Arguments from comparative studies support the idea that metals were long known in Mesoamerica. Archaeologists only recently learned that metal was being worked in Peru as early as 1900 B.C., and it was being traded in Ecuador before 1000 B.C. At the same time, all Mesoamerican scholars agree that intercommunication with Peru and Ecuador occurred over a period of thousands of years. Some definitely believe that it was via these voyages that metalworking reached Mexico and Guatemala. At the same time, we are asked to suppose that something as valuable as metal waited to be carried north until A.D. 900; then, suddenly, the metal connection finally "took." Such a strange idea of the culture contact process is now impossible to accept. Dudley T. Easby, Jr., one of the most respected experts on ancient American metal technology, wrote in 1960: "The majority of scholars, relying on circumstantial evidence, believe that fine metallurgy in ancient Mexico was limited to a few centuries before the arrival of the Spaniards. Perhaps they are right, but it seems to me that their theory leaves much to be explained." Now linguistic evidence confirms Easby's suspicions. A new theory of the history of Mesoamerican metalworking is needed. When it has been framed, the references to metals in the Book of Mormon will not seem as strange as they once did.

None of what has been said here means that point-by-point agreement now exists between the scripture and scientific findings. The trend of the evidence is moving toward agreement, but some serious differences remain to be worked out. In order to see what some of them are, let's now look very carefully at some statements about metals in the Nephite volume. But we must not let our preconceptions about the text stand in the way of gaining understanding.

Nephi, the son of Lehi, was a connecting link between the Near Eastern metallurgical tradition and Nephite culture in the New World. In the Arabian wilderness he found ore, refined it, and made tools with which to construct a ship. He required divine guidance for the design of the vessel, but his matter-of-fact description of the smelting indicates that he used his own knowledge to manage that (1 Nephi 17:8-11). What he knew was probably fairly rudimentary—his apparatus certainly was, being little beyond a bellows (verse 11). After all, the Israelites were not highly skilled in those arts. Instead, expertise with metal had been a monopoly of specialist non-Hebrew clans, whose craft secrets were passed down from father to son. Nephi could have known the basics of the processes, but he probably did not control the full repertoire of skills.

Upon arriving in the promised land, Nephi made a set of plates on which he kept his record (1 Nephi 19:1). Approximately twenty years later he manufactured more plates ("the small plates of Nephi," 2 Nephi 5:28-30). By that time he and his followers had left the Lamanites behind in the Pacific coastal lowlands and settled up in the land of Nephi. There he undertook to pass on what knowledge he did have in these matters. He taught his people "to work in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores." (2 Nephi 5:15). This is an impressive list. Unfortunately, the language leaves us uncertain what the Nephites did with these substances. We could infer that practical as well as decorative use was made of some of these (see 2 Nephi 5:16 regarding "precious things"). If so, utility soon took second place. Nephite concern with ores and metals a bit later had come to be with their "precious" quality (Jacob 1:16; 2:12). Only once thereafter, about 400 B.C., was utilitarian metalworking suggested (Jarom 1:8: tillage tools and weapons are mentioned). From that point on in the Nephite history, every reference to metals states or implies that they were strictly precious—a source of wealth. In fact, during the final 400 years of the Nephite account even gold and silver, the only metals mentioned at all, are noted but four times. Perhaps by that period the labor-cheap surface deposits had been exhausted, making ore harder to obtain. One discussion of American metals has suggested that such a difficulty probably arose generally, for it is a geological likelihood.

Processing ore gets almost no attention in the Book of Mormon. Only a single time are we unmistakably told of smelting. According to the Jaredite account, King Shule "did molten out of the hill, and made swords" (Ether 7:9). One possible Nephite reference to processing states that they did "work all kinds of ore, and did refine it" (Helaman 6:11). Note that Nephi's plates were "plates of ore," where we might expect to read "plates of gold" or such (1 Nephi 19:1). There are puzzles here because what the text means about Nephite operations with metals is simply unclear. Refining could have consisted of as simple a process as heating a piece of rich ore and pounding it. Certainly the Jaredite king who had his "fine gold . . . refined" within the confines of a "prison" (Ether 10:7) would not have been hauling bulky ore to such a place for smelting, although it might have made sense to have workers treat small amounts of less-than-fine gold in order to improve its quality. In short, we remain largely ignorant about the technical procedures employed by the Book of Mormon craftsmen, but there is no reason from the text to think they were very sophisticated technologically. It sounds as if they were within the modest range of skill common in later Mesoamerica.

What about the specific metals cited in the book? Were all the metals mentioned present in Mesoamerica? A total of seven are listed: gold, silver, copper, brass, iron, steel, and "ziff."

Gold and silver specimens are well-known. Some show the "lost-wax" method of casting, known in Mesoamerica, Peru, and also the Near East. However, the only form specified in the scriptures is the flat "plate" on which historical and religious records were kept. It would not be feasible to manufacture those other than by hammering. Thin hammered metal we know well, but metal sheets for record keeping are not yet attested archaeologically in the New World. (A nineteenth-century historian in Oaxaca said that the ancestors of the Mixtecs made very thin gold plates on which were engravings of ancient hieroglyphs, but we do not know the source of his information.)

Copper, too, was well known anciently. The earliest metal artifact yet known in Mesoamerica is the bit of copper already mentioned. But copper was also basic to alloys. One alloy used in many parts of nuclear America was tumbaga, a mixture of gold and copper. Treated properly it had the "appearance of gold" but weighed less and probably was cheaper. R. H. Putnam has argued persuasively that the Book of Mormon plates that were in Joseph Smith's hands were of tumbaga. (Had they been unalloyed gold, they would have been too heavy for a single person to carry.) A tumbaga specimen from Belize (British Honduras) shows that this material was known in the Maya lowlands no later than the fifth century A.D.

A different alloy is bronze, of copper with tin. The word bronze does not occur in the Book of Mormon, but "brass" does. The "brass plates of Laban" were brought from Jerusalem by Nephi, as we know. Until a few years ago it was supposed that what we call brass (an alloy including zinc) was developed only in the last few centuries. Yet the Bible speaks of "brass." Bible scholars have dealt with that apparent misstatement by saying that the word translated "brass" was actually bronze. The Hebrew word now known to refer to both copper and bronze was translated in the King James Version of the Bible as several different English words (in Ezekiel 1:4, 27 it comes out as "amber"). Within the last few years, however, some ancient artifacts from the Mediterranean area have been tested by more sophisticated scientific techniques than before, and the tests reveal that actual brass, with zinc in it, was in use among the Etruscans, probably as early as Lehi's time. That means that perhaps the brass plates of Lehi's day are neither an anomaly of culture history nor an oddity of linguistic labeling, but of the literal metal.

Bronze was used in Mesoamerica, although its composition (that is, the proportion of tin) was not as standardized as in the Old World. Interestingly, Ether 10:23 accurately distinguishes brass from copper in one subtle bit of context. The record says that the Jaredites dug up heaps of earth "to get ore . . . of copper." Naturally they would not have got "ore of brass" or bronze, for those metals must be manufactured by alloying. Rather, the same verse says, they "did make" brass. The terminological distinction comes out exactly as it would from a person who wrote with a real knowledge of metallurgy.

It is tempting to see "ziff" as tumbaga, for it is mentioned twice in direct connection with brass and copper (Mosiah 11:3, 8). Several derivations of "ziff" are possible in Hebrew with two general senses—"bright" or "shining" on the one hand and "plated" on the other. Both meanings would be appropriate for an alloy with a gilded surface. But "ziff" could also have been tin, another metal known in Mesoamerica. In fact, even mercury is a possibility, for it too occurred.

Iron use was documented in the statements of early Spaniards, who told of the Aztecs using iron-studded clubs. A number of artifacts have been preserved that are unquestionably of iron; their considerable sophistication, in some cases, at least suggests interest in this metal. (That is not surprising, since even a culture as simple as the Eskimo found iron—from meteors—valuable.) Few of these specimens have been chemically analyzed to determine whether the iron used was from meteors or from smelted ore. The possibility that smelted iron either has been or may yet be found is enhanced by a find at Teotihuacan. A pottery vessel dating to about A.D. 300, and apparently used for smelting, contained a "metallic-looking" mass. Analyzed chemically, it proved to contain copper and iron. Linne, the same Swedish archaeologist who made that find, accepted a piece of iron found in a tomb at Mitla, Oaxaca, as probably refined.

Without even considering smelted iron, we find that peoples in Mesoamerica exploited iron minerals from early times. Lumps of hematite, magnetite, and ilmenite were brought into Valley of Oaxaca sites from some of the thirty-six ore exposures located near or in the valley. These were carried to a workshop section within the site of San Jose Mogote as early as 1200 B.C. There they were crafted into mirrors by sticking the fragments onto prepared mirror backs and polishing the surface highly. These objects, clearly of high value, were traded at considerable distances. (This archaeologically established mineral processing was taking place within the valley that chapter I identified as the probable Jaredite land of Moron. The Jaredite record, a few centuries before the date of the San Jose Mogote finds, tells of the king who confined craftsmen who refused to pay taxes. There he compelled them to refine "his fine gold"—Ether 10:7.) But perhaps the strangest interest of all in iron materials on the part of the ancients has recently come to light. There is now reason to think that magnetite was used by the Olmecs to make compasses. (They could have rested a sliver of it on a bit of wood in a pot of water; the metal then would have oriented the wood and itself to magnetic north.) What a mysterious substance such "precious ore" (Helaman 6:11) must have seemed.

This is still not the whole story on iron, however. In the Near East, Akkadian, Hittite, and Egyptian names for iron meant something like "metal from heaven," for some iron had fallen as meteors. The Egyptians inferred that the sky was made of iron, although smelted terrestrial iron in the Near East was also very early, perhaps 5000 B.C. When the Spaniards asked the Aztecs where they obtained iron, they pointed to the sky. Their astronomers had seen and recorded meteors falling. The amount of iron obtainable from meteors was not trivial. H. H. Nininger, a leading authority on meteoritics, has estimated that 50,000 tons of this material falls on the earth yearly. Much of this is usable iron. A number of huge chunks have been discovered in Mexico. One of them, the Bacubirito specimen in Sinaloa, is 13 feet long and is estimated to weigh 27 tons. Rural people in its vicinity have made chunks of it into implements. It would not be surprising if the Nephites included meteoric metal among the "all manner of . . . iron" known to them (2 Nephi 5:15).

"Steel" is another complex problem. Nibley has discussed how uncertain we remain about what might be meant by "steel" in ancient Old World texts. The King James translators were unclear on the point; several places where they put "steel" now would be translated "bronze." Even experts have a problem, as suggested by a recent technical article entitled "Steel in Antiquity: A Problem in Terminology." In Mexico we face similar obscurity. The native chronicler Tezozomoc reported that the Tarascans (Mesoamerica's most noted metallurgists at the time of the Spanish conquest) wore "steel" helmets . Since we know so little about either our Nephite text or the materials and processes in use in prehispanic Mesoamerica, we all would do well not to jump to conclusions about the accuracy or inaccuracy of such a statement. In a recent dispute about the use of tin in the early Near East, J. D. Muhly and T. E. Wertime emphasized that documents that refer to the unexpected use of a metal are more persuasive as positive evidence than the failure of archaeologists to come up with specimens is acceptable as negative evidence. Caley and Easby make the identical argument regarding pre-Columbian tin in Mexico. After demonstrating that specimens of the metal were there all the time despite the doubts of archaeologists, who had failed to examine the evidence, they end by observing, "The results also show that it is not prudent always to discount or ignore historical accounts as possible sources of technical information; some of the 16th century chroniclers apparently were wiser and more observant in such matters than many of their critics." Perhaps the Jaredite historian who talked of steel (Ether 7:9) and Tezozomoc with his steel helmets on the Tarascans both knew something that archaeologists will yet document.

We have seen that the metals mentioned in the Book of Mormon can, for the most part, be accounted for in Mesoamerica. So far as there is a significant problem, it concerns dating. But the chronological picture of metal use is changing too, as we saw earlier. What the Book of Mormon says of these substances has its problems still, but it is interesting how different the entire topic looks today than, say, a quarter century ago.

A related line of research is promising too. Comparison of the names of metals in Mesoamerican languages and those of the Near East may tell us something about metallurgical knowledge among Book of Mormon peoples. Hyacinthe de Charency long ago pointed out that a Maya word for gold, nab or naab, parallels Egyptian noub, "gold." Nobody has paid any attention to this man's work for years, so the possible significance of this name linkage between the hemispheres as a reflection of a particular bit of technological transfer has not been weighed. With the help of colleagues, I have turned up additional suggestive parallels in terminology. Egyptian hmty (copper) compares closely with Zoquean hama-tin (gold or silver). (A prefix was attached to signify which metal was meant. To my knowledge, a Zoquean word for copper has not been recorded.) Zoquean is, we saw earlier, descended from the language in use among the Olmecs. Also in Zoquean, amachil (lead) could recall Hebrew anak, tin, but a link may be more likely to Akkadian (Babylonian), from which the Hebrew word was borrowed and where annaku was used for tin or lead. The Akkadian language would have been near in time and location to the Jaredites' homeland. But the earlier Sumerians, too, were near the Jaredite origin point, and one of their terms for gold, GUS.KIN, recalls the general Mayan word for precious metal, ta'kin (kin meaning "sun"). Then, to complete the circle, Sumerian AN.NA.HIA. means "tin," while Zoquean amachil is "lead." (The Maya related the two metals: the word for tin meant, literally, "white lead.") There are other provocative word links as well. Whether any of them signify historical connections will require more research to determine, but so far the possibilities seem challenging.

Where is the Book of Mormon left by all the metal data? First, both in the Book of Mormon and in what we know from Mesoamerica, metals were used more for decorative, ceremonial, and "precious" ends than for utility. In neither the scriptural account nor the secular record do we discover good reasons why metals were not more fully employed (or why we fail to find more evidence of it if they were). A bit of light is shed on why the Nephites considered some ores "precious." But the questions remaining, both for students of the Book of Mormon and for scholars on Mesoamerica, are vast. The conventional scientific view about the role of metal in Mesoamerica, and particularly about its date, is in the process of major change. Scholarly developments on the topic in the coming decade will be worth watching.