Archaeology and the Book of Mormon

Supporters and critics alike have long attempted to use archaeology to support their respective views of the origin(s) of the Book of Mormon. Although the Book of Mormon is considered an inspired sacred text by the entire Latter Day Saint movement, not all Latter Day Saint scholars, or Latter Day Saints, accept the view that the Book of Mormon is an actual history of any Native American people. As a matter of faith, most Latter Day Saints have traditionally interpreted the book as an actual history of the Native American people, a view promoted by the book's stated translator, Joseph Smith, Jr.

As a result, many early faithful Latter Day Saint scholars attempted to analyze the text of the Book of Mormon and use it as a guide to locate archaeological sites. This has borne much fruit in the Middle Eastern sites mentioned in the Book of Mormon. However, due to a dearth of geographic landmarks given in the Book of Mormon for sites in the Americas, this approach doesn't work well in the Western Hemisphere. Today, most faithful scholars take an opposing approach: analyze archaeological findings for parallels and correlations with information found in the Book of Mormon.

Although scholars have found no indisputable proof of the book's historicity, they have accumulated a large amount of what they believe is supporting and circumstantial evidence. No archaeological finding, as yet, has been accepted by the wider archaeological community as indisputable evidence that the book has a historical connection to Native Americans. Some critics of the Book of Mormon's historicity compare Book of Mormon archaeology with Biblical Archaeology (which is also controversial) for which there are few confirmed geographical locations and much disputed evidence that supports specific details and events.

There are virtually no groups involved in primary research on Book of Mormon archaeology outside of the Mormon academic community.

State of archaeological research

The Book of Mormon describes three heavily populated, semi-literate, technologically advanced civilizations existing in the Americas from about 2,000 B.C. to 400 A.D. who interacted with other groups in the Americas. (For example, the People of Zarahemla had many wars with others prior to Nephite contact). Though no population counts are given in the book at the height of the civilization portrayed, some Mormon scholars estimate that the size of described in Book of Mormon civilization(s) is in the range of a few millions. For example, the Book of Mormon tells specifically that in just one battle near the hill Cumorah about one hundred and thirty thousand soldiers were killed on one side alone. Adding similar amount from the other sides and accounting for women and children leads to estimates of about one million people. Jaredite civilization was likely much larger - the final war that destroyed the Jaredite civilization killed at least two million soldiers , which puts estimates of Jaredite civilization (including women and children) at around ten millions. This would be roughly the size of a few other great civilisations - Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome which also lived at about the same time as Book of Mormon civilizations. Skeptics argue that there should be archaeological evidence remaining from such long-lived and large civilizations, similar to the plentiful amount of archaeological evidences of Greek, Roman and other much smaller civilizations. However, no indisputable evidence outside of LDS scholarship of Book of Mormon civilizations has yet been found.

Only a small percentage of archaeological sites in the Americas have been carefully excavated, particularly in North America. Both in the Old and New World literally hundreds of sites are destroyed each year. As in Egypt, Greece and Italy, many sites in North America were destroyed by farmers, developers, political regimes, and by the spread of cities during last few centuries. Still, archaeology has provided data on the lives, customs, technology, etc. of many ancient American peoples, particulary those of great civilizations like the Maya, Inca and Olmec. Some of them, such as the Olmec and Maya, lived roughly at the times covered by the Book of Mormon. The data and artifacts from these people do not completely agree with the description of ancient civilizations given in the Book of Mormon. However, North and South America archaeology are still considered by many to be developing fields of study.

Both this body of knowledge and interpretations of it regarding The Book of Mormon are changing rapidly. In 1973, a prominent Mesoamerican archaeologist, Michael D. Coe of Yale University, said "As far as I know there is not one professionally trained archaeologist, who is not a Mormon, who sees any scientific justification for believing [the historicity of The Book of Mormon], and I would like to state that there are quite a few Mormon archaeologists who join this group" .

From the mid-1950s onwards the Church-owned Brigham Young University has sponsored (under the banner of the New World Archeological Foundation, or NWAF) a large number of archaeological excavations in Mesoamerica, with a focus on the Mesoamerican time period known as the Preclassic (earlier than c. 200 A.D.). The results of these and other investigations, while producing much in the way of valuable archaeological data, have not led to any widespread acceptance by non-LDS archaeologists of the Book of Mormon account.

Much of the literature of the Pre-Columbian Maya was deliberately destroyed by the Spanish when they conquered the region in the 1500s. On this point, Michael Coe noted:

"[O]ur knowledge of ancient Maya thought must represent only a tiny fraction of the whole picture, for of the thousands of books in which the full extent of their learning and ritual was recorded, only four have survived to modern times (though all that posterity knew of ourselves were to be based upon three prayer books and Pilgrim's Progress)."

However, in addition to the four surviving pre-Columbian Maya codices mentioned by Coe, there are also a number of documents dating from the 16th century conquest and shortly after, in which indigenous scribes or Spanish interlocutors recorded facets of Maya (and other) historical accounts and beliefs. These documents (such as the Popol Vuh documents of the Quiché people) provide some further historical insights into the creation accounts of Mesoamerican peoples, accounts which some ar gue fail to resemble the version offered in the Book of Mormon. The Maya civilization also left behind a vast corpus of inscriptions (upwards of ten thousand are known) written in the Maya script, the earliest of which date from around the 3rd century BC with the majority written in the Classic Period (c. 250 - 900 AD). Mayanist scholarship is now able to decipher a large proportion of these inscriptions; they are mainly concerned with the activities of rulers and the commemoration of significant events.

As the state of archaeological knowledge of the Americas progresses, many interested apologists and skeptics are evaluating each archaeological discovery for its probative value regarding the authenticity of the Book of Mormon, comparing the text of the book (animals, objects, place names, directions, etc.) with the archaeological record.

Smith stated that he believed that the discovery of ancient Mayan ruins on the Yucatán Peninsula in the late 1830s offered evidence to the Book of Mormon's authenticity. After reading about the accounts, Smith proclaimed the ruins were likely Nephite. Smith never specifically stated where the events depicted in the Book of Mormon took place. The first "history" of the Church was written in 1834 and 1835 by Oliver Cowdery, as a series of articles published serially in the Church's Messenger and Advocate. In this history, Cowdery stated that the final battle between the Nephites and the Lamanites, occurred at the Hill Cumorah in New York. He also identified the Jaredites' final battle as occurring in the same area as the Nephite/Lamanite final battle. Since Smith was an editor of the Messenger and Advocate and likely approved the history, some believe it can be argued that this was his belief as well. In any case, evidence appears to show that Smith clearly did not know where the events took place.

As Joseph Smith showed interest in limited geography theories in Meso-America and because current archeological evidence overwhelmingly points to Maya and Inca civilizations being most advanced civilizations in ancient Americas, most Mormon scholars have long focused on Central and South America. One book compiled by John Sorenson has more than 500 pages of plausible location theories placing the Book of Mormon events everywhere from the Finger Lakes region of the Northeast United States to Chile. However, all theories acknowledge that there are no existing landmarks that will identify, without dispute, the places in the Americas portion of the Book of Mormon narrative. The Old World narrative portion has proven much more fruitful for Mormon scholars where there are only two separate, but overlapping theories on the sites described in Lehi's journey to the Ocean, and the identification of locations, such as Nahom, that most Mormon scholars consider to be a confirmed location.

Mormon studies

Probably in recognition of the fundamental problem of apologetics through archaeology, many believing Book of Mormon researchers have in the late twentieth century shifted their focus from "apologetics" to "studies." This has generally resulted in better scholarship among believers as researchers have focused more on real answers than on talking points. Though ironically this shift of focus has provided better material for apologists. For apologetic researchers "archaeology and The Book of Mormon" is no longer driven solely by the apologist/skeptic debate, but by a serious research interest in the Book of Mormon itself by Mormon and non-Mormon research.

The following are some of the specific reasons most Mormon apologists do not place much emphasis on apologetics through archaeology:

1. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints officially discourages conversion through the intellect in favor of conversion through faith and personal revelation.
2. Book of Mormon studies are still in their youth, and no standard interpretations prevail. For example, the Book of Mormon narrative has been placed everywhere from South and Central America to the Finger Lakes region in New York (possibly relating the people in the story to the Mound Builders). Though some consensuses are being formed, using conflicting conclusions for apologetics is problematic.
3. Both casual apologists and casual critics tend to make errors of assumption because
   • Most of the modern archaeological research of the Mesoamerican area dates to a time after the Book of Mormon narrative ends and the people purportedly disperse and their language, religion, and culture deteriorate.
   • Some interpretations of the text of The Book of Mormon suggest there may have been other people and cultures in the same lands at the same time (though the book concerns itself exclusively with the peoples of the Jerusalem ancestry), possibly large populations and many different cultures.
   • The Book of Mormon narrative leads readers to the conclusion that the Lamanites hunted down and destroyed the surviving Nephites and most evidence of the Nephite civilization and culture.
   • Much of North American archaeology has been lost or misunderstood because of common misperceptions, stereotypes, and lack of preservation. For example, some are not aware of the existence of stone and mortar Maya cities in Mexico, structured stone and clay mortar pueblos of the Ancient Pueblo Peoples of the Southwest, or complex centers of flat-topped pyramidal platform mounds of the Mississippian culture in the Eastern United States. Despite the existence of these complex cultures in North America, many indiscriminately identify majority of Native Americans as migratory (hunters/gatherers and teepee or wigwam dwellers).
4. There are no geographic landmarks discussed in relation to other landmarks in Book of Mormon after the time of Christ that can be substantially identified, either by description or by their relation to other sites. Those prior to the "great upheavals" that took place in the Book of Mormon at the death of Jesus, are not in enough detail to identify (i.e.: There is no sign that says "Entering Zarahemla City Limits"). However, recent trends in Book of Mormon archaeology have focused on the Arabian peninsula in the Middle East as the early accounts in the Book of Mormon do describe actual locations. Some Mormon archaeologists, such as those involved in the Nephi Project, are fairly confident in actual evidence of Lehi's family's journey southward from Jerusalem to a place on the Arabian penensula called "Bountiful" by Lehi where they built ships to come to the Americas.

Proposed Book of Mormon real world setting

As with Bible studies, considerable effort in Book of Mormon studies has been focused on establishing the credible real world setting for the narrative. The Book of Mormon narrative begins at Jerusalem and follows a straightforward route along the Gulf of Suez, then across the Arabian Peninsula eastward, then apparently across the Pacific Ocean to America. Joseph Smith's claimed discovery of the book occurred in New York. Between these two bookends, the setting for the main Book of Mormon narrative (and the sub-narrative of the Jaredites as told in the Book of Ether) is not obvious.

The dominant assumption among Latter Day Saints has been that the narrative's setting encompasses all of the Americas, and that The Lamanites are the "principal ancestors of the American Indians" (all indigeneous Americans as opposed to most prominent). The Book of Mormon speaks of a narrow neck of land, and it has been an intuitive assumption for readers that the Isthmus of Panama fits the bill. According to LDS scholars, Book of Mormon archaeology limits the reach the narrative to a span of some 300 miles, demanding the identification of a limited American setting. This limited geography theory has been taught by many church leaders, including Joseph Smith, Orson Pratt, Parley Parker Pratt, and B.H. Roberts.

Based on extensive textual analysis and current archaeological data, most LDS scholars now agree that the Book of Mormon geography was centered in Mesoamerica around the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, in the area of current day Guatemala and the southern Mexico States of Tabasco, Chiapas, Oaxaca, Veracruz, and the surrounding area. This is one of the only areas in the Americas that evidence survives of an ancient system of writing.

Lehi's Arabian journey setting

The Book of Mormon describes with telling details a 600 B.C. journey of two families (or three counting the single man Zoram) from Jerusalem along the east side of the Red Sea, then 8 years east across the Arabian Peninsula from 600 B.C. to 592 B.C. Even through most of the twentieth century, no information was available to confirm the narrative of an encampment at a continually running stream (River of Laman) in a valley (of Lemuel) at the "fount of the Red Sea," of a burial at a place "called Nahom," of a "Bountiful" place on the east side of the Arabian Peninsula where multiple narrative details occur, or of any other detail of Lehi's Arabian journey. But in the late twentieth and the early twenty first centuries, a single set of candidates have emerged for each of these places that scholars find convincing for Lehi's journey. Field studies and research on this and other locations subject are ongoing.

Based on extensive text analysis and field work in Arabia, George Potter and Richard Wellington (who, while both hold advanced degrees, neither holds a degree in Archaeology) believe they have located every important Arabian site mentioned in the narrative of Nephi in the Book of Mormon. "These include, the 'borders near and nearer' the Red Sea, Shazer (where they stopped to hunt), the most fertile parts, the more fertile parts, the trees from which Nephi made his bow, Nahom, Nephi’s eastwardly trail to Bountiful, and Bountiful.

Evidence not only confirms these locations, but there are evidence of Jewish prophesies and Jewish influence in these locations between 600 and 550 B.C.E. Most Mormon scholars believe that Lehi and his family did interact with locals during his travels.

Lehi's Ancient home

Some speculate that Khirbet Beit Lei ("The Home of Lei") may have been the home of Lehi. While there are some striking similarities and circumstantial evidence to support this view, there is a lack of supporting evidence. FARMS (which is a research arm of BYU), in particular, argues against this interpretation. Local legends states that an ancient prophet lived in the area around the corresponding time of the Book of Mormon narrative.

In the same area, there is a cave with ancient Hebrew writing that can be dated to the 6th Century B.C. Some LDS historians and tourists believe this cave could have been the location where Lehi's sons stayed while trying to retrieve the Brass Plates, based on prophecies written on the walls of the cave. However, because the evidence is circumstantial FARMS has offered caution against tying the two together.

The site, despite having no confirming empirical evidence, remains a popular destination for LDS tourists.

Valley of Lemuel/River of Laman

The River of Laman has been equated with Wadi Tayyib al-Ism, 72 miles by trail from Aqaba. Wadi Tayyib al-Ism was discovered by George Potter and Craig Thorsted of the Nephi Project on 11 May 1995

Nahom

The Book of Mormon says that Ishmael, the patriarch of the family that left with Lehi's, was buried in a place "called Nahom" early on the journey from Jerusalem to Bountiful (one of the few places in the Book of Mormon that was not named by the travelers. This Nahom has been equated by Warren Aston with a place, referred to as "NHM" (Ancient writing did not always use vowels) in inscriptions dated to about 600 B.C.E. and was along the described route. The modern name of the location is "Nehhem" and it is known as an ancient burial site and is south-southeast of Jerusalem where a turn nearly due east would bring Lehi's group to the place Bountiful on the eastern coast of the Arabian Peninsula" . Ishmael, Nephi's father-in-law was buried at this location.

People of Lihy

Bruce A. Santucci claims to have discovered "seven linguistic footprints" of Lehi (Lihy) along the George Potter-Richard Wellington proposed route of Lehi across Arabia.

Around 550 B.C., the Dedanites of northwest Arabia changed their name to Lihyanites. Ceremonial temples in the Jewish style were discovered in Lihyanite territory by apologist George Potter, the second one in 2005. Combined with a revelation by Joseph Smith, Jr. that likens modern missionaries to Nephi journeying "from Jerusalem in the wilderness" (D&C 33:7-8), this is supportive of the idea that the party of Lehi make a significant spiritual impact on the Dedanites between 600 B.C. and 592 B.C. However the temples' orgins have not been determined.

Bountiful

LDS scholars believe they have located the land Bountiful (suggested earlier by the late Hugh Nibley as Salalah), and the place Bountiful where the Book of Mormon says Lehi camped and the harbour where it says Nephi built his ship." This idea is supported by Potter and Wellington of the Nephi Project .

American civilizations

Many LDS scholars believe that the Olmec civilization matches the appropriate time and place to be identified with the Jaredite civilization in The Book of Mormon, and the Maya civilization has been suggested as the Lamanite culture depicted in the Book of Mormon. There is substantial debate about whether the material and linguistic culture of these civilizations corresponds to the descriptions in the Book of Mormon.

No civilization has been identified with the Nephite culture, and it is postulated by LDS scholars that the Nephite culture was probably characterized by unpretentious Christian discipleship inconsistent with impressive monuments and stone artisanship. As such, LDS scholars sometimes postulate a Nephite culture existing within the greater Lamanite (usually Maya) culture.

In Belize in Central America, there is a ruined Mayan city named Lamanai. If this is a Hebrew word it would mean "Lamanite."

Military fortifications

Military fortifying berms are found in the Yucatan Peninsula as described in the Book of Mormon, in the region appropriate to where the wars described could plausibly have occurred. Structures similar to those described by the Book of Mormon are also found on some Native American mounds in Ohio, New York, and in the rest of the New England region. These mounds and their fortifications were a topic of intense controversy and discussion during the early years of the 19th century.

Archaeological and Genetic problems for the Book of Mormon

Descriptions with disputed archaeological evidence

The Book of Mormon states that there were pre-Columbian peoples that were white, literate, had knowledge of Old World languages, and possessed Old World derived writing systems. (E.g. 1 Nephi 13:23 et. seq.) They smelted metal and made tools and weapons of iron, steel, and brass. (E.g. Ether 7:9, 10:23) They owned domesticated horses and cattle. They possessed chariots. (E.g. Alma 18:9-12) The people covered the "entire land." The civilization described by these passages and scores of others in the Book of Mormon should yield certain types of discoveries in the pre-Colombian archaeological record. However, few such discoveries have been made and current evidence often contradicts the Book of Mormon's record of early American life.

Horses and elephants

Horses are mentioned about a dozen times in the Book of Mormon, and elephants in the Book of Ether. LDS scholars have in some cases proposed a loose interpretation of terms, such as deer or tapir for horse, suggesting that immigrants from the Old World might have applied old names to new concepts. In other cases, LDS scholars have proposed alternate English word meanings, such as domestic herds for cattle, suggesting that the intuitive modern meaning of words may not always be the appropriate Book of Mormon meaning.

Horses are found in the pre-Columbian Americas. Also, historian Thomas E. Sheridan, in his book Arizona: A History cites evidence that horses, camels, and mammoths were part of the North American landscape in pre-Columbian America. However, because there is evidence that the animals referenced may have become extinct between 4,000 and 10,000 years ago, they fit the requirements of the Book of Mormon narrative when applied to the Jaredite epoch (the Book of Ether tells of several families that crossed the ocean by the time of the building of the Tower of Babel). Current archeology suggests that a few horses may have survived to later dates in isolated locations, such as Florida, as recent as 2500 years ago.

Golden Plates

Many critics have suggested either that ancient cultures did not keep records on metal plates, or that it was not practical. Later criticism pointed to the actual weight of gold plates. For a discussion of such topics, see Golden Plates and Reformed Egyptian.

Ancient Iron-Works

The Book of Mormon states that metals including iron and steel (an iron alloy) were produced and used among the Book of Mormon peoples. Critics point out that there is little evidence of steel production in central and southern America, and would have been difficult to produce in those locales, while apologists point to evidence in North America.

Little evidence exists that iron and steel metallurgy took place in North American indigenous groups. A single internet source, [1], not affiliated with the LDS, presents a few sites that may provide possible evidence. The website covers not only possible sites in the East, but also provides a small amount of evidence that may indicate that Anasazi or Hohokam tribes in the Southwest performed iron smelting. This evidence is unfortunately weakened by poor chronological control and insufficient reporting of excavation. Most of the recorded evidence for iron smelting appears to be of recent or unknown dates. Despite that, the Hopewell culture, Adena culture, Mississippian culture, and many other groups clearly all practiced techniques to work copper and silver, and could slightly modify natural iron items. These forms of metal modification may have been quite sophisticated, but are not identical to iron or steel smelting or metallurgy.

Similarly, many Mesoamerican and South American cultures are thoroughly documented as working copper, and in some cases producing bronze. The Moche, Aztec, Maya, Inca, Olmec, Nazca, and others are all relevant examples. These techniques are quite ancient, but again, are not technically the same as the techniques needed for iron or steel metallurgy.

In addition, apologists note that the word steel could have been an approximate translation, actually referring to another type of metal entirely that in 19th century America there would have not been a word for (see Tumbaga and similar copper and iron based metals). Steel is only mentioned in three verses (2 Ne. 5:15, Jarom 1:8, Ether 7:9) in the Book of Mormon, all before 360 B.C. (by the book's chronology) and could have been an Old-World skill that was forgotten.

Other excavations in North America have uncovered what were once possibly iron smelting sites, and archaeological evidence including layering techniques support that they may have existed from pre-historic times (prior to the Hopewellian culture) [2], however radiocarbon dating evidence for these sites place them at the beginning of the 18th century (1700s). Other researchers believe that these smelting were the work of Ohio's immigrants of European descent, although there is no evidence of European settlers in the area at the time [3]. Frontiersmen and trappers were not common, but not unheard of and are likely candidates for the builders of the furnaces under this theory.

Wooden, stone, and metallic swords were made in pre-Columbian Americas both in the Northern and Southern hemispheres - see Sword.

Calendar evidence

Book of Mormon mentions standard 7-day Jewish calendar (with one day of sabbat) as the calendar system used by the Nephite people of the Book of Mormon. However, no archeological evidences exist for any use of 7-day calendar system in the pre-Columbian Americas.

Maya (considered by some experts to be the most advanced of all ancient American civilizations) had 4 different calendar systems. None of these uses 7 day cycles.

Quetzalcoatl legends

The ancient Mesoamerican legend of Quetzalcoatl, depicted in some versions as "the bearded white god", is interpreted by some Latter-day Saints as a depiction of the actual visit of Jesus to the Americas as related and foretold 600 years before his coming in the Book of Mormon. Other students of ancient Mesoamerica do not accept this claim for several reasons: Quetzalcoatl, the Feathered Serpent deity, is depicted in Mesoamerican art dated several centuries before Jesus. The King Quetzalcoatl who promised to return to Mexico dated almost 1,000 years after the life of Jesus. Finally, Quetzalcoatl may not have been discussed as either bearded or white before the intervention of the Spaniards. Apologists point out that part of the reason Hernan Cortes so easily conquered the Aztecs was that he fit the pre-existent Aztec conception of Quetzalcoatl, and thus the Aztecs hesitated to resist.

One modern interpretation of Mesoamerican mythology and astronomy has recast Quetzalcoatl, as well as the god Xolotl, as symbols of the planet Venus, whose appearance in the dawn and sunset sky was crucial to the measurements of the Maya calendar. The "return" of Quetzalcoatl, they claim, was a metaphor of Venus' appearance, indicating a new temporal cycle.

Stela 5

Main article: Izapa Stela 5

In the mid-1970s some Mormon researchers claimed that a complicated scene carved on Stela 5 in Izapa was a depiction of a Book of Mormon event called Lehi's dream, which features a vision of the tree of life. This interpretation is disputed by other Mormon and non-Mormon scholars.

Genetic studies

Another issue concerns the genetic implications of the Book of Mormon concerning indigenous Americans and current DNA evidence on the ancestry of modern indigenous Americans. Current studies of genetic anthropology using DNA evidence provide no support for the narrative of the Book of Mormon. No non-Mormon peer-reviewed scholar has published any genetic data supporting the Book of Mormon narrative.

The Book of Mormon claims that the people of Jared, consisting of several families from the Tower of Babel, migrated to America from Asia before Abraham's time; that the people of Lehi, consisting of three families (Lehi's, Ishmael's, and Zoram's), migrated to America from Jerusalem around 600 B.C.; and that the people of Mulek (son of Jewish King Zedekiah) migrated to America from Jerusalem perhaps 8 years later. The Book of Mormon makes no assertions regarding the migration or non-migration of other groups to America. Archaeologist J.L. Sorenson, informed by the available genetic studies which fail to support the alternative, supports the possibility of other peoples co-existing on the American continent with the Book of Mormon people and indicated in his article When Lehi's party arrived in the land, did they find others there? (Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 1:1–34), that careful examination and demographic analysis of the Book of Mormon record in terms of population growth and the number of people described implies that other groups were likely present in the America when the migrants described in the Book of Mormon arrived, and these groups may have genetically mixed with the descendants of the Book of Mormon migrants, and other groups.

Current LDS scholars agree that the entire geography covered by the Book of Mormon was quite limited, less than 1000 miles in any direction. The limited geographical area covered by the Book of Mormon allows plenty of room for other unknown peoples from whom indigenous Americans could also be descended. This factor combined with limitations in DNA testing for ancestry lead some to conclude that it is possible for some ancestors of indigenous Americans to be untraceable via DNA. Yet critics (some of which are Mormon) contend that DNA can establish something about the people of the book from that small of an area even when it also states that those people were exterminated, and that other people established themselves in the lands.

Recent evidence concerning whether some Native Americans are genetically linked to old world races currently indicates that most genetic traits and genes of modern Jews are not found in most Native Americans, though it has been pointed out that determining tribal ancestry among Native Americans (an aspect of ancestry which would be much more recent and concrete than analyzing the Book of Mormon account) through DNA is unreliable and should not be used as a test to determine ancestry ("If these were medical diagnostic tests, they would never be approved or adopted"). Mormon apologists, on the other hand, suggest that the DNA of the modern Jews to which the Native Americans are being compared represent only a fraction of the available genes that would have existed in ancient times, dramatically increasing the likelihood that Jewish migrants could not be traced by DNA. Some mitochondrial DNA analysis shows that others are found in both Israel and Native Americans; these, however, are either so general that they suggest an ancestor so far back as to be pre-Asian migration several tens of thousands of years ago, or else so recent as to be almost certainly post-Columbian contact era. The migration pattern of mitchondrial DNA offers no support for the Book of Mormon's narrative .

A study by controversial church member and anthropologist, Thomas W. Murphy, was published in late 2002. Murphy, assessing the data published by scientists in peer-reviewed journals, found that over the last few thousand years, modern-day Jews and modern-day Native Americans do not share common ancestors, and decided on this basis that "the Book of Mormon is a piece of 19th century fiction. And that means that we have to acknowledge sometimes Joseph Smith lied". The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints official response to Murphy's conclusion along with a range of articles giving an apologetic analysis of the subject can be found here [4]. Simon Southerton, a senior research scientist with CSIRO in Canberra, Australia concludes that the evidence proves that the LDS teachings on the origin of Native Americans is "completely false" in his book entitled Losing a lost tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church. However the conclusions reached by Murphy and Southerton are not the only possible answers to the lack of DNA evidence in support of the Book of Mormon account. Some Mormons arguing for the truth of the Book of Mormon agree with scientists that a balanced view of the evidence must include an understanding of the limitations of DNA testing and available reference samples to be complete, and suggest that these limitations have prevented demonstration of any evidence in support of the Book of Mormon's rendition of events.

Mormon researchers have shown what they call similarities of mitochondrial DNA between Native Americans and Palestinians, but critics argue that they have not demonstrated that these are significant. Mathematicians have postulated the existence of a "most recent common ancestor" living as recently as 3,000 years ago from whom all modern humans descend . While the subject of Amerind origins is currently under extensive discussion within academic circles, the interest is almost exclusively regarding the specific Asiatic sources and timings of migration, and since one group of people in the book are stated as coming from or through Asia, Mormons contend that DNA evidence cannot contradict the Book of Mormon account. Within scientific circles, there is near universal agreement that there is no pattern of migration of mitochondrial DNA corresponding to the migration of peoples mentioned in the Book of Mormon.

Mormon apologists note that lack of DNA evidence does not necessarily disprove the Book of Mormon account. Dr. John M. Butler in a recent article on this subject cites a large scale DNA study of the Icelandic people which highlights a significant limitation with using this type of DNA evidence to prove ancestry. He explains that from the Icelandic DNA research "the majority of people living today in Iceland had ancestors living only 150 years ago that could not be detected based on the Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA tests being performed yet the genealogical records exist showing that these people lived and were real ancestors. To the point at hand, if many documented ancestors of 150 years ago cannot be seen with Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA tests from modern Iceland, then the possibility can exist for people that are reported in the Book of Mormon to have migrated to the Americas over 2600 years ago and yet not have detectable genetic signatures today." .

Of course, mitochondrial testing isn't meant to identify all ancestors.

Another problem with using DNA to try to prove or disprove the migration account in the Book of Mormon is a lack of reliable reference samples. Without knowing the location of the limited geographical area covered by the Book of Mormon, comparisons with this population and modern indigenous Americans cannot be made. In addition diseases brought to the Americas by European conquerers led to deaths on a massive scale resulting in the present day indigenous Americans representing only a fraction of previous genetic lineages. M.H. Crawford in his book The Origins of Native Americans: Evidence from Anthropological Genetics writes "This population reduction has forever altered the genetics of the surviving groups, thus complicating any attempts at reconstructing the pre-Columbian genetic structure of most New World groups." That is, Mormons can find explanations that, though improbable, are possible, such as the death of the immigrants described in the Book of Mormon, sampling errors, the extremely unlikely chance that the immigrants contributed autosomal, but no Y-chromosomal or mitochondrial, DNA to the current population.

While the fact remains that there is no detectable pattern of migration of mitochondrial DNA corresponding to the migration of peoples mentioned in the Book of Mormon, or indeed by any testing mechanism currently used by scientists to evaluate theories of migration. The cited limitations in reference samples and DNA testing means that at present it is not possible to prove or disprove to the satisfaction of all the Book of Mormon based on DNA evidence.

Regardless of DNA evidence it is worth noting that Mormons believe in the Book of Mormon's account of Israelite migration to the new world primarily as an issue of faith rather than scientific fact.[5]

LDS cultural belief

Most members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe that ancient Israelites traveled to the Americas. Recent cultural movements, statements from Church authorities from as far back as the 1830s, and many passages in the Book of Mormon itself, suggest that other groups besides those explicitly mentioned were led from the middle east and other locations worldwide to the Americas. As the introduction states that these Israelite migrators are the "principal" (meaning foremost or most important) ancestors of the American Indians. A minority of church members believe that the three groups mentioned in the Book of Mormon populated in a short time the whole North and South American Continents.

Smithsonian's use of Book of Mormon

During the early 1980s, reports circulated in LDS culture that the Book of Mormon was being used by the Smithsonian to guide primary archaeological research. This rumor was brought to the attention of Smithsonian directors who, in 1996, sent a letter to enquiring parties stating that the Smithsonian did not use the Book of Mormon to guide any research and implied that they did not find the Book of Mormon historically likely. A letter that was sent to one inquiring party may be found here. In 1998, the Smithsonian revised the letter they sent relating to this issue to take a more neutral stance on the plausibility of the Book of Mormon [6]. This may have been because the 1996 letter contradicts some aspects of research published by Smithsonian staff members [7].

See also

• Dighton Rock
• Izapa Stela 5
• Khirbet Beit Lei
• Linguistics and the Book of Mormon
• Los Lunas Decalogue Stone
• Newport Tower
• Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact
• Reformed Egyptian
• Archaeology of Israel
• Biblical Archaeology

External links

• (Pro) http://farms.byu.edu/publications/bookofmormonview.php?subcat=100&cat=1
• (Pro) http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/DNA.shtml
• (Pro) http://www.lds.org/newsroom/mistakes/0,15331,3885-1-18078,00.html
• (Pro) http://jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml
• (Pro) http://www.bmaf.org Book of Mormon Archaeological Forum
• (Pro) http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/keystone.htm
• (Neutral) Larson, Stan, The Odyssey of Thomas Stuart Ferguson. Dialogue 23 (1) Spring 1990: 55-93.
• (Neutral) King, David S, "Proving" the Book of Mormon: Archaeology Vs. Faith., Dialogue 24 (1) Spring 1991: 143-146.
• (Con) Coe, Michael, "Mormons and Archeology - An Outside View", Dialogue, Summer, 1973.
• (Con) http://www.religioustolerance.org/lds_migr1.htm
• (Con)http://www.irr.org/mit/bompage.html
• (Con) http://www.ericbarger.com/mormon.dna.htm
• (Con) http://www.contenderministries.org/mormonism/bomproblems.php
• (Con) The Skeptics Annotated BOM
• (Con) http://utlm.org/topicalindexa.htm#Archeology