Response to Jockers, Criddle, et al., Now Available

[_marg]

I have to read your entire post.

[_marg]

I agree that Solomon is reported to having chronic health problems. However the time frame of just when his health became so bad that he could no longer work the forge is the question. He was actively surveying and laying out land tracts when he first moved to the area in 1809. He engaged in a partnership with Henry Lake to rebuild an iron forge in March of 1811. Part of the agreement was that, after a four month start up, each would take turns working the forge, but if one partner missed his turn, the other would have the right to work the forge for their own profit until the other was again able to take his turn.
There is no time frame given that I know of for the failure of the forge and Solomon's health failing to the point that he could no longer work.
John Miller's statement is a bit of a cipher. He notes staying with Solomon for some time, but does not give any time frame. He does note that Solomon would read humorous passages (found in the Oberlin manuscript but not the Boo of Mormon) to those present. That agrees with Matilda's statement about Solomon reading to the neighbors, but the time frame is 1812.

Glenn just to clarify..Miller does not say Solomon would read from the Oberlin Manuscript...you are misrepresenting him when you explain it as that...to better represent him would be to say that Spalding read from a manuscript..as described.

Oliver Smith says..."when Spalding first came to this place"...that would be 1809..he purchased a tract of land & commenced sellingit. While engaged in this business he boarded at my house, in all nearly 6 months. All his leisure hours were spent in writing a historical novel, founded upon first settlers in this country" That contradicts your theory that MSCC was started in 1812. Nathum Howard say he became acquainted with Spalding Dec 1810..after he frequently saw him at his house and he once in conversation told he was writing a story of inhabitants in this country. John Miller says he boarded with Spalding 1811 and was soon introduced to the manuscripts of spalding. Aron Wright knew him from 1809 and when at his house Spalding showed him a history he was writing. Henry Lake arrive in Conneaut Jan 1811 and says he frequently read to him from a manuscript. Artemas was there in Oct 1811 when he discussed manuscripts with Spalding. When you couple these comments with Martha saying Spalding's health sunk when they arrived in Conneaut and he wrote to occupy his time because of poor physical health and not being able to work..the evidence does not stack up that Spalding started writing in 1812 June or Aug..MSCC.

in my opinion you are reading incorrectly into both josiahs' and martha's statements that they are saying he started writing June 1812 & Aug 1812 respectively. For one thing Josiah wasn't around to know when Spalding's started. The manuscript Josiah was reading had been well started before he got there.

Matilda had a very good encoding event for her memory of the time frame that she said Solomon conceived the idea of writing that story.

You are reading more into her statement than she says. "Mr. Spalding being an educated man
and passionately fond of history, took a lively interest in these developments
of antiquity, and in order to beguile the hours of retirement and furnish employment for his lively imagination, he conceived the idea of
giving a historical sketch of this long lost race. Their extreme antiquity of
course would let him to write in the most ancient style; and as the Old Testament
is the most ancient book in the world, he imitated its style as nearly
as possible. His sole object in writing this historical romance was to amuse
himself and his neighbors. This was about the year 1812. Hull’s surrender
at Detroit occurred near the same time, and I recollect the date well from
that circumstance. As he progressed in his narrative, the neighbors would
come in from time to time to hear portions of it read, and a great interest in
the work was excited among them."

How would he amuse the neighbours with a story he had just started? And how many times would conneaut witnesses be able to spend reading discussing or listening to him read, if he only started writing Aug 1812 and moved not long after a few months later?

Oliver Smith's testimony is very problematic for the S/R theory because he has Solomon writing that story when he first came to the area. That leaves no room for him to have "altered his plan and commenced writing a history of the first Settlement of America the particulars you will find in my testimony Dated Sept 1833." (Aron Wright)

The way I see it is MSCC was started first, 1809 I don't think he read it to neighbours but might have discussed it with them and some had an opportunity to read if they wanted to. I think he starts MF around 1810. To the witnesses exposed to both they were essentially the same story but different time frame and one written is scriptural style to make it sound ancient. I think Spalding read to them, for the most part because he had control of the loose papers and he couldn't give people papers to take home. So I don't think they would perceive of the manuscripts as being completely separate, all his work was a work in progress...one set of papers simply was the same story different time frame.

I am looking at her statement in the context of what she said and the English that she used in making it. In her statement she is clearly saying that Solomon conceived his idea to write his story in August of 1812. To interpret that statement as saying that was the date he started reading the narrative to the neighbors is forcing the text to refer to a statement that had not been made ratherthan refer naturally to a previous statement.

You can say it over and over and over Glenn but she does not explicitly say that's when he started writing and in fact earlier in her statement she comments he started writing when they arrived in Conneaut due to poor health and to pass the time. In the context of the evidence he didn't start writing in Aug 1812.

I am looking at Josiah Spalding's statement in the context that he made it, and the English that he used in doing so. That is that he came to stay with Solomon due to difficulties caused by the war, among other things, but his visit came after the war broke out and caused those difficulties. Then came the statement that Solomon began to compose his story. Again, he gives a very good place marker for the time frame of his visit. The war of 1812, which began in June of 1812.

And again Glenn I don't read it that way, I read his comment about misfortune & the war was to explain why he went to see Solomon. That he wasn't explaining that to indicate when Solomon began writing. The overall evidence Glenn does not support Solomon starting to write in the summer of 1812. And frankly since Josiah read a manuscript of which much had already been written, as well he wasn't around Spalding from the time Spalding lived in conneaut to observe when spalding started MSCC..Josiah is not a good witness to determine when that would have occurred.

The date is probably not 1812, but 1813. Here is a link to a blowup that Dale has of that portion of the letter.
http://solomonspalding.com/Lib/Bsh1977a.htm#msp135
The date is almost certainly 1813, not 1812, although it really does not make much difference for a probable August beginning date. There is no time frame given for the insertion of that letter. It could not have been earlier than January of 1812. If the date was 1812, it could have been any date after that. If it were 1813, it could have been any time after that. But the fact is, that either of those dates are problematic for Oliver Smith's story. It is not my interpretation that is inconsistent, it is the statements of the witnesses.

Who the heck wrote over the original? Whoever did that, certainly made it look like 1813. Frankly it's unrealistic. Matilda and other witnesses say he started writing early after their move to conneaut and that he spent all his leisure time writing. He apparently was continuing to write before moving to Pittsburg in the fall of 1812..so he's writing all the time, and yet he's only got 132 pages written by Jan 1813 of his one and only manuscript. It doesn't make sense to have written only that much up to that point. And it also doesn' t make sense that he continues to write late summer in Conneaut..continues to write after moving in the fall to pittsburg, continues in pittsburg in Feb 1813 but he';s not much further ahead than what Josiah had read much earlier on. The most likely explanation since he spent so much time writing was he had another manuscript he was working on as well.

The information that the neighbors would come in from time to time to hear him read as the narrative progresses comes after the idea conception and the time frame of August of 1812. In order for your argument to have any merit, the bit about the neighbors would have to come before the date statement.

Glenn Josiah was not around to observe solomon writing throughout the years 1809 to 1812..the conneaut witnesses and Matilda were. It doesn't make any sense that Josiah comes along in Jan - Nov 1812 (I'm not sure when he is supposed to have arrived) and spalding starts writing MSCC and then a few months later moves to Pittsburg and the only thing written is MSCC started in 1812 with 132 pages finished by Jan or a few months later in 1813. All the witnesses who recall Spalding writing earlier including matilda ..you are accusing of being mistaken that they recall him writing anything earlier than when Josiah arrived.

[_GlennThigpen]

I agree that Solomon is reported to having chronic health problems. However the time frame of just when his health became so bad that he could no longer work the forge is the question. He was actively surveying and laying out land tracts when he first moved to the area in 1809. He engaged in a partnership with Henry Lake to rebuild an iron forge in March of 1811. Part of the agreement was that, after a four month start up, each would take turns working the forge, but if one partner missed his turn, the other would have the right to work the forge for their own profit until the other was again able to take his turn.
There is no time frame given that I know of for the failure of the forge and Solomon's health failing to the point that he could no longer work.
John Miller's statement is a bit of a cipher. He notes staying with Solomon for some time, but does not give any time frame. He does note that Solomon would read humorous passages (found in the Oberlin manuscript but not the Book of Mormon) to those present. That agrees with Matilda's statement about Solomon reading to the neighbors, but the time frame is 1812.

Glenn just to clarify..Miller does not say Solomon would read from the Oberlin Manuscript...you are misrepresenting him when you explain it as that...to better represent him would be to say that Spalding read from a manuscript..as described.

Please read my statement again. That clarification is not necessary. I noted in parentheses that humerous passages are found in the Oberlin manuscript, but you will not find them in the Book of Mormon.

Oliver Smith says..."when Spalding first came to this place"...that would be 1809..he purchased a tract of land & commenced sellingit. While engaged in this business he boarded at my house, in all nearly 6 months. All his leisure hours were spent in writing a historical novel, founded upon first settlers in this country" That contradicts your theory that MSCC was started in 1812. Nathum Howard say he became acquainted with Spalding Dec 1810..after he frequently saw him at his house and he once in conversation told he was writing a story of inhabitants in this country. John Miller says he boarded with Spalding 1811 and was soon introduced to the manuscripts of spalding. Aron Wright knew him from 1809 and when at his house Spalding showed him a history he was writing. Henry Lake arrive in Conneaut Jan 1811 and says he frequently read to him from a manuscript. Artemas was there in Oct 1811 when he discussed manuscripts with Spalding. When you couple these comments with Martha saying Spalding's health sunk when they arrived in Conneaut and he wrote to occupy his time because of poor physical health and not being able to work..the evidence does not stack up that Spalding started writing in 1812 June or Aug..MSCC.

in my opinion you are reading incorrectly into both josiahs' and martha's statements that they are saying he started writing June 1812 & Aug 1812 respectively. For one thing Josiah wasn't around to know when Spalding's started. The manuscript Josiah was reading had been well started before he got there.

I am only reading the English as it is written. Josiah said that in order, troubles because of war, went to stay with Solomon, Solomon began to compose his his story.

Matilda had a very good encoding event for her memory of the time frame that she said Solomon conceived the idea of writing that story.

You are reading more into her statement than she says. "Mr. Spalding being an educated man
and passionately fond of history, took a lively interest in these developments
of antiquity, and in order to beguile the hours of retirement and furnish employment for his lively imagination, he conceived the idea of
giving a historical sketch of this long lost race. Their extreme antiquity of
course would let him to write in the most ancient style; and as the Old Testament
is the most ancient book in the world, he imitated its style as nearly
as possible. His sole object in writing this historical romance was to amuse
himself and his neighbors. This was about the year 1812. Hull’s surrender
at Detroit occurred near the same time, and I recollect the date well from
that circumstance. As he progressed in his narrative, the neighbors would
come in from time to time to hear portions of it read, and a great interest in
the work was excited among them."

How would he amuse the neighbours with a story he had just started? And how many times would conneaut witnesses be able to spend reading discussing or listening to him read, if he only started writing Aug 1812 and moved not long after a few months later? [/quote]

I am only reading the English as it is written. Martha says that Solomon conceived of the idea to pass away forced retirement hours. Remembers the time frame because it was near to the time of Hulls' surrender of Detroit. That is exaclty the sequence that Matilda gives. I don't know. How long does it take to write seventy of eighty pages?

Oliver Smith's testimony is very problematic for the S/R theory because he has Solomon writing that story when he first came to the area. That leaves no room for him to have "altered his plan and commenced writing a history of the first Settlement of America the particulars you will find in my testimony Dated Sept 1833." (Aron Wright)

The way I see it is MSCC was started first, 1809 I don't think he read it to neighbours but might have discussed it with them and some had an opportunity to read if they wanted to. I think he starts MF around 1810. To the witnesses exposed to both they were essentially the same story but different time frame and one written is scriptural style to make it sound ancient. I think Spalding read to them, for the most part because he had control of the loose papers and he couldn't give people papers to take home. So I don't think they would perceive of the manuscripts as being completely separate, all his work was a work in progress...one set of papers simply was the same story different time frame.

marge, there is no witness evidence for your speculations. The witnesses and evidence external to them are what we have to go on. Please support your belief with something from a witness or from some other document. Oliver Smith says that he read and heard read one hundred pages or more. He brings up Nephi and Lehi. This was in 1809 and early 1810. That leaves no time for him to have began the Oberlin manuscript first. Several of the other witnesses stated that they examined the manuscript. If there were two stories veing written pretty much simultaneously, someone would have noticed, unless they were all incredibly stupid Old Testament illiterate. And if it were the same story, but a different time frame, it would still read likethe Oberlin manuscript and nothing of that story is in the Book of Mormon.
By the way, Abner Jackson puts the beginning of the story in 1812.
Although you read Matilda's statement that Solomon's health must have become so bad that he could not work very shortly after he came to the area, you have ignored the evidence that he was actively engaged in surveying land, (1809 and 1810) then in rebuilding and working a forge (1811 - ?).
According to Matilda, it was after he was forced into retirement that he actually began writing the story. This is in contradiction to the statements of Artemas Cunningham, Henry Lake, and especially Oliver Smith.

The you throw in the lost tribes by several witnesses, including Abner Jackson, and the straits of Darien out of the blue by John Miller, and you have a morass of contradictions, and wind up with one manuscript that Matilda Davison carefully preserved along with some of Solomon's sermons and short stories.

Glenn

[_Dan Vogel]

MCB,

(10) Specific learning disability —(i) General. Specific learning disability means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia.

(ii) Disorders not included. Specific learning disability does not include learning problems that are primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage. [34 CFR §300.8(c)(10)]

I don’t know all your reasoning on associating Joseph Smith with learning disability, but I think it might be too speculative when “environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage” are more obvious and less problematic. Joseph Smith’s misspellings are not different than most others in the 19th century. In fact, Joseph Smith’s spelling was probably better than BY’s. One way to hear their accents (or incorrect pronunciation of words) is to pronounce the words as they spelt them.

[_MCB]

when “environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage” are more obvious and less problematic.

Contrary to others with a psychological background, I refrain from any definitive diagnoses from such a distance. It remains only a possibility.

There were plenty of people who attended school very briefly, but self-educated to a very high level. Of course, academic interest in the home would then be a major factor, and we have little information about that.

[_Dan Vogel]

MCB,

Of course, academic interest in the home would then be a major factor, and we have little information about that.

I don’t see the Book of Mormon’s author as academic, but rather as charismatic, poetic, more orally inclined, preacher/storyteller.

[_marg]

Please read my statement again. That clarification is not necessary. I noted in parentheses that humerous passages are found in the Oberlin manuscript, but you will not find them in the Book of Mormon.

See how easy it is to misinterpret what people are saying, your focus was on "humorous" I didn't notice that. I think people could argue there are many humorous passages in the Book of Mormon because they would perceive the ideas ridiculous. Laban getting his head chopped off and Nephi putting on his clothes with no mention of blood and then the servant mistaking him for Laban because he talked like Laban. I found practically the whole Book of Mormon ridiculous to me it was a joke, practically everything in it. So I wouldn't be so quick to assume that a Spalding MF didn't appear humorous to his listeners. And especially if he read it in a way that made it obvious he wasn't being serious.

That is exaclty the sequence that Matilda gives. I don't know. How long does it take to write seventy of eighty pages?

Where do you get 70 of 80 pages from?

marge, there is no witness evidence for your speculations. The witnesses and evidence external to them are what we have to go on. Please support your belief with something from a witness or from some other document. Oliver Smith says that he read and heard read one hundred pages or more. He brings up Nephi and Lehi. This was in 1809 and early 1810. That leaves no time for him to have began the Oberlin manuscript first.

Let's go by your scenario first. You say, Spalding started writing one manuscript and one alone in the summer of 1812. This contradicts all the witnesses who say he was writing earlier than that. For someone who started writing much earlier than the summer of 1812..and someone who spent lots of time writing to pass the time, because he couldn't do physical work, he certainly didn't get much accomplished ...by Jan 1833. I doubt very much by the way that the date written was 1833, I think someone wrote over the original changing it. But for argument sake since you are using that date as the approx date of the letter written on MSCC on page 132, considering he spent so many years writing..we are talking 4 years before then, to only get to page 132...is rather slow writing to say the least. But that's your theory. You reject all the witnesses including Matilda who says he was writing much earlier than the summer of 1812. You interpret Matilda's statement of 1839 as saying Spalding began writing in Aug 1812, but you reject the earlier part in her statement in which she says that shortly after they arrived in Conneaut (1809) his health sunk and that in order to pass his retirement time he wrote about a long lost race.

As far as me providing evidence I am using statements just as you are using statements however the facts I'm using are in line with the events that occurred in their lives. That is Spalding's health sunk and a reason for his writing was to pass his time...then later he became more serious about writing for publishing purposese. You are going by some sentences in Josiah's and Matilda's statements which you have interpreted a particular way, but they don't fit in with the overall evidence. You want the one and only MSCC in existence to have begun in the summer of 1812..I suppose so you can reject the conneaut witnesses.

Several of the other witnesses stated that they examined the manuscript. If there were two stories veing written pretty much simultaneously, someone would have noticed, unless they were all incredibly stupid Old Testament illiterate. And if it were the same story, but a different time frame, it would still read likethe Oberlin manuscript and nothing of that story is in the Book of Mormon.

Martha didn't visit him until 1812, John says it wasn't until 3 years later after 1810 that Spalding mentioned he was writing a book intended for publication. So I don't think they had much exposure to MSCC..because they recall biblical style and character names in the Book of Mormon.

As to the others Oliver says he read and heard read 100 pages, and the impression he gives is that this was early near the beginning when Spalding arrived in Conneaut. And yet MSCC is only at page 132 by Jan 1812 or we'll also use your date Jan 1813. The main problem that I see is that MSCC should have a lot more written for Spalding to be writing all those years. I think Spalding switching . to an earlier time frame which focused on the moundbuilders would appear to be the same story to Oliver as MSCC which he also likely was exposed to. Spalding didn't have these writings in books..they were on loose sheets of paper and he must have read in bits and pieces..so after 20 years differentiating between those stories as if they were completely separate stories would have been difficult.

Miller says he had a number of manuscripts but he was focussed on one.

Aron Wright given his draft statement appears to be aware of more than one manuscript.

Oliver smith and Miller & Aron it appears were shown MSCC by Hurlbut ..and it appears they must have told Hurlbut that was an earlier version of MF because it was matter of Spalding going back further with the dates.

In any event given what the witnesses said, and in particular Matilda that due to his poor health and to pass the time, he would write and his health sunk on their arrival to Conneaut...the evidence indicates Spalding was writing in the early time period living in conneaut.

By the way, Abner Jackson puts the beginning of the story in 1812.
Although you read Matilda's statement that Solomon's health must have become so bad that he could not work very shortly after he came to the area, you have ignored the evidence that he was actively engaged in surveying land, (1809 and 1810) then in rebuilding and working a forge (1811 - ?).
According to Matilda, it was after he was forced into retirement that he actually began writing the story. This is in contradiction to the statements of Artemas Cunningham, Henry Lake, and especially Oliver Smith.

Are you saying he was in good physical health until the summer of 1812 at which point he started to write. Is that what you think Matilda describes? Sure his health may have improved at points during their time in Conneaut, but she makes it clear when they arrived his health sunk and when he was in poor health to pass his time he would write.

As far as Abner Jackson goes are you using him as to when Spalding began to write? According to Abner ..Spalding visiting his father in 1812 a short time before Spalding moved to Pittsburg. How on earth would Abner know when Spalding started writing that story ..just because he brought with him the story? What it appears is that Spalding was spending time on writing MF 1812 and was reading it to people then.

The you throw in the lost tribes by several witnesses, including Abner Jackson, and the straits of Darien out of the blue by John Miller, and you have a morass of contradictions, and wind up with one manuscript that Matilda Davison carefully preserved along with some of Solomon's sermons and short stories.

Of course there will be inconsistencies in people's statements, that's not surprising...but are there major contradictions? The witnesses were exposed at different times to Spalding's work. Some were exposed mainly shortly before he left conneaut, some while they lived with him in his early years in Conneaut, some during the entire period he lived in conneaut such as neighbours, some after he moved to Pittsburg, some in Amity. And the whole time from 1809 until he died he was writing on sheets of paper, a storyline which evolved. The early witnesses exposed to MSCC would not necessarily differentiate the main essence of the storyline of MSCC from MF..in time after Spalding switched. The focus for the witnesses was on recalling what he wrote that matched with the Book of Mormon, their focus was not on recalling everything in detail that he wrote. The Book of Mormon was a retreival cue after 20 years of non exposure. The MSCC was a retrieval cue as well for Aron Wright, and the others. And it's quite understandable that a MSCC which Spalding may not have talked about much, laid aside and was essentially the same theme with a later time period, would not have appeared significant to them when giving their statements.

And this evolving story was happening over years to some of them. Also keep in mind, not only was Hurlbut not trying to get lots of detail, because his focus was simply identifying if witnesses recognized Spalding's works in the Book of Mormon but as well the Conneaut witnesses didn't know Hurlbut, may not have trusted him, and put in the least amount of effort necessary. No one at that time, likely foresaw that millions of people would fall for the storyline of Book of Mormon. To an outsider Glenn the Book of Mormon can appear ridiculous. To an outsider it may be hard to fathom anyone taking it seriously. So you need to consider the early witnesses wouldn't necessarily think it was worth their time to put in too much effort into their statements for a stranger, Hurlbut.

[_Daniel Peterson]

To an outsider Glenn the Book of Mormon can appear ridiculous. To an outsider it may be hard to fathom anyone taking it seriously.

Just out of curiosity: Have you read it yet?

A few years ago, you hadn't, and, in fact, you were rather defiant about it, asserting that you didn't need to have read it in order to speak confidently about its origin and nature.

[_MCB]

I don’t see the Book of Mormon’s author as academic, but rather as charismatic, poetic, more orally inclined, preacher/storyteller.

My word "academic" in that post was in the sense of literate, rather than scholarly.

However, again, you would have to read my little project (600+ pages, including nigh on to 300 pages of related appendices) in order to understand my argument.

If it is necessary to take the Book of Mormon seriously in order to demonstrate how far LDS have strayed from the best of it, and the Bible, then, I guess that is what I have to do. That does not eliminate the funny parts, because humor can be a teaching tool.

[_Jersey Girl]

I don’t see the Book of Mormon’s author as academic, but rather as charismatic, poetic, more orally inclined, preacher/storyteller.

Briefly.


http://www.lightplanet.com/Mormons/people/parley_p_pratt.html

One of the most significant LDS missionaries, writers, poets, and thinkers to emerge during the early years of the LDS Restoration was Parley Parker Pratt (1807-1857).

http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/people/s_z/smith.htm

As founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, popularly known as the Mormons, Joseph Smith stands as one of the most charismatic and influential religious figures in American history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_Rigdon

Rigdon was a fiery orator and he was immediately called by Smith to be the spokesman for the church.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Spalding

Solomon Spalding (1761 – October 20, 1816) was the author of the Manuscript Story,[1] a work of fiction about the lost civilization of the mound builders of North America.