Looking for Zarahemla – Part IV

Continuing with another comment from a new reader, evidently promoting his own book “Finding Zarahemla,” to which we are responding and continuing with an understanding of this entire Delmarva Peninsula that Franklin Reid claims was the Land Southward. 

Top Left: The peninsula—note how much land there is beyond that is undefined and not collectable into a Land Northward; Top Right: The peninsula divided between Delaware, Maryland and Virginia, and described as “a flat narrow sandbar between the bay to the west and the Atlantic Ocean to the east; Bottom: The marsh lands in the northern Chesapeak Bay where Franklin places his narrow neck of land
    The Delmarva Peninsula, originally known as the Delaware Chesapeake Peninsula or simply the Chesapeake Peninsula, acquired the name Delmarva shortly after 1859, but did not become widespread until the 1920s, is an irregular coastline of drowned river valleys, streams, and creeks. The terrestrial landscape is topographically low and consists of vast areas of poorly drained silty soils and well-drained sandy soils. Large tracks of tidal marsh now blanket former forests and fill former streams and creeks, creating lowland swamps, floodplains, low terraces and inundated river valleys.
    It might also be of interest to know that during the last Ice Age, mile-thick glaciers stretched as far south as Pennsylvania, and the Atlantic coastline was about 180 miles farther east than it is today. Approximately 18,000 years ago, the glaciers began to melt, carving streams and rivers that flowed toward the coast. Sea level continued to rise, eventually submerging the area now known as the Susquehanna River Valley. This drowned river valley became the Chesapeake Bay, which assumed its present shape about 3,000 years ago (about the time of the Jaredites). Remnants of the ancient Susquehanna River still exist today as a few troughs that form a deep channel along much of the Bay's bottom. To fully define the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem, we must go far beyond its shores. Although the Bay itself lies entirely within the Atlantic Coastal Plain, its watershed includes parts of the Piedmont Plateau and Appalachian Province.
    Even so, the west coast of Dalmarva has continually expanded and receded over the past three thousand years, including the separation of islands from peninsulas, such as Tilghman Island (Great Choptank) which formed only in the period not long before John Smith discovered the area. In fact, just over 3,000 years ago, when the Jaredires would have landed, no one knows exactly what the Chesapeake Bay looked like, or even if it had yet formed, or that it extended far enough northward to reach Franklin’s narrow neck of land to set ashore in the Land Northward. And what would have brought their barges, being driven strictly by wave action, into the bay against strong tidal currents—a mixed wave and tide energy that created the lower seventy miles of the Virginia Eastern Shore tail on the peninsula. Of course, the same thing could be said for Nephi’s ship, “which was driven forth before the wind”—how did they go against the winds and currents streaming down the Chesapeak Bay to empty into the Atlantic Ocean? And how did they land when the western shore of Delmarva was far too shallow to broach in a deep sea sailing vessel?
    Even today, the Chesapeak Bay channel is so flattened “fill up” sediment that an ship has to pass through 11 man-made channels to sail up the Bay; near the mouth the channels are filling with sand from the ocean, near Baltimore they fill with sediment from the land, requiring a constant dredging program to keep the Bay and channels open.

In fact, 3,100 years ago, certain to be the time of the Jaredite landings, geologists tell us that much of this southern extension did not even exist above sea level (“Bay Geology,” Chesapeake Bay Program, 2012, Anapolis, Maryland). The area is shallow, and even today deep water ships cannot dock anywhere along this southern extension of the peninsula, and sailing ships of the type coming in from the open sea can not sail along the east shore beyond Cape Charles, which northward is limited to barge traffic. How Nephi’s ship could have landed along the middle of the peninsula would be an interesting question to try and answer, since these depths on a nautical chart show anywhere from 1 to 4 feet moving into the peninsula side of the Bay (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Nautical Chart #12224-Chesapeake Bay, Cape Charles to Wolf Trap). 
    The Atlantic Coastal Plain is a flat, lowland area with a maximum elevation of about 300 feet. To fully define the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem, we must go far beyond its shores. Although the Bay itself lies entirely within the Atlantic Coastal Plain, its watershed includes parts of the Piedmont Plateau and Appalachian Province. The waters that flow into the Bay have different chemical identities depending on the geology of where they originate. This coastal plain is supported by a bed of crystalline rock covered with southeasterly dipping wedge-shaped layers of sand, clay and gravel. Water passing through this loosely compacted mixture dissolves many of the minerals. The most soluble elements are iron, calcium and magnesium.
    The coastal plain extends westward from the continental shelf to a fall line that ranges from 15 to 90 miles west of the Bay. Waterfalls and rapids clearly mark this line, which is close to Interstate 95.

Cities like Baltimore, Maryland; Washington, D.C.; and Richmond, Virginia, were built along the fall line to take advantage of potential water power generated by the falls. These cities became important commerce areas, as colonial ships could not sail past the fall line and had to stop to transfer their cargo to canals or overland shipping.
    Since its formation, the Chesapeake Bay's shoreline has constantly been shaped by tides and currents that erode the land and move sediments to other parts of the Bay.
    There are many examples of erosion and sedimentation throughout the Bay. As an example, some geologists estimate that the Calvert County, Maryland, cliffs Captain John Smith explored in 1607 and 1608 have eroded back 300 feet. By the mid-1700s, forests were cut down and turned into farm fields, which increased erosion and caused sediment to fill some navigable rivers. Joppatowne, Maryland, was once a sea port, but is now more than two miles from water.
    In addition, many Chesapeake Bay islands that existed during colonial times are now severely eroded or completely submerged. In the early 1600s, Maryland’s Poplar Island encompassed several hundred acres. By the 1940s, only 200 acres remained. Today, the area is being restored using dredge material from Baltimore Harbor.
    The State of Delaware is located within two physiographic provinces, the Appalachian Piedmont and the Atlantic Coastal Plain. Most of the state lies within the Coastal Plain; it is only the hills of northern New Castle County that lie within the Piedmont (foothills). Delaware’s rolling hills, north in the Twelve-Mile Circle, which rise to over 400 feet above sea level, are a part of the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains. The rocks at the surface in the Piedmont are old, deformed, metamorphic rocks that were once buried in the core of an ancient mountain range. This range formed early in a series of tectonic events that built the Appalachians between about 543 and 250 million years ago. During an early event, called the Taconic orogeny, an offshore chain of volcanoes collided with the ancient North American continental margin to push up a gigantic mountain range that was as tall as the Alps or the Rockies of today.

Geologists date the Taconic orogeny between 470 and 440 million years ago. The Taconic orogeny is important to our understanding of the geology of Delaware, because during this event, the rocks of Delaware’s Piedmont were deeply buried under miles of overlying rock and metamorphosed by heat from the underlying mantle. Since that time, rivers and streams have carried the erosional products, mostly sand, clay, and gravel, from the mountains onto the Atlantic Coastal Plain and continental shelf. As the mountains wear down, the buried rocks rebound and rise to the surface. Thus what we see in the Piedmont today are old, deformed, metamorphic rocks that were once buried deep within an ancient mountain range. 
    Today, these mountain ranges are far out to sea.
(See the next post, “Looking for Zarahemla-Part IV,” for more information on Franklin Reid’s book Finding Zarahemla, and his comments to us and our responses, and also and introduction into the Dalmarva Peninsula to show how it simply does not fit the scriptural record)

Looking for Zarahemla – Part III

Continuing with another comment from a new reader, evidently promoting his own book “Finding Zarahemla,” to which we are responding and continuing from his last comment: “When the great emigration of the Nephites to the land northward occurred, described in Alma 63:4-5, it was a very large group that traveled overland through the narrow neck to move on to a better place.” 
    Response (cont): When we start talking about immigration by ship as opposed to overland, there are a couple of things to keep in mind. 1) Purpose, 2) Motivation, 3) Practicality, 4) Convenience, 5) Cost, and 6) Opportunity.
    Obviously, the purpose of these immigrants mentioned in Alma 63 and Helaman 3, had to do with dissatisfaction with the lengthy war that just ended between the Nephites and Lamanites, with their motivation looking for a more peaceful and isolated land northward. As for practicality, it was a simple matter of reaching Franklin’s Elk Neck area (narrow neck of land), less than 100 miles from his Zarahemla to the passage into his Land Northward.

Looking north from Franklin’s narrow neck area to the east and north of the Chesapeake Bay up Elk River; Bottom: Beyond the narrow neck at White Hall and Glasgow, looking north. Note the completely flat ground—it would have been an easy trek into his Land Northward from the Delmarva Peninsula with no narrow passage in sight
    A rather simple task, and at the same time quite convenient. The cost of overland travel would have been minimal and the opportunity after the war ended quite convenient. Going by ship, on the other hand, which in this circumstance makes no sense at all, would have been quite costly and much more difficult in securing passage, and conveying by ship all the necessary supplies, equipment and building tools needed. Typically, in ancient times, immigration by ship was taken when large bodies of water precluded overland travel—in this case, there would have been no water hindrances, nor mountains nor any terrain nor topography blockages, making ship travel completely unnecessary.
    Also note in the photos above showing the narrow neck area, there are no narrow passes between these two lands that Franklin claims is the narrow neck of land. It is about 12 miles wide with nary a hindrance, pass—narrow or otherwise—into the land beyond.

Top: The area of Franklin’s Narrow Neck of Land, a small area between the Delmarva Peninsula (south) and Pennsylvania (north), beyond Newark and Wilmington in the Twelve-Mile Circle of Delaware; Bottom: Eastern lock of the Chesapeake and Delaware (C&D) Canal in Battery Park, Delaware City, Delaware. Note how flat the Narrow Neck area is—no hills, mountains, canyons, passes, etc.
    To get a better picture of Delaware, it is on a level plain, with the lowest mean elevation of any state in the nation, with Delmarva, the entire peninsula falling within the Atlantic Coastal Plain, a flat, sandy and sometimes swampy area with very few or no hills and a maximum elevation of about 102 feet (447 in the continental or mainland of Delaware), and within the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain, which stretches for 239 miles along the coast and includes Eastern Maryland from the Anacostia River (separating Maryland from Washington D.C.) eastward, Delaware, and New Jersey (an area 12,168 square miles). Within Delmarva, or the peninsula, the highest point is only 102 feet above sea level at Stillpond Neck, about ten miles south of the Susquehanna River mouth on the east shore of the Chesapeake. It is only 5,721 square miles and runs north and south 170 miles, though the lower one-third is a narrow land neck about 50 miles long and 18 miles wide which, today, belongs to Virginia, and known as the Virginia "Eastern Shore." 
    The actual narrow neck of land, between the Elk River (at White Hall just south of Elkton) and the Delaware River at the mouth of Red Lion Creek (between Newcastle and Delaware City) is only 12 miles wide over flat, uninterrupted ground—hardly the day and a half journey for a Nephite described by Mormon. Nor is it a choke point, since the area just south of there would allow for a crossing of the Elk River, a distance of only 480 yards (less than five football fields) across between Henderson Point and Plum Point, and further south about 520 yards between Elk Forest and Bull Minnow Run—ether one of which an army of attacking Lamanites or Nephite defectors could cross in canoes, rafts or small boats, to gain a six mile wide finger of land that opens six miles northward into a vast open land hundreds of miles across that would be impossible to defend.

Looking north up the Elk River at Town Point, (yellow arrow) about 600 yards across. The river narrows to under 500 yards about 3 miles (white arrow) beyond this point. Note the flat land all around
    This Elk River north of Back Creek is not deep, being part of a tidal tributary of the  Chesapeake Bay and the most northern extension of the estuary, which is only 1.4 miles long between Elkton and the Chesapeake Bay. Beyond that, the streams run out of the Piedmont (foothills) of the Blue Ridge Mountains (about 2,000 to 4,000 feet elevation at this point) and the Shenandoah. The waterway itself is shallow, shoaling very quickly beyond Elkton anciently, but in the late 1800s, was dredged to a depth of 7 feet, and in 1915, dug out even deeper to about 14 ½ miles north of the mouth. To the south, the river to Back Creek is crooked and narrow in places, making it difficult for any type of vessel Hagoth built to have traversed.
    Your Blog Comment: “The location is completely different from any other theories you may have read about but, as you will see, it is very compelling.”
    Response: It can hardly be compelling when it lacks so much in comparison to the descriptions Mormon gave us. Truly, there is no narrow neck of land, just a narrowing of the land that is flat with no narrow passage or pass, no military choke point that could easily be defended with bows and arrows and swords, and at 12 miles, could easily be crossed in less than a day. There is no specific Land Northward, no mountains of any kind in the Land Southward, let alone ones "whose height is great"; there are no two animals that would not have been known to a New England farmer in 1829; no two grains; no natural herbs to remove fevers; no west, east or north sea beyond the narrow neck; no Land of Many Waters in the vicinity of the Land Northward; of the five or so main rivers in the Land Southward (Peninsula), none flow northward as the Sidon River does.

In addition, according to the Chesapeake Watershed Archaeological Research Foundation, of the officially searched 1500 archaeological sites on the Peninsula, the 60,000 acres of agricultural fields and over 600 miles of Chesapeake Bay shoreline and Atlantic coast line personally searched by the Foundation no evidence of substantial human populations occupying this Middle Atlantic coastal plain has been found. Even after numerous excavations and scores of years of the Smithsonian and other professionals, not a single indication of an ancient highly advanced culture exists; nothing beyond stone arrow points, knives and tools have been located, with most archaeological finds centering on shapes and designs of stone arrowheads, knives and tools, with a few ceramics, lithics (rocks), and bone tools.
This is hardly evidence of an advanced culture, which the Nephites coming from Jerusalem in 600 B.C. would have been.
(See the next post, “Looking for Zarahemla-Part IV,” for more information on Franklin Reid’s book Finding Zarahemla, and his comments to us and our responses, and also an introduction into the Delmarva Peninsula to show how it simply does not fit the scriptural record)

Looking for Zarahemla – Part II

Continuing with another interesting comment from a new reader, evidently promoting his own book “Finding Zarahemla,” to which we are responding to the comment that the Delmarva (Delaware/Maryland/Virginia Peninsula): 
   Your Blog Comment: “On the east side of America is a large peninsula, about the size of Palestine, with a sea east and a sea west with a narrow neck of land at the north end connecting it to the mainland."

Response: First of all, Palestine is only 2,402 square miles, whereas Delmarva is 7847 square miles in size—perhaps you meant Israel, which is 5,454 square miles, both of which are considerably smaller than Delmarva. Secondly, your Sea East is legitimately made up of the Atlantic Ocean and the large mouth of the Delaware River, which in ancient times, would have been a singular sea to early inhabitants. However, your West Sea is an ever narrowing Chesapeake Bay that likely would not have been along the east coast (the mainland or Maryland/Virginia) since it is far too shallow to have landed on the west coast of Delmarva—yet, the scriptural record says they landed on the west coast in the south, which could not have happened on the peninsula. Again, however, this bay as it extends northward along the entire length of your Land Southward (the entire Peninsula), narrows to as little as 2.8 miles wide. 

As can be seen in the image (left), the blue line is Franklin's narrow neck of land, just south of which Hagoth built his shipyard. Why he would have sailed north is questionable, however, people would not have had to sail northward, they could have (white arrow) walked into the Land Northward and into a huge empty land; or (green arrow) could have crossed the 2.8 mile width of the river in a raft, no need for "an exceedingly large ship," and entered this vast land in which to immigrate; or crossed downriver (yellow arrows) where the far coast is less than five miles. It would simply not make sense to build a huge ship to sail up a small river when access to the area was so readily available all along the coast.
    In addition, it is highly unlikely that the Nephites would have built their major shipyards in this far northern bay which is like a river at this point, and even more unlikely they would have sailed northward from there up the Susquehanna River, when they had so much other areas to explore and immigrate to in the west across this narrow water at this point, into Maryland’s mainland. Why immigrate by ship when you could walk there and not have to go far at all—just across the narrow bay to a huge interior land.
Your Blog Comment: “Hagoth built his ships and “they took their course northward”
(Alma 63:6). How could they sail directly into the land northward? They certainly couldn’t if we follow the Mesoamerica theory that they sailed west along the coast of Mexico until they finally could go north. If we look at the Delmarva Peninsula we see “launched it forth into the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward” (Alma 63:5) That is the Chesapeake Bay and at it’s north end is the opening of a very large river, the Susquehanna, which is as large as the Mississippi at it’s widest. It goes directly into the land northward and then bends east to enter central Pennsylvania.” 
    Response: There is no question about not being able to sail north from Mesoamerica’s narrow neck of land or the Isthmus of Tehuantepec; however, your site has its own, very huge problems. First of all, as already asked, why would Hagoth build “exceedingly large ships” to sail up a narrow river? That makes no sense at all. An exceedingly large ship built at that point would have sailed southward into the huge bay or out into the Atlantic and up the east coast, perhaps, but not up a narrow river as you proclaim?

Top: The Chesapeake Bay across from the Franklin’s narrow neck of land. Note the northeast branch river, the Susquehanna River, where he says Hagoth’s “exceedingly large” ships would have gone; Middle: The mouth of the Susquehanna River where it empties into the Chesapeake Bay. Upward the river flows against the movement of the ships going north. Note how quickly it narrows to a very limited sailing width; Bottom: The Susquehanna upriver. Note how narrow the river becomes for an “exceedingly large” ship 
    The mouth of the Susquehanna River (Len’api Indian “Sisa'we'hak'hanna” meaning “Oyster River), ”where it empties into the Chesapeake Bay is at sea level, and from there it runs up the north branch 464 miles to Otsego Lake in Otsego County, New York. One of its tributaries is the West Branch of the Susquehanna, which runs west at Northumberland, just above, Sunbury, to Carrolitown in Cambria County, Pennsylvania. It is claimed this river, like the Hudson and Delaware and Potomac rivers, was well established in the flat plains of eastern North America during the Mesozoic era.

The Susquehanna Canal was only four feet deep in the beginning, but it allowed passage of larger ships, usually barges and coastal merchants 
    Unfortunately for Franklin’s idea of using the Susquehanna to move Hagoth’s people upriver, the Susquehanna has many rapids which impeded northward and westward movement—while commercial traffic could navigate down the river in the high waters of the spring thaws, nothing could move up river! Two different canal systems were constructed on the lower Susquehanna to bypass the rapids, one called the Susquehanna Canal (Conowingo Canal or Port Deposit Canal) completed in 1802 running northwest from Philadelphia, the other was the longer and more successful Susquehanna and Tidewater Canal, running northwest from the Chesapeak Bay. Additional dams were required to raise the river and canals to allow for larger commercial vessels—meaning large ships, especially Hagoth’s “exceedingly large” ships. Both areas would have stopped Hagoth’s ships less than a handful of miles from where they were launched. Also, we need to keep in mind, that the Susquehanna like all eastern seaboard rivers, flows down to the ocean or Gulf, it would have been impossible to sail ships in Nephite times up any of these rivers, let alone get over the low, but mountainous areas inland—as an example, when building the Susquehanna Canal, loaded barges were transferred from the canal and hoisted across the mountain ridge into the Pittsburg area.
    The problem with ideas like this is that they don’t work in the pre-industrial era of America where the Corps of Engineers and other, earlier private groups, dug canals and channels to allow ocean sailing vessels inland into the American interior as we have shown in various articles of every sea lane from the Gulf of Mexico to the eastern seaboard running inland from the Gulf or Atlantic Ocean. You couldn’t sail where sailing wasn’t possible beyond a handful of miles from the coast all over the southern and eastern U.S.
    Your Blog Comment: ”It is like Mormon said, “nearly surrounded by water” except for the narrow neck. This peninsula doesn’t show in any of our maps because it is in three states: Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia. It is the Delmarva Peninsula.” 
    Response: Of course it shows on all maps. It is not labeled Delmarva,  because it includes three states: Maryland, Virginia, and almost the entire state of Delaware—but it is there on the map and is very definitely a peninsula with no separate or separable Land Northward.

Even on maps we have in the West, the State of Delaware appears, and does so on a peninsula, which is very noticeable on all of the maps above that were randomly picked off locally available maps. Even if the map is small (red arrow) or very old (bottom right) 
    Theorists have not missed this peninsula, it is just that it does not fit the criteria of the scriptural record and, therefore, has not been considered by anyone besides you, and while that is not a deterrent, the fact that it doesn’t match Mormon’s descriptions causes it to be overlooked by others.
    You Blog Comment: “When the great emigration of the Nephites to the land northward occurred, described in Alma 63:4-5, it was a very large group that traveled overland through the narrow neck to move on to a better place.”
    Response: Exactly. In fact, there is so much area north, northwest, and even northeast from your narrow neck, why immigrate by ships at all? Vast tracks of land would have been available just beyond the narrow neck in any direction. This is not what Mormon described, nor does your narrow neck fit the descriptive information about it in any way, from being too narrow to having no strategic purpose, to not keeping an enemy from circumventing it and moving into the land northward beyond this so-called neck.
(See the next post, “Looking for Zarahemla-Part III,” for more information on Franklin Reid’s book Finding Zarahemla, and his comments to us and our responses, with continuation of the above last paragraph)

 

Looking for Zarahemla – Part I

We received another interesting comment from a new reader, evidently promoting his own book “Finding Zarahemla,” to which we are responding: 

Comment: “In my own book, "Finding Zarahemla" available on Amazon, I explain how the Mesoamerica theory can't possibly be right. The land southward exists on the east coast of the U.S.as it is described by Mormon in Alma 22:32-33. He describes it is a peninsula, with no land bridge to the south. Looking at a modern map, this peninsula is about the size of Palestine and has a sea east and a sea west with a narrow neck (12-15 miles) at the north end. It was important that the Lamanites be "hemmed in" in the south with no place to go according to verse 33. Our problem is that most LDS people in the U.S. are westerners and know little or nothing of east coast geography” Franklin R.
    Response: I really think “our problem” is that many members of the Church do not spend enough time reading the scriptures before trying to decide where the Land of Promise might have been located. It seems anyone with a map can look for a peninsula, a narrow neck, the hill Cumorah, or whatever, and decide that has to be the place. In addition, it might be suggested that people in the west know more about geography than is suggested—we are a traveling people out here and have been to the east numerous times, while those in the east seldom come west, but vacation to the south along the eastern coast.
    Let us respond to a few of your points first, then we will get into the geologic foundation of your premise about the Delmarva Peninsula, referred to as Delmarva—a name taken from the three states DELaware,, MARyland, and VirginiA. Today it is technically an island, but only because of the digging of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, finished in 1829—before that it was strictly a peninsula. As such, it is 170 miles long and from 70 to 12 miles across or wide. While the lower half  borders the Atlantic Ocean on the east, the upper half borders the Delaware Bay and Delaware River on the east, both of which have been dredged to allow for ocean vessels to penetrate to Philadelphia. Delmarva is separated from the mainland on the west by the Chesapeake Bay, which is only 2.8 miles wide at its narrowest and 30 miles at its widest.
1. Your Comment: “I explain how the Mesoamerica theory can't possibly be right.” 
    Response: This is absolutely true. Mesoamerica, as we have been pointing out for six years in this blog, and in our four books on the subject, simply does not match the scriptural record and cannot possibly be the Land of Promise.

2. Your Comment: “The land southward exists on the east coast of the U.S.as it is described by Mormon in Alma 22:32-33.” 
    Response: First of all, there is no mention of or reference to the United States or that area the U.S. occupies in the American Continent. Second, let’s quote the scriptures referenced: “And now, it was only the distance of a day and a half's journey for a Nephite, on the line Bountiful and the land Desolation, from the east to the west sea; and thus the land of Nephi and the land of Zarahemla were nearly surrounded by water, there being a small neck of land between the land northward and the land southward. And it came to pass that the Nephites had inhabited the land Bountiful, even from the east unto the west sea, and thus the Nephites in their wisdom, with their guards and their armies, had hemmed in the Lamanites on the south, that thereby they should have no more possession on the north, that they might not overrun the land northward” (Alma 22:32-33). Note the term: “small neck of land” (which Mormon also calls “narrow neck” in Alma 63:5)—now this neck lay between and connected to two land masses of greatly larger sizes; the Land Northward—designated by Land of Desolation—and the Land Southward—designated by Land of Bountiful (Alma 22:31). We find that the Land Southward was, indeed surrounded by water except for a narrow neck of land that led further northward into the Land of Desolation and north of that, the Land of Many Waters which contained the land of Cumorah and the hill Cumorah (Mormon 6:4).

Third, the problem is, that while the scriptures tell us the Land Northward was also surrounded by water, Franklin’s map and location do not allow for such a thing, requiring him to change the scriptural record which reads: “And it came to pass that they did multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land southward to the land northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from the sea south to the sea north, from the sea west to the sea east” (Helaman 3:8, emphasis added). Now the term from sea to sea is not used except when those seas are not only extensive, but also cover entire seaboards or surround entire land masses.
    As an example, we talk about the United States running “from sea to shining sea,” but not in both directions, only from east to west (including the southeast and a portion of the south). On the other hand, in Australia, the term from sea to sea and from sea to sea would make sense. In Canada, which has sea surrounding the country on three sides and a coastline of 164,988 miles, compared to a land border of only 5,525 miles (Contiguous U.S. and Alaska), has as a motto: “A Mari Usque Ad Mare,” which is “from sea to sea.”
    If that is not sufficient to say that the Land Northward was also surrounded by water, then consider Jacob’s statement in the temple speaking to the Nephites when he said: “we have been led to a better land, for the Lord has made the sea our path, and we are upon an isle of the sea” (2 Nephi 10:20). The word “isle” in Joseph Smith’s time meant “island,” a word which was not in use then.
    The point is, though Franklin wants to use a peninsula to indicate his model, there is no suggestion or use of the term peninsula in the scriptural record. The only term ever used is "isle" meaning “island.”
3) Your Comment: “He describes it is a peninsula, with no land bridge to the south” 
    Response: Mormon does not describe the Land of Promise as a peninsula—he is describing only the Land Southward as being surrounded by water except for the narrow neck. However, as shown above, the entire scriptural record, when using all of the scriptural descriptions, shows we are dealing with an island, where there is a north, east and west seas for the Land Northward, as well.

Top Photos: Islands in the midst of the sea as Jacob describes; Bottom Left: An island in the midst of the see with a narrow neck separating two larger masses; Bottom Right: Island showing labels that would match the Land of Promise descriptions of a Land Northward, a Land Southward, a narrow neck of land, four seas and an inlet sea that divides the land 
    Your Comment in Book: “I have just looked at the simple facts as recorded in the text,” and also “Admittedly, I am taking much of it very literally and fully accept what has been said in these scriptures.” 
    Response: One of the problems always associated with Heartland, Great Lakes and other eastern U.S. theories is that they do not match the scriptural record descriptions, no matter how much the author might lay claim to doing so, as Franklin does above. Take, for instance the simple statement made by Samuel the Lamanite, a prophecy the Lord put into his heart, “there shall be many mountains laid low, like unto a valley, and there shall be many places which are now called valleys which shall become mountains, whose height is great” (Helaman 14:23).

The reality is, that the highest elevation anywhere in Delaware is 447.85 feet above sea level as shown by the Ebright Azimuth across from Tower Hill--and that is not even on the Delmarva Peninsula where the highest point is 102 feet. There are simply no mountains on the entire peninsula, your entire Land Southward, and nothing higher than 102-feet in elevation. Thus, this cannot be the Land of Promise location based upon a very simple statement made in Helaman of a prophecy the Lord placed in his heart for Samuel the Lamanite “prophesied unto the people whatsoever things the Lord put into his heart” (Helaman 13:4).
    The point is, if you are going to give more than lip service to “I have just looked at the simple facts as recorded in the text,” then you need to respond to such statements with logical and conclusive evidence, otherwise your argument comes off extremely weak, and you are left with having to ignore or change the meaning of other parts of the scriptural record. 
(See the next post, “Looking for Zarahemla-Part II,” for more information on Franklin Reid’s book Finding Zarahemla, and his comments to us and our responses)

The Faith of Lehi: A Prophet for His Time

When Joseph Smith began the translation of the plates, he started with the Book of Lehi, which translated into 116 pages of hand-written manuscript. Scribe Martin Harris, in trying to relieve at least curiosity of his wife and family, and the ridicule from Palmyra’s tavern crowd, he sought to borrow the manuscript to help provide “a further witness of their actual existence and that he might be better able to give a reason for the hope that was within him” to his wife and family. When these pages were lost, the Lord directed Joseph to translate from the “small plates” Nephi made and abridged his record upon “for a wise purpose in him, which purpose I know not” (1 Nephi 9:5). 

Consequently, as most every member knows, in the Book of Mormon, as we have it today, the record of 1 Nephi was written by Nephi, who had included a brief abridgement of his father’s record. Thus, we have a very incomplete record of Lehi, and know so little about this stalwart prophet. But Lehi is more than a “typical” prophet. And despite the fact that we do not have much information about him we can discover Lehi himself gives one key to his character.
    When Sariah, supposing that her sons had “perished in the wilderness or at the hands of Laban,” accuses Lehi of being a “visionary man.” Lehi agrees: “I know that I am a visionary man; for if I had not seen the things of God in a vision I should not have known the goodness of God, but had tarried at Jerusalem, and had perished with my brethren” (1 Nephi 5:24).
    Dreams and visions (1 Nephi 8:2) seem to have dominated Lehi’s life; he was called by the Lord in a vision in which he saw Christ and the twelve apostles (1 Nephi 1:6-14). In another prophecy he foretold the Babylonian captivity, the ministry of the Messiah, and the preaching of the gospel to the gentiles (1 Nephi 10:3-14). Even the journey into the wilderness was commanded in a dream (1 Nephi 2:1-3). In other dreams Lehi was commanded to send his sons back to Jerusalem to obtain the plates of Laban (1 Nephi 3:2-4), and later to persuade Ishmael and his sons and daughters to join them (1 Nephi 7:1-2).
    When his sons returned with the plates of Laban, the first thing the patriarch did was to “offer sacrifice and burnt offerings unto the lord; and they gave thanks unto God of Israel” (1 Nephi 5:9), for the safe passage of the sons and their return.
    It was only after that act of faith and devotion that Lehi was willing to satisfy his curiosity toward the records the Lord deemed so important for him to have. He then “took the records which were engraven upon the plates of brass, and did search them from the beginning” (1 Nephi 5:10-11).
    Lehi was not the only prophet of his time whose name the Old Testament has forgotten. Nephi says that just prior to his father’s call “there came many prophets, prophesying unto the people that they must repent, or the great city Jerusalem must be destroyed” (1 Nephi 1:4). These were among the messengers of God that the Bible tells us were “mocked,” their messages “despised,” and themselves “misused” (2 Chronicles 36:16-19)
    No prophet who sees beyond the immediate situation to the fall of a nation is ever popular with the people of that nation; and most of the time, unfortunately, he is ignored. Numerous Old Testament prophets found themselves in that position, and many of them were stoned or otherwise killed by the Jews (1 Thessalonians 2:14,15; Matthew 23:37; Acts 7:52).

In the midst of his preaching (1 Nephi 1:18), because the Jews became angry with him for pointing out their wickedness and prophesying of the coming of the Lord, they sought his life (1 Nephi 1:20). The Lord had something else in mind, however, and told Lehi to take his family and depart into the wilderness (1 Nephi 2:2), and he never wavered. Now Lehi was a wealthy man, with gold, silver and many precious things, but being obedient (1 Nephi 2:3) he left it all behind (1 Nephi 2:4) and headed into the wilderness as told.
    There is an interesting parallel between Lehi’s performance and that of members in our day. When the Saints were driven out of Nauvoo, they came west, following their leaders who the Lord directed. Because of their faithfulness and obedience, the Church survived the persecutions and mob attacks and settled in a far away land (the territory of Utah) where it could worship as they chose and build up the kingdom. Like Lehi, they didn’t ask why they had to leave their comfortable homes, secure setting and sheltered lives—they took what they could carry and left everything else behind.
    It might be of interest today to compare such action with the typical attitude sometimes displayed by the younger generation of members today who seem to feel they need to know “why.” One such individual told me recently, “Look, we live in the information age—we want to know the what, where, when and why of everything.”
    The halls of Wards today seem to echo with the questions: “Why did the Church change their stance about the Priesthood?” “Why can’t children of gay marriages be baptized?” “Why are women denied the Priesthood?” etc., etc., etc. I was asked recently what my favorite scripture was, and though I have many, my all-time favorite and has been since I first studied it, is Amos 3:7: “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret until his servants the prophets.”
    It seems in my generation, when asked to pack up and leave, we did it. It also seems in today’s generation, there is a hesitancy and a desire to know “why must I?” Perhaps I am mistaken in this, but it certainly seems to be the case.
    Lehi, however, didn’t ask anything. He didn’t hesitate, or need any further information. He simply left his wealth and comfort and fine home and headed into the wilderness. In this case, the wilderness was a barren desert.

The Negev, a Hebrew word meaning “dry,” is a rocky desert that runs along the Sinai desert, full of wadis, box canyons, deep craters, tall sand dunes and loess (wind-blown dust); to the other side is the Arava Valley, the hottest, southern stretch of the Arabah, 103 miles in length from the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Aqaba—it was through this area Lehi took his family
    Lehi’s reliance was on the Lord alone, and he turned from a dangerous and important task of preaching repentance to the Jews, to pursue an even more dangerous and important task. No longer would he try to change a nation. Now he would create one; he would raise up a righteous people for the Lord.
    Lehi’s family had always been important to him, but now his entire calling focused on his children and their children. His own sons and daughters were his mission, with no distractions. And suddenly the role of patriarch and the role of prophet became one role. It was for the benefit of “his seed” that he was commanded to send his sons for the plates of Laban (1 Nephi 5:19), and when he asked Ishmael and his family to share the journey, he was choosing the mothers who would help shape his righteous progeny (1 Nephi 7:1-2).
    At the end of his life, when he learned in a vision that Jerusalem had been destroyed, he did not mourn for the city he had loved and served so well. Instead he reminded his children that they lived in “a land of promise, a land which is choice above all other lands” (2 Nephi 1:5). He had been a prophet to his family, and he was satisfied (2 Nephi 1:14-15).
    The stature of Lehi as the Prophet and leader of the Family was never in question. Nephi makes that clear in no matter how close he himself came to the Lord, the revelation that dealt with where the family should go came to Lehi. The Lord spoke to Lehi “by night, and commanded him that on the morrow he should take his journey into the wilderness” (1 Nephi 16:9).

The “ball of curious workmanship” that directed them on their way appeared before Lehi’s tent (1 Nephi 16:10). When Nephi’s bow broke and he made another to keep the group alive, he went to his father to find out where he should go to get meat (1 Nephi 16:23-26, 30-31). And though the Lord spoke to Nephi to command him to build a ship (1 Nephi 17:8), Lehi received the Lord’s direction to enter it and begin the voyage (1 Nephi 18:5).
    When his wayward sons rebelled, Lehi rose to lovingly correct them. He understood their murmuring nature (1 Nephi 3:5), but never lost hope for his two older wayward sons (2 Nephi 1:17,19), and held out hope for them to the end (2 Nephi 1:24), but he did not excuse their wayward behavior and rebellious nature, warning them of a possible future that awaited them (2 Nephi 1:29) if they did not change.
     Lehi was the perfect example of a father, servant and leader. One we could all emulate.

The Faith of Sariah: A Woman for Her Time

When Nephi and his brothers returned from Jerusalem after obtaining the Brass Plates from Laban and with Zoram in toe, Lehi and Sariah were both comforted, especially Sariah who had envisioned the death of her sons at the hands of her relative, Laban. While he was a notable citizen, probably one of the prominent elders of Jerusalem at the time, who commanded great wealth and many servants, who had in his charge the brass plates that the Lord wanted Lehi to obtain, he was not a righteous man, but dishonest, and suffered from avarice in obtaining wealth not his own.

    He had custody of the brass plates that Lehi's sons were to retrieve. He was killed by Nephi at the command of the Lord (1 Nephi 4:10) when Nephi found him in a drunken stupor on the streets of Jerusalem. Ironically, the imposing sword Laban carried to impress his fellow elders became a symbol of leadership and was wielded in defense of freedom by a number of Nephite leaders later in the Land of Promise.
    While Lehi and Nephi were people shaping the events of their lives, others, like Sariah, Sam and Zoram were more ordinary people, being caught in events rather than shaping them, people striving to be righteous when overpowering forces weighed against them, people whose social status may be akin to our own, though their experiences themselves may differ. As an example, Sariah was caught in the fear of what had happened to her four sons after their lengthy separation while the four boys went back to Jerusalem to obtain the Brass Plates from Laban.

Lehi’s visions and revelations gave him strength to leave “the land of his inheritance, and his gold, and his silver and his previous things,” taking only his family tents, and provisions into the wilderness (1 Nephi 2:4). But not everyone who followed him was blessed with dreams; most had to trust Lehi’s vision. Laman and Lemuel were complaining by the time the group reached its first camp a few days’ journey into the wilderness.
    While Lehi did not express doubts, he intensely desired to know the mysteries of God, saying: “I did cry unto the Lord; and behold he did visit me, and did soften my heart that I did believe all the words which had been spoken by my father; wherefore, I did not rebel against him like unto my brothers” (1 Nephi 2:16).
    Sariah was obligated to move with her husband; there is no evidence that she was less than supportive during the move, but neither is there evidence that she received visions. She seems to have given up her comfortable surroundings and more important her kinfolk, without complaint—but giving up her sons was more than she thought she could bear.
    The trip back to get the brass plates may have taken the boys more than a week. The meetings, plotting, scheming, travel down to get Lehi’s wealth and return up to Jerusalem and then the escape from Laban’s servants, the encounter with Zoram, etc., may have taken a few additional days, and the final trip back to Lehi’s tent in the wilderness another week or so. All in all, we are looking at upwards of three weeks or more—a long time when one fears the consequences of the separation and the difficulty of the task at hand.

Both Lehi and Sariah must have known something about the unrighteousness of their kinsman Laban. Surely Sariah had good cause to worry for the safety of her sons. Lehi comforted her, not by promising that they would not face difficulties in their journeys, but by pointing out that those who stayed in Jerusalem would perish. Then he bore testimony that God would deliver his sons “out of the hands of Laban” (1 Nephi 5:5).
    The importance of these brass plates is found in what they contained:
• The five books of Moses (the Jewish Torah);
• A history of the Jewish people, down to the reign of [then current] King Zedekiah;
• The prophecies of the Israelite prophets down to Jeremiah, seen in the Book of Mormon as a contemporary of Lehi; and
• A genealogy of all the tribes of Israel including a genealogy of Lehi's own ancestors, revealing him to be a descendant of Joseph, son of the patriarch Jacob.
    After reading the contents of the brass plates, Lehi prophesied that they would "never be dimmed any more by time," and that they would ultimately "go forth unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people" who were of his seed.
    It is understandable when Sariah complained as she faced the potential loss of some, or all four of her sons (1 Nephi 5:1-3). She had just traveled the distance between Jerusalem and the Valley of Lemuel and knew exactly when her sons should be returning. Her husband was a wanted man in Jerusalem-which might possibly lead to danger for her sons as well.
    Considering these coupled with the fact that losing her sons would cause others to think she was cursed by the Lord, and she’d have no one to care for her in her old age or defend the family name, we begin to understand her desperation. She loved her sons, and her grief for their potential demise was valid. The delay of her sons’ return tested Sariah as never before. Yet, the Lord knew that this was an important trial of faith for her to go through. She would need to face even harder trials in the years to come
    It is likely that Lehi, who was undoubtedly a merchant and traveled about (1 Nephi 1:7), and probably his sons, would have been experienced at traveling and living in a tent, but not Sariah or her daughters. Coming from a wealthy home with servants, they would not have been experienced at taking on the demands of desert living. At the same time, it is most likely that the household had servants and possibly household slaves who cooked meals and handled much of that type of activity, and certainly because of the degree of secrecy in their leaving, would have been taken along on the journey. Likely, Ishmael’s wife and daughters were probably in the same situation, though it is unknown what kind of wealth, if any, Ishmael would have possessed.

It should also be kept in mind that the tents of the period were large and bulky, made of camel skin, and contained at least three rooms with hanging rugs between and others to cover the ground. It is claimed that to carry the poles it would take one donkey (there were no camels in Jerusalem because of the sharpness of the rocks and shale on the ground atop the mountain that would have cut into the soft padding of the camel hoof), another to carry the rugs and interior, and a third donkey to carry the tent itself.
    There also would have been cooking utensils and other household goods to be carried, as well as whatever provisions they took and their seeds of every kind.
    There seems little doubt that living out of a tent would have been a rather frightful time, since living in the Arabian wilderness offered many challenges: intense climate, endless rolling sands with scarcity of water, and peril from wild animals. Children and grandchildren suffered from lack of food and water, hostile Arabian tribes who thought nothing of murdering for gain would have threatened at every turn—especially when they reached the Rub’al Khalil sand desert and the Lord told them to use no fire that would have attracted Beduin thieves and marauders.
    She gave birth to at least two sons, Jacob and Joseph, in their eight-year sojourn in the wilderness, and possibly two daughters, for Nephi had two sisters by the time he fled from his brothers with those who would go with him (2 Nephni 5:5). Indeed, her life was a difficult one but the only complaint she seems to have uttered was when she thought she might have lost her sons to Laban's evil nature.
    But even more unsettling, the lack of love between her two older sons and the younger two would have been devastating for Sariah. She was also faced with a difficult choice, if she was alive at the time, after her husband passed away. Nephi, was commanded to flee from Laman in order to preserve his life (2 Nephi 5:5). Nephi took all those who believed in the “warnings and the revelations of God” (2 Nephi 5:6). Sariah was in this category and it would have been a difficult experience for her to say goodbye, permanently, to her two oldest sons, their wives, and all of those grandchildren.
    We don’t know how long Sariah lived or whether she witnessed the conflicts between the people of Laman and the followers of Nephi that seemed unending. But we do know that Sariah followed a prophet into the wilderness and spent many long years living in harsh, difficult, and deplorable conditions.
    Yet from the shores of the Red Sea to the hills of the Land of Promise, her testimony remained firm as she did indeed testify, “Now I know of a surety that the Lord hath commanded my husband to flee into the wilderness” (1 Nephi 5:8).
    Sariah, by her living and nature, is an example of faith and obedience and one after whom we could all pattern our lives.