The Four Seas of the Book of Mormon

It is true that many theorists misplace the various seas mentioned in the Book of Mormon, like moving the Sea West to the south (Joseph Allen), or Sea West to the east of the Sea South (Richard Hauck and V. Garth Norman), or the Sea South to east of the Sea East (Phyllis Carol Olive), or to claim there are two seas to the west and two seas to the east, making six seas (David McKane), and numerous others. It is just as inaccurate to move the Sea South to the middle of the Land of Promise (Arlin Nusbaum), or claim there is only an East and West Sea (John L. Sorenson). 
    It is important to keep in mind that ancient cultures typically named areas according to the compass heading, i.e., South Wilderness, North Sea, Northern Plains, Western Mountains, etc.

Even today we do the same, with naming and referring to areas according to their cardinal directions, such as Southern States, the Middle East and Far East, West Coast, Eastern Seaboard, etc. The point is, when using directional names (North, East, South, West) we do not name places out of their correct directional placement. As an example, South Island in New Zealand, is the southern of the two islands; West High School in Salt Lake City was in the western part of the early Salt Lake area when first named and opened; the East Coast of the Red Sea is the same place as the West Coast of Saudi Arabia. Another example is in the early days of America, places were referred to as South Mountain, the West Fork, East Lake or the North Shore. Some of these place names stuck, such as North Slope in Alaska; South Jordan, South Ogden, South Salt Lake, and South Weber in Utah, or South Mountain of the Blue Ridge Mountains in Maryland; West Plains, Missouri; West Virginia was located to the west of Virginia, or West Shore, Florida, so named because it was on the west shore of the Florida Peninsula; Northwestern University named to serve the Northwestern territory in 1851.
    Again, the point is that anciently, as well as today, when we name a place a cardinal direction name, it is in that direction, not somewhere else. Consequently, we need to understand that the seas mentioned in the scriptural record are directional seas, that is, they denote a direction. It was certainly the custom anciently to name places by their direction from a central location, rather than naming places with common names, as we tend to do today. Therefore, the seas of the Book of Mormon must be placed in the direction of their name.

For people anciently living on an island and using cardinal directional labels, the seas would be called by the direction they were from a central point in the island itself, as shown in this sample

    Secondly, since the Land of Promise was an island (2 Nephi 10:20), these seas must be connected, forming one total sea around the island. This is obvious in the statement made by Jacob and recorded by Nephi: “we have been driven out of the land of our inheritance; but 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). Let’s take a look at this statement:
1. “we have been driven out of the land of our inheritance,” which obviously means the Land of Jerusalem (1 Nephi 1:4; 2 Nephi 2:2-3).
2. “but we have been led to a better land,” which obviously is the Land of Promise (1 Nephi 18:23).
3. “for the Lord has made the sea our path,” which obviously refers to the ocean over which the Lehi Colony sailed to the Land of Promise in Nephi’s ship, called Irreantum by Lehi where they set sail (1 Nephi 17:5).
4. “and we are upon an isle of the sea,” which obviously can mean only that the Land of Promise was an island at the time Jacob made this statement. In addition, since the sea was their “path,” and they were led to this “better land,” and that land was “upon an isle of the sea,” it must be concluded that they set sail on an ocean at one point and landed upon the Land of Promise on that same ocean at another point.
    Therefore, it must needs be that the Land of Promise was on an ocean (the word sea meant ocean in Joseph Smith’s time according to Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language), and that ocean was the same one into which they set sail (1 Nephi 18:6,8), which sea was called “Irreantum” by Lehi, which meant “many waters” (1 Nephi 17:5).
    Thus, the ocean (Arabian Sea) they set sail upon, must also be connected to the sea that surrounded the Land of Promise island. This is obvious by looking at any map, for the Arabian Sea is part of the Indian Ocean, which is part of the Southern Ocean, which is part of the Pacific Ocean, which surrounded the Land of Promise island.
    Thus, since the Land of Promise was an island, and the Land of Nephi and the Land of Zarahemla (obviously including the Land of Bountiful) were nearly surrounded by water except for the Narrow Neck of Land (Alma 22:32), there had to be a sea in three directions—west, east, and south. And including the Land Northward, a north sea.

In the scriptural record, we find two indications of very large bodies of water. First, bordering the first Bountiful (1 Nephi 17:5), and the second in the north of the land Northward (Ether 15:8). One indication is Irreantum “many waters” and the other is Ripliancum “to exceed all,” both of which describe an ocean that would appear unending to those who stood on its shores or sailed upon it. And since the Land of Promise was an island, the “to exceed all” water in the north was part of the Irreantum “many waters” where the ship was launched.
    And to make sure we have no doubt that Jacob meant that the land of Promise was an island, he also said, “But great are the promises of the Lord unto them who are upon the isles of the sea; wherefore as it says isles, there must needs be more than this, and they are inhabited also by our brethren (2 Nephi 10:21).”
    Now this brings us to the so-called H38 Virus. As described by its creator, the H38 Virus “is looking for a single body of land surrounded by four bodies of water. It is particularly aggressive against models with a larger northern body of water. Here is an example of what the H38 Virus is seeking to remove from Book of Mormon Geography models:”
    According to the website, the H38 Virus stands for Helaman 3:8 which says: ”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).”

While there is another sea mentioned, i.e., “the sea that divides the land” (Ether 10:20), that sea would be the gulf, inlet or bay that cut in to form the narrow neck of land and thus, dividing the two major land masses

    Unfortunately, the creator of the H38 virus misuses the Helaman quote, by claiming it meant only those in the Land Northward were expanding, thus the four seas mentioned had to do with surrounding the Land Northward, not the entire Land of Promise, thus he places a south sea to the south of the Land Northward. However, as can clearly be seen, Helaman’s comment is inclusive of the Land Southward, since it specifically mentions that as the southern terminus, or the southern point of measurement: “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). Obviously, Helaman and Mormon’s abridgement, is meant to show that the entire Land of Promise, from the Land Southward to the Land Northward, and then surrounded by four seas, is indicative of the entire land, not just one portion of it as the H38 virus claims.
    Thus, the four seas, as directional seas (i.e., called by directions not other names), are located in the directions indicated. It is also apparent, at least before the crucifixion when so much damage and change took place, the seas were all connected.

Which Wall Would You Want to Protect You from Lamanites? – Part II

Continuing from the previous post regarding our understanding of what the scriptural record tells us about the location of the Land of Promise. This is especially important in light of the numerous differing views of a location when Nephi, Jacob, Mormon and Moroni make it quite clear with their numerous descriptions where that land was located and what it looked like anciently. 

Hopewell Mounds in Ohio

    As an example, one of the most glaring absences in North America is any real evidence that connects ancient Jerusalem, the scriptural record, and the existence of Nephites in the area. Mounds, as we have said numerous times in these articles, have no bearing or support in either ancient Israel (including Mesopotamia) or in the scriptural record. Nor are there any evidences left of buildings in North America of either the Jaredite 1500-year occupation, or the Nephite 1000-year occupation, yet we have evidence of the Jaredites buildings lasting hundreds of years (no doubt more than a thousand years from the time they were first built) in the scriptural record itself. This is borne out when Limhi’s 43-man expedition brought back reports of seeing the Jaredite lands “covered with ruins of buildings of every kind, having discovered a land which had been peopled with a people who were as numerous as the hosts of Israel” (Mosiah 8:8).
    It is always interesting to see how different theorists get around the reality of all these buildings both the Jaredites and Nephites built, by claiming they were built of wood, which did not last. First of all, if the Jaredite buildings had been built of wood, they would not have lasted several hundreds of years for Limhi’s people to have seen them, and secondly, to claim the Nephi built of wood, including his magnificent temple whose “workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine” (2 Nephi 5:16) that he compared it to Solomon’s temple, which was built entirely of stone except for wood supports for upper levels and roof, as well as cedars from Lebanon used to panel the stone interior walls, which was then overlaid with gold, is a far cry from scriptural evidence and an understanding of both the Jews in history and Nephi in general.

Top Left: An excavation in Jerusalem of ancient stone buildings during David’s time (900 B.C.); Top Right: Jerusalem buildings that date back to B.C. times (restored) made of the original stone; Bottom Left: Stone structure dating to B.C. times outside Jerusalem; Bottom Right: Stones that once belonged to a structure dating to Jeremiah’s time (626 B.C.)

    Nor can any evidence in all of Israel be found where the Jews built houses of wood—they built with stone, using wood for framework and supports of upper stories, roofs, and occasionally of stairwells, etc.
    It is also interesting to see how these North American theorists talk about “banks of earth round about to enclose his armies” that were thrown up by Moroni, but never mention—and I mean never mention—that in the very same verse Mormon tells us that Moroni was “also building walls of stone to encircle them about, round about their cities and the borders of their lands; yea, all round about the land” (Alma 48:8).
    Now it is quite obvious that banks of earth can dissipate over time from weathering, but walls of stone do not—especially when those walls were built for the express purpose of protecting the Nephites against constant Lamanite aggression and attacks. Would Moroni build a stone wall to stop the Lamanites that could be jumped over, did not provide protection, and could be easily toppled or broken through?

Which would you prefer for your defense? Top: 2 to 3 feet high walls, or (Bottom) 8 to 10 feet high walls? Which do you think Moroni had his army build to protect them?

    Despite the fact that the ancient Hebrews in Jerusalem in B.C. times never built with wood, many North American theorists insist that the Jews built their houses out of wood. It is interesting that even in the Old Quarter, not a single house anywhere in Jerusalem was ever built of wood—all were built of cut stone or rock. It is interesting on how these theorists make the same identical claims, yet there is not a shred of proof to their claim in any ancient description of the Jews dating to the time of David.

Top: An ancient free-standing B.C. building in Old Jerusalem of cut and dressed stone; Bottom: Interior of an ancient B.C. stone house in Jerusalem. Note the absence of wood in any manner

    Recently, archaeologists unearthed the remains of two houses they claim date to 5,000 B.C., making them the oldest evidence of a settlement in what is now called Jerusalem to be discovered. Stone tools, animal bones and gemstone beads found on the site suggest they formed part of a thriving farming community. Jerusalem, of course, was arguably one of the most important cities in the ancient world—a sacred center for three global religions, an impenetrable fortress and one of the most bloody locations in history. However, now it is believed that the ancient city of Jerusalem could be far older than previously thought, according to this remarkable new archaeological discovery.
    The remains of the dwellings, which include several well-preserved stone walls and stone flooring, were uncovered in the Shu'fat neighborhood of north east Jerusalem. Described as being “well preserved” and showing there was a permanent settlement on the ancient site of Jerusalem. At the time the inhabitants were still using stone tools as copper technology was beginning to emerge. Luckily, the site was discovered in the excavations that were carried out before a new road was laid down across the top of a hill in the area.

Archaeologists recently excavated what they are calling the oldest house in Jerusalem that so far dates to 5000 B.C.

    There is also a Jebusite wall in Millo part of the City of David. It is the rampart built by the Jebusites before David conquered the city. The Millo consists of the terraces and retaining walls on the eastern slope of the southeastern spur that supported the buildings above. The Millo is the Stepped Stone Structure uncovered by Kathleen Kenyon. Eilat Mazar has uncovered the Large Stone Structure (David’s Palace) that sat on the Millo. All of this dates to as early as 1200 B.C., and definitely before 1000 B.C. Note the extensive use of cut stone.

A massive stepped podium for the Canaanite-Jebusite palace/fortress that was also used as David’s palace. Eilat Mazar dates the building of this structure from the period of 1200-1000 BC. This Stepped Stone Structure was the work of the Jebusites during the days of the Judges, and the work of David around 1000 B.C.

    Obviously, from all of this, it cannot be said that the Jews built with wood as some North American theorists try to claim. Everything they built from the earliest beginnings of Jerusalem were using stone. This would have been the building technique of Lehi's time and Nephi, Sam, and Zoram would have been well familiar with it.
    Isn’t it about time that North American theorists started using intellectual honesty in their claims that so far run far afield of the scriptural record and the reality of history of the period?

Which Wall Would You Want to Protect You from Lamanites? – Part I

Just off the top of your head, if you were trying to defend yourself and your family against crazed attackers who sought to kill you without concern and have been trying to do so for many years, would you want one of these walls to protect you that North American theorists claim represent the stone walls that the Nephites built for their defense? 

Ancient stone walls in western New York state that Great Lakes theorists claim show that the ancient residents--who they claim were Nephites--built with stone

 

    Or, what about these so-called walls, also found in the area some claim were Nephite lands in New York. Consider how you might “hunker down” behind these walls as a sword wielding Lamanite charged.

Ancient stone walls in central and northern New York state that are claimed to be from Nephite times

    Even restored walls where the stones have been piled on top of each other as they originally were show that at most, these walls were two to three feet high, which might serve a man with a rifle lying flat on the ground behind them, but would have little value in defending against sword, spear, or a charging club-wielding enemy.

Stacked rock walls in (Top LtoR):  Kansas, Connecticut, and Maryland; (Bottom LtoR): New Hampshire, Eastern New York, and Maine where some theorists claim the Land of Promise was located

    Does anyone really think these were the kinds of stone walls that Moroni built? Since the man was a military genius, always one step ahead of the Lamanites with his army, helmets, leg and arm protections that literally frightened the Lamanites into running before them, wouldn’t it be more realistic to think in terms of permanent stone walls that would have provided serious protection from Lamanites not just for one battle, but for years to come?

Wouldn’t you rather have something like these stone walls--found in Andean Peru--for your protection and that of your family? It stands to reason that Moroni, as brilliant and forward thinking as he was, would have had his army building stone walls of significance around the land, not those wimpy stones used anciently in North America

    As  obvious as this seems, that Moroni would have built his “walls of stone” to a greater extent than those found anywhere in ancient North America, we still have theorists who push their view ignoring the scriptural record and what it tells us of that ancient Land of Promise.
    One of the problem is that there is so much in print lately about the North American location for the Land of Promise, with advocates of the Heartland, Great Lakes and Eastern U.S. theories so adamantly vociferous about their beliefs, that one sometimes wonders if any of them have tried to look beyond all the hype from people like Rod L. Meldrum and Bruce H. Porter for the Heartland Theory; Delbert W. Curtis, Vernal Holley and Wayne N. May for the Great Lakes Theory; and others, like David McKane take in the entire eastern U.S.
    After all, once beyond the hype of Mound Builders, the United States as the sole area of the Land of Promise claim, or the fallacy of one hill Cumorah, we start looking at what the scriptural record actually says, which is entirely different.
    First of all, there is no suggestion of there being only one hill Cumorah anywhere—there is just one mentioned in the area of the Land of Promise in which the Jaredites and Nephites settled. But the idea of there being more than one place with a Book of Mormon name is found in several places in the scriptural record, i.e., the Land of Bountiful in both Arabia and the Western Hemisphere; there being more than one Jerusalem, more than one Sidon, etc.
    The point is, it is merely stubborn foolishness to say outright without any support whatsoever that Moroni hid the records in the hill Cumorah where the final battle took place, since no one knows where he initially hid the plates in the ground, or even if he did that in the year 401 A.D. when he wrote his last entry on the plates.

To further understand this, keep in mind that Moroni concludes his record before hiding it from the Lamanites by saying: “and I write unto my brethren, the Lamanites…” and when finished, “I seal up these records after I have spoken a few words by way of exhortation unto you” (Moroni 10:1,2). Before writing this, Moroni informs us that after the final battle at the hill Cumorah, that “I make not myself known to the Lamanites lest they should destroy me…wherefore, I wander whithersoever I can for the safety of mine own life” (Moroni 1:1,3, emphasis added), telling us that he did not stay at or near Cumorah, but wandered around trying to remain hidden from the warring Lamanites who were everywhere because of the civil war that followed the destruction of the Nephites for “the Lamanites are at war one with another; and the whole face of this land is one continual round of murder and bloodshed; and no one knoweth the end of the war” (Mormon 8:8).

After completing his father’s record (Mormon 8 and 9), he then abridged the entire Jaredite record (Moroni 1:1), he wrote a little in the book bearing his own name, Moroni. As he states: “Therefore I will write and hide up the records in the earth; and whither I go it mattereth not” (Mormon 8:4).
    Thus, we see that Moroni, after the final battle at Cumorah, was moving about, hiding, keeping away from the Lamanites who would have killed him if they found him (Moroni 1:1). During this time, he writes the final two chapters of his father’s record, then abridges the entire Jaredite record, then writes his own record, before “hiding the records in the earth.”
    At no time does he tell us where he hid them, but it should be understood that he was nowhere near the hill Cumorah at the time, for in those 16 years (385 to 401 A.D.), he was running and hiding, writing when he could, but keeping away from the Lamanites who were warring with one another all over the land. Stated differently, we simply do not know where Moroni hid up the records for he never tells us, but does tell us he had wandered far and wide from Cumorah as he endeavored to keep away from the Lamanites who would have killed him if they found him.
    With that in mind, how is it that these North American theorists all cling to the unprovable belief that there is only one hill Cumorah? After all, the hill in upstate New York bears no resemblance to the hill described by Mormon, who was there! The fact that early Church members and leaders believed the hill Cumorah was where Moroni buried the records is both understandable, but unprovable. All we know is that it was where Moroni told Joseph Smith the records were located for him so he could extract them from the hill and translate them.
    To claim more is simply making claims that are not justified by the facts as they are known. And early Church members and leaders were quick to make claims that seemed reasonable to them in their eagerness to show the world the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. In that token, early Church members and leaders also made other claims, including the location of the Land of Promise in Central (meso-) America and South America.
(See the next post, “Which Wall Would You Want to Protect You from Lamanites? – Part II,” for more information on understanding what the scriptural record tells us about the location of the Land of Promise)

What Kind of Buildings Did Nephi Teach His People to Build?

Nephi tells us that after he, and those who went with him to escape his brothers and the sons of Ishmael, that “I did teach my people to build buildings, and to work in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores, which were in great abundance” (2 Nephi 5:15). While most of the information in this is of a smaller nature (wood, iron, copper, brass, steel, gold, silver and precious ores) suggesting detail work in the building of buildings and other matters, what exactly was the nature of the “buildings” that Nephi taught his people to build. And why would he have needed to teach them how to build buildings?

This is the entrance to a site in Peru where anyone seeking entrance to the city has to pass through this hundred-yard-long uphill corridor flanked on both sides by tall walls which would allow armed defenders on top to deny entrance to this city in Peru

    The answer to this last question is probably due to the fact that other than having lived their lives in tents, albeit large Bedouin-style tents, their time during eight years of struggle in the wilderness and probably two years at Bountiful, and the time it took to sail across the oceans and the year or two they spent in the area of first landing, by the time they reached the land they called Nephi, most had never seen a constructed building and would have known nothing about such. Consequently, he had taught them the building skills he had learned constructing a ship after the manner the Lord showed him (1 Nephi 17:18; 18:2) and all the conversations he had with the Lord who “showed unto me great things” (1 Nephi 18:3). However, Nephi built the ship, the final product was “exceedingly fine” (1 Nephi 18:4), and no doubt he learned many techniques and skills during that time, and he then taught his people after they settled in the land called Nephi.

A Sixty-Foot high wall all around a city denies inside access to enemy intruders except at the entrance

    We also know that Nephi was concerned about defending his small community against attack, so he “did take the sword of Laban, and after the manner of it did make many swords, lest by any means the people who were now called Lamanites should come upon us and destroy us; for I knew their hatred towards me and my children and those who were called my people” (2 Nephi 5:14), and after writing that, is when he talked about teaching his people to build buildings (2 Nephi 5:15), and then goes on to say “I, Nephi, did cause my people to be industrious, and to labor with their hands” (2 Nephi 5:17).
    So what kind of buildings would Nephi have taught his people to build, and would they have been defensive buildings, meant to provide the small community with as much protection as possible against Lamanite aggression, which he feared? As Jacob wrote later, “many means were devised to reclaim and restore the Lamanites to the knowledge of the truth; but it all was vain, for they delighted in wars and bloodshed, and they had an eternal hatred against us, their brethren. And they sought by the power of their arms to destroy us continually” (Jacob 7:24).

Yellow Arrows: Note the steps on the outside of the building, which can only be scaled slowly, and in a single direction

    Another method of building defensively was in constructing buildings and walls that required single side steps leading in higher levels where any intruder would be slowed down and completely exposed. Such constructions are found all or Andean Peru.

These singular steps are found all over Peru on buildings, walls, and forts

    It seems likely that whatever the Nephites built, during the latter years of Nephi’s life and into Jacob’s time, they were aimed at defense, for the Lamanites “continually” sought to destroy them. Jacob’s grandson, Jarom, wrote of this: “they came many times against us, the Nephites, to battle. But our kings and our leaders were mighty men in the faith of the Lord; and they taught the people the ways of the Lord; wherefore, we withstood the Lamanites and swept them away out of our lands, and began to fortify our cities, or whatsoever place of our inheritance” (Jarom 1:7), and his son, Omni, stated that “in my days, I would that ye should know that I fought much with the sword to preserve my people, the Nephites, from falling into the hands of their enemies, the Lamanites” (Omni 1:2). Even two generations later, Abinadom writes of this “I saw much war and contention between my people, the Nephites, and the Lamanites; and I, with my own sword, have taken the lives of many of the Lamanites in the defense of my brethren” (Omni 1:10).

Another method of defensive building found in Andean Peru is the long entrance pathways between tall walls

Still another method of defensive building is outside stairwells, where any enemy intruder would be vulnerably exposed

    After about 400 years in the City of Nephi and constant Lamanite intrusions and many wars, when the bulk of evil Nephites had been destroyed, Mosiah, the prophet of the Nephite people, was told by the Lord to leave the land and flee northward and take “as many as would hearken unto the voice of the Lord [to also] depart out of the land with him, into the wilderness” (Omni 1:12).  
    There seems little question that Nephi would have taught his people how to build in such a way as to protect themselves from the future constant attacks from the Lamanites that Nephi knew would occur. There are many simple manners of building that can protect entrances to buildings, to cities, and within the cities and communities. It would be foolish for any historian, knowing the history of the Nephites and Lamanites, not to expect Nephi to teach his people to build in preparation for such difficult and dangerous conflicts and outright wars. After all, Nephi knew the history of the Lamanite aggression and wars for the Lord gave him a vision of this when he wrote: “And it came to pass that I beheld multitudes gathered together to battle, one against the other; and I beheld wars, and rumors of wars, and great slaughters with the sword among my people, And it came to pass that I beheld many generations pass away, after the manner of wars and contentions in the land; and I beheld many cities, yea, even that I did not number them” (1 Nephi 12:2-3).

Another defensive structure in Peru, showing forty-foot tall walls with a single heavily guarded entrance

    It seems Nephi would have been remiss, knowing that was to be the fate of his people, not to prepare for such events with buildings, cities and plans that could counter such events and protect his people as much as possible. Yet, other than Andean Peru, such defensive structures and defensive buildings are not found in the Americas at such a time as Nephi taught his people how to build buildings.

What are Defensive Walls? – Part III

Continuing from the previous posts, we take a look at actual walls of defense built to fortify buildings, cities, fortresses, etc. They are found in Andean South America. 
    Obviously, a three or four-foot high fence or wall provides little value in dealing with enemy attacks on a town or city. Early wooden stockade walls in the West were generally 8’ to 10’ in height, meaning to keep out an enemy (Indians). Of course wooden fences became obsolete with the invention of canon, and walls were then made of stone, rock and cement.
    In discussions in this blog we have been inundated at times with Great Lakes, Heartland and Eastern U.S. theorists who claim that remnants of stone walls have been found in their chosen area for the Land of Promise, in order to claim their area matches the descriptions in the Book of Mormon, such as “throwing up banks of earth round about to enclose his armies“ (Alma 48:8), and “the Nephites had dug up a ridge of earth round about them, which was so high that the Lamanites could not cast their stones and their arrows at them“ (Alma 49:4).

Left: Archaeologists’ projection of a reconstruction of a section of fortifications, defensive earthworks, at Becan, Campeche, Mexico; Right: Mounds State Park at Newark, Ohio. The Mesoamerican example (left) is obviously a deterent to attack; the U.S. example (right) would not deter anyone

    Moroni also talked about fortifying existing places as well as building new: “Moroni had fortified, or had built forts of security, for every city in all the land round about“ (Alma 49:13). And also “all of which were strongly fortified after the manner of the fortifications of Moroni” (Alma 51:27). It is also mentioned: “And it came to pass that when he had fortified the city Gid“ (Alma 55:26), and “by their labors, fortified the city Morianton until it had become an exceeding stronghold“ (Alma 55:33).
    Noah Webster’s 1828 dictionary definition of fortified is “To furnish with strength or means of resisting force, violence or assault,” “to surround with a wall, with a view to defend against the attacks of an enemy, to strengthen and secure by forts, batteries and other works, as to fortify a city, town or harbor.” Currently, the term means to “strengthen, secure, protect, toughen, bolster, brace, buttress,” as in “the wall had been fortified,” or “the army fortified their citadel” or “strengthen (a place) with defensive works so as to protect it against attack.”
    Obviously, then, “to fortify” has a specific meaning as to strengthen a place, building, fort, or land against enemy attack. Now in Book of Mormon times, such attacks came with bow and arrows, sling and stones, spears, etc., with close in contact with swords. Thus, a short wall, meaning three or four feet in height, would have little value in such fortifications. Yet in the Eastern U.S. a three foot wall is specifically pointed out in a description of a fortified city built with a large portion of a three-sided wall being only three feet high.
    Of course, anything built of wood, such as walls, buildings, etc., in Nephite times, would not have survived over the next 1200 years to when the Europeans began moving into the areas of the Heartland, Great Lakes and Eastern U.S. theorists claim as their Land of Promise locations. However, earth mounds, defensive earthen walls, pits around cities, etc., would have. More importantly, the stone walls Mormon said Capt. Moroni had built all around the land also would have remained.
    As Mormon said, “Yea, he had been strengthening the armies of the Nephites, and erecting small forts, or places of resort…building walls of stone to encircle them about, round about their cities and the borders of their lands; yea, all round about the land” (Alma 48:8). To try and match this description, Eastern U.S. theorists point to the remains of rock walls that are still visible today.

Four examples of rock walls that still can be seen in the eastern U.S. Note that these are not fortified walls, but stacked stones, not very high, the tallest about two feet, perfect for someone lying in wait with a rifle, but absolutely useless in stopping an advancing army with bows and arrows, spears and swords

    By way of comparison, let us take a look at some descriptions and photos of fortified defensive walls built during Nephite times in South America. At fortress site of Sacsahuaman, perched on a hill above the city of Cuzco, is an immense fortified work six hundred yards long, built in three lines of wall consisting of enormous stones, some of which are twenty-seven feet in high, and were higher according to the conquering Spaniards, who tore down the higher stones because they were small enough to be moved, and used for the Spanish cathedrals and haciendas the conquerors built.

The three-tiered, zig-zagged defensive walls at Sacsayhuaman, overlooking the city of Cuzco, which would have been the city of Nephi

    Pissac is also the site of wonderful ruined masonry and an ancient observatory. At Ollantaytambo, forty-five miles to the north of Cuzco, is another of these gigantic fortresses, built to defend the valley of the Yucay. This stronghold is constructed for the most part of red porphyry, and its walls average twenty-five feet in height. The great cliff on which Ollantay is perched is covered from end to end with stupendous walls which zigzag from point to point of it like the salient angles of some modern fortalice. At intervals are placed round towers of stone provided with loopholes, from which doubtless arrows were discharged at the enemy. This outwork embraces a series of terraces, world-famous because of their gigantic outline and the problem of the use to which they were put. It is now practically agreed that these terraces were employed for the production of maize, in order that during a prolonged investment the beleaguered troops and country-folk might not want for a sufficiency of provender. The stone of which this fortress was built was quarried at a distance of seven miles, in a spot upwards of three thousand feet above the valley, and was dragged up the steep declivity of Ollantay by sheer human strength. The nicety with which the stones were fitted is marvelous.

Pisac and Ollantaytambo defensive walls built of huge interlocking stone. Even the Spanish conquistadores considered many of these fortresses in Peru to be impregnable in the age of gunpowder

    Another fortified city is that of Kuelap in Chachapoyas, Peru, overlooking the Utcubamba Valley where an entire mountain top was encircled with a wall 60-feet high. Considered the largest stone ruin site in the new World, it is comprised of massive stone blocks nearly ten-times the volume of the blocks used in the Giza Pyramid.  This mountaintop fortress city, rivals any ruins in the new world and comes complete with living quarters for thousands of residents and a 60-feet high stone wall fortification running the circumference to the city.

Top: the entire fortress on top of the mountain; Bottom: the height of the massive walls

    The massive exterior stone walls of this fortress contain more than four hundred buildings, and is roughly 1970 feet long and 361-feet wide, and was built to defend against the Huari or other hostile peoples. One of the special properties of this fortress is that though it is 711,170 square feet, it has only three entrances, and each is wide enough to only admit two people walking tightly abreast, then with 60-feet high walls on either side, it gradually ascends upward for about a hundred feet until it reaches the level of the fortress interior. In all that time, anyone entering is open to bow and arrow fire, and slingshot fire from above, as well as dropping rocks and boulders down on them.

Top: (Yellow Arrow): One of the entrances to the fortress; (White Arrow): Where the entrance ends inside the fortress; Bottom Left: The entrance from ground level—note the narrowness of the entrance; Bottom Right: As on climbs up the narrow entrance, he is exposed to bombardment from above, which can stand out of view

    Note Mormon’s words that a Nephite fortress with the earthen walls round about the city were so high that the Lamanites could not gain entrance “save it was by the place of entrance” (Alma 49:4). Obviously, they built very high stone walls as well (Alma 48:8).
    The point of all of this is that when Mormon talks about defensive walls, fortifications, and fortifying cities and forts, it means something more than some cosmetic approach. When your very life depends upon it, building fortifications become an important pursuit and Moroni was a master at defense, whether in covering his troops with armor and protective clothing, or building or remodeling forts and fortifications with impregnable walls and arrangements. No such items have been found in the Eastern United States, Heartland or Great Lakes.

What Are Defensive Walls – Part II

Continuing from the previous post regarding the question of defensive walls as described in pretty clear detail by Mormon in the scriptural record of the Book of Mormon.

Concluding the previous post with a discussion about the Mound Builders in central and eastern U.S., and what Capt. Moroni (left) described as the work to be done to build defensive fortifications against the Lamanites, it should be noted that Moroni did not have “burial mounds” built—which is what we find in the eastern U.S., but defensive walls, some of earth with timber on top (Alma 50:2), and others with stone encircling them (Alma 48:8) and also stone walls “round about their cities and the borders of their lands (Alma 48:8), the latter we do not find in the eastern U.S. in any manner.
    The fortifications generally mentioned in connection with the Mound Builders is in “the so-called hilltop enclosures or fortifications, claimed were obviously intended for purposes of defense; however, the most famous of these, the Fort Ancient Culture, did not build their famous “fort” until 1000 A.D., which remained in existence until 1750 A.D. And even so, there is nothing in the scriptural record of the Book of Mormon to suggest that the Nephites or Jaredites built their cities or villages on top of raised or mound platforms.

The mound builders built many ceremonial mounds and temples, and their weapons were made from bone or stone, and they grew three crops: maize, squash and beans—though the Nephites grew wheat, barley, neas and sheum (Mosiah 9:9. It should be noted that initially the site was thought to be a fort, though later such assumptions were dismissed—it was a ceremonial structure, with portions of the walls used in conjunction with the sun and moon to provide a calendar system for these peoples for planting and harvesting purposes.
    It should be noted that anthropologist Ephraim George Squier, who wrote about "The Iroquois as Mound Builders as well as "The Archaeology of Western New York," went to Central Americas in 1849 as the U.S. chargé de’affaires to Central America where he traveled extensively for 20 years to see the ruins and monuments, and Peru in 1863-1865 as U.S. commissioner, settling financial claims, which allowed him to travel extensively, where he studied the pre-Inca Chimú civilization, then scarcely known, and wrote Peru: Incidents of Travel and Exploration, 1877. The purpose of his efforts in Latin and South America was to find any connection between the U.S. Mound Builders and the ancient cultures to the south, which he never did, though he spent 22 years looking. Thus, it can only be shown that the Mound Builders of the eastern United States area were a unique people with no earlier or later ties, having sprung up anciently in North America with no history to show any other earlier locale. Certainly not the story of either the Jaredites or the Nephites.
    However, in returning to Moroni, and his earthworks program for the Nephites, Mormon writes: “And now it came to pass that Moroni did not stop making preparations for war, or to defend his people against the Lamanites; for he caused that his armies should commence in the commencement of the twentieth year of the reign of the judges, that they should commence in digging up heaps of earth round about all the cities, throughout all the land which was possessed by the Nephites. And upon the top of these ridges of earth he caused that there should be timbers, yea, works of timbers built up to the height of a man, round about the cities. And he caused that upon those works of timbers there should be a frame of pickets built upon the timbers round about; and they were strong and high. And he caused towers to be erected that overlooked those works of pickets, and he caused places of security to be built upon those towers, that the stones and the arrows of the Lamanites could not hurt them. And they were prepared that they could cast stones from the top thereof, according to their pleasure and their strength, and slay him who should attempt to approach near the walls of the city” (Alma 50:1-5).
    Let’s list what Moroni had done one at a time:

1. Digging up heaps of earth round about all the cities;
1828: Heap: “a pile or mass to form an elevation,” “to add until the mass takes a rounded form.”
2. Upon the top of these ridges of earth he caused that there should be timbers, yea, works of timbers built up to the height of a man;
1828: Ridge: “A steep elevation, eminence or protuberance,” “Any long elevation of land,” “ground thrown up by a plow or left between furrows.”
3. Upon those works of timbers there should be a frame of pickets built upon the timbers round about; and they were strong and high;
1828: Pickets: Enclosing or fortifying with pickets, means “to enclose or fence with narrow pointed boards, used in making a fence,” “a guard posted in front of an army to give notice of the approach of the enemy”
4. Caused towers to be erected that overlooked those works of pickets, that the stones and the arrows of the Lamanites could not hurt them;

1828: Tower: “To rise above the main edifice,” “a bastion, bulwark, rampart,” “an elevation, secures safety.”
5. They could cast stones from the top thereof, according to their pleasure and their strength, and slay him who should attempt to approach near the walls of the city.
    Now with that in mind, let’s take a look at what is being portrayed by theorists as an area where this was built in North America:

Note the earthen wall is of minimal height, hardly an increase in height whatsoever; also note that the pit is minimal depth, more like an irrigation channel. There would be no hindrance to Lamanites standing on the (Yellow Arrow) outside level and firing arrows or throwing rocks (slings) over a fence on the other side and into the compound beyond

    What is amazing, of the more than a thousand mounds found in central and eastern U.S., the vast majority are single mounds in the middle of nowhere, with no other mounds around and no indication that other mounds once existed there and certainly no indication that the singular mound was part of any defensive structure or combination of mounds,which is not at all what Moroni is described as building--and, not a single stone wall meant for defense can be found anywhere in the eastern U.S. as Mormon wrote about being built "throughout the land." There is simply no way these mounds can be considered anything like what Mormon describes in the scriptural record, yet Heartland and Eastern U.S. people cling to this illusion that is simply not supported by any statement in the entire Book of Mormon.

(See the next post, “What Are Defensive Walls – Part III,” for more on the defensive walls described in the Book of Mormon and where we find them in the Western Hemisphere today)

What Are Defensive Walls – Part I

Time and again, various Heartland, Great Lakes, and Eastern U.S. theorists try to claim that the mound building found throughout the eastern U.S. shows that these were not only Nephite constructions, but satisfy Mormon’s descriptions of earthen walls, etc., as found in Alma Chapter 50 and refortified in Alma Chapter 52.

A drawing representing what such a dirt wall and wood timbers on top might have looked like

    The problem is, they are not reading the scriptural record the way it is written, but reading into Mormon’s words something not said, or only partially said. As an example, in Alma 50:1, he states “they should commence in digging up heaps of earth round about all the cities, throughout all the land which was possessed by the Nephites.” Now “round about” means in this case to circle or to build the earth barrier “around the city” with the intent of protecting the city from Lamanite attack. He is not saying under the city, or for burial mounds, or for decorative effigy piles—but “round about the cities.” He also says that he had this done to the cities “throughout all the land.” Consequently, any mounds of earth used by theorists to meet the comment in Alma, needs to be a protective wall “around a city.”

These mounds from “the Mound Builders” in the central and eastern U.S. are not what Capt. Moroni built as Mormon describes his work

    Now, in Alma 52:6, Mormon writes: “by casting up walls round about and preparing places of resort.” To what purpose did Moroni do so, because “he kept making preparations for war” (Alma 52:7), “yea, and truly he was preparing to defend himself against them” the Lamanites (Alma 52:6). He went on to say: “Moroni also sent orders unto him that he should retain all the prisoners who fell into his hands…and he also sent orders unto him that he should fortify the land Bountiful, and secure the narrow pass which led into the land northward, lest the Lamanites should obtain that point and should have power to harass them on every side. And Moroni also sent unto him, desiring him that he would be faithful in maintaining that quarter of the land, and that he would seek every opportunity to scourge the Lamanites in that quarter, as much as was in his power, that perhaps he might take again by stratagem or some other way those cities which had been taken out of their hands; and that he also would fortify and strengthen the cities round about, which had not fallen into the hands of the Lamanites” (Alma 52:8-10).
    There can be no question that all of Moroni’s instructions had to do with their fighting and preparing for battle with the Lamanites. This means that any and all preparations, including digging up heaps of earth, and building walls, and fortifying and strengthening cities, had to do with defensive fortifications for the cities and/or his troops. Thus, the idea of building platform mounds upon which villages, huts, and meeting centers were then built, has nothing whatsoever to do with Alma 50 and Alma 52. Nor does building burial mounds or effigy (design) mounds. It is amazing that Heartland, Great Lakes, and Eastern U.S. theorists try to claim the idea of “digging up heaps of earth,” “round about cities,” and “around his army,” translates into platform and effigy mounds.

Not only are these mounds in the U.S. not the base for defensive walls, they are closely spaced separate mounds, which have no defensive nature at all

    It also might be asked what does: “by casting up walls round about and preparing places of resort,” actually mean. Now these “walls” did not have timber upon them. Where it says, “And he caused that they should build a breastwork of timbers upon the inner bank of the ditch; and they cast up dirt out of the ditch against the breastwork of timbers; and thus they did cause the Lamanites to labor until they had encircled the city of Bountiful round about with a strong wall of timbers and earth, to an exceeding height” (Alma 53:4, emphasis added), this is not in conjunction with any other wall, but regarding the wall encircling the city of Bountiful (Alma 53:4,5).
    As an example, nothing is said of earth when talking about other walls, such as regarding the city of Gad, Mormon writes: “who were within the wall of the city…of those parts which were within the walls” (Alma 55:20, emphasis added). Later we find the same type of wall described, only in this case, we are told that Moroni “came upon the top of the wall to spy out in which part of the city Lamanties did camp with their army” (Alma 62:20, emphasis added), and was, ”let down from the top of the wall into the inner part of the wall” (Alma 62:21, emphasis added); and also “his men should march forth and come upon the top of the wall, and let themselves down into that part of the city” (Alma 62:22, emphasis added).
    None of this would be proper language, or even make sense, if describing wooden, stockade type of walls made of timber, since one cannot stand or be “on top” of a stockade wall—a parapet, yes, a block or stone wall, yes, but not a wall of wooden stakes, which is what a stockade wall is. In those cases, Mormon uses the word “timber,” which meant in 1828, “the body of stem of a tree,” and applied to “standing trees,” as in “a forest of timber.” Thus, when Mormon wrote “And upon the top of these ridges of earth he caused that there should be timbers, yea, works of timbers built up to the height of a man, round about the cities” (Alma 50:2), he was referring to what we call a “stockade” type wall, i.e., the kind of walls that were built in the early frontier, especially around early American forts.

As these various stockade walls so clearly show, they not only cannot be stood upon, but were so built and so shaped as to keep an enemy from getting on top of, or climbing over, the wall

    Secondly, we have been all over that area and frankly, there are almost no mounds that are, or could have been, defensive fortifications—they are burial mounds, or foundation mounds where wood huts with thatched roofs or similar looking meeting centers were claimed to have been built on top. Mostly, though, what you have are mounds. Mounds, by the way, that do not fit in with anything Hebrew, Jewish, Jerusalem or even Jaredite Mesopotamia—there simply is no basis for claiming these were built by Nephites for either burial or foundation structures.
    It is interesting that in defending the fact that basically there are almost no defensive mounds found throughout the eastern U.S., that these theorists claim those were the ones destroyed by early American immigrants when they built villages, towns, and cities. Yet, with so many mounds in existence today, why were only the so-called defensive mounds destroyed?

According to Ephraim George Squier (left), newspaper editor, diplomat, and archaeologist who, with the physician and archaeologist Edwin H. Davis, conducted the first major study of the remains of the pre-Columbian North American Mound Builders, and also carried out explorations in Central America and Peru, claimed these mounds in the U.S. served three purposes—the mound builders “constructed various styles of earthen mounds for 1) religious and ceremonial functions, 2) burial, and 3) elite residential purposes. These included the Pre-Columbian cultures of the Archaic period; Woodland period (Adena and Hopewell cultures); and Mississippi period” (E. G. Squier and E. H. Davis, Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.)
    Note, that not one of the hundreds of mounds they uncovered and investigated fell into a category of forts, fortifications, or defensive walls.
    In fact, the ancient cultures were called “the Mound Builders,” “Mound City,” etc. It should be noted that the word “mound” does not appear anywhere in the Book of Mormon. Moroni caused “ridges of earth” that encircled something—either a city (Alma 50:2) or his army (Alma 49:4). However, in the entire eastern U.S., no mound encircles any area where a large, complex city would have fit, or even a large bivouacked army, with an exception found in Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site, in southern Illinois where the town was protected by a sophisticated semicircular fortification system; however, this site was not built until 600 A.D. (during the Late Woodland Period, or as late as the 9^th Century A.D. in the Emergent Mississippian culture period) and reached its peak in 1200 A.D. There were of course many Wood Forts in Ohio, but there are as many “experts” claiming they were built during the French Indian Wars of the 17^th and 18^th centuries, as there are saying they were built earlier.
(See the next post, “What Are Defensive Walls – Part II,” for more on the defensive walls described in the Book of Mormon and where we find them in the Western Hemisphere today)