New Series No.10

March 1997 A tax-exempt Research Corporation Since 1985

S.E.H.A. Division News

Research Division News

10.2 Izapa Archaeoastronomy Survey Discovers Venus Cosmic Mountain

Garth Norman conducted an archaeoastronomy field study at Izapa in January (1997) to refine his thesis data in Astronomical Orientations of Izapa Sculpture (1982 BYU thesis) for publication preparation. He was assisted in the technical survey by archaeoastronomer Nal Morris of Solametics Inc. With electronic theodolite and computer technology, a precise survey was accomplished that included producing an astronomical map of the eastern horizon. The new survey data refined but did not significantly change most prior results.

One interesting new find from this survey is that Izapa is oriented to the northern extreme standstill of Venus rise on the precise top of the volcanic peak of Tajumulco. Three sculptures that align on this Venus peak have prominent Venus related themes (Stelae 25, 50, Altar 60) that may relate to Quetzalcóatl. (See G. Norman, Izapa Sculpture, 1976, and 1982 above.) We are investigating this possible Venus/peak orientation at two other sites, with the possibility that this Venus cosmic mountain orientation could relate to the life god Quetzalcóatl. The results of this research will be reported as it develops.

Guest Article

10.3 The Land of Nephi by John A. Tvedtnes

During most of its history, the land of Nephi was under Lamanite control. Its original inhabitants were, however, Nephites who fled to the land of Zarahemla to avoid conflicts with their encroaching Lamanite neighbors. Some Nephites returned, however; and three generations of them lived side-by-side with the Lamanites. After they, too, fled to Zarahemla, the city of Nephi became the Lamanite capital.

The major cities located in the land of Nephi were Nephi, Shilom, Shemlon, Ishmael, Middoni, Lemuel, and Shimnilom. Many of the inhabitants of these cities were converted to the Nephite religion by the sons of Mosiah during the first quarter of the first century B.C. (Alma 23:8-13). They were unable to convert the inhabitants of the cities of Amulon, Helam, and Jerusalem, however (Alma 24: 1). Two of these-Amulon, Helam-were located in the wilderness, roughly en route to the land of Zarahemla. It is reasonable to assume that Jerusalem was in the same region.

A major characteristic of many-if not all of the cities mentioned in the Book of Mormon-is that they lay along a fault zone characterized by both earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. This is clear from the destruction described in 3 Nephi 8-9.

In this article, we shall summarize what is known from the Book of Mormon about cities in the land of Nephi and nearby lands.

The City of Nephi

The city of Nephi was founded by Nephi and his followers sometime between 586 and 556 B.C.1 Despite the fact that Nephi and his followers traveled "many days" to the site they named place Nephi (2 Nephi 5:7-8), by the fortieth year, they already had had wars and contentions with the Lamanites (2 Nephi 5:34; the manufacture of swords for defense is mentioned in 2 Nephi 5:14). These events imply that the two groups were not separated by a great distance. This distance proximity further indicated by the facts that Jacob, who lived in Nephi, knew of Lamanite family life (Jacob 3:3, 6-7) and that in his lifetime there were failed attempts to convert the Lamanites, with whom war broke out (Jacob 7:24-25). These wars continued during the next few generations (Enos 24; Jarom 7, Omni 1:1, 10).

The wars prompted many of the Nephites, perhaps most-to desert the city during the time of Mosiah I, ca. 150 B C.,2 and immigrate to a place called Zarahemla (Omni 1:12-13. Some, however, returned to Nephi in the days of Mosiah's son Benjamin (Omni 1:23-30), before 122 B.C. when Benjamin was succeeded by his son Mosiah II 3.

Mosiah 11, who reigned between ca. 12289 B.C., sent a search party to find the people who had gone up from Zarahemla to the city/land of Lehi-Nephi (Mosiah 7:1-2) They found the people were under Lamanite domination (Mosiah 7:15). Indeed, they were surrounded on every side by Lamnanites (Mosiah 21:5). The Nephites occupied the cities of Lehi-Nephi and Shilom, which had been yielded to them by the Lamanites when Zeniff first arrived in the land (Mosiah 7:7, 2 1; 9:6-7). The city of Nephi was close enough to the lands of Shilom and Shemlon (where the Lamanites lived) that, from a top a very high tower near the temple, one could see both these lands (Mosiah 11: 12; 19:5-6).

The Nephites deserted the city and fled to the land of Zarahemla early in Mosiah's reign (ca. 122-89 B.C.),4 leaving Nephi in the hands of the Lamanites. By ca. 72 B.C. (Alma 46:37), the city of Nephi "was the chief city" of the Lamanite kingdom (Alma 47:20), and the land of Nephi ran in a straight course from the East Sea to the west (Alma 50:8).

Topography

Nephi was higher in elevation than Zarahemla, from which it was separated by a wilderness.5 This wilderness evidently consisted of forest land, where wild beasts could be hunted (Enos 1:3). The city of Nephi was probably situated between the Lamenite land of Shemlon and the wilderness. When the Lamanites approached from the direction of the land of Shemlon, the Nephites fled into the wilderness, presumably in the opposite

direction (Mosiah 19:9, 23). Earlier, Zeniff had the women and children hide in the wilderness when the Lamanites attacked (Mosiah 10:9). Similarly, when Limhi saw the Lamanites preparing to attack (probably from the land of Shemlon; see Mosiah 28:1), he sent the people into the fields and forests (Mosiah 20:8).

Natural Resources

Among the natural resources used by the Nephites in the city of Nephi were wood (meaning forests) and an abundance of iron, copper, brass, gold, silver and other "precious ores."6 These resources imply a mountainous land. We are not sure which "precious things" that Nephi wanted to use in his temple were "not to be found upon the land" (2 Nephi 5:16). Although it is unlikely that wood will be found on the site of Nephi, some metallic artifacts may have been preserved.

Agriculture

The kinds of plants and animals raised are clues to the location of the city of Nephi. Some animals, for example, require pasturage, while some are restricted to specific climates. Climate altitude and soil conditions also determine the kinds of plants that can be grown. Pollens, ad sometimes seeds, is sometimes found during archaeological excavation, and bear evidence of the kinds of plants used during different time periods.

The original settlers of Nephi were able to grow much from seed, raised flocks, herds, and "animals of every kind" (2 Nephi 5:11). A generation later, Enos wrote of the Nephites having all manner of cattle of every kind, including goats, wild goats, and horses (Enos 2 1).

Zeniff's colony likewise grew corn, wheat, barley, neas, sheum, and all manner of fruits, and raised flocks and herds.7 King Noah planted vineyards (Mosiah 11:15). A generation later, wine was being given as tribute to the Lamanites (Mosiah 22:7, 10).

Structures

Among the structures one might expect to find at the site of Nephi are the following:

Fortifications. During the early generations (ca. 398 B.C.), the Nephites fortified their cities against the Lamanites. These fortifications were repaired by returning Nephites during the mid-second century B.C. (Mosiah 9:8). Two generations later, we read of both the wall and a gate (Mosiah 7: 10; 21:19, 23). Limhi and his people escaped from the city through a "back pass, through the back wall, on the back side of the city" (Mosiah 22:6).

Temple. Nephi built a temple "after the manner of the temple of Solomon, save it were not built of so many precious things" (2 Nephi 5:16). Jacob, Nephi's brother, taught in the temple (Jacob 1: 17). The temple of king Noah's day (second century B.C.)-which may or may not have been the one Nephi built-was ornamented with fine wood, gold, silver, copper, brass, and other "precious things" (Mosiah 11:10).

Seats for the high priests (built-in) were constructed "above all the other seats" and ornamented with gold. A breastwork before these seats enabled the priests to "rest their bodies and their arms" while speaking. The temple, still in use in Limhi's day, was large enough to assemble the city's inhabitants for a meeting (Mosiah 7:17).

Tower. A very tall tower had been built by king Noah near the temple, overlooking the lands of Shilom and Shemlon (Mosiah 11: 12; 19:5-6; 20:8).

Palace. Noah also built "a spacious palace," with a throne (perhaps built-in) "in the midst thereof," ornamented with "fine wood . . . gold and silver and . . . precious things" (Mosiah 11:9). Assuming that the king lived in the palace (in addition to its use for public functions), it must have contained living quarters sufficiently large to accommodate his many wives and concubines (Mosiah 11:2, 14). A Lamanite palace is noted in the early first century B.C. (Alma 22:1-2) and circa 72 B.C. (Alma 47:33-34), but we cannot ascertain from the text if these were different structures or rebuilt palaces.

Public buildings. During the time of king Noah, "many elegant and spacious buildings" were constructed in the city of Nephi. These were decorated with gold, silver, ziff, copper, brass, iron, wood, and other "precious things" (Mosiah 11:8).

Other buildings. There were some buildings in the city of Nephi during the first generations (2 Nephi 5:15; Jarom 8). Nephites returning under Zeniff erected buildings in the city (Mosiah 9:8).

Storage facilities. The people of Limhi, in preparation of their escape from the Lamanites, "kept together in a body as much as possible, and secured their grain and their flocks" (Mosiah 21:18). Presumably, they had storage and corral facilities within the city of Nephi, since they escaped out the "back pass" through the wall of the city (Mosiah 22:6).

Prison. There was a prison in the city at different periods of time (Mosiah 12:17; 17:5; 21:23). From the land of Zarahemla, then occupied by the land of Nephi (Helaman 5:16, 19), the sons of Helaman, ca. 50 B.C., went to the land of Nephi (Helaman 5:20) and were imprisoned in the same prison in which Ammon's search party had been placed earlier (Helaman 5:21-22), in the time of Limhi (Mosiah 7:7-8).

Smelters, quarries, etc. Because the Nephites worked in metals and stone while residing in the land of Nephi, future exploration might disclose the existence of mines, smelters, and quarries nearby. These would date from the time of Nephi until the departure of Mosiah I, between ca. 586 B.C. and 150 B.C. (2 Nephi 5:15-16) and from the time of the Nephite reoccupation of the land, during the second century B.C. (Mosiah 11:8-11). Since the Nephites also manufactured steel (Jarom 8), they would have had facilities for this. The nature of these workplaces would probably preclude finding them within the cities themselves, however.

Winepresses. King Noah constructed winepresses, which may, however, have been outside the city of Nephi (Mosiah 11: 15).

Artifacts

Among the artifacts that might be discovered in the ruins of the city of Nephi are:

Swords were in use from the time of Nephi until the Nephites' exodus from the city (2 Nephi 5:14; Omni 1:1, 10). The earlier swords are said to have been patterned after Laban's swords, which had a gold hilt and a steel blade (I Nephi 4:9); this may, however, refer only to the shape, not the material from which they were made.

Weapons and agricultural tools. In the days of Jarom, ca. 398 B.C. (Jarom 5), the Nephites were manufacturing "machinery . . . all manner of tools of every kind to till the ground" and weapons such as the "sharp pointed arrows, quivers, darts, and javelins" (Jarom 1:8). Weapons of war were also manufactured by the Zeniff colony (Mosiah 10:1).

Domestic tools. In the days of Zeniff, women in the city of Nephi spun cloth of various kinds (Mosiah 10:5). This would require tools, perhaps including spindles and looms. Wooden implements may not have survived, but stone spindle whorls might still be found.

One should expect to find on the site items made of gold, silver, iron, wood, copper, brass, steel, and other precious things (2 Nephi 5:15; Jacob 1:16; 2:12; Jarom 1:8; Mosiah 11:3, 8; 19:15; 22:12). Temple ornaments were made of these materials (Mosiah 11:9-11).

The City of Shilom

The city of Shilom first appears in the story of the Nephites who returned from Zarahemla to resettle the land of Nephi in the mid-second century B.C. Zeniff asked was granted the lands of Lehi-Nephi and Shilom by the Lamanite king (Mosiah 7:21; 9:6-7), and they remained in the Nephite hands until the colony fled to Zarahemla (Mosiah 7:7). Zeniff s group built buildings and repaired the walls of the cities of Lehi-Nephi and Shilom (Mosiah 9:8). After the Nephites abandoned the cities in the days of Limhi (Mosiah 22), the Lamanites retook it and appointed Amulon and the other former priests of Noah as teachers in Shilom, Shemlon and Amulon (Mosiah 24:1-2).

Topography and Agriculture

Shilom was near the lands of Nephi and Shemlon. From atop a very high tower near the temple in Nephi, one could see the Nephite land of Shilom and the Lamanite and of Shemlon (Mosiah 11: 12; 19:5-6), which means that these lands were lower in elevation than Nephi. Shilom appears to be on the road to Zarahemla. There was a hill north of Shilom where the Nephites under Mosiah I stopped en route to where they discovered Zarahemla (Mosiah 11:13). Arriving from Zarahemla two generation's later, Ammon's exploration party prepared to go "down" to Nephi at this hill. (Mosiah 7:5-6). So the hill was higher in elevation than the city of Nephi.

Limhi's people, fleeing to Zarahemla, departed into the wilderness from the city of Nephi and traveled around the land of Shilorn.8 This may imply that Shilom-which was not in the wilderness-was near Lamanite territory, where their departure might have been noted. Indeed, the Lamanite land of Shemlon may have been to the north of Shilom, which was evidently closer to Shemlon than was Nephi. We read that a Lamanite army, apparently

from the land of Shemlon, "came up upon the north of the land of Shilom" (Mosiah 10:7-8).

Elsewhere, * we learn that the land south of Shilom was suitable for watering and feeding flocks and for planting crops. A Lamanite army attacked the Nephites working in the fields and forced them to retreat to the city of Nephi (Mosiah 9:14-16). Evidently, Nephi was south of Shilom.

Structures

Nephites returning under Zeniff erected buildings in the land of Shilom (Mosiah 9:8). These may have been constructed in the days of Nephi (cf. 2 Nephi 5:15; Jarom 8). King Noah constructed many buildings in the land of Shilom and a tower atop the hill north of Shilom (Mosiah 11:13)

The City of Shemlon

We first read of the Lamanite land of Shemlon in the days of King Noah, who constructed a very high tower in the city of Nephi from which one could see the lands of Shemlon and Shilom (Mosiah 11: 12; cf. 19:5-6). The proximity of the three cities is further indicated by the fact that Zeniff sent spies from Nephi to the land of Shemlon to see the Lamanite preparations for war (Mosiah 10:7).

Shemlon was evidently north of Shilom, for when the Lamanites attacked in the days of Zeniff, the came on the north of Shilom (Mosiah 10:8). It was perhaps from Shemlon (see Mosiah 20: 1) that the Lamanites attacked the Nephites in the land of Nephi (Mosiah 20:9).

Topography

Nephi was higher in elevation than Shemlon, for the Lamanites "came up" against the Nephites (Mosiah 20:9). This is further implied by the fact that it was from the tower in Nephi that Limhi had seen the Lamanite preparations for war (Mosiah 20:1, 8). One would not expect him to see activities in a land higher in elevation than his own city.

Shemlon was near the wilderness. The priests of Noah, after fleeing the city of Lehi-Nephi, lay in wait in the wilderness outside the city and carried off some of the girls as wives (Mosiah 20:15). After the departure of Limhi's people from the land of Nephi, the Lamanite king appointed these priests to be teachers in Shilom, Shemlon, and Amulon (Mosiah 24:1-2).

Structures

There may have been cultic structures at the site in Shemlon where the Lamanite girls gathered to dance (Mosiah 20:1-2). A courtyard of some kind might have been located there.

The Waters of Mormon

The waters of Mormon are mentioned only in connection with the ministry of Alma I (Mosiah 18). The place was in the "borders of the land" (Mosiah 18:4, 3 1). A goodly number of Nephites from Lehi-Nephi went to Mormon to hear Alma and to be baptized in the waters (Mosiah 18:6- 10, 16-17). This means that the place was not at a great distance from king Noah's capital city. Indeed, the king learned of the meetings being held by Alma (Mosiah 18:32-33).

Topography and Agriculture

The waters of Mormon were located in the forest and were therefore possibly a lake (Mosiah 18:30). The -fountain of pure water" near a thicket of small trees where Alma hid probably denotes the waters in question (Mosiah 18:5).

But the region was also suitable for pasturage and planting of crops. Alma's followers had both flocks and grain, which they took with them when they fled into the wilderness (Mosiah 23: 1). The fact that they traveled only eight days before settling in another place shows how close to Mormon that wilderness was.9

That the people who assembled at Mormon were basically farmers is suggested by the flocks and grain they took with them and by the fact that when they arrived at their new home, they tilled the ground and constructed buildings (Mosiah 23:5). However, it is likely that they left no permanent structures in their temporary home at the waters of Mormon; for when they arrived at their next destination, they pitched tents prior to constructing buildings (Mosiah 23:1-5).

Ecology

The region of Mormon was infested at seasons by wild beasts (Mosiah 18:4). Because they were not present year-round, we assume they were migratory animals.

The City of Helam

The city of Helam was founded by Alma I and his followers about a century before Christ after they had fled from King Noah's army (Mosiah 23:1-5, 19-20). It was evidently named after Helam, the first person baptized by Alma at the waters of Mormon (Mosiah 18:12-14).

Helam was separated from Mormon by a wilderness (Mosiah 23:1, 3), which was evidently the same wilderness that separated the Lamanite and Nephite lands, for ultimately Alma's group went from Helam to Zarahemla (Mosiah 24:2325). Helam was an eight-day journey from the waters of Mormon for a group of about 450 persons fleeing with their animals and other possessions (Mosiah 23:3). It was evidently near Amulon, whose ruler of the same name was made king over the land of Helam by the Lamanite monarch (Mosiah 23:29). It may have been roughly between Amulon and Nephi.

Lamanites and Amulonites, having set out from Amulon to seek the land of Nephi, discovered Alma's People in Helam (Mosiah 23:30-36).

Topography and Agriculture

Helam is described as "a very beautiful and pleasant land, a land of pure water," with ground suitable for agricultural use (Mosiah 23:4-5; cf. 23:25-26). It is significant that the flocks and grains brought from the waters of Mormon grew well in the land of Helam (Mosiah 24:18).

Structures

Though buildings were constructed at Helam (Mosiah 23:5), it is possible that the site was occupied for only a few years by a very small population.10 The city may have had a wall, for during a Lamanite attack, farmers took refuge in the city (Mosiah 23:25-26).

The City of Amulon

The city of Amulon was founded in the second century B.C. by the priests of Noah (and named from their leader), after they had married Lamanite women captured at Shemlon (Mosiah 20:1-5; 23:31-32). The priests had lain in the wilderness outside the Shemlon and retreated into the wilderness, where they built Amulon.

The city of Amulon was roughly en route from the land of Nephi to the land of Zarahemla. Lamanites pursuing Limhi's people who fled from Nephi to Zarahemla were "lost in the wilderness" when they came across the Amulonites (Mosiah 22:15-16; 23:30-3 1).

Amulon was evidently not far from the cities of Shilom and Shemlon, for the priest Amulon was given authority by the Lamanites over the three cities (Mosiah 24:1-2). He was also made king over the land of Helam (Mosiah 23:39). The proximity of Amulon to the city of Nephi is evidenced by the fact that the Amulonites occasionally stole supplies from Nephi by night (Mosiah 21:20-2 1).

Topography and Agriculture

After fleeing into the wilderness (Mosiah 19:23; 20:23), the Amulonites evidently subsisted by stealing from the people in Nephi. But when discovered by the Lamanite army searching the fleeing Nephites from the city of Nephi, they had "begun to till the ground" (Mosiah 23:31). Assuming that the "wilderness" was forested land, it is possible that they used the "slash-and-burn" method of raising crops.

The City of Ishmael

Though in Lamanite-controlled territory and apparently near the land of Nephi (Alma 17:1920; 23:9; 25:13), Ishmael was not in the land of Nephi proper (Alma 20:1-2) and

had its own king (Alma 18:1-10, 12; 20:8). It may have been near the land of Middoni, whose king was an acquaintance of the king of Ishmael (Alma 20:2-5, 7-8, 28; 21:18). Ishmael is mentioned only in connection with events of the period of ca. 90-77 B.C.

Topography and Agriculture

Ishmael was lower in elevation than Nephi (Alma 20:1-2). Three days or less from the city of Ishmael lay the waters of Sebus, where flocks were brought for water (Alma 17:25-28, 31-33).

Structures and Artifacts

There was a prison (Alma 17:20) and synagogues (Alma 21:20-21) in the land of Ishmael. A royal sepulchre is also mentioned (Alma 19:1, 5).

Among the possible artifacts that could be found on the site are implements associated with chariot-pulling horses (Alma 18:9-10, 12), swords (Alma 20:14), and beds of some sort (Alma 18:43; 19:5).

The City of Middoni

Middoni is mentioned only in connection with events of the period of ca. 90-77 B.C. It was perhaps near the Lamanite village of Ani-Anti (Alma 21:1-2, 11-12), and appears to have been near the land of Ishmael, whose king was an acquaintance of the king of Middoni (Alma 20:25, 7-8, 28; 21:18). In Alma 24:5, we read of the land of Midian, which seems to be near Ishmael. This is probably a scribal or printer's error for Middoni, for it is the only occurrence of the name Midian as a New World city.

Topography and Structures

Middoni was lower in elevation than Nephi (Alma 22:1, 3). Nothing is known of the city itself except that it had a prison (Alma 20:2-5, 7, 28).

Other Lamanite Cities

Several Lamanite cities are mentioned so briefly in the Book of Mormon that we know very little about them. But their significance in geographical terms cannot be overlooked.

Jerusalem

The Lamanite-controlled city of Jerusalem was founded in the latter part of the second century B.C. or the early part of the first century B.C. by the Amulonites and Amalekites. It joined the borders of Mormon and was near the village of Ani Anti (Alma 21:1-2, 11-12; cf. 24: 1). At the time of Christ's crucifixion, Jerusalem sank into the earth and was covered by waters Q Nephi 9:67). We cannot be sure if those waters were a lake, a river, or the sea.

Laman

From its name, we presume that Laman was in Lamanite territory. We read of its destruction by fire at the time of Christ's crucifixion Q Nephi 9:10).

Ani-Anti

Nothing is known of the Lamanite village of Ani-Anti except that it was near the city of Jerusalem and perhaps near the land of Middoni and is mentioned in a text relating events of the first quarter of the second century B.C. (Alma 21:1-2, 11-12).

Siron

The city of Siron was in the Lamanite borderland, near the Zoramites, who lived in Antionum (Alma 39:2-3; cf. vs. 11). It is mentioned in a text relating events in ca. 74 B.C. The proximity of the Zoramite city of Antionum is also indicated in Alma 3 5: 10-11, where we read that the Zoramites began mingling with the Lamanites. (Alma 43:4). This prompted the Nephites to assemble armies in the land of Jershon, while the Lamanites gathered in the land of Antionum (Alma 43:4-5).

Notes

1. Lehi's , announcement of Jerusalem's impending destruction came in the first year of King Zedekiah (I Nephi 1:4), which would make it 598 B.C. He left his home soon thereafter (I Nephi 2:14). From biblical chronology, we know that this occurred in 586 B.C. Lehi evidently died soon thereafter (2 Nephi 4:12), and it was not long afterward that the city of Nephi was founded (2 Nephi 5:5-8)-the terminus ad quo of the thirtieth year since their departure from Jerusalem (2 Nephi 5:28).

2. Mosiah R died in the 509th year after Lehi's departure from Jerusalem, aged 63, following a reign of 33 years (Mosiah 29:46). This means that he was born in 446" year, i.e., 152 B.C., probably when his grandfather Mosiah I was still alive and king.

3. See the preceding note. 4. In the first year of the judges, Nehor slew Gideon, by then an old man (Alma 1:1-

9) and no longer the vigorous soldier he was at the time of the exodus from the land of Nephi (Mosiah 19:1-7; 20:17; 22:3-9). This was the year in which Mosiah abdicated and Alma 11 became the first chief judge, and the year in which Alma and Mosiah died (Mosiah 29:42-47).

5. Omni 1:27-29; Mosiah 7:4, 9, 13; 9:1-4; 19:18, 28; Alma 26:9, 23, 26. 6. 2 Nephi 5:15; Jacob 1:16; Jarom 8; 11:3, 8-9; 19:15; 22:112. Ziff listed with other

metals in Mosiah 11: 3, 8, probably derives from the Hebrew word meaning "brilliant, shining," and perhaps denotes electrum, a naturally occurring alloy of gold and silver.

7. Mosiah 7:22; 9:9, 12; 10:2, 4, 21; 11:3, 16-17; 21:18, 20-2 1; 22:2, 6, 8, 10-11.

8. Mosiah 22:8, 11. They went via a secret pass on the left of the Lamanite camp (Mosiah 22:7).

9. Mosiah 23:3; see also Mosiah 18:34-35; 21:34.10. The group consisted of about 450 souls (Mosiah 18:34-35; 21:34).

S.E.H.A. Question & Answer

10.4.1 Question: Are the parallels in Popol Vuh to the "tree of life" and the "forbidden tree" that could have originated from the Book of Mormon?

10.4.2 ANSWER: The Book of Mormon teaches the doctrine of the fall from the Genesis tree of life and the forbidden tree (2 Nephi 2:15-20; 42: 2, 7). There are subtle references to the same doctrine taught in story form in the Popol Vuh, Part 11, Chapter 3, that includes both tree symbols. Experts on the Popol Vuh are generally agreed, after much study, that the Popol Vuh is a genuine pre-Columbian sacred book of the Quiche Maya that was not composed around Biblical passages by the Indians, as some have supposed, to gain influence with the Spaniards. We can consider the Book of Mormon book of Nephi as the potential original resource record, because the Quiche chronicler knew there was an ancient book "no longer to be seen" from which his compilation of the Popol Vuh had originated (Recinos 1950:1617).

First, an ancient related source contemporary with the Book of Mormon has been observed on Izapa Stela 2, dating to about 200 B.C. In my Izapa Sculpture work (Norman 1976: 94) I compare the Calabash (gourd) tree on Stela 2 with the Popol Vuh underworld "tree of life." I believe there is a direct connection between these two sources. Two figures that appear to be offspring (fruit) of the Stela 2 tree compare to the hero twins, the first ancestors of the Quiche, who were sired when their mother, Xquic, partook of the forbidden gourd tree. They compare to Eve's first two sons born after she partook of the forbidden tree.

Other elements of this tree, which others have compared to the Book of Mormon tree of life that imparted eternal life, are the beauty of the tree with its sweet white fruit, and renewed life through the maiden partaking of its fruit. Careful examination of the details reveals that this gourd tree is closer to the "forbidden tree of knowledge of good and evil," and another tree represents the tree of life.

The maiden does not seem to have had knowledge that life would come from the tree (through her offspring) until after the fact. The fruit of the gourd tree is not described in the Popol Vuh text as being either beautiful or white. The maiden says, "Is it not wonderful to see how it is covered with fruit" which "must be very good?" Her wonderment was that the previously barren tree had become fruitful, not that it was beautiful. An assumption of beauty equating with white fruit can be made from the skull bone of Hun-Hunahpu placed in its branches being naturally white and the fruit matching the skull. In reality, the gourd is green, and only after losing its husk does the dried gourd pod take a beige color that resembles the skull. The skull of Hun Hunahpu hidden in the tree lamented that it had no flesh, because "the flesh is all which gives . . . a handsome

appearance," and after death, "men are frightened by their bones." So any whiteness in this context implies a bone fear of death, not beauty, joy, and life. Tedlock's Popol Vuh translation (page 114, footnote on page 274) observes that the reference to desirable, delicious fruit has to be metaphorical because the gourd is not edible, but the mystery is unsolved. Does it survive from an original tree of life or forbidden fruit account in the Book of Mormon?

An implied Book of Mormon tree of life correspondence is really nearer to Eve's encounter with the Genesis "tree of knowledge of good and evil" than to the tree of life. Adam and Eve were forbidden to partake of the fruit in consequence of death, and when Eve partook, they were cast out to the earth where they became mortal, had children, and became subject to death. They also had two sons, Cain and Abel, who became locked in a life-death struggle that introduced the ultimate evil of murder as part of the fall that had to be overcome by the redemption of Christ. This compares to the ancestral twins Hunahpu and Xbalanque of the Popol Vuh, who were locked in a life-death struggle with their two elder brothers. Because of their abusiveness, the two elder brothers were changed through sorcery into animals that resembled monkeys and went off and lived in the forest (Part II, Chapter 5). This compares to the elder brothers Laman and Lemuel who became cursed because of their rebellion and began living primitive lives in the forest (2 Nephi 5:21, 24). In this, we appear to have a Genesis account mixed with the original ancestors from Lehi's first four sons in the Book of Mormon.

The inhabitants of Xibalba were forbid en to approach the gourd tree, and the maiden in anticipation of partaking of its fruit said: "Must I die, shall I be lost, if I pick one of this fruit?" It was enticing, but a fear of death lingered from the skull that hung in this forbidden tree. I prefer this translation from Recinos rather than Tedlock's translation, who felt this passage makes more sense if it refers to the fruit dying and being wasted rather than the maiden.

The real tree of life in the Popol Vuh myth was not the Calabash but another tree. Upon her partaking of the Calabash, a judgment of death by sacrifice was pronounced upon the maiden, but she escaped death through the mediation of a "tree of light" that glowed when it provided red sap as a substitute for her blood and heart for a sacrifice in her behalf so that she could be exiled to the earth and live. The tree is identified as the Chuh Cakche, a large tree the Mexicans called ezauahuitl, "tree of blood," also identified in Chiapas, and in Guatemala where it is called Pilix and Cancante that is also distinguished for its white leaves and stems. Is not this white "tree of light" a direct reflection from the Book of Mormon tree of life?

An important point of correspondence, according to Mormon theology, is the condition that the human race would not have been propagated without Adam and Eve being exiled to the earth after partaking of the forbidden tree's fruit. Also, consequence of death that came with mortality was overcome through the atoning blood sacrifice of Christ as mediator in their behalf. And we learn from the Book of Mormon that the tree of life that ensured eternal life was the symbolic embodiment of Christ as the Redeemer through his atoning sacrifice (I Nephi 11).

-V. Garth Norman

References

Norman, V. Garth. 1976. Izapa Sculpture; Part 2 Text. Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation, No. 30. Provo.

Recinos, Adrian. 1950. Popol Vuh, the Sacred Book of the Ancient Quiche Maya. English version by D. Goetz and S. G. Morley from Spanish translation by Adrian Recinos. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Tedlock, Dennis. 1985. Popol Vuh; A Definitive Edition of the Maya Book of the Dawn of Life, and the Glories of God and Kings. Simon and Schuster, New York.

The Book Review

10.5 Review of a Recent Translation of The Popol Vuh by Dr. Allen J. Christenson.

The Popol Vuh is perhaps the most important among the handful of pre-Columbian books that have survived Spanish Conquest. As such, it has received a great deal of attention from LDS readers who are interested in the authentic reminiscences of people of possible Lamanite heritage. Dennis Tedlocks's recent translation of the Popol Vuh (Simon and Schuster, 1985) is a landmark contribution to a proper understanding of this Native American text. Although there have been many translations of the Popol Vuh over the years, this one must rank as the best and most authoritative to date.

The original text of the Popol Vuh was composed in highland Guatemala by anonymous lords of the Quiche Maya, shortly before the year 1558. Their stated intention was to preserve the religious and cultural knowledge of their people. It is written in elegant Quiché, and was, at least in part, based on an ancient hieroglyphic codex. The Popol Vuh is an acknowledged literary masterpiece, an expression of the Maya's most profound thoughts on the creation, the cycles of universal death and rebirth, and the origin of the Quichés as a great nation.

It is important to remember that the Popol Vuh was compiled more than a thousand years after the Book of Mormon account was completed, and its historical accounts refer to event dating no further back in time than the thirteenth century after Christ. It is therefore unreasonable to expect extensive references to Book of Mormon events of theology. Nevertheless, there are several intriguing passages which may represent Book of Mormon period influences. The authors of the Popol Vuh declared in their preamble to the text that the Quiché people arrived in Guatemala from "across the sea." This agrees with other Highland Maya documents such as the Annals of the Cakchiquels, which gives their place of origin as "the other side of the sea," or the Title of the Lords of Totonicapán, which speaks of the original Quiché home as being beyond "the other part of the ocean, from where the sun rises."

The Quiché version of the creation contained in the first section of the Popol Vuh is remarkably similar to that in the scriptural account of the Bible. The creator gods are arranged as a trinity, and it is by their divine word alone that the world is formed. The universe was said to have begun as a vast, lifeless sea from which dry land, vegetation, animals, birds, and finally man was created. As in Genesis, the first men were destroyed by a universal flood when they said to have descended voluntarily into the realm of death where he was slain and hung on a "Tree of Life" which instantly bore fruit (a reference perhaps to both the crucifixion, and the Tree of Life, which Nephi associates with the sacrifice of the Savior). The twin gods which brought life back into the world were miraculously born of a virgin, Xquic, possibly a dim recollection of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ.

As a result of these Biblical parallels, some scholars have discounted this section as being heavily influenced by European Catholicism as taught to the Maya soon after the Conquest. For a number of reasons this is very unlikely. First of all, the Popol Vuh is otherwise free of intrusive European material. The gods have native Maya names and are authentically pre-Columbian in character. The chief creator god is described as a feathered serpent deity, similar in iconography and character to other feathered serpent gods worshipped throughout Mesoamerica even in Book of Mormon times. Other than the preamble, there are no intrusive Spanish words in the Popol Vuh. This is unique, since most Maya texts written during the sixteenth century contain a great number of Spanish words and concepts. In many cases this was to please any non-Maya readers with the Christianization of the text.

The stated purpose of the Quichés transcription of the Popol Vuh was to preserve it from destruction, presumably by Spanish Christians. It contains extensive accounts of pagan polytheism, mythology, and human sacrifice, which would have been offensive to Christian priests who were then actively seeking out such writings to destroy them. The authors of the Popol Vuh apparently had no intention of showing it to their new European overlords, and it is known that the text was kept hidden from outsiders for over a century. It is unlikely that given the otherwise authentic nature of the Popol Vuh text, that there would be any incentive for the Maya to include intrusive Christian material in their account.

Another indication of the authenticity of these portions of the Popol Vuh is their extensive use of chiasmus (Allen Christenson, "Chiasmus in Mayan Texts," Ensign, October 1988). Chiasmus is a poetic form that matches elements in reverse order; that is, the first element parallels the last, the second element very infrequently and the form was not characteristic of Spanish writings of the sixteenth century. Exciting research has been carried out recently by Dr. John Welch, identifying extensive passages of the Book of Mormon which employ chiasmus, thus identifying it as an ancient text (John W. Welch, "Chiasmus in the Authorship," Provo, UT: Brigham Young University, 1982, pp. 33-52). This selection from the speech of King Benjamin is a simple example: I give not because I have not, but if I had I would give" (Mosiah 4:24; italics added). In this light it is significant that the Popol Vuh is rich in chiasms. The following example is from the creation account:

The face of the earth was not yet visible.

All by itself lay dammed

the sea, and the womb of heaven, everything.

There was nothing whatever, all was

silenced,

or at rest.

Each thing was made silent,

Each thing was made calm, was made

invisible,

was made to rest in heaven.

There was not, then, anything in fact that

was standing there.

Only the pooled water, only the flat sea.

All by itself it lay dammed.

There was not, then, anything in fact that might have existed.

Longer chiasms are also evident in the Popol Vuh. The creation account itself is arranged as a single, large chiasmus. Each phase of creation is outlined in detail, from primordial darkness to the division of the rivers. The final ten lines of the section then summarize the events in reverse order.

One criticism I have of Tedlock's new translation is his neglect of the purely poetic nature of large sections of the Popol Vuh. Tedlock organizes his version of the Popol Vuh in a flowing prose. This stands in marked contrast to previous translations, particularly that of Munro Edmonson, who organized his translation completely into a long string of parallel couplets. This type of arrangement admittedly became rather forced in places, and also ignored other poetic devices, such as chiasmus.

It is one of the great tragedies of the Spanish Conquest in the early sixteenth century that most Maya texts were purposely destroyed. Native Maya literacy steadily declined thereafter. I have not been able to identify any examples of chiasmus in Quiché-Maya documents after the first generation of native scribes had passed away. With very few

exceptions, the Quichés were essentially an illiterate people within a century after the Conquest. As a result ' the rich literary heritage of the Quichés was lost to its own people.

Fortunately, modem Quichés are vigorously conservative in spiritual matters, preserving a surprising amount of pre-Columbian ritual and calendric knowledge in their ceremonies. In preparing his new translation, Dr. Tedlock realized that the Quichés themselves would have a unique insight into the language and religious significance of the Popol Vuh. He therefore spent more than a year in Guatemala working on his translation in close cooperation with Quiché shaman-priests in the village of Momostenango. Having worked off-and-on as a Quiché translator for the past fifteen years, I have felt that native informants are essential to such an endeavor. I knew many of Tedlock's informants in Momostenango, particularly Vicente de León, and know them to be proud of their heritage and eager to preserve it for the future.

For the most part, the contributions of Tedlock's Quiché informants are remarkable, demonstrating the subtle genius of the text itself, and the wisdom of modem native priests. Having said this, however, I must admit to some reservations about relying too heavily on this approach. The Quiché language has not been widely used in written form over the past several centuries. It is therefore unusually dynamic, varying widely from village to village. Much of the ancient vocabulary and grammatical constructions of the Popol Vuh have inevitably fallen out of use. A modem Quiché priest would have little more insight into such passages than a typical twentieth century American would have in understanding the archaic language of Medieval England.

To his credit, Dr. Tedlock did an admirable amount of more traditional research in preparing his translations. He refers frequently to early Quiché dictionaries compiled by post-Conquest Spanish priests. He evidently also spent a great deal of time combing through major manuscript archives for relevant documents, including the Gates Collection at BYU, and Chicago's Newberry Library where the oldest known copy of the Popol Vuh is preserved.

Tedlock does not claim personal fluency in the Quiché language. This is evident in a number of minor errors in grammar and interpretation. Another possible source of difficulty is his translation of the original Quiché form. In some cases half a name is translated into English, while leaving half in Quiché, as in the name of the progenitor hero "Jaguar Quitze." Translation of proper name is for the most part unnecessarily confusing and some of the translations are certainly questionable. We do not bother to translate the name derivations of cities like Seattle or Minneapolis, nor do we automatically think of the adjective "pretty" when we say the name Linda. By the same token, modem Quichés do not think of "monkey" when they use the common family name Batz, although that would be an acceptable translation. The royal capital of the once mighty Quiché nations was K'umarcaj. I doubt very much that the great city was always thought of in terms of the name's obscure original derivation, "Rotten Cane."

Dennis Tedlock's translation of the Popol Vuh is perhaps not the "Definitive Edition" the title page suggests. Such a thing cannot ever be derived from an ancient text like the

Popol Vuh, unless one has generous access to the shades of the learned Quiché lords who originally penned it. Tedlock has however succeeded in bringing us closer to the book's spirit and nobility. Minor criticisms aside, it is an impressive work and unquestionably the best edition of the text available in English.