Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Is Zarahemla near Nauvoo, Illinois?


livy111us

Recommended Posts

D/C 125:3 "Let them build up a city unto my name upon the land opposite the city of Nauvoo, and let the name of aZarahemla be named upon it."

Rodney Meldrum claims that this scripture proves that Zarahemla is in North America, across the river from Nauvoo. As ridiculous as this is, Matt Roper has done an excellent job in answering this claim.

In March 1841, in a revelation now known as section 125 of the Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord counseled the Saints in Iowa to gather at several appointed locations:

What is the will of the Lord concerning the saints in the Territory of Iowa? Verily, thus saith the Lord, I say unto you, if those who call themselves by my name and are essaying to be my saints, if they will do my will and keep my commandments concerning them, let them gather themselves together unto the places which I shall appoint unto them by my servant Joseph, and build up cities unto my name, that they may be prepared for that which is in store for a time to come. Let them build up a city unto my name upon the land opposite the city of Nauvoo, and let the name of Zarahemla be named upon it. And let all those who come from the east, and the west, and the north, and the south, that have desires to dwell therein, take up their inheritance in the same, as well as in the city of Nashville, or in the city of Nauvoo, and in all the stakes which I have appointed, saith the Lord. (D&C 125:1

Link to comment

Even the Seminary Manual disputes Meldrum's take on this:

D&C 125:3 . Where Does the Term Zarahemla Come From? Where Was the City Located?

The precise meaning of the word Zarahemla is not known. The term comes from the Book of Mormon account of the people who came to America from Jerusalem at the time Zedekiah was carried captive into Babylon. They were called the people of Zarahemla after the name of their leader. They lived in a city named Zarahemla, in the land of Zarahemla (see Omni 1:12

Link to comment

Even the Seminary Manual disputes Meldrum's take on this:

Is there a citation for where, exactly, Meldrum is claiming this?

He's claimed this many times. Here is an article he wrote

"This is completely congruent with the proposed geography outlined in the presentation and DVD(s). If the place of first landing was the Gulf Coast of North America and the proposed location for Zarahemla (according to the Heartland Model) is across the Mississippi River from Nauvoo, IL (named by the Lord "Zarahemla" D&C125.3) then certainly the 'head' was in the northern parts of the land."

And has a video on it here called "Is Zarahemla across the river from Nauvoo, IL?"

I have never in my life seen someone with such disregard to evidence. I think he is worse than anti-Mormons in that regard.

Link to comment

And has a video on it here called "Is Zarahemla across the river from Nauvoo, IL?"

There are so many assumptions and to be blunt bad assumptions on the part of Brother Meldrum and Brother Christensen in this video. First of all you cannot get rid of all archeological evidence. For them to equate arrow heads as from the many wars of the BofM is well, ridiculous. Where are the remains of the great city of Zarahemla? If small arrow heads can be found surely someone wrote about something more, a building, a temple anything? Yes the Mississippi is shallow, no problem with that then should we not see some type of evidence for such a great city. Or before the dam was built why was it not discussed? If there was going to be a dam that flooded Cahokia there would have been much yelling and gnashing of teeth to save it or place the dam somewhere else. There was no city there no remnants of a city therefore the okay was given. Furthermore I have been right where Brother Meldrum is standing in this video, I have waded into those very muddy waters it is very cold here in the winter time I would think that would be mentioned it least in part with all the mentioning of the Zarahemla in the Book of Mormon. Last but not least could King Limhi's expedition do that amount of walking in 28 days? I think not.

Edited to add the section of the Doctrine and Covenants (125:3) in which Meldrum claims Joseph said that across the Mississippi from Nauvoo was the city of Zarahemla is wrong. It just says to build up a city and to name it that, it does not and in no way imply that that is where Zarahemla was.

Link to comment

There are so many assumptions and to be blunt bad assumptions on the part of Brother Meldrum and Brother Christensen in this video. First of all you cannot get rid of all archeological evidence. For them to equate arrow heads as from the many wars of the BofM is well, ridiculous. Where are the remains of the great city of Zarahemla? If small arrow heads can be found surely someone wrote about something more, a building, a temple anything? Yes the Mississippi is shallow, no problem with that then should we not see some type of evidence for such a great city. Or before the dam was built why was it not discussed? If there was going to be a dam that flooded Cahokia there would have been much yelling and gnashing of teeth to save it or place the dam somewhere else. There was no city there no remnants of a city therefore the okay was given. Furthermore I have been right where Brother Meldrum is standing in this video, I have waded into those very muddy waters it is very cold here in the winter time I would think that would be mentioned it least in part with all the mentioning of the Zarahemla in the Book of Mormon. Last but not least could King Limhi's expedition do that amount of walking in 28 days? I think not.

  • The only time "weather" is mentioned in the Book of Mormon is when it was out of the ordinary. Droughts, recovering rains. Except the "heat of the day" to describe the cause of fatigue which would make the story of Teancum sneeking around more plausible to future readers. Thus there's no reason for its authors to mention something ordinary, such as snow (or rain). How often is rain mentioned in the Book of Mormon, except in terms of a drought? When was Heat by Nephi mentioned when he was in Arabia? How often do you mention "it snowed" "it rained" in your journal/emails/twitter/Facebook? Or it's really hot in Arizona today!
  • Meldrum's theory for Zarahemla being across from Nauvoo may be shallow (pun intended) but Zarahemla was "burned by fire" meaning that city wasn't made from stone. It was started by lightning. Nearby Chicago back in the day? O'Leary's cow. The idea that there has to be archeological evidence and that it has to be stone when Mormon wrote the "Nephite cities, towns and villages were burned with fire" is ignoring the text.
  • There are many assumptions about the Mesoamerica Theory that anyone can touch on - such as the River Sidon. Is it the Usamacinta River or the Grijalva? Both are major rivers which share deltas into the Gulf of Mexico, the latter completely blocked some years ago by a massive landslide, which had to be "undammed" using extensive engineering efforts by the Mexican Government. Yet, the Book of Mormon only talks of one major river. But civilization starting along waterways? Sure, why not. It happened in America by Europeans.
  • Both theories have their weaknesses. Yet Meldrum doesn't go around dismissing early church history as being inaccurate or "speculative" by it writers, as the members and promoters of FARMS Mesoamerica theory often do. I enjoy that, instead of learning that Joseph Smith didn't know what he was talking about.

Link to comment

From the following quotes we can tell even the early leaders of the church posited that Mesoamerica was the setting for the BofM;

Mr. Stephens' great developments of antiquities are made bare to the eyes of all the people by reading the history of the Nephites in the Book of Mormon. They lived about the narrow neck of land, which now embraces Central America, with all the cities that can be found. Read the destruction of cities at the crucifixion of Christ...Let us turn our subject, however, to the Book of Mormon, where these wonderful ruins of Palenque are among the mighty works of the Nephites (Joseph Smith editor)
[W]e have found another important fact relating to the truth of the Book of Mormon. Central America, or Guatimala [Guatemala], is situated north of the Isthmus of Darien and once embraced several hundred miles of territory from north to south.-The city of Zarahemla, burnt at the crucifixion of the Savior, and rebuilt afterwards, stood upon this land as will be seen from the following words in the book of Alma...It is certainly a good thing for the excellency and veracity, of the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon, that the ruins of Zarahemla have been found where the Nephites left them: and that a large stone with engravings upon it as Mosiah said; and a 'large round stone, with the sides sculptured in hieroglyphics,' as Mr. Stephens has published, is also among the left remembrances of the, (to him,) lost and unknown. We are not going to declare positively that the ruins of Quirigua are those of Zarahemla, but when the land and the stones, and the books tell the story so plain, we are of opinion, that it would require more proof than the Jews could bring to prove the disciples stole the body of Jesus from the tomb, to prove that the ruins of the city in question, are not one of those referred to in the Book of Mormon...It will not be a bad plan to compare Mr. Stephens' ruined cities with those in the Book of Mormon: light cleaves to light, and facts are supported by facts.
Link to comment

  • The only time "weather" is mentioned in the Book of Mormon is when it was out of the ordinary. Droughts, recovering rains. Except the "heat of the day" to describe the cause of fatigue which would make the story of Teancum sneeking around more plausible to future readers. Thus there's no reason for its authors to mention something ordinary, such as snow (or rain). How often is rain mentioned in the Book of Mormon, except in terms of a drought? When was Heat by Nephi mentioned when he was in Arabia? How often do you mention "it snowed" "it rained" in your journal/emails/twitter/Facebook? Or it's really hot in Arizona today!
  • Meldrum's theory for Zarahemla being across from Nauvoo may be shallow (pun intended) but Zarahemla was "burned by fire" meaning that city wasn't made from stone. It was started by lightning. Nearby Chicago back in the day? O'Leary's cow. The idea that there has to be archeological evidence and that it has to be stone when Mormon wrote the "Nephite cities, towns and villages were burned with fire" is ignoring the text.
  • There are many assumptions about the Mesoamerica Theory that anyone can touch on - such as the River Sidon. Is it the Usamacinta River or the Grijalva? Both are major rivers which share deltas into the Gulf of Mexico, the latter completely blocked some years ago by a massive landslide, which had to be "undammed" using extensive engineering efforts by the Mexican Government. Yet, the Book of Mormon only talks of one major river. But civilization starting along waterways? Sure, why not. It happened in America by Europeans.
  • Both theories have their weaknesses. Yet Meldrum doesn't go around dismissing early church history as being inaccurate or "speculative" by it writers, as the members and promoters of FARMS Mesoamerica theory often do. I enjoy that, instead of learning that Joseph Smith didn't know what he was talking about.

Hi Nenahnzad! Thanks for your input. So many things I can touch on here.

1) I have studied many of the journals and papers written during the revolutionary and civil wars and when fought in the snow or ice weather is mentioned and is mentioned very often. The most popular being Valley Forge and of Washington crossing of the Delaware. Not just those stories but in individual letters and journals are many times has the cold been mentioned. The only time snow is mentioned in the BofM is when Nephi is quoting Isaiah. Now I admit it is speculation on my part albeit well informed and very well studied I would think the cold is very often mentioned in other warring times of this country we would find it least in one entry on it in the BofM. This is one indicator it least to me that it took place in a tropical/subtropical climate. And for your question the latest entries in my journal about weather was last week and today (me and my wife were the speakers in sacrament and we could not get to church because of the road conditions).

2)Every Seminary, Institute and any other expert on the Book of Mormon I have spoken with have said they have felt the thick mist of darkness where even a torch could not be lit was due to volcanic ash. I agree. But did you know in Meldrums great-lakes/heartland theory there where no volcanic eruptions. There have been three eruptions East of the Mississippi the closest to our time was 65 million years ago the other two even in a longer past. However by contrast in Mesoamerica there have been many, many eruptions and some even date to the precise time of this passage in the BofM. It could be a coincident but even so it validates Mesoamerica and makes the heartland model beyond problematic but to the ream of impossibility.

3. Burned with fire. Many buildings in the Mayan cities were burned with fire even the stone ones,(like the ones in the BofM). There is even Mayan glyphs that speak of burning them oh and to boot these glyphs are done in a chiasmus (Hebrew poetry)form.

4) As far as rivers I feel LPaulson who contributes his ideas here from time to time has the best theory on that. I subscribe to his theory that the Grijalva was the river Sidon.

5)"Yet Meldrum doesn't go around dismissing early church history as being inaccurate or "speculative" by it writers, as the members and promoters of FARMS Mesoamerica theory often do"What Brother Meldrum does is, he ignores all early church leaders accounts that directly contradict his own ideas. He does condescend in tone his derision for any who dare to approach a different theory, he erases everything (I mean everything) on his web site that even comes close to sounding critical of his model, he uses proven forgeries to back up his model (he knows they are fraudulent) and he deceived Archeologist and portrayed them on his video as promoting his ideas when they have have actually come out against him.

Just saying....

Link to comment

  • The only time "weather" is mentioned in the Book of Mormon is when it was out of the ordinary. Droughts, recovering rains. Except the "heat of the day" to describe the cause of fatigue which would make the story of Teancum sneeking around more plausible to future readers. Thus there's no reason for its authors to mention something ordinary, such as snow (or rain). How often is rain mentioned in the Book of Mormon, except in terms of a drought? When was Heat by Nephi mentioned when he was in Arabia? How often do you mention "it snowed" "it rained" in your journal/emails/twitter/Facebook? Or it's really hot in Arizona today!
  • Meldrum's theory for Zarahemla being across from Nauvoo may be shallow (pun intended) but Zarahemla was "burned by fire" meaning that city wasn't made from stone. It was started by lightning. Nearby Chicago back in the day? O'Leary's cow. The idea that there has to be archeological evidence and that it has to be stone when Mormon wrote the "Nephite cities, towns and villages were burned with fire" is ignoring the text.
  • There are many assumptions about the Mesoamerica Theory that anyone can touch on - such as the River Sidon. Is it the Usamacinta River or the Grijalva? Both are major rivers which share deltas into the Gulf of Mexico, the latter completely blocked some years ago by a massive landslide, which had to be "undammed" using extensive engineering efforts by the Mexican Government. Yet, the Book of Mormon only talks of one major river. But civilization starting along waterways? Sure, why not. It happened in America by Europeans.
  • Both theories have their weaknesses. Yet Meldrum doesn't go around dismissing early church history as being inaccurate or "speculative" by it writers, as the members and promoters of FARMS Mesoamerica theory often do. I enjoy that, instead of learning that Joseph Smith didn't know what he was talking about.

This is a very superficial look at weather in The Book of Mormon. For starters, the Lamanites were nothing but loincloths all year long. If this were the only evidence we had of weather in The Book of Mormon, it would prove that the Lehites could not have lived in an area where it was cold in the winter. I wrote a blog post on the subject that goes into more detail about it.

Snow is only mentioned once in The Book of Mormon, and that is only when the Lehites were still in the Old World 1. This is very indicative of where The Book of Mormon took place. If they lived in an area that was cold, such as the area around the Great Lakes, surely the bitter winters known in that area would have been mentioned. Other than the one reference , there is no mention of snow at all where the primary events of The Book of Mormon took place. John Lund states

Link to comment

  • Both theories have their weaknesses. Yet Meldrum doesn't go around dismissing early church history as being inaccurate or "speculative" by it writers, as the members and promoters of FARMS Mesoamerica theory often do. I enjoy that, instead of learning that Joseph Smith didn't know what he was talking about.

Yes, until there is a revelation on BOM geography, there will only be theories. But that is not the problem with Meldrum. He is cherry-picking quotes which fit his theory and ignoring every other quote by Joseph Smith and other leaders, past and present, concerning the BOM taking place anywhere else that the Great Lakes area. All the while, claiming those who disagree with him are discounting Joseph Smith and his revelations. This is dishonest by saying that Joseph Smith *only* taught a North American setting for The Book of Mormon, and then claiming that there was a revelation when the Church has stated that neither Joseph Smith, nor anyone else has received a revelation on BOM geography. He does this to sidestep the issue. Instead of actually answering the statements from Joseph Smith and others that the BOM happened in Mesoamerica or elsewhere, he only claims that Mesoamerican theorists have something to lose if their theory is not true. Instead of throwing a red herring out there, why not actually address the facts?

There has been a lot written on Joseph Smiths beliefs on BOM geography. If you are interested, I can send you some material.

Link to comment

Hi Nenahnzad! Thanks for your input. So many things I can touch on here.

1) I have studied many of the journals and papers written during the revolutionary and civil wars and when fought in the snow or ice weather is mentioned and is mentioned very often. The most popular being Valley Forge and of Washington crossing of the Delaware. Not just those stories but in individual letters and journals are many times has the cold been mentioned. The only time snow is mentioned in the BofM is when Nephi is quoting Isaiah. Now I admit it is speculation on my part albeit well informed and very well studied I would think the cold is very often mentioned in other warring times of this country we would find it least in one entry on it in the BofM. This is one indicator it least to me that it took place in a tropical/subtropical climate. And for your question the latest entries in my journal about weather was last week and today (me and my wife were the speakers in sacrament and we could not get to church because of the road conditions).

2)Every Seminary, Institute and any other expert on the Book of Mormon I have spoken with have said they have felt the thick mist of darkness where even a torch could not be lit was due to volcanic ash. I agree. But did you know in Meldrums great-lakes/heartland theory there where no volcanic eruptions. There have been three eruptions East of the Mississippi the closest to our time was 65 million years ago the other two even in a longer past. However by contrast in Mesoamerica there have been many, many eruptions and some even date to the precise time of this passage in the BofM. It could be a coincident but even so it validates Mesoamerica and makes the heartland model beyond problematic but to the ream of impossibility.

3. Burned with fire. Many buildings in the Mayan cities were burned with fire even the stone ones,(like the ones in the BofM). There is even Mayan glyphs that speak of burning them oh and to boot these glyphs are done in a chiasmus (Hebrew poetry)form.

4) As far as rivers I feel LPaulson who contributes his ideas here from time to time has the best theory on that. I subscribe to his theory that the Grijalva was the river Sidon.

5)"Yet Meldrum doesn't go around dismissing early church history as being inaccurate or "speculative" by it writers, as the members and promoters of FARMS Mesoamerica theory often do"What Brother Meldrum does is, he ignores all early church leaders accounts that directly contradict his own ideas. He does condescend in tone his derision for any who dare to approach a different theory, he erases everything (I mean everything) on his web site that even comes close to sounding critical of his model, he uses proven forgeries to back up his model (he knows they are fraudulent) and he deceived Archeologist and portrayed them on his video as promoting his ideas when they have have actually come out against him.

Just saying....

Hi! Thanks for the nice reply. Here's is mine, in order, to yours.

1) The Book of Mormon is not a meteorological text. It's a summary of an extensive history. But good point.

2) Volcanic eruptions. That's a good point. I can't speak for Meldrum. Below copied from a book (w/o punctuation) P.367 called "American antiquities and discoveries in the West: (etc.) by Josiah Priest.

Here's a Link at Google Books.

Lake Ontario formed by a Volcano Though the northern parts of America have been known to us but about two centuries yet this interval short as it is in the annals of nature has already says Volney been sufficient to convince us by numerous examples that earthquakes must have been frequent and violent here in times past and that they have been the principal cause of the derangements of which the Atlantic coast presents such general and striking marks To go back no farther than the year 1628 the time of the arrival of the first English settlers and end with 1782 a lapse of 154 years in which time there occurred no less than forty five earthquakes These were always preceded by a noise resembling that of a violent wind or of a chimney on fire they often threw down chimnies sometimes even houses and burst open doors and windows suddenly dried up wells and even several brooks and streams of water imparting to the waters a turbid color and the foetid smell of liver of sulphur throwing up out of great chinks with a similar smell the shocks of these earthquakes seemed proceed from an internal focus which raised the earth up from the principal line of which ran northeast and southwest the course of the river Merrimack extending southward the Potomac and northward beyond the St Lawrence particularly affecting the direction of Lake Ontario Respecting .. etc.

Modern Geology may disagree. You and others may laugh. But apparently there's something that points to Lake Ontario being volcanic, in part; if you read further from Page 367. It's deeper than the other Great Lakes, has a steep shoreline in parts, etc.. Maybe this leans toward the City of Moroni (in the east) sinking into the sea. The USGS notes fault lines/quakes -albeit small- in the Great Lakes area.

(Josiah Priest was essentially a contemporary of Stephens. Stephens discovered Maya cities are younger than the Book of Mormon timeline. So they are both just as credible, correct?)

This site give some credence to it:http://fishgator.com/wny-kayaking/a-brief-geologic-history-of-lake-ontario/

This site notes a fault line at the bottom of the lake: http://newsrelease.uwaterloo.ca/archive/news.php?id=235

This notes a 5.0 quake in June 2010: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/dyfi/events/us/2010xwa7/us/index.html

I don't give much credence, anymore, to these fantastic timelines of "millions of years" when in 1980 - The National Geographic published an article about Mount St. Helens. In the article it mentioned that the "strata" laid down by that volcano amazed the scientists then - as similar strata found at other volcanic locations were thought to take millions of years to be laid down - yet it only took hours by St. Helens. I can't find the article, maybe someone can. I'm digging here, I know, bringing it up without a link. But I wouldn't put quakes in the eastern US out of the realm of possibility. Especially given the ash in Nebraska said to come from a Caldera in Idaho/Wyoming and in which are buried animals (mammals). http://ashfall.unl.edu/

The mists of darkness could have been volcanic gases as the text states many were "overpowered by the vapor of smoke." (3 Ne. 10:13) Thus, those overcome by gas would be closer to an eruption(s) than those from ash - generally speaking. Mt. Saint Helens sent ash farther than its destructive pyroclastic gas cloud, if you will. So a volcanic explosion near a Mesoamerica city would kill more people than say, a huge eruption(s) in western North America which would send ash miles away. There is no mention of quakes before or after 3 Nephi. Which would make "trembling, volcanic" Mesoamerica the unlikely location.

Priest, in his book, mentions Niagara Falls being formed by an earthquake. He's speculating. Modern geology disagrees (glaciation). But if the Falls had not been there Mulekites maybe could have navigated up the St. Lawerence to the Lakes? It's a thought. Laugh away. The Book of Mormon says Lehi was brought to the south. Mulek to the North. (Ether 1:1 & Helaman 6:10). Their descendants eventually met in the Land of Zarahemla which was north of the Land of Nephi.

3) No doubt the Maya used wood. But so did other civilizations, such as the Chinese. The Chinese also used chiasmus. Confucius for one: http://www.drmardy.com/chiasmus/masters/confucius.shtml

4) The River Sidon in Mesoamerica? Your example proves there's still disagreement in that location - while LGT theorists disagree with the Mississippi River? Apparently, there is no agreed upon river anywhere. There's certainly not a consensus on it for Mesoamerica. Then again, there are 8 rivers which flow north in Mesoamerica. 8.

"Norman dismisses the Grijalva River as the river Sidon on the basis of a lack of any significant ruins that could be identified with the city of Zarahemla and problems with John L. Sorenson's view of directions" http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=19&num=2&id=655 , 2007

5)

he deceived Archeologist and portrayed them on his video as promoting his ideas when they have have actually come out against him.
That's a bold statement. Can you point me to this?

Regarding Early Church Leaders, Dr. Sorenson declared an absolute:

Link to comment

Yes, until there is a revelation on BOM geography, there will only be theories. But that is not the problem with Meldrum. He is cherry-picking quotes which fit his theory and ignoring every other quote by Joseph Smith and other leaders, past and present, concerning the BOM taking place anywhere else that the Great Lakes area. All the while, claiming those who disagree with him are discounting Joseph Smith and his revelations. This is dishonest by saying that Joseph Smith *only* taught a North American setting for The Book of Mormon, and then claiming that there was a revelation when the Church has stated that neither Joseph Smith, nor anyone else has received a revelation on BOM geography. He does this to sidestep the issue. Instead of actually answering the statements from Joseph Smith and others that the BOM happened in Mesoamerica or elsewhere, he only claims that Mesoamerican theorists have something to lose if their theory is not true. Instead of throwing a red herring out there, why not actually address the facts?

There has been a lot written on Joseph Smiths beliefs on BOM geography. If you are interested, I can send you some material.

I believe FARMS, and company, were cherry-picking quotes by early Church Leaders, long before Meldrum came onto "the scene." Go to MaxwellInstitute.org. There are articles older than Meldrum's materials. Meldrum is just a reaction to it and attempting to reconcile a geographical location in harmony, if you will, of statements made by early Church Leaders about North America. That's my take on it, anyway. If Joseph Smith mentioned both North America and Central America, then it must be a Hemispheric model. No? But FARMS disagrees: it all occurred in Mesoamerica, they say. You're conceding that both parties are cherry-picking. (I don't understand why some Lamanites could not have moved south, into Central and South America, while others chased the Nephites to the North.)

Anyway, sure, I'm interested in the material. Thanks!

Link to comment
I believe FARMS, and company, were cherry-picking quotes by early Church Leaders, long before Meldrum came onto "the scene." Go to MaxwellInstitute.org. There are articles older than Meldrum's materials. Meldrum is just a reaction to it and attempting to reconcile a geographical location in harmony, if you will, of statements made by early Church Leaders about North America. That's my take on it, anyway. If Joseph Smith mentioned both North America and Central America, then it must be a Hemispheric model. No? But FARMS disagrees: it all occurred in Mesoamerica, they say. You're conceding that both parties are cherry-picking. (I don't understand why some Lamanites could not have moved south, into Central and South America, while others chased the Nephites to the North.)

Anyway, sure, I'm interested in the material. Thanks!

Nenahnezad,

I hope your understanding of the evidence undergoes a long upgrade. Do please read some of the material. You'll find that the geographical information given in the Book of Mormon -- always and only incidentally -- consistently describes a small area which can be traversed on foot in a matter of days.

The American double-continent just seems a smidge too big for that.

In any event, I think the matter at issue in this thread is well settled: Joseph did not say that the Book of Mormon Zarahemla was anywhere near Montrose, Iowa; rather, he established a new settlement in Iowa and called it Zarahemla.

Regards,

Pahoran

Link to comment

A few quick points as I'm in the middle of an intense game of monopoly.

Josiah Priest was an uneducated man, while John Lloyd Stephens was an archaeologist. Just because they lived in the same time period does not mean that they are equal. That is like equating me with Michael Coe. We both live in the same period, but Michael Coe knows quite a bit more info, and is probably more accurate than me in his papers. If you are going to quote from people, try to quote from reliable sources. If there were earthquakes in that area (it really doesn't matter all that much to me if there were or not), then there will be evidence in scholarly journals of it happening anciently in BOM time periods, not in dubious writings.

Do you subscribe to Meldrums geography? If so, what do you consider Sidon?

Also, is not Meldrum disparaging Joseph Smiths comments about The Book of Mormon taking place outside of his theory? Or how about John Taylors comments, or Wilford Woodruff, or the current Church policy? Just because he cherry picks a few comments, all of the sudden everyone who disagrees with him is now disparaging him. This does not make any sense, and is not honest.

Link to comment

2) Volcanic eruptions. That's a good point. I can't speak for Meldrum. Below copied from a book (w/o punctuation) P.367 called "American antiquities and discoveries in the West: (etc.) by Josiah Priest.

Here's a Link at Google Books.

Lake Ontario formed by a Volcano Though the northern parts of America have been known to us but about two centuries yet this interval short as it is in the annals of nature has already says Volney been sufficient to convince us by numerous examples that earthquakes must have been frequent and violent here in times past and that they have been the principal cause of the derangements of which the Atlantic coast presents such general and striking marks To go back no farther than the year 1628 the time of the arrival of the first English settlers and end with 1782 a lapse of 154 years in which time there occurred no less than forty five earthquakes These were always preceded by a noise resembling that of a violent wind or of a chimney on fire they often threw down chimnies sometimes even houses and burst open doors and windows suddenly dried up wells and even several brooks and streams of water imparting to the waters a turbid color and the foetid smell of liver of sulphur throwing up out of great chinks with a similar smell the shocks of these earthquakes seemed proceed from an internal focus which raised the earth up from the principal line of which ran northeast and southwest the course of the river Merrimack extending southward the Potomac and northward beyond the St Lawrence particularly affecting the direction of Lake Ontario Respecting .. etc.

Modern Geology may disagree. You and others may laugh. But apparently there's something that points to Lake Ontario being volcanic, in part; if you read further from Page 367. It's deeper than the other Great Lakes, has a steep shoreline in parts, etc.. Maybe this leans toward the City of Moroni (in the east) sinking into the sea. The USGS notes fault lines/quakes -albeit small- in the Great Lakes area.

(Josiah Priest was essentially a contemporary of Stephens. Stephens discovered Maya cities are younger than the Book of Mormon timeline. So they are both just as credible, correct?)

This site give some credence to it:http://fishgator.com...f-lake-ontario/

This site notes a fault line at the bottom of the lake: http://newsrelease.u...news.php?id=235

This notes a 5.0 quake in June 2010: http://earthquake.us...7/us/index.html

I don't give much credence, anymore, to these fantastic timelines of "millions of years" when in 1980 - The National Geographic published an article about Mount St. Helens. In the article it mentioned that the "strata" laid down by that volcano amazed the scientists then - as similar strata found at other volcanic locations were thought to take millions of years to be laid down - yet it only took hours by St. Helens. I can't find the article, maybe someone can. I'm digging here, I know, bringing it up without a link. But I wouldn't put quakes in the eastern US out of the realm of possibility. Especially given the ash in Nebraska said to come from a Caldera in Idaho/Wyoming and in which are buried animals (mammals). http://ashfall.unl.edu/

The mists of darkness could have been volcanic gases as the text states many were "overpowered by the vapor of smoke." (3 Ne. 10:13) Thus, those overcome by gas would be closer to an eruption(s) than those from ash - generally speaking. Mt. Saint Helens sent ash farther than its destructive pyroclastic gas cloud, if you will. So a volcanic explosion near a Mesoamerica city would kill more people than say, a huge eruption(s) in western North America which would send ash miles away. There is no mention of quakes before or after 3 Nephi. Which would make "trembling, volcanic" Mesoamerica the unlikely location.

Priest, in his book, mentions Niagara Falls being formed by an earthquake. He's speculating. Modern geology disagrees (glaciation). But if the Falls had not been there Mulekites maybe could have navigated up the St. Lawerence to the Lakes? It's a thought. Laugh away. The Book of Mormon says Lehi was brought to the south. Mulek to the North. (Ether 1:1 & Helaman 6:10). Their descendants eventually met in the Land of Zarahemla which was north of the Land of Nephi.

As an Autistic who's passion topic used to be volcanoes, I'd like to say something about this.

None of the books I have read have said things about Lake Ontario being related to volcanic eruptions. In fact... in my 'Volcanoes of North America' book, no recent (in geological terms) volcanic eruptions is listed further east than New Mexico/Wyoming(it's called Rayton-Clayton and it had eruptions 8.2 Ma, 7.2 to 2.2 Ma, and 1.9 Ma to ~2.3 ka ago).

If we go to Wikipedia, which has an even broader aspect in list of volanic activity, there is only five'eastern' volcanic eruptions recorded. One is in Missippi, and is called 'Jackson Volcano' and it erupted 65 million years ago. One in Missouri is called Taum Sauk Caldera and it erupted 1.5 bya. Two in New Hampshire are called Pawtuckaway Mountains (Devonian) and Ossipee Mountains (Devonian). And finally in South Dakota we have Bear Butte.

None of these volcanoes, according to ash deposits (and some, such as Bear Butte do not have ash deposits), erupted in the time period of about 2000 years ago. So, looking at that, we must realize that if it is in the area Meldrum thinks it is A) it needs be a large enough rating on the VEI scale in order to spread enough ash and B) it needs to have an injection into the atmosphere in order to spread large distances. This speaks that the eruption must have been greater than about a 6. Luckily for us, we have a list of most of the '6's that occurred during this time period. There are 51 '6's in the last 10,000 years. If we look at the '6's located around 0 AD, we come up with Mount Vesuvius (Italy 79 AD, not possible), Mount Churchill (Alaska, 60 AD, not possible), Ambrym (Vanatu, 50 AD, not possible), and Apoyeque (Nicragua 50 BC, not possible). All of these locations are not possible due to location in relative to the target, Missouri.

As of such, considering that in order for there to be ash thick enough to be non seen, there must be either A) a volcano with VEI 3 or greater that we do not know about in the American East (very unlikely) or B) a volcano with VEI 6 or greater that has not revealed significant ash deposits in recorded geology (almost impossible). Thus, I see Meldrum's theory as being in somewhat of a pickle.

Now, let's talk about Earthquakes... Earthquakes do not always happen in areas where volcanoes are active, they happen wherever faults are. Here in OC (SoCal), I get many many Earthquakes, yet the closest 'geographically recent volcanic activity' is over 2 hours away. It hasn't erupted in millions of years. If we look in the Missouri/Illinois area, we can see that faults and earthquakes are quite common, and are very violent (quake of 1811/1812). (See New Madrid Seismic Zone/Wabash Valley Seismic Zone). As of such, it is not wise to predict a volcanic eruption for the area considering what bad earthquakes we have had in the area (some of the highest on record) unaccompanied by an eruption of this 'unrecorded volcano'.

Another thing... about pyroclastic flows. They travel far - but not that far. The largest I was able to find produced normally traveled only 48 miles. For farther traveling flows, you need something much larger - a large caldera collapse - and they usually accompany VEIs 6+ (which would be easy to detect). Large caldera collapses produce flows (although they can't really be considered flows anymore - they obliterate everything) that will go over 200 miles distance from the volcano (exe. Yellowstone's Huckleberry Ridge eruption).

The ashfall fossil bed you cite is an example of what happened during one of the two largest Yellowstone eruptions (there are three). They are 8 and 8/9 in VEI scale rating, meaning we would have ashfall evidence of them everywhere - from Southern California to New Hampshire. Also, ash would surround the globe in such a case meaning you would have detectable Crop Blights in other places.

As of such, I think Meldrum is going a bit out on limb to describe volcanic eruptions in the area. What would be ideal is to look at ashfall deposits in a lab of the area around Nauvoo, and to see if there is any detectable traces of ash from the time of around 0 AD give or take 100 years. But until he does that, I think it is rather futile to put it in that area, and say it's cause is a volcanic eruption. It could be something else, but volcanoes are rather outside of the picture.

Sorry if that was long and arduous... it's just volcanoes make me talk a lot. Too much actually =P XD.

Link to comment

I believe FARMS, and company, were cherry-picking quotes by early Church Leaders, long before Meldrum came onto "the scene." Go to MaxwellInstitute.org. There are articles older than Meldrum's materials. Meldrum is just a reaction to it and attempting to reconcile a geographical location in harmony, if you will, of statements made by early Church Leaders about North America. That's my take on it, anyway. If Joseph Smith mentioned both North America and Central America, then it must be a Hemispheric model. No? But FARMS disagrees: it all occurred in Mesoamerica, they say. You're conceding that both parties are cherry-picking. (I don't understand why some Lamanites could not have moved south, into Central and South America, while others chased the Nephites to the North.)

Anyway, sure, I'm interested in the material. Thanks!

Actually, I learned about Zelph and Joseph Smiths comments about a North American setting through FARMS, now the Neal A Maxwell Institute. And they have never denied that Joseph Smith taught the BOM happening in North America because it disagrees with their geography. Meldrum denies any comment that disagrees with him. That is nothing short of dishonest. He only accepts facts, or pseudo-facts, when they agree with him and denies anything that goes against what he already believes. That is the antithesis for scholarship and the search for truth.

I COMPLETELY agree with you that Joseph Smith believed and taught a Hemispheric geography for The Book of Mormon. He placed it all over the map and neither Meosamericanists or Meldrumites can claim that he only supports their view. I am glad to see that you recognize that. But does that mean it is true? Since Joseph Smith was speculating on it's whereabouts, what is the difference between his views and later Prophets who thought it happened in Central America?

Link to comment

As an Autistic who's passion topic used to be volcanoes, I'd like to say something about this.

None of the books I have read have said things about Lake Ontario being related to volcanic eruptions. In fact... in my 'Volcanoes of North America' book, no recent (in geological terms) volcanic eruptions is listed further east than New Mexico/Wyoming(it's called Rayton-Clayton and it had eruptions 8.2 Ma, 7.2 to 2.2 Ma, and 1.9 Ma to ~2.3 ka ago).

If we go to Wikipedia, which has an even broader aspect in list of volanic activity, there is only five'eastern' volcanic eruptions recorded. One is in Missippi, and is called 'Jackson Volcano' and it erupted 65 million years ago. One in Missouri is called Taum Sauk Caldera and it erupted 1.5 bya. Two in New Hampshire are called Pawtuckaway Mountains (Devonian) and Ossipee Mountains (Devonian). And finally in South Dakota we have Bear Butte.

None of these volcanoes, according to ash deposits (and some, such as Bear Butte do not have ash deposits), erupted in the time period of about 2000 years ago. So, looking at that, we must realize that if it is in the area Meldrum thinks it is A) it needs be a large enough rating on the VEI scale in order to spread enough ash and B) it needs to have an injection into the atmosphere in order to spread large distances. This speaks that the eruption must have been greater than about a 6. Luckily for us, we have a list of most of the '6's that occurred during this time period. There are 51 '6's in the last 10,000 years. If we look at the '6's located around 0 AD, we come up with Mount Vesuvius (Italy 79 AD, not possible), Mount Churchill (Alaska, 60 AD, not possible), Ambrym (Vanatu, 50 AD, not possible), and Apoyeque (Nicragua 50 BC, not possible). All of these locations are not possible due to location in relative to the target, Missouri.

As of such, considering that in order for there to be ash thick enough to be non seen, there must be either A) a volcano with VEI 3 or greater that we do not know about in the American East (very unlikely) or B) a volcano with VEI 6 or greater that has not revealed significant ash deposits in recorded geology (almost impossible). Thus, I see Meldrum's theory as being in somewhat of a pickle.

Now, let's talk about Earthquakes... Earthquakes do not always happen in areas where volcanoes are active, they happen wherever faults are. Here in OC (SoCal), I get many many Earthquakes, yet the closest 'geographically recent volcanic activity' is over 2 hours away. It hasn't erupted in millions of years. If we look in the Missouri/Illinois area, we can see that faults and earthquakes are quite common, and are very violent (quake of 1811/1812). (See New Madrid Seismic Zone/Wabash Valley Seismic Zone). As of such, it is not wise to predict a volcanic eruption for the area considering what bad earthquakes we have had in the area (some of the highest on record) unaccompanied by an eruption of this 'unrecorded volcano'.

Another thing... about pyroclastic flows. They travel far - but not that far. The largest I was able to find produced normally traveled only 48 miles. For farther traveling flows, you need something much larger - a large caldera collapse - and they usually accompany VEIs 6+ (which would be easy to detect). Large caldera collapses produce flows (although they can't really be considered flows anymore - they obliterate everything) that will go over 200 miles distance from the volcano (exe. Yellowstone's Huckleberry Ridge eruption).

The ashfall fossil bed you cite is an example of what happened during one of the two largest Yellowstone eruptions (there are three). They are 8 and 8/9 in VEI scale rating, meaning we would have ashfall evidence of them everywhere - from Southern California to New Hampshire. Also, ash would surround the globe in such a case meaning you would have detectable Crop Blights in other places.

As of such, I think Meldrum is going a bit out on limb to describe volcanic eruptions in the area. What would be ideal is to look at ashfall deposits in a lab of the area around Nauvoo, and to see if there is any detectable traces of ash from the time of around 0 AD give or take 100 years. But until he does that, I think it is rather futile to put it in that area, and say it's cause is a volcanic eruption. It could be something else, but volcanoes are rather outside of the picture.

Sorry if that was long and arduous... it's just volcanoes make me talk a lot. Too much actually =P XD.

Excellent post, TAO. Thank you for posting this!

Link to comment

Actually, I learned about Zelph and Joseph Smiths comments about a North American setting through FARMS, now the Neal A Maxwell Institute. And they have never denied that Joseph Smith taught the BOM happening in North America because it disagrees with their geography. Meldrum denies any comment that disagrees with him. That is nothing short of dishonest. He only accepts facts, or pseudo-facts, when they agree with him and denies anything that goes against what he already believes. That is the antithesis for scholarship and the search for truth.

I COMPLETELY agree with you that Joseph Smith believed and taught a Hemispheric geography for The Book of Mormon. He placed it all over the map and neither Meosamericanists or Meldrumites can claim that he only supports their view. I am glad to see that you recognize that. But does that mean it is true? Since Joseph Smith was speculating on it's whereabouts, what is the difference between his views and later Prophets who thought it happened in Central America?

They never denied? They explained it away, 1999:

"If the history of the church were to be revised today using modern historical standards, readers would be informed that Joseph Smith wrote nothing about the discovery of Zelph, and that the account of uncovering the skeleton in Pike County is based on the diaries of seven members of Zion's Camp, some of which were written long after the event took place. We would be assured that the members of Zion's Camp dug up a skeleton near the Illinois River in early June 1834. Equally sure is that Joseph Smith made statements about the deceased person and his historical setting. We would learn that it is unclear which statements attributed to him derived from his vision, as opposed to being implied or surmised either by him or by others. Nothing in the diaries suggests that the mound itself was discovered by revelation."

http://maxwellinstit...=8&num=2&id=202; 1999

According to "modern historical standards," apparently, there would be no History of the Church. LOL! All because of a Mesoamerica Theory, not Meldrum.

Link to comment

No, the NEVER denied it. Show me one example of them EVER denying that Joseph Smith never taught a North American setting for The Book of Mormon. You cannot. In fact, I just did a search of several known statements from Joseph Smith placing the BOM in North America and got numerous hits. For trying to hide/deny/explain away this, they sure write about it a lot.

The quote you show says nothing that it did not happen, just that if we were to use modern standards, it would say "Joseph Smith wrote nothing about the discovery of Zelph, and that the account of uncovering the skeleton in Pike County is based on the diaries of seven members of Zion's Camp, some of which were written long after the event took place." Just as you quote. I am curious, how is this denying that the event happened? How is this wrong in ANY way, other than giving full disclosure? This type of methodology reeks of Meldrum, and if you would like to be taken seriously, you should avoid it at all cost.

So you cannot show that they ever did this. But, Meldrum on the other hand has written many times, made videos, and I have personally heard him say (and have several emails) that Joseph Smith only taught a North American setting for The Book of Mormon. Who is being honest here?

Also, a few paragraphs later it says "Still, other data seem to reflect a different view and make it uncertain just what geographical conception, if any single one, prevailed among the early church leaders. Evidently Joseph Smith's views on this matter were open to further knowledge. Thus in 1834, when Zelph was found, Joseph believed that the portion of America over which they had just traveled was "the plains of the Nephite," and that their bones were "proof" of the Book of Mormon's authenticity."

There he goes again, denying a North American geography theory. Oh wait....nevermind.

Link to comment

Also, you asked Anijen about his bold statement about the scholars in his video coming out against him. Here it is:

Written by the scholars interviewed for Meldrums film "Lost Civilizations of North America".

http://petra-archaeology.com/

January 4th, 2011

The following is a statement jointly authored by myself and the several other scholars indicated regarding our participation in the recent video production,

Link to comment

As an Autistic who's passion topic used to be volcanoes, I'd like to say something about this.

None of the books I have read have said things about Lake Ontario being related to volcanic eruptions. In fact... in my 'Volcanoes of North America' book, no recent (in geological terms) volcanic eruptions is listed further east than New Mexico/Wyoming(it's called Rayton-Clayton and it had eruptions 8.2 Ma, 7.2 to 2.2 Ma, and 1.9 Ma to ~2.3 ka ago).

If we go to Wikipedia, which has an even broader aspect in list of volanic activity, there is only five'eastern' volcanic eruptions recorded. One is in Missippi, and is called 'Jackson Volcano' and it erupted 65 million years ago. One in Missouri is called Taum Sauk Caldera and it erupted 1.5 bya. Two in New Hampshire are called Pawtuckaway Mountains (Devonian) and Ossipee Mountains (Devonian). And finally in South Dakota we have Bear Butte.

None of these volcanoes, according to ash deposits (and some, such as Bear Butte do not have ash deposits), erupted in the time period of about 2000 years ago. So, looking at that, we must realize that if it is in the area Meldrum thinks it is A) it needs be a large enough rating on the VEI scale in order to spread enough ash and B) it needs to have an injection into the atmosphere in order to spread large distances. This speaks that the eruption must have been greater than about a 6. Luckily for us, we have a list of most of the '6's that occurred during this time period. There are 51 '6's in the last 10,000 years. If we look at the '6's located around 0 AD, we come up with Mount Vesuvius (Italy 79 AD, not possible), Mount Churchill (Alaska, 60 AD, not possible), Ambrym (Vanatu, 50 AD, not possible), and Apoyeque (Nicragua 50 BC, not possible). All of these locations are not possible due to location in relative to the target, Missouri.

As of such, considering that in order for there to be ash thick enough to be non seen, there must be either A) a volcano with VEI 3 or greater that we do not know about in the American East (very unlikely) or B) a volcano with VEI 6 or greater that has not revealed significant ash deposits in recorded geology (almost impossible). Thus, I see Meldrum's theory as being in somewhat of a pickle.

Now, let's talk about Earthquakes... Earthquakes do not always happen in areas where volcanoes are active, they happen wherever faults are. Here in OC (SoCal), I get many many Earthquakes, yet the closest 'geographically recent volcanic activity' is over 2 hours away. It hasn't erupted in millions of years. If we look in the Missouri/Illinois area, we can see that faults and earthquakes are quite common, and are very violent (quake of 1811/1812). (See New Madrid Seismic Zone/Wabash Valley Seismic Zone). As of such, it is not wise to predict a volcanic eruption for the area considering what bad earthquakes we have had in the area (some of the highest on record) unaccompanied by an eruption of this 'unrecorded volcano'.

Another thing... about pyroclastic flows. They travel far - but not that far. The largest I was able to find produced normally traveled only 48 miles. For farther traveling flows, you need something much larger - a large caldera collapse - and they usually accompany VEIs 6+ (which would be easy to detect). Large caldera collapses produce flows (although they can't really be considered flows anymore - they obliterate everything) that will go over 200 miles distance from the volcano (exe. Yellowstone's Huckleberry Ridge eruption).

The ashfall fossil bed you cite is an example of what happened during one of the two largest Yellowstone eruptions (there are three). They are 8 and 8/9 in VEI scale rating, meaning we would have ashfall evidence of them everywhere - from Southern California to New Hampshire. Also, ash would surround the globe in such a case meaning you would have detectable Crop Blights in other places.

As of such, I think Meldrum is going a bit out on limb to describe volcanic eruptions in the area. What would be ideal is to look at ashfall deposits in a lab of the area around Nauvoo, and to see if there is any detectable traces of ash from the time of around 0 AD give or take 100 years. But until he does that, I think it is rather futile to put it in that area, and say it's cause is a volcanic eruption. It could be something else, but volcanoes are rather outside of the picture.

Sorry if that was long and arduous... it's just volcanoes make me talk a lot. Too much actually =P XD.

Thanks for the input.

No I agree. There hasn't been any "recent" volcanic activity in the Eastern United States. But modern geology makes a lie out of the Book of Mormon. The cataclysm event involved more than volcanos and earthquakes. Plains were broken up, mountains/cities sunk, mountains cast up, whirlwinds, etc. Where is it taught in modern geology that the landscape change drastically some 2000 years ago either in North America or Mesoamerica? Yet, it appears to have been a universal event, given Nephi quoting Zenos about the "Kings of the Isles of the seas."

Is there any account of geological destruction in the Maya writings?

And all these things must surely come, saith the prophet Zenos. And the rocks of the earth must rend; and because of the groanings of the earth, many of the kings of the isles of the sea shall be wrought upon by the Spirit of God, to exclaim: The God of nature suffers.

The groanings of the earth were heard, not only locally, but almost universally.

Link to comment

Thanks for the input.

No I agree. There hasn't been any "recent" volcanic activity in the Eastern United States. But modern geology makes a lie out of the Book of Mormon. The cataclysm event involved more than volcanos and earthquakes. Plains were broken up, mountains/cities sunk, mountains cast up, whirlwinds, etc. Where is it taught in modern geology that the landscape change drastically some 2000 years ago either in North America or Mesoamerica? Yet, it appears to have been a universal event, given Nephi quoting Zenos about the "Kings of the Isles of the seas."

Is there any account of geological destruction in the Maya writings?

And all these things must surely come, saith the prophet Zenos. And the rocks of the earth must rend; and because of the groanings of the earth, many of the kings of the isles of the sea shall be wrought upon by the Spirit of God, to exclaim: The God of nature suffers.

The groanings of the earth were heard, not only locally, but almost universally.

I think that is a good question. I am no expert on the Maya by any stretch of the imagination, but do know that earthquakes were common in Mesoamerica. I know that they had a city called "earthquake", and had a god Cizin who was linked to earthquakes.

From a blog post I wrote a while back: "The Motagua fault line runs through several Central American countries and has been active since the Mayan times, as well as the Chixoy-Polochic fault line. Volcanoes, a result of seismic activity, are also found throughout Mesoamerica. Lund finds that

Link to comment

Thanks for the input.

No problem, glad to help =).

No I agree. There hasn't been any "recent" volcanic activity in the Eastern United States. But modern geology makes a lie out of the Book of Mormon. The cataclysm event involved more than volcanos and earthquakes. Plains were broken up, mountains/cities sunk, mountains cast up, whirlwinds, etc. Where is it taught in modern geology that the landscape change drastically some 2000 years ago either in North America or Mesoamerica? Yet, it appears to have been a universal event, given Nephi quoting Zenos about the "Kings of the Isles of the seas."

I think there actually, all that might be necessary would be a volcanic eruption and a hurricane occuring at relatively the same time. Volcanic Eruptions can brek up plains and mountains very well, as can earthquakes. A hurricane would be needed for the whirlwinds and such, perhaps, but I guess that could also be done with a volcano if it created an intense and thick enough ashcloud. Also, some earthquakes can be felt on the other side of the world (near to the exact opposite point) rather strongly - so it may have been two intersecting earthquakes on the opposite side of the world, or the same earthquake shaking both places.

Is there any account of geological destruction in the Maya writings?

I don't know - I haven't done very much research on Mayan writings. There are other people here who know alot about it though... a few of them look in alot of Mayan folklore and the like.

And all these things must surely come, saith the prophet Zenos. And the rocks of the earth must rend; and because of the groanings of the earth, many of the kings of the isles of the sea shall be wrought upon by the Spirit of God, to exclaim: The God of nature suffers.

The groanings of the earth were heard, not only locally, but almost universally.

I think this may have been multiple intersecting disasters, perhaps... but I'll have to do more reasearch.

At any rate, here are some possible volcano candidates for Central/South America possibilities.

-Apoyeque (VEI 6)

-Turrialba (VEI 4)

Calbuco (VEI ?)

-Cayame (VEI 3)

El Chichon (VEI ?)

Those are each within approximately 50 years of 34 AD, which means they are possibilities. And I think there were some I didn't listed, because other eruptions on the chart have +-200 years, and I didn't do all that much searching.

But I guess there is a lot of data to look at =D.

EDIT: Oh yah, I like Apyeque a lot... it is next to lots of water which makes it fit well =). And it's big enough to effect a large area. But it is kinda off on date, so I don't know (50BC +-100 years or so).

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...