A complete understanding of how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham unfortunately remains elusive. Writing in the introduction to the Joseph Smith Papers Project’s edition of the manuscripts pertaining to the Book of Abraham, volume editors Robin Scott Jensen and Brian M. Hauglid observe how “no known first-person account from Joseph Smith exists to explain the translation of the Book of Abraham, and the scribes who worked on the project and others who claimed knowledge of the process provided only vague or general reminiscences.”[1] Complicating matters is the fact that scholars have not reached consensus on the exact relationship the Book of Abraham shares with the so-called Egyptian-language manuscripts (or, alternatively, the Kirtland Egyptian Papers).[2] Furthermore, although Joseph Smith used the terms translate and translation to describe, respectively, his production of the Book of Abraham and its final textual result,[3] this terminology, when used by the Prophet, did not always appear to “correspond to the conventional meaning of the word” as it is understood and used today.[4] Sometimes when Joseph Smith spoke of “translating” a text or language, for instance, he meant it in the conventional sense of rendering one language into another,[5] but other times he seems to have meant something more like offering an interpretation of a scriptural passage,[6] or the copying and transmission of a text over time,[7] or even restoring a lost text through revelation.[8]

Regarding the translation of the Book of Abraham, multiple sources either overly affirm or seem to suggest that Joseph Smith used the "Urim and Thummim" or a seer stone in the process. Courtesy of Intellectual Reserve, Inc.

Regarding the translation of the Book of Abraham, multiple sources either overtly affirm or seem to suggest that Joseph Smith used the “Urim and Thummim” or a seer stone in the process.[9] Those sources, however, are not uniformly reliable, are not uniformly clear or consistent with one another, and vary in their evidentiary value. My aim here is to carefully present and analyze the available evidence regarding Joseph Smith’s potential use of a seer stone in the translation of the Book of Abraham. This study stands to benefit religious educators specifically and interested Latter-day Saints generally who are unlikely to have ready access to the individual pieces of primary source data pertaining to this matter. As will be seen, I am by no means the first to attempt to answer this question, nor will I be the last. Indeed, many sources I discuss have been well known to Latter-day Saint historians for decades, yet a consensus remains elusive. Until more definitive evidence is discovered, this will likely be the state of affairs for the foreseeable future, and the issue will undoubtedly remain open to additional investigation.

I will argue that we should take seriously the real possibility that Joseph Smith used a seer stone in the translation of the Book of Abraham. I believe the cumulative testimony from sources close to Joseph Smith leads to the conclusion that the Prophet likely used a seer stone as part of his translation of the Egyptian papyri, even if we cannot say definitively how it was used in that effort.

The History of a Controversy

For over a century Latter-day Saints have wondered whether Joseph Smith used a seer stone in the translation of the Book of Abraham. In 1910 the Danish Latter-day Saint artist and writer Carl Christian Anton Christensen questioned in the pages of his Danish-language periodical, Bikuben, precisely how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham and whether he used the Urim and Thummim in the process as he did in translating the Book of Mormon.[10] Because he could not locate any reliable archival or anecdotal sources affirming that possibility, Christensen concluded that the Prophet probably did not use the instrument, leaving the question open.[11] That same year, Octave Frederick Ursenbach matter-of-factly, but with no supporting citations, described how “by the gift and power of God, and by the aid of the Urim and Thummim, Joseph Smith translated a manuscript that had providentially fallen into his hands. It contained some of the writings of Abraham, and is part of a book known to Mormondom as the Pearl of Great Price, and bears the title of the Book of Abraham.”[12] By contrast, one year later Isaac Ball flatly denied that the seer stones were used in the translation, declaring unequivocally, “The translation of the Book of Mormon was accomplished mostly by the aid of the Urim and Thummim. The translation of the Book of Abraham was wrought out with no such aid.”[13] Amid the 1912 controversy over the publication of Franklin Spalding’s bombshell pamphlet Joseph Smith, Jr., as a Translator,[14] both Janne M. Sjodahl and John Henry Evans denied the use of the Urim and Thummim in the production of the Book of Abraham, with both going so far as to claim its translation process was something fundamentally different from that of the Book of Mormon.[15]

On the centennial anniversary of Joseph Smith’s acquisition of the Egyptian papyri, the Church’s Dutch-language periodical, De Ster, published an article on the Book of Abraham that seemed to imply, without much elaboration (and without citing any sources), that Joseph Smith used the Urim and Thummim in translating that record as he did in translating the Book of Mormon.[16] Ten years later, Milton R. Hunter would explicitly make this argument, offering what appears to be the earliest citation of two of the better-known sources related to Joseph Smith’s potential use of the seer stone in translating the Book of Abraham. Toward the end of his 1945 serial Deseret News article, “The Story of the Book of Abraham,”[17] Hunter reasoned that “since the Egyptian language was extremely difficult to decipher and also a dead language, the Mormon Prophet was dependent entirely upon the same sources for help which he had utilized previously in translating the Book of Mormon, namely, inspiration from God and the Urim and Thummim which he had received in 1827 from Angel Moroni in connection with the Nephite records.” Acknowledging that earlier Latter-day Saint writers had maintained that Joseph never used the Urim and Thummim after they were returned to Moroni, Hunter nevertheless went on to insist otherwise, citing the accounts left by Wilford Woodruff and Parley P. Pratt (discussed below) to make his case that the Prophet continued to use the instrument even after the translation of the Book of Mormon. “Joseph Smith had the Urim and Thummim in his possession even at that date [1842] and had made good use of it while translating the writings of Abraham,” he affirmed.[18]

In an unpublished family history composed in 1952, Clara Fullmer Bullock preserved an account of the life of her great-great-grandfather, Benjamin Bullock III, and the role he played in the coming forth of the Book of Abraham.[19] According to her account, it was Bullock who informed “his friend” Michael Chandler that Joseph Smith “claimed to have some kind of power given him to translate ancient languages” and that Chandler should therefore visit Kirtland to exhibit the papyri. “Arriving in Kirtland on the third day of July 1835,” wrote Clara, “[Bullock and Chandler] found conditions among the Mormons very different to what they had expected.” After they had viewed Chandler’s papyri, “with the Urim and Thummim, the Prophet discerned that the ancient writings contained vital information to the welfare of the Church.”[20]

Jay M. Todd raised the topic again in 1969,[21] shortly after the surviving Joseph Smith Papyri fragments were returned to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on November 27, 1967.[22] Like Hunter before him, Todd cited sources close to Joseph Smith (Woodruff and Pratt) that affirmed the use of the “Urim and Thummim” in the translation of the Egyptian papyri but did not go as far as Hunter did by claiming that it must have been the same device used in the translation of the Book of Mormon. “It is apparent,” wrote Todd, “that the same instrument [used to translate the Book of Mormon] or another serving a similar purpose had again been provided for Joseph’s use [in the Egyptian project].”[23] Hugh Nibley was aware of at least one of these sources in 1968[24] but remained undecided on the matter both then and in his monumental 1975 work The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri: An Egyptian Endowment, wherein he explored the function of the Urim and Thummim in the Prophet’s translation efforts generally without committing himself to a position on whether such was used in the production of the Book of Abraham.[25] Equally uncertain was H. Donl Peterson, who in his posthumous The Story of the Book of Abraham identified several of the same sources previously utilized by Todd but left the question unresolved, writing merely that “it is not clear how or how often Joseph Smith used the Urim and Thummim to aid in the translation of the Book of Abraham.”[26] Michael Rhodes left the question unresolved in his articles treating the topic in the Ensign and in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism,[27] while Richard Van Wagoner, writing for the journal Dialogue, cited evidence (explored below) for the Prophet using the “Urim and Thummim” in the translation of the Book of Abraham.[28]

More recently, a manual on Church history for seminary and institute students included a quotation from Wilford Woodruff (discussed below) attesting to Joseph Smith’s use of the Urim and Thummim in the translation of the Book of Abraham but without commenting further or providing any additional context.[29] Michael Hubbard MacKay and Nicholas J. Frederick, meanwhile, emerged from their examination of this question with a sanguine attitude toward the real possibility that Joseph used the seer stone. Although “there is little known about the process of the translation of the Book of Abraham,” they write, “some of Joseph Smith’s closest associates believed that at least part of the book was translated with the use of a seer stone.” The proximity of these sources (discussed below) to the Prophet means they “should be taken seriously,” MacKay and Frederick conclude.[30] This opinion has been shared by others, including D. Michael Quinn, Matthew J. Grey, Mark J. Johnson, and Kerry Muhlestein,[31] but rejected by scholars John Gee and Grant Hardy.[32] Jensen and Hauglid (quoted earlier) have remarked that although “a few sources state that Smith used ‘the Urim and Thummim’—apparently his seer stone—during his Nauvoo-era work on the Book of Abraham, . . . differences in these accounts suggest that if Smith used a seer stone during the translation of the Book of Abraham, he did not use it at all times.”[33] Terryl Givens, too, has voiced his view that it is “entirely likely” that “[Joseph] Smith employed the Urim and Thummim, or seer stone,” in the translation of the Egyptian papyri. “However,” he continues, echoing views that precede him by at least a century, “his employment of such a device should in no way obscure the fact that the process by which he produced the Book of Abraham was of a different category altogether from that of his 1829 production of the Book of Mormon.”[34]

So the question remains unresolved and the discussion lively, and those who have approached this topic have wisely remained tentative with their conclusions.[35] The surviving accounts are, indeed, not always as explicit as we might hope (to say nothing of the fact that, as mentioned, the Prophet himself gave no firsthand account of how he translated the Egyptian papyri or if he used a seer stone in the process).

The Sources

Cleveland Whig—1835

According to his manuscript history, Joseph Smith acquired the Egyptian papyri and mummies associated with the translation of the Book of Abraham in early July 1835.[36] The earliest known account that mentions the Prophet using a seer stone in connection with the translation of the Book of Abraham surfaced just one month later from an Ohio newspaper—the Cleveland Whig, which on August 5, 1835, reported the following:

Another Humbug.—We are credibly informed that the Mormons have purchased of Mr. Chandler, three of the mummies, which he recently exhibited in this village; and that the prophet Joe has ascertained, by examining the papyrus through his spectacles, that they are the bodies of Joseph (the son of Abraham,) and King Abimeleck, and his daughter. With this shallow and contemptible story, Williams has commenced travelling about the country, and will no doubt gull multitudes into a belief of its truth. Surely one half of the world are fools.[37]

What immediately stands out in this report is the mention of Joseph “examining the papyrus through his spectacles.” This exact term (spectacles) was used by the Prophet and other contemporaries in the years preceding this account to describe the crystalline “Urim and Thummim” used in the translation of the Book of Mormon.[38] This naturally leads one to wonder if the language used here could have come from either Joseph Smith or a source close to him. Of course, it is entirely possible that this mention of the spectacles in connection with the Egyptian relics was the anonymous Whig author’s own interpolation. Those critical of Joseph Smith’s miraculous claims, after all, were already accustomed to speaking of the “spectacles” in a derisive or mocking tone, and it could be that the Whig was merely following a common trope.[39]

But other aspects of the Whig’s report would seem to indicate otherwise. It is noteworthy, for instance, that the paper names a source for this information: a certain “Williams,” who was evidently publicly recounting details about Joseph Smith’s acquisition of the papyri. Who might this Williams be? MacKay and Frederick identify the informant as William W. Phelps.[40] Phelps was directly involved in the translation of the Book of Abraham, serving as both a scribe for the project and laboring alongside Joseph Smith on the related Egyptian-language manuscripts.[41] But another promising candidate for the identity of Williams, and in my opinion the more likely one, is Frederick G. Williams, who had been appointed Joseph Smith’s clerk and scribe in 1832 and a counselor in the First Presidency in 1833.[42] Like Phelps, Williams also participated in the translation of the Book of Abraham, acting as a scribe for the manuscript now designated “Book of Abraham Manuscript—A.”[43] So he, too, would have had close access to Joseph Smith during the composition of the text and would have been in a position to witness the Prophet’s potential use of a seer stone.

What’s more, Williams’s granddaughter, Lucy E. Godfrey, recorded in a late family history how her grandfather, along with her father, Williams’s son Ezra Granger Williams, toured the Ohio countryside in the summer of 1835 with the Egyptian relics:

In July, 1835, Michael H. Chandler came to Kirtland exhibiting two Egyptian mummies in whose coffins were found two rolls of papyrus rolled in linen and saturated with bitumen. These were placed in care of Dr. Williams and were taken by his son Ezra and exhibited to the Saints in the surrounding communities. The rolls were afterward interpreted and proved to be the writings of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price.[44]

It would appear that in this late account Lucy is describing the same event mentioned by Truman Coe, who reported in August 1836 that during the previous summer the mummies went out “for exhibition by one of [the] apostles.”[45] Unfortunately, Coe did not specify which “apostle” was exhibiting the papyri, leaving us able to only wonder if he and the Whig were referring to Williams’s exhibition of the mummies and papyri to outlying Latter-day Saint communities in Ohio as described by his granddaughter Lucy. Although impossible to prove, Lucy’s account reinforces the overall probability that Frederick G. Williams (or his son Ezra, or both) was indeed the “Williams” identified in the Whig and the nameless “apostle” mentioned by Coe.

An additional challenge with the Whig’s account, however, is its identification of the mummies. Per this account, upon examining the papyri with his “spectacles,” Joseph Smith ascertained that the mummies purchased with the papyri manuscripts were the remains of Joseph of Egypt and King Abimelech (the same mentioned in connection with Abraham in Genesis 20:1–16; 21:22–34). The difficulty with this claim is that Oliver Cowdery, in a December 1835 letter to William Frye, specifically refuted it:

It has been said, that the purchasers of these antiquities pretend they have the body of Abraham, Abimelech, the king of the Philistines, Joseph, who was sold into Egypt, &c. &c. for the purpose of attracting the attention of the multitude, and gulling the unwary—which is utterly false. For the purpose of correcting these and other erroneous statements, concerning both the mummies and also the records, we give an extract of a letter written by a friend in this place, who possesses correct knowledge concerning this matter, to a gentleman who resides at a distance. Who these ancient inhabitants of Egypt are, we do not pretend to say,—neither does it matter to us. We have no idea or expectation, that either of them are Abraham, Abimelech, or Joseph. Abraham was buried on his own possession, “in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron, the son of Zohar the Hittite, which is before Mamre,” which he purchased of the sons of Heth; Abimelech lived in the same country, and for aught we know, died there, and the children of Israel carried Joseph’s bones from Egypt when they went out under Moses. Consequently, could not have been found in Egypt in the 19th century. But the records are the most important, concerning which, we refer our readers to the extract for information.[46]

The fact that Cowdery published this letter in the Church’s newspaper suggests he was speaking to some degree in an official capacity for the Church (or at least for the mainstream Latter-day Saint position). This somewhat diminishes the reliability of the Whig’s account. On the other hand, it is possible that the Whig was merely reporting what Williams himself or some other Latter-day Saint source had independently assumed and was telling others about the identities of the mummies. In that case, the fault lies with the source for spreading misinformation about the identity of the mummies, not the Whig for accurately reporting what others were claiming. It may also be significant that while Cowdery disputed the perception that the Latter-day Saints were making positive claims about the identity of the mummies, he did not attempt to refute the claim that Joseph Smith used his “spectacles” in the translation of the papyri. If this particular information in the Whig was false, or if Cowdery wished to downplay it like he did the supposed identity of the mummies, it is odd that he would not do so in his letter to Frye, since that would have afforded the perfect opportunity. Indeed, that Joseph Smith was still using a seer stone in the mid-1830s to receive revelation is confirmed by the fact that the Prophet gave a patriarchal blessing to Newel K. Whitney through “the Urim and Thummim” on October 7, 1835,[47] just three months after the recovery of the papyri and two months after the Whig’s report of Joseph using his “spectacles” in connection with his examination of the papyri.

Despite these potential issues with its credibility, overall the Whig’s August 1835 report of Joseph Smith using his “spectacles” in the early stages of the translation of the Book of Abraham indicates the possibility and perhaps likelihood for the use of a seer stone early in the process. Not only did the paper name a source close to Joseph Smith, but we also appear to have some measure of independent corroboration of the report’s broad details.

Warren Parrish—1838

Another one of Joseph Smith’s scribes in the Book of Abraham project, Warren Parrish,[48] mentioned the translation process after his disaffection and excommunication from the Church in December 1837.[49] Writing to the editor of the Painesville Republican, another local Ohio newspaper, Parrish excoriated Joseph Smith for, among other things, the failure of the Kirtland Safety Society and denounced him and other Church leaders as “infidels” and blasphemers.[50] In this letter, dated February 5, 1838, Parrish informed his recipient that he had, among other things, “been Smith’s private secretary, called to fill this high and responsible station by revelation,” referring to a revelation received by Joseph Smith on November 14, 1835, and scribed by Parrish himself.[51] This privilege granted Parrish close access to Joseph while the latter worked on the translation of ancient scripture. Accordingly, Parrish could speak from a position of knowledge when he relayed, “I have set by his [Joseph Smith’s] side and penned down the translation of the Egyptian Hieroglyphics as he claimed to receive it by direct inspiration from Heaven.”[52]

In this account, however, Parrish does not mention the use of a seer stone or the Urim and Thummim in the translation of the “Egyptian Hieroglyphics.” He rather speaks of the Prophet translating the same “by direct inspiration from Heaven,” signifying merely some mode of revelation. He also seems to distance himself from the whole affair, indicating this is what Joseph Smith “claimed to receive” in connection with the papyri without necessarily committing himself to believing such. But whatever Parrish himself may have thought about the nature of the Book of Abraham, he was in a firsthand position to know something about what Joseph Smith claimed with respect to the translation of the Egyptian papyri; accordingly, “as the only scribal witness reporting how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham, Parrish’s testimony should not be so glossed over.”[53]

Something very curious about Parrish’s language is how it echoes that of Oliver Cowdery in his now-famous description of the translation of the Book of Mormon:

These were days never to be forgotten—to sit under the sound of a voice dictated by the inspiration of heaven, awakened the utmost gratitude of this bosom! 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,” the history or record called “The book of Mormon.”[54]

Here we see Cowdery apparently making a connection between the “inspiration of heaven” and the use of the Urim and Thummim to translate ancient records. Could Parrish have been mimicking Cowdery’s understanding with his own comment that he witnessed Joseph Smith translate the Egyptian papyri “by direct inspiration from Heaven”? One author stated, “Parrish’s testimony . . . does indeed sound like the Book of Abraham was produced in much the same way Joseph Smith brought forth the Book of Mormon—by simply dictating, or spontaneously channeling, the translation as he received it from heaven.”[55] But while it is tempting to think that with this language Parrish may have been alluding to the use of the Urim and Thummim in the Book of Abraham translation, this remains speculative and does not get around the fact that he simply does not make the presence of the seer stone in the process overt, as Cowdery does in his description of the translation of the Book of Mormon.

Additionally, one key difference between the two is Parrish’s inclusion of the word direct in his description, which, it might be feasibly argued, was his way of actually saying just the opposite: that Joseph Smith claimed to know the contents of the papyri without the use of the seer stone and instead by unmediated revelation directly from heaven. Unfortunately, Parrish simply did not elaborate on what he meant precisely by this term either in his letter to the editor of the Painesville Republican or in any other known record. This evidence, therefore, while suggestive, merely indicates that Parrish understood Joseph Smith as claiming revelation in his translation of the Book of Abraham but not specifically that this included the use of a seer stone. “[Parrish’s] statement supports the idea that the Book of Abraham was received through revelation, but it doesn’t specify anything beyond that.”[56]

John Whitmer—ca. 1838

Another important early source that affords some insight into the nature of the Book of Abraham translation comes from John Whitmer, who was called to be Church historian in early 1831.[57] During his tenure in that capacity between 1831 and his excommunication in early 1838, Whitmer, who clerked for Joseph Smith and was a scribe in the translation of both the Book of Mormon and the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible, compiled the “Book of John Whitmer” (so designated by the manuscript’s superscription), an important chronicle of events of the early days of the Restoration.[58] Whitmer’s history, fortunately, preserves an early report of the acquisition of the Egyptian papyri and the translation thereof, probably dating to early 1838:

About the first of July 1835 there came a man having four Egyptian Mummies exhibiting them for curiosities, which was a wonder indeed! having also some r[e]cords connected with them which were found deposited with the Mummies, but there being no one skilled in the Egyptian language therefore could not translate the record, after this [e]xhibition Joseph the Seer saw these Record[s] and by the revelation of Jesus Christ could translate these records, which gavee an account of our forefathers, even Abraham Much of which was written by Joseph of Egypt who was sold by his brethren. Which when all translated will be a pleasing history and of great value to the saints.[59]

As with the Parrish account, Whitmer’s retelling of the translation of the Book of Abraham is sparse on details. And like Parrish, Whitmer does not explicitly speak of the Prophet using a seer stone or the Urim and Thummim. What Whitmer’s account does make clear is that Joseph professed to translate the papyri “by the revelation of Jesus Christ.” But the language immediately preceding this is also interesting and potentially significant. “Joseph the Seer,” writes Whitmer, “saw these Records.” The use of this verb, in conjunction with Whitmer’s use of the title “Seer” in this instance, could indicate more than simply looking at the physical record. A fundamental mechanism in Joseph Smith’s seeric process was, apparently, to see and then recite revealed words that appeared in the stones he used in scriptural translation, something Whitmer was potentially aware of in his capacity as a Book of Mormon scribe.[60]

Still, as just mentioned, Whitmer does not explicitly describe the use of the seer stone in his account of the translation of the papyri. His report of Joseph “seeing” the record of Abraham and then “by the revelation of Jesus Christ” being able to “translate” it is nevertheless suggestive, as this terminology in an early Latter-day Saints context would potentially have held specific meaning involving the use of seer stones.[61] Of course, it is also possible that Whitmer intended nothing more than to say that when Joseph Smith saw these records (the physical papyri) in a mundane sense for the first time, he then translated them by revelation. As with the Parrish account, this source is therefore not conclusive evidence that Joseph Smith used a seer stone and could very plausibly indicate that the Prophet received direct revelation in the process. Yet this evidence remains, in any case, highly provocative.

Wilford Woodruff—1842

One source that may come closer to being decisive, however, is Wilford Woodruff. When the Book of Abraham was published in March 1842, Woodruff was an assistant in the printshop of the Times and Seasons in Nauvoo and worked on the publication of the Book of Abraham. On February 19 that year, just two weeks before the publication of the first installment of the Book of Abraham on March 1, 1842, Woodruff noted in his journal that he “had the privilege this day of assisting in setting the TIPE for printing the first peace of the BOOK OF ABRAHAM that is to be presented to the inhabitants of the EARTH in the LAST DAYS.”[62] In this same entry, Woodruff was also clear about Joseph using a seer stone in preparing the text:

The Lord is Blessing Joseph with Power to reveal the mysteries of the kingdom of God; to translate through the Urim & Thummim Ancient records & Hyeroglyphics as old as Abraham or Adam, which causes our hearts to burn within us while we behold their glorious truths opened unto us. Joseph the Seer has presented us some of the Book of Abraham which was written by his own hand but hid from the knowledge of man for the last four thousand years but has now come to light through the mercy of God. Joseph has had these records in his possession for several years but has never presented them before the world in the english language untill now. . . . My soul has been much edifyed of late from time to time in hearing Joseph the Seer convers about the mysteries of the Kingdom of God, truly GOD is with him & is making him mighty in wisdom & knowledge & I am convinced for myself that none of the Prophets Seers or Revelators of the Earth have ever accomplished a greater work than will be accomplished in the Last days through the mercy of God By JOSEPH THE SEER.[63]

As with Whitmer, the title Woodruff favors in describing Joseph’s role in bringing forth the text is “Seer,” but this time paired with an unambiguous mention of the Prophet’s use of the Urim and Thummim. Woodruff’s report appears credible because he was both involved in the production of the Book of Abraham and was someone to whom on a previous occasion Joseph Smith had shown his seer stone, indicating that Woodruff shared the Prophet’s confidence in this matter.[64] However, one concern is that, as far as we can presently tell, Woodruff was not a witness to the translation of the Egyptian papyri but rather merely assisted in publishing the text after it had been translated.[65] It is reasonable to suppose that Woodruff learned the details of the papyri’s translation directly from Joseph Smith and that this included details about the use of the seer stone in the process (which in turn would explain his comment about Joseph using the Urim and Thummim to translate “Ancient records & Hyeroglyphics as old as Abraham or Adam”). But it could also be that Woodruff himself merely assumed the Urim and Thummim were used in the process because of his general understanding of Joseph Smith’s role as a seer and revelator. This account, therefore, constitutes relatively good evidence that Joseph Smith used a seer stone for at least part of the translation of the Book of Abraham but is not definitive.

Parley P. Pratt—1842

Just a few months after the Book of Abraham’s initial publication in Nauvoo, Apostle Parley P. Pratt, who was presiding over the British Mission, republished the text and the first facsimile of the Book of Abraham in the Millennial Star,[66] thus fulfilling his earlier promise that he would provide “extracts” of the text for European readers.[67] After publishing the first installment of the text (Abraham 1:1–2:18), Pratt favored his readers with an editorial that mentioned the Prophet’s use of the Urim and Thummim to translate the text.

The record is now in course of translation by means of the Urim and Thummim, and proves to be a record written partly by the father of the faithful Abraham, and finished by Joseph when in Egypt. After his death, it is supposed they were preserved in the family of the Pharaohs and afterwards hid up with the embalmed body of the female with whom they were found. Thus it is, indeed, true, that the ways of the Lord are not as man’s ways, nor his thoughts as our thoughts.[68]

From where, precisely, did Pratt obtain his information? How did he know that the “record” was “now in course of translation by means of the Urim and Thummim”? After all, Pratt was on the other side of the Atlantic when he wrote that editorial for the Millennial Star, so he presumably must have heard something about how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham from an informant. Unfortunately, Pratt did not specify who, if anyone, the source of this information may have been, leaving us to wonder if he had firsthand knowledge of Joseph’s use of the seer stone, or if he had received this information from Joseph Smith or someone else close to the Prophet, or whether he instead had merely made an assumption about the nature of the translation after seeing the issues of the Times and Seasons containing the published text of the Book of Abraham.[69]

Pratt knew the basic story of how Joseph Smith recovered the Egyptian papyri and mummies, since in the same editorial where he mentioned use of the Urim and Thummim he also provided a brief sketch of how the Prophet first came into possession of the relics. That sketch broadly agrees with the account preserved in Joseph Smith’s own history.[70] Either Pratt knew something about the translation of the Book of Abraham before he departed for England in 1839,[71] or he learned the details from written communications with Joseph Smith or others after his departure. Without additional documentary evidence, it is impossible to know for sure, and it is also entirely possible that Pratt merely assumed the translation of the Egyptian records was comparable to the translation of the Book of Mormon, thereby leading him to believe the seer stone was used in the translation of the former as it was in the latter. Pratt’s testimony, therefore, is valuable, but as with Woodruff’s account, caution should be used in accepting it as firm evidence for the use of a seer stone in translating the Book of Abraham.

“M.”/Lucy Mack Smith—1846

In the summer of 1846, two years after Joseph Smith’s death, a party of Quakers visited Nauvoo and recited their experience in a published account that appeared in the Friends’ Weekly Intelligencer, a Philadelphia-based Quaker periodical.[72] The author of this correspondence was identified in the published reports merely with the initial M. After relating the condition of the Latter-day Saints in 1846 and narrating a tour of the city the party took with a Latter-day Saint guide who answered questions and showed them the recently completed Nauvoo Temple, M. described an encounter the group had with Lucy Mack Smith, the Prophet’s mother:

After we had obtained all the information we could at the Temple, we visited the Mother of the Prophet, (a respectable looking old lady) who has four Mummies for exhibition, who (she says) were a King and Queen, and their Son and Daughter, and gives the names of each. She produced a black looking roll (which she told us was papyrus) found upon the breast of the King, part of which the Prophet had unrolled and read; and she had pasted the deciphered sheets on the leaves of a book which she showed us. The roll was as dark as the bones of the Mummies, and bore very much the same appearance; but the opened sheets were exceedingly like thin parchment, and of quite a light color. There were birds, fishes, and fantastic looking people, interspersed amidst hyeroglyphics; but the old lady explained the meaning of them all, as Joseph had interpreted them to her.

The stories appeared to be more particular accounts than our Bible gives us, of Noah, the Ark and the flood—of Abraham and Melchizedec—of Joseph and Pharaoh—and of various other distinguished characters. She said, that when Joseph was reading the papyrus, he closed his eyes, and held a hat over his face, and that the revelation came to him; and that where the papyrus was torn, he could read the parts that were destroyed equally as well as those that were there; and that scribes sat by him writing, as he expounded. She showed us a large book where these things were printed, which of course sealed their truth to Mormon eyes and minds; but we had not time to read them.[73]

This account is remarkable for a number of reasons, including the implications it has for the Book of Abraham translation. Taken at face value, this report seems to indicate that Joseph Smith translated the Egyptian papyri in a manner similar to how he translated the Book of Mormon. Specifically, the reference to Joseph placing his face into a hat and receiving revelation aligns closely with how eyewitnesses described the Prophet placing a seer stone in a hat to read and then translate the gold plates.[74] Perhaps the most famous portrayal of this process comes from David Whitmer, who in 1887 gave “a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated”:

Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. . . . Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.[75]

Although the account left by M. does not explicitly mention the seer stone being in the hat, there can be little doubt that its presence is assumed in the description given by Lucy. After all, what reason would there be otherwise for mentioning the presence of the hat unless, along the lines of Whitmer’s recollection, Joseph needed it to shield the external light as he held the stone up to his face? Indeed, the description of the Prophet holding the hat “over his face” as he “was reading the papyrus,” receiving revelation, and “expounding” the meaning of the text as “scribes sat by him writing” parallels closely the accounts left by those who described the process of the Book of Mormon translation. Even the comment that Joseph could “read the parts [of the papyrus] that were destroyed” and “expound” the meaning of those parts of the text seems like a broad parallel with Whitmer’s detail that a sort of seeric second sight enabled Joseph to see a text in vision.[76]

Even without knowing the identity of M., we can say something about the reliability of his or her description. In fact, both the broad contours and the fine details of this account find corroboration from other sources. For example, we know that Lucy Mack Smith entertained several guests with exhibitions of the papyri and mummies,[77] and we know that she sometimes identified the mummies for her visitors or would explain the meaning of the figures and illustrations on the papyri, just as she did for her Quaker guests.[78] In addition, the notion that Joseph could read even the torn or missing portions of the papyri, as M. reports Lucy claimed her son could accomplish by revelation, is also confirmed by two other independent sources.[79] One of these sources speaks of Joseph being able “to translate the whole [of the papyri] by divine inspiration, and that which is lost, like Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, can be interpreted as well as that which is preserved,”[80] while the other mentions the Prophet’s ability to read “any of the [Egyptian] characters [that] were missing by reason of the mutilation of the roll” by means of “a ‘special revelation,’” perhaps itself an ironic euphemism for the seer stone.[81]

There are, however, complications with this source. First, there is the question of how reliable Lucy was in relating the details of how the Book of Abraham was translated. She herself was not, as far as we can tell, an eyewitness or participant thereto, so any information about it that she may have gleaned could have been obtained only by someone who was. This automatically makes her a secondhand source. Compounding this is the fact that Lucy’s version of the translation is coming through her anonymous visitor M., which makes this account of the translation a thirdhand report. We must also consider the fact that on a few occasions Joseph and Lucy discussed the origins of the Book of Mormon with visitors who were shown the Egyptian relics.[82] It is possible that M. and the other Quakers who visited Lucy in 1846 also asked about the Book of Mormon and that after hearing Lucy explain how that book was translated, M. then conflated those details with the translation of the Book of Abraham. Alternatively, Lucy herself may have conflated the details, which she then passed on to her visitors. The problematic nature of this second point is diminished somewhat, however, by the fact that in the published narrative M. relates how the Quaker party asked their guide at the Nauvoo Temple about the origins of the Book of Mormon before they visited Lucy.[83] Additionally, the way M. describes the encounter makes it apparent that Lucy was speaking of the Egyptian papyri, not the Book of Mormon plates, which never came into discussion according to the published report. But, of course, conflation may have still occurred on the part of M. if he or she heard from the Nauvoo Temple guide about the translation of the Book of Mormon and from Lucy about the translation of the Book of Abraham.

In both its general and specific details, however, the account preserved by M. appears generally reliable, but because it is thirdhand it should be accepted cautiously. Still, it appears safe to suppose at the very least that it is a reasonable approximation of what the Prophet’s mother understood to be the translation method of the papyri—a method that appeared to mirror the translation of the Book of Mormon in strikingly similar detail. Whether this understanding can be traced back to Joseph Smith, however, is difficult to say.

William Appleby—1856

Another Latter-day Saint who caught a glance of the Joseph Smith Papyri during the Prophet’s lifetime was William Ivins Appleby, who joined the Church of Jesus Christ in late 1840 and went on to hold leadership positions in both the Church and in Utah Territory before his death in 1870.[84] In his manuscript history and journal that he began compiling on July 7, 1848[85]—but which drew in part from material composed in 1841[86]—Appleby included a detailed firsthand account of his experience viewing the papyri and having its contents explained to him by Joseph Smith when he visited the Prophet on May 5, 1841.[87] Although Appleby captured significant details about the papyri in his description, he did not, unfortunately, preserve any specific information concerning how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham.

Although his manuscript history does not enlighten us on the nature of the translation of the Egyptian papyri, a letter from Appleby to John Taylor on October 29, 1856, may contain a reference to the seer stone being used in the process. First published in Taylor’s New York newspaper, The Mormon,[88] and subsequently republished in both the Millennial Star and in the Deseret News,[89] Appleby’s letter, which offered “a brief history of the translation of the Bible, the compilations, &c.,”[90] provides a glimpse into how he understood the Prophet’s method of revealing scripture in the latter days. “The Scriptures at first were pure and plain,” wrote Appleby, “written in Hebrew, on parchment, as the several Seers, Patriarchs, and Prophets received them from the Almighty; but it was a great elapse of time before any portion of them were compiled.” These texts, he continued, evoking the contents of the Book of Abraham,

were handed down from the Fathers from the beginning to Abraham, he being a lawful heir to the Priesthood and promises, “the Record fell into his hands,” containing an account of the Planet Kolob, the Celestial Residence, the Organization of Intelligences, Election of Great and Noble Spirits in the Eternal Worlds for God’s Rulers on the Earth, Fall of Lucifer, and the spirits “which kept not their first estate,” Organization of this Globe, Fall of Adam, Plan of Salvation, Promise of the Only Begotten, Order of the Priesthood, Celestial Astronomy, History of Enoch, Noah, and the Flood, the first settlement of the land of Egypt, Cause of idolatry, Canaanites, &c., &c.[91]

After devoting several paragraphs on the long transmission of the Bible from antiquity to the modern era, and pontificating all the while on the errors and interpolations of men that he felt compromised that sacred text appreciably enough to warrant concern, Appleby went on to rejoice that God had raised a modern prophet to identify and correct the errors of the past and to restore the plain truths that had been lost. “But thanks and praise be given to Him who rules on high and sways the destinies of men,” he exulted.

He has spoken from the heavens in these days, raised up a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, who has, by commandment and the aid of the Urim and Thummim, and the power of inspiration, translated and brought back and restored “the most plain and precious things” that have been taken away by uninspired men, under the authority of a corrupt and apostate church, so that the Saints of Latter Days know, understand and comprehend truth from error, and the inspiration of the Almighty from the wisdom of men.[92]

Appleby’s reference to Joseph Smith employing the Urim and Thummim in the recovery of lost texts and sacred truths could, of course, be interpreted very generally in the overall thrust of his main point. Yet it may be significant that Appleby begins his treatise by specifically citing material from the Book of Abraham (both in its general themes and specifically in the language of Abraham 1:28 and 3:26) as an example of what was lost before the Bible’s compilation but restored by Joseph Smith through the Urim and Thummim. Appleby appears to have been deeply impressed with the contents of the Book of Abraham, for he copied the text of Abraham 1:15–31 into his history.[93] This fact, combined with his remarks from his 1856 letter, leads one to wonder if during his visit with Joseph Smith in May 1841 he learned more about the translation process than he let on in his history. So it seems possible that there was some kind of connection with the text of the Book of Abraham and the Urim and Thummim in Appleby’s thinking. But once more, because he did not make this relationship explicit, and did not specifically mention the Prophet’s use of a seer stone in the translation of the papyri, Appleby’s comments provide only perhaps faint circumstantial or tangential evidence that a seer stone was used in translating the papyri.

Salt Lake Tribune—1873

Intriguingly, brief mention of Joseph Smith’s use of the Urim and Thummim in translating the Book of Abraham appeared in the pages of one of Utah’s prominent newspapers—the Salt Lake Tribune. On February 7, 1873, the Tribune was pleased to reproduce an excerpt of T. B. H. Stenhouse’s newly published book, The Rocky Mountain Saints,[94] “for the especial benefit of the thousands in [Utah] Territory whose faith in the divine right business [of the Church of Jesus Christ] was becoming weak.” The portion of Stenhouse’s book the Tribune saw fit to republish that Friday morning was “devoted to the annihilation of the celebrated ‘Book of Abraham,’ which Joseph Smith professed to translate from papyri found with Egyptian mummies.”[95]

What Stenhouse had to offer in The Rocky Mountain Saints was basically a repackaging, with some of his own perspective, of another work antagonistic toward the Latter-day Saints.[96] Jules Rémy’s Voyage au pays des Mormons first appeared in 1860 and then in English a year later as A Journey to Great-Salt-Lake City.[97] This work cast doubt on the credibility of the Book of Abraham by citing the authority of a contemporary Egyptologist—the young savant Théodule Deveria of the Louvre Museum in Paris, who offered a dramatically different interpretation of the facsimiles of the Book of Abraham than the one given by Joseph Smith.[98] Although Latter-day Saints in Europe were aware of this work and had offered some response to it,[99] Rémy’s argument against the Book of Abraham appeared not to gain much traction outside Europe until Stenhouse republished his arguments for an American audience eager for tell-all exposés produced by former members of the Church.[100]

The Tribune, for its part, was of course more than happy to promote this damning new argument against the Book of Abraham, if for no other reason than Stenhouse himself was, in fact, associated with the paper and a compatriot of its “Godbeite” proprietors.[101] As the leading opposition newspaper in Utah, the Tribune made no attempt in its early days to conceal its outright disdain for the institutional Church and its leaders. “We are strong believers in the efficacy of disintegrating the Mormon faith in order to break up the power of the priesthood,” the paper made clear in its lead-up to Stenhouse’s comments on the Book of Abraham, “and free the people from that mental slavery which still holds so many in bondage to one man power,” referring to Brigham Young’s domineering presence in Utah’s civil, economic, and religious affairs. With its antagonistic intentions made abundantly clear, the Tribune prefaced its excerpt of The Rocky Mountain Saints with the following:

In the early days of the Church, and even at the present time, there are thousands who believe in the infallibility of Joseph Smith as a translator of the dead languages through divine agency, and the miraculous Urim and Thummim, by the aid of which it is alleged he translated the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham. In fact the whole superstructure of Mormonism rests upon this assumption. If, then, his translation of the papyri is proved by scientific men versed in the translation of hieroglyphics to be the nonsense, then all faith based on this gift receives such a crushing blow that the founder of Mormonism falls from the lofty height and sacred niche which modern prophets and inspired translators always hew for themselves, to the humiliating level of men whose chief characteristics are ignorance and fanaticism.[102]

Leaving aside the Tribune’s palpable anti-Church bias, the mention that “it is alleged” that Joseph used the Urim and Thummim in the translation of both the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham raises an important question: alleged by whom? Unfortunately, the Tribune does not specify. Rémy himself, after quoting Deveria’s negative judgment of Joseph Smith’s ability as a translator, made a sarcastic jab at the fallibility of the Urim and Thummim given what he deemed the Prophet’s inept interpretation of the facsimiles,[103] but this probably was not the source the Tribune had in mind with its comment. Stenhouse, in The Rocky Mountain Saints, does describe Joseph’s use of the Urim and Thummim, but only in connection with Joseph’s youthful treasure digging and the translation of the Book of Mormon,[104] and what’s more, the excerpt quoted by the Tribune omits any such mention of the seer stone. Assuming the editor or author of this anonymous description wasn’t simply making things up, it seems the Tribune may have been reporting a general belief held among the Latter-day Saints at the time about the nature of the translation of the Book of Abraham (namely, that it was accomplished with the Urim and Thummim in a manner comparable to the translation of the Book of Mormon). If this is correct, then until a more reliable informant can be identified as the Tribune’s source for the detail that Joseph used the seer stone in translating the papyri, this piece of evidence remains relatively weak, since it preserves only what people generally may have assumed about the translation of the Book of Abraham at the time of this reporting.

Orson Pratt—1878

Like his brother Parley, Orson Pratt was one who enjoyed Joseph Smith’s confidence. After his conversion to the restored gospel on September 19, 1830, Orson would quickly enter the Prophet’s inner circle and would go on to enjoy a storied ministry in the early Church as one of the original members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, a prolific pamphleteer and missionary, a member of the Council of Fifty, and a towering intellectual figure in early Latter-day Saint theology (among other achievements).[105] Pratt also left us an impressive documentary record in the form of published works, sermons, and private letters and journals. Fortunately for our purposes here, his historical footprint left behind some details about the translation of the Book of Abraham.

In a sermon delivered on August 25, 1878, Pratt addressed his Latter-day Saint listeners on themes from the Book of Mormon that were weighing on his mind.[106] After discussing some important truths taught in the Book of Mormon, Pratt pivoted to discussing some of the content in the Pearl of Great Price, which that same year had seen republication in Salt Lake City under his supervision.[107] “These are not the only revelations given through this great modern Prophet,” said Pratt, referring to the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the content in the Pearl of Great Price now known as the Book of Moses. Speaking of the Book of Abraham specifically, Pratt went on to give a description of its recovery and translation (reproduced in the appendix below).[108] The account presented by Pratt was a familiar one, but significantly the Apostle concluded his version of the recovery of the Book of Abraham by making explicit mention of the use of the Urim and Thummim in the process:

The Prophet translated the part of these writings which, as I have said is contained in the Pearl of Great Price, and known as the Book of Abraham. Thus you see one of the first gifts bestowed by the Lord for the benefit of His people, was that of revelation—the gift to translate, by the aid of the Urim and Thummim, the gift of bringing to light old and ancient records.[109]

The importance of Pratt’s account is amplified by the fact that he claimed to be an eyewitness to the translation of the Egyptian records. Twenty years earlier, in a sermon delivered on July 20, 1859, in the Salt Lake Tabernacle,[110] Pratt affirmed becoming “intimately acquainted with the Prophet Joseph Smith” after his conversion. “I had the great privilege,” he remarked, “of boarding the most of the time at his house, so that I not only knew him as a public teacher, but as a private citizen, as a husband and father.” What’s more, Pratt went on to claim,

I witnessed his earnest and humble devotions both morning and evening in his family. I heard the words of eternal life, flowing from his mouth, nourishing, soothing and comforting his family, neighbors and friends. I saw his countenance lighted up, as the inspiration of the Holy Ghost rested upon him, dictating the great and most precious revelations now printed for our guide. I saw him translating, by inspiration, the Old and New Testaments and his inspired book of Abraham from Egyptian papyrus.[111]

Records from Joseph Smith corroborate Pratt’s recollection. On October 3, 1835, the Prophet favored “most” of the members of the Quorum of the Twelve with a view of the papyri and “gave [them an] explanation of the same.”[112] Pratt had returned to Kirtland from a mission on September 25, 1835, and was living with Sidney Rigdon just two days before this audience with the Prophet.[113] He was almost certainly a part of the apostolic cohort that viewed the papyri on October 3.[114] Although the brief entry in his journal fails to provide any specific detail, it is not hard to imagine that Joseph’s “explanation” of the contents of the papyri to the members of the Twelve in that meeting could have included a description of how he translated the text, and perhaps even a demonstration, as Pratt’s later recounting would suggest. In any case, Pratt’s claim to have been an eyewitness to the translation of the Book of Abraham appears credible, since we can point to at least one documented instance in which Joseph showed him the papyri and explained their contents to him. That Pratt mentions the use of the Urim and Thummim in the context of the coming forth of the Book of Abraham, therefore, is a measure of good evidence for its use in the process.

Howard Coray—1889

Our final source to evaluate is Howard Coray, who briefly clerked for the Prophet after joining the Church in the spring of 1840.[115] In a letter to his daughter Martha dated August 2, 1889, Coray, among other things, reminisced about some of his experiences with Joseph and bore testimony of his divine calling.[116] “I soon went to Nauvoo [after joining the Church and] became acquainted with the Prophet,” he wrote to Martha. “[I] heard him preach and saw him conduct the April Conference of 1840. The power and wisdom that he displayed on this occasion was more evidence [for the truthfulness of the restored gospel].”[117] After recounting witnessing miraculous healings upon his arrival to Nauvoo, which confirmed his faith, Coray divulged the following to his daughter:

I have studied the Gospel as revealed by Joseph Smith and wondered if it were possible for any one unaided by the spirit of God to have revealed such a system of salvation and exaltation for man. My conclusion is that in the negative. I sat and listened to his preaching at the stand in Nauvoo, a great many times when I have been completely carried away with his indescribable eloquence—power of expression—speaking as I have never heard any other man speak—I have heard him prophesy many things that have already come to pass, I have seen him translate by the Seer’s stones[.] I have been <was> present when he received a revelation on priesthood; he blessed me and prophesied that on my head, which has been literally fulfilled; and I have seen him by the aid of the Spirit of the Lord, as a prophet raised up to usher in the dispensation of the fulness of times; besides <this, the> work and the workings of it, have been made manifest to me by the good spirit.[118]

Embedded in this testimony is a very curious mention of Coray having seen Joseph “translate by the Seer’s stone.” Naturally, the question arises as to what translation effort Coray could be referring to. The translations of the Book of Mormon and the Bible can be immediately ruled out, since those efforts were accomplished before Coray was even a member of the Church. Since Coray would have seen Joseph using the seer stone in Nauvoo, he may have been referring to the curious case of the Kinderhook Plates, which unfolded in early May 1843. But that actually seems very unlikely, if not outright impossible, since Coray was concluding a mission at the time of the incident[119] and makes no mention of the bogus plates or their “translation” in his papers. What’s more, the definitive work on the matter has shown beyond doubt that Joseph attempted a secular rather than a seeric translation of the plates that apparently did not involve use of the seer stone but rather available lexical material.[120]

It might be argued that Coray was describing having seen Joseph receive a revelation through the seer stone, but the language in this letter suggests otherwise. The way he recalls his experience for his daughter seems to indicate that Coray heard Joseph prophesy and pronounce revelation and, apart from that, witnessed him translate with the seer stone. This would appear to leave only the Book of Abraham as the last viable candidate for what Coray was talking about. Indeed, as discussed earlier, the fact that other Nauvoo-era sources affirm the use of the seer stone in the translation or preparation of the Book of Abraham at the time of its publication reinforces the likelihood that Coray is describing the same thing that Woodruff and Pratt described.

It is possible, of course, that Coray innocently misremembered seeing Joseph Smith use the seer stone sometime between 1840 and 1844. This recollection to his daughter, after all, came over four decades after his time living in Nauvoo. This and the fact that he is not more specific about what he saw Joseph translate with the seer stone urges us to be cautious in using Coray as a definitive source on the nature of the translation process of the Book of Abraham.

Conclusion

Returning to the question posed in the title of this paper with the evidence now in mind, we ask again: did Joseph Smith use a seer stone in the translation of the Book of Abraham? Though not definitive, the available evidence provides ample reason to believe he did. Sources close to him overtly affirm that the Prophet used the seer stone in his work on the Egyptian papyri. Other sources perhaps use language to the same effect but are not explicit, rendering their testimonies less compelling but still suggestive. Additionally, one account indicates that the translation of the Egyptian papyri was done in a manner similar to the translation of the Book of Mormon. Cumulatively, then, the case for a seer stone being used in the translation of the Book of Abraham is good but, admittedly, not decisive. Acknowledging the conflicting conclusions scholars have reached on this topic, my own investigation leads me to agree with two recent writers that the evidence for Joseph Smith using the seer stone in his translation of the Egyptian papyri “should be taken seriously.”[121]

Asking whether or not Joseph Smith used the seer stone or Urim and Thummim in the translation of the Book of Abraham brings with it additional questions, such as, for starters, whether this topic is even worth exploring in the first place. Does it really matter if Joseph used the seer stone in translating the Egyptian papyri? Is this topic more than simply a historical curiosity? I believe it matters whether Joseph continued using his seer stone after translating the Book of Mormon and receiving his earliest revelations because a correct view will inform our understanding of his evolving role as a seer and revelator and may help shed light on other issues related to the translation of the Book of Abraham.

For example, the Prophet’s use of a seer stone in the production of the Book of Abraham would seem to problematize the theory that he was reliant on the Egyptian-language papers, such as the “Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language” manuscript, in his production of the text.[122] After all, what need would there have been for the Prophet to first draft an elaborate, confusing “grammar and alphabet” in order to translate the Book of Abraham when a seer stone would suffice? If the Prophet could use a seer stone to reveal an English translation of an ancient source text in the cases of the Book of Mormon (the gold plates) and the writings of John (the apostle’s lost “parchment”)[123] without recourse to a grammar, why would he suddenly need to use such to generate a revealed translation of the writings of Abraham contained, ostensibly, on an ancient Egyptian papyrus? In fact, multiple sources reported that Joseph produced a translation of at least a portion of the papyri before he undertook an attempt to study the Egyptian language.[124] How might this relate to his use of the seer stone in the translation of the papyri, if at all? None of this necessarily precludes the possibility that Joseph used both the seer stone and the Egyptian-language documents in the translation of the Book of Abraham, but it does add further nuance to the matter and compels us to be tentative both in how we understand the translation of the Book of Abraham and in how we present it in a classroom setting.

Additionally, if Joseph Smith received the text of the Book of Abraham, or at least portions of it, through the seer stone, does that make the text something more like the “translation” of the parchment of John described in Doctrine and Covenants 7? If so, then how might that affect our understanding of the source of the English text of the Book of Abraham, which on at least one occasion the Prophet himself called a “revelation”?[125] These sorts of questions, naturally, oblige us to be more cautious in how we frame Joseph’s role as the translator or revealer of the Book of Abraham, to say nothing of how we understand the nature of the translation itself. They also frustrate simplistic attempts to reductively depict Joseph Smith as only a “conventional” translator in the mundane sense, as some have tried to do.[126]

These are questions and issues that deserve to be explored more fully. I raise them here merely to demonstrate the number of different directions one might take this line of thinking and why I believe asking these questions is important. Suffice it to say that the portrait that emerges from the present investigation pertaining to the translation of the Book of Abraham reinforces the point about the uniqueness of the Prophet’s method of “translation.”[127] This, in turn, invites us to explore that method more carefully and ponder how we appreciate and teach Restoration scripture—including the remarkable and inexhaustible Book of Abraham.

Appendix: Sources Pertaining to Joseph Smith’s Potential Use of a Seer Stone in Translating the Book of Abraham

“Another Humbug,” Cleveland Whig 1, no. 49 (August 5, 1835): 1.

Another Humbug.—We are credibly informed that the Mormons have purchased of Mr. Chandler, three of the mummies, which he recently exhibited in this village; and that the prophet Joe has ascertained, by examining the papyrus through his spectacles, that they are the bodies of Joseph (the son of Abraham,) and King Abimeleck, and his daughter. With this shallow and contemptible story, Williams has commenced travelling about the country, and will no doubt gull multitudes into a belief of its truth. Surely one half of the world are fools.

Warren Parrish, letter to the editor of the Painesville Republican, February 5, 1838, in “Mormonism,” Painesville Republican 2, nos. 14–15 (February 15, 1838): [3].

Sir:— I have the liberty to send you a synopsis of some of the leading features of the characters of Joseph Smith, Jr., and Sidney Rigdon, who are styled leaders of the Mormon Church, and if you are disposed, and think it would be of service to the public, you are ate liberty to publish it. I have for several years past been a member of the Church of latter day Saints, commonly called Mormons, belonging to the quorum of seventy High Priests, and an intimate acquaintance of Joseph Smith, Jr., and Sidney Rigdon, the modern Prophets, and have had an opportunity to ascertaining to as great an extent, perhaps the real characters of these men, as any other individual. I have been Smith’s private Secretary, called to fill this high and responsible station by revelation which I wrote myself as it dropped from the lips of the Prophet, and although contrary to my natural inclinations, I submitted to it, fearing to disobey or treat lightly the commands of the Almighty. I have kept his Journal, and like Barak the ancient scribe, had the honor of writing the History of one of the Prophets.— . . . I have set by his side and penned down the translation of the Egyptian Hieroglyphics as he claimed to receive it by direct inspiration from Heaven.

“John Whitmer, History, 1831–circa 1847,” p. 76, www.josephsmithpapers.org.

About the first of July 1835 there came a man having four Egyptian Mummies exhibiting them for curiosities, which was a wonder indeed! having also some r[e]cords connected with them which were found deposited with the Mummies, but there being no one skilled in the Egyptian language therefore could not translate the record, after this [e]xhibition Joseph the Seer saw these Record[s] and by the revelation of Jesus Christ could translate these records, which gavee an account of our forefathers, even Abraham Much of which was written by Joseph of Egypt who was sold by his brethren. Which when all translated will be a pleasing history and of great value to the saints.

Wilford Woodruff, Journal, February 19, 1842, [133–34], www.wilfordwoodruffpapers.org.

19^th This was a busy day in each department of business it being tithing day for the temple their was much business done at the store property brought in &c. We sent about two bushels of the Times & Seasons to the post office to send to our patrons I received 3 papers from Mr Ezra Carter ^jr which contained much intelligence of various kinds

It is truly interesting edifying & glorious to contemplate the great & mighty work which God has set his hand to esstablish in these last days by revealing the fullness of the everlasting gospel as recorded in the Book of mormon & esstablishing his church & kingdom as at the beginning which is according to the order of heaven with seers prophets, Apostles, Elders Priests, Bishops, Teachers, Revelation, Administering of Angels gifts, graces, Knowledge, wisdom, healings &c. &c. Truly the Lord has raised up Joseph the seer of the seed of Abraham out of the loins of ancient Joseph, & is now clothing him with mighty power & wisdom & knowledge which is more clearly manifest & felt in the midst of his intimate friends than any other class of mankind. The Lord is Blessing Joseph with Power to reveal the mysteries of the kingdom of God; to translate through the Urim & Thummim Ancient records & Hyeroglyphics as old as Abraham or Adam, which causes our hearts to burn within us while we behold their glorious truths opened unto us. Joseph the Seer has presented us some of the Book of Abraham which was written by his own hand but hid from the knowledge of man for the last four thousand years but has now come to light through the mercy of God. Joseph has had these records in his possession for several years but has never presented them before the world in the english language untill now. But he is now about to publish it to the world or parts of it by publishing it in the Times & Seasons, for Joseph the Seer is now the Editor of that paper & Elder Taylor assists him in writing while it has fallen to my lot to take charge of the Business part of the esstablishment. I have had the privilege this day of assisting in setting the TIPE for printing the first peace of the BOOK OF ABRAHAM that is to be presented to the inhabitants of the EARTH in the LAST DAYS

Parley P. Pratt, “Editorial Remarks,” Millennial Star 3, no. 3 (July 1842): 46–47.

We have much pleasure this month in being able to give an illustration and extract from the Book of Abraham; a book of higher antiquity than any portion of the bible. Singular is the providence by which this ancient record fell into the hands of the servant of the Lord, Joseph Smith. A gentleman, travelling in Egypt, made a selection of several mummies, of the best kind of embalming, and of course in the best state of preservation; on his way to England he died, bequeathing them to a gentleman of the name of Chandler. They arrived in the Thames, but it was found the gentleman was in America, they were then forwarded to New York and advertised, when Mr. Chandler came forward and claimed them. One of the mummies, on being unrolled, had underneath the cloths in which it was wrapped, lying upon the breast, a roll of papyrus, in an excellent state of preservation, written in Egyptian character, and illustrated in the manner of our engraving, which is a copy of a portion of it. The mummies, together with the record, have been exhibited, generally, through the States, previous to their falling into our hands. Mr. Chandler was, of course, anxious to find some one who could interpret or translate this valuable relic of antiquity, and, we believe, on one occasion, met with an individual who was enabled to decipher a small portion, or, at least, to give an opinion of what he supposed its meaning to be. He every where heard mention of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon, but so generally associated with something slanderous, that he could scarcely think seriously of applying to him. But at length, however, he called upon Mr. Smith, to inquire if he could translate the ancient Egyptian. Mr. Smith retired into his translating room, and presently returned with a written translation in English, of the fragment, confirming the supposed meaning ascribed to it by the gentleman to whom it had been previously presented. An event, of a nature so extraordinary, was of course soon noised abroad, when a number of gentlemen in the neighbourhood, not connected with the Saints, united together, and, purchasing the record together with some or all of the mummies, made Mr. Smith a present of them. The record is now in course of translation by means of the Urim and Thummim, and proves to be a record written partly by the father of the faithful, Abraham, and finished by Joseph when in Egypt. After his death, it is supposed they were preserved in the family of the Pharaohs and afterwards hid up with the embalmed body of the female with whom they were found. Thus it is, indeed, true, that the ways of the Lord are not as man’s ways, nor his thoughts as our thoughts.

M., “Correspondence of the Friends’ Weekly Intelligencer,” Friends’ Weekly Intelligencer 3, no. 27 (October 3, 1846): 211.

After we had obtained all the information we could at the Temple, we visited the Mother of the Prophet, (a respectable looking old lady) who has four Mummies for exhibition, who (she says) were a King and Queen, and their Son and Daughter, and gives the names of each. She produced a black looking roll (which she told us was papyrus) found upon the breast of the King, part of which the Prophet had unrolled and read; and she had pasted the deciphered sheets on the leaves of a book which she showed us. The roll was as dark as the bones of the Mummies, and bore very much the same appearance; but the opened sheets were exceedingly like thin parchment, and of quite a light color. There were birds, fishes, and fantastic looking people, interspersed amidst hyeroglyphics; but the old lady explained the meaning of them all, as Joseph had interpreted them to her.

The stories appeared to be more particular accounts than our Bible gives us, of Noah, the Ark and the flood—of Abraham and Melchizedec—of Joseph and Pharaoh—and of various other distinguished characters. She said, that when Joseph was reading the papyrus, he closed his eyes, and held a hat over his face, and that the revelation came to him; and that where the papyrus was torn, he could read the parts that were destroyed equally as well as those that were there; and that scribes sat by him writing, as he expounded. She showed us a large book where these things were printed, which of course sealed their truth to Mormon eyes and minds; but we had not time to read them.

“Correspondence of Judge Appleby,” The Mormon 2, no. 38 (November 8, 1856): [2]–[3].

Dear Sir,—. . . Here permit me to give a brief history of the translation of the Bible, the compilations, &c.

The Scriptures at first were pure and plain, written in Hebrew, on parchment, as the several Seers, Patriarchs, and Prophets received them from the Almighty; but it was a great elapse of time before any portion of them were compiled. They were handed down from the Fathers from the beginning to Abraham, he being a lawful heir to the Priesthood and promises, “the Record fell into his hands,” containing an account of the Planet Kolob, the Celestial Residence, the Organization of Intelligences, Election of Great and Noble Spirits in the Eternal Worlds for God’s Rulers on the Earth, Fall of Lucifer, and the spirits “which kept not their first estate,” Organization of this Globe, Fall of Adam, Plan of Salvation, Promise of the Only Begotten, Order of the Priesthood, Celestial Astronomy, History of Enoch, Noah, and the Flood, the first settlement of the land of Egypt, Cause of idolatry, Canaanites, &c., &c.

After which it appears the “Records” were taken by the Jews into Egypt, and when they were led out by Moses, they carried what Scriptures they had along with them, and retained them (together with others they received) and carried them to Babylon in their captivity. . . .

[Appleby discusses the transmission of the Bible and various translations made thereof from antiquity to the middle of the nineteenth century.]

. . . Surely the day has come, as Paul said: “when the people would not endure sound doctrine, but heap to themselves teachers having itching ears; and they should turn their ears from the truth unto fables;” “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” But thanks and praise be given to Him who rules on high and sways the destinies of men; He has spoken from the heavens in these days, raised up a Prophet, Seer and Revelator, who has by commandment and the aid of the Urim and Thummim, and the power of inspiration, translated and brought back and restored “the most plain and precious things” that have been taken away by uninspired men, under the authority of a corrupt and apostate church, so that the Saints of Latter Days know, understand and comprehend truth from error, and the inspiration of the Almighty from the wisdom of men. W. I. Appleby.

“‘The Book of Abraham’ [from ‘The Rocky Mountain Saints.’],” Salt Lake Tribune, February 7, 1873, [2].

In the early days of the Church, and even at the present time, there are thousands who believe in the infallibility of Joseph Smith as a translator of the dead languages through divine agency, and the miraculous Urim and Thummim, by the aid of which it is alleged he translated the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham. In fact the whole superstructure of Mormonism rests upon this assumption. If, then, his translation of the papyri is proved by scientific men versed in the translation of hieroglyphics to be the veriest nonsense, then all faith based on this gift receives such a crushing blow that the founder of Mormonism falls from the lofty height and sacred niche which modern prophets and inspired translators always hew for themselves, to the humiliating level of men whose chief characteristics are ignorance and fanaticism.

“Discourse by Elder Orson Pratt,” Deseret News 27, no. 40 (November 6, 1878): 626.

The Lord brought to light sacred records from the Catacombs of Egypt. After several hundred men had wrought and toiled for many months in digging down one of these vast structures, they entered into its interior; they found a great number of mummies—the bodies of persons that had been preserved since the catacomb was built, and some eleven of these mummies, well preserved, were taken out by these men, and they finally fell into the hands of a person named M. H. Chandler. They were sent from Egypt to Ireland, where it was supposed he resided, but learning that he resided in America, they were sent to him. After receiving the mummies he began to take off some of the ancient covering or wrapping, and to his astonishment he found upon the breast of one of these mummies a record written upon ancient papyrus in plain characters, written both in black and red inks, or stains, or colors. And the mummies and the records were exhibited by Mr. Chandler in New York, Philadelphia, and many of the eastern states of our Union; and thousands of people saw them, and among them many learned men; and these characters were presented to them, and not unfrequently was Mr. Chandler referred to “Joe” Smith, as they used to term him, who they said, pretended to have translated some records that he found in the western part of New York, and that if Mr. Chandler would go and see him perhaps he would translate those ancient characters. Many of these references were made with the intention of ridiculing Mr. Smith; but it so happened that in traveling through the country, he visited Kirtland, Ohio, where the Prophet Joseph Smith resided, bringing the mummies and the ancient papyrus writings with him. Mr. C. had also obtained from learned men the best translation he could of some few characters, which however, was not a translation, but more in the shape of their ideas with regard [t]o it, their acquaintance with the language not being sufficient to enable them to translate it literally. After some conversation with the Prophet Joseph, Mr. Chandler presented to him the ancient characters, asking him if he could translate them. The prophet took them and repaired to his room and inquired of the Lord concerning them. The Lord told him they were sacred records, containing the inspired writings of Abraham when he was in Egypt, and also those of Joseph, while he was in Egypt; and they had been deposited, with these mummies, which had been exhumed. And he also enquired of the Lord concerning some few characters which Mr. Chandler gave him by way of a test, to see if he could translate them. The Prophet Joseph translated these characters and returned them, with the translation to Mr. Chandler; and who, in comparing it with the translation of the same few characters by learned men, that he had before obtained, found the two to agree. The prophet Joseph having learned the value of these ancient writings was very anxious to obtain them, and expressed himself wishful to purchase them. But Mr. Chandler told him that he would not sell the writings unless he could sell the mummies, for it would detract from the curiosity of his exhibition. Mr. Smith inquired of him the price, which was a considerable sum, and finally purchased the mummies and the writings, all of which he retained in his possession for many years; and they were seen by all the Church that saw proper to visit the house of the Prophet Joseph, and also by hundreds of strangers.

The prophet translated the part of these writings which, as I have said, are contained in the Pearl of Great Price, and known as the Book of Abraham. Thus you see one of the first gifts bestowed by the Lord for the benefit of his people, was that of revelation—the gift to translate, by the aid of the Urim and Thummim, the gift of bringing to light old and ancient records. . . . Here then the very first gift that the Lord set in his church, is a peculiar gift so far as the religions of the world are concerned, not peculiar so far as the Church of Christ is concerned, but so far as the religious world in the four quarters of the earth is concerned, we have something which they have not got, and something that is in accordance with the Bible. What man, I would ask further, among all the religions of the earth, for the last seventeen centuries, that has possessed the Urim and Thummim, the gift that would constitute him a seer and a revelator?

Howard Coray letter, Sanford Colorado, to Martha Jane Lewis, August 2, 1889, MS 304, Church History Library.

Dear daughter Martha,

Yours having date Jun 2./89 came duly to hand; and I would have answered you at once if I could have taken the time necessary to treat upon all your questions and queries in a manner satisfactorily to myself as well as profitable to you but I could not consistently do so. . . .

I have studied the Gospel as revealed by Joseph Smith and wondered if it were possible for any one unaided by the spirit of God to have revealed such a system of salvation and exaltation for man. My conclusion is that in the negative. I sat and listened to his preaching at the stand in Nauvoo, a great many times when I have been completely carried away with his indescribable eloquence—power of expression—speaking as I have never heard any other man speak—I have heard him prophesy many things that have already come to pass, I have seen him translate by the Seer’s stones[.] I have been <was> present when he received a revelation on priesthood; he blessed me and prophesied that on my head, which has been literally fulfilled; and I have seen him by the aid of the Spirit of the Lord, as a prophet raised up to usher in the dispensation of the fullness of times; besides <this, the> work and the workings of it, have been made manifest to me by the good spirit.

Notes

[1] Robin Scott Jensen and Brian M. Hauglid, eds., Revelations and Translations, Volume 4: Book of Abraham and Related Manuscripts, facsimile ed., vol. 4 of the Revelations and Translations series of The Joseph Smith Papers, ed. Ronald K. Esplin, Matthew J. Grow, Matthew C. Godfrey, and R. Eric Smith (Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2018), xxiii (hereafter JSP, RT4).

[2] “Almost every aspect of these documents is disputed: their authorship, their date, their purpose, their relationship with the Book of Abraham, their relationship with the Joseph Smith Papyri, their relationship with each other, what the documents are or were intended to be, and even whether the documents form a discrete or coherent group. With so many questionable or problematic facets of the documents in dispute, theories about the Book of Abraham built on this material run the risk of following a potentially incorrect assumption to its logically flawed conclusion. The only things about the manuscripts that are not disputed are their provenance and (with one exception) the handwriting of the document. Yet, while the handwriting of the document is not disputed, whether the individual writing the document was serving as author or scribe is.” John Gee, An Introduction to the Book of Abraham (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2017), 33.

[3] See, e.g., the entries dated November 19–20, 24–25, 1835, in “Journal, 1835–1836,” pp. 47, 49–50; “History, 1838–1856, volume B-1 [1 September 1834–2 November 1838],” pp. 596–97; “Editorial, circa 1 March 1842, Draft,” pp. [1]–[2]; and “The Book of Abraham,” Times and Seasons 3, no. 9 (March 1, 1842): 704 (accessible under the title “Book of Abraham and Facsimilies, 1 March–16 May 1842”). All these documents are found on the Joseph Smith Papers (JSP) website, www.josephsmithpapers.org.

[4] Jensen and Hauglid, JSP, RT4:xxii.

[5] Joseph Smith’s study of Hebrew under the tutelage of Joshua Seixas between January and March 1836 was undertaken in a conventional manner with the aid of a grammar book and lexicon. See generally Matthew J. Grey, “‘The Word of the Lord in the Original’: Joseph Smith’s Study of Hebrew in Kirtland,” in Approaching Antiquity: Joseph Smith and the Ancient World, ed. Lincoln H. Blumell, Matthew J. Grey, and Andrew H. Hedges (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2015), 249–302. In multiple entries in his journal during this time, Joseph spoke of “studying,” “reading,” “learning,” and “translating” the language in a series of “lectures” or “lessons” delivered by Seixas. (See, e.g., the entries dated January 26, 29, February 1, 3, 5, 9–13, 15, 21–23, 26–28, and March 10, 16, 24–25, 29, 1836, in “Journal, 1835–1836,” pp. 142–85. This is not to deny that even when learning how to read and translate languages in the conventional manner the Prophet totally compartmentalized this effort with his revelatory sensitivities. On January 19, 1836, for instance, Joseph recorded in his journal, “[S]pent the day at school, the Lord blessed us in our studies,— this day we commenced reading in our hebrew bibles with much success, it seems as if the Lord opens our minds, in a marvelous manner to understand this word in the original language, and my prayer is that God will speedily indue us with a knowledge of all languages and toungs, that his servants may go forth for the last time, to bind up the law and seal up the testimony.” “Journal, 1835–1836,” p. 131.

[6] This appears to be what Joseph Smith meant in his September 1842 letter where he said he would have “rendered a plainer translation” of Malachi 4:5–6 in his doctrinal exposition of these verses (compare Doctrine and Covenants 128:18). See “Letter to the Church, 7 September 1842 [D&C 128],” p. 6, www.josephsmithpapers.org.

[7] In what is now the eighth article of faith, Joseph Smith affirmed that Latter-day Saints believe the Bible “to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.” “Church History,” Times and Seasons 3, no. 9 (March 1, 1842): 709; see under “‘Church History,’ 1 March 1842,” p. 709, www.josephsmithpapers.org. This usage of translation must surely have been referring also to the transmission of the text besides its rendering into modern English. The Prophet clearly recognized that the biblical books did not escape some corruption over time, remarking in 1843, “I beli[e]ve the bible, as it ought to be, as it came from the pen of the original writers.” “Discourse, 15 October 1843, as Reported by Willard Richards,” p. [129], www.josephsmithpapers.org. This entry was expanded in Joseph Smith’s manuscript history to read, “I believe the bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers; ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors” (emphasis added; see “History, 1838–1856, volume E-1 [1 July 1843–30 April 1844],” p. 1755, www.josephsmithpapers.org), indicating at a minimum how Joseph Smith and his close associates understood his intent behind the Bible translation project.

[8] Such was the case of the lost “parchment of John,” now canonized as section 7 of the Doctrine and Covenants. See the excellent discussion in David W. Grua and William V. Smith, “The Tarrying of the Beloved Disciple: The Textual Formation of the Account of John,” in Producing Ancient Scripture: Joseph Smith’s Translation Projects in the Development of Mormon Christianity, ed. Michael Hubbard MacKay, Mark Ashurst-McGee, and Brian M. Hauglid (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2020), 231–61.

[9] In this essay I do not address the conundrum of the conflicting terminology Joseph Smith used to describe his translation instruments (“spectacles,” “Urim and Thummim,” “seer stone(s),” “interpreters,” etc.). I often use the terms Urim and Thummim and seer stone(s) synonymously. For perspective, see Roger Nicholson, “The Spectacles, the Stone, the Hat, and the Book: A Twenty-First Century Believer’s View of the Book of Mormon Translation,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 5 (2013): 121–90; Michael Hubbard MacKay and Nicholas J. Frederick, Joseph Smith’s Seer Stones (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2016), 45–65; and Don Bradley, The Lost 116 Pages: Reconstructing the Book of Mormon’s Missing Stories (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2019), 45–51.

[10] See C. C. A. Christensen, “Papyrusrulle Aabenbarelse. Abrahams Bog,” Bikuben, July 28, 1910, 1, 5.

[11] See Christensen, “Papyrusrulle Aabenbarelse,” 5.

[12] O. F. Ursenbach, Why I Am a “Mormon” (Salt Lake City: n.p., 1910), 129.

[13] Isaac Ball, “Joseph Smith, Translator of the Book of Abraham,” Young Woman’s Journal 22, no. 1 (January 1911): 41.

[14] See Franklin S. Spalding, Joseph Smith, Jr., as a Translator (Salt Lake City: Arrow Press, 1912).

[15] See Janne M. Sjodahl, “The Book of Abraham,” Improvement Era 16, no. 4 (February 1913): 326–27; and John Henry Evans, “Bishop Spalding’s Jumps in the Logical Process,” Improvement Era 16, no. 4 (February 1913): 344.

[16] “Het Honderdjarig Bezit van het Boek van Abraham in de Kerk,” De Ster 40, no. 13 (July 1935): 203.

[17] See Milton R. Hunter, “The Story of the Book of Abraham,” Deseret News, September 8, 1945, 2; September 15, 1945, 2, 9.

[18] Hunter, “Story of the Book of Abraham,” 9.

[19] See Clara Fullmer Bullock, “Life Story of Benjamin Bullock III,” August 1952, typescript, in author’s possession. Copies of this history can be accessed in H. Donl Peterson Collection, MSS 2019, box 3, folder 6, L. Tom Perry Special Collections, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT; and Isaac Bullock family papers (photocopies), 1854–1952, MS 0005, box 1, folder 1, Special Collections, J. Willard Marriott Library, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.

[20] Bullock, “Life Story of Benjamin Bullock III,” 3–4. Although Clara claims at the outset of her history that she learned the details of her account from members of the Bullock family, including from a written source preserved by the family, she also indicates that she was unable to locate a copy of this source, which she claimed to have first encountered some thirty-five years before she composed her account (1–2). This makes it difficult to fully assess the reliability of her account, including the detail that Joseph Smith used the Urim and Thummim at the beginning of the translation of the papyri.

[21] See Jay M. Todd, The Saga of the Book of Abraham (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1969), 175–76, 220–23, 263, 325.

[22] See Jack E. Jarrard, “Rare Papyri Presented to Church,” Deseret News, November 27, 1967, A-1, A-3; and “Church Receives Joseph Smith Papyri,” Church News, December 2, 1967, 7–10.

[23] Todd, Saga of the Book of Abraham, 221; emphasis added.

[24] See Hugh Nibley, “A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price: Part I. Challenge and Response (Continued),” Improvement Era 71, no. 3 (March 1968): 17; compare Hugh Nibley, An Approach to the Book of Abraham (Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2009), 72.

[25] See Hugh Nibley, The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri: An Egyptian Endowment (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1975), 49–52 (51–62 in the 2005 edition published by FARMS and Deseret Book).

[26] H. Donl Peterson, The Story of the Book of Abraham: Mummies, Manuscripts, and Mormonism (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1995), 161–63, esp. 161.

[27] In the July 1988 Ensign, Rhodes questioned if the translation of the Book of Abraham was comparable to that of the Book of Mormon or the parchment of John (Doctrine and Covenants 7), writing: “We can envision a possible similar process taking place in Joseph Smith’s translation of the papyri he got from Michael Chandler. Instead of making a literal translation, as scholars would use the term, he used the Urim and Thummim as a means of receiving revelation. Even though a copy of Abraham’s record possibly passed through the hands of many scribes and had become editorially corrupted to the point where it may have had little resemblance to the original, the Prophet—with the Urim and Thummim, or simply through revelation—could have obtained the translation—or, as Joseph Smith used the word, he could have received the meaning, or subject-matter content of the original text, as he did in his translation of the Bible. This explanation would mean that Joseph Smith received the text of our present book of Abraham the same way he received the translation of the parchment of John the Revelator—he did not even need the actual text in front of him.” Michael D. Rhodes, “I Have a Question,” Ensign, July 1988, 52. Four years later, Rhodes again brought up the issue of the Prophet’s use of the seer stone in the translation: “A major question about [the Book of Abraham’s] authenticity continues to revolve around whether Joseph Smith translated the work from the papyrus fragments the Church now has in its possession or whether he used the Urim and Thummim to receive the text of the book of Abraham by revelation, as is the case with the translation of the scroll of John the Revelator, found in Doctrine and Covenants section 7, or the Book of Moses, which is excerpted from the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible and is also found in the Pearl of Great Price.” “Studies about the Book of Abraham,” in Encyclopedia of Mormonism, ed. Daniel H. Ludlow (New York: Macmillan, 1992), 1:138.

[28] Richard Van Wagoner, “Joseph Smith: ‘The Gift of Seeing,’” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 15, no. 2 (Summer 1982): 59–61 (Van Wagoner was illustrating his point that there was no terminological consistency among early Latter-day Saints in describing the Nephite “interpreters” found with the gold plates as opposed to Joseph’s personal seer stone[s]). Contrast Van Wagoner’s verdict with that offered by Milan D. Smith, Jr., “‘That Is the Handwriting of Abraham,’” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 23, no. 4 (Winter 1990): 168.

[29] Instead, the manual merely stated, “Joseph Smith did not explain the method of translating the book of Abraham, just as he did not explain fully how the Book of Mormon was translated. Nevertheless, like the Book of Mormon, the book of Abraham is its own evidence that it came about through the gift and power of God.” Church History in the Fulness of Times: The History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2nd ed. (Salt Lake City: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2003), 257–58, esp. 258.

[30] MacKay and Frederick, Joseph Smith’s Seer Stones, 127–29, esp. 127.

[31] See D. Michael Quinn, Early Mormonism and the Magic World View, rev. ed. (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1998), 244; Grey, “‘Word of the Lord in the Original,’” 260; Mark J. Johnson, “Scriptures with Pictures: Methodology, Unexamined Assumptions, and the Study of the Book of Abraham,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 25 (2017): 17–20; and Kerry M. Muhlestein, “Book of Abraham, Translation of,” in Pearl of Great Price Reference Companion, ed. Dennis L. Largey (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2017), 68. See also the conclusion reached by Samuel Morris Brown in In Heaven as It Is on Earth: Joseph Smith and the Early Mormon Conquest of Death (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 136–37.

[32] See John Gee, “A History of the Joseph Smith Papyri and Book of Abraham” (lecture transcript, FARMS Book of Abraham Lecture Series, March 3, 1999), 11; Gee, A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2000), 4; Gee, An Introduction to the Book of Abraham (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2017), 15, 20–21; and Grant Hardy, “The Book of Mormon Translation,” BYU Studies Quarterly 60, no. 3 (2021): 211. Richard Bushman, in “Joseph Smith as Translator,” in Believing History: Latter-day Saint Essays, ed. Reid L. Neilson and Jed Woodworth (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004), 243, also appears to reject the use of the Urim and Thummim or seer stone in the translation of the Book of Abraham.

[33] Jensen and Hauglid, JSP, RT4:xxiv.

[34] Terryl Givens, The Pearl of Greatest Price: Mormonism’s Most Controversial Scripture (New York: Oxford University Press, 2019), 170, 173, esp. 173.

[35] Interestingly, at least two non–Latter-day Saint scholars have weighed in on this issue. In 1980 Helmut Obst categorically declared, without citing evidence, that Joseph Smith used his “prophet glasses” (Prophetenbrille) to translate the Egyptian papyri. Apostel und Propheten der Neuzeit: Gründer chrislitcher Religionsgemeinschaften des 19./20. Jahrhunderts (Berlin: Union Verlag, 1980), 181. More recently, Lester L. Grabbe has followed D. Michael Quinn in affirming the use of a seer stone in the translation of the Book of Abraham. See Lester L. Grabbe, “Prophecy—Joseph Smith and the Gestalt of the Israelite Prophet,” in Ancient Israel: The Old Testament in Its Social Context, ed. Philip F. Esler (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2006), 123. In a survey of the secondary literature, a general pattern appears to emerge: those authors who at least offer some form of evidence from primary source documents appear more hesitant to make certain pronouncements than those authors who offer no evidence or rely on secondary literature.

[36] See “History, 1838–1856, volume B-1 [1 September 1834–2 November 1838],” pp. 595–96; compare William W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, Kirtland, Ohio, July 20, 1835, in Journal History of the Church, CR 100 137, Church History Library, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City, UT (hereafter CHL).

[37] “Another Humbug,” Cleveland Whig 1, no. 49 (August 5, 1835): 1.

[38] See, e.g., Jonathan A. Hadley, “Golden Bible,” Palmyra Freeman, August 11, 1829; compare Rochester Advertiser and Daily Telegraph, August 31, 1829, cited in Larry E. Morris, A Documentary History of the Book of Mormon (New York: Oxford University Press, 2019), 237–38; The Gem (Rochester, NY), September 5, 1829, 70; Diedrich Willers to Rev. L. Mayer and D. Young, June 18, 1830, cited in Morris, Documentary History of the Book of Mormon, 403–5; “History, circa Summer 1832,” p. 5, www.josephsmithpapers.org; Charles Anthon to E. D. Howe, February 17, 1834, cited in E. D. Howe, Mormonism Unvailed (Painesville, OH: E. D. Howe, 1834), 270; and William W. Phelps to Oliver Cowdery, December 25, 1834, published as “Letter No. 4,” Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate 1, no. 5 (February 1835): 65.

[39] In addition to the sources cited above, see The Reflector, 3rd series, no. 14 (August 28, 1830): 108; Alexander Campbell, “Delusions,” Millennial Harbinger 2, no. 2 (February 7, 1831): 90; and Thomas Hamilton, Men and Manners in America (New York: Russell & Russell, 1833), 364.

[40] See MacKay and Frederick, Joseph Smith’s Seer Stones, 127.

[41] In addition to being the scribe for the “Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language” documents (if not also their author), Phelps, according to an entry dated October 1, 1835, in the Prophet’s journal, “labored on the Egyptian alphabet” alongside Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery on that day (“Journal, 1835–1836,” p. 3). Phelps also scribed the opening lines (Abraham 1:1–3) of what the Joseph Smith Papers designates “Book of Abraham Manuscript—C.” See “Book of Abraham Manuscript, circa July–circa November 1835–C [Abraham 1:1–2:18],” p. 1, www.josephsmithpapers.org; and “Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language, circa July–circa November 1835,” pp. 1–34, www.josephsmithpapers.org.

[42] See “Williams, Frederick Granger” (biographical entry), www.josephsmithpapers.org.

[43] See “Book of Abraham Manuscript, circa July–circa November 1835–A [Abraham 1:4–2:6],” pp. 1–4, www.josephsmithpapers.org.

[44] Lucy E. Godfrey, “Biographical Sketch of Rebecca Swain Williams, Wife of Dr. Frederick Granger Williams and Mother of Dr. Ezra Granger Williams,” in Utah Pioneer Biographies (Salt Lake City: n.p., 1935), 1:110. My thanks to Kerry Muhlestein for alerting me to this source.

[45] Truman Coe, letter to the editor of the Ohio Observer, in “Mormonism,” Cincinnati Journal and Western Luminary, August 25, 1836, [4].

[46] Oliver Cowdery to William Frye, December 22, 1835, reprinted in Cowdery, “Egyptian Mummies,” Messenger and Advocate 2, no. 3 (December 1835): 233–34.

[47] “Blessing to Newel K. Whitney, 7 October 1835,” pp. 6–7, www.josephsmithpapers.org. When this blessing was copied into Patriarchal Blessing Book 1, it was prefaced by scribe Oliver Cowdery thus: “The following blessing was given by president Joseph Smith, Jr. through the Urim and Thummim, according to the spirit of prophecy and revelation, on Wednesday, the 7th of October, 1835, and written by president Frederick G. Williams, who acted as Clerk.” H. Michael Marquardt, ed., Early Patriarchal Blessings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2007), 69.

[48] Parrish scribed the Kirtland-era Book of Abraham manuscripts today designated “Book of Abraham—B” and the remainder of Book of Abraham—C (the first few lines were scribed by William Phelps). See “Book of Abraham Manuscript, circa July–circa November 1835–B [Abraham 1:4–2:2],” pp. 1–6; and “Book of Abraham Manuscript, circa July–circa November 1835–C [Abraham 1:1–2:18],” pp. 1–10, www.josephsmithpapers.org.

[49] See “Parrish, Warren Farr” (biographical entry), www.josephsmithpapers.org.

[50] Warren Parrish, letter to the editor, Painesville Republican 2, nos. 14–15 (February 15, 1838): [3]; reprinted as “Mormonism,” Sunbury American 1, no. 26 (March 20, 1841): [1].

[51] Parrish had already begun clerking for Joseph Smith on October 29, 1835. See “Journal, 1835–1836,” p. 10. The revelation calling Parrish to assist the Prophet specifically in the work of translation as a scribe reads in full: “verily thus saith the the Lord unto my servant Joseph concerning my servant Warren [Parrish], behold his sins are forgiven him because of his desires to do the works of righteousness therefore in as much as he will continue to hearken unto my voice he shall be blessed with wisdom and with a sound mind even above his fellows, behold it shall come to pass in his day that he shall <see> great things shew forth themselves unto my people, he shall see much of my ancient records, and shall know of hid[d]en things, and shall be endowed with a knowledge of hid[d]en languages, and if he desires and shall seek it at my hand, he shall be privileged with writing much of my word, as a scribe unto me for the benefit of my people, therefore this shall be his calling until I shall order it otherwise in my wisdom and it shall be said of him in a time to come, behold Warren the Lords Scribe, for the Lords Seer whom he hath appointed in Israel; Therefore <if he will> keep my commandments he shall be lifted up at the last day, even so Amen.” “Journal, 1835–1836,” p. 35.

[52] Parrish, letter to the editor.

[53] John S. Thompson, “‘We May Not Understand Our Words’: The Book of Abraham and the Concept of Translation in The Pearl of Greatest Price,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 41 (2020): 15.

[54] Oliver Cowdery to William W. Phelps, September 7, 1834, published as Cowdery, “Letter I,” Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate 1, no. 1 (October 1834): 14; emphasis in original. Thompson, “‘We May Not Understand Our Words,’” 15–16, also makes this point, noting the similarities in Cowdery’s and Parrish’s respective accounts and discussing the potential significance this holds for the nature of the Book of Abraham translation.

[55] Thompson, “‘We May Not Understand Our Words,’” 15.

[56] Johnson, “Scriptures with Pictures,” 18.

[57] See “Whitmer, John” (biographical entry), www.josephsmithpapers.org.

[58] For a historical overview and introduction to this history, see Karen Lynn Davidson, Richard L. Jensen, and David J. Whittaker, eds., Histories, Volume 2: Assigned Historical Writings, 1831–1847, vol. 2 of the Histories series of The Joseph Smith Papers, ed. Dean C. Jessee, Ronald K. Esplin, and Richard Lyman Bushman (Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2012), 5–12.

[59] “John Whitmer, History, 1831–circa 1847,” p. 76, www.josephsmithpapers.org.

[60] This detail was captured by multiple sources close to Joseph Smith and the translation of the Book of Mormon. Joseph Knight reported: “Now the way he translated was he put the urim and thummim into his hat and Darkned his Eyes then he would take a sentance and it 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. Thus was the hol [whole] translated.” Morris, Documentary History of the Book of Mormon, 79. Martin Harris likewise informed Edward Stevenson, “By aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin, and when finished he would say, ‘Written’ and if correctly written, that sentence would disappear and another appear in its place, but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used.” Morris, Documentary History of the Book of Mormon, 269. And David Whitmer famously recounted: “I will now give you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. 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 Oliver Cowdery, 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.” Morris, Documentary History of the Book of Mormon, 347.

[61] In his 1838–39 history, for instance, Joseph Smith reported what the angel had disclosed to him on the evening of September 21, 1823: “<the possession and use of these stones> that was what constituted seers in ancient or former times and that God <had> prepared them for the purpose of translating the book.” “History, 1838–1856, volume A-1 [23 December 1805–30 August 1834],” p. 5, www.josephsmithpapers.org; compare Joseph Smith—History 1:35. Compare also Mosiah 8:13–17 in “Printer’s Manuscript of the Book of Mormon, circa August 1829–circa January 1830,” pp. 172–73, www.josephsmithpapers.org, which stipulates that those who are designated “seers” are so called precisely because they see or look into special stones set aside for the purpose of translation and divination.

[62] Wilford Woodruff, Journal, February 19, 1842, [134], “Journal (January 1, 1841–December 31, 1842),” Wilford Woodruff Papers, www.wilfordwoodruffpapers.org. Compare the entries dated February 21–26, 1842, [135].

[63] Woodruff, Journal, February 19, 1842, [134], www.wilfordwoodruffpapers.org.

[64] On December 27, 1841, the Prophet assembled members of the Quorum of the Twelve, including Woodruff, and showed them his seer stone, which Woodruff called the Urim and Thummim. This was, he confided in his journal, the first time he had seen the stone personally. See Woodruff, Journal, December 27, 1841, [122], www.wilfordwoodruffpapers.org.

[65] Woodruff had previously seen the papyri and mummies while in Kirtland (see Woodruff, Journal, November 25, 1836, [113–14], wilfordwoodruffpapers.org), but he never described being actively involved in the translation of the Egyptian records either then or in 1842.

[66] See “A Fac-simile from the Book of Abraham. No. 1,” Millennial Star 3, no. 3 (July 1842): [33]; and “The Book of Abraham,” Millennial Star 3, no. 3 (July 1842): 34–36; no. 4 (August 1842): 49–53.

[67] Parley P. Pratt, “Notices,” Millennial Star 3, no. 2 (June 1842): 32.

[68] Parley P. Pratt, “Editorial Remarks,” Millennial Star 3, no. 3 (July 1842): 46–47.

[69] The republished text of the Book of Abraham in the July and August 1842 issues of the Millennial Star is based on the published version of the text from the March 1 and 15, 1842, issues of the Times and Seasons.

[70] See Pratt, “Editorial Remarks,” 46–47; compare “History, 1838–1856, volume B-1 [1 September 1834–2 November 1838],” pp. 595–96, www.josephsmithpapers.org.

[71] According to his posthumous autobiography, Pratt left for England on August 29, 1839. See The Autobiography of Parley Parker Pratt (Chicago: Law, King & Law, 1888), 325.

[72] See “Correspondence of the Friends’ Weekly Intelligencer,” Friends’ Weekly Intelligencer 3, no. 25 (September 19, 1846): 194–95; and “Correspondence of the Friends’ Weekly Intelligencer,” Friends’ Weekly Intelligencer 3, no. 27 (October 3, 1846): 211–12.

[73] “Correspondence of the Friends’ Weekly Intelligencer,” 211.

[74] See the sources and discussion in Michael Hubbard MacKay and Gerrit J. Dirkmaat, “Firsthand Witness Accounts of the Translation Process,” in The Coming Forth of the Book of Mormon: A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, ed. Dennis L. Largey et al. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2015), 61–79.

[75] David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ (Richmond, MO: David Whitmer, 1887), 12.

[76] See note 61 herein.

[77] See, e.g., Charlotte Haven’s letter from March 5, 1843, in “A Girl’s Letters from Nauvoo,” Overland Monthly 16, no. 96 (December 1890): 623–24; H. A. Graves, “Nauvoo and Joseph Smith,” Christian Reflector 6, no. 35 (August 30, 1843): 138; “The Mormons,” Buffalo Daily Courier and Economist 3, no. 722 (June 15, 1844), 1; Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs, Diary, 1844 June–1845 September, August 9–10, 1844, Zina D. H. Young diaries, 1844–1845, 1886, 1889, MS 6240, CHL; W. Aitken, A Journey Up the Mississippi River, from Its Mouth to Nauvoo, the City of the Latter-Day Saints (Ashton-under-Lyne, England: John Williamson, 1845), 35; and Henry Ashbury, Reminiscences of Quincy, Illinois (Quincy, IL: D. Wilcox & Sons, 1882), 153.

[78] See, e.g., Haven’s letter from March 5, 1843, in “Girl’s Letters from Nauvoo,” 623–24; Extract of a Letter Written by LaFayette Knight, Undated, December 21, 1843, MS 2362, CHL; “The Mormons,” Buffalo Daily Courier 17, no. 3549 (October 19, 1852); and Eudocia Baldwin Marsh, “Mormons in Hancock County: A Reminiscence,” ed. Douglas L. Wilson and Rodney O. Davis, Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society 64, no. 1 (Spring 1971): 38.

[79] See William West, A Few Interesting Facts Respecting the Rise and Progress and Pretensions of the Mormons (n.p., 1837), 5–6; and Frederic G. Mather, “Early Days of Mormonism,” Lippincott’s Magazine 26, no. 152 (August 1880): 211.

[80] West, A Few Interesting Facts, 5.

[81] Mather, “Early Days of Mormonism,” 211.

[82] See, e.g., Rambler (pseudonym), “The Mormons—A Visit to Nauvoo—Joe Smith’s Preaching—A Personal Confab—Anecdotes, &c.,” New-York Tribune 147 (September 29, 1841): 1; Henry Caswall, The City of the Mormons; or, Three Days at Nauvoo, in 1842 (London: J. G. F. & J. Rivington, 1842), 22–23, 26–28; “P.,” letter to the Albany Evening Atlas, August 26, 1845, in “Atlas Correspondence,” Albany Evening Atlas 4, no. 1539 (September 9, 1845): [2]; and F. J., “Visit to Nauvoo,” Ladies’ Magazine and Album 10–11 (June 1848): 134–35.

[83] See “Correspondence of the Friends’ Weekly Intelligencer,” 195.

[84] See “Appleby, William Ivins” (biographical entry), www.josephsmithpapers.org.

[85] See William I. Appleby, Autobiography and Journal, 1848–1856, preface, 2, MS 1401, CHL, which dates the commencement of this work’s composition to July 7, 1848, when he was writing from his native New Jersey (Recklesstown, now Chesterfield).

[86] The portion of Appleby’s 1848–1856 history describing his May 1841 visit with Joseph Smith was first published that same year as “Journal of a Mormon,” Christian Observer, September 10, 1841, 146.

[87] See Appleby’s May 5, 1841, reminiscence in Appleby, Autobiography and Journal, 71–73.

[88] See “Correspondence of Judge Appleby,” The Mormon 2, no. 38 (November 8, 1856): [2]–[3].

[89] See William I. Appleby, “Translations of the Bible,” Millennial Star 18, no. 51 (December 20, 1856): 803–4; and “Translations of the Bible,” Deseret News 6, no. 51 (February 25, 1857): 406.

[90] “Correspondence of Judge Appleby,” [2]; emphasis in original.

[91] “Correspondence of Judge Appleby,” [2]; emphasis in original.

[92] “Correspondence of Judge Appleby,” [3]; emphasis in original.

[93] Appleby, Autobiography and Journal, May 5, 1841, 73–75; compare Brian Hauglid, ed., A Textual History of the Book of Abraham (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, Brigham Young University, 2010), 201–9.

[94] See T. B. H. Stenhouse, The Rocky Mountain Saints: A Full and Complete History of the Mormons (New York: D. Appleton Company, 1873).

[95] “‘The Book of Abraham’ [from ‘The Rocky Mountain Saints.’],” Salt Lake Tribune, February 7, 1873, [2].

[96] See Stenhouse, Rocky Mountain Saints, 507–22.

[97] See Jules Rémy, Voyage au pays des Mormons, 2 vols. (Paris: E. Dentu, 1860); and Jules Rémy and Julius Brenchley, A Journey to Great-Salt-Lake City, 2 vols. (London: W. Jeffs, 1861).

[98] See Rémy, Voyage au pays des Mormons, 2:459–66; and Rémy and Brenchley, Journey to Great-Salt-Lake City, 2:536–46.

[99] See, e.g., Louis Alphonse Bertrand, Mémoires d’un Mormon (Paris: E. Dentu, 1862), 216–17.

[100] Stenhouse’s wife, Fanny, would herself publish an enormously popular anti-polygamy exposé: “Tell It All”: The Story of a Life’s Experience in Mormonism (Hartford, CT: A. D. Worthington & Co., 1875). On the Stenhouses and their effects on the public perception of the Latter-day Saints, see the discussion in Ronald W. Walker, “The Stenhouses and the Making of a Mormon Image,” Journal of Mormon History 1 (1974): 51–72. Only a few years after the publication of The Rocky Mountain Saints, George Reynolds would produce a series defending the Book of Abraham from Deveria’s critiques and upholding its inspiration. See George Reynolds, “The Book of Abraham—Its Genuineness Established,” which ran from January 6, 1879, to April 7, 1879, in the Millennial Star (41, nos. 1–14) and was republished as The Book of Abraham: Its Authenticity Established as a Divine and Ancient Record (Salt Lake City: Deseret News, 1879).

[101] See Walker, “Making of a Mormon Image,” 51–72; and Wayward Saints: The Godbeites and Brigham Young (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1998), 232–50.

[102] “‘The Book of Abraham’ [From ‘The Rocky Mountain Saints.’],” [2].

[103] “Après les révélations que nous venons de faire, si les Mormons persistent à croire que leur prophète ne savait pas mentir, ils conviendront, au moins, que la puissance divinatoire de l’Urim-Thummim n'est pas infaillible.” Remy, Voyage au pays des Mormons, 2:467. (“After the disclosures we have just made, if the Mormons persist in believing that their Prophet cannot lie, they will at least allow that the divining faculty of the Urim and Thummim is not infallible.” Rémy and Brenchley, Journey to Great-Salt-Lake City, 2:546.)

[104] See Stenhouse, Rocky Mountain Saints, 508, 551.

[105] See “Pratt, Orson” (biographical entry), www.josephsmithpapers.org; and Breck England, The Life and Thought of Orson Pratt (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1985).

[106] See “Discourse by Elder Orson Pratt,” Deseret News 27, no. 40 (November 6, 1878): 626–27; compare Orson Pratt, in Journal of Discourses (London: Latter-Day Saints’ Book Depot, 1880), 20:62–77.

[107] See The Pearl of Great Price: Being A Choice Selection from the Revelations, Translations and Narrations of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Latter-Day Saints’ Printing and Publishing Establishment, 1878).

[108] See “Discourse by Elder Orson Pratt,” 626; compare Orson Pratt, in Journal of Discourses, 20:64–65.

[109] “Discourse by Elder Orson Pratt,” 626; compare Orson Pratt, in Journal of Discourses, 20:65.

[110] See “Sermon,” The Deseret News 9, no. 20 (July 20, 1859): [1]–[2]; compare Orson Pratt, in Journal of Discourses, 7:176–90.

[111] “Sermon,” [1]; compare Orson Pratt, in Journal of Discourses, 7:176.

[112] “Journal, 1835–1836,” p. 4.

[113] See Orson Pratt, Journal, 1835 February–1837, October 1, 1835, [66], MS 587, CHL; and “History of Brigham Young,” Millennial Star 27, no. 6 (February 11, 1865): 87.

[114] It appears that two Apostles were missing from the October 3 viewing of the papyri and mummies—William E. McLellin and Brigham Young, who would be shown the same on December 16, 1835, after they “returned home” to Kirtland that month. “Journal, 1835–1836,” p. 69.

[115] Coray was baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ in March 1840. Less than a month later he began clerking for Joseph Smith. See Howard Coray reminiscences, 6–7, MS 8142, CHL; also found at Coray Family Papers, MSS 1422, box 1, folder 1, Perry Special Collections, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University.

[116] Howard Coray letter, Sanford Colorado, to Martha Jane Lewis, 1889 August 2, MS 3047, CHL.

[117] Coray to Lewis, 3.

[118] Coray to Lewis, 4.

[119] See Coray reminiscences, 15.

[120] See the definitive analysis in Don Bradley and Mark Ashurst-McGee, “‘President Joseph Has Translated a Portion’: Joseph Smith and the Mistranslation of the Kinderhook Plates,” in MacKay, Ashurst-McGee, and Hauglid, Producing Ancient Scripture, 452–523.

[121] MacKay and Frederick, Joseph Smith’s Seer Stones, 127.

[122] As recently argued, for instance, by Brian M. Hauglid in “‘Translating an Alphabet to the Book of Abraham’: Joseph Smith’s Study of the Egyptian Language and His Translation of the Book of Abraham,” in MacKay, Ashurst-McGee, and Hauglid, Producing Ancient Scripture, 363–89. Hauglid does not engage any of the evidence raised in the present study.

[123] See Grua and Smith, “Tarrying of the Beloved Disciple,” 231–61.

[124] See, e.g., “History, 1838–1856, volume B-1 [1 September 1834–2 November 1838],” pp. 595–96, www.josephsmithpapers.org; Cowdery, “Egyptian Mummies,” 235; Pratt, “Editorial Remarks,” 46–47; Richard Savary, “Mormonism Exposed!,” The Prophet 1, no. 3 (June 1, 1844): 1; “Discourse by Elder Orson Pratt,” 626; “Book of Mormon,” 64–65; and Edward Tullidge, “History of Provo,” Tullidge’s Quarterly Magazine 3, no. 3 (July 1884): 283.

[125] Joseph Smith, “Persecution of the Prophets,” Times and Seasons 3, no. 21 (September 1, 1842): 902.

[126] See, e.g., Dan Vogel, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2021), 204–13, and its review in Stephen O. Smoot, “Framing the Book of Abraham: Presumptions and Paradigms,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 47 (2021): 263–338, esp. 286–90.

[127] Hugh Nibley’s observation from 1975 is still highly relevant on this point: “The Prophet has saved us the trouble of faulting his method by announcing in no uncertain terms that it is a method unique to himself depending entirely on divine revelation. That places the whole thing beyond the reach of direct examination and criticism but leaves wide open the really effective means of testing any method, which is by the results it produces.” Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri, 63. See additionally the perspectives offered in Robert J. Matthews, “Joseph Smith—Translator,” in Joseph Smith: The Prophet, the Man, ed. Susan Easton Black and Charles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1993), 77–87; and Bushman, “Joseph Smith as Translator,” in Believing History, 233–47.