This is quite long, but I think it will be worth your time.
“URIM AND THUMMIM”/ SPECTACLES/SEER STONEMarg brought up an issue with the early Mormon use of the term “Urim and Thummim”, which she assume was used exclusively for Joseph Smith’s translating spectacles. Some researchers have noticed that the term had a generic use, and that Joseph Smith used it to refer to both the spectacles and seer stone. Using this information, they tried to harmonize eyewitness accounts that refer to Joseph Smith’s translating with “Urim and Thummim” or putting the “Urim and Thummim” into a hat as references to the seer stone. This seemed to work well with some sources like Joseph Knight’s statement that Joseph Smith “put the urim and thummim into his hat and Darkned his Eyes then he would take a sentence and it would apper in Brite Roman Letters,” and David Whitmer’s statement in the
Chicago Times, 7 Aug. 1875: “placed the Urim and Thummim in his hat, Joseph placed the hat over his face, and with prophetic eyes read the invisible symbols syllable by syllable and word by word.” Whitmer seems to have sometimes used the term “Urim and Thummim” generically, because he reportedly told one reporter: “Smith was given by the angel a Urim and Thummim of another pattern, it being shaped in oval or kidney form. This seer’s stone he was instructed to place in his hat, and on covering his face with the hat the characters and translation would appear on the stone” (
Chicago Tribune, 17 December 1885). However, this explanation didn’t seem to fit Cowdery’s 1848 declaration:
I wrote, with my own pen, the entire Book of Mormon (save a few pages) as it fell from the lips of the Prophet Joseph Smith, as he translated it by the gift and power of God, by the means of the Urim and Thummim, or, as it is called by that book, “Holy Interpreters.” ...
--Reuben Miller, “Last Days of Oliver Cowdery,” Deseret News 9 (13 April 1859). Reprinted in Millennial Star 21 (1859): 544-46. (EMD 2:495)
This anomaly is easily corrected by reference to the consistent testimony of the other eyewitnesses, who describe Joseph Smith dictating to Cowdery with his head in the hat. I also suggested that Reuben Miller had added the explanatory phrase “or, as it is called by that book, ‘Holy Interpreters.’” Being very familiar with how the minutes of meetings are taken and later fleshed out, I though that was a possibility. However, after doing more research, I now think Cowdery was intentionally being misleading, and that this habit goes back to July 1830--which I will discuss below.
The issues are complex. In answering Marg’s question about the term “Urim and Thummim”, other related issues also have to be dealt with to understand the context of eyewitness statements and the confusion of some reporters. Why did Joseph Smith use spectacles then switch to his more familiar seer stone? Why was the term “Urim and Thummim” used by Joseph Smith? Why was the stone in hat story suppressed?
I will show that the introduction of the spectacles was an unplanned element in the story and that Joseph Smith was not comfortable with them and quickly discarded them for his seer stone. However, when the seer stone was linked to his fraudulent money-digging, he (and Cowdery) began emphasizing the spectacle story. The term “Urim and Thummim” was first suggested by W. W. Phelps in 1833, which Joseph Smith appropriated by Joseph Smith to refer to the spectacles--first in his revelations revised in 1835 and then in his official 1838 history. This gave the spectacles a biblical flavor.
The move away from folk-magic origins evidently began during Joseph Smith’s trials in Colesville and South Bainbridge, New York, in June-July 1830, carried over to Joseph Smith’s unpublished 1832 history and Oliver Cowdery’s 1834-35 history in the
Messenger and Advocate, and completed in Joseph Smith’s 1838 official history. To combat anti-Mormon claims that he was a money-digger and that the discovery of the gold plates came out of a money-digging context, Joseph Smith denied being a money-digger and stripped out the folk-magic elements from the story of his finding the plates. In keeping with this, Joseph Smith deleted any mention of translating with stone in hat (which was the method for finding treasures) and emphasized his use of the spectacles, which he repeatedly called “Urim and Thummim”. He also introduced several revelations from the early period as coming through the “Urim and Thummim”. Readers naturally assumed the spectacles were meant; however, these revelations were received through the stone in hat. This larger conceptual framework goes far to explain the confusion when the eyewitnesses begin to tell the stone in hat story in the 1870s, after being separated from the majority of Book of Mormon believers for decades. Going chronologically through the main sources, let me tell you how I see it.
INTRODUCTION OF THE SPECTACLES STORYMany will be surprised to learn that Joseph Smith did not invent the story of the spectacles and that this concept came from his fellow treasure seer Samuel Lawrence. Concerning this, I wrote in my biography of Joseph Smith:
As September 1825 neared, Joseph seemed to entertain the idea that fellow treasure seer Samuel T. Lawrence might be a good candidate for Alvin’s substitute.70 At least, his close friendship with Lawrence led Willard Chase to arrive at such a conclusion. Joseph seemed to trust Lawrence with information he otherwise withheld from treasure seekers, even showing him the location of the gold plates. However, Joseph quickly learned that Lawrence was a shrewd competitor.
When he showed Lawrence the location of the plates, the latter apparently had brought his own seer stone, for Chase said that Lawrence asked Joseph “if he had ever discovered anything with the plates of gold.” Joseph said, “no.” Lawrence then asked him to “look in his stone, to see if there was anything with them.” Joseph looked but said he could see nothing. Lawrence told him to “look again, and see if there was not a large pair of specks with the plates.” Joseph “looked and soon saw a pair of spectacles, the same with which Joseph says he translated the Book of Mormon.” This became an added element to the original story; indeed, the spectacles would subsequently play a brief role in Smith’s translation of the gold plates. “Not long after this,” according to Chase, “Joseph altered his mind, and said L[awrence]. was not the right man, nor had he [Joseph] told him the right place.”71
Of course, Joseph had no intention of making Lawrence--his rival--a substitute for Alvin. More likely Joseph hoped that he could induce his fellow seer to see the plates and thereby verify Joseph’s gift and diffuse the accusation that his visions were of the devil. If he could not get the plates, he would at least get testimony of their existence. If this was his intent, he would not have anticipated Lawrence’s response. His friend not only confirmed the existence of the plates but then sought to establish his own seeric abilities above and beyond Smith’s. Joseph would not get what he wanted from Lawrence without a price. He had no choice but to confirm, albeit reluctantly, the existence of the spectacles Lawrence said he saw. Thus, Joseph received his first witness to the existence of the plates, and Lawrence secured from Joseph a testimony of his own exceptional gift. Joseph had much to learn from the older, more experienced seers.72
Lawrence evidently understood the religious nature of the plates and advised Joseph to delay bringing them forth until the revival fires had cooled. During their 1825 visit to the hill, Chase said, “Lawrence told [Smith] it would not be prudent to let these plates be seen for about two years, as it would make a great disturbance in the neighborhood.”73 Perhaps Lawrence knew that a religious book that was found through divination and necromancy would disturb the local religious equilibrium. Joseph’s conversation with a minister had already proven the accuracy of Lawrence’s supposition. Unable to comply with the messenger’s requirement, Smith likely made no effort in 1825 or 1826 to get the plates. --Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, 66.
This explains why Joseph Smith quickly discarded the spectacles for his stone in hat--it wasn’t his plan to sit behind a curtain and dictate the entire Book of Mormon. That wouldn’t be very convincing.
Book of MormonThe Book of Mormon mentions the spectacles and that the book would be translated with them.
Now Ammon saith unto him, I can assuredly tell thee, O king, of a man that can translate the records: for he hath wherewith that he can look, and translate all records that are of ancient date; and it is a gift from God. And the things are called interpreters; and no man can look in them, except he be commanded, lest he should look for that he had not ought, and he should perish. And whosoever is commanded to look in them, the same is called seer. (Mosiah 8:13)
And now he translated them by the means of those two stones which was fastened into the two rims of a bow.
Now these things was prepared from the beginning, and was handed down from generation to generation, for the purpose of interpreting languages;
and they have been kept and preserved by the hand of the Lord, that he should discover to every creature which should possess the land, the iniquities and abominations of his people: and whosoever has these things, is called seer, after the manner of old times. (Mosiah 28:13-16)
And behold, when ye shall come unto me, ye shall write them and shall seal them up, that no one can interpret them: for ye shall write them in a language that they cannot be read.
And behold, these two stones will I give unto thee, and ye shall seal them up also, with the things which ye shall write.
For behold, the language which ye shall write, I have confounded; wherefore I will cause in mine own due time that these stones shall magnify to the eyes of men, these things which ye shall write. (Ether 3:22-24)
However, the seer stone is also mentioned. When handing down the records and interpreters to his son Helaman, Alma said:
And now, I will speak unto you concerning those twenty-four plates, that ye keep them, that the mysteries and the works of darkness, and their secret works, or the secret works of those people, which have been destroyed, may be made manifest unto this people; yea, all their murders, and robbings, and their plunderings, and all their wickedness, and abominations, may be made manifest unto this people; yea, and that ye preserve these interpreters [1830 = “directors”].
For behold, the Lord saw that his people began to work in darkness, yea, work secret murders and abominations; therefore the Lord said, If they did not repent, they should be destroyed from off the face of the earth.
And the Lord said, I will prepare unto my servant Gazelem, a stone, which shall shine forth in darkness unto light, that I may discover unto my people which serve me, that I may discover unto them the works of their brethren; yea, their secret works, their works of darkness, and their wickedness and abominations.
And now my son, these interpreters [1830 = “directors”] were prepared, that the word of God might be fulfilled, which he spake, saying: I will bring forth out of darkness unto light, all their secret works and their abominations; and except they repent, I will destroy them from off the face of the earth; and I will bring to light all their secrets and abominations, unto every nation that shall hereafter possess the land. And now my son, we see that they did not repent; therefore they have been destroyed, and thus far the word of God hath been fulfilled; yea, their secret abominations have been brought out of darkness, and made known unto us. (Alma 37:21-24)
In talking about the directors/interpreters (changed after 1840 edition), Alma adds a prediction about “Gazelem, a stone, which shall shine forth in darkness.” There has been uncertainty about the term Gazelem, whether it refers to the servant or the stone. Some have interpreted it as a Nephite word for a seer stone, while others think it refers to Joseph Smith. The latter point to Joseph Smith’s reference to himself as “Gazelam” in several revelations dating to 1832 and 1834:
And now, verily thus saith the Lord, it is expedient that all things be done unto my glory, that ye should, who are joined together in this order; or in other words, let my servant Ahasdah [Newel K. Whitney], and my servant Gazelam, or Enoch [Joseph Smith, Jun.], and my servant Pelagoram [Sidney Rigdon], sit in council with the saints which are in Zion; ... (D&C 78:9; see also 82:11; 104:26, 43, 45-46)
So here in Alma 37 we have the conflation of the spectacles with seer stone, and a hint that both would be used by the translator, although only the spectacles are specifically mentioned as the means of translating the record.
ORIGINAL STORYThe earliest accounts given in 1829 describe Joseph Smith dictating with stone in hat. This information originated with Martin Harris, who experienced both methods of translation during his work as scribe. Not surprisingly therefore the reporter conflated the two stories, describing Harris as saying: “By placing the spectacles in a hat, and looking into it, Smith could (he said so, at least) interpret these characters” (“Golden Bible,”
Palmyra Freeman, circa August 1829, as reprinted in Advertiser and Telegraph (Rochester), 31 August 1829; EMD 2:221).
Interestingly, this conflation did not appear in the
Wayne County Inquirer, which was published in Bethany, PA, in the next county east of Susquehanna County. This reporter said: “Smith would put his face into a hat in which he had a
white stone, and pretend to read from it, while his coadjutor transcribed” (
Wayne County [PA] Inquirer, circa May 1830, as reprinted in
Cincinnati Advertiser and Ohio Phoenix 8 (2 June 1830): 1; EMD 3:274). Joseph Smith’s possession of a white seer stone was not widely known, suggesting the reporter got his information from a very reliable source.
JOSEPH SMITH’S 1830 TRIAL IN COLESVILLE AND SOUTH BAINBRIDGEAbout three months after the Book of Mormon came off the press, Joseph Smith was arrested by Constable Ebenezer Hatch in Colesville on Wednesday, 30 June, for being a “disorderly person,” and taken to South Bainbridge for trial the next day. Concerning Joseph Smith’s arrest, I wrote in my biography:
The officer who apprehended him was Ebenezer Hatch, a constable for Chenango County, who had crossed county lines to arrest the prophet on the charge of being, according to Smith’s history, a “disorderly person; of setting the country in an uproar by preaching the Book of Mormon, &c &c.”26 Actually, the warrant had nothing to do with Smith’s preaching or the recent activities in Colesville, over which Chenango authorities had no jurisdiction, but pertained to the four-year-old charge brought against him in South Bainbridge. Smith’s days as a treasure seer had returned to haunt him. Joseph Knight remembered that some of the mob, whom he called “vagabonds,” conspired with “a young fellow by the name of Doctor Benton,” believed to be South Bainbridge physician Abram W. Benton, to swear out a warrant against Smith for “pretending to see under ground.” They had found, Knight said, “a little clause ... in the [New] York laws against such things.”27 John S. Reed, Smith’s legal counsel, said Smith was arrested for the “crime of glass looking and juggling [and] fortune telling and so on, for which the state of New York was against it and made it a crime and the crime was a fine and imprisonment.”28 Indeed, New York law included in its definition of disorderly persons anyone “pretending to tell fortunes, or to discover where lost or stolen goods may be found.”29 ...
26. J. Smith, Manuscript History, 44 (EMD 1:114-15).
27. Knight, “Manuscript of the History of Joseph Smith,” 8 (EMD 4:22). Smith’s history similarly states that it was “a young man named Benton” who “swore out the first warrant” against Smith (J. Smith, Manuscript History, 48 [EMD 1:125-26]).
28. John S. Reed to Brigham Young, 6 Dec. 1861, 1, Brigham Young Collection, LDS Church Archives (EMD 4:122).
29. Laws of the State of New-York, Revised and Passed at Thirty-Sixth Session of the Legislature, 2 vols. (Albany, NY: H. C. Southwick and Co., 1813), 1:114, sec. I.
--Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, 511-12.
On 1 July 1830, Joseph Smith was tried in South Bainbridge before Justice Joseph Chamberlin. Joseph Knight hired James Davidson and John Reed to defend Smith. Predictably, the prosecution focused on Joseph Smith’s character and his pretending to see buried treasures with a seer stone. According to South Bainbridge resident Abram W. Benton,
During the trial it was shown that the Book of Mormon was brought to light by the same magic power by which he pretended to tell fortunes, discover hidden treasures, &c. Oliver Cowdry, one of the three witnesses to the book, testified under oath, that said Smith found with the plates, from which he translated his book, two transparent stones, resembling glass, set in silver bows. That by looking through these, he was able to read in English, the reformed Egyptian characters, which were engraved on the plates.
--[Abram W. Benton], “Mormonites,” Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate (Utica, New York) 2 (9 April 1831): 120.
Although Cowdery didn’t say that was how Joseph Smith dictated to him, it would seem Cowdery emphasized the spectacles as Joseph Smith’s method of translation and suppressed any mention of the stone in hat method. The advantage of doing this at the trial is obvious. Cowdery’s goal was to distance the Book of Mormon as far as possible from Joseph Smith’s previous money-digging activities by giving the (false) impression that the stone in the hat was for treasure seeing, but the spectacles were for translating. At this point it doesn’t appear Cowdery was lying, only that he was willing to distort the truth and give a false impression.
I knew Joseph Smith wanted to transition the story of the Book of Mormon’s coming forth from it’s folk-magic origins to one more acceptable to mainstream Christians--I just hadn’t connected the beginning of that process to the July 1830 trial. At a meeting on 25 Oct. 1831, Hyrum Smith requested Joseph Smith to tell the elders the story of the Book of Mormon’s coming forth. To which Joseph Smith responded that “it was not intended to tell the world all the particulars of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, & also said that it was not expedient for him to relate these things &c.” (Far West Record). When Joseph Smith decided to give an account in 1832, he said “the Lord had prepared spectacles for to read the book” (EMD 1:30), but provided few details. In his 1834-35 history, Cowdery gave a similar statement that was very similar to his 1848 statement at Council Bluffs: “Day after day I continued, uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated, with the Urim and Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, ‘Interpreters,’ the history, or record, called ‘The Book of Mormon’” (
Messenger and Advocate 1 [October 1834]: 14).
It’s possible OC was using the terms generically--playing a verbal game to avoid talking about the stone in hat. It’s also possible that he simply distorted the truth as he did for other parts of the story. In the same history, he gave the following account of Joseph Smith’s 1823 attempt to take the plates from the hill:
On attempting to take possession of the record a shock was produced upon his system, by an invisible power which deprived him, in a measure, of his natural strength. He desisted for an instant, and then made another attempt, but was more sensibly shocked than before. What was the occasion of this he knew not there was the pure unsullied record, as had been described -- he had heard of the power of enchantment, and a thousand like stories, which held the hidden treasures of the earth, and supposed that physical exertion and personal strength was only necessary to enable him to yet obtain the object of his wish. He therefore made the third attempt with an increased exertion, when his strength failed him more than at either of the former times, and without premeditating he exclaimed, “Why can I not obtain this book?” ...
--Messenger and Advocate 1 [October 1835]: 197-98.
This was another attempt at distancing Joseph Smith’s story from his discredited money-digging past. By this time OC had been made co-president of the church and was being assisted by Joseph Smith in writing this history. The two were formulating the church’s official version of the story that would counter anti-Mormon claims published by E. D. Howe in 1834 that connected Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon’s coming forth with folk-magic stories of treasure guardians.
None of this means OC was a coconspirator with Joseph Smith, only that he was willing to lie to promote the Book of Mormon and God’s church.INTRODUCTION OF THE TERM “URIM AND THUMMIM”The term “Urim and Thummim” was not used in the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith’s early revelations. The translating instrument was called “directors” or “interpreters” in the Book of Mormon (Mos. 8:13, 19; 28:20; Alma 37:24; Eth. 4:5). Joseph Smith’s 1832 history called the instrument “spectacles” (EMD 1:30). William W. Phelps was apparently first to associate the spectacles with “Urim and Thummim”:
It was translated by the gift and power of God, by an unlearned man, through the aid of a pair of Interpreters, or spectacles -- (known, perhaps, in ancient days as Teraphim, or Urim and Thummim) and while it unfolds the history of the first inhabitants that settled this continent, it, at the same time, brings a oneness to scripture, like the days of the apostles; ...
--The Evening and The Morning Star 1 (January 1833): 58.
URIM AND THUMMIM ADDED IN 1835 D&CIn revising his early revelations for publication in the 1835 D&C, Joseph Smith added two references to “Urim and Thummim”. The following revelation dates to May 1829; the words in italic were not in the first publication in the 1833 Book of Commandments:
Now, behold, I say unto you, that because you delivered up those writings which you had power given unto you to translate by the means of the Urim and Thummim, into the hands of a wicked man, you have lost them. (D&C 10:1)
The revelation pertaining to the three witnesses given in June 1829 wasn’t published in the BofC, but the term “Urim and Thummim” is an anachronism that probably originally read “interpreters” or “directors”.
Behold, I say unto you, that you must rely upon my word, which if you do with full purpose of heart, you shall have a view of the plates, and also the breastplate, the sword of Laban, the Urim and Thummim, which were given to the brother of Jared upon the mount, when he talked with the Lord face to face, and the miraculous directors which were given to Lehi while in the wilderness, on the borders of the Red Sea. (D&C 17:1)
Ezra Booth had criticized the revelation in 1831 because it promised the witnesses a view of the plates by the “eye of faith” (
Ohio Star [27 Oct. 1831]: 3), which may have been the reason for its suppression in 1833. There is no MS copy of this revelation, and the pages containing it in earliest collection of revelations (“A Book of Commandments & Revelations ...”) were torn out of the book.
It is important to note that Joseph Smith did not claim the Nephite “interpreters” were
the “Urim and Thummim”--that is, the one that Aaron and the Israelite high priests used. It was understood that he was using it as a generic term for all such instruments, including the Nephite spectacles.
JOSEPH SMITH’S 1838 HISTORYE. D. Howe’s publication of documents in 1834 describing Joseph Smith as a money-digger who used a peep stone in a hat to find buried treasure (which always seemed to supernaturally slip away through the ground before being unearthed) was one of the main reasons Joseph Smith tried to sanitize his official 1838 history of anything that sounded like folk magic or treasure lore. In a paper I delivered at the Mormon Historical Association in Vermont several years ago, I said:
Autobiographies, especially those produced institutionally, are, in the words of British historiographer John Tosh, “often inaccurate and selective to the point of distortion. ... notorious for their errors of recall and their special pleading.” Louis Gottschalk’s historical primer warns that official histories tend “to suppress embarrassing, incriminating, and confidential information, and to present apologia.” A critical assessment of Joseph Smith’s autobiographies will therefore resist the impulse to harmonize, but highlight changes in detail and emphasis; attempt to verify details against external sources; seek to reconstruct chronology and uncover anachronisms; take note of events glossed over or suppressed; and listen carefully for apologia and rhetorical manipulation. The purpose of such an exercise would not necessarily be to raise questions about the veracity of Smith’s truth-claims, although a non-historical Book of Mormon would entail such issues, but rather as a means of exploring the manner in which he tailored his image to serve the needs of his followers.
Apologetic concerns are apparent right from the first lines of Smith’s 1838 autobiography:
“Owing to the many reports which have been put in circulation by evil disposed and designing persons [he began] ... I have been induced to write this history so as to disabuse the public mind, and put all enquirers after truth into possession of the facts ...”
Contrary to this promise, Smith was less than forthcoming when he misrepresented his involvement in money-digging as a one-time event in 1825 as one of Josiah Stowell’s hired hands. In fact, however, he was a leader in many such operations over a period of at least three years, locating the places to dig with his seer stone. Non-Mormon historian Alan Taylor, who charitably referred to Smith’s prevarication as a “de-emphasis,” suggested that “[Smith] recognized that a reputation for treasure-seeking was a handicap in communicating his message to an audience increasingly committed to rationality and a more abstract understanding of religion.” Jan Shipps was also charitable when she said: “It seems reasonable to conclude that the motive for playing down this part of the prophet’s background was the knowledge that it could be used as the basis for charges that might endanger his reputation.”
Actually, Joseph Smith was doing more than preserving his reputation; he was overhauling his history and reinventing himself to become a more suitable leader for his followers and potential followers. If Smith was to consolidate and expand his authority and influence, his story would have to lose its cultural particularity and become more universal. Thus it is also quite apparent, as D. Michael Quinn and others have demonstrated, that Joseph Smith “de-emphasized” the folk-magic and treasure-seeking context of his 1823 and 1827 encounters with “Moroni,” and inserted anachronistic elements such as the terms “angel” and “Urim and Thummim” and the reference to Elijah returning to reveal the “priesthood,” all of which gave it a more mainstream Christian flavoring. --Dan Vogel, “In Pursuit of the Elusive Joseph Smith,” MHA Meeting, May 2005.
For those who think I’m too sympathetic and uncritical towards Mormonism, imagine saying those words to that conservative society. I quoted this to show that we have to treat Joseph Smith’s history as any official history, as propaganda. That doesn’t mean we throw it out. Instead, we study it to learn how it manipulates or suppresses information. We do that by reference to outside sources. The shift away from folk-magic origins meant the head in hat disappeared and the spectacles--called by the euphemism “Urim and Thummim”--became the official explanation. Use of this term in Joseph Smith’s 1838 History obscured the distinction between the spectacles and seer stone, and this primarily became the reason for so much confusion. The following are quotes from the
History of the Church probably referring to the spectacles as “Urim and Thummim”:
He also said that the fullness of the everlasting Gospel was contained in it, as delivered by the Savior to the ancient inhabitants; also that there were two stones in silver bows and these stones, fastened to a breastplate, constituted what is called the Urim and Thummim deposited with the plates; and the possession and use of these stones were what constituted "Seers" in ancient or former times; and that God had prepared them for the purpose of translating the book. ...
Again, he told me, that when I got those plates of which he had spoken—for the time that they should be obtained was not yet fulfilled I should not show them to any person; neither the breast plate with the Urim and Thummim; only to those to whom I should be commanded to show them; ...
I looked in, and there indeed did I behold the plates, the Urim and Thummim, and the breastplate, as stated by the messenger. ...
At length the time arrived for obtaining the plates, the Urim and Thummim, and the Breastplate. ..
I commenced copying the characters off the plates. I copied a considerable number of them, and by means of the Urim and Thummim I translated some of them, ...
--History of the Church, 1:12, 13, 18, 19.
Joseph Smith’s early revelations were given through the same head in hat method. Orson Pratt related in 1878 “the circumstances under which revelations were received by Joseph . . . he [Elder Pratt] being present on several occasions of the kind.... At such times Joseph used the ‘seer stone’ when inquiring of the Lord, and receiving revelations, but that he was so thoroughly endowed with the inspiration of the Almighty and the spirit of revelation that he often received them without any instrument or other means than the operation of the spirit upon his mind” (
Millennial Star 40 [16 Dec. 1878]: 787). The revelation pertaining to Orson Pratt was dictated on 4 November 1830 through the seer stone (D&C 34). James R. B. Vancleave interviewed Orson Pratt in 1878 and reported that “Joseph ... asked Pratt and John Whitmer to go upstairs with him, and on arriving there Joseph produced a small stone called a seer stone, and putting it into a hat ... asked Elder P[ratt]. to write as he would speak, but being too young and timid and feeling his unworthiness he asked whether Bro. John W[hitmer]. could not write it, and the Prophet said that he could: Then came the revelation” (James R. B. Vancleave to Joseph Smith III, 29 Sept. 1878, Community of Christ Archives). David Whitmer claimed he was “present when Brother Joseph gave nearly every revelation that is in the Book of Commandments”, and that “Brother Joseph [gave] the revelations of 1829 through the same stone through which the Book was translated” (
An Address to All Believers in the Book of Mormon, 3). Headings in the current LDS Doctrine and Covenants for Sections 3, 6, 7, 11, and 14-17, received July 1828-June 1829, state that they were given to Joseph Smith by “Urim and Thummim”. This information comes from the
History of the Church. The following are quotes from the
History of the Church probably referring to the seer stone as “Urim and Thummim”:
Some time after Mr. Harris had begun to write for me, he began to importune me to give him liberty to carry the writings home and show them; and desired of me that I would inquire of the Lord, through the Urim and Thummim, if he might not do so. ...
I inquired of the Lord through the Urim and Thummim, and obtained the following: [D&C 6] ...
... we mutually agreed to settle it by the Urim and Thummim and the following is the word which we received: [D&C 7] ...
I inquired of the Lord through the Urim and Thummim, and received for him the following: [D&C 11] ...
In the meantime, David, John and Peter Whitmer, Jun.,12 became our zealous friends and assistants in the work; and being anxious to know their respective duties, and having desired with much earnestness that I should inquire of the Lord concerning them, I did so, through the means of the Urim and Thummim, and obtained for them in succession the following revelations: [D&C 14] ...
... Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and the aforementioned Martin Harris (who had come to inquire after our progress in the work) that they would have me inquire of the Lord to know if they might not obtain of him the privilege to be these three special witnesses; and finally they became so very solicitous, and urged me so much to inquire that at length I complied; and through the Urim and Thummim, I obtained of the Lord for them the following: [D&C 17] ...
--History of the Church, 1:21, 33, 36, 45, 49, 53.
Book of Mormon TRANSLATED WITH URIM AND THUMMIM (SPECTACLES): OFFICIAL VERSIONJoseph Smith was well into dictating his official 1838 history when he gave the following answer to the question: “How, and where did you obtain the Book of Mormon?”
Moroni, the person who deposited the plates, from whence the Book of Mormon was translated, in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County, New York, being dead, and raised again therefrom, appeared unto me and told me where they were and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them and the Urim and Thummim with them, by the means of which I translated the plates and thus came the Book of Mormon. --Elder’s Journal 1 (July 1838): 42-43.
Similarly, in his letter to John Wentworth, 1 March 1842, Joseph Smith said:
With the records was found a curious instrument, which the ancients called “Urim and Thummim,” which consisted of two transparent stones set in the rim of a bow fastened to a breast plate. Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift and power of God. ... --History of the Church, 4:537.
Technically, Joseph Smith did translate the Book of Mormon with the “Urim and Thummim”--just not with the one discovered with the plates.
GENERIC USE OF “URIM AND THUMMIM” BY JOSEPH SMITHThe place where God resides is a great Urim and Thummim. This earth in its sanctified and immortal state, will be made like unto crystal and will be a Urim and Thummim to the inhabitants who dwell thereon, whereby all things pertaining to an inferior kingdom, or all kingdoms of a lower order, will be manifest to those who dwell on it; and this earth will be Christ's. Then the white stone mentioned in Revelation ii: 17, will become a Urim and Thummim to each individual who receives one, whereby things pertaining to a higher order of kingdoms, will be made known; and a white stone is given to each of those who come into the celestial kingdom, whereon is a new name written, which no man knoweth save he that receiveth it. --History of the Church, 5:323-24.
GENERIC USE OF THE TERM “URIM AND THUMMIM” BY OTHERSLucy Smith’s 1845 History refers to the seer stone as a “Urim and Thummim”:
That of which I spoke, which Joseph termed a key, was indeed, nothing more nor less than the Urim and Thummim, and it was by this that the angel showed him many things which he saw in vision; by which also he could ascertain, at any time, the approach of danger, either to himself or the Record, and on account of which he always kept the Urim and Thummim about his person. --Biographical Sketches (1853), 106.
Wilford Woodruff’s journal describes a Quorum of the Twelve meeting held 27 December 1841 in Nauvoo:
The Twelve, or part of them, spent the day with Joseph the Seer, and he confided unto them many glorious things of the Kingdom of God. The privileges and blessings of the priesthood, etc. I had the privilege of seeing for the first time in my day, the Urim and Thummim.
Parley P. Pratt reportedly said in 1842:
The Pearl of Great Price is now in course of translation by means of the Urim and Thummim and proves to be a record written partly by the father of the faithful, Abraham, and finished by Joseph when in Egypt. --Millennial Star 3 (July 1842): 47.
Orson Pratt made a similar claim in 1878:
The Prophet translated the part of these writings which, as I have said, is contained in the Pearl of Great Price, and known as the Book of Abraham. Thus you see one of the first gifts bestowed by the Lord for the benefit of His people, was that of revelation, the gift to translate by the aid of the Urim and Thummim. --Journal of Discourses, 20:65.
Wilford Woodruff wrote in his journal:
The Lord is blessing with power to reveal the mysteries of the kingdom of God; to translate by the Urim and Thummim ancient records and hieroglyphics old as Abraham or Adam. --Wilford Woodruff journal, 19 Feb. 1842.
Referring to the Chase seer stone, which had been brought to Salt Lake City by Phineas Young, Heber C. Kimball said in 1853:
Has Brother Brigham got the Urim and Thummim? Yes, he has everything that is necessary for him to receive the will and mind of God to this people. --Journal of Discourses, 2:111.
CONCLUSIONAfter the official story became Joseph Smith translated with the spectacles--just as the Book of Mormon implied--and the term “Urim and Thummim” connected that instrument with the Old Testament, most converts were unaware of the stone in the hat story--which was just as Joseph Smith wanted it. So when the eyewitnesses told the truth about the head in the hat, they were risking criticism from a majority of fellow believers, although they knew there were others who could verify what they claimed. Cowdery evidently stuck with the expected story when speaking to a Mormon audience and seeking rebaptism in 1848. It appeared to believers that some of the “apostate” eyewitness were supporting the anti-Mormons who had linked the head in hat with discredited treasure digging.
So while they were eager to give reasons to support their belief in Joseph Smith’s gift, they were doing it in a way that pleased anti-Mormons and displeased mainstream believers. In a certain way, the stone in hat worked against their self interest and adds to their credibility as witnesses.