This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jcg5029 (talk | contribs) at 15:15, 4 July 2007 (Theory no longer valid to historians). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:15, 4 July 2007 by Jcg5029 (talk | contribs) (Theory no longer valid to historians)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)The Spalding-Rigdon theory of Book of Mormon authorship is the theory that the Book of Mormon was plagiarized from an unpublished manuscript written by Solomon Spalding. This theory first appeared in print in the book Mormonism Unvailed (sic), published in 1834 by E.D. Howe. The theory claims that the Spalding manuscript was at some point acquired by Sidney Rigdon, who used it in secret collusion with Joseph Smith Jr. to produce the Book of Mormon. This theory suggests that the Spalding manuscript may have been revised to include Rigdon's favored Campbellite theology. The theory generally cites Spalding-friendly witnesses who support his authorship, and Rigdon's sudden rise in Mormonism, combined with alleged parallels between Spalding's known "Manuscript Found" and the Book of Mormon. Historians now reject the theory for lack of concrete evidence for an association with Smith before Rigdon's baptism and a complete lack of association between the two books.
Origin of the theory
This theory was mentioned even before the Book of Mormon was ever published in 1830. Rigdon had visited the print shop in Pittsburg where Spalding deposited the manuscript before Spalding's death in 1816, but denied he ever knew of Spalding or his manuscript.
The Spalding theory of authorship first appeared in print in Eber D. Howe's 1834 book Mormonism Unvailed. This book contained a collection of affidavits collected by Doctor Philastus Hurlbut from Spalding's neighbors. Hurlbut heard of an unpublished romance novel by author Solomon Spalding as he was touring Pennsylvania giving lectures against the Mormon church. Hurlbut concluded that the description of the story in the manuscript bore some resemblance to that of the Book of Mormon. A contemporary of Hurlbut's, Benjamin Winchester, states that Hurlbut "had learned that one Mr. Spaulding had written a romance, and the probability was, that it had, by some means, fallen into the hands of Sidney Rigdon, and that he had converted it into the Book of Mormon." Upon learning this, Hurlbut determined to obtain the manuscript. Hurlbut learned that Rigdon had once resided in Pittsburg and that the manuscript had once been there, and subsequently "endeavoured to make the finding of the manuscript take place at Pittsburgh, and then infer, that S.R. had copied it there."
Author Dan Vogel suggests that Hurlbut was not the originator of the Spalding-Rigdon theory, noting that Hurlbut pursued this in response to what he had heard about the manuscript and suggests that had Hurlbut been the inventor of the theory "he would not have made strenuous efforts to recover Spalding's manuscript."
Statements from Spalding's neighbors and relatives
Eight of the affidavits acquired by Hurlbut from Solomon Spalding's neighbors stated that there were similarities between the story and the Book of Mormon.
An example is the statement of Solomon Spalding's brother John, which declared that Spalding's manuscript, referred to as Manuscript Found, "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." Martha Spalding, John's wife, tells a similar story, and states that "the names of Nephi and Lehi are yet fresh in my memory, as being the principal heroes of his tale."
Author Fawn Brodie expressed suspicion regarding these statements, claiming that the style of the statements was too similar and displayed too much uniformity. Brodie suggests that Hurlbut did a "little judicious prompting."
Howe's response to the Spalding manuscript
Howe concluded that Joseph Smith and Sidney Ridgon plagiarized the Spalding manuscript and then produced the Book of Mormon for the purpose of making money. Hurlbut obtained the manuscript from Spalding's widow and provided it to Howe in 1833 prior to the publication of Mormonism Unvailed. Howe was unable to find the alleged similarities with the Book of Mormon that were described in the statements and instead argued that there must exist a second Spalding manuscript which was now lost. After the publication of Howe's book in 1834, the Spalding manuscript in his possession was either lost or suppressed.
Rejection of the theory
In 1840 Benjamin Winchester, who personally knew Hurlbut, published a book rejecting the Spalding theory as "a sheer fabrication." Winchester attributed the creation of the entire story to Hurlbut.
Regarding Sidney Rigdon's alleged involvement, Rigdon's son John recounts an interview with his father in 1865:
My father, after I had finished saying what I have repeated above, looked at me a moment, raised his hand above his head and slowly said, with tears glistening in his eyes: "My son, I can swear before high heaven that what I have told you about the origin of is true. Your mother and sister, Mrs. Athalia Robinson, were present when that book was handed to me in Mentor, Ohio, and all I ever knew about the origin of was what Parley P. Pratt, Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Smith and the witnesses who claimed they saw the plates have told me, and in all of my intimacy with Joseph Smith he never told me but one story."
In 1884 a Spalding manuscript known as "Manuscript Story" was discovered and published, and the manuscript now resides at Oberlin College in Ohio.. This manuscript is believed by some to bear no resemblance to the Book of Mormon story, but believed by others to contain parallels in theme and narrative. The second "lost" manuscript purported to exist by Howe has never been discovered.
Notes
- Spaulding 1996 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFSpaulding1996 (help)
- Winchester 1840, p. 9 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFWinchester1840 (help)
- Winchester 1840, p. 11 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFWinchester1840 (help)
- Vogel 1998, p. 15 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFVogel1998 (help)
- Roper 2005 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFRoper2005 (help)
- Howe 1834, p. 279 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFHowe1834 (help)
- Brodie 1971, pp. 446–47 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFBrodie1971 (help)
- Roper 2005 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFRoper2005 (help)
- Winchester 1840, p. Title page harvnb error: no target: CITEREFWinchester1840 (help)
- Reeve 1996 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFReeve1996 (help)
- Reeve 1996 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFReeve1996 (help)
References
- Template:Harvard reference.
- Template:Harvard reference.
- Template:Harvard reference.
- Template:Harvard reference.
- Template:Harvard reference.
- Template:Harvard reference.
- Template:Harvard reference.
External links
- Craig Criddle's analysis of Spalding-Rigdon connections
- Spalding's "Manuscript Story" and parallels
- A fragment comparing Sidney Rigdon's biography with a known passage from Solomon Spalding