Did Joseph Smith place the ancient city Manti in Missouri?

[livy111us]

Porter and Meldrum claim that Joseph Smith declared the ancient Book of Mormon city of Manti to be located near Huntsville, Randolph County, Missouri. They cite two documents as support. The first is an entry from the journal of Samuel D. Tyler, a Latter-day Saint who traveled with the Kirtland Camp to Missouri in 1838.?89 The second is an excerpt from the Manuscript History of the Church.90 Based upon these two references, the authors claim, "The Prophet Joseph, according to these diary accounts, revealed where the Book of Mormon city of Manti was located" (p. 110). Tyler's journal for 25 September 1838 reads as follows:

We passed thro Huntsville, Co. seat Randolph Co. Pop. 450 & three miles further we bought 32 bu. of corn of one of the brethren who resides in this place (66) There are several of the brethren round about here & this is the ancient site of the City of Manti, which is spoken of in the Book of Mormon & this is appointed one of the Stakes of Zion and it is in Randolph Co. Mo. 3 miles west of the Co. seat.91

Contrary to the authors' belief, there is no evidence that Tyler was reporting something he heard Joseph Smith say to the Kirtland Camp. In fact, the Prophet was not even present at the time. He did not travel with the Kirtland Camp from Ohio to Missouri but was already living in Far West, several counties away.?92 Tyler never explains where he heard this information, nor does he attribute the ideas about the city Manti to Joseph Smith or a revelation on Book of Mormon geography. What was the source of this local hearsay? Was it based upon something Joseph Smith said, or does it reflect speculation among the local brethren? How accurately was it reported? The Tyler journal does not provide answers for these questions.

The second source the authors cite as evidence that ancient Manti was in Missouri is the Manuscript History of the Church. The relevant entry, for 25 September 1838, reads as follows:

The camp passed through Huntsville in Randolph County which has been appointed as one of the stakes of Zion, and is the ancient site of the City of Manti and pitched tents at Dark Creek, Salt Licks, seventeen miles. It was reported to the camp that one hundred and ten men had volunteered from Randolph and gone to Far West to settle difficulties.93

This second source, however, is not a contemporary journal written by the Prophet or by anyone else in the Kirtland Camp in 1838; it was actually written by Willard Richards after the Prophet's death. Comparative evidence suggests that Richards's entry was based upon the Tyler journal entry.

Tyler Journal,

25 September 1838

Manuscript History, 1843?

We passed thro Huntsville, Co. seat Randolph Co. Pop. 450 & three miles further we bought 32 bu. of corn of one of the brethren who resides in this place (66) There are several of the brethren round about here & this is the ancient site of the City of Manti, which is spoken of in the Book of Mormon & this is appointed one of the Stakes of Zion & it is in Randolph Co. Mo. 3 miles west of the Co. seat. We progressed on 3 miles further to Dark Creek, Salt Licks, & pitched. . . . 17 miles. 733 + 17 = 750 Miles. . . . We hear that 110 men have volunteered to save being drafted & have gone from this Co. to Far West to settle some disturbances between the Missourians & Mormons & that they are collecting forces from many other Co's to settle perhaps they know not what themselves.

The camp passed through Hunts ville in Randolph County which has been appointed as one of the stakes of Zion, and is the ancient site of the City of Manti and pitched tents at Dark Creek, Salt Licks, seventeen miles. It was reported to the camp that one hundred and ten men had volunteered from Randolph and gone to Far West to settle difficulties.

When this portion of the history was first published in the Millennial Star in 1854, the entry read essentially the same as it did in Richards's handwritten manuscript.94 However, when church historian Andrew Jenson prepared it for publication in the Historical Record in 1888, he incorrectly assumed that the Prophet Joseph Smith was the source of this information. Consequently, Jenson inserted the words "which the Prophet said" immediately before the part of the sentence about Manti, making it read "which the Prophet said was the ancient site of the city of Manti."?95

Fortunately, there is another source, not cited by the authors, that sheds light upon the question. Elias Smith, a cousin to Joseph Smith, also kept a contemporary journal of the travels and activities of the Kirtland Camp. On this same day, 25 September 1838, he recorded the following:

We came through Huntsville the county seat of Randolph where we were told before we arrived there we should be stopped but saw nothing of the kind when we came through the town and heard no threats whatever, but all appeared friendly. 11/2 miles west of Huntsville we crossed the east branch of Chariton and 11/2 miles west of the river we found Ira Ames and some other brethren near the place where the city of Manti is to be built and encamped for the night on Dark creek 6 miles from Huntsville.96

Elias Smith did not equate the land near Huntsville, Missouri, with the ancient location of Manti, but he indicated that this was the place where a future settlement named after the ancient one was "to be built." In light of the above, it would appear that the Missouri Saints in 1838 initially anticipated the establishment of a future settlement and stake of Zion in the region, much as they did later with the Zarahemla settlement in Iowa. Neither the Samuel Tyler nor Elias Smith journals, however, attribute these plans to any prophetic revelation on ancient Book of Mormon geography.

When church historian B. H. Roberts was preparing the History of the Church for publication, he reviewed original sources upon which the Manuscript History was based and revised parts of the narrative accordingly. Although it was apparently unavailable to earlier historians who wrote the Manuscript History, Roberts utilized the Elias Smith account instead of the portion of the Manuscript History based upon the Tyler journal. The entry for 25 September 1838, as first published in 1905 and all subsequent editions of the History of the Church, says that the village of Huntsville, Missouri, was "near the place where the city of Manti is to be built."?97 Any attribution to the Prophet Joseph Smith or to Huntsville being the location of the ancient site was removed. Church leaders apparently felt that the words "the place where the city of Manti is to be built"

[Anijen]

livy111us

Thanks. This is an important concept to notice what we see today was also occuring back then. Mainly the expansion of speculation which evolved into a "truth." For example on these boards we can read a statement were one poster announces in factual tones that all of the prophets since Joseph have declared the Hill Cumorah in NY the place of the final battle. We see the same thing here were most likely due to their excitement and from traditional assumption the Book of Mormon events occurred right there in New York one brethren may say something (offering an opinion) another hears it is excited recounts it later probably unintentionally embellishing it and it grows from every retelling etc before you know it the original opinion has turned into a first hand factual account by the Prophet. I remember hearing about coinage in the Book of Mormon it actually uses that term (in the chapter heading). Some good intentioned members would vouch for the BofM in the Ohio valley when a coin was found in the Tennessee river that dated back to the Roman Empire. Although a little critical thinking could go along way sometimes in excitement logic is thrown out the window. Was this coin a fake? Was it an actual time era coin of the Roman Empire but later placed into the river? These are questions that the ilk of Meldrum, Porter, May do not want to ask. Well the truth sometimes is hard to swallow; No Joesph was not even there when this conversation was supposedly given, No all the prophets from Joseph on have declared NY the place of the final battle, the coinage was in a chapter heading (by BRM) and has since been removed, and finally the coin found in the Tennessee river was a fake.

[Zakuska]

Got to love the telephone game in action!

[Bob Crockett]

Some more of my favorite inspiritional quotes to show that the Brethren know more:

Regarding the Toronto Temple, "I noted that in Moroni's hand was his familiar trumpet. He was gazing homeward, homeward to Cumorah." Thomas S. Monson, CR Nov. 1990, p. 67.

"As the fighting neared its end, Mormon gathered the remnant of his forces about a hill they called Cumorah, located in what is now the western part of New York." Mark E. Peterson, CR Nov. 1978, p. 57.

"In the western part of the state of New York near Palymra is a prominent hill known as the 'hill Cumorah.' On July twenty-fifth of this year, as I stood on the crest of that hill admiring with awe the breathtaking panoroma which stretched out before me on every hand, my mind revereetd to the events which ocurred in that vicinity some twenty-five centureds ago -- events which brought an end the great Jaredite nation." Pres. Marion G. Romney, CR, Nov. 1975, p. 35.

I also bring your attention to the various speeches and sermons made in General Conference in 1928 shortly after the Church "a cquired and dedicated the Hill Cumorah. President Ivins started his sermon with the following words:

"It [the dedication of the Hill Cumorah site] appeares to be an event of such importance that I desire to devote the short time which is at my disposal this morning to a discussion of the subject. . . .

After referring to the last battles of the Jaredites and the Nephites, Pres. Ivins said: "All of these incidents to which I have referred, my brothers and sisters, are very closely associated with this particular spot in the State of New York. Therefore I feel, as I said in the beginning of my remarks, that the acquisition of that spot of ground is more than an incident in the history of the Church."

After referring to the hill as the same as Ramah and the site of the final Nephite battle, "[w]e know positively that it was in this hill that Moroni deposited the abrigement . . . ." Pres. Anthony Ivins, CR April. 1928, p. 13.

Are there any general conference sermons which support, even implicitly, the supposition that the final battles of Ramah and Cumorah took place somewhere other than in NY?

[livy111us]

Some more of my favorite inspiritional quotes to show that the Brethren know more:

Regarding the Toronto Temple, "I noted that in Moroni's hand was his familiar trumpet. He was gazing homeward, homeward to Cumorah." Thomas S. Monson, CR Nov. 1990, p. 67.

"As the fighting neared its end, Mormon gathered the remnant of his forces about a hill they called Cumorah, located in what is now the western part of New York." Mark E. Peterson, CR Nov. 1978, p. 57.

"In the western part of the state of New York near Palymra is a prominent hill known as the 'hill Cumorah.' On July twenty-fifth of this year, as I stood on the crest of that hill admiring with awe the breathtaking panoroma which stretched out before me on every hand, my mind revereetd to the events which ocurred in that vicinity some twenty-five centureds ago -- events which brought an end the great Jaredite nation." Pres. Marion G. Romney, CR, Nov. 1975, p. 35.

I also bring your attention to the various speeches and sermons made in General Conference in 1928 shortly after the Church "a cquired and dedicated the Hill Cumorah. President Ivins started his sermon with the following words:

"It [the dedication of the Hill Cumorah site] appeares to be an event of such importance that I desire to devote the short time which is at my disposal this morning to a discussion of the subject. . . .

After referring to the last battles of the Jaredites and the Nephites, Pres. Ivins said: "All of these incidents to which I have referred, my brothers and sisters, are very closely associated with this particular spot in the State of New York. Therefore I feel, as I said in the beginning of my remarks, that the acquisition of that spot of ground is more than an incident in the history of the Church."

After referring to the hill as the same as Ramah and the site of the final Nephite battle, "[w]e know positively that it was in this hill that Moroni deposited the abrigement . . . ." Pres. Anthony Ivins, CR April. 1928, p. 13.

Are there any general conference sermons which support, even implicitly, the supposition that the final battles of Ramah and Cumorah took place somewhere other than in NY?

What does that have to do with the city Manti? If you want to argue the location of Cumorah, there are threads dedicated to that topic.

[thesometimesaint]

livy111us:

Though plenty of personal speculations abound, the short and long answer is that, to date, there are no lands(cities), or other cultural artifacts, of the Nephites/Lamanites civilizations in the New World that are recognized/accepted by the Church.

[Nenahnezad]

What does that have to do with the city Manti? If you want to argue the location of Cumorah, there are threads dedicated to that topic.

It has everything to do with the City of Manti. According to the LGT theory postulated by FARMS, etc., Nephite locations were limited to a small area in Mesoamerica. Thus the Hill Cumorah being pronounced as being in New York would place the City of Manti outside of Mesoamerica. It's a geographical marker. General Authorities have not declared the Hill Cumorah to be in Veracruz, Mexico. That's an old sectarian notion. That hill is volcanic, surrounded by cinder cones, all originating from a nearby large volcano.

[Pahoran]

It has everything to do with the City of Manti.

The thread originator gets to decide on the boundaries of the discussion that are permissible for the thread. And indeed, if you read the OP, you can see that the thread has a fairly narrow focus. It's not discussing where the ancient city of Manti was, it's discussing whether Joseph Smith named any US location as Manti.

And it demonstrates -- to my entire satisfaction -- that the evidence that he did so is late and second-hand. The closer we get to the original statement, the clearer it becomes that a future settlement, to be named Manti, is what was under discussion.

According to the LGT theory postulated by FARMS, etc., Nephite locations were limited to a small area in Mesoamerica. Thus the Hill Cumorah being pronounced as being in New York would place the City of Manti outside of Mesoamerica. It's a geographical marker. General Authorities have not declared the Hill Cumorah to be in Veracruz, Mexico. That's an old sectarian notion. That hill is volcanic, surrounded by cinder cones, all originating from a nearby large volcano.

Actually the only "old sectarian notion" in view is the one that asserts that GA's repeating an unexamined tradition represent some kind of doctrinal or revelatory "declaration." For instance, when they equate the New York drumlin with Mormon's Cumorah. The First Presidency has repeatedly affirmed that no Book of Mormon geography has been revealed; therefore, every one of the GA statements prooftexted in support of an unscholarly and unscientific geographical theory is being misused for that purpose.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Anijen]

It has everything to do with the City of Manti. According to the LGT theory postulated by FARMS, etc., Nephite locations were limited to a small area in Mesoamerica. Thus the Hill Cumorah being pronounced as being in New York would place the City of Manti outside of Mesoamerica. It's a geographical marker. General Authorities have not declared the Hill Cumorah to be in Veracruz, Mexico. That's an old sectarian notion. That hill is volcanic, surrounded by cinder cones, all originating from a nearby large volcano.

However the hill Cumorah has never been pronounced as being in New York (as far as it being the place of the events in the Book of Mormon) Yes the hill in NY has and is confirmed where Joseph retrieved the plates from Moroni in which is where he buried them. Out of the 22 times Moroni visited Joseph Smith not once did he confirm to him that was the hill of the final battle or of any other event in the Book of Mormon.

[livy111us]

There are also Mesoamerican theorists who believe that Ramah/Cumorah was in New York, and battles pushed the Nephites and Lamanites up to that area. It has absolutely nothing to do with the original post.

[Nenahnezad]

There are also Mesoamerican theorists who believe that Ramah/Cumorah was in New York, and battles pushed the Nephites and Lamanites up to that area. It has absolutely nothing to do with the original post.

Ok. There are also Mesoamerica Theorists that believe Moroni traveled to the Hill Cumorah as a resurrected being, an Angel, flying through the air, carrying the plates, from Mesoamerica. So what I understand from this thread and replies, is that no one at the Maxwell Institute knows where anything is, Manti or Cumorah, in either North or Central America. And that they have as many versions of their Mesoamerica Theory as they claim there are versions of Early Church History?

So why is Meldrum the only one wrong around here? It's ok to be wrong about the many variants of Mesoamerica? But when it comes to North America, the early saints recorded it incorrectly? So let's pounce only on them - play on off of the other by quoting journals - a bunch of dead people who can no longer defend themselves?

I don't see anyone arguing about the location of the City of Manti in Mesoamerica. Maybe because no one really cares? Just as long as it's there, somewhere in the jungles? That's good enough? Even though FARMS has admitted "the Nephites were not the Maya" ? And they can't agree on the location of the River Sidon in Mesoamerica?

I don't get it. Or maybe I do. Just making an observation.

[livy111us]

Ok. There are also Mesoamerica Theorists that believe Moroni traveled to the Hill Cumorah as a resurrected being, an Angel, flying through the air, carrying the plates, from Mesoamerica. So what I understand from this thread and replies, is that no one at the Maxwell Institute knows where anything is, Manti or Cumorah, in either North or Central America. And that they have as many versions of their Mesoamerica Theory as they claim there are versions of Early Church History?

So why is Meldrum the only one wrong around here? It's ok to be wrong about the many variants of Mesoamerica? But when it comes to North America, the early saints recorded it incorrectly? So let's pounce only on them - play on off of the other by quoting journals - a bunch of dead people who can no longer defend themselves?

I don't see anyone arguing about the location of the City of Manti in Mesoamerica. Maybe because no one really cares? Just as long as it's there, somewhere in the jungles? That's good enough? Even though FARMS has admitted "the Nephites were not the Maya" ? And they can't agree on the location of the River Sidon in Mesoamerica?

I don't get it. Or maybe I do. Just making an observation.

I doubt that Moroni had to fly through the air to get to the New York Cumorah. If he had to get them there, he would have just taken a bus

The reason why there are differing opinions is because there is no revealed doctrine on the subject. That only leaves speculation. Until there is something revealed, then you will have several different theories. And don't worry, there are just as many theories of it happening in North America as well.

Meldrum is the epitome of bad scholarship and is attacking actual scholars who have gone to school for many years and earned doctorates. He does not have any schooling whatsoever, except in marketing (Hhhmmmmmm.....). He is making A LOT of money from this theory, and disregards facts and evidence. If there is anyone like that in the Church, no matter what they are promoting, they will get the same kind of attention. On lesser scales, Mesoamerican theorists have disregarded facts, and BYU has written articles concerning their fraudulent claims. This is not a Mesoamerican vs North American geography, it is about honesty and integrity.

[thesometimesaint]

Moroni had about 20 years to walk from Mesoamerica to what was to become New York.

[Bob Crockett]

However the hill Cumorah has never been pronounced as being in New York (as far as it being the place of the events in the Book of Mormon)

If you ignore members of the First Presidency (Romney and Ivins) and a Q12 President (Smith) as well as a work still in publication (DoSalvation) I guess you're correct.

[Bob Crockett]

Meldrum is the epitome of bad scholarship and is attacking actual scholars who have gone to school for many years and earned doctorates. He does not have any schooling whatsoever, except in marketing (Hhhmmmmmm.....). He is making A LOT of money from this theory, and disregards facts and evidence. If there is anyone like that in the Church, no matter what they are promoting, they will get the same kind of attention. On lesser scales, Mesoamerican theorists have disregarded facts, and BYU has written articles concerning their fraudulent claims. This is not a Mesoamerican vs North American geography, it is about honesty and integrity.

I don't think Meldrum deserves this kind of abuse. "Facts and evidence" are not all that apparent. There are interesting theories and suppositions, but not enough to brand somebody who thinks otherwise a liar and a cheat.

[livy111us]

My guess is that if you've had the same experiences with him as I have, and have seen his true character, you may have a similar opinion about him. BTW, I have the evidence to back up my claims as well. I doubt I will ever share them. But trust him about as far as I can throw him.

[SkepticTheist]

Porter and Meldrum claim that Joseph Smith declared the ancient Book of Mormon city of Manti to be located near Huntsville, Randolph County, Missouri. They cite two documents as support.

As clarification, Meldrum and Porter took this theory from my book "This Land: Zarahemla and the Nephite Nation" that appeared in 2002 before he came along. But I retracted this theory. They still push it even though it is discredited.

Ed Goble

[Pahoran]

As clarification, Meldrum and Porter took this theory from my book "This Land: Zarahemla and the Nephite Nation" that appeared in 2002 before he came along. But I retracted this theory. They still push it even though it is discredited.

Ed Goble

Ed, a quick question: do you know whether or not Meldrum and Porter are aware that that book no longer represents your position? It just seems odd that anyone would embrace a theory knowing that its originator has discarded it.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

As clarification, Meldrum and Porter took this theory from my book "This Land: Zarahemla and the Nephite Nation" that appeared in 2002 before he came along. But I retracted this theory. They still push it even though it is discredited.

Ed Goble

THat is interesting, You should inform them of this and explain why it id discredited. Of course I doubt that will stop them from doing what they are doing.

[SkepticTheist]

THat is interesting, You should inform them of this and explain why it id discredited. Of course I doubt that will stop them from doing what they are doing.

Believe you me, it is not for lack of trying....

Ed Goble

[SkepticTheist]

Ed, a quick question: do you know whether or not Meldrum and Porter are aware that that book no longer represents your position? It just seems odd that anyone would embrace a theory knowing that its originator has discarded it.

Regards,

Pahoran

They are both to some degree teamed up with Wayne May who was the co-author of my book who still pushes the theory as well. May still publishes that book too.

Yes, Meldrum is well aware. I know Meldrum and have talked with him face to face. I don't know whether Porter is all that aware of these facts.

Ed

[SkepticTheist]

They are both to some degree teamed up with Wayne May who was the co-author of my book who still pushes the theory as well. May still publishes that book too.

Yes, Meldrum is well aware. I know Meldrum and have talked with him face to face. I don't know whether Porter is all that aware of these facts.

Ed

Oh, and another clarification. I have talked with Porter face to face too, but not about this subject.

Ed