Conference tecrus::mormonism

95.0. "The Spalding Theory, Then & Now" by CACHE::LEIGH () Wed Mar 16 1988 11:36

The following information is taken from "The Spalding Theory Then and Now"
by Lester E. Bush, Jr., Reprint Series #1, 1984, Mormon Miscellaneous, 1433 East
9175 South, Sandy, Utah 84092 (801) 571-5185.  Bush's footnotes are not
included.

"Late in the summer of 1833 one Doctor Philastus Hurlbut, recently
excommunicated from the Mormon church for 'unchristianlike' conduct
toward some of the sisters, learned of a manuscript written some twenty years
before by the late Reverend Solomon Spalding which was similar to the Book
of Mormon.  His interest piqued, he set out to investigate this story,
principally through interviews with former residents of Conneaut, Ohio, where
Spalding once had lived.

"Hurlbut obtained remarkably similar affidavits from the Reverend Spalding's
brother John, John's wife Martha and six other former neighbors and friends,
all of whom remembered that Spalding had written a 'historical romance' about
the 'first settlers' of America.  Entitled 'Manuscript Found,' this novel
'endeavored to show' that the American Indians were descendants of the Jews,]
or the lost tribes.  John and Martha recalled that it 'gave a detailed account
of their journey from Jerusalem, by land and sea, till they arrived in America,
under the command of NEPHI and LEHI.  They afterwards had quarrels and 
contentions, and separated into two distinct nations, one of which he
denominated Nephites and the other Lamanites.  Cruel and bloody wars ensued, in
which great multitudes were slain.  They buried their dead in large heaps,
which caused the mounds so common in this country.'  Other Spalding
acquaintances recalled that the story included characters named 'Moroni' and
'Laban', and even a place called 'Zarahemla.'  The constant repetition of the
phrases, 'it came to pass' and 'I, Nephi' seemed especially familiar.

"His appetite whetted by these statements, Hurlbut traced the manuscript to
Otsego County, New York.  There he learned from Spalding's widow--now Mrs.
Davison (Spalding died in 1816)--the manuscript might be in a trunk in a
friend's home among some of Spalding's other papers.  On locating the chest
in question, Hurlbut took what he supposed to be the original Manuscript
Found.

"The storyline, as Hurlbut and his associates were shortly to discover, bore
a superficial similarity to the Book of Mormon....

"Although there are unmistakable parallels in Spalding's introduction and
Joseph Smith's early experiences, there is little to compare in the actual
narrative histories.  Spalding wrote of a group of Romans living about the
time of Constantine, who had been blown off course on a voyage to 'Brittain.'
Through the 'tender mercies of their God,' they safely reached the east coast
of North America, where one of their number, Fabius, began writing a history
of their experiences.  Most of Fabius' account deals with the Deliwan, Kentuck
and Sciotan Indians.  Aside from an emphasis on wars, however, there are
virtually no similarities in episodes, characters, or themes between
Spalding's account and what was found in the Book of Mormon.  Only one brief
passage is notably reminiscent of the Book of Mormon: one of Spalding's
characters, Hamack, had 'a stone which he pronounced transparent--tho' it was
not transparent to common eyes.  Thro' this he could view things present & 
things to come.  Could behold the dark intrigues & cabals of foreign courts,
& discover hidden treasures, secluded from the eyes of other mortals.'

"The narrative style is particularly dissimilar, and Spalding's story contains
not a single 'it came to pass.'  As to the specific names recalled by those
Hurlbut interviewed, Spalding had written of neither a Nephi, Lehi, Laman,
Moroni, nor a Zarahemla.  Stretching credulity (but being charitable to faded
memories), one can find some similarity to a handful of Book of Mormon names.
There was a 'Moonrod' (cf. Moroni); a 'Mammoon' (cf. Mormon), the native
term for a domesticated woolly mammoth; a 'Lamesa' (cf. Laman), in this case
a woman; a 'Hamelick' (cf. Ameleki or Amelickiah), and a couple of additional
Book of Mormon 'sounding' names, 'Hadoram' and 'Boakim.'  More commonly
Spalding used names (such as Bombal, Chianga, Hamboon, Lobasko, and Ulipoon)
with no resemblance whatsoever to those of Joseph Smith.

"The materials collected by Hurlbut, including the affidavits and the Spalding
manuscript, were sold shortly thereafter to Eber D. Howe, who in 1834 published
what B. H. Roberts termed the first anti-Mormon work 'of any pretensions.'  The
final chapter of Howe's book, 'Mormonism Unvailed' [sic], set forth at length
the 'Spalding theory' of the origin of the Book of Mormon.  It had been
evident, Howe wrote (although Mormons were convinced that Hurlbut was actually
the author), 'from the beginning of the imposture' that 'a more talented
knave [than Joseph Smith was] behind the curtain.'  The ultimate source, he
proposed, was the Reverend Solomon Spalding, literate graduate of Dartmouth
College.  In support of this thesis were placed the eight striking statements
collected by Hurlbut.  A passing reference was made to the manuscript obtained
by Hurlbut from the Spalding trunk to indicate that it had not proved to be a
copy of Manuscript Found.  Rather, it was 'a fabulous account of a ship's
being driven upon the American coast, while proceeding from Rome to Britain.'
When this latter manuscript was shown to several of those previously 
interviewed by Hurlbut, they reportedly recognized it as Spalding's work, but
said that it bore 'no resemblance' to the Manuscript Found.  Spalding, according
to Howe, had 'told them that he had altered his first plan of writing, by going
further back with dates, and writing in the old scripture style.

"Howe's casual dismissal of the Spalding manuscript located by Hurlbut was
merely the first of many selective presentations of the relevant facts.  Much
of what Hurlbut's eight witnesses remembered could well have been based on the
story found in the trunk.  Although not apparent in Howe's brief summary, that
story was indeed about a 'manuscript found,' and recounts the 'arts, sciences,
customs and laws,' and particularly the wars of ancient inhabitants of America.
Moreover, it purports to be based--as one of Hurlbut's sources had recalled--on
a translation of some records 'buried in the earth, or in a cave.'  The claim
that Spalding's work was interesting listening--one witness even spoke of
'humorous passages'--is hard to reconcile with either the Book of Mormon or
the Roman story.  The text of the latter at least gives occasional evidence
of trying to be amusing.  None of the foregoing parallels was central to the
plagiarism argument, of course, but a detailed knowledge of the manuscript
located by Hurlbut should have focused more careful attention on claims
uniquely related to the Book of Mormon.

"The Hurlbut-Howe case for plagiarism rested primarily on two such unique
claims--the assertions that 'most' of the names and the 'leading incidents'
in the Book of Mormon originated with Solomon Spalding.  Actually this
sweeping generalization rested on less than a dozen disingenuously uniform
bits of evidence.  For example, in a sentence of virtually identical wording,
the majority of Hurlbut's witnesses cited Spalding's alleged account of the
departure of a small group of Jews from Jerusalem, and 'their journey, by
land and sea, till they arrived in America.'  Many also recalled that the 
emigrants were descendants of the 'lost tribes'--at the time a common 
explanation of Indian origins, but without support in either the Book of Mormon
or the Roman story.  One of Hurlbut's sources recalled the group landing near
the 'Straits of Darien' (now Panama), reflecting an early interpretation of
Book of Mormon geography shared by Eber D. Howe, among others.  (Joseph
Smith reportedly placed the landing near Valparaiso, Chile.)

"The most striking aspect of the early claims unquestionably related to the
proper names.  Here, however, the coincidence of memory was even more suspect.
Of some 300 potential names, Hurlbut's witnesses all used the same handful
of specific examples.  Most cited 'Nephi' and 'Lehi.'  Two witnesses (John
and Martha Spalding) added 'Nephites' and 'Lamanites,' and only three
additional names were mentioned even once--'Laban,' 'Zarahemla' and 'Moroni.'
(The last two by the witness who remembered the humorous passages).  Despite
the elapsed decades, all recalled identical spellings for these odd-sounding
names, spellings which matched exactly those found in the Book of Mormon.
A corollary claim that Spalding wrote in a 'scripture style' was illustrated
with the same unanimity.  Everyone who recalled specific wording cited 'and
it came to pass,' with 'now it came to pass' a distant second.  Not
surprisingly, nearly everyone acknowledged that his memory had been refreshed by
a recent reading of the Book of Mormon." (pp. 2-5)

Lester Bush goes on to describe attempts by the proponents of the Spalding
theory to connect Joseph Smith with the Spalding manuscript.  Their arguments
concerned Spalding's moving to Pittsburg, the printing office of Lambdin &
Patterson in that city, and Sidney Rigdon (an early Mormon leader) being
in Pittsburg.  Bush also describes attempts by persons both for and against
the theory to bolster their claims.

This reply is a continuation of the discussion of the Spalding theory by
Lester E. Bush.

Bush describes the discovery in 1884 of the original Spalding manuscript
which had been taken from the trunk by Hurlbut and sold to Howe.  The
manuscript was among papers of Howe when Howe's business was sold to a Mr.
L. L. Rice.

"Years later Rice unknowingly carried the manuscript to Hawaii, where in 1884
it was rediscovered among some old papers.  The key to the identity of the
'old, worn, and faded manuscript of about 175 pages' was the following
statement, recorded on an empty page:

    "The writings of Solomon Spalding, proved by Aaron Wright, Oliver Smith,
    John N. Miller and others.  The testimonies of the above gentlemen are
    not in my possession.
                     D.P. Hurlbut

"Rice sent the manuscript, which he labeled 'A manuscript story,' to his friend
James Fairchild, President of Oberlin College, who in turn published his
analysis of the discovery.  Finding, as had L. L. Rice and others, no
similarity in style, names or incidents between the manuscript and the Book
of Mormon, Fairchild at first concluded that the Spalding theory 'will
probably have to be relinquished.'

"Later, while acknowledging that it was 'perhaps, impossible at this day to
prove or disprove the Spalding theory,' he still found the affirmative case
to be particularly weak.  There seemed 'no ground to dispute' the Mormon claim
that Sidney Rigdon had been neither a printer, nor a resident of Pittsburg prior
to 1822.  The accepted view that the religious portions of the Book of Mormon
were interpolations into a much shorter historical narrative he found
'difficult--almost impossible, to believe.'  Such sections were 'of the original
tissue and substance of the document,' and besides 'a man as self-reliant
and smart as Sidney Rigdon...would never have accepted the servile task.'

"Moreover, Fairchild reasoned, 'in its general features the present manuscript
fulfills the requirements of the 'Manuscript Found'--an important point which
Hurlbut and Howe had neglected to call to the attention of their early readers.
It was, in fact, the story of a manuscript found in a cave containing an
account 'of the aboriginal inhabitants of the country.' wrote Fairchild,
'These general features would naturally bring it to remembrance, on reading
the account of the finding of the plates of the 'Book of Mormon.''  It had,
after all, been 'twenty-two years or more...since they had heard the 
manuscript read; and before they began to recall their remembrances they
had read, or heard the 'Book of Mormon,' and also the suggestion that the
book had its origin in the manuscript of Spaulding.'  The cautious Fairchild
nevertheless chose not to carry his speculations to a firm conclusion.  Some
people were saying that a second manuscript was 'still in existence, and will
be brought to light at some future day.'  'It would not seem unreasonable to
suspend judgment in the case until the new light shall come...'" (pp. 14-15)

Bush went on to review the impact of the discovery of the manuscript.

"In practice, the rediscovery of Spalding's story had very little impact on the
established arguments, or the frequency or confidence with which they were
advance....On both sides of the debate, new testimonies [i.e. recent books]
had simply been piled onto old arguments."  (pp. 16-17)

This reply is a continuation of the discussion of the Spalding theory by
Lester E. Bush.

"Just when it seemed that Reverend Spalding might be forever buried in
obscure academic footnotes or among the equally remove vestiges of the
anti-Mormon publishing industry, a whole new Spalding debate has suddenly
been proclaimed.  'Based on the evidence of three handwriting experts,'
reported the Los Angeles 'Times' news service of June 25, 1977, 'researchers
have declared that portions of the Book of Mormon were written by a
Congregationalist minister...'

"The three California-based 'freelance researchers'--Howard Davis, Donald
Scales, and Wayne Cowdrey--had provided nationally known handwriting
specialists--Henry Silver, William Kaye, and Howard Doulder--with photocopies
of several original manuscript pages of the Book of Mormon.  Comparisons were
made with 'specimens of handwriting in [Spalding's] 'Manuscript Story.''
According to the 'Times', Silver had stated his 'definite opinion that all of
the questioned handwriting (was) written by the same writer known as Solomon
Spalding.'  The other two experts were said to agree.  Kaye reportedly had
written in August 1976 'that it was his 'considered opinion and conclusion
that all of the writings were executed by Solomon Spalding.''  Doulder was
quoted as stating, 'This is one and the same writer.'  Shortly thereafter
both 'Time' and 'Christianity Today' carried essentially the same story.

"Less conspicuously reported reported were the disclaimers issued shortly
thereafter.  In a press conference three days later, Silver stated that the
'Times' had 'completely misrepresented' him, and that he would be unable
to give a definite opinion until he had examined original specimens of the
handwriting.  After examining the Book of Mormon manuscripts, he reaffirmed
that he still could not 'definitely come to a conclusion' until he also
had examined original pages of the 'Manuscript Story.'  A week later, the
86-year old Silver withdrew from the case.  His doctor had advised against
further travel, and he was also 'fed up.'  In addition to his displeasure
at being misrepresented in the press, he was concerned that Walter Martin,
whose Christian Research Institute was financing the study, 'has a vendetta
against the church.'  Interviewed later in his home, Silver added, 'I
don't like their methods and their attack on the Church.  I want no further
part of this whole matter.'" (pp. 18-21)

Bush reviewed the visits of Kaye and Doulder to Salt Lake City on July 20,
1977 to study several original pages of the Book of Mormon manuscript.
"Neither issued a statement following his one day visit;*" (p. 21)

"* As of October 1 [1977] the full reports of the handwriting experts still
have not been released.  Kaye has been quoted in the September 8 'Los
Angeles Times' as reaffirming in his final 'summary report' that the pages
he examined were 'unquestionably...executed by the same person.'  Doulder,
however, was reported in a September 24 'Times' article to have concluded
that the pages were the work of 'different authors.'  Neither Doulder nor
Kaye were quoted as addressing the questions implicit in the other apparent
examples in Church records of this disputed handwriting, discussed above
[Bush had discussed the fact that the same disputed handwriting appears
in other LDS historical documents which were written after Spalding's death].
The disagreement underscores the limitations of this type of analysis.  Kaye
and Silver--the third of the original three experts--previously had differed
on the authenticity of the [Howard] Hughes will." (pp. 21-22)

Bush concluded his informative booklet with the following:

"While for the past thirty years the Spalding theory has been a dead
issue, it has never disappeared.  The very imprecision of the original
arguments, so integrally tied to the eventual abandonment of the theory by
scholars of Mormonism, has served to assure its preservation.  However high 
the possibility, no one has ever been able to 'prove' in any absolute sense
that the Hurlbut affidavits were erroneous recollections, deliberate or
otherwise.  Superficial analyses, shaped largely by an 'a priori' assumption
that Joseph Smith was incapable of producing the Book of Mormon alone, will
no doubt continue to find 'hard evidence' in the persisting trace of 
uncertainty--and carry the Spalding corpus perpetually onward.  So long as the
subject remains, in O'Dea's words, a 'not-quite-solved' historical problem,
this will probably ever be so.  One therefore can reasonably expect that
new variants will, like the influenza, emerge every now and then.  The
strength of these will probably be, as in the most recent instance, inversely
proportionate to the publicity with which they are heralded.  One newspaper
headlined this latest episode, 'BOOK OF MORMON'S AUTHENTICITY DOUBTED BY
HANDWRITING EXPERTS."  More aptly the title could have been, 'THE LATE
REVEREND SPALDING DISINTERRED...BUT SLATED FOR REBURIAL." (pp. 23-24)