By August 28, 2020
By Mark Ashurst-McGee
In the previous installments of this series, I have given a brief history of the research Don Bradley and I have been conducting over the last three decades on the Kinderhook plates episode in early Mormon history.
By August 27, 2020
By Mark Ashurst-McGee
As explained in the previous installment (2 of 4), I had found what I believed to be the source of the content of Joseph Smith’s translation of the Kinderhook plates: The Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language (GAEL).
By August 26, 2020
By Mark Ashurst-McGee
See here for the previous installment.
So, as I was saying, in the spring of 1996 I delivered a presentation at MHA in which I argued that Joseph Smith did translate (mistranslate) a portion of the fraudulent Kinderhook plates but that he had attempted this translation by secular methods. (For the basic outline of the argument, see the previous installment.)
A few months after the presentation, I found the source of the content of the translation.
It was in the Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language.
By August 25, 2020
Mark Ashurst-McGee is Senior Research and Review Editor for the Joseph Smith Papers and a long-time friend of the JI. He is a co-editor (with Michael Hubbard MacKay and Brian M. Hauglid) and contributor to the recently published Producing Ancient Scripture: Joseph Smith’s Translation Projects in the Development of Mormon Christianity (UofU Press), which we highlighted in a recent guest post.
If I remember it correctly, I started studying the Kinderhook plates episode in the fall of 1990, soon after I completed my mission and returned to BYU—and there found the magnificent run of BX8600 books in the 4th-floor stacks of the Lee Library. I spent countless hours between there and the old Special Collections (with its stunning window view of Mount Timpanogos).
A decade earlier, historian Stan Kimball had obtained permission to conduct destructive testing on the one extant Kinderhook plate—in order to determine whether it was ancient or modern. In the late nineteenth century, men from Kinderhook, Illinois, claimed that the plate had been fabricated there in 1843 and then planted near a decomposed skeleton in a nearby American Indian burial mound. This was all in preparation for the excavation and “discovery” that followed. The problem was that, according to the History of the Church, when Joseph Smith was shown the plates he believed they were genuine and even translated a portion of their inscriptions. So, were the plates genuine or bogus? ancient or modern? The destructive testing conducted in 1980 conclusively demonstrated that the plate and its inscriptions were a 19th-century fabrication.
By August 17, 2020
Kurt Manwaring has published an interview with Matthew Grey, over on his site, From the Desk. Grey earned his Ph.D. in Religious Studies from the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. An excerpt from Manwaring’s site on Joseph Smith, translation and Hebrew is posted below; click over to From the Desk to read the rest!
Matthew Grey: There is evidence that many early Latter-day Saints—including Joseph Smith, W.W. Phelps, and Oliver Cowdery—naturally adopted some of the assumptions circulating in their nineteenth century intellectual climate, including the common views mentioned above that supernatural means were necessary to decipher Egyptian hieroglyphs and/or that Egyptian was a linguistic system related to Hebrew (both having descended from the original “pure language” of humanity) that could be illuminated through Hebraic insights.
By August 13, 2020
Thanks to friend of JI K. Pollock for putting this together!
Metamorphosis:
Scattered and Gathered Saints Emerge After Crises
Saturday, September 19, 2020, 5:30 p.m. CDT
Join the John Whitmer Historical Association from the comfort of your own home to see two great presentations on restoration history by Dr. Jane Hafen and Dr. David Howlett, to enjoy an awards ceremony honoring the top books and articles of 2019, and to participate in a hymn sing!
Find official event page and registration HERE.
By August 3, 2020
You can read the original announcement HERE. If you were accepted for the 2020 program, please take care to let Joseph Stuart and Anne Berryhill whether you’d like to present your 2020 paper/panel in 2021. You have until November 15, 2020 to confirm you will deliver your paper, but the sooner you can let them know the easier you will make it to map out a 2021 program!
Mormon History Association
56th Annual Meeting
Rochester/Palmyra, New York
June 10-13, 2021
The Mormon History Association is pleased to announce the rescheduling of its Rochester/Palmyra conference for June 10-13, 2021. This 56th Annual Conference continues the previously-planned theme, “Visions, Restoration, and Movements,” commemorating the 200th anniversary of Mormonism’s birth in upstate New York. If health conditions don’t allow an in-person meeting, MHA will make the conference available digitally.
© 2024 – Juvenile Instructor
Recent Comments
Steve Fleming on Study and Faith, 5:: “The burden of proof is on the claim of there BEING Nephites. From a scholarly point of view, the burden of proof is on the…”
Eric on Study and Faith, 5:: “But that's not what I was saying about the nature of evidence of an unknown civilization. I am talking about linguistics, not ruins. …”
Steve Fleming on Study and Faith, 5:: “Large civilizations leave behind evidence of their existence. For instance, I just read that scholars estimate the kingdom of Judah to have been around 110,000…”
Eric on Study and Faith, 5:: “I have always understood the key to issues with Nephite archeology to be language. Besides the fact that there is vastly more to Mesoamerican…”
Steven Borup on In Memoriam: James B.: “Bro Allen was the lead coordinator in 1980 for the BYU Washington, DC Seminar and added valuable insights into American history as we also toured…”
David G. on In Memoriam: James B.: “Jim was a legend who impacted so many through his scholarship and kind mentoring. He'll be missed.”