No ancient ruin or city/area could have been a Nephite location north of the narrow strip of wilderness if it was built, or was in the process of being built, prior to about 120 BC, unless it was conquered or converted by the Nephites subsequent to this date. Hopefully, this article about Zarahemla’s rise and fall will show not only that Swingler is correct in his analysis but also that the following statement is accurate: Whenever the largest area realized by the Nephites in the land southward is indicated, then it can appropriately be described as the “greater land of Zarahemla.” Any term for any size in between seems irrelevant because the growth from about 124–120 BC (its initial identifiable size) to Moroni’s time (about 72–56 BC when it reached its apogee) was so constant and rapid as to render useless any attempt at naming an intermediate size.Ĭlearly, David Swingler is correct in describing the limited nature of the Nephite experience in Mesoamerica: “They were little fish in a big pond full of many ferocious fish.” 4 A rereading of his article is very beneficial for all analysts who are seeking to understand the geography of the Book of Mormon. Most references to the land of Zarahemla refer to the “local land,” “city/land,” or “lesser land” of Zarahemla. Proposal: Book of Mormon analysts should follow the example of the Book of Mormon and use the descriptive term “city/land of” to indicate a particular city and the area supporting that specific city. 1 Ric Hauck, Joseph Allen, and Blake Allen use the term “lesser land of Zarahemla.” 2 The Book of Mormon uses such terms as “land or city,” “the city,” or “the land of” or similar terminology. For example, Kirk Magleby uses the term “local land of Zarahemla” for the lands surrounding the city.
A review of the various scriptures relating to the geographic size and growth of the city and the land of Zarahemla is very instructive in determining their probable location and, perhaps just as important, in determining where other major Book of Mormon cities or territories could have been located and could not have been located.īook of Mormon analysts should be consistent in the terminology used to describe the sizes of the land of Zarahemla.
The geographic size of the city and land of Zarahemla depends on the time period being discussed in the Book of Mormon.
0 kommentar(er)
