OBJECTIONS TO THE BOOK OF MORMON (Continued).
I.
Alleged Plagiarisms of Historical and Biblical Events.
It is charged against the Book of Mormon that many of its historical incidents are mere plagiarisms of historical and Biblical events. I shall only be able to indicate a few of these charges, and point out the means by which they may be fairly met. I call attention to the fact, in the first place, that some of the charges are absolutely false; that they are based on misquotations and misstated incidents. In other cases the comparison is very much strained to get the result of likeness, and throughout the likelihood of similarity in human experience is entirely overlooked.
Mr. John Hyde declares that Nephi's description of the rise of a great and abominable church immediately after the days of the Messiah on earth, together with his description of her pride, power, and cruelty, is a quotation from the book of Revelations, "A description of the Church of Rome;"[1] the abduction of the daughters of the Lamanites by the Priests of King Noah;[2] the martyrdom of Alma's converts in the land of Ammonihah;[3] and the slaughter of the converts of Ammon among the Lamanites,[4] are events "borrowed from the history of Nero, Caligula, and Fox's book of Martyrs."
In Alma's conversion, he sees "an imitation of Paul's miraculous conversion" with this difference; that Paul was struck with blindness for three days, and Alma is struck dumb for two days![5] In the remarks of King Mosiah on the advantages of a government by the people as against the rule of absolute monarchs, our author sees the doctrine of "Vox populi vox Dei,"[6] although that idea nowhere occurs in the passage to which he gives reference, and in fact, in no passage of the Book of Mormon. These citations from the long list that our author makes out will perhaps be sufficient from him. Those who wish to trace out this class of objections, as he makes them, may consult his work.[7]
A more recent writer enters into the same line of argument in greater detail.[8] His theory is that the author of the Book of Mormon set out to "beat the Bible" in the matter of wonderful things recorded. Thus in the "eight barges" of the Jaredites he sees an attempt to outdo the Bible account of Noah's "one ark." In a complete vision granted to the brother of Jared of the pre-existent spirit-personage of the Messiah, he sees the partial view of the same personage granted to Moses outdone. In the fact that the Nephite prophet, Abinadi, interpreted certain writings upon the wall of a temple, he sees an imitation of Daniel's exploit of reading the writing on the wall of Belshazzar's palace. In Ether's expressed doubt as to his own fate, whether he would be granted the privilege of translation or be required to pass through the ordeal of death, he sees the counterpart of the story of Elijah's ascent into heaven. In the retention of three of the Nephite apostles on earth until Messiah shall come in his glory, he sees the New Testament intimation and the early Christian notion that the apostle John might be granted such a privilege—if such it could be regarded—outdone. In the signs of Messiah's birth, granted to the Nephites—the night of continuous light and the appearance of a new star in the heavens; as also in the signs of his crucifixion and burial—three hours of tempest and earthquake while the Son of Man was on the cross, and three days of darkness while he lay in the tomb[9]—our author sees again an effort to outdo the Bible signs accompanying Messiah's birth and death.
In the account given in III Nephi[10] of the multitude being permitted to come in personal contact with the Savior one by one, and touch the scars of the wounds he had received in crucifixion, Rev. Lamb sees an effort to outdo the New Testament story of Thomas thrusting his hands in the wounds of our Savior, that he might be convinced of the reality of his resurrection. Indeed, the Reverend gentleman makes very much of this circumstance. He supposes the multitude granted this privilege numbered 2,500; and allowing that five persons would pass the Savior every minute, giving each one twelve seconds to thrust his hand into Messiah's side, and feel the print of the nails, would require "eight hours and twenty minutes of time!"[11] The Reverend Gentleman, however, neglected to give the matter due consideration. The number of the multitude, 2,500, is given at the close of the first day's visit of Messiah to the Nephites; whereas, the circumstance of the people being allowed to personally come in contact with the Savior, is an event that took place early in the day, almost immediately upon the Christ's appearance in fact, and when the "multitude" was much smaller than at the close of the day. Two circumstances lead to the belief that the crowd was greatly augmented through the day. For instance, after some considerable time had elapsed after his appearing, and after the multitude had gone forth and felt the wounds in his hands and feet, Jesus called for their sick and afflicted, that he might heal them. It is unreasonable to suppose that the blind and halt and sick were with the "multitude" when Jesus first appeared, as the latter were a party strolling about the temple viewing the changes wrought in the land by the recent cataclysms, while the sick and maimed with their attendants would doubtless be at their homes. Therefore, many of the people departed from the presence of Jesus to bring to him these afflicted ones; and as they went on this errand of mercy they doubtless spread the news of Christ's presence among them, with the result that the people were gathered together throughout the day.
Again, after blessing their afflicted ones, the Lord Jesus caused their children to be gathered together, that he might bless them; which doubtless in many cases caused parents to hasten again to their homes and ever as they went the news spread further and further of the Messiah's presence, until finally, at the close of the day's gathering, 2,500 were found to be present. It by no means follows, however, that all this number thrust their hands into the wounds of Messiah; but only the very much smaller number that was gathered about the temple in the land of Bountiful earlier in the day, when Messiah appeared to them.
Our author sees in these things I have quoted and some others that he details, plagiarisms of Bible events; and concludes that the Book of Mormon, instead of being what it claims to be, is largely but a collection of Bible events distorted by Joseph Smith's inventions.
It places a Christian minister, believing as he does in the divinity of both the Old and New Testament, at a very great disadvantage to make this kind of an argument. Suppose we were to apply it as a test of the New Testament? We could then say that the ascension of Jesus, recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, is but an imitation of the glorious ascension of Elijah into heaven in the presence of a host of angels.[12] We could say that the special miracles wrought by the hands of Paul so that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs and aprons to the afflicted, and "the diseases departed from them and the evil spirits went out of them," is but an imitation of what Elijah did when he sent his staff by the hands of his servant, commanding him to lay it on the face of the dead child of his Shunammite friend to restore him to life.[13]
"It might be said, also, that in the subsequent conduct of Elijah in restoring this same child to life, we have the original of the New Testament story of Jarius's daughter.[14] In this same chapter of Kings we have the following story of Elisha's miraculously feeding a multitude:
And there came a man from Baalshalisha, and brought the man of God bread of the firstfruits, twenty loaves of barley, and full ears of corn in the husk thereof. And he said, Give unto the people, that they may eat. And his servitor said, What, should I set this before an hundred men? He said again, Give the people, that they may eat: for thus saith the Lord, They shall eat, and shall leave thereof. So he set before them, and they did eat, and left thereof, according to the word of the Lord.
"Who can doubt," the Biblical sceptic might ask, "but what this story inspired that of the Evangelists concerning the miraculous feeding of five thousand people, in a desert place, from five loaves, and two fishes.[15] The excess of people mentioned in the New Testament—five thousand thus miraculously fed as against Elijah's one hundred—"could be pointed to as an effort of the New Testament writer to merely "outdo" in the marvelous the miracles of the Old Testament.
Again, it might be continued that the story of tenth Revelations, where a little book is given to John the apostle to eat, one that should be bitter in his belly, but in his mouth sweet as honey, is but a plagiarism of a very similar story told in Ezekiel where that prophet is commanded to eat the roll of the book, and it was in his mouth "as the honey for sweetness."[16]
Thus we might continue in drawing such parallels, but there would be neither profit nor argument in doing so. Such procedure is scarcely worthy the name of criticism. It reminds one of Shakespeare's Rosalind finding the doggerel verses of the love-sick swain, Orlando, hanging upon the trees of the forest of Arden, and of Rosalind reading them—
From the east to the western Ind,
No Jewel is like Rosalind.
All the pictures fairest lined,
Are but black to Rosalind.
Let no fair be kept in mind,
But the fair of Rosalind.
Which doggerel the more sensible Touchstone, listening to—and impatient at withal—finally breaks in upon the fair reader with:
"I'll rhyme you so eight years together, dinners and suppers and sleepin-hours excepted:—for a taste—
If a hart do lack a hind,
Let him seek out Rosalind.
If the cat will after kind,
So be sure will Rosalind.
Winter garments must be lined,
So must slendor Rosalind.
They that reap must sheef and bind,
Then to cart with Rosalind.
Sweetest nut hath sourest rind,
Such a nut is Rosalind.
So with like result one might run on with this kind of argument based upon the Book of Mormon's alleged plagiarisms from the Hebrew scriptures.
II.
The Absence of Book of Mormon Names Both of Place and Persons in Native American Language.
It is objected to the Book of Mormon that there nowhere appears in native American languages Book of Mormon names. "During the one thousand years of their recorded history," says one, "as given in the Book of Mormon, the old familiar names of Lehi, Nephi, Laman, Lemuel and others are constantly recurring; they held on to them with reverential pertinacity. If the Book of Mormon were a true record we should find these names in abundance among various Indian races scattered over both continents." The absence of Book of Mormon names in the native language, is held to be fatal testimony against the claims of the Book of Mormon by this writer.[17]
One recognizes here a real difficulty, and one for which it is quite hard to account. It must be remembered, however, that from the close of the Nephite period, 420 A. D., to the coming of the Spaniards in the sixteenth century, we have a period of over one thousand years; and we have the triumph also of the Lamanites over the Nephites bent on the destruction of every vestige of Nephite traditions and institutions. May it not be that they recognized as one of the means of achieving such destruction the abrogation of the old familiar names of things and persons? Besides there is the probable influx of other tribes and peoples into America in that one thousand years whose names may have largely taken the place of Nephite and Lamanite names.
I have already suggested that the name "Nahuas" and the adjective derived from it, "Nahuatl," are probably variations of the names "Nephi" and "Nephite," derived, it may be, together with the Bible names "Nepheg," "Nephish," "Nephishesim," and "Naphtali" from a common Hebrew root.[18] Also, that the name "Hohgates," by which names the seven mythical strangers were called who in ancient times settled at Point St. George on the Pacific coast near San Francisco, is a survival of the Book of Mormon name "Hagoth," who is prominent in the Book of Mormon narrative as the man who first started maritime migrations from South America, northward along the Pacific coast of North America.[19]
Mr. Priest, the author of "American Antiquities," declares that the word "Amazon," the name of the chief river of South America, is an Indian word.[20] Early in the century in which Messiah was born, four of the sons of the Nephite king, Mosiah II, departed from Zarahemla on a mission to the Lamanites. At that time the Lamanites occupied the lands formerly possessed by the Nephites, previous to the migration of the more righteous part of that people to Zarahemla—the old "land of Nephi." This land, so far as can be determined, corresponds somewhat to the modern country of Ecuador and perhaps the northern part of Peru.[21] In this region, it will be remembered, the river Amazon takes its rise. The leader of the Nephite missionary expedition referred to was Ammon, doubtless the oldest son of King Mosiah II.[22] Such were the achievements of this man; such his rank, and such his high character that it is not difficult or unreasonable to believe that his name was given by the people to the principal stream of the land, and that it has survived under the modern variation of the name Amazon.
Again, the word "Andes," the name of the chief mountain range in South America, is quite generally supposed, if not conceded by the best authorities, to come from the native Peruvian word "Anti," meaning copper.[23]
The Peruvians, in order to cultivate some mountainous parts of their country, terraced the mountain sides, facing the same with stone. These terraces the Spaniards called "Andenes," whence some suppose the name "Andes." "But the name," says Prescott, "is older than the Conquest, according to Varcilasso, who traces it to 'Anti,' the name of a province that lay east of Cuzco. 'Anta,' the word for copper, which was found abundant in certain quarters of the country, may have suggested the name of the province, if not immediately that of the mountains."[24]
In any event we have the words "Anti" and "Anta" established as native American words, and the word "Anti" is of frequent use in the Book of Mormon in a number of compound words, such as "Anti-Nephi-Lehi," the name of a Lamanite king or chief about B. C. 83.[25] The same name was given to his people, that is, they were called "Anti-Nephi-Lehi's,"[26] and possibly it may have been given to the land they occupied. If so it accounts for the word "Anti" surviving as the name of a province, according to Garcilasso, lying east of Cuzco.
We also have the word "Antiomno,"[27] the name of a Lamanite king; "Antionah," the name of a chief; "Antionum," both the name of a man,[28] and also the name of a city;[29] also the word "Antiparah," a Nephite city;[30] "Antipas," the name of a mountain;[31] and "Antipus," the name of a Nephite military leader.[32]
It is true these words in the Book of Mormon, are written as simple words, but they are susceptible of being regarded as compound words, as follows: "Anti-Omno," "Anti-Pas," "Anti-Parah," and so following. If the Peruvian terraces derived their name from this native word "Anti," then when applied to Nephite lands Anti-Onum would doubtless mean the terraced lands of Onum, and Anti-Parah, the name of a city, would doubtless be the terraced city of Parah, and so following.
But after all this is said it is still a matter of regret that more of the Nephite names, both of men and countries, have not survived in the native American languages. Still the field of knowledge of American antiquities has not yet been thoroughly explored, and when its buried cities and monuments shall be more thoroughly known all the evidences that can be demanded along these lines will doubtless be produced.
III.
Nephi's Temple.
First Nephi gives the following account of building a temple in the New World:
And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon, save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land; wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon's temple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceeding fine.[33]
This statement is unfairly dealt with by objectors. They generally represent it as saying that Nephi, in this description, holds out the idea that he duplicated Solomon's temple, excepting as to the richness of the materials employed in its construction. Then an elaborate description of the greatness and architectural grandeur of Solomon's temple is given. Attention is also called to the fact that the Hebrew nation bent all their energies through seven years of activity in constructing the temple of Solomon; that they were aided by surrounding peoples, notably by King Hiram and the Tyrians.
After all this is explained then comes what is supposed to be an insurmountable difficulty, namely: Lehi's colony that came from Jerusalem to America was a very small one, consisting of two families only, Lehi's and Ishmael's, and in addition the man Zoram, perhaps not exceeding a score of adult persons on their arrival in the promised land. Then after some time this colony is divided; the more righteous branch following Nephi, and the wicked following his elder brothers Laman and Lemuel. So that it is safe to conclude that during the lifetime of the first Nephi the colony remained a very small one; and since this temple was built about thirty years after the colony departed from Jerusalem, the Nephite division of it could not have included more than one hundred adults. How, then, it is triumphantly asked, could this small colony duplicate Solomon's temple, renowned for its architectural beauty and greatness, and which required seven years for the nation of the Hebrews to construct, assisted by surrounding people and the great treasuries which David, in his reign, had accumulated for that sacred purpose?
The answer to the objection is to be found in a denial of the construction put upon Nephi's description of his temple. That description does not warrant the conclusion that Nephi's temple was a duplicate of Solomon's, except as to the "manner of the construction," from which it is to be inferred that the general plan of the structure followed that of Solomon's, but it does not follow that it was anything like Solomon's in the extent or largeness of it; but in the arrangement of its courts; its several divisions and subdivisions were built "after the manner" and for the purposes for which Solomon's temple was constructed. So that the labored argument as to the inability of so small a colony as Lehi's duplicating Solomon's temple is merely so much wasted energy, since no one is bound to hold that in its dimensions and greatness the Nephite Temple equaled Solomon's temple. It was only like unto Solomon's temple in its arrangement and uses, but doubtless by this colony was regarded as a very great achievement, as undoubtedly it was, and they would likely speak of it in the superlative degree of admiration in describing it.
IV.
The Difficulty of Iron and Steel Among the Nephites.
The Book of Mormon repeatedly affirms the Nephite knowledge of the fusion of metals, and their knowledge and use of both iron and steel. As many writers on American Antiquities deny the knowledge and use of these metals by the ancient Americans, their alleged existence in the Book of Mormon is generally regarded as a capital objection to that record. Not all the influential writers, however, are on that side of the question.
"There is no evidence," says Bancroft, "that the use of iron was known except the extreme difficulty of clearing forests and carving stone with implements of stone and soft copper."[34]
Referring to some of the stones in the ruins of Peruvian buildings, Prescott remarks:
Many of these stones were of vast size; some of them being full thirty-eight feet long, by eighteen broad, and six feet thick. We are filled with astonishment when we consider that these enormous masses were hewn from their native bed and fashioned into shape by a people ignorant of the use of iron.[35]
But why could not the argument of Wilkinson be followed when confronted with a similar problem respecting the ancient Egyptian works in stone? He allowed that the achievements of that ancient people in quarrying and shaping huge blocks of stone to be an evidence of their knowledge and use of iron, but that its tendency to decomposition and oxidation prevented any specimens of it from being preserved.[36]
Later, notwithstanding Prescott's disagreement with the argument, some of the best authorities sustained the conclusions of Wilkinson. George Rawlinson, for instance, in his "History of Ancient Egypt," says:
In metals Egypt was deficient. * * * * Copper, iron, and lead do, however, exist in portions of the eastern desert, and one iron mine shows signs of having been anciently worked.
"Then," he remarks, "the metal is found in form of specular and red iron ore. Still, none of these metals seem to have been obtained by the Egyptians from their own land in any considerable quantity. In a foot note he says this mine lies in the eastern desert between the Nile and Red Sea, at a place called Hammami."[37] Later, he says:
It has been much questioned whether iron was employed at all by the Egyptians until the time of the Greek conquest. The weapons and implements and ornaments of iron which have been found in the ancient cities are so few, while those of bronze are so numerous, and the date of the few iron objects discovered is so uncertain that there is strong temptation to embrace the simple theory that iron was first introduced into Egypt by the Ptolemies. Difficulties, however, stand in the way of a complete adoption of this view. A fragment of a thin plate of iron was found by Col. Vyse imbedded in the masonry of the great pyramid.[38]
Continuing, he says:
Some iron implements and ornaments have been found in the tombs with nothing about them indicative of their belonging to the late period. The paucity of such instances is partially, if not wholly accounted for, by the rapid decay of iron in the nitrous earth of Egypt, or when oxidized by exposure to the air. It seems very improbable that the Hebrew and Canaanites should for centuries have been well acquainted with the use of iron, and their neighbors of Egypt, whose civilization was far more advanced, have been ignorant of it. On these grounds the most judicious of modern Egyptologists seem to hold, that while the use of iron by the Egyptians in Pharaonic times was at the best rare and occasional, it was not wholely unknown, though less appreciated than we should have expected. Iron spear-heads, iron cycles, iron gimlets, iron bracelets, iron keys, iron wire were occasionally made use of, but the Egyptians on the whole were contented with their bronze implements and weapons, which were more easily produced and which they found to answer every purpose.[39]
May it not be argued with equal reason, that the Lamanites, after the conquest of the Nephites, found themselves in the same condition, that is, it was easier for them to convert copper into such implements as they desired than iron, until finally the use of iron was discontinued and the art of manufacturing it lost.
Baldwin says of the Peruvians:
Iron was unknown to them in the time of the Incas, although some maintain that they had it in the previous ages, to which belong the ruins of Lake Titicaca. Iron ore was and still is very abundant in Peru. It is impossible to conceive how the Peruvians were able to cut and work stone in such a masterly way, or to construct their great roads and aqueducts without the use of iron tools. Some of the languages of the country, and perhaps all, had names for iron; in official Peruvian it was called "quillay," and in the old Chilian tongue "panilic." "It is remarkable," observes Molina, "that iron, which has been thought unknown to the ancient Americans, has particular names in some of their tongues." It is not easy to understand why they had names for this metal, if they never at any time had knowledge of the metal itself. In the "Mercurio Peruano," (tome i., p. 201, 1791), it is stated that, anciently, the Peruvian sovereigns, "worked magnificent iron mines at Ancoriames, on the west shore of Lake Titicaca;" but I can not give the evidence used in support of this statement.[40].
DeRoo says:
Iron seems to have been unknown in America at the time of the Spanish discovery, but the Mound-Builders' graveyards, afford proof that they not only knew it, but manufactured it into tools and implements. In the sepulchral mound at Marietta (Ohio) there was found in the year 1819 a little lump of iron ore that had almost the specific gravity of pure iron, and presented the appearance of being partially smelted, while in the mound at Circleville oxidized iron was unearthed in the shape of a plate.[41]
Referring again to what was found in the mound at Marietta, he says:
In June of 1819, upon opening a mound at Marietta, some very remarkable objects were discovered, consisting of three large circular copper bosses thickly overlaid with silver, and apparently intended as ornaments for a buckler or a sword-belt. On the reverse were two plates fastened by a copper rivet or nail, around which was a flaxen thread, while between the plates were two small pieces of leather. The copper showed much signs of decay; it was almost reduced to an oxide; but the silver, though much corroded, resumed its natural brilliancy on being burnished. In the same tumulus was also found a hollow silver plate six inches long and two broad, intended apparently as the upper part of a sword-scabbard. The scabbard itself seems to have perished in the course of time, as no other portion of it was found, with the exception of a few broken, rust-eaten pieces of a copper tube, which was likely intended for the reception of the point of the weapon.[42]
Josiah Priest has the following passages on the subject of the discoveries of iron in the mounds of America:
We have examined the blade of a sword found in Philadelphia, now in Peel's Museum, in New York, which was taken out of the ground something more than sixty feet below the surface. The blade is about twenty inches in length, is sharp on one edge, with a thick back, a little turned up at the point, with a shank drawn out three or four inches long, on which was doubtless, inserted in the handle, and clenched at the end. It is known that the swords of all ancient nations were very short, on which account, their wars on the field of battle, were but an immense number of single combats.[43]
Describing what was found in one of the mounds at Circleville, in Ohio, upon the authority of Mr. Atwater, who was present when the mound was opened, he says:
The handle, either of a small sword, or a large knife, made of an elk's horn; around the end where the blade had been inserted, was a ferule of silver, which, though black, was not much injured by time; though the handle showed the hole where the blade had been inserted, yet no iron was found, but an oxide or rust remained, of similiar shape and size. The swords of the ancient nations of the old world, it is known, were very short. Charcoal, and wood ashes, on which these articles lay, were surrounded by several bricks, very well burnt. The skeleton appeared to have been burnt in a large and very hot fire. * * About twenty feet to the north of it (i. e. the skeleton) was another, with which was found a large mirror. * * * On this mirror was a plate of iron, which had become an oxide, but before it was disturbed by the spade, resembled a plate of cast iron. The mirror answered the purpose very well for which it was intended.[44]
Iron was known to the antediluvians; it was also known to the ancients of the west. Copper ore is very abundant, in many places of the west; and, therefore, as they had a knowledge of it when they first came here they knew how to work it, and form it into tools and ornaments. This is the reason why so many articles of this metal are found in their works; and even if they had a knowledge of iron ore, and knew how to work it, all articles made of it must have become oxidized as appears from what few specimens have been found, while those of copper are more imperishable.[45]
Quoting Mr. Atwater again, Priest says:
There is a tradition (among the Indians) that Florida had once been inhabited by white people, who had the use of iron tools; their oldest Indians say, when children, they had often heard it spoken of by the old people of the tribe, that anciently, stumps of trees covered with earth, were frequently found, which had been cut down by edged tools. Whoever they were, or from whatever country they may have originated, the account, as given by Morse, the geographer, of the subterranean wall found in North Carolina, goes very far to show they had a knowledge of iron ore; and consequently knew how to work it, or they could not have had iron tools, as the Shawanese Indians relate.[46]
Again:
On the river Gasconade, which empties into the Missouri, on the southern side, (about 70 miles west of St. Louis) are found the traces of ancient works, similar to those in North Carolina. In the saltpetre caves of that region, the Gasconade country, in particular, were discovered, when they were first visited, axes and hammers made of iron; which led to the belief that they had formerly worked those caves for the sake of the nitre. Dr. Beck, from whose Gazetteer of Missouri and Illinois, (p. 234), we have this account, remarks, however, that "it is difficult to decide whether these tools were left there by the present race of Indians, or a more civilized race of people. * * * * This author considers the circumstance of finding those tools in the nitre caves, as furnishing a degree of evidence that the country of Gasconade river was formerly settled by a race of men who were acquainted with the use of iron, and exceeded the Indians in civilization and a knowledge of the arts.[47]
In the town of Pompey, Onondaga county, New York, in one of the mounds where Mr. Priest describes the finding of glass, he also says:
In the same grave with the bottle was found an iron hatchet, edged with steel. The eye, or place for the helve, was round, and extended or projected out, like the ancient Swiss or German axe. * * * * In the same town, on lot No. 17, were found the remains of a blacksmith's forge; at this spot have been ploughed up crucibles, such as mineralogists use in refining metals.
These axes are similar, and correspond in character with those found in the nitrous caves on the Gasconade river, which empties into the Missouri, as mentioned in Professor Beck's Gazatteer of that country. * * * * * Within the range of these works have been found pieces of cast iron, broken from some vessel of considerable thickness. These articles cannot well be ascribed to the era of the French war, as time enough since then till the region around about Onondaga was commenced to be cultivated, had not elapsed to give the growth of timber found on the spot, of the age above noticed; and, added to this, it is said that the Indians occupying that tract of country had no tradition of their authors.[48]
Again he states:
Anv'ls of iron have been found in Pompey, (Onondaga county) in the same quarter of the country with the other discoveries, as above related; which we should naturally expect to find, or it might be inquired how could axes, and the iron works of wagons, be manufactured?[49]
As I have before remarked, it has been contended that the ancient Americans knew nothing of the fusion of metals, but the presence of these materials for such purpose goes far towards dispelling that opinion. It is true that Mr. Priest advances the opinion that this forge and these crucibles found in New York, may have been of Scandinavian origin; still that is but a conjecture, and here I wish to introduce the testimony of Columbus, quoted by Nadaillac, who says:
The Mayas knew nothing of iron; copper and gold were the only metals they used, and it is doubtful whether they understood smelting metals. Christopher Columbus is said, however, to have seen, off the coast Honduras, a boat laden with crucibles, filled with ingots of metal and hatchets made of copper which had been fetched from a distance. ("Prehistoric America," p. 269).
Speaking again of discoveries in the ancient tumuli of America, Priest says:
A vast many instances of articles made of copper and sometimes plated with silver, have been met with on opening their works. Circular pieces of copper, intended either as medals or breast plates, have been found, several inches in diameter, very much injured by time. In several tumuli the remains of knives, and even of swords, in the form of rust, have been discovered. * * * * * But besides, there have been found very well manufactured swords and knives of iron, and possibly steel, says Mr. Atwater; from which we are to conclude that the primitive people of America, either discovered the use of iron themselves, as the Greeks did, * * * * or that they carried a knowledge of this ore with them at the time of their dispersion.[50]
Speaking of the discovery of a skeleton of a man in one of the mounds of Merrietta, Ohio, he says:
Two or three pieces of a copper tube were also found with this body, filled with iron rust. The pieces from their appearance composed the lower end of the scabbard near the point of the sword, but no sign of the sword itself, except a streak of rust its whole length.[51]
A. J. Connant, A. M., member of the St. Louis Academy of Science, and of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, published the following, in 1879:
From an interesting account of certain mounds in Utah, communicated by Mr. Amasa Potter to the Eureka Sentinel, of Nevada, as copied by The Western Review of Science and Industry, I make the following extracts: The mounds are situated on what is known as the Payson Farm, and are six in number, covering twenty acres of ground. They are from ten to eighteen feet in height, and from 500 to 1,000 feet in circumference. "The explorations divulged no hidden treasure so far, but have proved to us that there once undoubtedly existed here a more enlightened race of human beings that that of the Indian who inhabited this country, and whose records have been traced back hundreds of years." While engaged in excavating one of the larger mounds, we discovered the feet of a large skeleton, and carefully removing the hardened earth in which it was embedded, we succeeded in unearthing a large skeleton without injury. The human framework measured six feet, six inches in length, and from appearances it was undoubtedly that of a male. In the right hand was a large iron or steel weapon, which had been buried with the body, but which crumbled to pieces on handling. Near the skeleton we also found pieces of cedar wood, cut in various fantastic shapes, and in a state of perfect preservation; the carving showing that the people of this unknown race were acquainted with the use of edged tools.[52]
Mr. Conant also refers with approval to several passages I have already quoted from Dr. Priest's works, and adds on his own account:
There are certain facts which have been quoted from time to time, which fit into none of the popular theories concerning the state of the arts of the Mound-builders. It has been stated, and often repeated, that they had no knowledge of smelting or casting metals, yet the recent discoveries in Wisconsin of implements of copper cast in molds—as well as the moulds themselves, of various patterns, and wrought with much skill—prove that the age of metallurgical arts had dawned in that region at least.
And again: what shall be said concerning the traces of iron implements which have been discovered from time to time in the mounds, but more frequently at great depths below the surface of the soil. Though accounts of such discoveries are generally from reliable sources, they have latterly received no attention, and always have been considered as so much perilous ware which no one cared to handle.[53]
After referring to their stupendous works in stone, and their skill in the fine arts, involving the most delicate carving, Mr. Conant remarks of the old American race who wrought them:
And it is difficult to conceive how, without cutting implements equal, at least, to our own in hardness, such delicate and such stupendous works could have been executed. And to the question whether they possessed a knowledge of working iron, the wise man will hesitate long before he answers in the negative. It should be remembered, too, how quickly—unless under most favoring conditions—iron corrodes to dust and leaves scarcely a trace behind. The piles of the Swiss lake-dwellings, the cedar posts of the mounds, may endure for ages, while iron—so hard, and more precious than gold in the advancement of the world's civilization,—speedily melts away before the gentle dews and air of heaven.[54]
There is more to the same effect, but our limits will admit of no further quotations.
V.
The Horse and Other Domestic Animals of the Book of Mormon.
It has to be conceded that the weight of assertion on the part of writers on American antiquities, is against the existence of the horse, cow, ass, goat, sheep, etc., in America within historical times, and before the advent of Europeans. There is no evidence developed so far that satisfactorily proves that any of the native races of America, wild or civilized, had any knowledge of the horse and other domestic animals named at the time of the discovery of America by the Europeans. The Book of Mormon, however, repeatedly and most positively declares that all these animals existed in great numbers. The first Nephi, for instance, says:
We did find upon the land of promise, as we journeyed in the wilderness, that there were beasts in the forest of every kind, both the cow and the ox, and the ass and the horse, and the goat and the wild goat, and all manner of wild animals, which were for the use of men.[55]
The same animals, with others, are enumerated as existing also in Jaredite times, and in the reign of King Emer—the fifth of the Jaredite line of kings—that people are said to have had—
All manner of cattle, of oxen, and cows, and of sheep, and of swine, and of goats, and also many other kind of animals which were useful for the food of man; and they also had horses, and asses, and there were elephants and cureloms, and cummoms; all of which were useful unto man, and more especially the elephants, and cureloms, and cummoms.[56]
It is to be observed, curiously enough, that elephants are spoken of as being in use for domestic purposes in connection with the horse and cattle, etc., and it is rather a striking circumstance that the remains of these animals, together with those of man, have been unearthed in various parts of the American continent, though their existence is accredited to very ancient times—to ages long prior to either Nephite or Jaredite times.[57]
It is held, of course, by opponents of the Book of Mormon that this apparent conflict between the book and the supposed facts, as they are declared to be by the writers on such subjects, constitutes a grave objection to the claims of the Book of Mormon. And, indeed, in the present state of our knowledge upon the subject, it has to be admitted that it constitutes one of our most embarrassing difficulties. Still it should be remembered that there is a wide difference between a difficulty for which one has not at hand an adequate explanation, and one that would be fatal to the claims made for the Book of Mormon. The fact has to be admitted that the native Americans seemed to have had no knowledge of the horse at the time of the discovery of America, but that does not necessarily carry with it the conclusion that he did not exist and was not used a thousand years before that time. His apparent extinction may be and is sarcastically referred to as "a very strange thing," still, "strange things" do sometimes happen; and the extinction of species of animals is not an unknown thing in the history of our earth. Indeed our scientists are confronted by just such—nay, with the identical "strange occurrence;" namely, the sudden and complete disappearance of the horse from the American continents. First let me explain that the result of recent long continued investigation upon the subject leads our scientists to the conclusion that North America was the original home of the horse—the place of his "evolution." In the Century Magazine, for November, 1904, is a very elaborate and very able article on "The Evolution of the Horse in America," really a study of the "Fossil Wonders of the West," by Henry Fairfield Osborn, Professor of Zoology in Columbia University, and Curator in the American Museum of Natural History. Speaking of the migration of the horse from America to Europe, he says:
About the early or mid-Pliocene period there apparently occurred the long journey of the true American breed horses into Asia and Europe and over the newly made land-bridge of Panama or of the Antilles into South America. That the true Old World horse actually came from America is inferred because of the sudden appearance in the Upper Pliocene of the Siwalik Hills of northern India, in northern Italy, and in England, of five species of the true horse, of which no ancestors have been found in either Europe or Asia. Another strong argument for their American origin is found in the simultaneous appearance in the same countries of the camel, which we positively know to have been an exclusively American-bred animal. It is possible, however, that in unexplored portions of northern Asia the evolution of true horses may have been progressing. I am sanguine that traces of this great exodus and migration of the horses will be discovered in the rocks of northern Asia, and that this great problem in the history of the horse will be solved in favor of America.
Speaking further of the horse in America in very ancient times, our author says:
The preglacial or earliest Plieistocene times in America, as in Europe were of temperate climate with increasing coldness. The country was covered from north to south with three noble species of elephants, namely, the northern mammoth, the Columbian mammoth, and the imperial mammoth or elephant of Texas; there were also large and small camels, and a variety of large ground-sloths which had recently made their way over the new land bridge from South America. The great number and variety of our preglacial horses speak for favorable conditions, and constitute an additional proof of the American-origin theory. In 1826 Mitchell aroused wide-spread interest by the discovery of the first true fossil horse of America, found near the Navesink Highlands of New Jersey. This was seventy-eight years ago; it antedated by a quarter of a century Leidy's discoveries in Nebraska. The wide geographical range, as well as the great variety in size and breed of the American preglacial horses, is indicated by the following facts. One animal (Equus complicatus), about the size of a small western broncho, originally found near Natchez, has been traced all over the Southern States from the isles of the Gulf of Mexico to South Carolina. A larger horse with very elaborate grinding teeth has been found in the Northeastern and Middle States. On the extreme western coasts of California and in Oregon occurs the large "Pacific horse" perhaps closest to the existing species of horse. In Nebraska we quarried a whole season, securing remains of hundreds of horses belonging to another species. In a portion of this quarry all the larger limb bones were found broken in two. This suggested to me the possibility that these larger bones, the only ones known to have contained marrow, had been broken by man, who was primitively a great marrow eater, but we searched in vain for any collateral evidence of this hypothesis. To my knowledge, no human remains have been found associated with those of the fossil horse in North America; but I confidently expect that such association will be discovered, as it has been in South America. By far the largest species of either wild or domesticated horse known has been determined by Mr. Gidley in Texas, and has appropriately been called the "giant horse." The grinding teeth exceed those of the Percheron draft-horse by one third. At the other extreme is a diminutive horse, discovered both in Florida and in the valley of Mexico.* * * * * * A more welcome discovery could hardly be imagined, therefore, than that by our party, in 1899, on the eastern edge of the Llana Estacado of Texas. It was no less than a small herd of six or seven preglacial horses. * * * * * * This true American horse was certainly rather ungainly-looking, proportioned like the larger primitive horses of Europe, with long body, short limbs, sloping sides, and quarters like those of some of the zebras. Like the early cave-horses of Europe, it had a large head, convex forehead, stout limbs, spreading hoofs and splint-bones which represent the last of the lateral toes.
Then, coming to the strange circumstance of the total "elimination of the horse from the American continents," the professor says:
When we look back upon the enormous antiquity of our horse, upon the ceaseless trials of nature by which it was produced, and upon the splendid varities of breeds which roamed over the country in preglacial times, we cannot but regard the total elimination of this race as a calamity for the North American continent. * * * * There is no doubt that we supplied South America with the horses which under the peculiar conditions there began to separate into a number of distinct breeds. The extremely short-limbed Hippidium of the pampas of Argentina was contrasted with the more normal long-limbed horses found in various parts of South America. The horse also persisted in South America until the advent of man; during the Upper Pleistocene lake formations its remains are found associated with chipped stone implements, with pottery and fire refuse, proving that it was both hunted and eaten. The evidence, however, for the total extinction of the horse is as strong in South as it is in North America, and it is generally accepted that in 1530 Mendoza reintroduced the horse into the La Plata region, just as the Spaniards reintroduced it into our Southern States. The rapid spread of several breeds of horses in South America and of the mustangs in North America bespeak highly favorable conditions of life. Many of these horses have reverted to a very primitive condition, notably the striped yellow duns of Mexico. The increasing cold and the advancing ice sheet of the glacial period are commonly assigned as the cause of the extinction of American horses. The fact that most of our native fauna became extinct at the same time lends probability to this theory. But this does not explain the elimination which also occurred to the south in Central and South America, and for other reasons it seems to me that the temperature theory is not adequate to explain all the facts. The great herds of kiangs, or wild asses, and other breeds which subsist under the extreme conditions of the northern winters, as well as the survival of the horse through the glacial period in Europe, demonstrate the capacity of this family to endure cold. Another class of causes which should certainly be taken into consideration is the occurrence of a wide-spread epidemic among the quadrupeds, such as the rinderpest of Africa, or that which is spread by the tsetse-fly. In certain parts of South America the puma is an animal especially destructive to horses.
May not the last named class of causes be as confidently relied upon to explain the apparent extinction of the horse in America since the close of the Nephite period, as to explain his extinction in the more ancient preglacial times?
What is more embarrassing than the apparent absence of knowledge of the horse by the natives at the time of the European discovery of America, is the absence of any positive and abundant evidence of the remains of the horse in the tumuli or other ruins of the land; and an absence also of any drawing or other representation of the horse in the native picture writing or sculpture, while many other animals and birds and fish are frequently represented both in picture writing and sculpture.
Kitto notes the fact, however, that from the account of the burial of Jacob,[58] and from the Song of Moses,[59] it is clear that horsemen were a part of the Egyptian army, and yet there is but one solitary specimen of a man on horseback amongst the infinite variety of sculptured representations of their manner and customs.[60]
Daniel G. Brinton, one of the most competent writers upon the subject, says:
There is no doubt but that the horse existed on the continent contemporaneously with post-glacial man; and some palaeontologists are of opinion that the European and Asian horses were descendants of the American species;[61] but for some mysterious reason the genus became extinct in the New World many generations before its discovery.[62]
May it not be possible that a too great antiquity is claimed for most of the evidences of the existence of these animals in the western world? The convictions of Nadaillac, concerning the non-existence of the horse in America within historical times (and previous to the Spanish invasion), was well nigh shaken by some of the discoveries of Charnay. The latter, "in the execution of a mission entrusted to him by the French government, superintended the excavation of some tumuli, mountains of rubbish probably, which had covered for many centuries the relics of the ancient Toltecs"—the native Americans who most resemble the Nephites, judging from their traditions. One dwelling, which Charnay unearthed, "consisted of twenty-four rooms, two cisterns, twelve corridors, and fifteen little staircases of extraordinary architecture and thrilling interest."
"This is not all," continues Charnay. "In the midst of fragments of pottery of all kinds, from the coarsest used in building, such as bricks, tiles, water-pipes, to the most delicate for domestic use, I have picked up enamels, fragments of crockery and porcelain, and more extraordinary still, the neck of a glass bottle iridescent like ancient Roman glass."
"Amongst the debris," says Nadaillac, "lays the bones of some gigantic ruminants (perhaps bisons?), the tibia of which were about one foot three inches long by four inches thick, the femur at the upper end about six inches by four inches. Admitting that there is no mistake, these facts are absolutely new, for previously it was considered that the early Americans did not know how to make either glass or porcelain, and that before the arrival of the Conquistadors (the Conquerors, the Spaniards) none of our domestic animals were known in America, but that of the oxen, horses, and sheep living there at the present day are all descended from ancestors imported from Europe."
"The excavations have also yielded some little chariots that Charnay thinks were the toys of children. Now, supposing these toys to have been a reproduction in miniature of objects used by men, we must conclude that the Toltecs employed carriages, and that their use was not only given up, but absolutely unknown on the arrival of Cortes. These discoveries, we can but repeat, greatly modify the conclusions hitherto accepted. But are these really original productions? May they not have been imported? This is after all doubtful, and new proofs are needed to establish certainly that the objects discovered really date from the pre-Columbian period before we can admit that in the eleventh century the Toltecs possessed domestic animals, that they knew how to make and fashion porcelain, glass, perhaps even iron, for Charnay also collected in his excavations several iron implements.[63]
Priest, in his "American Antiquities," speaks of "a great number of tracks, as turkeys, bears, horses, and human beings, as perfect as they could be made on snow or sand," found impressed in the surface of a solid rock on a certain mountain in the State of Tennessee, situated a few miles south of Braystown. He says, "that these are the real tracks of the animals they represent, appears from the circumstance of this horse's foot having slipped several inches, and recovered again; the figures having all the same direction, like the trail of a company on a journey."[64] Referring later to this subject, he says:
The horse, it is said, was not known in America till the Spaniards introduced it from Europe, after the time of its discovery by Columbus, which has multiplied prodigiously on the innumerable wilds and prairies of both South and North America; yet the track of a horse is found on a mountain of Tennessee, in a rock of the enchanted mountain, as before related, and shows that horses were known in America in the earliest ages after the flood.[65]
The question, then, for the present may be stated thus: The Book of Mormon positively testifies to the existence, in America, of these animals in both Jaredite and Nephite times. There have been discovered, by the researches of men, abundant evidences of the horse's existence in America, but they claim a very much greater antiquity for that existence than Book of Mormon times. It must be admitted that the weight of evidence, though not all the evidence, as it stands at present, is with those who make such claims; still it may be reasonably claimed, as for instance in the evidence found by Charnay and referred to in the passage I have quoted from Nadaillac, that some of the evidence points to a more recent existence of the horse on the American continents. Very much more evidence may yet be hoped for on the subject as explorations shall become more perfect and more extensive.
Relative to other domestic animals, Bancroft says, speaking of those in Central America:
Turkeys, ducks, geese, and other fowl were domesticated; and pigs, rabbits, and hares are mentioned as having been bred. Multitudes of bees were kept for their honey and wax, and hives are spoken o, by Las Casas without description. Gomera says the bees were small and the honey somewhat bitter.[66]
It has sometimes been questioned whether bees were found in America; and their supposed non-existence has sometimes been urged as an objection to the Book of Mormon, which positively states that the Jaredites brought with them to the northern continent "deseret," which by interpretation is "honey bee."[67]
The foregoing passage from Bancroft, and very much more evidence that might be quoted, sets that question at rest.
Relative to other domestic animals referred to, the cow, goat, sheep, etc., is a subject much more easily disposed of, for the mountain sheep and great herds of buffaloes may be the domesticated animals of ancients gone wild.
VI.
The Barges of the Jaredite Colony.
The story of the migration of the Jaredite colony from the coast of Asia to America in eight barges, driven across the seas by strong winds, has been an incident ridiculed by nearly every writer against the Book of Mormon from the beginning. Rev. Alexander Campbell especially makes merry over it, and disgraces himself by the garbled and unfair manner in which he relates the story.[68] But it was reserved for Rev. M. T. Lamb to make the most of such objections as may be urged against these barges.[69]
Omitting all reference to his silly ridicule and "smartness," in which he but mimics the methods among infidel writers when dealing with the story of "Noah's deluge," the objection against the Jaredite migration and barges may be stated thus:
1. The barges are too small and too few in number to carry Jared's colony, the animals they are said to have taken with them, and the necessary provisions.
2. Each barge had an opening in the top of it for the admission of air into the vessel, which could be closed at will in the event of there being danger of submersion. A similar opening made in the bottom of the barge but capable of being kept closed—and when closed water tight—at the will of the occupants—is regarded as unnecessary and ridiculous.
3. The provisions made for lighting the interior of the barges by means of transparent stones made luminous by the touch of God's finger, is unusual and just subject for ridicule.
4. The length of the voyage (344 days), being propelled by furious winds, the eight barges keeping together till their arrival at the promised land—is all regarded as too wonderful for belief.
Let us now consider these several objections one by one.
1. The barges are inadequate to convey the colony to America. They are said to have been small and light on the water. But how small? The length is described as "the length of a tree."[70] But of what tree? A tree one hundred feet long, or one two hundred feet long, or longer? Who may tell? Small; but small in comparison of what? Perhaps small in comparison of the ark, the traditions concerning which were well known to Jared and his brother, for they lived but a few generations removed from the time of its construction. The size of the ark is variously given because of the variations in the length of the cubit, by means of which its dimensions are described. The one usually accepted, however, omitting fractions of feet, is as follows: 525 feet in length; 87 feet in breadth; 52 feet in height.[71]
If this vessel was in the mind of the Jaredite who described the barges as "small," and he meant they were small in comparison of the ark, they could still be good-sized vessels, notwithstanding the descriptive term "small;" as they also could be good sized vessels notwithstanding the length of them is described as the length of a tree, since they could be, if some trees were in the mind of the writer, from one to three hundred feet in length. The breadth and depth of them is not given, but doubtless those dimensions would be in good proportion of their length, for their safety, and not at all as the width of a tree is to its length.
As to their being inadequate for the colony of Jared and the animals they brought with them to the New World, it should be remarked, in the first place, that the colony of Jared was small. A number of years after the arrival of the colony in America, the two principal families, that of the Prophet Moriancumr and of Jared, are given as follows: The former had of sons and daughters twenty-two, while the number of sons and daughters of the latter were twelve. How many of these sons and daughters were born after the colonies arrived in America is not known, but the numbers are given in connection with the statement that the brother of Jared—Moriancumr—was become old and was anxious to make some provisions for the settled government of the people. The "friends of Jared and his brother" at the time of the departure of the colony from Babel are set down as "twenty-two souls," but how many were born of these after the colony arrived in America is not known; but certainly these figures make it clear that the colony of Jared was small.
Secondly, it should be remarked that the number of animals the colony brought with them in the barges may not be determined, but most likely the number was few, and mainly for breeding purposes in the new home to which the people were being led.
In view of these reflections, the writer is of the opinion that the candid reader will find no insuperable difficulties in the way of accepting the barges as adequate to the conveyance of the colony from one land to another.
I know there is no particular progress made in the matter of removing one difficulty by pointing to another of like nature, especially such difficulties as Mormon believers of the Bible, as well as sectarian believers of it, are equally under obligations to explain as best they may. Still I think it proper to remark that sectarian ministers, who are confronted with the difficulties which infidels present concerning the inadequacy of Noah's ark to house Noah and his family and all the animals that they were to take into the ark with them, with the necessary food supplies for the five months through which the flood prevailed, (the very lowest estimate of the time) cut a sorry figure when making mouths at Jared's barges.
2. Relative to the openings in the top and bottom of the barges which has been so fruitful a source of merriment for reverend opponents of the Book of Mormon, it is only necessary to say that the opening provided for at the bottom of the barges was doubtless some merely emergency provision.
3. There is nothing in the matter of the transparent stones made luminous by being touched by the finger of God that is too much for a reasonable credulity in one who believes in God and his power. The stones, called Urim and Thummim, in the breast-plate of the Jewish High Priest were made luminous under the power of God, and through them in some mysterious way the will of God was communicated to a prophet. It is no more marvelous that God, at the solicitation of one prophet should make transparent stones luminous, by touching them with his finger, than that he should write his law upon the tablets of stone with his own finger for another prophet;[72] or that he should make a bush luminous, for that matter, or cause it to burn and yet not be consumed.[73]
Especially is belief in the possibility of making these stones luminous easy since the recent discovery of radium by those eminent French chemists, M. and Mme. Curie. Radium is a substance procured from pitchblende, which has not only the peculiar power of radiating light, but which has the power also of imparting to certain other substances, for a time at least, the same property. These eminent chemists were also the first to isolate from other substances, another metal which they called "polonium," after Poland, the native country of Mme. Curie.
Speaking of this latter metal before the Chemical Congress at Berlin, in 1903, W. Markwald said of it:
In a much higher degree even than radium it possesses the property of shining in the dark, and although it is known that actual particles infinitesimally small are being shot out from it continually—a fact which is proved by magnetic experiments—this strange substance does not seem to exhaust itself, nor to lose its luminous power with the passage of time. Here, therefore, is a hint, at least, of the future possibility of a constant and brilliant illuminant generated without heat or combustion.
An editorial writer of "The Medical News," commenting on Professor Markwald's paper, said:
Professor Markwald's demonstrations at Berlin make it clear that polonium is capable of communicating its radiant energy to many other substances in a very marked way.
In the presence of this knowledge concerning the qualities of these newly discovered metals, it is becoming for even supposedly hardheaded scientists to stop ridiculing the "luminous stones" of Jared's barges, while sectarian ministers, professing to believe in the omnipotence of God. [Text unreadable] splendidly displayed according to accounts given in the Hebrew scriptures, never had any case against the "luminous stones," and their ridicule from first to last has been unbecoming.
4. The adequacy of the eight barges to carry the colony of Jared, together with the seeds and animals they brought with them to the New World is established the moment it was proved that they may have been and doubtless were of considerable size; and by the same fact the difficulty of the length of the voyage was overcome; while the matter of keeping the barges together is a marvel of our opponent's own creation.
While it is true that no direct mention is made of any steering apparatus, it does not follow from this silence that there was no means for steering provided,[74] and an "outlook" from the opening in the upper side of the barge was not impossible. Indirectly, the matter of "steering" is mentioned as a factor in preparing the barges. For Moriancumr (the brother of Jared), the prophet leader, in praying that some means of light might be provided, also said: "O Lord, in them there is no light, whither shall we [by which we shall?] steer?"
Some provision evidently had been made for steering the barges which needed only the convenience of light to render it adequate.
These considerations dispose of the difficulties of the barges keeping together.
The Marvels of Liahona—"Compass."
This divine instrument, found by Lehi at his tent door, while still in the wilderness of Arabia, and which he describes as a "round ball of curious workmanship" of fine brass, within which were two spindles, of which Nephi says: "and one pointed the way whither we should go into the wilderness, and * * * I, Nephi, beheld the pointers which were in the ball; that they did work according to the faith and diligence and heed which we did give unto them."[75]
This curious instrument in an incidental way is called a "compass" in several passages.[76] Whereupon, our opponents seek to bring the Book of Mormon in conflict with supposed historical facts by insisting that the Book of Mormon speaks of the people being in possession of "a mariner's compass, long before the invention of such an instrument!"[77]
The director of the Nephites makes no pretentions to being a "Mariner's compass" of man's invention, and surely the description given above, supplemented as it is by a fuller description in the Book of Alma, where it is called "Liahona," must dispel all thought of this instrument being considered as an ordinary compass, such as is invented by men for navigating purposes; and which, as everybody knows, has but this one quality, namely, its needle constantly points northward because of the magnetic pole force, and mariners knowing one direction may ascertain others. The silliness of argument, which even supposedly grave and reverend historians and essayists descend to on such a point, is illustrated by an alleged incident with which Linn stoops to render his pages luminous, by pretending to quote the manner in which "Mormons in Utah" are supposed to explain the alleged anachronism of the "compass." He says:
The ease with which such an error could be explained is shown in an anecdote of a Utah Mormon, who, when told that the compass was not known in Bible times, responded by quoting Acts xxvii: 13, where Paul says: "And from thence we fetched a compass!"
That is, to quote the passage in full—"From thence we fetched a compass, and came to Rhegium."
This is merely the repetition of an old, silly story told against the Mormons long before they arrived in Utah, and was invented by the Rev. Henry Caswell, author of "The Prophet of the Nineteenth Century," published in 1843. It is of that order of stuff as the tales about the Prophet Joseph attempting to walk on the water, and his pretending to raise the simulated dead.
The antiquity of the compass really, of course, is of no importance in this discussion, since it is not claimed that "Liahona" is a compass, but an entirely different instrument, "and the Lord prepared it;" still, in passing, it may be well to point out that those who have attempted to make capital out of this supposed anachronism have not stated the whole truth concerning the compass.
"The directive power of the magnet," says a respectable authority "seems to have been unknown in Europe till late in the 12th century. It appears, however, on very good authority, that it was known in China, and throughout the east generally, at a very remote period. The Chinese annals indeed assign its discovery to the year 2634 B. C., when, they say, an instrument for indicating the sun was constructed by the emperor Hou-angti. At first, they would appear to have used it exclusively for guidance in traveling by land."[78]
VII.
The Weight of the Plates.
An objection is urged against the credibility of Joseph Smith's account of carrying the plates of the Book of Mormon home from the Hill Cumorah. It is claimed that on account of their great weight it would be impossible for him to carry them a distance of some two miles and repel successfully the three assaults which he alleges were made upon him enroute.
Hyde estimates that a mass of gold plates of the dimensions given, 7x8 inches and 6 inches thick, would weigh 200 pounds.[79] Many others have echoed this objection, and have adopted Hyde's data upon which it is founded. To increase the difficulties they also say, that "besides these plates he had, according to his third story, a breast-plate of brass, Laban's sword, the crystal interpreters, the 'brass ball with spindles,' the director of Lehi. Yet he packs his horse load, keeps these large and awkward shaped things completely concealed, and, at the same time, beat off and outruns two empty-handed men a distance of two miles! Statements must be probable, and, therefore, these ought to be rejected."[80]
This is a misrepresentation. The Prophet did not carry these "awkward shaped things" with him at the time he carried home the plates and repelled the attacks of his assailants. He carried with him the plates only on that occasion. The other articles, or as many of them as he had—I have nowhere found in any narrative of Joseph Smith's, or one by any responsible person associated with him, that he took possession of the sword of Laban or Lehi's director—he carried home at other times.[81]
In passing, I call attention to the fact that nearly every objection urged against the Book of Mormon has in it the element of misrepresentation. If the main fact contended for in the foregoing objection is true, namely, that the plates weighed 200 pounds, and therefore were too heavy for Joseph Smith to carry two miles and at the same time repel his assailants, why add the untruths of the rest of the statement? If the conclusion as to the weight be true, would not that be difficulty enough to present? It may be a little apart from the main question here to call attention to this tendency of misrepresentation in all the objections urged, yet the very strangeness of the circumstance tempts one to notice it, and it reveals the fact that those who are making objections to the Book of Mormon are not quite certain of the strength of such objections as may be urged while rigidly adhering to the facts in the case.
Without accepting or rejecting the conclusions relative to the probable weight of the plates—for it is largely matter of speculation in any case, and the conclusions urged may or may not be near the truth; and, moreover, ground for the difficulty presented would exist if it could be established that the plates weighed 90 or even 50 pounds, wo we will not haggle about the number of pounds in weight—it is conceded that the weight was considerable. In fact, I have already urged that it was a matter which impressed itself upon the minds of the Eight Witnesses, who incidentally say that they saw and "hefted" them.[82]
Replying to this objection it is to be urged, first of all, that Joseph Smith was a strong, athletic young man; and aroused as he was under the stress of the excitement of the occasion, he would be wrought up to his highest physical tension, and when so aroused the limits of what may be done by men in the way of feats of strength and agility have not yet been found. Of course there is yet to be reckoned with the power which God could, and which perhaps he did impart to the young Prophet. If that be accepted as a factor in the event, the objection based on the weight of the plates is swept aside. It matters not, then, whether the weight be 50 or 200 pounds. The difficulty is as easily overcome in the one case as in the other. But when a natural, ordinary source can be appealed to for explanation of such a circumstance as is before us, I do not care to appeal to the supernatural, to the miraculous; and I am of opinion that when the unusual personal strength of Joseph Smith is taken into account, and that the young man was aroused to his highest physical tension by the excitement of the circumstances under which he was acting, I think he could accomplish the things he claims to have performed though the weight of the plates be conceded as considerable.
In conclusion, on this head, I call the attention of the many sectarian "Reverends" who make much of the apostate Hyde's objection, and use his data for arriving at the weight of the plates, to the fact that it ill becomes them to urge this objection, while they have to account to an unbelieving world for the marvelous feats of strength and endurance of many Bible characters, and especially of Samson, for twenty years Judge of Israel. What of this man, bare handed, meeting a lion and overcoming him? What of one lone man, with so poor a weapon as the jaw bone of an ass, slaying a thousand men of a war-like people? What of his carrying away bodily, together with the posts and iron bar which fastened them, the huge gates of the city of Gaza? And finally of his pulling down the great central pillars of the temple of Dagon, so that the temple fell, slaying himself and a host of the Philistines?
If these "Reverend" gentlemen shall say in reply to this that each of these feats of strength and others accredited to Samson is in every case preceded by the statement, "the Spirit of the Lord began to move him," or "the Spirit of the Lord came mightily upon him;" and that when at last he was caught weakly in the lap of the false Delilah, and in accounting for that weakness it is said, "he wisted not that the Lord was departed from him"—in a word, if his strength is to be accounted for by referring its origin to the Spirit of God resting upon the man, wayward though he was in some respects, that argument must count as much in explaining Joseph Smith's feat of carrying the Nephite plates home and repelling his assailants as in accounting for Samson's exploits.
The Death of Shiz.
The description given in the Book of Mormon of the death of Shiz, the Jaredite leader who fought Coriantumr, "the last of the Jaredites," is regarded as an objection to the Book of Mormon. The description follows:
And it came to pass that when Coriantumr had leaned upon his sword, that he rested a little, he smote off the head of Shiz that Shiz raised upon his hands and fell; and after that he had struggled for breath, he died.[83]
It is claimed that this represents an impossible thing—a man with his head stricken off rising upon his hands! And yet equally marvelous things of this nature have occurred, and are matters of record.
Mr. G. W. Wightman, of the Seventeenth Lancers of the British Light Brigade, and a survivor of the wild charge at Balaclava, relates, in the "Electric Magazine" for June, 1892, the incident of Captain Nolan's death during that charge. Captain Nolan was of the Fifteenth Hussars, and he met his fate, according to Wightman, as follows:
We had ridden barely two hundred yards and were still at the "trot," when poor Nolan's fate came to him. I did not see him cross Cardigan's front, but I did see the shell explode, of which a fragment struck him. From his raised sword-hand dropped the sword, but the arm remained erect. Kinglake writes that "what had once been Nolan' maintained the strong military seat until the 'erect form dropped out of the saddle;' but this was not so. The sword-hand indeed remained upraised and rigid, but all other limbs so curled in on the contorted trunk as by a spasm, that we wondered how for the moment the huddled form kept the saddle."
It is quite as remarkable that a man stricken unto death by the fragment of a shell should continue erect in the saddle, with sword-arm upraised and rigid, while the other limbs so curled in on the contorted trunk that those who saw him "wondered how the huddled form kept the saddle," as that a man as his head is stricken off should momentarily rise on his hands.
Mr. Wightman, in the same article, relates the still more remarkable case of Sergeant Talbot's death:
It was about this time that Sergeant Talbot had his head clean carried off by a round shot, yet for about thirty yards farther the headless body kept the saddle, the lance at the charge firmly gripped under the right arm.[84]
After this well attested fact, and many others of a similar nature that might be cited, it is not worth while being skeptical about Shiz convulsively rising on his hands for a moment after his head was stricken off.
Concluding Reflections.
The foregoing are not all the objections urged against the Book of Mormon, but they are the chief ones and the only ones I consider worthy or necessary of notice here; and even some of these scarce pass muster on the score of being worthy of consideration. I have already called attention to the tendency of misrepresentation in these objections; it is a characteristic of all objections that I have ever seen urged against the Book of Mormon. Why it is so I shall leave those to explain who make the objections. The arguments made against the Book of Mormon, especially those made by professed ministers of the Gospel, are wonderfully similar in spirit to those made by skeptics against the Hebrew scriptures, and in fact against all written revelation. The same scoffing at miracles; if they differ from those of the Bible—and sometimes when this difference is one only of degree—then it is argued that they cannot be true, because of said differences; if the miracles resemble those of the Bible—however remotely—then they are plagiarisms of the Bible, and are idle imitations unworthy of belief. The same old complaint of skeptics is made against the inadequacy and imperfections of the language—the language is not that of an All-Perfect Deity—it is unlike what might be expected of God, the human elements are all too apparent. And so one might continue through the whole gamut of criticism against the Book of Mormon.
Sectarian divines who would complain bitterly of such arguments if used against the Bible, do not hesitate to employ them and couple with them all the bitterness, ridicule, sarcasm, ribaldry, inuendo, and even misrepresentation that a certain class of skeptics have employed against the Bible. I do not mention these things in the way of complaint; I only want to point to the fact of them, that the reader, with me, may wonder at them and ask himself the question, why is this the case?
And now a final word as to these objections. Are all the objections to the Book of Mormon satisfactorily answered? Are all difficulties which they represent removed? Frankly, no; they are not. Every one must feel that. But, on the other hand, do these objections that are not entirely and satisfactorily answered constitute an insuperable difficulty in the way of a rational faith in the Book of Mormon? My answer is, they do not. Nor does incompleteness of evidence on any particular point necessarily mean error as to the general result of the evidence. But a little more time, a little more research, a little more certain knowledge, which such research will bring forth, will undoubtedly result in the ascertainment of facts that will supply the data necessary for a complete and satisfactory solution of all the difficulties which objectors now emphasize, and on which they claim a verdict against the Book of Mormon.
Meantime, do not our opponents recognize the fact that some responsibility devolves upon them in the controversy? What of the positive evidences and arguments advanced in favor of the Book of Mormon? Have we not a clear right to expect and demand a recognition of these, or else a clear confutation of them? It is nugatory, as George Stanley Faber successfully contended respecting infidel arguments against the Christian religion—it is nugatory to say that the evidences in favor of the Book of Mormon are weak and unsatisfactory, while yet no regular confutation or that evidence, and those arguments are brought forward. To state difficulties, paraphrasing Faber,[85] is one thing; to refute evidence and answer argument is another. The work which we have the right to demand of our opponents is a work in which they shall go regularly through the treatise, say of Charles Thompson, of Orson Pratt, or Parley P. Pratt, or George Reynolds,[86] and last, and perhaps least, the less worthy treatise of these pages, taking argument after argument, necessarily showing its utter inconclusiveness, and the inconclusiveness of the whole cumulative evidence and argument, bringing out the triumphant conclusion that the evidences in support of the claims of the Book of Mormon are too weak and unsatisfactory to command reasonable assent.
This is what is incumbent upon the opponents of the Book of Mormon. The mere statement of difficulties is not sufficient; for be it remembered that mere difficulties though unanswered, or even unanswerable, cannot set aside direct and positive evidence. "A negative presumption," says John Fiske, "is not created by the absence of proof in cases where, in the nature of things, proof is inaccessible,"[87] as is the case in respect of some proof to meet objections urged against the Book of Mormon. Again our author says: "No amount of negative evidence can outweigh a single well-established item of positive evidence."[88] And again: "Negative evidence, as every one knows, is a very unsafe basis of argument. A single item of positive evidence will always outweigh any amount of negative evidence."[89] The positive evidence that stands for the claims of the Book of Mormon become the difficulties that our opponents must overcome before they can hope to overthrow the claims made for the Nephite record. Until this is done, I shall hold that the mass of evidence which it has been the effort of the writer through these pages to set somewhat in order, is sufficient, both in quality and quantity, to fill the mind who pays attention to it with a rational faith in the Book of Mormon—THE AMERICAN VOLUME OF SCRIPTURE.
THE END.
Footnotes
1. Nephi xiii: 14.2. Mosiah xx.3. Alma xiv.4. Alma xxiv.5. Mosiah xxvii: 18-23.6. Mosiah xxix.7. "Mormonism" (1857) pp. 280-282.8. "The Golden Bible," Rev. M. T. Lamb, (1887), chapter v.9. Elsewhere on the subject of these signs given to the Nephites, I have said: "I think I see something very beautiful and appropriate in these marvelous signs. I think it is fitting that he who is described in the four Gospels as well as in the fifth (III. Nephi, Book of Mormon) as the 'Light and Life of the world,' should have his entrance into earth life proclaimed by a night in which there should be no darkness, and that a new star for a season should appear in the heavens, to be a witness to the people that 'the Life and Light' of mankind had indeed come into the world. And equally appropriate is it that when he who is described as the 'Life and Light of the world' is laid low in death, the world should have the testimony of light eclipsed. I see a beautiful appropriateness in these signs, and in them I see added pictures in the life and career of the Lord Jesus Christ." ("The Fifth Gospel," a Discourse by the writer replying to criticisms of Dr. W. M. Paden on III. Nephi, Defense of the Faith and the Saints, pp. 381-2.)10. III. Nephi xi.11. "The Golden Bible," p. 162.12. Compare II. Kings ii: 7-13 and Acts i: 4-9.13. Compare Acts xix: 11, 12, Acts v: 15 with II. Kings iv: 29.14. Compare Matthew ix: 18-26 with II. Kings iv: 32-37.15. Matthew xiv: 15-21.16. Compare Rev. x: with Ezekiel ii and iii.17. See "The Golden Bible," pp. 273-283.18. Chapter xxxvi this work.19. See Ibid, chapter xxxiv.20. "American Antiquities," p. 355.21. Dictionary of Book of Mormon (Reynolds) p. 223, also Mos. xxviii.22. Mosiah xxvii: 34. I take it that the sons of the king are named in the order of their ages and Ammon is named first.23. Century Dictionary, word Andes. The Encyclopaedia Britannica gives the word "Anti" as the probable origin of the word "Andes;" also "Anta" or "Tapir;" and "Antis" the name of a tribe resident in the mountains of Peru.24. Conquest of Peru, Vol. I., p. 113, note.25. Alma xxiv: 3-5.26. Alma xxiii: 17.27. Alma xx: 4.28. Mormon vi: 14.29. Alma xxxi: 3.30. Alma 56: 4.31. Alma xxxvii: 7.32. Alma 56: 9.33. II. Nephi v: 16.34. "Native Races," (Bancroft), Vol., IV, p. 779.35. "Conquest of Peru," (Prescott), Vol. I., p. 37.36. The argument is briefly stated by Prescott, and he cites Wilkinson's "Ancient Egypt," Vol. III., pp. 246-254.37. "History of Ancient Egypt," George Rawlinson, M. A., Vol. I., p. 97.38. In a note he cites the fact that the British museum possesses several specimens of Egyptian iron, but three of these seven or eight specimens he declares to be of modern date. Vol. I., p. 519.39. "History of Ancient Egypt," Vol. I, pp. 519, 520.40. "Ancient America," (Baldwin), pp. 248, 249.41. "History of America before Columbus," (DeRoo) Vol. I., p. 67.42. Ibid. p. 68, 69.43. "American Antiquities," p. 141.44. Ibid. p. 185.45. Ibid. p. 225.46. Ibid. pp. 238, 239.47. "American Antiquities," pp. 241, 242.48. "American Antiquities," pp. 260, 261.49. Ibid. p. 263.50. Ibid. p. 265.51. Ibid. p. 269.52. "Foot-prints of Vanished Races in the Mississippi Valley," pp. 67, 68.53. Ibid. p. 108, 109.54. Ibid. pp. 109, 110.55. I. Nephi xviii: 25. The animals named in this passage are repeatedly referred to in all parts of the Book of Mormon.56. Ether ix: 18, 19.57. Pre-Historic America, (Nadaillac), pp. 15-28.58. Gen. i: 9.59. Exod. xv: 1, and xiv: 26.60. "Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature," (Kitto), Vol. II., p. 973. He quotes Wilkinson as the authority for the above. Vol. I., p. 289.61. This opinion is defended by Max Schlosser in the "Archiv fur Anthropologie," 1889, s. 132.62. "The American Race," (Brinton), p. 51.63. "Pre-Historic America," (Nadaillac), p. 357.64. "American Antiquities," p. 157.65. Ibid. p. 263.66. "Native Races," Vol. II., pp. 721-722.67. Ether ii:3.68. Following is Campbell's account of the barges: "Moroni writes the Book of Ether, containing an account of the people of Jared, who escaped from the building of the tower of Babel unconfounded in his language. These people of Jared God marched before in a cloud, and directed them through the wilderness, and instructed them to build barges to cross the sea; and finally they built eight barges, air tight, and were commanded to make a hole in the top to admit air, and one in the bottom to admit water;(!) and in them were put sixteen windows of molten stone,(!) which when touched by the finger of Jesus, became as transparent as any glass, and gave them light under 'the mountain waves' and when above the water.(!) * * * * And the eight barges after swimming 344 days, arrived on the coast of the land of promise!"69. "Golden Bible," (Lamb), p. 3.70. Ether 2: 17.71. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, (Hackett's edition) Vol. III., p. 2178.72. Exodus xxxi: 18.73. Ibid. iii: 2.74. I have usually found in personal controversies on this point, that our opponents depended upon the statement in the Book of Mormon to the effect that these "barges" should be as a "whale in the midst of the sea." (Ether ii: 24). To which the answer is obvious; namely, it does not follow that they were to be like a "tailless," that is to say "redderless," whale.75. I. Nephi xvi, II. Nephi v: 12.76. I. Nephi xviii: 12-21.77. "Story of the Mormons," (Linn) p. 97. This writer attributes the possession of the "compass" to the Jaredites. Whether it is the slip of a careless writer or an effort on his part to make the matter of the "compass" in the Book of Mormon more ancient, is a question for him or his friends to explain. Many other writers in their anxiety to find anachronisms in the Book of Mormon refer to this "compass." Lamb is positively dishonest in the matter, since he assumes the existence of two instruments. One he calls the "Director," and applies to it the description given above in the text, and the other he calls the "Compass," though clearly this latter word is used in an incidental way in describing the "Director." This is the only way he could create the longed for anachronism, and hence he adopted it. This may secure his fame for ingenuity, but what of his honesty? (See "The Golden Bible" Chapter III., Subdivisions "C" and "D").78. "Universal Knowledge," (Chambers) p. 203.79. Following is the method by which he arrives at this conclusion: "The plates of gold measure 7x8 inches, and six inches thick, and are fastened through the back edge with three rings. A box of tin, 10x14, and 3 inches deep, weighs about 125 lbs. gross. The box may weigh 10 lbs., leaving the net weight of tin 115 lbs. Now 10x14x3: 115 :: 7x8x6 : 92 lbs. Had these gold plates been tin, they would have weighed about 90 lbs. But the relative weight of tin and gold is as 19.25 to 7.58. So that 7.58 : 19.25 :: 92 : 220.44. Hence, this mass of gold plates, as they were not so compactly pressed as boxed tin, would have weighed nearly 200 lbs." (Hyde's "Mormonism," p. 244).80. Hyde's "Mormonism," p. 244.81. See this Work, Vol. II, ch. iv.82. This Work, Vol. II, p. 281.83. Ether xv: 30-31.84. I am indebted to the kindness of the late Joseph Rich, son of the late Apostle Charles C. Rich, for these two items. He was kind enough to mark the passages and send me the article from the "Electric Magazine," June, 1892.85. "Difficulties of Infidelity," Sec. I.86. It is a pleasure to note the work of this my brother, and fellow President in the First Council of the Seventies in this field of Book of Mormon labor. I feel myself much indebted to him because of his great achievements in this field of research.
First, for his excellent Book of Mormon Chronological Table, published now for many years in connection with the late Elder F. D. Richards' "Compendium."
Second, for his "Myth of the Manuscript Found."
Third, for his "Dictionary of the Book of Mormon."
Fourth, for a series of articles in the "Contributor," (Vol. 5) on the History of the Book of Mormon.
Fifth, for a second series of articles in the "Contributor" (Vol. 17) under the title "Evidences of the Book of Mormon; Some External Proofs of its Divinity."
Sixth, and last, and greatest achievement of all, I thank him for his "Complete Concordance of the Book of Mormon." The amount of patient, pains-taking labor required for the production of this magnificent work will never be known to the general reader. Only the close student of the Nephite Scriptures will ever really appreciate it. What Cruden and Young have done for Bible students, Elder Reynolds has more abundantly done for Book of Mormon students. The Elders of the Church through all generations to come will, I am sure, feel deeply grateful to Elder Reynolds for his great work which will stand as a monument to his pains-taking habits of thorough application to a task; but what is better still, the work will stand as a monument of his love for the Book of Mormon.87. Studies in Religion, p. 78.88. Cosmic Philosophy, Vol. I., p. 81.89. Ibid. Vol. III., p. 60.1.
