The Anthon Manuscript

[Brian 2.0]

I friend of mine recently showed me some article about the characters on the manuscript and their similarity with some other shorthand (I'll have to dig it up).  

 

But the whole thing made me think on the Anthon visit and something that never made sense to me.  

 

Are we to understand that Anthon looked at the characters and Joseph's translation and found the translations to be accurate?    And if so, how was this accomplished since "reformed Egyptian" was/is unknown?

 

 

[Brian 2.0]

I should have said Anthon Transcript, not manuscript.

[Okrahomer]

I think this has been discussed recently on this board.  Take a look through this thread.

[hope_for_things]

In case you're interested, I found this multi part series about the Anthon episode to be fascinating.  Much of it was new to me. 

 

http://mormonitemusings.com/2013/08/26/19th-century-photo-of-joseph-smiths-caractors-discovered/

 

Another interesting article on a photo of Charles Anthon that was incorrectly identified and corrected thanks to the Metcalf's work.  I also heard that Erin Metcalf presented some information at the JWHA recently on a third letter discovered in the correspondence from Anthon about his interactions with Mormons.  I'd hoping to read that in the future.  

 

http://www.mormonstudiespodcast.com/famous-charles-anthon-portrait-misidentified/

[hagoth7]

...But the whole thing made me think on the Anthon visit and something that never made sense to me...

Hi Brian,

 

I'm interested. What was the part that never made sense to you?

 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/js-h/1.64-65?lang=eng#63

 

Consider this: http://en.fairmormon.org/Question:_Did_Charles_Anthon_validate_the_characters_that_Martin_Harris_brought_to_him_that_had_been_copied_from_the_Book_of_Mormon_plates%3F

Which also references this: http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1110&index=19

Edited September 1, 2015 by hagoth7

[Brian 2.0]

Hi Brian,

 

I'm interested. What was the part that never made sense to you?

 

 

I guess it's that IF he said the characters were authentic and the translation that Joseph provided was accurate... by what education did Anthon know this?  Since Reformed Egyptian is an unknown language?  

[JAHS]

I friend of mine recently showed me some article about the characters on the manuscript and their similarity with some other shorthand (I'll have to dig it up).  

 

But the whole thing made me think on the Anthon visit and something that never made sense to me.  

 

Are we to understand that Anthon looked at the characters and Joseph's translation and found the translations to be accurate?    And if so, how was this accomplished since "reformed Egyptian" was/is unknown?

 

Actually Professor Anthon gave Harris a certificate verifying the authenticity of the characters; not about the translation of them. He only saw the reformed egyptian characters and must have recognized them as being Egyptian-like in their appearance. 

Edited September 1, 2015 by JAHS

[Brian 2.0]

Actually Professor Anthon gave Harris a certificate verifying the authenticity of the characters; not about the translation of them. He only saw the reformed egyptian characters and must have recognized them as being Egyptian-like in their appearance.

JS History v64 quotes Anthon as verifying the translation.

[hagoth7]

JS History v64 quotes Anthon as verifying the translation.

The confusion is understandable.

 

Keep in mind that v64 was Joseph paraphrasing Martin a few years after the event. And Martin had paraphrased Anthon. Some small degree of Chinese whispers perhaps...?

 

I'm of the opinion that Anthon gave his opinion that the characters were of ancient origin. I'm not so convinced that Anthon attempted a translation of the characters himself.

 

Precisely what was said and done in the meeting between Martin and Anthon may not be as clear as we might prefer (because there are a number of competing accounts). However, the gist of the event is that Martin came back from the encounter with sufficient confidence to mortgage his farm to make the publication possible.

 

Nuf said?

Edited September 1, 2015 by hagoth7

[Calm]

Do we have anything earlier from Martin himself or someone else he talked to that could add details?

[hagoth7]

Do we have anything earlier from Martin himself or someone else he talked to that could add details?

Not that I know of.

First we have the event itself, in 1828.

Then we have a written statement from Anthon a handful of years later in 1834.

Next we have Joseph's history from 1838 (a decade after the event).

And finally we have another written statement from Anthon in 1841.

I haven't read extensively on the matter, but I'm not aware of anything other than that.

 

Brian, here's another link, that includes citations from both of the accounts from Anthon's perspective, which offers helpful reconciliation for it all.  Thoughts?

Edited September 1, 2015 by hagoth7

[ALarson]

Not that I know of.

First we have the event itself, in 1828.

Then we have a written statement from Anthon a handful of years later in 1834.

Next we have Joseph's history from 1838 (a decade after the event).

And finally we have another written statement from Anthon in 1841.

I haven't read extensively on the matter, but I'm not aware of anything other than that.

 

Brian, here's another link, that includes citations from both of the accounts from Anthon's perspective, which offers helpful reconciliation for it all.  Thoughts?

Is there somewhere that the 2 statements from Anthon are posted (I put them in bold above)?  I'd love to read them.  (Are they at the link you gave?)  I'll search too.

[JAHS]

The confusion is understandable.

 

Keep in mind that v64 was Joseph paraphrasing Martin a few years after the event. And Martin had paraphrased Anthon. Some small degree of Chinese whispers perhaps...?

 

I'm of the opinion that Anthon gave his opinion that the characters were of ancient origin. I'm not so convinced that Anthon attempted a translation of the characters himself.

 

Precisely what was said and done in the meeting between Martin and Anthon may not be as clear as we might prefer (because there are a number of competing accounts). However, the gist of the event is that Martin came back from the encounter with sufficient confidence to mortgage his farm to make the publication possible.

 

Nuf said?

 

Yes I don't see how Anthon could have verified any translation of the characters since it was in an altered form of Egyptian, although he may have agreed that they looked Egyptian.  

[hagoth7]

Is there somewhere that the 2 statements from Anthon are posted (I put them in bold above)?  I'd love to read them.  (Are they at the link you gave?)  I'll search too.

Yes. They're in the document to which I linked.  Thoughts?

[ALarson]

Yes. They're in the document to which I linked.  Thoughts?

Thanks!  I'll check them out.  I had just read that Anthon's statements contradict Harris's, but I wanted to read them myself and haven't done so yet.

[hagoth7]

What is even more interesting is that Anthon's first statement contradicts his own next one

[ALarson]

What is even more interesting is that Anthon's first statement contradicts his own next one

Yes, I think I read that too (but it's been awhile).  I'll read them.  Thanks again for the link.

[ALarson]

Here are Anthon's 2 statements:

 

(1834)

This paper in question was, in fact, a singular scroll. It consisted of all kinds of singular characters disposed in columns, and had evidently been prepared by some person who had before him at the time a book containing various alphabets, Greek and Hebrew letters, crosses and flourishes; Roman letters inverted and placed sideways were arranged and placed in perpendicular columns, and the whole ended in a rude delineation of a circle, divided into various compartments, arched with various strange marks, and evidently copied after the Mexican calendar by Humboldt, but copied in such a way as not to betray the source whence it was derived. I am thus particular as to the contents of the paper, inasmuch as I have frequently conversed with friends on the subject since the Mormon excitement began, and well remember that the paper contained anything else but Egyptian hieroglyphics.

 

 

(1841)

He [Martin Harris] then proceeded to give me the history of the whole affair, which convinced me that he had fallen into the hands of some sharper, while it left me in great astonishment at his simplicity. On my telling the bearer of the paper that an attempt had been made to impose on him and defraud him of his property, he requested me to give him my opinion in writing about the paper which he had shown to me. I did so without hesitation, partly for the man's sake, and partly to let the individual 'behind the curtain' see that his trick was discovered.

 

 

I wonder if he really did write out his opinion (even though Anthon writes that it was not what Harris stated it was).  He definitely contradicts himself on that detail.

 

However, no contradiction on his opinion of the characters.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I guess it's that IF he said the characters were authentic and the translation that Joseph provided was accurate... by what education did Anthon know this?  Since Reformed Egyptian is an unknown language?  

I think this is a pretty big assumption. Do we even know what part of the BoM the "charactors" were copied from? Remember that the script had been changed later in the BoM.

[CA Steve]

So if accounts of the actual translation of the Book Of Mormon are correct, that Joseph was not actually looking at the plates or the reformed Egyptian characters themselves as he translated, why would he initially provide a facsimile of some "charactors " along with a translation of the same, as if that was how he was translating? If he could look at the characters on the plates and translate them why change to what appears to be a more difficult process of placing the stone in a hat and reading off the stone?

[Brian 2.0]

Not that I know of.

First we have the event itself, in 1828.

Then we have a written statement from Anthon a handful of years later in 1834.

Next we have Joseph's history from 1838 (a decade after the event).

And finally we have another written statement from Anthon in 1841.

I haven't read extensively on the matter, but I'm not aware of anything other than that.

 

Brian, here's another link, that includes citations from both of the accounts from Anthon's perspective, which offers helpful reconciliation for it all.  Thoughts?

 

Thanks for the link.  Every account just seems to have problems.   They all seem to have contradictions and error, even if you completely side with the "church" side of the accounts.  There seems to be a bit of bias in what the author chooses to throw out.  There's a lot of "Anthon contradicts himself, he's not being truthful" yet the other way is much more sympathetic "The Harris account contradicts itself, but it's just simply misremembering." And the parts his misremembering are the inconsistencies and not the parts that fulfill prophecy from the scriptures.

 

Side note... I always bump against the whole "I cannot read a sealed book" claim.  Is the idea of a "sealed book" a thing back then?  It seems such an odd line for Anthon to say.  Is that phrase that people understood to be mystical?  And Anthon has such odd tactics in the Harris account.  He hears it's from an angel, and he proceeds to rip up the cert in from to Harris... THEN he asked for Harris to bring the book to him and he'll translate it (uhhh.  probably shouldn't have ripped up the cert in front of Harris before you asked that Anthon).

[Okrahomer]

Side note... I always bump against the whole "I cannot read a sealed book" claim.  Is the idea of a "sealed book" a thing back then?  It seems such an odd line for Anthon to say.  Is that phrase that people understood to be mystical?

 

I think it was probably seen as a fulfillment of Isaiah 29:11

 

11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:

[Brian 2.0]

I think it was probably seen as a fulfillment of Isaiah 29:11

 

11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:

 

I know it was seen as that from Martin and Joseph, but if that conversation actually transpired, I'm trying think what Anthon was getting at.

 

If someone wanted me to read a book and it had duck tape on it, I wouldn't just say "I cannot read a taped book".  

 

Is the idea of a mystically sealed book a thing?  Was he dismissing the mystical nature of the request?  Sort of like a doctor saying "Well, I can't read palm lines so get out of here." 

[CA Steve]

 

 

Side note... I always bump against the whole "I cannot read a sealed book" claim.  Is the idea of a "sealed book" a thing back then?  It seems such an odd line for Anthon to say.  Is that phrase that people understood to be mystical?  And Anthon has such odd tactics in the Harris account.  He hears it's from an angel, and he proceeds to rip up the cert in from to Harris... THEN he asked for Harris to bring the book to him and he'll translate it (uhhh.  probably shouldn't have ripped up the cert in front of Harris before you asked that Anthon).

Side note to your side note, but still along the line of thing that don't make sense.

If Joseph was able to translate the plates with out even having to look at them, as some accounts state, why would sealing a portion of the plates do any good?

[Okrahomer]

I know it was seen as that from Martin and Joseph, but if that conversation actually transpired, I'm trying think what Anthon was getting at.

 

If someone wanted me to read a book and it had duck tape on it, I wouldn't just say "I cannot read a taped book".  

 

Is the idea of a mystically sealed book a thing?  Was he dismissing the mystical nature of the request?  Sort of like a doctor saying "Well, I can't read palm lines so get out of here." 

 

I lean toward you're last conjecture:  As an educated rational man, Anthon decided he didn't really want anything to do with it when Harris explained how the plates had been obtained, i.e., "visions, angels."  So, he told Martin he would have to see the actual plates in order to properly assess them.  When Harris told him that he was forbidden from bringing the plates and that part of them were sealed anyway, perhaps Anthon's response ("I cannot read a sealed book") simply reflected his final exasperation--he just wanted Harris to leave.  (Imagining it in my modern mind, I can "see" Anthon blowing a bit of air through his lips and rolling his eyes and saying it in a bit of sarcastic voice as well.)