Nephi's Bow As Pagan Family Heirloom

[nosmelone]

So I recently read an article by Peter Cornswalled entitled, "Nephi's Broken Bow" in which he argues that the bow of Nephi should be recognized as a one of the "founding images of Christendom/Mormonism".  He states that many apologists and antagonists spend too much time arguing about if his bow was made with some sort of modern steel have completely missed the point.   He then goes on to stated that the use of the word steel is given to mean that it was a "strengthened" bow usually made of bronze and gives a handful of examples of Biblical versus that support this idea...including quoting William Hamblin on this idea from his article "Steel in the Book of Mormon". 

 

He then states that the metal bow Nephi had wouldn't have been a hunting bow used for technique and precision instead it would have either been a bow used for military war conquests used to shoot rapidly but without much precision (to stiff and inaccurate for hunting) or as some sort of family heirloom.  He notes that bows are not used in any known modern Jewish rituals but points out that they are used in a number of pagan rituals (but no examples given...and I was too lazy to search them myself) so it may have been some sort of pagan family heirloom or obtained from the spoils of King Laban when obtaining the plates.  Thus when Nephi breaks the bow while attempting to obtain food for the family it can be seen as a symbol that paganism cannot feed your soul.  It should be remembered that Jerusalem was condemned to destruction for turning away from God with wickedness pagan rituals.

 

I'll admit there is much more to the article that I have described here, and the idea is intriguing.  But does the idea of a pagan bow breaking in Nephi's hands at this desperate time seem logical? 

[thesometimesaint]

So I recently read an article by Peter Cornswalled entitled, "Nephi's Broken Bow" in which he argues that the bow of Nephi should be recognized as a one of the "founding images of Christendom/Mormonism".  He states that many apologists and antagonists spend too much time arguing about if his bow was made with some sort of modern steel have completely missed the point.   He then goes on to stated that the use of the word steel is given to mean that it was a "strengthened" bow usually made of bronze and gives a handful of examples of Biblical versus that support this idea...including quoting William Hamblin on this idea from his article "Steel in the Book of Mormon". 

 

He then states that the metal bow Nephi had wouldn't have been a hunting bow used for technique and precision instead it would have either been a bow used for military war conquests used to shoot rapidly but without much precision (to stiff and inaccurate for hunting) or as some sort of family heirloom.  He notes that bows are not used in any known modern Jewish rituals but points out that they are used in a number of pagan rituals (but no examples given...and I was too lazy to search them myself) so it may have been some sort of pagan family heirloom or obtained from the spoils of King Laban when obtaining the plates.  Thus when Nephi breaks the bow while attempting to obtain food for the family it can be seen as a symbol that paganism cannot feed your soul.  It should be remembered that Jerusalem was condemned to destruction for turning away from God with wickedness pagan rituals.

 

I'll admit there is much more to the article that I have described here, and the idea is intriguing.  But does the idea of a pagan bow breaking in Nephi's hands at this desperate time seem logical? 

 

I think its a bit of "creative" writing.

[bluebell]

I don't really get it.

 

The BOM text implies that the metal bow was the only thing feeding the family (since L&L had broken theirs' long ago) and that when Nephi lost it the family started to starve.

 

How does that fit in with the idea that metal bows were too inaccurate to hunt effectively?

[nosmelone]

  I'm guessing he is stating that historically that the use of bows fused with metal (usually bronze) were commonly associated with military weaponry and not with hunting.  He states that this was because the stiffness of the bow caused them to not be as precise when aiming. He states that historically the earliest examples of metal bows are found in India and these bows were small portable and could be used as a cudgel in hand to hand combat but were not terribly reliable as bows due largely to their short range and poor accuracy.  Other than these the only known used metal bows were ornamental bows used for decoration and ceremonial bows used in pagan rituals.  Because Nephi did not come from a family of warriors he assumes the second option of an ornamental bow used for pagan rituals.

Edited January 5, 2015 by nosmelone

[thesometimesaint]

  I'm guessing he is stating that historically that the use of bows fused with metal (usually bronze) were commonly associated with military weaponry and not with hunting.  He states that this was because the stiffness of the bow caused them to not be as precise when aiming. He states that historically the earliest examples of metal bows are found in India and these bows were small portable and could be used as a cudgel in hand to hand combat but were not terribly reliable as bows due largely to their short range and poor accuracy.  Other than these the only known used metal bows were ornamental bows used for decoration and ceremonial bows used in pagan rituals.  Because Nephi did not come from a family of warriors he assumes the second option of an ornamental bow used for pagan rituals.

 

Wooden bows in that type of environment tend to dry out unless well cared for. Even assuming that the Lehites weren't military types(We don't know either way) a metal bow does have some advantages over a wooden one. Certainly the shape as well as the materials used have considerable effects on the range and accuracy of any bow.

[The Nehor]

The "spoils of King Laban"?

Why would we assume pagan heirloom? Like cigars sometimes a bow is just a bow.

Edited January 5, 2015 by The Nehor

[nosmelone]

I think its a bit of "creative" writing.

although its an interesting idea, I tend to lean the same way you are.  I think he is taking some serious creative writing liberties in coming to these conclusions.

[nosmelone]

The "spoils of King Laban"?

Why would we assume pagan heirloom? Like cigars sometimes a bow is just a bow.

Yeah, I don't think it makes sense that he obtained it from King Laban while obtaining the plates....this goes back to the writing creativity thing.  But to be the devils advocate I guess the author is just stating that the only known bows with metal were either military or ornamental (usually used for pagan rituals) so he is technically only giving us these limited options.  But your right I suppose a bow could just be a bow.

[Kenngo1969]

Sounds like something that would be published by the New, "Improved" Maxwell Institute.

[Uncle Dale]

Sounds like something that would be published by the New, "Improved" Maxwell Institute.

 

Or by an "antiquities buff" back in 1820...

 

From a previous discussion of such oddities:

 

>On page 176 of his 1820 treatise, the amateur prehistorian Caleb Atwater says:

>"It is a matter of much regret that on no one of the articles yet found, has been

>discovered any letters, characters, or hieroglyphicks, which would point to what

>nation or age these people [mound-builders] belonged.

>

>I have been told by an eye witness, that a few years ago, near Blacksburgh in Virginia,

>eighty miles from Marietta, there was found about half of a STEEL BOW, which, when entire,

>would measure five or six feet; the other part was corroded or BROKEN...."

>

>For any reader of Atwater's report, from 1820 up through the present day, a browsing

>through the text in search of any reference to "letters, characters, or hieroglyphicks,"

>yields no other fruitful results than the suspicion that any ancient Americans capable

>of fabricating steel bows ought also to have been able to fabricate alphabets, books

>and libraries. The modern student of Atwater's writings comes away from his investigation

>of Description of the Antiquities pondering not only the lack of a prehistoric mound-builder

>literature, but also this odd evidence of a purported pre-Columbian metalurgical skill

>(which might have not only manufactured steel but have also turned that metal into

>weapons of the hunt and war).

>

>Novelist Cornelius Mathews must have been just such a ponderer of Atwater, for he

>incorporated steel bows into his 1839 tale, Behemouth, a Legend of the Mound-Builders

>(see page 33, for Mathews' fanciful description of "laboratories" where mound-builder

>smiths "wrought out large bows of steel, from which to speed the barbed arrows").

>Although Cornelius Mathews says nothing of prehistoric warriors breaking their bows in half,

>in the American wilderness, he does manage to paint a half convincing word picture of

>"the Mound-builders' instruments of war, namely, vast steel bows six feet or more in length

>and quivers filled with correspondent shafts." At the end of his novel, in the Notes section,

>Mathews refers his readers back to Atwater's 1820 mention of the Blacksburgh "steel bow"

>for "evidence as to the armor and weapons mentioned in the text."

 

UD

[Nevo]

Thus when Nephi breaks the bow while attempting to obtain food for the family it can be seen as a symbol that paganism cannot feed your soul. 

 

There probably is some symbolism in the broken bow narrative. But several things make it hard to credit the story as something that actually happened. Despite Psalm 18:34, a bow made of "fine steel" would not likely break in anyone's hands. As Professor Hamblin has noted, "a pure steel bow of the fourteenth-century-A.D. type . . . would be essentially impossible to break by human muscle power alone." Hamblin suggests that Nephi's bow of fine steel was actually "an ordinary wooden weapon decorated or reinforced in certain parts . . . with bronze." But was such a weapon ever used in ancient Israel? The three biblical references to a "bow of bronze" (Job 20:24; 2 Samuel 22:35; Psalm 18:34) are problematic. Further, as Aron Pinker has observed:

 

Neither [brass or bronze] is practical for construction of the bow's body, which has to be light and pliable. For the same reason the phrase cannot mean "brass or bronze plated bow" or "arc composite bound and/or inlaid with bronze." Metal plating of the body, even of ornamental kind, would undermine its pliability, increase its weight, and hamper aiming without adding any advantages. Perhaps, some ceremonial bows or bows used for votive purposes were of this kind. However, neither a metal bow nor a metal plated bow that was used for warfare has ever been found in any archeological excavations, though it would have had a better chance for preservation than the wood based bow." 

 

Even if we allow that Nephi somehow obtained (and used!) a heavy ornamental bow, there are other difficulties. Where did Nephi learn how to hunt and how did he acquire the know-how to create a functioning bow and arrow from two sticks? Did he receive training in archery in addition to receiving training as an elite Egyptian scribe and learning the metalworking trade? Why didn't Lehi's party just trade with the people that they met along the trail when food sources were scarce in the mountains? Etc. 

[ERayR]

  I'm guessing he is stating that historically that the use of bows fused with metal (usually bronze) were commonly associated with military weaponry and not with hunting.  He states that this was because the stiffness of the bow caused them to not be as precise when aiming. He states that historically the earliest examples of metal bows are found in India and these bows were small portable and could be used as a cudgel in hand to hand combat but were not terribly reliable as bows due largely to their short range and poor accuracy.  Other than these the only known used metal bows were ornamental bows used for decoration and ceremonial bows used in pagan rituals.  Because Nephi did not come from a family of warriors he assumes the second option of an ornamental bow used for pagan rituals.

 

I love assumptions.

[ERayR]

Sounds like something that would be published by the New, "Improved" Maxwell Institute.

 

Ohhhh!

[ERayR]

There probably is some symbolism in the broken bow narrative. But several things make it hard to credit the story as something that actually happened. Despite Psalm 18:34, a bow made of "fine steel" would not likely break in anyone's hands. As Professor Hamblin has noted, "a pure steel bow of the fourteenth-century-A.D. type . . . would be essentially impossible to break by human muscle power alone." Hamblin suggests that Nephi's bow of fine steel was actually "an ordinary wooden weapon decorated or reinforced in certain parts . . . with bronze." But was such a weapon ever used in ancient Israel? The three biblical references to a "bow of bronze" (Job 20:24; 2 Samuel 22:35; Psalm 18:34) are problematic. Further, as Aron Pinker has observed:

 

Neither [brass or bronze] is practical for construction of the bow's body, which has to be light and pliable. For the same reason the phrase cannot mean "brass or bronze plated bow" or "arc composite bound and/or inlaid with bronze." Metal plating of the body, even of ornamental kind, would undermine its pliability, increase its weight, and hamper aiming without adding any advantages. Perhaps, some ceremonial bows or bows used for votive purposes were of this kind. However, neither a metal bow nor a metal plated bow that was used for warfare has ever been found in any archeological excavations, though it would have had a better chance for preservation than the wood based bow." 

 

Even if we allow that Nephi somehow obtained (and used!) a heavy ornamental bow, there are other difficulties. Where did Nephi learn how to hunt and how did he acquire the know-how to create a functioning bow and arrow from two sticks? Did he receive training in archery in addition to receiving training as an elite Egyptian scribe and learning the metalworking trade? Why didn't Lehi's party just trade with the people that they met along the trail when food sources were scarce in the mountains? Etc. 

 

Flexing metal can and does cause metal fatigue which causes breakage.

[The Nehor]

Even if we allow that Nephi somehow obtained (and used!) a heavy ornamental bow, there are other difficulties. Where did Nephi learn how to hunt and how did he acquire the know-how to create a functioning bow and arrow from two sticks? Did he receive training in archery in addition to receiving training as an elite Egyptian scribe and learning the metalworking trade? Why didn't Lehi's party just trade with the people that they met along the trail when food sources were scarce in the mountains? Etc.

Nephi being able to use a bow seems simple. If his father led caravans it would not take much to learn how to shoot. I assume he learned how to make a bow the same way he learned how to build a ship. Perhaps he learned metalworking the same way.

The one oddity of the account is why did he need to make an arrow with his new bow. Why not use the arrows he already had and whatever arrows his brothers had left over?

As to why Lehi's party would not trade the area they were travelling in was not safe. Making friendly contact with people was probably not easy even discounting the danger. And if they did make contact what did they have to trade? Their wealth was all left at Laban's house. What they had they needed.

[Nevo]

Nephi being able to use a bow seems simple. If his father led caravans it would not take much to learn how to shoot.

Maybe it is simple. I've never hunted with a bow, metal or otherwise. If Lehi was a caravaneer, then Nephi's prowess with a bow seems more plausible. But "Lehi as caravaneer" seems to preclude "Lehi as metalsmith" and "Lehi as trained scribe"—the explanations usually invoked to explain how Nephi acquired his prowess in metallurgy and writing (in Egyptian no less!). I just find it hard to fathom how Nephi became expert at so many things at such a young age. Maybe I just lack imagination. In any case, the explanation that you suggest is probably the best one: because God.

[ERayR]

I just find it hard to fathom how Nephi became expert at so many things at such a young age. Maybe I just lack imagination. In any case, the explanation that you suggest is probably the best one: because God.

 

He was a precocious child.

[The Nehor]

Maybe it is simple. I've never hunted with a bow, metal or otherwise. If Lehi was a caravaneer, then Nephi's prowess with a bow seems more plausible. But "Lehi as caravaneer" seems to preclude "Lehi as metalsmith" and "Lehi as trained scribe"—the explanations usually invoked to explain how Nephi acquired his prowess in metallurgy and writing (in Egyptian no less!). I just find it hard to fathom how Nephi became expert at so many things at such a young age. Maybe I just lack imagination. In any case, the explanation that you suggest is probably the best one: because God.

Bow hunting is more difficult then hunting with a firearm but it is not that hard to pick up. People do it recreationally now. I suspect Lehi was a merchant who either achieved or always had wealth and prided himself on being educated and making sure his sons were educated as well. Some have tried to trace Lehi's life by what he named his children. Laman and Lemuel were desert names. Sam and Nephi are city names. Jacob and Joseph are religious names. So Laman and Lemuel were born when he was travelling a lot in caravans, Sam and Nephi were born when he was wealthy and more cultured and possibly travelled less, and his last two sons were born after his visions started. A lot of conjecture there admittedly.

It is also possible that Nephi was the most educated of Lehi's sons as he was around when Lehi had the wealth to spoil him more with education. He says he was trained in Egyptian and Jewish learning and language with no mention of the elder sons getting the same training. This may have aggravated Laman and Lemuel's hatred as he was viewed as an insufferable know-it-all. I admit that if I were in their shoes as Nephi's older brother I would have been tempted to clock him a few times if he acted the way he did. I like to think I would stop short of attempted murder though.

[Nevo]

He was a precocious child.

Indeed. For anyone else to have produced a text as long and as complex as 1&2 Nephi would have required many years of scribal training. Nephi goes even beyond his professional contemporaries by managing the feat in Egyptian. And not just Egyptian but an archaic form of Egyptian, and not on typical parchment scrolls but on metal plates that he fashioned himself from raw ore. In addition to pioneering long-form writing on metal plates, he also pioneers a new writing style, addressing his audience in his own voice ("I, Nephi...")—something that no other Israelite scribe would do before the Hellenistic era. And that's only scratching the surface of his many accomplishments.

[Nevo]

It is also possible that Nephi was the most educated of Lehi's sons as he was around when Lehi had the wealth to spoil him more with education.

Even though he was the youngest son, Nephi does seem to be the best educated—by a long shot. It's not even clear that Laman and Lemuel can read. There are some indications in 1 Nephi that they can't. Maybe Lehi's wealth was gained from commerce. I've seen other suggestions that he had ancestral lands that he collected rent on. Maybe he did both. He obviously had tents and pack animals on hand when he left Jerusalem. But how did he end up with gold, then? According to Jeffrey Chadwick, gold was extremely rare at the time. For Lehi to possess gold, Chadwick thinks he must have been a jeweller. But who knows? One can only speculate, while trying to make the best sense of the conflicting indicators in the text.

Edited January 6, 2015 by Nevo

[ERayR]

Indeed. For anyone else to have produced a text as long and as complex as 1&2 Nephi would have required many years of scribal training. Nephi goes even beyond his professional contemporaries by managing the feat in Egyptian. And not just Egyptian but an archaic form of Egyptian, and not on typical parchment scrolls but on metal plates that he fashioned himself from raw ore. In addition to pioneering long-form writing on metal plates, he also pioneers a new writing style, addressing his audience in his own voice ("I, Nephi...")—something that no other Israelite scribe would do before the Hellenistic era. And that's only scratching the surface of his many accomplishments.

 

I think you overstate things a bit and make assumptions according to your misunderstandings.

[ERayR]

One can only speculate, while trying to make the best sense of the conflicting indicators in the text.

 

Yuup.

[Nevo]

I think you overstate things a bit and make assumptions according to your misunderstandings.

In other words, we're posting on an Internet discussion board.

[morgan.deane]

So I recently read an article by Peter Cornswalled entitled, "Nephi's Broken Bow" in which he argues that the bow of Nephi should be recognized as a one of the "founding images of Christendom/Mormonism".  He states that many apologists and antagonists spend too much time arguing about if his bow was made with some sort of modern steel have completely missed the point.   He then goes on to stated that the use of the word steel is given to mean that it was a "strengthened" bow usually made of bronze and gives a handful of examples of Biblical versus that support this idea...including quoting William Hamblin on this idea from his article "Steel in the Book of Mormon". 

 

He then states that the metal bow Nephi had wouldn't have been a hunting bow used for technique and precision instead it would have either been a bow used for military war conquests used to shoot rapidly but without much precision (to stiff and inaccurate for hunting) or as some sort of family heirloom.  He notes that bows are not used in any known modern Jewish rituals but points out that they are used in a number of pagan rituals (but no examples given...and I was too lazy to search them myself) so it may have been some sort of pagan family heirloom or obtained from the spoils of King Laban when obtaining the plates.  Thus when Nephi breaks the bow while attempting to obtain food for the family it can be seen as a symbol that paganism cannot feed your soul.  It should be remembered that Jerusalem was condemned to destruction for turning away from God with wickedness pagan rituals.

 

I'll admit there is much more to the article that I have described here, and the idea is intriguing.  But does the idea of a pagan bow breaking in Nephi's hands at this desperate time seem logical? 

The idea of this as a family heirloom would be stronger if this item was mentioned later in the text. For example in the first chapter of Mosiah the king gives charge of sacred objects to his sons which included the records, the sword of Laban, and the Liahona. But no mention of the bow. https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/mosiah/1.16?lang=eng#15  Of course this could have been an heirloom of Lehi and his family prior to it, but I don't know why it wouldn't have continued if that was the case. These are people that kept other objects from their journey for 1,000 years. I think some of the other ideas on here are good as well, and for 99 cents I might buy a copy of it.  

[ERayR]

In other words, we're posting on an Internet discussion board.

 

Yep.