Tuesday, July 21, 2020

Destruction of Records in Ancient America and the Book of Mormon

Men of Ammonihah burn the scriptures of believers (churchofjesuschrist,org)

The Nephite prophet-historians carefully preserved their most valuable records which were privately passed down from generation to generation with stern admonitions to keep them safe from abuse and destruction (Alma 37:14-18). Enos, the son of Nephi's priest brother Jacob wrote that their Lamanite enemies, "swore in the wrath that, if it were possible, they would destroy our records and us, and also all the traditions of our fathers" (Enos 1:14), and the Book of Mormon shows that it was only through painstaking labor that they were able to be successful in doing so. Not long before the annihilation of the Nephites, Mormon recorded,

Knowing this to be the last struggle of my people, and having been commanded of the Lord that I should not suffer the records which had been handed down by our fathers, which were sacred, to fall into the hands of the Lamanites, (for the Lamanites would destroy them) therefore I made this record out of the plates of Nephi, and hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records which had been entrusted to me by the hand of the Lord, save it were these few plates which I gave unto my son Moroni (Mormon 6:6).

Attempts to destroy records of the past have a long a tragic history and the history of ancient Mesoamerica is no exception. "Deliberate destruction of records," writes Nichoson, "frequently accompanied pre-hispanic as well as post-Conquest military takeovers. As always, one of the principles prizes of military victory was the past (cf. Orwell's `who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.'), and conscious alteration of existing records for political advantage in the wake of conquests and related upheavals must have been common.--and creates problems in long range chronological interpretation" (H. B. Nicholson, Western Mesoamerica: 900-1620," in R. E. Taylor and Clement W. Meighan, eds., Chronologies in Ne World Archaeology. New York: Academic Press, 1978, 320).

The Spanish Conquest led to the irreparable loss of valuable historical knowledge about the pre-columbian past. Diego Duran, who sought to reconstruct the history of the Mexica wrote with frustration, "Some early friars burned ancient books and writings and thus they were lost. Then too, the old people who could write these books are no longer alive to tell of the settling of this country,and it was they whom I would have consulted for my chronicle" (Doris Heyden, ed., The History of the Indies of New Spain. Norman and London: University of Oklahoma Press, 1994, 20). The sparse details concerning Tlaxcaltecan rulers given in the Anonimo Mexicano, a document written decades after the Conquest, sadly points to the dearth of historical knowledge caused by the loss of such records. 

From Diego Rivera's mural The History of Mexico (Wikipedia Commons)

In a passage which speaks of earlier kings the writer recounts


He was called Cuauhtzinteuctli, grandson of the ruler of Acolhua. And he made himself the ruler. and this ruler's accomplishments were not written, because the books about his rulership perished. The he was succeeded by Ilhhuicamina. After he died, Matlaccoatl followed behind him and was made ruler. After this ruler died, a son called Tezcacoatl received the rulership. After this Tezcacoatl died, one named Tezcapoctli ruled. After this Tezcapoctli died, the lord Teotlehuac followed him. But the accomplishments of all these lords are not found in the painted books. When the Spanish entered, they destroyed all these books (Richley H. Crapo and Bonnie Glass-Coffin, ed., Anonimo Mexicano. Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press, 2005, 26).\

In Yucatan, Bishop Diego de Landa caused the destruction of numerous Mayan codices of which less than a handful survive today. He wrote:

These people also made use of certain characters or letters, with which they wrote in their books their ancient matters and their sciences, and by these drawings and by curious signs in these drawings, they understood their affairs and made others understand them and taught them. We found a large number of books in these characters and, as they contained nothing in which there were not to be seen superstition and lies of the devil, we burned them all, which they regretted to an amazing degree, and which caused them much affliction (Alfred M. Tozzer, ed., Landa Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan. Cambridge: Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, 1941, 169).  

Bernardo de Lizana wrote that Landa discovered a cache of idols in a cave.

Thus he collected the books and the ancient writing and he commanded them burned and tied up. They burned many historical books of the ancient Yucatan which told of its beginning and history, which were of much value if, in our writing, they had been translated because today there would be something original. At best there is no great authority for more than the traditions of these Indians (Tozzer, 78).

Subsequent Spanish Clergy and historians lamented the willful destruction of such records.

With suspicion of this idolatry, they collected all the books and ancient writings which the Indians had and in order to erase all the danger and memory of their ancient rites, as many as they were able to find we burned publicly on the day of the auto and at the same time with these (were destroyed) the history of their antiquities (Diego Lopez de Cogolludo, in Tozzer, 78).

Afterwards some of our friars understood and knew how to read them, and even wrote them, but because in these books were mixed many things of idolatry, they burned almost all of them, and thus was lost the knowledge of many ancient matters of that land which by them could have been known (Alonzo de San Juan Ponce, in Tozzer, 78).

In the province of Yucatan, where is the so-called Bishopric of Honduras, there used to exist some books of leaves, bound or folded after a fashion, in which the learned Indians kept the distribution of their times and the knowledge of plants, animals, and other things of nature and the ancient customs, in a way of great neatness and carefulness. It appeared to a teacher of doctrine that all this must be to make witchcraft and magic art; he contended that they should be burned and those books were burned and afterwards not only the Indians but many eager-minded Spaniards who desired to know the secrets of that land felt badly. The same thing has happened in other cases where our people, thinking that all is superstition, have lost many memories of ancient and hidden things which they might have used to no little advantage. This follows from a stupid zeal, when without knowing or even wishing to know the things of the Indians, they say as in the sealed package, that everything is sorcery and that the peoples there are only a drunken lot an what can they know or understand. The ones who have wished earnestly to be informed of these have found many things worthy of consideration (Jose de Acosta, in Tozzer, 78).

Native accounts from the Valley of Mexico indicate that during the reign of Itzcoatl (1427-1440) many Aztec records were deliberately burned by Aztecs rulers themselves for ideological and propaganda purposes. The rulers at Tenochtitlan rewrote their own history and destroyed earlier versions. “Doris Heyden explains, "The Aztec had to be put in a favorable light in order to eradicate their early and probably undistinguished past” (Heyden, 81, note 7). For example, according to the Florentine Codex, “A council of rulers of Mexico took place. They said: `It is not necessary for all the common people to know of the writings; government will be defamed, and this will only spread sorcery in the land; for it containeth many falsehoods” (Charles E. Dibble and Arthur J. O. Anderson, eds., The Florentine Codex. Book 10: The People. Santa Fe: School of American Research and the Museum of New Mexico, 1961, 191).  Joyce Marcus suggests that these burned histories likely, "contained the deeds of previous rulers, their genealogies, and their relations with neighboring peoples” (Joyce Marcus, Mesoamerican Writing Systems: Propaganda, Myth, and History in Four Ancient Civilizations. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1992, 146).

In the official Mexica version of the conquest of Azcopalzalco, the Mexica did not acknowledge the substantial aid they received from their allies, the Alcohua of Texcoco; in fact, they neglected to mention that they had had any help. To legitimize their new prominence, the Mexica also needed to establish that they had had a glorious and worthy heritage; thus, they decided to claim descent from the last great civilization, that of the Toltec. They also decided to elevate their patron deity of war, Huitzilopochtli, to a level above that of the other deities populating the cosmos. . . . Itzcoatl thought that the Mexica’s historical archives were no longer appropriate to their new-found prominence, so he burned them and wrote a new history that was more in line with current needs (Marcus 148-49). 


Madrid Codex


“The famous burning of the books by (Aztec) Itzcoatl," wrote Davies, "was hardly an isolated case and the Maya were surely not alone in ritually destroying their carved texts." He believes such codices, "were destroyed at intervals and history was then rewritten to suit the ruler of the day" (Nigel Davies, “The Aztec Concept of History: Teotihuacan and Tula,” in Jacqeline de Durand-Forest, ed., The Native Sources and the History of the Valley of Mexico. Oxford: BAR, 1984, 207). Monuments and Stela appear to have been frequently defaced and destroyed throughout most Mesoamerican history. Such monuments, written on stone, however, constituted only a small part of what once must have been a robust and widespread literary tradition of records written on perishable materials. The late Mayanist Michael Coe wrote that the end of the Classic Period of Maya culture sadly saw the destruction of many such records. 


It was not just the `stela cult’–the inscribed glorification of royal lineages and their achievements - that disappeared with the collapse, but an entire world of esoteric knowledge, mythology, and ritual. Much of the elite cultural behavior . . . such as the complex underworld mythology and iconography found on Classic Maya funerary ceramics, failed to re-emerge with the advent of the Post-Classic era, and one can only conclude that the royalty and nobility, including the scribes who were the repository of so much sacred knowledge, had "gone with the wind." They may well have been massacred by an enraged populace, and their screen-fold books consumed in a holocaust similar to that carried out centuries later by Bishop Landa (Michael D. Coe, The Maya, Fifth edition. London: Thames and Hudson, 1993, 128).

The deliberate destruction of records makes sense in light of the Book of Mormon which was written by a record keeping people. Nephite enemies had rival traditions which conflicted with those held by the Nephites (Mosiah 10:12-17; Alma 54:16-18; 3 Nephi 3:10). Nephites dissenters, some of whom found value in keeping records for economic reasons, were not particularly interested in preserving much of the Nephite tradition itself (Mosiah 24:5-7). And the Lamanites actively sought to destroy Nephite records and traditions (Enos 1:14; Mormon 6:6). Records written on perishable materials would not likely have survived (Jacob 4:1-2; Alma 14:8). Original documents written on permanent material such as plates were carefully preserved and hidden up to come forth at a future day, but persistent efforts, following the last war to destroy anything considered Nephite would most likely insure that other Nephite records written in reformed Egyptian would not survive. When we think of the people of the people of Lehi as one pre-columbian group among many, it seems more understandable how the records of such a group might no longer be found in archaeological remains.



Saturday, June 1, 2019

Buyer Beware: Review of the Annotated Book of Mormon

President M. Russell Ballard recently counseled teachers and instructors in the Church, "not to pass along faith promoting or unsubstantiated rumors or outdated understandings and explanations of our doctrine and practices from the past. It is always wise to . . . consult the works of recognized, thoughtful, and faithful LDS scholars to ensure you do not teach things that are untrue, out of date, or odd and quirky." Here is a detailed 8 part review of book which is a prime example of what happens when we refuse to follow that Apostolic counsel. Differences of opinion and interpretation about Book of Mormon geography don't bother me. Everybody has a right to their own opinion. What is troubling is where books like the one reviewed below make factually, demonstrably erroneous claims that, if left unchecked, will damage the faith of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when they discover many of those things are problematic or untrue. There are many solid evidences of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. But the claims, as presented in this book cannot be relied upon. Buyer Beware.


Thursday, May 30, 2019

Has the Location of the Hill Cumorah Been Revealed?

Some have recently claimed that the location of the Hill Cumorah has been identified by revelation and that the New York Hill, called by that name today is the same hill at which the Nephites and Jaredites of the Book of Mormon were destroyed. Other Latter-day Saints who have examined the historical evidence have concluded that name of the New York Hill is likely based upon old tradition rather than a revelation of the geographical location of Mormon's Cumorah. Do those who hold the latter view reject the Prophets?

In recent decades Church leaders and historians have expressed caution concerning the location of the ancient hill. See for example, a recent statement from the official website of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints by two Church historians "Saints and Book of Mormon Geography."

Recently, the Church has also issued another statement affirming that the Church does not have an official position on the location of events in the Book of Mormon beyond affirming that they took place somewhere in the Americas. The Church welcomes humble and careful study of the subject, but cautions the Saints not to represent their personal interpretations as those of the Church.

On this see also my earlier post  "A New York Cumorah: Not a Hill We Have to Die On"

Here is the latest from the Pan on this question

"Has the Location of the Hill Cumorah Really Been Revealed?"


Neville-Neville Land


A number of years ago I discussed some of the concerns I had over the rise of what has come to be known as the Heartland Movement.

"Losing the Remnant: The New Exclusivist `Movement' and the Book of Mormon," FARMS Review 22/2 (2010): 87-124.

"Joseph Smith, Revelation, and Book of Mormon Geography," FARMS Review 22/2 (2010): 15-85.


In 2015 I also addressed some of the writings and claims of Jonathan Neville who is currently one of the leaders of this movement.

"The Treason of the Geographers: Mythical `Mesoamerican' Conspiracy and the Book of Mormon," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-Day Saint Faith and Scholarship 16 (2015): 161-205.


"John Bernhisel's Gift to a Prophet: Incidents of Travel in Central America and the Book of Mormon," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-Day Saint Faith and Scholarship 16 (2015):207-253.


"Zarahemla Revisited: Neville's Newest Novel," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-Day Saint Faith and Scholarship 17 (2015):17-61.


"Setting the Record Straight"


It appears that I have not been the only target such attacks. These now include CES, including the Seminary and Institute program of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Brigham Young University, the Church History Department, editors of the Joseph Smith Papers, Interpreter Foundation, FAIRMormon, Book of Mormon Central, and some of the art which may be hanging on our chapel walls.

I was recently surprised to note the appearance of Neville-Neville Land: Refuting the Errors of Jonathan Neville and Heartland Hoax. It seems that Peter Pan and Captain Hook have taken up the gauntlet and have been addressing the poor logic, misrepresentation, and escapades of the Neville-One.











Thursday, August 31, 2017

What is the significance of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon?

In the past several months Book of Mormon Central has published a number of research summaries relating chiasmus and the Book of Mormon. The following article, "Does Chiasmus Prove Anything about the Book of Mormon?" provides a concluding capstone to this recent series.

For the sake of those who may have missed some of these I list them here with links to them at Book of Mormon Central.

"How Was Chiasmus Discovered in the Book of Mormon?"

"How Much Could Joseph Smith Have Known about Chiasmus in 1829?'

"What Counts as Chiasmus?"

"How Did Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Writers Use Chiasmus?"

"Can Chiasmus Survive Translation?"

"Was Chiasmus Known to Ancient American Writers?"

"What Can We Learn from 10 of the Best Chiasms in the Book of Mormon? Part 1"

"What Can We Learn from 10 of the Best Chiasms in the Book of Mormon? Part 2"

"What Can We Learn from 10 of the Best Chiasms in the Book of Mormon? Part 3"

There have also been several news stories about the recent Chiasmus Jubilee on August 16. These reports only deal with the last and closing event of what was actually a two day international conference hosted by Book of Mormon Central at Brigham Young University and included both Latter-day Saint and non Latter-day Saint Scholars. We expect that the proceedings will be published sometime in the future.

Here is a transcript of Elder Jeffrey R. Holland's remarks at the Chiasmus Jubilee

Here is a brief report including some pictures of Elder Holland

and

"Chiasmus, a Columnist, and Conviction of the Book of Mormon"




Monday, January 16, 2017

A New York Cumorah? Not a Hill We Have to Die On



    In 1990, anti-Mormons began to circulate copies of a letter purportedly written by F. Michael Watson, Secretary to the First Presidency to a Bishop Darrell L. Brooks in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, dated October 16, 1990. In his letter, Watson noted that a member of Brooks’ ward had “inquired about the location of the Hill Cumorah mentioned in the Book of Mormon, where the last battle between the Nephites and Lamanites took place.”He then wrote, “The Church has long maintained, as attested to by the references in the writings of General Authorities, that the Hill Cumorah in western New York state is the same as referenced in the Book of Mormon” (F. Michael Watson to Darrell L. Brooks, 16 October, 1990).

    In 1993, while I was a student at BYU, I was also a part-time employee at the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS). Part of my responsibilities then included responding to frequently asked questions about the Book of Mormon which we often received. I was frequently at the office and remember when Brent Hall showed me a FAX from Michael Watson, then Secretary to the First Presidency. Brent allowed me to make a copy of it, which we found very helpful at the time in responding to questions about the 1990 letter, which anti-Mormons at Utah Mission in Marlow Oklahoma and Watchman Fellowship in Texas were then giving wide circulation. This was shared with me and others at the time, including some who had written to FARMS with questions. Additionally, Professor William Hamblin had also written directly to Michael Watson and received a copy of the same FAX from the Office of the First Presidency as well which he cited in an article published in the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies in 1993.

    Some writers have claimed without basis that the FAX was either a fabrication or was sent by a Church employee in Salt Lake City without the knowledge or support of the First Presidency or Michael Watson. These claims are baseless. The following is a copy of a two page document which I retain in my personal files. The first page is a cover memo written and signed by Brent Hall who was the office manager at FARMS during this time. The second page is the FAX in question. The cover memo or first page reads:

I thought you would be interested in this FAX from Michael Watson, secretary to the First Presidency. We have been receiving a number of questions from the Oklahoma, Texas area where anti-Mormons are using a letter from Brother Watson to a Bishop where Brother Watson said that the Church supports only one location for Cumorah, and that is the New York location. I talked with him on the phone the other day and told him of the questions that were coming to us. He responded that the First Presidency would like to clear up that issue and he would FAX me with the clarification.

The second page, the FAX itself is dated April 23, 1993 and was sent by Carla Ogden (presumably secretary working in the office) to Brent Hall at FARMS. It reads:

The Church emphasizes the doctrinal and historical value of the Book of Mormon, not its geography. While some latter-day Saints have looked for possible locations and explanations because the New York Hill Cumorah does not readily fit the Book of Mormon description of Cumorah, there are no conclusive connections between the Book of Mormon text and any specific site that has been suggested.

As indicated in this memo:

1) Brent Hall spoke directly with Michael Watson and discussed the questions that were being generated by his previous 1990 letter.

2) Watson informed Hall that the First Presidency wanted to clear up the misunderstanding (that the Church considered the location of the final battlefield in New York a matter of revelation and doctrinal importance) and that the forthcoming FAX was intended to address that misunderstanding.

3) The FAX itself, when the context is understood, constitutes a correction of the 1990 Watson letter as well as a clarification of the Church position on the subject. It is consistent with earlier statements by Church leaders that the question of the location of the final battlefield of the Jaredites and Nephites at Cumorah, as with other points of Book of Mormon geography, should not be considered a matter that has been settled by revelation, is not a standard of doctrinal orthodoxy, but remains an open question for careful students of the Book of Mormon.

[For details see my discussion “The Church and Book of Mormon Geography”]


Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Darkness and Destruction in 3 Nephi 8-10 (Howlers # 32)

"The author, evidently, mounts the fiery steed of his imagination and herds together every strange thing, every wonderful thing, every blood-curdling story, and every impossible thing he had ever heard of, or thought of, or dreamed of, and attempts, in this master effort, to combine them all in one huge miracle!"

M.T. Lamb, The Golden Bible (1887).

"The account of the convulsions of nature, which occurred in America at the time of Christ’s coming, would compel the geologist to re-examine his theories as to the formation of land and sea, and the astronomer to adjust his laws of the heavens to the wonderful three days of darkness."

F. S. Spalding, Joseph Smith, Jr., As A Translator (1912).

"Geology and the Book of Mormon are in irreconcilable"

T. C. Smith, The Book of Mormon and Mormonism (1912).


Wrong again. Those contrary rascals over at Book of Mormon Central provides an informative summary of recent research and perspectives.