What makes you think Joseph Smith did not provide a translation of the characters he copied from the Gold Plates? The fact is he did provide both a copy of the characters, and the translation of them. It was intended that Martin Harris would show the characters first to see if they were authentic Egyptian characters. Then he would show them the translation done by Joseph Smith to see if they thought it was a true translation. Charles confirmed both at first, then recanted and denied he had said any such thing. And Professor Mitchell later coroberated what Anthon said. The Characters were taken from Either 6 in the Book of Mormon...whew4

To clarify the question, here's a brief summary of the "Anthon Incident" from WikiPedia: In 1828 Martin Harris, a farmer from Palmyra, New York received from Joseph Smith a copy of some of the "reformed Egyptian" characters from the gold plates in order to obtain scholarly opinion about their authenticity. Harris then presented the material to at least three scholars in the eastern United States, the most important being Charles Anthon, a noted classicist at Columbia College.[11] In 1887, David Whitmer said that he had the piece of paper that Harris had showed to Anthon and the other scholars.[12] This short document is known as the Caractors document or the Anthon Transcript. Anthon believed "reformed Egyptian" to be a hoax:[13] The whole story about my having pronounced the Mormonite inscription to be "reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics" is perfectly false. Some years ago, a plain, and apparently simple-hearted farmer, called upon me… Upon examining the paper in question, I soon came to the conclusion that it was all a trick, perhaps a hoax …On hearing this odd story, I changed my opinion about the paper, and, instead of viewing it any longer as a hoax upon the learned, I began to regard it as part of a scheme to cheat the farmer of his money, and I communicated my suspicions to him, warning him to beware of rogues. He requested an opinion from me in writing, which of course I declined giving, and he then took his leave carrying the paper with him. This paper was in fact a singular scrawl. It consisted of all kinds of crooked characters disposed in columns, and had evidently been prepared by some person who had before him at the time a book containing various alphabets. Greek and Hebrew letters, crosses and flourishes, Roman letters inverted or placed sideways, were arranged in perpendicular columns and the whole ended in a rude delineation of a circle divided into various compartments, decked with various strange marks, and evidently copied after the Mexican Calendar given by Humboldt, but copied in such a way as not to betray the source whence it was derived… the paper contained any thing else but "Egyptian Hieroglyphics."[14] Pomeroy Tucker, a contemporary of Harris and Joseph Smith, wrote that all the scholars whom Harris visited "were understood to have scouted the whole pretense as too depraved for serious attention, while commiserating the applicant as the victim of fanaticism or insanity."[15] Because Anthon's delineation seems inconsistent with the "caractors document"—for instance, there is no "rude delineation of a circle"—the latter may be only a portion of the material that Harris took to Anthon. Of course, the professor might also have erred in his description of the caractors document, but as Dan Vogel has noted, he must have realized that the document might be produced and his error revealed.[16] According to an account which Joseph Smith attributed to Harris,[17] Anthon "stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. [Harris] then showed him those which were not yet translated, and he said that they were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic; and he said they were true characters." According to the same account, Anthon provided Harris with a certificate as to the veracity of the characters but tore it up after learning the characters were copied from a book said to have been delivered by an angel.[18] Regardless of whether or not Anthon ever wrote such a certificate, it is highly unlikely that Anthon would have been able to read Egyptian hieroglyphs in the late 1820s when Harris showed him the writing specimen because during this period Egyptology was in its infancy.[19] In any case, after his visit with Anthon, Harris was willing to mortgage his farm to publish the Book of Mormon, although it is also possible that his eagerness was based (as he boasted to his wife and sister-in-law) on his belief that the Book of Mormon would be a financial windfall.[20] [11] Dan Vogel, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2004), 113–16. [12] ^ "Address to All Believers," 11. This "Caractors document" is currently owned by the Community of Christ. Shields Research, Mormon apologetics; EMD, 1: 70,fn. 45. Another scholar was probably Samuel Latham Mitchill of New York. Mitchill died before being asked for testimony by non-Mormons, but in any case, Mitchill was not a scholar of Egyptian. [13] ^ Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 65-66. [14] ^ "Anton to E. D. Howe". Mormonism Unvailed. Painesville, Ohio: Telegraph Press, 1834. 1834-02-17. http://www.solomonspalding.com/docs/1834howf.htm#pg270. [15] ^ Pomeroy Tucker, Origin, Rise, and Progress of Mormonism (New York: Appleton and Company, 186), 41–42. [16] ^ Dan Vogel, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2004), 114. The document is now owned by the Community of Christ. [17] ^ Joseph Smith—History 1:62-65 [18] ^ The full account reads, "I went to the city of New York and presented the characters which had been translated, with the translation thereof to Professor Anthony (sic), a gentleman celebrated for his literary attainments;—Professor Anthony (sic) stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those which were not yet translated, and he said that they were Egyptian, Chaldeac, Assyriac, and Arabac [Arabic], and he said that they were true characters. He gave me a certificate certifying to the people of Palmyra that they were true characters, and that the translation of such of them as had been translated was also correct." Martin Harris, "Times and Seasons," III, 773. [19] ^ In 1814, the Briton Thomas Young finished translating the enchorial (demotic) text and began work on the hieroglyphic alphabet. From 1822 to 1824, Jean-François Champollion greatly expanded this work, and he is usually considered the decipherer of the Rosetta Stone. In 1858, the Philomathean Society of the University of Pennsylvania published the first complete English translation of the Rosetta Stone. Allen, Don Cameron. "The Predecessors of Champollion", Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 144, No. 5. (1960), 527–547. and Adkins, Lesley; Adkins, Roy. The Keys of Egypt: The Obsession to Decipher Egyptian Hieroglyphs (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2000 [hardcover, ISBN 0-06-019439-1); 2001 (paperback, ISBN 0-00-653145-8). Although Anton owned a copy of a preliminary study by Champollion published in 1827, it is not certain that he owned the book before the visit from Harris. Nor, of course, did Champollion's book include photographic reproductions of hieroglyphics. Shields Research, Mormon apologetics. [20] ^ Richard N. Ostling and Joan K. Ostling, Mormon America: The Power and the Promise (HarperSanFrancisco, 1999), 26; Dan Vogel, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2004), 481. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformed_Egyptian And here is the complete text of Charles Anthon's letter: New York, Feb. 17, 1834 Dear Sir – I received this morning your favor of the 9th instant, and lose no time in making a reply. The whole story about my having pronounced the Mormonite inscription to be "reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics" is perfectly false. Some years ago, a plain, and apparently simple-hearted farmer, called upon me with a note from Dr. Mitchell of our city, now deceased, requesting me to decypher, if possible, a paper, which the farmer would hand me, and which Dr. M. confessed he had been unable to understand. Upon examining the paper in question, I soon came to the conclusion that it was all a trick, perhaps a hoax. When I asked the person, who brought it, how he obtained the writing, he gave me, as far as I can now recollect, the following account: A "gold book," consisting of a number of plates of gold, fastened together in the shape of a book by wires of the same metal, had been dug up in the northern part of the state of New York, and along with the book an enormous pair of "gold spectacles"! These spectacles were so large, that, if a person attempted to look through them, his two eyes would have to be turned towards one of the glasses merely, the spectacles in question being altogether too large for the breadth of the human face. Whoever examined the plates through the spectacles, was enabled not only to read them, but fully to understand their meaning. All this knowledge, however, was confined at that time to a young man, who had the trunk containing the book and spectacles in his sole possession. This young man was placed behind a curtain, in the garret of a farm house, and, being thus concealed from view, put on the spectacles occasionally, or rather, looked through one of the glasses, decyphered the characters in the book, and, having committed some of them to paper, handed copies from behind the curtain, to those who stood on the outside. Not a word, however, was said about the plates having been decyphered "by the gift of God." Every thing, in this way, was effected by the large pair of spectacles. The farmer added, that he had been requested to contribute a sum of money towards the publication of the "golden book," the contents of which would, as he had been assured, produce an entire change in the world and save it from ruin. So urgent had been these solicitations, that he intended selling his farm and handing over the amount received to those who wished to publish the plates. As a last precautionary step, however, he had resolved to come to New York, and obtain the opinion of the learned about the meaning of the paper which he brought with him, and which had been given him as a part of the contents of the book, although no translation had been furnished at the time by the young man with the spectacles. On hearing this odd story, I changed my opinion about the paper, and, instead of viewing it any longer as a hoax upon the learned, I began to regard it as part of a scheme to cheat the farmer of his money, and I communicated my suspicions to him, warning him to beware of rogues. He requested an opinion from me in writing, which of course I declined giving, and he then took his leave carrying the paper with him. This paper was in fact a singular scrawl. It consisted of all kinds of crooked characters disposed in columns, and had evidently been prepared by some person who had before him at the time a book containing various alphabets. Greek and Hebrew letters, crosses and flourishes, Roman letters inverted or placed sideways, were arranged in perpendicular columns, and the whole ended in a rude delineation of a circle divided into various compartments, decked with various strange marks, and evidently copied after the Mexican Calender given by Humboldt, but copied in such a way as not to betray the source whence it was derived. I am thus particular as to the contents of the paper, inasmuch as I have frequently conversed with my friends on the subject, since the Mormonite excitement began, and well remember that the paper contained any thing else but "Egyptian Hieroglyphics." Some time after, the same farmer paid me a second visit. He brought with him the golden book in print, and offered it to me for sale. I declined purchasing. He then asked permission to leave the book with me for examination. I declined receiving it, although his manner was strangely urgent. I adverted once more to the roguery which had been in my opinion practised upon him, and asked him what had become of the gold plates. He informed me that they were in a trunk with the large pair of spectacles. I advised him to go to a magistrate and have the trunk examined. He said the "curse of God" would come upon him should he do this. On my pressing him, however, to pursue the course which I had recommended, he told me that he would open the trunk, if I would take the "curse of God" upon myself. I replied that I would do so with the greatest willingness, and would incur every risk of that nature, provided I could only extricate him from the grasp of rogues. He then left me. I have thus given you a full statement of all that I know respecting the origin of Mormonism, and must beg you, as a personal favor, to publish this letter immediately, should you find my name mentioned again by these wretched fanatics. Yours respectfully, CHAS. ANTHON.New York, Feb. 17, 1834 http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/anthonletter.htm ATTACHED IMAGES: 1) The Anthon Transcript 2) Charles Anthon 3) Martin Harris

You have provided a lot of the background history in your response and I've already had a conversation about Anthon's letters with Otter - he was questioning the 'discrepancies' around Anthon writing an opinion - but I made it perfectly clear that Anthon had many details correct and it was probably down to the reasons for writing, the questions and comments in the letters Anthon was replying to and what he chose to write just as much as what detail he chose to ommit from writing - we all fo through a selection process when we write and what is written is the process of much thought and decisions. . No modern prophet, or scholar has translated the characters because they do not make sence - they are a jumble of either made up letters, part made up letters, or copies of letters from various origins which could have been made from a book. . I found some information at the following site useful; . www.mormonthink.com/bomweb.htm . Section titled: The Anthon Visit . What do modern-day scholars make of the Anthon Transcript? . All the nonLDS scholars, that have looked at the characters on the Anthon Transcript, have said it is gibberish and don't give it any further thought. They basically state the same thing that Anthon said 'It consisted of all kinds of crooked characters disposed in columns, and had evidently been prepared by some person who had before him at the time a book containing various alphabets. Greek and Hebrew letters, crosses and flourishes, Roman letters inverted or placed sideways.' Klaus Baer, Egyptologist at the University of Chicago, called the characters of the "Caractors" document nothing but "doodlings." . What do the LDS scholars say? Some Mormons have attempted to decipher the "Caractors" document but, according to Mormon apologist John Gee, "the corpus is not large enough to render decipherment feasible." Nevertheless, various LDS scholars and one RLDS scholar, have made the attempt, including Ariel L. Crowley, Blair Bryant, and Stan and Polly Johnson. No credible translations have been made of the Anthon transcript. Obviously if modern-day scholars can't decipher it, then how could professor Anthon in 1828? . Analysis by a scholar One scholar noted remarkable similarities between many characters from the Anthon manuscript and a form of Latin shorthand called Tironian notes. . The column on the left is made up of characters from the "Anthon transcript, The column on the right contains Tironian notes, the Latin shorthand upon which early modern shorthand was based. . Why doesn't this document get more scholarly attention? . In this age of computer-assisted research, we are baffled as to why cryptographic studies have not yielded results in this area. This document could very well prove that the Book of Mormon is truly an ancient, historical book but yet it is never talked about by the Church and LDS scholars largely ignore it. We can't help but ask why. The reasons seem to be the same as with the Book of Abraham papyri. The scholarly translation of these documents damage Joseph Smith's translating ability claims rather than strengthen them. LDS apologist and Egyptologist John Gee immediately dismisses any attempts at translating the Anthon transcript as not feasible given the small amount of characters. That's a shocking attitude to take for a document that could be help prove the BOM true - also the document has some 175 characters so that's enough to work with and not just ignore. It's much more likely that LDS scholars don't want the Anthon transcript to get any attention as nonLDS scholars have denounced it as gibberish and nothing at all related to any real ancient American or Egyptian languages. . See also: . solomonspalding.com/SRP/saga/saga02b.htm .