Should Fawn Brodie's Excommunication be Over Turned?

[rongo]

3 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Very impressive Rongo, but if the whole point of Nibley and others trying to cast doubt on the trail (arraignment?) was to disassociate Joseph Smith from Brodie's  accusations of treasure hunting, a fact clearly established by numerous other sources since then, I am not sure what difference whether or not the trail happened makes any difference in her being vindicated at this point. She was still correct about the treasure hunting part, was she not?

I was giving Patty credit for her point, and background to the 1826 trial that might be of interest to some. Not arguing that her point wasn't valid.  

I'm not sure that knowledgeable people have ever disassociated Joseph Smith from treasure searching, per se --- just the claim about what that says about him (i.e., that he was shiftless, lazy, devil-worshipping, greedy, associated with bad people, incompetent, etc.). Heck, he admits to treasure digging in his 1838 account in our scriptures --- but not what critics insist are the implications of that treasure searching.

Brodie went whole hog on the negative side of the implications, and unfairly and shoddily, in my opinion. 

[hope_for_things]

19 hours ago, Nevo said:

Well, maybe Richard Bushman can convince you:

Thus, for example, Elder John Widtsoe, in Joseph Smith: Seeker after Truth, Prophet of God (1951), argued that Joseph was never involved in money-digging except during his brief employment with Josiah Stowell (p.34) and denied that Joseph ever used a seer stone to locate lost treasure: "Enemies have suggested, and widely circulated the suggestion that Stoal employed Joseph because he was said to have a peepstone by which lost treasure could be located. The suggestion is of course based upon his claim of having had communications with heavenly beings" (p. 34). Widtsoe also claimed that Joseph's 1826 charge of being a disorderly person "was found groundless" and suggested that "it was done to get him out of the country and away from Emma" (p. 35).

Hugh Nibley's 1961 The Myth Makers went even further, suggesting that there never was an 1826 trial. In his 1991 foreword to Tinkling Cymbals and Sounding Brass, historian David Whittaker acknowledged that a number of Nibley's conclusions had not aged well. Noting that Nibley "made no claims to be an expert in American or Mormon history" and wrote "in part under assignment, and preferring that his time could be devoted to other projects," Whittaker wrote: "Readers thirty years later should not be surprised to discover that, with the subsequent professionalization of the Church library and archives, the study of Mormon history has progressed on a variety of details discussed in Nibley’s works. For example, recent work has been done on the now available accounts of Joseph Smith’s First Vision, as well as on money digging and his 1826 trial, and the earliest treatments of his religious claims. . . . Such new research has strengthened Nibley’s arguments in many cases; it has corrected him in others."

Now, of course, Joseph Smith's youthful involvement in folk magic and his 1826 trial as a "glass looker" are old hat. A senior historian in the Church History Department and research and review editor for the Joseph Smith Papers even wrote a thesis on "Joseph Smith as Rodsman, Village Seer, and Judeo-Christian Prophet."

Nevo, 

Thanks for the excellent response, really appreciate your attention to detail and the current sources you're using, so well done.  This isn't the first time that someone has referred to Mark Ashurst-McGee's thesis paper, and I would like to read it, so I'm wondering if you have any suggestions about how someone can track this down.  I didn't have any luck using Google.  Any suggestions? 

[Calm]

You can apparently order a copy through ProQuest:

http://dissexpress.umi.com/dxweb/results.html?QryTxt=Pathway+to+prophethood&By=&Title=&pubnum=

[hope_for_things]

9 minutes ago, Calm said:

You can apparently order a copy through ProQuest:

http://dissexpress.umi.com/dxweb/results.html?QryTxt=Pathway+to+prophethood&By=&Title=&pubnum=

Thanks Calm, appreciate it!  

[california boy]

41 minutes ago, rongo said:

I was giving Patty credit for her point, and background to the 1826 trial that might be of interest to some. Not arguing that her point wasn't valid.  

I'm not sure that knowledgeable people have ever disassociated Joseph Smith from treasure searching, per se --- just the claim about what that says about him (i.e., that he was shiftless, lazy, devil-worshipping, greedy, associated with bad people, incompetent, etc.). Heck, he admits to treasure digging in his 1838 account in our scriptures --- but not what critics insist are the implications of that treasure searching.

Brodie went whole hog on the negative side of the implications, and unfairly and shoddily, in my opinion. 

I am not trying to argue your point or cast any negativity on Joseph Smith, but I would like to know what you think if someone told you that a trunk full of treasure was buried on your property and he has a magic stone that he can look through to locate it.  And when after you start excavation, he tells you to keep digging because the trunk keeps moving and shifting so as not to be easily found.  You may not think the person was trying to con you, but do you think it is reasonable that others might hold that view?  And would you cast disparaging remarks towards a person who did not think those magical powers were honest?

 

[rongo]

42 minutes ago, california boy said:

I am not trying to argue your point or cast any negativity on Joseph Smith, but I would like to know what you think if someone told you that a trunk full of treasure was buried on your property and he has a magic stone that he can look through to locate it.  And when after you start excavation, he tells you to keep digging because the trunk keeps moving and shifting so as not to be easily found.  You may not think the person was trying to con you, but do you think it is reasonable that others might hold that view?  And would you cast disparaging remarks towards a person who did not think those magical powers were honest?

That's part of what makes the accounts of the 1826 trial, taken together or individually, ridiculous. He was supposedly tried for being a "vagabond, with no visible means of support" (even though, as Nibley points out, he had a job, and was well-paid at that, if these same witnesses are to be believed). And this kangaroo trial, with everyone arrayed against him, results in him "designedly being allowed to escape" ("leg bail"), or "found guilty" (with no word as to effects or consequences, and the aftermath not showing any), or chastized and let go. 

Some of the accounts have Stowell vociferously defending Joseph in the "trial," saying that he was more than satisfied with Joseph's role in the digging (which was supposed to be finding treasure through his gifts). This stands in stark contrast to what a moron and ignoramus Joseph was represented as being, haplessly pretending to be able to find things, but never, ever successfully finding anything. Yet, people keep hiring him and paying him money, only to have him reprise his previously well-known failures? Nibley's treatment in The Mythmakers can be acerbic and biting, but he illustrates well by using their own sources the absurdity of the binary proposition that Joseph Smith was a ridiculous idiot who constantly bumbled and failed, yet had this far-and-wide reputation for being a great "glass looker."

Something is very fishy about these accounts and "the witness of results" (my phrase). Everyone agrees that Stowell sought him out (Joseph's mother says that this is because he had heard that Joseph had "means" for finding things not able to be seen "by the eye" (or something like that), and Stowell never expressed himself ill-used or cheated by Joseph (despite the accounts trying to paint Joseph for imposing or conning him). 

Whether or not others thought Joseph was trying to con Josiah Stowell, Stowell himself was satisfied and happy with his service. 

As for the "slippery treasure" that kept slipping out of reach just as they reached it, these accounts are from anti-Mormon primary sources, not Joseph Smith himself. He never claimed that any of that happened. 

[Johnnie Cake]

5 hours ago, rongo said:

The Bainbridge trial is of special interest to me, and I have a lot on it in my files. Researching it was actually my first experience with apologetics research. I even had a copy of the Benton account mailed to me by BYU Special Collections when I went to read it, because the copy that we have is very fragile and brittle. 

For the record, I believe that the Bainbridge trial happened, but I also believe that all of the records that we have of it are forgeries or inventions. Because Nibley made such a good case against it in The Mythmakers, I was convinced that it had never happened and was conflated with the Bainbridge trial in 1830 under Justice Chamberlain. When my oldest was a baby, I was corresponding with a professional anti-Mormon who referred me to Marquardt and Walters' book (can't remember the title). I called the Chenango County historian's office to confirm the record's existence, and spoke with the county historian, Dale Storms (a woman, by the way --- and the third woman named Dale involved in some way in this search along the way. What are the odds?  ). She seemed a little reserved when I asked her about the record, and asked if I wanted to make an appointment to see it. I told her that that wasn't necessary; that I was simply verifying its existence and location. She explained again the process for making arrangements to view it, and I told her again that I wasn't in a position to be able to come to New York --- that I was simply verifying, and that she had been very helpful.  About ten minutes after hanging up with her, I got a phone call from Steven Sorenson from Church archives. Somewhat sheepishly, he asked me if I had just called Dale Storms in the Chenango County historian's office. He wondered if I would mind telling him who I am. He said that she had called very upset, and he told her he would find out who I am for her. He told me that amateur and professional historians had inundated them for decades, and a BYU professor had marched in with guns blazing (figuratively) and a court order to see the record. He also explained that a very young Mark Hoffman had been poking around in the basement of the Norwich court house weeks before Justice Neely's bills were found. He also said that Walters and Poffarl had done several illegal things by removing the record without permission, and that these things allow the provenance to be questioned --- and that there was some acrimony between the county historian's office and the anti-Mormons because of Walters' behavior. He said, "You have to understand, given this background on both sides, why they get antsy when researchers from the intermountain west call with questions about the record." He was relieved to find out that I am a nobody, and not a crackpot (he did question me about my extended family when I explained that both sides of my family were well read in Church history. I had to tell him that he wouldn't have heard of any of them). The real treat was that he asked me if there were any questions he could answer for me, and we spoke for about an hour about Church history topics (I remember in particular asking him about, and discussing, Fanny Alger and the Mosiah Hancock account. Things like that). 

Sources friendly to the Church mention the 1826 trial (examination, if we're being technical). In particular, Oliver Cowdery's letters to then non-member W.W. Phelps. But, Nibley's criticisms (which largely followed Francis Kirkham. I also photocopied and bound Kirkham's "A New Witness for God in America," which is the source for much of Nibley's points against the 1826 trial accounts) of the existence of the record are still valid, in my view --- there are a lot of problems with all of the accounts that haven't been adequately dealt with (they fatally conflict in key points, even though each claimed to have insider, eyewitness provenance). Wes Walters, Fred Poffarl, and Mike Marquardt also detailed an exhaustive search to find the original records referenced, combing Salt Lake, San Francisco, and Denver. Nibley's taunting clearly bugged them, and only after documenting that it did not exist anywhere (they claimed, lamely, that it probably perished in a fire in Denver), did they "providentially" find the Neely bills in the basement of the Norwich court house, in a water-soaked box with only the Neely bills surviving. A lot of their descriptions of the find and clandestine taking of it for preservation contains too many small details, as if they were conscious of objections and trying to bolster the find. Of course, by removing it from its surrounding environment, they welcomed questioning . . .

I was also struck by the bill listing various charges and examinations, but singling out "Joseph Smith The Glass Looker" as the only one with extraneous commentary --- as if wanting to make it painfully obvious what the significance of this is. I don't know if the timeline even works with Mark Hoffman poking around in the basement in the 70s, but I found Sorenson's comment interesting, given that Hoffman spent his mission stealing period paper from libraries in England, and his apparent involvement in the John D. Lee lead sheet forgery found right after the 2002 Winder Olympics ended. In other words, he had a track record and obvious motive to use forgeries to embarrass the Church, and was pretty sophisticated at a young age.

At any rate, while I do accept that Joseph Smith was examined by Neely in 1826, the Benton, Pearsall, Tuttle, and Marshall accounts all conflict on key points (especially the outcome), and were a thorn in the anti-Mormon side until the discovery of Neely's bills in the 1970s. I think that Nibley was correct about the problems with the accounts. At worst, the examination did take place, with no actual legal consequence (although Walters tried mightily to argue that he had been driven from the county under "leg bail" --- which is odd, given that Joseph Smith and Emma were married by a JP in Chenango County later. You would think that people would have still remembered that, especially when Joseph was tried by Chamberlain in Chenango County in 1830). 

What others among the "several that you could list" can you list, Patty?  

I've read this somewhere else years ago.  Did you just cut and paste this from something you wrote or should it be attributed to someone else

[rongo]

6 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I've read this somewhere else years ago.  Did you just cut and paste this from something you wrote or should it be attributed to someone else

You might have that good of a memory. I've discussed it over the years here and elsewhere. But, go ahead and google parts of this if you want to catch me plagiarizing. It was 100% written by me from memory, on the fly, at the end of my work day today. 

[Johnnie Cake]

17 minutes ago, rongo said:

You might have that good of a memory. I've discussed it over the years here and elsewhere. But, go ahead and google parts of this if you want to catch me plagiarizing. It was 100% written by me from memory, on the fly, at the end of my work day today. 

Ok...no worries...I had just remembered the story...it was familiar...I probably read your similar version on here when you brought it up before...

[Peppermint Patty]

 

6 hours ago, rongo said:

 

What others among the "several that you could list" can you list, Patty?  

Rongo,

Here are a few more. 

 

-Fawn Brodie discussed, and was one of the first to address the many different accounts of  the First Vision.

Over sixty years later the Church acknowledged and published an essay on this very subject: https://www.lds.org/topics/first-vision-accounts?lang=eng&old=true

 

-Fawn Brodie discussed the Book of Abraham and discussed how Joseph did not correctly translate.

Over sixty years later the Church changed the heading from "A translation from some Egyptian Papyri that came into the hands of Joseph Smith.." to "An inspired translation of the writings of Abraham." And, the Church has now acknowledged the same and published an essay on this very subject:  https://www.lds.org/topics/translation-and-historicity-of-the-book-of-abraham?lang=eng&old=true

 

-Fawn Brodie was one of the first to discuss the numerous wives of Joseph Smith and the sexual aspect of many of these relationships.

Over sixty years later the Church acknowledged Joseph Smith had as many as 40 wives, one as young as 14, and and published an essay on this very subject: https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng&old=true 

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/11/11/363324816/mormon-church-admits-founder-joseph-smith-had-up-to-40-wives

[Sleeper Cell]

1 hour ago, Peppermint Patty said:

-Fawn Brodie was one of the first to discuss the numerous wives of Joseph Smith and the sexual aspect of many of these relationships.

One of the first?  

“William Clayton … sealed to Joseph Smith as a plural wife, Lucy Walker … Following are some of the names of young ladies who were sealed to the prophet Joseph Smith in Nauvoo … during the lifetime of the prophet:  Eliza R. Snow, Sarah Ann Whitney, Helen Mar Kimball, Fanny Young … and Rhoda Richards. … These facts have been published in Jensen‘s Historical Record and in the Deseret News in years past.”

Joseph F. Smith (Gospel Doctrine, p 489-490; also Improvement Era, Oct 1902)

[CA Steve]

15 hours ago, rongo said:

That's part of what makes the accounts of the 1826 trial, taken together or individually, ridiculous. He was supposedly tried for being a "vagabond, with no visible means of support" (even though, as Nibley points out, he had a job, and was well-paid at that, if these same witnesses are to be believed). And this kangaroo trial, with everyone arrayed against him, results in him "designedly being allowed to escape" ("leg bail"), or "found guilty" (with no word as to effects or consequences, and the aftermath not showing any), or chastized and let go. 

Some of the accounts have Stowell vociferously defending Joseph in the "trial," saying that he was more than satisfied with Joseph's role in the digging (which was supposed to be finding treasure through his gifts). This stands in stark contrast to what a moron and ignoramus Joseph was represented as being, haplessly pretending to be able to find things, but never, ever successfully finding anything. Yet, people keep hiring him and paying him money, only to have him reprise his previously well-known failures? Nibley's treatment in The Mythmakers can be acerbic and biting, but he illustrates well by using their own sources the absurdity of the binary proposition that Joseph Smith was a ridiculous idiot who constantly bumbled and failed, yet had this far-and-wide reputation for being a great "glass looker."

Something is very fishy about these accounts and "the witness of results" (my phrase). Everyone agrees that Stowell sought him out (Joseph's mother says that this is because he had heard that Joseph had "means" for finding things not able to be seen "by the eye" (or something like that), and Stowell never expressed himself ill-used or cheated by Joseph (despite the accounts trying to paint Joseph for imposing or conning him). 

Whether or not others thought Joseph was trying to con Josiah Stowell, Stowell himself was satisfied and happy with his service. 

As for the "slippery treasure" that kept slipping out of reach just as they reached it, these accounts are from anti-Mormon primary sources, not Joseph Smith himself. He never claimed that any of that happened. 

Well I am going to get in trouble here because I am going off memory and mine is certainly not as good as yours regarding this incident but from what I have read about trials (arraignments) of this period, "leg bail" was frequently used, especially in this type of situation. Joseph was young, considered a vagrant by some and engaged in an activity view suspiciously by many. I know NIbley contests the unemployed but if an activity is illegal can it be counted as gainful employment at the same time? Leg bail was simply a means to avoid the expense of an actual trial, raise money for the local jurisdiction and encourage the offender to leave and not come back because there was an outstanding warrant. Many times there simply wasn't a location with which to jail someone securely while they were held over for trail. Leg bail was an effective solution to all those problems and quite likely was used in Joseph's situation

I think we can both agree that treasure hunting was a common practice back then and hopefully we both agree that it was not successful at all in actually finding anything. Well beyond Joseph, there were many people involved in both ends looking for treasure, those that hired people to do it and those that engaged in the actual practice. To label Joseph as a bumbling idiot who constantly failed is, in my opinion a strawman. He wasn't failing to earn money doing it, as Nibley points out, nor was he failing to find people to employ him to do it even after he tried to stop. I suppose those who were willing to pay him to search were similar to addicted gamblers today, the next big score is just around the corner. Get rich schemes are age old and willing participants are easily found.

It is strange that you should mention that "slippery treasure" is from ant-Mormon sources since it is also a motif found in the Book of Mormon.

 

Quote

the time cometh that [the Lord] curseth your riches, that they become slippery, that ye cannot hold them; and in the days of your poverty ye cannot retain them" (Helaman 13:31). In that day the Nephites would lament, "We have hid up our treasures and they have slipped away from us, because of the curse of the land. O that we had repented in the day that the word of the Lord came unto us; for behold the land is cursed, and all things are become slippery, and we cannot hold them" (vv. 35-36)

Quote

More than three centuries later, Mormon recorded that, in fulfillment of Samuel's prophecy, the Gadianton robbers "did infest the land, insomuch that the inhabitants thereof began to hide up their treasures in the earth; and they became slippery, because the Lord had cursed the land, that they could not hold them, nor retain them again" (Mormon 1:18)

 

16 hours ago, rongo said:

I was giving Patty credit for her point, and background to the 1826 trial that might be of interest to some. Not arguing that her point wasn't valid.  

I'm not sure that knowledgeable people have ever disassociated Joseph Smith from treasure searching, per se --- just the claim about what that says about him (i.e., that he was shiftless, lazy, devil-worshipping, greedy, associated with bad people, incompetent, etc.). Heck, he admits to treasure digging in his 1838 account in our scriptures --- but not what critics insist are the implications of that treasure searching.

Brodie went whole hog on the negative side of the implications, and unfairly and shoddily, in my opinion. 

Thanks. I am not sure what knowledgeable people have or have not done but it seems that Joseph Smith should be judged on his treasure hunting activities through the same lens as those around him engaged in the same activity were and are judged.

 

I think Brodie's work was very impressive given when it was published and the restrictions she had with source material. While I am also not comfortable with all of her conclusions and certainly we have discovered much more about Joseph Smiths life since she published, at the time it was ground breaking. And, again, I cannot emphasize enough what an outstanding writer she was. Those that wish to criticize her methodology might want to take a moment to consider that Bushman also employed much of the same in his work . As Ben Parks puts it:

Quote

And more importantly, if we dismiss the entire subfield of psychobiography, we dismiss one of the giants of Mormon historiography: Richard Bushman.

It is well known that Bushman, the current dean of Mormon studies, established his reputation outside of Mormon history before turning his attention to Joseph Smith. What is sometimes less acknowledged is that much of his early work was part of a historiographical craze over psychoanalysis that swept the profession in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, partly inspired and improved by Brodie herself.

Fawn Brodie, Joseph Smith, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Bushman, and Psychoanalysis

Quote

 

Edited February 3, 2017 by CA Steve

[rongo]

1 hour ago, CA Steve said:

Well I am going to get in trouble here because I am going off memory and mine is certainly not as good as yours regarding this incident but from what I have read about trials (arraignments) of this period, "leg bail" was frequently used, especially in this type of situation.

I am certainly open to the possibility that Joseph Smith was ordered to leave the county, informally. It's just that there is no actual evidence that he was. Some of the 1826 trial accounts have him being outright "acquitted." Where one stands on this is more of a mirror showing their Stimmung than anything else.

Joseph was young, considered a vagrant by some and engaged in an activity view suspiciously by many. I know NIbley contests the unemployed but if an activity is illegal can it be counted as gainful employment at the same time?

Has anyone demonstrated that treasure digging or scrying were illegal activities? Critics like to portray the environment as being saturated with such practices, but at the same time scorned by society. Which is it?

The vagrancy charge, if there ever was one, was simply absurd on its face. Neely's bill simply calls him "The Glass Looker."

I think we can both agree that treasure hunting was a common practice back then and hopefully we both agree that it was not successful at all in actually finding anything. Well beyond Joseph, there were many people involved in both ends looking for treasure, those that hired people to do it and those that engaged in the actual practice. To label Joseph as a bumbling idiot who constantly failed is, in my opinion a strawman. He wasn't failing to earn money doing it, as Nibley points out, nor was he failing to find people to employ him to do it even after he tried to stop. I suppose those who were willing to pay him to search were similar to addicted gamblers today, the next big score is just around the corner. Get rich schemes are age old and willing participants are easily found.

Maybe. I still find it odd that he would be hired so much for "finding" if he never found anything. How did word get to Stowell that Joseph was the man to ask for?

There are critics who claim that the reason there were so many attempts to get the plates from Joseph was because the others in his treasure digging company felt that they had a contract entitling them to equal shares. If they're going to claim this, then doesn't that show that they found the idea of Joseph finding something to be plausible?

It is strange that you should mention that "slippery treasure" is from ant-Mormon sources since it is also a motif found in the Book of Mormon.

As a curse on peoples consumed with the treasures of the earth in the Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith and the Mormon sources never mentioned abortive treasure digging incidents where the mother lode vanishes. Those all come from very dubious anti-Mormon sources that have major problems on a lot of fronts. 

I am not sure what knowledgeable people have or have not done but it seems that Joseph Smith should be judged on his treasure hunting activities through the same lens as those around him engaged in the same activity were and are judged.

I agree. Are there records of any other people with legal troubles in New England for treasure searching or scrying? Honest question. I would be interested to know if Joseph Smith is the only person on record who was pursued legally for these types of things.

I think Brodie's work was very impressive given when it was published and the restrictions she had with source material. While I am also not comfortable with all of her conclusions and certainly we have discovered much more about Joseph Smiths life since she published, at the time it was ground breaking. And, again, I cannot emphasize enough what an outstanding writer she was. Those that wish to criticize her methodology might want to take a moment to consider that Bushman also employed much of the same in his work . As Ben Parks puts it:

Fawn Brodie, Joseph Smith, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Bushman, and Psychoanalysis

She's an engaging writer. I don't care for Bushmans psychobiography stuff, either. It departs from the historical method, and is largely a mirror into what the author chooses to emphasize and minimize or exclude. 

[Nevo]

2 hours ago, rongo said:

Has anyone demonstrated that treasure digging or scrying were illegal activities?

I assume you've read Gordon Madsen's article. He cites the relevant statute as follows:

"That all persons who threaten to run away and leave their wives or children to the city or town, and all persons who shall unlawfully return to the city or town from whence they shall respectively have been legally removed by order of two justices of the peace, without bringing a certificate from the city or town whereto they respectively belong; and also all persons who not having wherewith to maintain themselves, live idle without employment, and also all persons who go about from door to door or place themselves in the streets, highways, or passages, to beg in the cities or towns where they respectively dwell, and all jugglers, and all persons pretending to have skill in physiognomy, palmistry, or like crafty science, or pretending to tell fortunes, or to discover where lost goods may be found; and all persons who run away and leave their wives and children whereby they respectively become chargeable to any city or town; and all persons wandering abroad and lodging in taverns, beer-houses, out-houses, market-places, or barns, or in the open air, and not giving a good account of themselves, and all persons wandering abroad and begging, and all idle persons not having visible means of livelihood, and all common prostitutes, shall be deemed and adjudged disorderly persons" (Revised Laws of New York [1813], 1:114, sec I).
 

Quote

There are critics who claim that the reason there were so many attempts to get the plates from Joseph was because the others in his treasure digging company felt that they had a contract entitling them to equal shares.

Yes, "critics" like Martin Harris, David Whitmer, Joseph Knight...

Quote

Mormon sources never mentioned abortive treasure digging incidents where the mother lode vanishes. Those all come from very dubious anti-Mormon sources that have major problems on a lot of fronts.

"Orin P. Rockwell is an eyewitness to some powers of removing the treasures of the earth. He was with certain parties that lived nearby where the plates were found that contain the records of the Book of Mormon. There were a great many treasures hid up by the Nephites. Porter was with them one night where there were treasures, and they could find them easy enough, but they could not obtain them. 

I will tell you a story which will be marvelous to most of you. It was told me by Porter, whom I would believe just as quickly as any man that lives. When he tells a thing he understands, he will tell it just as he knows it; he is a man that does not lie. He said that on this night, when they were engaged hunting for this old treasure, they dug around the end of a chest for some twenty inches. The chest was about three feet square. One man who was determined to have the contents of that chest, took his pick and struck into the lid of it, and split through into the chest. The blow took off a piece of the lid, which a certain lady kept in her possession until she died. That chest of money went into the bank. Porter describes it so [making a rumbling sound]; he says this is just as true as the heavens are. I have heard others tell the same story" (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 19: 37).

Edited February 3, 2017 by Nevo

[The Nehor]

On 2/2/2017 at 5:54 PM, california boy said:

I am not trying to argue your point or cast any negativity on Joseph Smith, but I would like to know what you think if someone told you that a trunk full of treasure was buried on your property and he has a magic stone that he can look through to locate it.  And when after you start excavation, he tells you to keep digging because the trunk keeps moving and shifting so as not to be easily found.  You may not think the person was trying to con you, but do you think it is reasonable that others might hold that view?  And would you cast disparaging remarks towards a person who did not think those magical powers were honest?

I have a hard time imagining this as I do not think I would get to the "start excavation" phase.

[CA Steve]

21 hours ago, rongo said:

I am certainly open to the possibility that Joseph Smith was ordered to leave the county, informally. It's just that there is no actual evidence that he was. Some of the 1826 trial accounts have him being outright "acquitted." Where one stands on this is more of a mirror showing their Stimmung than anything else.

I agree, we just don't know. I was just pointing out that "Leg Bail" was common and not something that could be rejected out of hand.

 

Has anyone demonstrated that treasure digging or scrying were illegal activities? Critics like to portray the environment as being saturated with such practices, but at the same time scorned by society. Which is it?

As Nevo shows, it was an illegal activity.

Quinn provides multiple contemporary non Mormon related references to treasure hunting activities in the area and even goes so far as to describe Vermont as "something of a treasure digging Mecca". (Footnote #228 on pg 378 of EM7tMWV). I am not sure the critics (whomever that is) are anymore vested in defining the environment that way then are people today like Bushman or the contemporary accounts provided by Nevo above from people who were not critics. A society can be made up of individuals who are engaged in activities that others in the same society scorn. It is not either or. Another activity that was common at that time was counterfeiting which was also considered a scourge. Besides, aren't some of the modern-day defenses for Joseph Smith's involvement in treasure hunting that it was a common activity?

The vagrancy charge, if there ever was one, was simply absurd on its face. Neely's bill simply calls him "The Glass Looker."

I'll have to check but I believe the statute that Nevo quotes was under the vagrancy laws, so that would be the reason it was labeled a vagrancy charge.

 

 

Maybe. I still find it odd that he would be hired so much for "finding" if he never found anything. How did word get to Stowell that Joseph was the man to ask for?

I find it odd that people I know keep getting involved in pyramid schemes today over and over again when every one I have ever seen was a bad idea, if not illegal, from the start. People are gullible and whether or not one invest with someone usually has more to do with the personality of the people involved with the investment than it does with the reliability of the investment itself. I myself am guilty of the same thing, I suppose. I choose doctors based on their bedside manner more often than not and I recently hooked up with a finance guy based more on the fact I was comfortable with him personally than what I knew about the success of his investment strategies. That is human nature.

I do not know how Stowell found out about Joseph's ability to see treasure. Maybe it was when Joseph came to Issac Hales farm which was near Stowell's or maybe it was through Stowell's nephew Lyman Stowell, I would have to do more checking into that. There are conflicting accounts on when Issac Hale and Joseph first met. Obviously somehow Stowell heard about Joseph and brought him to his farm to dig for treasure.

There are critics who claim that the reason there were so many attempts to get the plates from Joseph was because the others in his treasure digging company felt that they had a contract entitling them to equal shares. If they're going to claim this, then doesn't that show that they found the idea of Joseph finding something to be plausible?

Again, I am not sure why this is something labeled as what "the critics" says, maybe this is what you meant by "Where one stands on this is more of a mirror showing their Stimmung than anything else."? As discussed above, I believe there were groups of people who found treasure hunting plausible, and if anything, laws against it would indicate that there were people engaged in it as it would be silly to pass a law against something specific like that if no one was  doing it.

 

As a curse on peoples consumed with the treasures of the earth in the Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith and the Mormon sources never mentioned abortive treasure digging incidents where the mother lode vanishes. Those all come from very dubious anti-Mormon sources that have major problems on a lot of fronts. 

This is simply not true, as Nevo has shown. And, as Quinn puts it regarding this very issue, "Once again, a Mormon source verifies the accuracy of an anti-Mormon memory of what he heard early Mormon say." (D. Michael Quinn, Early Mormonism and the Magic World View, pg 61)

 

 

I agree. Are there records of any other people with legal troubles in New England for treasure searching or scrying? Honest question. I would be interested to know if Joseph Smith is the only person on record who was pursued legally for these types of things.

My comment about Joseph being judged through the same lens was in reference to how we view his treasure activities today and how it was viewed back then. The same standards should apply to Joseph as we apply to others engaged in the same activity. I do think the question of how many others were also brought before a judge for the same charge, is an interesting one. I have spent a few minutes looking and so far have only found one regarding Luman Walters being charged in 1818 with juggling in Hillsborough Ca, New Hamshire. (See Quinn EM&MWV pg 119.)

 

 

 

[thesometimesaint]

The Pharisee's had a field day with Yeshua Bar Yosef. 

Edited February 4, 2017 by thesometimesaint

[Vance]

On 2/1/2017 at 7:35 PM, Johnnie Cake said:

Mormon historians consistently use her groundbreaking work to support their own...several have been mentioned in this thread...go back and read the thread

I read what had been written.  Not one of them used positive language when describing HER work.  I did pickup positive comments about the responding efforts.

[Glenn101]

On 2/3/2017 at 0:50 PM, rongo said:

I am certainly open to the possibility that Joseph Smith was ordered to leave the county, informally. It's just that there is no actual evidence that he was. Some of the 1826 trial accounts have him being outright "acquitted." Where one stands on this is more of a mirror showing their Stimmung than anything else.

The 1826 legal affair has been hashed and rehashed in various forums. I guess that one's bias would pretty much define where the interpretation of the meager information we have. However, if one researches Joseph's timeline, it is evident that he remained in the area for several weeks after the affair and made no attempt at taking "leg bail." The only person that actually claimed to have been at the proceeding declared that Joseph was discharged.

Glenn

[Gatorman]

Have read all posts thus far... no one seems to grasp that intelligent, honest human beings neither are able nor should believe that another can look at a stone and translate a book. Utter nonsense...almost as absurd as " the stone functioned like a cell phone..."

Gatorman

9-4

18-5

[JLHPROF]

9 hours ago, Gatorman said:

no one seems to grasp that intelligent, honest human beings neither are able nor should believe that another can look at a stone and translate a book. Utter nonsense

Nonsense.  I see absolutely nothing to preclude such a possibility except for narrow minded skepticism.
Supernatural occurrence is a big part of our faith tradition.  Picking and choosing the more "believable" is the utter nonsense.

[bluebell]

10 hours ago, Gatorman said:

Have read all posts thus far... no one seems to grasp that intelligent, honest human beings neither are able nor should believe that another can look at a stone and translate a book. Utter nonsense...almost as absurd as " the stone functioned like a cell phone..."

Gatorman

9-4

18-5

Is it any different than intelligent, honest human beings believing that someone can raise someone else from the dead, or that a man can be resurrected after His death?

Where are we supposed to draw the line?  

[Gatorman]

 Looking at rocks in a hat is a reasonable line to start with...

 

Gatorman

[JLHPROF]

14 minutes ago, Gatorman said:

 Looking at rocks in a hat is a reasonable line to start with...

 

Gatorman

Why?

And I mean that seriously.  Why is that particular claim so much less acceptable/believable than any other?
Scripture makes repeated reference to similar usage of "rocks".

[readstoomuch]

On 2/2/2017 at 9:09 PM, Peppermint Patty said:

 

Rongo,

Here are a few more. 

 

-Fawn Brodie discussed, and was one of the first to address the many different accounts of  the First Vision.

Over sixty years later the Church acknowledged and published an essay on this very subject: https://www.lds.org/topics/first-vision-accounts?lang=eng&old=true

 

-Fawn Brodie discussed the Book of Abraham and discussed how Joseph did not correctly translate.

Over sixty years later the Church changed the heading from "A translation from some Egyptian Papyri that came into the hands of Joseph Smith.." to "An inspired translation of the writings of Abraham." And, the Church has now acknowledged the same and published an essay on this very subject:  https://www.lds.org/topics/translation-and-historicity-of-the-book-of-abraham?lang=eng&old=true

 

-Fawn Brodie was one of the first to discuss the numerous wives of Joseph Smith and the sexual aspect of many of these relationships.

Over sixty years later the Church acknowledged Joseph Smith had as many as 40 wives, one as young as 14, and and published an essay on this very subject: https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng&old=true 

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/11/11/363324816/mormon-church-admits-founder-joseph-smith-had-up-to-40-wives

I look at the plural marriage differently than you are implying.  I find that most latter day saints new about Joseph, Brigham, etc supposed quantity of wives well into the 30s and 40s.  Those that didn`t generally heard about it from Fawn Brodie`s book.  It was widely read.  They couldn`t keep the copies in the libraries in Utah by some reports.  It has really been the last 30-40 years that people didn`t seem to know as much about the polygamy.  I think there are some strong arguments about the number of wives Joseph Smith actually had.  40 wives implies sex with them whereas there are no children and all of the children by polyandrous wives have been proven not to be his.  One of the number of items that Brodie implied and proved by unsubstantiated quotes from Wylhelm Wyl.  Most reputable historians count about 33 women who were sealed to Joseph during his lifetime.  There are some who claimed to have relations with Joseph, but for those who admitted to that, it was for the most part at the Temple Lot trial to try and establish who the rightful owner of the property was.  The Church had something to lose in that circumstance.  I think it is much more genuine to say that Joseph Smith was a polygamist than really knowing or counting his wives.  

As far as the accounts of the first vision and Book of Abraham, they are more recent issues.  In fact I have only read the second edition from early 70s and not the original from 1945.  I don't know if the issues were discussed in the first edition or not (Brodies 1st edition).  That is about all I feel like talking about, so I am just going to leave it at that.