Footnotes
[1]. History of the Church, vol. I, p. 18.
[2]. This upon the authority of Samuel M. Smucker, author of a "History of the Mormons," p. 37.—Hurst & Co., N. Y.
[3]. This fac simile of Nephite characters is copied from "The Prophet" of December 21, 1844 (vol. I, no. 31).
[4]. Stevenson's Reminiscences, p. 33.
[5]. The writer is of the opinion that there is in this statement too wide a scope given to what Professor Anthon said of the translation of the Egyptian-Nephite characters. Of course, in the transcripts the professor would doubtless recognize some Egyptian characters of the hieratic Egyptian, and in the translation would also find a right interpretation of those characters, as it will be seen by his letters, quoted later in the body of the work. He may have acknowledged that the characters submitted to him were true characters, but beyond this I do not think he could give confirmation as to the correctness of the translation; for, according to the writers of the Book of Mormon, they had changed somewhat the characters in both languages in which they made records, both in the Egyptian, and also in the Hebrew (See Mormon 9:32, 43); and Moroni adds: "The Lord knoweth the things which we have written, and also that none other people knoweth our language, therefore he hath prepared means for the interpretation thereof" (Mormon 9:34), referring to the Urim and Thummim or "Interpreters," as the Nephites call that instrument. It follows from this that neither Professor Anthon nor any one else could have confirmed the translation beyond perhaps saying that some one or more of the Egyptian characters, which he recognized in the transcript, had been assigned their true significance.
[6]. History of the Church, vol. I, p. 20
[7]. To this point the Letter of Professor Anthon is copied from Early Days of Mormonism, by J. H. Kennedy, Scribners & Sons, 1888, p. 268. The remainder of the letter is copied from Gregg's Prophet of Palmyra, pp. 60-62.
[8]. "Prophet of Palmyra", (Gregg) pp. 60-62.
[9]. History of the Church, vol. I, p. 21.
[10]. History of the Church, vol. I, pp. 21, 22; also Doc. and Cov., sec. 3.
[11]. The reader will of course understand that reference is here made to the descendants of these ancient American peoples.
[12]. The revelation, here quoted in the History of Joseph Smith—Millennial Star, vol. 14 (Supplement) p. 8; and also in some of the earlier editions of the Doctrine and Covenants (sec. 10), bears the date of "May, 1829." This date, however, must be wrong, because contradictory of the language of the prophet who in speaking of this revelation says that after the plates and Urim and Thummim were taken from him, after he had received the revelation dated July, 1828, (just quoted)—"In a few days they were returned to me, when I inquired of the Lord, and the Lord said thus to me." Then follows the revelation, the date of which is under consideration. If the date of the revelation given July, 1828, in which the Prophet is reproved for importuning the Lord to allow Martin Harris to have one hundred and sixteen pages of translation from the Book of Mormon, is correct—then it could scarcely be said, "in a few days" the Urim and Thummim was returned to the Prophet; that he inquired and then received the revelation in question if that revelation was received in May, 1829. That would make nine or ten months' time between these two revelations instead of "a few days." Moreover, the matter of the revelation is more in keeping with the events of a few days after July, 1828, than with May, 1829. Oliver Cowdery came to Joseph Smith on the 5th of April, 1829; and on the 7th began to assist him in the translation. This was before May, 1829, the alleged date of the revelation in question, and it is scarcely likely that the work of translation was resumed after the loss of the manuscript by Harris, before the revelation given informing the prophet of the intention of those who had stolen it. My conclusion is that the revelation erroneously dated May, 1829, was given "a few days after" the one bearing date of "July, 1828."
[13]. Doc. and Cov., sec. 10.
[14]. Doubtless an allusion to his breaking the covenant with Joseph respecting the manuscript which was lost.
[15]. Most likely Emma Smith, the Prophet's wife, wrote for him during these days when he was evidently translating occasionally.
[16]. History of the Church, vol. I, p. 28; also Doc. and Cov., sec. 5.