sign in sign up
<<
Home , Book of Mormon witnesses, Dan Vogel, David Whitmer, Eight Witnesses, Ezra Booth, Herald House

Journal of Book of

Volume 14 Number 1 Article 4

1-31-2005

Attempts to Redefine the Experience of the

Richard Lloyd Anderson University

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms

BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Anderson, Richard Lloyd (2005) "Attempts to Redefine the Experience of the Eight Witnesses," Journal of Studies: Vol. 14 : No. 1 , Article 4. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms/vol14/iss1/4

This Feature Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Book of Mormon Studies by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Title Attempts to Redefine the Experience of the Eight Witnesses

Author(s) Richard Lloyd Anderson

Reference Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 14/1 (2005): 18–31, 125–27.

ISSN 1065-9366 (print), 2168-3158 (online)

Abstract Skeptics have misused some historical sources as they attempt to reverse the Eight Witnesses’ state- ments about their physical contact with the Book of Mormon plates. The Eight Witnesses speak of viewing the plates themselves with unobstructed . They left 10 specific statements of handling the plates. This article provides an overview of the statements and experiences of the Eight Witnesses and the arguments of their critics, both then and now. Their unequivo- cal testimonies resist revisionists’ attempts to portray their experience as mere illusion or deception. Attempts to~, RedefineRedeftne the~~~G Experience~Xperl~nCe of~),: the\!1i ~ E,t· 'ht , Eight Witnesses'.ttnesses —Richard Lloyd Anderson—

n showed the Book of Mormon Smith constructed an imitation. But the Eight plates to the , who heard Witnesses were tradesmen and farmers who AGod’s voice declare the translation cor- worked with materials and would recognize a rect. But the Eight Witnesses report handling clumsy counterfeit. More recent skeptics advance the plates under natural circumstances, describ- a double theory: (1) that at various times Joseph ing color, substantial weight, individual leaves Smith allowed the eight men to lift but not see a with engraved writings, and careful craftsman- heavy covered object; (2) that these men testified ship throughout. Critics have reacted variously of seeing plates because of a vision induced by to such physical language. Some see the Eight enthusiasm or mind control. This theory is show- Witnesses as participants in a fraud. But their cased by arbitrary interpretation of very few docu- lives do not fit that mold, since all suffered in the ments. This article discusses sources that have severe persecutions of early and been misused in attempts to reverse the Eight not one reversed his written testimony. Other crit- Witnesses’ statement about their physical contact ics acknowledge sincerity and suppose Joseph with the ancient record.

18 Volume 14, number 1, 2005 •

- •

• journal of Book of Mormon Studies 19

Eight Witnesses See the Gold Plates, by Paul Mann. © 1988 Paul Mann. Ito.~ • .,t':....___ .:.. _~~--'~,_:.. _,=::":,,.2:J.... The official testimonies of the Three and Eight no doubt come from that early period. He said, Witnesses1 are strengthened by a third tier of wit- “I hefted the plates many times, and should think nesses, family members who had contact with the they weighed forty or fifty pounds.”8 Much later plates as Joseph brought them into his he told a newspaper editor that the plates weighed farm home, as well as scribes who worked around “altogether, from forty to sixty pounds.”9 This early the plates in the translation process. William Smith assistant said that he and his family lifted the plates was 16 when his older brother outran pursuers and in a box when first investigating Joseph’s story, and breathlessly carried the covered metal record into he held the plates on his knee while hiding them in the house. William recounted lifting the plates the forest with Joseph.10 Judged by other sources, that night, saying several times that they weighed the record was wrapped at that time. Martin regu- about 60 pounds.2 In a pulpit speech William told larly said he saw the plates, and sometimes he said of feeling their outlines through cloth wrappings: he saw the plates covered. This is not contradictory, “They were not quite as large as this . Could because these remarks relate to different occasions tell whether they were round or square. Could raise during the translation. the leaves this way (raising a few leaves of the Bible before him).”3 And he added detail in an interview: Attempts to Repackage the Eight Witnesses’ “I could tell they were plates of some kind and Testimony that they were fastened together by rings running through the back.”4 As an early secretary for her In contrast to seeing a covered record, the Eight husband, remembered how the covered Witnesses speak of viewing the plates themselves plates were on the translating table, and she some- with unobstructed vision, noting they had “the times moved them and once felt their shape through appearance of gold . . . of ancient work . . . of curi- the linen covering: “They seemed to be pliable like ous workmanship.”11 In their official testimony, thick paper, and would rustle with a metallic sound they looked closely at the engravings while turning when the edges were moved by the thumb.”5 the leaves, seeing and handling at the same time. These family descriptions closely correlate with Thus the published testimony contradicts the cur- the written “Testimony of Eight Witnesses,” show- rent subjective theory, which asserts the eight men ing that the current theory of a visual illusion is out saw the plates in a mystic group experience but of touch with the realities of the translation period. handled them only on other occasions when they Since this subjective concept relies heavily on state- were covered. and Grant H. Palmer give ments of Martin Harris, it is important to clarify variations of this basic theory, though predeces- two types of experience he had with the plates. Of sors published similar arguments.12 Both authors course, Martin was one of the Three Witnesses, are noted for challenging the objective reality of who saw the angel and plates in 1829. This visitation ’s founding visions. Palmer largely first came to Joseph Smith, , and avoids statements from the witnesses but concludes , and David clarified that they saw “that the eight, like the three, saw and scrutinized but did not handle the plates at that time.6 About the plates in a mind vision.” He downgrades Joseph an hour afterward, this visitation came to Martin Smith’s own story by repeating rumors and folk- and Joseph, and Joseph said the first experience was lore about how the Prophet found and returned repeated.7 Thus Martin Harris saw the bare plates the plates. Thus he paints the Book of Mormon when the angel showed them to the Three Wit- witnesses as simplistic believers who possessed the nesses. By contrast, Martin was also Joseph Smith’s “shared magical perspective” of their culture. After first scribe, and his comments about covered plates discovering the inner workings of their minds, he concludes that these witnesses thought “the spiri- tual was material,” meaning that their official state- A form of this paper was presented at the 2003 ment “sounded more physical than was intended.” Kirtland Conference of the Mormon History So reinterpreting the “Testimony of Eight Wit- Association. Quotations of historical sources are nesses” is really based on knowing their “mind-set” given in original form, without corrections of instead of focusing on what they repeatedly said spelling, grammar, and punctuation. about their experience.13

20 Volume 14, number 1, 2005 Vogel’s approach to the Eight Witnesses Mack Smith refutes a split experience of seeing on matches Palmer’s, though with more detailed specu- one day and lifting the plates at an earlier time. lation. He starts with flat disbelief: “There is simply Of course, she knew her family had picked up the no reliable proof for the existence of the supernatu- covered metal object that Joseph brought home in ral.”14 Reading Vogel on the Book of Mormon wit- 1827, but she describes an additional formal inspec- nesses, therefore, is tracking a conclusion in search tion by the Eight Witnesses as the translation was of evidence. In his writing, no witness saw a divine ending. Mother Smith was present when the Three vision or examined an authentic ancient artifact. In Witnesses returned to the rural Whitmer home and explaining the experience of the Eight Witnesses, reported their gratitude on seeing the angel and Vogel uses little material from these men, though the plates. She then describes surrounding circum- he has collected most of their published testimo- stances as the Smiths returned some 30 miles to nies. In all his explanations, the Eight Witnesses their residence south of Palmyra village. Her uned- saw the plates only through imagination, what he ited manuscript picks up the story as follows, omit- calls a “visionary” experience.15 As for holding the plates, he apparently prefers the possibility of lifting ting only her quotation of the written testimony of a weighted box, with something like group hypno- the Eight Witnesses: sis persuading the eight men that they “viewed the In a few days we were follow by Joseph and plates through the lid of the box.”16 Oliver and the whitmers who came to make us a This concept comes with a second possibil- visit and also to make some arrangements about ity of how Joseph Smith might have convinced the getting the book printed soon after they came Eight Witnesses there were plates: “They saw them They all that is the male part of the company in vision but handled them in a box, or while cov- repaired to a little grove where it was customary ered, on some previous occasion.”17 However, Lucy for the family to offer up their secret prayers.

Joseph Smith Sr. log home, south of Palmyra village, New York. The grove where the Eight Witnesses saw and handled the gold plates was near this home. Photograph by Lee V. Kochenderfer. © 1998 Intellectual Reserve Inc.

journal of Book of Mormon Studies 21 as Joseph had been instructed that the plates in an empty box. But serious readers want accurate would be carried there by one of the ancient reports from eyewitnesses or those who can respon- . Here it was that those 8 witnesses sibly report what eyewitnesses say. In this case, Ford recorded in the Book of Mormon looked upon said his information came from “men who were once the plates and handled them of which they bear in the confidence of the prophet.” One immediately witness in the following words. . . . After the thinks of turncoat John C. Bennett and his exagger- witnesses returned to the house the Angel again ations, as well as several ex- around Ford made his appearance to Joseph and received the at the martyrdom who were characterized by John plates from his hands. We commenced holding Taylor as “some of the vilest and most unprincipled meetings that night in the which we declared men in creation.”22 Ford’s story traces to no reliable those facts that we knew to be true.18 During these events of late June 1829, Lucy When Turley again resided in her original log home, which was then crowded with guests, and she would know challenged John to when a group of men left to examine the plates and when they “returned to the house.” Mother Smith’s be consistent with his history states that the Eight Witnesses all saw and handled the plates on the same date. She further written testimony, states that their joint testimony was drawn up to report their experience in the grove on that occa- John reinforced the sion. She insists that they “looked upon the plates and handled them” near her house on that day, an physical terms in that understanding gained from observation, conversa- tion, and hearing the Eight Witnesses in the eve- document: “I now ning meeting when all “declared those facts that we knew to be true.” say I handled those

The Turley Report and ’s Other plates. there was Statements fine engravings This and the next section will discuss the evi- dence offered by the subjective school. Palmer be- on both sides. lieves that all of the witnesses “seem to have seen the records with their spiritual eyes and inspected I handled them.” them in the context of a vision, apparently never having actually possessed or touched them.”19 And source and appears to be outright folklore. Vogel Vogel broadly equates the experience of the Eight admits it lacks credibility but trusts it for insight: Witnesses with that of the Three Witnesses, who “The details transmitted by Ford may be inaccurate, he thinks describe an event of a “subjective nature” but the essence of the account contains an element that fits “the illusion of a group hallucination.”20 of truth.”23 Vogel’s use of the “inaccurate” story is Thus “the experiences of the eight men were appar- justified because the governor’s “account is similar ently visionary in nature, similar to the experiences to the claims that dissident Mormons in Ohio and of the three witnesses.”21 were making in 1838.”24 But slander circu- Use of one source shows how little real evidence lating in one location is not proved true by similar supports the subjective theory regarding the Eight slanders developed elsewhere, as the history of po- Witnesses. Vogel revives an anecdote of Illinois gov- litical campaigns shows. ernor Thomas Ford, who said Joseph Smith admit- Revisionists offer one interview with one of the ted isolating a few followers and whipping up faith Eight Witnesses to support a mental mirage. As and guilt until they imagined they saw gold plates the Mormons were forced from Missouri in 1839,

22 Volume 14, number 1, 2005 Theodore Turley temporarily remained as a church the Three Witnesses, Davis obviously got that detail business agent and was visited by several residents, wrong in reporting what John told him. And six including John Whitmer, who had been excommu- statements from John Whitmer speak of handling nicated the year before. The hostile group ridiculed the plates, including the full Turley reference and Turley’s belief in the Book of Mormon, but he con- John’s editorial farewell in the church newspaper, fronted John Whitmer with inconsistency. Turley stating “that I have most assuredly seen the plates later reconstructed the rest of the conversation: from whence the Book of Mormon is translated, Whitmer asked do you hint at me? Turley replid and that I have handled these plates.”32 So John “if the cap fits you wear it. all I know, you have Whitmer claimed to handle the plates as Joseph published to the world that an angel did present Smith showed them, not to behold them as dis- those plates to Joseph Smith.” Whitmer replied played by an angel. Though interviews may be quite “I now say I handled those plates. there was fine accurate, they are not transcripts. Davis correctly engravings on both sides. I handled them.” and gave John’s statement about seeing the plates but he described how they were hung and they were confused the testimonies of the Three and the Eight shown to me by a supernatural power. he ac- Witnesses concerning seeing an angel. knowledged all. Turley asked him why the trans- So the Davis interview shows the fallacy of lation is not now true, & he said “I cannot read it, proof-texting with a single phrase suggesting the and I do not know whether it is true or not.”25 marvelous. Turley remembered John Whitmer as saying the plates were shown to him “by a supernat- One statement here becomes a pillar for the the- ural power.” But as just stated, in his church history ory of visionary plates: “they were shown to me by a John noted that Joseph Smith personally showed supernatural power.” Vogel insists this “would sug- the plates to the Eight Witnesses, which agrees with gest something other than a normal, physical expe- their testimony printed in the Book of Mormon. rience.”26 And Palmer echoes: “This added detail of However, Turley erroneously thought the published how he saw indicates that the eight probably did not statement of the Eight Witnesses testified of the observe or feel the actual artifact.”27 But a strange miraculous, telling John, “[Y]ou have published “added detail” is a red flag. David Whitmer often to the world that an angel did present those plates complained of misquotation in his many interviews. to Joseph Smith.” When Turley challenged John Here the concept of miraculous display differs from to be consistent with his written testimony, John all other John Whitmer accounts. Vogel prints rele­ reinforced the physical terms in that document: “I vant parts of 15 interviews with John Whitmer.28 now say I handled those plates. there was fine en- My files contain an additional 8 reports of John’s gravings on both sides. I handled them.”33 On the own testimony of the Book of Mormon.29 The total other hand, the phrasing “supernatural power” cor- is 23 reports from this last survivor of the Eight responds with Turley’s preconception, not the writ- Witnesses. Many are brief and general, but when ten testimony that John was supporting. Thus the details are given, they speak of seeing and/or han- idea of a supernormal event evidently came from dling as a normal event, except for Turley’s phrase the interviewer, since John only indicates natural “supernatural power” and Joshua Davis’s recollec- circumstances in other statements referring to the tion that John declared: “I, with my own eyes, saw Eight Witnesses’ group experience with the plates the plates from which the Book of Mormon was themselves. The rest of Turley’s report blends with translated, and I also saw an angel who witnessed to the witnesses’ declaration and with John Whitmer’s the truth of the Book of Mormon.”30 other five statements that he handled the plates. But John Whitmer’s own words counter the odd particulars in these two reports. As official church Burnett’s Hearsay Report and Testimonies of historian, he named the Three Witnesses, “into Handling whose presence the angel of God came and showed them the Plates, the ball, the directors, etc.” He then Besides misusing the Turley report, revisionists named himself and seven others “to whom Joseph mainly rely on an 1838 letter of former missionary Smith Jr showed the plates.”31 Since John Whitmer Stephen Burnett, which mentions two linked oc- personally states that the angel appeared only to casions when he heard Martin Harris discuss his

journal of Book of Mormon Studies 23 own experience and that of the Eight Witnesses. As indicated, Stephen Burnett heard Harris’s But Burnett’s letter is hostile and accusatory, adding first comments in mid-March, and a week later he distracting static to the line of information. War- renounced the Book of Mormon in the Kirtland ren Parrish also mentions Harris’s initial comments Temple, with Harris protesting he was misunder- and thereby clarifies how disbelievers reinterpreted stood. Afterward Burnett reported both occasions the witnesses’ printed testimonies. Parrish opposed in his partisan letter. Following are the relevant Joseph Smith after the Kirtland bank failed in early portions: 1837. A national depression followed that summer, when I came to hear Martin Harris state in and a counter party proclaimed Joseph Smith a public that he never saw the plates with his fallen prophet, resulting in the December excom- natural eyes, only in vision or imagination, munication of Parrish and about two dozen associ- neither Oliver nor David & also that the eight ates, which probably included Stephen Burnett.34 witnesses never saw them & hesitated to sign Martin Harris first discussed the witnesses’ testi- that instrument for that reason, but were per- monies about mid-March 1838. Then seceders Bur- suaded to do it, the last pedestal gave way. . . . I nett and Parrish gave their versions of what Harris therefore three weeks since in the stone Chapel said, and the following comes from Parrish, though gave a full history of the church since I became it is unclear whether he personally heard the Book acquainted with it . . . I was followed by W. of Mormon witness: Parrish, , and John Boynton, all Martin Harris, one of the subscribing witnesses, of who concurred with me. After we were done has come out at last, and says he never saw the speaking M Harris arose & said he was sorry for plates, from which the book purports to have any man who rejected the Book of Mormon for been translated, except in vision; and he further he knew it was true, he said he had hefted the says that any man who says he has seen them plates repeatedly in a box with only a tablecloth in any other way is a liar, Joseph not excepted; or a handkerchief over them, but he never saw see new edition, Book of Covenants, page 170, them only as he saw a city through a mountain. which agrees with Harris’s testimony.35 And said that he never should have told that the testimony of the eight witnesses was false, if it On scores of documented occasions, Martin had not been picked out of him but should have Harris insisted he saw the angel and the plates. So let it passed as it was. . . . I am well satisfied for if Harris used the word vision to describe the Three myself that if the witnesses whose names are Witnesses’ experience, he would have meant there attached to the Book of Mormon never saw the was a real visit of an angel, mirroring the normal plates as Martin admits that there can be noth- usage of vision in the and other ing brought to prove that any such thing ever scriptures. But Parrish used a skeptic’s definition, existed for it is said on the 171 page of the book referring to what is now Section 17 of the Doctrine of covenants that the three should testify that and Covenants, to show that faith was required to they had seen the plates even as J.S. Jr. & if they see the plates, which proved to Parrish that pre- only saw them spiritually or in vision with their conditioning produced a religious delusion. The eyes shut—JS Jr never saw them in any other approach was not new. For example, way & if so the plates were only visionary.37 left the church in 1831 and admitted that the Three Witnesses “frequently” testified that an angel ap- The two-stage interaction with Harris is clear in peared “and presented them the ,” yet Burnett’s letter. He first heard what he considered a when he discovered that 17 shocking admission of Harris, which was obviously promised the Three Witnesses a view of the Nephite repeated as the centerpiece of Burnett’s exposure artifacts if they had faith, he concluded this meant in the later temple meeting. However, Harris’s re- that the witnesses saw the plates “by faith or imagi- sponse in this second stage represents his true at- nation.” Booth’s slanted reasoning was reprinted in titude, since Harris said his earlier words were mis- Howe’s anti-Mormon work of 1834 and sounds like used. This shows that caution is required in quoting a promptbook for Burnett and Parrish interpreting Burnett’s version of any of Harris’s words. Burnett’s Harris in 1838.36 bias is clear in reporting Harris’s original remarks,

24 Volume 14, number 1, 2005 where the witness supposedly acknowledged he saw dissenters’ visionary theory, which shows that the the plates “in vision or imagination.” Yet the word physical reality of the plates was Harris’s theme imagination would not have come from Harris, who in the second meeting. He had actually held them later wrote, “no man ever heard me in any way deny “with only a tablecloth or a handkerchief over them, . . . the administration of the angel that showed me but he never saw them only as he saw a city through the plates.”38 Moreover, Burnett ends with an inter- a mountain.” In this context, Harris was not talking pretive paraphrase of Harris, for there is no parallel of his testimony of seeing the angel and plates, but for the witness equating seeing “in vision” with hav- speaking of other times when he knew the plates ing “their eyes shut.” These pseudo-quotations are were under “a tablecloth or a handkerchief,” proba- conclusions of the liberated Mormons, for whom bly the experience that he and Emma shared during a “vision” was by definition an illusion produced the 1828 translation, as discussed near the begin- by blind faith. And in reporting Harris’s first Kirt- ning of this paper.39 land remarks on the plates, Burnett went further At the follow-up meeting, Harris modified his to claim that Harris said the “eight witnesses never initial comments on the Eight Witnesses. As noted, saw them,” meaning that they saw them only as did Burnett claimed that Harris first said that group the Three Witnesses—“in vision or imagination.” saw the plates only in vision.40 Three months before, Hepzibah Richards pictured the Kirtland religious climate: “A large number have dissented from the body of the church, and are very violent in their “[W]ee wass talking opposition to the Presiden[cy] and all who uphold them.”41 Harris fraternized with the reorganizers about the Book of but drew scorn for believing the Book of Mormon. Burnett’s letter indicates that the witness explained Mormon which he is he had given an earlier answer under pressure. This means that Harris’s corrections in the second meet- one of the witnesses ing supersede the earlier, nonphysical language. On reflection Harris said that “he never should he said he had but too have told that the testimony of the eight witnesses was false, if it had not been picked out of him but hands and too eyes should have let it passed as it was.” To Vogel, this means that “Harris expressed regret about reveal- he said he had seen ing the true nature of the experience of the eight witnesses,”42 but the context is Harris straightening the plates with his eyes out Burnett by adding his own testimony that there were physical plates. If we compensate for Burnett’s and handled them loaded language, Harris’s retraction was essentially this: he never would have agreed that the Eight Wit- with his hands.” nesses saw the plates through spiritual sight if he had not been confused by leading questions, but would have let their written testimony speak for But the reader comes closer to Harris’s true views itself. Vogel thinks the Harris disclosure theory is when Burnett reports Martin’s later rebuttal. validated because Harris knew the Eight Witnesses The second meeting was held in the temple in and their experience, but this view widely misses late March 1838, when Burnett no doubt stressed the point.43 The real question is whether Burnett the central argument of his letter, that “the plates quoted Harris accurately. The answer is that Burnett were only visionary.” He was followed by Parrish, continued to believe in a visionary experience for whose letter embraced the same theory, and then the Eight Witnesses even after Harris said he had ex-apostles Boynton and Luke Johnson. Finally, given the wrong impression on that issue. Since Martin Harris stood and said that “he had hefted Harris insisted he had “hefted the plates repeatedly the plates repeatedly.” This clearly countered the in a box,” he disagreed with Burnett’s spiritualizing

journal of Book of Mormon Studies 25 seen and handled the plates, &c.”45 After his ordeal in Liberty Jail was over, Hyrum, still sensitive to the slanders of the Kirtland dissenters, wrote to his fellow church members, starting his letter with specific reference to giving “my testimony to the world of the truth of the book of Mormon.” After narrating persecutions, he returned to his published testimony: “I felt a determination to die, rather than deny the things which my eyes had seen, which my hands had handled, and which I had borne testi- mony to, wherever my lot had been cast.”46 This means that many times, in several states, Hyrum testified to handling the plates. His brother Samuel gave the same oral testimony. Daniel Tyler was 15 and intensely religious when he heard Samuel sim- ply tell his story: “He knew his brother Joseph had the plates, for the prophet had shown them to him, and he had handled them and seen the engravings thereon.”47 The Eight Witnesses left 10 specific statements of handling the plates: the above 4 from Samuel and Hyrum and 6 among the John Whitmer reports.48

Portrait of , by Lewis A. Ramsey

of the Eight Witnesses’ experience. Burnett’s report of Harris’s quoting them is not only compound hearsay, but hearsay rejected by its author. Six of the Eight Witnesses were still alive by March 1838, but all were either in Missouri or trav- eling there. Hyrum Smith was the last to leave Kirt- land, and his group stopped at the home of Sally Parker in central Ohio. Later she sent a letter to rela­ tives in Maine, knowing they had been exposed to messages from Kirtland dissenters. She mentioned the opposition by Parrish and Boynton and reflected back on the faith-promoting visit of Hyrum Smith, who gave his personal testimony: “[W]ee wass talk- ing about the Book of Mormon which he is one of the witnesses he said he had but too hands and too eyes he said he had seen the plates with his eyes and handled them with his hands.”44 Two other solid sources report this language from Hyrum in this period. Hyrum married Mary Fielding at the end of 1837, and a little later her brother Joseph wrote: Portrait of Joseph Smith Sr., by William Whitaker “My sister bears testimony that her husband has

26 Volume 14, number 1, 2005 Vogel quotes 8 of the 10 handling statements and families and activities of David and John Whitmer. adds the disturbing comment “As can be seen, ex- Poulson was interested in the Smith family, and cept for Poulson’s late interview with John Whitmer, Joseph Smith III accepted a guarded friendship specific declarations by the witnesses about handling with him. Soon after Poulson’s Whitmer interviews, the plates are few and vague.”49 The basic reliability Joseph III said he was “a man of ability and learn- of Poulson’s interview will be discussed next, but if ing, is and has been for some years, a Spiritualist.”55 it is not counted, the remaining 9 references to han- Though Poulson became an eccentric and fictional- dling the plates are more than few. Nor is the word ized his background, his ability as a reporter is the handling vague. Smith family members, such as Wil- main issue in evaluating his interviews with David liam and Emma, describe their limited examination and John Whitmer. He visited them as an educated of the covered plates. But in print and in interviews, person and religious eclectic, evidently seeking to the Eight Witnesses speak of unlimited direct con- preserve the stories of the last surviving Book of tact, not a vision of the plates with previous experi- Mormon witnesses. ences of lifting them when covered. In fact, two ob- Revisionists consider Poulson’s report as “per- servers note the experience was not strung out over haps suspect since John Whitmer was dead at the time. As discussed earlier, Lucy Smith states she was time of publication and David Whitmer com- present as Whitmer family members, along with her plained about the accuracy of Poulson’s interview husband and two sons, left her log home for forest with him.”56 The first problem is trivial: Poulson privacy on the special day when the Eight Witnesses interviewed John in Missouri in April 1878, John “looked upon the plates and handled them.”50 Like- died in July, and Poulson sent the interview to the wise, David Whitmer was present and/or aware of from Idaho at the end of that month. these circumstances, stating that the eight men be- The delay is reasonable and John’s death unpredict- came witnesses on a particular date. After recalling able. Regarding accuracy, after the David Whitmer that the Three Witnesses saw the plates in late June, interview appeared in the Deseret News, that wit- David explained that “the eight witnesses saw them, ness answered a question about it from L. F. (or T.) I think, the next day or the day after. Joseph showed Monch (or Mouch), probably capable Ogden educa- them the plates himself, but the angel showed us tor Louis F. Moench. David said Poulson did not get the plates.”51 Thus David Whitmer also pictures the one of his answers straight: “I surely did not make experience of Eight Witnesses as an event on a given the Statement which you say he reports me to have date, when the plates were shown by Joseph, not by a made.”57 It is unknown which statement is meant, divine being or supernatural means. but critics are sloppy in stating that David com- plained about the whole interview. Instead, he cor- John Whitmer’s Comprehensive Interview rected one issue in a report consisting of answers to 20 questions. Similarly, David corrected many de- Subjective interpreters seek to disqualify John tails in his 1881 Kansas City Journal interview, pro- Whitmer’s most informative interview. P. Wilhelm nouncing the rest “substantially correct.”58 In the Poulson visited both John and David Whitmer in Poulson interview, about two-thirds of what David upper Missouri in 1878, sending his accounts to reportedly said is corroborated by what he said in the Deseret News that summer. Poulson had pre- other published interviews (most of the other third sided over the Copenhagen district from 1861 to being new material that cannot be compared for 1863, when he came to the United States and was consistency), so Poulson’s report of his interview named secretary for his emigrating company.52 He with John Whitmer likely reflected a similarly high became a homeopathic physician and practiced in degree of accuracy.59 , Council Bluffs, and the San Fran- In questioning John Whitmer, Poulson concen- cisco area. He was doing psychic analysis by late trated on the tangibility of the metal record, and a 187353 and expanded this spiritualistic activity up to similar question to David Whitmer shows the inter- later years, when he published spirit messages from viewer was careful on this topic. Poulson apparently notable Mormons and non-Mormons.54 He settled visited David first, and he was obviously interested in Council Bluffs during the period of his Whit- in the materiality of each brother’s experience. mer interviews, both of which accurately describe When Poulson asked David if the Eight Witnesses

journal of Book of Mormon Studies 27 did not “handle the plates,” David responded: “We viewed by two groups of four is an odd detail, possi- did not, but they did.” Here Poulson accurately re- bly an error in the interview process. Mother Smith’s ports David, since later and careful interviews with history should have priority as being dictated and David, as those of Zenas H. Gurley and Nathan reviewed.62 Nevertheless, Lucy’s history harmonizes Tanner Jr., also report that that the Three Witnesses with the rest of the answers in the Poulson interview, did not handle the plates.60 Poulson’s dialogue with which clearly state that the men handled uncovered John follows here: plates in the presence of others. I said: I am aware that your name is affixed to the testimony in the Book of Mormon, that you Miscounted Interviews and the Printed saw the plates? He–It is so, and that testimony Testimony is true. I–Did you handle the plates with your hands? He–I did so! I–Then they were a mate- More people sought out the Three Witnesses rial substance? He–Yes, as material as anything because they had seen a brilliant angel. Even though can be. I–They were heavy to lift? He–Yes, and the Eight Witnesses left fewer interviews, they you know gold is a heavy metal, they were very adequately describe a simple, natural experience. heavy. I–How big were the leaves? He–So far as Subjective interpreters seek to replace a material I recollect, 8 by 6 or 7 inches. I–Were the leaves event with a psychic event, and they minimize how thick? He–Yes, just so thick, that characters much the Eight Witnesses said about examining could be engraven on both sides. I–How were the plates. Vogel generalizes: “Individual statements the leaves joined together? He–In three rings, by the eight witnesses are rare due largely to their each one in the shape of a D with the straight early deaths.”63 This statement prefaces the listing line towards the centre. . . . . I–Did you see them of two group testimonies and 17 times when one of covered with a cloth? He–No. He handed them the Eight Witnesses explained or validated his pub- uncovered into our hands, and we turned the lished testimony or when family members said he leaves sufficient to satisfy us.61 was always faithful to it. Thus rare is inaccurate, es- pecially since this source scholar has added six John These seven related answers are impressive on Whitmer interviews to the above inventory.64 And the solid substance of the plates. On the other hand, there are a number of other known contacts beyond there are two problematic answers on surrounding this. For instance, Vogel writes “no known testimo- circumstances, though they do not invalidate a long nies” by the names of Christian and Peter Whitmer interview. Poulson’s account contains minor differ- Jr.65 Yet the latter accompanied Oliver Cowdery ences with Lucy Smith’s history regarding place and on the western mission in 1830–31, when inves- grouping. Following are the two answers that were tigator attended a meeting where omitted from the above line of questions: “one testified that he had seen , and another I–In what place did you see the plates. He–In that he had seen the plates.”66 Another omission Joseph Smith’s house; he had them there. . . . is Zenas H. Gurley’s recollection of visiting John I–Were you all eight witnesses present at the Whitmer about 1872: “He had seen the plates; and same time? He–No. At that time Joseph showed it was his especial pride and joy that he had written the plates to us, we were four persons, present in sixty pages of the Book of Mormon.”67 In addition, the room, and at another time he showed them recalled hearing testimonies to four persons more. from the Prophet’s father and brother Hyrum. And the sons of Jacob Whitmer, John Whitmer, and Hy- As discussed, said the Eight rum Page heard their fathers’ testimonies at least Witnesses left her house for a grove, a likely location once in life as well as once before their deaths. We because that day many Whitmers and now can document over 40 instances when one of were at the small home that the Smith family had re- the Eight Witnesses restated his testimony, with the cently reoccupied. John Whitmer possibly said some- printed declaration of that testimony mentioned or thing like “at Joseph Smith’s house,” meaning to him understood in the statement or conversation. that the Eight Witnesses viewed the plates on that Yet personal statements or reports are only part property. And Poulson’s report that the plates were of the story of the Eight Witnesses. Their relatives

28 Volume 14, number 1, 2005 The testimony of the Eight Witnesses, as it appeared in the first edition of the Book of Mormon. Courtesy of Family and Church History Department Archives, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

brothers regularly validated their formal group statement. Sons and nephews of Jacob Whitmer, John Whitmer, and Hiram Page gave similar cu- mulative accounts. Likewise, Samuel Smith’s obituary noted “his steadfastness as one of the witnesses to the Book of Mor- mon.”69 And William Smith in- cluded his father and brothers in saying that all of the Eight Witnesses testified “that they not only Saw with their eyes but handled with their hands the said record . . . nor has either or any one of these witnesses ever to my knowledge Counteracted the testimony as given above Concerning the real existence of these Mormon tablets.”70 The above family observations point to hundreds of times when the Eight Witnesses stood by their written declaration. And thoughtful converts, such as the Pratt brothers, , and William E. McLellin, recount how they systematically questioned each Book of Mormon wit- ness at the outset. McLellin later said: “When I first joined the church in 1831, soon I be- came acquainted with all the Smith family and the Whitmer families, and I heard all their testimonies, wh[ic]h agreed in said they affirmed their experience throughout the main points; and I believed life, showing they were deeply impressed by what them then and I believe them yet.”71 McLellin was a they had “seen and hefted.” When word reached schoolteacher in eastern Illinois who attended Mor- Kirtland about the deaths of Christian and Peter mon meetings as teams of elders traveled from Ohio Whitmer Jr., brother-in-law Oliver Cowdery wrote to Missouri to participate in dedicating that land that “they proclaimed to their last moments, the for the gathering. He heard David Whitmer’s testi- certainty of their former testimony.”68 Thus these mony of seeing an angel and was so impressed that

journal of Book of Mormon Studies 29 he rode across two states to western Missouri, just a study of U.S. constitutional law that rarely men- missing the Prophet but spending time with David tions the Constitution. Revisionists virtually set Whitmer and Martin Harris, and then conversing aside this definitive source on examining the plates. with Hyrum Smith for four hours, which McLellin In quick review, two main documents are used to described as follows: “I inquired into the particulars transform handling the plates into “a vision of the of the coming forth of the record, of the rise of the plates.”74 Both documents are flawed—the Burnett church and of its progress and upon the testimo- letter contains irresponsible hearsay about the Eight nies given to him &c.”72 McLellin was baptized and Witnesses, and the Turley dialogue begins with the ordained an before returning east as Hyrum’s interviewer’s misconception that John Whitmer’s missionary companion. At Jacksonville, Illinois, written testimony spoke of the supernatural. Judged both spoke on the validity of the Book of Mormon, by the agreement of 40 other interviews of the Eight with William first giving a picture of the buried Witnesses, the historian should conclude that Turley book as he learned about it from two of the Three misquoted John Whitmer on a miraculous viewing Witnesses, and especially from questioning Hyrum: of the plates. Ironically, the main point of Turley’s in- “a set of thin plates resembling gold, with Arabic terview is that John Whitmer still upheld his written characters inscribed on them. The plates were mi- testimony, twice saying he handled the plates. nutely described as being connected with rings in Although current critics claim a conflict between the shape of the letter D, which facilitated the open- later sources and the original published testimony, ing and shutting of the book.”73 The description of its accuracy is the stated or implied theme of all “D rings” is unusual and confirms the same point in interviews with the Eight Witnesses. In 1847 McLel- John Whitmer’s interview with Wilhelm Poulson, lin asked Hiram Page about his faith in the Book who wrote down specifics of a direct examination of of Mormon and received this reply: “[I]t would be an uncovered metallic volume. doing injustice to myself, and to the work of God of The printed “Testimony of Eight Witnesses” is the last days, to say that I could know a thing to be the centerpiece for the nature of their experience. true in 1830, and know the same thing to be false in Current arguments for a subjective event read like 1847. To say my mind was so treacherous that I had forgotten what I saw.”75 This answer is seen as evidence that Page did not handle the plates,76 but the reverse is true. Page here insists he cannot modify the published statement. A correspondent in Salem, Massachusetts, referred to hearing Hyrum Smith “declare, in this city in public, that what is re- corded about the plates, &c. &c. is God’s solemn truth.”77 Here Hyrum refers to his published testimony in the Book of Mormon, as did John Whitmer repeatedly. E. C. Brand visited him in 1875 and wrote that John “declared that his testimony, as found in the ‘Testimony Gold tablet of Darius I, deposited at Persepolis about 516 bc. Paul R. Cheesman Collection, L. Tom of Eight Witnesses,’ in the Perry Special Collections, Harold B. Lee Library, , Provo, Utah. Book of Mormon, is strictly true.”78

30 Volume 14, number 1, 2005 Among 42 statements or personal reports from church historian, John Whitmer wrote that the Three the Eight Witnesses, 39 percent give some detail of Witnesses knew “for a surety” because the angel su- the experience, such as seeing, handling, or lifting. pernaturally showed them the plates, and John added And as discussed, 10 of these mention handling by contrast that he was one of eight men “to whom the plates.79 The above assertions of Hiram Page, Joseph Smith Jr showed the Plates.”82 Similarly, in Hyrum Smith, and John Whitmer give a different early church newspapers, John Whitmer83 and kind of response, a report of the witness expressly Hyrum Smith84 mentioned their written testimo- affirming the printed testimony. These simple re- nies, adding they had both seen and handled the affirmations are 33 percent of the total. Since the plates. By connecting these actions with their writ- original testimony refers to a material event, such ten testimony, these witnesses identified sight and restatements do the same and therefore qualify as touch as part of the 1829 event when Joseph Smith physical descriptions. Thus over two-thirds of the showed the plates to their group. In addition, Hiram statements or interviews of the Eight Witnesses are in fact physical descriptions. The remaining inter- Page wrote to William McLellin, stating he could views are generic assurances of continued belief in not change his printed testimony.85 In addition to the Book of Mormon, which are essentially short- these four testimonies penned by three of the Eight hand reaffirmations of their published testimony. Witnesses, near the end of his life John Whitmer Finally, advocates of a group illusion for the reinforced his prior written comments about seeing Eight Witnesses admit that the original declaration and handling the plates, sending three personal let- “seems to describe a literal event,” and its language ters in answer to inquiries of Reorganized Church “implies a natural, physical experience.”80 No evi- missionaries. In mid-1876 he told Mark H. Forscutt: dence to the contrary can be shown to come from “I have never heard that any one of the three, or the witnesses themselves, so seems and implies eight witnesses ever denied the testimony that they should be deleted from these statements. The well- have borne to the Book as published in the first edi- considered published testimony states that Joseph tion of the Book of Mormon.”86 And in late 1876 Smith, not an induced apparition, “has shown unto John Whitmer answered Heman C. Smith, referring us”81 not a box or heavy bundle but “the plates,” to the published declaration and concluding, “That with observable color and engravings, with leaves testimony was, is, and will be true, henceforth and that “we did handle with our hands.” Moreover, forever.”87 Finally, John Whitmer responded to an a group event is pictured for all these actions, not 1877 letter “concerning my testimony as recorded in individual contacts with covered plates over a pe- the Book of Mormon.” John wrote: “It is the Same riod of time. The essence of the written testimony is as it was from the beginning, and it is true. . . . I Joseph Smith’s showing of the plates, repeated twice have never denied my testimony as to the Book of for emphasis, each time followed by how the record was physically examined while being observed. Mormon, under any circumstances whatever.”88 All These emphatic redundancies first state that the wit- of these firsthand statements add no adorning spiri- nesses saw engravings on the goldlike leaves as they tual details but establish a standard of comparison turned them, with the simple restatement that the for dozens of reports mediated by interviewers. The volume was “seen and hefted.” above seven personal editorial statements or letters The documented affirmations of the Eight -Wit combine with the published “Testimony of Eight nesses include personal writings from three who in Witnesses” in direct evidence that Joseph Smith their own phrases verified their official statement did possess a finely constructed and engraved book, published in 1830. Four of these direct statements with multiple leaves of deep yellow metal. ! are discussed above but are summarized here. As

journal of Book of Mormon Studies 31 44. A. G. Nerlich, F. Parsche, I. a nearly pure ‘Ancylostoma History (Bibliothek der allge- 66. Charles A. Borden, Sea Quest: Wiest, P. Schramel, and U. duodenale’ infestation in native meinen Sprachwissenschaft: Global Blue-Water Adventuring Löhrs, “Extensive pulmonary South American Indians and Reihe 2, Einzeluntersuchungen in Small Craft (Philadelphia: hemorrhage in an Egyptian a discussion of its ethnological und Darstellungen) (Heidel- Macrae Smith, 1967); Alan J. mummy,” Virchows Archiv significance,” American Journal berg: Carl Winter Universitäts- Villiers, Wild Ocean: The Story 427/4 (1995): 423–29; Franz of Hygiene 7 (1927): 174–84; verlag, 1992), 19. From the of the North Atlantic and the Parsche and Andreas Nerlich, L. F. Ferreira, A. Araújo, U. E. ethnically Papuan Austronesian Men Who Sailed It (New York: “Presence of drugs in different Confalonieri, M. Chame, and Buma tribe, on Vanikoro, east- McGraw-Hill, 1957). tissues of an Egyptian mummy,” B. Ribeiro Filho, “Encontro ern Solomon Islands: “uka” [last 67. Hannes Lindemann, Alone at Fresenius’ Journal of Analytical de ovos de ancilostomideos em vowel is a schwa] = louse, and Sea, ed. J. Stuart (New York: Chemistry 352 (1995): 380–84. coprólitos humanos datados from Austronesian-speaking Random House, 1957). 45. S. Balabanova, F. Parsche, and de 7,230±80 B. P. no estado Ontong Java (in the western W. Pirsig, “Drugs in cranial de Piauí, Brasil,” in Paleo- Solomons), “uku = louse.” Attempts to Redefine the hair of pre-Columbian Peruvian parasitologia no Brasil, ed. L. F. 61. Sándor Bökönyi and Dénes Experience of the Eight Witnesses mummies,” Baessler Archiv Ferreira, A. Araújo, and U. Jánossy, “Adatok a pulyka Richard L. Anderson (NF) 40 (1992); F. Parsche, Confalonieri (Rio de Janeiro: kolumbusz ellötti Európai S. Balabanova, and W. Wirsig, Programa de Educação Pública, elöfordulás ához,” Aquila: A 1. “The Testimony of Three Wit- “Drugs in ancient populations,” Escola Nacional de Saúde Magyar Ornithologiai Központ nesses” and “The Testimony of The Lancet 341 (20 February 20, Pública, 1988), 37–40. Folyóirata 65 (1953): 265–69 Eight Witnesses” appear in the 1993): 503. 52. Marvin J. Allison, Daniel Men- (Budapest). front matter in current editions 46. J. M. Riddle and J. M. Vreeland, doza, and Alejandro Pezzia, 62. Clive Gamble, Timewalkers: The of the Book of Mormon. “Identification of insects associ­ “Documentation of a case of Prehistory of Global Coloniza- 2. William Smith, William Smith ated with Peruvian mummy tuberculosis in pre-Columbian tion (Phoenix Mill, England: on Mormonism (Lamoni, IA: bundles by using scanning elec- America,” American Review of Alan Sutton; Cambridge: Har- Steam Book and tron microscopy,” Paleopathol- Respiratory Disease 107 (1973): vard University Press, 1993), Job Office, 1883), 12. ogy Newsletter 39 (1982): 5–9. 985–91. 214–30. 3. William Smith, “Sermon in the Regarding S. paniceum in pre- 53. Ferreira, “Encontro de ovos.” 63. P. Norton,“El señorio de Salan- Saints’ Chapel” [Deloit, Iowa, dynastic Egypt and Bronze Age 54. L. F. Ferreira, A. Araújo, and gone y la liga de mercaderes: 8 June 1884], Saints’ Herald 31 England, see P. C. Buckland and U. E. Confalonieri, “Os parasi- el cartel spondylus-balsa,” in (1884): 643–44. Eva Panagiotakopulu, “Rameses tos do homem antigo,” Ciência Arqueología y etnohistoria del 4. Interview of William Smith II and the tobacco beetle,” An- Hoje 1/3 (November–December, sur de Colombia y norte del with E. C. Briggs and J. W. tiquity 75 (2001): 549–56; Eva 1982): 63–67. Ecuador, comp. J. Alcina Franch Peterson, ’s Ensign, 13 Panagiotakopulu, Archaeology 55. Fonseca, Parasitismo e migrações. and S. Moreno Yánez (Miscela- January 1894, 6. and Entomology in the Eastern 56. Ferreira, “Encontro de ovos.” nea Antropológica Ecuatoriana, 5. Emma Smith, interview be- Mediterranean. Research into 57. A. Araújo, “Paleoepidemiologia Monográfico 6, y Boletín de los tween 4 and 10 February 1879, the History of Insect Synan- da Ancilostomose,” in Paleo- Museos del Banco Central del Saints’ Herald 26 (1879): 290. thropy in Greece and Egypt (Ox- parasitologia no Brasil, ed. L. F. Ecuador 6) (Cayambe, Ecuador: 6. See Richard Lloyd Anderson, ford: BAR International Series Ferreira, A. Araújo, and U. Ediciones Abya-Yala, 1987); Investigating the Book of Mor- 836, 2000), 9. Confalonieri (Rio de Janeiro: Joseph Needham and Lu Gwei- mon Witnesses (Salt Lake City: 47. Mary W. Helms, Ulysses’ Sail: Programa de Educação Pública, Djen, Trans-Pacific Echoes and Deseret Book, 1981), 81. An Ethnographic Odyssey of Escola Nacional de Saúde Resonances: Listening Once 7. See Joseph Smith, History of the Power, Knowledge, and Geo- Pública, 1988), 144–51. Again (Singapore and Philadel- Church of Jesus Christ of Latter- graphical Distance (Princeton, 58. L. F. Ferreira, A. Araújo, and phia: World Scientific, 1985), day Saints, ed. B. H. Roberts NJ: Princeton University Press, U. E. Confalonieri, “The find- 48–49. (Salt Lake City: Deseret News, 1988). ing of eggs and larvae of para- 64. Clinton R. Edwards, Aboriginal 1902–32), 1:55; hereafter History 48. Douglas H. Ubelaker, “Patterns sitic helminths in archaeologi- Watercraft on the Pacific Coast of the Church. of demographic change in the cal material from Unai, Minas of South America (Berkeley: 8. Joel Tiffany interview, Tiffany’s Americas,” Human Biology 64 Gerais, Brazil,” Transactions, University of California Press, Monthly, August 1859, 166; also (1992): 361–79; M. L. Powell, Royal Society of Tropical Medi- 1965); “New World perspectives in Dan Vogel, Early Mormon “Health and disease in the cine and Hygiene 74/6 (1980): on pre-European voyaging in Documents (Salt Lake City: late prehistoric Southeast,” in 65–67. the Pacific,” in Early Chinese , 1996–2002), Disease and Demography in the 59. L. Miller Van Blerkom, “The Art and Its Possible Influence in 2:306. Americas, ed. John W. Verano Evolution of Human Infectious the Pacific Basin: A Symposium 9. Iowa State Register, 28 August and Douglas H. Ubelaker Disease in the Eastern and Arranged by the Department of 1870; also in Vogel, Early Mor- (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Western Hemispheres” (PhD Art History and Archaeology, mon Documents, 2:330. Institution Press, 1992), 41–53. diss., University of Colorado at Columbia University, New York 10. See Anderson, Investigating, 25– 49. O. da Fonseca, Parasitismo e Boulder, 1985), 4. City, August 21–25, 1967, ed. 26; 21 (20 Au- migrações da parastologia para 60. R. L. Roys, “The Ethno-Botany Noel Barnard in collaboration gust 1859); also in Vogel, Early o conhecimento das origins do of the Maya,” Middle Ameri- with Douglas Fraser, vol. 3, Mormon Documents, 2:297. hommem americano: Estudos de can Research Series, Publica- Oceania and the Americas (New Martin spoke of handling the Pré-história Geral e Brasileira tion No. 2 (New Orleans, LA: York: Intercultural Arts Press, leaves of the plates, but possibly (São Paulo, Brasil: Instituto de Tulane University), 341. In 1969), 843–87. when the record was covered, as Pré-história de Universidade de Mayan: “Uk. The louse found 65. Vital Alsar, La Balsa; The William and Emma Smith did. São Paulo, 1970). on man and quadrupeds,” ac- Longest Raft Voyage in History 11. “Testimony of Eight Witnesses.” 50. Samuel T. Darling, “Observa- cording to the oldest major (New York: Reader’s Digest Curious is derived from the tions on the geographical and Mayan dictionary (the Motul); Press/E. P. Dutton, 1973); Pa- Latin cura, giving one early ethnological distribution of W. Wilfried Schuhmacher, F. cific Challenge (La Jolla, CA: English meaning of “made with hookworms,” Parasitology 12/3 Seto, J. Villegas Seto, and Juan Concord Films [dba ALTI Pub- care or skill.” This is the sense (1920): 217–33. R. Francisco, Pacific Rim: Aus- lishers]), 1974, an 84-minute of the Book of Mormon phrase 51. Fred L. Soper, “The report of tronesian and Papuan Linguistic video. curious workmanship, which is

journal of Book of Mormon Studies 125 repeated in the Eight Witnesses’ haps mistaken to place so much March by Burnett in the long 45. Letter to Parley P. Pratt, Millen- testimony. weight on Ford’s account.” extract quoted next. nial Star 4 (August 1841): 52. 12. See Grant H. Palmer, “Wit- 24. Vogel, “Validity,” 103. 36. Ezra Booth to Reverend Ira 46. “To the Saints scattered nesses to the Golden Plates,” 25. “Theodore Turley’s Memoran- Eddy, letter 3, 24 October 1831, abroad,” 1 chap. 6 of An Insider’s View dums,” Church Archives, hand- in E. D. Howe, Mormonism Un- (November 1839): 20, 23. For of Mormon Origins (Salt Lake writing of Thomas Bullock, who vailed (Painesville, OH: author, context, see Anderson, Investi- City: Signature Books, 2002). began clerking in late 1843; also 1834), 186–87; also in Vogel, gating, 148. Vogel’s main treatments of this in Vogel, Early Mormon Docu- Early Mormon Documents, 47. See context and reference in subject are in his Early Mormon ments, 5:241. 5:308–9. Anderson, Investigating, 140. Documents, 3:464–72; and in his made slight changes to this 37. Stephen Burnett to Lyman 48. These six references appear in study “The Validity of the Wit- text, which appears with minor E. Johnson, 15 April 1838, in the text at note 32 and within nesses’ Testimonies,” in Ameri- modifications in History of the Joseph Smith, Letter Book, that note. can Apocrypha, ed. Dan Vogel Church, 3:307–8. 2:64–66, Church Archives; also 49. Vogel, Early Mormon Docu- and Brent Lee Metcalf (Salt 26. Vogel, Early Mormon Docu- discussed in Anderson, Investi- ments, 3:468. Lake City: Signature Books, ments, 5:240. gating, 155–58. Most of the let- 50. Lucy’s full account was quoted 2002), 79–121. Vogel briefly 27. Palmer, Insider’s View, 205–6. ter is published in Vogel, Early earlier in this paper. See Ander- restates his subjective approach 28. See Vogel, Early Mormon Docu- Mormon Documents, 2:290–93. son, Lucy’s Book, 456. to the Eight Witnesses in his ments, 5:231–51. 38. Letter to H. B. Emerson, Janu- 51. Interview of and speculative psychobiography, 29. The most significant of these ary 1871, Saints’ Herald 22 (15 Joseph F. Smith, Deseret News, Joseph Smith: The Making of a eight accounts are used with October 1875): 630; also in An- 16 November 1878, omitting Prophet (Salt Lake City: Signa- reference citations later in this derson, Investigating, 118. parenthetical clarifications; also ture Books, 2004), 466–69. article. 39. Palmer, in Insider’s View, 206, in Cook, David Whitmer Inter- 13. Palmer’s quotations in this 30. “A visit to John Whitmer,” carelessly states that Harris used views, 40. paragraph are from Insider’s Deseret Evening News, 12 April the metaphor of seeing through 52. See , History of View, 175–76, 206–7. For 1875. a mountain for the experience the Scandinavian Mission (Salt Palmer’s pattern of assuming 31. Bruce N. Westergren, ed., From of “the eight witnesses,” making Lake City: Deseret News Press, the witnesses’ “mind-set” with- Historian to Dissident: The Book this error a main proof for his 1927), 156, 177, 494. out evidence, see the reviews by of John Whitmer (Salt Lake City: subjective theory concerning 53. See Ronald W. Walker, Way- Steven C. Harper (“Trustworthy Signature Books, 1995), 56. their experience. Saints (Urbana, IL: Uni- History?”) and Mark Ashhurst- 32. Latter Day Saint Messenger and 40. In the indented extract above, versity of Illinois Press, 1998), McGee (“A One-Sided View of Advocate 2 (March 1836): 286– Burnett claimed the Eight 268. Mormon Origins”) in FARMS 87; also in Vogel, Early Mormon Witnesses hesitated to sign a 54. See Peter Wilhelm Poulson Review 15/2 (2003): 283–88, Documents, 5:239. Besides this physical certificate because Fagerstjerna, The Light of the 340–48. source and Turley’s report, they had seen the plates only Messiah (San Francisco: author, 14. Vogel, Joseph Smith, xvi; com- the other four references from spiritually. Harris may have 1888), showing some affinity for pare xii. John Whitmer regarding his made a more faith-promoting the Reorganized Church. 15. Vogel, “Testimony of Eight Wit- handling the plates are in Vogel, argument. Apparently speak- 55. Joseph Smith III to Dr. E. A. nesses,” 471. Early Mormon Documents, ing of the Three Witnesses, Kilbourne, 11 March 1879, 16. Vogel, Joseph Smith, 469; com- 5:245, 247, 250, 251. Vogel is David Whitmer told James H. Brigham Young University pare Vogel, “Validity,” 104. legalistic in commenting on Hart that “when they were first transcriptions of Joseph Smith 17. Vogel, “Validity,” 102. the report of Whitmer’s 1878 commanded to testify of these III letterpress books, original at 18. Preliminary manuscript, Family schoolhouse speech, which de- things they demurred” because Library– and Church History Depart- scribes the physical plates and of general skepticism about Archives. Archivist Ron Romig ment, The Church of Jesus states that Whitmer “had often an advanced urban culture in located this and a series of Christ of Latter-day Saints handled” them. Whether or ancient America, but they were Joseph Smith III letters between (hereafter Church Archives); not “often” is correct, Whitmer assured the Lord would inspire 1879 and 1888 pertaining to also transcribed in Lavina Field- was obviously speaking about discoveries about it (Letter Poulson. His expert assistance ing Anderson, Lucy’s Book (Salt his familiar official testimony. to Deseret News, 4 September has been essential in producing Lake City: Signature Books, Yet Vogel claims Whitmer did 1883; cited in Lyndon W. Cook, this article. 2001), 455–57. not describe the plates from ed., David Whitmer Interviews: 56. Vogel, Early Mormon Docu- 19. Palmer, Insider’s View, 207. “personal experience” (Early A Witness [Orem, ments, 3:465n1. 20. Vogel, Joseph Smith, 442, 446. Mormon Documents, 5:245). UT: Grandin Book, 1991], 98). 57. Letter of David Whitmer, 18 Vogel appears to favor halluci- 33. Palmer thinks eight men could Except for the indirect Burnett November 1882, Community nation to explain both testimo- “handle the plates in a vision” letter, no source suggests the of Christ Library–Archives, nies of the witnesses but warns (Insider’s View, 206), whereas Eight Witnesses were reluctant with my manuscript reading of that his explanations contain Vogel judges “this possibility to sign their formal testimony. the name; also in Cook, David “qualifying verbs and adverbs” unsatisfactory” (“Validity,” 102). 41. Letter to Willard Richards, 18 Whitmer Interviews, 241. that show “where my analysis 34. John Smith to George A. January 1838, Church Archives; 58. Cook, David Whitmer Inter- is speculative or conjectural” Smith, 1 January 1838, Church also reprinted in Kenneth W. views, 71–73. (xvii). Archives; cited in Anderson, Godfrey, Audrey M. Godfrey, 59. Poulson’s interview with David 21. Vogel, Joseph Smith, 467. Investigating, 119n13. and Jill Mulvay Derr, Women’s Whitmer appears in the Deseret 22. History of the Church, 7:75. 35. to E. Holmes, Voices (Salt Lake City: Deseret News, 16 August 1878; also in Ford’s story and its vague source 11 August 1838, Evangelist 16 Book, 1982), 71. Cook, David Whitmer Inter- are reprinted in Vogel, Early (1 October 1838): 226. Parrish 42. Vogel, “Validity,” 100. views, 19–24. David likely ob- Mormon Documents, 3:333. intended to quote the 1835 43. See Vogel, “Validity,” 101. jected to Poulson’s report that 23. Vogel, “Validity,” 103. Compare Doctrine and Covenants, page 44. Letter to John Kempton, 26 David and Oliver Cowdery were Vogel, Early Mormon Docu- 171, now section 17, though he August 1838, Family History also present when the angel ap- ments, 3:332 on the dubious cited the facing page, 170. The Library, The Church of Jesus peared the second time, when historical pedigree: “For this Parrish quotations of Harris Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt he was seen by Martin Harris reason Fawn Brodie was per- match those dated in mid- Lake City, microfilm no. 840025. and Joseph Smith.

126 volume 14, number 1, 2005 60. Compare page 22 of Cook, 10/4 (Summer 1970): 486. Community of Christ Library– 3. Reid L. Neilson, The Japanese David Whitmer Interviews, 72. William E. McLellin journal, 19 Archives; also in Vogel, Early Missionary Journals of Elder with pages 152 and 188. David’s August 1831, in Jan Shipps and Mormon Documents, 5:250. Alma O. Taylor, 1901–10 (Provo, statement that the Eight Wit- John W. Welch, The Journals of 79. See the discussion and footnotes UT: BYU Studies and the Joseph nesses handled the plates is es- William E. McLellin, 1831–1836 in the last paragraph of the Tur- Fielding Smith Institute for Lat- sentially another John Whitmer (Provo, UT: BYU Studies and ley interview section above. ter-day Saint History, 2001), 16 interview, since the brothers Brigham Young University, 80. Palmer, Insider’s View, 204; Vo- July 1904, 214. Original spell- certainly discussed each other’s 1994), 33. gel, “Validity,” 97. ings have been retained in all experiences. 73. Huron Reflector (Norwalk, OH), 81. Earlier English shewn appears citations. 61. Deseret News, 6 August 1878; 31 October 1831, article titled in the printer’s manuscript and 4. Neilson, Japanese Missionary also in Vogel, Early Mormon “From the [Jacksonville] Illinois early editions. Journals, 28 April 1905, 243. Documents, 5:247–49. This Patriot, Sept. 16.” The article 82. See text at note 31, and the cita- 5. Neilson, Japanese Missionary interview agrees with the above reports a Mormon sermon “last tion in that note. Journals, 21 March 1906, 270. Turley report concerning en- Saturday” by a recent convert 83. See text at note 32, and the cita- 6. Alma O. Taylor to George gravings on both sides of each who traveled to Independence tion in that note. Reynolds, January 1906, Family leaf and with ’s to investigate Mormonism. The 84. See text at note 46, and the cita- and Church History Depart- report of seeing the plates joined day and its events correspond tion in that note. ment Archives, The Church of at the side with “D rings” (see with the McLellin journal for 85. See text at note 75, and the cita- Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Anderson, Investigating, 31). See Saturday, 10 September. tion in that note. (hereafter Church Archives). the last section of this article for 74. Vogel, Joseph Smith, 468. This 86. Letter of 5 March 1876, ad- 7. Though there is no way to de- another “D ring” report. is one of Vogel’s terms for his dressed to “Mark H. Forest,” termine the reasons for Sōseki’s 62. Perhaps John Whitmer origi- nonphysical conception of how courtesy of Community of refusal to become involved, it nally said that the Eight Wit- both sets of witnesses saw the Christ Library–Archives; also is interesting to speculate on nesses were composed mainly plates. in Vogel, Early Mormon Docu- whether the negative experi- of two groups, meaning the 75. Hiram Page to “Bro. William ments, 5:243. ences he had had with overbear- four Whitmer brothers and the [McLellin],” 30 May 1847, En- 87. Smith and Smith, History of the ing Christians on his sea voyage three Smiths, with Hiram Page sign of Liberty 1 (January 1848): Reorganized Church of Jesus to London in 1900, as well as not included in the general 63; partially reproduced in Vo- Christ of Latter Day Saints, the unpleasant experience of comment. Two sets of witnesses gel, Early Mormon Documents, 1:57n6; copied from the original being coerced into reading the might have been mistaken for 5:255. The Book of Mormon that was in Heman Smith’s pos- Bible by some British ladies at two separate viewings of the section of the letter is repro- session (now unlocated), with a tea party in 1902, might have plates. duced in Richard Lloyd Ander- italics used for the whole sen- made Sōseki less receptive to 63. Vogel, Early Mormon Docu- son, “Personal Writings of the tence in the first printing. Taylor’s petition. See Van C. ments, 3:465, with a redundant ,” in 88. Letter to J. R. Lambert, 6 May Gessel, Three Modern Novelists: to removed. Noel B. Reynolds, ed., Book of 1877, copied from the original Sōseki, Tanizaki, Kawabata (To- 64. Compare Vogel, Early Mormon Mormon Authorship Revisited that was in Joseph Lambert’s kyo: Kodansha International, Documents, 3:465n2, 467–68 (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1997), 53. possession, attested by Joseph R. 1993), 39–42, 47–48. with 5:238, 245, 250–51. 76. See Vogel, “Validity,” 99, indicat- Lambert in a letter to E. L. Kel- 8. Alma O. Taylor to George Reyn- 65. Vogel, Early Mormon Docu- ing Page “only testified that he ley, 29 January 1884, Commu- olds, 6 January 1906, Church ments, 3:466. saw the plates.” Palmer misses nity of Christ–Archives refer- Archives. 66. Lyman Wight, manuscript the point of Page’s reaffirmation, ence no. P13, f311. 9. Neilson, Japanese Missionary journal, in Joseph Smith III and claiming he mentions “neither Journals, 18 August and 27 Au- Heman C. Smith, History of the handling or seeing the plates” “Strange Characters and gust 1908, 380–81. Reorganized Church of Jesus (Insider’s View, 205). Palmer Expressions”: Three Japanese 10. Neilson, Japanese Missionary Christ of Latter Day Saints (La- springs to that conclusion by Translations of the Book of Journals, 30 September 1909, moni, IA: Board of Publication, not quoting the part of Page’s Mormon 409–10. 1897), 1:153. See 1:151n40 for 1847 statement that said his 1830 Van C. Gessel 11. Quoted in “Morumon Sho no source note. testimony was still true. The hensen,” part 11 of “Shashin 67. Saints’ Herald 26 (15 December concept of not forgetting “what 1. See Fredric Jameson, The de miru Nihon kyō kai 100- 1879): 370. I saw” immediately follows and Prison-House of Language: A nenshi,” Liahona 3, September 68. 3 refers back to Page’s 1830 expe- Critical Account of Structural- 2001, 15, author’s translation. (1836): 426. See Anderson, In- rience. But Palmer artificially ism and Russian Formalism 12. Satō Tatsui, “Shin’yaku Mo- vestigating, p. 127 for context. connects “what I saw” to Page’s (Princeton: Princeton Univer- rumon Kei ni tsuite,” Seito no 69. Times and Seasons 5 (1 August personal vision of angels, men- sity Press, 1972). michi, October 1957, 5, author’s 1844): 607, obituary by John tioned six lines down in the pub- 2. Some in the foreign language translation. Taylor, who had known Samuel lished letter. See Steven Harper’s teaching community in the 13. See the brief discussion in R. for over six years. Emphasis in comment and comparison of the United States actually use this Lanier Britsch, From the East: the original. original with the fractionated term to designate the languages The History of the Latter-day 70. “Notes Written on ‘Chambers’ quotation in “Trustworthy His- classified by the State Depart- Saints in Asia, 1851–1996 (Salt Life of Joseph Smith,’” 15, my tory?” 303–5 (see n. 13 above for ment as the most difficult for Lake City: Deseret Book, 1998), transcription, with underlining full citation). Americans to learn: Japanese, 156–57. in the original; also in Vogel, 77. “Mr. J. B. Newhall’s Lecture,” Chinese, Korean, and Arabic. 14. “New Translation Brings New Early Mormon Documents, 1:485. signed by “A Hearer,” Salem See Eleanor H. Jorden, “Japa- Day,” Church News, 25 January 71. William E. McLellin (signed Advertiser and Argus, 12 April nese Language Training over 1997, 6. “McLellan”) to James T. Cobb, 1843, an extract correctly re- the Years: A Personal Observa- 15. Literal translation by author. 14 August 1880, New York ported in Times and Seasons 4 tion,” in Japanese Studies: Over 16. Kokugo Daijiten (Tokyo: Public Library manuscript; also (15 June 1843): 234–35; empha- the Past Century & New Direc- Shōgakkan, 1981), 61, s.v. “an- in Larry C. Porter, “William sis in the original. tions for the 21st Century, ed. ata,” translation by author. E. McLellan’s Testimony of the 78. First-person note of visit on Masakazu Watabe (Provo, UT: 17. What are we to make, for in- Book of Mormon,” BYU Studies 18 February 1875, courtesy of BYU Press, 2000), 73–82. stance, of the contrast between

journal of Book of Mormon Studies 127