This will be the first of three parts about the possible location of the Nephites and Lamanites. This is a controversial subject with many differing opinions. The thoughts expressed here are what I have deducted through my own research and from the research of others. I will attempt to cite sources of information as best as I can, but some of what I write is speculation on my part.
Once I got to the end of 1 Nephi of the Book of Mormon, I had to ask myself "Where does this take place?" Obviously it is North, Central, and/or
On top of that the authors of the Book of Mormon wrote in a language known only as "Reformed Egyptian"; most likely a combination of Hebrew with Egyptian hieroglyphic chracters (there have been other examples of this from history - a link to Jeff Lindsay's blog, "Mormanity"). Basically the language of the prophets and authors was, most likely, not the same as the common language of the people. One could compare the use of Hebrew by Jews and Latin by Catholics; many times their scriptures were written in a different language than that of the populous, holding to tradition rather than adapting to secular life.
Okay, now where do we start? Well how about with the first location that is shared amongst the Bible and the Book of Mormon:
Here is where critics will immediately write off the Book of Mormon arguing that there is no river that continuously flows into the Red Sea. One critic asks LDS Apologetics to "Please name the continually-flowing river that emptied into the Red Sea".[1] He then writes about the "inaccuracy" presented already with Lehi's account of coming to "the borders which are nearer the Red Sea" (1 Nephi 2:5). He goes on:
I can imagine Joseph Smith narrating this story with a map of the middle east in front of him, mistaking the Gulf of Aqaba for the Red Sea... Giving Joseph the benefit of the doubt, lets assume Lehi and his family only traveled to the Gulf, and not (as the text says) to the Red Sea.[1]
The Book of Mormon says Lehi "came down by the borders near the shore of the Red Sea; and he traveled in the wilderness in the borders which are nearer the Red Sea..." (1 Nephi 2:5). I find no fault in the text here, in fact, I find evidence in support of the Book of Mormon. The Gulf of Aqaba is located at the very southern tip of modern-day Israel, it separates the Sinai Peninsula from Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Now the Gulf of Aqaba and Gulf of Suez are results of Sinai's bifurcation of the northern Red Sea. Both of the Gulfs have been referred to as the "arms of the Red Sea". A researcher, Ron Wyatt, makes the argument that the "'Red Sea' is used to refer to all sections of that sea - the main body, the Gulf of Suez, and the Gulf of Aqaba".[2] Wyatt makes the argument that Moses crossed, in Exodus 13, the Gulf, referring to them as the Red Sea, but that is beside the point. It is most likely that those at the time also viewed the "Gulf of Aqaba" to be of the Red Sea, or to at least be "in the borders of the Red Sea" (1 Nephi 2:5).
Now back to the question of where the River Laman and Valley of Lemuel are located. Well I have heard of two possible locations that could be River Laman/Valley of Lemuel. The first is a great candidate for the river 12 miles north of a town called Maqna located at the junction of the Red Sea basin and Gulf of Aqaba in Saudi Arabia. This discovery was made by George Potter in an article for the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship (FARMS), Potter writes,
I believe George Potter's location of the River Laman is quite plausible: it is a three day walk from the tip of the Gulf of Aqaba, we have a continuously flowing river (also supported by the vegetation surrounding it), we have a location right on the Red Sea, and we have a valley with high walls that could protect Lehi and his family's tents as they camped near the windy Red Sea.Eight miles north of Maqna, we came to our first surprise. The southern end of the mountain range that here forms the shoreline seemed to drop directly into the waters of the Gulf of Aqaba. There was just enough room for the coast guard dirt road to pass between the giant cliffs on the right and the watery gulf on the left. We followed the narrow road for another four miles, with waves occasionally breaking over our path. Rounding the base of a cliff, we came upon a truly spectacular sight. A magnificent narrow canyon just ahead of us ended in a palm-lined cove. The brilliant blue shades of the clear gulf waters and the sky framed the scene.
What can we reasonably say about the river Laman from the Book of Mormon? First, the river was quite surely not a major stream. Otherwise a permanent settlement, and a name, would have accompanied it. Second, Lehi gave the river a name, so it probably had no name that he was aware of (see 1 Nephi 2:8). It is hard to imagine that any substantial flow of water in the Near East would go unnamed, implying that the stream did not amount to much and probably was a localized phenomenon. Third, the river Laman was in the wilderness (see 1 Nephi 2:6), a place generally devoid of people. Fourth, the waters of the river Laman emptied into the sea (see 1 Nephi 2:9) in the area where Lehi had camped, which must have been at the north end of the Red Sea, near the Gulf of Aqaba. Fifth, Nephi described the stream as “continually running" (1 Nephi 2:9). Finally, the river Laman ran through a geographical feature that Lehi called the valley of Lemuel (see 1 Nephi 2:6–10). Our initial visit confirmed that the stream in the canyon met at least all of the physical criteria.[3]
Photos by George Potter of the
Left: The River Laban
Right: The
Now the second location has only recently been labeled as a plausible area, mainly due to the fact that it is considerably closer to the Red Sea than the site near Maqna. The other location is argued by Jeffery R. Chadwick to be near Bir Marsha, a location near the Gulf of Eilat. He states in his article for the FARMS Review, "The Wrong Place for Lehi's Trail and the Valley of Lemuel":
My own guess is that one of the wadis near the shore at Bir Marsha would be the strongest candidate for the actual valley of Lemuel. Why Bir Marsha? Because it is the furthest point south that one can travel along the east shore of the Gulf of Eilat. About fifty miles south of Ezion Geber, along that shoreline, high mountain cliffs jut out into the sea, cutting off the coastal path just south of Bir Marsha. It would take at least two days for Lehi’s party to cover those fifty miles on camels. If they proceeded more slowly (looking for a campsite) or if any were traveling on foot, it would take the group three days to go from the Ezion Geber area to Bir Marsha. They would then have pitched their tents in a secluded canyon in the mountain face just a few hundred meters from the Bir Marsha shoreline. With a seasonal winter stream running in the wadi to provide them with water, Lehi then gave the small river and the high-walled valley the names of his two eldest sons.[4]This other proposed spot is also plausible, even though it is not a "continuously flowing river" (as in all year round) it does "continuously flow into the Red Sea" (as opposed to other areas). Supporters of this location explain, in accordance with Lehi's Sermon: "And when my father saw that the waters of the river emptied into the fountain of the Red Sea, he spake unto Laman, saying: O that thou mightest be like unto this river, continually running into the fountain of all righteousness!" (1 Nephi 2:9), that Lehi meant only the river continuously flowed into "the fountain of the Red Sea", not that it flowed year-round.
Both possible locations are plausible and I myself, as of now, am unsure which I prefer, but I present both to you, to show plausibility of the Book of Mormon text as a whole.
The party most likely stayed near the River Laman for quite some time, to allow for the multiple visitations to Jerusalem and other activities that took place while they were still camped (1 Nehphi 3 and 1 Nephi 7). Then we get the arrival of the Liahona which directs Lehi to take his family, Ishmael's family, and Zoram's family and travel for the space of four days in the same south-southeast direction until the party set up camp in a place they named Shazer (1 Nephi 16:13). Now where could Shazer be? Well according to the Book of Momon it was in an area where they could "go forth into the wilderness to slay food for our families" (1 Nephi 16:14). This means the area had to hold some type of vegetation so that animals would be able to live there. So Shazer was obviously some type of "oasis" or area that had a bit of vegetation so that game could live there. Jeff Lindsay has a great article that goes much further in depth on the plausible location of Shazer than I do: The Place Shazer in the Arabian Peninsula. I will cite a bit of his article here:
Okay so now we have a "perfect fit" for Shazer, an area where there is ample vegetation to sustain animals, therefore an area where Nephi and his brethren could have hunted game. Then, after the party had most likely restocked on food and rest, they moved on, "following the same direction, keeping in the most fertile parts of the wilderness, which were in the borders near the Red Sea" (1 Nephi 16:14). Now Nephi's account goes on to tell us the travel continued "for the space of many days" (1 Nephi 16:17). On their way Ishmael dies and is buried at a place called Nahom. What is distinct here is Nephi says, "And it came to pass that Ismael died, and was buried in the place which was called Nahom" (1 Nephi 16:34) as opposed to other areas such as Shazer where he makes the distinction, "we did call the name of the place Shazer" (1 Nephi 16:13). This means Nahom was an area not discovered or created by Lehi's party, therefore we must ask does a real area closely phonetically to the name Nahom exist in Arabian Peninsula, where one could/would bury someone? The answer is yes. There is a site in Yemen, known as NHM, which I believe is Ishmael's burial place. Now most of you reading may be confused, how is NHM the same as "Nahom"? Well the Hebrew alphabet is purely based in constants, and no vowels. Now vowels are used in spoken Hebrew, just 'left out' of written Hebrew.[6] On top of the plausible name, three alters were found by the Nephi Project from NHM, which would make it a plausible burial location as well.[7]Regarding the name "Shazer," Hugh Nibley wrote:
"The first important stop after Lehi's party had left their base camp was at a place they called Shazer. The name is intriguing. The combination shajer is quite common in Palestinian place names; it is a collective meaning 'trees,' and many Arabs (especially in Egypt) pronounce it shazher. It appears in Thoghret-as-Sajur (the Pass of Trees), which is the ancient Shaghur, written Segor in the sixth centurey... It may be confused with Shaghur 'seepage,' which is held to be identical with Shihor, the 'black water' of Josh. 19:36. This last takes in western Palestine the form Sozura, suggesting the name of a famous water hole in South Arabia, called Shisur by Thomas and Shisar by Phillby... So we have Shihor, Shaghur, Sajur, Saghir, Segor (even Zoar), Shajar, Sozura, Shisur, and Shisar, all connected somehow or other and denoting either seepage--a weak but reliable water supply or a clump of trees. Whichever one prefers, Lehi's people could hardly have picked a better name for their first suitable stopping place than Shazer. (Lehi in the Desert [Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft, 1952], p.90.)" [L]et us note that Shazer is introduced in a classic Hebraism: "we did call the name of the place Shazer" (1 Nephi 16:13). In normal English we would say that we called the place Shazer or named the place Shazer, but in Hebrew one would say that he called the name of the place, for it is the name that is called, not the place itself. This point is made by John L. Sorenson and Melvin J. Thorne, eds., Rediscovering the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City and Provo: Deseret Book Co., Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1991), p. 89.
It turns out that there is a perfect fit for Shazer, a large, extensive oasis region with what is said to be the best hunting in all of Arabia, and it is in the right location to have been a four-days' journey south-southeast of the established location for the Valley of Lemuel, near a branch of the ancient frankincense trail and in the region of Arabia near the Red Sea called the Hijaz. This oasis is in the wadi Agharr.[5]
After Nahom, the party traveled "nearly eastward from that time forth" and along the way the "women did bear children in the wilderness" (1 Nephi 17:1). Finally they reach an area they call Bountiful (1 Nephi 17:5). Nephi's description of the area is as follows, "And we did come to the land which we called Bountiful, because of its much fruit and also wild honey; and all these things were prepared of the Lord that we might not perish. And we beheld the sea, which we called Irreantum, which, being interpreted, is many waters" (1 Nephi 17:5). It took Lehi and his party eight years of travel through the wilderness to reach Bountiful (1 Nephi 17:4) the land where Nephi will build his ship (1 Nephi 17:8).
Bountiful is one of the most detailed areas described in Lehi's journey, there is much criteria possible locations must fit in, in order to be considered plausible. First, the location must be almost due east from Nahom (we will use NHM as the plausible location of Nahom, as stated above). Second, it must have abundant fruit, hence its name (1 Nephi 17:5-6). Thrid it must be located on the coast. Fourth, it must have 'mountains' somewhere in the vicinity (1 Nephi 17:7). Fifth, it must have some type of ore reserves near by (1 Nephi 17:10). Sixth, there needs to be good trees for shipbuilding (1 Nephi 17:8). Seventh, there must be ore found close by for the making of Nephi's tools (1 Nephi 17:9-10). Eighth, there needs to be areas of freshwater, for drinking and a prolonged stay. Surprisingly, with Bountiful, we have two great, plausible areas where it could be located.
The first is known as Salalah and the second is Wadi Sayq. Salalah seems to provide a much greater deal of fruit and timber than Wadi Sayq, but this could be due to modern irrigation patterns, therefore unavailable in Nephi's time. Both areas have abundant trees, fruit, mountains, ore, a place to build a ship, and are nearly directly east from Nahom; but the trees, mountains, and such are in a much closer vicinity in Wadi Sayq than in Salalah. I believe that Wadi Sayq looks to be more plausible than Salalah. Wadi Sayq is almost directly east of Nahom, as opposed to Salalah, which is a bit further north. Wadi Sayq offers an inlet that would have been quite useful for launching his ship. It also has a large body of fresh water, which would be essential for setting up a camp for the period of time it would take the party to build the ship. Also there have been recent findings of ore in the area of Wadi Sayq, which is quite astonishing because much of the Arabian Peninsula does not have such reserves.[8]
In conclusion, Lehi's venture across the Arabian Peninsula was a long and arduous one. I only touched upon the geography of the journey, not the realistic physical, mental, and spiritual hardships members of the party experienced: hunger, loss of faith, exhaustion, fear, death, depression, etc. Although Nephi's account of the journey, in relation to the entirety of the First Book of Nephi, is quite small, it actually gives us a great deal of information, specific information. Could a farm boy with a fourth grade education, who's vast traveling most likely only consisted of the area in between New Hampshire to Ohio, 'make-up' such specific facts and locations only to have them proved to be true decades after his writing them? Absolutely not. Critics can (and do argue) that there were books about Arabian geography that Smith could have used to write the Book of Mormon, but texts like this did not exist anywhere close to him at the time he translated the Book of Mormon. S. Kent Brown, Chairman, Department of Ancient Studies, BYU writes about the posibility of such materials to Joseph Smith Jun.
As one can see, Joseph Smith Jun. could not have used 'outside' research and resources other than the Golden Plates he was given by the Angel Moroni. Besides the geographical information in the Book of Mormon; that only a true scholar of the region, with access to vast amounts of modern-day resources, could give us or one who actually walked these lands and experienced these things could have written (a very unsubtle nudge telling you that Nephi was a real person who experienced these thing and his record is a true record of his journey and a true record of the Lord Jesus Christ, I mean just incase you missed it...), the emotion one feels when they read Nephi's account would be hard-pressed to receive even from a professional literary author and only could be invoked by a first person storyteller who actually experienced such events (another subtle nudge). Joseph Smith Jun. was neither of these things. I testify the account of Lehi's journey, along with the rest of the Book of Mormon, is true. It was revealed to Joseph Smith Jun. by God and his only begotten son Jesus Christ.[T]he ease of access to written sources in, say, a local library. A student assistant and I have gone through all of the works known to have been in the collection of the Manchester Public Library before 1830, a resource that would have been available to Joseph Smith in his teens and later. None of the works in that collection which claim to deal with the ancient Near East would have given him good information on ancient Arabia. And in our review we spotted nothing that bears a familiar ring in the narrative of First Nephi. The only other library resource that young Joseph could possibly have drawn on was that of Dartmouth College. As most are aware, the Smith family lived in Lebanon, New Hampshire, from 1811 to late in 1813[he was between the ages of 5 and 8 during this time], before moving back to Vermont. The home where the Smith family lived in Lebanon was just down the road from Dartmouth College. There are two problems that a researcher must surmount in determining whether Joseph Smith during these years might possibly have put his hands on works such as Robert Heron’s English translation of Carsten Niebuhr’s description of Arabia, or Jean-Baptiste D’Anville’s map titled Orbis Veteribus Notus, or even an English translation of Pliny’s Natural History, or Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, all of which dealt with ancient Arabia in one way or another. (1) The first concerns the dates of the acquisition of these works by Dartmouth’s library, or by any other major library in the United States. In the case of Robert Heron’s two-volume translation of Niebuhr’s work that was published in1792, the acquisition date at the Dartmouth library is 1937, more than 140 years after it appeared in print...
Hence, it is clear that, in the case of Dartmouth College, this work was not available in its library when the Smith family lived in the town of Lebanon, New Hampshire. Thus, in my mind, one cannot draw conclusions about any influence of such a work on young Joseph Smith...
Even if — hypothetically — such resources were available in the Dartmouth library before 1810 or so, a researcher would have to determine when young Joseph Smith could possibly have spent enough time there to glean information about ancient Arabia. One will recall that Joseph Smith became seriously ill in Lebanon early in the year of 1813, after turning seven years old, and was unable to function normally for several months following the surgical removal of bone from his leg. In light of the above, a researcher would have to make a case for Joseph Smith actively reading and gleaning when he was the age of a typical first or second grader, while taking into account that these were the periods when, if he were well enough, his father needed him for the work on the farm that the family had leased in Lebanon. In this light, it seems impossible to sustain a hypothesis that any library resource which dealt with Arabia, and particularly with NHM, influenced the very young Joseph Smith, or was even consulted by him. That works which dealt with Arabia in one way or another may have available in libraries in the then United States is possible. But demonstrating that Joseph Smith ever visited such institutions, or even knew of libraries that owned these works, lies beyond what the modern researcher can show.[9]
I hope this brief (although it didn't feel so brief writing it...) overview of plausible geographical locations of Book of Mormon in the Near East, will help you build your testimony (as it has mine) of the truth of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Book of Mormon, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ; whether you are a member, an investigator, or just a regular reader.
My next installment will deal with Lehi's journey through the Pacific. Stay tuned for more!
[1] Landstrom, Eric. "A River Against Mormons." Protestant Apologetics and Theology. 02 Feb 2008. 14 Feb 2008
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment