Mesoamerica
as Hinterland: The Times and Seasons articles
The
North American Core and Mesoamerican Periphery of Book of Mormon Geography
The historicity
(historical authenticity) of the Book of Mormon has been a focal point for
critics of the Book since before it was published. After nearly two hundred
years, the question remains open, yet the answer is critical to millions of
Mormons (and billions of non-Mormons).
The argument boils down
to an either/or scenario. If the book is an authentic history, the only
rational explanation for its existence is that given by Joseph Smith; i.e.,
direct divine intervention, the ministering of angels, and translation by
revelation. And if that’s what actually
happened, then the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has divine
imprimatur superior to any other church or religion. But if the book is not an
authentic history, it is, at best, inspirational fiction, like The Lord of the
Rings, mingled with scripture. If that’s
the case, then the Church is like any other church or religion; if it appeals
to you, fine, but there’s nothing “true” about it in the sense of special
divine power or authority.
The historicity question
involves a combination of linguistics, purported anachronisms, and
geography—but especially geography. If there is no physical record of the
extensive civilization described in the Book of Mormon, then it is no different
from any other fantasy novel (except in the sense that it insists it is not
fantasy).
Believers in the Book of
Mormon generally adhere to one of three theories. First, that the events took
place in Mesoamerica. Second, that the events took place in North America (the
“Heartland”). Third, that it doesn’t matter where it took place because the
book has a spiritual message and purpose. The latter approach is unpersuasive
to the vast majority of people who read the book, or know someone who has
(including both members and investigators of the Church). Consequently, the
geography question remains vital.
The war over Book of
Mormon geography has focused on articles published in the Times and Seasons
(T&S), primarily during 1842, because these were the source of the
Mesoamerican theory. (Debate rages over the proper interpretation of numerous
other statements of Joseph Smith and other church leaders, but those arguments
hinge on the T&S material.) At one time, the consensus about Book of Mormon
geography was strong enough that the footnotes in the officially published Book
of Mormon identified the Lamanites as the Indians, the promised land as the
United States, etc. Those footnotes were removed, and the Church has declined
to take a formal position ever since (although it has approved artwork
depicting Book of Mormon scenes in Mayan-like settings).
The Mesoamerican
theorists cite these 1842 T&S articles as evidence that Joseph Smith
thought the Book of Mormon events took place in Central America (or considered
it a possibility because he didn't know much about BoM geography). The
Heartland theorists say Joseph Smith didn't write these articles. The two sides
go back and forth on wordprint (stylometric) analysis and historical context (i.e.,
whether Joseph was physically present when the articles were published) in
efforts to prove or disprove their positions.
In a good faith effort to resolve the conflicts, Mark Alan Wright recently (2014) published an article in Interpreter titled Heartland as Hinterland: The Mesoamerican Core and the North American Periphery of Book of Mormon Geography. He makes the case that “the best available evidence for the Book of Mormon continues to support a limited Mesoamerican model. However, Alma 63 indicates that there was a massive northward migration in the mid-first century BC” that resulted in Nephite settlements in North America—the so-called “Hinterland.”
In a good faith effort to resolve the conflicts, Mark Alan Wright recently (2014) published an article in Interpreter titled Heartland as Hinterland: The Mesoamerican Core and the North American Periphery of Book of Mormon Geography. He makes the case that “the best available evidence for the Book of Mormon continues to support a limited Mesoamerican model. However, Alma 63 indicates that there was a massive northward migration in the mid-first century BC” that resulted in Nephite settlements in North America—the so-called “Hinterland.”
In my view, Wright has
provided an excellent methodology, but he has misinterpreted the relevant data.
In fact, my analysis of these T&S articles, in the context of the other
material published in T&S itself, leads the reader to a conclusion opposite
from Wright; i.e., these articles establish my thesis of Mesoamerica as
Hinterland: The North American Core and the Mesoamerican Periphery of Book of
Mormon Geography.
Furthermore, the available material extrinsic to the T&S supports the Mesoamerica as Hinterland approach.
Furthermore, the available material extrinsic to the T&S supports the Mesoamerica as Hinterland approach.
Wright’s thesis, as well
as the underlying assumption of most participants in the debate, focuses on the
authority of Joseph Smith when it comes to the Book of Mormon. Some, probably
most, Mesoamerican advocates take the view that Joseph didn’t know all that
much about the Book of Mormon. He rarely cited it and on the rare occasions when
he alluded to its geography, he gave mixed signals, if not outright
contradictory claims. Some in turn see this as evidence of his role as an
inspired translator instead of author; i.e., he had to have translated it by
revelation because he didn’t know enough about the subject matter to have
written it. Others see his ignorance or confusion as evidence that someone else
wrote it (such as Sidney Rigdon, Solomon Spalding, etc.).
The North American
advocates (commonly referred to in the literature as “Heartlanders” because they
best-known advocates locate most of the Book of Mormon events in the
Ohio-to-Missouri setting) take the view that Joseph knew all about the Book of
Mormon, including (to quote his mother), “their dress, mode of traveling, and
the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every
particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship… as if he
had spent his whole life among them.” They seek to assemble every word spoken
by Joseph on the topic and reject inconsistent statements made by others.
Another recent
publication in the Interpreter focuses on that point. Neal Rappleye’s article, “War of Words and Tumult
of Opinions”: The Battle for Joseph Smith’s Words in Book of Mormon Geography
(2014), is a review of John L. Lund’s book Joseph
Smith and the Geography of the Book of Mormon. Rappleye extends his piece
beyond a book review as he addresses the ongoing debate between Rod Meldrum and
John Lund, as well as the stylometric or “wordprint” studies of Roper, et al., published by the Maxwell Institute in 2013
under the title, Joseph Smith, The Times
and Seasons, and Central American Ruins. Roper assessed a “composite
Central America text” (a compilation of the three unsigned comments totaling
906 words from the 9/15 and 10/1 T&S). Throughout this article, I will
refer to these editorials using Roper’s term.
Rappleye concludes that
“the battle for Joseph Smith’s words is just tangential skirmish. The crucial
battlefield is over what the Book of Mormon actually says about its own
geography, and the Mesoamericanists have been winning on that front all along.”
His conclusion, though, is based on his prior determination that, “[i]n light
of present evidence, it seems impossible to insist that Joseph Smith had any
revelatory knowledge that limited the lands of the Book of Mormon to the United
States.”
In my view, Rappleye’s
assertion is a red herring. Neither theory “limits” the Book of Mormon lands,
whether to the “United States” or Mesoamerica. Indeed, that is the thrust of
Wright’s article about the Hinterlands.
Worse, Rappleye’s claim
that the battle is over what the book says about its own geography overlooks
the fact that, even creating an “internal map” based on the book’s geographical
hints, researchers derive different locales. Furthermore, the Mesoamerican
theory is premised on the book’s internal directional system being wrong, or at
best misleading to modern readers; i.e., north is not north. Instead, Sorenson
(who, according to Rappleye, is the only one who has “fully practiced” a
“comprehensive” internal map) claims cardinal directions are determined by
reference to the coastline. Others use vague notions derived from Mayan
mythology to define “north” as any direction within a range of west northwest
to east northeast.
Most importantly, Rappleye
glosses over the irony that such post hoc rationalization is driven by the very words in the T&S that he now
finds irrelevant.
List of T&S Articles
Below is a complete table of Book of Mormon
geography references in the Times and Seasons, so far as I’ve been able to
discover. The last column reflects whether the content as traditionally
interpreted favors Mesoamerica or North America (although I will argue they all
favor Mesoamerica as Hinterland). Columns Rappleye cited are bolded.
Vol.
|
Date
|
Page
|
Signed
|
TITLE
|
Meso/N.A.
|
2
|
6/15/41
|
440
|
-
|
AMERICAN
ANTIQUITIES—MORE PROOFS OF THE BOOK OF MORMON
|
both
|
3
|
1/1/42
|
640
|
-
|
EVIDENCES IN PROOF OF THE BOOK OF MORMON
|
N.A.
|
3
|
3/1/42
|
707
|
J.S.
|
CHURCH HISTORY (WENTWORTH)
|
N.A.
|
3
|
5/1/42
|
781
|
ED
(J.S.)
|
A CATACOMB OF MUMMIES
FOUND IN KENTUCKY
|
N.A.
|
3
|
6/1/42
|
813
|
-
|
FROM PRIEST’S AMERICAN
ANTIQUITIES
|
N.A.
|
3
|
6/15/42
|
818
|
ED (J.S.)
|
TRAITS OF THE MOSAIC HISTORY, FOUND AMONG THE AZTECA NATIONS
|
N.A.
|
3
|
7/15/42
|
858
|
ED (J.S.)
|
AMERICAN
ANTIQUITIES
|
N.A.
|
3
|
9/15/42
|
911
|
-
|
INCIDENTS OF TRAVEL IN CENTRAL AMERICA
|
Meso
|
3
|
9/15/42
|
921
|
-
|
FACTS ARE STUBBORN THINGS
|
Meso
|
3
|
10/1/42
|
927
|
-
|
ZARAHEMLA
|
Meso
|
3
|
10/1/42
|
935
|
J.S.
|
LETTER FROM JOSEPH
SMITH
|
N.A.
|
4
|
11/15/42
|
15
|
-
|
RUINS RECENTLY
DISCOVERED IN YUCATAN MEXICO
|
Meso
|
4
|
5/1/43
|
185
|
-
|
ANCIENT RECORDS
|
Meso
|
4
|
10/1/43
|
346
|
-
|
STEPHENS’ WORKS
ON CENTRAL AMERICA
|
Meso
|
5
|
12/15/43
|
744
|
-
|
ANCIENT RUINS
(Jaredites created the plains)
|
Meso
|
5
|
1/11/44
|
755
|
W.S.
|
WILLIAM SMITH TO W.W.
PHELPS
|
Meso
|
This focus on Joseph Smith leads to conflict because the critical T&S articles at issue are unsigned. In a forthcoming book I will demonstrate who wrote these and why, and how they came to be published in the T&S. But here's the conclusion: North America was the core, and Mesoamerica was the Hinterland.
