Controversial “Coins”

A similar issue that hinges on both translation and reading assumptions is the notion of anachronous coins in the Book of Mormon. Alma 11:4 says: “Not these are the names of the different pieces of their gold, and of their silver, according to their value.” Perhaps because a common currency in the world during Joseph Smith’s time was the Spanish coin that was give the English name “piece of eight” (a single coin worth eight reales), Alma’s “pieces of their gold” were assumed to be coins.

It is not hard to find faithful LDS authors who assume that this text indicated coinage. George Reynolds and Janne M. Sjodahl’s Commentary on the Book of Mormon discusses this section in terms of coinage. Sidney B. Sperry and Monte S. Nyman similarly refer to coins in the Book of Mormon. Richard Pearson Smith even suggested that “in every case it turns out that the [Nephite coinage] system has an edge over the other systems from the standpoint of number of coins required for a purchase.” So pervasive was the assumptive reading of the text that the heading in the 1920 edition was “Nephite coins and measures,” which was modified only slightly in the 1981 edition: “Nephite coinage set forth.” The 1830 edition did not have a chapter break between our chapters 10 and 11, and the headnote of the chapter including our chapter 11 said nothing at all about this section.

The idea that there would be coins in the Book of Mormon has righty been the focus of historical criticism of the text. Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson of the Mormonism Research Ministry note:

Some have criticized the Mormon Church for its failure to provide evidence for any Nephite coins. But should we really expect the LDS Church to produce them? Coinage in the Western Hemisphere during the Book of Mormon time period was unknown. The use of coins did not become popular until the sixteenth century, more than a millennium after the last Nephite had allegedly died. However, the problem does not lie in a lack of Nephite coins. Rather, it lies in Joseph Smith’s implication that such coins existed in the first place.

McKeever and Johnson are correct that the presence of coins would be anomalous. They also correctly note that many LDS authors have assumed that the text refers to coins. They also correctly note that “over the years, many Mormons—including some scholars—have dismissed [the] description as coins.” They cite Daniel C. Peterson’s discussion:

It is, alas, quite true that there is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of Book of Mormon coins. Not even in the Book of Mormon itself. The text of the Book of Mormon never mentions the word “coin” or any variant of it. The reference to “Nephite coinage” in the chapter heading to Alma 11 is not part of the original text, and is mistaken. Alma 11 is almost certainly talking about standardized weights of metal—a historical step toward coinage, but not yet the real thing. [Here ends McKeever and Johnson’s citation of Peterson. Peterson continues;} Genuine coinage was not invented until some years after Lehi’s departure from Jerusalem. And, even then, it is scarcely circulated beyond Anatolia and reached Palestine only in the fifth century before Christ. Thus, while an ignorant nineteenth-century con artist mist easily have blundered into putting coins in the pockets of his fictional Near Eastern immigrants, the Book of Mormon depicts precisely the monetary situation that it ought to for its claimed time, and place of cultural origin. So Latter-day Saint scholars would be as surprised as anybody if we were someday to find a cache of “Book of Mormon coins.”

McKeever and Johnson suggest that Joseph Smith really intended coins, but this conclusion is based on their assumption that “pieces” necessarily refers to coins. Peterson’s point is that the text not only does not say coins, but it does not describe coins. The textual descriptions actually come much closer to the descriptions of exchange systems from the ancient world where there is no assumption nor indication that the system included coins. John W. Welch notes the initial provision of Eshnunna’s law code, instituted in Babylon in the early eighteenth century B.C.

1 kor of barley is (priced) at 1 shekel of silver

3 qa of “best oil” are (priced) at 1 shekel of silver;

1 seah (and) 2 qa sesame oil are (priced) at 1 shekel of silver . . .

The hire for a wagon together with its oxen and its driver is 1 massiktum (and) 4 seah of barley. If it is (paid in) silver, the hire if one third of a shekel.

Welch also notes a parallel between the Babylonian and Nephite systems which:

has to do with the basic reason for establishing values for various goods. As Eshnunna, this valuation was designed to allow merchants to deal in a variety of commodities, each one being convertible into either silver or barley, sesame oil, wool, and other things. Thus precious metal an grain measures were interchangeable. Correspondingly, the Nephite system allowed traders to convert from silver or gold into many other goods: “also for a measure of every kind of grain” (Alma 11:7).

Alma 11:7 specifies: “A senum of silver was equal to a senine of gold, and either for a measure of barley, and also for a measure of every kind of grain.” The fact that these measures, in either gold or silver, are equivalent to a measure of grain tells us that we are dealing with weights. The primary Mesoamerican food crops were corn and beans, both of which would easily be measured by weight.