They were found, I judged, more than twelve feet below the surface of the top of the mound. I am, most respectfully, a citizen of Kinderhook, W. P. HARRIS, M. D.
We, the citizens of Kinderhook, whose names are annexed, do certify and declare that on the 23rd of April, 1843, while excavating a large mound in this vicinity, Mr. R. Wiley took from said mound six brass plates of a bell shape, covered with ancient characters. Said plates were very much oxydated. The bands and rings on said plates mouldered into dust on a slight pressure. ROBERT WILEY, W. LONGNECKER, GEO. DECKENSON, FAYETTE GRUBB, W. FUGATE, W. P. HARRIS, J. R. SHARP, G. W. F. WARD, IRA S. CURTIS, (From the Quincy Whig.)

John Taylor was unable to provide an illustration of these plates for his early report in the Times and Seasons, but he and Wilford Woodruff were naturally eager to publicize the wonderful discovery. Accordingly, a few weeks later, they printed the broadside now at hand, and reproduced the encouraging editorial from Quincy, along with the affidavits from Kinderhook. The plates are shown in three horizontal rows of four sides each (fronts and backs of the six plates); they are apparently woodcuts, with white hieroglyphics against black backgrounds in the shape of the plates.
Just above the facsimile of the plates, we find the promise that "The contents of the Plates, together with a Fac-Simile of the same, will be published in the ' Times & Seasons,' as soon as the translation is completed." Indeed, speculation was running high in Nauvoo on this subject, and according to William Clayton's journal:

"President J. has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found, and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth." -Kimball, p.73; cf. History of the Church 5:372

Transcript of the account of the Kinderhook Plates.
From 'History of the Church' by Joseph Smith pages vol. 5, pages. 372-379
I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.
I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.

At the time of the Civil War the Kinderhook plates were lost. Some time in the 1960's, however, M. Wilford Poulson, who taught at Brigham Young University, found one of the original plates in the Chicago Historical Society Museum, but it was mislabeled as one of the original gold plates of the Book of Mormon. The plate that he found has been identified as plate no. 5 in the Kinderhook Plates facsimiles found in the History of the Church. While Professor Poulson's research led him to believe that the plate was a forgery, in 1962 Welby W. Rides, who was President of the BYU Archaeological Society, hailed the discovery as a vindication of Joseph Smith's work as he believed that Joseph did translate some of the Kinderhook plates as the Church historically taught.
Tests on the plate were performed in 1960, 1966 and 1969. The results of those tests proved inconclusive. The plates could have been made in the 1800s as claimed by the hoaxers or could have been much more ancient as the Church had always claimed.
In 1980, permission was given to use destructive methods to determine the authenticity of the plate. The use of electronic and chemical analysis of the metal plate proved that the plate was not of ancient origin, but was produced in the 1800s in a manner exactly as the hoaxers had claimed. Also, an analysis was done and determined that this could not have been a forgery of the Kinderhook Plates, but was in fact one of the actual plates discovered in Kinderhook in 1843.

I wish you were a little more thorough, Thews.

Just kidding.
Actually, you are so thorough, you take my breath away.
I love it when you've got the exact documents to show
(thank you, Jesus, for the internet, or Al Gore, or whoever)
as part of your splendid exposition.

"Mrs. Smith, widow of the Mormon Prophet, presented this engraving
to the Donor at Nauvoo 1847: she did not believe in Mormon."

This one is really simple TBM – Please explain how Joseph Smith translated the Kinderhook plates where he made this claim, “I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.”

President J. has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found, and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.

I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.

Although this account appears to be the writing of Joseph Smith, it is actually an excerpt from a journal of William Clayton. It has been well known that the serialized “History of Joseph Smith” consists largely of items from other persons’ personal journals and other sources, collected during Joseph Smith’s lifetime and continued after the Saints were in Utah, then edited and pieced together to form a history of the Prophet’s life “in his own words.” It was not uncommon in the nineteenth century for biographers to put the narrative in the first person when compiling a biographical work, even though the subject of the biography did not actually say or write all the words attributed to him; thus the narrative would represent a faithful report of what others felt would be helpful to print. The Clayton journal excerpt was one item used in this way. For example, the words “I have translated a portion” originally read “President J. has translated a portion. …”

It’s interesting to note the witnesses all signed to the truthfulness of their claims, much like the supposed 11 witnesses to the golden plates, yet this was a known fraud.

In spite of the considerable excitement they generated in Nauvoo after their “discovery” the plates were allowed to leave the Saints, apparently without fanfare. No known record exists which intimates that Joseph Smith or those around him ever purchased or attempted to purchase the plates (as were the mummies associated with the Book of Abraham papyrus), even though their owner, Wiley, was prepared to sell them.

So it is that in the 100-year battle of straw men and straw arguments, Joseph Smith needs no defense—he simply did not fall for the scheme. And with that understood, it is perhaps time that the Kinderhook plates be retired to the limbo of other famous faked antiquities.

In spite of the considerable excitement they generated in Nauvoo after their “discovery” the plates were allowed to leave the Saints, apparently without fanfare. No known record exists which intimates that Joseph Smith or those around him ever purchased or attempted to purchase the plates (as were the mummies associated with the Book of Abraham papyrus), even though their owner, Wiley, was prepared to sell them.

They didn't buy them.
Therefore they knew they were a hoax.
Therefore the church is true.

This is nowhere near my line of logic. I'm primarily making the statement that the quote from Joseph Smith is not truly his. The fact that the plates were not purchased does not summarily prove that the members of the Church at the time knew it was a hoax, but it certainly does heavily support the idea that Joseph Smith didn't fall for it. Nowhere in my post do I mention the validity of the Church.

In spite of the considerable excitement they generated in Nauvoo after their “discovery” the plates were allowed to leave the Saints, apparently without fanfare. No known record exists which intimates that Joseph Smith or those around him ever purchased or attempted to purchase the plates .... even though their owner, Wiley, was prepared to sell them.

Thews, would you use your impressive expertise to elucidate the salamander letter controversy for TBM. I would like to hear the rationale on that one.

I have heard this before, but never had the opportunity to delve into it. I did some preliminary research and discovered that you are absolutely correct; this one is really simple. So the simple answer: Joseph Smith never made that statement.

President J. has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found, and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.

I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.

These two statements are extremely similar. Coincidence that they're nearly word for word? Not when you take this into account:

Although this account appears to be the writing of Joseph Smith, it is actually an excerpt from a journal of William Clayton.

It has been well known that the serialized “History of Joseph Smith” consists largely of items from other persons’ personal journals and other sources, collected during Joseph Smith’s lifetime and continued after the Saints were in Utah, then edited and pieced together to form a history of the Prophet’s life “in his own words.” It was not uncommon in the nineteenth century for biographers to put the narrative in the first person when compiling a biographical work, even though the subject of the biography did not actually say or write all the words attributed to him; thus the narrative would represent a faithful report of what others felt would be helpful to print. The Clayton journal excerpt was one item used in this way. For example, the words “I have translated a portion” originally read “President J. has translated a portion. …”

Something not completely relevant that I also noticed...

It’s interesting to note the witnesses all signed to the truthfulness of their claims, much like the supposed 11 witnesses to the golden plates, yet this was a known fraud.

When I read the accounts of how the hoax went down I found that only two of the witnesses knew of the fraud - Wilbur Fugate and Robert Wiley. Since they secretly buried the plates shortly before the discovery the statement made is absolutely true, and even those who knew of the fraud could truthfully make the statement that they were, in fact, dug up from the ground. The contents of the statement say only this along with a description of the plates.

Here's a couple of final things I'd like to quote from the aforementioned article:

In spite of the considerable excitement they generated in Nauvoo after their “discovery” the plates were allowed to leave the Saints, apparently without fanfare. No known record exists which intimates that Joseph Smith or those around him ever purchased or attempted to purchase the plates (as were the mummies associated with the Book of Abraham papyrus), even though their owner, Wiley, was prepared to sell them.

So it is that in the 100-year battle of straw men and straw arguments, Joseph Smith needs no defense—he simply did not fall for the scheme. And with that understood, it is perhaps time that the Kinderhook plates be retired to the limbo of other famous faked antiquities.

It almost sounds like you guys are accusing Joseph Smith and the mormon leaders of habitual, obsessive lying.

As one of the few people that was actually taught in gospel doctrine class the story of the Kidnerhook Plates, I would like to throw in my two cents here.

First off, I was taught by a member of the bishopric in gospel doctrine class the story of the Kinderhook Plates. It was one of the most interesting lessons ever. But it was taught as a faith-promoting story. The instructor believed the KP Plates to be real and that Joseph did indeed translate them as indicated in History of the Church, Times & Seasons, B.H. Roberts, etc.

The apologetic response that Joseph didn't fall for the hoax is nonsensical for the following reasons:

Why wasn't this ever the church's position before scientists proved the plates were fake? If the Kinderhook Plates were really just a hoax, then why didn't the church ever say that in the first 130 years since the KP were unearthed? It's clear from the evidence above that the Church leaders believed the KP were real and that Joseph translated a portion of them. Why did it take finding evidence that proved the KP were fake to have the church change their mind on their authenticity? The church only seems to change their beliefs (like the limited geography theory of the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, location of Hill Cumorah, American Indians are the principle ancestors of the Lamanites, etc.) when contradictory evidence disproves their recorded history. This seems inconsistent with a church run by modern-day prophets with modern revelation.


Why didn't the hoaxers come forth right after Joseph did his translation?

If Joseph really did do some sort of translation of the KP, why didn't the hoaxers come forth right afterwards and prove the prophet wong?

The people that made the plates were undoubtedly hoping Joseph would say more about the plates than he did. They were probably waiting for him to write a sequel to the Book of Mormon from the KP, like was rumored at the time. Imagine how much more amazing the hoax would have been had Joseph actually written an entire book instead of just a simple paragraph like he did. The prospect of a much longer, detailed translation would likely be enough for the hoaxers to hold their tongues until this thing played out. Perhaps they hoped a future prophet would make more of them. More than likely, they had their fun and let it be. Joseph didn’t give them the “big bang” they had hoped for but anything other than Joseph denouncing them as a fraud or simply saying he didn’t know what they were is still evidence Joseph lied about the KP even if he didn’t say more than a small paragraph about them.

Did he say the following or didn’t he? “"I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook... I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, and that he received his Kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth." Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr., History of the Church, v. 5, p. 372

If Joseph said the above, as all reports indicate, then Joseph made that up which calls into question the credibility of his other claims. If he never said that then there must be a credible explanation as to why everything and everybody said he did, including the official church scribe William Clayton who was with him on that very day!


WILLIAM CLAYTON
For those that say it was the scribes words and not Joseph's:

Who else would have been able to make these grand claims? Why would a scribe think this Indian was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven & earth. Why not a descendant of Noah or Abraham? This seems way too unusual and too specific to be made by anyone other than the Prophet Joseph Smith. Also, Joseph's scribe William Clayton, was a trusted, official scribe for the church and was noted for being a stickler for details and accuracy and not in the habit of making stuff up and attributing it to Joseph.

Why would Joseph Smith, an editor of the Times and Seasons, allow the article with pictures of the plates be published if it wasn't true? Even hardcore LDS admit that Joseph must have known the article was published and did not dispute it. The LDS book History of the Church makes it very clear that Joseph translated a portion of the Kinderhook Plates.

Certainly Joseph would have retracted the story printed in the Times and Seasons at some point if he was misquoted about something this important. Can you imagine The Ensign printing a totally bogus article and then a hundred years from now, the faithful members of the church claim that the prophet and apostles didn’t have any knowledge of that article and it was just made up by some editors and went completely unnoticed by the General Authorities?


How plausible is this argument raised by some LDS writers? Was it unusual for accounts recorded by Joseph's scribes to be entered as Joseph's own words? Who was William Clayton? Was he in a position to accurately know and record Joseph's words? Was Clayton considered a reliable scribe and a dependable person? Are there other entries in his journals that are accepted without question as the words of Joseph Smith?

Clayton: Intimate Confidante of Joseph Smith
From his conversion to the Mormon Church at age 23 in Preston, England in 1837, to his death in Salt Lake City, Utah in 1879, William Clayton is described as "never swerving in his belief in the church and its leaders" by George D. Smith, editor of An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton (p. xvii). In his fifty-page introduction to Clayton's life and journals, George D. Smith includes descriptions of Clayton from close associates and family members who uniformly remember him as a serious, meticulous and dependable person. His daughter spoke of him as "methodical, always sitting in his own armchair, having a certain place at the table . his person was clean and tidy; his hands small and dimpled" (p. liii). G.D. Smith writes:

Long after his death, Clayton was remembered as "the soul of punctuality"; his daughter remembering his "love for order, which he believed was the first law of heaven . he would not carry a watch that was not accurate" (p. xvi).
Mormon leaders recognized Clayton's gifts and abilities early on, for after being a member of the LDS Church for less than six months he was named second counselor to the president of the British Mission (p. xvi), and later became the first branch president of Manchester (BYU Studies, 27:1, p. 47).

At Clayton's death, Joseph F. Smith, who would become the sixth President of the LDS Church, noted Clayton's achievements:

He was a friend and companion of the Prophet Joseph Smith, and it is to his pen to a very great extent that we are indebted for the history of the Church . during his acquaintance with him and the time he acted for him as his private secretary, in the days of Nauvoo (p. lx).
LDS scholars who have studied Clayton's life have noted his "meticulous detail that was the hallmark of his writing" (p. xx), and also that,

Beginning early in 1842, William Clayton found himself involved in nearly every important activity of Nauvoo, but especially the private concerns of the prophet. For two and a half years, until Joseph's death in 1844, they were in each other's company almost daily.

[James B.] Allen [who wrote a biography of Clayton], explains that Clayton was not only Smith's trusted employee and associate but also his personal friend and confidante. He wrote letters for the prophet, recorded his revelations, ran his errands, and helped prepare the official history of the church (pp. xxii-xxiii).

There would appear to be nothing or no one to detract from Clayton's ability to accurately record the words of Joseph Smith, and every reason to believe he did so accurately and reliably.

Therefore, one can understand why the leaders of the LDS Church when compiling an authoritative history of the life of Joseph Smith and the Church, would accept without question the accuracy of Clayton's journal entry for May 1, 1843 that stated:

I have seen 6 brass plates which were found in Adams County... President Joseph has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found & he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven & earth ntimate Chronicle, p. 100, emphasis added).
As LDS leaders constructed a history of Joseph's life with words recorded by him and others, it would have been easy to justify modifying Clayton's May 1, 1843 entry so it read as follows when incorporated into the History of the Church:

I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike County, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and other, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth (History of the Church, vol. 5, p. 372)

If one does not accept Clayton's journal entry at face value, about the only alternative is to imply that Clayton did not hear Smith make these statements, but instead was willing and capable of inserting speculative and unsubstantiated ideas and falsely attributing them to Joseph Smith. While this can be granted as a possibility, it certainly seems improbable and highly implausible given what we know of Clayton's life and character and the high level of confidence placed in him by Joseph Smith and subsequent LDS leaders and scholars.

Corroborating Evidence
Equally important in assessing the accuracy of Clayton's journal entry is the existence of corroborating historical evidence related to Clayton, Joseph Smith and the Kinderhook Plates. For example:

•The Mormons published facsimiles of the plates in a broadside titled "Discovery of the Brass Plates," published at Nauvoo, Illinois, 24 June 1843. This broadside stated in part:
The contents of the Plates, together with a Fac-Simile of the same, will be published in the "Times & Seasons," as soon as the translation is completed (LDS Archives - reproduced in Stanley B. Kimball, "Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to be a Nineteenth-Century Hoax," Ensign 11 [August 1981]:72).

•Joseph Smith hired Clayton specifically to record what he did and said, and "beginning in early 1842, William Clayton found himself involved in nearly every important activity of Nauvoo, but especially the private concerns of the prophet. For two and a half years, until Joseph's death in 1844, they were in each other's company almost daily" ntimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton, George D. Smith, ed., pp. xxii-xxiii).
•Clayton was with Joseph Smith on the day he records Joseph rendering his verdict on the plates ntimate Chronicle, p. 100).
•Church Historian George A. Smith affirmed in 1858 that there was an accurate system in place so that the recorded history would be "strictly correct." The historians and clerks engaged in the work were "eye and ear witnesses of nearly all the transactions recorded in this history, most of which were reported as they transpired, and, where they were not personally present, they have had access to those who were" (Edward Ashment, unpublished article on file, Institute for Religious Research, Appendix A, p. 2)
•The history of Joseph Smith that contains the Kinderhook Plate statement was approved by Brigham Young, who himself was at Joseph Smith's house and saw the plates there. Young even includes a sketch of one of the plates he saw at Joseph's house in his diary (Ashment, p. 2).
Thus, numerous historical sources indicate Clayton's May 1, 1843 journal entry is accurate, and that Joseph considered the Kinderhook Plates ancient artifacts and began a translation of them. This historical evidence, coupled with a complete lack of any evidence to the contrary, was sufficiently convincing that for over 130 years no Mormon seems to have questioned or contested the authenticity of these bell-shaped brass plates.

LDS writer Stanley B. Kimball summarized the extent of LDS acceptance of the Plates as follows:

Over the decades, through the pages of the Times and Seasons, the Nauvoo Neighbor, The Prophet, missionary pamphlets, the Millennial Star, the Desert News, the University Archaeological Newsletter, the Improvement Era, [in] BYU Symposia [and in Visitors' Centers, and] in books and unpublished reports, LDS scholars and laymen (and at least two RLDS writers) have affirmed and striven to prove the story of the Kinderhook plate incident and tried to make them vouch for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon and to defend Joseph's alleged translation of them (Stanley B. Kimball, "New Light on the Old Kinderhook Plates Problem," based on a paper read at the 16th annual Mormon History Meeting, Ricks College, May 1-3, 1981, p. 3).
From http://www.mrm.org/topics/joseph-smith/ ... ook-plates

The ruse was a success. Appealing to what Joseph Smith "says", Joseph Smith's trusted confidant William Clayton wrote that Smith began a translation:

"I have seen 6 brass plates... covered with ancient characters of language containing from 30 to 40 on each side of the plates. Prest J. has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth." (William Clayton's Journal, May 1, 1843, as cited in Trials of Discipleship - The Story of William Clayton, a Mormon, p. 117)
Author Brent Lee Metcalfe points out that "when Clayton recorded his diary entry on the Kinderhook plates he was... "

•Smith's private secretary
•perhaps Smith's most trusted confidant
•officiator for Smith's secret plural wedding at Smith's residence in the morning
•at Smith's residence for much of the day
•in Smith's company for much of the day
•house sitting for Smith later that day while Joseph was on a date with Flora Woodworth3
•at Smith's residence when he examined the fake ancient artifacts
•at Smith's residence when he wrote his journal entry
On this issue Don Bradley writes:

"William Clayton did not acquire his information about Joseph and the Kinderhook plates from the rumor mill. Clayton was Joseph's personal secretary, and a man as much in his confidence as any at the time. He dined with Joseph at the Mansion House, examined the plates while there, and traced one of them on the reverse of the page where he recorded his journal entry for the day, including this regarding the plates, 'Brother Joseph has translated a portion of them, and says they contain...'"

But given that Clayton was in Smith's company for much of the day, we have good reason to trust him when he reports that "Prest J. has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found", even though Clayton otherwise got some particulars wrong on the digging up of the plates (which Smith may have misunderstood as well). The whole incident gives us a number of reasons to pause before accepting the prophetical calling of Joseph Smith and the validity of Mormonism. In a direct sense, it shows us that Smith was not a very discerning man.

Apparently he was just as gullible as many of those who followed him. If men such as Bridge Whitten, Robert Wiley, and Wilburn Fugate could hoodwink Smith, could an angel claiming to be a messenger from God not also deceive him? Even if we could excuse Smith's lack of discernment, it does not take away from the fact that Smith insisted he had the ability to "translate" the bogus pieces of metal. Whether Smith knowingly tried to deceive his followers or was deluded himself is of little consequence; certainly it shows he is not a man worthy of people's trust.


It is very convenient for LDS faithful to blame all of the translation problems, such as the Kinderhook Plates and the Egyptian Book of Alphabet and Grammar by Joseph Smith, on the scribes, but the facts simply don't support it.

If all of Clayton's journals and diaries that he scribed for Joseph are rejected, there would be very little, if any, Church history published from Joseph's lifetime. The LDS apologists are selectively picking and choosing which journal entries they wish to include as the "official" history of the church. They can't have it both ways.

For more info: http://www.mormonthink.com/kinderhookweb.htm

That was awesome. Thanks for the great find, thews!

Oh for heaven's sake, the evidence is conclusive.Even Richard Bushman had to admit the embarrassing truth: "Church historians continued to insist on the authenticity of the Kinderhook plates until 1980." But not just historians. Apostles and Prophets alike.

Two months after the "discovery," the Nauvoo Neighbor published this on June 24, 1843:



Here is a close up of the text:



This was published by two apostles, (Taylor and Woodruff), both of whom would move on to become Prophets of the Church. The last part of the article says:

Quote:
The public curiosity is greatly excited, and if Smith can decipher the hieroglyphics on the plates, he will do more towards throwing light on the early history of this continent, than any man now living. The contents of the Plates, together with a Fac-Simile of the same, will be published in the "Times and Seasons," as soon as the translation is completed.


Three subsequent issues of the Times and Seasons addressed the plates again:

Quote:
"The brass plates had characters or hieroglyphics on them which nobody was able to read. The bones found in the mound might have belonged to, "a person, or a family of distinction, in ages long gone by, and that these plates contain the history of the times, or of a people, that existed far - far beyond the memory of the present race." (Times and Seasons, vol. 4, page 187.)

"Why does the circumstance of the plates recently found in a mound in Pike county, III., by Mr. Wiley, together with ethnology and a thousand other things, go to prove the Book of Mormon true? - Answer: Because it is true!" (Times and Seasons, Vol. 5, page 406)

"We learn there was a Mormon present when the plates were found, who it is said, leaped for joy at the discovery, and remarked that it would go to prove the authenticity of the Book of Mormon--which it undoubtedly will. " (Times and Seasons, Vol.4, p.187)


Obviously the ruse worked, as the entire Church was "excited" about it, thinking it gave more proof for the Book of Mormon. We're supposed to believe that while the entire Church fell for the ruse, Joseph Smith just let them remain deceived without informing them it was a hoax, or that he never translated anything and that no forthcoming publication would ever include a translation? There is no evidence that Smith felt it was a hoax. None. All we have are ignorant assertions by irrelevant apologetic cheerleaders like why me and Yahoo Bot. But moving on...

A similar quote in History of the Church: "A person present when the plates were found remarked that it would go to prove the authenticity of the Book of Mormon, which it undoubtedly will." (History of the Church, Vol. 5, p.378) In a March 1904, decades after the hoax admission, an issue of the Improvement Era shows the Church placing the spotlight on the plates yet again, claiming to have answered the question of translation in the affirmative!:

Quote:
Certain bell-shaped plates are said to have been discovered in a mound, in the vicinity of Kinderhook, Pike county, Illinois, by Robert Wiley, in 1843, and taken to Joseph Smith. Now, I wish to ask: 1. Were these plates translated by Joseph Smith? 2. If so, what were their contents? 3. Where are they? 4. Are they considered of any value in confirming the Book of Mormon? 5. Is there anything about them in any of the Church works?

"1 and 2. Near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois-between fifty and sixty miles south and east of Nauvoo-on April 23, 1843, a Mr. Robert Wiley, while excavating a large mound, took from said mound six brass plates of bell shape, fastened by a ring passing through the small end, and fastened with two clasps, and covered with ancient characters. Human bones together with charcoal and ashes were found in the mound, in connection with the plates which evidently had been buried with the person whose bones were discovered. The plates were submitted to the Prophet, and speaking of them in his journal, under date of May 1, 1843, he says: "I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth."

"3. The plates were later placed in a museum in St. Louis, known as McDowell's, which was afterward destroyed by fire, and the plates were lost.

"4. The event would go very far towards confirming the idea that in very ancient times, there was intercourse between the eastern and western hemispheres; and the statement of the prophet would mean that the remains were Egyptian. The fair implication, also, from the prophet's words is that this descendant of the Pharaohs possessed a kingdom in the new world; and this circumstance may account for the evidence of a dash of Egyptian civilization in our American antiquities.

"5. The whole account of the finding of the plates, together with the testimony of eight witnesses, besides Mr. Wiley, who were acquainted with the finding of the relics, as also the statement from the prophet's history, is found in the Millennial Star, vol. 21: pp. 40-44."


During that same period, the famous Church Historian, B.H. Roberts addressed the "hoax admission" by calling it a lie.

Quote:
Of this presentation of the matter it is only necessary to say that it is a little singular that Mr. Fugate alone out of the three said to be in collusion in perpetrating the fraud should disclose it, and that he should wait from 1843 to 1879-a period of thirty-six years-before doing so, when he and those said to be associated with him had such an excellent opportunity to expose the vain pretensions of the Prophet-if Fugate's tale be true? For while the statement in the text of the Prophet's Journal to the effect that the find was genuine, and that he had translated some of the characters and learned certain historical facts concerning the person with whose remains the plates were found, may not have been known at the time to the alleged conspiritors to deceive him, still the editor of the Times and Seasons-John Taylor, the close personal friend of the Prophet-took the find seriously, and expressed at once explicit confidence in an editorial in the Times and Seasons, of May 1st, 1843, that the Prophet could give a translation of the plates. And this attitude the Church, continued to maintain; for in The Prophet, (a Mormon weekly periodical, published in New York) of the 15th of February, 1845, there was published a fac-simile of the Kinderhook plates, together with the Times and Seasons editorial and all the above matter of the text. How easy to have covered Joseph Smith and his followers with ridicule by proclaiming the hoax as soon as they accepted the Kinderhook plates as genuine! Why was it not done? The fact that Fugate's story was not told until thirty-six years after the event, and that he alone of all those who were connected with the event gives that version of it, is rather strong evidence that his story is the hoax, not the discovery of the plates, nor the engravings upon them. (New Witnesses for God, p. 63)


In 1921, LDS Apostle John A. Widstoe follows the Clayton account and writes that Joseph Smith translated the plates:

Quote:
May 1. Translates a portion of certain brass plates discovered at Kinderhook, Iowa." (John A. Widtsoe, "Joseph Smith--Seeker after Truth," Prophet of God/i], p. 366)


In 1955, George Reynolds and Janne M. Sjodahl wrote:

Quote:
But, on the other hand, we have the fact before us, that the skeleton of the Pharaoh, found in Kinderhook, Illinois, referred to previously, was dug out of a large mound. After penetrating about eleven feet the workers came to a bed of limestone that had been subjected to the action of fire. They removed the stones, which were small and easy to handle, to the depth of two feet more, when they found the skeleton. This was evidently a burial chamber, as with the bones, which appeared to have been burned, was found plenty of charcoal and ashes. From this fact it is evident that some of the mounds are of very ancient date, as it is not supposable that this man would be the only one of his race and nation to be buried in this manner. We also suggest that this colony of Egyptians may have originated the style of architecture in this country in which so many find resemblances to the Egyptian, and which is specially characterized by the erection of vast truncated pyramids." (George Reynolds and Janne M. Sjodahl, [i]Commentary on the Book of Mormon, edited and arranged by Philip C. Reynolds, 7 vols., 6:, p.232).


In 1962, Welby W. Ricks, who was president of the BYU Archaeological Society, wrote the following:

Quote:
A recent rediscovery of one of the Kinderhook plates which was examined by Joseph Smith, Jun., reaffirms his prophetic calling and reveals the false statements made by one of the finders...The plates are now back in their original category of genuine.... Joseph Smith, Jun., stands as a true prophet and translator of ancient records by divine means and all the world is invited to investigate the truth which has sprung out of the earth not only of the Kinderhook plates, but of the Book of Mormon as well." (The Kinderhook Plates)


Of course we now know that is the "world is invited to investigate the truth," then it should be prepared to be called anti-Mormon. And moving on...

In 1979 Apostle Mark E. Peterson wrote a book called “Those Gold Plates!”. In the first chapter Peterson describes various ancient cultures that have written records on metal plates. Then Peterson claims,

Quote:
There are the Kinderhook plates, too, found in America and now in the possession of the Chicago Historical Society. Controversy has surrounded these plates and their engravings, but most experts agree they are of ancient vintage. (page 3, Those Gold Plates, Mark E. Peterson)


In 1981 the Church published the following:


Quote:
Six plates having the appearance of Brass have lately been dug out of a mound by a gentleman in Pike Co. Illinois. They are small and filled with engravings in Egyptian language and contain the genealogy of one of the ancient Jaredites back to Ham the son of Noah. His bones were found in the same vase (made of Cement). Part of the bones were 15 ft. underground. ... A large number of Citizens have seen them and compared the characters with those on the Egyptian papyrus which is now in this city. - Apostle Parley Pratt, May 7, 1843, (reprinted in The Ensign, August 1981, page 73).


So ultimately we've proven that the Fugate hoax succeeded beyond his wildest imagination. I just wish I could have seen the look on his face after finding out that the Church refused to believe it was a hoax, even after he came clean! We've also proven that a complete translation of the plates was expected by high ranking Church members as early as May 1843 and many people close to Smith believed he had already started one.