|
Commentary on M. D. Bown's Book of Mormon / Spalding MS Parallels Numbers 25-47 (Full Commentary) by Dale R. Broadhurst Revision 0a: September, 1998 Editorial and Bibliographic Information |
|
ITEMIZED LIST OF PRESUMED SIMILARITIES Between Spaulding's "Manuscript Story" and the Book of Mormon Specific and single similarities have been isolated, listed separately, and numbered, with the paralleling citations from each work following. Whenever possible, direct quotations have been made. Only when necessary has discussion been utilized, and here care has been taken that the duplicating references are amply and accurately recorded -- but even so, errors no doubt will appear. This method of listing parallels is cumbersome perhaps, and has involved exceeding labor in preparation; but it seems to have the merit of providing direct comparison between the two works with a minimum of vagueness. "MS" refers to Solomon Spaulding's "Manuscript Story," the edition used being published at the Millennial Star Office, Liverpool, England, 1910, 116 pages. "BM" refers to the BOOK OF MORMON, and the edition used was published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City, 1920, 522pp. Please Read These Notes First: 1. All additions to Bown's original paper are shown in blue. 2. Commentary here as a summary; For full commentary follow the links. 3. The Commentator's Personal Ratings of Bown's Parallels: * poor parallel or not a parallel: should have been dropped Some On-line Textual Resources: 1. Search the Book of Mormon: LDS and RLDS texts (side-by-side scrolling comparison) 2. Search the Book of Mormon: Current LDS edition (includes phrase search) 3. Search the Book of Mormon: 1830 edition (includes concordance functions) 4. Search the Spalding MS: Special e-text version (includes concordance functions) 5. Search the Spalding MS: Special e-text (side-by-side with 1830 Book of Alma) 6. Search the Spalding MS: LDS 1910 edition (the edition used in Bown's citations) 7. Read Holley's book: Book of Mormon: A Closer Look (Spalding / BoM Comparisons) 8. Search the Bible: King James version (includes Apocrypha & concordance functions) 9. Search Ethan Smith's Book: View of the Hebrews (includes concordance functions) |
|
25. There were many tribes or races of people. Full comments on item #25: Bown again provides us with a parallel so loosely worded that it is practically meaningless. We might expect that any history of the pre-Columbian Americas, whether true or otherwise, would mention a variety of inhabitant groups. A better explanation would inform us that neither account goes to the trouble of describing and enumerating all of the pre-Columbian inhabitants of the Americas. Spalding's natives are the Ohians and the various savage tribes which he apparently meant to include all American Indians. Of these only the "Deliwan" nation is named. These people obviously correspond to the Delaware Indians, who originally occupied the same region where Spalding makes his Romans land. Both the traditions of the "Deliwan" and the real Delaware told them that they had once migrated to the Eastern Woodlands and Atlantic Seaboard from the west. Contrasted with the savage tribes are Spalding's lighter-skinned, more civilized Ohians. He never tells us their origins. Finally, we have the more recent arrivals of Lobaska's family and the Romans. The Sciotans and the Kentucks were merely two political divisions of the Ohian people. Both nations apparently accepted into their ranks various neighboring tribes, some of which may have been Spalding's stereotypical American Indians. Lobaska's descendants had even lighter skins than the typical Ohians. They became the leading families of that people and eventually became racially inseparable from them. Such also appears to have been the fate of Spalding's Romans, though in their case they began by inter-marrying with the Deliwan. Through an unclearly stated process of warfare, Spalding seems to have exterminated the Ohians, leaving only savage tribes to meet Columbus. The Book of Mormon has no native people to welcome its storm-tossed arrivals. Apparently both the Jaredites and the Lehites, in their turn, occupied Americas devoid of other inhabitants. As to who the Mulekites were and what there fate was, we are given practically no information. The Lehites, like Spalding's Ohians, quickly split into two rival political groups: the Nephites and the Lamanites. The Lamanites soon become what appears to be a racially distinct people who then correspond roughly with Spalding's savage tribes. The other peoples Bown mentions are essentially Nephite sub-divisions. Given this information, we see that the tribal and racial commonalties between Spalding's peoples and the Book of Mormon peoples are nowhere strong and distinct. While we may draw a few sub-parallels between the various groups, the fact the texts mention multiple groups is itself only barely a parallel. 26. The people built cities. Full comments on item #26: Neither account tells us much about its cities. We can gather that most were walled inhabitations and they had some similar defensive (fortifying) structures. Beyond this the cities of the two accounts most resemble each other in what we are not told about them. We know practically nothing of their design and layout. We are told very little about the economies which supported them or how each influenced the region which surrounded it. Cities like Zarahemla and Tolanga were administrative centers, but we do not know much of their connections with other cities and towns. Given what little information we can put together, I have the uneasy feeling that the remains of both Zarahemla and Tolanga would be archaeologically indistinguishable from those of Hopewell Cahokia. With the best of luck we might find some non-Hopewell cultural artifacts in a Spalding city or a Mormon city to help us identify the ruins. But even a non-Indian identification would not help us distinguish the site of Zarahemla from that of Tolanga or Gamba. 27. Built along the seashore and bodies of water. Full comments on item #27: Given the topography and vegetative cover of those inhabitable parts of the Americas where we find rivers and seashores with natural harbors, it is not surprising that the cities would first grow up along their banks. This was certainly be the case in post-Colombian days, and the major "mound-builder" sites of the Eastern Woodlands are generally found in these places. Some known pre-Columbian population centers developed in places well away from major rivers and seashores. The terrain and vegetation of such places as the Valley of Mexico and the Andean highlands present some exceptions to this paradigm, but the major native inhabitations and ceremonial centers of those places were generally planned constructions; chosen for economic or defensive purposes; and built late in the evolution of the local cultures. The karst topography of Yucatan does not allow for much in the way of rivers but at least one Mayan center was built upon the seacoast. Excluding modern California, Argentina, and the Pacific Northwest, we are left with little beyond the favored Tehuantepec of contemporary Book of Mormon scholars, Central America, and the region east of the Mississippi for a land of cities built upon rivers and seashores. Several Book of Mormon descriptions appear to show that the Jaredites and Lehites favored locations in well-watered lands and along seacoasts. If a Great Lakes Geography could be established for the Book of Mormon lands, the parallel with Spalding's seacoast settlements might be strengthened. See my comments on Bown's item #23 for more thoughts on this possibility. 28. Some modern building methods were used. Full comments on item #28: It is probably incorrect to view the structures and building methods of either source as being exclusively "modern." About the only Spalding building element that would be an out-of-place addition to known pre-Columbian homes would be his fireplace with a draft chimney. But this is not found in Book of Mormon structures. Exactly what the Book of Mormon writer meant by the word "cement" is unclear. Presumably he did not mean reinforced concrete construction, but rather the cementing of stones to produce structural walls. Joseph Smith, jr. used the term with this general meaning when he spoke of finding a cemented stone box of Nephite construction. Structures built of cemented stone, plastered over on the outside and roofed with wood, sod, or additional rock work could have been erected by Book of Mormon peoples and Spalding's Ohians with equal ease. The civilized peoples of both accounts appear to have reached about the same level of technology and both would have generally had the same building materials to work with. Bown is thus incorrect in seeing this type of building as being exclusively "modern." Primitive cement can be made from a mixture of ground limestone, sand, clay and a bit of vegetable fiber. Such a material would weather and deteriorate in most climates, leaving little evidence in the archaeological record. 29. Some of the people built houses of wood. Full comments on item #29: If Bown meant this generality to serve as a parallel, he should have said something similar to my comments given for his item #28. It is a bit unclear whether Book of Mormon peoples built houses of wood and houses of cement, or whether they built some houses exclusively out of wood and others of both wood and cement. Houses like those described by Spalding, built of plastered wood, could easily be essentially the same as structures built both of wood and cement. Perhaps Book of Mormon "cement" was little more than a structurally stronger version of Ohian "plaster." At any rate, pre-Columbian houses of Spalding's exact type have never been uncovered. These fictional structures probably find their closest real equivalents in some of the highland constructions of ancient South America. 30. Others lived in tents. Full comments on item #30: Bown is correct in equating Spalding's "wigwams" with at least some of the Book of Mormon "tents." Those of the Lamanites would likely be close counterparts. He might have strengthened his parallel by noting that the Ohian soldiers on campaign encamped in tents, just as their Book of Mormon military counterparts did. During one night-time break in the battle, the Nephite commander, Teancum, stole into the encampment and into "the TENT of the (enemy) king, and put a javelin to his heart." During another nightly break in battle, Spalding has two Kentuck warriors plan a similar murder within the nearby enemy encampment. There plans are concocted while they are "sitting in their TENT." Both the Nephite and the Ohian warriors would have experienced great difficulty in carrying about such heavy baggage as tents; especially so during some of their rapid troop deployments, undetected night-time movements, etc. The Nephite people who traveled about with all their flocks and possessions would have more naturally lived in tents. Other than the Deliwan, these kinds of non-military tent-dwellers are not mentioned by Spalding. 31. They fortified their cities and borders. Full comments on item #31: The Ohian and Nephite fortification efforts were essentially identical and both would have taken a tremendous expenditure of energy and resources over relatively short periods of time. It does little good to build half a fort or to slowly add new border defenses. Such constructions are planned and quickly executed in response to hostile threats, especially when such threats occur along the frontiers of a nation. The interior defenses mentioned in both records may have been erected at a somewhat more leisurely pace. It is possible a nation to fortify cities a few at a time, concentrating its initial efforts on those most vulnerable to attack. Spalding's Ohians never lost their warlike spirit, not even during their lengthy period of peace and prosperity. They trained soldiers and engaged in border skirmishes with the savage tribes on their borders. These hostile frontier encounters helped encourage them to fortify their borders, but their most important works of defensive construction appear to have been the walls and special forts they build for their cities and towns. In Spalding's story at least some of these forts were erected outside their cities or adjacent to them. This also appears to have been the defensive policy of the Nephites at one stage in their wars with the Lamanites. Not only do the Lamanites (like the Sciotans) slip past the enemy's border defenses rather quickly, they did not have to contend with strongly fortified citadels within the Nephite cities themselves. This was also the experience of the Sciotans in their occupation of northern Kentuck, and it probably indicates that in both accounts some cities were fully built before any pressing need for building fortifications arose. 32. These fortifications were similar. Full comments on item #32: This is one of Bown's better discoveries, but it is slightly weakened by the fact that any ancient Americans building an extensive network of forts would probably have used the same methods and materials. These fortifications correspond to what we know of the "mound-builder" enclosures which were scattered throughout the Mississippi Valley and the lands drained by the Ohio. Josiah Priest and Ethan Smith, in telling of these ancient earthworks, provided essentially the same descriptions as do Spalding and the Book of Mormon writers. If we were to reconstruct Forts William Henry, Niagara, and Ticonderoga (minus their gun emplacements) we would have similar earth and wood structures -- forts familiar to Julius Caesar, Natty Bumppo, Moroni, and Prince Moonrod alike. Bown's parallel would be stronger if he could show some common phraseology in the two accounts. But Spalding uses "trench" or "canal" where the Book of Mormon uses "ditch;" and the Ohian "ramparts" are not quite the same as Moroni's "banks" and "ridges." About the only common words in the two accounts at this point are "dirt," "walls," and "timber(s)." In terms of common vocabulary, the Nephite description lies closer to ones provided by Josiah Priest and Ethan Smith than they do to Spalding's. Perhaps the only item that catches our eye as being of any special interest is that "UPON THE TOP OF" his earthen ridges Moroni placed upright "TIMBERS" or "pickets" which were "the height of a man." This corresponds to the Ohians' "sharpened" pieces of "TIMBER ON THE TOP OF" the earthen ramparts being "about seven feet in length." Perhaps a giant like King Sambal could have peered over the top of this huge picket fence while standing on his tip-toes. 33. There were classes among the people. Full comments on item #33: This is yet another one of Bown's ubiquitous generalities that barely qualifies as a parallel. Spalding use of the term "class" does not present us with a picture of any rigid caste-system being in place among the Ohians. Rather, Spalding paints a picture of an ancient people who dressed plainly and lived in plain-looking cottages. They may have looked something like ancient Shakers. The major class distinction among them must have been the noble or royal status held by the descendants of Lobaska. The Book of Mormon account also provides us with some examples of nobility and royalty. There were a number of shameless ingrates who desired such a status badly enough to join parties of "king-men" or even commit secret murders to improve their positions in society. Beyond this, the only real class distinctions in the two records appear to be based upon race and wealth. Within the Ohian and Nephite societies themselves, race would have not been an issue. That leaves us with the parallel of wealth creating something like an upper class in both accounts. Since "chances for learning" would have been largely dependent upon prior status and wealth, they must have been only a minor factor in sustaining the class-structure. Initially the great reformer Lobaska established schools for the "principal subjects of the King," but in later times education appears to have as widespread among the Ohians as it was among the Nephites. 34. The people were governed by kings. Full comments on item #34: This parallel is valid, but Bown presents an incomplete view of the topic. The emperors of the Roman story appear neither in the Jaredite record nor the Nephite stories. And, while a crude sort of kingship existed among Spalding's Deliwan and the Book of Mormon Lamanites, the more developed royal administration appears to have been limited to the Jaredites, the Benjamin-Mosiah era Nephites, and the Ohians before the appearance of Lobaska. Ohian kingship under Lobaska's imperial administration was obviously something different from the old royal system. Bown neglected to mention that the more enlightened Nephite governments were headed by judges, not kings. This practice is echoed in Fabius' party, where Roman rule by imperial deligation of powers is replaced by what appears to be a primitive communal Christianity, governed by elected judges. The judges in both accounts appear to have drawn upon the pre-Saulite traditions of the early Israelites as their judicial-administrative protypes. 35. The kingship passed from father to son. Full comments on item #35: This observation is generally true, but it overlooks the fact that Nephite kings could resign from office and hand their powers over to (apparently) whomever they chose. This avoidance of absolute rule and leadership responsibility for life finds some resonance in the institution of Nephite judgeship, as well as in the story of Alma, the great religious leader who elected to relinquish his authority and disappear in his later life. Spalding was also taken with this idea: his Fabius gives up power long enough to allow an election which returns it, and the great religious teacher, Lobaska, like Alma, wanders off to places unknown in his old age, leaving the high priesthood to his sons in Sciota and Kentuck. Spalding was no doubt a great supporter of Hamiltonian democracy and he probably carried memories of Washington's final address with him to his death-bed. The story of Washington's having refused a kingly title must have been a perpetual delight to the Vermont democrat. Holley tries, without much success, to demonstrate a similar father-to-son passing of office between the high priests mentioned in both records. While the Spalding story has an hereditary high-priestly office, Holley's evidence for the same institution in the Book of Mormon is generally unconvincing. 36. Practiced communal living. Full comments on item #36: Bown would have done better to have mentioned that only a relatively small portion of the peoples in either account ever practiced communal living. Excluding the original Lehites, the tribal Lamanites, and Spalding's tribal people, the practice appears to have been limited to Fabius' little group of castaways and to gospel-influenced Nephite Christians. Lamanite converts to Christianity appear to have had their racial "curse" removed and became, for all practical purposes, Nephites themselves Having narrowed down the times, places, and conditions where comunal living was practiced in the two accounts, we see that in each case it was among the gospel-influenced Christians, who must have looked to a similar innovation among the earliest of Old World Christians for their example. In the case of the pre-advent Nephites this information would have come through predictive prophecy; the Romans would have known it from the Book of Acts in their scriptures. No doubt early advocates of communal life within Mormonism (like Sidney Rigdon and Lyman Wight) would have felt equally at home in either community (Roman or Nephite). 37. Trade and commerce practiced in times of peace. Full comments on item #37: The trade between the Sciotans (not "Ohons") and Kentucks paralleled that carried on among the Jaredites and that entered into by the Lamanites and Nephites. The Ohians also traded "to the southwestward," for "cotton and other articles." New World cotton would have been available to the Ohians in the Valley of Mexico, and perhaps from sources as close to home as the Indians tribes living south of the Colorado. The Nephites presumably grew their own Old World cotton and flax. Nothing is said in the Book of Mormon of their engaging in the wide-ranging trade of such raw materials. (See also my comments for Bown's item #53.) 38. They had a system of taxation. Full comments on item #38: Although the two accounts both tell of taxation, their respective descriptions of that institution are quite different. The taxes mentioned in the Book of Mormon taxes appear to be mostly onerous levies of goods and corvee labor. This burdened the pious with a biblical-style oppression from which they sought salvation. In the Spalding story taxation is mentioned only once, and then as a legal provision, not in terms of any particular set of practices of instances of enactment. Ohian taxes were to be levied for the legitimate support of a benevolent constitutional imperialism. 39. They wrote in characters. Full comments on item #39: This is one of Bown's more weighty discoveries. While the Jaredites and Lehites were accustomed to inscribing their writings on metal, rather than on Ohian parchment, the use of characters in Spalding and the Mormon book is essentially the same. The Book of Mormon peoples brought their character-writing with them from Asia. Spalding's Lobaska, who was apparently also from Asia, brought similar characters with him and taught their use to the Ohians. Holley attempts to extend Bown's parallel here by demonstrating that Nephite communication was also written in parallel columns. In order to do this he is forced to resort to the external (and perhaps partly unreliable) statements of Charles Anthon. While the Egyptian writing found in monumental engravings, in early texts accompanying religious paintings, and in hillside graffiti might be written columns, the cursive script of their records was almost always written on horizontal lines. If the Ohians wrote their columns in Egyptian, the text must have been "unreformed" hieroglyphic, not hieratic or demotic. It is possible that Spalding somewhere saw reproductions of meso-American inscriptions from a stele or some other source where the "characters" had been inscribed vertically. If so, he provides us with no hint that Ohian writing had any counterparts in the Valley of Mexico and points southward. 40. They also wrote on a roll. Full comments on item #40: Bown's quoting from the Isaiah texts reproduced on Nephi's small plates is rather disingenuous, to say the least. The contents of these Old World documents cannot always be applied directly to the descendants of Lehi in the New World. From their records and traditions, some Nephites were probably familiar with writing in scrolls and rolls. Perhaps their "epistles," so quickly exchanged under battlefield conditions, were inscribed on Nephite parchment. But all this is speculation, not a textual parallel. 41. They communicated by means of letters. Full comments on item #41: The Nephite-Lamanite letters do not deserve such a grandly biblical identification as "epistles." That word probably crept into the translation of the Nephite record in emulation of New Testamant terminology. They are, in fact, precisely the same sorts of documents as Spalding's written messages, albeit more wordy and tiresome to read. Holley says that the exchanges of letters are located in about the same relative places in the story outlines of the two accounts, and I'd agree with that statement. Both accounts are using the same literary device to personalize and enrich their narratives. The sub-parallels which might be found within these missive collections deserve some careful study themselves. 42. The people were agricultural. Full comments on item #42: Here is another of Bown's self-evident disclosures. Practically every people on the face of the planet were farmers or herdsmen until the Europeans barred the Jews from such livelihoods during the middle ages. It comes as no surprise that both Spalding and the Book of Mormon offer us examples of farmers, livestock-raisers, and hunter-gatherers. Both accounts tell of some industry, trade, craftmanship, educational services, etc., so we might expect that there was something of a diversified economy among their respective groups of peoples. Generally speaking, the level they had reached in regard to agricultural and industrial technology was about the same. 43. Corn and wheat were raised. Full comments on item #43: Here is the information Bown should have provided in his previous parallel. The Ohians and Nephites parallel each other in their raising of New World maize (Indian corn) and Old World wheat. Maize cultivation is essentially a horticultural endeavor; it can be carried on garden-style without the use of plows and draught animals. It is not surprising that both accounts mention the raising of corn. We would fault them with a serious omission if they did not. But wheat cultivation is an altogether different undertaking. The adoption of wheat-based subsistence agriculture requires a considerable number of trade-offs in a peoples' elected lifestyle, nutrition, tool kits, social organization, animal husbandry, etc. The same might be said for rice cultivation, the adoption of which makes a similar, but not exactly the same, impact upon a people. If either the Ohians or the Nephites carried on the cultivation of Old World wheat on any substantial scale, they would have been different peoples than we picture them as being from the two accounts. Venturing away from the texts themselves a bit, I might get into the external commonalty that Old World wheat simply wasn't raised in identifiable quantities prior to the arrival of the Europeans in the Americas. We may grasp at the stubble of harvested wild-rice and wild grasses of the barley family to explain Nephite "wheat," but the parallel stands that such cultivation was, is, and very likely will remain unknown among pre-Colombians of any type. 44. They raised stock of various kinds. Full comments on item #44: The principal livestock of the Ohians were elk, horses, and mammoth. They used the horses to plow their fields rather than oxen, bison, or some other bovine, which they appear to have never possessed. The term "cattle" is a general one, but when differentiated from goats it might include bovines, sheep, llamas, possibly even domesticated deer. The known overlap between Ohian and Book of Mormon livestock seems to be limited to horses. There isn't much here upon which to construct a parallel unless we just say that both accounts tell of stock-raisers. 45. They domesticated large animals which are unknown today. Full comments on item #45: It is unclear what sorts of animals "cureloms and cumoms" might have been. But, since they are grouped with horses, asses, and elephants, they were probably fairly large creatures (alpacas?, tapirs?, ground sloths?, bison?). Jaredite elephants and Ohian "mamoons" are a close match, especially so if the former were domesticated New World members of the elephant family (mastodons or mammoth). Since Asian elephants are easily domesticated and folks like Hannibal occasionally subdued the African variety, we can assume that when the people "had" elephants "which were useful unto man," they were domesticated animals. Spalding no doubt derived his "mamoons" from known Indian traditions of great creatures having once lived upon the land, as well as from the discovery of New World elephant bones in the New York and Ohio of his day. Bown didn't mention that the unknown word "mamoon" sounds a bit like the unknown word "cumom." Perhaps the two large mammals were related species. 46. They domesticated horses. Full comments on item #46: No herds of American horses roamed the plains of America when Columbus arrived. No evidence of Pre-Columbian bridles, bits, saddles, horseshoes, etc. have ever been uncovered. These facts alone put the Spalding horses and the Book of Mormon horses in the same category. Although Spalding does not have the Book of Mormon's chariot-pulling horses, he does have wheeled mechanisms rolling on his ancient ground and war-horses in his ancient battles. The parallel here is a significant one. No collection of Book of Mormon illustrations would be complete without Arnold Frieberg's famous depiction of Helaman mounted upon his battle-charger, leading his stripling soldiers into battle. Whether or not that scene has any basis in reality, Spalding presented similar descriptions of war horses and farm horses. There is a parallel here somewhere, but it's a bit difficult to define, based upon just what the texts themselves have to say. The evidence for New World horses in late pre-Colombian times is so slender as the be practically non-existent. Even if someone can locate a pre-Spanish horse carving in a Mississippian mound or some non-intrusive horse bones at an archaeological site, the question is far from being answered in the affirmative. The parallel stands, that people encountering Spalding or the Book of Mormon for the first time know of no late pre-Colombian horses. Bown missed the opportunity to compare Nephite chariots with Ohian wheelbarrows. It seems that both accounts represent something like wheeled vehicles. The use of the vehicular wheel was known in the ancient Americas; though it was never put to any great use among the peoples of those days. 47. Dogs were known. Full comments on item #47: It is generally believed that very early human migrants brought their dogs with them to the Americas and so they did not have to domesticate the New World wolves, coyotes, foxes, etc. I assume that the "dogs" mentioned in both accounts are of this Old World domesticated type. Since the "dogs" in Alma are differentiated from the "wild beasts," it's safe to assume they were of the domesticated variety. If the descendants of Lehi didn't possess dogs, their neighbors on all sides must have, for they are everywhere in the American archaeological record. Spalding's Deliwans ate their dogs; his Ohians merely kept them as domestic guards. 47b. (was 100.) Captured and domesticated fowls. Full comments on item #47b: While the Jaredites' possession of fowls looks like a solid parallel with the keeping of geese and turkeys by the Ohians, the practices of the Deliwan and Lehites are less clearly stated. The "fowling" carried on by the Deliwan was probably the snaring and shooting of game birds. If the Nephites kept the law of Moses and carried on the traditional temple offerings, some of the people should have been sacrificing doves as personal sin offerings, at least for part of the Nephite history. Amulek's addressing this very subject makes that likelihood all the more probable. Domestic turkeys were kept by the native tribes at the time Columbus arrived in American waters and their remains are evident in the archaeological record for centuries before that time. If the Deliwan and Lehites did not keep fowl, their neighbors did. Still, none of this quite adds up to the Lehites having kept the geese and other fowl which the Ohians had domesticated; Bown's parallel is an incomplete one. |
|
Commentary on M.D. Bown: [Index] [parallels 01-14] [parallels 15-24] < - > [parallels 48-59] [parallels 60-78] [parallels 79-99] [Bown's Notes] [Names Index] [Editorial & Bibliographic Info.] The Spalding Studies Home Page: [Introduction] [Site Map & Index] [Links] [E-mail Site Host] revision 0a: September, 1998 |