Meeting the Archaeologist Halfway

The section of the Book of Mormon we have just been discussing raises several points that relate to material remains that archaeologists examine. Sometimes the significance of their findings proves elusive in relation to the scriptural text. A few more comparisons between the archaeological and textual materials may sharpen our sensitivity to the methodological problems involved and will underline the need for caution in handling both sorts of data.

Linen and silk are textiles mentioned in the Book of Mormon (Alma 4:6). Neither fabric as we now know them was found in Mesoamerica at the coming of the Spaniards. The problem might be no more than linguistic. The redoubtable Bernal Diaz, who served with Cortez in the initial wave of conquest, described native Mexican garments made of "henequen which is like linen." The fiber of the maguey plant, from which henequen was manufactured, closely resembles the flax fiber used to make European linen. Several kinds of "silk," too, were reported by the conquerors. One kind was of thread spun from the fine hair on the bellies of rabbits. Padre Motolinia also reported the presence of a wild silkworm, although he thought the Indians did not make use of the cocoons. But other reports indicate that wild silk was spun and woven in certain areas of Mesoamerica. Another type came from the pod of the ceiba tree. We may never discover actual remains of these fabrics, but at least the use of the words in the Book of Mormon now seems to offer no problem.

The "money" of Alma 11 is another story, however. It would be nice to say that the problem has been solved, but that is not true. Hugh Nibley has given a sensible introduction to the difficult topic of "What is money?" from a Near Eastern perspective. But the question remains, was money used in Mesoamerica, the land of the Book of Mormon? No reliable data show that minted coins were used anywhere in the pre-Columbian New World, despite rare, puzzling finds of Old World coins. But money need not take the form of coins. It can be any agreed-upon medium in standard units that serves as a public measure of value. Several kinds of money in this sense were known in Mesoamerica. The commonest was the cacao bean, which continued in use at least up to fifty years ago. (People could literally drink up their money then, in the form of cocoa!) The system reported in the Book of Alma followed Israelite practice before the Babylonian Exile in that the money units employed (such as the shekel) were weight units of metal rather than standardized coins. Minted coins apparently came into use in Palestine only after Lehi left there. Certainly the "money" units given in Alma 11 were proportionate weights. The inappropriate term "coinage" in the chapter heading is an error due to nineteenth century editing, not a part of the ancient text. Research has also shown recently that relating measures of grain to values of precious metal, in the manner of Alma 11:4-19, was an Egyptian practice. Whether there was Mesoamerican weighed money we cannot say. No serious study of money usage there has ever been done. As I explain at length in chapter 7, the entire subject of metals in Mesoamerica in Book of Mormon times needs far more research to fill major gaps in our knowledge. South American metallurgy is much better understood than that in Mexico and Guatemala, yet startling finds are turning up even in that "well-known" area. Most recently a burial containing 12,000 pieces of metal "money" (though not coins as such) was found in Ecuador, for the first time confirming that some ancient South Americans had the idea of accumulating a fortune in more or less standard units of metal wealth. Such a startling find in Mesoamerica could change our present limited ideas.

Another aspect of ancient culture also deserves clarification on the basis of archaeology. Three types of religious places are mentioned in the Book of Mormon: temples, sanctuaries, and synagogues. These places of worship ought to leave remains, shouldn't they? We gave brief consideration to temples in the previous chapter, but not to the other two types. A sanctuary is usually considered a structure at a revered spot where unscheduled individual and family worship can take place. In Palestine, Bethel was such a place, in use at least from the time of Abraham's worship there (Genesis 12:8; 28:16-22) to Lehi's day (2 Kings 23:15). The Israelites who came to America would no doubt have followed the practice of designating and worshipping at sanctuaries. Some of these would have existed in homes or residential localities; believers in God were expected "to call on his name and confess their sins before him," "watching and praying continually" (Alma 15:17; 17:4). Native homes in many parts of Mesoamerica today continue a pre-Columbian custom of devoting a corner of the house to quiet, daily rituals. Hilltops too have served, and still do, as sanctuaries where individuals leave offerings. Waterholes and lakes are also frequent worship spots. Pre-Columbian stone monuments themselves are considered sacred today in many localities. People resort there to confess sins and pray for forgiveness. Lamanite and Nephite sanctuaries might have taken any of these forms.

On that note we should return to the previous discussion of prophetic versus Baalist religion. Consistently, worship led by the prophets deemphasized (though it did not exclude) sacred objects and places. Its main concerns were spiritual results rather than physical setting. Such religious furniture as archaeologists have recovered in Palestine seems to derive mostly from the nonprophetic tradition. In the American promised land, we would expect a similar distinction. The esoteric sculptures and paintings of ancient Mesoamerica were nearly all of some religious significance, it is supposed, but they probably had little or no place in the worship of Benjamin or Alma. Of course, before his conversion the younger Alma had been an idolatrous man (Mosiah 27:8), as had his father before him (Mosiah 11:7; 17:2). Visitors to the museums of Mesoamerica or to great sites like Teotihuacan may see remains aplenty of the baser worship, but we should not expect to connect those objects directly with the religion of the Nephite prophets. It is of interest, then, that monumental religious art is largely absent in those areas of Chiapas that I associate with the Nephite presence during Book of Mormon times. On the contrary, the places of prime Lamanite inhabitation, according to this geographical interpretation, do yield many religious images, particularly during the times when the Book of Mormon tells us that religious practices were decadent.

What were synagogues? They are mentioned among both Nephites and the Lamanites under dissident Nephite influence (Alma 21:4-5; 32:1-12; Helaman 3:9, 14; Moroni 7:1). Would they have left ruins that might have been discovered? At first glance the very idea seems to pose a problem for the Book of Mormon. Many historians have maintained that synagogues were not known among the Jews until well after Lehi had left Palestine. Another group of experts, however, now argue that the synagogue predated Lehi's departure. They propose that when King Josiah carried out his sweeping reforms of Jewish worship in order to clean out pagan intrusions, he closed the old sanctuaries (2 Kings 23). "The centralization of worship in Jerusalem from 621 B.C. onwards, with many Jews thereby denied a share in temple worship, must inevitably have led to the establishment of non-sacrificial places of assembly"—in effect, synagogues. So at least the concept of the synagogue could well have been around for a generation by the time First Nephi begins. Later synagogues served as community centers open to any who wished to worship or speak (compare Alma 26:29). According to the Babylonian Talmud, the Jewish synagogue was normally oriented to face Jerusalem and was also located on the highest place in town and near water. A synagogue was not necessarily a building; it might be only an enclosure.

Structures for seemingly sacred purposes that meet most of the Talmudic criteria existed in early Mesoamerican sites. It remains for some ambitious student to make detailed comparisons. That study should look carefully at names as well as ruins. The term synagogue is difficult to distinguish in concept from related terms used in the Book of Mormon. The "churches" set up by Alma in Zarahemla, and also the "assembly" of the Lamanites (Alma 21:16), were apparently functional parallels to synagogues. Several Old Testament terms signify "congregation" or "assembly" or the meeting place for such a group, the terms overlapping in translation. One of those words has come to be translated "synagogue," but anciently words like synagogue, ekklesia, kenishta, and 'eda were translated quite freely as though they were equivalent. 64 Thus, we may find that whatever distinguished a synagogue from a local church by Nephite standards was so subtle that we will be unable to tell them apart on the basis of their remains.

Altars are mentioned twice in the Book of Mormon (Alma 15:17; 17:4). They ought to be identifiable in the archaeological remains. In fact, the Mesoamerican use of an altar together with a stela apparently originated on the Pacific coast of Guatemala. Perhaps this complex will prove to be related to that in use in Israelite Palestine in Lehi's day, where a memorial stela (massēbāh) was erected for a deceased person at a "high place" or sacred mound where sacrifices were offered; for "each bamoth [high place or sacred mound] had to have its altar." The stela-altar-sacred-mound complex is, of course, characteristic in the Mesoamerican Second Tradition.

Another construction showing up in the remains of the past is what the Book of Mormon calls a "sepulchre." The Lamanite queen asked Ammon if her unconscious spouse, Lamoni, should be interred in one of these, "which they had made for the purpose of burying their dead" (Alma 19:1, 5). At Kaminaljuyu tombs of that very time period have been excavated that give us a good idea of what a Lamanite "sepulchre" probably looked like. Tomb I in Mound E-III-3 was found to contain the remains of some highly honored person. The tomb had been dug down into the top of the artificial mountain, the largest single earthen platform at the dead city. Terraces or benches had been left along the walls of the hole cut down into the clay fill. The richly dressed corpse had been carried there on a litter, no doubt accompanied by an extensive procession of mourners (compare Alma 18:43). After the litter bearing the corpse, head to the south, had been carefully placed in the center of the burial chamber, rich furnishings and equipment for use in the life after death were placed on and around the body. When the ceremony was completed, a flat timber roof was constructed and covered with clay fill. (Eventually the timbers rotted, whereupon more clay was added to fill in the depression and make the surface smooth on top. Still later, tomb robbers dug down to look for precious ornaments.) In a second tomb in the same mound, three skeletons were found in addition to the principal one. Their condition and position suggested they had been sacrificed to accompany the deceased leader. Perhaps they were slaves (compare Mosiah 7:15; Alma 17:28; 27:8).

We see points at which archaeological findings may touch directly upon statements in the Book of Mormon. Meeting the archaeologist halfway is probably a good idea, but perhaps he will need to come even further if his work is to be significant to elucidate properly the written record.