skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A reader sent in this
quote and asked what we thought of it:
“We learn of the direction Lehi and his family journeyed once they left
Jerusalem in 1 Nephi 16:13
where we read they traveled in a south, southeast direction. Continuing in that
direction would have taken them to 19 degrees north latitude. In
chapter 17:1 we learn they "did
travel eastward from that time forth." Thus, eastward to the Sea of
Arabia. Apparently early theorists assumed the directions given in 1 Nephi were not just the direction
they maintained while they were traveling on foot but may have been intended to
include the general direction they traveled even after they set sail. Therefore,
in their efforts to follow the journey to a reasonable conclusion, simply
followed the sailing party eastward across the pacific to a likely landing site.”
Example of “simply followed the sailing party eastward
across the pacific to a likely landing site.” However, such would not be very
likely because of what lay between Arabia and the Pacific Ocean
This statement is
found on the “Book of Mormon Lands” website, under the page heading: “The
Evolution of Book of Mormon Geography,” with excerpts from Phyllis Carol
Olive’s book, The Lost Lands of the Book
of Mormon. This statement was half of the second paragraph, however, the reader
failed to send in the second half of that paragraph, which reads:
“The final piece of information given in the Williams’ statement
indicates that Lehi and his people sailed in a southeast direction and landed
in Chile along the western borders of South America. Now, since traveling
southeastward, as described in the comment by Williams, would have taken them
in a direct course toward the continent of Australia, and beyond toward
the Antarctic, they would, of necessity, have had to turn due east at some
point to reach the west coast of Chile at thirty degrees south latitude.”
So while the reader
asked for an opinion on the first statement, we will endeavor to respond to
both statements since they are inseparably connected.
As for our answer,
consider the following three points:
Lehi had been traveling south-southeast
along the Red Sea, then turned nearly eastward (blue arrow) after that
1. People assumed, though there is no comment or
suggestion for it, that the term “did travel eastward from that time forth” (1 Nephi 17:1), had reference to more than
the next location (Bountiful). Assumptions are never a wise basis for an
opinion on such slim information and such an obvious single subject, i.e.,
traveled eastward from that time forth…until they “did come to the land which
we called Bountiful” (1 Nephi 17:6).
2. Continuing east from Bountiful “in their efforts to follow the journey to a reasonable
conclusion, simply followed the sailing party eastward across the pacific to a
likely landing site,” is not the simple idea made to seem
here. Between Arabia and the Pacific are 17,000 islands comprising 699,548
square miles in a total area (including seas) of 741,096 square miles, in the
closely compacted area of the Indonesian archipelago. Besides the islands, the
East Indian Archipelago (Indonesia) encompasses twelve seas, two gulfs and one
straight, each with its own difficulties of negotiating currents, shoals, and
daily squalls and torrential rain—even today with engines, GPS, and radar, the
area “has a notorious reputation for being navigationally difficult.”
Map showing the larger of the 17,000 islands of
Indonesia through which Lehi would have had to negotiate. Note the continual
course changes that would be needed by inexperienced people who had never
before been to sea--an in a sailing boat "driven forth before the wind." It should also be noted that this is considered the most
difficult and dangerous sailing course on the planet
Far too often,
uninformed comments like that are made by individuals who are unfamiliar with
the Sea. When it comes to sailing, two terms are important to keep in
mind: 1) Pilotage or Cabotage,
which is the art of sailing along the coast using known landmarks; and 2) Navigation, which is the art of sailing
long distances out of sight of land. The former is the use of fixed visual
reference of the shore, such as cliffs, rock, capes and points, to guide a ship
to its destination, and is dependent on the pilot being able to recognize the
visual references in order to make use of them, or capable of discovering them
from a map. Obviously, such travel in 600 B.C. had to be done in the daytime,
and with enough visibility, where the natural features could be seen from the
ship.
Cabotage, an original
shipping term, meant “trade or transport in coastal waters,” from the French, Caboter, meaning “to sail along the
coast.” It was the term later applied to the early traders before the Age of
Sail, who plied the coastal waters.
Top: The early trade routes established by
Cabotage vessels sailing by day and putting in at night, keeping in view of
known landmarks along the coast; Bottom: The reason they put in at night—this
is shot off the starboard bow, with the wheel in bottom left and rigging to
right. Note that except for the moon trail across the water, nothing else can
be seen though the boat is less than a mile from shore
The latter is Navigation,
and prior to the instruments known in the Age of Sailing, was often little more
than “dead reckoning.” Sometimes called ded,
for “deduced” reckoning (DR), where the navigator finds his position by
measuring the course and distance he has sailed from some known point.
Even though Columbus had a magnetic compass (they had been known in Europe
since at least 1183), in his first voyage, he returned mostly by dead reckoning
and was off two hundred miles when nearing the Azores. On rare occasions, an
early sea captain might chance a dead reckoning voyage between two very well
known points, with the advanced point one that if missed, a location could
still be determined when reached from the known landmarks.
Consequently, for all
those theorists who like to claim man was sailing the deep ocean, running
between Arabia and Indonesia, before a magnetic compass was invented (left),
might want to rethink their view. Without a compass, in open sea where there
are no landmarks, is like sailing blindfolded--you have no idea where you are, or where you are going. As an example, as late as the 8th or 9th
century A.D., Viking merchants navigated their “knarr”—a ship that was wider, deeper, and
shorter than the Viking longship and used for long sea voyages—on regular
journeys over the North Atlantic connecting their settlements in Norway,
Iceland and Greenland. Although they had no magnetic compass, they were able to
sail due West or due East courses by using the Sun at daytime and the stars at
night to verify their course. From their port of departure, they would sail
along the Norwegian coast North or South until they had reached the Latitude of
their destination and then sailed on a constant course West to their port of
destination. The prominent ice-covered mountain peaks of Iceland and Greenland
were used as landmarks to approach these coasts. By experience, they knew
approximately how long their voyages would take so that they also applied a
kind of Dead Reckoning combined with an elaborate celestial knowledge of which
they took advantage for their constant-latitude navigation.
Left: the shorter, stubbier and deeper
Viking Knarr; Right: The more familiar narrower, shallower Viking Long Ship
While that worked for
the Vikings at their latitude, moving straight as an arrow so to speak, sailing
in the Indian Ocean or through Indonesia could not have been done this way. Nor
could the unique sailing of the Polynesians who moved basically due north and
due south with a wide ocean around them, have been used by these early traders,
or up to or even during the Age of Discovery.
That leaves us only
one explanation for Lehi’s deep sea voyage to the Land of Promise and it can be
summed up in one word—Liahona. However, knowing changes of direction during the
type of island-hopping voyage one would have taken through Indonesia in 600
B.C., would not have helped people who had never been to sea before, let alone
who were not experienced mariners.
(See the next post,
“They Turned Eastward” – Part II,” for the third point and more information on the article about
sailing directly eastward and the complications of such an attempt)
There are certain people, writing about the Heartland of the U.S. as being
the site of the Land of Promise, and often use as a source, the Commentary on the Book of Mormon, Vol 2, 1960, p 324, George Reynolds
and Janne M. Sjodahl. In this work, Reynolds and Sjodahl write, quoting Andrew
Jenson Historical Record, p 601:
Dedicated temple site at
Far West, Missouri. One of the four cornerstones laid by the Apostles in 1886
can partially be seen in the far right foreground
“In
1836, the Prophet Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and others, found it best, on
account of apostasy and bitterness, to leave Kirtland and go to Far West, Mo.,
where the Saints were endeavoring to establish themselves. On September 25,
they passed through Huntsville,
Randolph Co., and the Prophet is said
to have told the brethren that that place, where a stake of Zion had been
established, was "the ancient site
of the city of Manti."
However, there seems to have been some confusion in the minds of
Reynolds and Sjodahl about the dates of Joseph Smith’s departure from Kirtland
for Far West, and the later departure of the Kirtland Camp. The 1836 date cited
by Reynolds and Sjodahl is incorrect. Saints started to settle Shoal Creek,
attached to Ray County, Missoursi (later named Far West, Caldwell County) in
September of 1836, but The Kirtland Camp passed through Huntsville, Randolf
County on September 25, 1838.
Joseph Smith, however, was not
with them.
Map of Caldwell
County, created by Governor Boggs at Joseph Smith’s request, had a 6 mile
buffer around it to keep the Mormons and Missourians separate. Note the
numerous settlements (yellow circles) and the site of Far West (larger yellow
square)
From the Assistant Church Historian, Andrew Jenson, in Church Chronology, Joseph Smith, and Sidney
Rigdon left Kirtland, on Wednesday, September 27, 1837, to establish other
places of gathering for the Saints, and to visit with the Saints in Missouri,
where they arrived in the latter part of October. On Tuesday, November 7, an important
conference was held at Far West, when Joseph Smith arrived from Kirtland, and
on October 4, 1838, the Kirtland Camp arrived at its destination at
Adam-ondi-Ahman.”
Reynolds and Sjodahl relied on Assistant Church Historian Andrew Jenson
writings. In a monthly magazine called the Historical Record, Andrew
Jenson wrote a redacted (edited) history of the 1838 “Kirtland Camp” in which
he wrote: “Tuesday 25th.
The camp passed through Huntsville,
Randolf Co., which had been appointed as one of the Stakes of Zion, and which the Prophet said was the ancient site of the
City of Manti…” (The
Historical Record, “Kirtland Camp”, Vol. VII, July 1888, pg. 601).
Jenson also noted that
Judge “Elias Smith (left) was chosen clerk and historian” for the Council of the
Kirtland Camp, and he was also one of the commissioners leading the Camp. He
kept a daily journal (right) of the uninterrupted history of the camp
However, there is no reference to a Missouri Manti in the Elias Smith
journals.
From the Journal of Samuel D.
Tyler, an actual member of the Kirtland Camp who kept a handwritten diary:
“…We passed through Huntsville,
Co. seat of Randolph Co. Pop. 450, and three miles further we bought 32 bu. of
corn off one of the brethren who resides in this place. There are several of
the brethren round about here and this
is the ancient site of the City of Manti, which is spoken of in the Book of
Mormon and this is appointed one of the Stakes of Zion…” (Journal of Samuel D. Tyler,
September 25, 1838, pp. 66-67).
Note that Tyler’s journal entry does not attribute the Book of Mormon
“Manti” in Missouri idea to the Prophet Joseph Smith, who was not even in the
group, since the Kirtland Camp arrived in the vicinity of Far West on 2 October
1838 and was met there by Joseph Smith according to the Papers of Joseph Smith,
Vol 2, Journal 1832-1842, p 307.
As was stated in the last post on Zarahemla, Iowa, Joseph Smith may well
have planned to name some of the Saint’s settlements after Book of Mormon
place names. And it is always possible that word of mouth passage of the name
Manti may have embellished the reasons for naming settlements after Book of
Mormon namesakes.
Before Andrew Jenson’s magazine history, an
account mentioning “Manti” in Missouri was published overseas in the Millennial Star. This account was based
on the Manuscript History of the Church
by Willard Richards (left). The account was written after Joseph Smith’s death:
“The camp passed through Huntsville,
in Randolph County, which has been appointed as one of the stakes of Zion, and
is the ancient site of the City of
Manti…” (Millennial Star, “History of Joseph
Smith,” May 13, 1854, Vol. 16, pg. 296). It might be significant to note that Willard Richards, a contemporary of Joseph Smith, did not obviously
attribute the ancient site of Manti claim to the Prophet. So what source
was Willard Richards relying on when he wrote his account?
The redacted History of the Church makes is sound like the
Kirtland camp’s journal kept by Judge Elias Smith was used. However, the History
of the Church, like other revised works, takes liberties with original
material. So setting that aside, B.H. Roberts’ in History of the Church (Vol
3, p 144) wrote this about the event:
“Tuesday, September 25. Thomas Nickerson lost his
horses and could not find them before the camp started, and did not overtake us
at night. We came through Huntsville, the county seat of Randolph county,
eleven miles, where we were told before we arrived there, that we should be
stopped, but nothing of the kind occurred when we came through the town, and we
even heard no threats whatever, but all appeared friendly. A mile and a half
west of Huntsville we crossed
the east branch of Chariton, and one and a half miles west of the river we
found Ira Ames and some other brethren near the place where the city of Manti is to be built, and encamped for the
night on Dark creek, six miles from Huntsville. Traveled this day seventeen
miles. Distance from Kirtland, seven hundred and fifty-five miles.”
It should be of interest, too, that there is nothing in Joseph Smith’s
journals or his letters about the Book of Mormon Manti being in Missouri. There
is also no verifiable statement by the Prophet anywhere, mentioning an ancient
Manti in Missouri.
In fact, there is no firsthand record in any journal of what Joseph said
of this matter, and there isn’t even a secondhand
statement by one of Joseph’s contemporaries claiming he said that Manti of the
Book of Mormon is at Huntsville Missouri.
This 1844 Carey & Hart Map shows the
last portion of the route (red line) of the 1838 Kirtland Camp in Missouri; it
highlights Randolph County, where Huntsville (red box) is located
It also might be of interest to
recall that in the last post, we discussed Zarahemla, Iowa, which many
Heartland Theorists have tried in vain to claim D&C 125 states that this
was the location of the original Book of Mormon Zarahemla. Once again, Joseph
Smith merely wrote regarding this name: “…advised that a town be built there,
and called Zarahemla” on Tuesday
July 2, 1839 (History of the Church 3:382). But the revelation
specifying that “the name of Zarahemla be named upon” a city in Iowa was given
March 1841.
In fact, of this day, Joseph Smith recorded in his Journal on 2 July
1839 “…Advised that a town be built there” with no town name given. It is
entirely possible that Joseph’s statement taken from his journal and recorded
in Church History, the name Zarahemla was added to identify for the reader the
settlement later named Zarahemla.
When it comes to locating the
covenant lands of the Book of Mormon we’re all better off sticking with
scriptures and signed statements by Joseph Smith. He never even gave a name for
the town in his Journal when recording that a town was to be built in Iowa that
was later given the name Zarahemla. The
saints are asking for trouble if they rely on less authoritative sources than
the scriptural record and statements written in Joseph Smith’s own hand—not just
ones repeated over and over again until they seem legitimate. As Joseph
said of himself that he did not enjoy the right vouchsafed to
every American citizen; that of free speech, and when he ventured to give his
private opinion on any subject of importance his words were often garbled and
their meaning twisted and then given out as the word of the Lord because they
came from him ("LaFayette C. Lee, Notebook, LDS Church Archives).
When the Saints flooded into Illinois in 1839, land was
purchased on both sides of the Mississippi River, acquiring Illinois land and
Iowa land. Then area in Iowa was then called Nashville that later was renamed
Zarahemla.
As the concluding statement in the last post, “was there any importance attached to this area
originally called Nashville and became Zarahemla?” Obviously, from the
discussion in the last post, this area of Lee County in south-eastern Iowa, was
critical to the Saints five years later when they left for Utah, since their
travels were through Iowa, and several of these settled areas became staging
camps for the Saints who had been expelled from Nauvoo.
Looking across the river
from the Montrose area to Nauvoo, with the ferry crossing from Nauvoo to Iowa
in 1842
On the twenty thousand acres south of Montrose the church bought in 1839,
Nashville was founded, built a large stone building for worship and provided a
steamboat landing on the river. It was the first landing for steamboats above
the rapids where boats docked to onload and offload goods during low water. As
Elias Smith wrote in August 1841, “We have a good market here within a few rods
of our door.” When the Saints left in May 1846, many Saints crossed to
Nashville. In Augusta, a sizable population of Saints clustered on both sides
of the Skunk River, those on the north in Des Moines county and those on the
south in Lee County. Joseph Smith conducted a conference there in April 1843
with 200 members attending, at which time he wrote in his history, that Augusta
was a “flourishing town” with three saw miles and two flour mills.
The Maid of Iowa
crossing from Augusta to Nauvoo in 1843. This area along the Mississippi, because
of its position above the rapids, was a major transportation corridor for goods
and people. Steamboats were a lifeline for Nauvoo as they were to August and
all communities, carrying to and transporting from its wharves the large volume
of merchandise needed to sustain economic growth
For a cost of $4,000 members Levi Moffit and Dan Jones built a little
60-ton “stern wheeler” steamboat, christened the Maid of Iowa, in the early autumn of 1842, at Augusta, Iowa, which
became an important landing on the Skunk River, to compete in the trade
conducted on the smaller rivers emptying into the Mississippi. In 1832, the
“tonnage of vessels” registered at New Orleans was 233,065. Ten years later,
when the Maid of Iowa made her debut
on the river, that figure had risen to 521,644, almost 120 percent increase.
Joseph Smith purchased shares of the boat in 1843, and despite her small
size, and minimal 115’ length, the Maid
was used not only to transport goods such as coal, lumber lead military
supplies wheat, corn, and pork, up and down the Mississippi, and along most
navigable rivers of the Mississippi valley, but served at intermittent periods
as a ferry boat across the Mississippi. She also was used for church services
for the Saints, and a transport for converts to and religious and political
missionaries from Nauvoo, and also hauled workers and supplies for work on the
Nauvoo Temple.
In March 1843, Elders Parley P. Pratt and Levi Richards, having just
anded in New Orleans with about two hundred British convert, south to charter a
steamer to take their group up river to Nauvoo. Captain Dan Jones, of the Maid
of Iowa, who had spent the winter on the lower river in the bayou trade, was
looking for passengers and freight destined for the upper Mississippi, and on
April 12, loaded the little vessel to her limits, and sailed north, hauling up
at the Nauvoo House landing where the passengers were met by Joseph Smith and
joyful Nauvoo residents.
Joseph was the first aboard the boat and could not refrain from shedding
tears” at the privilege of again greeting old friends and welcoming the new
arrivals. So appreciative was he of Captain Jones’ service that he laid his
hand on the captain’s head and said, “Bless this little man,” leading to an
affectionate friendship between the two, and eventually to Jones’ conversion
and baptism. It was then that Joseph arranged a partnership with Jones in the
steamboat trade, buying out Moffit’s share for $1375.
The Iowa City Standard
carried a glowing report on April 10, 1842, and above is an ad from the Nauvoo
Neighbor of 17 May 1843
The timing was most opportune, for with the opening of western and central Iowa
after the settlement with the Sac and Fox Indians in the Black Hawk Purchase,
huge numbers of land seekers headed for Illinois and on to Iowa. The Maid of
Iowa was perfect as a ferry across the Mississippi. So important was the Maid and its ferrying capabilities, even
out-of-town newspapers carried stories about it and encouraged the enterprise.
Fully loaded, the Maid was capable of
hauling about forty tons of freight and two hundred passengers, making five to
eight knots and nearly two-thirds that speed when going upstream. The Maid could
accommodate 25 to 30 passengers in the boat’s cabin (both male and female
quarters) with the rest having deck passage.
Top:
Steamboat ticket on the “Maid of Iowa,” issued to Brigham Young and signed by Joseph Smith, Emma
Smith, and Dan Jones (boat captain). The 20-cent ticket, dated May 24, 1843,
gave Brigham Young passage across the Mississippi River to Augusta, Iowa;
Bottom: Numerous steamships docking at Nauvoo and another heading into port in
1844
By 1845, with over 11,000 people in the city limits of Nauvoo, and the
area at its peak (only Chicago, with 15,000 was a larger city, and the Nauvoo
area had as many as 17,000 overall), twelve steamships tied up at Nauvoo docks
in a five-day period.
In the beginning, it appeared that the church was settling a larger area
in Iowa, creating the Iowa Stake, perhaps not knowing their eventual
destination was Utah, or merely in attempting to safeguard their future in case
of further troubles, or just the natural expansion of the church. However, according to the 1981 Church Almanac, p 140, “the plan was abandoned…on 6 January
1842, the stake itself was discontinued, but Brother Smith continued to preside
over the Saints in Iowa, whose numbers were continually added to by immigrants,
until the exodus to Utah.” In 1844 due to mounting animosities, members in outlying areas were often
forced to move to Nauvoo.
As for the revelation
where the Lord gave the name of Zarahemla for one of these cities in Iowa, this
short 4-verse section relates to the question in verse 1: “What is the will of the Lord concerning the saints in the Territory of
Iowa?” in which the Lord says in verse 2 “if they will do my will and keep my commandments concerning them, let
them gather themselves together unto the places where I shall appoint unto them
by my servant Joseph, and build up cities unto my name, that they may be
prepared for that which is in store for a time to come.”
The Saints leaving Nauvoo. They crossed the
Mississippi River and entered Iowa, stopping in areas to camp that had
previously been settled by the Iowa Saints. From these staging camps, they
eventually traveled west to Utah
We might at this
point ask, “What was the time to come?” The answer seems obvious. In five
years, the Saints were on their way west to settle in the Salt Lake region, and
in order to do so, they had to come through Iowa, using many of these areas and
others as staging camps.
Continuing with the
revelation, in verses 3 and 4, the Lord continues: “Let them build up a city unto my name upon the land opposite the city
of Nauvoo, and let the name of Zarahemla be named upon it. And let all those
who come from the east, and the west, and the north, and the south, that have
desires to dwell therein, take up their inheritance in the same, as well as in
the city of Nashville, or the city of Nauvoo, and in the stakes which I have
appointed, saith the Lord.”
Left: Some of the early settlements in the Illinois (right of map) and Iowa (left of map) areas the Lord wanted settled by the Saints; Right: The tracts of land owned by Galland that were purchased by the Church in Iowa and a few across the Mississippi River in Illinois
Stated differently,
the Lord was telling the Saints then, as well as now, that we should be building
up cities, communities, and a society that will serve the Lord, and no matter
from where we come (or who we are), we should “take up our inheritance” in the
kingdom of God in that city (wherein we dwell), whether it be in Iowa, or
anywhere else in the land. That is, no matter where we live, no matter in what
city, no matter what the name of that city where we dwell, we should consider
it our inheritance in the kingdom of God and build it up to the Lord through
our devoted service to Him.
This short, four-verse
section deals with what the Lord wanted the Saints located in the Territory of
Iowa to do in March, 1841. Zarahemla, is indeed, mentioned in this section, but
in the same sentence the Lord also names the city of Nashville and the city of
Nauvoo, both along the Mississippi. Is this to mean there was a Nashville and a
Nauvoo in the Book of Mormon that we know nothing about? Clearly, this idea
about naming a city Zarahemla had nothing to do with the location of the
original City of Zarahemla in the Book of Mormon, for that city was near the
west sea, where the Mulekites landed (Omni 1:16). There never was a West Sea
near Nauvoo or Nashville. It was also just north of the high valleys within
higher mountains as shown by 1) the Lamanites always “going down” to the land
of Zarahemla, and also shown when Ammon and his brethren (Amaleki Helem and
Hem, among others) “went down into the land of Nephi” from the hill, north of
the land of Shilom (Mosiah 7:5-6).
Knowing and
understand the historical background of this revelation should show, even to
the casual reader, that the name of Zarahemla applied to the original town of
Nashville, Iowa, was merely a name, though of great significance in Book of
Mormon times, was here not applied to any significance of its location—just the
re-use of an earlier important name.
Since we have received several inquiries about the town of
Zarahemla, Iowa, and the statements in D&C 125, the following two-part post
has been written.
When the Saints flooded into Illinois in 1839, following the
infamous “extermination order” of October 27 1838, by Missouri Governor Lilburn
W. Boggs, land was purchased on both sides of the Mississippi River, acquiring
Illinois land and the city then called Commerce (originally Venus), and on the
Iowa side, the area then called Nashville (today called Galland). Commerce was
renamed Nauvoo a year later, from a Hebrew word meaning “beautiful place” or
“city beautiful.” Along the Iowa side, the refugees from Missouri settled in
Nashville, Montrose Keokuk and Augusta. Nashville, first settled in 1839 by the
Saints, was not renamed Zarahemla until the revelation in D&C 125, which
was given in March 1841, two years later.
In 1839, the eastern part of Iowa, especially eastern Lee
County, was considered part of greater Nauvoo, according to Stanley B. Kimball
(Nauvoo West: the Mormons of the Iowa
Shore) and Donald Q. Cannon (Mormon Satellite Settlements in Hancock County
Illinois and Lee County Iowa). Land was purchased on both sides of the
Mississippi River at the same time from the same person, with stakes established
in both places and Mormons living on both sides of the river, though most lived
on the Illinois side.
Early photo of (red arrow) Nauvoo, across (blue
arrow) the Mississippi, seen from the area of (yellow arrow) Nashville, Iowa
A ferry crossed the Mississippi and connected the Iowa side
with Nauvoo, and Joseph Smith preached and visited in Lee County. The Sugar Creek
camp and staging ground for the 1846 trek across Iowa lay seven miles west of
the Mississippi River, and the September 1846 miracle of the quails took place
on the Iowa shore, as did Joseph Smith's well-known healing of Brigham Young
and Elijah Fordham in July 1839.
On October
9 with food in dangerously short supply, quail flocks flew near the camp and
flopped onto the ground in the morning and afternoon. The Saints picked up
quail in their hands and soon had as much cooked quail as they wanted to eat
After a time these Saints in Iowa wanted to know if they should
remain there or move to Nauvoo—perhaps brought about by Dr. Isaac Galland, the
man who sold the land on which both Nauvoo and Nashville was built. It was
Galland who also purchased nineteen thousand acres
in the Half-Breed Tract in Iowa and established the settlement of Nashville on
the west bank in unorganized U.S. territory and practiced medicine, established
a trading post, and founded the first school in what would become the Iowa
Territory.
Galland wrote to David W. Rogers, suggesting the Saints located
in Iowa would most likely be better protected by the U.S. government in
Illinois (a state) than in Iowa (a territory), for he thought the Saints “would be more likely to receive protection
from mobs under the jurisdiction of the United States, than they would be in a
state of the Union, where murder, rapine and robbery are admirable (!) traits
in the character of a demagogue; and where the greatest villains often reach
the highest offices.”
Isaac
Galland (left), his first school house in Iowa (center) and Governor Robert
Lucas of Iowa (right)
In Essentials in
Church History, p 220, we find that Galland also wrote to Governor Robert
Lucas of Iowa, who had known the Mormons in Ohio, and “who spoke very highly of them as good citizens.”
In addition, by the summer of 1839, Saints had settled in
Ambrosia, which was three miles west of Montrose and extended another four
miles westward. At first it was called Hawley’s Settlement, and ultimately had
about 100 members living there. When the first wave of Saints left Nauvoo in
1846, their massive Sugar Creek encampment was located with the Ambrosia
settlement area.
The revelation in D&C 125, received in 1841, was
directed to the many Saints who were already settled in Iowa. Before the Saints
arrived in Lee County, Iowa, there were 2,839 residents, but about 7 years
later in 1846, the population had swelled to 12,860—many of whom were LDS.
In March, 1841, Joseph Smith inquired of the Lord regarding
this question of the Iowa Saints relocating to Nauvoo, or elsewhere in
Illinois. In response, the Lord spoke of the Saints gathering together “unto
the places which I shall appoint” in preparation “for that which is in store in
a time to come” (D&C 125:2). This revelation obviously looked ahead to the
exodus of the Latter-day Saints to the Rocky Mountains in 1846–47, in which
Iowa became a temporary gathering place for those who were driven from their
homes in Illinois—a short distance of only seven miles across the Mississippi,
the staging area called Sugar Creek Camp, and just south of Nashville, Keokuk
in Iowa became staging areas for many Saints readying to move west as well as
those later coming from the East and Europe as late as 1853.
The Keokuk
staging area camp was in operation from 1846 to 1853 on property owned by
church members who settled on the Iowa side of the Mississippi a few miles
downriver from Nauvoo
As for the name “Zarahemla,” we do not know its meaning,
only that it came from the Book of Mormon, and existed among the Mulekites prior
to the Nephites encountering them (Omni 1:12-19). It was common in Book of
Mormon times to name cities “after the name of him who first possessed them”
(Alma 8:7). Perhaps someone among the original group who came with Mulek was
named Zarahemla and founded a city near their settlement, for they had always
lived where Mosiah found them (Mosiah 1:16). In any event, we know that the
Nephites named Bountiful in the Land of Promise evidently after the Bountiful
in Arabia where Nephi built his ship. They also named some cities after people
of Israel, or old city names in Israel, i.e., Jerusalem, Judea, David, Jordan, Shem,
Midian, Angola, Noah, etc. Also, when the Saints moved into Utah, they named
cities Nephi, Moroni, Manti, and Bountiful, etc.
One of the first settlements named in this way by the Saints
in America, was Zarahemla, at Nashville, Lee County, Iowa. From a commentary by
George Reynolds and Janne M. Sjodahl, p 796, we find regarding Zarahemla, Iowa:
“This settlement was founded by the
Saints in 1839, on the uplands about a mile west of the Mississippi River, near
Montrose and opposite Nauvoo, Ill. The Church had bought an extensive tract of
land here. At a conference held at Zarahemla, August 7th, 1841, seven hundred
and fifty Church members were represented, of whom three hundred and twenty-six
lived in Zarahemla. But when the Saints left for the Rocky Mountains, that city
was lost sight of.”
This 1841 Conference occurred five months after the
revelation that brought about the change in name from Nashville to Zarahemla.
At the time of the name change, there were nine branches in the Iowa area, all
belonging to what was then the “Iowa Stake,” and as such, the Iowa members
were on an ecclesiastical par with Nauvoo, having a stake presidency (Joseph’s
uncle, John Smith as President), high council, bishop, and nine branches or
congregations that by 1841 included some 750 members, when the stake’s name was
changed to the “Zarahemla Stake.”
So the question arises, “was there any importance attached to this area
originally called Nashville and became Zarahemla?” President Joseph Fielding Smith
wrote in Essentials in Church History,
p 222: “Across the river on the Iowa
side, extensive holdings also were obtained. The village of Nashville, in Lee
County, with twenty thousand acres adjoining, was purchased; also other lands
opposite Nauvoo. Here the Prophet instructed the Saints that a city should be
built, to be called Zarahemla. A number of members of the Church had located
here when the Saints were driven from Missouri, and it appeared to be a
suitable location for a permanent settlement of the people. … The idea seemed
to be that the Latter-day Saints should spread out over considerable territory
and form organizations in various parts of the country.”
The Iowa Half-Breed Tract of land between Keokuk (south) and Fort Madison (north), and the Des Moines River (west) and the Mississippi (right), designated as 120 on the map. Red Arrow: Nauvoo, across the Mississippi in Illinois. Montrose and Zarahemla are across the river from Nauvoo in Iowa, within the tract of land
Specifically, in June 1839 the church bought two extensive
tracts of land in the triangular Half-breed Tract, which extended from Fort
Madison west to the Des Moines River and south to Keokuk. The purchase included
a town site three miles south of Montrose called Nashville (now Galland) and
20,000 acres around it and along the Mississippi River. The church also bought
another 30,000 acres in and around Montrose, including part of the Montrose
town site. In fact, individual Saints also bought land in nearby Keokuk and
settled in neighboring Des Moines and Van Buren Counties. In addition, by early
1839, some forty LDS families occupied the deserted U.S. Army barracks of Old
Fort Des Moines—built in 1834 facing the Mississippi River and abandoned in
1837—located just across the river from where Nauvoo soon sprang up, including
Brigham Young, John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff.
(See the next post, “Nashville, Montrose and Zarahemla –
Part II,” for more on the naming of Zarahemla, Iowa)
A reader
wrote in to express a disagreement regarding the story in the Book of Mormon
about Nephi killing Laban and getting away with it. Since the answer to his
short question could not equally be short, we have taken this entire post to
try and do it justice.
“I find
the slaying of Laban by Nephi an impossible event. Why would a God-fearing man
kill another, especially one that was unconscious and helpless, and more
importantly, how could a single man kill one of great prominence on the city
streets of Jerusalem and escape without notice? Surely someone would have seen
him and raised a cry.” Fisher B.
Response: The story of Samual ibn Adiyt, a most famous Jewish
poet of Arabia in ancient times, won undying fame in the East by allowing his
son to be cruelly put to death before his eyes rather than give up some costly
armor that had been entrusted to his care by a friend. No doubt, taken in part
from the real life history of Samuel Ibn Naghrillah
(HaNagid) of Mérida (993 A.D.), a shop keeper and merchant in Córdoba,
later removed to Granada where he rose in the Court to assistant vizier of
state to the Berber king Habbus al-Muzaffar, and his son Joseph--all reminds us that eastern and western standards are not the same. It might
surprise us to know that the callousness of Americans in many matters of
personal relationships would shock Arabs, as many things they do shock us.
Yet, in the scriptural record, no
one seems more disturbed by Labab’s death, than Nephi himself, who takes great
pains to explain his position (1 Nephi 4:10-18). First he was "constrained
by the Spirit" to kill Laban, but he said in his heart that he had never
shed human blood and became sick at the thought: "I shrunk and would that
I might not slay him" (1 Nephi 4:10). The Spirit spoke again, and to its
promptings Nephi adds his own reasons: "I also knew that he had sought to
take away mine own life; yea, and he would not hearken unto the commandments of
the Lord; and he also had taken away our property" (1 Nephi 4:11). But
this was still not enough; the Spirit spoke again, explaining the Lord's
reasons and assuring Nephi that he would be in the right; to which Nephi offers
more arguments of his own, remembering the promise that his people would
prosper only by keeping the commandments of the Lord, "and I also thought
that they could not keep the commandments . . . save they should have the
law" (1 Nephi 4:15), which the dangerous and criminal Laban alone kept them
from having. "And again, I knew that the Lord had delivered Laban into my
hands for this cause. . . . Therefore I did obey the voice of the Spirit"
(1 Nephi 4:17-18).
Streets in ancient cities were seldom as
one might expect today. They were narrow, often with numerous turns, and dark,
even in the daytime. Envision these Old Jerusalem streets late at night, with
everyone inside (they didn’t have city lights then, only torches, and little
was done at night) without the modern lights seen here
Your suggestion that the story of Laban's death is absurd,
if not impossible, since Nephi could not have killed him and made his escape.
Those unfamiliar with night patrols in the military, or with the condition of
streets anciently, may not realize that lighting of city streets, except for
festivals, is a blessing unknown to ages other than our own.
Streets of even the biggest towns were perfectly dark at
night, and very dangerous. To move about late at night without lamp bearers and
armed guards was to risk almost certain assault. In the famous trial of
Alcibiades, a general in the Peloponnesian War, for the mutilation of the Hermae (Hermes), a quadrangular memorial
stone sculpture set in city streets to mark boundaries, is the testimony of one
witness who, all alone, beheld by moonlight the midnight depredations of a
drunken band in the heart of downtown Athens—obviously, city streets of the
greatest city in the western world were unlighted, deserted, and dangerous at
night.
Top: London
and New York city streets in 1800s; Bottom: City streets today. Most anything
can be done amid darkness in streets of the past and even some of today
From the Greek and Roman comedy and from the poets we learn
how heavily barred and closely guarded the doors of private houses had to be at
night, and archaeology has shown us eastern cities in which apparently not a
single house window opened onto the public street, as few do even today at
ground level. East and West, the people simply shut themselves in at night as
if in a besieged fortress. Even in Shakespeare's day we see the comical terror
of the night watch passing through the streets at hours when all honest people
are behind doors. In a word, the streets of any ancient city after sundown were
a perfect setting for the committing of deeds of violence without fear of
detection.
It was very late when Nephi came upon Laban (1 Nephi 4:5,
22); the streets were deserted and dark. Laban was wearing armor, so the only
chance of dispatching him quickly, painlessly, and safely was to cut off his
head—the conventional treatment of criminals in the East, where beheading has
always been by the sword, and where an executioner would be fined for failing
to decapitate his victim at one clean stroke.
Nephi drew the sharp, heavy weapon and stood over Laban for
a long time, debating his course (1 Nephi 4:9-18). He was an expert hunter and
a powerful man: with due care such a one could do a quick and efficient job and
avoid getting much blood on himself. But why should he worry about that? There
was not one chance in a thousand of meeting any honest citizen, and in the dark
no one would notice the blood anyway. What they would notice would be the armor
that Nephi put on, and which, like the sword, could easily be wiped clean.
The donning of the armor was the natural and the sensible
thing for Nephi to do—there is no greater safety in an enemy camp than to don
the insignia of a high military official (and not hang around too long), and
Nephi had no intention of delaying his departure. No one dares challenge leaders
too closely (least of all a grim and hot-tempered Laban); their business is at
all times secretive and important, and their uniform gives them complete
freedom to come and to go unquestioned.
Nephi tells us that he was "led by the Spirit" (1
Nephi 4:6). He was not taking impossible chances, but being in a tight place he
followed the surest formula of those who have successfully carried off ticklish
assignments. His audacity and speed were rewarded, and he was clear of the town
before anything was discovered. In his whole exploit there is nothing in the
least improbable.
How Nephi disguised himself in the clothes of Laban and
tricked Laban's servant into admitting him to the treasury is an authentic bit
of Oriental romance, and of history as well. When Zoram, the servant,
discovered that it was not his master with whom he had been discussing the
highly secret doings of the elders as they walked to the outskirts of the city,
he was seized with terror—in such a situation there was only one thing Nephi
could possibly have done, both to spare Zoram and to avoid giving alarm;
something no westerner could have envisioned doing.
Nephi, a powerful man, held the terrified Zoram in a
vice-like grip long enough to swear a solemn oath in his ear, "as the Lord
liveth, and as I live" (1 Nephi 4:32), that he would not harm him if he
would listen. Zoram immediately relaxed, and Nephi swore another oath to him
that he would be a free man if he would join the party: "Therefore, if
thou wilt go down into the wilderness to my father thou shalt have place with
us" (1 Nephi 4:34). What generally astonishes the western reader is the
miraculous effect of Nephi's oath on Zoram, who upon hearing a few conventional
words promptly becomes tractable, while as for the brothers, as soon as Zoram
"made an oath unto us . . . that he would tarry with us from that time
forth . . . our fears did cease concerning him" (1 Nephi 4:35, 37).
The reaction of both parties makes sense when one realizes
that the oath is the one thing that is most sacred and inviolable among the
desert people: "Hardly will an Arab break this oath, even if his life be
in jeopardy," for "there is nothing stronger, and nothing more sacred
than the oath among the nomads," and even among the city Arabs, if it be
exacted under special conditions. Yet, not every oath will do: to be most
binding and solemn an oath should be by the life of something, even if it be
but a blade of grass; the only oath more awful than "by my life" or
(less commonly) "by the life of my head," is the wa hayat Allah, "by the life of God," or "as the
Lord liveth," the Arabic equivalent of the ancient Hebrew hai Elohim.
The one and only way that Nephi could have pacified the
struggling Zoram in an instant was to utter the one oath that no man would
dream of breaking, the most solemn of all oaths to the Semite: "as the
Lord liveth, and as I live" (1 Nephi 4:32).
Commanded by the Lord, guided by the Spirit, and using his own
intelligence, Nephi carried out the command, knowing the Lord would “provide
means whereby they can accomplish the thing which he has commanded,” was not
only a possible event, but one quite probable, and was accomplished as Nephi tells it.
In this final and concluding look at John R’s
January 2014 rebuttal of our March 1, 2011 article series on Mesoamerica, we
pick up where he, like most Mesoamericanists, lay claim to the Olmec as being
the Jaredites as proof of the Mesoamerica Land of Promise. Much of this was
discussed in the last post, but we continue here:
The area of Soconusco is in the southeast corner of Chiapas, Mexico, along the Guatemala border. Obviously, this is far into the Mesoamericanists' Land Southward, where the Olmecs never settled according to the scriptural record
As stated earlier,
the Olmec, if they were Jaredites, would not have settled south of the narrow
neck of land (east in your alignment). Nor can you hold on to the misconception
that the Olmec settled in the north and moved south, since there are numerous
indicators that a vigorous movement in the opposite direction—toward the north
(actually west)—was going on at precisely this time, in which case the
so-called Olmec influence must have been a native-born development emanating
from Soconusco itself (along the southern coast of Chiapas near the Guatemala
border in the Mesoamericanist’s Land Southward).
In fact, according to
Michael Blake and Michael D. Coe, all of the jadeite
(Jade) and almost all the Obsidian found in the Olmec sites is from Guatemalan
sources, particularly from the piedmont region of southern Chiapas, often
referred to as the Soconusco, and according to Raymond V. Sidrys and Frank
Asaro, more specifically from the Guatemalan highlands (Tamumulco, El Chayal,
Ixtepeque, and San Martin Jilotepeque)—For clarification, El Chayal and
Ixtepeque are along the eastern border of Guatemala separating that country from Honduras.
Early peoples of the Americas considered jade more valuable
than gold and silver. The Olmecs, the great sculptors of the pre-Columbian era,
carved jades into delicate human forms and scary masks. Mayan kings and other
royalty often went to their graves with jade suits, rings and necklaces. The
living had their teeth inlaid with the colored gems; yet there is no mention of Jade or any precious stone like it in the scriptural record where gold, silver and copper are frequently identified
“And
they did preserve the land southward for a wilderness, to get game” (Ether
10:21). It is interesting that the Jaredites never went into the Land
Southward, except to hunt—“And in the days of Lib the poisonous serpents were
destroyed. Wherefore they did go into the land southward, to hunt food for the
people of the land, for the land was covered with animals of the forest. And
Lib also himself became a great hunter” (Ether 10:19)—yet, here we have Olmec
cities in the Land Southward, and they obtained their Jade and Obsidian from
deep into the Land Southward, and their influence was all over the land
Southward, and in fact, several Olmec-Mayan experts think the Olmec originated
in what is the Mesoamericanists’ Land Southward.
Not finished with this, though, is the fact that Izapa,
along the Chiapas coast, was the extension of the Olmec civilization and prior
to the Maya, having major centers from 1500 B.C. that lasted for about 1000
years. Izapa is on the Chiapas, Mexico-Guatemala border, almost 400 miles south (actually east) of Mesoamericanists’ narrow
neck of land.
In the southwest corner of Chiapas, both
Soconusco and Izapa were early Olmec sites. Both areas are about 400 miles from
the Narrow Neck and clearly in opposition to Ether’s record stating the
Jaredites never occupied the Land Southward, but kept it as a reserve for
hunting
Now we come to the
famous Mexican archaeologist Ignacio Bernal, in his The Olmec World
(University California Press, 1969), “The climatic station of Villahermosa is
typical of the Gulf coastal plain of eastern Mexico, the region Bernal has
termed the "Olmec metropolitan area,” and Nigel Davies, the eminent
British writer and archeologist maintains that the Olmec eventually were found
all over Mesoamerica, saying “they were present in almost every region.” It is
in Villahermosa that the Parque—Museo de
La Venta, the Olmec Archaeological Park and museum is located (this is
different from the La Venta Archaeological Site near Huimanguillo—which are
merely plastic reproductions of the original stone carvings), considered the
heart of the Olmec metropolitan area.
Villahermosa is well within the area of the
Mesoamericanists Land Southward, yet another indication of the difference
between the Olmecs as Jaredites and the Ether record of the Jaredites
Another consideration
is that M. D. Coe, who has been involved in and written on both the Olmec and
Maya, in his Olmec Jaguar and Olmec Kings
(Dumbarton Oaks, 1972) said that “the beliefs of the Maya were of Olmec origin
and that the pre-Maya were Olmecs.” However, in the scriptural record, we find
that the Nephites were completely unaware of the Jaredite civilization until
king Mosiah I interpreted Coriantumr’s writing the last Jaredite survivor carved on a large stone kept by
the people of Zarahemla (the Mulekites), nor can it be said they were
influenced or knew the Jaredites, for the people of Zarahemla had no idea who
Coriantumr was nor his people until Mosiah, around 200 B.C., interpreted the
writing (Omni 1:20-22).
Thus, it cannot be
claimed that the Olmec influenced and were the forerunners of the Nephites or
the Mulekites, which they would have to be if Mesoamerica was Lehi’s landing
site as you and other Mesoamericanists claim.
In addition, Brainerd
and Sharer “found colonial Olmec at Maya sites,” and Schele and Freidel
believed that “the monumental structures of the Maya were derived from Olmec
prototypes,” and Olmec jaguar masks were found under Mayan pyramids (two in
Guatemala and one in Belize) far into their Nephite lands south (actually east)
of their narrow neck of land, all showing a definite interaction between Olmec
and Maya, yet the Jaredites were completely gone by the time Mosiah learned of
the Jaredites, and again, were never in the Land Southward, and the Mulekites
knew only of Coriantumr, who they knew nothing about and not until Mosiah
interpreted the stone Coriantumr wrote upon did they know who he was and who
his people were (Omni 1:20-22).
Yellow Arrow: Isthmus of Tehuantepec; Blue
Line: the Narrow Neck—making all the lands to the east (right) the
Mesoamericanists’ Land Southward; White Arrow: the modern country of Belize;
Red Arrow: Guatemala. As can be seen, these areas are deep into their Land
Southward contrary to the scriptural record
In fact, showing how
far off from the scriptural record the Mesoamericanist is regarding the Olmec
being the Jaredites, we find that “dominating Central America over a millennium
before the Mayans and over two millennium before the Aztecs were present in
Central America a people called the Olmecs reigned supreme. Their civilization
reigned over Mexico's Yucatan peninsula and their influence extended throughout
Guatemala, Honduras, Belize, Costa Rica, and El Salvador.”
Yellow Arrow: Isthmus of Tehuantepec; Blue
Line: the Narrow Neck; White Arrow: Honduras; Red Arrow: El Salvador; Green
Arrow: Nicaragua and further is Costa Rica. As can be seen, these areas are very deep into
their Land Southward, 1200 miles to Costa Rica where the Olmecs were, contrary to the scriptural
record
This inarguably places the Olmec
deep in the Mesoamerican Land Southward, contrary to the scriptural record, which should in and of itself eliminate Mesoamerica as a possible Land of Promise site.
In addition, as found
in Olmecs: A Mesoamerican Wonder by
Kimberly Lavin, “The Olmec were believed to be in existence during the
Preclassic era, from 1200 - 100 B.C. This Indian group is thought to be the
oldest of the Mesoamericans, that we know. The Olmecs had their home among
three major cities: La Venta in Tabasco, Laguna de los Cerros in Veracruz, and
San Lorenzo in Tenochtitlan. The Olmec influence went much furthur though. It
spread through Guatemala, Honduras, Belize, Costa Rica, and El Salvador.”
In fact, one of the
Olmec colossal heads was found in the foothills of the Guatemala coast at Takalik Abaj (John Graham, Olmec Diffusion: a Sculptural
View from Pacific Guatemala, Cambridge University, 1989, pp 231-32), and David
Hatcher Childress in his The Mystery of
the Olmecs, states: “Olmec artifacts [have been] found along the Pacific
coast of Chiapas and Guatemala…it is now known that the Land [of the Olmec]
spread from the Central Valley to the La Venta area and to the Pacific coast of
the Isthmus of Tehuantepec and even further south along the Pacific into
Guatemala to El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica.” He also wrote: “While we
have found small statuettes of Olmec figures in Costa Rica, it is in Guatemala
that the largest statues and stone heads are to be found. Some of these rival
the colossal heads found on the Gulf Coast in sheer size and skill of
workmanship.” To make sure this is understood, all of Guatemala, El Salvador, Belize, etc., are in the Mesoamericanists' Land Southward--contrary to the scriptural record.
Charles Gallenkamp in
his Mayas: The Riddle and Rediscovery of a Lost Civilization, states: “Olmec
culture is known mainly from three important ruins: La Venta, Tres Zapotes, and
San Lorenso…their influence was extremely widespread. Unmistakably Olmec Traits
are found in archaeological sites extending from the Valley of Mexico to El
Salvador, and some authorities view the Olmec as a kind of ‘Mother Culture’
that played a vital role in stimulating the Rise of Civilization throughout the
area.”
Lynn V. Foster, in his A Brief History of Central America
writes about the Olmec in the Guatemala highlands as well as being in Chiapas
and Oaxaca, all south (east) of the Mesoamericanists’ narrow neck of land—that
is, in their Land Southward. And a recent analysis
made to the 4th Offering of La Venta
(a treasure reunited in the Museum of National Anthropology),
coordinated by Diana Magalolni and Laura Filloy, have allowed investigators to
discover evidence suggesting that the ancient Olmec civilization, that
flourished in the Gulf of Mexico, reached a territorial and commercial
expansion much bigger than what had been originally thought, since it’s
believed they were in contact with Guatemala, Guerrero and Oaxaca--which would b in the Land Southward.
We could go on with
numerous commentaries by archaeologists and anthropologists regarding the
presence of Olmec far to the east of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec (the
Mesoamericanists’ Land Southwasrd), but the point should be well made here. The
Olmec could not have been the Jaredites, for the scriptural record makes it
quite clear that they never settled in the Land Southward, nor is there any
record of any interaction between the Jaredites and the other groups in the
scriptural record.
Mesoamerica is simply not the Land of Promise of the Book of Mormon!
Lehi had been traveling south-southeast
along the Red Sea, then turned nearly eastward (blue arrow) after that
