Young Generals

Modern readers of the Book of Mormon might wonder a bit at the precociousness of some of the military leaders. Moroni "was only twenty and five years old when he was appointed chief captain over the armies of the Nephites." (Alma 43:17). Mormon says that when he was "fifteen years of age" (Mormon 1:15), "the people of Nephi appointed me that I should be their leader, or the leader of their armies. Therefore it came to pass that in my sixteenth year I did go forth at the head of an army of the Nephites" (Mormon 2:1–2).

Other leaders were also young. The text reports that "Moroni yielded up the command of his armies into the hands of his son, whose name was Moronihah" (Alma 62:43) in the thirty-second year of the reign of the judges (see Alma 62:39). Moroni was twenty-five in the eighteenth year (Alma 43:3-4, 17) just fourteen years earlier. Even if we assume that Moronihah was born when Moroni was fifteen, Moronihah could not have been more than twenty-four when he took over command of all the armies.

On the one hand, mortality rates in the ancient world were significantly higher than they are now. So individuals simply had to take over responsibilities at an earlier age. On the other hand, there may have been a cultural factor at play as well.

Bernardino de Sahagun reports the custom among the Aztecs of sending young men to live in a "young men's house" (tepuchcali):

And when [he was] yet an untried youth, then they took him into the forest. They had him bear upon his back what they called logs of wood--perchance now only one, or, then, two. Thus they tested whether perhaps he might do well in war when, still an untried youth, they took him into battle. He only went to carry a shield upon his back.

And when [he was] already a youth, if mature and prudent, if he was discreet in his talking, and especially if [he was] of good heart, then he was made a master of youths; he was named tiachcauh. And if he became valiant, if he reached manhood, then he was named ruler of youths (telpochtlato). He governed them all; he spoke for all the youths. If one [of them] sinned, this one judged him; he sentenced [the youths] and corrected them. He dealt justice.

And if he was brave, if he took four [captives] then he attained [the office of] commanding general, [or] chief. (Fray Bernardino de Sahagun, Florentine Codex 3, appendix 5, in Arthur J. O. Anderson and Charles E. Dibble, Florentine Codex [Santa Fe, NM: The School of American Research, 1952], 4:53.)

While Sahagun is writing about Aztecs, not Nephites, and about customs of a much later time, we do not know how far back the customs stretch. The custom, however, provides a plausible parallel for how a man could rise to be a commanding officer at an early age.

Feminized Courage and other Gender Ideas from the Book of Mormon

[The following is cross posted with permission from Morgan Dean].


In one of my more sarcastic moments I thought I should write some sort of feminist study of the Book of Mormon. But the more I started thinking about the topic the more I realized how fruitful it could be.

Whore Imagery:

In both Nephi’s visions (1 Nephi 14:12) and in a talk from Alma the Younger to his son there is a discussion of whores and harlots.(Alma 39: 3, 11) The sexual impurity contrasts with the laws of purity that described by John Welch.[1] He cites scriptures in the Law of Moses about being ritually pure (Deuteronomy 23:9; Joshua 3:5) and Book of Mormon verses with related concepts. These include Captain Moroni insisting that his soldiers not “fall into transgression,” (Alma 46:22) and the exceeding faith and purity of the Stripling Warriors. (Alma 53:21; 57:26) One of the central promises of the Book of Mormon concerns those that prosper for keeping commandments. Hence sexual impurity would stand as a significant loss of virtue and strength.

A Women’s Tale:

In the very beginning of the story, in Mosiah 9:2 Zeniff has to relate the sad tale of civil war and strife to the new widows. Before facing battle Zeniff hid his women and children in the wilderness. (Mosiah 10:9) Underlining the importance of sexual purity and honoring covenants, one of the first things King Noah does is begin take many wives and concubines. ( Mosiah 11:2) The soldiers of King Noah were forced to leave behind their women and children. (Mosiah 19:11) These soldiers were so angry they rebelled and burned King Noah at the stake. (Mosiah 19:19-20) The remaining soldiers that didn’t flee with King Noah put their women in front of their army to mollify the Lamanite force. (Mosiah, 19:13) (That tactic worked which raises all sorts of questions.) In Mosiah 20:1-5 the priests of King Noah abduct Lamanite daughters. (In chapter two of my book I suggest this is an early version of bride stealing- see also Helaman 11:33.) The people of Limhi are blamed and then attacked and they fought with extra vigor for their women and children. (Mosiah 20: 11) (This of course, predates the famous Title of Liberty, and also underscores the same tactic used by Mormon, Mormon 2:23-24) And towards the end of the story in Mosiah 21:17 we find so many widows that the remaining men had to support them.

Upon closer reflection it seems the fate of women and children are closely intertwined with the entire story of the people of Zeniff. Their inclusion accounts for motivation of many of the actors, adds pathos to the major events, and makes this one of the more inclusive and humanistic accounts in the Book of Mormon. This is so intriguing I will likely transform this into a full paper.

Masculine Courage?

The famous Stripling Warriors often give credit to their mothers for their victory. (Alma 56: 47-48) What is interesting is this feminized origin of martial bravery. Many narratives would place the origins of courage in a father based setting. Perhaps the warriors learned courage from hunting with their fathers, (see Enos 3) or from a campaign on which they accompanied their fathers as children. But here they learned battlefield courage from their mothers. This could represent the somewhat unique situation where their fathers refused to take up arms. So the Stripling Warriors had little chance to witness combat from their fathers. Or this could be an intriguing lesson from Mormon. It could act as a subversive teaching that undercuts the idea that fighting is exclusively man’s business. One of my favorite Disney songs is “Be a Man” from Mulan, since by the end of the movie the soldiers are dressed like women and following the lead of the female protagonist. The reference to mothers could also undermine the idea that people need to fight in the first place. After all, the pertinent teaching here is a trust in God, which is similar to idea of surrendering our lives, and control of our lives, to the care of Heavenly Father found in step three of the LDS recovery program. (See also Alma 61:12-13)

Token of Bravery:

In one of the last chapters of Moroni we read about the horrible treatment of women and children in probably the most graphic verses in all of scripture. The Nephite women and children are held captive by the Lamanites and forced to eat the flesh of their slain husbands or fathers. While the Lamanite women are captured, raped, and then eaten ravenously as a token of bravery. (Moroni 9:8-10) The phrase, token of bravery is interesting and makes me wonder what other tokens of bravery they had. I know for example that many of the elite Aztecs wore the bones of their dead enemy, and rather colorful clothes. The word token is also associated with the temple, so I wonder if this is some sort of perverse ceremony that took place in the corrupted Nephite temples. Sacrifices to the gods were a part of pre-battle rituals of Mesoamerica. So if the Nephites had apostatized to the God of War, and we know that a warlike cult from Teotihuacan (modern Mexico city) was spreading throughout Mesoamerica at this time, it would make sense that a brutal act of conquest against women would satisfy that false God. It would also act as almost the exact opposite of the Laws of Purification expected of God’s people. This works thematically too, since the last chapter exhorts the readers to study the book, remember God’s mercy,(Moroni 10:3) and then apply Christ’s saving power in their lives. (Moroni 10: 32-33) Much like the book Hosea in the Bible, that uses an unfaithful and whoring wife to highlight the strength of God’s covenants, the depravity of chapter nine could serve to highlight the sanctifying and saving power of Christ in chapter ten.

As you can see, a study of women and their associations with sex raise a host of interesting issues that would enhance our understanding of the Book of Mormon. These are a few preliminary ideas and essentially little more than a brainstorming session but I look forward to presenting these ideas in greater detail.

**********


[1] John Welch, "Law and War in the Book of Mormon," in Warfare and The Book of Mormon, Stephen Ricks, William Hamblin eds. (Provo, Salt Lake City: FARMS, Deseret Book, 1991).


By Morgan Deane, cross-posted from Warfare and the Book of Mormon.

Eat This: Logistics in the Book of Mormon

[Morgan Deane hosts an excellent blog Warfare and the Book of Mormon. The following is cross posted with his permission].


Mormon doesn’t include many details in his narrative of the destruction of the Nephites, his most frequent refrain is that he doesn't want to dwell on the war they are losing; but in a letter to his son we do get an interesting tidbit. Moroni 9:16-

And again, my son, there are many widows and their daughters who remain in Sherrizah; and that part of the provisions which the Lamanites did not carry away, behold, the army of Zenephi has carried away, and left them to wander whithersoever they can for food; and many old women do faint by the way and die.

This verse is intriguing for several reasons. I first thought of it in response to a critic attempting to describe how logistical problems of feeding groups as large as the quarter million mentioned in chapter six would be impossible and lead to starvation. According to his logic therefore the Book of Mormon was obviously a fiction from Smith’s mind.[1] So while the account was rather brief, in one of the most detailed letters we do see examples of logistical problems that led to combat over limited provisions and starving civilians.[2] Of course, chapter 9 also mentions acts of cannibalism on both sides, so the assumption that they were living on a normal diet, and would need the normal amounts of food listed in such places as Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army, Supplying War, and even Aztec Warfare wouldn’t apply in this situation.[3] On top of this, the prisoners taken by the Lamanites were only fed the flesh of their relatives. (Moroni 9:8) So what we have here could be the practical implications of excessive war in addition to spiritual decay.

Moreover, I’ve often compared the large numbers in the Book of Mormon to the Chinese War of the Eight Princes. Unsurprisingly, their bloody war featuring massive numbers of people and the end of a nation also featured cannibalism. As I wrote in chapter one of my upcoming book (highlights added):

The Princes of the Jin dynasty laid waste to the rival cities. The citizens in and around the capital city of Luoyang were almost continuously looted, raided, starved, eaten, conscripted and attacked by Chinese and barbarian forces until one of the largest cities of the 3rd century world and most prosperous regions was desolate. The city of Luoyang had an estimated 600,000 people, and the army may have had as many as 700,000 people at the start of the war. And even suggested peace plans and the heads of rival generals couldn’t stay the slaughter.

And contemporary and later Chinese historians recorded:

By the [end of the war] trouble and disturbances were very widespread….many suffered from hunger and poverty. People were sold [as slaves]. Vagrants became countless. In the [provinces around the capital] there was a plague of locusts…Virulent disease accompanied the famine. Also the people were murdered by bandits. There rivers were filled with floating corpses; bleached bones covered the fields…There was much cannibalism. Famine and pestilence came hand in hand.

The verse also mentions several armies. The Lamanites are naturally listed. But then he mentions the army of Zenephi. This doesn’t seem like a Lamanite army or Mormon wouldn’t have listed it right after them. So it is either an independent army from another power, or a Gadianite army. Mormon uses the term “my army is weak” in the next verse and laments that he could no longer enforce his commands. So we may infer that he commanded that the widows, and civilians in general be protected and provided with food. But the Nephite army led by Zenephi disobeyed those commands and took the supplies they needed. (17-18)

Notice also, how close this commander’s name is very similar to Nephi. A brief search of the term suggests it is a hybrid Egyptian and Hebrew name meaning, “one of Nephi.” But given this is an apostate general I like the Hebrew term that means “one of lighting.” https://onoma.lib.byu.edu/onoma/index.php/ZENEPHI

Strategically this implies that the Nephites were pressed on several fronts. All the armies were close to the tower of Sherrizah, but Mormon could not reach it. So the Lamanite army occupied what is called the central position. This allowed the Lamanites to shift and mass their forces between the army of Mormon and that of Zenephi as necessary. While the Nephites armies would each have to attack on their own. Since Zenephi is not following the orders of Mormon it is unlikely that would work. Napoleons early campaigns in Italy, and Stonewall Jackson at the battles of Cross Keys and Port Republic used this to maneuver to great effect.[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jackson%27s_Valley_Campaign_May_21_-_June_9,_1862.png

Mormon also mentioned that he lost several choice men in battle. These could be previously loyal commanders of other armies. Or it could be sub commanders in his army. Again using the American Civil War and Napoleonic Wars, as the war dragged on the brilliant commanders like Lee and Napoleon increasingly had to rely on less capable and less trustworthy generals. This trend could only have been worse in an ancient society, and one like the Nephites where I’ve argued before that they were only a dominant city state of a coalition than a large hegemonic power like the Romans.[5]

Finally, we realize more about Mormon as a man. He cares deeply about his people, and the only details of battle he gives are the loss of righteous men, the horrible treatment of prisoners by forces on both sides, and the suffering of widows. While he was a commander capable of earning the respect of his people and was given leadership at a young age. He cared more about the spiritual welfare of his people. Given the horrors he witnessed and constant fighting it is amazing he held to a belief and hope in Christ. While all of my strategizing is good, it is better that we remember the struggle that Mormon and Moroni truly cared about, the salvation of their brethren. Thus a nuanced and detailed analysis of the Book of Mormon helps us understand its many dimensions, but also gives us additional context and a deeper understanding of its primary mission. Thanks for reading.

[1]This is my best representation of the argument. Arguments from critics often lack detailed reasoning, have poor grammar, and often simply want to score rhetorical points, to the point that I have to fill in the blanks the best that I can. Ironically, they still accuse me of being the brainwashed idiot.

[2] This has important anthropological implications as well, since fighting over limited resources is one of the reasons given for conflict in society. 

[3] Engles, D. W. (1978). Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army. Berkely: Univeristy of California Press. Creveld, M. V. (1977). Supplying War: Logistics from Wallenstein to Patton. London: Cambridge University Press.  Hassig, R. (1988). Aztec Warfare: Imperial Expansion and Political Control. Norman, London: University of Oklahoma Press.

[4] I’m glad my Master’s Thesis on Stonewall Jackson is still useful.

[5] This thought is expanded upon in chapter two of my upcoming book. http://mormonwar.blogspot.com/2010/12/nephite-politics.html


By Morgan Deane, cross-posted from Warfare and the Book of Mormon.

Scimitars in Mesoamerica in Book of Mormon Times (Howlers # 19)

Part 3

Hassig suggests that the short sword is a Post-classic Toltec invention and was unknown in Mesoamerica before this time (Hassig, War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica, 112-13), however, curved scimitar-like long daggers are portrayed in the hands of warriors at Teotihuacan circa A.D. 450 (Arthur G. Miller, The Mural Painting of Teotihuacan. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1973, 85, 116, 162). A monument from Tonina, Mexico, which dates to A.D. 613, shows a noble posing with a curved “scimitar-like flint blade” (Mary Miller and Simon Martin, Courtly Art of the Ancient Maya. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2004, 188, plate 106). A figurine found today in the Museo Regional de Campeche, which most likely dates from this period, portrays a warrior wearing a death mask who grasps an unhappy captive in his right hand and a curved weapon in his raised left hand with which he is about to decapitate his victim. The weapon in the figure’s left hand has been called an ax by some scholars, but given its curved form it could just as well be a scimitar (Linda Schele, Hidden Faces of the Maya, 1997, 100-101).

       Similar blades are portrayed in classic and preclassic Maya art from Comitan, Loltun Cave, Izapa,and La Venta, Mexico, and at Kaminaljuyu in highland Guatemala (Roper, “Swords and `Cimeters’ in the Book of Mormon,” 35-40).  Curved scimitar-like blades are also portrayed on several monuments at the Olmec site of San Lorenzo in southern Veracruz (1500-900 BC). Ann Cyphers, currently the leading archaeologist at the site observes that Monuments 78 and 91 portray weapons resembling the Aztec macuahuitl, except that they are curved. Monument 78 “has a curved body with eleven triangular elements encrusted in the sides” (Ann Cyphers, Escultura Olmeca de San Lorenzo Tenochtilan. Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, 2004, 145).  Monument 112 portrays a figure with a curved dagger in his belt (Cyphers, 190, figure 126). Monument 91 also displays “an object in the form of a curved macana with 14 triangular points” including one on the tip (Cyphers, 159). These weapons appear to represent variants of the same curved “short sword” weapon known from later postclassic art. This suggests that Mesoamerican scimitars were not a late innovation, but were known from preclassic times as the Book of Mormon text suggests.

Mesoamerican Scimitars (Howlers # 19)

Part 2

Ross Hassig has identified a curved weapon portrayed in Postclassic Mesoamerican art which he calls a “short sword”  (Ross Hassig, War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1992, 112-13;  “Weaponry,” in Susan Toby Evans and David L. Webster, eds., Archaeology of Ancient Mexico and Central America: An Encyclopedia. New York and London: Garland Publishing, 2001, 810-11; Mexico and the Spanish Conquest. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2006, 23-24; “La Guerra en la Antigua Mesoamerica,” Arqueologia Mexicana 14/84 Marzo-Abril 2007: 36. See also Esperanza Elizabeth Jimenez Garcia, “Iconografia guerrera en la escultura de Tula, Hidalgo,” Arqueologia Mexicana 14/84 Marzo-Abril 2007: 54-59).

       It was a curved weapon designed for slashing and consisted of a flat hard wooden base approximately 50 cm. (20 inches) long into which were set obsidian blades along both edges. “It was an excellent slasher and yet the forward curve of the sword retained some aspects of a crusher when used curved end forward” (Hassig, War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica, 113). The lightness of the short sword enabled the soldier to carry more than one weapon. “Soldiers could now provide their own covering fire with atlatls while advancing and still engage in hand-to-hand combat with short swords once their closed with the enemy” (Hassig, Mexico and the Spanish Conquest, 23-24).

This weapon or something very similar may have been used until shortly before the arrival of the Spanish in some sectors of Mesoamerica. Huastec engravings on shell show “a sort of curved club, apparently of wood and with a cutting edge” which may have been a similar weapon (Guy Stresser-Pean, “Ancient Sources on the Huasteca,” in Handbook of Middle American Indians 11 1971, 595). Hassig reported that short swords are portrayed in the hands of warriors on a Aztec monument from the ceremonial center at Tenochtitlan and took this as evidence that the weapon was either “still in use or at least remembered as a functional weapon” at that time (Hassig, War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica, 248, note 8).  Reportedly among the weapons used by the ancestors of Guatemalan peoples were “certain scimitars they say were made of flint” (“Descripcion de la provincia de Zapotitlan y Suchitepequez,” Sociedad de Geografia e Historia de Guatemala, Anales 28 1955: 74).  Another tradition relates that the Pre-Columbian ancestral heroes of certain west Mexican tribes taught their people to make fire and “gave them also machetes or cutlasses of iron” (Robert H. Barlow, “Straw Hats,” Tlalocan 2/1 1945: 94). Interestingly, if credited, this may suggest that pieces of iron may have sometimes been used as scimitar or machete-like blades rather than obsidian. In any case, this weapon seems to be a reasonable candidate for the Book of Mormon scimitar (William J. Hamblin and A Brent Merrill first suggested this correlation in “Notes on the Cimeter (Scimitar) in the Book of Mormon,” Warfare in the Book of Mormon, 361. For a more detailed discussion see Matthew Roper, “Swords and `Cimeters’ in the Book of Mormon,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 8/1 1999: 39-40, 41-43; Roper, “Mesoamerican `Cimeters’ in Book of Mormon times,” Insights: An Ancient Window 28/1 2008: 2-3).

Ancient Near Eastern Scimitars (Howlers # 19)

Part 1

A Cimeter (more commonly spelled scimitar) is a sword  “having a curved blade with the edge on the convex side” or “something resembling a scimitar (as in sharpness or shape); esp: a long-handled billhook” (Webster’s Third International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged 1993). Critics have long claimed that the scimitar was unknown before the rise of Islam and that references to this weapon in the Book of Mormon is anachronistic.


I might urge the utterance of ideas and the use of words which these ancient writers, if genuine, could not have known, as an argument against the authenticity of the book. Such as . . . . Cimeters.”

John Hyde Jr., Mormonism: Its Leaders and Designs (1857), 234-35.

The book contains evidence of its modern origin . . . . The cimeter, a Turkish weapon, not known until after the time of Mohommed.

Samuel Hawthornthwaite, Adventures Among the Mormons (1857), 69.

The use of the word `scimitar’ does not occur in other literature before the rise of Mohammedan power and apparently that peculiar weapon was not developed until long after the Christian era. It does not, therefore, appear likely that the Nephites or the Lamanites possessed either the weapon or the term.

W. E. Riter to James E. Talmage, August 22, 1921.

Cimeters were curved swords used by the Persians, Arabs, and Turks, half a world away from America and appearing a thousand years too late in history to enter the picture.

Gordon Fraser, Joseph Smith and the Golden Plates (1964), 58.

Scimitars are unknown until the rise of the Muslim faith (after 600 A. D.)

James Spencer, The Disappointment of B.H. Roberts (1991), 4.

There are other anachronisms such as . . . cimeter, the latter presumably an Arabian scimitar that "did not originate before the rise of Islam" more than a millennium  after Lehi.

Earl Wunderli, An Imperfect Book: What the Book of Mormon Tells Us About Itself (2013), 36.


We now know that scimitars of various forms were known in the Ancient Near East as early as 2000 B.C. (Yigael Yadin, The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963, 1: 10-11, 78-79, 172, 204-207; William J. Hamblin, Warfare in the Ancient Near East to 1600 BC. London and New York: Rutledge, 2006, 66-71, 279-80). They are subsequently portrayed in martial art from Mesopotamia and Egypt. Rare archaeological specimens of this weapon have also been found. The cutting edge was usually on the convex side, however some were double-edged such as the “curved sword sharpened on two sides” discovered at Shechem which dates to 1800 B.C. (“Arms and Weapons,” in Charles F. Pfeiffer, ed., The Biblical World: A Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology. New York: Bonanza Books, 1966, 93). “Ancient representations show mostly the employment of the inner blade; that of the outer one is however also perhaps to be found. Preserved oriental scimitars have the blade outside” (G. Molin, “What is a Kidon?” Journal of Semitic Studies 1/4 October 1956: 336).

In the biblical account of David’s confrontation with Goliath the Philistine champion is said to be well armored. In addition to his spear he had both a hereb sword with a sheath (1 Samuel 17:51) and a kidon which he carries between his shoulders (1 Samuel 17:6). The term kidon was once a mystery, but texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls suggest that it was some kind of sword and is now widely acknowledged to have been a scimitar (Paul Y. Hoskisson, “Scimitars, Cimeters! We have scimilars! Do we need another cimeter?” in Warfare in the Book of Mormon, 352-59. G. Molin, “What is a Kidon?” 334-37; Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel. New York and Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1965, 1:242). When challenged in 1 Samuel 17:45 David responds to his opponent, “You come against me with a sword [hereb] and spear [hanit] and scimitar [kidon], but I come against you with the name of Yahweh Sabaoth, god of the ranks of Israel” (See P. Kyle McCarter, Jr., 1 Samuel. New York: Doubleday, 1980, 285). Interestingly, as Hoskisson observes, the biblical description in the Hebrew text parallels that in Alma 44:8 in which the Zoramite chieftain carries both a sword and a scimitar (Hoskisson, “Scimitars, Cimeters!" 355).