Jump to content

Limited geography model

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Trevdna (talk | contribs) at 04:42, 9 January 2024. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Part of a series on the
Book of Mormon
Origin
Peoples
Persons
Books
Geography
Analysis
Objects
Adaptations
Other

A limited geography model for the Book of Mormon is one of several proposals by Latter Day Saint scholars that the book's narrative was a historical record of people in a limited geographical region, rather than of the entire Western Hemisphere as believed by nearly all early and present Latter Day Saints.[1][unreliable source?]

These models, developed in an effort to reconcile claims in the Book of Mormon with archaeology and geography, have situated the book's events in South America, Mesoamerica, and/or the Great Lakes area. One popular LDS theory places the setting for the Book of Mormon in the vicinity of Mexico and Central America surrounding the Isthmus of Tehuantepec.[2][3] Others recognize a setting among the mound builders as the book's original setting.[4] The mound builder setting parallels traditional settings of the Book of Mormon accepted during the 19th century, but is still a minority view in LDS academia.[5][unreliable source?] The limited geography models are the result of a school of thought among Latter Day Saint scholars that for the text of the Book of Mormon to realistically be interpreted as a historical document, the events described therein must be limited to an area of several hundred square miles.[6]

However, narrowing the discussion to only one geographic model has proven problematic. Each of these models has sustained harsh criticisms, often from fellow LDS researchers, as they attempt to reconcile known archeological (and geographic) locations with claimed Book of Mormon lands and peoples, and to untangle other apparent contradictions and problems with each model in its turn.

These models have not changed the academic consensus outside the Latter Day Saint movement that the Book of Mormon is not an accurate description of ancient American history.[7] Archaeological evidence supporting the Book of Mormon's "Mound-builder" literary setting is not interpreted by mainstream academia as proving the historicity or divinity of the work.[8] The Book of Mormon is regarded by mainstream historians and literary experts as a work of 19th century American literature, in the "Mound-builder" genre[9] but not as history.

Background and history

The Book of Mormon describes a journey by a group of people led by a prophet named Lehi from the Old World to the New World in approximately 600 BC. The Book of Mormon also describes the journey of two other groups to America, called the people of Mulek,[10] and the Jaredites.[11]

Janne M. Sjödahl was one of the earliest proponents of a limited geography model. In 1927, he stated that "students of the Book of Mormon should be cautioned against the error of supposing that all the American Indians are the descendants of Lehi, Mulek and their companions."[12][13]

In 1938, an LDS church study guide for the Book of Mormon stated that "the Book of Mormon deals only with the history and expansion of three small colonies which came to America, and it does not deny or disprove the possibility of other immigrations, which probably would be unknown to its writers."[12][14]

Another prominent proponent of the limited geography model was LDS scholar Hugh Nibley, who argued that the assumption that there were no other people present in the New World at the time of Lehi's arrival might be incorrect. In 1980, Nibley, referring to archaeological evidence, stated that the assumption of an empty New World represented a "simplistic reading" of the Book of Mormon.[12][15]

In the 1920s, LDS General Authority and historian B.H. Roberts questioned the assumption of a hemispheric geography and population model for the Book of Mormon. In his critical examination of the Book of Mormon, eventually published in 1985 under the title Studies of the Book of Mormon, Roberts affirmed that Book of Mormon peoples numbered and occupied "the land at least from Yucatan to Cumorah," and speculated that such peoples would have come "in contact with other races and tribes of men, if such existed in the New World within Book of Mormon times." Finally he asserted that "the area occupied by the Nephites and Lamanites would have to be extremely limited, much more limited, I fear, than the Book of Mormon would admit our assuming."[16]

Early in the twentieth century, RLDS (Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) members proposed a limited Mesoamerican geography for the Book of Mormon.[17] By the middle of the twentieth century, most LDS authors shared the belief that the Book of Mormon events took place within a limited region in Mesoamerica, and that others were present on the continent at the time of Lehi's arrival.[18] This geographical and population model was formally published in the official church magazine, The Ensign, in a two-part series published in September and October 1984.[19] This was followed by a book on the subject by LDS anthropologist John L. Sorenson in 1985.[20]

The presence of inhabitants on the American continents long before the arrival of Lehi's party is well supported by existing archaeological data. Mainstream scientists believe native populations arrived via a land bridge in the Bering Strait during the last Ice Age approximately 14,000 years ago.[21]

Mesoamerican setting

According to a subset of LDS scholars investigating the field, the application of the Book of Mormon limited geography model to a Mesoamerican setting produces a "highly plausible match."[22] LDS scholars use "contextual knowledge" in order to establish a plausible setting for the cultural events of the Book of Mormon within the context of known Mesoamerican historical settings. The goal is to determine places and times at which Book of Mormon events occurred that correlate with similar events in the Mesoamerican historical record.[23] Based on textual analysis and comparison of the Book of Mormon limited geography model to existing geographical regions, time-lines and cultures, many LDS scholars believe that the Book of Mormon geography is centered in Mesoamerica around the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, in the area of current day Guatemala and the southern Mexico States of Tabasco, Chiapas, Oaxaca, Veracruz, and the surrounding area.[24]

Proposed map of the lands and sites of the Book of Mormon in Mesoamerica

The Mesoamerican limited geography model suggests that the introduction of a small, external population into the existing Mesoamerican population would initially show little evidence in the archaeological record.[25] It is suggested by LDS scholars that certain cultural features spread out from the Mesoamerican area to surrounding regions over time after the arrival of external groups.[26]

Proposed locations of cities, events, and landmarks

Some LDS scholars believe that the Tehuantapec model provides enough of a match with existing geography, ancient cultures and ruins, to propose plausible locations for certain Book of Mormon places and events. Critics, on the other hand, insist that the Tehuantepec model is fundamentally flawed.[27]

Position of seas

The Book of Mormon refers to two lands, a land northward and a land southward.[28] The land northward was completely surrounded by water [29] and the land southward was nearly surrounded by water.[30] The majority of references to seas refer to a sea east and west of the land northward and the land southward [31][32] The Isthmus of Tehuantepec borders the Gulf of Mexico on the north and the Pacific Ocean on the south.

The "narrow" neck of land

The Isthmus of Tehuantepec, at 125 miles (201 km) wide, is considered by some LDS scholars to be "just within the range of plausibility" for the "day and a half's journey for a Nephite" indicated by the text of the Book of Mormon,[33] although critics question this association.[34]

Location of the final battles of the Lamanites and the Nephites

Several proponents of the Tehuantapec model have proposed that the final battles of the Lamanites and the Nephite civilizations occurred at the Cerro El Vigia ("Lookout Hill"), a 3000 foot (800 m) tall extinct volcano located in the northwestern section of the Sierra de los Tuxtlas mountain range in Mexico. Significantly larger than the 110-foot (34 m) tall "Hill Cumorah" located in New York, the Cerro El Vigia is said to be a plausible location for the "Hill Ramah" and "Hill Cumorah" described in the Book of Mormon.[35]

Existence of ancient system of writing

Support for the hypothesis of Mesoamerica as a plausible location for a limited Book of Mormon geography requires that the ancient inhabitants have a highly developed system of writing. Mesoamerica is the only area in the Americas where evidence survives of an ancient system of writing.[36] There have been identified at least six pre-Christian era Mesoamerican systems of writing.[37] Although much of this writing has been deciphered, there are still instances of ancient writing from these cultures that scholars have not yet been able to translate.[38] However, the oral tradition of certain native people of "northern America" maintains the existence of an indigenous, pre-Columbian script.[39] More than one LDS researcher has concluded that various characters from "North America's first indigenous script" resemble characters believed to have been copied from the Book of Mormon plates.[40]

Criticism

Moroni and the final resting place of the plates

Several Book of Mormon geography models conflict with the western New York location of Cumorah where Joseph Smith reported finding the golden plates. This has led to an argument promoted by some LDS apologists, known as the "Two Cumorahs" theory.[41] Some LDS apologists and leaders take exception to the Two Cumorahs theory.[42][43] The Book of Mormon states that some final battles of the Nephite people took place near "the narrow passage".[44] Mesoamerican setting advocates seek to place this geographic feature in Central America.[45] Others point out that there are several isthmuses, or narrow moraines, in the vicinity of western New York, which would simplify the task of locating Cumorah.[46]

In the Book of Mormon narrative, the Nephite historian Mormon states that he "hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records” that were in his possession.[47] The "hill Cumorah" referred to by Mormon is the hill located near the scene of the final battle between the Nephites and the Lamanites. Moroni continues to record information on these plates as late as 35 years after they were given to him.[48] Some LDS apologists suggest that the method by which the plates reached New York was that Moroni carried them there during this long interim.[49]

One author criticizes this theory as being "problematic" because "Moroni makes it clear that he buried the plates in the vicinity of the Nephites' destruction, not 2,000 miles (3,200 km) away in some remote region." To support this assumption, it is postulated that Moroni buried the plates near the scene of the final battle and then returned 20 years later to retrieve them and add information to them before his final farewell, in which he states that his intention to "seal up these records"[50]

The "two Cumorahs" theory is considered preposterous by some. Historian and journalist Hampton Sides remarks, "As fantastic as it may seem, [LDS apologist John] Sorenson actually argues that there were two Cumorahs: one in Mexico where the great battle took place, and where Moroni buried a longer, unexpurgated version of the golden Nephite records; and one near Palmyra, New York, where Moroni eventually buried a condensed version of the plates after lugging them on an epic trek of several thousand miles."[51]

Zelph

The story of Zelph is used to support the idea the Joseph Smith promoted a hemispheric geography for the Book of Mormon, or perhaps a Great Lakes setting (see below),[52] and would not be compatible with a limited Mesoamerican setting.

Archeological criticism

The Limited Mesoamerican Geography Model has been critiqued, suggesting that it is not an adequate explanation for Book of Mormon geography and that the locations, events, and flora and fauna described in it do not precisely match.[53][54][a]

Critics note that several of the cardinal directions discussed in the Book of Mormon (such as east and west) more closely correspond to perpendicular cardinal directions (such as north and south) in the proposed geography of the Mesoamerican limited geography model. In response, apologists draw parallels with other ancient cultures wherein cardinal directions are rendered differently.[56] Another researcher has suggested that ancient Maya directions were set 45° different from our own.[57]

Religious criticism

A Mesoamerican setting apparently contradicts passages in the Book of Mormon (and later the Doctrine and Covenants) which appeared to prophesy that the United States of America would take control of the geographical lands occupied by the Book of Mormon peoples.[58]

Great Lakes setting

Map showing possible lands and sites of the Book of Mormon in the American Great Lakes region

Some LDS researchers have proposed a limited Great Lakes setting for the Book of Mormon.[59] One of these proposals has the histories of the Jaredite, Nephite and Lamanite civilizations taking place in a small area of southern Ontario and western New York. According to Delbert Curtis, the seas surrounding the land are said to be Lakes Huron, Ontario, and Erie.[60]

Favoring a setting more localized near the Great Lakes, Olive writes that Lehi's company sailed across the Gulf of Mexico and up interconnected North American rivers such as the Mississippi, Ohio and other navigable ancient water ways, to within a short distance of the Book of Mormon's "west sea" or "west sea, south" – the freshwater Great Lake Erie (according to Olive).[61]

In counties near Lake Ontario, E.G. Squier, commissioned by the Smithsonian Institution, documented the remains of numerous earth and timber "castles" and "towns" constructed by the indigenous peoples of western New York in 1849.[62] With the expansion of modern civilization, aboriginal monuments and antiquities have vanished from the New York landscape.[63][vague][better source needed]

The breadth of "Bountiful" (or the narrow neck of land discussed above), according to Olive, Coon and Hamilton, is approximately the 33 mi (53 km) distance from Batavia, New York, westward to the coast of Lake Erie – along the line of the Onondaga scarp. The "narrow neck of land" according to Olive is a narrow moraine near Batavia.[64]

Heartland model

See also: Indigenous peoples of the Eastern Woodlands

A somewhat more expansive, though overlapping limited geography model, is known as the "Heartland Model" (or "Heartland theory"). It postulates that the events described in the Book of Mormon took place, primarily, in the "heartland" of North America, including the Great Lakes region, but also in regions somewhat further afield.[65][66] Proponents see this new model as a way of better supporting the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon,[67] while proponents of the Mesoamerican limited geography model hold that “it doesn't fit the geography, the culture or the time period” described in the Book of Mormon.[66]

Among the model's proposals are that Mound Builders, including the Hopewell and the Adena, were among those peoples described in accounts of events in Book of Mormon books such as Alma and Helaman. The Mississippi River is identified as the River Sidon, and Big Spring (in Carter County, Missouri) as the Waters of Mormon. The Niagara Falls region has been described as the "narrow neck of land" mentioned in Alma. In addition, the Appalachian region of Tennessee is claimed by some to be the Land of Nephi.[68]

In this model, the Hill Cumorah is located in upstate New York. It is the same hill referenced in the Book of Mormon as the location of the destruction of both the Jaredite (arguably associated with the Adena people) and Nephite (arguably the Hopewell) peoples, and the same hill in which Mormon ostensibly hides the records, and from which Joseph Smith ostensibly retrieved them in 1827.

Criticism

Mesoamerican setting advocate John E. Clark claims that all seas that bordered New World Book of Mormon lands "had to be the Pacific and Atlantic oceans ..."[69] Clark also alleges that the designations of west and east seas in the Book of Mormon "are tied to ... original arduous journeys across oceans and the receding direction of their [the voyaging immigrant's] forfeited homeland."[69]

Rejecting hemispheric settings and locating Cumorah in upstate New York,[70] LDS authors Olive, May and others, have concluded that the "many waters" crossed by Lehi's family involved the Atlantic Ocean.[71] This view is clearly at odds with the Indian and Pacific Ocean tradition alleged in sources like the Williams document (see "South American setting", below). An ostensibly prophetic vision recorded in the Book of Mormon describes how "a man among the Gentiles" was seen navigating "the many waters". The reference to "the many waters" in this instance, is unequivocally interpreted by LDS to mean the Atlantic Ocean, and the implicit descriptions (in the scripture) of events in colonial American history, seems to support this conclusion.[72]

Opponents of a limited Great Lakes setting say that the cultures of the ancient inhabitants of the area (mound builder) do not match the Book of Mormon narrative, even though North American peoples associated with these cultures, are known to have been accomplished metal workers, and to have made impressive works of earth, timber, rock, and plaster,[citation needed][b] not unlike the constructions described in the Book of Mormon.[73] Joseph Smith affirmed that at least some of the mound builders were the Nephites of the Book of Mormon.[74]

In opposition to placing the setting for the Book of Mormon in lands near the Great Lakes, it has been suggested that a feature as significant as Niagara Falls could not escape mention in the Book of Mormon had this been the area in which the civilizations described in it existed.[75] However, in the limited Great Lakes setting proposed by Olive, Niagara Falls situate on a watery western extremity and would not have been encountered in any of the situations detailed in the abridged Nephite narrative. The fact that western New York was inundated in antiquity fits the description found in the Book of Mormon text.[76][non-primary source needed] Olive points out that there were several cataracts along the northern escarpment, resulting from the overflow of old Lake Tonawanda, which is believed by Olive to be the Book of Mormon's land-dividing sea.[77] More than one of these may have rivaled the falls of Niagara.[78]

Geographic criticism

Some LDS scholars reject the Great Lakes limited geographic model on the presumption that snow and cold are not mentioned in the Book of Mormon – except briefly, in the instance where Nephi, after arriving in the Promised Land of America, described his previous visions to future generations "who should possess the land."[79][c]

Other reasons given by LDS scholars for discounting some of these theories include an apparent lack of appropriate geographical features, such as highlands and lowlands[d] - and an apparent lack of seismic activity in the northeastern United States, which is considered important given references in the Book of Mormon to strong seismic activity at certain points.[e]

Demographic criticism

Mormon scholars have estimated that at various periods in Book of Mormon history, the populations of civilizations discussed in the book would have ranged between 300,000 and 1.5 million people.[86] The size of the late Jaredite civilization was even larger. According to the Book of Mormon, the final war that destroyed the Jaredites resulted in the deaths of at least two million people.[87] From Book of Mormon population estimates, it is evident that the civilizations described are comparable in size to the civilizations of ancient Egypt, ancient Greece, ancient Rome, and the Maya. Such civilizations left numerous artifacts in the form of hewn stone ruins, tombs, temples, pyramids, roads, arches, walls, frescos, statues, vases, and coins.

No evidence of any civilization approaching this size and scale has been found in the Great Lakes region.

South American setting

A commonly held belief among the LDS for many years was that Lehi's group landed on the coast of Chile. An early Mormon document in the handwriting of Frederick G. Williams states (or speculates) that Lehi's company "sailed in a southeast direction and landed on the Continent of South America in Chili [Chile] thirty degrees south latitude."[88] This document greatly influenced a tradition that Lehi's family voyaged across the Arabian Sea, the Indian Ocean, and the vast Pacific Ocean. Twentieth Century LDS Church authorities, however, called the Williams document into question.[89] The idea that the "west sea" of the Book of Mormon is the Pacific Ocean has, nevertheless, persisted in localized Central American, South American and hemispheric settings for the Book of Mormon.[90]

A booklet published in 1882 by Franklin D. Richards made the claim that this information had been received by revelation through Joseph Smith.

LEHI'S TRAVELS.—Revelation to Joseph the Seer. The course that Lehi and his company traveled from Jerusalem to the place of their destination:

They traveled nearly a south, southeast direction until they came to the nineteenth degree of north latitude; then, nearly east to the Sea of Arabia, then sailed in a southeast direction, and landed on the continent of South America, in Chili [sic], thirty degrees south latitude.[91]

Challengers of the limited geography model use this statement, along with the teachings of early Mormon missionaries supporting the idea of a landing in Chile, as evidence that the widespread belief in the hemispheric geography model was based upon a revelation through Joseph Smith, and that any information to the contrary constitutes "apologetic denial."[92] LDS scholars point out that in the earlier document authored by Frederick G. Williams, that the words "Lehi's Travels" and "Revelation to Joseph the Seer" do not appear in this text as they do in the subsequent 1882 publication.[93]

A paper authored by LDS affiliated research group FARMS notes that the document authored by Frederick G. Williams "does not attribute the statement to Joseph Smith and, although Richards follows closely the Williams account, he gives no source for the statement or the title. There is no known earlier historical evidence associating this specific statement with Joseph Smith."[94] On the other hand, Williams was a scribe of Smith's, and therefore many documents in Williams' hand may represent Smith's own thoughts and ideas.

The claim of a landfall in Chile may have actually originated with Orson Pratt, who often included the Chile landing hypothesis in his writings and said that "this view was actually based upon his own inference from the Book of Mormon text."[95] In a talk given in 1872, Pratt described Lehi's group as "landing on the western coast of what is now called South America. As near as we can judge from the description of the country contained in this record the first landing place was in Chili [sic], not far from where the city of Valparaiso now stands."[96] Pratt's opinions were incorporated into the geographical footnotes that he added into the 1879 edition of the Book of Mormon.[97]

In 1975, Venice Priddis, an LDS researcher, published a book proposing a limited geography model based in South America.[98]

The criticism inherent in the Great Lakes limited geographic model - namely that no evidence has been found of any civilizations of the extent described in the Book of Mormon - applies implicitly in the South American limited geographic model.[f] Likewise, the criticism inherent in the Mesoamerican limited geographic model - that of "two Cumorahs" - applies implicitly here as well.

See also

Notes

Explanatory footnotes

  1. ^ In response to one of these critiques in 1994, Sorenson reaffirmed his proposal for a limited Mesoamerican geographical setting.[55]
  2. ^ "cement", see 19th century definition, Oxford Dictionary; Joseph Smith History 1:52
  3. ^ Nephi's expression, "driven snow," implies that Nephi had experienced something like a blizzard – snow carried by the wind into drifts.[80] Nephi's exact wording is without parallel in the Bible. It rarely snows in temperate Jerusalem. Jewish prophets were acquainted with the white-capped mountains of Lebanon to the north.[81] The Book of Mormon also describes severe "hail", a weather condition favored in temperate climates.[82][83][unreliable source?]
  4. ^ although supporters believe the limited Great Lakes setting proposed by Olive meets topographical requirements well.[84]
  5. ^ Although supporters claim that western New York is subject to strong anomalous earthquakes.[85]
  6. ^ More specifically, no evidence exists of civilizations of that extent, during the timeframe the Book of Mormon covers. The Inca Empire would rise much later, around the 15th century AD.

References

  1. ^ Coon, W. Vincent "How Exaggerated Settings for the Book of Mormon Came to Pass"
  2. ^ (Southerton 2004, p. 157)
  3. ^ Southerton claims that "[t]here is only one serious contender accepted by most Mormon academics, which proposes that most Book of Mormon events took place in a restricted part of Mesoamerica. Only in Mesoamerica are there ruins of civilizations of the magnitude evident in the Book of Mormon."
  4. ^ Olive The Lost Empires and Vanished Races of Prehistoric America; Coon, Choice Above All Other Lands – Book of Mormon Covenant Lands According to the Best Sources
  5. ^ Coon, for instance, ("How Exaggerated Settings for the Book of Mormon Came to Pass") cites literary historian Robert Silverberg.
  6. ^ (Sorenson 1985, pp. 1–48)
  7. ^ Duffy (2004, p. 37).
  8. ^ Coon, "Olive's Near Cumorah Setting by Deduction and Best Fit"
  9. ^ Roger G. Kennedy, HIDDEN CITIES – THE DISCOVERY AND LOSS OF ANCIENT NORTH AMERICAN CIVILIZATION, 1994, pp. 228-231; Robert Silverberg, "and the mound-builders vanished from the earth",American Heritage Magazine, June 1969, Volume 20, Issue 4
  10. ^ "Book of Omni". Book of Mormon. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
  11. ^ "Omni 1:21". Book of Mormon. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
  12. ^ a b c (Smith 1997, p. 263)
  13. ^ See also: Sjodahl, Janne M (1927). "An Introduction to the Study of the Book of Mormon". Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press.
  14. ^ See also: Berrett, William E; Hunter; Milton R. (1938), A Guide to the Study of the Book of Mormon, Salt Lake City: Department of Education of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, p. 48
  15. ^ See also: Nibley, Hugh W (1980), The Book of Mormon and the Ruins: The Main Issues, Provo, Utah: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies
  16. ^ (Roberts 1985, p. 93)
  17. ^ Hills, L. E., "Geography of Mexico and Central America from 2234 B.C. to 421 A.D.", Independence, MO, 1917; also Hills, "A Short Work on the Popol Vuh and the Traditional History of the Ancient Americans", Independence, MO, 1918; and Hills, "New Light on American Archaeology", Independence, MO, 1924; see also Gunsolley, J. F., "More Comment on Book of Mormon Geography", Saints Herald, Vol. 69, No 46, 1922, pp. 1074-1076
  18. ^ (Smith 1997, p. 264)
  19. ^ Sorenson, John L (September 1984), "Digging into the Book of Mormon:Our Changing Understanding of Ancient America and Its Scripture (Part 1)", Ensign, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: 27, archived from the original on 2010-06-15, retrieved 2007-01-11. Sorenson, John L (October 1984), "Digging into the Book of Mormon:Our Changing Understanding of Ancient America and Its Scripture (Part 2)", Ensign, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, archived from the original on 2010-06-15, retrieved 2007-01-21.
  20. ^ (Sorenson 1985)
  21. ^ (Coe 2002, p. 41)
  22. ^ (Sorenson 1985, pp. 46–47)
  23. ^ (Smith 1997, pp. 259–260).
  24. ^ (Sorenson 1985, pp. 35–36).
  25. ^ (Sorenson 1985, p. 85).
  26. ^ (Sorenson 1985, p. 93).
  27. ^ Coon, Choice Above All Other Lands – Book of Mormon Covenant Lands According to the Best Sources, pp. 23-42, 45-48; “A Critique of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec Theory” Archived 2015-10-21 at the Wayback Machine; “Israelite Compass”; Hamilton, New York Nephites Archived 2010-05-28 at the Wayback Machine
  28. ^ 3 Nephi 6:2
  29. ^ Helaman 3:8
  30. ^ Alma 22:32
  31. ^ Helaman 11:20
  32. ^ Coon, Choice Above All Other Lands, "Relative Directions in Scriptural Lands", Appendix, pg 276; see also The “land northward” bounded by seas in each of the cardinal directions, compared to the lands of “Zarahemla” and “Nephi” bordered by west and east seas
  33. ^ (Sorenson 1985, p. 36)
  34. ^ The book of Mormon nowhere states that "the narrow neck of land" was a day and a half's journey across. This distance relates to a line of demarcation between the northern land of Desolation and the more southern land of Bountiful. (Alma 22:32) The Mesoamerican Isthmus of Tehuantepec is so wide that advocates of this setting are forced to place the entire Desolation / Bountiful line within "the small neck of land". See also Coon A Not So Narrow Neck of Land, and “Critique of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec Theory” Archived 2015-10-21 at the Wayback Machine
  35. ^ (Palmer 1990)
  36. ^ (Coe 2002, p. 13). Coe states that "[a]ll the Mesoamerican Indians shared a number of traits which were more or less peculiar to them and absent or rare elsewhere in the New World: Hieroglyphic writing, books of fig-bark paper or deerskin which were folded like screens, a complex permutation calendar ..."
  37. ^ (Clark 2005)
  38. ^ "Mesoamerican Relic provides new clues to mysterious ancient writing system". BYU News. Brigham Young University. Archived from the original on 2004-05-15. Retrieved 2007-01-16.
  39. ^ Coon, Choice Above All Other Lands, pp. 49-51, 178; Coon cites Schmidt, David L., and Marshall, Murdena, Mi'kmaq Hieroglyphic Prayers, Readings in North America's First Indigenous Script
  40. ^ May, Wayne N., THIS LAND – They Came from the EAST, Vol. 3, pg. XI; see also bookofmormonpromisedland.com Q&A, "Native American Writing"
  41. ^ (Sorenson 1985, p. 44).
  42. ^ 123rd Annual Conference of the Church, April 4–6, 1953, General Conference Report, pp. 83-84; or Improvement Era, June, 1953, pg. 423
  43. ^ See also Hamilton,"What Church Leaders Have Said About the Hill Cumorah" Archived 2015-10-21 at the Wayback Machine
  44. ^ Mormon 2:28-29; 3:5
  45. ^ (Sorenson 1985, p. 44).
  46. ^ Olive, P.C. Archived 2015-10-21 at the Wayback Machine, The Lost Empires & Vanished Races of Prehistoric America, pp. 54-58; Coon, W. Vincent, Choice Above All Other Lands, pp. 28-30, 45-48; see also Coon, "How Exaggerated Settings For the Book of Mormon, Came to Pass"
  47. ^ Mormon 6:6.
  48. ^ Moroni 10:1).
  49. ^ (Sorenson 1985, pp. 44–45). Sorenson illustrates as an example a similar trip made in the mid-sixteenth century by a shipwrecked sailor named David Ingram, who walked from Tampico, Mexico to the St. John River in Canada over a period of 11 months.
  50. ^ (Vogel 2004, p. 648).Vogel concludes "Thus, Moroni is old and ready to die when he hides the plates in the same hill around which the Nephites were destroyed."
  51. ^ Sides, Hampton, "This is Not the Place!", Double Take Magazine, Vol. 5, No 2; Also included in his work American: Dispatches from the New Frontier, 2004)
  52. ^ Godfrey, Kenneth W (1999), "What is the Significance of Zelph In The Study Of Book of Mormon Geography?", Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, 8 (2), Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute: 70–79, doi:10.2307/44747524, JSTOR 44747524, S2CID 164298864, retrieved 2007-01-23
  53. ^ (Matheny 1994
  54. ^ Wunderli 2002)
  55. ^ (Sorenson 1994)
  56. ^ (Sorenson 1985, pp. 38–39).
  57. ^ Vogt, Evan Z (1969), Zinacantan: A Maya Community in the Highlands of Chiapas, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, p. 602
  58. ^ 1 Nephi 13:30, 2 Nephi 10:10-11, The Doctrine and Covenants, Section 10:48-51)
  59. ^ (Aston 1998)
  60. ^ (Curtis 1988)
  61. ^ Olive, P.C., The Lost Lands of the Book of Mormon, pg 50
  62. ^ (Squier 1849)
  63. ^ Coon, W. Vincent, Choice Above All Other Lands - Book of Mormon Covenant Lands According to the Best Sources, pp. 213-217, 225; see also "Ancient Earth & Timber Works of Western NY"
  64. ^ Olive, The Lost Empires and Vanished Races of Prehistoric America, pg. 97; Coon, Choice Above All Other Lands, pg. 47, Map of Book of Mormon Lands by P.C. Olive Archived 2015-10-21 at the Wayback Machine, Narrow Neck and Bountiful Line Archived 2015-10-21 at the Wayback Machine, Nephite Territory in a Nutshell Archived 2009-09-23 at the Wayback Machine
  65. ^ De Groote, Michael (May 27, 2010). "Pros, cons of Book of Mormon geography theories". DeseretNews.com.
  66. ^ a b Moulton, Kristen. "Book of Mormon geography stirring controversy". The Salt Lake Tribune. Retrieved 2016-04-24.
  67. ^ Duffy 2004.
  68. ^ "FIRM Foundation - the Foundation for Indigenous Research and Mormonism". Archived from the original on 2016-10-11. Retrieved 2016-04-24.
  69. ^ a b Clark, John E., "Searching for Book of Mormon lands in Middle America, Review of Sacred Sites: Searching for Book of Mormon Lands by Joseph L. Allen, Maxwell Institute, 2004, Footnote 7
  70. ^ Interpreting D&C 128:20 at face value
  71. ^ May, Wayne N., This Land, They Came from the EAST, Vol. 3, pp 12-15, Olive, P.C., The Lost Lands of the Book of Mormon, Chapter four, pp 49-67, See also Coon, W. Vincent, Q and A, bookofmormonpromiseland.com
  72. ^ 1 Nephi 13:10-20
  73. ^ Alma 49:2-18, Alma 50:1-4, Helaman 3:9
  74. ^ On the banks of the Mississippi, June 4, 1834, "... 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 proof of its divine authenticity ..." Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, compiled and edited by Dean C. Jessee, S.L.C, Deseret Book, 2002, pp. 345-346.
  75. ^ (Palmer 1990).
  76. ^ Ether 13:2.
  77. ^ See Ether 10:20).
  78. ^ (Olive 2008).
  79. ^ 1 Nephi 11:8, 1 Nephi 19:1-5, 2 Nephi 5:28-33
  80. ^ bookofmormonpromisedland.com "Q & A"
  81. ^ Jeremiah 18:14, Isaiah 1:18, Psalms 51:7.
  82. ^ Mosiah 12:6, Helaman 5:12.
  83. ^ Coon, W. Vincent, Choice Above All Other Lands - Book of Mormon Covenant Lands According to the Best Sources, pg. 112, bookofmormonpromisedland.com "Seasons in the Promised Land"
  84. ^ (Olive 2000)
  85. ^ (Kafka 2004).
  86. ^ Smith 1997, p. 280
  87. ^ Ether 15:2
  88. ^ Richards, Franklin; Little, James A., eds. (1886), Compendium, Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, p. 289
  89. ^ Pack, Frederick J. and Pyper, George D., "The Route Traveled by Lehi and His Company", The Instructor, Vol. 73, No. 4, April 1938, pg 160. See also Robert, B. H., New Witness for God, Vol. 3, pp 501-03
  90. ^ Coon, "How Exaggerated Settings for the Book of Mormon Came to Pass”
  91. ^ Franklin D. Richards and James A. Little, A Compendium of the Doctrines of the Gospel (Salt Lake City: Deseret News, 1882), 289.
  92. ^ (Vogel 2004, p. 629 note 18).
  93. ^ (Roper 2004)
  94. ^ Williams, Frederick G. III (1988), "Did Lehi Land in Chile?: An Assessment of the Frederick G. Williams Statement", FARMS Paper: 3–4.
  95. ^ (Roper 2004).
  96. ^ (Pratt 1872, p. 325).
  97. ^ (Sorenson & Roper 2003)
  98. ^ (Priddis 1975)

References

Further reading

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Limited_geography_model&oldid=1194473383"