The Nephites and "the animals on which they rode".

[Uncle Dale]

...

Is your argument really more compelling than say Palmer and his The Golden Pot theory?

...

Even though Ted Chandler had this series of web-articles at his site for several years,

I did not take more than a passing interest in the matter until after the results of the

recent Standford team's BoM word-print analysis were published.

That was about the same time that Ted announced he was removing his site from the web.

The Stanford team were looking for additional old texts to "test for Rigdon," and so I

got the idea of offering them the Times & Seasons Smith history (or better yet,

its 1838 manuscript version), along with several other "suspect" Rigdon text possibilities.

I thus copied the Chandler web-pages to my own Spalding site.

I can't formulate much in the way of "arguments" on top of Ted's original reporting, until

I see what plays out in the word-print arena in the next couple of years.

In the meanwhile, I would be most happy to read any 19th century "ancient records discovery"

texts that you (or others) might send my way. Perhaps I can thus discover some examples

of unrelated narratives that resemble Smith's plates discovery account even more closely

than does Spalding.

I know you will ask "resemble? -- resemble by what objective criteria??" ----- but, I'm willing

to go upon a simple "readers' suspicion" of plagiarism, at this initial stage of investigation.

UD

[Benjamin McGuire]

Dale writes:

Even though Ted Chandler had this series of web-articles at his site for several years,

I did not take more than a passing interest in the matter until after the results of the

recent Standford team's BoM word-print analysis were published.

Dale, the Stanford team's study is completely worthless. I have in great detail listed on these forums (as you know) the several problems that it has. I do not accept it as evidence of any sort. While it is likely that the methodology could be used to be helpful in this kind of stylometric problem, it would need to be heavily modified to do so.

In the meanwhile, I would be most happy to read any 19th century "ancient records discovery"

texts that you (or others) might send my way. Perhaps I can thus discover some examples

of unrelated narratives that resemble Smith's plates discovery account even more closely

than does Spalding.

I am not interested in this - because it clearly isn't relevant to my argument - which you haven't addressed yet. Here are the two main points:

1) We can find sufficiently complex parallels of this sort between texts that have no known relationship. This means that such parallels can in fact be coincidental. The argument isn't about whether or not parallels exist, but about how you define significance - and its an issue that so far, very few (if any) of the LDS critics have ever addressed - yourself included. It isn't enough to say that the parallels exist, because parallels exist in all sorts of places without having these kinds of connotations. I don't have to find other discovery narratives, because I am not claiming that these kinds of parallels are restricted to discovery narratives. There isn't something special about a discovery narrative that makes it different from any other kind of narrative or text when talking about parallels and their significance. Your suggestion is largely a distraction leading us away from questions of method and trying to refocus us on your "oddity".

2) You speak of a spaldingish vocabulary - but what makes it uniquely spaldingish? Have you attempted to compare this spaldingish vocabulary with other contemporary writers? I am pretty certain that you haven't. Calling it Spaldingish is merely an arbitrary label that has no real underlying value.

These are the issues that deal with method - if your method doesn't stand up to scrutiny, how can we trust your conclusions or your evidence? In many ways, you remind me in this discussion a bit of Donofrio whose only response was "I know it when I see it".

I know you will ask "resemble? -- resemble by what objective criteria??" ----- but, I'm willing

to go upon a simple "readers' suspicion" of plagiarism, at this initial stage of investigation.

See what I mean? The problem, of course, is that I don't buy your claim of simple "reader's suspicion" - and I mean this both ways - I don't believe that it is plagiarism, and I don't buy your claim that you are a simply a reader.

Ben M.

[Uncle Dale]

...

I do not accept it as evidence of any sort.

...

Which is entirely understandable. Were I in your place, I might think the same.

But it is not up to you and me to make the final decisions on this. If the computerized

methology has any merit in determining authorship, then the scholarly community in

general will adapt it and make use of it. If not, then somebody will refute the two

processes the Standford team used, and will demonstrate their errors scientifically.

I don't think that will happen in the next year or two -- so you and I can express

opinions back and forth, as to what "sort" of evidence we might accept (or not);

and it won't make much difference.

If, on the other hand, you're inclined to work with the Maxwell Institute people

(or some other forum) and put your responses into the peer-reviewed literature,

I'm sure we all will be interested in seeing how your own contributions are received.

At the moment I'm more interested in coming up with a list of suspected Rigdon

writings -- which will mostly be taken from unattributed, published LDS sources.

Do you have any suggestions on how I might begin to compile such a list, for

others to examine, investigate and test, at their leisure?

UD

[Benjamin McGuire]

Unfortunately, Dale, I think this related topic is not one which I am prepared to discuss at this time.

[Uncle Dale]

Unfortunately, Dale, I think this related topic is not one which I am prepared to discuss at this time.

That's OK --

What about animals the Nephites and Jaredites might have used for transportation?

Would you exclude elephants?

UD

[Benjamin McGuire]

I wouldn't exclude anything probably - however, I don't think that the text makes much of an argument for such an animal.

The primary beast of burden seems to be human.

[Uncle Dale]

I wouldn't exclude anything probably - however, I don't think that the text makes much of an argument for such an animal.

The primary beast of burden seems to be human.

I lived in South Asia for a while. Saw lots of elephants.

People rode them all the time; but not just anybody. They were

living bulldozers and tree-carriers. The poor animals worked

day in and day out, but they generally had a rider, while performing

their arduous tasks.

Why would Jaredite domesticated elephants (assuming there

really were such things) NOT have borne a rider (a "mahut")??

UD

.

[Sevenbak]

That's OK --

What about animals the Nephites and Jaredites might have used for transportation?

Would you exclude elephants?

UD

I wouldn't.

From The Project Gutenberg EBook of Animal Carvings from Mounds of the

Mississippi Valley, by Henry W. Henshaw

Fig. 28.â??Elephant Pipe, Iowa

Fig. 29.â??Elephant Pipe, Iowa.

Fig. 27.â??The Elephant Mound, Grant County, Wisconsin.

[Sevenbak]

Sorry. You can find the images of the elephant pipes in the link provided above.

[Uncle Dale]

Sorry. You can find the images of the elephant pipes in the link provided above.

Yeah, I know about the pipes -- There is some controversy over their authenticity.

The elephant mound is generally conceded to be a bear, and the "trunk" a product

of weathering.

There were hairy elephants on Wrangle Island well into "recent" prehistoric times, so I'm

not saying that Jaredite elephants are impossible -- just that better evidence needs to

be put forth -- such as carbon-dated elephant pipes.

An authenticated depiction of an ancient American riding on an elephant would be interesting.

UD

[Sevenbak]

Yeah, I know about the pipes -- There is some controversy over their authenticity.

The elephant mound is generally conceded to be a bear, and the "trunk" a product

of weathering.

There were hairy elephants on Wrangle Island well into "recent" prehistoric times, so I'm

not saying that Jaredite elephants are impossible -- just that better evidence needs to

be put forth -- such as carbon-dated elephant pipes.

An authenticated depiction of an ancient American riding on an elephant would be interesting.

UD

Would such proof make a difference in your approach to the LDS?

[Uncle Dale]

Would such proof make a difference in your approach to the LDS?

Might help if the elephant rider so depicted was identified as "Nephi"

rather than "Sitting Bull."

UD

[Sevenbak]

Might help if the elephant rider so depicted was identified as "Nephi"

rather than "Sitting Bull."

UD

Firstly, Elephants are never mentioned in Nephite times, only Jaredite.

Perhaps Shule riding a Mastadon?

Secondly, let me repeat the question. Lets say someone discovers a pictograph, with a large man riding an elephant, carrying a sword, with body amour, walking along a beach with several wooden submarines in the background.

Would it make a difference? I'm just asking.

[Uncle Dale]

Firstly, Elephants are never mentioned in Nephite times, only Jaredite.

Perhaps Shule riding a Mastadon?

Secondly, let me repeat the question. Lets say someone discovers a pictograph, with a large man riding an elephant, carrying a sword, with body amour, walking along a beach with several wooden submarines in the background.

Would it make a difference? I'm just asking.

I would probably have about the same reaction as Dr. Talmadge had to the

so-called "Michigan Relics." He took the trouble to study the alleged discovery,

and he consulted anthropological/archaeological sources, in order to compare

the dug-up "relics" with known, authenticated preColumbian artifacts.

I'm not so accomplished a scientist as he was, so I would have to depend upon

the "experts" to inform me if some unusual modern find was valid or not. If it

were as you described, and were well authenticated, I'd probably join in with

the other scholars who were looking for reliable explanations.

UD

[Sevenbak]

I would probably have about the same reaction as Dr. Talmadge had to the

so-called "Michigan Relics." He took the trouble to study the alleged discovery,

and he consulted anthropological/archaeological sources, in order to compare

the dug-up "relics" with known, authenticated preColumbian artifacts.

I'm not so accomplished a scientist as he was, so I would have to depend upon

the "experts" to inform me if some unusual modern find was valid or not. If it

were as you described, and were well authenticated, I'd probably join in with

the other scholars who were looking for reliable explanations.

UD

I suppose I should have added "and verified as authentic". Question still stands.

I actually came back to this thread to add this, from the Wentworth Letter that I posted on another thread. It's relevant to this topic. This is from Joseph's first meeting with Moroni, as stated in his own words.

"I was also informed concerning the aboriginal inhabitants of this country [America] and shown who they were, and from whence they came; a brief sketch of their origin, progress, civilization, laws, governments, of their righteousness and iniquity, and the blessings of God being finally withdrawn from them as a people, was [also] made known unto me;"

Considering he met with Moroni many more times after this, at least 20, he knew much more than we are privy to.

[Uncle Dale]

...

in his own words.

"I was also informed concerning the aboriginal inhabitants of this country [America] and shown who they were, and from whence they came; a brief sketch of their origin, progress, civilization, laws, governments, of their righteousness and iniquity, and the blessings of God being finally withdrawn from them as a people, was [also] made known unto me;"

Considering he met with Moroni many more times after this, at least 20, he knew much more than we are privy to.

A few years ago I was in the Grandin Print Shop Visitors' Center in Palmyra

and had an opportunity to discuss "Lamanites" with our tour guide.

She assured us that "the aboriginal inhabitants of this country" were only

descendants of the Lehites in some small, unknown piece of Central

American jungle --- and that "most" of the North American Indians probably

were not descendants of Lehites and Mulekites -- probably came from Siberia.

That good Sister obviously hadn't read Smith's letter in the Chicago Democrat, eh?

UD

[Sevenbak]

A few years ago I was in the Grandin Print Shop Visitors' Center in Palmyra

and had an opportunity to discuss "Lamanites" with our tour guide.

She assured us that "the aboriginal inhabitants of this country" were only

descendants of the Lehites in some small, unknown piece of Central

American jungle --- and that "most" of the North American Indians probably

were not descendants of Lehites and Mulekites -- probably came from Siberia.

That good Sister obviously hadn't read Smith's letter in the Chicago Democrat, eh?

UD

Obviously. Not only is it in the Wentworth letter, it was also in that good sister's scriptures in the Pearl of Great Price.

Joseph Smithâ??History 1:34

He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang.

Yet another reason the modern Limited Geography Theory of Mesoamerica doesn't work.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Obviously. Not only is it in the Wentworth letter, it was also in that good sister's scriptures in the Pearl of Great Price.

Joseph Smithâ??History 1:34

He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang.

Yet another reason the modern Limited Geography Theory of Mesoamerica doesn't work.

That is not not so cut and dry as you would have it. Mexico is still on this continent. What did JS mean by it? Well we would have to ask him everything else is speculation.

[Sevenbak]

That is not not so cut and dry as you would have it. Mexico is still on this continent. What did JS mean by it? Well we would have to ask him everything else is speculation.

What he meant by it is what he said in the Wentworth letter. "This Country", America. That doesn't exclude Mesoamerica, but he's talking specifically about the ancient inhabitants of this country.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

What he meant by it is what he said in the Wentworth letter. "This Country", America. That doesn't exclude Mesoamerica, but he's talking specifically about the ancient inhabitants of this country.

Yeah, I know we have gone down this road but I feel we should revisit jsut a portion of this. You do realise that by the end of the BoM being a Nephite or a Lamanite was not something that was or always had to be about being a "Lehite" or having Lehite DNA, as the critics would call it. It was a political term. I am just going off of the text of the BoM. It very well may have included America and judging by JS's own words it would seem that it did include parts of america or all of it.

Any way carry on.

[Joseph Antley]

Going back to my original post, Peter Ingersoll reported this in his hostile affidavit:

"At another time, he [Joseph Smith, Sr.] told me that the ancient inhabitants of this country used camels instead of horses. For proof of this fact, he stated that in a certain hill on the farm of Mr. Cuyler, there was a cave containing an immense value of gold and silver, stands of arms, also, a saddle for a camel, hanging on a peg at one side of the cave. I asked him, of what kind of wood the peg was. He could not tell, but said it had become similar to stone or iron." (Ingersoll affidavit, Mormonism Unvailed, 233)

[Sevenbak]

Yeah, I know we have gone down this road but I feel we should revisit jsut a portion of this. You do realise that by the end of the BoM being a Nephite or a Lamanite was not something that was or always had to be about being a "Lehite" or having Lehite DNA, as the critics would call it. It was a political term. I am just going off of the text of the BoM. It very well may have included America and judging by JS's own words it would seem that it did include parts of america or all of it.

Any way carry on.

Absolutely. By that time, the seed was well mixed with the tribe of Judah (Mulek).

But this wasn't about Lehi seed, it was about the record being about the "ancient inhabitants of this country or continent", being the history of the BOM.

[Sevenbak]

Going back to my original post, Peter Ingersoll reported this in his hostile affidavit:

"At another time, he [Joseph Smith, Sr.] told me that the ancient inhabitants of this country used camels instead of horses. For proof of this fact, he stated that in a certain hill on the farm of Mr. Cuyler, there was a cave containing an immense value of gold and silver, stands of arms, also, a saddle for a camel, hanging on a peg at one side of the cave. I asked him, of what kind of wood the peg was. He could not tell, but said it had become similar to stone or iron." (Ingersoll affidavit, Mormonism Unvailed, 233)

Has there ever been corroborating evidence of JS saying this, other than this hostile source? And if so, is he talking Adamites (pre-flood), of which there is plenty of evidence of ancient camels in this continent?

It seems to me a wood peg that had turned to stone would be much older than any of the Nephite record.

[Joseph Antley]

Has there ever been corroborating evidence of JS saying this, other than this hostile source? And if so, is he talking Adamites (pre-flood), of which there is plenty of evidence of ancient camels in this continent?

It seems to me a wood peg that had turned to stone would be much older than any of the Nephite record.

As mentioned in the OP, Joseph Jr. used to describe to the family the culture of the Nephites/Lamanites, as he was told by Moroni--or at least he deduced these things about Nephite/Lamanite life from what Moroni told him.

As far as I know, there is no other mention of Joseph Sr. describing ancient American camels, but Ingersoll's account is consistent with Lucy describing Joseph entertaining the family with information about the Nephites and "the animals on which they rode".

Assuming there's any truth to Ingersoll's comment, it is unlikely that he is remembering the discussion word-for-word, and there's always the possibility (or, in this case, probability) of embellishment. And if Joseph Sr. did describe Nephite "camels", it wouldn't necessarily refer to what we know as "camels"--along the same lines that the Book of Mormon's "horses" aren't literally what the Smiths understood as "horses".

[Sevenbak]

As mentioned in the OP, Joseph Jr. used to describe to the family the culture of the Nephites/Lamanites, as he was told by Moroni--or at least he deduced these things about Nephite/Lamanite life from what Moroni told him.

As far as I know, there is no other mention of Joseph Sr. describing ancient American camels, but Ingersoll's account is consistent with Lucy describing Joseph entertaining the family with information about the Nephites and "the animals on which they rode".

Assuming there's any truth to Ingersoll's comment, it is unlikely that he is remembering the discussion word-for-word, and there's always the possibility (or, in this case, probability) of embellishment. And if Joseph Sr. did describe Nephite "camels", it wouldn't necessarily refer to what we know as "camels"--along the same lines that the Book of Mormon's "horses" aren't literally what the Smiths understood as "horses".

Yes, I understand where you are coming from, and the only thing I am leery of is the existence of an actual statement by Joseph on the matter. Still, I have no reason to expect that they didn't exist, given their remains have been found alongside Mastodons and Mammoths, etc.

Does the BOM mention them? No. Does the BOM contain even a hundredth part of the record or considered to be a historical record in and of itself? No.