
I was pleased that Deseret Book sent me a copy of Joseph Smith’s Seer Stones to review. I know a lot of people have complained church members have complained that we always reference the Urim and Thummim, but not seer stones. There is also the complaint that the artwork is incorrect concerning Joseph translating the plates. It appears Deseret Book is out to change that perception and give more information regarding this topic with this new book. It is a welcome book that is easy to read, and uses footnotes to give the reader scholarly information on Joseph’s Seer stones (plural). While the Church recently published a photo of the brown, chocolate colored stone, the cover of the book shows an artist’s rendition of a white seer stone Joseph used, and there was also talk of a green seer stone used by Joseph. Apparently Joseph preferred the white one over the brown one (that he used to translate the Book of Mormon), and gave the brown one to Oliver Cowdery in 1830. He kept the white one throughout his life, and some of the revelations from the D&C were received through this white seer stone! A chart on page 128-9 indicates Joseph got the brown stone sometime between 1822 and 1830 (there are 4 theories that do not mesh well), got the “Nephite interpreters” between 1827-1829, and had possession of the white stone between 1822-1844. There is talk of a green stone, but not sure when he had it.

The ownership of the brown stone is best documented. After the church was organized in 1830, Joseph gave it to Oliver who kept it until his death. Phineas Young secured the stone from Oliver’s widow and then gave it to his brother Brigham in 1857 who owned it until 1877. One of Brigham’s widows had it for a time, and it ended up with John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff. It was then given to the Smith family (I was unclear which Smith family, but I believe it was descendants of Hyrum.) In 1970 it was in the possession of Joseph Fielding Smith, and has been kept with the First Presidency since.
The provenance of the white stone isn’t quite as clear. This stone was used to receive revelations 3, 6, 7, 11, 14, 17, and 132! (The brown stone was used for the Book of Mormon translation, according to Emma, and was also used for the revelation to obtain a Canadian copyright on the Book of Mormon.) It is known that Wilford Woodruff had the white stone, and laid it upon the altar of the Manti Temple during the dedication. It may have been used for parts of the Book of Abraham.
Appendix 2 discusses Joseph Smith’s green and Nauvoo stones.

There is only one nineteenth-century account describing what is known as Joseph Smith’s green seer stone. In 1873, Emily C. Blackman published a statement by J. B. Buck, who apparently described Joseph Smith’s green stone. Buck pronounced the story of Joseph Smith purchasing the stone from Jack Belcher, which was described in chapter 4. Buck apparently told Blackman, “It was a green stone, with brown, irregular spots on it. It was a little smaller than a goose’s egg, and about the same thickness.”1
…
There are no accounts of Joseph Smith using the green stone, nor are there any accounts that offer firsthand knowledge that Joseph Smith actually possessed a green stone. Though historians have been skeptical of Buck’s account, Jospeh may have actually had a stone that fit the description of Belcher’s original seer stone. Known only from correspondence to Wilford C. Wood in the mid-1930s, a green geode had apparently been preserved by descendents of Philo Dibble, a close friend of Joseph Smith. In 1934, Norman C. Pierce wrote to Wood that he had acquired a green geode seer stone at the death of his wife’s aunt, spouse of David Dibble.3 D. Michael Quinn wrote to Edwin S. Dibble in 1986, who explained that he had never known about the green seer stone, nor was there anyone in his family who knew about it, but Pierce ha apparently taken possession of the stone in the early twentieth century (1936), possibly demonstrating why there was no strong tradition about the stone in the Dibble family.4 The stone was apparently given to Princeton University upon passing of Normal Pierce along with all his papers. Princeton apparently maintained possession of the stone for some time before it was sold in 1993, according to Rick Grunder (for $75,000). The buyer is unknown, but it is likely that a friendly member of the Church purchased the stone and donated it to the LDS Church.
I was surprised how freely the book quoted Michael Quinn and Dan Vogel, two scholars that have often been viewed as less than faith-promoting in their studies of Mormon history. I was also surprised how often the word “occult” was used at the beginning of the book to describe Joseph’s treasure seeking activities prior to his discovery of the Book of Mormon. I’ll give the authors a lot of credit here–occult is a loaded term in today’s world, yet they didn’t shy away from it (nor give a definition of exactly what they meant.) From literally pages 1-2,

As Tucker and others have contemplated Joseph Smith’s early years of money digging and his interest in the supernatural of the occult, they would have unnaturally created a divide between supernatural interests an other early nineteenth century religious experiences.4 Where they saw a deep divide, Joseph saw an environment where the ecstatic religious experiences ever present in revivalism were exhibited in folk religion and the occult. For Joseph, Christianity worked together with folk religion, medicine, and common folklore….The non-institutionalized characteristics of folk religion and the occult was rarely incorporated into genteel religion or declared publicly, but those who participated did not firmly distinguish between their own Christian beliefs and the occult. Historian Robert Fuller argues, “Americans have had a persistent interest in religious ideas that fall well outside the parameters of Bible-centered theology….In order to meet their spiritual needs, … [they] switched back and forth between magical and Christian beliefs without any sense of guilt or intellectual inconsistency.”
The book tries to normalize this kind of magical thinking in Joseph’s day, while at the same time acknowledging that Joseph was charged with being a “disorderly person” in 1826 in Pennsylvania on account of his using seer stones to find buried treasure. From page 32,
Though “glass looking” was relatively common, New York lawmakers could categorize such activities under an 1813 law that allowed courts to prosecute “disorderly persons,” which included “pretending to have skill in physiognomy, palmistry, or like crafty science, or pretending to tell fortunes, or where lost or stolen goods may be found.”10
The authors also note that Joseph Smith was unique in that he was the only one who claimed to see actual words in his seer stones, and that others, including Willard Chase and Oliver Cowdery used seer stones, or dowsing for water. In fact, from page 20
Even after the church was organized in 1830, the overlap of religious and occult experiences, now Doctrine and Covenants 8, provides a perfect example of the occult’s religious nature and why it is so difficult to separate the occult from biblical Christianity in nineteenth-century America. In it, Oliver Cowdery was told he had two gifts. The first gift as the “spirit of revelation,” which was “the spirit by which Moses brought the children of Israel though the Red Sea on dry ground.” The second was less descriptive, but the printed version of the revelation explained that Cowdery was given the “gift of Aaron” by God. The printed version made the parallel between the gifts associated with Moses and Aaron, but early versions of the revelation were less explicit about this parallel. In the original manuscript, the second gift was described as “the gift of working with the sprout” instead of the gift of Aaron.” The second gift apparently had two overlapping meanings. The idea of a “sprout” could have easily represented the miracle in Numbers 17:2, in which the rod of Aaron budded or sprouted. Yet it was also a reference that indicated Cowdery was known for his ability to find subterranean minerals and water with a divining rod. The term “sprout” was often used to describe divining rods in the 1820s and ’30s.52 Once Cowdery’s revelation was printed, Sidney Rigdon changed the word “sprout” to “rod.” Eventually, the 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants replaced the original term with “the gift of Aaron.”53 It is possible that the revelation was intended to reference the rod of Aaron originally, since it was given alongside a description of the gift of revelation which Moses possessed, but its parallel meaning which references Cowdery’s gift of using a divining rod demonstrates the indistinguishable tie between the occult and religion. A diviner would have been pleased with this parallel between biblical teachings and teh supernatural, and a Christian at that time would have been happy to know divining had a biblical precedent.54

I think it is interesting how honest the authors are about the occult. I expect this discussion still may make modern people a little uncomfortable, but once again, they are trying to describe Joseph’s understanding, not ours. One area I thought they were a little weak on was the discussion of the King James Bible in the Book of Mormon. They did discuss 4 theories about the translation of the Book of Mormon, briefly describing the (1) Royal Skousen, (2) Solomon Spaulding, (3) Blake Ostler, and (4) Grant Hardy theories on the composition of the Book of Mormon. Briefly, Royal Skousen (page 46)
suggests that “Joseph Smith could actually see (whether in the interpreters themselves or in the mind’s eye) the translated English text–word for word and letter for letter–and that he read off the revealed text to his scribes.”5 The implication of this theory is that Joseph Smith was not only not the author of the Book of Mormon,” but also, “not even (the author) of its English language translation.”
I’ve already discussed the Spaulding Theory which states that Joseph plagiarized a novel by Solomon Spaulding. I think you should actually read the novel (see part 1 and part 2) to see how badly written the novel is, but some people are still trying to prove the Spaulding theory, but I think has been thoroughly debunked. I also think the original Jokkers wordprint study was successfully refuted by BYU.
Concerning option 3 (Blake Ostler), the authors write (page 47)
Some Mormon scholars have reached a middle ground and want to allow for both divine inspiration and Joseph’s own active role in the final English text. One such scholar, Blake T. Ostler, argued, “The Book of Mormon is best interpreted as an ancient text has been translated, explained, and expanded within a nineteenth-century framework.” It is important to see that the issue is not whether Joseph Smith interpreted the Book of Mormon, but to what extent.”13 Those who favor Joseph’s own creative role in the project reject the idea of him simply reading the English words from seer stones and instead prefer an inspirational or visionary model of the translation process.”
Then there is option 4, Grant Hardy. Page 48
Other scholars, such as Grant Hardy, have tried to examine the Book of Mormon on its own terms, asking what it says about itself (and what that implies about its own textual transmission, including translation) rather than how it stands up against ancient and modern history. This method avoids the dichotomized worlds of those who accept its claims the phenomological experiences of Joseph Smith and his scribes and the effects of the Book of Mormon as a lived sui generis work.
With regard to option 4, it is important to note seer stones within the Book of Mormon, and the authors wonder if the Liahona was a sort of seer stone. Concerning other stones mentioned in the Book of Mormon (page 117)

Brant Gardner has argued that this stone [mentioned in Omni 1:22] is best understood as a royal stela, one that recorded the deeds of Coriantumr. But Gardner notes two curiosities. First, it is “virtually unheard of to create a monument to the defeat of one’s own people,” and thus the mere existence of the stone is an anomaly. Second, if Coriantumr is the last of the Jaredites, who was the carver of the stone? These incongruities lead to an intriguing suggestion: “Since the information on Coriantumr comes through Mosiah’s inspired (but perhaps not literal?) reading of the stone, the explanation may be a prophetic/seeric ‘reading’ of the stone, supplying information that does not appear in its inscription. Mosiah would be using the stone as a base text but expanding it with information about the Jaredite destruction.
Could Joseph Smith have done the same thing with regards to adding the King James Bible to the Book of Mormon. It is argued that 19th century people would have expected to read KJV English which would therefore confirm the book’s authenticity since it reads exactly the same as their bibles. It seems like this idea supports Ostler more than Royal Skousen, yet Skousen refers to David Whitmer’s explanation that words appear on the rock and then disappear. I just find it hard to reconcile and didn’t find this argument all that convincing.
The authors also write off the didactic model of revelation–the idea that Joseph used seer stones at first and then quit using them once he learned how to get revelation. Yet Joseph apparently used the white seer stone late in life for D&C 132, and said the white stone mentioned in the Book of Revelations would be given to all church members for their own personal seer stones. (I certainly wasn’t aware that a seer stone was used for 132!)
I applaud both Deseret Book, as well as authors Michael Hubbard Mackay and Nicholas J. Frederick for their attempt to shed much more light on seer stones. I know some people will think these guys are apologists, but I think they’ve created a good book with a lot of scholarly summaries. It is a wonder if people will buy this book and read it, or simply stick it on their shelf without reading it. What are your thoughts about this book? Were you aware Joseph had more seer stones than just the one shown last year at LDS.org? Are you comfortable with how often Joseph used occult magic within his religious life?
I’m a little confused about exactly how these apologists interpret what they are calling “occult” and “folk magic” practices. If they deny the “didactic model,” where Joseph used them as spiritual crutches to exercise faith in, does that mean they literally believe these stones have magical powers?
And how exactly do they want modern Mormons to interpret these objects? The words “occult” and “folk magic” would not have been in Joseph Smith’s vocabulary. He saw these practices as following in legitimate Biblical traditions, like the stone in Revelations, or the Old Testament Urim and Thumin.
So it’s interesting that LDS apologists use these words, as if they are having to apologise for the spiritual prejudices of modern Mormons, who, although they literally believe in burning bushes, immaculate conceptions, not to mention angels and golden plates, for some reason get uptight about revelatory stones, as if dowsing and such things were in a different category then all these “official” miracles.
The word “magic” also would have been completely foreign to Joseph Smith, who believed in eternal laws, and that miracles were not breaking any universal laws, but merely higher manifestations of them.
So if the apologists reject the “didactic model,” where does the magic of the seer stones end, and the objective, officially believed-in miracles start? Is the gospel “magic” or is it a manifestation of eternal spiritual laws as Joseph believed, and predicated upon obedience?
Thefirst picture has the words. “some antagonists have called the right painting dishonest.” Is that quote from the book? If so I have some doubs about how serious of a scholarly work this book is. Those are clearly the words of an apologist. I also see no talk of the other theory of translation that the Johnson brother’s did research on. Is that included? I would like to read the book. It looks interesting.
The caption is my caption and that photo is not in the book.
I saw this at Deseret Book a couple weeks ago and thought it was cool they supported the effort. I was aware that Joseph had multiple seer stones, though I haven’t really studied the subject in-depth.
The idea of seer stones was fascinating when I was a teenager, though I only remember looking into the Urim and Thummim since that’s what I thought Joseph used. Finding out that early church members just randomly found seer stones on their own was a little harder to swallow. The folk magic element feels weird, but I’ve done enough family history to know the worlds my ancestors inhabited were just different than my own. Then I see people do energy healing and have a lesson in RS where the teacher ties anxiety to dark spirits, and I realize our world probably isn’t so different after all.
MH- how would you compare this book to “magic world view” by Quinn, or “Seer Stones” by Ogden Kraut?
Also, any chance you can give a reference for where it says prez.woodruf put the white stone on the manti alter? I always thougly it was the Chocolet stone.
What is the evidence that the white stone was used for D&C 132? The account I remember reading was that someone asked Joseph to use the stone for D&C 132, but he said he had it memorized already, so he didn’t use a stone for it. Is there strong evidence to contradict that account?
For me seer stones are problematic for the Church. It leaves a lot of troubling questions.
1. Why have gold plates?
2. Why have the instruments that came with the plates for the purpose of translating?
3. What else did he use the stones for?
4. Did he convince a group of like minded people of his claims since not everyone was into a magic world view?
5. What does this say about the honesty of our leaders?
I would like to read the book. I wonder if it will come out on kindle.
@mike-
Those are all culture-in-context questions. If you haven’t read Mike Quinn’s book “Mormonism and the magic world view” you might enjoy it, since it explores some of those questions.
#8-I have read Quinn’s book. It was very good. Putting a label on the questions does not make them go away for me. I have yet to see a good answer to these questions.
Nate, a lot of people mistake an apologist for someone who apologizes for the church. That is not what the word means. The definition of apologetics “is the discipline of defending a position (often religious) through the systematic use of information.” Calling someone an apologist is now basically a slur, saying the information can’t be trusted.
Certainly Joseph saw seer stones as more of a miracle (which is the word religious people would use) rather than magic. We wouldn’t say Moses performed magic on the Red Sea, we would say it was a miracle. According to Royal Skousen (and confirmed by David Whitmer), Joseph saw the words in the stone. Once again, we (and Joseph) would call this a miracle, rather use a word like magic or occult.
Joe Schmo, I haven’t read Quinn’s book, and wasn’t aware of Kraut’s book, so I can’t really comment other than to say that yes MacKay and Frederick do reference Quinn’s book quite a bit. I do remember hearing Richard Bushman say that Quinn’s book was wonderful in that he found a lot of information concerning magic in Joseph Smith’s day, but Bushman said he felt it was lacking in context. It’s like saying that palm readers and psychics are still around in our day. You see commercials for these people. But do you really think they are mainstream? Probably not. You may have even gone to a palm reader for fun. DOes this mean you believe palm reading is legit or was it a fun waste of money? According to Bushman, that’s the problem with Quinn’s analysis–Quinn doesn’t really put it in a good context, and there were lots of both skeptics and believers in Joseph’s day as well as our day regarding magic and occult practices.
Here’s what the book says about Woodruff and the Manti Temple (page 80).
MH, what does the book say as to why Woodruff did that?
hope_for_things, I may have overstated the case for D&C 132, but it is clear that Joseph’s friends and brother wanted him to use the seer stone for 132. Here’s a few quotes about 132, as well as the discredited didactic model. From page 125.
Mike, you have some good questions, and I don’t know that i have a good answer, but here’s my attempts to answer them.
1. Why have gold plates?
The authors attempt to answer this by saying what I said in the OP. “Since the information on Coriantumr comes through Mosiah’s inspired (but perhaps not literal?) reading of the stone, the explanation may be a prophetic/seeric ‘reading’ of the stone, supplying information that does not appear in its inscription. Mosiah would be using the stone as a base text but expanding it with information about the Jaredite destruction.
Perhaps Joseph did the same sort of thing–some was on the plates, and some wasn’t.
2. Why have the instruments that came with the plates for the purpose of translating?
It does appear that Joseph used the Urim and Thummim for the lost pages, but found them cumbersome to use and simply preferred to use the seer stone for the rest of the Book of Mormon.
3. What else did he use the stones for?
Like I said, various books in the D&C, possibly the translation of the Bible, and possibly the Book of Abraham.
4. Did he convince a group of like minded people of his claims since not everyone was into a magic world view?
Well, he convinced many of us! (I think we would use the term “revelatory” world view, rather than magical world view.) Certainly some of Joseph’s contemporaries, like Josiah Stoal, Willard Chase, Hiram Page, used seer stones, and others like Oliver Cowdery were good at dowsing. Now Josiah Stoal took Joseph to court when Joseph couldn’t produce the treasure he promised to find, so there were some skeptics, and of course anti-mormons weren’t fans of the seer stone either. Many anti-mormons at first embraced the church (Doctor Hurlbut) and then became bitter enemies, looking for all sorts of ways to discredit Joseph.
5. What does this say about the honesty of our leaders?
Not sure what you’re getting at with this question. Joseph openly used seer stones and was very honest about it. Perhaps you’re referring to later church leaders who downplayed (perhaps covered up) his seer stones? Perhaps it was to avoid feeding into anti-mormon rhetoric. I wish leaders had been more open about seer stones, and I’m glad they’re getting better.
I would like to read the book. I wonder if it will come out on kindle.
Yes it is available on Kindle. Not much cheaper though. Click the first link in the OP to find the Kindle version.
Mike, no the book doesn’t say why. I would speculate that Woodruff held the seer stones in high regard. Maybe he wondered if he might have a revelatory experience with them. But I’m simply guessing.
“I also see no talk of the other theory of translation that the Johnson brother’s did research on. Is that included?”
I didn’t read anything about the Johnson brothers. Can you elaborate on that? I’m not familiar with what you’re referring to.
MH- thanks for the extra info on manti. For some reason I always assumed it was the Chocolet stone.
I’ve taken a shine to your…conversation starting posts. Always interesting.
MH, I was not expecting you to attempt to answer my questions. While the answers you provided for the most part don’t hit at the heart of the matter as I see it, I appreciate your honest effort. Interesting post and I look forward to reading the book.
I am a believing Mormon. I am comfortable with the elements of magic that Joseph Smith believed in. I was taught about Seer Stones when I grew up in the Church, but I did not fully understand how much they were used in the translation of the Book of Mormon until much later. As I see it, if God is going to reveal something to a prophet, God would use elements that are familiar to that particular prophet. Magic was a significant part of colonial American culture and Joseph was very familial with it. I plan to get this book!