\ r~"^''^1 
 
 
 American Anthropology 
 
 Disproving the 
 
 Book of Mormon. 
 
 CHARLES A. SHOOK. 
 
 "The calling into ^question of doctrines and dogmas, 
 wrong or inapplicable' is the intellectual right of all men, 
 sanctioned bj' our great exemplar from the heavens." — 
 Elder S. W. L. Scott, of the Reorganised or Josephite 
 Mormon body. 
 
 CONTENTS: 
 
 I. The Early Americans were Not White 4. 
 
 n. " " " were Not of the Lost Tribes .... 5. 
 
 in. " " " were "Stone Age" People 7. 
 
 IV. " " " Had No Iron or Steel 8. 
 
 V. " " " were only Advanced Savages. . ,9. 
 
 VI. " " " were American Indians II. 
 
 IVII. " " " Migrated South instead of North 1 2. 
 
 'III. " " ** were Never Exterminated 13. 
 
 IX. " " " Did Not Speak Hebrew 15. 
 
 X. The Ancient Civilization Not Imported 17. 
 
 XI. The Ancient Language Not even Like Egyptian 17. 
 
 I XII. The Ancient People had no "Great Spirit" 19. 
 
 Conclusion; 20. 
 
 THE UTAH GOSPEL MISSION, 
 
 Cleveland, O. 
 
 [First Edition, 1916. 
 
 ■m 
 
From Professor G. Frederick Wright, D. D., LL. D., editor 
 Bibliotheca Sacra, and original investigator and writer on pre- 
 historic man and allied subjects; 
 
 Oberlin, Ohio, March 8, 1916. 
 
 I thank you for the reading, of Shook's "American Anthro- 
 pology Disproving the Book of Mormon." The positions which 
 he defends are correct, and his evidence unanswerable. My 
 prolonged investigations concerning glacial man and the Mound 
 Builders fully sustain all the statements made by jNIr. Shook. 
 The Mormon claims for archaeological support are made without 
 any regard to the facts. G. Frederick Wright. 
 
 ABOUT THE BOOK OF MORMON. 
 
 "This book must be either true or false. * * * jf false, 
 it is one of the most cunning, wicked, bold, deep-laid impositions 
 ever palmed upon the world, calculated to deceive and ruin 
 millions who will sincerely receive it as the word of God." — ■ 
 Divine Authority of the Book of Mormon, by Apostle Orson 
 Pratt: Introduction, 1851. 
 
 VERY IMPORTANT BIBLE WARNINGS. 
 
 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's cloth- 
 ing, but inwardly are ravening wolves." — Matthew 7:15. 
 
 "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and 
 shall show great signs and wonders; so as to h-ad astray, if 
 possible, even the elect." — Matt. 24; 24. 
 
 BOOKS, BY THE SAME AUTHOR. 
 
 Cumorah Revisited, or the Book of Tvlormon and the Claims 
 of the Mormons Re-Examined from the \'iewpoint of American 
 Archaeology and Ethnology. 
 
 This is a work of 589 pages, by Charles A. Shook. The pur- 
 pose of the author is to show that the Book of Mormon is false 
 in its historical claims and in its descriptions of the race, re- 
 ligion, arts, customs and civilization of the ancient Americans 
 and, hence, cannot be accepted as from God. Such subjects 
 as the Jewish descent of the American Indians, the nationality 
 of the "Mound Builders" and "Cliff Dwellers" and the ciiaracter 
 of ancient American writing are fully considered. With the 
 consideration of these subjects, a full exposure of the Mormon 
 "collateral evidences," the notorious "Kinderhook Plates" and 
 the "Newark Tablets," is given. An Appendix is added in 
 which special attention is paid to the bogus "^lichigan Relics 
 which have attracted considerable attention of late and which 
 in a number of instances have been held up as proof of the 
 claims of the Book of Mormon. Perhaps no stronger work 
 against the historical claims of the Book of Mormon has ever 
 been written. Cloth, price $1.50 
 
 The True Origin of Mormon Polygamy. By Charles A. Shook. 
 A keen presentation of tlie fact;^. with affidavits, which show 
 beyond successful contradiction that INIormon polygamy orgi- 
 nated with Joseph Smith, and was to cover up his own wrong- 
 doing before he claimed to have had any "revelation; hence 
 the untruth of both the Tosephite and Brighamite claims regard- 
 ing him. Cloth, 213 pages, illustrated $1-^ 
 
 The True Origin of the Book of Mormon. By Charles A. 
 Shook. This book contains 187 pages of the best embodiment 
 of the general facts, rare documents, afifidavits, etc., as to the 
 origin of the Book of Mormon that we have ever seen; includ- 
 ing Oliver Cowdery's tract giving his reasons for leaving the 
 eystem and concluding it a hoax. Cloth, illustrated $1.00 
 
 For copies of the above, and also for this and other tracts 
 on Mormonism, enclose the price to „^^^„^ 
 
 THE UTAH GOSPEL MISSION, , ^, . 
 
 1854 E. 81st Street, Cleveland, Ohio. 
 
 The price of this tract is five cents, postpaid; ten for 30 
 cents; 100 for $2.50. 
 
American Anthropology 
 Disproving the Book of Mormon. 
 
 BY CHARLES A. SHOOK. 
 
 There are two theories upon which all of the sects of Mor- 
 monism have been agreed: that Joseph Smith, Jr., was a 
 prophet of God, and that the Book of Mormon is an inspired 
 and credible history of ancient America. While the entirely 
 human character of this book has already been proved in various 
 ways, the careful comparison in the following pages of its state- 
 ments concerning the early history of man upon this continent 
 with the facts known to science is especially interesting and 
 convincing. Such titles as "1 Nephi," "2 Nephi," "Helaman," 
 "Alma," "Ether" and "Mormon," which appear, are the names 
 of books in the Book of Mormon. The figures which follow 
 them, marked (J) and (B), are, respectively, the chapter and 
 paragraph references to the Josephite and Brighamite editions 
 of that book. The references are to the 1913 edition of the 
 Josephite Book of Mormon, and to the 1888 Utah edition. 
 
 The Book of Mormon claims to be the inspired his- 
 tory of the ancient inhabitants of America and of God's 
 dealings with them. It is said to have been written 
 upon gold plates and to have been deposited in "Hill 
 Cumorah," in Western New York, in the year 420 
 A. D., from whence it was taken by Joseph Smith, 
 under the direction of the angel Moroni, on September 
 22, 1827, and was afterwards traslated by him miracu- 
 lously, through the Urim and Thummim. 
 
 According to the Book of Mormon, the first inhabi- 
 tants of America were the Jaredites, who came to 
 Central America from the Tower of Babel about five 
 hundred years after the flood, and who continued until 
 about 600 B. C, when they were exterminated in a civil 
 war. The second colony was a company of Jews who 
 came to Peru about the time of the Jaredite extermina- 
 tion. This colony, after its arrival, divided into two 
 factions, the Nephites and Lamanites ; the first continu- 
 ing until about 400 A. D., when they were exterminated 
 by the other faction, the Lamanites, who have continued 
 down to our time as the American Indians. 
 
 Mormonism makes its boast that the historical claims 
 of the Book of Mormon have been, and are being, fully 
 substantiated by American archaeological and ethno- 
 logical research, as may be seen by the following quota- 
 tions from Mormon authors, both Josephite and 
 Brighamite: 
 
4 
 
 The historical accounts recorded in the book are being rapidly 
 substantiated by American archaeological research. — Opinions of 
 Sirty-fize Leading Ministers and Bible Commentators: C. J. 
 Hunt, (J), pp. 3, 4. 
 
 The students of American antiquities will find upon a careful 
 examination that no discovery has thus far been made which 
 in a single instance contradicts the record of America's great 
 and glorious past, as found in the Book of Mormon. — The Book 
 Unsealed: R. Etzenhoiiser, (J), p. 78. 
 
 The Latter-day Saints base their belief in the authenticity and 
 genuineness of the book on the following proofs: * * * The 
 strongly corroborative evidence furnished by modern discoveries 
 in the field of archaeological and ethnological science. — Two 
 Lectures; J. E. Talmage, (B), p. 22. 
 
 It is our purpose in these pages to expose the falsity 
 of this claim and, by the latest and most authoritative 
 works on American archaeology, to show that the Book 
 of Mormon is a false history, untrue in its descriptions 
 of the race, culture, arts, religions, habits and customs 
 of the ancient inhabitants of this continent ; and hence 
 impossible to be regarded as inspired except where it 
 quotes from the Bible. 
 
 ERROR I. THE BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT THE 
 
 ANCIENT INHABITANTS OF THIS CONTINENT 
 
 WERE OF THE WHITE RACE; THE OLDEST SKULLS 
 
 AND BONES THAT HAVE BEEN FOUND— SOME OF 
 
 WHICH DATE BACK NEARLY TO THE GLACIAL 
 
 PERIOD— SHOW THAT THEY WERE IDENTICAL 
 
 WITH THE PRESENT AMERICAN RACE. 
 
 And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea even 
 
 a sore cursing because of their iniquity. For behold, they had 
 
 hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like 
 
 unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceeding fair 
 
 and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people, 
 
 the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them. 
 
 —2 Nephi; 4:33-35 (J), V:21 (B). 
 
 This is the Book of Alormon account of the origin 
 of the Indian race, which is declared to have occurred 
 since 600 B. C. and to have been produced by a miracle. 
 But Indian bones and skulls have been found in deposits 
 which date farther back than that. Dr. D. G. Brinton, 
 one time Professor of American Archaeology and 
 Linguistics in the University of Pennsylvania, says of 
 certain skulls found in different parts of the American 
 continent : 
 
 All these are credited with an antiquity going back nearSy 
 to the close of the last glacial period, and are the oldest yet 
 found on the continent. They prove to be strictly analogous to 
 those of the Indians of the present day. — The American Race, 
 p. 36. 
 
He also gives the following conclusion of the cele- 
 brated Swiss anatomist, Dr. J. KoUman : 
 
 The variety of man In America at the close of the glacial 
 period had the same facial form as the Indian of today; and 
 the racial traits which distinguish him now, did also at that time. 
 
 From this, Dr. Brinton draws the following conclu- 
 sion : 
 
 These very ancient remains prove that in all important 
 craniologic indicia the earliest Americans, those who were 
 contemporaries of the fossil horse and other long since extinct 
 quadrupeds, possessed the same racial character as the natives 
 of the present day, with similar skulls and a like physiognomy. 
 We reach, therefore, the momentous conclusion that the Ameri- 
 can race throughout the whole continent, and from its earliest 
 appearance in time, is and has been one, as distinct in type as 
 any other race, and from its isolation probably the purest of all 
 in its racial traits — Essays of an Americanist, p. 40. 
 
 Bancroft remarks on certain remains taken from the 
 ancient sepulchres of Ticul, Yucatan : 
 
 The skeletons and skulls dug up at Ticul were pronounced 
 by Dr. Morton to belong to the universal American type. — Na- 
 tive Races, Vol. 4, p. 282. 
 
 While on the mortuary remains of the mound builders, 
 he says : 
 
 Very few skulls or bones are recovered sufficiently entire to 
 give any idea of the Mound-builders' physique, and these few 
 show no clearly defined differences from the modern Indian 
 tribes. — Native Races, Vol. 4, p. 71 S. 
 
 If the ancient Americans were of the white race, 
 absolutely no craniological or osteological proofs of it 
 have ever been found. 
 
 ERROR II. THE BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT 
 
 THE AMERICAN INDIANS ARE DESCENDENTS OF 
 
 THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL; ANTHROPOLOGICAL 
 
 RESEARCH HAS MADE IT NECESSARY FOR US TO 
 
 REJECT THIS DERIVATION THEORY. 
 
 Wherefore, it is an abridgment of the record of the people 
 
 of TSTephi, and also of the Lamanites; written to the Lamanites, 
 
 who are a remnant of the house of Israel.— Soofe of Mormon; 
 
 Preface (J), title page (B). 
 
 And it came to pass that my father Lehi also found upon the 
 plates of brass a genealogy of his fathers; wherefore he knew 
 that he was a descendent of Joseph; yea, even that Joseph, who 
 was the son of Jacob, who was sold into Egypt.— 1 Nepln; 1: 
 164-5 (J), V:14 (B). 
 
 At the time that the Book of Mormon was first pub- 
 lished (1830), the theory of the Jewish descent of the 
 American Indians was held by a number of prominent 
 students. Prior to this time, it had been advocated by 
 such writers as Beatty, Smith, Adair, Boudmot and 
 
6 
 
 Priest, and after its appearance, it had at least one 
 illustrious defender, Lord Kingsborough, whose work, 
 "Mexican Antiquities," was published between the years 
 1831-48. Kingsborough, after returning to Europe, was 
 imprisoned in Dublin jail for debt, where he died, and 
 with him died his theory; for so fanciful are his proofs 
 that his view has not appealed to any writer of promi- 
 nence since. Here are some authoritative quotations on 
 this point: 
 
 As for the Lost-Tribes-of-Israel theory, on which Kingsborough 
 was wrecked, no archaeologist of to-day would be willing to give 
 it a second thought. — North Americans of Yesterday; (Dellen- 
 baugh) p. 429. 
 
 The wildest as well as the most diverse hypotheses were 
 brought forward and defended with great display of erudition. 
 One of the most curious was that which advanced the notion 
 that the Americans were the descendents of the ten "lost tribes 
 of Israel." No one, at present, would acknowledge himself "a 
 believer in this theory; but it has not proved useless, as we 
 owe to it the publication of several most valuable works. — TJie 
 American Race; (Brinton), p. 18. 
 
 One of these theories is (or was), that the original civilizers 
 of ^Mexico and Central America were the "lost ten tribes of 
 Israel." This extremely remarkable explanation of the mystery 
 was devised very early, and it has been persistently defended 
 by some persons, although nothing can be more unwarranted or 
 more absurd. * * * This wild notion, called a theory, 
 scarcely deserves so much attention. It is a lunatic fancy, pos- 
 sible only to men of a certain class, which in our time does not 
 multiply. — Ancient America; (Baldwin), pp. 166, 167. 
 
 The Book of Mormon modifies this theory somewhat, 
 however, and claims that the Nephites and Lamanitcs 
 were not only descendants of some of the ten tribes, 
 but also of the house of Judah. Lehi is said to have 
 been a descendant of Manasseh, while Mulek, who led 
 a colony to the Isthmus of Panama about the time that 
 Lehi came to Peru, was a son of Zedekiah, hence of the 
 tribe of Judah. But this theory stands no better show 
 than the other, as will be seen by the following: 
 
 But all such theories of the origin of the American races 
 from an Israclitish stock, or from a Cymric or a Gaelic, may 
 be safely dismissed as the fruits of misguided enthusiasm and 
 perverted ingenuity. — Ancient Cities of the Nezv World; (Char- 
 nay), Introduction by Rice. 
 
 In a letter to Rev. S. W. Traum, of Richmond, In- 
 diana, dated June 17, 1905, W. H. Holmes, chief of the 
 Bureau of American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institu- 
 tion, Washington, D. C, says: 
 
 I may say briefly that at the present time no scientific eth- 
 nclcgist for a moment entertains the notion that the American 
 
Indian is descended from the Jew, or has a trace of the lost 
 tribes in his veins, unless acquired in very recent years. The 
 American race stands alone, the result of a long period of de- 
 velopment, a period which might be represented by tens of 
 thousands gather than thousands of years. If the Indian of 
 today can be traced beyond the Western Continent, he will be 
 found to connect most directly with the peoples of eastern 
 Asia, as he is undoubtedly more closely allied to the Mongolian 
 race than to any other. — Mor monism Against Itself, p. 107. 
 
 The analogies between the Indians and the Jews, in 
 habit, custom and rite, which have been presented by 
 the Mormons to prove their theory, are ridiculous 
 fancies. They are fully exposed in my "Cumorah Re- 
 visited," Chapter IV. (See notice on page 2 of this 
 booklet. 
 
 ERROR III. THE BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT 
 THE FIRST IMMIGRANTS TO THIS CONTINENT 
 WERE CIVILZED MEN; ANTHROPOLOGICAL RE- 
 SEARCH HAS PROVED CONCLUSIVELY THAT THEY 
 WERE OF THE STONE AGE. 
 According to the Book of Ether (one of the divisions 
 of the Book of Mormon), the Jaredites were a highly 
 civilized people, possessing the arts of writing, boat 
 building and working in the metals ; worshipping the 
 true God, and having large flocks and herds. In har- 
 mony with this account, Apostle W. H. Kelley (Joseph- 
 ite) says: 
 
 In the "Book of Mormon" we are informed that upwards of 
 twenty centuries before the birth of the Saviour (at the fall 
 of Babel and the confusion of tongues) there came a colony 
 out from this old Cushite civilization, under divine guidance, 
 to the land of America. They were called Jaredites, and they 
 brought with them the civilization, the arts, sciences, habits, 
 customs, traditions, and language of their day and time. — Presi- 
 dency and Priesthood, (J) pp. 257, 258. 
 
 But this is a dream that scientific men do not indulge 
 in. American anthropology has fully demonstrated that 
 the first Americans were mere chippers of stone and 
 not civilized Cushites from the Tower of Babel. Israel 
 Cooke Russell, professor of Geology in the University 
 of Michigan, says on this point : 
 
 The generally accepted conclusion in reference to the origin 
 of the American aborigines seems to be that man reached this 
 continent while the peoples of the Old World were yet in a 
 primitive condition, and at a time when the highest stage of 
 culture was expressed by the knife and spear-point of chipped 
 stone, and developed independently, in accord with the natural 
 conditions with which he was surrounded. — North America, p, 
 356. 
 
 Major J. W. Powell, formerly chief of the Smith- 
 
sonian Institution, as quoted by this author (p. 357), 
 ?ays : 
 
 Thus we are forced to conclude that the occupancy of America 
 by mankind was anterior to the developement of arts, industries, 
 institutions, languages and opinions; that the primordial occu- 
 pancy of the continent antedates present geographical conditions, 
 and points to a remote time which can be discovered only on 
 geological and biological investigation. 
 
 Other scientific men write as follows : 
 
 At an epoch not far distant, men, probably derived from the 
 same source, made their appearance in the New World, wander- 
 ing on the shores of either ocean. Like their nomad contem- 
 poraries of the other hemisphere, they knew no shelter save that 
 afforded by nature in her forests and rocks. Rudely shaped 
 stones served them alike for tools and weapons and their social 
 condition was parajleled by that known for their European con- 
 temporaries under the name of the Stone age. — Prehistoric 
 America; (Nadaillac), Preface. 
 
 It seems that the Amerindian race, while originally composed 
 of different elements, was, as a body, separated from the other 
 peoples of the world, at a remote epoch, and by peculiar cli- 
 matic and geographic influences, welded into an ethnic unity, 
 which was unimpressed by outside influences till modern times. — 
 North Americans of Yesterday; (DcUcnbaugh) , p. 458. 
 
 ERROR IV. The BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT- 
 THE ANCIENT AMERICANS MANUFACTURED IRON 
 AND STEEL TOOLS; SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION 
 HAS PROVED CONCLUSIVELY THAT THE MANU- 
 FACTURE OF IRON AND STEEL TOOLS WAS 
 WLtOLLY UNKNOWN TO THE ANCIENT AMERICAN 
 PEOPLES. 
 And they did work in all manner of ore, and they did make 
 gold, and silver, and iron, and brass, and all manner of metals. 
 —Ether; 4:71 (J), X:23 (B). 
 
 And I did teach my people to build buildings: and to work 
 in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of 
 brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious 
 ores, which were in great abundance. — 2 Nephi; 4:21 (J), F:15, 
 (■B). 
 
 In opposition to these pretended historical statements, 
 I submit the following : 
 
 Iron, we repeat, was absolutely unknown; nowhere do we find 
 it mentioned, and nowhere do we meet with the characteristic 
 rust which is the undeniable proof of its presence. — Prehistoric 
 America; (Nadaillac), p. 378. 
 
 The use of iron as a metal was unknown In America previous 
 to the discovery by Columbus. — American Archaeology ; (Thomas), 
 p. 11. 
 
 So far no prehistoric iron has been found in the ruins of 
 Yucatan. — North Americans of Yesterday; (Dellenbaugh), p. 81. 
 No implement of iron has been found in connection with the 
 ancient civilizations of American. The Mound-builders, as we 
 have seen, wrought as a stone, the rich specular ores of Mis- 
 souri, into various instruments, which they ground and polished 
 
9 
 
 with elaborate care, little conscious that the same material, 
 subjected to a high heat, could be cast into any required form, 
 and converted into much more efficient weapons. — Prehistoric 
 Races of the United States; (Foster), p. 333. 
 
 That iron and steel were not used for cutting implements, 
 is clearly proved by the fact that hard, flinty spots in the soft 
 stone of the statues are left uncut, in some instances where 
 they interfere with the details of the sculpture. — Native Races 
 of the Pacific States; (Bancroft), Vol. 4, p. 102. 
 
 The implements of iron and steel that have been 
 found in some of the mounds and other ancient works 
 are proved to be of post-Columbian workmanship and 
 so, instead of proving the high culture of the ancient 
 Americans, they establish the recent construction of 
 these antiquities. 
 
 ERROR V. THE BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT 
 THE ANCIENT INHABITANTS OF THE UNITED 
 STATES WERE HIGHLY CIVILIZED; ANTHROPO- 
 LOGICAL RESEARCH HAS PROVED THAT THEY 
 HAD REACHED ONLY THE UPPER STATUS OF 
 SAVAGERY. 
 And the whole face of the land northward was covered with 
 inhabitants; and they were exceeding industrious, and they did 
 buy and sell, and traffic one with another, that they might get 
 gain. And they did work in all manner of ore, and they did 
 make gold, and silver, and iron, and brass, and all manner of 
 metals; and they did dig it out of the earth; wherefore they 
 did cast up mighty heaps of earth to get ore, of gold, and of 
 silver, and of iron, and of copper. And they did work all 
 manner of fine work. And they did have silks, and fine twined 
 linen; and they did work all manner of cloth, that they might 
 clothe themselves from their nakedness. And they did make all 
 manner of tools to till the earth, both to plough, and to sow, 
 and to reap, and to hoe, and also to thrash. And they did make 
 all manner of tools with which they did work their beasts. 
 And they did make all manner of weapons of war. And they 
 did work all manner of work of exceeding curious workman- 
 ship.— £f/z^r; 4:70 (J), X:22-27. (B). 
 
 The Josephite Committee on American Archaeology, 
 in their Report (p. 59), bound the "land northward" 
 by the Gulf of Mexico on the souths the Great Lakes, 
 or Hudson's Bay, on the north, the Atlantic Ocean on 
 the east and the Pacific Ocean on the west. 
 
 But the ancient inhabitants of the "land northward," 
 or the present United States, were uncivilized peoples, 
 and there is not a scrap of trustworthy evidence to show 
 that they had ever attained to such a degree of culture 
 as described in the foregoing description of Ether. As 
 proof of this, I submit the testimony that follows : 
 
 Nothing more than the upper status of savagery was attained 
 by any race or tribe living within the limits of the present 
 
10 
 State of Ohio. All statements to the contrary are misrepre- 
 sentations. If we go by field testimony alone (not to omit the 
 reports of early travelers among North American tribes), we 
 can assign primitive man high attainments in but few things 
 and tliese indicate neither civilization nor an approach toward 
 it. — Primitive Man in Ohio; (Moorehead), pp. 199, 200. 
 
 Notliing trustworthy has been discovered to justify the theory 
 that the mound builders belonged to a highly civilized race, or 
 that they were a people who had attained a higher culture 
 status than the Indians. It is true that works and papers on 
 American archaeology are full of statements to the contrary, 
 which are generally based on the theory that the mound builders 
 belonged to a race of much higher culture than the Indians. 
 Yet, when the facts on which this opinion is based are ex- 
 amined with sober, scientific care, the splendid fabric which has 
 been built upon them by that great workman, imagination, fades 
 from sight. — Work in Mound Exploration; (Thomas), pp. 11, 12. 
 
 The research of the past ten or fifteen years has put this sub- 
 ject in a proper light. First, the annals of the Columbian epoch 
 have been carefully studied, and it is found that some of the 
 mounds have been constructed in historical time, while early 
 explorers and settlers found many actually used by tribes of 
 North American Indians; so we know many of them were build- 
 ers of mounds. Again, hundreds and thousands of these mounds 
 have been carefully examined, and the works of art found 
 therein have been collected and assembled in museums. At the 
 same time, the works of art of the Indian tribes, as they were 
 produced before modification of European culture, have been 
 assembled in the same museums, and the classes of collections 
 have been carefully compared. All this has been done with the 
 greatest painstaking, and the mound builders' arts and the In- 
 dians' arts are found to be substantially identical. No fragment 
 of evidence remains to support the figment of theory that there 
 was an ancient race of the mound builders superior in culture to 
 the North American Indians. * * * It is enough to say that the 
 mound builders were the Indian tribes discovered by white men. 
 • — Prehistoric Man in America; (Article in Forum of Jan., 1890. 
 by Maj. J. W. Powell, Chief of the Bureau of American Eth- 
 nology). Quoted in Cherokees in Pre-Columbian Times; 
 (Thomas), pp. 38, 39. 
 
 For the most part the objects found in them (the mounds), 
 from the rude knife to the carved and polished "gorget," might 
 have been taken from the inmost recesses of a mound or picked 
 up on the surface among the debris of a recent Indian village, 
 and the most experienced archaeologist could not decide which 
 was their origin. — Prehistoric America; (Nadaillac), p. 131. 
 
 Since 18/9, when the Bureau of American Ethnology, 
 Smithsonian Institution, was organized, more exact 
 methods of research have been applied to the solution 
 of the problems relating to North American archaeology, 
 with the .result that many of the fanciful theories here- 
 tofore held, have been fully refuted. 
 
11 
 
 ERROR VI. THE BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT 
 THE ANCIENT INHABITANTS OF THE UNITED 
 STATES WERE RACES DISTINCT FROM THE 
 AMERICAN INDIANS; ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH 
 HAS ESTABLISHED THAT THEY WERE ONLY 
 TRIBES OF AMERICAN INDIANS. 
 According tc the Book of Mormon, the first people 
 to colonize the present territory of the United States, 
 was a company under the Jaredite king, Omer, who 
 was deposed from his throne by Akish and was forced 
 to flee from the land of Moron in Central America. 
 Omer settled at Ablom, by the seashore, which the 
 Josephite Committee on American Archaeology locate 
 where Boston now stands. He was afterwards joined by 
 Nimrah, son of Akish, and from this small nucleus and 
 from Central America the Jaredites spread out until 
 they covered the whole face of the "land northward." 
 The Nephites followed the Jaredites and, about 44 B. C, 
 departed out of the "land of Zarahemla" (United 
 States of Colombia), and coming into the "land north- 
 ward," travelled "to an exceeding great distance inso- 
 much that they came to large bodies of water" — the 
 Great Lakes— "and many rivers"— the Mississippi, etc. 
 —"yea, and even they did spread forth into all parts 
 of the land, into whatever parts it had not been ren- 
 dered desolate, and without timber, because of the 
 many inhabitants" — Jaredites- "who had before in- 
 herited the \2ind:'—Helaman; 2:3 (J), ni:3-ii (B). 
 
 These peoples, we are told, were white races, dis- 
 tinct from the tribes that afterwards inhabited this 
 part of the New World. But the mound builders, it is 
 now certain, were only tribes of North American In- 
 dians : 
 
 For a long time these aboriginal monuments were esteemed 
 sufficient evidence to prove that the country had been inhabited 
 by a peculiar race, to which the name of "Mound-Builders 
 was given. We now know that these works were constructed 
 by the immediate ancestors of our American Indians, and that, 
 indeed, in the more southern parts of the Mississippi valley, as 
 for instance, in northern Mississippi, the people had not quite 
 abandoned the mound-building habit when they came in con- 
 tact with the yi\\\\.cs.— Nature and Man in America; (Sfujler). 
 p. 182. 
 
 For a long time it was believed by a great many persona, 
 scientific and otherwise, that these piles of earth, often called 
 pyramids quite erroneously, could not have been made by ordi- 
 nary Amerinds, but as the study of the native American pro- 
 ceeded and the data of what he did and docs actually do began 
 to be recorded, it was perfectly plain that it was not at all 
 necessary to look beyond the "Indian" for the origin of the 
 
12 
 
 mounds — thai is, beyond the "Indian" as ... was known in the 
 region where the mounds occur. U was found that he had 
 erected mounds after the arrival of the whites, and if he built 
 one or several, he might have built all. — North Americans of 
 Yesterday; (Dellenbaugh), p. 343. 
 
 What, it may be asked, are we to believe was the character 
 of the race to which for the purpose of clearness we have for 
 the time being applied the term "Mound Builders"? The answer 
 must be, they were no more nor less than the immediate prede- 
 cessors in blood and culture of the Indians described by De 
 Soto's chronicler and other early explorers, the Indians who 
 inhabited the region of the mounds at the time of their dis- 
 covery by civilized men. — Prehistoric America; (Nadaillac), p. 
 130. 
 
 In view of these results, and of the additional fact that these 
 same Indians are the only people, except the whites, who, so 
 far as we know, have ever held the region over which these 
 works are scattered, it is believed that we are fully justified in 
 claiming that the mounds and inclosures of Ohio, like those in 
 New York and the Gulf States, were the work of the red Indians 
 of historic times, or of their immediate ancestors. — Quotation 
 from Prof. Lucien Carr. in Prehistoric America, p. 132. 
 
 If the mound builders were only tribes of red Indians, 
 will the Mormon "Church" kindly come to the front 
 and tell us where the evidence is to be found that the 
 present territory of the United States was formerly in- 
 habited by civilized races who built houses of "cement," 
 worked the metals, and did many other things indica- 
 tive of a high grade of civilization ? 
 
 ERROR VII. THE BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT 
 THE TREND OF MIGRATION IN NORTH AMERICA, 
 IN ANCIENT TIMES, WAS FROM SOUTH TO NORTH; 
 THE TRADITIONS, LANGUAGES AND CULTURE OF 
 THE AMERICAN TRIBES AT THE TIME OF THE 
 DISCOVERY CLEARLY ESTABLISH THAT IT WAS 
 IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. 
 
 The Jaredites are said to have landed upon the east 
 coast of Central America near the mouth of the river 
 Motagua (Report Committee on American Archceology, 
 (J) pp. 6g, 70). From this point they pressed 
 northward until they covered the present territory of 
 the United States. The Nephites landed on the west 
 coast of South America not far from the thirtieth 
 degree, south latitude (Report, p. 11). And from this 
 point also spread northzvard, through Colombia, Cen- 
 tral America and Mexico, into the United States. 
 
 But this is directly contrary to the migrational direc- 
 tion of the ancient races as established by science. 
 The mound builders, Mexicans and Central Americans 
 all entered their ancient seats from the north or north- 
 
13 
 west. Prof. Cyrus Thomas says of the movements of 
 the tribes of the United States in prehistoric times : 
 
 So far as linguistic and traditional evidence can be tracect, 
 it leads to the conclusion that the general movement, in pre- 
 historic times, of the stocks in the United States, was toward 
 the south and the southeast. — American Archaology, p. 157. 
 
 On the migration of the Mayas, the ancient semi- 
 civilized people of Central America, Brinton says : 
 
 The uniform assertion of their legends is that the ancestors 
 of the stock came from a more northern latitude, following 
 down the shore of the Gulf of Mexico. This is also supported 
 by the position of the Huastecas, who may be regarded as one 
 of their tribes left behind in the general migration, and by 
 the tradition of the Nahuas which assigned them a northern 
 origin. — The American Race, p. 154. 
 
 Of the ancient inhabitants of Mexico, Nadaillac says : 
 All these men, whether Toltecs, Chichimecs or Aztecs, be- 
 lieved that their people came from the north, and migrated 
 southward, seking more fertile lands, more genial climates, or, 
 perhaps, driven before a more warlike race; one wave of emi- 
 gration succeeding another. — Prehistoric America, p. 13. 
 
 The Mayas and Nahuas, or "Toltecs," were the build- 
 ers of those remarkable prehistoric cities which the 
 Mormons identify with the cities built by the Jaredites 
 and Nephites. Other writers speak as follows of the 
 movements of the ancient North Amerrcan peoples : 
 
 It results from the evidences in our possession that there has 
 existed a continuous and general tendency of migration from 
 north to south in the two Americas. — Preadamites; (Winchell), 
 p. 395. 
 
 The prevailing opinion among scholars of the present day, 
 so far as published, appears to be that the XahuatI group 
 originated in, or at least came from, some place north of the 
 known localities of the tribes composing the family. — American 
 Archaology ; (Thomasj, p. 316. 
 
 No reasonable doubt exists but that the Athapascas, Algonkins, 
 Iroquois, Chahta-Muskokis and Xahuas all migrated from the 
 north or west to the regions they occupied. — Myths o.f the New 
 World; (Brinton), p. 47. 
 
 ERROR VIII. THE BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT 
 THE ANCIENT CIVILIZED PEOPLES OF THIS CON- 
 TINENT WERE EXTERMINATED RACES; AMERICAN 
 ANTHROPOLOGY HAS PROVED BEYOND THE POS- 
 SIBILITY OF A DOUBT THAT THE PEOPLES WHO 
 BUILT THE ANCIENT CITIES, MOUNDS AND CLIFF- 
 HOUSES OF AMERICA WERE THE VERY TRIBES 
 WHO WERE FOUND HERE BY THE FIRST WHITE 
 SETTLERS, OR THEIR DIRECT ANCESTORS IN 
 BOTH BLOOD AND CULTURE. 
 About 600 B. C, the Book of Mormon tells us, the 
 Jaredites were all exterminated at "Hill Ramah" (the 
 same as the Nephite "Cumorah") in western New York, 
 
14 
 with the exception of two men, Coriantumr, one of their 
 generals, and their prophet, Ether. One thousand years 
 afterwards, on the same field, the Nephites met a simi- 
 lar fate and all perished with the exception of a few 
 who "dissented" to the Lamanites. Of the Jaredites, 
 Apostle Kelley says : 
 
 Before, or about the time of, the arrival of the two colonies 
 of Jews [Nephites and IMulekites, C. A. S.] to the continent, 
 the old Jaredite nation had attained its highest ascendency, de- 
 teriorated and became extinct. — Presidency and Priesthood, p. 
 287, (f). 
 
 Of the two peoples, he says : 
 
 The ancient nations are extinct * * * they were con- 
 quered, overcome and destroyed by a wild, ferocious and savage 
 race of people, who spared neither old nor young, male nor 
 female.— Ibid, p. 292. 
 
 But the romantic end that has been attributed to the 
 Jaredites and Nephites is all a myth. While it is true 
 that there may have been wars and pestilences that have 
 broken up tribes, and disintegrating mfluences which 
 have weakened and overthrown powers, there is to be 
 found not one bit of evidence that great, powerful and 
 widespread races, such as the Jaredites and Nephites 
 are described to have been, have ever been extermin- 
 ated. In other words, the facts that have been gath- 
 ered in the field of anthropological research demonstrate 
 that the Central American mound builders and cliff 
 dwellers are not "extinct," "vanished" or "exterminated" 
 races ; for, although they have passed through num- 
 berless governmental and social changes, they still exist 
 in the various native American tribes of today. 
 
 I have already shown by reliable testimony that the 
 mound builders were only tribes of American Indians; 
 I shall now show, by the following quotations from 
 standard scientific works, that the cliff dwellers, like- 
 wise, were only tribes of the race now living : 
 
 There is no warrant whatever for the old assumption that the 
 "cliff dwellers" were a separate race; and the cliff dwellings 
 must be regarded as only a phase of pueblo architecture. — 16f/i 
 Annual Report. Bureau American Ethnology; (Mindeleff), p. 191. 
 
 The kinship of the cliff dwellers and Pueblos was long ago 
 recognized by ethnologists, both from resemblances of skulls, 
 the character of architecture and archaeological objects found in 
 each class of dwellings. — \7th Report, Bureau American Eth- 
 nology; (Fezi'kes), p. 532. 
 
 I would emphatically say there is nothing in any of the re- 
 mains of the pueblos, or the cliff houses, or any other antiquities 
 in that portion of our continent, which compels us to seek other 
 constructors for them than the ancestors of the various tribes 
 
13 
 
 which were found on the spot by the Spaniards in the sixteenth 
 century, and by the armies of the United States in the middle 
 of the nineteenth. This opinion is in accordance with history, 
 with the traditions of the tribes themselves, and with the condi- 
 tion of culture in which they were found. — The American Race; 
 {Brinton), p. 115. 
 
 Directing our attention now to still another region, we find 
 in the Southwest a vast deal that is absorbingly interesting. 
 Fortunately, the people were, many of them, still there when 
 the first Spaniards came into the country in 1540, so that we 
 have data to prevent the attributing the works found there to 
 some mysterious race. It has been attempted in the case of the 
 "Cliff-dwellers," but the investigations of competent ethnologists 
 have effectually settled that matter, and checked the romantic 
 tendency except in the case of a few who will not learn. — North 
 Amricans of Yesterday; (Dellenbaugh), p. 176. 
 
 As proof that the builders of the ancient cities of 
 Central America were the same races that inhabited 
 that part of the country at the coming of the whites, I 
 submit the following : 
 
 I deem the grounds sufficient, therefore, for accepting this 
 Central American civilization of the past as a fact, referring it 
 not to an extinct ancient race, but to the direct ancestors of 
 the people still occupying the country with the Spaniards, and 
 applying to it the name Maya as that of the language which has 
 claims as strong as any -to be considered the mother tongue of 
 the linguistic family mentioned. — Native Races; (Bancroft), Vol. 
 2, p. 117. 
 
 All of them were the work of the same people, or of nations 
 "f the same race, dating from a high antiquity, and in blood 
 and language precisely the same race * * * ihg,t was found 
 in occupation of the country by the Spaniards, and who still 
 constitute the great bulk of the population. — Palacio Carta; 
 Squire), pp. 9, 10. 
 
 The sculptures and temples of Central America are the work 
 of the ancestors of the present Indians. — Researches; (Taylor), 
 p. 189. 
 
 At the time of the conquest the stately structures of Copan, 
 Palenque, T'Ho and many other cities were deserted and covered 
 with an apparently primitive forest; but others not inferior to 
 them, Uxmal, Chichen Itza, Peten, etc., were the centers of 
 dense population, proving that the builders of both were identi- 
 cal. — The American Race; (Brinton), p. 155. 
 
 ERROR IX. THE BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT 
 ^ THE ANCIENT AMERICANS ORIGINALLY SPOKE 
 M THE HEBREW LANGUAGE; PHILOLOGICAL RE- 
 ^ SEARCH HAS PROVED BEYOND A DOUBT THAT 
 THEY DID NOT, AND THAT THERE IS NO AF- 
 FINITY WHATEVER BETWEEN THE TONGUES OF 
 THE AMERICAN TRIBES AND THE HEBREW OR 
 ANY OTHER INFLECTED OLD WORLD TONGUE. 
 And if our plates had been sufficiently large, we should have 
 written in the Hebrew; but the Hebrew hath been altered by us 
 also; and if we could have written in the Hebrew, behold ye 
 
16 
 
 would have had no imperfection in our record. — Mormon, 4:99 
 (J), IX:33 (B). 
 
 In support of this assertion, the Mormons cite the 
 statements of Adair, Boudinot and Priest, among the 
 early writers, in which it is declared that the American 
 tongues present unmistakal^le affinities to the Hebrew. 
 But, under later and more careful investigations, this 
 illusion has been dispelled and it is now known that 
 there are positively no marked resemblances between 
 the two languages. 
 
 The researches of the few philologists who have given Ameri- 
 can languages their study have brought to light the following 
 facts: First, that a relationship exists among all the tongues 
 of the northern and southern continents; and that while certain 
 characteristics are found in common throughout all the lang- 
 uages of America, these languages are as a whole sufficiently 
 peculiar to be distinguishable from the speech of all the other 
 races of the world. — Native Races; (Bancroft), Vol. 3, p. 553. 
 
 The language of the American Indian throws no light upon 
 his origin, except that that origin was so far remote that all 
 attempts by this clue, to establish a common center of human 
 creation, are utterly futile. — Prehistoric Races; (Foster), p. 318. 
 
 It has been asked if our Indians were not the wrecks of 
 more civilized nations. Their language refutes the hypothesis; 
 every one of its forms is a witness that their ancestors were, 
 like themselves, not yet disenthralled from nature. — History of 
 the United States; (Bancroft), Vol. 3, p. 265. 
 
 No theories of derivation from the Old World have stood the 
 test of grammatical construction. All traces of the fugitive 
 tribes of Israel, supposed to be found here, are again lost. — 
 Quotation from Hayden, in Prehistoric Races, p. 319. 
 
 As the American languages have no affinity with the Teutonic 
 or Semitic stocks, it is evident that the source or sources from 
 which they came far antedate the birth of the oldest people of 
 which history takes cognizance. Man must therefore have set 
 foot on American soil before the sprouting of the linguistic 
 twig which, after millenniums, produced the cuneiform inscrip- 
 tions of ancient Persia and Assyria. — North America; (Russell), 
 p. 360. 
 
 No authentic trace of any Old-World language thus far has 
 been found on this continent. North Americans of Yesterday; 
 (Dellcnbaugh), p. 428. 
 
 Instead of the Hebrew, the Basque of France comes 
 the nearest to the American tongues in its structure. 
 The Encyclopedia Britannica says of the Indian lan- 
 guages : 
 
 They come nearest in structure to the Basque, which is the 
 only incorporating language of the Old World. 
 
 Says Dellenbaugh : 
 
 While the Basque more nearly resembles the Amerind lang- 
 uages than does any other Old World tongue, it stops short of 
 the incorporating power of that of the Amerinds. — North Ameri- 
 cans of Yesterday, p. 22. 
 
17 
 
 The lists of Hebro-Indian comparisons that are 
 found in a number of Mormon works are without any 
 value whatever, as, in a number of instances, it has 
 been found that both the Hebrew and Indian words 
 have been changed to make their resemblance more 
 apparent! (See my Cumorah Revisited, Chapter IX, 
 for a full exposure of this trick.) 
 
 ERROR X. THE BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT 
 ANCIENT AMERICAN CIVILIZATION WAS EXOTIC; 
 ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION HAS ESTAB- 
 LISHED THAT IT WAS PURELY INDIGENOUS AND 
 OWED NOTHING TO THE OLD WORLD. 
 
 Of the Jaredites, Apostle Kelley says : 
 
 They brought with them the civilization, the arts, sciences, 
 habits, customs, traditions and languages of their day and time. 
 — Presidency and Priesthood, p. 258. 
 
 In opposition to this assertion, I submit the following 
 convincing and irrefutable testimonies from leading 
 scientific men : 
 
 The more we study them (the American monuments) the 
 more we find it necessary to believe that the civilization they 
 represent was originated in America, and probably in the region 
 where they are found. It did not come from the Old World; 
 it was the work of some remarkably gifted branch of the race 
 found on the southern part of this continent when it was dis- 
 covered in 1492. Undoubtedly it was very old. Its original 
 beginning may have been as old as Egypt, or even farther back 
 in the past than the ages to which Atlantis must be referred; 
 and it may have been later than the beginning of Egypt. Who 
 can certainly tell its age? Whether earlier or later, it was 
 original. — Ancient America; (Baldwin), p. 184. 
 
 We seek then in vain for any analogies in art which would con- 
 nect the civilization of this country with that of the Old World. 
 That art was not derived from a remote source; it was the out- 
 growth of a people domesticated to the soil. — Prehistoric Amer- 
 ica; (Foster), p. 330. 
 
 The most competent observers are agreed that American art 
 bears the indisputable stamp of its indigenous growth. Those 
 analogies and identities which have been brought forward to 
 prove its Asiatic or European or Polynesian origin, whether in 
 myth, folk-lore or technical details, belong wholly and only to 
 the uniform development of human culture under similar con- 
 ditions. This is their true anthropological interpretation, and 
 we need no other. — Myths of the New World; (Brinton), pp. 
 33, 34. 
 
 ERROR XI. THE BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT 
 THE NEPHITES UNDERSTOOD THE WRITTEN 
 LANGUAGE OF EGYPT; A CAREFUL COMPARISON 
 OF THE GRAPHIC SYSTEMS OF AMERICA AND 
 EGYPT REVEALS THE FACT THAT THE GRAPHIC 
 SYSTEMS OF THE TWO COUNTRIES ARE NOT 
 EVEN SIMILAR. 
 I make a record in the language of my father, which consists 
 
 of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians. 
 
 — 1 Nephi; 1:1 (J). 1:2 (B). 
 
18 
 
 And now behold, we have written this record according to 
 our knowledge in the characters, which are called among us 
 the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us, 
 according to our manner of speech. — Mormon; 4:98 (J), IX:32 
 (B). 
 
 As confirmatory of this, the Mormons have asserted 
 that Prof. LePlongeon discovered the "Ancient Maya 
 Hieratic Alphabet" and that a great number of its char- 
 acters resemble those of the Eg>'ptian. Now, it is true 
 that Prof. LePlongeon did produce an alphabet from 
 the Maya hieroglyphics, closely resembling the Egyp- 
 tian, which he claimed was the "key" that unlocked the 
 mysteries of ancient Maya writing. But, has this 
 alphabet demonstrated its correctness and value? It 
 most emphatically has not ; and, after having been before 
 the scientific world for thirty or more years, it is now 
 absolutely rejected by scholars, as have also been the 
 alphabets of Landa, De Rosny, Cresson and Rouchefou- 
 cauld. If the reader wishes to carry this inquiry fur- 
 ther, I suggest that he read Brinton's "A Primer of 
 Mayan Hieroglyphics" and "Essays of an Americanist;" 
 also consulting the Bulletins and Reports of the Bureau 
 of Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution. 
 
 Scholars are now pretty generally agreed that an- 
 cient American writing was indigenous in its origin and 
 development and owed nothing, whatever, to any influ- 
 ence from the other hemisphere. This will be seen 
 from the following quotations : 
 
 The American hieroglyphics contain no element to prove their 
 foreign origin, and there is no reason to look upon them as 
 other than the result of original native development. — Native 
 Races; (Bancroft), Vol. 2, p. 551. 
 
 Notwithstanding the oft-repeated assertion that a resemblance 
 between Egyptian and Maya hieroglyphics exists, no one of the 
 Egyptologists, so successful in their chosen field, has been able 
 to decipher the Maya writing. — North Americans of Antiquity; 
 (Short), /). 418. 
 
 So far as now (1900 A. D.) understood, there is no relation- 
 ship between any kind of Amerindian writing and that of other 
 races. Like everything else pertaining to the Amerind people, 
 the development appears to have been purely indigenous. — North 
 Americans of Yesterday; (Dellenbaugh), p. 80. 
 
 Prof. Cyrus Thomas, one of the most accomplished 
 students of Maya writing who has ever lived, says of 
 the characters of that system: 
 
 The more I study these characters the stronger becomes the 
 conviction that they have grown out of a pictographic system 
 similar to that common among the Indians of North America. 
 — Quoted in the Discovery of America; (Fiske), Vol. 1, p. 132. 
 
19 
 ERROR XII. THE BOOK OF MORMON TEACHES THAT 
 THE LAMANITES (THE AMERICAN INDIANS) OR- 
 IGINALLY BELIEVED IN THE EXISTENCE OF A 
 '•GREAT SPIRIT;" RESEARCH HAS CONCLUSIVELY 
 PROVED THAT THIS DEITY WAS WHOLLY AN IN- 
 VENTION OF THE WHITE MISSIONARY AFTER 
 THE DISCOVERY BY COLUMBUS. 
 And then Ammon said, Believest thou that there Is a Great 
 Spirit? And he said, Yea. And Ammon said. This is God. 
 And Ammon said unto him again, Believest thou that this Great 
 Spirit, who is God, created all things which are in heaven and 
 in the earth? And he said. Yea, I believe that he created all 
 things which are in the earth; but I do not know the heavens. 
 —Alma; 12:103-107 (J), XVIII :26-29 (B). 
 
 But the original words for "God" in all the American 
 tongues do not express the idea of personality, but 
 simply and only, the idea of the supernatural in general, 
 the mysterious, the incomprehensible, the unknown ; 
 and have been variously translated, "god," "spirit," 
 "heaven," "medicine," "hell" and the like. When the 
 missionary appeared upon the scene, he found that this 
 word, or these words, were not definite enough to ex- 
 press the Idea of the Divine Personality, so he invented 
 the term, "Great Spirit." As proof that the "Great 
 Spirit" was not originally the god of the red man. I 
 submit the following: 
 
 Of monotheism, either as displayed in the one personal, defi- 
 nite Gcd of the Semitic races, or in the pantheistic sense of the 
 Brahmins, there was net a single instance en the American 
 continent. — Myths of the New World; (Brinton), p. 69. 
 
 In no Indian language could the early missionaries find a 
 word to express the idea of God. Manitou and Oki meant any- 
 thing endowed with supernatural powers, from a snake skin or 
 a greasy Indian conjurer up to ]\Ianabozho and Jouskeha. — The 
 Jesuits in North America; (Parkman), p. 79. 
 
 The "Great Spirit," so popularly and poetically known h% 
 the god of the red man, and the "Happy Hunting-ground," gen- 
 erally reported to be the Indian's idea of a future state, are 
 both of them but their ready conception of the white man's 
 God and Heaven. This is evident from a careful study of their 
 past as gleaned from the numerous myths of their prehistoric 
 existence. — 2nd Report Bureau American Ethnology; (Erminie 
 A. Smith), pp. 52, 53. 
 
 Nations with civilized institutions, art with palaces, mon- 
 otheism as the worship of the Great Spirit, all vanish from the 
 priscan condition of North America in the light of anthropo- 
 logic research. Tribes with the social institutions of kinship, 
 art with its highest architectural development exhibited in the 
 structure of communal dwellings, and polytheism in the worship 
 of mythic animals and nature-gods, remain. — \st Report Bureau 
 American Ethnology; (Poiijell), p. 69. 
 
 They had no understanding of a single "Great Spirit" till 
 the Europeans, often unconsciously, informed them of their own 
 belief. — North Americans of Yesterday; (Dellenhaugh), p. 375. 
 
20 
 
 Instead of a "Great Spirit," the Indians originally i 
 worshiped spirits, the heavenly bodies, the sea, any awe- 
 inspiring work of nature, and deified animals and men. 
 For a further consideration of this subject, see my! 
 Cumorah Revisited (Chapter VIII) and Brinton's] 
 Myths of the New World. 
 
 \ 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 Reader, the leaders of the Latter-day Saints havej 
 been wont to boast that American anthropology is cer- 
 tainly and surely proving their claims. But, unless 
 themselves deluded, they have simply played upon 4'ie 
 ignorance of the general public about such matters. 
 Scientific investigation tells an entirely different story 
 about the ancient American races from that found in- 
 scribed upon the pages of the Book of Alormon. The 'e 
 is no agreement between the two. The Book of .<>. > 
 mon is based upon theories in vogue in 1830 and has but 
 little in common with the facts known In 1916. Much 
 of the Mormon "evidence" comes from the works of 
 men who wrote nearly a hundred years ago,, and whose 
 theories were never generally accepted. Some of it 
 comes from the works of men who wrote forty or fifty 
 years ago, who then stood high in the scientific world, 
 and whose theories were then plausible, viewed in the 
 light of the data then obtainable, but which have since 
 been refuted by deeper archaeological investigation. But 
 still more of it comes from "yellow journalism" and 
 similar sources. It is astonishing with what ease Mor- 
 monism swallows any story that smacks of mystery, no 
 matter how preposterous the story may be or how 
 much of scientific condemnation there may be against 
 it. For years it has flaunted before the public the noto- 
 rious archaeological frauds, the "Kinderhook Plates'* 
 and the "Newark Tablets," as proof that the ancient 
 Americans had an hieroglyphical system of writing; yet 
 both of these frauds were fully exposed fifty, or more, ^^f\ 
 years ago. From the facts that are given in the fore- 
 going pages, it will be readily seen how utterly at vari- 
 ance Uie Book of Mormon and American archccolouy 
 are. Across its claim of historical credibility and divin 
 inspiration must be written the word "TEKEL," "thoi 
 art weighed in the balances and art found wanting/^ 
 February, 1916. 
 
PHOTOMOUNT 
 PAMPHLET BINDER 
 
 PAT. NO. 
 877188 
 
 Manufactured by 
 
 ;GAYL0RD BROS. Inc. 
 
 Syracuse, N. Y. 
 
 Stockton, Calif. 
 
 
 Date Due 
 
 ; 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 '"■^ 
 
 
 
 
 ■m^^>^ 
 
 ^. 
 
 
 ■^f0^S^ 
 
 k 
 
 
 
 ■ Mmm/' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 mi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 f) 
 
 i !