| Scale of the floor 4 feet to an inch | |
| 15 14½ feet long 3 feet wide | |
| 1◊ 14½ by 9 |
Footnotes
Covenant of Oliver Cowdery et al., 17 Oct. 1830; see also Revelation, 20 July 1831 [D&C 57:1–3].
Whitmer, History, 32, underlining in original; Revelation, 1 Aug. 1831 [D&C 58:57].
Revelation, 22–23 Sept. 1832 [D&C 84:4].
Revelation, 1 June 1833 [D&C 95:3].
Revelation, 1 June 1833 [D&C 95:11, 14]. JS, Sidney Rigdon, and Frederick G. Williams had been appointed to “obtain a draft or construction of the inner court of the house.” (Minutes, ca. 1 June 1833.)
See Historical Introduction to Plan of the House of the Lord in Kirtland, Ohio (Fragments), ca. June 1833.
Although the original plan does not include a date, the later copy in JS’s letterbook dates the “discription of the house of the Lord which is to be built first in Zion” to 25 June 1833, the date of the letter accompanying the plan. (“A Discription of the House of the Lord Which Is to Be Built First in Zion,” 25 June 1833, in JS Letterbook 1, pp. 41–44; Letter to Church Leaders in Jackson Co., MO, 25 June 1833.)
The package consisted of the following documents: the Plat of the City of Zion, ca. Early June–25 June 1833; Letter to Church Leaders in Jackson Co., MO, 25 June 1833; and the plan featured here. John Whitmer acknowledged receiving the building “plan of our Lord” in his letter dated 29 July 1833. (Letter from John Whitmer, 29 July 1833.)
A temple was not built in Jackson County, but the temple eventually completed in Kirtland was evidently constructed according to a pattern similar to the one presented here. (See Plan of the House of the Lord in Kirtland, Ohio [Fragments], ca. June 1833.)
| Presiden[t]s of the Priesthood No 1 | 3½ by 6 | |
| No 2 seat | 3½ by 6 | |
| No 3 seat | 3½ by 6 | |
| 3½ by 6 | 3½ by 4 8 | 3½ by 6 |
| +c. | No 4 seat | |
| 4 feet wide |
| from this dotted line go up stairs. | Broad Stair |
| vestry | |
| 14½ feet by 3 | |
| 12 by 3 | |
| 11 feet 10 inch by 3 | 11 feet 10 inch by 3 |
| Scale of the floor 4 feet to an inch | |
| 15 14½ feet long 3 feet wide | |
| 1◊ 14½ by 9 |
| 12½ by 3 feet. | |
| 10 feet by 3½ |
| 5 feet wide | Swing table |
| 4 feet wide | |
| 8 feet long | |
| No 4 | |
| No 3 | |
| No 2 | |
| No 1 | |
| 12½ by 3 | |
| 10 feet by 3½ |
The term “house of the Lord” was used in the Old Testament to refer to the temple Solomon built. (See 1 Kings 6:2; 7:51; 8:11.)
The presidency of the high priesthood. This House of the Lord was also to be used for religious instruction and worship. For information on changes that had been recently made to the presidency of the high priesthood, see Historical Introduction to Revelation, 8 Mar. 1833 [D&C 90].
These figures are the building’s interior dimensions.
Similar to the House of the Lord in Kirtland, this temple was to have two courts, or assembly halls, one stacked above the other. The inner court refers to the meeting room on the lower, or first, level. Use of the term court reflects influence from the Bible, in which different sections of the temples were called courts. The entry for court in Webster’s 1828 dictionary says that “places of public worship are called the courts of the Lord.” One court in this temple was likely for the community, and the other was for the school where men ordained to the priesthood would be instructed. (“Court,” in American Dictionary, italics in original; see also 1 Kings 6:36; Ezekiel 44:27; and Revelation, 1 June 1833 [D&C 95:15–16].)
An American Dictionary of the English Language: Intended to Exhibit, I. the Origin, Affinities and Primary Signification of English Words, as far as They Have Been Ascertained. . . . Edited by Noah Webster. New York: S. Converse, 1828.
This appears to be an error as eighty-seven feet subtracted by ten feet would be seventy-seven feet, not seventy-eight.
In other words, “the central block of pews was to have a four-inch gap dividing it lengthwise into two equal parts. In addition, the central and the lateral blocks were to be divided widthwise by another four-inch gap. These gaps allowed curtains, or ‘vails,’ . . . to be unrolled from the ceiling and pass to the floor, thereby quartering the congregational area.” Although this feature seems unusual, a “moveable partition down the middle of the auditorium” that could be used to separate the audience into two groups was a common feature in contemporary Quaker meetinghouses. (Robison, First Mormon Temple, 20, 85–93; Rose, Colonial Houses of Worship in America, 71.)
Robison, Elwin C. The First Mormon Temple: Design, Construction, and Historic Context of the Kirtland Temple. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 1997.
Rose, Harold Wickliffe. The Colonial Houses of Worship in America Built in the English Colonies before the Republic, 1607–1789, and Still Standing. New York: Hastings House, 1963.
According to John Corrill, in each of the assembly halls “were built two pulpits, one in each end. Each pulpit consisted of four different apartments. . . . Each of these apartments was just large enough, and rightly calculated to receive three persons, and the breast-work in front of each . . . was constituted of three semi-circles, joining each other, and finished in good style.” The four apartments were to be staggered like stairs, each one built higher and further back than the one in front of it. (Corrill, Brief History, 21–22.)
The rows of the pulpit are described in descending order, beginning with the most elevated row. Because the lowest row of pulpits mentioned in the subsequent list was designated for the elders, “high priest hood” is here used more broadly than its typical reference to only ordained high priests. For more information on the high priesthood, see Minutes, ca. 3–4 June 1831.
No “coves” or speaker stands were called for on the bottom pulpit row designated for the elders. Instead, a swing table was to be attached to the front.
That is, to each side of them.
Architectural historian Elwin C. Robison explains, “Each row of pulpits was to be raised above the previous row, with the central pulpit higher than the flanking ones. The specifications on both sets of drawings for the Independence Temple state that the central pews in each row should rise in twelve-inch increments, while the pulpits to each side should increase in eight-inch increments. The intent of this directive was probably to elevate the central pulpits four inches above the flanking ones. However, if the pulpits were built as described on the drawing, the uppermost central pulpit would be four times four inches, or sixteen inches, above its flanking pulpits and would require two steps leading from the side to the central pulpit. Unfortunately, lack of space would run such steps into the adjacent pulpit. Perhaps this unresolved problem led carpenters [who later worked on the Kirtland temple] to dispense with making the central pulpit higher and to build all three pulpits in each row at the same elevation.” (Robison, First Mormon Temple, 19–20.)
Robison, Elwin C. The First Mormon Temple: Design, Construction, and Historic Context of the Kirtland Temple. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 1997.