Continuing with the
last post on the type of ship Nephi built, and whether or not it was a large
raft as Stephen L. Carr and John L. Sorenson claim, or a more sophisticated ship.
Anciently, in most
parts of the world, to move logs down rivers, the idea of rafts was invented,
replacing the driving of logs (floating logs individually), which was both
dangerous and difficult. Tying logs together, a temporary hut could be built on
top and the raft steered by oars, which grew into rafting other cargo, such as
raw materials like ore, fur, and game, as well as man-made products. Rafts were
used solely in rivers, or very calm waters where drift currents could help
guide and propel the raft—but rafts were never used in the oceans except in
island areas, such as Indonesia and close island locations of the South Pacific
where one island could be seen from another.
Top:
Aerial view of today’s Singapore with thousands of house- boats and rafts,
making up the living quarters of half a million people; Bottom Left: Rafts and boats in Hong Kong harbor, and
Right Bottom: Typical Asian houseboat, the modern rendition of the ancient
house-raft
However, in Indonesia
and the South Pacific, rafts were found mostly as living accommodations, and
usually closer into main islands, like Sumatra, Java, and Malaysia or along the
mainland coast of areas like China, India, and Australia. No one in their right
mind would have chosen to try and cross open ocean in log rafts. Only
drift-voyages, such as Kon-Tiki (and later others) demonstrated where a raft
was launched into a drift current, and you simply went where the current took
you. There was no maneuvering, steering, guiding, except for very small course
corrections. Sails were added, but only to increase speed within the current
itself, as Thor Heyerdahl did with his specially-built rafts.
Left: Ancient Chinese trading vessel; Top Right: 3800-year-old ancient
Egyptian ship; Ancient Indonesian trading ship. Note that in all these ancient
ships had gunwales, prows and though the material may have been different, the
designs were basically the same
The point of all this is to show
that a raft had a certain purpose in the ancient world, but it was not
something anyone took on long sea voyages unless that voyage could be assured
to flow with a current the entire way—then there would be the problem of a
return trip. As for the Polynesians and their remarkable navigation abilities
and their long voyages, these were not in rafts, but special outrigger canoes
with paddlers to move the canoe along with or without the aid of a sail,
depending on winds. Manual power, after all, can overcome currents and winds
where a sail could not in the ancient world, but confined the craft to move
with those winds and currents.
Now Carr, Sorenson and others
would limit Nephi’s ability, under the tutelage of the Lord, to build a ship of
any size, limiting him to a simple log raft, large as it might be, that would
cause his brothers after Nephi “had finished the ship,
according to the word of the Lord, my brethren beheld that it was good, and
that the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine; wherefore, they did humble
themselves again before the Lord” (1 Nephi 18:4)
Nephi, from the experiences and building abilities he demonstrates
throughout the scriptural record, would have been able to construct a ship such
as this one with the simple woodwork involved
One factor Carr and
Sorenson seem to have overlooked is the fact that Nephi’s ship would have to
brave deep water for thousands of miles, without an island to set into—the
vessel would have to be extremely sturdy to withstand the constant pounding of
the deep ocean, waves, storms, etc., as well as capable of moving swiftly in
the currents that drove his ship “before the wind.” Rafts and canoes simply do
not fit this criteria, and no matter the rhetoric to claim so, did not sail the
deep oceans except in very small craft moving cross-currents by paddle-power
between Hawaii and Polynesia. In addition, they ignore the attitude of the
rebellious brothers once the ship was completed.
Consider that the brothers
had been along the seashore of what they called Irreantum, meaning “many waters,” and continually looked outward
from shore at a never-ending sea while the year or two it took for the ship to
be built, knowing that when the ship was finished, they would get on it and
sail out into the unknown. They would not have looked upon a flat raft, even a
large one, and feel secure, let along feeling good about taking their wives and
children on board. They had, after all, traveled for some time down the Red Sea
and seen numerous Arab dhows with their high prow and sides, and large sail. A
raft would not have humbled them unless it was in fear of going aboard on the
high seas.
Typical Arab dhows, similar in size and construction of 600 B.C. These
were simple ships, built for five to fifteen people or sometimes more, that
sailed up and down the Red Sea in Lehi’s time
Also consider that
coming down the Red Sea, they would have seen the smaller Arab dhows, knowing
that a ship had a prow, sides (gunwales), and a large sail. Then consider that
if Laman, Lemuel and the sons of Ishmael were to look upon a raft, no matter
how large, would they have been impressed? Would they have considered “the
workmanship exceedingly fine”? Would a raft have engendered in them a desire to
“humble themselves again before the Lord”?
After all, no matter
how well made, a raft is still a raft, and a canoe (outrigger or not) is still
a canoe. We are talking about Laman and Lemuel and the sons of Ishmael trusting
their wives and children to go to sea in a raft or canoe—how many family men would
do that? Especially ones that had been so vociferous in their complains and
objections to almost everything. This adventure with ship-building began with
them chiding Nephi, “Our brother is a fool, for he thinketh that he can build a
ship; yea, and he also thinketh that he can cross these great waters” (1 Nephi
17:17), and “We knew that ye could not construct a ship, for we knew that ye
were lacking in judgment; wherefore, thou canst not accomplish so great a work”
(1 Nephi 17:19). If he would have completed a simple raft, would not his
brothers chided him further about so puny a work? What kind of ship would have
silenced them, humbled them, and caused them to appreciate “so fine a work”?
Certainly not a raft!
It is difficult to
imagine these rebellious sons thinking a large raft or canoe would be safe on
the high seas. It should also be kept in mind that the celebrated drift-voyages
such as Kon-Tiki, RaI, RaII, Tangaroa,
etc., all had crews of under nine, some as few as five. The double-canoes, or
outriggers, of ancient days traveled from island to island, a rather short
distance, though Kon-Tiki traveled
almost 5,000 miles, drifting with the current
Left: The Samudra Raksa (Defender of the Seas) was an 8th
century Borobudurship built strictly from (Right) bas relief drawings in
Indonesia. A 1982 expedition sailing from Indonesia across the Indian Ocean to
Madagascar
When we talk about a ship that
was to carry upwards of 50 people or more, along with supplies and equipment
meant to start a new life in a new world, we are not talking about a raft, no
matter how designed. The Kon-Tiki and other such drift voyages were built and
meant to show that currents drifted in certain directions and would have shown
that a people along the West Coast of South America, particularly around Peru,
would have drifted in a simple raft all the way down to Polynesia, four or five
thousand miles away. Drift, by its very name, means to drift with the
current—not sail cross currents, against currents, etc. And as Kon-Tiki showed,
the lack of steering of a raft meant it could not be stopped at will, but ended
up crashing into the rocky outcroppings of an atoll. Other drift voyages, well
covered by secondary craft, helicopters, planes, GPS, radio, etc., were guided
at the end to a landing—but Lehi would have had none of these modern
advantages.
Nephi’s ship was “driven forth
before the wind,” but it was also steerable, obviously with some type of
important rudder system, and had all the other conveniences mentioned in the
first of these three posts. A raft or canoe would simply have been out of the
question, and far too simple to need the Lord’s constant instruction.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment