Manetho, Josephus, and the Book of Abraham

[Marcus]

You might be interested in W. Davis' piece, then. In his opinion, Smith was considerably influenced by Bunyan's storytelling. Here's a quick overview of his article in the LA Review of Books:

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/149066

Thanks Marcus. Interesting stuff. I checked to see if he'd actually written a book, and he did. But the influence of Bunyan's storytelling doesn't appear to have made it into the book. Have you seen anything by him either explaining why not or elaborating on the similarities?

no, but I would be interested in hearing more about how "the influence of Bunyan's storytelling doesn't appear to have made it into [his] book." could you elaborate on that?

[Res Ipsa]

Thanks Marcus. Interesting stuff. I checked to see if he'd actually written a book, and he did. But the influence of Bunyan's storytelling doesn't appear to have made it into the book. Have you seen anything by him either explaining why not or elaborating on the similarities?

no, but I would be interested in hearing more about how "the influence of Bunyan's storytelling doesn't appear to have made it into [his] book." could you elaborate on that?

https://wheatandtares.org/2022/08/15/dr ... uthorship/

[Marcus]

no, but I would be interested in hearing more about how "the influence of Bunyan's storytelling doesn't appear to have made it into [his] book." could you elaborate on that?

https://wheatandtares.org/2022/08/15/dr ... uthorship/

Interesting, but I must have missed it. Where in that link did it say that "the influence of Bunyan's storytelling doesn't appear to have made it into [his] book"?

[Res Ipsa]

https://wheatandtares.org/2022/08/15/dr ... uthorship/

Interesting, but I must have missed it. Where in that link did it say that "the influence of Bunyan's storytelling doesn't appear to have made it into [his] book"?

If you disagree with the impression I got from the interview, that’s fine.

[Marcus]

Interesting, but I must have missed it. Where in that link did it say that "the influence of Bunyan's storytelling doesn't appear to have made it into [his] book"?

If you disagree with the impression I got from the interview, that’s fine.

I was just curious where you got the impression that "the influence of Bunyan's storytelling doesn't appear to have made it into [his] book" but if you'd rather not explain, that's fine.

[Res Ipsa]

I read his full piece on the parallels he found with Bunyan. He wrote it while he was working on the book. The fact that he wrote an article on it, the quantity of evidence he discussed, and the tone of the article indicated to me that the parallels he found were a significant part of the research he was doing for the book.

It was new to me and I thought I’d see if he’d written the book. When I found the book, there was no mention of Bunyan in the description. I thought that was odd, so I looked for reviews. In doing so, I found the extensive interview with the author, and there was no mention of Bunyan.

He says in the first paragraph that he decided to focus the book on one part of his research and so left a lot of things that he had researched out. Because he never mentioned Bunyan in the quoted part of the interview, I concluded the Bunyan parallels were among the material that didn’t make the cut.

I was hoping to find something else he published on the parallels, but haven’t found anything. In looking, I also found a detailed review of the book by Hales in the Interpreter. It appears to leave no nit unpicked, but it never mentions Bunyan.

It sounded interesting to me. Maybe he’ll do something more with it someday.

[Marcus]

I read his full piece on the parallels he found with Bunyan. He wrote it while he was working on the book. The fact that he wrote an article on it, the quantity of evidence he discussed, and the tone of the article indicated to me that the parallels he found were a significant part of the research he was doing for the book.

It was new to me and I thought I’d see if he’d written the book. When I found the book, there was no mention of Bunyan in the description....

Oh. Ok. So your comment that "the influence of Bunyan's storytelling doesn't appear to have made it into [his] book" was based on some description you read, but not upon reading the book. Got it.

[Res Ipsa]

I read his full piece on the parallels he found with Bunyan. He wrote it while he was working on the book. The fact that he wrote an article on it, the quantity of evidence he discussed, and the tone of the article indicated to me that the parallels he found were a significant part of the research he was doing for the book.

It was new to me and I thought I’d see if he’d written the book. When I found the book, there was no mention of Bunyan in the description....

Oh. Ok. So your comment that "the influence of Bunyan's storytelling doesn't appear to have made it into [his] book" was based on some description you read, but not upon reading the book. Got it.

No. It was based on the nature of the article the author wrote while writing the book, a description of the book after it was published, and the interview with the author after the book was published.

I think the Interpreter review confirms my original impression as expressed in my comment.

Had I read the book, I wouldn’t have used the word “appear.”

[Dr. Shades]

At the same time, I don’t find it very useful to try to understand everything about Mormonism through the lens of Joseph Smith’s apparent character flaws in individual areas, as though all we need to know is that he lied about this, that, or the other, to write the whole thing off.

For consistency’s sake, do you also not find it very useful to try to understand everything about Donald Trump through the lens of his apparent character flaws in individual areas, as though all we need to know is that he lied about this, that, or the other, to write his whole legacy off?

Joseph Smith himself also understood that people would demand him to be the two-dimensional “saint” they felt a prophet should be but that he would always fail at being.

Donald Trump isn’t a saint, either. So does that mean we should severity soften the harm that he, too, did?

Although it is nearly irresistible to obsess over the moral character of others, there are times when that concern can become oppressive, and those who insist on doggedly pursuing the question almost seem to be relishing in the failures of others to their own detriment. That is something that I know I have to be on my guard against in myself.

Do you similarly warn others against judging Donald Trump with the same anthropological detachment with which you warn others against judging Joseph Smith?

[Kishkumen]

In some ways, I think you have made a real point here. I kinda doubt I would have had much to do with the Mormons had I lived in Joseph Smith’s time. It is almost impossible to say, though. Contrafactual history is interesting, fun, and a worthwhile exercise up to a point, but it is also impossible to line up what are ultimately incommensurables.

Donald Trump is not Joseph Smith. They are quite different characters with different careers whose activities will have quite different long term outcomes. I do agree that, in his day, Smith would have understandably provoked a similarly negative response in some. I doubt I would have wanted to follow Smith had I been alive at the time.