Joseph Smith's Schooling/Vocabulary to produce The Book of Mormon

[webbles]

53 minutes ago, Zosimus said:

It's quite common to add details to stories as you go. I would think most books are written that way. In this case, Joseph could have easily developed the core narrative or an outline of headers within a month, and then added detail to that narrative as he went along over the next two months. 

Some of the most prolific authors dictate their books, including Dan Brown and Kevin J. Anderson, a member of the church who has published 165 novels with a total wordcount of 15 millions words. Here's a presentation of him explaining how he wrote On Being a Dictator: Using Dictation to Be a Better Writer in one month, using dictation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CwtdvhFVtY

Joseph had three months from start to finish to dictate the Book of Lehi. Since we know nothing about the dictation process at this point we can't assume there wasn't any editing and revising going on up until Harris took the manuscript to Palmyra in June.

Are you saying he was dictating stories from the Book of Mormon during these sessions? Maybe. But if so then he was also practicing and perfecting his skills at dictating narratives. This would make it even easier for him to dictate the entire Book of Lehi in one month.

One thing I read recently, William Hyde, a friend of Joseph Smith Sr. had said something very similar independent of Lucy Smith's account. He said that Joseph Smith Sr. would chat with him night after night of the "former inhabitants of this continent, how a large portion of the earth now covered by the Pacific Ocean was once occupied by land, etc." (source)

That seems unusual that he follows his statement that Joseph Sr. would speak to him about the former inhabitants of the Americas with a comment about unidentified lands in the Pacific Ocean. Sounds an awful lot like Charles Anthon's theories about the moundbuilders in America coming from Meroe via India, Atlantis, the Polynesian Islands or some other space in the Pacific Ocean. Remember Harris returned from speaking with Anthon in February of 1828, previous to the chats Joseph Smith Sr. was having with William Hyde about the former inhabitants of the American continent.

I'd imagine Joseph Smith Sr. and Joseph Smith Jr. were both telling stories about the former inhabitants of the American continent, and the sources from whence they sprang many months/years previous to the dictation of the Book of Lehi.

Yes, we don't know the substance of the conversations. But we do know that both Mitchill and Anthon confirmed the characters were authentic. Knowing that, we can be sure they didn't just say "oh that's cool, authentic ancient characters written on metal plates in a hill near Palmyra" and then send Harris on his way. Surely they would have discussed the origins of the characters, other historical examples of writings on metal plates, and how such plates might make their way to New York. Surely Mitchill knew of Buchanan's account of Jews with brass plates, and if he really believed that Joseph's characters from metal plates were authentic, he likely would have mentioned it. Or he may have mentioned Jahn's comments on Jews writing on gold in his Biblical Archaeology, noted by WW Phelps in The Evening and the Morning Star 1833.

It'd be unusual if Harris didn't communicate the substance of his discussions with Mitchill and Anthon to Joseph Smith. It'd be unusual if the substance of those discussions didn't influence the dictation of the Book of Lehi one month later.

I don't think you really understand my objections.  So this will be my last comment here.

My problem is that Joseph Smith had a story to tell.  He "found" the plates and was going to write something.  What was that?  What was his original story?  And why would he have changed it in 1 month?  That just feels weird to me.  It makes more sense that if he heard anything from Martin, it was confirming what he already was planning or he made a few small changes.  But the core of the story had been known to him for months, if not years.

56 minutes ago, Zosimus said:

Joseph had three months from start to finish to dictate the Book of Lehi. Since we know nothing about the dictation process at this point we can't assume there wasn't any editing and revising going on up until Harris took the manuscript to Palmyra in June.

We discussed this before.  It makes absolutely no sense to me for Joseph to go from an easier process (editing and revising) to a harder process (absolutely no revising).  What ever explanation he gave to Martin for why he could revise the text after "translating" it would have been given to Oliver.

[Zosimus]

9 hours ago, webbles said:

My problem is that Joseph Smith had a story to tell.  He "found" the plates and was going to write something.  What was that?  What was his original story?  And why would he have changed it in 1 month?  That just feels weird to me.  It makes more sense that if he heard anything from Martin, it was confirming what he already was planning or he made a few small changes. 

We don't disagree here. As we've discussed before, I now believe that the narrative building started in Vermont where, according to this account, Joseph Smith Sr. was going around telling people that any nation "could be made to believe in any religion however absurd it might be, if it was advocated perseveringly for fifty years". And that "it would become the popular religion of the country, and as good as any other". One of his sources is then revealed through the claim that he believed "that Voltaires writings were the best bible then extant"

I believe the crafting of the story began in the 1810s using primarily Voltaire's writings about the books of Enoch along with his comments and summaries of other apocryphal Jewish, Christian and Hindoo texts. But that's for another thread. Details were then added to conform with the latest ideas out of Columbia College at least one month before the dictation began.

Quote

But the core of the story had been known to him for months, if not years.

I can agree with that. If that is the case, I see no reason why the whole Book of Lehi could not have even been memorized, if we allow for years of narrative building.

9 hours ago, webbles said:

We discussed this before.  It makes absolutely no sense to me for Joseph to go from an easier process (editing and revising) to a harder process (absolutely no revising).  What ever explanation he gave to Martin for why he could revise the text after "translating" it would have been given to Oliver.

No major revisions or edits to the Book of Lehi were necessary. Following discussions with Mitchill and Anthon, minor historical details like brass plates and the identification of the Lehites as Manasseh were added to the core narrative. Convincing details about their path along the Red Sea and toponyms like Nahom could have also been added after discussions with Bradish, who had personally traveled much of the route described in the Book of Lehi. Any of these details could have found their way into the Book of Mormon narrative well before the translation of 1st and 2nd Nephi began in June 1829, one full year after Harris took the 116 pages to Palmyra.

Edited January 25, 2025 by Zosimus