More Comments from Readers – Part III

Here are more comments that we have received from readers of this website blog:
Comment #1: “Since the people who traveled north in the ships that Haggoth built was in about 50BC, that would put the building of MesoAmerica 550 years later after Lehi had arrived. So it is obvious that there was no building going on in MesoAmerica. Problem is they needed to look southward and then they would have thought much differently! But they are making their statements based on what they actually see in MesoAmerica.. which was nothing because no one was really there” Mr. Nirom.

Top: The famed Chichen Itza on the Yucatan Peninsula and (Bottom) Coba in Quintana Roco, Yucatan, were built by the Maya and thrived from 600 to 1221 AD

Response: Mayan civilization flourished between 300 and 900 AD and once consisted of over 40 cities spread across southern Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and northern Belize where there are some of the most impressive ruins of these ancient cities that can be visited today.
    As we have written in these articles in the past, the "hard evidence" of Mesoamerica, i.e., the dating of buildings and structures carry dates of 100 B.C. to 100 A.D. onward into A.D. time, which matches perfectly the Hagoth ship immigrants. We need to keep in mind that this immigration started then but continued onward in time. Any dates before this time are based more on archaeological and anthropological assumpti1 ve development belief than hard evidence.
Comment #2: “Hikayat Merong Mahawangsa is fictitious. During the Langkasuka period, Ligor (Nakhon Si Thammarat)!played an important role. Each province was a assigned to a zodiac sign. Kedah was assigned to big serpent or dragon zodiac sign. Dragon in Siamese is 'marong'. 'Mahavamsa' is chronicle of rulers in Ceylonese tradition. Merong Mahawangsa = Chronicle of Kedah” Adrina.
Response: Nakhon Si (or Sri) Thammarat is a city (“Thesaban nakhon” meaning “city municipality”) in southern Thailand, and capital of the Nakhon Si Thommarat Province, which is located about 380 miles south of Bankok on the east coast of the Malay Peninsula. It is one of the most ancient cities of Thailand, previously the Kingdom of Ligor, and contains many buildings and ruins of historical significance; however, most of these were not built until 775 A.D. when the king of Srivijaya “had established a foothold on the Malay Peninsular at Ligor,” and “where he built various edifices, including a sanctuary dedicated to the Buddha and to the Bodhisattvas Padmapani (“enlightened Lord who looks down”) and Vajrapani (Budha’s Power).

Map of Southeast Asia in the 1400s, with the various Kigoms and Empires shown A.D. Blue Violet: Ayutthaya Kingdom (Siamese kingdom 1351-1767); Dark Green: Lan Zang; Purple: Lanna; Orange: Sukhothai Kingdom; Red: Khmer Empire; Yellow: Champa; Blue: Dai Viet

The Kingdom of Ayutthaya (Ayudhya) was a Siamese kingdom that existed from 1351 to 1767. Ayutthaya was friendly towards foreign traders, including the Chinese, Vietnamese, Indians, Japanese, Persians, and later the Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch, and French, permitting them to set up villages outside the walls of the capital, also called Ayutthaya.
    In the sixteenth century, it was described by foreign traders as one of the biggest and wealthiest cities in the East. The court of King Narai (1656-88) had strong links with that of King Louis XIV of France, whose ambassadors compared the city in size and wealth to Paris.
    By 1550, the kingdom's vassals included some city-states in the Malay Peninsula, Sukhothai, and parts of Cambodia. In foreign accounts, Ayutthaya was called Siam, but many sources say the people of Ayutthaya called themselves Tai, and their kingdom Krung Tai, 'The Tai capital'. The word “krung” has alternative meanings, as does “tai,” but in this context Tai capital is appropriate.
    According to the most widely accepted version of its origin, the Siamese state based at Ayutthaya in the valley of Chao Phraya River rose from the earlier, nearby kingdoms of Lavo (7^th A.D. Century until 1388 A.D.), which at that time was still under the Khmer control) and Suphannaphoom (Suvarnabhumi). One source says that, in the mid-fourteenth century, due to the threat of an epidemic, King U Thong moved his court south into the rich floodplain of the Chao Phraya (a River that flows through Bankok and into the Gulf of Thailand) on an island surrounded by rivers, which was the former seaport city of Ayothaya, or Ayothaya Si Raam Thep Nakhon, the Angelic City of Sri Rama (“The Foundation of Ayuthia, Journal of the Siam Society, Vol1, 1904). The new city was known as Ayothaya, or Krung Thep Dvaravadi Si Ayothaya. Later it became widely known as Ayutthaya, the Invincible City (“The Tai Kingdom of Ayutthaya” The Nation: Thailand’s World, 2009).
    However, the point of all this is not such modern historical information, but the B.C. period of the area and whether or not people lived on the Malay Peninsula during 600 B.C. through the early A.D. period. There is so little on the Malay Peninsula to match the Book of Mormon record that though Olsen has written much about it, the concept simply does not fit into the period of time and the events described in the scriptural record.
Comment #3: “Nauvoo was in Hancock County, an established area with a significant non-Mormon population that included the reasonable sized towns of Warsaw and Carthage. As with the church’s experience in Kirtland, it would be difficult and expensive for poor church members to gather to the area and buy farmland (and conflict with existing “old settlers” was almost inevitable). Iowa, by contrast, was wide open. For an industrious, agricultural people, land was the key ingredient to fuel a successful settlement. With hindsight, it’s very clear that Zarahemla should have become the church’s headquarters. Nauvoo was a mistake” Brigham B.

Response: “Perhaps. We will never know; however, one thought to consider. If the Saints had been well received in Iowa, and not driven out, most may never have gone to Salt Lake Valley, and settled Utah, and all the wonderful things that occurred in connection with that event might not have happened. In addition, while Utah did not become a state until January 4, 1896, after the Church was very well established in Utah territory, Iowa became a state on December 28, 1846, which would have held far more difficulties for the Saints, including voting block problems within a state, while the Church was quite young and under populated, which probably would have affected polygamy, the growth of the Church, and forced Church members into social interaction long before they were in Utah.
Comment #4: “Three times in this article (Is the Chile Landing Site a Myth? Part I) you referred to Ralph G. Williams, but did later in the article referred to Fredrick G. Williams. I am assuming here that Fredrick was to be the name used through out the article” Mr. Nirom.
Response: My apologies. Old age must be taking its toll :) The name, of course, is Fredrick Granger Williams.
Comment #5: “It seems that the 30 degrees south latitude in South America landing site for Lehi was speculated by Frederick G. Williams, not Joseph Smith. What is your source for it being Joseph's? Thanks,” Kyle E.
Response: No source. It is a matter that cannot be proven one way or another. However, given the circumstances as Williams being Joseph Smith’s scribe and secretary, plus being a member of the First Presidency at the time, and the fact that other important comments were written on the same paper (paper was not plentiful in 1840s, it was costly, and most used every piece completely), it seems likely it was a discussion between Joseph and among his Presidency. Whether or not it was a prophecy as people argue about, the point is that it was written down—an area that so well matches the landing site of Lehi that it is remarkable at all to have been thought of it a time when no one in the U.S was familiar with Coquimbo Bay and its harbor and landing site, no one knew that La Serena had a Mediterranean Climate that would have grown the seeds from a like climate in Jerusalem, nor would they have known about the several other things, including the abundance of precious metals in natural ore surface sites, etc.
    There is so much to warrant the area, that for someone to have come up with the idea out of the blue is very improbable—Las Vegas would give you a million to one odds. Another point, Orson Pratt speculated on a South America west coast landing, but picked Valpraiso, a city that would have been known in the U.S. as a major port and population center; however, it would have been much further to the south, and would not have had the climate. Lastly, while the Mesoamericanists and other church scholars and writers of a location for the Land of Promise can only claim that there is no proof that William’s unsigned, undated writing represents a revelation given to Joseph Smith, the point is the location showed up on the paper and would not have been any reason to claim it in 1840.
    Only in the last few decades has this area become known and understood to match the writings of Nephi toward the end of the 18^th chapter of his first book.