Book of Mormon in Mesoamerica Polities and Power

Introduction

While the Book of Mormon is largely a religious text, replete with lengthy sermons that would be quite at home in nineteenth century America, it does contain enough background historical information for readers to draw reasonable conclusions about what kind of society is therein described. One of the more productive avenues of explorations concerns the probable level of social complexity as well as the type of power wielded by polities. Before exploring this avenue, it is necessary to provide some basic information about different levels of social complexity.

In his book The Ancient Maya, page 58, Arthur Demarest provides the following:

Box 2 Traditional typologies of “level” of political complexity in human societies

Traditionally archaeologists and anthropologists sought to classify ancient or modern societies in order to facilitate comparison and discussion. The most popular traditional typologies have been those proposed by Morton Fried based on the degree of stratification, i.e. social inequality, in societies, and by Elman Service based on the degree of political and economic integration of societies.

Service: integration typology

Bands: small, loosely integrated groups of hunters and gatherers that possess a common territory in which they move nomadically. They have few differences in wealth or status and are characterized by reciprocal economic relations. Integration is through kinship or marriage.

Tribes: Larger societies, often with agricultural and/or pastoral economies, living in permanent (sedentary) locations. Tribes are often multi-settlement societies integrated by theoretical descent groups and voluntary association organizations (for example, warrior clubs, religious cults, fraternal organizations, etc.)

Chiefdoms: Often larger societies in which social integration is facilitated by the existence of prestigious leaders who direct warfare and storage or redistribution of food. Individuals are ranked in their status according to their degree of kinship relationship to the chief. Chiefdoms sometimes have ceremonial centers as the focus of religious activities, redistribution, and social integration.

States: Societies with highly integrated, organized, and centralized leadership with a governing body or rulers. The power of the ruler is backed by coercive force, law, and/or religious sanctions.

Fried: stratification typology

Egalitarian societies: Simple societies with as many positions of status as there are people to fill them. Wealth, status, and power are acquired, not inherited. There are relatively small differences in wealth, and economic relations are reciprocal in nature.

Ranked societies: Societies in which there are fewer positions of status than individuals to fill them. In some cases there are a fixed number of offices, but the competition to fill them is not entirely hereditary.

Economic differences are somewhat restricted by expectations of redistribution by the societies’ leaders.

Stratified societies: Societies in which positions of status are fixed and largely hereditary. A class structure and coercive force maintain these differences.

[The state]: A special function institution of some stratified societies that legitimizes stratification through governing bodies, laws, and police structures to maintain internal order and control class conflict.

Current debate on evolutionary typologies

More recent discussion in archaeology has been highly critical of such universally applied typologies, since they ignore many characteristics, mask internal variability in societies, and, arguably, impose an ethnocentric, evolutionary scheme. Others argue that these designations are useful in practice, if only as loose, broad, comparative designations.

Alternative approaches include multivariate assessments of societies based on many different variables, including degree of inequality, heterogeneity, centralization, and other traits. Many contemporary “postprocessual” theorists reject linear evolutionary typologies of any kind as stereotyping and potentially racist generalizations that pigeonhole societies into a Western materialist presumed hierarchy of development.

Unfortunately (or fortunately?), in the case of the rise of Maya civilization, such typological, terminological, and epistemological debates seldom arise; the data on the early development of lowland Maya civilization is currently so poor that it virtually defies synthesis and interpretation. The earliest Preclassic societies in the Maya lowlands are identified primarily by ceramic deposits. The first sites with public architecture (eg Nakbe and Cerros) were left by societies that were already at a fairly high level of complexity (however that might be designated). Here terms such as bands, chiefdoms, or states are used as only very broad, convenient descriptive terms.

The controversy over terminology will not have a great impact on the following discussion, since the majority of the discussion is focused on the demonstrative power of the polities in question, rather than the specific attached label. I will only use the specific labels when the evidence is clearly supportive of such use.

There is an overwhelming amount of information that can be considered in this topic, both originating from the Book of Mormon text as well as the writings of Mesoamerican scholars. I cannot possibly address it all, so this should be regarded as only a summary of significant points. I will approach this essay using the chronological sequence presented in the Book of Mormon as a general guideline, primarily focusing on the Nephite time-table, due the fact that more information is available on this time period both in the Book of Mormon and in Mesoamerican studies. Once again, I will attempt to frame this discussion in terms of contextual archaeology and probability.

Many of the Book of Mormon verses I cite contain anachronisms, such as the use of tents, but since this is not the primary focus of this section, I will not note each and every anachronism.

In the Beginning…

The Lehites reached the New World in approximately BC 589. The text makes no mention of the Lehites meeting the pre-existing “others”, the indigenous natives, but the foundation of the Limited Geography Theory demands their existence. If one accepts the reasoning of Dr. Sorenson on this issue, the Lehites would actually have met two groups of pre-existing others within a short time frame. The first group constituted the “others” who chose to follow Nephi:

1 Behold, it came to pass that I, Nephi, did cry much unto the Lord my God, because of the anger of my brethren.

2 But behold, their anger did increase against me, insomuch that they did seek to take away my life.

3 Yea, they did murmur against me, saying: Our younger brother thinks to rule over us; and we have had much trial because of him; wherefore, now let us slay him, that we may not be afflicted more because of his words. For behold, we will not have him to be our ruler; for it belongs unto us, who are the elder brethren, to rule over this people.

4 Now I do not write upon these plates all the words which they murmured against me. But it sufficeth me to say, that they did seek to take away my life.

5 And it came to pass that the Lord did warn me, that I, Nephi, should depart from them and flee into the wilderness, and all those who would go with me.

6 Wherefore, it came to pass that I, Nephi, did take my family, and also Zoram and his family, and Sam, mine elder brother and his family, and Jacob and Joseph, my younger brethren, and also my sisters, and all those who would go with me. And all those who would go with me were those who believed in the warnings and the revelations of God; wherefore, they did hearken unto my words.

7 And we did take our tents and whatsoever things were possible for us, and did journey in the wilderness for the space of many days. And after we had journeyed for the space of many days we did pitch our tents.

8 And my people would that we should call the name of the place Nephi; wherefore, we did call it Nephi.

9 And all those who were with me did take upon them to call themselves the people of Nephi.

While it does not seem necessary to infer unnamed indigenous natives as the “others” due to the possibility of unnamed spouses or offspring, this is one of the primary evidences of the pre-existing indigenous native “others” that Book of Mormon scholars cite. It is impossible to conclude how many “others” were involved at this particular juncture.

However, an additional meeting point, largely ignored, is required due to Mesoamerican history. Verse 8 informs us that Nephi and his followers called the place where they pitched their tents “Nephi”, which would later be known as the “City of Nephi”. Dr. Sorenson offers Kaminaljuyu as a likely candidate for the City of Nephi, and I know of no other suggestions. Kaminaljuyu, by BC 588, was already a well-established polity by this point, with enough political capital to regulate the public building project of canals.

By 700 B.C.E., Kaminaljuyu had constructed an irrigation canal fed by a nearby lake. In the rainier tropical lowlands, however, massive irrigation systems were not usually necessary, although arid northern Yucatan could have used them, if only they had had the water to do so. Small-scale systems of ditches and drains have been identified at many sites in the southern lowlands; canals sometimes encircled sacred centers such as that at Cerros, serving perhaps both agricultural and defensive purposes.

One of the most powerful Preclassic cities, Kaminaljuyu occupied the highland valley now occupied by Guatemala City. Situated only 20 kilometers (12 miles) from one of the most important obsidian sources in the Maya region, Kaminaljuyu grew from a small Middle Preclassic Period settlement into the dominant city in the southern region during the Late Preclassic. Its construction included extensive canals and earthen pyramids; its rulers were buried in some of the wealthiest tombs then known; and its art included many stelae in the Izapan style. At the beginning of the Early Classic Period, the city contracted and was depopulated until the central Mexican city of Teotihuacan probably conquered it in the fourth century C.E. and used it as a base for its trade operations in the region. The city was occupied into the Postclassic Period, but after the Early Classic period, it never rose again to be a major power. It was abandoned by the time of the Spanish Conquest. (p 109)

New centers emerged in the central Guatemala highlands at this period (middle preclassic), probably because the flat plateaus became more habitable due to diminishing volcanic activity. All these new settlements were well situated for trade. Kamnaljuyu in the Valley of Guatemala, for example, could control nearby obsidian sources, but it was also in an enviable position to command trade between the Caribbean and the Pacific coast through the river routes in the Motagua Valley, and through the highland pass down to the Pacific. Cacao, obsidian, and jade were part of the valuable trade that would expand in the Late Preclassic, making Kaminaljuyu flourish into one of the most important cities of that period. By 700 B.C.E., Kaminaljuyu already had constructed a major irrigation canal, and by 500 B.C.E., it began carving freestanding stone slabs called stelae. (page 30)

Kaminaljuyu grew from a small center in the Valley of Guatemala in 500 B.C.E. to a capital city dominating the terminal Preclassic period. Although the sprawl of modern Guatemala City has destroyed much of the ancient site and made a careful reconstruction of its development impossible, Kaminaljuyu in its final phase (Early Classic) was a city of more than 200 earthen and adobe-plastered mounds in contrast to approximately 80 at Izapa. The majority of the mounds dated to the Late Preclassic period. Some were 20 meters (66 feet) high and once supported adobe or wooden temples with thatched roofs. One massive structure, judging from the rich tombs it contained, must have been an ancestor shrine dedicated to deceased rulers. An artificial canal, built c. 400 B.C.E. to replace one from the Middle Preclassic Period, fed a vast irrigation system. Great platforms with temples and what may have been a palace courtyard complex were constructed; stelae, some almost 2 meters (6 feet) tall, were carved in low relief, with hieroglyphic inscriptions.

Kaminaljuyu was more powerful and wealthier than any other city in the southern region during this period. Kaminaljuyu influences can be seen at other highland sites and from the Salama Valley to El Baul and Chalchuapa. Although population estimates for Kaminaljuyu cannot be made because of the destruction of the site, tens of thousands of laborers, probably drawn from all over the valley, were necessary to construct and maintain the city.

Many archaeologists believe that the centralized power required to organize such public works would have been beyond that of a mere chiefdom. And the stelae cult probably served to glorify the rulers of such an incipient state. One tomb – Bural C in Structure E-III-3 – is the richest yet discovered anywhere in the Maya realm for the Late Preclassic Period. Its more than 300 artifacts – jade, obsidian, quartz crystals, entire sheets of mica, stingray spines (known to be used by Maya royalty for autosacrifice), fish teeth, and, of course, ceramics including Usultan-ware – certainly suggest that its occupant, accompanied by four sacrificed individuals, was a Kaminaljuyu king. The burial contents also demonstrate the extensive trade and wealth of this strategically located city. (page 38)

The Book of Mormon tells us that the Nephites ruled the City of Nephi until their flight guided by King Mosiah in approximately BC 279 (Omni 13). This dating places them as leaders of Kaminaljuyu from the later portion of the Middle Preclassic period to a hundred years into the Late Preclassic period. While it appears that Kaminaljuyu likely did not reach the full extent of its power until after the dating of the Nephite exodus, it is undeniable that it was already a well organized settlement with a structured leadership by the time that Nephi and his followers would have pitched their tents and named the location the City of Nephi.

This indicates that almost immediately following Nephi’s arrival in the New World, he was able to persuade two groups of unmentioned indigenous others to not only join his company, but to actually elect him as their king.

10 And we did observe to keep the judgments, and the statutes, and the commandments of the Lord in all things, according to the law of Moses.

11 And the Lord was with us; and we did prosper exceedingly; for we did sow seed, and we did reap again in abundance. And we began to raise flocks, and herds, and animals of every kind.

12 And I, Nephi, had also brought the records which were engraven upon the plates of brass; and also the ball, or compass, which was prepared for my father by the hand of the Lord, according to that which is written.

13 And it came to pass that we began to prosper exceedingly, and to multiply in the land.

14 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.

15 And 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.

16 And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon’s temple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine.

17 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did cause my people to be industrious, and to labor with their hands.

18 And it came to pass that they would that I should be their king. But I, Nephi, was desirous that they should have no king; nevertheless, I did for them according to that which was in my power.

Although we can only speculate about how Nephi accomplished this feat, given the fact that the background of these indigenous others included the tendency to completely enmesh religion and government (see the Holy Lords section), it seems quite reasonable to conclude that this must have included a religious conversion. What a remarkable event this would have been, surely surpassing the later miraculous conversions of Lamanites. Yet, strangely, the Book of Mormon, a text that the authors tell us is written for intent of bringing souls to Christ, is completely silent on this event.

Regardless of how the indigenous others were persuaded to elect Nephi as their leader, the group went on to experience great prosperity, to the point where Jacob, Nephi’s brother, already saw fit to warn the people of the danger of pride.

15 And now it came to pass that the people of Nephi, under the reign of the second king, began to grow hard in their hearts, and indulge themselves somewhat in wicked practices, such as like unto David of old desiring many wives and concubines, and also Solomon, his son.

16 Yea, and they also began to search much gold and silver, and began to be lifted up somewhat in pride.

12 And now behold, my brethren, this is the word which I declare unto you, that many of you have begun to search for gold, and for silver, and for all manner of precious ores, in the which this land, which is a bland of promise unto you and to your seed, doth abound most plentifully.

13 And the hand of providence hath smiled upon you most pleasingly, that you have obtained many riches; and because some of you have obtained more abundantly than that of your brethren ye are lifted up in the pride of your hearts, and wear stiff necks and high heads because of the costliness of your apparel, and persecute your brethren because ye suppose that ye are better than they.

14 And now, my brethren, do ye suppose that God justifieth you in this thing? Behold, I say unto you, Nay. But he condemneth you, and if ye persist in these things his judgments must speedily come unto you.

15 O that he would show you that he can pierce you, and with one glance of his eye he can smite you to the dust!

16 O that he would rid you from this iniquity and abomination. And, O that ye would listen unto the word of his commands, and let not this pride of your hearts destroy your souls!

17 Think of your brethren like unto yourselves, and be familiar with all and free with your substance, that they may be rich like unto you.

19 And after ye have obtained a hope in Christ ye shall obtain riches, if ye seek them; and ye will seek them for the intent to ado good—to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry, and to liberate the captive, and administer relief to the sick and the afflicted.

20 And now, my brethren, I have spoken unto you concerning pride; and those of you which have afflicted your neighbor, and persecuted him because ye were proud in your hearts, of the things which God hath given you, what say ye of it?

In particular, verses 13 and 19 seem to indicate that the society is already dividing into classes. While Kaminaljuyu was already an established settlement with a some sort of structured leadership that enabled them to build public canals, it is questionable that such a clear division between classes would have arisen at such an early stage. Moreover, even when later in Mesoamerican history clear class divisions did arise, it is misleading to think of the lower class, the commoners, as struggling to meet their needs. The main division between the elite and the commoner classes was access to exotic goods and knowledge that enabled the elite to engage in important ritual events.

In their essay “Commoners in Postclassic Maya Society: Social versus Economic Class Constructs”, from the book Ancient Maya Commoners, Marilyn Masson and Carlos Peraza Lope state:

The concept of a commoner class in Postclassic Maya society is an evasive one, suggesting that social status position does not vary evenly with the conditions of economic life. As many of the contributors to this volume have demonstrated, when economic patterns of household production and local, regional, and distant exchange are compared, commoners are not always easily distinguished from elites. Elites are identified primarily from indicators of social status that are rooted in political and ritual activity. Such indicators include increased residential platform size, the monopolization of certain types of ritual events and paraphernalia, and the control of particular forms of production or exchange. These vary from site to site according to historical and geographical contexts that affected social and economic institutions at individual communities. From the perspective of material realities in the archaeological record, the continuum of social and economic indicators suggest that class structure was to some degree fluid. A single model of class relations within all Postclassic Maya communities is not reflected. (page 197)

Social mobility based on economic affluence was likely fluid. Many activities of economic production and exchange do not distinguish the households of elites and commoners. Social (rather than economic) elites maintained their distinctions much in the manner of Maya elites prior to the Postclassic period – through the control of important calendrical ceremonies celebrated at Maya communities. Most probably, they also helped maintain their polities by hosting ritual activities essential to intercommunity integration, forging alliances external to their polities, and perhaps organizing major market events. (p 199)

Arthur Demarest, in the aforementioned The Ancient Maya, makes similar statements regarding the Classic period, which was the most complex and advanced period in ancient Mesoamerican history, although social divisions became more pronounced in the Postclassic period. The last few centuries of the Late Preclassic period were almost indistinguishable from the Early Classic period, and the centuries preceding the Late Preclassic would have been less socially complex and stratified.

Some of the social patterns of Classic Maya society were “fossilized” in architecture and artifacts in the ruins of household groups. For each household group the amount of stone masonry (versus mud and thatch) often varied with the social rank of the ancient inhabitants. Height and area of household platforms, the presence or absence of monuments, distance from the nearest epicenter, the number of courtyards, presence of plastered floors, and the types of pottery and artifacts in burials are all clues to the social and political standing of a group’s ancient inhabitants. Evidence from recent settlement pattern studies shows that Classic Maya families varied almost continuously in social standing and wealth – in contrast to earlier depictions of ancient Maya society as starkly divided between elites and commoners. Instead, Classic Maya households ranged from isolated huts without even a basal platform to plaza groups of noble families with fine stone masonry, plastered floors, rich tombs, and sculpture. Most Classic Maya had a complex social structure with few sharp divisions between “levels” or classes of Maya society, despite the great contrast between the poorest huts and the richest royal palaces. (page 116)

In her essay “The Pre-Classic Maya Compound as the Focus of Social Identity”, from the book Social Patterns in Pre-Classic Mesoamerica, Julia Hendon states:

Studies of the distribution of artifacts from Middle-Late Pre-Classic domestic contexts at Cuello and from Late Pre-Classic ones at Cerros provide additional insight into the economic role of the household. Production, whether to fulfill subsistence needs or for exchange, is firmly embedded in the household. Furthermore, little evidence exists for the differentiation of households by occupation. Evidence for subsistence or specialized production is dispersed throughout the residential area and on a relatively small scale. (page 108)

Demarest’s aforementioned text discusses at length how the ancient Maya were able to become such a thriving culture, supporting surprisingly large population numbers. He believes that the secret to their success lay in how they used a variety of agricultural approaches to achieve the highest level of productivity with their rainforest environment. Included in that was the fact that the majority of households had their own intensive garden that provided for their basic needs. He also states that:

Traditional theories of the rise of complex society and the formation of states explain the development of elites as managers of critical aspects of the economy. Functionalist thinking dictates that if institutions of inequality in wealth and centralization of power exist, they must have arisen for a “practical” reason. Thus, early chiefs and archaic states are assumed to have been involved in aspects of the economy which required centralized management, such as construction and maintenance of hydraulic systems, management of trade in subsistence goods, and corporate organization of intensive agricultural systems. Yet, as we have seen, in the Maya lowlands one of the secrets of their rain forest adaptation was that it was decentralized – allowing local adaptations to microenvironmental conditions for each patch of ground. Farming families, drawing upon generations of knowledge of their soils, gradients, and vegetation, were able to apply any of a variety of intensive or extensive gardening or field systems to suit those local conditions. (page 146)

One of the most important distinctions between the elite and commoners was based in the consumption of luxury items directly related to religious rituals. Again from Demarest:

It was observed at the time of the Spanish Conquest in central Mexico that most such luxury goods and status-reinforcing symbols were limited by custom and formal sumptuary laws to the rulers and nobles, and to those who served them well as priests, warriors, or administrators. Similarly, Maya rulers in the Classic period would have controlled the acquisition and distribution of symbols of authority such as quetzal feathers, precious stones, and jaguar pelts. These items were probably exchanged between elites both regionally and at long distances as dowry, bride-price or gifts at royal marriages, coronations, pilgrimages, funerals, and major religious rituals. Exotic goods and fine polychrome ceramics were also probably regularly given as tribute to rulers by subordinate conquered centers and vassals. (page 161)

It is difficult to reconcile Jacob’s concern with the struggling poor with Mesoamerican history, as it is difficult to understand his concern with costly apparel when the primary source of class differentiation in ancient Mesoamerica was so directly tied to religious rituals and ceremonies. Certainly, in times of drought or flood, commoners would suffer more food shortage than the elite would, but the Book of Mormon consistently links neglect of the poor to times of general prosperity.

If a Mesoamerican city, like Kaminaljuyu, had the prerequisite population level and social complexity to demonstrate the beginnings of social classes, then it would have been one of the most advanced and powerful polities in ancient Mesaomerica.

If the elite leaders of one of the most advanced and powerful polities in ancient Mesoamerica were Judeo-Christian, then they would have influenced the course of social evolution in ancient Mesoamerica.

If there really were unnamed “others”, then Nephi would have neglected to mention the miraculous conversion of two groups of indigenous “others” in his record, and would have somehow convinced people living in an already successful settlement to accept his leadership.

If Jacob actually lived in an ancient Mesoamerican setting, then his expressed concern with the struggling poor had to nothing to do with their actual subsistence, but rather had to do with their inability to access luxury items connected to the pre-existing native religion, which they would not have even been practicing.

Zarahemla

In An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon, Dr. Sorenson offered Santa Rosa as the setting for Zarahemla. He makes this determination based on geographical requirements and the fact that Santa Rosa was the largest archaeological site on the upper Grijalva. It is not coincidental that he looked for the largest site; the polities described in the Book of Mormon, as I shall demonstrate, absolutely require the largest sites. Once again, I utilize Sorenson’s model due to the fact that it is so widely accepted among adherents to the Limited Geography Theory, as well as the fact that I know of no other actual suggested candidate. Deanne Matheny, in her essay “Does the Shoe Fit?,” from New Approaches to the Book of Mormon analyzed how well Santa Rosa fits the description of Santa Rosa. Some of the problems she noted were the lack of evidence of a wall or evidence of a wide-scale fire, reflecting its destruction at the time of the death of Jesus. In addition, the location Sorenson suggests for Sidom, Chiapa de Corzo, is actually a “richer and better-constructed ceremonial center”, which contradicts the actual content of the Book of Mormon which suggests that Zarahemla was a more significant center than Sidom. In fact, Zarahemla is depicted as one of the, if not the, most powerful Nephite city throughout the entire Book of Mormon text.

However, before addressing this particular point, there is another point of correspondence, according to Sorenson, that merits discussion. On page 156 of his book, Sorenson states:

A unique fact about the pattern of this settlement came to light in the excavations by the New World Archaeological Foundation. Archaeologist Donald Brockington, who helped excavate part of the largest pyramid mound in the center of Santa Rosa, found that in this structure, constructed in the first century BC, a layer of gravel had been laid which was then stuccoed over as a footing on which the mound was further built. The base gravel was of two completely different kinds, clearly brought there from two sources. The line separating the gravel areas was meticulously straight and was oriented approximately east and west, dividing the structure exactly in half. Furthermore, the site’s inhabitants lived in two oval-shaped zones separated from each other by a ceremonial zone oriented along the same line. Brockington concluded that the gravel had been laid down by two distinct social (perhaps linguistic) groups that occupied the site and that seem to have related to each other by formal ritual and political arrangements. Could these two groups have been the people of Zarahemla and the people of Nephi? Mosiah 25:4 supports the possibility: “And now all the people of Nephi were assembled together, and also all the people of Zarahemla, and they were gathered together in two bodies.” Also the “churches” Alma organized (Alma 25:19-21) were probably based on ethnic/residential units. If two distinct peoples did live in separate sections within the city, the arrangement would agree with later Mesoamerican practice.

At first glance, this appears to be a truly exciting “hit”. Yet, on closer inspection, there are problems that Matheny reveals:

A number of archaeological investigations have occurred at Santa Rosa in the state of Chiapas, Mexico – the site which Sorenson suggests comes closest to this profile suggested by the Book of Mormon. The first investigations there were carried out by Gareth W. Lowe in 1956. He noted that Santa Rosa appeared to be the largest Preclassic site on the Grijalva River between the site of Chiapa de Corzo and the Guatemalan frontier. More intensive fieldwork was carried out by the New World Archaeological Foundation in 1958. Located on the south side of the Grijalva River at its confluence with the Aguacate River, the site of Santa Rosa is composed of over forty earthen mounds. A cluster of twenty-eight mounds oriented along a general east-west line forms the central group. Delgado noted that there is little planning in the architectural layout other than the general east-west orientation. The central portion of the site includes an area about 500 meters north-south by about 800 meters east-west. Mound W is the tallest at the site, reaching a height of 14 meters. Mound S, a platform measuring 74 meters east-west by 80 meters north-south, is the largest.

The excavations at Santa Rosa were adequate, although by no means as extensive as those at Chiapa de Corzo and other sites in the region. These excavations consisted of seventeen trenches in mounds and twenty-nine stratigraphic tests pits. The excavations revealed six periods of prehistoric occupation at Santa Rosa and one brief period of historic occupation. Phase I is Middle Preclassic (800-600 BCE) with no known associated architecture; the ceramic distribution suggest that a zone of scattered houses existed along the Rio Aguacate. In Phase 2 (600-500 BCE), also Middle Perclassic, Brockington postulates from his study of ceramic distribution that there was a clustered village with a moiety or dual division indicated by two separate parallel areas of potsherds. The village was oriented in relation to a ceremonial structure (Mound V).

During phase 3 (500-50 BCE) there was further ceremonial construction (mounds G and W), and the two parallel areas of postherd concentrations continue although they are longer and wider, indicating that the basic Phase 2 arrangement continued but with greater population. Phase 4 (50 BCE- CE 200) was a time of cultural florescence at Santa Rosa with considerable construction in the ceremonial center. According to Brockington, the areas of potsherd concentrations seen in the previous two phases survive but have more complex patterns. He sees this as evidence that a basic moiety division continued to exist. As further evidence he mentions a layer of gravel atop Mound S at the site center. The gravel on each side of a median line was different and unmixed, suggesting that a separate group made each section.

Phase 5 begins about CE 200 and corresponds to the Early Classic period in the Maya area. Remains from this period are sparsely represented at Santa Rosa, and little construction can be assigned to this period. The population at the site seems to have declined significantly from Phase 4 times. Ceramic distribution is altered from earlier periods; a concentration now runs through the site center along a northeast-southwest line. This change probably indicates a break with earlier traditions. Brockington suggests that there may have been a hiatus of occupation between Phases 5 and 6. In Phase 6 (CE 800-1000) the settlement patter was similar to Phase 5 and the population was close to the smaller population of Phase 5. A long hiatus of occupation at the site followed Phase 6. It lasted until after the Spanish Conquest when the site was reoccupied for a short time, probably early in the nineteenth century.

This sentence in particular is problematic for this “hit”. “In Phase 2 (600-500 BCE), also Middle Perclassic, Brockington postulates from his study of ceramic distribution that there was a clustered village with a moiety or dual division indicated by two separate parallel areas of potsherds.” This crucial sentence actually reveals that the division which Dr. Sorenson points to as evidence of the two groups living in Zarahemla: the people of Nephi and the people already living in Zarahemla - actually long predated the arrival of Mosiah and his followers. Of course, this does not preclude the possibility of a THIRD group joining two already pre-existing groups at Zarahemla, but there is no evidence of a third group. It is extremely misleading to cite this as evidence supporting the Book of Mormon text when surely Dr. Sorenson had access to the actual information, which, according to Matheny, clearly states that the moiety division began in Phase 2, long before the arrival of Mosiah.

While this evidence does not lend support to the Book of Mormon, it does provide information on what kind of polity Santa Rosa actually was - a basic moiety. In her book, Maya Political Science, Prudence Rice offers information that helps clarify the issue.

During the Preclassic period, the Maya were at a chiefdom level of organization, with “political” aspects regulated by kin groups (moieties) having different responsibilities: one was “charged with internal affairs (land use, personal conflict) while the leader of the other group would handle external affairs (warfare, ritual). Through time – by the Late Classic – this was transformed by economic wealth into a more formal and less kinship-based, diarchical structure. Furthermore, “the divine origins of the dual rulers are clearly described in the Popol Vuh and other origin myths which reify the cognitive processes involved with this kind of political structure. (page 266)

Moiety organization rather than a chiefdom?

How do people manage to incorporate competing “big men” and their factions into a single, integrated society? On the Plains of western North America, the creative solutions developed to solve this problem included elaborate tribal rituals, tribal councils, rotating chiefships, medicine and war societies, and many other mechanisms of social integration. For us, the most pervasive feature of social structure of the San Jose phase of the Valley of Oaxaca is not a system of ranked descent groups but the duality of earth-and-sky symbolism. We suggest that this dual emphasis is inconsistent with social structure based on unilineal descent. Unilineal descent-group systems such as those of the Hopi, the Northwest Coast Indians, the Iroquois, and the Huron are much more fragmented, although some cases also have a dual grouping of descent groups, each with its own totemic symbolism, sacred objects, emblems, residences or clusters of houses, rituals, and even ritual structures. For example, the Hopi, with a turn-of-the-twentieth-century population of about 2,000 (the same as the Valley of Oaxaca in 1000 BC), were divided into about thirty clans. Some groupings of related clans (called phratries) occurred, but even combined in this way there were fourteen groupings rather than just two.

Social structure based on descent groups is likely to show greater diversity in symbolism than we have in the Valley of Oaxaca at 1000 BC. Given the wide distribution of earth-and-sky symbolism throughout Mesoamerica during the Early Horizon, it is difficult to see how it could have represented the same descent groups over such a large, culturally diverse area. This degree of uniformity seems unlikely since descent group systems in general tend to be variable from region to region. This discrepancy throws additional doubt on the hypothesis that the Valley of Oaxaca had a political structure based on descent reckoning. (pages 39, 40)

We lack the data that would allow us to understand the dual divisions in the Valley of Oaxaca of 1000 BC in detail, but the pervasive duality of earth-and-sky symbolism suggests that social integration was achieved through a principle of moiety opposition rather than through the centralized political offices of a chieftainship. A productive analogy for San Jose Mogote and the rest of the Valley of Oaxaca in 1000 BC might be found among ethnographically described Mesoamerican peasant communities with moiety structures. This pattern of dualistically partitioned communities (which in some cases links outlying dependent communities to partitions of a central one) is regarded by cultural anthropologists as a survival of an ancient aboriginal Mesoamerican social structure, because most of the communities still displaying it are those that were least influenced by Spanish imperial policies. In addition, there are no known Spanish ore more recent Mexican government policies that would have produced it.

These dual partitions or barrios generally are not composed of ranked unilineal descent groups such as the conical clan systems of chiefdoms. Indeed, Mesoamerica is not recognized as an area in which unilineal descent played an important role in aboriginal social structure. Furthermore, moiety structure and descent groups need not coexist; many known moiety systems (for example, the Tewa Pueblos of New Mexico) exist in the absence of descent group structure.

The dual partitions or barrios known ethnographically have primarily ceremonial and political functions. For example, among the Western Mixe speakers of the mountains just north and east of the Valley of Oaxaca, each barrio has its own saint as a key symbol and its charged with carrying out the associated saint’s-day ritual. In addition to ritual, governance of Mixe communities is structured by the dual system. An important feature of dual governance is that it prevents the concentration of power in any one group or household. At any one time the two most important Mixe officials, mayor and judge, must be of different barrios, and these offices are reversed between barrios annually. Lower officials involved in day-to-day governance rotates offices between barrios in alternate weeks. (pages 41,21)

This information demonstrates two important points: a polity organized as a moiety was likely at the chiefdom level of complexity, and that moieties were not uncommon in ancient Mesoamerica. Handbook to Life in the Ancient Maya World shares more information about chiefdoms:

In the Archaic Period and Early Preclassic Periods, Maya settlements on the Pacific coast appear to have become simple chiefdoms in which the shaman-ruler inherited the right to rule. Socially, these chiefdoms were stratified into elite lineages and commoners, as well as specialists, such as potters. There were no large public projects that would require the mobilization of the population. The central and northern areas, meanwhile, were more likely typified by egalitarian fishing villages, not chiefdoms.

In the Middle Preclassic Period, many of these chiefdoms on the Pacific littoral evolved into polities in which the chief ruled over numerous small villages from a capital city. But at the same time, other cities became far more complex urban centers, such as Nakbe in the Peten and Chalchuapa and La Blanca in the southern region. Based on the size of the monumental architecture at such urban centers, the elite class was increasingly wealthy and capable of organizing and directing the large workforce necessary to build masonry complexes. Some of the laborers must have been plaster specialists, stonecutters, and supervisors, suggesting increasing social specialization and political complexity. In the preindustrial world, the rise of complex states was accompanied by the building of such monumental public projects. Some of these cities may have reached the level of incipient states. (page 122)

While some polities in the Preclassic period did develop into the state level of complexity, Santa Rosa was not one of those polities. At the very most, Santa Rosa could have ruled over a few small nearby villages. In contrast, the text of the Book of Mormon presents a very different picture. In this essay, I will not address the actual population figures provided, due to the realistic possibility of authorial exaggeration. Instead, I will focus on the behaviors of the polity in question.

The first example is from Alma, chapter 8, around BC 82. Alma abdicated his position as chief judge in order to focus his full attention on spreading the church in the land of Zarahemla. One of the cities he visited was Ammonihah.

2 And thus ended the ninth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi.

3 And it came to pass in the commencement of the tenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi, that Alma departed from thence and took his journey over into the land of Melek, on the west of the river Sidon, on the west by the borders of the wilderness.

4 And he began to teach the people in the land of Melek according to the holy order of God, by which he had been called; and he began to teach the people throughout all the land of Melek.

5 And it came to pass that the people came to him throughout all the borders of the land which was by the wilderness side. And they were baptized throughout all the land;

6 So that when he had finished his work at Melek he departed thence, and traveled three days’ journey on the north of the land of Melek; and he came to a city which was called Ammonihah.

7 Now it was the custom of the people of Nephi to call their lands, and their cities, and their villages, yea, even all their small villages, after the name of him who first possessed them; and thus it was with the land of Ammonihah.

8 And it came to pass that when Alma had come to the city of Ammonihah he began to preach the word of God unto them.

9 Now Satan had gotten great hold upon the hearts of the people of the city of Ammonihah; therefore they would not hearken unto the words of Alma.

10 Nevertheless Alma labored much in the spirit, wrestling with God in mighty prayer, that he would pour out his Spirit upon the people who were in the city; that he would also grant that he might baptize them unto repentance.

11 Nevertheless, they hardened their hearts, saying unto him: Behold, we know that thou art Alma; and we know that thou art high priest over the church which thou hast established in many parts of the land, according to your tradition; and we are not of thy church, and we do not believe in such foolish traditions.

12 And now we know that because we are not of thy church we know that thou hast no power over us; and thou hast delivered up the judgment-seat unto Nephihah; therefore thou art not the chief judge over us.

13 Now when the people had said this, and withstood all his words, and reviled him, and spit upon him, and caused that he should be cast out of their city, he departed thence and took his journey towards the city which was called Aaron.

Verse twelve is extremely clear. The people who lived in the city of Ammonihah recognized the authority of the chief judge seated in Zarahemla. In this analysis, and those that will follow, it helps to visualize the distances involved.

Unfortunately, I do not know of any online map that shows the correlation of Book of Mormon cities to contemporary Central American cities, so to arrive at an understanding of the approximate distances involved required looking in several sources. I used Deanne Matheny’s map from her essay “Does the Shoe Fit?” and compared it to mapquest’s maps of Chiapas, Mexico. The approximate distance from Zarahemla to Ammonihah is 110 miles, as the crow flies (the distance would likely be even longer were I to factor reasonable walking paths). Therefore, Zarahemla’s chief judge was also the ruling authority figure for a city 110 miles away. In today’s modern world, that assertion does not cause concern. However, it causes a great deal of concern in regards to the history of ancient Mesoamerica.

Prudence Rice, in Maya Political Science – Time, Astronomy, and the Cosmos, states:

Analysis of spatial distances between Classic centers does not qualify as creating “models” of political organization, but it can reveal hierarchies of sites. Many authors have commented on the geographic spacing between Classic centers and its implications for political organization and administration. The distances between sites in the lowlands generally range from 12 to 20 miles, roughly the distance that could be walked in a day. Similar spacing of archaeological sites has been noted in other regions of the world, such as Europe and the Near East, and may represent a common logistical factor that facilitates administration in early states lacking vehicular or animal transport systems. (page 35)

At the apex is a large primary site with scores of plazas and a population in the tens of thousands, which dominated a territory of thousands of square km. These primary cities interacted with smaller secondary sites through royal marital ties and other alliances, perhaps economic, ritual, or military. Secondary sites were, in turn, surrounded by even smaller tertiary and quaternary level sites, perhaps dower houses and tiny farming homesteads were interspersed around all of these. (page 36)

There have been many methods applied by scholars to estimate the territorial size and populations of Maya states. For many decades we have relied upon indirect measures based on archaeological data about the distance between sites, the volume of construction in sites, or the number of monuments, plazas, or structures. More recently we have been able to shift to the historical record of the stone monuments and their inscriptions identifying the ruling of dynasties of the K’uhul Ajaw and their political alliances, rituals, and wars. Critical to such interpretations are the emblem-glyphs and titles described earlier. A few texts even mention tribute payments by vassal polities. With such detailed data, it is possible to be more specific about which centers were dominant powers in particular periods and to plot their political relationships. This epigraphic record portrays a very complex inter-elite political landscape throughout the Classic period.

As a minimal building block of Maya polities, the individual small polity, defined by a dynastic “holy lord” title or emblem-glyph, has been estimated by some scholars as being one or two days’ walking distances in diameter. Probably dynastic seats or “capitals” of such minimal polities were often about ten to thirty kilometers apart. We might speculate that this size for the realm of the average holy lord befits a “theater-state” in which the K’uhul Ajaaw’s personal presence and celebration of rites were central to the maintenance of his authority. For a time, epigraphers and archaeologists believed that the lowland Maya world in the Classic period consisted of only such small city-states interacting in a “peer polity” system. Now, with more detailed information, we can study the tremendous variability in Maya polities and the historical development of structurally distinct regional states and pan-lowland, but short-lived, alliances.

In the Late Classic, polities had populations varying from several thousand at most major cities to several hundred thousand around some great regional capitals such as Calakmul, Tikal, and Caracol. All such demographic estimates for sites, polities, or regions are highly speculative calculations based on house mound counts, ceramic dating of mounds, ethnographic models for the number of persons per structure, and, usually, a calculation factor for “invisible” houses that lacked clearly visible substructure mounds or platforms. Combined with the epigraphic evidence on specific political formations, the speculative demography and settlement evidence allow broad, very tentative characterizations of Classic Maya political history. (page 214)

There does exist some disagreement among Mesoamerican scholars in regards to the sizes of a ceremonial capital’s region, in terms of secondary and tertiary sites, which would describe the relationship between Zarahemla and Ammonihah. The following information from Foster’s Handbook to Life in the Ancient Maya World helps to delineate the possibilities.

Site rankings and regional mappings cannot by themselves define the boundaries of the Maya states. More information is needed to create such territorial boundaries and to determine the size and number of Maya political states. With no hieroglyphic inscriptions available for most regions and most periods of Maya civilization, archaeologists have utilized various models about central places to delineate political territories. Assuming that the first-rank cities, such as Tikal, Copan, and Coba, were at the center of their domains, the boundaries were projected by formulas based on information about the maximum distance for effective communication, transportation, and control.

The world systems theory, for example, argues that a pedestrian society like that of the Maya could cover only 20 kilometers (12.4 miles) in one day and that would be the farthest distance feasible for a secondary center. Such information has recently been used to delineate the Early Postclassic states of Chichen Itza, and it has successfully explained the carefully spaced towns between that capital city and its port at Isla Cerritos. It could also be used to explain El Mirador’s central location amid the series of paved roads to other Late Preclassic Period cities; the paved roads must have expedited travel between the capital and its second-tier cities.

For the Classic Period, mathematical models have provoked far more controversy, primarily because there has been less agreement over which cities should be considered capitals. Where emblem glyph information has been available, the advocates of city-states have argued that an emblem glyph indicates an independent polity, regardless of size, unless the hieroglyphic evidence indicates otherwise. For example, the small city of Pomona, usually considered a dependency of Palenque, had an emblem glyph, and in the eighth century it was independent of Palenque. The size difference between Pomona and Palenque was no more relevant to their political status in the eighth century, it is argued, than that of Holland and the United States in the 20^th century: All are autonomous. The regional states position has tended to elevate only the physically largest of cities with emblem glyphs to the status of a capital and has relied heavily on archaeological evidence as opposed to epigraphic decipherments. (page 130)

So while it may not be possible to categorically assert the relationships between all ancient Mesoamerican polities, scholars generally accept that secondary sites must be within one day’s walking distance of the capital center, in order for the capital center to exert any form of control over that site.

But there is some dispute over how large these polities became, which again is reflected in Foster’s summary:

Mathematical models and site rankings have not resolved basic issues about the size of Maya political states, and both the regional and city-state theories require some modification to fit more closely with the known archaeological facts. In the case of Chichen Itza and perhaps even El Mirador, the regional state theory seems to be supported by archaeological evidence. But some archaeologists believe that for most periods of Maya civilization, the Maya political states was inherently unstable and incapable of forming the large unitary sates envisioned under the regional state position. Such weak states are called peer polities, or segmentary states, and many argue that the city-state model better captures the fragmentation that results from such instability.

Regardless of their size, segmentary states have the same function. Tikal provided no more benefits to its populace, under this theory, than Nakum did, once it proclaimed its independence from Tikal. If a member of a dynasty were unhappy or if a competing noble lineage became dissatisfied, a splinter state could be formed with no loss…

Under the peer polity theory, Maya states were incapable of sustaining expansive regional states because the Maya ruler inspired loyalty to local dynasties, not large regional territories. Many small, weak states resulted, and their power fluctuated according to whether they had strong, militaristic rulers. According to this view, the Maya political system could not sustain political stability, and the Maya ruler had interest only in protecting his state, not in territorial expansion.

Although there is now considerable evidence that some Maya states were interested in territorial expansion, the peer polity theory has many followers. In fact, supporters of this theory argue that the amount of warfare among the many cities that were allegedly unified into regional states proves they were, in fact, fragmented and not integrated. Tikal was repeatedly attacked and defeated by the very cities it supposedly ruled as a regional state, Caracol being its most notable enemy. During the Late Classic Period, at least, such political shifts within states, whether city-states or regional states, were not unusual. (page 132)

By the 1990s, the increasingly refined readings of the hieroglyphic texts enabled Mayanists to understand far more about political relationships than permitted by the emblem glyphs alone. The new information suggests that there may have been immense political territories, as envisioned by proponents of the regional state theory. On the other hand, the texts suggest that such political territories, far from being integrated states, constituted only a confederacy of autonomous city-states. Any city-state’s autonomy, however, lasted only as long as the city-state cooperated with the confederacy; autonomy came with a price tag: tribute payments.

The decipherments demonstrate that dynastic rulers of cities with emblem glyphs were sometimes subservient to another. Some were members of the dynastic nobility that had been appointed to govern dependencies. Some rulers were installed under the auspices of a ruler not through dynastic ties but through conquest or marriage alliances. Yet these rulers, apparently subservient to a greater state, continued to fight wars, receive their own tribute to build immense palatial complexes, and take on all the appearances of autonomous city-states. These texts suggest that city-states combined into regional confederations, but the local rulers were permitted to act as if their authority had not been compromised.

The superstate theory is still being refined, but it suggests that the Maya city-states sometimes participated in large territorial confederacies controlled by one of the great military powers Tikal or Calakmul. Tikal and Calakmul were surrounded by extensive territories – at least 120 square kilometers (27 square miles) for Calakmul – in which no other city employed an emblem glyph. Their power may have originated from the vast territorial resources under their direct control, which included many bureaucratic tiers of other cities and towns. As such, they were powerful, independent city-states. The dynasties of these two great military states intermarried with dynasties at other states, conquered yet others and controlled the installation of their rulers, and forged a network of trade and tribute. In the process, these two states created large confederacies, or superstates.

The power of these states was such that smaller ones gained considerable prestige through the association. Also, the inscriptions suggest that the states participating in these confederations did not war with one another. Under this view, there were two different kinds of states in the Late Classic Period: somewhat autonomous city-states and larger superstates that included these semi-independent city-states. This might be roughly comparable to the current situation in Europe where many independent nations have joined the European Union, mostly for economic reasons, but also for the peace that it insures. In the case of the European Union, however, membership in the confederacy is completely voluntary. For the Maya superstates, military coercion was probably used as often as political persuasion. (page 133)

While the issue is far from settled among Mesoamerican scholars, for the sake of argument I shall assume the most generous territorial plan, that of the super-state, to evaluate the polities described in the Book of Mormon. The association described between Zarahemla and Ammonihah still falls far outside the most generous vision of Mesoamerican political power. Note, for example, the distances given for one of the most powerful and expansive Classic period polities, Calakmul – 27 square miles. Yet, as I stated earlier, as the crow flies, the simple distance from Zarahemla and Ammonihah is over 100 miles. The second fatal flaw is in regards to the fact that Ammonihah recognized the legal authority of the chief judge of Zarahemla. Even under the super-states theory, each city-state retained its own jurisdictional authority. There is simply no political system coherent with ancient Mesoamerica that could satisfactorily include the relationship between Zarahemla and Ammonihah, particularly when they were so far apart.

Of course, the relationship between these two cities is only one example of a larger problem encompassing almost the entire Book of Mormon story. Ammonihah is just one of many cities listed as being under some form of control of Zarahemla. Another example comes from the book of Alma, after the miraculous conversion of so many Lamanites:

1 Now it came to pass that when those Lamanites who had gone to war against the Nephites had found, after their many struggles to destroy them, that it was in vain to seek their destruction, they returned again to the land of Nephi.

2 And it came to pass that the Amalekites, because of their loss, were exceedingly angry. And when they saw that they could not seek revenge from the Nephites, they began to stir up the people in anger against their brethren, the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi; therefore they began again to destroy them.

3 Now this people again refused to take their arms, and they suffered themselves to be slain according to the desires of their enemies.

4 Now when Ammon and his brethren saw this work of destruction among those whom they so dearly beloved, and among those who had so dearly beloved them—for they were treated as though they were angels sent from God to save them from everlasting destruction—therefore, when Ammon and his brethren saw this great work of destruction, they were moved with compassion, and they said unto the king:

5 Let us gather together this people of the Lord, and let us go down to the land of Zarahemla to our brethren the Nephites, and flee out of the hands of our enemies, that we be not destroyed.

21 And it came to pass that the chief judge sent a proclamation throughout all the land, desiring the voice of the people concerning the admitting their brethren, who were the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi.

22 And it came to pass that the voice of the people came, saying: Behold, we will give up the land of Jershon, which is on the east by the sea, which joins the land Bountiful, which is on the south of the land Bountiful; and this land Jershon is the land which we will give unto our brethren for an inheritance.

23 And behold, we will set our armies between the land Jershon and the land Nephi, that we may protect our brethren in the land Jershon; and this we do for our brethren, on account of their fear to take up arms against their brethren lest they should commit sin; and this their great fear came because of their sore repentance which they had, on account of their many murders and their awful wickedness.

The significance of this section is that the city of Zarahemla apparently had enough control over the land of Jershon that they could “give” the converted Lamanites this land. Again, referring to Matheny’s map and the map of modern Chiapas, Jershon would have been approximately 160 miles away from Zarahemla. Once again, while Mesoamerican scholars may disagree on some points regarding the type of polities that existed in ancient Mesoamerica, it is not even within the realm of discussion to imagine one city having that type of control over another area 160 miles away. No Mesoamerican polity, during that time period, could have extended such control over such a large region, much less the moiety of Santa Rosa. The only feasible imperial candidate for such a feat would be the Aztecs, and, of course, they came on the scene a thousand years too late.

Additional verses provide more information about the power Zarahemla exerted. Later in the book of Alma, the Lamanites wage war against the Nephites, and Moroni is at the head of the Nephite army, around BC 67. Note the various Nephite cities mentioned in this campaign, in addition to the aforementioned Jershon, on the coast:

22 Behold, now it came to pass that they durst not come against the Nephites in the borders of Jershon; therefore they departed out of the land of Antionum into the wilderness, and took their journey round about in the wilderness, away by the head of the river Sidon, that they might come into the land of Manti and take possession of the land; for they did not suppose that the armies of Moroni would know whither they had gone.

1 And now it came to pass in the eleventh month of the nineteenth year, on the tenth day of the month, the armies of the Lamanites were seen approaching towards the land of Ammonihah.

2 And behold, the city had been rebuilt, and Moroni had stationed an army by the borders of the city, and they had cast up dirt round about to shield them from the arrows and the stones of the Lamanites; for behold, they fought with stones and with arrows.

12 Therefore they retreated into the wilderness, and took their camp and marched towards the land of Noah, supposing that to be the next best place for them to come against the Nephites.

13 For they knew not that Moroni had fortified, or had built forts of security, for every city in all the land round about; therefore, they marched forward to the land of Noah with a firm determination; yea, their chief captains came forward and took an oath that they would destroy the people of that city.

14 But behold, to their astonishment, the city of Noah, which had hitherto been a weak place, had now, by the means of Moroni, become strong, yea, even to exceed the strength of the city Ammonihah.

15 And now, behold, this was wisdom in Moroni; for he had supposed that they would be frightened at the city Ammonihah; and as the city of Noah had hitherto been the weakest part of the land, therefore they would march thither to battle; and thus it was according to his desires.

1 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.

2 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.

3 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.

4 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.

5 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.

6 Thus Moroni did prepare strongholds against the coming of their enemies, round about every city in all the land.

7 And it came to pass that Moroni caused that his armies should go forth into the east wilderness; yea, and they went forth and drove all the Lamanites who were in the east wilderness into their own lands, which were south of the land of Zarahemla.

8 And the land of Nephi did run in a straight course from the east sea to the west.

9 And it came to pass that when Moroni had driven all the Lamanites out of the east wilderness, which was north of the lands of their own possessions, he caused that the inhabitants who were in the land of Zarahemla and in the land round about should go forth into the east wilderness, even to the borders by the seashore, and possess the land.

10 And he also placed armies on the south, in the borders of their possessions, and caused them to erect fortifications that they might secure their armies and their people from the hands of their enemies.

11 And thus he cut off all the strongholds of the Lamanites in the east wilderness, yea, and also on the west, fortifying the line between the Nephites and the Lamanites, between the land of Zarahemla and the land of Nephi, from the west sea, running by the head of the river Sidon—the Nephites possessing all the land northward, yea, even all the land which was northward of the land Bountiful, according to their pleasure.

12 Thus Moroni, with his armies, which did increase daily because of the assurance of protection which his works did bring forth unto them, did seek to cut off the strength and the power of the Lamanites from off the lands of their possessions, that they should have no power upon the lands of their possession.

13 And it came to pass that the Nephites began the foundation of a city, and they called the name of the city Moroni; and it was by the east sea; and it was on the south by the line of the possessions of the Lamanites.

14 And they also began a foundation for a city between the city of Moroni and the city of Aaron, joining the borders of Aaron and Moroni; and they called the name of the city, or the land, Nephihah.

15 And they also began in that same year to build many cities on the north, one in a particular manner which they called Lehi, which was in the north by the borders of the seashore.

17 And in these prosperous circumstances were the people of Nephi in the commencement of the twenty and first year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi.

18 And they did prosper exceedingly, and they became exceedingly rich; yea, and they did multiply and wax strong in the land.

I could demonstrate my point with even more citations from the Book of Mormon, but these should be adequate. The capital city of Zarahemla exerted a great deal of control over the other polities that extended throughout the entire region demonstrated earlier on the map showing the general region in question. Again, utilizing mapquest along with Matheny’s map, I roughly approximate the area under Nephite control to be 75,000 square miles.

Santa Rosa aside, there is simply no ancient Mesoamerican polity that had this type of power. It rivals that of the Aztec Empire, which stretched over 80,000 square miles. Regardless of whatever disagreements Mesoamerican scholars may have regarding super-states versus peer polities, not a single one suggests that such an empire existed during the Book of Mormon time frame.

If Zarahemla exerted the type of control over a region as large as depicted in the Book of Mormon, then it would have been an empire to rival the stature of the much later Aztec Empire…but still left not a single trace of its existence.

Warfare

Warfare is significant in the Book of Mormon, as it was in ancient Mesoamerica. Believers sometimes consider this a “hit” for the Book of Mormon, due to the fact that so many Mesoamerican scholars used to believe that the Maya were a nation of peaceful, calendar-obsessed priests and commoners. However, this was a view that was largely propagated by Sylvanus Morley and Eric Thompson in the 1940s and 50s. During Joseph Smith’s time period, the common belief was in a warlike ancient people comprised of two groups, one civilized and one barbaric. From The View of the Hebrews, a text often cited as a possible source for the Book of Mormon, page 139:

No wonder these questions should arise in the highly philosophical mind of this arch investigator. Had he known the present theory of their having descended from ancient Israel; it seems as though his difficulties might at once have obtained relief. These accounts appear most strikingly to favour our hypothesis. Here we account for all the degrees of civilization and improvements existing in past ages among the natives of those regions. How perfectly consentaneous are these facts stated, with the scheme presented in the preceding pages, that Israel brought into this new continent a considerable degree of civilization; and the better part of them long laboured to maintain it. But others fell into the hunting and consequent savage state; whose barbarous hordes invaded their more civilized brethren, and eventually annihilated most of them

However, aside from the fact that both sources present a civilization plagued by warfare, many problematic differences exist between the two. These differences are often related, in nature, to the limited extended regional control ancient Mesoamerican polities were able to enact. Some differences are simple anachronisms, such as bows and arrows, or metal breastplates. Other differences are reflective of the actual context of the text, and cannot be dismissed as a translation artifact. One of those differences has to do with what type of warfare was practiced in ancient Mesoamerica, during the Book of Mormon period, versus the type of warfare described in the Book of Mormon.

During one particular violence-ridden period in the Book of Mormon, the Nephites expressed one of their primary concerns:

24 Behold, we followed the camp of the Amlicites, and to our great astonishment, in the land of Minon, above the land of Zarahemla, in the course of the land of Nephi, we saw a numerous host of the Lamanites; and behold, the Amlicites have joined them;

25 And they are upon our brethren in that land; and they are fleeing before them with their flocks, and their wives, and their children, towards our city; and except we make haste they obtain possession of our city, and our fathers, and our wives, and our children be slain.

The Nephites make their concern plain: they worry that the Lamanites will take possession of their city, and kill its inhabitants. In fact, they have good reason for such a concern, as, in fact, the Lamanites often did just that:

22 Behold, it came to pass that while Moroni was thus breaking down the wars and contentions among his own people, and subjecting them to peace and civilization, and making regulations to prepare for war against the Lamanites, behold, the Lamanites had come into the land of Moroni, which was in the borders by the seashore.

23 And it came to pass that the Nephites were not sufficiently strong in the city of Moroni; therefore Amalickiah did drive them, slaying many. And it came to pass that Amalickiah took possession of the city, yea, possession of all their fortifications.

24 And those who fled out of the city of Moroni came to the city of Nephihah; and also the people of the city of Lehi gathered themselves together, and made preparations and were ready to receive the Lamanites to battle.

25 But it came to pass that Amalickiah would not suffer the Lamanites to go against the city of Nephihah to battle, but kept them down by the seashore, leaving men in every city to maintain and defend it.

26 And thus he went on, taking possession of many cities, the city of Nephihah, and the city of Lehi, and the city of Morianton, and the city of Omner, and the city of Gid, and the city of Mulek, all of which were on the east borders by the seashore.

27 And thus had the Lamanites obtained, by the cunning of Amalickiah, so many cities, by their numberless hosts, all of which were strongly fortified after the manner of the fortifications of Moroni; all of which afforded strongholds for the Lamanites.

28 And it came to pass that they marched to the borders of the land Bountiful, driving the Nephites before them and slaying many.

29 But it came to pass that they were met by Teancum, who had slain Morianton and had headed his people in his flight.

30 And it came to pass that he headed Amalickiah also, as he was marching forth with his numerous army that he might take possession of the land Bountiful, and also the land northward.

31 But behold he met with a disappointment by being repulsed by Teancum and his men, for they were great warriors; for every man of Teancum did exceed the Lamanites in their strength and in their skill of war, insomuch that they did gain advantage over the Lamanites.

1 And behold, now it came to pass that our next object was to obtain the city of Manti; but behold, there was no way that we could lead them out of the city by our small bands. For behold, they remembered that which we had hitherto done; therefore we could not decoy them away from their strongholds.

2 And they were so much more numerous than was our army that we durst not go forth and attack them in their strongholds.

3 Yea, and it became expedient that we should employ our men to the maintaining those parts of the land which we had regained of our possessions; therefore it became expedient that we should wait, that we might receive more strength from the land of Zarahemla and also a new supply of provisions.

4 And it came to pass that I thus did send an embassy to the governor of our land, to acquaint him concerning the affairs of our people. And it came to pass that we did wait to receive provisions and strength from the land of Zarahemla.

5 But behold, this did profit us but little; for the Lamanites were also receiving great strength from day to day, and also many provisions; and thus were our circumstances at this period of time.

6 And the Lamanites were sallying forth against us from time to time, resolving by stratagem to destroy us; nevertheless we could not come to battle with them, because of their retreats and their strongholds.

7 And it came to pass that we did wait in these difficult circumstances for the space of many months, even until we were about to perish for the want of food.

8 But it came to pass that we did receive food, which was guarded to us by an army of two thousand men to our assistance; and this is all the assistance which we did receive, to defend ourselves and our country from falling into the hands of our enemies, yea, to contend with an enemy which was innumerable.

31 And those cities which had been taken by the Lamanites, all of them are at this period of time in our possession; and our fathers and our women and our children are returning to their homes, all save it be those who have been taken prisoners and carried off by the Lamanites.

32 But behold, our armies are small to maintain so great a number of cities and so great possessions.

5 And it came to pass that while Moroni was thus making preparations to go against the Lamanites to battle, behold, the people of Nephihah, who were gathered together from the city of Moroni and the city of Lehi and the city of Morianton, were attacked by the Lamanites.

6 Yea, even those who had been compelled to flee from the land of Manti, and from the land round about, had come over and joined the Lamanites in this part of the land.

7 And thus being exceedingly numerous, yea, and receiving strength from day to day, by the command of Ammoron they came forth against the people of Nephihah, and they did begin to slay them with an exceedingly great slaughter.

8 And their armies were so numerous that the remainder of the people of Nephihah were obliged to flee before them; and they came even and joined the army of Moroni.

9 And now as Moroni had supposed that there should be men sent to the city of Nephihah, to the assistance of the people to maintain that city, and knowing that it was easier to keep the city from falling into the hands of the Lamanites than to retake it from them, he supposed that they would easily maintain that city.

10 Therefore he retained all his force to maintain those places which he had recovered.

16 For when Moronihah saw that they did repent he did venture to lead them forth from place to place, and from city to city, even until they had regained the one-half of their property and the one-half of all their lands.

18 And it came to pass in the sixty and second year of the reign of the judges, that Moronihah could obtain no more possessions over the Lamanites.

19 Therefore they did abandon their design to obtain the remainder of their lands, for so numerous were the Lamanites that it became impossible for the Nephites to obtain more power over them; therefore Moronihah did employ all his armies in maintaining those parts which he had taken.

Just in case it is not explicit enough, note the passage in Alma 58 that states when the Nephites took back possession of their cites, their fathers, wives, and children returned to their homes. Obviously, in Book of Mormon warfare, Lamanites and Nephites would “take possession” of cities in a manner that resulted in the inhabitants fleeing the city, or being killed, and in a manner that would allow them to return to their homes, once regaining “possession”. So it should be clear that this is a physical possession of a city, and not simply a tributary relationship, which is also sometimes described in the Book of Mormon and has a fundamentally different nature.

22 And all this he did, for the sole purpose of bringing this people into subjection or into bondage. And behold, we at this time do pay tribute to the king of the Lamanites, to the amount of one half of our corn, and our barley, and even all our grain of every kind, and one half of the increase of our flocks and our herds; and even one half of all we have or possess the king of the Lamanites doth exact of us, or our lives.

A tributary relationship is just about the only “match” between Book of Mormon warfare and Mesoamerican warfare. However, the nature of the tribute is problematic. From Demarest’s The Ancient Maya:

Another changing aspect of the Maya economy regards tribute from subordinate centers conquered in warfare or affiliated to major centers by alliance or voluntary association. At the elite level, we are able to identify such tribute in fine ceramics, exotic goods, and artifacts with the help of hieroglyphic inscriptions, as well as style and compositional sourcing of artifacts. Yet there are some indications in Classic Maya inscriptions that warfare tribute was more extensive, involving textiles, perishable artifacts, and possibly those commodities that could be easily shipped, such as woodwork, cacao beans, salt and pelts. As warfare increased in frequency and intensity during the Classic period, the role of such tribute would have gained importance in regional and interregional economies.

At the local level, Maya farmers, craftspeople, and local leaders paid tribute to the ruling elites in subsistence support, corvee labor, crafts, and raw materials to their ruler’s extended families, courts, and attached specialists. These courts monopolized (via sumptuary laws) various products and benefited from a higher portion of meat and protein in their diets. Indeed, through strontium analyses of bones, archaeologists have been able to identify “palace diets” characteristic of the members of the court and their attached specialists and retainers.

Archaeologists are still unable to specify most cases what the nonelites obtained in return for such tribute. In some cases warfare and coercion may have been the motive for tithing, but this appears to have been a secondary consideration at best. The question of elite reciprocal contribution to the general population for tribute and labor leads us to the broader, more difficult question of the role of rulers and elites in the Maya economy. (page 172)

Aside from that minor match, the majority of the warfare described in the Book of Mormon did not take place in ancient Mesoamerica during the specified time period. There is some disagreement among Mesoamerican scholars in regards to the exact nature of warfare, in particular, whether or not commoners were involved to any serious extent, or whether it was largely conducted between elites. However, there is no disagreement on this point: during the specified Book of Mormon time period, polities did not go to war and take physical “possession” of the city, forcing inhabitants to flee or be killed.

Warfare was another area in which Maya rulers had a managerial role, yet again the role generally focused on the ideology of political legitimation. Warfare had an early impact on the development of Maya society, probably as a pressure enabling chiefs to extend their power beyond kinship-defined systems. Yet its direct economic impact, positive or negative, appears relatively small when compared to its impact on central Mexico, Peru, or Bolivia (as described by other contributors to this volume). Warfare became less restricted during the last part of the Classic period and in situations of conflict across ethnic boundaries, but epigraphy and archaeology show that defeat in warfare did not usually lead to political domination of the defeated center. For example, it has been demonstrated that Quirigua’s famous defeat of Copan (celebrated in many monuments) did not lead to territorial control of Copan by Quirigua or to an economic decline at Copan itself. Indeed, after this defeat, Copan went on to its greatest period of monumental construction. The same occurred after Tikal’s defeat in AD 678 by Dos Pilas. Tikal’s next king, Ruler A, was not a vassal of Dos Pilas, rather, he led Tikal into its greatest period of florescence.

Throughout most of the Preclassic and Classic periods, warfare was ritualized and culturally constrained to varying degrees. In most cases the spoils of war were probably sacrificial victims, the status reinforcement of the victory itself, access to some captives as slaves, and some amount of tribute (primarily in nonsubsistence exotic goods). As Freidel has pointed out, warfare was usually closer in its effects to interdynastic marriage than to territorial absorption; in other words, it was another form of elite interaction, alliance, and information exchange. Moreover, like all of the other forms of elite interaction, Maya warfare as deeply embedded in ritual and religious institutions. Like coronations, period-endings, births, funerals, and other royal events, warfare provided an occasion for the elite visits and elaborate public rituals that helped to hold the Classic Maya world together. Recent syntheses of deciphered Maya texts have detailed the elaborate web of ritual events and contacts between elites.

Still, the economic and political impact of Maya warfare in some cases could be quite significant, especially in the cases of the territorial expansion of conquest states like those of Tikal, Dos Pilas, and Caracol. Yet even these largest of Maya conquest states controlled extended territories for less than a century before the retracted to “standard” size for Maya polities. In most cases the political or economic gains from warfare came indirectly from ideological effects – the enhancement of the prestige of the victorious ruler and his lineage. For example, the sacrifice of Copan’s high king enhanced Quirigua’s prestige, legitimated the power of its dynasty, and increased the local power of its rulers over their own populace. The higher status of Quirigua’s dynasty was ensured by the public ritual of royal captive sacrifice repeatedly advertised in public monumental sculptures and inscriptions. Thus, the dynasty strengthened its power over the populace and increased its ability to draw on the labor and loyalty of the citizens – an ideological effect that led to very concrete material gains. The same occurred in the case of the defeat of Tikal by Dos Pilas in AD 678. Tikal was not dominated, nor did it lapse into deeper decline, but the prestige of Dos Pilas’ Ruler I was greatly enhanced by the victory, which was celebrated in many stone monuments. The increased prestige helped to launch this young center on its own campaign of expansionism. (page 143)

As noted above, it is possible that, at times, the impact of warfare could be significant on the inhabitants. So the next question is one of timing. At what period in ancient Mesoamerican history did this type of “territorial expansion” warfare take place? From Rice’s Maya Political Science:

It has long been known that central Mexico- most probably the enormous site of Teotihuacan – played an important but as yet undefined role in the Maya area during the Early Classic period. Early attention focused on what was presumed to be a key interaction with Kaminaljuyu in the Maya highlands, but more recent interest has been stimulated by epigraphic evidence of an “arrival event” of Teotihuacanos at Tikal on January 14, 378. On that day, acccording to David Stuart’s reconstruction, a group of central Mexicans, including Siyaj K’ak’ or K’ak Sij (Fire Born, formerly known by the nickname “Smoking Frog”), Yax Nun Ayuin I (First ? crocodile, formerly Curl Snout), and Spearthrower Owl arrived at Tikal. On this same day the Tikal ruler Cahk Tok Ich’ak I “entered the water”, which is presumed to mean that he died. Stuart sees Siyaj K’ak’ as a military leader sent by Spearthrower Owl to overthrow Tikal’s dynasty, consolidate power, and serve as a regent for a new ruler, Spearthrower Owl’s young son, Yax Nun Ayin I. Yax Nun Ayin I was installed on a day 5 Kab’an 10 Yaxk’in (September 11, 379), and on his accession monument, Stela 4, he wears a necklace of large shells and his face peers out from the maw of a huge feathered jaguar (?) head headdress. Above him a long-nosed deity head gazes downward….

What has gone relatively unnoticed in this discussion of the 378 event is the substantial presence of central Mexicans in Tikal for more than a century before this “arrival” and the relative lack of evidence for dynastic disruption in the following century. With respect to the former, a key variable in identifying central Mexican contact or influence outside the Mexican plateau is the presence of talud-tablero architectural facades. This term refers to the two-part construction of the tiers of a structural platform, in which a sloping batter (talud) is topped by a rectangular, bordered panel (tablero). At Tikal, talud-tablero architecture is first evidence in Mundo Perdido around AD 250-300, about a century before the 378 “arrival” of central Mexicans in Tikal. Interestingly, it makes its earliest appearance in connection with modifications to the radial temple in the E-group and shows up slightly later (AD 350-378) on three platforms in residential Group 6C-XVI, a short distance to the south of Mundo Perdido.

Despite the evident importance of these central Mexican dignitaries in the lowlands, continuities with prearrival canons of dynastic legitimation were maintained. While subsequent Tikal rulers traced descent from Spearthrower Owl in the male line, they married Tikal women of presumably comparable high-status royal lines, perhaps from the Jaguar Paw dynasty…

The imagery on stelae erected by Tikal’s post-entrada rulers is purely Mayan in concept, style and execution….

Rather than being a formal military takeover of Tikal, this Teotihuacan arrival was clearly only one event in several centuries of interactions between central Mexico and the lowland Maya. (page 102)

In their book A Forest of Kings, Schele and Freidel emphasized this Tikal event, speculating that it heralded a new type of conquest warfare. However, evidence since the writing of that book seems to point towards the above conclusion, rather than a territorial war. This is unfortunate for some Book of Mormon scholars, who have attempted to make a connection between the final Book of Mormon wars and the introduction of a new, devastating type of warfare with the Tikal event.

I think the increase in militarism seen in the Book of Mormon fits the Maya pattern of conflict until the end. At that point there is a shift in the way warfare is waged and there is a shift from domination to destruction. Historically this follows the Teotihuacano entrada into Tikal. I suspect that the larger and more powerful city states (such as Tikal) were the earlier target of Teotihuacan, and the wars at the end of the Book of Mormon represent expansion wars after the alliances were forged with the more powerful cities.

This is no longer consistent with the current scholarly thought in regards to the “Tikal event”. Moreover, there was never any evidence that, had Teotihuacan even conquered Tikal, which is in dispute, that they immediately targeted other polities spread throughout the region. (Tikal is around 216 miles from Santa Rosa/Zarahemla.) What there is evidence of is the introduction of a new type of warfare in ancient Mesoamerica. Once again, this is not categorically accepted by all Mesoamerican scholars. Much depends upon the interpretation of certain glyphs. One view is represented by Ross Hassig, as noted by Rice in Maya Political Science.

Ross Hassig’s study of warfare in Mesoamerica provides a measured overview of lowland Maya data. He notes that among the Classic Maya, warfare was primarily “aristocratic,” involving small numbers of soldiers who were probably nobles (to judge from their sumptuous attire), and highly individual or one-on-one, suggested by hand-held rather than long-range weapons. True warfare would have been limited, he believes, by the tropical forest environment hindering massive troop movements, by the lack of easily portable foodstuffs (eg, tortillas), and by seasonal rainfall cycles making trails impassable for many months. In short, Hassig’s observations support the idea that Maya warfare was primarily a matter of quick raids and highly symbolic conflict intended for “internal political purposes, such as validating rulers” through acquisition of captives, rather than territorial conquest to gain control over resources. Similarly, Culbert in summarizing the role of warfare in Maya political history, emphasizes that most captives are unnamed or “unprovenienced” as to home site, suggesting that they may not have been important individuals. (page 259)

It is not unreasonable to argue that the role of warfare in Late Classic lowland Maya society has been exaggerated in recent assessments. Many of the new glyph decipherments have yielded words that are sufficiently general that they could be interpreted less violently in other arenas of competition or combat, such as the ballgame. Also, many of the relationships between supposedly warring sites are difficult to explain in the context of warfare as territorial conquest. According to Quirigua Stela E, K’ak’ Tiliw came to rule Quirigua in 724 under the supervisions of (u kab’iy) the very man he subsequently killed, Copan’s ruler Waxaklajun Ub’aj K’awil. In 738 Quirigua “defeated” Copan, but none of the Quirigua accounts of this event refer to it by using a term for war.

In another example, Schele describes the lords of Tikal and Calakmul as “deadly enemies.” But there are no recorded wars between these great Classic sites after Tikal’s defeat of Calakmul in 695, and their rulers were able to come together – presumably peaceably – with other lords on state occasions, as seen on Copan Stela A. The notion of deep and enduring hostilities between Tikal and Calakmul is belied by the latter site’s material culture affiliations. During the Late Classic period, Calakmul’s architecture is of Peten style and its pottery complex is a full member of the Tikal-centric Tepeu sphere, ceramic spheres traditionally interpreted as indicative of some degree of economic integration. If the two sites were in protracted wars of conquest, it is hard to imagine why they would share material symbols displaying social identities, as well as let traders bringing such utilitarian goods as pottery pass through embattled territory.

Evidence for destruction of sites and monuments, which has been an important contributor to scenarios of widespread Classic warfare, could instead represent the termination rituals that accompanied the end of the seating of the may in a particular city. (page 271)

At the same time, these Late Classic “wars” could be analogous to the “wars of proof” carried out by Aztec kings in order to seize captives as evidence of cosmic sanction for their ruler. As Martin and Grube remark, “Although bloodline was their main claim to legitimacy, candidates still had to prove themselves in war. A bout of captive-taking often preceded elevation to office.” In this light, the Bonampak raids may have been for the purpose of taking captives in preparation for accession to office. Whatever the proximate or ultimate causes of the Late Classic wars, I see them as forms of ritual conflict designed to demonstrate calendrical-cosmological legitimation of the right to rule, specifically the seating of may and k’atuns. Hassig’s assessment of lowland Maya warfare as being largely ritualized, one-on-one combat, is generally correct in terms of scale, then, but not for all the right reasons.

Much of the vocabulary interpreted as warfare could refer to the ritual conflict symbolized in the ballgame. Throughout Mesoamerica, the ballgame was increasingly politicized and tied to warfare in the Classic period, and this certainly appears to hold true in the central Maya area. The captives displayed on monuments and in ballgame scenes were sometimes among the governing elites of important cities, and the permanent and public display of their defeat on stone monuments seem to be of paramount significance. In addition, the texts of Yaxchilan’s ballgame panels identify associated sacrifices as ‘conquests”. In such cases, the battle of the ballgame might have been the context of conquest (ajal) and the bound captive the actual or symbolic vanquished opponent in a ballgame contest, bound for sacrifice. These and other textual references to combat, battle, and conquest could therefore be interpreted in the context of symbolic and ritualized contests between structurally mandated “opponents” rather than as literal warfare. Here the obvious analogy is to the Popol Vuh, in which the Hero Twins conquered the evil Lords of the Underworld in a ballgame contest. (page 272)

In his essay “Warfare in the American Southwest and Mesoamerica: Parallels and Contrasts”, contained in the book Ancient Mesoamerican Warfare, Steven LeBlanc directly addresses this controversy:

In the Southwest, did escalating warfare increase the social position of successful warriors potentially leading to their attaining some form of social control or dominance? In Mesoamerica, was it ever the case that the elite battled over the commoners, or did they battle with them? It seems that this question is at the heart of the debate characterized by the differences in positions of Freidel and Webster although by no means is it restricted to them. Webster accuses many Mayanists of clinging to a tradition of a lack of real war among the Maya, arguing that lip service is paid to evidence of war but that conflict is seen as ritually based, with inconsequential impact on the social systems. The model is elites fighting with elites almost as a game while the rest of the population is unaffected and uninvolved. Freidel et al.counter that researchers have long recognized warfare in the Maya area and do see it as significant.

Webster makes a good case that much of the discussion of Maya warfare seems to be couched in terms of little more than boys playing games. It is inconceivable that warfare was no more than trying to attain captives for sacrifice. Worldwide, warfare at this level of social complexity can have no short-term territorial gains, and it can be couched in terms of revenge, honor, and the like in the short run. But over the long term, death rates are very high, and resources do change hands. This is one of Keeley’s major points. Once one looks closely, Mesoamerican warfare also involves economic and ecological factors.

There were intensely competing polities, with clear conquest of some polities and repeated suggestions of outsider takeover of other polities. Subsequently, regional abandonments occurred, followed by a decline in social complexity and a decline in regional population. That warfare is not intimately involved as either a cause or a major factor in this process is unlikely. That is, while Freidel and his colleagues and Webster seem to be at odds about how “real” Maya warfare was, no one seems to have characterized how it actually functioned. Until we know that, it is hard to see how it relates to other aspects of the social system.

A critical issue is whether Mesoamerican warfare was restricted to elites fighting with elites. It must be remembered that Homer describes the exploits of the elite during the Trojan War, but large numbers of commoners were involved. A likely scenario for Mesoamerican warfare is that a large segment of society was involved, and the elites were involved as both champion fighters (in the Homeric sense) and military commanders. This model of Mesoamerican warfare would have large numbers of commoners, not trained as professionals, taking part and being killed. Over time, professional soldiers may have developed, but is there really any evidence that armies were comprised almost entirely of professionals? For example, the Aztec army was highly trained and well organized, but it comprised far too many men to have consisted of only elites. Ross Hassig touches on these issues, but no coherent, testable model of just who was doing the fighting has yet been put forth. Intriguing relevant evidences comes from the Vanderbilt Petexbatun project. This long-term project focused on warfare more directly than perhaps any in the history of archaeology. They found that there was significant evidence for warfare prior to 760 AD, but there were no fortifications. They were then rapidly implemented (initially with a noticeable lack of skill). They were so extensive that they could not have been defended by just the elite. The implication is that prior to 760 AD, warfare did not involve attacking political centers and may well have been elite based, champion-type fighting, but after AD 760, the nature of the warfare changed, and everyone became involved. Despite such tantalizing evidence, the lack of knowledge of who was doing the fighting would seem to be the most glaring gap in our understanding of Mesoamerican warfare and one that has the most serious implications for the Southwest, as is considered next. (page 295)

Even among those who take the stance that territorial conquest warfare, in which one polity actually conquered, and took possession of, another polity, they seem to agree on two points that are in major conflict with the Book of Mormon. One is that these conquest wars did not take place until after approximately 378 AD. In addition, this type of war did not normally result in the inhabitants of the conquered polity fleeing or being killed, but rather that the victorious polity installed a new leader who was under the control of the conquering polity. This new leader could be, and often was, actually from the conquered polity.

The magical nature of warfare did not change with the fourth century inception of Venus-Tlaloc war and the victory of Tikal over Wasaktun, but its specific manifestations and political objectives did. Before the fourth century, we believe, warfare was not the wholesale slaughter that it later became. It was fought by rigidly observed codes – the intent not to destroy neighboring kingdoms but to take captives for sacrifice. Long before the Teotihuacan allies of Tikal arrived on the scene, the Maya War Jaguars had prowled for victims on the open savannas of the lowlands. It was the changing of the rules of conduct and the intent of war associated with the new imagery that eventually led to the downfall of Maya kingship. We believe these new rules opened the way to a “Warring States” phase of lowland society that lasted unabated for five centuries. At the outset, however, the Maya kings who watched the new kind of war in Peten and who embraced the flint-shield, the War Tlaloc, and Waxaklahun-Ubah-Kan as their own might have regarded the change in tactics as rational., They could not have realized that they were speeding their own eventual decline.

We suspect that the harnessing of Teotihuacan military statecraft to that of the Maya unleased a slow-moving, ever-widening cycle of conflict and destruction. From what we can discern in the painted halls and stone friezes of Teotihuacan, their version of the Waxaklahun-Ubah-Kan served the government rather than particular individual lords or families. In the case of the Maya, this great symbol became identified with mighty and ambitious individuals. The Tikal king Great-Jaguar-Paw, who first used this monster and its flint-shield talisman, took the spear-thrower-shield tok’-pakal emblem as his personal title.

The grafting of the symbol of an imperialistic state onto the war practices of individual Maya kings evidently escalated the feuds between their ancient dynasties into a war encompassing all the great kingdoms, a world war – at least in their terms. The ninth-century collapse of the southern lowland Classic kingdoms was preceded by a delicate balance of power that had lasted for hundreds of years. During that time the many kingdoms and dynasties had woven themselves into a treacherous web of marriages and alliances. These grand alliances bought brief respites of support, security, and peace at a very heavy price – the perpetual obligation to engage the enemies of enemies in war. They lived by the tragic old adage we have seen played out in our own world time and again: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Or perhaps the reciprocal is even more to the point: the friend of my enemy is my enemy. It was not the success of war but the failure of peace that drove the Maya elite to chaos. (page 323)

In their essay “Texts and Contexts in Maya Warfare: A Brief Consideration of Epigraphy and Archaology at Caracol, Belize”, in the book Ancient Mesoamerican Warfare, Diane and Arlen Chase state:

A number of hieroglyphs are associated with Maya warfare. While there is some variation in emphasis and use of these glyphs among sites in the southern lowlands, four major warfare-related hieroglyphs enjoyed widespread and fairly consistent usage over time and space. Other glyphs have also been suggested as having war-related meanings, such as “shell kin” and “flint and shield”, but the interactions implied in texts that use such hieroglyphs do not appear to be of the same order as the four major event glyphs described here. For example, the flint-and-shield glyph is often combined within texts with one of the war-related verbs, most likely indicating that the flint-and-shield glyph represents a particular object. The shell-kin glyphs that are particularly found at Naranjo may not be involved as much in war events as in ritual burning events. While other hieroglyphs and phrases may be related to aggression, the four most secure and consistent warfare-related hieroglyphs are chu’ah (capture), hubi (destruction), ch’ak (axe), and shell-star (star-war) events. These distinct glyphic expressions surely represented different kinds of warfare events; however, their meanings also may have been contextually variable.

Chuc’ah, or “capture”, is probably the least constant and most controversial kind of aggression mentioned in the hieroglyphic record. The act of capture is perhaps best represented on certain Yaxchilan lintels that combine both imagery and text to ensure meaning. Whether “capture” relates only to specific individuals or symbolically refers to towns, communities, and regions is a matter of current debate. The differences in opinion over this issue, however, have major ramifications on the interpretations of Maya warfare. If only specific individuals are named, then an argument can be made for elite ritual warfare with little impact on the overall population. However, if the portrayed individuals symbolically represent larger entities, then Maya warfare could be seen as involving territorial gain and tribute. For instance, it has been suggested that the Palenque ruler Kan-Xul (also now known as K’an-Hok’-Chitam) was captured and executed by Tonina. Kan-Xul is both named and portrayed on a Tonina carved monument. But did his capture have an impact on the general population of Palenque? While Palenque’s sucession may have been altered, it is not known whether tribute was given by Palenque to Tonina as a result of this event or if there were other local changes that would have affected the population at large. In another case, the hieroglyphics associated with a captive have been interpreted in two very different ways. On Naranjo Stela 24, Schele and Freidel suggest that the captive in the lower register, on whom the ruler stands, was an individual named “Kinichil-Cab” from the site of Ucanal. Marcus alternatively reads the hieroglyphs associated with this captive as a nonpersonal name meaning “western land” and views the captive as an artistic symbol for captured territory. The implied difference between these two viewpoints as it relates to the scale of the associated warfare is striking. We suspect that both readings of chuc’ah may sometimes be appropriate and that the meaning is context dependent.

Hubi and ch’ak events clearly represent military endeavors. Hubi has been translated as “destruction” and appears to refer to the attainment of specific goals and objectives in warfare. For instance, an AD 695 event records Tikal’s “destruction” of the “flint and shield” of Jaguar-Paw of Site Q. The use of this verb to indicate warfare between Caracol and Naranjo seems fairly well established given the multiple records that exist at Caracol and Naranjo for specific hubi events. Yet hubi has also been taken to read “to come down” in accession contexts, and it is conceivable that the translation of this glyph may be modified in the future.

Ch’ak, or “axe”, events have been interpreted both as “decapitation” and as important “battles”. Recovered archaeological records that are relevant to the verification and assessment of ch’ak events are available from several sites. In all cases, argument can be made that while ch’ak events were undoubtedly significant to the victors, they may not have greatly impacted the losers. Perhaps the best-known ch’ak event is the one carried out by Quirigua against Copan king thirty-nine days later. As noted by Sharer, this event appears to have had a major effect on Quirigua. The actual impact on Copan, however, is still a matter of debate. A ch’ak event by Tikal against Caracol in AD 556 (recorded on Caracol Altar 21 and, to some extent, set up textually as a propaganda counter-balance for later antagonisms by Caracol against Tikal) was obviously offset six years later by a more conclusive shell-star event against Tikal (also recorded on Caracol Altar 21).

Of all epigraphically known warfare events, shell-star, or star-war, events are interpreted to be of the greatest consequence. They are thought by most epigraphers to represent the defeat of one site by another. Thus, epigraphic data suggest that one polity may interrupt the succession at another site, exert dominion over another polity, and/or, alternatively, break free in a war of independence. We have argued elsewhere for the territorial impact of this kind of warfare. Indeed, the substitution of the caban, or “earth”, glyph in lieu of a specific emblem glyph as the center sign in the shell-star hieroglyph has been taken to indicate that this kind of warfare had a territorial dimension. Despite arguments to the contrary, it would seem that the star-war event against Tikal recorded on Caracol Altar 21 had devastating consequences at Tikal while positively impacting on Caracol. (page 172)

To reiterate an earlier point, even if these “star-wars” were of a conquest sort, the conquering polity would have simply installed a new leader who would be directed by the conquering polity. The inhabitants of the city would not have to flee or be killed. This point was made earlier in a citation by Foster:

Even one of the supporters of the idea of territorial conquest, David Freidel, makes the following statement in his essay “Early Classic Maya Conquest in Words and Deeds”, from the book Ancient Mesoamerican Warfare:

A careful and systematic consideration of evidence from both central public places and elite residence in the city of Tikal will be needed to really understand the way that factional politics coordinated with outside strangers in “takeovers” by kings not directly descended from the prior kings in succession. The notion of conquest of Tikal by armies marching halfway across Mesoamerica seems implausible to us. However, the notion of local factions attaching their ambitions to the military and commercial representatives of lucrative long-distance trade agreements not only makes reasonable sense but also echoes the political machinations of the rulers of Mayapan, Yucatan, the last great lowland capital. (page 214)

Hopefully a brief review of the earlier given map is all that is required for the reader to understand the import of this statement, given the claims of the Book of Mormon.

If the Book of Mormon is an ancient Mesoamerican record, then it describes a type of warfare for which there is no evidence in the given time frame. These massive wars passed without a trace.

Standing Armies and Provisions

Many portions of the Book of Mormon time-table deal with active warfare, and other sections address the fear of oncoming warfare, which requires certain preparations. These preparations can also provide background information that can be compared to actual ancient Mesoamerican history.

5 And now, Teancum saw that the Lamanites were determined to maintain those cities which they had taken, and those parts of the land which they had obtained possession of; and also seeing the enormity of their number, Teancum thought it was not expedient that he should attempt to attack them in their forts.

6 But he kept his men round about, as if making preparations for war; yea, and truly he was preparing to defend himself against them, by casting up walls round about and preparing places of resort.

7 And it came to pass that he kept thus preparing for war until Moroni had sent a large number of men to strengthen his army.

8 And Moroni also sent orders unto him that he should retain all the prisoners who fell into his hands; for as the Lamanites had taken many prisoners, that he should retain all the prisoners of the Lamanites as a ransom for those whom the Lamanites had taken.

9 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.

10 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.

11 And he also said unto him, I would come unto you, but behold, the Lamanites are upon us in the borders of the land by the west sea; and behold, I go against them, therefore I cannot come unto you.

2 And Moroni went to the city of Mulek with Lehi, and took command of the city and gave it unto Lehi. Now behold, this Lehi was a man who had been with Moroni in the more part of all his battles; and he was a man like unto Moroni, and they rejoiced in each other’s safety; yea, they were beloved by each other, and also beloved by all the people of Nephi.

3 And it came to pass that after the Lamanites had finished burying their dead and also the dead of the Nephites, they were marched back into the land Bountiful; and Teancum, by the orders of Moroni, caused that they should commence laboring in digging a ditch round about the land, or the city, Bountiful.

4 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.

5 And this city became an exceeding stronghold ever after; and in this city they did guard the prisoners of the Lamanites; yea, even within a wall which they had caused them to build with their own hands. Now Moroni was compelled to cause the Lamanites to labor, because it was easy to guard them while at their labor; and he desired all his forces when he should make an attack upon the Lamanites.

6 And it came to pass that Moroni had thus gained a victory over one of the greatest of the armies of the Lamanites, and had obtained possession of the city of aMulek, which was one of the strongest holds of the Lamanites in the land of Nephi; and thus he had also built a stronghold to retain his prisoners.

7 And it came to pass that he did no more attempt a battle with the Lamanites in that year, but he did employ his men in preparing for war, yea, and in making fortifications to guard against the Lamanites, yea, and also delivering their women and their children from famine and affliction, and providing food for their armies.

8 And now it came to pass that the armies of the Lamanites, on the west sea, south, while in the absence of Moroni on account of some intrigue amongst the Nephites, which caused dissensions amongst them, had gained some ground over the Nephites, yea, insomuch that they had obtained possession of a number of their cities in that part of the land.

9 And thus because of iniquity amongst themselves, yea, because of dissensions and intrigue among themselves they were placed in the most dangerous circumstances.

Both of these sections clearly describe a standing army, that is, an army that remains organized and structured while waiting for active battle. Again, this does not strike a modern reader as unreasonable, yet there is no evidence of such a practice in ancient Mesoamerica during the Book of Mormon time frame.

Payson Sheets explains in his essay “Warfare in Ancient Mesoamerica: A Summary View”, contained in the book Ancient Mesoamerican Warfare:

Warfare should not be seen as a monolithic repetitive entity among Mesoamerican societies. Rather, warfare varied considerably, depending on factors such as the degree of political centralization, presence or absence of competitive nearby polities, demographic and ecologic processes, ritualization of warfare, resource unpredictability, and economic and technological changes. Hassig deals with some of these factors, and I anticipate that future warfare research will both broaden and deepen them. Are there correlations between the degree of political centralizaton and the nature of warfare? In a general sense, there is a relationship, as both of the most highly urbanized and centralized civilizations, Teotihuacan and the Aztecs, waged war with standing armies against external polities. Hassig characterizes Teotihuacan and the Aztecs as meritocratic states with some social mobility for individuals based on their military successes. Both states were relatively innovative in military techniques and technology, and both developed large standing armies that expanded over much of Mesoamerica, but neither society lasted for a long time. In contrast, the Maya waged aristocratic wars, were more conservative, avoided having large standing armies of commoners, and as a result were less expansionistic and in the long run more stable. I believe that we can include the Olmec with the Maya in these characteristics. Additionally, I believe that the Zapotecs more closely resemble the Maya than the Basin of Mexico states. (page 295)

The existence of a standing army as described in the book of Alma would have been highly unusual in ancient Mesoamerica, and would have required a highly urbanized and centralized polity, which did not exist in ancient Mesoamerica during the specified time period.

A related problem can be demonstrated in how these Book of Mormon standing armies were maintained.

13 And now these are the cities of which the Lamanites have obtained possession by the shedding of the blood of so many of our valiant men;

14 The land of Manti, or the city of Manti, and the city of Zeezrom, and the city of Cumeni, and the city of Antiparah.

15 And these are the cities which they possessed when I arrived at the city of Judea; and I found Antipus and his men toiling with their might to fortify the city.

26 And thus, with their forces, they were determined to maintain those cities which they had taken.

27 And now it came to pass in the second month of this year, there was brought unto us many provisions from the fathers of those my two thousand sons.

28 And also there were sent two thousand men unto us from the land of Zarahemla. And thus we were prepared with ten thousand men, and provisions for them, and also for their wives and their children.

29 And the Lamanites, thus seeing our forces increase daily, and provisions arrive for our support, they began to be fearful, and began to sally forth, if it were possible to put an end to our receiving provisions and strength.

The fathers of these sons would have been from Jershon, which had been earlier given to the Lamanite converts. Jershon was approximately 160 miles from Zarahemla, and Judea, where the army was stationed, was another 54 miles further south. They were sending provisions for a large number of people over a distance of 210 miles away. Diane and Arlen Chase, in their essay “Texts and Contexts in Maya Warfare: A Brief Consideration of Epigraphy and Archaology at Caracol, Belize”, in Ancient Mesoamerican Warfares state:

We have previously used archaeological data, ethnohistorical inference, hieroglyphic statements of aggression, warfare distance, and military theory to argue that Maya warfare could be broken into wars between primary centers and wars for border control. Border wars between primary and secondary centers are recorded as formal star-wars had an average distance of 36 kilometers between the two antagonistic centers. In contrast, the distance between primary centers who warred with each other averaged 96.5 kilometers. Both of these distances are in accord with military theory concerning marching distance and suggest that Maya polities could reasonably maintain physical and territorial borders to a radius of 60 kilometers, which translates into the distance that could be effectively marched by an army in three days. The direct territorial control implied by effective marching distance, in turn, has implications for the average size of Classic Maya polities. Following the logic of this military theory, polities that were dominated by primate centers (such as Caracol) could approach a spatial size of approximately 11,300 square kilometers. Larger-size polities could have been accommodated but likely would have been correlated with hegemonic control, more like that undertaken by the later Aztecs. (page 187)

An army could march 60 kilometers, or 37 miles, in three days. Keep in mind, however, that this was not simply a marching army, but one carrying provisions. From the book Ancient Mesoamerica: A Comparison of Change in Three Regions, Richard Blanton explains:

We need to specify more precisely why Mesoamerica’s elite found it desirable to interact, and what their exchange included. Human carriers moved raw materials and finished items of jade, crystal, metal, feathers, jaguar skins, cotton, and cacao, and the costliest pottery types. Knowledge of writing and the calendar was limited to the elite, yet was pan-Mesoamerican in distribution, as were the ball game and its paraphernalia. Certain pieces of rank-status apparel – headdresses, ear spools, nose plugs, shields – were made to regional sumptuary specifications, but they were likely to be crafted from imported materials. Furthermore, they were universally recognized as symbolic statements about the human versus the animal realm, and about the purity and degree of power of their wearers. In fact, many sacred concepts and their physical representations, rituals, and cult figures – such as the feathered serpents, lords of the underworld, rain-lightening deities (Chaco, Tlaloc, Dzahui, Cocijo), Eehcatl, and Totec – were transregional. The significance of self-sacrifice, ancestor veneration, and funeral rituals were explicitly understood among the elite across all across Mesoamerica.

The elite prestige system did not comprise all of the interregional exchange in Mesoamerica. In addition to the rich trade, some consumer goods flowed among regions. Obsidian, for example, was mined in only two main mining areas (the northern basin of Mexico and highland Guatemala), turned into cores and tools, and carried to all parts of Mesoamerica. Regional economies then saw to its distribution, which was usually differential – in some contexts restricted to the elite, in some places not. Cotton, cacao, and certain other food items may have had interregional distributions, but evidence for this prior to the fifteenth century is scarce.

Apparently the elite exchange provided the stimulus, opportunity, procedures, and established structure for a more irregular traffic in bulk commodities or items in mass demand. There is little evidence for the formation of regular interregional dependencies for goods in common use. Mesoamerica’s relatively high cost of transport undoubtedly made a macroregional-scale food economy less feasible transport undoubtedly made a macroregional-scale food economy less feasible than it was in Europe or China. To illustrate, we may consider the problem of supplying maize, a common food, to the Valley of Mexico from Tuxtepec, an important trade center on the Papaloapan River. It had to be moved by tameme, human carriers, who typically carried a load of thirty kilos and who traveled twenty-four kilometers a day, according to sixteenth century evidence. Over the most convenient trails, the journey to Mexico would take eighteen days. A person will consume, however, the equivalent of at least two-thirds of a kilo of corn per day. If we look at the food energy alone, we see that our tameme will consume 80 percent of the load over the round trip. This is not to say that bulk items never moved among regions, for other considerations beside the total energy cost may have at times been involved – for example, the providers, not the consumers, may have sometimes paid the cost of transport, as in the Aztec tribute systems. These “noneconomic” conditions, however, place the question back in the realm of exchange determined by elite relationships. That is why the Mesoamerican rich trade is not simply an archaeologically preserved proxy for trade in basic commodities. It had a purpose of its own. There is nonetheless a more subtle connection between elite exchange and basic production.

Specific, rational goals and strategies lie behind the exchange of goods, people, and information among Mesoamerica’s regional elites. Many of the material items, such as jade or feathers, were important in the scheme of rewards. Control over these prestige items was a key aspect of ruler’s power, because the ability to mass and direct large numbers of people was the measure of greatness. In Mesoamerica, people were the major factor in the production of wealth. More followers meant that more food could be produced, more craft items could be manufactured, and more warriors could be dispatched to the fields of battle. In the absence of coercion, followers had to be enlisted and their captains rewarded with the universally recognized badges of prestige. (page 220)

This means that the army carrying provisions would travel at an even slower rate, around 14 miles a day. It would take fifteen days to transport these provisions to Judea, during which time the transporters would have consumed the majority of the provisions. The sending of provisions to the army is mentioned several times in the Book of Mormon, and presents the same inconsistencies. However, the problem is increased with a different scenario, again including the idea of travel and provisions:

21 But Gidgiddoni saith unto them: The Lord forbid; for if we should go up against them the Lord would deliver us into their hands; therefore we will prepare ourselves in the center of our lands, and we will gather all our armies together, and we will not go against them, but we will wait till they shall come against us; therefore as the Lord liveth, if we do this he will deliver them into our hands.

22 And it came to pass in the seventeenth year, in the latter end of the year, the proclamation of Lachoneus had gone forth throughout all the face of the land, and they had taken their horses, and their chariots, and their cattle, and all their flocks, and their herds, and their grain, and all their substance, and did march forth by thousands and by tens of thousands, until they had all gone forth to the place which had been appointed that they should gather themselves together, to defend themselves against their enemies.

23 And the land which was appointed was the land of Zarahemla, and the land which was between the land Zarahemla and the land Bountiful, yea, to the line which was between the land Bountiful and the land Desolation.

24 And there were a great many thousand people who were called Nephites, who did gather themselves together in this land. Now Lachoneus did cause that they should gather themselves together in the land southward, because of the great curse which was upon the land northward.

25 And they did fortify themselves against their enemies; and they did dwell in one land, and in one body, and they did fear the words which had been spoken by Lachoneus, insomuch that they did repent of all their sins; and they did put up their prayers unto the Lord their God, that he would deliver them in the time that their enemies should come down against them to battle.

Once again, the Nephite region would have covered 75,000 square miles. People from throughout this region were traveling, carrying provisions with them. Yet only those from very nearby would not consume a majority of the provisions en route. With so many people living in a much smaller region than normally, it would have been very difficult to provide for all their needs, so they certainly would have needed those provisions. Yet, at the end of this seven or nine year period (3 Nephi 4:4), the Nephites still had plenty of provisions left over!

1 And now it came to pass that the people of the Nephites did all return to their own lands in the twenty and sixth year, every man, with his family, his flocks and his herds, his horses and his cattle, and all things whatsoever did belong unto them.

2 And it came to pass that they had not eaten up all their provisions; therefore they did take with them all that they had not devoured, of all their grain of every kind, and their gold, and their silver, and all their precious things, and they did return to their own lands and their possessions, both on the north and on the south, both on the land northward and on the land southward.

The probability of this event having taken place in ancient Mesoamerica, with the limitations of transportation and political control, is astonishingly small. It is so small that I feel comfortable stating that there is simply no way this event could have occurred in ancient Mesoamerica.

If this event occurred in ancient Mesoamerica, then it required the existence of a highly urbanized, centralized polity with a far more efficient transportation system than actually existed in ancient Mesoamerica, and that same polity and transportation system disappeared without a trace.

If these events occurred in ancient Mesoamerica, then it requires that two highly urbanized, centralized polities exist during the time frame, because all the problems described for the Nephites are just as equally linked to the Lamanites. Yet both of these polities disappeared without a trace.

The Death of Christ

Book of Mormon scholars believe that massive volcanic eruptions may explain the devastation described at the death of Christ. In his essay “Volcanic Destruction in the Book of Mormon: Possible Evidence from Ice Cores”, Benjamin Jordan states:

The eighth chapter of 3 Nephi preserves one of the best accounts from antiquity of a natural disaster. It documents the destruction of entire cities and the deaths of, in all likelihood, tens of thousands of people during a terrible storm and accompanying earthquakes. The effects of the storm, including extremely high winds and intense lightning (see 3 Nephi 8:5–7, 12, 16), would have devastated crops and people. Recovery from such events would most likely have taken months, if not years. One of the most commonly asked questions concerns the cause of the storm. Because of its nature as described in the report, in conjunction with the movement of large amounts of earth that buried whole cities (see 3 Nephi 8:10), a number of studies have concluded that the storm resulted from volcanic activity. If that is so—and I think that the evidence for this view is strong—then it may be possible to also find evidence in ice cores that scientists have begun to collect and study during the last half century.

Certainly it is possible that some of the destruction described in the Book of Mormon could have originated from a massive volcanic eruption. Volcanoes can cause cities to be buried, burned, and even flooded when the volcano forces a river to change course. However, only a truly massive eruption could cause the magnitude of destruction described in the Book of Mormon that extended across an entire region. The cities of Zarahemla, Moronihah, Moroni, are specifically listed in Chapter 8. Chapter 9 lists more cities by name: Gilgal, Onihah, Mocum, Jerusalem, Gadiandi, Gadiomnah, Jacob, Gimigimno, Jacobugath, Laman, Josh, Gad, and Kishkumen. These cities extend across the entire region specified by the Book of Mormon as being “Nephite”, and even extend into the Lamanite region. Conservatively, 75,000 square miles were impacted by this event. Just what kind of eruption could have caused this level of destruction?

The most powerful volcanic eruption known in ancient Mesoameria was the eruption of Ilopango. There are disputes concerning the dating. Most Mesoamerican scholars place the date at around 260 AD, which is consistent with the population shift. In The Ancient Maya, Arthur Demarest states:

The Problematic Transition to the Early Classic

The end of the late Preclassic was a period of rapid demographic growth and cultural florescence in both the highlands and lowlands. Incipient states had formed, as indicated by complex economies, massive public architecture, and the symbols and information systems associated with rulership. In the highlands, Kaminaljuyu had become a sprawling center of trade and intensive agricultural production. Other highland and coastal centers, such as Chalcuhapa, Abaj Takalik, and Izapa, controlled exchange systems in ceramics, lithics, and other goods. The various art styles of these centers had given rise to the stelae-altar complex and perhaps the hieroglyphic and chronological systems that became central features of the lowland Classic Maya society.

Meanwhile, in the lowlands, even more precocious colossal centers such as Nakbe and El Mirador dominated the northern Peten, while Dzibilchaltun, Komchen, and other sites in the northern Yucatan had large populations supported by regional economies. These sites shared symbolic systems and early forms of the cult of the K’uhul Ajaws with centers of more modest scale such as Cerros, Lamanai, Tikal, and Uaxactun. Throughout the lowlands, population levels were high, as indicated by vast quantities of Late Preclassic monochrome potsherds in these early components of many sites.

Then, at the beginning of the Early Classic between AD 250 and 450, there was an apparent dramatic reduction in population and constructional activities at many lowland centers. Nakbe, El Mirador, and other northern Peten sites have reduced occupations, and a similar decline is observed at sites as distant as Seibal on the Pasion River to the west, Komchen in northern Yucatan, and Cerros in Belize. Some archaeologists have speculated that global or regional climate change, overpopulation and soil exhaustion, or even the explosion of the Ilopango volcano in El Salvador had disrupted the Late Preclassic florescence and caused a reduction or shift in populations. More complex theories look to changes in trade routes or political processes for the alleged cultural recession of the third and fourth centuries. Others note that regional centers, such as Calakmul north of the El Mirador basin and Tikal to its south, continued to grow, exhibiting major architectural constructions and large populations in the Early Classic period.

The apparent Early Classic decline might be, to some extent, a methodological illusion. Commoners outside of the elite epicenters may have had little access to the Tzakol-style polychromes used to date house groups in the Classic period. Most households might have continued to use variants of Late Preclassic ceramics into the fourth or even early fifth centuries. Archaeologists could be incorrectly dating such occupations as Late Preclassic rather than Early Classic. Such an explanation is especially plausible for sites that are far from the northeastern Peten, in zones where the traditional Tzakol Early Classic ceramic diagnostics are less common. Nonetheless, it is certain that in some zones there was a very real fourth-century population decline. (page 103)

Foster is more assertive in her stance in Handbook to Life in the Ancient Maya World:

In the southern Maya area, the impact of the drought (climaxed at 100 CE) was compounded by the eruption of the Ilopango volcano (c 200-250 CE) in central El Salvador. Chalchuapa, manufacturer of obsidian blades and the Usulutan ceramics that were valued items in Maya trade, had to be abandoned. Not until the Late Classic Period (600-900) could the soil be farmed again. The eruption affected more than the Chalchuapa region, however. Ash-clogged rivers flooded the southeastern Pacific littoral and caused the rivers to change course. (page 42)

After this period of extraordinary accomplishment in architecture, art, and writing, there was a hiatus in which many Maya cities were depopulated and some were totally abandoned. The eruption of Ilopango Volcano in El Salvador c. 250 CE, but perhaps as much as a century later, made a large area of the southern region uninhabitable, but there may have been other reasons for the hiatus, especially in the lowlands. By the beginning of the Classic period, there was a major adjustment in the Maya world in which the lowlands emerged as the heartland of Maya civilization, greatly eclipsing the southern region and rendering it peripheral despite its fertile lands enriched by volcanic ash and lava. (page 34)

The eruption of Volcan Ilopango c. 250 is an excellent example of the kind of dramatic environmental change the Maya confronted. It destroyed many centers of early Maya culture in the southern Maya area, forcing the abandonment of Chalchuapa in El Salvador for centuries and creating a hiatus in sites on the southeastern Pacific slopes of Guatemala. The eruption deposited enough ash in rivers in the highlands to cause them to change course and flood lowland centers. Such eruptions are known to have occurred periodically in highland Guatemala and El Salvador as well as in other regions of Mesoamerica, including central Mexico. (page 98)

Her confidence may be based on indirect evidence, such as timing of the aforementioned population shift.

Maya civilization developed and flourished during the Late Preclassic Period, but as the period came to a close, C. 150 to 250 CE, many cities that had experienced the most dynamic growth collapsed or at least shriveled in size, and this phenomenon occurred from the Pacific to northern Yucatan. The archaeological indicates that most cities on the Pacific littoral were abandoned by 250 CE, as was Komchen in northern Yucatan, Altar de Sacrificios on the Rio Pasion, and Cerros in northern Belize. The great cities of the Mirador Basin and Kaminaljuyu in the highlands were seriously depopulated but not abandoned. This hiatus in Maya cultural development has received considerable scrutiny because it occurs at a critical period: the onset of Classic Period civilization and the shift of Maya power into the lowlands. (page 41)

Additionally, there is supportive evidence from pottery artifacts of a serious disruption at around this time:

The ceramic complex changed too. With the eruption of Ilopango Volcano, there was disruption in the production and distribution of Usulutan-ware. When it was revived, it was part of the Copador ceramic complex found at Copan but not in the remainder of the lowlands, reinforcing the fact that Salvadoran sites, like most of those on the Pacific littoral, were only on the fringe of Classic Period Maya civilization. Those Preclassic cities that survived into the Early Classic Period, such as Kaminaljuyu and coastal Tiquistate, employed new ceramic forms, many of them imported or inspired by the central Mexican city of Teotihuacan. Thin orange effigy vessels were actually imported from Teotihuacan, but central Mexican slab-legged tripod pots painted with Maya scenes may have been locally manufactured. The Maya continued to manufacture their characteristic polychrome ware as well but in a new style called Tzakol. Some of this complex is characterized by wide bowls decorated by stylized birds and human figures. (page 46)

Stephen Harris also seems confident of the dating in his essay “Archaeology and Volcanism”:

Volcanic activity has also preserved a number of important archaeological sites in the New World. During the third century A.D., a caldera-forming eruption of the Volcan Ilopango devastated the highlands of El Salvador, Central America, covering a broad area under pyroclastic flows and a much larger region under thick layers of tephra. Whereas land lying within a radius of about 60 miles of the vent was rendered completely uninhabitable, areas lying father away suffered varying degrees of environmental damage, leaving a large population of survivors with no means of subsistence. Recent studies by Payson Sheets and others suggest that the eruption, occurring at the close of the Proto-classic Maya period (A.D. 200-300), had unusually long-term social and economic effects on the evolution of Maya culture. Besides totally destroying farmlands and villages in the most severely impacted zone around the volcano and disrupting agricultural production over a vast region, the eruption may also have been responsible for a massive redistribution of the Maya population, causing an estimated 320,000 survivors to migrate northward from Salvador to Belize and northern Guatemala. The influx of migrants, displaced by the Ilopango event, may have been a catalyst that helped accelerate the already in-progress development of Classic Maya civilization. Flooding lowland towns and villages north of Ilopango, these tens of thousands of refugees may have stimulated rapid social and political responses by the Maya leadership to accommodate the suddenly increased populations. After the eruption forced abandonment of the major highland trade route, rulers at Tikal gained control of regional commerce.

Excavations at sites scattered over central and western El Salvador which were affected by the Ilopango cataclysm reveal a wealth of Preclassic Maya artifacts. Located about 40 miles from Ilopango, pre-eruption Chalchuapa was a major residential, economic, and ritual center in the southeast Maya highlands, featuring numerous 50 foot high pyramids arranged around open plazas and elaborately sculptured monuments, some of which bore calendric dates. Numerous ceramic vessels, some with polychrome painting, were found under Ilopango's ubiquitous layer of light-colored ash, known locally as the tierra blanca. Digs at rural sites have uncovered farms, fields (many apparently irrigated), and villages The ruins of a farmhouse at the village of Joya de Ceren, buried under 16 feet of ash, disclosed much about the Maya villagers' diet and way of life, indicating that they ate corn, wild and domesticated beans, and squash, liberally spiced with an array of chilies. Enjoying a variety of shellfish, they cooked their food in cottonseed oil and wove cotton cloth that they may have traded for obsidian, a desirable raw material for tools in the New as well as the Old World.

Payson Sheets goes into more details in his essay “The Effects of Explosive Volcanism on Ancient Egalitarian, Ranked, and Stratified Societies in Middle America”, in the book The Angry Earth: Disaster in Anthropological Perspective:

The white volcanic ash layer that buried ancient artifacts in central and western El Salvador has been the subject of intermittent interest by archaeologists and geologists during much of this century, beginning with Jorge Larde in 1917. Called the “tierra blanca joven” or TBJ, it was erupted from a volcanic vent under the west end of Lake Ilopango. It is radiocarbon dated to AD 260 +- 114 (calibrated; one sigma range: AD 146 to 374), but a more precise dating may be provided by analyses of Greenland ice cores. A volcanic ash began falling in the summer of AD 175 in Greenland which might have been caused by Ilopango; both share the same high silica content of 69 percent. Where it is well preserved at Chalchuapa, seventy-seven kilometers from the source, it is over one half meter thick, indicating a regional disaster of major proportions.

The Ilopango eruption occurred in three phases. First, a great explosion deposited a relatively coarse pumice across the countryside, to a radius of about thirty kilometers. That was followed by two colossal ash flows that headed north to the Rio Lempa and west into the Zapotitan valley. These were unusually massive and long, stretching for more than forty-five kilometers. The one that headed west had sufficient impetus to flow up and over the Santa Tecla (Nueva San Salvador) pass at one thousand meters elevation and then down into the Zapotitan valley, even though the vent elevation is only five hundred meters. Both of these first stages were devastating to flora, fauna, and people in their paths, but the third phase was even more damaging regionally. It was an immense blast of very fine-grained volcanic ash that fell over all of central and western El Salvador and must have been significant in adjoining southern Guatemala and southwestern Honduras. The eruption must have blasted ash into the troposhere, so finding Ilopango ash in Greenland ice cores should not be surprising.

Some eight thousand square kilometers might have been rendered ininhabitable. Segerstrom found that ten to twenty-five centimeters of volcanic ash is too much for traditional agriculturalists to cope with, and natural processes of tephra erosion, weathering, soil formation, and plant succession are necessary before the affected area can be reoccupied by cultivators. Depending on the tephra and the environment, those processes can take decades or centuries. Given an estimated regional population density in central El Salvador of forty people to every square kilometer, one can very roughly estimate that some 320,000 people could have been killed or displaced by the eruption. The fact that the TBJ tephra was highly acidic (sialic) rendered the impact more drastic and the recovery delayed. The dozens of sites in the Zapotitan valley buried by some one to two meters of Ilopango tephra are comparable in tephra depth to many of the sites in the Arenal area. The contrast is how different the pre- and post-eruption societies were in El Salvador and how similar the pre- and post-eruption societies were in Costa Rica. To some degree that contrast is due to more rapid culture change in Mesoamerica compared to the Intermediate area (between Mesoamerica and the Andes), and to some degree it is due to greater resilience to perturbation by Arenal societies.

Many areas of central and western El Salvador were abandoned for a century or two. Many archaeologists have noted the striking population decline along Guatemala’s Pacific coastal plain at about this time, which was probably a result of ecological suppression caused by the Ilopango ashfall.

Flooding is a common aftermath following a volcanic ash deposit in a river’s headwaters, as protective vegetation is killed or suppressed. The flooding reported at so many sites in western Honduras at the Formative-Classic boundary was likely caused by the Ilopango tephra and resultant heavy runoff and redepositions. Included are sites such as Copan, Playa de los Muertos, Pimienta, and Los Naranjos. Even some sites as far away as Barton Ramie in Belize witnessed flooding at about this time, but Barton Ramie is a considerable distance from Ilopango, and the flooding might have occurred for quite different reasons. In Middle American areas, where only a few centimeters or millimeters of Ilopango tephra were deposited, the deleterious affects of the eruption were probably minimal and the light dusting could have been beneficial immediately. (page 46)

I first want to note that even a massive eruption the likes of Ilopango affected a region of 8,000 square kilometers (4,970 square miles). It had far-reaching affects extending beyond the area rendered inhabitable. Yet this does not come close to the region impacted in the Book of Mormon at the death of Christ. It seems highly unlikely that smaller eruptions could have caused the type of devastation described, as Jordan indicates in his essay.

The second point is in regards to the timing. The timing of the Ilopango volcano is interesting for two reasons. First, it can be eliminated as the source of the destruction at the time of Christ. Second, if it occurred in 260 AD as most scholars speculate, it would have rendered most of the area discussed in the Book of Mormon already inhabitable or severely impacted, making it even more unlikely that any of the events described therein actually occurred in ancient Mesoamerica. Sheets mentioned the ice-core dating, and that is the reason why we cannot be certain that Ilopango did erupt in 260 AD after all. The Smithsonian Institution provides online data regarding the ice-core dating of Ilopango, and places it at 450 AD, +- 30 years. Ilopango

However, in the paper Firn accumulation records for the past 1000 years on the basis of dielectric profiling of six cores from Dronning Maud Land Anarctica, the authors indicate some uncertainty regarding the Ilopango data by assigning a question mark beside Ilopango in their table. Ilopango dating

Unfortunately, the ice-core record is not always clear. Whether or not evidence of a volcanic eruption is recognized in it is determined by a number of factors. Most of these are caused by natural processes, while others have to do with sampling and interpretation.

Although I cannot assert this with enough confidence to consider it a devastating issue for Book of Mormon historicity, I am inclined to accept the 260 AD dating, due to all the additional circumstantial evidence. For example, I already cited this passage from Matheny regarding Santa Rosa as a candidate for Zarahemla:

Phase 4 (50 BCE- CE 200) was a time of cultural florescence at Santa Rosa with considerable construction in the ceremonial center. According to Brockington, the areas of potsherd concentrations seen in the previous two phases survive but have more complex patterns. He sees this as evidence that a basic moiety division continued to exist. As further evidence he mentions a layer of gravel atop Mound S at the site center. The gravel on each side of a median line was different and unmixed, suggesting that a separate group made each section.

Once again, this fits within the pattern of a 260 AD eruption, which disrupted many sites in the area. Even aside from the issue of Ilopango, a hiatus in population at Zarahemla from 200 AD is consistent with the Book of Mormon.

If the destruction at the death of Christ was caused by a volcanic eruption, then it was a far more devastating eruption or series of eruptions than even Ilopango, and yet there is no archaeological or ice-core evidence supporting a massive eruption at that time period.

4 Therefore I will write and hide up the records in the earth; and whither I go it mattereth not.

5 Behold, my father hath made this record, and he hath written the intent thereof. And behold, I would write it also if I had room upon the plates, but I have not; and ore I have none, for I am alone. My father hath been slain in battle, and all my kinsfolk, and I have not friends nor whither to go; and how long the Lord will suffer that I may live I know not.

6 Behold, four hundred years have passed away since the coming of our Lord and Savior.

7 And behold, the Lamanites have hunted my people, the Nephites, down from city to city and from place to place, even until they are no more; and great has been their fall; yea, great and marvelous is the destruction of my people, the Nephites.

8 And behold, it is the hand of the Lord which hath done it. And behold also, 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.

9 And now, behold, I say no more concerning them, for there are none save it be the Lamanites and robbers that do exist upon the face of the land.

10 And there are none that do know the true God save it be the disciples of Jesus, who did tarry in the land until the wickedness of the people was so great that the Lord would not suffer them to remain with the people; and whether they be upon the face of the land no man knoweth.

Book of Mormon scholars insist that the chronology of the Book of Mormon is consistent with the known history of ancient Mesoamerica. However, this assertion rests on interpreting the actual Book of Mormon text in a manner that is quite foreign to most readers. One of the best examples of this has to do with the massive destruction detailed at the end of the Book of Mormon. In fact, the destruction of the Nephites was so complete that Moroni had to wander alone, hiding from the Lamanites who would surely kill him.

I would feel safe guessing that almost every person who has read the Book of Mormon interpreted the text as meaning that the Lamanites killed every Nephite they could find. Yet, Book of Mormon scholars who are aware that there is no evidence in ancient Mesoamerica of such a massive genocide interpret this to mean that the elite leaders were killed. Instead of cities being destroyed, the ruling power of the cities simply switched hands. An example of this reasoning can be seen in Brant Gardner’s comments on the Zion’s Lighthouse Message Board:

The end game of the Nephites removes a particular line, but not all of the people, and not the cities. Those cities would continue and people would still be there. It is a type of people that are destroyed.

This is an example of my assertion that the LGT requires doing damage to the meaning of the Book of Mormon. The cited verse clearly states that the Nephites, in general, were killed, and the fact that Moroni had to hide by wandering alone in the wilderness also supports this contention. If the cities were actually left standing, with the majority of the population intact, then why didn’t Moroni simply travel to another city and blend in with that population? If one were to accept the proposition that the massacre really referenced only the elite rulers, all the verses that describe the Nephites being forced to flee from city to city make absolutely no sense. Clearly, the general population was forced to flee, not simply the elite rulers. Yet Book of Mormon scholars have no choice but to opt for distorting the text of the Book of Mormon due to the fact that there was no mass destruction and genocide in ancient Mesoamerica during the specified time period. In fact, ancient Mesoamerica went on to experience its greatest fluorescence yet. From Foster’s Life in the Ancient Maya World:

The Late Classic Period was initiated with profound cultural and political changes. Tikal, encircled by its rivals and isolated from trade, would not become a political force again until late in the seventh century. Teotihuacan declined as a power in Mesoamerica, and C. 700, its sacred center was sacked and burned. Kaminaljuyu also declined. Yet, this was not a period of decline in the Maya world, perhaps because the Maya were free of foreign interference. The Late Classic Period witnessed enormous growth in population, in the number of Maya polities, in the power of the elite class, and in the sophistication of artistic expression. Hieroglyphic texts, more numerous than before, displayed the virtuosity of Maya scribes and recorded the ingenuity of Maya calendrics and astronomical knowledge.

From Palenque in the west and Copan in the east to Uxmal in the north and Dos Pilas in the south of the Peten heartland, Maya cities flourished, leaving a legacy that would define Maya civilization. (page 49)

Book of Mormon scholars are left with either trying to force the known population shift possibly associated with the Ilopango eruption to match the Book of Mormon chronology, or they are left with attempting to reconstruct the meaning of the Book of Mormon itself, as Gardner’s comments demonstrate above. However, even the most cursory reading of the chapter of Mormon contradicts this assertion.

If the chapter of Mormon describes nothing more than the exodus of a small, elite, ruling class, leaving the general population intact, then the Book of Mormon is so poorly constructed or translated, that readers can never hope of understanding it at all.

If the chapter of Mormon is reliable, and describes a mass destruction and genocide, then this incredible event did not leave a trace in ancient Meosamerica.

Blanton, Richard E., Stephen Kowalewski. Gary Feinman, Laura Finsten. Ancient Mesoamerica: A Comparison of Change in Three Regions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1997.

The Book of Mormon. Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 1975.

Braswell, Geoffrey. The Maya and Teotihuacan Reinterpreting Early Classic Interaction. Austin: University of Texas Press. 2003.

Brown, Kathryn M. and Travis W. Stanton. Ancient Mesoamerican Warfare. New York: AltaMira Press: 2003.

Demarest, Arthur. Ancient Maya The Rise and Fall of a Rainforest Civilization. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Foster, Lynn. Handbook to Life in the Ancient Maya World. New York: Oxford University Press. 2002.

Hofstede, Coen, et al. Firn accumulation records for the past 1000 years on the basis of dielectric profiling of six cores from Dronning Maud Land Antarctica. Journal of Glaciology. 2004. Journal of Glaciology

Jordan, Benjamin. Volcanic Destruction in the Book of Mormon: Possible Evidence from Ice Cores. Provo: FARMS. 2003. FARMS - Volcano

Joyce, Rosemary and David Grove. Social Patterns in Pre-Classic Mesoamerica. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. 1999.

Lohse, Jon C. and Fred Valdez, Jr. Ancient Maya Commoners. Austin, Tx: University of Texas Press. 2004.

Metcalfe, Brent. New Approaches to the Book of Mormon. Salt Lake City: Signature Books. 1993.

Oliver-Smith, Anthony and Susanna Hoffman. The Angry Earth: Disaster in Anthropological Perspective. New York: Rutledge. 1999.

Rice, Prudence M. Maya Political Science: Time, Astronomy, and the Cosmos. Austin, Tx: University of Texas Press. 2004.

Schele, Linda and David Friedel. A Forest of Kings The Untold Story of the Ancient Maya. New York: William Morrow. 1990.

Sorenson, John. An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company. 1985.