Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7
Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13
War is a major theme in the second half of the book of Alma, but by the time readers encounter those detailed accounts of military actions, we are not surprised. Warfare is endemic in the Book of Mormon. Even early in the formation of the Nephite nation, warfare is at least a threatening backdrop. Nephi declared:
And it came to pass that we began to prosper exceedingly, and to multiply in the land. And I, Nephi, 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 5:13–14)
By Jarom’s time, there was enough of a threat of warfare that Jarom says that they fortified their cities:
And it came to pass that 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)
There were times of respite, but most of the history Mormon wrote of his people covers conflict much more frequently that peace and prosperity. Mormon ironically chronicles times of “continual peace.” The longest continual peace was twenty-two years (Mosiah 10:5), with one as short as a single year (Alma 3:32). There was peace, but not that often (or, really, that continual).
Mesoamerican Militarism
The recognition of the centrality of warfare in Mesoamerican cultures is relatively recent.[1] Payson D. Sheets describes the current state of the understanding about warfare in Mesoamerica: “Warfare was woven deeply into the social fabric of most Formative and all Classic and Postclassic Mesoamerican civilizations.”[2] One of the important underlying factors that is often unrecognized is that foundational to the ability to wage large-scale warfare is the ability to feed an army, of course retaining sufficient food for those left behind.[3]
Intervillage conquests are attested for the Olmec (Jaredite times),[4] although Olmec militarism appears to have been more protective than expansionistic.[5] Ross Hassig notes:
The Olmec aftermath was a period of increasing military professionalism among local elites, and specialized arms now dominated warfare. The weapons pioneered by the Olmecs continued into this period, though with some changes in emphasis. Thrusting spears became the primary combat weapons as they spread throughout Mesoamerica. Clubs persisted, but declined in importance in major armies although they remained significant in less sophisticated groups.[6]
Numerous Mesoamerican sites were fortified, demonstrating freestanding walls with accompanying moats.[7] Moats appear at Becán and perhaps Cuello. A wall was built around El Mirador and a fortified ditch separated Tikal and Uaxactún.[8]
Recently, Interpreter has published a chapter of a book on Anachronisms, specifically examining warfare in the Book of Mormon. The findings are very relevant to this topic of militarism and quite supportive of finding the appropriate technologies in Mesoamerica.[9]
It is also quite possible that the demise of the Nephites may have been related to the Teotihuacano conquest into Maya lands. The conquest of Tikal occurred in A. D. 378 according to the date on a stela.[10] There should be no question that the warfare described in the Book of Mormon finds a comfortable home in the known history and archaeology of Mesoamerica.
Hopewell Culture: Absence of Militarism
John C. Lefgren has written a paper that proposes to support the case for large armies in at least the late Book of Mormon.[11] He begins by noting that the larger ancient world has multiple examples of large armies:
During the 1,420 years represented in the figure for pre-industrial armies there were 6 empires and dynasties which had armies of about 500,000 men. These were (1) the Persian Empire of 500 BC, (2) the Mauryan Empire of 300 BC, (3) the Han Dynasty of AD 1, (4) the Nephite-Lamanite Nations of AD 385, (5) the Gupta Dynasty of AD 350, and (6) the Roman Empire of AD 425.[12]
This is quite true. Ironically, Lefgren never actually provides any evidence that such armies existed in the Heartland geography he supports. He does begin with some important caveats, however:
This paper supports the Heartland Geography for the lands of the Book of Mormon. The primary arguments are based on the knowledge (1) that large armies need large populations, (2) that large populations need large amounts of food, and (3) that large amounts of food need large amounts of land and water.[13]
He is absolutely correct. Unfortunately, it is the very problem of not having large amounts of food that prohibited the Woodland cultures from having very large populations. As noted in the post on population density, Brad Lepper described the Hopewellian relationship to agriculture: “Hopewell societies were becoming increasingly dependent on farming, but, in many ways, they still were grounded in the hunting and gathering way of life.”[14] Thus, Lefgren is correct about the need, but misses the point that the Hopewell simply didn’t have the caloric base sufficient to support large militaries.
It is for this reason that “There is, however, no evidence for warfare during this period. There are no known human remains from Hopewell sites that bear wounds of war and there are no artistic depictions of warriors.”[15] In general, the region has been deemed relatively free of extensive warfare:
The archaeological record of Hopewell populations is sometimes interpreted as that of a peaceful folk that avoided the unpleasantness of war. Howard Winters coined the term Pax Hopewelliana to connote this relationship, and like many catch phrases it continues to be used in the literature. Winters focused on the scanty evidence for violent death in the Hopewell mounds of the Midwest, and used the phrase to connote a generally friendly nature to Hopewell interactions, with the implicit analogy to the imposed peace of the Roman Empire, the Pax Romana. . . . Milner’s (1995, 1999) recent reviews of the evidence for violent death in eastern North America seems to confirm Winters’ earlier findings—there is little by way of direct evidence for Hopewell (and the Early Woodland period as well) violent death.[16]
There is a hint of conflict as there is some evidence of body parts taken as trophies. Nevertheless:
It should be noted that whereas a later and much better understood Mississippian iconography reveals a strong representation of conflict between humans (or humanized deities) replete with weapons and severed heads in the hands of successful warriors, Hopewell iconography is dominated by other themes pertaining to shamanism, renewal, and animal spirits. Very few of the people buried in Hopewell mounds seem to have met a violent death.[17]
One argument in favor of military activity among the Hopewell is the presence of mound artifacts that have been called forts. These appeared, at least to the non-native colonists in the late 1800s, to be fortified positions.[18] Brad Lepper provides the current archaeological view of these structures:
Although the hilltop enclosures often are called “forts,” such as Fort Ancient and Fort Hill, it is extremely unlikely that this was their intended function—or at least their sole purpose. The Fort Ancient site, for example, is simply too big and there are too many openings in the walls for it to have served as an effective defensive structure.[19]
For example, the Great Circle Earthworks has a wall, but the borrow pit is on the inside and was likely filled with water.[20] If this were a defensive location, the moat should have been built on the outside of the wall.
The Hopewell were more dependent upon agriculture than the Adena, but neither were able to grow crops that could provide sufficient calories for subsistence. That fact required that while the Hopewell may have been more closely tied to the land than were the Adena, they still required space for hunting and gathering activities. Those conditions have always limited population sizes throughout the world. The small and sparse Hopewellian villages are appropriate for the way in which they produced their food.[21] Lacking a strong agricultural base that might sustain a large population, the Hopewell also lacked the ability to field, and feed, a large military.
Conclusion
The Mesoamerican model easily fits into the Book of Mormon descriptions of large scale warfare. The Hopewell cultures, on the other hand, were sparse and unable to sustain large armies. There is no archaeological evidence of any significant warfare among the Adena or the Hopewell. That absence stands in stark contrast to the description of wars in the Jaredite record as well as the Nephite record.
Brother Gardner. Thank you again for an excellent article. I have enjoyed every one. This one was particularly interesting to me as I spent some time as a soldier.
In a few places (I think I once counted eight times) the Book of Mormon is very specific on exactly what day, month, and year an event started. Several of those were the start of attacks by Lamanites. I’ve been curious to consider how those date might correspond to a military advantage – perhaps the level of moonlight, or maybe in relationship to a holy gathering. I’m wondering if I could coax you into a sequel to this article address those dates, and what we can understand about them.
Thank you again.
Sam
Sam, you must first understand that I see the Book of Mormon against a Mesoamerican cultural setting. That background significantly enriches and explains the text for me. Having said that, many Mesoamerican battles were “scheduled.” Raids were raids and would take account of surprise. Major battles, however, involved as much politics as military and it was not uncommon at all to schedule the battle. We really see this in Mormon where Mormon asks for, and receives permission to hold the battle at a later date.
Another issue with this theory, is the Jaredites.
As I understand it, they were the Olmec. Did the Olmec speak a non-confounded Adamic language, pure from the Tower of Babel?
Abraham Lincoln visited Niagara Falls when returning to Illinois from Massachusetts.
He wrote about his visit:
“It calls up the indefinite past. When Columbus first sought this continent—when Christ suffered on the cross—when Moses led Israel through the Red-Sea—nay, even, when Adam first came from the hand of his Maker—then as now, Niagara was roaring here.
The eyes of that species of extinct giants, whose bones fill the mounds of America, have gazed on Niagara, as ours do now. Co[n]temporary with the whole race of men, and older than the first man, Niagara is strong, and fresh to-day as ten thousand years ago. The Mammoth and Mastadon—now so long dead, that fragments of their monstrous bones, alone testify, that they ever lived, have gazed on Niagara.”
https://lincolninstitute.wordpress.com/2013/09/28/lincoln-at-niagara-falls/
Why does Abraham Lincoln know of the bones of giants filling mounds of America?
Their eyes and of the Mammoths and Mastadons, gazing on Niagara?
Yet, we do not. Why is that?
Again, how far is Palmyra from Niagara?
Didn’t Moroni in Moroni 1:1 abridge the Jaredite record upon “this” North Country? Where his Father was from? Didn’t Cowdery state in Letter IV that the angel told Joseph that the record was both written and deposited near the Prophet’s home?
Abraham Lincoln is usually considered as our greatest President–but never much of a linguist or archaeologist. Why did he believe and we do not? Science, actually. See Adreinne Mayor, Fossil Legends of the First Americans (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005). The answer to your question is comprehensively explained in her book.
Important question, but you are asking (or avoiding) the right one. Why is the NY Cumorah in the wrong place? It is supposed to be north of the narrow neck, not south of it.
The Mesoamercanites know perfectly well that in abridging his record, the Prophet Mormon could not write the hundredth part of the things of his people.
Words of Mormon 1:6
Jacob 3:13 – Jacob stated the same
3 Nephi 26:6 – Mormon about the teachings of our Resurrected Lord
Ether 15:33 – Moroni when abridging the record of Ether
Yet when the Prophet Joseph Smith mentioned Zelph being a white or converted Lamanite, a warrior and chieftain under the great prophet Onandagus known from the east sea or Cumorah to the Rocky Mountains, the account needs to be rejected because it’s not part of Mormon’s Hundredth.
Mesoamercanites also acknowledge that Christopher Columbus was led to the seed of Nephi’s brethren, then they use maps made by the explorations of Columbus and other European explorers to identify Central America as the narrow neck.
Because obviously, Mormon had a European map and created his “Mormon’s Map” through Dr. Sorenson to contradict another Prophet of The Lord, Joseph Smith.
When it comes to geography and maps for The Book of Mormon, Prophets need to contradict each other. This is the way to Eternal Lives. Contention and contradiction and anachronisms. Be united or Be divided.
James: “When it comes to geography and maps for The Book of Mormon, Prophets need to contradict each other. ”
You mean like what you claim for Joseph and what every subsequent prophet believed? We can certainly find them agreeing that the NY hill was Cumorah, but there are none who espoused anything similar to the Heartland. In fact, they pretty consistently tell us that there has been no revelation. So, you opinion of what Joseph believed, or all the other prophets? I’ll go with the prophets.
By the way, I also note that you have ignored the substance of pretty much every post to repeat what you said about Cumorah. That is hardly engaging with the evidence. Do you have evidence that the NY hill was supposed to be southeast of the narrow neck instead of northeast of it? Do you have evidence that there were sufficient calories to support large cities? Do you suggest that, contrary to evidence, there were no sustained wars in the Heartland? Do you pay any attention to the evidence?
If you’re going with the Prophets, why then did you remove Joseph Smith from the very beginning of your discussion and made him a hostile witness to your arguments about the location of Cumorah?
Yet you use a European map of the Western Hemisphere – an anachronism – to identify Central America as the narrow neck. The only conclusion by doing so is that the Nephites, Mulekites and Jaredites knew the extent of the entire Western Hemisphere – from the Atlantic to the Pacific.
Yet you talk about directions.
Do you have any evidence that Nephi knew the extent of the Western Hemisphere to be able to identify Central America as a limited area in which to dwell from 600 B.C. to 420 A.D?
Or are you merely imposing your viewpoint onto the text abridged by a Prophet of God and the other Prophet of God who translated it and who are supposed to contradict each other?
Mormon’s Map vs “Joseph Smith the ignorant” on the location of the Hill Cumorah.
You claim Joseph Smith lost the location of the Hill Cumorah. But you lost it yourself.
That has vibes of D&C 121.
The Mesoamericanites lost the Hill Cumorah and are still wandering around trying to locate it.
Have you located the Hill that you lost?
When do you plan on doing so? In this life or the next?
President Joseph Fielding Smith rejected this theory in 1938. That can be found on FAIR’s website. This theory then obviously existed before 1938.
Then he rejected it again in 1954 for the next generation:
https://newspapers.lib.utah.edu/details?id=25569779
But here we are in 2025. 71 years later.
But you claim that you will go with the Prophets.
If so, then why are you promoting this week after week and have written and sold volumes of books about it?
James, you are making several non sequitur accusations. Maps are only a tool. The Nephites believed themselves to be on an “island of the sea.” They didn’t have a clue as to modern day boundaries, etc. I’m sure Joseph Smith didn’t know that someday Alaska would be a part of the United States. In many things, we are all ignorant. What is dark matter? No human knows. Neither did Joseph.
We all make assumptions, hopefully based on the best information available.
For example, the author of Genesis gave us two accounts of the Creation. In one account, we get a flat earth with the Sun and moon close by in a domed firmament, rotating around a fixed earth. None of it is true science, but God revealed to ancient prophets information they could understand.
Perhaps Joseph Smith wasn’t ready to know, or didn’t need to know about exact locations nor about limited geographic models.
For Joseph and members today, the important issues are that the BiM is true and testifies of Christ.
I understand the Nephites believed to be on an island of the sea. But this Mesoamerican theory, doesn’t fit that description. It refers to the Tehuantepec peninsula as the narrow neck with seas north and south of it and/or east and west. It’s not an island.
It’s also understood that the three parties landed there and restricted themselves to it, the Jaredites for thousands of years, then the Lehites and Mulekites for 1000 years, until Moroni left alone for New York.
Yet restricting themselves to it or inside of it, they understood it to be a narrow neck of land, which doesn’t make sense. They would have to have known the extent outside of this narrow neck to understand that they were inside of a narrow neck or a peninsula.
Thus this theory is from a perspective outside of Tehuantepec – our perspective. The persons who created and promoted this theory, looking at a modern-map of the Western Hemisphere. They are imposing their viewpoint onto the text.
James,
I will preface this by saying that I’m not trying to convince you of anything. I did, however, want to point out one fact that you may not have taken into account.
You say “Mesoamericanites also acknowledge that Christopher Columbus was led to the seed of Nephi’s brethren…”
Please be aware that Columbus made four trips to the New World. These were the landfalls that were made on each of the trips. (I’m using present-day geographical names in this list.):
Trip 1 (1492-93): Bahamas, Haiti, and Dominican Republic.
Trip 2 (1493-96): Lesser Antilles, Puerto Rico, Haiti, and Dominican Republic.
Trip 3 (1498-1500): Trinidad, Venezuela, Haiti, and Dominican Republic.
Trip 4 (1502-04): Lesser Antilles, Honduras, Central America, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama.
That’s it. Columbus did not get as far north as North America, only from the Caribbean southward.
I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusions.
-Allen
Regarding Columbus, the text states that he visited the seed of Nephi’s brethren. Thus he doesn’t need to have visited North America. It doesn’t rule out a Heartland theory with Cumorah in New York.
In Nephi’s vision, 1 Nephi 12:19-21 Nephi was shown after his seed was overpowered by the seed of his brethren – Cumorah in 420 A.D. – that they went forth upon the face of the land.
This would be basically Lamanites going forth into the Caribbean, Central and South America. Some may have fled there before, just as Nephites fled north (including the people of Ammon) because they tired of the wars.
Thus, I don’t understand why Columbus had to have visited New York or some North American political boundary defined today.
On his last voyage, it was Bartholomew Columbus, his brother, who encountered a Maya war canoe off the coast of Honduras. If the Nephites are equated with the Maya it doesn’t sound like they were restricted to Tehuantepec, farther north.
To get technical, Columbus did discover Cuba on his first voyage, at one time a US Territory acquired from Spain from the Spanish-American War. Cuba and the other major Caribbean islands are considered part of North America. Thomas Jefferson longed for it, believing it should be part of The United States.
Cuba was granted independence by The United States through the Platt Amendment of 1901 – with conditions – ending US Military occupation since 1898 and allowing self-rule. Thus Cuba in a sense, fell under the laws of the US Constitution and certainly the Monroe Doctrine. It was a US vacation spot until 1959 when Fidel Castro took over.
Thus I tire of this “Columbus landed in the Caribbean” to support the Mesoamerican theory. It’s baseless.
“This would be basically Lamanites going forth into the Caribbean, Central and South America. Some may have fled there before, just as Nephites fled north (including the people of Ammon) because they tired of the wars.”
I’m sorry, but one of the central pillars of the Heartland Model is the claim that the term “Lamanites” refers exclusively to the Indigenous peoples of the Eastern and Midwestern United States. Rod Meldrum and others in that camp have gone to great lengths to delegitimize any attempt to classify Indigenous peoples from Central America, South America, or even the western United States as Lamanites. According to their model, expanding the label beyond the so-called “Heartland” is not just incorrect, it also undermines supposed prophetic declarations of who the Lamanites are and genetic “proof” for the Heartland model.
(On that last point, Meldrum’s exclusivist view is tied directly to one of his most frequently cited lines of evidence: Haplogroup X. For that argument to work, the term “Lamanite” must be restricted to the populations who carry that marker—or at least live in the right geographic area.)
So for you to suddenly propose Lamanite migrations into Central or South America runs completely counter to the Heartland framework and the rationale its proponents have constructed around it.
@Smoot
That makes perfect sense that none of the Lamanites would have traveled from North America into the Caribbean, Central and South America.
In light of the fact that no Jaredite, Lamanite, Mulekite nor Nephite traveled outside of the limited geography of Tehuantepec, until after the final battle.
Then only Moroni traveled to New York.
Good catch, Brother Smoot.
None of the seed of Lehi traveled from outside of Tehuantepec into Latin America. They ended up in New York.
Since the mid 80’s it has become culturally incorrect to portray the Ancient Americans as other than mostly peaceful. However, the vast quantities of arrowheads and spear points that literally lie beneath our feet across the eastern half of the US are hard evidence to the contrary. The US South, Southeast and the Heartland is carpeted with arrowheads and spearheads and is a treasure trove for arrowhead hunters and collectors.
Arrowhead collecting is a popular hobby in the US. There are thousands of collectors totaling millions of points that have already been found and that’s only a fraction of what’s out there. While some collectors have huge, famous collections worth millions of dollars, others have smaller collections. My neighbor here in Georgia has a large collection of arrowheads he found on his own 10 acres. There is a website, “35 Must-Visit Places To Find Arrowheads In Georgia In 2025.”
At Cahokia, near where Gerald used to live, archaeologists found 3,500 arrowheads in their excavations that were less than less than 0.5 % of the area. This would be over 700,000 arrowheads on that site. Over 8,000 arrowheads were found art Poverty Point in Luisiana where 1% of the area was excavated, indicating 800,000 at that site. To discount all these as lost hunting arrows is ludicrous.
These millions of arrowheads that have been fond would be only a small fraction of those that are strewn across the US, east of the Mississippi. This hard evidence testifies from the dust of a large population involved in wars across the entire area, just as described in the Book of Mormon.
From archeological excavation repot of the digs at Cahokia we read the following:
“The people in Cahokia also practiced human sacrifice. Excavations in 1967 uncovered a mass burial on the site of Mound 72. Around 280 skeletons were uncovered. Around 80% of the bodies were young women. They were placed in neat rows, without signs of trauma. They were likely killed by strangulation or blood-letting. In a separate pit, there are around 40 men and women bodies. They were killed by violent means, including decapitation, arrow wounds, and horrific fractures. Evidence shows some dug their nails into the soil, suggesting they were buried alive. Archeologists speculate they were prisoners of war…”
( https://memoriesoftheprairie.com/blog-1/2020/01/28/2020-1-28-human-sacrifices-at-cahokia-mounds/ )
That is mot mostly peaceful, and has a similarity to the following:
“For according to the knowledge which I have received from Amoron, behold, the Lamanites have many prisoners, which they took from the tower of Sherrizah; and there were men, women, and children. And the husbands and fathers of those women and children they have slain; and they feed the women upon the flesh of their husbands, and the children upon the flesh of their fathers; and no water, save a little, do they give unto them.” (Moroni 9:7-8)
Cahokia may be the tower of Sherrizah.
Cahokia was long after the end of the Book of Mormon
Only if you believe that the age estimates of the mounds are always accurate.
I have spoken to several archaeologists. They know that the times are not perfect, but they are pretty good. Much better than assuming they are wrong because we want them to be different
Dr. Mitchill was an archaeologist.
Apparently, it makes no sense that Martin Harris’ account of meeting with Charles Anthon and Dr. Samuel Latham Mitchill became canonized scripture.
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/times-and-seasons-2-may-1842/7
Mitchill being an archaeologist, among many other things:
https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms/vol20/iss2/4/
Because the Book of Mormon is actually about a Maya Civilization far removed from New York.
Martin Harris never should have mortgaged his farm to pay for the printing of The Book of Mormon if he knew how wrong Anthon and Mitchill were as well as Joseph Smith.
It’s not what I want, it’s that I don’t reject a mound site that fits the text, on a subjective age estimate. I trust the text more than I trust the estimate.
“Cahokia was long after the end of the Book of Mormon”
So also the Maya ruins discovered by John Lloyd Stephens. And by definition the Maya Civilization.
Yet somehow the Nephite nation being destroyed is now equated with the Maya.
I’m guessing you don’t read much of what the Mesoamericanists have written. If you had, you would understand that we are VERY careful about dates. We also accept what the science says.
Honestly one can fairly definitely say that at least Oliver Cowdery subscribed to the hemispheric model. He preached in November of 1830 that Lehi landed in Chile. He wrote in Letter VII his thinking on the New York Cumorah being the location of the last battle. Nothing JS said is inconsistent with the hemispheric model. Thinking there were plains of the Nephites in the eastern US is consistent with North America being in the land northward.
The writings of both Joseph and Oliver demonstrates a belief in a hemispheric model. Trying to force a portion of their words into any other model as proof of a limited geography model is to do violence to their words.
If you insist that their statements are based on revelation, then
1. You have to embrace the hemispheric model, and
2. You have to ignore scientific evidence and internal BoM evidence for a limited geography model.
Gerald,
What evidence do you have from the BoM for a limited geography?
Obviously all of the evidence you have seen and do no accept. Similarly, Mesoamericanists can’t see the vast scope you suggest.
One of the problems is the logistics of warfare. Traveling the distances you require takes a lot of food. The Aztecs could conquer their limited territory because the used conquered cities to provide the food. In North America, you don’t have a surplus that would sustain an army. There simply aren’t enough calories available–which is why North American populations tended to be smaller, farther apart–and didn’t participate in large wars. They simply didn’t have the food to allow that.
I haven’t seen any BoM evidence for a limited geography. Perhaps you could point it out?
Not enough food energy in North America? It took more food energy to build those thousands of towers/mounds than it would to move an army.
Joseph and Oliver never taught a hemispheric model. The Prophet corrected Orson Pratt’s speculation on a hemispheric opinion printed his “An account of several remarkable visions” in the later Wentworth Letter referring to this Country and this Continent.
But Pratt agree Cumorah is in New York. Pratt didn’t get it then continued his speculation in footnotes in later editions of The Book of Mormon.
But members assumed Orson Pratt learned it from Joseph Smith. (An honest mistake.)
The problem with the Hemispheric is having the Lands of Zarahemla and Nephi in South America south of the narrow neck (Central America), is King Limhi’s search party leaving the Land of Nephi (Ecuador/Peru).
The Limhi search party then missing Zarahemla farther north (Colombia), than traveling up the Darién Gap north across North America to upstate New York, retrieving Ether’s gold plates, armors and cankered swords, then returning from New York back to South America again missing the land of Zarahemla.
Zarahemla was the goal of the search party, but they ended up in New York from South America?
As well as the last Jaredite leaving Ramah in New York and traveling to the Land of Zarahemla in South America.
Both scenarios are ridiculous. Thus being ridiculous, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery never taught a hemispheric geography. The same as they never plagiarized from Stephens’ books.
What’s also absurd it to assume Nephi, after traveling 8 years through the Saudi Desert, also traveled the length from Southern Chile to Peru – across the Atacama Desert, one of the driest deserts on earth – then settled the Land of Nephi in Peru or Ecuador.
Give the guy a break. That route is ridiculous and is only assumed by individuals who don’t understand South American topography.
It’s also bizarre that anyone would assume Nephi, Mulek and the Jaredites had a 16th Century map created by the explorations of Columbus, Magellan, Vespucci and other European explorers, thus they knew that Central America was the narrow neck and then all three decided to land there, specifically in Tehuantepec.
That’s an anachronism and few seem to grasp it.
TB,
Both the Heartland and Tehuantepec models are limited geography models. Both agree that South America was not the Nephite lands.
However, when Oliver has Lehi landing in Chile, Joseph sees Nephites in Palenque and Zelph in Missouri, and Spencer W Kimball telling the Bolivians they are in the center of Nephite lands, you can ascertain they see a hemispheric model.
However, distances, narrow neck of land, archaeology, age of ruins, disparate native groups, etc, show it could not be based on the hemispheric model.
Gerald,
I agree that the BoM saga is not Hemispheric. By meticulously matching the text to the facts on the ground, I believe that Lehi landed on the Pacific coast of Costa Rica, Mulek landed about 250 miles up the Mississippi, and the Jaredites landed on the New Jersey shore. Although it is is not mentioned in the text, it is highly probable that Lamanites migrated into South America.
TB agreed with a limited geography model, and said Lamanites later moved to South America.
This is possible. However, I believe other Israelites, as noted in the BoM, were led away and brought to South America. Stories of Wiraqocha tie in closely with the 3 Nephite account of Christ in America, perhaps visiting some of the lost tribes.
Other Israelites in South America is also possible.
You’re (intentionally?) missing the point about the significance of John Lloyd Stephens in the context of early Latter-day Saint reception of the Book of Mormon.
Stephens is not important because his discoveries offer definitive “proof” of the Book of Mormon’s historicity in Mesoamerica. Rather, he matters because Joseph Smith and other early Saints saw his accounts of ancient ruins in Central America as powerful external vindication of the Book of Mormon’s claims—particularly its descriptions of sophisticated, urban civilizations in the ancient Americas. In the early 19th century, many Americans believed Native peoples were too “savage” to have built cities or monumental architecture. Stephens’ reports challenged that racist assumption and gave early Latter-day Saints a contemporary framework for understanding the plausibility of the Book of Mormon narrative.
This historical context poses a challenge for advocates of the Heartland model. Joseph Smith’s enthusiastic engagement with Stephens’ Mesoamerican findings suggests he was open to—or even favored—a Mesoamerican setting for the Book of Mormon, which runs counter to the Heartland model’s insistence on a North American geography that Joseph Smith allegedly knew by revelation. This is why Heartlanders are desperate to deny Joseph’s involvement with the Times and Seasons articles republishing material from Stephens—going so far to posit absurd conspiracy theories that see Joseph’s editorial supervision of the newspaper during that time purposefully undermined by a cabal of evil apostates advocate for the wicked Mesoamerica geography.
Moreover, serious proponents of the Mesoamerican model do not uncritically rely on outdated 19th-century sources like Stephens. They draw on a wide array of up-to-date archaeological, linguistic, and cultural research. Ironically, it’s often Heartland advocates who consistently rely on discredited 19th-century pseudo-archaeology to bolster their claims about ancient civilizations in North America.
@Smoot
The Mesoamericanites are claiming Joseph Smith didn’t know the location of the Hill Cumorah, but only went along with others after those others first called the Hill near his home as “Cumorah.”
The Prophet apparently, just went with the flow and didn’t correct anyone about the location of Cumorah.
“Go with the flow, Joe.” President Nelson, his current successor, does the same, doesn’t he? As well as the Quorum of The Twelve.
“Go with the flow.”
But Mesoamericanites will accept Maya ruins built after 420 A.D. as proof of The Book of Mormon – because of the later time period.
But not earlier statements by Joseph Smith about the plains of the Nephites, etc. during Zion’s Camp because Joseph Smith wanted to lie to future leaders, which was what Zion’s Camp was meant to identify under stress.
Thus the Prophet ignored his prophetic mantle and later wholeheartedly turned over to John Lloyd Stephens as the discoverer of where The Book of Mormon occurred.
Yet the Mesoamercanites can’t identify the location of the Hill Cumorah, because they lost it somewhere in Central America and have yet to locate it.
Losing the location of the Hill Cumorah is a Mesoamericanite’s badge of honor.
Thus The Book of Mormon becomes a fantasy map with narrow necks and pretty primary colors for Primary classes to deceive the rising generation and those yet unborn.
The ritual sacrifice of war captives is not unique to Indigenous peoples of North America; it’s a well-documented practice across many ancient civilizations. Just this year, archaeologists working at Teotihuacan uncovered new evidence of large-scale, ritualized violence—often involving the sacrifice of prisoners of war. Crucially, unlike the evidence from sites like Cahokia, which dates to a much later period, the findings at Teotihuacan correspond to the Early Classic period (ca. AD 250–550), which aligns perfectly with the events described in Moroni 9 which you cite.
This ritual sacrifice of war captives in both Mesoamerica and Illinois, appears to be a gruesome cultural link between them.
Fort Mountain in Georgia is named from an ancient 885-foot-long rock wall located on its e peak. It stretches between two precipices with embattlements along the wall, in addition to a ruin of a gateway. The wall was constructed out of local stones from the surrounding regions around the summit. It guards the passes on either side of the mountain. Most experts believe it was built during the Middle Woodland period (100 BC-500 AD).
Geogia Parks Department placed a bronze plaque at the site which reads:
“Some of the old Cherokee tales relate that the wall was built by the white moon-eyed people…and that they used the wall for their futile last-ditch defense.”
Population density is critical in determining the possible location of the Nephites and Jaredites.
Finding arrowheads is evidence of hunting and training for the hunt, not large military expansion. There just isn’t evidence for Nephites in North America, no matter how much the Heartland followers wish or impose supernatural methods.
Of course, we need to ignore Joseph Smith who took a tour of the Heartland during Zion’s Camp. Wilford Woodruff wrote in his journal: “While on our travels we visited many of the mounds..”
Joseph Smith in a letter to his wife stated: “The whole of our journey, in the midst of so large a company of social honest and sincere men, wandering over the plains of the Nephites, recounting occasionally the history of the Book of Mormon, roving over the mounds of that once beloved people of the Lord, picking up their skulls & their bones, as a proof of its divine authenticity, …”
It’s interesting how selective Heartlanders are of Joseph Smith’s statements. When he speculates about possible Book of Mormon connections to the mounds of the American Midwest, those remarks are elevated to a dogmatic level of prophetic certainty. But when he expresses interest in Mesoamerican settings—such as in his 1841 letter to John Bernhisel or the Times and Seasons editorials published under his editorship—Heartlanders suddenly dismiss or downplay his comments, often resorting to pseudo-historical conspiracy theories to explain them away. The inconsistency reveals a clear bias: only the statements that support the predetermined Heartland geography are treated as authoritative, while the rest are conveniently reinterpreted or ignored.