[Editor’s Note: We are pleased to present chapter 7 from a book entitled Anachronisms: Accidental Evidence in Book of Mormon Criticisms. It is presented in serialized form in this volume of Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship.]
Table of Contents
Preface
Chapter 1 — Book of Mormon Animals
Chapter 2 — Warfare in the Book of Mormon
Chapter 3 — Metals and Metallurgy
Chapter 5 — Book of Mormon Names
Chapter 6 — Old World Journeys by Land and Sea
Chapter 7 — Records, Writing, and Language
Chapter 8 — Events in Third Nephi
Chapter 7: Records, Writing, and Language
Items mentioned in the Book of Mormon relating to ancient records and languages have been grouped under this category. These include alleged anachronisms relating to writing on metal plates, archaeological evidence for Hebrew and Egyptian writing, and pre-Columbian writing.
193. Jews Writing in Egyptian
Status: Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: Book of Mormon writers said they wrote in “the language of the Egyptians” (1 Nephi 1:2) or used “reformed Egyptian” characters (Mormon 9:32). Some have claimed that Jews would never have written in ancient Egyptian.1
Response: Examples of Jewish texts written in Egyptian scripts are now attested from preexilic times in Israel and the ancient Near East.2
[Page 204]194. Scripture in Egyptian
Status: Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: The Book of Mormon also states that the writings on the plates of brass, which contained the five books of Moses, a history of the Jews, and the writings of prophets like Jeremiah and Isaiah (1 Nephi 5), were in Egyptian (Mosiah 1:4). Some have specifically claimed that ancient Israelites and Jews would never have written scriptures in Egyptian.3
Response: Scriptural texts written in Egyptian are attested. For example, Amherst Papyrus 63 (figure 53), a papyrus from the second century BC, has a copy of Psalm 20:2–6 written in Demotic Egyptian script.4

Figure 53. Papyrus Amherst 63.4. (Wikimedia Commons, s.v. “Papyrus Amherst 63.4,” commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=152360431.)
195. Anthon Transcript and Egyptian
Status: Partially Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: At the behest of Joseph Smith, Martin Harris delivered a transcript of characters copied from the plates of the Book of Mormon to a scholar named Charles Anthon to verify their authenticity and possibly provide a translation. The original copy of these characters is apparently no longer extant, but several other copies of a portion of those characters based upon that earlier copy have survived.5 [Page 205]Some claim that these extant copies of Book of Mormon characters bear no resemblance to ancient Egyptian.6
Response: Although subsequently denied by Charles Anthon, historical evidence suggests that he told Martin Harris that the transcribed characters resembled “short-hand” Egyptian, a term that was used in literature in the professor’s personal library to refer to Egyptian hieratic script. The term “short-hand” Egyptian would not have likely been known to Harris before his visit to Anthon.7
While most of the relatively few scholars who have considered the issue have been dismissive of the so-called Anthon transcript, two non-Latter-day Saint Egyptologists suggested a resemblance to Egyptian scripts. William Hayes, former Curator of Egyptian Art at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, thought it could conceivably have been an example of hieratic script.8 Professor Richard A. Parker of the Department of Egyptology at Brown University thought the characters “could well be the latest form of the written language—demotic characters.”9
196. Metal Plates (OW)
Status: Confirmed (1829–1844)
Critics’ Claim: The Book of Mormon is presented as a translation from gold plates (Joseph Smith—History 1:34), and makes reference to several other records on metal plates throughout its pages (1 Nephi 3:24; 9:4; Mosiah 8:9; Mormon 2:18). Although there was some evidence for the ancient practice of writing on metal plates at the time the Book of Mormon was published, it is unclear if Joseph Smith was familiar with such sources. Some of his contemporaries claimed that important records were not kept on metal plates in ancient times. The missionary and Latter-day Saint Apostle John Taylor wrote in 1843 that he and others were told that “it was improbable, nay, almost impossible—notwithstanding the testimony of history to the contrary, that anything like plates could have been used anciently; particularly among this people.”10 The general idea of metal plates in antiquity was dismissed by some critics as well as the possibility that such plates could have been found in the Americas.
Response: Since the publication of the Book of Mormon, thousands of examples of metal plates have been recovered from the past, pointing to the widespread nature of the practice across time and in various cultures. (See figure 54 for an example.) Additionally, many of these [Page 206]documents show affinities with the contents of metal plates described in the Book of Mormon.11

Figure 54. Kamauli copper plate inscription of Vaidadeva. (Arthur Venis, s.v. “Kamauli copper plate inscription of Vaidyadeva plate 3 obverse,” Wikimedia Commons, commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kamauli_copper_plate_inscription_of_Vaidyadeva_plate_3_obverse.jpg.)
197. Israelite Writing on Metal
Status: Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that ancient Israelites or Jews never kept records on metal. “The Jews never kept any of their records on plates of brass,” one critic asserted.12 Another wrote, “The records of the Jews were not engraven on plates but written on skins.”13
When the Book of Mormon came to reveal to the world that these migrating people . . . had the custom of engraving their records on tablets of gold or copper to leave to posterity . . . the wise laughed heartily at these absurdities.14
Response: Examples of Israelite or Jewish metallic records include the silver Ketef Hinnom amulets, which date to before the destruction of the first Jerusalem temple, and also the copper scroll inscribed with a list of purported treasures from the Jerusalem temple that was [Page 207]found with the Dead Sea Scrolls. The copper scroll is actually two metal copper plates that were then rolled together.15
A medieval Jewish text called The Treatise of the Vessels, recently translated into English, references a list of temple treasures that were hidden away in the earth and claims that “Shimmur the Levite and his companions wrote them on a tablet of bronze, along with all the vessels of the most holy sanctuary which Solomon the son of David made.”16
There is also a report from an eighteenth-century British sailor that a Jewish colony in India preserved a record of their people, written in Hebrew and inscribed on copper plates. Interestingly, this group of Jews reportedly belonged to the tribe of Manasseh and fled Israel close to the time of Lehi. Thus, although the account can’t currently be verified, it provides a close analogue to the story of the Book of Mormon.17
198. Scripture Inscribed on Metal
Status: Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: Some have specifically claimed that ancient Israelites and Jews never wrote scripture on metal.18
Response: The preexilic silver Ketef Hinnom amulets bear an inscription from the priestly blessing in Numbers 6:24–26.19 Sacred texts considered scripture in other religious traditions were also sometimes engraved on metal plates.20
199. Writing on Metal Plates (NW)
Status: Unconfirmed
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that there are no New World archaeological examples of texts inscribed on metal plates from pre-Columbian times.21
Response: There is currently no evidence for this.
200. Pre-Columbian Writing
Status: Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that there is no evidence for writing in pre-Columbian times. Early Apostle Parley P. Pratt reported that a Reverend Peck, in 1831, rejected the Book of Mormon stating that [Page 208]there were no inscriptions from pre-Columbian times.22 One critic in Great Britain stated in 1838,
According to Mormon, these native Americans could read and write . . . but when that country first became known to Europeans, the inhabitants knew no more about letters than the four-legged animal knows the rules of logic; and not a scrap of writing was to be found.23
Another in 1840 claimed that there was not “even so much as a shadow or proof that the sciences of reading and writing [and other evidences of advanced culture mentioned in the Book of Mormon] were ever known here.”24 “When that country first became known to Europeans, the inhabitants knew no more about letters than a monkey knows about logic.”25
It is a well-known fact that the Indians had no books, and among the twenty millions who were found scattered about through the three Americas when Columbus made his discovery four hundred years ago, none of them could read, and consequently they had no literature to transmit.26
“There is no evidence that Indians had anything other than simple pictorial writing at that time. They wrote no books.”27
Response: The widespread practice of writing on stone and paper codices in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica is now well known (figure 55).28
201. Early Pre-Columbian Writing
Status: Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that pre-Columbian writing did not develop until centuries after the period described in the Book of Mormon. “Literacy in Middle America came into its florescence many years after the Book of Mormon dates, and during most of the period ascribed to the Mormon record there was no true literacy known on the American continents.”29
Response: Evidence now indicates that pre-Columbian writing was known from an early period in Mesoamerica. Recently, multispectral imaging was done on bark paper fragments, the remains of a Maya codex found in lowland Guatemala dating to the Early Classic. Researchers discovered that the codex had been painted over, [Page 209]concealing an earlier text so that the paper could be transcribed with a newer one.30 Pre-Columbian codices may have been used as early as Olmec times in the Early Preclassic Period.31

Figure 55. Replica of a Classic Maya Codex. (Gary Todd, s.v. “Classic Maya Codex, Replica,” Wikimedia Commons, commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Classic_Maya_Codex,_Replica.jpg.)
202. Reformed Egyptian (OW)
Status: Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that there has been no such thing as “reformed Egyptian” (Mormon 9:32).32
Response: “Reformed” (that is, modified forms of) Egyptian script are now well-known, of which hieratic and Demotic Egyptian are two examples.33
203. Evidence of Egyptian Language (NW)
Status: Partially Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that there is no evidence that Egyptian was ever known in pre-Columbian times.34
Response: Linguistic evidence from Uto-Aztecan languages that [Page 210]were spoken in Mexico and the North American southwest suggests a significant influence from ancient Egyptian.35
204. Egyptian or Reformed Egyptian Inscriptions (NW)
Status: Unconfirmed
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that no pre-Columbian inscriptions of Egyptian script have been discovered in the New World.36
Response: It is true that no authentic Egyptian inscriptions have thus far been discovered from pre-Columbian times.
205. Evidence of Hebrew Language (NW)
Status: Partially Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that there is no evidence that the Hebrew language was known in ancient America.37
Response: Research on Uto-Aztecan languages provides evidence suggesting a significant influence from ancient Aramaic and Hebrew.38
206. Hebrew Inscriptions (NW)
Status: Unconfirmed
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that no pre-Columbian Hebrew inscriptions have been found in the Americas.39
Response: No authentic Hebrew inscriptions have been identified thus far.
207. Inscriptions with Book of Mormon Names (OW)
Status: Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that not a single place mentioned in the Book of Mormon has been identified in ancient writings.40
Response: Nephi mentions a place called Nahom on his family’s journey through the wilderness (1 Nephi 16:34). The name NHM, which is a viable ancient spelling for Nahom, has been identified with a tribe and location in ancient Yemen. Inscriptions rediscovered in the twentieth century show that the name for this region and tribe was extant at the time of Lehi. This is significant because unlike other names mentioned in Nephi’s account to which his family gave their own personal [Page 211]names, the place of Ishmael’s burial was previously called by that name (1 Nephi 16:34).41
208. Inscriptions with Book of Mormon Names (NW)
Status: Unconfirmed
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that no Book of Mormon names have been discovered in pre-Columbian inscriptions.42
Response: No such inscriptions have been found thus far.
209. Inscriptions with Book of Mormon Texts
Status: Unconfirmed
Critics’ Claim: Some have claimed that no pre-Columbian inscriptions with texts from the Book of Mormon have been found.43
Response: No such inscriptions have so far been found.
210. Practice of Hiding Up Records
Status: Confirmed (1966–2023)
Critics’ Claim: Early critics of the Book of Mormon claimed that the practice of hiding up records (Mormon 1:3, 6:6; Joseph Smith—History 1:51–52) is suspicious and not authentic.44
Response: The practice of hiding or burying sacred records in the earth, often with the intention to bring them forth for a later time, is now a well-attested ancient and pre-modern historical practice.45
211. Inscribed Stone Monuments (NW)
Status: Confirmed (1829–1844)
Critics’ Claim: The Book of Mormon mentions “a large stone . . . with engravings on it” (Omni 1:20). Some have claimed that there is no evidence of stone monuments in pre-Columbian times.46
Response: Illustrated examples of stone monuments with inscriptions were described by Stephens and Catherwood in their 1841 publication Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan.47 According to David Stuart, “Mayanists are now accustomed to the idea that ancient Maya artisans and scribes, when composing and carving monumental inscriptions, were principally concerned with the [Page 212]commemoration of historical events surrounding kings, their families, and their courts.”48
Summary of Results
During the first period (1830–1844), nine items relating to language, writing, and records had been mentioned by writers, two of which found confirmation by 1844. Two others were partially confirmed and five were unconfirmed (figure 56). In the second period (1845–1965), the total had risen to eighteen items, six confirmed, one partially confirmed, and eleven unconfirmed (figure 57). During the third period (1966–2024), there were nineteen items, eleven confirmed, three partially confirmed, and five unconfirmed (figure 58).

Figure 56. Anachronisms for records, writing, and language in the Book of Mormon (1830–1844).
[Page 214]

Figure 57. Anachronisms for records, writing, and language in the Book of Mormon (1845–1965).
[Page 215]

Figure 58. Anachronisms for records, writing, and language in the Book of Mormon (1966–2024).

Go here to see the 5 thoughts on ““Anachronisms: Accidental Evidence in Book of Mormon Criticisms — Chapter 7: Records, Writing, and Language”” or to comment on it.