“Wither she did go” ??

[Shulem]

In the meantime, "wither did that poor ship go?" Right into the mouth of the Susquehanna River and into the land northward. Yeah, baby! That's exactly what Smith was thinking while looking at his American map.

Shulem, do you think they arrived at Otsego Lake? How far could the Susquehanna River be navigated?

That's a question best given to Dan Vogel who has been doing a lot of podcasts lately and mentioning Kidd and the Susquehanna. You'd think he's smart enough to make the connection but I've not had much luck convincing him of much of anything. He's stuck on his stupid Panama neck and mound thingy. I don't know about Dan. It's going to take a lot work to convert him to Delmarva. Oh for Christ's sake.

Vogel’s recent podcast interview (Aug 31, 2022) mentions Captain Kidd’s alleged treasure in association to Joseph Smith’s treasure digging. Thus, the lore of Kidd’s treasure is brough closer to Smith via the Susquehanna River which I believe is the same river in which Joseph Smith envisioned Hagoth sailing from the west sea of the narrow neck “into the land northward”.

video snip
Dan Vogel Interview part 1- Magical Worldview & Seer Stones

Robert (William) Kidd, he was a pirate and eventually caught and hung, hanged, in London. So, the tale was that Robert (William) Kidd, Captain Kidd, buried his treasure along the Atlantic shore of America of the United States and so treasure digging was more prevalent along that shore but the people that were inland kind of started trying to tap into that lore also by saying that Captain Kidd may have not buried it on the shore, maybe he buried his treasure upstream, along the streamways, that connected to the Atlantic, various people would be digging for Captain Kidd’s treasure along there….

video snip
Dan Vogel Interview part 1- Magical Worldview & Seer Stones

What I was going to mention was that the waterways, and one of them was that maybe Captain Kidd went up the Susquehanna River and the Susquehanna River goes through Harmony Pennsylvania. This is the river that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery baptized themselves in and it’s the river in the house Joseph lived in was in feet of this river and they believe that in 1825 when Joseph Smith was hired by Josiah Stowell to go there, and he had dug the previous year without success….

video snip
Dan Vogel Interview part 1- Magical Worldview & Seer Stones

Josiah Stowell wasn’t the first to dig on this hill either, there were two previous digs at the same location without success. So, they had imagined that the treasure of the pirates had gone up the Susquehanna and stopped there and dug a hole and buried the treasure in it and it was enchanted and so when Josiah Stowell went and hired Joseph Smith to take him there in November, so he had dug on it in the summer before this November 1825, or October, in November they finally got there and when they got there on the 11th if I’m not mistaken, they signed a contract there and this is where Joseph Smith met Isaac Hale, Emma Hale’s Father, because some of the money diggers were boarding with him.

Dan,

If Joseph Smith can imagine Captain Kidd sailing up the Susquehanna River to bury treasure then it’s equally reasonable that he could envision Hagoth sailing up the same river to deposit his treasure which consisted of people looking for a better life.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Why Otsego lake? This is the first time I’ve heard of this.

- Doc

[Shulem]

Why Otsego lake? This is the first time I’ve heard of this.

- Doc

Beats me. But Otsego Lake is the source of the Susquehanna and therefore would be the end of the line for anyone traveling upstream.

[Moksha]

Why Otsego lake? This is the first time I’ve heard of this.

- Doc

Beats me. But Otsego Lake is the source of the Susquehanna and therefore would be the end of the line for anyone traveling upstream.

Sort of a shame an entire Book of Mormon section was not dedicated to that epic river journey. A tale of the journey from the West Sea of the Chesapeake Bay to the unknown Otsego Lake would have helped to enliven many General Conference talks. The Interpreter Foundation would be hesitant to put forth Lake Titicaca as the disembarkation point because of the name.

[Shulem]

So, Dan the man, what do you think of girl-ships in the Bible and in the Book of Mormon?

Hi, Shulem.

[Shulem]

12. All A.I.-generated text may only be posted within the appropriate forums' artificial intelligence megathreads, found here for Mormon-related topics and here for non-Mormon topics. Additionally, do not post any links to anything in those threads (just send the person whom you want to see the text a private message pointing it out). For additional information, see here.

I no longer require the assistance of David Bokovoy or Dan McClellan because I got A.I.to answer my question and A.I. is a pro! As per the Universal Rule, I cannot quote A.I. text in this thread, however, I may formulate results and provide an explanation from my enquiry in my own words.

I asked A.I. the following:

Did the Jews in about 600 BC refer to ships or boats using the feminine pronoun "her" or "she" like sailors do in modern times? Was this nautical expression used by Jews anciently?

I learned:

1. The practice of referring to ships in that manner was not part of the language and customs of ancient Jews.
2. Ancient Hebrew nouns are categorized and possess linguistic grammatical gender. The word for ship was oniyah which is a feminine noun but this does not imply that a vessel was referred or personified in feminine nautical terms.
3. The feminine oniyah was a technical grammatical term for a ship but is not to be compared to modern maritime customs of referring to ships as "she" or "her". The ancient Jews did not personify ships in feminine terms like modern English speaking sailors just because the noun was classed as a feminine Hebrew word.

I then asked A.I. the following question:

Please evaluate two specific verses from the Book of Mormon written by authors (Alma 63:8 & Mormon 5:18) who were said to be descendants from a group of people that left Israel in 600 BC and sailed to America where they established new colonies for the next thousand years. Is the use of feminine pronouns for ships in their times (147 BC – 350 AD) appropriate or are they anachronisms produced by the modern translator, Joseph Smith. 1) "And it came to pass that they were never heard of more. And we suppose that they were drowned in the depths of the sea. And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and whither SHE did go we know not." 2) "But now, behold, they are led about by Satan, even as chaff is driven before the wind, or as a vessel is tossed about upon the waves, without sail or anchor, or without anything wherewith to steer HER; and even as SHE is, so are they."

The answer A.I. gave me is somewhat inconclusive and could be interpreted in favor of Smith's modern translation of an alleged ancient text or it could show how his 19th century thinking influenced stories in fiction. I interpret the A.I. response as evidence that Smith was making stuff up on the fly and was speaking for Alma and Mormon, quite literally as the original and only author. Also, the question concerning the argument for a tight translation vs. loose translation influences how the results are interpreted. There are some big ifs regarding translation being "dynamic" or "idiomatic" and whether it was "strict" or "literal".

Perhaps I will publish those results in the official A.I. thread if anyone is interested or readers can plug my questions into A.I. and get their own results.

Nonetheless, this is not a good day for Mormonism. The apologists are left without a paddle.

Folks, the Mormon ship is sinking, fast!



PS. I think this is a good subject for RFM to take up.

Historically, from a faithful point of view, Mormon was responsible for the feminine pronoun (she) that appears in Alma 63:8 because he compiled and abridged the records and moreover was responsible for the feminine pronouns (her & she) in his own book that described a vessel in that nature. It's a rather glaring omission that there are no like comparisons in Nephi's account while crossing the ocean. Why is that? And nothing is ever said about what became of the ship once they landed. Why not tell how they dismantled their ship of faith and used it for building a base camp? The ship was just too important to the whole operation not to mention what happened to it and what ever happened to Nephi's poor mother? Perhaps those details were mentioned in the lost 116 pages along with the number of days they were at sea during the voyage to the promised land. So many important missing details!

But getting back to Mormon and his description of ships using a feminine idiom and how on earth he thought to use it is beyond me. There simply is nothing in the record's narrative that lends me to think how Mormon would think in those terms because he was a land general and little is ever said about seafaring or nautical enterprise, military or civilian. So, it all comes back to the translator and true author of the book novel, Joseph Smith. Whether one ascribes to a tight translation or a loose translation really makes little difference because the whole story was the product of Joseph Smith who used his knowledge to invent whatever he wanted. The feminine expressions for seafaring used in the Book of Mormon seem very much out of place and inconsistent with the rest of the book's thousand year history.

Lots of literature borrows heavily from other literature.

In this thread, I posted twice on page 6 about the 19th century English poet William Wordsworth's sonnet (traditional 14-line poem) and how it compares to wording found in Alma that references Hagoth's ship: here and here.

It's possible/plausible that American readers in the 1820's (including the Smiths) were familiar with some English poetry produced by poets such as John Keats and William Wordsworth. My question is, did Smith borrow from Wordsworth's sonnet, "With Ships the Sea was Sprinkled Far and Nigh"?

I want to revisit this and reconsider the possibilities:

5 And it came to pass that Hagoth, he being an exceedingly curious man, therefore he went forth and built him an [1] exceedingly large ship, on the borders of the land Bountiful, by the land Desolation, and launched it forth into the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward.

6 And behold, there were many of the Nephites who did enter therein and did sail forth with much provisions, and also many women and children; and they took their course northward. And thus ended the thirty and seventh year.

7 And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built other ships. And the first ship did also return, and many more people did enter into it; and they also took much provisions, and set out again to the land northward.

8 And it came to pass that they were never heard of more. And we suppose that they were drowned in the depths of the sea. And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and [2] whither she did go we know not.

9 And it came to pass that in this year there were many people [3] who went forth into the land northward. And thus ended the thirty and eighth year.

With ships the sea was sprinkled far and nigh,
Like stars in heaven, and joyously it showed;
Some lying fast at anchor in the road,
Some veering up and down, one knew not why.
A goodly vessel did I then espy
Come [1] like a giant from a haven broad;
And lustily along the bay she strode,
Her tackling rich, and of apparel high.
The ship was nought to me, nor I to her,
Yet I pursued her with a lover's look;
This ship to all the rest did I prefer:
[2] When will she turn, and whither? She will brook
No tarrying; where she comes the winds must stir:
[3] On went she, and due north her journey took.

The driving force in making this comparison is based on three things:

• Large/Giant Ship
• Whither did she Go/Turn
• Went/Journey forth Northward/North

BONUS POINTS:

Smith's story converted into sonnet (14-line) form:

And it came to pass that Hagoth, he being an exceedingly curious man, therefore he went forth
and built him an exceedingly large ship, on the borders of the land Bountiful, by the land Desolation,
and launched it forth into the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward.
And behold, there were many of the Nephites who did enter therein and did sail forth with much provisions,
and also many women and children;
and they took their course northward.
And thus ended the thirty and seventh year.
And in the thirty and eighth year, this man built other ships.
And the first ship did also return, and many more people did enter into it;
and they also took much provisions, and set out again to the land northward.
And it came to pass that they were never heard of more.
And we suppose that they were drowned in the depths of the sea.
And it came to pass that one other ship also did sail forth; and whither she did go we know not.
And it came to pass that in this year there were many people who went forth into the land northward.

[Physics Guy]

I'm sorry, but that just is not a sonnet.
We need more than just line count here, doggone it.
Forgive me if I have a bee in bonnet.
You shaped your text and polished it and shone it,
But it should scan—five feet per line, count on it;
And it should rhyme. The rhymes should all be honnête,
Ideally. In practice, you can con it,
With foreign words and trips to County Connaught.

At this point you may cry, "Fie, out upon it!
"If this poem were a board, I would've sawn it!
"If this poem were a watch, I'd go and pawn it!
"A truly awful verse! Ain't no-one wannit!"

Well, you are right, I must admit, doggone it.
But technically, at least, it is a sonnet.

[Shulem]

I'm sorry, but that just is not a sonnet.
We need more than just line count here, doggone it.
Forgive me if I have a bee in bonnet.

You are absolutely correct that it is not a sonnet and thank you for your lovely piece!

Forgive me for giving the impression that I was producing a sonnet out of Smith's verses but I was merely taking the content of the verses in question and breaking them down into 14-line form to see how the [3] components I highlighted aligned within the text. The whole point of this exercise is to see if it can reasonably be inferred that there is a connection between the Wordsworth sonnet and Smith's story of Hagoth. It's the three components that I flagged in the text that caught my interest. Either there was a genuine connection in Smith's mind or there was not. That is the question!

I think the answer is probably not. But I'm open to the possibility and the whole purpose of this exercise is to flesh it out and see where it goes from there.

Do my three points of interest share a connection?

[1] exceedingly large
[2] whither she did go we know not.
[3] who went forth into the land northward.

[1] like a giant
[2] When will she turn, and whither?
[3] On went she, and due north her journey took.

The driving force in making this comparison is based on three things:

• Large/Giant Ship
• Whither did she Go/Turn
• Went/Journey forth Northward/North

There are connotations to Wordsworth's sonnet that may not have been fully appreciated by readers here who are considering the implications of what I'm suggesting insomuch that Joseph Smith may have been attracted to this particular sonnet -- that is, the sonnet has sexual undertones and everyone knows that Joseph loved the ladies. If so, please zero in on these beauties taken from the sonnet:

A goodly vessel did I then espy
And lustily along the bay she strode,
Yet I pursued her with a lover's look;
This ship to all the rest did I prefer:

Yeah, Joseph Smith loved to ride the ladies, especially Fanny behind the barn. Fornication, infidelity, adultery, and polygamy were the ways of the prophet!

[1] exceedingly large
[2] whither she did go we know not.
[3] who went forth into the land northward.

[1] like a giant
[2] When will she turn, and whither?
[3] On went she, and due north her journey took.

Wordsworth & Smith combined:

• Like a giant & exceedingly large
• When will she turn, and whither/whither she did go we know not
• On went she, and due north her journey took who went forth into the land northward

Plugged into Delmarva:







Hi Moksha! RIP.

But getting back to Mormon and his description of ships using a feminine idiom and how on earth he thought to use it is beyond me. There simply is nothing in the record's narrative that lends me to think how Mormon would think in those terms because he was a land general and little is ever said about seafaring or nautical enterprise, military or civilian.

THIS:

I must correct myself. Mormon combined and abridged the records and specifically called attention to Nephite shipping but does not provide any details of those accounts ("books" & "records"):

14 But behold, a hundredth part of the proceedings of this people, yea, the account of the Lamanites and of the Nephites, and their wars, and contentions, and dissensions, and their preaching, and their prophecies, and their shipping and their building of ships, and their building of temples, and of synagogues and their sanctuaries, and their righteousness, and their wickedness, and their murders, and their robbings, and their plundering, and all manner of abominations and whoredoms, cannot be contained in this work.

15 But behold, there are many books and many records of every kind, and they have been kept chiefly by the Nephites.

16 And they have been handed down from one generation to another by the Nephites...

Bottom Line

Mormon and Joseph Smith were one in the same person, so anything Mormon read, so also did Joseph Smith, and that would include Late War by Gilbert Hunt.



After further review, I have since learned there are no ancient Hebrew records dating from biblical times that personify a ship or vessel using the personal pronoun "she" or "her" that identify a vessel as a female entity.

Joseph Smith speaking with his face in a hat while pretending to speak for Alma/Mormon by reading God's word on a stone is the exception.

And there you have it!

[huckelberry]

Checking navigation on the Susquehanna river I read it is shallow and difficult to go upstream in. People used it to ship downstream in high water. This does not fit your scenario but I do not know what Joseph Smith was aware of.

I think there is a possibility that his story mapping superimposed your map for details on a Panama idea with no details beside seas and north and south.

[Shulem]

Checking navigation on the Susquehanna river I read it is shallow and difficult to go upstream in. People used it to ship downstream in high water. This does not fit your scenario but I do not know what Joseph Smith was aware of.

Huck, it seems appropriate that I cut and paste posts from my Terrestrial geography thread rather than simply post the links because *this* thread is about ships at sea and how Smith perceived them.

Here area a couple of clips from that thread:

Young Joseph was very interested in Captain Kidd and his voyages.

See: Mormon Think: by Grant H. Palmer

He [Joseph] saw Captain Kidd sailing on the Susquehanna River during a freshet, and that he buried two pots of gold and silver. He claimed he saw writing cut on the rocks in an unknown language telling where Kidd buried it, and he translated it through his peepstone … [and then] dug for Kidd's money, on the west bank of the Susquehanna, half a mile from the river.

(Arthur B. Deming, ed., Naked Truths About Mormonism 1 (Oakland, CA, January 1888): 2, qtd. in Vogel, Early Mormon Documents, 4:182-84.)

he knew Jo[seph] Smith when he was digging near the Susquehanna River for Capt. Kidd's Money. Jo[seph] had a peep-stone through which he claimed to see hidden or buried treasures.

(May 1885, cited in Arthur Deming, Naked Truths About Mormonism, 3, qtd. in Vogel, Early Mormon Documents 4:179.)

Susquehanna River

QUESTION: From what point did Captain Kidd gain entry into the Susquehanna River?

And it came to pass that Hagoth, he being an exceedingly curious man, therefore he went forth and built him an exceedingly large ship, on the borders of the land Bountiful, by the land Desolation, and launched it forth into the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward.

I think Joseph Smith pictured Hagoth heading up the Susquehanna river.

Also, this is the key phrase which Shulem nailed, and I want to reiterate also:

And thus the land of Nephi and the land of Zarahemla were nearly surrounded by water there being a SMALL NECK OF LAND between the land northward and the land southward.

So, the area described is surrounded by water, save the small neck of land which Shulem details in earlier posts. There is literally no geographic region in the Americas that matches the description, save the delmarva peninsula. If Joseph Smith was plagiarizing the Late War (shout out to Dan Peterson), there simply isn’t any other explanation for this description to be included in the Book of Mormon. In poker, this is a tell. Joseph Smith gives his hand away, his plagiarism of the Late War by including these relatively unnecessary literary details.

- Doc

I think there is a possibility that his story mapping superimposed your map for details on a Panama idea with no details beside seas and north and south.

My geography threads talk about the four seas which are listed in the Book of Mormon. The Jaredites must have utilized the north sea in their voyage and the the south sea was a phantom nobody ever used after Lehi landed. Delmarva was the microcosm to Smith's geographic vision of the land of Nephi and the entire hemisphere was a spiritual macrocosm to everything else.