Saturday, December 4, 2021

Matching the List of Descriptions in the Scriptural Record – Part V

Continuing from the previous post regarding the lists that theorists have created for their individual models, yet seldom refer to the scriptural record in forming their lists. In addition, in their describing the types of events or things listed in the Scriptural Record, they often totally avoid the mention of some very specific and clear descriptions that Mormon listed existing in the Land of Promise—but not found in their models. The first seven were listed previously—we continue here with item #8:

Two animals unknown to Joseph Smith that were very useful to man

 

8. Two unknown animals that were more useful and beneficial than horses and asses (donkeys) in the Land of Promise (Mosiah 9:9). Heartland and Great Lakes theorists also rarely mention that the Land of Promise should have, or had, these two animals that were unknown to the farming family of Joseph Smith and, therefore, not given a known name.

As Moroni put it: “And also all manner of cattle, of oxen, and cows, and of sheep, and of swine, and of goats, and also many other kinds of animals which were useful for the food of man. And they also had horses, and asses, and there were elephants and cureloms and cumoms; all of which were useful unto man, and more especially the elephants and cureloms and cumoms” (Ether 9:18-19, emphasis added).

John L. Sorenson and other Mesoamericanists consider these two animals that Mosiah mentioned and Mormon abridged, as being the Sloth and the Tapir—two animals that have little value other than for food in some parts of the world. Neither, under the most  liberal thinking, could be considered valuable to man on the level of horses and elephants as were the cureloms and cumoms.

The choice of Heartland theorists for these two animals, that were unknown to Joseph Smith, is the Buffalo and the Mountain Goat, which was endemic (native and restricted) to mountainous areas of western North America—specifically the Rocky Mountains, from which it got its name as the Rocky Mountain Goat. However, while Buffalo are very valuable to man (the animal that supported “Indian” life on the plains of North America, they could not be domesticated like horses and elephants—and, therefore, not as valuable as the elephant as were the cureloms and cumoms like Mormon wrote (Mosiah 9:19).

Top: Short grass found just east of the Rocky Mountains; Bottom: The areas were short grass, mixed grass, and tall grass are located

 

It should be noted that the buffalo lived on the “short grass prairie” that covered the lands just east of the Rocky Mountains, running from Canada through Montana, the eastern portions of Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico, and the western portion of Texas. Tall grass, which covered eastern Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa and Illinois (Meldrum’s Heartland), with mixed grass in between.

This limits the major area of the buffalo and, except in occasional small numbers of 10 to 30 buffalo in a herd, from being anywhere in the major portion of both the Heartland and great Lakes Land of Promise locations.

On the other hand, Mountain goats which are a locally abundant game animal that were indigenous to the Rocky Mountains (massive mountain ranges that stretch from Canada to central New Mexico) and the Cascade Range (Mount Rainier National Park in Washington) and other mountain regions of the Western Cordillera of North America, from Washington, Idaho and Montana through British Columbia and Alberta in Canada. In fact, the daily movements by individual mountain goats are primarily confined to areas on the same mountain face, drainage basin, or alpine opening.

These ungulate animals have long been eaten by Indigenous Peoples in Canada and were a principle food source for them; however, in the Rocky Mountains due to difficulty associated with acquiring these animals, they were hunted only occasionally and only by those who had access to mountainous habitats and the skills to hunt in rugged terrain. In addition, it was usually only hunted in the summer when the animal was fat and the terrain was easiest to navigate.

(Dorothy I.D. Kennedy and Randall T. Bouchard “Northern Coast Salish—Indian tribes of the Pacific Northwest in Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 7: Northwest Coast, Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press, Washington, DC, 1990, pp441-445).

Thus, these goats were important to particular cultures in and places, but their importance and use was not nearly as widespread as hoofed-mammals like caribou, elk, deer or moose. In fact, some of these early Americans consumed goat meat only when other game animals were scarce (Leslie Main Johnson Gottesfeld, “Conservation, Territory, and Traditional Beliefs,” Human Ecology (USA), vol.22, no.4, December 1994, pp443-465).

Left Buffalo (bison) of the short-grass plains; Right: Mountain Goat of the Rocky Mountains

 

For animals to meet Mormon’s description of being akin to the elephant and greater value than horses and donkeys, the cureloms and cumoms would have to have been domesticated, and neither the buffalo nor the mountain goat can be domesticated.

So we come to South America, where there are two of the most valuable animals not known in North America until the 20th century, and unknown to farmers and animal raisers during the Smith family of farmers, were the Andean Llama and Alpaca—two animals extremely useful to man and more valuable than horses and asses.

9. crossing over, go over, went over, Mormon’s use of “over” is an important phrase in gaining insight to his meaning and the makeup of the Land of Promise terrain. He used: “crossing over,” “going over,” “went over,” “go over,” etc. to another town or land. “crossing over is to pass from one side or area, physical or abstract, to another. To reach the other bank of the river, they tried crossing over on a small boat.

Athwart; over; from side to side; To move or pass laterally, or from one side towards the other, or from place to place, either at right angles or obliquely; as, to cross from Nantucket to New Bedford.” Actually, that would be to cross over Nantucket Sound from Nantucket to Martha’s Vinyard, and from there cross over Vinyard Sound to Naushon Island, and from there cross over Buzzards Bay to New Bedford.

Such crossing over wordage can be found in Mormon’s writing when he wrote:

• [they] went over upon the east of the river Sidon, into the valley of Gideon” (Alma 6:7, emphasis added);

• “they took their armies and went over into the borders of the land of Zarahemla” (Alma 25:2, emphasis added)

• “Now this man went over to the land of Jershon also, to preach these things among the people of Ammon“ (Alma 30:19, emphasis added)

• Zoram and his sons crossed over the river Sidon” (Alma 16:7, emphasis added)

• “for thou didst forsake the ministry, and did go over into the land of Siron, among the borders of the Lamanites” (Alma 39:3, emphasis added).

Crossing over, went over, go over, means moving over some major divide, like mountains, canyons, rivers or seas—in order to get to the other side. Like crossing over a hill or mountain, crossing over a stream or river, crossing over a canyon or narrow gorge.

Left: You do not cross over a forest, (Right): you pass through it

 

After all, you do not cross over a forest—you go through it. You do not cross over a jungle, you go through it; you do not go over a desert—you go through it. But you cross over a mountain; you cross over a river; you cross over a canyon, you cross over a sea or lake. Again such crossing is found in Mormon’s writing:

• after they had crossed the sea” (Mosiah 10:13, emphasis added);

• “they were driven by Lehi into the waters of Sidon, and they crossed the waters of Sidon” (Alma 43:40, emphasis added).

While the Heartland and Great Lakes areas are mostly flat grasslands and prairies with distant low, rolling hills in places, the term of cross-over would not relate to those areas as much as an area with tall mountains that had to be crossed through passes, canyons or narrow gorges crossed by bridges—the kind of terrain found in Andean South America.

These extensive articles regarding the makeup of the landscape and overall terrain in the Land of Promise—showing a scriptural record verification of Mormon’s descriptions—is meant to show theorists that there is a solid basis found to verify the scriptural record that it is essential to finding and verifying the location of the Land of Promise. It is not based on tinkering, adjusting or forcing another meaning or outright changing Mormon’s writing. Instead it depends upon taking Mormon and others’ writings at face value and building an understanding on what the scriptural record states and not looking for errors or so-called inaccuracies so a different meaning supporting a different Land of Promise location than what was implied and meant.


No comments:

Post a Comment