Metallurgy Did Not Exist in Mesoamerica Prior to 600 A.D. – Part VI

Continuing from the previous post regarding the importance that the lack of metallurgy in Mesoamerica is when considering where the Land of Promise truly was located. Also continuing with the comments of John L. Sorenson, the so-called guru of Book of Mormon Land of Promise geography, that are meant to lessen and even question the meaning of the use of metal terminology in the scriptural record. 

According to William Hamblin, BYU professor and former board member of FARMS, in an article entitled “Steel in the Book of Mormon,” on the ancientamerica.org Ancient America Foundation (AAF) site, states: “There are two major fallacies in discussions on this topic. First is the problem of the hermeneutics of hyper-skepticism (which means the disposition not to accept claims without proof—to be skeptical that a claim is true unless and until one has been provided reason to believe it). Applying the same hermeneutical standard to other ancient texts creates some obvious absurdities. Second is the semantic fallacy, which consists of arguing about the meaning of words rather than the reality the words are trying to depict.”
    He goes on to tell us that a single ancient reality can be defined in a number of different ways, with people often describing their perceptions of reality differently than we do, and that these fallacies are omnipresent among many anti-Mormons.
    He then goes on to describe the uses of the word “steel” in the scriptural record (which is mentioned five times). Then tells us: “The minimalist and tightest reading of this evidence is that Nephi had a steel weapon from the Near East. He attempted to imitate this weapon—whether in function, form, or material is unclear. His descendants apparently abandoned this technology by no later than 400 B.C. Based on a careful reading of the text of the Book of Mormon, there are no grounds for claiming-as anti-Mormons repeatedly do—that the Book of Mormon describes a massive steel industry with thousands of soldiers carrying steel swords in the New World.”

An artist’s view of Laban’s sword. It is doubtful the cross guards were so large, or the pommel was so big—these traits did not appear until the medieval period; but the blade would have been wide, as shown; thin blades rapier) were not known until around 1500, and the length shown would have been correct, since short swords were not known until Roman times

    First of all, Hamblin bases his first conclusion—that we are uncertain in what way Nephi replicated Laban’s steel sword, when Nephi wrote: “And I, Nephi, did take the sword of Laban, and after the manner of it did make many swords, lest by any means the people who were now called Lamanites should come upon us and destroy us; for I knew their hatred towards me and my children and those who were called my people” (2 Nephi 5:14)—the conclusion he draws is that “He attempted to imitate this weapon-whether in function, form, or material is unclear.”
    Now, there is so suggestion that Nephi attempted to do something and did not achieve the results he set out to achieve, i.e., the replicating of Laban’s sword. So what is it about Laban’s sword that Nephi was trying to replicate? Surely, he knew what a sword looked like before ever laying eyes on Laban’s weapon. Nephi tells us what interested him in the sword: “And I beheld his sword, and I drew it forth from the sheath thereof; and the hilt thereof was of pure gold, and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine, and I saw that the blade thereof was of the most precious steel” (1 Nephi 4:9, emphasis added).
    So Nephi saw three things about Laban’s sword that interested him:
1. Hilt of fine gold;
2. Workmanship exceedingly fine;
3. Blade of precious steel.
    Nothing more is said of the sword itself until Nephi later, after escaping from his older brothers and settling in the area they called the Land of Nephi, writes: “I, Nephi, did take the sword of Laban, and after the manner of it, did make many swords” (2 Nephi 5:14).
    So from that we know:
1. Nephi made swords after the manner of Laban’s weapon;
2. He made many swords.

While we cannot determine how many is “many,” we can at least suggest he made a sufficient number that those who came with him and settled in this new land they called Nephi, that could wield a sword in their defense, was provided a sword. Whether that number is five, ten, twenty or thirty depends on how large the group of Lehi’s party arrived in the Land of Promise two or three years earlier, and whether or not Ishmael’s household (and that of Lehi’s) contained more than just family members, i.e., servants, workers, slaves, etc. Since that number cannot be determined from the scriptural record, we can only assume the number.
    The more important part of Nephi’s statement pertaining to the earlier question, is what was meant by “after the manner.”
    That phrase means “the way in which a thing is done,” “the same way,” “according to,” “in this way,” In Hebrew, it carries another meaning: “Exactly,” or “same.”
    Thus, we can accurately suggest that the meaning of Nephi’s statement was that he made many swords “exactly like Laban’s sword, made it in the same way Laban’s sword was made, and according to its dimensions, shape, heft, weight and balance—or as close as he could do so. The point is, that anyone who wields a sword can tell immediately how it feels in terms of being able to use it easily, quickly, and with force. Therefore, the weight and size of the weapon would be foremost in mind, along with the hardness of the metal so it could be used to strike objects and not be adversely affected. 

Another factor, and critically important is the balance of the sword. While this depends on the sword to some degree, typically the balance point is a few inches above the hilt or guard
the correct balance point of a sword does depend on the sword, but is generally a few inches above the hilt/cross guard. At this point the length of the blade should be equal weight with the handle and guard so the swordsman effectively has a pivot point on the sword just above the hand, which allows for even, fluid movements in both attack and defense. If the weight is too far forward one would be quite slow in bringing the point back up in defense, or be uncontrolled in a counter attack—too much weight in the hilt, and the forte (upper half of the blade) become weak and one would find it hard to push their opponent’s blade around. Whether or not Nephi knew this is unknown, but once hefting a well-made sword, the balance becomes obvious.
    It should also be kept in mind that when making something for fun or for show, the interest is not the same as making something that your life will depend on. Nephi would have put a great deal of perfection into his efforts, since their very lives and existence would probably depend upon those efforts. This is born out when he said, “lest by any means the people who were now called Lamanites should come upon us and destroy us; for I knew their hatred towards me and my children and those who were called my people” (2 Nephi 5:14). After all, you don’t cut corners when your own life and that of your family rests upon your efforts.

Therefore, we can, with certainty assume that Nephi made swords that were, in every utilitarian manner, as identical to Laban’s sword as he could possibly make them. For Hamblin to say, “He attempted to imitate this weapon—whether in function, form, or material is unclear” has little meaning, and certainly should not cast any doubt on both Nephi’s effort and his success. His life depended on what he made and how he made it. Therefore, it seems certain he made the swords to have the same function, the same form, the same material, balance and weight.
(See the next post, “Metallurgy Did Not Exist in Mesoamerica Prior to 600 A.D. – Part VII,“ to see how far theorists go to try and bend the facts presented in the scriptural record to maintain their erroneous beliefs, paradigms and models)