In Search of the Sidon River – Part I

There are few geographic locations in the Land of Promise mentioned as often as the Sidon River, which is listed thirty-five times—34 times in Alma, and once in Mormon. 
   This river, is mentioned so many times, and located within lands which are also located directionally, that we get a clear understanding that the river Sidon begins in the south (north of the Land of Nephi, but south of the Land of Zarahemla) within the narrow strip of wilderness (Alma 22:27), and runs northward by the Land of Zarahemla (Alma 2:15) and past the city of Zarahemla (Alma 6:7), and flows to the sea (Alma 3:3; 42:22).
    The point of this post is to show that Rod L. Meldrum, the President of The Firm Foundation for Indigenous Research and Mormonism, and creator of his “Heartland Theory” of the Land of Promise tries to twist the scriptural record in an attempt to show that the river Sidon flows in the opposite direction than the scriptural references describe in order to maintain his belief that the Mississippi River was the river Sidon.

The headwaters of the Mississippi River is located at 1475 feet elevation, beginning “as a small trickle over some rocks flowing out of Lake Itasca” in Minnesota on its way to its mouth, 2552 miles away in the Gulf of Mexico
    To straighten this misconception out through the scriptural record, let’s take a look at Meldrum’s comments, beginning with the question he asks on his website:
    Meldrum: “What is the "Head" of a river?” He then goes on to answer his own question with, “Alma 22:29 indicates that the head of the Sidon River was in the north as it states "the Nephites had taken possession of all the northern parts of the land bordering on the wilderness, at the head of the river Sidon, ..."  This is completely congruent with the proposed geography outlined in the Heartland Model presentations.”
    Response: Unfortunately for Meldrum and his theory, he completely misstates the scriptural meaning of this issue, which is quite clear when comparing ALL of the scripture involved, and not just the one verse he uses. First of all, Mormon is inserting an extensive statement into Alma’s record about the land the Lamanite king controls, beginning with verse 27, and continuing through the end of the chapter, verse 34, with verse 35 stating “And now I, after having said this, return again to the account of Ammon and Aaron, Omner and Himni, and their brethren.” In those eight verses, Alma gives his future reader an understanding of the land that a proclamation the Lamanite king is being sent “throughout all the land, amongst all his people who were in all his land, who were in all the regions round about, which was bordering even to the sea, on the east and on the west, and which was divided from the land of Zarahemla by a narrow strip of wilderness, which ran from the sea east even to the sea west” (Alma 22:27).

Ammon was led by the Spirit to the Land of Nephi, and their experiences with the king and his conversion led to his sending out a proclamation to everyone in his land
    This land that the Lamanite king controls is, of course, the Land of Nephi where Ammon was led by the Spirit (see Alma 22:21 to begin this series of events that leads to Mormon’s inserted explanation).
    Mormon then goes on to describe this land. Since the king controls the Land of Nephi, he then moves northward, stating his Land of Nephi “which was divided from the land of Zarahemla by a narrow strip of wilderness, which ran from the sea east even to the sea west, and round about on the borders of the seashore, and the borders of the wilderness which was on the north by the land of Zarahemla, through the borders of Manti, by the head of the river Sidon, running from the east towards the west -- and thus were the Lamanites and the Nephites divided” (Alma 22:27).
    Thus, the Land of Nephi in the south ran from the “sea on the east and on the west” and was separated from the Land of Zarahemla, which was north of the Land of Nephi, by a narrow strip of wilderness, which also ran from the sea east to the sea west.
    Now here is the important part. In this narrow strip of wilderness was the headwaters, or “head of the river Sidon,” or where the river Sidon began. This river Sidon “ran by the land of Zarahemla” (Alma 2:14), which was north of the narrow strip of wilderness, and was on the east of the city of Zarahemla, running between the city of Zarahemla and the land of Gideon (Alma 6:7). Thus, there was a “line between the Nephites and the Lamanites, between the land of Zarahemla and the land of Nephi, from the west sea, running by the head of the river Sidon -- the Nephites possessing all the land northward, yea, even all the land which was northward of the land Bountiful (Alma 50:11). Consequently, north of the Land of Nephi, which the Lamantie king controlled, were the 1) narrow strip of wilderness; 2) the Land of Zarahemla; 3) the Land of Bountiful; and 4) all the land that was north of Bountiful.
    In addition, this narrow strip of wilderness, and the Land of Nephi to the south, was higher in elevation than the Land of Zarahemla. This is seen when the Nephites, after fortifying their cities to the north of the Land of Nephi (Alma 50:22), awaited an attack from the entire Lamanite army, which could not “march down against the city of Zarahemla, neither durst they cross the head of Sidon, over to the city of Nephihah (Alma 50:25, emphasis mine).

Mormon describes  this part of the Land Southward in three parts: 1) the Land ofNephi in the South; 2) The Land of Zarahemla in the north; and 3) A narrow strip of wilderness in between
    Thus, we find Meldrum’s quote used to imply an inaccurate direction, when he stated above: “the Nephites had taken possession of all the northern parts of the land bordering on the wilderness, at the head of the river Sidon, ..." It is obvious that the Nephites controlled everything north of the narrow strip of wilderness, from the head of the river Sidon northward, including the entire Land of Zarahemla, Land of Bountiful, narrow neck, Desolation, and the entire Land Northward.
    First, “these northern parts of the land” is referring to all the land north of the narrow strip of wilderness. Second, “at the head of the river Sidon” has reference to that area where the Nephites did not control within the narrow strip of wilderness which separated the Land of Zarahemla from the Lamanite controlled Land of Nephi. Third, Meldrum tries to create a false understanding that the head of the river Sidon was in the north, but as can be seen from the entire scriptural reference here, the headwaters of the river Sidon was in the narrow strip of wilderness between the Lamanite controlled Land of Nephi and the Nephite controlled Land of Zarahemla.
    Thus, his statement that “Alma 22:29 indicates that the head of the Sidon River was in the north” is completely inaccurate and misleading. He goes on to write:
    Meldrum: “If the place of first landing was the Gulf Coast of North America and the proposed location for Zarahemla (according to the Heartland Model) is across the Mississippi River from Nauvoo, IL…then certainly the 'head' was in the northern parts of the land [and] the Book of Mormon textual references to the River Sidon works very well in this geography, once a more complete understanding of what the 'head' of the river Sidon might mean.”
    Response: First, the word “IF” as used here is a very big “IF.” However, that issue will have to wait for another time and has already been dealt with in these posts numerous times, as has Zarahemla being the city mentioned in D&C as being in Iowa. The point here for this post is in the meaning of the word “head” as in head of a river.
    Meldrum: “As regarding the Sidon River there is a very simple explanation that lies in the definition of 'head' of a river. In Noah Webster's 1828 dictionary, the reference dictionary in Joseph Smiths time, the word 'head' as relating to a river is defined thus. 'Head…The principal source of a stream; as the head of the Nile.'”
    Response: First, his reference, mshaffer.com is an Internet Information Services site. Second, under Meldrum’s reference there is no listing for Head, 18. The principal source of a stream; as the head of the Nile.' http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/search/word,head; however, in going directly to (http://webstersdictionary1828.com/), which is Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language (of which I have an original copy published in its entirety by the Foundation for American Christian Education, complete with Webster's 16-page explanation of his work, beliefs and motivation, plus an 86-page explanation of the dictionary itself) which Meldrum accurately states would be the correct “reference dictionary in Joseph Smiths time” (though there is no suggestion the Smith's would have owned one, we find:
     Head: “the principal source of a stream; as the head of the Nile.” But we also find two other definitions from Webster: 1) “The part most remote from the mouth or opening into the sea; as the head of a bay, gulf or creek” and 2) “to have its source, as a river.”
    And under source, we find: “Properly, the spring or fountain from which a stream of water proceeds, or any collection of water within the earth or upon its surface, in which a stream originates. This is called also the head of the stream [italics mine}. We call the water of a spring, where it issues from the earth, the source of the stream or rivulet proceeding from it. We say also that springs have their sources in subterranean ponds, lakes or collections of water. We say also that a large river has is source in a lake. For example, the St. Lawrence has its source in the great lakes of America.”

The headwaters of the Missouri River is found in Three Forks, Montana, and runs east and then south for 2341 miles before entering the Mississippi River north of St. Louis. The “head” or “headwaters” does not change merely because it enters another river, nor does the “head” or “headwaters of the Mississippi River change merely because the Missouri flows into it
    Thus, the word “head” relating to a river, is defined as the beginning or source of that river. However, Meldrum does not accept his own source for a definition. He goes to another.
(See the next post, “In Search of the Sidon River – Part II,” for more of Meldrum’s fanciful explanations as he tries to change the flow of the river Sidon and make it the Mississippi River)