Continuing from the last post
regarding the many descriptions Mormon wrote about the land he knew so well,
and lived in all his life, that are vital for us to consider when claiming a
current location of that land.
As an example, he tells us in Alma
that a man named Hagoth, evidently a shipwright by profession, built many ships
in a shipyard near the narrow neck of land “on the borders of the land
Bountiful, by the land Desolation” and launched his ships into the west sea
(Alma 63:5). Obviously, this was a profitable business for Hagoth as well,
perhaps, as others, for in Helaman we find that the Nephites, among other things,
were involved in “shipping and the building of ships” (Helaman 3:14).
Since the Land of Promise was an
island (2 Nephi 10:20) and surrounded by water with people spread over 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), it
seems likely that a lot of business was conducted on the sea lanes about the
Land of Promise.
In addition, the story of Hagoth
suggests that the business of emigration was also profitable, for “many of the
Nephites did enter in and did sail forth with much provisions, and also many
women and children” (Alma 63:6). The number of people these vessels carried is
not recorded, but Mormon does tell us that the ships were “exceedingly large”
(Alma 63:5)
In condensing what seems evident
was a much longer discussion by Alma regarding Hagoth and his ship building
enterprise and the emigrant business, Mormon merely writes: “And behold, there were many of the Nephites who did enter therein and
did sail forth with much provisions, and also many women and children; and they
took their course northward” (Alma 63:6).
At
this point it seems worthwhile to ask ourselves “If the space on the plates
were scarce, why did Mormon include the brief story of Hagoth?” What is it
about that story, covered in just six verses, that was important enough, and
obviously more important than many others, to include in the scriptural record?
In its brevity, it would seem to have little significance, so why did Mormon
include it?
To
consider an answer, we need to understand what it is about the story that makes
it significant. First of all, it is about immigration. Mormon tells us that “in
the thirty and seventh year of the reign of the judges, there was a large
company of men, even to the amount of five thousand and four hundred men, with
their wives and their children, departed out of the land of Zarahemla into the
land which was northward” (Alma 63:4). In and of itself, that does not appear
significant—after all, he tells us that “it came to pass that in this year
there were many people who went forth into the land northward” (Alma 63:9), just
five verses later, and then shortly afterward, seems to repeat himself when he
tells us that “And it came to pass in the forty and sixth year…there were an
exceedingly great many who departed out of the land of Zarahemla, and went
forth unto the land northward to inherit the land” (Helaman 3:3). It is true
that these latter two events are eight years apart, but when condensing some
900 years of history, eight years is insignificant, so why mention five
different times in the space of a paragraph or two that people emigrated
northward, evidently three different groups by ship and two different migrations by land?
Might
not he be talking about two different locations and two different types of
emigration?
1.
Alma 63:4 – 5400 men, plus their wives and children (probably 20,000 to 25,000
people) left Zarahemla for a land “which was northward;
2.
Alma 63:6 – Many of the Nephites did board Hagoth’s ship with much provisions,
including women and children, and took their course northward;
3.
Alma 63:7 – The following year this ship returned and many more boarded with
their provisions and set out again to sail northward;
4.
Alma 63:9 – Many more people went forth into the Land Northward;
5.
Helaman 3:3 – An exceedingly great many departed out of the land of Zarahemla
and went unto the Land Northward.
It
is interesting that in the case of the last event, the purpose of the
emigration is to inherit the land. Inheritance is not mentioned in the other four
instances. So what does it mean to inherit the land? Hundreds of years earlier,
Lehi left his “land of inheritance”
(1 Nephi 2:4, 11; 1 Nephi 3:16), which was also the land of his sons
inheritance (1 Nephi 3:22; 17:21) to go into the wilderness and eventually to a
new land that would be their inheritance (1 Nephi 13:30; 2 Nephi 1:5, 8-9; 3:2;
4:11; 10:19), which is the Land of Promise.
Now,
up to this time, the Nephites had only occupied the Land Southward, from
Zarahemla to Bountiful, but here we find them moving into the Land Northward,
which, according to Mormon (Alma 22:33-34), was all considered the Land of
Promise. Therefore, it only makes sense that Mormon is telling us that an
“exceedingly great many who departed out of the land of Zarahemla, and went
forth unto the land northward to inherit the land (Helaman 3:3), was a large
number of Nephites who had been living in the Land of Zarahemla, and who decided
to emigrate into the Land Northward to claim that land as their inheritance
within the Land of Promise.
However,
the 5400 men, plus women and children, who went north by ship, evidently did
not travel into the Land Northward since they were not inheriting the land.
They must have gone elsewhere—to a “land
which was northward,” to another, unattached land, where they settled and
were “never heard of more” (Alma
63:18).
It
should also be considered that seldom do people emigrate by sea from one part
of their country to another—they usually go inland, by foot, wagon, or
whatever. When sailing to emigrate, it is almost always to a land that is not
connected to the one from which they leave--or a great distance away. In addition, it would rarely be financially
worthwhile to take a ship when traveling from one area to another that could be
reached directly by land.
Emigration
by ship is generally to a far off, or unattached land; emigrating within the
same land is almost always done overland
Obviously, then, Mormon included the story of Hagoth to show
that a significant number of Nephites emigrated to another land, one that was
northward. In addition, he also tells us that other Nephites, at least one ship
full, took a different course—thus those headed in either direction were never heard from again. Consequently, it seerms we can understand from Mormon’s brief inclusion that there were Nephites
who went to another land which was northward, and another group that went
elsewhere—to Polynesia? Obviously, if you don’t sail north, and south would be
against winds and currents, the most likely course would be westward from the
west sea. And in the area of Peru, westward sea lanes would take a sailing ship
down into Polynesia as Thor Heyerdahl’s Kon-Tiki
drift voyage showed.
Now, a course northward beyond
the Land of Promise would have taken the emigrants in Hagoth’s ships to a land
for settlement that should show us today such Nephite-style buildings and
accomplishments as the city and temple Nephi, and later other Nephites, built.
That means that there should be two places, one north of the other, where two
ancient civilizations during Nephite times would show types of civilizations
described in the scriptural record. In the Western Hemisphere, there are only
two such areas—Andean Peru and Mesoamerica.
In addition, the one to the
south, in this case Andean Peru, should show a more ancient civilization than
the one to the north, in this case Mesoamerica. And this is what is found with
archaeological carbon-dating ruins of both civilizations.
So if you are looking for the
location of the Land of Promise, Mormon’s descriptions throughout the
scriptural record show exactly where Lehi landed and where the Nephite nation
was located.
You really need look no further.
(See
the next post for another of these Land of Promise factors described by Book of
Mormon prophets that should help us to understand where the Land of Promise was
located)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment