Evolution of Land of Promise Geography – Part IV

Continuing with the understanding of the paper on which Frederick G. Williams wrote that Lehi landed along the Chilean west coast at 30º South Latitude. It should be noted that theorists who champion other sites, such as Mesoamerica and the Heartland and Great Lakes, take issue with the Williams’ note, though they have no explanation what prompted it and why it was circulated about the early Church.     

Frederick G. Williams made more notes than just the landing site of Lehi. Above are characters that Williams copied from the Book of Mormon, suggesting he was prone to make notes of what was discussed in the First Presidency meetings and pertaining to the Church at the time

Many might reasonably question why the Williams statement was given such importance when numerous theories were being introduced at the time. The answer to that question becomes more apparent when we realize that Williams was the Prophet’s scribe during the years between 1833 and 1837, and because the proposed landing site of Lehi was found on the same sheet of paper with a known revelation regarding John the Beloved. Thus, many Saints believed the proposed Chilean landing site must have been a revelation as well.
    It is interesting, however, that critics like to point out that this was not a revelation, and we certainly have no axe to grind on that point since it was never acknowledged as such by Joseph Smith. Yet, that does not change the issue at hand. 
    How did these three men know about the 30º south latitude landing site matching the Book of Mormon description given by Nephi in Chapter 18, verses 23-25? 
     In addition, what was it doing written on that sheet of paper at all? What brought about the decision of Williams to write this statement down that Lehi landed at 30º south latitude along the west Chilean coast?
    It is interesting that critics of this statement never address that fact, only the “hysteria” that led to people thinking it was a revelation. But when you eliminate the revelation idea, you are still left with a statement written by Williams on a sheet of paper with other important information connected to his role as the scribe and 2^nd counselor in the First Presidency. It is interesting that no one wants to address this issue beyond the question of whether or not it was a revelation.
    The fact remains, it was still an item of discussion between the First Presidency that prompted Williams to write it down in the first place. It is also of note that the revelation on the sheet of paper about John the Beloved was received in 1829 before Williams even joined the Church. Therefore, the paper with the heading "A Revelation Concerning John the Beloved" appears to be nothing more than a note penned by Mr. Williams in reference to the earlier revelation,  possibly during his hours spent in the school of the prophets.
    While this is of import, it does not change the fact that Williams wrote these four things on the sheet of paper, all issues that would have been discussed in some official capacity. The fact that Williams’ proposed landing site of Lehi eventually found its way into print should also be of interest since it was given some status of importance at the time.

Franklin D. Richards and James A. Little were the first to publish the Williams statement in A Compendium of the Doctrines of the Gospel in 1882. The work was titled Lehi’s Travels. A Revelation to Joseph the Seer. Now, since there was no title given on the original paper by Williams, both the title and the additional phrase, "A Revelation to Joseph the Seer" was simply added by either the authors or the publisher. However, while that seems likely, we cannot rule out that Williams’ himself let it be known to others who carried the information forward that this information was of serious consideration in whatever meeting Williams was in where this was discussed, and as the personal scribe of Joseph Smith, it may well have been from the prophet that the information originated.
    It should also be of note that critics of the statement have gone to great length to discredit its value and importance. Their statement: “It is interesting to note that the statement by Williams was not included in the 1857 edition of the Compendium which was much closer to the time the statement was made and began to be circulated throughout the Church. If this had been an official revelatory statement given to the Prophet for the benefit of the Church, surely it would have been included in the earlier edition.”
    The problem is, the value of the statement is not in whether or not it was revelatory (though one can only wonder where these men in the 1830s came up with such a thought), its importance is that it was made and written down by a counselor in the First Presidency, personal confidant of Joseph Smith and his personal scribe and physician. Thus, the source of the statement was not just a member with a wild idea, but someone of some importance and calling in the early Church.

To bring this again into focus, the sheet of paper containing the reference to John the Beloved was clearly labeled "A Revelation concerning John the beloved." The section of paper containing the Lehi’s travel statement had no title or header calling it a revelation or anything else, and was found on the sheet that had been separated into four sections by a line drawing. The top section contained a copy of the revelation pertinent to John, the second had "Questions in English and Answers in Hebrew," and the third section had writings titled "Characters on the Book of Mormon." The Lehi statement was found at the bottom of the page in the fourth section. There was no reference to authorship or headers of any kind in this section. It should be of interest that at least two of these four items would be directly associated with the Prophet Joseph Smith: 1) the Revelation, which he received, and 2) Questions in English and Answers in Hebrew, would be an area of Joseph’s expertise, for who else at the time in this group spent their time studying Hebrew other than Joseph Smith? Now it also seems that the third area, “Characters on the Book of Mormon,” would be connected to Joseph, since he above all the others would have been the leading expert on such matters pertaining to the Book of Mormon.
    Thus, it might be said that Joseph Smith was definitely connected to the four statements on the sheet of paper. So whether we want to call something a revelation, or revelatory, we ought to be asking ourselves:
1. Where did the information, unknown to these men and just about anyone else in the area, come from? 
2. Where did the statement originate? 
3. Who would have known about that particular landing site? 
4. Why would it have been written down at all? 
5. Why written  on that particular sheet of paper?
    While it is true that no basis for it being considered a revelation to Joseph could ever be justified, according to Williams’ great, great, grandson (who, by the way was connected to FARMS and the Mesoamerican theory for the Land of Promise), Orson Pratt did make the following statement: “As near as we can judge from the description of the country contained in this record {Book of Mormon} the first landing place was in Chile, not far from where the city of Valparaiso now stands,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 14, 11, Feb, 1872, p325).
    It is also interesting that this following statement made by some of the critics of the location: “Even though no information about the physical geology of Lehi’s landing site is ever given in the scriptures, those who were following the journey of Lehi eastward from the Arabian Peninsula may have still found the Chilean landing site plausible.” 
    It should be noted that in the 1830s onward, the total lack of information about the west coast of South America to the average person in the eastern United States would have been almost non-existent. Other than U.S. Navy vessels, no American ships sailed those waters at that time. The plausibility, therefore, would have been simply that the early members had no idea where Lehi landed and one place would have semed as good as any other at the time.

In any event, the theory that Lehi landed in Chile continued to persist. In fact, Orson Pratt found the theory so appealing he successfully perpetuated it for many years and unabashedly proclaimed "the western coast of South America" to be the site of Lehi’s landing” (An Interesting Account of Several Remarkable Visions, and of the Late Discovery of Ancient Records, 3rd American ed., New York, 1842, p18).
(See the next post, “Evolution of Land of Promise Geography – Part V,” for more information regarding how the Book of Mormon Land of Promise geography came about).