Page 1

	Home
	Page 2
	Page 3
	Page 4

The Ethan Smith Theory

Hurlbut also visited Matilda Spalding Davison, Solomon's widow, and obtained her permission to search through Solomon's papers for his manuscript, which, according to the witnesses, was entitled "Manuscript Found." Hurlbut did find a manuscript, but when it was shown to the eight Conneaut witnesses, they said that it was not the story that they remembered. It proved to be an account narrated by a Roman named Fabius, whose ship had encountered a storm at sea and was blown to the coast of North America. The manuscript remained in the possession of E. D. Howe, who never made it public, although he did include a very brief summary in Mormonism Unvailed. In 1884 it was discovered by L. L. Rice, who succeeded Howe as editor of the Painesville Telegraph. On the cover of the manuscript, Rice wrote in ink "Solomon Spaulding's Writings." The words "Manuscript Story -- Conneaut Creek" also appear in pencil, but Rice said that he did not add this title and that the words were already on the cover when he found the story. Rice gave the manuscript to James H. Fairchild, president of Oberlin College, who examined it and declared that he could find no resemblance between it and the Book of Mormon.

The testimony of the Conneaut witnesses now seemed to be discredited, and they were accused of having combined their dim recollections of the Fabius story with the Book of Mormon, producing in their minds a second book called "Manuscript Found." Memory substitution was one of the primary arguments used by Fawn Brodie against the Spalding theory in her biography of Joseph Smith, No Man Knows My History.

Brodie embraced another hypothesis, which had been proposed by Brigham H. Roberts, an official of the Mormon church. Roberts had recognized similarities between the Book of Mormon and View of the Hebrews, published by Ethan Smith in 1823. Roberts argued that Joseph Smith had a sufficient amount of imagination and intelligence to use View of the Hebrews as the basis for the Book of Mormon. This also became the position of Fawn Brodie, and most other scholars have followed her opinion, without examining her reasons for accepting the hypothesis and rejecting the Spalding theory.

B. H. Roberts compiled a list of eighteen parallels between the Book of Mormon and View of the Hebrews. The first three are not really parallels, but provide other circumstantial evidence. Ethan Smith was the minister of the Congregational Church in Poultney, Vermont, from 1821 to 1826. Roberts noted that the Smith family had lived in Sharon, Vermont, from 1805 to 1811 and that Sharon and Poultney were in adjoining counties. Further research has shown that Oliver Cowdery lived in Poultney until 1825 and that his stepmother and three sisters attended Ethan Smith's church. Roberts also noted that the first edition of View of the Hebrews was published in 1823 and that Joseph Smith claimed that Moroni first visited him and told him about the gold plates in 1823. Ethan Smith enlarged and reprinted his book in 1825, and Joseph Smith stated that he finally obtained the gold plates in 1827.

In his parallels, Roberts recorded similarities between the Book of Mormon and View of the Hebrews. However, it is misleading to say that these similarities are parallels between the two books, because Ethan Smith's book is largely a compilation of material from the works of other writers, particularly James Adair and Elias Boudinot. James Adair's book History of the American Indians was published in 1775, nearly fifty years before View of the Hebrews, and Boudinot's book, printed in 1816, also made generous use of Adair's work. In his parallels, B. H. Roberts acknowledged at least three times that Adair was being cited. We should therefore view Roberts's fifteen parallels in relation to Adair's book.

Beginning with parallel number four, Roberts made the following comparisons between the Book of Mormon and View of the Hebrews:

(4) Both books argue that the American Indians are descendants of the Hebrews. The Hebrew origin of the American Indians was also Adair's major thesis, and his book is devoted to citing evidence to support twenty-three arguments in favor of the theory.

(5) Both books relate the discovery of buried records. To illustrate this parallel, Roberts quoted three passages from Ethan Smith's book, which center around the discovery of the Pittsfield parchments. In 1815, a man named Joseph Merrick said that after ploughing some ground, he found what looked like a black strap. A closer examination revealed that it was pieces of thick rawhide sewed together, which contained four folded leaves of old parchment of a dark yellow color. The parchments were taken to Cambridge, where it was determined that the writing consisted of verses of Deuteronomy and Exodus in Hebrew characters. Roberts speculated that this account could have been the inspiration for Joseph Smith's discovery of the gold plates. However, Adair's book contains a much closer parallel. Adair relates reports which he heard of five copper and two brass plates in the possession of an Indian tribe, which were kept closely guarded and used only in ceremonial activities. An Indian named Old Bracket stated that "he was told by his forefathers that those plates were given to them by the man we call God; that there had been many more of other shapes, some as long as he could stretch with both his arms, and some had writing upon them which were buried with particular men; and that they had instructions given with them, viz. they must only be handled by particular people" (Adair [1775] 1986, 188).

(6 & 7) Both books refer to inspired prophets and describe objects resembling the Urim and Thummim and the breastplate of the Hebrew high priest. Roberts's evidence for these two parallels utilizes quotations from Adair's book.

(8) Both books refer to written characters similar to Egyptian hieroglyphs. Adair also suggests that some Indian words may have been derived from the Egyptians and refers to the conjectures of some people that Indian words are "hieroglyphical characters, in imitation of the ancient Egyptian manner of writing their chronicles." He also states that Choktah symbols seem "to argue, that the ancienter and thicker-settled countries of Peru and Mexico had formerly, at least, the use of hieroglyphic characters; and that they painted the real, or figurative images of things, to convey their ideas" (Adair [1775] 1986, 66, 83).

(9 & 17) Both books claim that the Indians were separated into civilized and barbarous cultures and that the civilized people were exterminated by the barbarous Indians. And both books attest to a high level of civilization in ancient America. It must be admitted that parallel nine is much more clearly stated by Ethan Smith than by Adair. Nonetheless, Adair does argue for the primacy of the highly developed cultures of Mexico and Peru, stating that the further people migrated from those centers, the more they degenerated. He also paraphrases the descriptions of the Spanish friar Hieronimo Roman of the temple complexes in Peru, as well as Acosta's reports of Mexican religious rites. One passage in Adair's book suggests protracted warfare and the extermination of one tribe by another: "The Muskoghe who have been at war, time out of mind, against the Indians of Cape-Florida, and at length reduced them to thirty men, who removed to the Havannah along with the Spaniards . . . the constant losses they suffered, might have highly provoked them to exceed their natural barbarity" (Adair [1775] 1986, 142).

(10, 11, 12 & 13) Both books emphasize the destruction of Jerusalem, refer to the scattering and restoration of Israel, quote frequently from Isaiah, and claim that American Gentiles are to play an important role in restoring the Indians back into the house of Israel. Adair was trying to prove the Hebrew origins of the Indians, but he had no particular religious purpose in advancing his theory. Ethan Smith, on the other had, was interested in the prophecies of Isaiah concerning the scattering and restoration of the lost tribes and the role of Gentiles in bringing the gospel to the Indians. These four parallels are therefore the strongest link between Ethan Smith's book and the Book of Mormon. Nonetheless, Ethan Smith's views were not unique, and there are some points which we should note about these parallels. View of the Hebrews discusses the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in A.D. 70, while the Book of Mormon is concerned with the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in the sixth century B.C. In addition, both B. H. Roberts and Fawn Brodie greatly overstated the Isaiah parallel. Roberts wrote: "Ethan Smith's 'View' quotes copiously and chiefly from Isaiah in relation to the scattering and gathering of Israel" (Roberts 1985, 335). Apparently relying upon Roberts, Brodie stated that "both quoted copiously and almost exclusively from Isaiah." She said further: "Thus about twenty-five thousand words in the Book of Mormon consisted of passages from the Old Testament -- chiefly those chapters from Isaiah mentioned in Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews . . . ." (Brodie 1971, 47, 58). This certainly is not true, however. Ethan Smith does quote Isaiah often, but most passages involve only a couple of verses. Ethan did not neglect the other prophets, however; he quotes verses from six chapters of Zechariah, six chapters of Jeremiah, five chapters of Ezekiel, and five chapters of Hosea, as well as verses from Amos, Zephaniah, Joel, and Micah. After compiling a list of verses quoted by Ethan Smith from nineteen chapters of Isaiah, I found that only five of those chapters were also quoted in the Book of Mormon, which reproduces chapter after chapter of Isaiah. Moreover, chapter four of Ethan Smith's book is largely a commentary on the seven verses of Isaiah 18, but Isaiah 18 is not one of the chapters found in the Book of Mormon, which would be a curious omission, if the Book of Mormon was inspired by Ethan Smith's book.

(14 &16) Both books condemn pride and seeking of riches, and both praise the virtues of the Indians. Adair again expresses the same views. Concerning the Indians, he wrote: "I have observed with much inward satisfaction, the community of goods that prevailed among them, after the patriarchal manner, and that of the primitive christians; especially with those of their own tribe. Though they are become exceedingly corrupt, in most of their ancient commendable qualities, yet they are so hospitable, kind-hearted, and free, that they would share with those of their own tribe, the last part of their provisions even to a single ear of corn . . . . An open generous temper is a standing virtue among them; to be narrow-hearted, especially to those in want, or to any of their own family, is accounted a great crime, and to reflect scandal on the rest of the tribe" (Adair [1775] 1986, 18).

(15) Both books condemn polygamy. Adair also refers to polygamy among the Indians, although he does not condemn it. However, his comments are of interest: "The grandeur of the Hebrews consisted pretty much in the multiplicity of their wives to attend them, as a showy retinue . . . . The Indians also are so fond of variety, that they ridicule the white people, as a tribe of narrow-hearted, and dull constitutioned animals, for having only one wife at a time . . . ." In another passage, he states: "By the Spanish authorities, the Peruvians and Mexicans were Polygamists, but they had one principal wife to whom they were married with certain solemnities" (Adair [1775] 1986, 145, 226).

(18) Both books describe the appearance of an important person on the American continent -- Christ and Quetzalcotl. However, Ethan Smith did not identify Quetzalcotl with Christ; he suggested instead that the legend of Quetzalcotl is a dim representation of the account of Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt. He probably would have rejected any implication that Christ personally appeared to the Indians. However, the visit of Christ to the American continent could have been suggested by a passage in Adair's book. Speaking of the French Canadians, Adair said: "Then they infected the credulous Indians with a firm belief, that God once sent his own beloved son to fix the red people in high places of power, over the rest of mankind; that he passed through various countries, to the universal joy of the inhabitants, in order to come to the beloved red people, and place them in a superior station of life to the rest of the American world; but when he was on the point of sailing to America, to execute his divine embassy, he was murdered by the bloody monopolizing English" (Adair [1775] 1986, 160). This also suggests, as does the Book of Mormon, that the Indians were to hold a special place among the Gentiles in America.

At most, we could grant Roberts that seven of his parallels argue for the influence of Ethan Smith on the Book of Mormon, but the other eleven could equally prove the influence of Adair. In fact, we should take note of two parallels between the Book of Mormon and Adair's book. The Book of Mormon is sometimes preoccupied with the changing skin color of the Indians; it says that the skins of the Lamanites turned dark because of their wickedness, but at a later date the skins of some righteous Lamanites turned white. Ethan Smith notes that Quetzalcotl was supposed to be a bearded white man, and he refers to another tradition which said that the ancestors of the Indians were white, but he does not attempt to explain the causes which produced a change in Indian skin color. At the outset of his book, Adair observes that some tribes of Indians are fairer than others and concludes that this variation is due to living habits: "Many incidents and observations lead me to believe, that the Indian colour is not natural; but that the external difference between them and the whites, proceeds entirely from their customs and method of living, and not from any inherent spring of nature . . . ." (Adair [1775] 1986, 3).

In addition, Ethan Smith discusses only one theory about the migration of people to the Americas. He holds that they took a northward journey across Asia to the Bering Strait and then spread southward. Adair mentions this theory once, but consistently argues that civilization originated in the New World in Central and South America and that people then migrated north and east across North America. Although the Book of Mormon covers all bases, Adair's theory seems to accord better with the landing site of Lehi's group in South America and the subsequent movement of people first into Central America and later into areas northward.

If Roberts's parallels applied uniquely and exclusively to Ethan Smith's book, we would have to believe that Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, since View of the Hebrews was published after Spalding's death. But the parallels actually testify to the fact that the Book of Mormon agrees with many of the popular theories and speculation of the day.

David Persuitte has shown that some of the religious ideas and language of the Book of Mormon are similar to those of Ethan Smith, and he concludes that Joseph Smith used View of the Hebrews as a major source in writing the Book of Mormon. However, he also notes that there are differences in style and viewpoint between the two books, since the Book of Mormon was written as a Nephite bible, and that Joseph Smith would have had to invent characters and a story to supplement the basic framework supplied by Ethan Smith. Persuitte portrays Joseph as not merely using material from Ethan's book, but as actually analyzing and musing over it, reaching conclusions which contradicted Ethan Smith on some key points. Persuitte traces rather intricate and sophisticated lines of reasoning by which Joseph might have arrived at these ideas. But he has not demonstrated that Joseph was knowledgeable and intelligent enough to reason in this manner. Furthermore, he finds it necessary to bring in other writers as sources, such as Francisco Clavigero, an eighteenth century Mexican historian. Finally, Persuitte claims that inconsistencies between the Book of Ether and the rest of the Book of Mormon demonstrate that the Jaredite history was an early version of the book, which Joseph later decided to revise. Thus although Persuitte argues that Joseph used Ethan's book as a major source, he attributes a great deal to Joseph, allowing him time not only to invent characters and events to flesh out Ethan's meager story line, but also to ponder theological points and to make major revisions of his book.

However, in an appendix, Persuitte admits that there may be something to the Spalding theory. He quotes an article, which appeared in the Cleveland Plain Dealer (24 April 1887). The author of the article claims that he got his information from a grandson of Ethan Smith, who lived in Cleveland. This unnamed grandson stated that Ethan Smith had himself written a story about the migration of the Lost Tribes of Israel to Central America, where they established a great empire, which was destroyed through bloody wars, leaving the survivors to relapse into barbarism. He said further that Solomon Spalding and Ethan Smith were friends and that Ethan allowed Solomon to look at his manuscript, which Ethan did not intend to publish, fearing that it would injure his reputation. Spalding, it is theorized, used Ethan's story as the basis for his own book, which then fell into the hands of Joseph Smith. Persuitte notes that both Solomon Spalding and Ethan Smith attended Dartmouth College; Solomon graduated in 1785, and Ethan entered in 1786. Therefore, it is at least possible that the two men might have known each other. However, the story about Ethan Smith's historical romance is doubtful at best, and there is no other evidence to support it.

An anecdote related by Emma Smith suggests that Joseph did not use View of the Hebrews in writing the Book of Mormon. Newell and Avery relate the following: "The schoolteacher in Emma recognized Joseph's struggle with written English. 'He could not pronounce the word Sariah,' she said. Although Joseph's own reading of the scriptures had been sporadic at best, Emma knew the Bible well and read it often. Once, as he translated, the narrative mentioned the walls of Jerusalem. Joseph stopped. 'Emma,' he asked, 'did Jerusalem have walls surrounding it?' Emma told him it did. 'O, I thought I was deceived,' was his reply" (Newell and Avery 1984, 25-26). Joseph was probably "translating" 1 Nephi 4:4, in which Nephi says that his brothers "did follow me up until we came without the walls of Jerusalem." If, as the proponents of the Ethan Smith theory hold, Joseph was so impressed by View of the Hebrews that he resolved to write a book based upon it, he would have known that Jerusalem was surrounded by walls. On page fifteen of his book, Ethan Smith writes: "Most of this city was surrounded with three walls. In some places, where it was deemed inaccessible, it had only one. The wall first built was adorned and strengthened with sixty towers. Fourteen towers rested on the middle wall. The outside one, (most remarkable for its workmanship) was secured with ninety towers" (Ethan Smith 1825, 15). This description occurs in the chapter dealing with the destruction of Jerusalem, and both Roberts and Brodie stressed the destruction of Jerusalem as a parallel with the Book of Mormon. If Joseph wrote the Book of Mormon using Ethan Smith as a primary source, how could he have not known that Jerusalem was a walled city? Moreover, how could Joseph be questioning a passage from the Book of Mormon which he had written himself? It might be argued that Joseph was actually questioning Ethan's description, but this is not likely, if Joseph accepted Ethan as an authority.

Emma's anecdote raises another serious problem with the Ethan Smith theory. Both Roberts and Brodie asserted that Joseph Smith had the imagination and intelligence to write the Book of Mormon. Brodie rejected "the untenable assumption that Joseph Smith had neither the wit nor the learning to write the Book of Mormon . . . ." She also stated that the Book of Mormon was the product of "an audacious and original mind. Joseph Smith took the whole Western Hemisphere as the setting for his book and a thousand years of history for his plot. Never having written a line of fiction, he laid out for himself a task that would have given the most experienced novelist pause" (Brodie 1971, 442, 49). But if Emma's story is true, we must believe that Joseph was so ignorant of the Bible that he did not know that Jerusalem had walls. 1 Kings 3:1 states that Solomon built a wall around Jerusalem. 2 Kings 14:13 records that Jehoash "came to Jerusalem, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem from the gate of Ephraim unto the corner gate, four hundred cubits." 2 Chronicles 36:19 states that the Babylonians "burnt the house of God and brake down the wall of Jerusalem . . . ." And Nehemiah says that the walls of Jerusalem were rebuilt by the Jews who returned from the Babylonian captivity. How can we possibly believe that Joseph Smith was ignorant of these facts and yet possessed the wit, learning, and originality which would enable him to write the Book of Mormon?

Emma was not the only one to comment on Joseph's lack of education. According to M. T. Lamb, David Whitmer repeated Emma's story: "David Whitmer confesses that Joseph Smith was 'but little versed in Biblical lore . . . . did not even know that Jerusalem was a walled city" (Lamb 1887, 93). Emma said that Joseph did not know how to pronounce the word Sariah. David Whitmer stated in the Deseret Evening News: "In translating the characters Smith, who was illiterate, and but little versed in Biblical lore, was ofttimes compelled to spell the words out, not knowing the correct pronunciation . . . . Cowdry, however, being a school-teacher, rendered invaluable aid in pronouncing hard words, and giving them their proper definition" (Lamb 1887, 58). According to Anthony Metcalf, Martin Harris said, "I wrote a great deal of the Book of Mormon myself, as Joseph Smith translated or spelled the words out in English" (Tanner 1968, 2:40). Hiram Page also stated that Joseph did not know how to pronounce the word Nephi (Hill 1977, 92). On another occasion, Emma told her son Joseph III that when Joseph was translating the Book of Mormon, he "could neither write nor dictate a coherent and well worded letter" (Bushman 1984, 96). Orson Pratt gave this appraisal of Joseph's abilities: "Now in regard to Joseph Smith's qualifications or attainments in learning, they were very ordinary. He had received a little education in the common country schools in the vicinity in which he had lived. He could read a little, and could write, but it was in such an ordinary hand that he did not venture to act as his own scribe" (Peterson 1987, 371). Lucy Smith said that in 1823, when Joseph was first visited by Moroni, he "had never read the Bible through in his life: he seemed much less inclined to the perusal of books than any of the rest of our children, but far more given to meditation and deep study" (Lucy Smith 1880, 87).

The proponents of the Ethan Smith theory must also explain how it is possible that Joseph Smith did not know to pronounce names which he had himself invented.

Little evidence has been presented to demonstrate that Joseph Smith had the imagination and intelligence to write the book of Mormon. B. H. Roberts cited a passage from Lucy Smith's history, which he thought testified to Joseph's powers of imagination. Lucy said that following Moroni's first visit, Joseph continued to receive instructions from the Lord, which Joseph related to his family in the evenings: "During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of traveling, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life among them" (Lucy Smith 1880, 87). However, no one has ever pointed out that Lucy's account does not describe the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon tells us that the Lamanites went almost naked, except for skins girded around their loins, and that the Nephites wore armor into battle, but it says nothing about the everyday dress of the various groups of people who inhabited the Americas. The Book of Mormon refers several times to horses and chariots, but most of the people seem to travel on foot; no one is ever described as riding upon any animal. The Book of Mormon does not discuss the layout of cities, the types of buildings that people lived in, or their manner of construction. It does say that people who migrated into northern territories constructed their buildings of cement, because of a scarcity of timber, and one passage says that Nephi, the son of Helaman, had a tower in his garden. These unusual features would certainly have deserved further elaboration. The Book of Mormon gives us a few details about the temple in Lehi-Nephi and a Zoramite synagogue, but otherwise provides no information about the design of religious buildings. Aside from a few references to burnt offerings, the Book of Mormon does not describe religious ceremonies in temples and churches; baptisms sometimes occur outdoors. If the passage from Lucy's history is proof that Joseph's imagination was so highly developed that he could have written the Book of Mormon, why did he not include the information which he had related to his family?

Jerald and Sandra Tanner, who also reject the Spalding theory, have offered another document as proof that Joseph Smith had the ability to write the book of Mormon. They cite a history which Joseph began in 1832, claiming that if he could have written the history in 1832, he could have written the Book of Mormon in 1829. However, Joseph admits in his history that "we were deprived of the bennifit of an education suffice it to say I was mearly instructid in reading writing and the ground rules of Arithmatic which constuted by whole literary acquirements" (Joseph Smith 1984, 4). The whole history fills only five printed pages and covers a period only up to the appearance of Oliver Cowdery. The document is partly in the handwriting of Joseph Smith and partly in that of Frederick G. Williams. Obviously, this small history does not demonstrate that Joseph had the discipline to write a complex book, nearly six hundred pages in length. Furthermore, the Tanners do not consider the possibility that Joseph was adapting material written by someone else. This possibility is suggested by one long passage in the history which describes the majesty and sublimity of creation as proof for the existence of an omnipotent and omnipresent eternal Being. It is doubtful that this came from the mind of Joseph.

Granted that Joseph Smith could read and write imperfectly and had a vivid imagination, where is the proof that he had the intelligence, learning, and discipline to write the Book of Mormon? And even if we were to allow that Joseph had the ability to write the Book of Mormon, where is the evidence that he had any interest in theories about the Hebrew origins of the Indians or that he would have read Ethan Smith's book, if given the opportunity? The evidence that we have suggests that Joseph was primarily interested in convincing other people that he could locate buried treasure by gazing into his peep stone.

The proponents of the Ethan Smith theory seem to be drawn in two different directions. On the one hand, they stress Joseph's original and creative imagination. B. H. Roberts said that Joseph's imagination was "a remarkable power which attended him through all his life. It was as strong and varied as Shakespeare's and no more to be accounted for than the English Bard's" (Roberts 1985, 244). Fawn Brodie also said that the Book of Mormon is "not formless, aimless, or absurd. Its structure shows elaborate design, its narrative is spun coherently, and it demonstrates throughout a unity of purpose" (Brodie 1971, 69). On the other hand, after stating his case for Joseph's remarkable imagination, Roberts wrote: "In the first place there is a certain lack of perspective in the things the book relates as history that points quite clearly to an undeveloped mind as their origin. The narrative proceeds in characteristic disregard of conditions necessary to its reasonableness, as if it were a tale told by a child, with utter disregard for consistency" (Roberts 1985, 251). And this comment comes immediately after Roberts's comparison of Joseph Smith to Shakespeare! The fact is that the Book of Mormon seems to reveal two different minds at work: one is intelligent, learned, and imaginative; the other is young, undeveloped, and inconsistent. These contrary indications in the Book of Mormon can be reconciled if Joseph Smith did not write the Book of Mormon, but did make clumsy and inconsistent revisions of some other person's text.

The other studies in this series have demonstrated that the writings which have been attributed to Joseph Smith were written by someone who had a thorough knowledge of the Bible and Roman history. The author was familiar with such writers as Livy, Caesar, Plutarch, Cicero, Virgil, and Herodotus; he knew the philosophies of Plato, the Atomists, Philo, Descartes, and Rousseau; he not only had an intimate knowledge of the Bible, but also knew Jewish legends and was familiar with the works of Josephus, Eusebius, Augustine, Bede, and Geoffrey of Monmouth; he also knew Irish myths and the legends concerning the Lia Fail and the Holy Grail. In other words, the author had probably received an education in the classics, typical of programs offered in colleges of the day, and he obviously was interested in theories about the origins and history of the American Indians.

Joseph Smith certainly does not fit this profile of the author of the Mormon scriptures, but let us consider the testimony of Matilda Spalding Davison concerning Solomon's abilities and interests.

Rev. Solomon Spalding . . . was a graduate of Dartmouth college, and was distinguished for a lively imagination and a great fondness for history. . . . In the town of New Salem [Conneaut] there are numerous mounds and forts, supposed by many to be the dilapidated dwellings and fortifications of a race now extinct. . . . Numerous implements were found, and other articles, evincing great skill in the arts. Mr. Spalding being an educated man and passionately fond of history, took a lively interest in these developments of antiquity, and in order to beguile the hours of retirement and furnish employment for his lively imagination, he conceived the idea of giving an historical sketch of this long lost race. Their extreme antiquity of course would let him to write in the most ancient style; and as the Old Testament is the most ancient book in the world, he imitated its style as nearly as possible. . . . . . . He was enabled from his acquaintance with the classics and ancient history to introduce many singular names . . . . (Davis, Scales, and Cowdrey 1977, 43-44)

It is apparent that Solomon Spalding possessed all of the requirements to be the author of the Book of Mormon: he was a graduate of Dartmouth College, was acquainted with the classics and ancient history, had a lively interest in the curious mounds which were found near Conneaut, possessed a good knowledge of the Bible, and had the time to write a lengthy book.