Archeology and DNA Arguments BYU

8/12/2019 Archeology and DNA Arguments BYU

1/82

Archaeology, Relics, and Book of Mormon Belief

John E. Clark

Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 14/2 (2005): 3849, 7174.

1065-9366 (print), 2168-3158 (online)

Archaeology has much to offer as a scientific meansof gathering independent evidence of the Book ofMormons authenticity. But one must look in the rightplace. A cautionary tale is the failed Cluff expedition of1900, which, assuming a hemispheric model of Bookof Mormon geography, traveled from Provo as far asColombia looking for the city Zarahemla. Yet in 1842 the

Times and Seasons(under Joseph Smiths editorship) hadprinted excerpts from a popular book on Mesoamericanarchaeology that demonstrated a surprisingly highlevel of civilization, implying that Nephite lands did notextend into South America, thus supporting the theoryof a limited geographic model. Both sides believe thatarchaeology is on their side. Book of Mormon criticsalso claim that archaeology is on their side, but decadesof archaeological investigation in Mesoamerica andin the Old World has shown a pattern of increasing

convergence that favors Book of Mormon authentic-ity. Evidences discussed include, among others, metalrecords in stone boxes, ancient writing, warfare, thetree of life and other metaphors, Old and New Worldgeography, and cycles of civilization. In a sidebar article,the findings of an amateur archaeologist challenge apopular assumption that the hill was the scene of the finalbattles depicted in the Book of Mormon.

Title

Author(s)

Reference

ISSN

Abstract


2/82

Te wee hours o 22 September 1827 oundJoseph Smith climbing the western slope o a promi-nent hill near his home to keep his annual appoint-ment with the angel Moroni. Afer our yearso probation, the 21-year-old prophet was finallyentrusted with the golden plates and the sacredstones needed to translate them. Te consequenceso this event have been earthshaking. Te Book oMormon, translated rom this ancient record, is nowavailable in 105 languages, and close to 130 millioncopies have been printed.

Te Book o Mormon challenges the world totake it seriously as an account o Gods dealingswith ancient New World peoples. Nothing less thansalvation is at stake. Te world has not taken thischallenge lying down; it pushes back by denying thebooks miraculous delivery and authenticity. Whilebillions o people in act remain indifferent to thebook, as they do to the Bible, a vocierous cadre ocritics clamor that the Book o Mormon is a abrica-tion, an ignorable fiction, but one they cant seem toleave alone.

relics,

andbook ofmormon belief

38 VOLUME 14, NUMBER 2, 2005

by john e. clark


3/82

JOURNAL OF BOOK OF MORMON STUDIES 39

Since 1829 critics haveattempted to discredit theBook o Mormon by claimingthat it was written by JosephSmithnot translatedandthat its history has no ground-

ing in the real world. Teybelieve they are winning theday, but 175 years o alse-hoods and weak argumentshas not scratched the bookscredibility. Because o whatis at stake, let us agree thatcharges against the book areserious and require response.Te critical question concernsBook o Mormon authorship.Did Joseph Smith Jr. write

the book, or was it revealedthrough divine means? Tisis where archaeology steps inas the only scientific meanso gathering independentevidence o authenticity, andhence authorship. Te Book o Mormon is uniquein world scripture because its claimed divine originscan be evaluated by checking or concrete evidencein the real world. Prove the existence o Zarahemla,or example, and the validity o the rest ollows. Telogic is simple and compelling or both sides.

Let us consider the anti-Mormon position first.I Joseph Smith made the book up, then its peoplesdid not exist, its events did not happen, and thereshould be no trace o them anywhere. I, afer areasonable period o diligent searching, materialevidence is not ound, then the Book o Mormonwould be shown to be imaginary, and by implica-tion Joseph Smith would be exposed as a liar andthe church he ounded unveiled as a hoax.

Te Latter-day Saint position is the near oppo-site. Confirmation o historic details o the Book oMormon would substantiate Joseph Smiths accounto how it came to be and thus validate his seershipand the divine origin o both the book and TeChurch o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints. Tisbrings us to the astonishing possibility o being ableto test Joseph Smiths claims through science, a pos-sibility that critics have long tried to exploit. TeBook o Mormon is the keystone o Mormonism;destroy this stone and all that it supports will come

crashing down. Given thestakes involved, the very pos-sibility o testing the bookshistoricity and authenticitybecomes a moral obligation todo so.

Space precludes a reviewo ull Latter-day Saintinvolvement with these issues;one example will have to do.Lets revisit Provos AcademySquare the morning o 17April 1900. Te assembledstudent body o BrighamYoung Academy bade arewellto their president, 15 ellowstudents, and others as theyrode off or South America.

Academy president BenjaminCluff Jr. hoped to discoverthe ancient Nephite capitalo Zarahemla . . . [and] inthis way . . . to establish theauthenticity o the Book o

Mormon. Te expedition began with the bless-ing o the Church but not its financial backing, andits blessing was withdrawn beore the group evenmade it out o the United States. O the original24 men, 9 crossed into Mexico and 6 made it toColombia. Afer the group had boated 630 miles

up the Magdalena River, a point that was 632 daysjourney rom Academy Square, Colombian officialshalted the anxious explorers progress just daysshort o their destination. Cluff and his students

Opposite page: The Maya site of Becn, inCampeche, Mexico. Photo courtesy of John E.Clark. Background: Maya monument sketch byFrederick Catherwood.

Clockwise from top: Moroni Delivering the GoldenPlates, by Gary Kapp; portrait of Benjamin CluffJr.; embarkation of Cluff expedition.


4/82


never reached Zara-hemla. Latter-daySaint scholars andtourists have beentrying to get thereever since, but it isnot clear where theyshould look, howthey should look, orhow they will knowZarahemla whenthey find it.

Cluff returnedto become thefirst president oBrigham Young

University (the new name o the academy). His pro-posal or the location o Zarahemla was apparentlya popular one among Mormons at the time. He pre-sumed that Book o Mormon lands included bothNorth and South America, a theory known as thehemispheric model. Tat it took nearly two years tomeander to Colombia should have given him pause.Te longest trip specified in the Book o Mormon

took 40 days, and that group was lost and on oot(see Mosiah 7:4).An argument against the hemispheric model

was provided by Joseph Smith. Te year 1842 inNauvoo had beenhectic as the Prophetmoved the work alongon the Book o Abra-ham and the temple,all the while dodgingalse arrest. He evenassumed editorialresponsibility or theimes and Seasons,theNauvoo newspaper.

Months earlier he received a copy o the recent best-seller by John Lloyd Stephens, Incidents of ravelin Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan, the firstpopular English book to describe and illustrateMaya ruins.

Tis book amazed the English-speaking world

with evidence o an advanced civilization thatno one imagined existedno one, that is, exceptLatter-day Saints. Te Prophet was thrilled, andexcerpts rom the book were reprinted in the imesand Seasonswith unsigned commentary, presum-ably his. What Joseph recorded is significant or theissues at hand:

Since our Extract [rom Stephenss book] waspublished . . . we have ound another impor-tant act relating to the truth o the Book oMormon. Central America . . . is situated northo the Isthmus o Darien and once embraced

several hundred miles o territory rom northto south. he city o Zarahemla . . . stood uponthis land. . . . It will not be a bad plan to com-pare Mr. Stephens ruined cities with those inthe Book o Mormon.

The ill-fated Cluff expedi-tion began in Provo, Utah,and ended prematurely inColombia.

In the 1840s Stephenssbook (cover from 1969edition by Dover) providedcompelling evidence for theBook of Mormon. Far right:Map from the book.


5/82


As is evident in hiscomments, Joseph Smithbelieved Maya archae-ology vindicated theBook o Mormon. Hisplacement o Zarahemlain eastern Guatemalaimplied that the LandSouthward described inthe Book o Mormonwas north o Darien, as

Panama was then called;thus his commentary pre-supposed a smallish geog-raphy that excluded SouthAmerica. Te Prophetregarded the location oBook o Mormon landsas an open question, andone subject to archaeo-logical confirmation. Inthe past 50 years, riendsand oes have adopted

Josephs plan o com-paring ruined cities withthose in the Book o Mor-mon. Both sides believearchaeology is on theirside.

Archaeology and Book

of Mormon Arguments

Consider the argu-ment against the Booko Mormon circulatedrecently by an evangelicalgroup in a pamphlet:

he Bible . . . is sup-ported in its truthclaims by the cor-roborating evidenceo geography and

The Stephens book created a stirin Nauvoo, prompting this editorialcoverage in Times and Seasons.


6/82


archaeology. hat assertion cannot be said orhe Book of Mormon. Several decades o archae-ological research, unded by LDS institutions,concentrating in Central America and Mexico,have yielded nothing that corroborates the his-toric events described in he Book of Mormon.

Te only things wrong with this clever argu-ment are that its claims are alse and its logic aulty.Archaeology and geography support the Book oMormon to the same degree, and or the samereasons, that they support the Bible. Both bookspresent the same challenges or empirical confirma-tion, and both are in good shape. Many things havebeen verified or each, but many have not. Criticalarguments specialize in listing things mentionedin the Book o Mormon that archaeology has notound. Rather than cry over missing evidence, I

consider evidence that has been ound.Te pamphlet lists eight deficiencies: first, that

no Book of Mormoncities have been located, andlast, that no artiact o any kind that demonstratesTe Book of Mormonis true has been ound. Tislast assertion is overly optimistic in suggesting thatsuch material proo is even possible.

No artiact imaginable, or even a roomul,could ever convince dedicated critics that the Booko Mormon is true. Te implied claim that the rightrelic could prove the books truth beyond all doubt

is too strong and underestimates human cussed-ness. Moroni could appear tomorrow with thegolden plates, the sword o Laban, and the Liahonain hand and this would not satisy public demandsor more proos.

Te logical challenges with the first assertion,

that no cities have been located, are more subtle.Book o Mormon cities have been ound, they arewell known, and their artiacts grace the finestmuseums. Tey are merely masked by archaeologi-cal labels such as Maya, Olmec, and so on. Teproblem, then, is not that Book o Mormon artiactshave not been ound, only that they have not beenrecognized or what they are. Again, i we stumbled

Cumorahs Cave, by Robert T. Barrett. Early accounts relate thatJoseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery returned the Book of Mormonplates to a cave filled with such records. Preserving records on metalplates is an attested Old World practice that supports the Book ofMormons authenticity.

Above: How They Till the Soil and Plant, copper plate engraving byTheodore De Bry (152898). Below: The Towne of Pomeiock, byJohn White (155093). Nineteenth-century Americans familiar withNative American lifeways as depicted in these two illustrations couldno longer dismiss the Book of Mormons claim of city-level societiesonce the advanced civilizations in Central America came to light.


7/82


onto Zarahemla, how would we know? Te difficultyis not with evidence but with epistemology.

One last point about significant evidence. Tehypothesis o Joseph Smiths authorship o the Booko Mormon demands that truth claims in the bookbe judged by what was believed, known, or know-

able in Josephs backyard in the 1820s. Te booksdescription o ancient peoples differs greatly romthe notions o rude savages held by 19th-centuryAmericans. Te books claim o city societies waslaughable at the time, but no one is laughing now.

As the city example shows, the lower the proba-bility that Joseph Smith could have guessed a utureact, the stronger the likelihood he received theinormation rom a divine source. Consequently, the

most compelling evidence or authenticity is thatwhich verifies unguessable things recorded in theBook o Mormon, the more outlandish the better.Confirmation o such items would eliminate anyresidual probability o human authorship and go along way in demonstrating that Joseph could not

have written the book. Tis is precisely what a cen-tury o archaeology has done.

I consider only a ew items. Te one require-ment or making comparisons between archaeologyand the Book o Mormon is to be in the right place.For reasons I will explore below, Mesoamerica is theright place.

1. Metal Records in Stone Boxes

Te first archaeological claims related to theBook o Mormon concern the purported acts o22 September 1827: the actuality o metal plates

preserved in a stone box. Tis used to be considereda monstrous tale, but concealing metal records instone boxes is now a documented Old World prac-tice. Stone offering boxes have also been discov-ered in Mesoamerica, but so ar the golden platesare still at largeas we would expect them to be.

2. Ancient Writing

Another act obvious that September morn-ing was that ancient peoples o the Americas knewhow to write, a ludicrous claim or anyone to makein 1827. We now know o at least six Mesoameri-

can writing systems that predate the Christianera. Tis should count or something, but it is notenough or dedicated skeptics. Tey demand to seereormed Egyptian, preerably on gold pages, andto find traces o the Hebrew language. Tere arepromising leads on both, but nothing conclusive

Altar from Copan, sketched on the spot by Frederick Catherwood forStephenss bookIncidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas andYucatan (1841).

The impression made by a roller seal from ancient Mesoamerica (seephoto on next page) displays a sophisticated writing system. Photocourtesy of John L. Sorenson.


8/82


yet. New scripts are still

being discovered, and manytexts remain undeciphered.One example was recovered56 years ago and qualifies asAmericas earliest writing sam-ple, but so ar nothing muchhas been made o it, and mostscholars have orgotten it exists.

3. The Arts of War

Te golden plates and other relics ended up inNew York in the final instance because the Nephites

were exterminated in a cataclysmic battle. Te Booko Mormon brims with warare and nasty people.Until 20 years ago the books claims on this matterwere pooh-poohed by amous scholars. Now thatMaya writing can be read, warare appears to havebeen a Mesoamerican pastime.

Te inormation on warare in the Book oMormon is particularly richand provides ample opportu-nity to check Joseph Smithsluck in getting the detailsright. Te warare described

in the book differs rom whatJoseph could have known or

imagined. In the book, one reads o ortified citieswith trenches, walls, and palisades. Mesoamericancities dating to Nephite times have been ound withall these eatures.

Te Book o Mormon mentions bows andarrows, swords, slings, scimitars, clubs, spears,

shields, breastplates, helmets, and cotton armorallitems documented or Mesoamerica. Aztec swordswere o wood, sometimes edged with stone knives.Tere are indications o wooden swords in the Booko Mormonhow else could swords become stainedwith blood? Wooden swords edged with sharpstones could sever heads and limbs and were lethal.Te practice o taking detached arms as battletrophies, as in the story o Ammon, is also docu-mented or Mesoamerica.

Another precise correspondence is the practiceo fleeing to the summits o pyramids as places o

last deense and, consequently, o eventual surren-der. Conquered cities were depicted in Mesoamericaby symbols or broken towers or burning pyramids.Mormon records this practice. Other practices ohis day were human sacrifice and cannibalism, vilebehaviors well attested or Mesoamerica (see Mor-mon 4:14; Moroni 9:8, 10).

Te final battle at Cumorah involved staggeringnumbers o troops, including Nephite battle unitso 10,000. Aztec documents describe armies o over200,000 warriors divided into major divisions o8,000 warriors plus 4,000 retainers each. One battleinvolved 700,000 warriors on one side. Te Aztecciphers appear to be propagandistic exaggeration; Ido not know whether this applies to Book o Mor-mon numbers or not.

In summary, the practices and instrumentso war described in the Book o Mormon display

This roller seal was found at thesite of Tlatilco, just west of MexicoCity. The writing appears to datebetween 400 and 700 BC.

Clockwise from below: The Mayasite of Becn, in Campeche, Mexico;artists rendering of Becn, whichdates to Nephite times; drawing ofdry moat and fortified wall based onexcavations at Becn.


9/82


multiple and precise correspondences with Meso-american practices, and in ways unimaginable to19th-century Yankees.

4. Cities, Temples, Towers, and Palaces

Mesoamerica is a land o decomposing cities.

Teir pyramids (towers), temples, and palaces areall items mentioned in the Book o Mormon butoreign to the gossip along the Erie Canal in JosephSmiths day. Cities show up in all the right placesand date to time periods compatible with Book oMormon chronology.

5. Cement Houses and Cities

One o the more unusual and specific claimsin the Book o Mormon is that houses and cities ocement were built by 49 in the Land Northward, aclaim considered ridiculous in 1830. As it turns out,this claim receives remarkable confirmation at eo-tihuacan, the largest pre-Columbian city ever builtin the Americas. eotihuacan is stil l covered withancient cement that has lasted over 1,500 years.

6. Kings and Their Monuments

All Book o Mormon peoples had kings whoruled cities and territories. American prejudicesagainst native tribes in Josephs day had no roomor kings or their tyrannies. Te last Jaredite king,Coriantumr, carved his history on a stone about 400, an event in line with Mesoamerican practices atthat time. A particular gem in the book is that KingBenjamin labored with his own hands (Mosiah2:14), an outrageous thing or Joseph Smith to haveclaimed or a king. It was not until the 1960s thatanthropology caught up to the idea o workingkings and validated it among world cultures.

View of Teotihuacans Sun Pyramid from the pyramid ofQuetzalcoatl. Photo courtesy of Val Brinkerhoff.

Above: Hieroglyphic text from La Mojarra Stela 1 describing arulers accession to power. Left: Carved throne from the Olmecsite of La Venta.


10/82


More specifically, we consider Riplakish, the10th Jaredite king, an oppressive tyrant who orcedslaves to construct buildings and produce ancygoods. Among the items he commissioned about1200 was an exceedingly beautiul throne(Ether 10:6). Te earliest civilization in Mesoamer-

ica is known or its elaborate stone thrones. Howdid Joseph Smith get this detail right?

7. Metaphors and the Mesoamerican World

Not all evidence or the authenticity o theBook o Mormon concerns material goods. A strik-ing correspondence is a drawing rom the DresdenCodex, one o our surviving pre-Columbian Mayabooks. It shows a sacrificial victim with a tree grow-ing rom his heart, a literal portrayal o the meta-phor preached in Alma, chapter 32. Other Meso-american images depict the tree o lie. Te Book o

Mormons metaphors make sense in the Mesoameri-can world. We are just beginning to study thesemetaphors, so check theJournal of Book of MormonStudiesor uture developments.

8. Timekeeping and Prophesying

A correspondence that has always impressed meinvolves prophecies in 400-year blocks. Te Mayawere obsessed with time, and they carved precisedates on their stone monuments that began with thecount o 400 years, an interval called a baktun. Each

Hieroglyphic writing graces the pages of the Dresden Codex, a Mayabook from the Yucatn Peninsula dating to AD12001250. Thehighlighted image shows a tree growing out of the heart of a sacrifi-cial victim (note the trees entwined roots at the bottom).

Right: Re-created mural from Oxtotitlan Cave, in Guerrero, Mexico,depicts an Olmec ruler dressed in a bird costume and seated on athrone. Courtesy of John E. Clark.


11/82


baktunwas made up o 20 katuns, an extremelyimportant 20-year interval. I you permit me someliberties with the text, Samuel the Lamanite warnedthe Nephites that one baktunshall not pass awaybeore . . . they [would] be smitten (Helaman 13:9).Nephi and Alma uttered the same baktunprophecy,

and Moroni recorded its ulfillment. Moroni bids usarewell just afer the first katuno this final baktun,or 420 years since the sign was given o the com-ing o Christ (Moroni 10:1). What are the chanceso Joseph Smith guessing correctly the vigesimalsystem o timekeeping and prophesying amongthe Maya and their neighbors over 50 years beorescholars stumbled onto it?

Te list o unusual items corresponding to Booko Mormon claims could be extended. Te Latter-day Saint tendency to get absorbed in specifics hasbeen characterized as a method or distracting

attention rom large problems by engaging criticswith endless, irrelevant details, much as a mos-quito swarm distracts rom the rhinoceros in thekitchen. Lets take up the dare to consider big issues,namely, geography and cycles o civilization andpopulation.

9. Old World Geography

As is clear rom the Cluff expedition, i thegeography is not right, one can waste years search-ing or Zarahemla and never reach it. Book o Mor-mon geography presents a serious challenge because

the only city location known with certitude is OldWorld Jerusalem, and this does not help us withlocations in the promised land. However, geographi-cal correspondences are marvelous or the OldWorld portion o the narrative. As S. Kent Brownand others have shown, the geography o the Ara-bian Peninsula described in 1 Nephi is precise downto its place-names. Te remarkable geographic fitincludes numerous details unknown in JosephSmiths day.

10. New World Geography

For the New World, dealing with geography is atwo-step exercise. First an internal geography mustbe deduced rom clues in the book, and this deduc-tion must then become the standard or engagingthe second step, matching the internal geographywith a real-world setting. John Sorenson has donethe best work on this matter. Te Book o Mor-mon account is remarkably consistent throughout.

Nephite lands included a narrow neck between twoseas and lands northward and southward o thisneck. Te Land Southward could be traversed onoot, with children and animals in tow, in about 30days, so it could not have been much longer than300 miles. Te 3,000 miles required or the two-

hemisphere geography is off by one order o magni-tude. Nephite lands were small and did not includeall o the Americas or all o their peoples. Te prin-cipal corollary o a limited geography is that Booko Mormon peoples were not alone on the conti-nent. Tereore, to check or correspondences, onemust find the right place and peoples. It is worthnoticing that anti-Mormons lament the demise o

Map of Book of Mormon lands based soley on internal evidencefrom the text itself.


12/82


the traditional continental correlation because itwas so easy to ridicule. Te limited, scriptural geog-raphy is giving them fits.

Sorenson argues that Book o Mormon landsand peoples were in Central America and southernMexico, an area known as Mesoamerica. We notice

that the configuration o lands, seas, mountains,and other natural eatures in Mesoamerica are atight fit with the internal requirements o the text. Itis important to stress that finding any sector in theAmericas that fits Book o Mormon specificationsrequires dealing with hundreds o mutually depen-dent variables. So rather than counting a crediblegeography as one correspondence, it actually countsor several hundred. Te probability o guessingreams o details all correctly is zero. Joseph Smithdid not know about Central America beore readingStephenss Incidents of ravel in Central America,

Chiapas, and Yucatan,and he apparently did notknow where Book o Mormon lands were, so a Booko Mormon geography correlation becomes compel-ling evidence that he did not write the book.

11. Cycles of Civilization in Mesoamerica

I mentioned that the Book o Mormons claimo civilized peoples was verified in Josephs lietime.Tis claim is actually twoold because the bookdescribes an earlier Jaredite civilization that over-lapped a ew centuries with Lehite civilization. Tedates or the Nephite hal o Lehite civilization are

clearly bracketed in the account to 587 years beoreChrist to 386 years afer. But those or the earliercivilization remain cloudy, beginning sometimeafer the ower o Babel and ending beore KingMosiah fled to Zarahemla. Jaredites were probablytilling American soil in the Land Northward at leastby 2200 , and they may have endured their ownwickedness until 400 .

Te two-civilizations requirement used to be aproblem or the Book o Mormon, but it no longeris now that modern archaeology is catching up. Iemphasize that I am interpreting civilization inthe strict sense as meaning city lie. In check-ing correlations between the Book o Mormon andMesoamerican archaeology, I ocus on the rise anddecline o cities. Te earliest known Olmec city wasup and running by 1300 , and it was preceded bya large community dating back to 1700 . MostOlmec cities were abandoned about 400 , prob-ably under duress. In eastern Mesoamerica, Olmec

civilization was replaced by the lowland Maya, whobegan building cities in the jungles o Guatemalaabout 500 to 400 . As with Olmec civilization,Maya civilization experienced peaks and troughs odevelopment, with a mini-collapse about 200.In short, the correspondences between the Book oMormon and cycles o Mesoamerican civilizationare striking.

12. Mesoamerican Demographic History

Reconstructing ancient demography requiresdetailed inormation on site sizes, locations, dates,

and requencies. It will take another 50 years oactive research to compile enough inormation toreconstruct Mesoamericas complete demographichistory. Te Nephite and Lamanite stories are toocomplicated to review here; I will just consider theJaredite period. o begin, the earliest developmentso Jaredites and Olmecs are hazy, but rom about1500 onward their histories are remarkably par-allel. Te alternations between city building andpopulation declines, described or the Jaredites,correspond quite well with lowland Olmec develop-ments. Olmec cities were abandoned by 400 ,

and the culture disappearedjust as the Book oMormon describes or the Jaredites (see Ether 1315). Tis is a phenomenal correlation. Much moreresearch in southern Mexico is needed to check thelands that Sorenson identifies as Nephite. Te littleI know o the region looks promising or utureconfirmations.

Possible correspondences between the histories of Book of Mormonpeoples and the histories of Mesoamerican peoples.


13/82


Beore leaving this issue, it is important to makeone observation on a global question that troublessome Latter-day Saints. Could millions o peoplehave lived in the area proposed as Book o Mormonlands? Yes, and they did. Mesoamerica is the onlyarea in the Americas that sustained the high popu-lation densities mentioned in the Book o Mormon,and or the times specified.

A Trend of Convergence

o this point, I have shown that the content o

the Book o Mormon fits comortably with Meso-american prehistory, both in general patterns and insome extraordinary details. Many things mentionedin the book still have not been verified archaeologi-cally, but this was true just a ew years ago or someitems just reviewed. Te trend over the last 50 yearsis one o convergence between the Book o Mormonand Mesoamerican archaeology. Book o Mormonclaims remain unaltered since 1830, so all theaccommodation has been on the archaeology side.I the book were fiction, this convergence wouldnot be happening. We can expect more evidence incoming years.

Coming back to the original question: DidJoseph Smith write the Book o Mormon? He didnot. It has been obvious since 1829 to those whoknew him best that Joseph Smith could not havewritten the Book o Mormon. Recent findingssimply make the possibility o his authorship that

much more inconceivable. Te accumulating evi-dence rom archaeology and the impressive internalevidence demonstrate that the Book o Mormon isan authentic ancient book o New World origin. Teonly plausible explanation or the books existence isthat supernatural agencies were involved in its com-ing orth in our day.

Te Book o Mormon still presses the world totake it seriously, and now science is lending a hand.Te archaeology that has been undertaken in Meso-america is confirming historical, geographical, andpolitical acts mentioned in the text. Archaeology

is powerless, however, to address the books centralchallengethe promise that its doctrine leads toChrist. Although the Book o Mormon does notprovide clear directions or reaching Zarahemla, itsinstructions or coming to Christ are unsurpassed,and this is the infinitely more important destina-tion. I we are ever to reach this destination, wemust keep the relationship between external Booko Mormon evidences and belie in proper perspec-tive. President Gordon B. Hinckley sums up thematter in his testimony:

he evidence or [the Book o Mormons]

truth, or its validity in a world that is proneto demand evidence, lies not in archaeology oranthropology, though these may be helpul tosome. It lies not in word research or historicalanalysis, though these may be conirmatory.he evidence or its truth and validity lieswithin the covers o the book itsel. he test oits truth lies in reading it. It is a book o God.Reasonable people may sincerely question itsorigin; but those who have read it prayerullyhave come to know by a power beyond theirnatural senses that it is true, that it contains the

word o God, that it outlines saving truths othe everlasting gospel. !

Fluctuations in population for the Jaredites and Olmecs are striking.


14/82


15/82


1. See Matthe w B. Brown, Platesof Gold: The Book of MormonComes Forth(American Fork,UT: Covenant, 2003), for adetailed account of the eventsof that morning.

2. Figures current as of February2006, Curriculum Depart-ment, The Church of JesusChrist of Latter-day Saints.

3. For a concise review of histori-cal positions concerning theorigins of the Book of Mor-mon, see Louis C. Midgley,Who Really Wrote the Bookof Mormon? The Critics andTheir Theories, in Book of

Mormon Authorship Revi s-ited: The Evidence for AncientOrigins(Provo, UT: FARMS,1997), 10139.

4. The most thorough discussionof these points can be foundin Terryl L. Givens, By theHand of Mormon: The Ameri-can Scripture That Launcheda New World Religion(NewYork: Oxford University Press,2002).

5. Ernest L. Wilkinson and W.Cleon Skousen, Brigham YoungUniversity: A School of Destiny(Provo, UT: Brigham YoungUniversity Press, 1976), 151.

6. See Wilkinson and Skousen,Brigham Young University, 160.

7. See Wilkinson and Skousen,Brigham Young University,17980.

8. Copies of the Book of Mormonavailable at the turn of thecentury would have had thechanges added to the 1879 edi-tion by Orson Pratt, and theseincluded footnotes contain-ing geographical informationbased on a hemispheric geog-raphy. These specific identifi-cations were removed for the1920 edition and have beenexcluded ever since.

9. For good overviews of Bookof Mormon geographies andrelated issues, see John L.Sorenson,An Ancient Ameri-can Setting for the Book of

Mormon(Salt Lake City:Deseret Book and FARMS,1996); Sorenson, The Geogra-

phy of Book of Mormon Events:A Sourcebook(Provo, UT:FARMS, 1992); and S orenson,

Mormons Map (Provo, UT:FARMS, 2000).

10. Times and Seasons3 (15 March1842): 710.

11. John L. Stephens, Incidents ofTravel in Central America , Chi-apas, and Yucatan(New York:Harper and Brothers, 1841).

12. Times and Seasons3 (1 Octo-ber 1842): 927.

13. Tal Davis,A Closer Look atThe Book of Mormon(Atlanta:Home Mission Board, South-ern Baptist Convention, 1993).

14. Judging supposed deficienciesof Book of Mormon a rchae-ology from the vantage ofbiblical archaeology is akinto gauging the speed of anoncoming car on the freeway.Neither driver is in a positionto make the cal l. The compel-ling argument from archae-ology requires t he readersfaith and indulgence in thesoundness of biblical archaeol-ogy as an entry fee to evaluateBook of Mormon claims. Intruth, biblical archaeology isriven with pitfalls and dif-ficulties. Archaeology has notconfirmed the Bible in anynontrivial sense. For a frankassessment of some of t hechallenges of biblical archaeol-ogy, see William G. Dever,What Did the Biblical WritersKnow and When Did TheyKnow It? What ArchaeologyCan Tell Us about the Real-ity of Ancient Israel(GrandRapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001);Randall Price, The Stones CryOut: What Archaeology Revealsabout the Truth of the Bible (Eugene, OR: Harvest House,1997).

15. The list of archaeologicalobjections to the Book of Mor-mon was taken from a n earlierpamphlet by Hal Hougey,

Archaeo logy and The Book ofMormon (Concord, CA: PacificPublishing, 1983), 12. Thefull list of objections, as theyappear in Davis,A Closer Lookat The Book of Mormon(see n.13), is as follows: 1. No Bookof Mormoncities have beenlocated. 2. No Book of Mormonnames have been found inNew World inscriptions. 3.No genuine inscriptions havebeen found in Hebrew. 4. Nogenuine inscriptions have beenfound in Egyptian or anythingsimilar to Egyptian, whichcould correspond to JosephSmiths Reformed Egyptian.5. No ancient copies of Book of

Mormon scriptures have beenfound. 6. No ancient inscrip-tions of any kind that indicatethat the ancient inhabitantsheld Hebrew or Christianbeliefsall are pagan . 7. Nomention of Book of Mormonpeople, nations, or places has

been found. 8. No artifact ofany kind that demonstratesThe Book of Mormonis truehas been found.

16. For an excellent discussion ofwhat physical evidence canand cannot do for the Book ofMormon, see John W. Welch,The Power of Evidence in theNurturing of Faith, in Echoesand Evidences of the Bookof Mormon, ed. Donald W.Parry, Daniel C. Peterson, andJohn W. Welch (Provo, UT:FARMS, 2002), 1753.

17. See John L. Sorenson, HowCould Joseph Smith WriteSo Accurately about AncientAmerican Civilization? inEchoes and Evidences, 261306;and John Gee, T he WrongType of Book, in Echoes andEvidences, 30729.

18. Hugh Nibley called suchimprobable confirmationshowlers. Hugh Nibley,Howlers in the Book of Mor-mon,Millennial Star(Febru-ary 1963): 2834; reprintedin Nibley, The Prophetic Bookof Mormon(Salt Lake City:Deseret Book and FARMS,1989), 24358.

19. See William J. Adams Jr.,Lehis Jerusalem and Writingon Silver Plates, in Press-ing Forward with the Book of

Mormon , ed. John W. Welchand Melvin J. T horne (Provo,UT: FARMS, 1999), 2326;Adams, More on the SilverPlates from Lehis Jerusa lem,in Pressing Forward, 2728; C.Wilfred Griggs, The Book ofMormon as an A ncient Book,in Book of Mormon Author-ship: New Light on AncientOrigins, ed. Noel B. Reynolds(Provo, UT: FARMS, 1982),75101; William J. Hamblin,Metal Plates and the Book ofMormon, in Pressing Forward,2022; Noel B. Reynolds, ByObjective Measures: Old Wineinto New Bottles, in Echoesand Evidences, 127153; Ste-phen D. Ricks, ConvergingPaths: Language and CulturalNotes on the Ancient NearEastern Background of theBook of Mormon, in Echoesand Evidences, 389419;John L. Sorenson, Challeng-ing Conventional Views ofMetal, in Pressing Forward,18789; H. Curtis Wright,Ancient Burials of MetalDocuments in Stone Boxes,in By Study and Also by Faith:Essays in Honor of Hugh W.

Nibley, ed. John M. Lundquistand Stephen D. Ricks (SaltLake City: Deseret Book andFARMS, 1990), 2:273334.

20. An early stone box is knownfor the late Olmec site of TresZapotes, Veracruz; see Chris-topher A. Pool, From Olmecto Epi-Olmec at Tres Zapotes,Veracruz, Mexico, in Olmec

Art and Archaeology in Meso-america, ed. John E. Clark a ndMary E. Pye (Washington DC:National Gallery of Ar t, 2000),146. Many offering boxes havebeen found in t he excavationsof the Aztec capital of Tenoch-titlan (present Mexico City) inthe Templo Mayor excavations;see Leonardo Lpez Lujn, TheOfferings of the Templo Mayorof Tenochtitlan(Niwot, CO:University Press of Colorado,1994).

21. The different scripts currentlyknown include Zapotec, Low-land Maya, Highland Maya atKaminaljuy , Tlatilco, Teoti-huacan, La Mojarra, La VentaOlmec, and a recent scriptfrom the Olmec heartland thathas not yet been labeled. Forsome introductory discussionof these scripts, see Stephen D.Houston, Writing in EarlyMesoamerica, in The FirstWriting: Script Invention asHistory and Process, ed. Ste-phen D. Houston (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2004), 274309; David H.Kelley, A Cylinder S eal fromTlatilco,American Antiquity31/5 (1966): 74446; John S.Justeson, The Origin of Writ-ing Systems: Preclassic Meso-america, World Archaeology17/3 (1986): 43758; Justes onand Terrence Kaufman, ADecipherment of Epi-OlmecHieroglyphic Writing, Science259 (19 March 1993): 170311;Joyce Marcus, The Originsof Mesoamerican Writing,

Annual Review of Anthropol-ogy5 (1976): 3567; Joyce Mar-cus,Mesoamerican WritingSystems: Propaganda, Myth,and History in Four AncientCivilizations(Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press,1992); Sylvia Mluzin, FurtherInvestigations of the TuxtlaScript: An Inscribed Mask andLa Mojarra Stela 1(Provo,UT: Papers of the New WorldArchaeological Foundation,1995); Mary E . Pohl, Kevin O.Pope, and Christopher vonNagy, Olmec Origins of


16/82


Mesoamerican Writing, Sci-ence298 (6 December 2002):198487; Karl A. Taube, TheWriting System of Ancient Teo-tihuacan(Barnardsville, NC:Center for Ancient AmericanStudies, 2000); Javier UrcidSerrano, Zapotec HieroglyphicWriting(Washington DC:Dumbarton Oaks ResearchLibrary and Collection, 2001).

22. See John Gee, Two Notes onEgyptian Script, in PressingForward, 24447; Stephen D.Ricks a nd John A. Tvedtnes,Semitic Texts Written inEgyptian Characters, inPressing Forward, 23743; andBrian Stubbs, Hebrew andUto-Aztecan: Possible Linguis-tic Connections, in Reexplor-ing the Book of Mormon, ed.John W. Welch (Provo, UT:FARMS, 1992), 27981.

23. See Kelley, Cylinder Seal fromTlatilco, 74446.

24. See M. Kathryn Brown andTravis W. Stanton,Ancient

Mesoamerican Warfare(Wal-nut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press,2003); Ross Hassig,AztecWarfare: Imperial Expansionand Political Control(Nor-man: University of OklahomaPress, 1988); and Hassig, Warand Society in Ancient Meso-america (Berkeley: Universityof California Press, 1992).

25. See John L. Sorenson, For-tifications in the Book ofMormon Account Comparedwith Mesoamerican Fortifica-tions, in Warfare in the Book of

Mormon, ed. Stephen D. Ricksand William J. Hamblin (SaltLake City: Deseret Book, 1990),42544; and Sorenson, Imagesof Ancient America: VisualizingBook of Mormon Life(Provo,UT: Research Press, 1998),13233.

26. See William J. Hamblin andA. Brent Merrill, Swordsin the Book of Mormon, inWarfare in the Book of Mor-mon, 32951; Matthew Roper,Eyewitness Descriptions ofMesoamerican Swords, inPressing Forward, 16976; andSorenson, Images of Ancient

America, 13031.27. For blood-stained swords, see

Alma 24:1213, 15.28. See Alison V. P. Coutts, From

a Converts Viewpoint, inEchoes and Evidences, 42152;Bruce H. Yerman, Ammonand the Mesoamerican Customof Smiting Off Arms,JBMS8/1 (1999): 4647; John M.

Lundquist and John W. Welch,Ammon and Cutting Of f theArms of Enemies, in Reex-

ploring the Book of Mormon,18081.

29. For towers as the last refugein battle, see A lma 50:4; 51:20;Moroni 9:7. Compare withFray Diego Durn, The Aztecs:The History of the Indies ofNew Spain, trans. Doris Hey-den and Fernando Horcasitas(New York: Orion Press, 1964),68: The Tecpanecs, retreat-ing toward their c ity, intendedto use their temple as a laststronghold, but Tlacaelel [anAztec leader] reached thetemple before them and, tak-ing possession of its entrance,ordered one of his men to set iton fire, having made prisonerall those who were within.Durn, p. 89: When we reachTotoltzinco the king of Tex-coco will set fire to the templeand the battle will come to anend.

30. See Durn, The Aztecs, 217;Hubert Howe Bancroft, TheNative Races of the PacificStates of North America(NewYork: Appleton, 1875), 2:425;and Sorenson, Images of

Ancient America, 12629.31. See Sorenson,Ancient Ameri-

can Setting.32. Teotihuacan, located just

north of Mexico City, was builtabout this time with massiveamounts of cement. In citingthis correspondence pointedout by others, I am not claim-ing that Teotihuacan wasindeed the place mentioned inthe Book of Mormon account;see Joseph L. Allen, SacredSites: Searching for Book of

Mormon L ands (AmericanFork, UT: Covenant Com-munications, 2003), 8991. Atthe moment, no New Worldcity mentioned in the Bookof Mormon is known withcertainty. Other cities in theregion around Teotihuacanengaged in similar practices,so I am drawing attentionhere to a region, a time period,and a cultural practice, all ofwhich are confirmatory of theBook of Mormon account ifone concedes that the LandSouthward was south of theIsthmus of Tehuantepec. Forfurther references to cement,see John L. Sorenson, HowCould Joseph Smith Writeso Accurately about AncientAmerican Civili zation? 261

306; and John W. Welch, ASteady Stream of SignificantRecognitions, in Echoes andEvidences, 33187.

33. The notion of working kingsor lesser kings came into theanthropological literaturewith the rise of evolutionarytypologies and the concept ofchiefdoms. For valuable treat-ments of chiefdoms, see ElmanR. Service, Primitive SocialOrganization: An Evolution-ary Perspective, 2nd ed. (NewYork: Random House, 1971);Morton H. Fried, The Evolutionof Political Society: An Essay inPolitical Anthropology(NewYork: Random House, 1967);Timothy Earle, ed., Chiefdoms:Power, Economy, and Ideology(Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-

versity Press, 1991); Robert D.Drennan and Carlos A. Uribe,eds., Chiefdoms in the Americas(Lanham, MD: University Pressof America, 1987); and AllenW. Johnson and Timothy Earle,The Evolution of Human Societ-ies: From Foraging Group to

Agrarian State(Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press, 1987).

34. For information on Olmecthrones, see David C. Grove,Olmec Altars and Myths,

Archaeo logy26/2 (April1973): 12835; Grove, OlmecArchaeology: A Half Centuryof Research and Its Accom-plishments,Journal of WorldPrehistory11/1 (1997): 51101;Grove and Susan D. Gillespie,Ideology and Evolution atthe Pre-State Level: Forma-tive Period Mesoamerica, inIdeology and Pre-ColumbianCivilizations, ed. Arthur A.Demarest and Geoff rey W.Conrad (Albuquerque: Schoolof American Research Press,1992), 1536; Gillespie, Power,Pathways, and Appropriationsin Mesoamerican Art, inImagery and Creativity: Ethno-aesthetics and Art Worlds inthe Americas, ed. Dorothea S.Whitten and Norman E. Whit-ten Jr. (Tucson: The Univer-sity of Arizona Press, 1993),67107; and Gillespie, OlmecThrones as Ancestral Altars:The Two Sides of Power, in

Mater ial Symbols: Culture andEconomy in Prehistory, ed.John E. Robb (Carbondale,IL: Center for ArchaeologicalInvestigations, 1999), 22453.

35. The classic statements onthe Maya calendar are thoseof Sylvanus G. Morley,An

Introduction to the Study ofthe Maya Hieroglyphics(1915;reprint, New York: Dover Pub-lications, 1975); and J. Eric S.Thompson,Maya HieroglyphicWriting: An Introduction(Nor-man: University of OklahomaPress, 1960). Most introduc-tory books on Mesoamericanarchaeology cover the basicsof the calendar. I recommendany edition of Michael D. Coe,The Maya(London: Thamesand Hudson). Ernst WilhelmFrstemann is credited withdiscovering the principles ofthe Maya calendar in 1887; seehis article The Inscriptionon the Cross of Palenque,reprinted in The Deciphermentof Ancient Maya Writing, ed.Stephen Houston, OswaldoChinchilla Mazariegos, andDavid Stuart (Norman: Uni-

versity of Okla homa Press,2001), 22433.

36. See Alma 45:10; Helaman 13:9;Mormon 8:6.

37. See Michael Coe, on the fal-lacy of misplaced concrete-ness, quoted in HamptonSides, This is Notthe Place,Doubletake 5 (Spring 1999):4655, quotation from p. 51:Theyre [Mormon apologists]always going after the nitty-gritty things. . . . Lets look atthis specific hi ll. Lets look atthat specific t ree. Its exhaust-ing to follow all these mind-numbing leads. It keeps thefocus off the fact that its allin the service of a completelyphony history. Where are thelanguages? Where are the cit-ies? Where are the artifacts?Look here, theyll say. Heresan elephant. Well, thats fine,but elephants were wiped outin the New World around8,000 by hunters. Therewere no elephants! See alsoCoe, Mormons and Archaeol-ogy: An Outside View, Dia-logue 8/2 (1973): 4048.

38. See S. Kent Brown, The PlaceThat Was Called Nahom: NewLight from Ancient Yemen,

JBMS8/1 (1999): 6668; War-ren P. Aston, Newly FoundAltars from Na hom,JBMS10/2 (2001): 5661; and Brown,New Light from Arabia onLehis Trail, in Echoes andEvidences, 55125.

39. See Sorenson,Ancient Ameri-can Setting; and Sorenson,

Mormons Map.40. The population profile for the

Lowland Olmecs is based on


17/82


data for the history of the twoprincipal capitals in the area,San Lorenzo and La Venta, aswell as on some limited surveyaround both capitals. I drawfrom the following sources:Michael D. Coe and Richard A.Diehl, In the Land of the Olmec(Austin: University of TexasPress, 1980); Ann Cyphers,Reconstructing Olmec Lifeat San Lorenzo, inOlmec Artof Ancient Mexico, ed. Eliza-beth P. Benson and Beatriz dela Fuente (Washington DC:National Gallery of Art, 1996),6171; Cyphers, ed., Poblacin,Subsistencia y Medio Ambienteen San Lorenzo Tenochtitln(Mexico City: UniversidadNacional Autnoma de Mxico,1997); Rebecca Gonzlez Lauck,La Venta: An Olmec Capital,inOlmec Art of Ancient Mexico,7381; Stacey C. Symonds andRoberto Lunagmez, Settle-ment System and PopulationDevelopment at San Lorenzo,inOlmec to Aztec: SettlementPatterns in the Ancient GulfLowlands, ed. Barbara L. Starkand Philip J. Arnold III (Tuc-son: University of ArizonaPress, 1997), 14473; Symonds,Cyphers, and Lunagmez,

Asentamiento Prehis pnico enSan Lorenzo Tenochtitln(Mex-ico City: Universidad NacionalAutnoma de Mxico, 2002);and Christopher von Nagy,The Geoarchaeology of Settle-ment in the Grijalva Delta, inOlmec to Aztec, 25377.

41. See John E. Clark, Richard D.Hansen, and Toms PrezSurez, La Zona Maya en elPreclsico, in Historia Anti-

gua de Mxico, Volumen 1:El Mxico Antiguo, sus reasculturales, los orgenes y elhorizonte Preclsico, ed. LindaManzanilla and LeonardoLpez Lujn (Mexico City:Instituto Nacional de Antro-pologia e Historia, 2000),437510.

42. For basic information seethe entries on El M irador,Kaminaljuy, a nd Chiapa deCorzo in Susan Toby Evansand David L. Webster, eds.,

Archaeology of Ancient Mexicoand Central America: An Ency-clopedia(New York: GarlandPublishing, 2001).

43. For the demise of the Olmeccivililzation, see the following:Clark, Hansen, and Prez, LaZona Maya, 437510; John E.Clark and Richard D. Hansen,

The Architecture of EarlyKingship: Comparative Per-spectives on the Origins of theMaya Royal Court, in RoyalCourts of the Ancient Maya:Vol. 2, Data and Case Stud-ies, ed. Takeshi Inomata andStephen D. Houston (Boulder:Westview Press, 2001), 145;Richard A. Diehl, The Olmecs:

Americas First Civi lization(London: Thames and Hud-son, 2005); and Gonzlez, LaVenta: An Olmec Capital,7381.

44. See Terryl L. Givens, By theHand of Mormon: The Ameri-can Scripture That Launched aNew World Religion.

45. Gordon B. Hinckley, FourCornerstones of Faith, Ensign,February 2004, 6.

Lehis Vision of the Tree of Life:Understanding the Dream asVisionary Literature

Charles Swift

1. Robert L. Millet, AnotherTestament of Jesus Christ,in The Book of Mormon: FirstNephi, the Doctrinal Founda-tion, ed. Monte S. Nyman andCharles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT:BYU Religious Studies Center,1988), 163.

2. Richard Dilworth Rust, Feast-ing on the Word: The LiteraryTestimony of the Book of Mor-mon(Salt Lake City: DeseretBook and FARMS , 1997), 4.

3. Leland Ryken, How to Readthe Bible as Literature(Grand

Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984),165.

4. See, for example, Robert Alter,The Art of Biblical Poetry(NewYork: Basic Books, 1985); Ber-nard McGinn, Revelation,in The Literary Guide to theBible, ed. Robert Alter andFrank Kermode (Cambridge,MA: Belknap Press of Har-

vard Univers ity Press, 1990),52341; John B. Gabel, CharlesB. Wheeler, and Anthony D.York, The Bible as Literature:

An Introdu ction , 4th ed. (NewYork: Oxford University Press,2000); Northrop Frye, The

Great Code: The Bible and Lit-erature(New York: HarcourtBrace Jovanovich, 1982); andNorthrop Frye, Words withPower: Being a Second Study ofthe Bible and Literature(SanDiego, CA: Harcourt BraceJovanovich, 1990).

5. Ryken, Bible as Literature, 166.6. Admittedly, one might argue

that mist of darkness reallymeans dark mis t, the way therod of iron might be cal ledthe iron rod. This may ormay not be the ca se. Thereare several other instances inthis account in which adjec-tives are used before nouns tomodify them (e.g., dark anddreary wilderness, whiterobe, dark and drearywaste, large and spaciousfield, strait and narrowpath), indicating, at least, thatits reasonable to read mistof darkness to be somethingother than just a dark mistsince the words dark mistcould have been used to c on-

vey that l atter mea ning.7. On the possible connection of

the building of Lehis dreamto ancient South Arabianarchitecture, see S. KentBrown, The Queen of Sheba,Skyscraper Architecture, andLehis Dream,JBMS 11 (2002):1023.

8. On the connections to desertgeography and other features oflife in Lehis dream, see S. KentBrown, New Light from Ara-bia on Lehis Trail, in Echoesand Evidences of the Book of

Mormon, ed. Donald W. Parry,Daniel C. Peterson, and JohnW. Welch (Provo, UT: FARMS,2002), 6469, 1024.

9. S. Kent Brown, Lehi, Journeyof, to the promised land, inBook of Mormon ReferenceCompanion, ed. Dennis L.Largey et al. (Salt Lake City :Deseret Book, 2003), 515.

10. Ryken, Bible as Literature, 167;emphasis in original.



13. Examples of ancient Arabianhouses built af ter the Baby-lonian design of Lehis daywere 10 and 12 stories high,with their windows starting20 to 50 feet above the groundfor purposes of defense. Atnight these lighted windowswould certainly give the effectof being suspended above theearth. Early castles of Arabialooked like they stood in t heair, high above the earth (seeHugh Nibley,An Approach tothe Book of Mormon, 3rd ed.[Salt Lake City: Deseret Bookand FARMS, 1988], 257; alsosee Brown, Lehi, Journey of,to the promised land, 515).The fact that such ancient

houses existed, however,does not change the argu-ment that the vision of t hetree of life demands that thereader deal with unfamiliarimages. The Book of Mormonis an ancient book written formodern timesits readers arethe people of today, not thosecontemporaneous with Lehi oranyone else in the book. Whilethere may be images in the

vision t hat correspond wit hwhat some people in the bookmay have actually seen in life,these same images are unfa-miliar to readers of the Bookof Mormon.


15. Leland Ryken, James C. Wil-hoit, and Tremper LongmanIII, eds., Dictionary of BiblicalImagery(Downers Grove, IL:InterVarsity Press, 1998), s.v.Dreams, Visions.

16. Of course, we might choose todivide up the vision into com-ponents in several dif ferentways. For this chart, however,I have basically chosen todesignate a new componentwhen the location of the actionchanges. Lehis location doesnot change once he has pa r-taken of the fru it of the tree,but the location of the eventshe is observing and talkingabout does.

17. Ryken, Bible as Literature,17071; emphasis in original.

18. Ryken, Bible as Literature, 171.19. Leland Ryken, Literature of

the Bible(Grand Rapids, MI:Zondervan, 1974), 339.

20. Corbin T. Volluz, LehisDream of the Tree of Life:Springboard to Prophecy,

JBMS2/2 (1993): 38.21. Ryken, Bible as Literature, 173.22. It is interesting that while

people are concerned about t hehistoricity of symbols, rarelydo they concern t hemselveswith the symbolism of history.Just as symbols can corre-spond to actual events, actualevents can be understood to besymbolic. I do not refer onlyto ritual a nd ceremony, suchas the sacrament or baptism,which are by definition sym-bolic actions. I refer to eventsin everyday life that normallywould not be considered any-thing out of the ordinary butthat can actually be seen aspointing to meaning beyondthemselves. For example,Elder Boyd K. Packer spoke


18/82

B M O N A

M I DNA S

Ugo. A. Perego

Background

Where did Native Americans come rom? When did they arrivein the Western Hemisphere? Which route(s) did they ollow?How many colonization events were there? Tese and other asci-nating questions have been at the center o debates among scholars

rom different disciplines since the rediscovery o the New World by

Europeans more than five hundred years ago. Archaeologists, lin-

guists, anthropologists, and geneticists are still investigating the pro-

cesses that took place through the millennia that led to the peopling

o Americas double continent. Te considerable number o scholarly

papers that have been published on DNA and Amerindians is a dem-onstration that despite the 80-year history o genetic studies in the

Americas, the real work is now [only] beginning to ully elucidate the

genetic history o [the] two continents.

At first, Europeans believed that the New World inhabitants

were somewhat connected with the biblical account o the lost ten

I am grateul to the ollowing individuals or commenting on this manuscript: Dr.

Alessandro Achilli (University o Perugia, Italy), Jayne E. Ekins, Diahan Southard, andDr. Scott R. Woodward (Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation, USA), ProessorAntonio orroni (University o Pavia Italy) and Dr Amy Williams (Harvard Medical


19/82

192 The FARMS Review 22/1 (2010)

tribes (2 Kings 17:6), leading them to look or cultural and linguistic

similarities between contemporary Jews and Native Americans. Teevidence amassed to this point indicates that although sporadic pre-

Columbian contacts with the Old World cannot be completely ruled

out, the majority o Native Americans share a genetic affinity with

Asian populations.

Te notion that some or all American Indians are o Hebrew

descent is still popular among Latter-day Saints. Te Book o Mormon

tells o three relatively small parties (the Jaredites, Lehites, and

Mulekites) that lef their native homeland in the Old World at different

times and through divine guidance traveled to a new promised land,

presumably on the American continent. Te Book o Mormon contains

only marginal inormation about the demographic dynamics and the

geography o the land occupied by the people it describes. Instead,

the volume claims to be primarily an abridgment o thousands o

years o mostly spiritual and religious history and not a ull account

o the people. For example, the text does not give direct inormationabout whether other populations were already established in the land

at the time o the migrants arrival. Tis lack o inormation leaves

many open questions that have proound implications or the genetic

characteristics that we would expect to find in present-day Native

2. Michael Craword, Te Origins of Native Americans: Evidence from anthropologi-cal genetics(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 2. 3. Geraldine Barnes, Viking America: Te First Millennium (Suffolk, England: St.Edmundsbury Press, 2001). Note that no genetic contribution rom Vikings has beendetected to date in the modern Native American population. Either they kept to them-selves and were not welcomed by native groups, or their DNA has not yet been identifiedin contemporary Amerindians. John L. Sorenson, Ancient Voyages Across the Oceanto America: From Impossible to Certain, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 14/1(2005): 6, notes that the Viking presence in North America has been considered to be ono historical importance and goes on to present decisive empirical evidence o trans-oceanic distribution o flora and auna in pre-Columbian times. See also Martin H. Raishand John L. Sorenson, Pre-Columbian Contacts with the Americas across the Oceans: An

Annotated Bibliography, 2 vols. (Provo, U: Research Press, 1996). 4. Antonio orroni et al., Asian affinities and continental radiation o the ourounding Native American mtDNAs American Journal of Human Genetics 53/3


20/82

O N A(Perego) 193

American populations. Te extent to which these Old World groups

expanded and colonized their new habitat, the level o admixture theymay have experienced with local indigenous populations (i any were

present), and the locations o their settlements would all influence

the genetic landscape we would observe in Native Americans today.

Furthermore, it is implausible that ancient record keepers would have

had a comprehensive knowledge o all the goings-on o the entire vast

landmass o the Americas, considering that rom northern Canada

to Patagonia is about 8,700 miles, a greater distance than that rom

Portugal to Japan! Despite these many complex actors, since the

publication o the Book o Mormon in 1830, Mormons and non-

Mormons alike have resorted to speculation in an attempt to fill in the

historical and geographical details that are either completely missing

or only briefly alluded to in the Book o Mormon text.

Even in light o statements by individual Latter-day Saint church

leaders and scholars on this topic through the years, the church

advocates no official position on the subjects o Book o Mormon

geography and the origins o Amerindian populations. ogether

with all other members, LDS Church leaders are entitled to their own

opinions and reasoning on this subject, as demonstrated by pre-DNA

comments such as that o President Anthony W. Ivins, a member o

the First Presidency, at the April 1929 General Conerence: Te Book

o Mormon does not tell us that there was no one here beore the

Book o Mormon peoples. It does not tell us that people did not comeafer. Others have expressed similar opinions more recently.

5. For a summary o the principal theories o Book o Mormon New World geogra-phy, see http://en.airmormon.org/Book_o_Mormon/Geography/New_World (accessed2 June 2010). 6. Carrie A. Moore, Debate renewed with change in Book o Mormon introduc-tion, Deseret Morning News, www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695226008,00.html(accessed 2 June 2010).

7. In Conerence Report, April 1929, 1516. 8. See, or example, John L. Sorenson, When Lehis Party Arrived in the Land,Did Tey Find Others Tere? Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 1 (1992): 134; John L


21/82


Over the past decade, critics o the Book o Mormon have promoted

the idea that since the majority o Amerindian DNA lineages are closelyrelated to Asian populations, and since no perect genetic affinity to

the Middle East has been ound, it must be concluded that the Book

o Mormon account is fictional. Tis argument is sometimes bolstered

in part by a common sentiment among Latter-day Saints generally

that all Native Americans are descendants o the Old World migrants

described in the Book o Mormon text, particularly Lehis colony. o

contend with these arguments, some Mormons dismiss DNA studies

as being unreliable or reconstructing history, while others are quick

to embrace any news o possible Middle Eastern DNA in the Americas

as conclusive proo that the migrations to America described in the

Book o Mormon are real.

In this article, I will provide an updated review on the properties

o mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and explain how these pertain to

the study o ancient population expansions, specifically ocusing on

the origin o Native Americans. Tis topic is especially relevant to thecurrent debate on the applicability o DNA evidence to the question

o Book o Mormon historicity, as such evidence is based mostly

on mtDNA data published during the past two decades. Te major

arguments in this debate have been presented at length in previous

publications and will not be restated herein. Te most pertinent

supporting material that ollows will provide a oundation to the

reader regarding the basics o mtDNA heredity, a review and updateon the most recent mtDNA data available pertaining to the origins o

Native American populations, and a summary o how this inormation

9. Tis issue has been dealt with competently in Daniel C. Peterson, ed., Te Bookof Mormon and DNA Research (Provo, U: Neal A. Maxwell Institute or ReligiousScholarship, 2008). Examples o Book o Mormon criticisms based on alleged DNA evi-dence are ound in Simon G. Southerton, Losing a Lost ribe: Native Americans, DNA,and the Mormon Church(Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2004); Tomas W. Murphy,

Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics, in American Apocrypha: Essays on theBook of Mormon, ed. Dan Vogel and Brent L. Metcale (Salt Lake City: Signature Books,2002) 4777; and Brent L Metcale Reinventing Lamanite Identity Sunstone March


22/82

O N A(Perego) 195

relates to the larger DNA and Book o Mormon discussion. It is

important or readers to understand that while mtDNA and othergenetic motis are useul in elucidating some historical questions,it may not be possible to achieve a ull resolution o questions arisingbetween secular and religious history.

Mitochondrial DNA

Te hereditary eatures o mtDNA provide unique inormation

that geneticists use to study the ancient history o humanity. Suchstudies are based on the oundational principles o populationgenetics. It is essential to have a working knowledge o these principles

when evaluating genetic studies relating to the Book o Mormon,because those who argue against its authenticity overlook some othese concepts.

MtDNA is ound in mitochondria, which are the organelles withineach cell responsible or lie-sustaining processes such as cell energymetabolism, cell division, and programmed cell death (apoptosis). Each

cell may contain thousands o mitochondria, and each mitochondrionmay contain hundreds o mtDNA genomes. A significant hereditaryeature o mtDNA is that it is maternally inherited, a act that affectsthe extent o historical inormation one can learn rom its analysis.

Te mtDNA molecule comprises only 16,569 bases and isthereore very small when compared to the nuclear genome (i.e., the

3.2 billion bases o genetic material that make up the twenty-threepairs o chromosomes ound in the cells nucleus). Te first completemtDNA genome was sequenced in 1981 at Cambridge University andis called the Anderson or Cambridge Reerence Sequence (CRS). In1999 Andrews and colleagues resequenced the original CambridgemtDNA, which is now reerred to as rCRS. Tis sequence became

10. See, or example, Ugo A. Perego, Jayne E. Ekins, and Scott R. Woodward,

Mountain Meadows Survivor? A Mitochondrial DNA Examination,Journal of MormonHistory32/3 (Fall 2006): 4553.11 Stephen Anderson et al Sequence and organization o the human mitochon-


23/82


the industry standard used to compare complete or partial mtDNA

data produced to date. Instead o reporting long lists o genetic basesor each mtDNA sample, a typical report includes only differences (i.e.,

mutations) rom the rCRS. Tis set o mutations is called a haplotype,

the mtDNA genetic profile descended rom the maternal lineage o

an individual. As a general rule, mutational events occur randomly,

and their accumulation over time has resulted in the differentiation

o the many mtDNA lineages observed in todays world populations.

Analysis o these lineages can thereore be structured hierarchically

in a treelike ormat called aphylogeny (fig. 1). A phylogeny attempts

to model the true hereditary history o mtDNA across populations.

Similar to the Y chromosome (Ycs), mtDNA does not recombine

with the DNA rom the other molecules. Tat is, mtDNA is inherited

as a ully intact DNA segment between generations, with variations

rom mother to child arising rarely due to random mutations. While

the Ycs is inherited along the paternal line, as noted beore, mtDNA

ollows an inheritance pattern ound on the opposite side o the amilytree, along the unbroken maternal line (fig. 2). A mothers mtDNA

is passed to all o her children, but only the daughters will pass

their mtDNA to the next generation. Although there has been one

documented instance o male-inherited mtDNA in humans, this is

considered an exceptionally rare (almost unique) exception, mainly

associated with a pathological status.

Te mtDNA genome has two parts: the control region, whichincludes three segments called HVS1, HVS2, and HVS3, and the

coding region (where all the mtDNAs genes that produce proteins

essential to lie are ound). Genetic data rom an individuals mtDNA

is obtained by the ollowing methods, with each successive approach

yielding more inormation:

1. Inspection o restriction ragment length polymorphisms

(RFLPs) using enzymes that break the DNA into smaller13 Marianne Schwartz and John Vissing Paternal Inheritance o Mitochondrial


24/82

O N A(Perego) 197

Figure1.Schematicphylogenyo

humanmtDNA(Alessandro

AchilliandUgoA.Perego,20

09).Teourcommon(A2,B

2,C1,an

and

rarer(D4h3)NativeAmerica

nlineagesarenestedwithintheEastAsianportionothetree,whilethenorthernNorth

Americ

isoundamongtheWestEurasia

nsubclades(AlessandroAchillietal.,2008;UgoA.Perego

etal.,2009).Currently,atotalofifee

ColumbianmtDNAhaplogroups

havebeenidentifiedintheAmericas(UgoA.Peregoetal.,

2010).


25/82


ragments at specific short (usually our to six base pair)sequences. Depending on the presence or lack o mutations,the ragment will or will not be broken and the resultingragment length indicates the presence or lack o the mutation.

2. Assaying single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), where thetype o base at a specific location is identified or comparisonwith the reerence sequence.

3. Sequencing o part or all the control region (up to

approximately 1,000 bases).4. Sequencing o the complete mtDNA genome (all the 16,569

basesthe highest level o mtDNA molecular resolutionattainable).

During the 1990s, a number o studies were published presentingmtDNA data obtained rom RFLP and control region sequences (ofenonly HVS1, approximately 300 bases), many o them highlighting

several Native American populations. Te mtDNA data produced

Figure 2. Te strict paternal Y chromosome (Ycs) and strict maternal mitochondrialDNA (mtDNA) inheritance patterns.


26/82

O N A(Perego) 199

during that decade allowed scientists to investigate or the first time the

mtDNA variation rom diverse populations. From this they advancedthe first theories about the origin o anatomically modern humansand the processes o expansion that resulted in the colonization o thecontinental masses.

Starting around the year 2000, researchers employing newtechnological advances began to produce complete genome sequencesas the standard or the most rigorous mtDNA population studies.However, the process o generating a ull mtDNA sequence is still

labor intensive and relatively expensive. Recently, a study reviewingall the published mtDNA ull sequences reported that only a verysmall raction o these data are o Native American origin, leaving aconsiderable gap to fill in the scientific literature.

Te opportunity to acquire complete mtDNA sequencesbrought several benefits to the field o population genetics, includingresolution o questionable phylogenies based on control region data

(this region has a higher mutation rate and is thereore affected byrecurring mutations), identification o smaller clades within the largeworld mtDNA tree, better understanding o events that characterizethe expansion and migration routes ollowed by our early ancestors,and an improved understanding o the expected mutation rate o themtDNA genome, yielding a better calibration o the molecular clock

and Y-Chromosome Polymorphisms in Four Native American Populations romSouthern Mexico,American Journal of Human Genetics54/2 (1994): 30318; Antonioorroni et al., Mitochondrial DNA clock or the Amerinds and its implications ortiming their entry into North America, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences91/3 (1994), 115862; and Peter Forster et al., Origin and Evolution o Native AmericanmtDNA Variation: A Reappraisal, American Journal of Human Genetics 59 (1996):93545. 17. Antonio orroni et al., Do the Four Clades o the mtDNA Haplogroup L2 Evolveat Different Rates?American Journal of Human Genetics69/6 (2001): 134856. 18. Lusa Pereira et al., Te Diversity Present in 5140 Human MitochondrialGenomes, American Journal of Human Genetics 84 (2009): 62840; and Mannis van

Oven and Manred Kayser, Updated Comprehensive Phylogenetic ree o GlobalHuman Mitochondrial DNA Variation, Human Mutation30/2 (2009): E38694, www.phylotree org (accessed 4 June 2010) As o 10 November 2009 the publicly accessible


27/82


the mathematical underpinnings o historical date estimations based

on genetic data.It is important to remember that population geneticists ace the

continuing challenge o correlating their findings with those o other

disciplines, including linguistics, anthropology, and archaeology. A

multidisciplinary approach allows a consensus to be ormed or date

estimates and helps to cross-veriy findings among different fields o

study.

MtDNA Haplogroups

Te differentiation o mtDNA has been generated by the sequential

accumulation o new mutations along radiating maternal lineages. Over

the course o time, this process o molecular divergence has given rise

to separate mtDNA lineages that are now called haplogroupsthat is,

groups o haplotypes sharing similar characteristics. Haplogroups are

named ollowing a simple but standardized nomenclature procedure,alternating letters with numbers and starting with a capital letter (e.g.,

K1a4, H1a, A2d2, C1b2a) (fig. 1). Coincidentally, the first time haplogroup

names were given was when the sequence variation o mtDNAs rom

Native American populations was investigated. Four major mutational

motis were identified, and they were thereore originally named A, B,

C, and D.

Te mtDNA process o molecular differentiation was relatively

rapid and occurred mainly during and afer the recent process o human

colonization and diffusion into different regions and continents.

Tus, serendipitously, the different subsets o mtDNA variation tend

to be restricted to different geographic areas and population groups.

Older mtDNA lineages had more time to accumulate a greater

number o mutations, while younger mtDNA lineages accumulated

ewer mutations and thereore underwent less variation. Mainstream

19. Alessandro Achill i and Ugo A. Perego, Mitochondrial DNA: A FemalePerspective in Recent Human Origin and Evolution in Origins as a Paradigm in the


28/82

O N A(Perego) 201

population geneticists are in agreement that, based on the available

mtDNA data, the most recent common emale ancestor, rom whomall mtDNAs in modern humans derive, lived in Arica about 200,000years ago and that an initial migration out o Arica took placearound 70,000 years ago, represented by an mtDNA lineage knownas L3. Tis lineage lef the Horn o Arica by migrating eastwardand ollowing a southern coastal route along the Indian Ocean; andwhile moving arther east about 63,000 years ago, it gave rise to twomtDNA daughter branches known as haplogroups M and N. An

offshoot o N shortly afer was haplogroup R. Lineages M, N, and Rare the emale ancestors o all the known non-Arican lineages thateventually colonized the rest o the continents. Tese lineages are alsoknown as macro- or superhaplogroups. Te Americas were the lasto all the continents to be colonized by Homo sapiens,approximately10,00020,000 years ago (fig. 3).

Te Basics of Population Genetics

Using the mtDNA mutations as a guide, it is possible to trace allmodern mtDNA lineages back to a single Arican emale ancestor.Geneticists have named this ancestor the Arican Eve, but despitethis name, she was not necessarily the only woman on the planet. TemtDNA lineages corresponding to other women simply disappearedbecause their offspring ailed to produce additional continuous

emale lineages (a phenomenon known in population genetics asgenetic drif), because o natural or manmade calamities that wipedout a significant portion o the population (an event reerred to asa population bottleneck), or because they were selected against dueto the detrimental effect o specific mutations. Tis Arican Evewas the only one that was successul in perpetuating her mtDNAlineage through the generations. Tereore, because o genetic drif,population bottlenecks, or natural selection, the mtDNA lineagesobserved in todays population do not reflect the ull range o mtDNA

i ti th t d th h t h hi t A t l


29/82


30/82

O N A(Perego) 203

are just a small representation o people that lived just three hundred

years ago. Tis work is a powerul illustration and a rare exampleo a controlled study where genealogical, historical, and genetic data

are available to unequivocally demonstrate the effect o genetic drif

and natural selection in a airly isolated population. Te effect o these

population genetics processes occur globally (including in organisms

other than humans) and are not exclusive to the Icelandic population.

Most relevant to our current discussion, these principles have also

affected populations in the Western Hemisphere. Although some

would like to dismiss the Icelandic model and suggest that it is more

an exception than the rule, these population genetics laws cannot

be ignored: they are the undamental orce that shaped the modern

genetic landscape worldwide. It is a well-known act that mtDNA

lineages have disappeared in the past and that they will continue to

disappear in modern times. Tis process has occurred everywhere in

the world, and the Americas are no exception.

Native American DNA

With regard to measuring the genetic variation observed among

the indigenous people o the Western Hemisphere, molecular anthro-

pologist Michael H. Craword has stated this problem succinctly and

repeatedly in his book Te Origins of Native Americans:

Te Conquest and its sequelae squeezed the entireAmerindian population through a genetic bottleneck. Te re-

duction o Amerindian gene pools rom 1/3 to 1/25 o their

previous size implies a considerable loss o genetic variabil-

ity. . . . It is highly unlikely that survivorship was genetically

random. . . . Tus, the present gene-requency distributions

21. Agnar Helgason et al., A Populationwide Coalescent Analysis o Icelandic

Matrilineal and Patrilineal Genealogies: Evidence or a Faster Evolutionary Rate omtDNA Lineages than Y Chromosomes, American Journal of Human Genetics 72/6(2003): 137088


31/82


o Amerindian populations may be distorted by a combina-

tion o effects stemming rom genetic bottlenecks and naturalselection. . . . Tis population reduction has orever alteredthe genetics o the surviving groups, thus complicating anyattempts at reconstructing the pre-Columbian genetic struc-ture o most New World groups.

Subsequent research has supported this notion. In an articledealing with ancient DNA rom Native American populations that

was published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, theauthors made the ollowing statement: Genetic drif has also beena significant orce [on Native American genetics], and together witha major population crash afer the European contact, has alteredhaplogroup requencies and caused the loss o many haplotypes.

Tese statements rom experts in the field o modern and ancientDNA rom Native American populations (experts not involved withthe Book o Mormon and DNA debate) give insight into the influenceo the major population-altering events o the Columbian and pre-Columbian eras on the genetic variation o modern Native Americans.Teir mtDNAs were not immune to the evolutionary processes ogenetic drif and population bottleneck that have been observed ina similar ashion in other populations. One cannot overstate theimportance o considering both random as well as environmentalactors when studying history using DNA samples rom modern

populations, including that o Amerindians. Population geneticsprinciples guide geneticists who study human history, and geneticdrif and population bottlenecks are among the most basic actorsconsidered in their work.

Some wonder i ancient DNA samples might shed additionallight on the history o ancient populations such as the ancestralNative Americans. Tis approach can be valuable when the necessarysamples are available and the DNA is o good quality. Note,however,

24 Craword Origins of Native Americans 4951 23941 26061


32/82

O N A(Perego) 205

that several limitations must be careully considered when studying

ancient DNA:a. Accessibility to the ancient remains: In many cases Native

American and First Nation groups consider their burialgrounds sacred and are quite resistant to DNA testing beingperormed on their ancestors remains. (Moreover, they areofen resistant to testing being done on themselves.)

b. Contamination: Skeletal remains in museums or personal

collections may have been handled improperly over time.Tus any attempt to retrieve endogenous DNA rom themmay be compromised by the presence o DNA belonging tothose who have touched the samples since the time o theirexcavation.

c. Confidence that the data obtained are genuine: A generalpractice when analyzing ancient DNA samples is to comparethe data obtained with samples rom the modern population.

I identical or similar haplotypes are ound in the modernpopulation, then it is assumed that the data obtained romthe ancient specimen are reliable. However, i no matches areound in the modern population, it can become difficult toascertain i the data obtained belong to a lineage no longer inexistence or i the genetic signal comes rom contaminationor postmortem damage.

d. Failed sequencing due to environmental actors: Even incases when bone ragments are ound and proper excavationtechniques are in place, the success rate o extracting andanalyzing ancient DNA is approximately 1 in 3. Extreme heat,high humidity, gamma rays rom the sun, and other actorscan accelerate DNA degradation. During the last decade,thanks to new technological advancements and a betterunderstanding o how to work with ancient DNA, results

26. Amy Harmon, DNA Gatherers Hit Snag: ribes Dont rust Tem,New York imes 10 December 2006 www nytimes com/2006/12/10/us/10dna- html?


33/82


have improved and the data are more reliable. However, much

o the data published in the 1990s was susceptible to lessrigorous collection and lab procedures that may have resultedin unreliable DNA data and conclusions.

e. Limited quantity o data obtained: Because ancient DNA ishighly degraded, only small ragments o genetic materialcan be sequenced. Most o the ancient DNA data available inthe public literature comes rom sequencing short segmentso the control region. o date, only a ew complete mtDNA

sequences (the ull 16,569 bases o the mtDNA genome) romancient human remains have been successully produced (e.g.,five Neanderthals and the yrolean Ice Man, tzi).

In summary, even though ancient DNA data have the potentialto be extremely helpul in phylogenetic studies and in reconstructingpast population events, scientists are still limited by the amount andquality o data they can obtain rom ancient remains.

A significant finding that elucidates the useulness o combiningancient and modern DNA in the study o Native American populationscomes rom a recent publication eaturing a short control region segmentsequenced rom a skeleton ound in Alaska that is approximately 10,000years old. Carbon dating confirmed that the remains were clearlypre-Columbian, but the genetic profile obtained did not match anyo the earlier identified Amerindian mtDNAs (A2, B2, C1, D1, andX2a). Previously, a number o studies on Native American populationsrevealed a small quantity o samples labeled others since they didnot belong to any o the known indigenous mtDNA lineages and werethought to have been contaminated or to be the result o Europeanadmixture. Based on the mtDNA data retrieved rom the ancientAlaskan specimen, some o those previously unclassified sampleswere reexamined and are confirmed as belonging to a novel Native

28. Adrian W. Briggs et al., argeted Retrieval and Analysis o Five Neandertal

mtDNA Genomes, Science 325 (2009): 31821; and Luca Ermini et al., CompleteMitochondrial Genome Sequence o the yrolean Iceman, Current Biology 18 (2008):


34/82

O N A(Perego) 207

American lineage named D4h3. Unortunately, as explained earlier,

it is difficult to access and to obtain data o good quality rom ancientDNA. Tereore, or every reclassified mtDNA lineage, it is probable

that many misclassifications remain unknown or unresolved. Te case

o D4h3 is likely to be a rare event in shedding additional light on the

maternal history o Native American populations.

Another serious limitation is the possibility o making inap-

propriate assumptions about which mtDNA candidate haplogroups

to expect rom the small groups described in the Book o Mormon.A survey o modern populations including Middle Easterners and

Asians would reveal a certain number o mtDNA lineages that occur

at high requencies and are thereore labeled as region-specific or the

modern population, but such a survey would also uncover a number

o mtDNA haplogroups that are more rare. Most likely, these less

requent mtDNA lineages are the result o relatively recent migratory

events, an occurrence very common throughout history because ointernational trade routes (such as those that took place along the Silk

Road) or military expansions (e.g., the Assyrian, Babylonian, Roman,

or Mongol empires). Tese important historical events are responsible

or a partial reshuffling o the DNA compositions o geographic

regions throughout the world, adding to the genetic diversity o

affected locations. Although the majority o lineages in one region

could be considered the typical mtDNA expected to be observed in a

specific location in modern populations, the reality is that potentially

any given mtDNA lineage could also be ound at low requencies in the

same geographic area. Any o these low-requency haplogroups could

be candidates or genetic types that may have been more common

during any previous time period within the last ew thousand years.

Tis issue touches on the people o the Book o Mormon because

we dont know their mtDNA affiliation. Lehis group could have

included typical Middle Eastern lineages or rare ones, even some


35/82


with a close Asian affinity. o elucidate this point, I use my own Y

chromosome (Ycs) haplogroup as an example. As explained earlier,Ycs is a uniparental marker that, like mtDNA, can be traced along one

specific amily tree branch (in this case the direct paternal line), and

or the most part it does not recombine with the other chromosomes

(fig. 2). Ycs haplotypes can also be grouped in a large phylogenetic

tree based on common characteristics that in most cases can be

associated with specific geographic regions. I was born and raised

in Italy and can trace my paternal ancestry back several generations

to the mid-seventeenth century . However, my Ycs belongs to

haplogroup C, which has a requency in southern Europe o less than

1 percent. Haplogroup C is mostly ound in east Asia with a branch

(C4) ound among the aborigines o Australia. How did haplogroup

C become part o my paternal ancestry? One possibility is that i