One good example of how narratives develop is the introduction to Documents, Volume 1: July 1828–June 1831, in the The Joseph Smith Papers.
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/intro/introduction-to-documents-volume-1-july-1828-june-1831?p=1
The introduction repeatedly converts theories into statements of fact.
This will be evident from my interlinear comments. It's difficult to understand why professional historians would make such factual claims, especially when they omit important, relevant historical sources that contradict their claims.
Nevertheless, the narrative they create here prevails because people defer to the credentials of the authors/editors.
_____
The following excerpts start with the end of the 10th paragraph. Original in blue, my comment in red.
Examining the process by which Smith translated the Book of Mormon is essential to understand not only the book itself, but also Smith’s earliest revelations, many of which were apparently received through a similar process.
As we'll see, this examination of the process omits much of what Joseph said
In surviving records, Joseph Smith provided very little specific information about the translation process.
But he was very specific about what instrument he used. Contrary to reports that he read words off a stone in the hat (SITH), he responded to ongoing confusion about the translation in the Elders' Journal in 1838.
Question 4th. How, and where did you obtain the Book of Mormon?
Answer. Moroni, the person who deposited the plates, from whence the Book of Mormon was translated, in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County, New York, being dead, and raised again therefrom, appeared unto me and told me where they were and gave me directions how to obtain them. I obtained them and the Urim and Thummim with them, by the means of which I translated the plates and thus came the Book of Mormon.
(Elders’ Journal I.3:42 ¶20–43 ¶1)
He did not claim to translate the Book of Mormon through his own knowledge of ancient languages. In the Book of Mormon’s preface, he simply stated, “I would inform you that I translated, by the gift and power of God.”20
That excerpt is misleading because that is not all he "simply stated." He also explained the source he translated from.
I would inform you that I translated, by the gift and power of God, and caused to be written, one hundred and sixteen pages, the which I took from the Book of Lehi, which was an account abridged from the plates of Lehi, by the hand of Mormon.
We see here that Joseph "took" the translation from the plates, not from a stone in the hat.
Note 20 quotes from the Wentworth letter, but still omits important context that contradicts SITH.
Note 20: "In the well-known “Wentworth letter” in 1842, his most complete public account prior to the publication of his multivolume history, he affirmed, “Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift, and power of God.” (JS, “Church History,” Times and Seasons, 1 Mar. 1842, 3:707.)
The preceding sentence in the Wentworth letter explains what Joseph Smith meant when he used the term Urim and Thummim.
With the records was found a curious instrument which the ancients called “Urim and Thummim,” which consisted of two transparent stones set in the rim of a bow fastened to a breastplate.
This context is important because it excludes the SITH theory that Joseph was referring to the seer stones when he used the term "Urim and Thummim."
Continuing...
Smith may have deliberately refrained from giving a detailed public account of the mechanics of translation. In an 1831 church conference, his brother stated that “he thought best that the information of the coming forth of the book of Mormon be related by Joseph himself to the Elders present that all might know for themselves.” Rather than complying with this request, Joseph Smith responded that “it was not intended to tell the world all the particulars of the coming forth of the book of Mormon, & also said that it was not expedient for him to relate these things &c.”21
"the coming forth of the Book of Mormon" is not the same as the translation. The translation is arguably part of the "coming forth," but there are many details involving the plates that Joseph didn't disclose. For example, Brigham Young pointed out that Oliver didn't discuss the repository of plates in public, but only privately.
Furthermore, others present at that meeting later described their version of the translation process in some detail, indicating they did not understand Joseph's reluctance to pertain to the translation per se.
Joseph himself expanded on the translation in later days, in the Elders' Journal (above) and the Wentworth letter (see below).
Notwithstanding their lack of detail, records from Joseph Smith and his scribes demonstrate that he used two separate instruments to translate the Book of Mormon.
This is misleading because it commingles Joseph and his scribes. However, Joseph and his principal scribe, Oliver Cowdery, never once said, implied, or even suggested that Joseph used any instrument other than the interpreters that Joseph obtained with the plates. The only other known scribes for the text we have today, John and Christian Whitmer, never commented on the translation except that John Whitmer said Joseph used the Urim and Thummim.
The sentence refers to "his scribes" which are itemized in subsequent sentences.
Smith stated that the first [he never said "the first" because he said this was the only instrument he used] was found with the plates and delivered to him by an angel, who explained it consisted of “two stones in silver bows . . . and that was what constituted seers in ancient or former times and that God had prepared them for the purpose of translating the book.”22
The text of the Book of Mormon spoke of the same instrument as “interpreters” and foretold that it was to be preserved with the gold plates.23 By August 1829, Smith apparently referred to this device as “spectacles,” a term he used again in his 1832 history.24
In January 1833, an article in the church newspaper The Evening and the Morning Star declared that he had translated the Book of Mormon “by the gift and power of God . . . through the aid of a pair of Interpreters, or spectacles— (known, perhaps, in ancient days as Teraphim, or Urim and Thummim).”25 Soon thereafter Smith apparently began applying the biblical term Urim and Thummim to the interpreters or spectacles.
The foregoing paragraph relates an obsolete theory; i.e., the idea that Joseph adopted the term "Urim and Thummim" from Phelps' 1833 article. The editors know perfectly well that in 1832, Orson Hyde and Samuel Smith told a minister in Boston that Joseph translated the plates with the Urim and Thummim.
The earliest known reference to the Urim and Thummim was published in the Boston Investigator on August 10, 1832. The article, titled "Questions proposed to the Mormonite Preachers," related an interview with Orson Hyde and Samuel Smith that included these questions and answers:
Q. -- In what manner was the interpretation, or translation made known, and by whom was it written?
A. -- It was made known by the spirit of the Lord through the medium of the Urim and Thummim; and was written partly by Oliver Cowdery, and partly by Martin Harris.
Q. -- What do you mean by Urim and Thummim?
A. -- The same as were used by the prophets of old, which were two crystal stones, placed in bows, something in the form of spectacles, which were found with the plates.
One could argue that Orson and Samuel were the ones who invented the term, but that seems highly unlikely compared with the assumption that they heard about the U&T from Joseph (or Oliver) before they left on their mission. At any rate, the editors should provide this information to readers so they can make informed decisions and not be misled into thinking that Phelps was the first to coin the term Urim and Thummim.
There are other references that Joseph himself claimed that it was Moroni who identified the interpreters as Urim and Thummim. Joseph provided specific details to Oliver for Letter IV, which relates Moroni's visit. The JSP editors forgot to include this.
He [Moroni] said this history was written and deposited not far from that place, and that it was our brother’s privilege, if obedient to the commandments of the Lord, to obtain and translate the same by the means of the Urim and Thummim, which were deposited for that purpose with the record.
We saw above that the Wentworth letter specifically identified the Urim and Thummim as the instrument that came with the plates that consisted of two transparent stones set in a rim. This contradicts the claim that Joseph used the term to apply to a separate seer stone.
In addition to the device found with the plates, Joseph Smith also translated using other individual seer stones, which he would place in a hat to limit outside light.
This is an example of transforming a handful of disputed claims into a statement of fact. The sentence implies that Joseph and Oliver made this claim, which is false. An accurate statement would be something such as this: "Although neither Joseph nor Oliver said or implied anything of the sort, some people who claimed to be witnesses of the translation said Joseph read words that appeared on a stone he placed in a hat."
He and others apparently later referred to these seer stones as Urim and Thummim, thus making it difficult to determine in later accounts whether they were referring to the device found with the plates or a separate stone that performed the same function.26
This is deliberately misleading because (i) Joseph explicitly stated that he translated with the Urim and Thummim that came with the plates and (ii) Joseph never once referred to the stone he supposedly used in the hat as either "a" or "the" "Urim and Thummim. The only citation to support this claim (note 26) contradicts the premise.
, Smith’s principal scribe for most of the translation, explained, “Day after day I continued, uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated, with the Urim and Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, ‘Interpreters.’”27
This is an official declaration, canonized in Joseph Smith-History in the Pearl of Great Price, that leaves no room for SITH.
Joseph Smith’s wife , who also served as a scribe for the translation, described his use of two distinct instruments: “Now the first that my husband translated, was translated by the use of the Urim, and Thummim, and that was the part that lost, after that he used a small stone, not exactly, black, but was rather a dark color.”28
This brief 1870 letter by Emma is vague. She doesn't explain whether she was writing from personal experience or from what she heard, but there is no record that she was ever authorized to see the Urim and Thummim. Consequently, at least that part of her statement was hearsay. The next sentence in her letter explains her uncertainty: "I cannot tell whether that account in the Times and Seasons is correct or not because someone stole all my books and I have none to refer to at present, if I can find one that has that account I will tell you what is true and what is not."
Her description of the stone shows she was not referring to the striped stone that historians now claim Joseph possessed when he produced the Book of Mormon.
Later accounts by Joseph Smith’s close associates—either scribes or other early believers who likely learned of the process from Smith or his scribes—provide some idea of what appeared on the Urim and Thummim or seer stone during the translation process.
Whether they "likely learned" this from Smith or his scribes, or from other sources, is pure assumption, and their testimony is all hearsay.
, a family friend, recalled that after Smith “put the urim and thummim into his hat and Darkned his Eyes,” a sentence “would apper in Brite Roman Letters then he would tell the writer and he would write it then that would go away the next sentance would Come and so on But if it was not spelt rite it would not go away till it was rite so we see it was marvelous.”29
reportedly told an interviewer that her husband spelled out difficult or unfamiliar words, including “proper names he could not pronounce.” She further stated, “While I was writing them, if I made any mistake in spelling, he would stop me and correct my spelling, although it was impossible for him to see how I was writing them down at the time. . . . When he stopped for any purpose at any time he would, when he commenced again, begin where he left off without any hesitation.”30
We can see from the original manuscript that there are spelling inconsistencies that contradict Emma's claim. This should be noted in the JSP.
Decades after the translation work, , one of the Three Witnesses of the Book of Mormon, wrote that on the “spiritual light” of the seer stone, “a piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to , who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.”31
The JSP should point out that this is obviously hearsay because David did not claim to have seen what appeared on the seer stone.
Early accounts indicate that Joseph Smith and his scribes described the process, including the use of both the Urim and Thummim and seer stones, to others outside of the circle of believers soon after the translation was complete.
There are zero accounts of Joseph and his scribes describing the use of both the U&T and the seer stone(s). Joseph, Oliver, John Whitmer, and Martin Harris all said Joseph used the U&T. The only variation is Martin's alleged account of swapping Joseph's seer stone, which was not published until after Martin's death.
In the summer of 1829, before publication of the Book of Mormon had begun, a newspaper printed the book’s title page with an explanation of how the plates were translated, an account likely obtained from Smith himself or one of his associates. The editor explained with considerable incredulity that “by placing the Spectacles in a hat, and looking into it, Smith could (he said so, at least,) interpret these characters.”32
This is the Jonathan Hadley narrative, which has been grossly misrepresented to promote SITH. See
and
In late 1830, while traveling through the Shaker community of Union Village, Ohio, explained the process of translation, as recorded by one of the Shakers: “The engraving being unintelligible to learned & unlearned. there is said to have been in the box with the plates two transparent stones in the form of spectacles thro which the translator looked on the engraving & afterwards put his face into a hat & the interpretation then flowed into his mind. which he uttered to the amanuensis who wrote it down.”33
Although this is hearsay from a skeptic, at least the account is consistent with what Joseph and Oliver always said about translating the engravings on the plates by means of the Urim and Thummim. If accurate, it's an explanation for the origin of SITH. Because no one (other than Oliver) was permitted to see the U&T during the translation process, no one other than Oliver could have observed this process. Consequently, it is feasible that (i) those who claimed to be witnesses of SITH related hearsay based on what Joseph and Oliver told them (after studying the plates through the U&T, Joseph put the U&T in a hat to block light) and/or (ii) Joseph conducted a demonstration of the process with a seer stone to "satisfy the awful curiosity" of his followers, only for them to report the demonstration as the actual translation.
Regardless of how the translation actually occurred, it is difficult to overemphasize the importance of the Book of Mormon to Joseph Smith and his early followers. “They had in their possession,” wrote scholar Terryl Givens, “a recovered record whose very existence was seen as prophetic proof that the final dispensation was truly arrived.”34
This is true, but it's a deflection, because nowhere in this introduction do the editors tell us what Joseph Smith himself said about the translation.
Its existence made the movement that Joseph Smith led unique. He considered it “the key stone of our religion.”35
In a time of intense conflict over biblical interpretation, historian Gordon Wood noted, the Book of Mormon “cut through these controversies and brought the Bible up-to-date. It was written in plain biblical style for plain people. It answered perplexing questions of theology, clarified obscure passages of the Bible, and carried its story into the New World. And it did all this with the assurance of divine authority.”36
