101 Questions on the Sanctuary and on Ellen White

73. Why Quotation Marks Were Omitted

In view of the fact that the Whites were acquainted with copyright laws, why did Ellen White not always use quotation marks and give credit to other authors when she copied material from them? QSEW 66.1

In spite of the existence of copyright laws it was not uncommon a century ago for writers, both religious and secular, to borrow from one another without giving specific credit. In his History in the United States 1800-1860 (Johns Hopkins Press, 1970), George Callcott states: QSEW 66.2

“The second major assault by modern scholars on the historians of the early nineteenth century centered about plagiarism, the practice of using in their own works the same phraseology as someone else had used. The early nineteenth-century historian would have been dismayed by the attack, would have pleaded nolo contendere, and would simply have pointed out that he had never pretended to be original when he could find someone else who had satisfactorily said what he had in mind. QSEW 66.3

“One of the first to be attacked was William Gordon for using material from the Annual Register without quotation marks. After citing his sources, a typical writer stated that he ‘would here publicly acknowledge that he has often copied their language as well as their facts, and has not been particular to disfigure his page with quotation marks.’ Another glibly explained that his ‘first five chapters ... are from the admirably written historical sketch in Martin’s Gazetteer.’ Others openly stated that they ‘had not scrupled’ to copy a well-written previous study. That they ‘used substantially another’s language’. That they utilized the work of others ‘without introducing my authorities’; that if a good source was found they had ‘adopted the phraseology of the author entire’; and that they had ‘made use of them as public property. ’ QSEW 66.4

“The early nineteenth-century historian felt no need to argue for originality, and he would not have understood why he should make a fetish of reworking material when what he wanted to say already had been better said by another... QSEW 66.5

“Historians usually felt flattered rather than insulted when their words were used by another. The period is remarkable for the lack of scholarly rivalry, and writers who borrowed from each other remained on the warmest terms.”—pages 134-136. QSEW 66.6

In 1863 Ingram Cobbin wrote: QSEW 66.7

“All the commentators have drawn largely from the fathers, especially from St. Augustine; and most of them have made general property of Patrick, Lowth, and Whitby. Poole has exhausted the old continental writers; Henry has made very free with Bishop Hall and others; Scott and Benson have enriched their pages abundantly from Henry. Gill has translated the spirit of Poole’s ‘Synopsis,’ but he most generally gives his authorities. Adam Clarke and Davidson have been much indebted to all the best critics, though the former does not always mention his obligations, and the latter never. But his preface to his admirable ‘Pocket Commentary’ is an honest confession that he pretends to be no more than a compiler.”—Quoted by F. D. Nichol, Ellen G. White and Her Critics, Page 406. QSEW 66.8

In 1873 W.P.P. Noble published his exceptional book, The Prophets of the Bible, with the following preface: QSEW 67.1

“In preparing these sketches, the writer has freely used any material suited to his object. He acknowledges his indebtedness to various writers who have touched the same great theme in any of its parts. The works of many leading authors have been before him, and used so far as they could be made available for his purpose. It has been his effort to bring the substance of a number of books before a class of readers to whom these authorities are not accessible. And with this end in view, anything in other writers that seemed likely to impart additional interest to the reading of the Scriptures has been incorporated, so far as space permitted. QSEW 67.2

“In carrying out his plan, he has not thought it necessary to load the pages with foot-notes, or the letter-press with quotation marks, but deems it sufficient to give this general credit at the outset.” QSEW 67.3

Conybeare and Howson, from whom Ellen White was accused of copying, borrowed from other writers without giving credit or using quotation marks. (See Nichol, pages 424, 425.) D. M. Canright, who in 1887 condemned Mrs. White for this practice, borrowed extensively himself in an 1878 publication of his own, with no indication in the preface or anywhere else in the book that he was doing so. (See Nichol, Page 408.)Raymond Cottrell states that when he was working on The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, he had occasion to compare thirty commentaries on 1 Corinthians with one another. To his amazement he discovered that many of these respected commentators had “copied significant amounts of material from one another without once giving credit.” Cottrell concluded that “nineteenth century literary ethics, even among the best writers, approved of, or at least did not seriously question, generous literary borrowing without giving credit.” (“The Literary Relationship Between The Desire of Ages, by Ellen G. White, and The Life of Christ, by William Hanna,” Page 6). QSEW 67.4

As late as 1920 the Review and Herald published W. W. Prescott’s college textbook, The Doctrine of Christ, which had quotation marks, but no credit lines for more than 700 of the 1000 paragraphs of borrowed materials. What the publishers would not even consider for a moment today apparently was quite acceptable in 1920. Prescott defended this liberal borrowing from other authors without giving them credit. In his introductory note he stated: QSEW 67.5

“All quotations in the notes taken from the spirit of prophecy are duly credited to book and page. The other quotations have been selected from many sources, but as they are not cited as authority, but are used merely for the expression of the thought no credit has been given.”—The Doctrine of Christ. Page 3. QSEW 68.1