Spalding–Rigdon theory of Book of Mormon authorship

The Spalding–Rigdon theory of Book of Mormon authorship is the theory that the Book of Mormon was plagiarized in part from an unpublished manuscript written by Solomon Spalding. This theory first appeared in print in the book Mormonism Unvailed [sic], published in 1834 by E. D. Howe. The theory claimed that the Spalding manuscript was at some point acquired by Sidney Rigdon, who used it in collusion with Joseph Smith to produce the Book of Mormon. Although Rigdon claimed that he was converted to the Latter Day Saint movement through reading the Book of Mormon, Howe argued that the story was a later invention to cover the book's true origins. Contemporary Mormon apologetics state that the theory has been disproved and is discredited and argue that "few historians—whether friendly or hostile to the truth claims of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church)—believe that the historical data support the Spalding manuscript hypothesis." Reaction within the Latter Day Saint movement: Most Mormons give the Spalding–Rigdon theory little credence, believing that it has, as asserted by the Maxwell Institute, "fallen on hard times." In a paper titled "The Mythical 'Manuscript Found'", Matthew Roper concludes: Whether one accepts the Spalding explanation or some other theory, one still has to explain not only if, but how Joseph Smith or any other candidate could write such a book, a point upon which critics have never agreed and probably never will agree. The Book of Mormon will always be an enigma for the unbeliever. The Latter-day Saint, of course, already has an explanation that nicely circumvents that puzzle. For those who are unwilling to believe Joseph Smith's explanation of the origin of the Book of Mormon but who still cannot see the ignorant Palmyra plowboy as responsible for its contents, some variation of the Spalding theory with its mythical "Manuscript Found" may be the best fiction they can contrive. In 1840, Benjamin Winchester, a Mormon defender who had been "deputed ... to hunt up the Hurlbut case," published a book rejecting the Spalding theory as "a sheer fabrication." Winchester attributed the creation of the entire story to Doctor Philastus Hurlbut, one of Howe's researchers. Regarding Rigdon's alleged involvement, Rigdon's son John recounted an interview with his father in 1865: "My father, after I had finished saying what I have repeated above, looked at me a moment, raised his hand above his head and slowly said, with tears glistening in his eyes: 'My son, I can swear before high heaven that what I have told you about the origin of the Book of Mormon is true. Your mother and sister, Mrs. Athalia Robinson, were present when that book was handed to me in Mentor, Ohio, and all I ever knew about the origin of the Book of Mormon was what Parley P. Pratt, Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Smith and the witnesses who claimed they saw the plates have told me, and in all of my intimacy with Joseph Smith he never told me but one story.'" Daniel C. Peterson contends that there is little or no evidence supporting the Spalding–Rigdon theory and that extensive evidence, including "very sophisticated statistical analysis," renders it "deeply improbable and only desperate necessity would ever have given rise to it in the first place. But the Spalding theory nonetheless limps on in certain circles." Peterson also argues that the Spalding–Rigdon theory must be placed in the larger historical context of the advent of Mormonism, asserting that even so, it doesn't even begin to explain the Witnesses, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, and a host of other matters."