A Note about Wilderness

The term "wilderness" occurs over 200 times in the text of The Book of Mormon. Divinely guided journeys through the wilderness Mosiah 1:16 were powerful symbols of the Exodus motif in the Nephite worldview. Some wilderness areas were distinctive enough to have a name Alma 2:37, Ether 14:14. Most were simply east, west, or south of somewhere else Alma 62:34. The Book of Mormon describes different kinds of terrain as wilderness. Deserts 1 Nephi 2:5, mountains Helaman 11:31, jungles Mosiah 22:16, Alma 43:27, and swamps Alma 2:36-38 are all suggested in the text. Some wildernesses were near oceans 1 Nephi 16:14 or rivers Alma 16:6. Not all Book of Mormon wildernesses were uninhabited. In fact, some were home to quite a few people Alma 22:28, Alma 31:3. People living in a wilderness often had a hunter-gatherer or predatory lifestyle Enos 1:20. Wilderness areas figured prominently in warfare Alma 46:31, Ether 14:5. Colonizing wilderness areas through forced relocation settlements was a tool the Nephite state used to strengthen their defenses against Lamanite invasion Alma 50:9. Wildernesses were conserved as important game habitat Ether 10:21. A great deal of human suffering happened in the wilderness 1 Nephi 17:1. The difficulty of distinguishing landmarks or milestones in the wilderness created confusion and misdirection for travelers Mosiah 7:4. Some Nephite cities had wilderness immediately adjacent to the settlement Alma 58:13. The common threads in Book of Mormon wildernesses were a lack of permanent built-up areas and an absence of effective political control. If the central authorities in Nephi or Zarahemla did not excercise sovereignty over an area, it could be classed as wilderness. In other words, wilderness was frontier territory that lacked law and civilization (as defined by the authors of the text). For example, when Captain Moroni evicted the Lamanites from the east wilderness, they had built strongholds there Alma 50:11, but since they were not Nephite strongholds, chronicler Helaman I (abridged by Mormon) called the area "wilderness."   The Book of Mormon describes developed settlements as small villages, villages, towns and cities Alma 8:7, Mormon 5:5. Populated places were then grouped together in lands. A city/state pattern, familiar from Maya culture, is often evident in the text where a principal city and its environs form a land Mosiah 23:25. Lands were grouped together in vast, sweeping entities with political (kingdoms, countries) or physical geographic (land northward, land southward) meaning. Names and sizes of these multi-land entities changed frequently throughout Nephite history Alma 22:31, Helaman 6:10. Nephite wilderness areas were buffers, corridors, even barriers between lands and countries. All of these territories (wilderness, lands, countries) had borders and a great deal of the action in The Book of Mormon takes place in border regions.
--
Archaeologists are often quite thorough in site surveys, cataloging remains of human occupation even if formal excavation has not yet been done. The first thing many archaeologists do when they enter a new region is a wide-area reconnaissance with some surface scavenging. After they create a map and get a feel for the potential sites in a given area, they may then choose to focus on one of the more promising prospects. Over time, the accumulated maps from all of these site surveys can give us a good idea of ancient settlement patterns. We are blessed in the greater Maya area to have a marvelous resource, The Electronic Atlas of Ancient Maya Sites: a Geographic Information System (GIS), (EAAMS) compiled by Dr. Clifford T. Brown, a Maya archaeologist with Florida Atlantic University and Dr. Walter R.T. Witschey, a Maya archaeologist with Longwood University. The project is closely associated with the Middle American Research Institute (MARI) at Tulane. These researchers have compiled a data base of over 6,000 known archaeological sites in the Maya area with geographic coordinates and made that information available for us to use in Google Earth. We will use EAAMS data as a control to spatially analyze potential wilderness areas mentioned in The Book of Mormon.

Data from the Electronic Atlas of Ancient Maya Sites (EAAMS)
showing over 6,000 known archaeological sites in the greater
Maya area. 

Dividing the Rivers

Before we begin illustrating the physical characteristics of the Mezcalapa-Grijalva and the Usumacinta from satellite imagery and other spatial data sets, it is important to establish some riverine nomenclature. Both of the rivers we will be studying have an upper, middle and lower section.

The upper Mezcalapa-Grijalva begins at the confluence of the Selegua and the Cuilco and runs through the Central Depression of Chiapas past Tuxtla Gutierrez, ending at the formidable Sumidero Canyon. The Angostura dam, aka Belisario Dominguez (1976), created a huge reservoir that floods dozens of important archeological sites in this part of the river. The upper Mezcalapa-Grijalva flows 178 km and falls from 539 meters elevation to 388 meters with a slope gradient of .000848.

Upper Mezcalapa-Grijalva with the Nenton on the north flowing into the
Selegua in the middle which then joins with the Cuilco coming in from
the south to form the Mezcalapa-Grijalva.

The middle Mezcalapa-Grijalva begins at the Sumidero and runs to the head of navigation at Plan de Ayala upstream from Huimanguillo. The Chicoasen dam (1980), just downstream from Sumidero Canyon, is Mexico's highest and houses the largest hydroelectric plant in the country. Malpaso dam, aka Netzahualcoyotl (1966), created a large reservoir that also floods many important ancient sites. Penitas dam (1987), the smallest on the river, lies just upstream from Plan de Ayala. The middle Mezcalapa-Grijalva flows 175 km and falls from 388 meters elevation to 51 meters with a slope gradient of .001926.

Middle Mezcalapa-Grijalva

The lower Mezcalapa-Grijalva begins at the head of navigation and runs through the Tabasco coastal plain  to the Gulf of Campeche. In Book of Mormon times, the outlet was at Barra Tonala where the Tonala River flows today. In Book of Mormon times, the lower Mezcalapa-Grijalva flowed 229 km and fell from 51 meters elevation to sea level with a slope gradient of .000223.

Lower Mezcalapa-Grijalva as it flowed in Book of Mormon Times

--
The upper Usumacinta begins at the confluence of the Salinas and the Pasion and runs through the jungle on the Mexico/Guatemala border, ending at Boca del Cerro. The upper Usumacinta flows 227 km and falls from 109 meters elevation to 17 meters with a slope gradient of .000405.

Upper Usumacinta with the Salinas coming up from the south joining
with the Pasion coming in from the east.

The middle Usumacinta begins at Boca del Cerro and runs through the higher ground of the Tabasco coastal plain above the area of annual flooding, ending at Teclopan. The middle Usumacinta flows 200 km and falls from 17 meters elevation to 4 meters with a slope gradient of .000065.

Middle Usumacinta

The lower Usumacinta begins at Teclopan, flows through the Pantanos de Centla (the delta area of permanent flooding), joins with the Original Grijalva and empties into the Bay of Campeche at Frontera. The lower Usumacinta flows 188 km and falls from 4 meters elevation to sea level with a slope gradient of .000021.

Lower Usumacinta with distributaties the Palizada that flows eastward
into the Laguna de Terminos and the San Pedro y San Pablo that
flows northward in the middle of the delta. The main channel
joins with the Original Grijalva flowing northward from Villahermosa.

--
Does this mean that Book of Mormon authors also divided the river Sidon into upper, middle and lower sections? No. These are modern geographical terms that archaeologists have adopted. The Nephites were very familiar with the "Head of the river Sidon" Alma 22:27, Alma 50:11 which will be a topic for another day.
--
In summary, the Mezcalapa-Grijalva in Book of Mormon times flowed 582 km and fell from 539 meters elevation to sea level with a steep slope gradient of .000926. The Usumacinta, which has not changed course significantly since Book of Mormon times, flows 615 km and falls from 109 meters to sea level with a mild slope gradient of .000177.

Asking the Right Questions

Updated January 19, 2015
One of the best ways to discover the truth is to ask the right questions. The eventual question we want to answer is "Which river, the Mezcalapa-Grijalva or the Usumacinta, is the river Sidon in the Book of Mormon? To arrive at the answer, we put on our Sherlock Holmes hat and pose a series of intermediate questions designed to draw contextual meaning from what The Book of Mormon does and does not say:

1. What was the nature of the Jaredite - Mulekite relationship? Did the Mulekites settle among the Jaredites (Olmec)? Or did the Mulekites establish Zarahemla on the periphery of Jaredite culture? The Jaredites & Mulekites were contemporaries for about 200 years until the Jaredite collapse. The Mulekites did not migrate very far away from their original homeland in Zarahemla Omni 1:16. When the Mulekites discovered Coriantumr, he was not previously known to them Omni 1:21. Coriantumr lived the last few months of his life among a strange people Omni 1:21, Ether 13:21. No one in the Mulekite community had enough experience with Jaredite culture to translate Coriantumr's stela. It remained a mystery to them until Mosiah I come down to Zarahemla from Nephi with the interpreters which allowed him to read Coriantumr's inscription Omni 1:20. Answer: The Mulekites did not establish Zarahemla among the Jaredites. They lived on the margins of and somewhat isolated from the strong influence of the Jaredite culture core.
2. Where were the Mulekites most likely to have founded their capital city? Where do ocean-going migrants typically locate first generation cities? Think Boston on the Charles, New York on the Hudson, Philadelphia on the Delaware and Augusta on the Savannah. Think London on the Thames, Alexandria on the Nile and Shanghai on the Yangtze. Answer: The most likely place for the Mulekites to have founded their city was in a coastal plain, on the navigable portion of a major river, upstream from the seasonal floods in the delta but not beyond the head of navigation at the fall line. Portland on the Columbia, Buenos Aires on the Plata, Seville on the Guadalquivir, Bordeaux on the Garonne - the list could go on and on. The best Book of Mormon scholarship has the Mulekites landing first at the mouth of the Papaloapan River in southern Veracruz Alma 22:30, Helaman 6:10, then coasting along the Gulf of Campeche. They must have investigated the mouth of the Coatzacoalcos River and the mouth of the Mezcalapa-Grijalva which at that time ran where the Tonala River flows today. The Mulekites almost certainly did not abandon their ocean-going vessel(s) and portage their goods inland past the fall line on their river of choice. Such behavior is simply atypical of first generation settlers arriving by sea. Movement by water is so much more energy efficient than overland cartage, that historic settlement patterns favor the area downstream from the head of navigation. Upstream areas tend to remain "wilderness" for generations.
3. Did the Mulekites site Zarahemla in a populated area? Answer: No. The Book of Mormon text specifically says they established their city in a wilderness Mosiah 25:2, Alma 22:31.
4. What was the nature of the Mulekite - Nephite relationship prior to the mass migration under Mosiah I? The two groups were totally isolated - unaware of the other's existence for hundreds of years Omni 1:14. Their languages evolved to become so dissimilar that at initial contact they could not understand each other Omni 1:17. Answer: They had no relationship - zero communication for centuries.
5. What was the nature of the Land of Zarahemla - Land of Nephi relationship during the reigns of Kings Mosiah I, Benjamin, Mosiah II, Zeniff, Noah, Limhi, Lamoni & Lamoni's father? The first group who made the journey enjoyed divine help Omni 1:13. Subsequent travel happened intermittently, but the routes were not yet well-established. Groups got lost as they traveled or attempted to travel between the two lands Mosiah 7:4, Mosiah 8:8, Mosiah 21:25. Tracks became impossible to follow after only a few days Mosiah 22:16. People even got lost trying to find their way back home Mosiah 23:35, 36. People who had been on the trail recently and more or less knew the way still did a lot of wandering around Mosiah 9:4. There was little or no regular communication Omni 1:30, Mosiah 7:14. Former Nephites introduced writing to the Lamanites Mosiah 24:6, which fueled an immediate economic boom Mosiah 24:7. Answer: Travel was very difficult and unpredictable. Many journeys suffered delays or outright failure because the guides became disoriented and could not decide which way to go. Communication was almost non-existent.
6. What was the nature of the Land of Zarahemla/Land of Nephi relationship during the Nephite/Lamanite wars? The Lamanites were able to mount surprise attacks, even on the capital city Zarahemla Helaman 1:19.  The Nephites were over-extended, struggling to defend their large territorial holdings with the relatively small number of men they had under arms Alma 58:32. The Nephite population was scattered in pockets with wilderness in between the enclaves Alma 62:34. Nephite hegemony reached its apogee. Lamanite invasions came into the west, the south and the east of Zarahemla. Answer: Repeated Lamanite attacks with little or no warning on less densely populated Nephite lands.
7. Did the Nephites and the Lamanites speak the same language? Nephite dissenters traveled to Nephi and had themselves crowned king Alma 47:35, Alma 52:3. Former Nephites occupied most of the top leadership posts in several Lamanite armies Alma 43:6, Alma 48:5, Helaman 1:15. Nephite missionaries proselytized effectively among Lamanites of various social classes Alma 26:28-31. A Nephite among Lamanite elites was considered a demi-god Alma 18:2 and engaged royalty in subtle and profound communication Alma 18:17-41. Lamanites became Nephites Alma 47:29. Nephites became Lamanites Alma 43:4. Converted Lamanites preached to the Nephites in the land of Zarahemla Helaman 6:4. Answer: Yes. The Nephites and the Lamanites spoke a very similar language - similar enough that they had no difficulty understanding each other. This is a case where The Book of Mormon's silence is instructive. Mormon goes to some length to explain to his readers the linguistic difficulty the Mulekites had with Mosiah I and his Nephite migrants when they first arrived in Zarahemla Omni 1:18. Between the Nephites and Lamanites, though, the text never implies any verbal language incompatibility. Educated Nephites who kept the national records had an esoteric written language Mosiah 1:2, Mosiah 9:1 that the Lamanites eventually acquired Mosiah 24:4. 
8. Was the River Sidon on a linguistic/cultural boundary? Answer: No, the text of the Book of Mormon indicates that by the time of Alma II and Helaman, people on both sides of the river spoke a common language and shared a similar material culture. Alma 6:7, Alma 8:3, Alma 62:46-48.
9. What was the nature of the terrain between the Land of Zarahemla and the Land of Nephi? Extensive wilderness lay between the two lands Mosiah 22:13. Nephi was at a higher elevation than Zarahemla Alma 26:23, Alma 27:5. Distinctive Narrow Strip of Wilderness mountains large enough to form a line of military defense Alma 50:11 ran in an east-west direction separating the two lands Alma 22:27. Answer: Zarahemla was down, Nephi was up and an east-west mountain barrier plus lots of wilderness lay between them. 
10. What was the general direction from Nephi to Zarahemla? Answer: Zarahemla was north of Nephi. Most serious internal reconstructions of Book of Mormon geography show Zarahemla on the north Alma 22:33 and Nephi on the south Alma 50:7 with the River Sidon flowing northward from the highlands to the sea.
11. Was the Land of Zarahemla centrally located within the Land Southward? The Nephites conceived of a center with four quarters extending in the four cardinal directions. Mosiah 27:6. Captain Moroni positioned armies in those four quarters Alma 52:10, Alma 56:1, Alma 58:30, Alma 58:35. Zarahemla was the heart Alma 60:19, Helaman 1:18 or the center Helaman 1:26,27 of the Nephite polity. Answer: Yes, the Nephite worldview positioned the Land of Zarahemla more or less in the center of the Land Southward north of the Narrow Strip of Wilderness.
12. Did the Lands of Nephi and Zarahemla share a similar climate? Answer: No. Nephi was higher in elevation, so the people there enjoyed a cooler, breezier, drier climate than those in the lower Zarahemla. The most likely explanation for the Zeniff colony's irrational return to Nephi Mosiah 7:21, Mosiah 9:3, Mosiah 9:10, Mosiah 10:18 is a more hospitable climate in the highlands.
13. Did the Lands of Nephi and Zarahemla share similar topography? Answer: No. The Land of Nephi had metallic mineral mining operations which implies mountainous highlands 2 Nephi 5:15. People in the City of Nephi could see into neighboring jurisdictions Mosiah 11:12, Mosiah 20:8 which indicates long-range atmospheric visibility and moderate relative humidity. Residents of Zarahemla suffered seasonal fevers and other climatically-influenced maladies Alma 46:40, suggesting tropical lowlands. Military heat exhaustion Alma 51:33 also favors lowlands.
14. Did the River Sidon ever change course? Answer: Not during Book of Mormon times. When Mormon as a youth visited the densely populated Land of Zarahemla by the river Mormon 1:6, it was in the same area the Mulekites had settled almost a thousand years earlier.
15. Did the River Sidon have any major obstructions that inhibited movement up and down the river? Answer: No. The text describes difficult travel both up and down river, but nothing that required a major detour Mosiah 7:16, Mosiah 9:3.
16. How swift was the current in the River Sidon? Rivers are measured by flow - the volume of water moving in the channel and current - the speed of the water. In The Book of Mormon, people cross the Sidon all the time in both directions with no particular difficulty mentioned Alma 16:6, Alma 43:40. It is almost second nature to them. This implies a slow current in a relatively placid river. Many readers of The Book of Mormon are under the misconception that Nephites and Lamanites walked across the Sidon like the Mormon Handcart Pioneers fording the Sweetwater. This is simply not true. Both the Mezcalapa/Grijalva and the Usumacinta are much too large and deep for pedestrian fording, even at low water during the dry season. When the Spanish conquistadores swept through Chiapas and Guatemala in the early 1500's, they described very large numbers of small (and some not so small) watercraft on both of these huge rivers and on hundreds of smaller streams. Small boats must have been the dominant mode of transport on the rivers in Book of Mormon times as well. The verbiage in Alma 43:40 "crossed the waters of Sidon" suggests the terminology elsewhere in the text where marine crossings explicitly involve boats 1 Nephi 17:17, Ether 2:6. Alma 43:35 indicates that the Lamanite army took some time to get across the Sidon, which allowed Lehi and his men to engage those who still remained on the east bank of the river. The Book of Mormon also describes a volume of water flowing down the Sidon large enough to wash thousands of dead human bodies out to sea Alma 3:3, Alma 44:22. Answer: The Book of Mormon describes a high flow, slow current river which means gentle slope gradients.
17. Did the River Sidon flow through wilderness areas? Answer: Yes, along much of its length Alma 8:3, Alma 16:6, 7. In the case of Captain Moroni downstream from Manti, the wilderness (think dense vegetation) on the west bank of the river was so thick it concealed one of his armies Alma 43:27. 
18. Were the territories in modern day Belize and Quintana Roo part of The Book of Mormon picture? A generation ago, the Caribbean coastal area was a poorly explored archaeological backwater, not well represented in the Mesoamerican literature. Then the nation of Belize made it easy to obtain excavation permits and a scientific florescence ensued. Today, we realize that one can't fully understand what is going on at Palenque, Tikal & El Mirador without also taking into account Cuello, Lamanai and Altun Ha. Major Jaredite (Olmec) presence is currently being uncovered in the area around Chetumal Bay. Izapan influence has been documented at Kohunlich. Answer: Yes. Most of the New World events described in The Book of Mormon happened in the Land Southward. The Caribbean coastal areas of Quintana Roo and Belize were important during Jaredite (Olmec & Epi-Olmec), Nephite-Mulekite (Izapan & Maya pre-classic) and Lamanite (Maya pre-classic, classic & post-classic) times. The Nephites held an expansive view of their own territory Mosiah 27:6, Helaman 3:8. In the days of Helaman I, Parhoran (critical text orthography) & Captain Moroni, Nephite settlement expanded eastward to the sea coast Alma 50:9. The east sea coast was generally oriented in a north/south direction. Alma 50:13, Alma 27:22. The greater land of Nephi had an east sea coast Alma 50:8 which could only be the Caribbean. 

Sizing up the Candidates

Even though they are separated from each other by only about 170 kilometers as the crow flies, the Mezcalapa-Grijalva and the Usumacinta are very different rivers in many ways:

• Hydroelectric potential. Although the Usumacinta carries more water, the Mezcalapa-Grijalva has much higher hydroelectric potential because it has steeper gradients over much of its course, which causes faster currents. The Mezcalapa-Grijalva has 3 large and 1 small hydroelectric dams and the Usumacinta has none (although some of the higher elevation tributaries of the Usumacinta have been dammed). 
• Tropical climate. Both rivers are within tropical latitudes, but the altitudes and rain shadows affecting the Mezcalapa-Grijalva give it a sub-tropical climate throughout most of its course. The Usumacinta, on the other hand, is definitely a tropical river. In fact, geographers generally define the Usumacinta basin as the northern edge of the Central America tropics. This means that compared with the Usumacinta, the Mezcalapa-Grijalva runs through country that generally has:
• Cooler temperatures
• Lower humidity
• Less dense vegetation.
• Seasonality. Both rivers run higher during the rainy season and lower during the dry season, but the seasonal change in water volume is relatively greater in the Mezcalapa-Grijalva. The Usumacinta does not fluctuate as much because its catchment area receives greater amounts of precipitation spread more evenly throughout the year.
• Navigability. The Usumacinta is navigable for about 330 kilometers upstream. The Mezcalapa-Grijalva is only navigable for less than half that distance.
• Obstructions to movement. The middle Mezcalapa-Grijalva is home to the world-famous Sumidero with high cliffs on either side of a 13-kilometer-long canyon. The Usumacinta does flow through some canyons, but they are modest in comparison. 
• Length. The Usumacinta is somewhat longer than the Mezcalapa-Grijalva.
• Sinuosity. The Mezcalapa runs relatively straight, particularly in its upper and middle sections, while the Usumacinta is famously convoluted with hundreds of large meanders.
• Basin size. The Usumacinta drains an area more than twice as large as the Mezcalapa-Grijalva.
• Ambient elevation. Along most of its course, the Mezcalapa-Grijalva is surrounded by high mountains.  The Usumacinta, on the other hand, runs through generally flatter country.
• Visibility. From the banks of the Mezcalapa-Grijalva, one often has visibility for kilometers. The banks of the Usumacinta, on the other hand, are generally so heavily forested that visibility through the jungle is limited.
• Forest Canopy height. The forest canopy surrounding the Usumacinta is much higher on average than the trees near the Mezcalapa-Grijalva. In fact, in many places, the vegetation surrounding the Mezcalapa-Grijalva is brushy scrub dotted with the occasional tall tree.
• Population. Many more people live along the Mezcalapa-Grijalva than along the Usumacinta. The same was true anciently.
• Population distribution. The smaller numbers of people who live along the Usumacinta are concentrated  in pockets with relative wilderness between the enclaves. The larger numbers of people who live along the Mezcalapa-Grijalva are spread more evenly. This same pattern generally held anciently. 
• Language. The Mezcalapa-Grijalva begins in Maya country, but it runs through Mixe-Zoque country for much of its length. The famed Chiapa de Corzo is the quintessential Zoque site, and barrios of Zoque speakers reside in Tuxtla Gutierrez today.
• Breadth. The Mezcalapa-Grijalva basin is relatively narrow and confined in western Chiapas and western Tabasco. The Usumacinta basin, on the other hand, encompasses the entire Lacantun, Pasion, and San Pedro basins. It includes central Chiapas on the west, most of the Peten, and a tiny part of Belize on the east.
• Flood plain. The Usumacinta flood plain is much larger than that of the Mezcalapa-Grijalva. There are many lakes and wetlands alongside the actual Usumacinta river. In the lower Usumacinta, the extensive Pantanos de Centla wetlands that cover almost one-fourth of the state of Tabasco (the largest wetlands in Mexico and a United Nations Biosphere Reserve) alternate between swamps in the dry season and lakes in the rainy season. 
• Roads. In both ancient and modern times, extensive networks of trails and roads have been important avenues of transportation and communication throughout the Mezcalapa-Grijalva basin. Because of the jungles and swamps, trails and roads have been less of a factor in the Usumacinta basin, and more movement has been on the waterways themselves.    

Wandering River

The principal problem facing Mesoamericanist Book of Mormon scholars in September, 2011, is the fact that there are two large rivers in the Chiapas, Tabasco, Guatemala area and either one of them - the Grijalva or the Usumacinta - could be the Sidon. Both have vocal cheering sections. Both have major tributaries whose headwaters originate less than 15 kilometers apart in the rugged Cuchumatanes massif near Huehuetenango. During most of their course, they are mutually exclusive, flowing in roughly parallel channels about 170 kilometers apart before coming together in confluence (in modern times) at Villahermosa, Tabasco, then emptying into the Gulf of Campeche which is the extreme southern portion of the Gulf of Mexico. The implications of choosing one or the other are profound - remains of the Mulekite and later Nephite capital Zarahemla will be found on the western banks of the right river. Successfully identifying which river is the Sidon will breathe new life into an entire sub-discipline of Book of Mormon studies (New World geographic correlations) that has lain relatively dormant for decades.
--
One very important point to understand is that the lower Grijalva has changed course, moving eastward many times since the Book of Mormon era. When the Mulekites settled Zarahemla, the river that today we call the Grijalva actually flowed into the Tonala, past the famous Olmec site of La Venta, and emptied into the Gulf of Mexico at Barra de Tonala which is about 160 kilometers west of its current mouth at Frontera. This is a case where one cannot simply consult a contemporary map and begin drawing inferences because the lower Grijalva river as shown on modern maps is in a very different location than it was anciently. The image below is a screen capture from Google Earth. Click on the image to expand it to full size (the same holds true for all images in this blog).

Grijalva River with major tributary, the Selegua and
Usumacinta River with major tributaries, the Chixoy/Negro, the Salinas
and the Teapa as they appear on modern maps.

The Mexican State of Tabasco is the 2nd leading oil-producing state in the country, so the geology of the lower Grijalva area has been studied intensively. Tabasco, including the capital Villahermosa, experiences severe seasonal flooding in wet years, so the hydrology of the area has been investigated thoroughly. Tabasco is also the place where the Spanish Conquest of Mexico really began, so the history of the region is well-known. Prior to 1675, the lower Grijalva flowed past the important westernmost Maya site, Comalcalco, whose archaeology has been investigated by the Middle American Research Institute at Tulane and others. Consulting sources from all of these disciplines, one can re-construct the meanderings of the Grijalva river over the centuries. Before we go there, though, it is important to establish some naming conventions. The Grijalva river is named for the famous Spanish Conquistador Juan de Grijalva, precursor of Hernan Cortes. In April, 1518, Grijalva captained a flotilla of four ships that left Cuba and coasted along the the Mexican shores of Campeche, Tabasco, and Veracruz. Near the mouth of what is today the combined Grijalva/Usumacinta River, the exploring party was surprised to find a freshwater current flow so strong that they dipped sweet water from the ocean several leagues out to sea. They sailed upriver to what is today the Tabascan capital Villahermosa and exulted about how much larger this waterway was than the famed Guadalquivir, the only great navigable river in their native Spain. They named it Rio Grijalva. Continuing west for about 50 kilometers along the coast of Tabasco, they encountered a smaller, but still significant river near present day Paraiso that had two outlets. They named it Rio Dos Bocas. This double-mouthed river, known today in Tabasco as the Mezcalapa or Rio Grande de Chiapa, is the same river that flows through the Central Depression of Chiapas - the one we call the Grijalva on modern maps. Residents of the Mexican State of Chiapas began calling their river the "Grijalva" about a hundred years ago, the name stuck, and the Tabascans have never quite forgiven them because Tabasco already had a perfectly good Rio Grijalva - the original one named in 1518 by Juan de Grijalva himself. So, in order to deal with the hydrological situation as it existed in pre-columbian times, this blog will use the term "Mezcalapa-Grijalva" to refer to the modern Grijalva, the term "Original Grijalva" to refer to the river Juan de Grijalva named after himself in 1518, and the term "Usumacinta" to refer to the modern Usumacinta that has a confluence with the Original Grijalva and its principal mouth at Frontera, Tabasco. This terminology is consistent with contemporary usage in Tabasco today.

Mezcalapa-Grijalva, Original Grijalva, and Usumacinta Rivers as they flowed
at the time of Spanish Conquest (1518).

So, how did a very large river like the Mezcalapa-Grijalva do a 90 degree turn and suddenly flow 45 kilometers almost due east into the Original Grijalva as it does today? The answer, interestingly, has to do with pirates bounding the Spanish Main. During much of the Spanish Colonial era, English pirates backed by the British crown controlled the Isla del Carmen in the Laguna de Terminos, the large lagoon in the modern Mexican state of Campeche. These pirates preyed not only on Spanish treasure galleons, but also on Mexican coastal towns. The Mezcalapa-Grijalva with its two mouths was navigable and gave the marauding corsairs easy access to interior towns, including Cardenas, in Tabasco's rich Chontalpa region. The Tabascans finally got tired of pirate depredations. Knowing that the Mezcalapa-Grijalva had changed course many times, they took advantage of high water in the river in 1675 and engineered a diversion at the town of Nueva Zealandia south of Cardenas and north of Huimanguillo. In Tabascan hydrology literature, this impressive feat of colonial civil engineering is called the "rompido de Nueva Zealandia." The old river bed, called "Rio Seco" or "Dry River" is easy to spot on Google Earth or Google Maps.

Google Maps image of Rio Seco, Cardenas and Nueva Zealandia, Tabasco.

Hydrologists consider the Mezcalapa-Grijalva a young river, which means it carries enough sediment suspended in its waters to rapidly form sandbars and eventually change course. In the low-lying coastal plains of Tabasco, these diversions can be quite dramatic. Around AD 900, the Mezcalapa-Grijalva flowed past the important Maya site of Comalcalco just as it did at European contact. 700 years earlier, though, in approximately AD 200 (near the end of The Book of Mormon record) the Mezcalapa-Grijalva emptied into the Laguna de la Machona/Laguna El Carmen lagoon system where the Santa Ana River runs today, about 110 kilometers west of its current mouth at Frontera.

Google Earth image showing the Mezcalapa-Grijalva, Original Grijalva,
and Usumacinta Rivers as they flowed ca. 200 AD.

Even more dramatically, in approximately 500 BC, when the Jaredites were in severe decline headed toward collapse and the Mulekites had just recently appeared on the scene, the Mezcalapa-Grijalva flowed into the Tonala River a full 160 kilometers west of its current mouth.

Mezcalapa-Grijalva, Original Grijalva and Usumacinta Rivers as they
flowed in late Jaredite, early Mulekite times (ca. 500 BC).

Evidences of large changes in the course of the Mezcalapa-Grijalva river abound in the Tabascan coastal plain from the Tonala River on the west to the Rio Seco on the east. Ancient meanders in particular show up well in Google Earth's satellite imagery.

Google Earth placemarks show locations of ancient meanders where
the Mezcalapa-Grijalva River flowed in previous millennia. 

Zoomed in view of 2 ancient Mezcalapa-Grijalva meanders.
Click to enlarge.

Sources for the changing course of the ancient lower Grijalva include interviews with Mexican scholars Maximo Carrera Sosa, Judith Guadalupe Ramos Hernandez, and Augustin Somellara Pulido in Villahermosa and Christopher L. von Nagy, "Making Milpa Amid Meandering Streams: Olmec Settlement in the Ancient Grijalva Delta," paper presented at the Society for American Archaeology 61st Annual Meeting, New Orleans, 1996 and von Nagy's 2003 Tulane PhD dissertation entitled "Of Meandering Rivers and Shifting Towns: Landscape Evolution and Community with the Grijalva Delta."

And what of the Usumacinta? Has it changed course by dozens of kilometers in the last 2,500 years as the Mezcalapa-Grijalva has? Somewhat. Hydrologists consider the Usumacinta a mature river where erosion and sediment deposition are more or less in equilibrium. In wet years, new distributaries sometimes form near the mouth, and the river sometimes cuts through the narrow neck of an oxbow meander, but in general the course of the Usumacinta has remained largely unchanged from Book of Mormon times until now. Ca. AD 1,050 an avulsion caused the apex flow to move westward from the San Pedro y San Pablo to join the original Grijalva at Tres Brazos. Eariler, the major western tributaries of the Usumacinta, the Sierra and the Chilapa, used to flow where the Rio Gonzalez is today, discharging at Barra Chiltepec. So there has been streamflow movement westward in the drainage basin delta among Usumacinta distributaries, but the effect has been less dramatic than in the Mezcapala-Grijalva basin. See Kees Noreen, et al., "The Usumacinta-Grijalva beach ridge plain in southern Mexico: a high-resolution archive of river discharge and precipitation." in Earth Surface Dynamics, 5 (2017) pp. 529-556. This study dates varves which are ancient annual sediment deposition layers that harden into long-lasting striated landforms in a current or former river delta.
--
Rivers as large as the Mezcalapa-Grijalva and Usumacinta (the Usumacinta is the largest river in Mexico or Central America, and among the 100 largest in the world measured by cubic meters of water discharged annually) have a handful of major tributaries and hundreds of smaller streams feeding into them. They will also frequently have multiple distributaries near their mouth. It is often useful, therefore, to visualize a river's entire drainage basin because natural ecosystems and human cultures tend to develop within drainage basins.

Mezcalapa-Grijalva (blue) and Usumacinta (red) Rivers shown as they were in
Book of Mormon times with tributaries, distributaries and drainage basins (white).

So, we finally have a map we can use to compare and contrast the two viable candidates for the only New World river mentioned by name in the Book of Mormon - the Sidon. Will it be the fiesty Mezcalapa-Grijalva or the more staid Usumacinta? Stay tuned. The water fight on the river is about to begin.

Article last updated April 20, 2000.

The Book of Mormon Map as of September, 2011

Because of the ambivalent nature of some textual passages, The Book of Mormon map puzzle is a multivariate equation that will be solved with best fit analysis - calculus rather than simple algebra. Consensus over time is a pretty reliable indicator that best fit has been achieved. The good news is that there is considerable consensus among credible Book of Mormon scholars about many key points on the map. For example, almost all serious students of the Nephite text now agree that:

• The historical New World events described in the book took place within an area not much larger than 1,000 kilometers (about 600 miles) in diameter. 
• Mesoamerica (southern Mexico and northern Central America) is the New World setting for the book.
• The Isthmus of Tehuantepec is the narrow neck of land.
• Southern Mexico (Oaxaca, Veracruz, Puebla, Guerrero) is the land northward.
• Northern Central America (Chiapas, Tabasco, Campeche, Quintana Roo, Guatemala, Belize) is the land southward.
• The Hill Ramah/Cumorah area is along the gulf coast of Veracruz, north of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec.
• The city of Nephi area is in highland Guatemala, near present day Guatemala City. 
• Teotihuacan, near present day Mexico City, is on the extreme northern fringe of Book of Mormon lands.
• Western El Salvador and Honduras are on the extreme southern fringe of Book of Mormon lands.
• The Book of Mormon Jaredites were a subset of the Olmec, the mother culture of Mesoamerica.

It is heartening to know that this consensus has remained largely unchanged since the 1970's.

Those generally subscribing to this consensus viewpoint are a veritable who's who of Book of Mormon scholars:

• Blake J. Allen
• Joseph L. Allen
• Jerry L. Ainsworth
• Joe V. Andersen
• Ted E. Brewerton
• Stephen L. Carr
• Douglas K. Christensen
• Ross T. Christensen (deceased)
• John E. Clark
• John P. Fugal
• F. Richard Hauck
• Shirley R. Heater
• Paul Henning (deceased)
• Louis E. Hills (deceased)
• Howard W. Hunter (deceased)
• M. Wells Jakeman (deceased)
• John L. Lund
• Kirk A. Magleby
• Neal A. Maxwell (deceased)
• Hugh W. Nibley (deceased)
• V. Garth Norman (his site)
• David A. Palmer (deceased)
• Daniel C. Peterson
• Lawrence L. Poulsen
• Noel B. Reynolds
• Stephen D. Ricks
• John L. Sorenson
• Sidney B. Sperry (deceased)
• Neil Steede
• Ted D. Stoddard
• Javier Tovar (his blog)
• Raymond C. Treat
• John A. Tvedtnes
• Bruce W. Warren
• John W. Welch
• Diane E. Wirth
• Mark A. Wright

Institutions espousing this consensus viewpoint include:

• Ancient America Foundation (AAF)
• Book of Mormon Archaeological Forum (BMAF)
• Foundation for Apologetic Information & Research (FAIR)
• FARMS - now Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, BYU
• Pre-Columbian Studies Institute (PSI)
• Zarahemla Research Foundation (ZRF)

All is well in Zion? Yea, Zion prospereth? 2 Nephi 28:21 Not yet. But, four decades of substantial agreement among some of the best minds in the business is not a bad place to start.
--
See the blog article entitled "Book of Mormon Map" for a series of ever-evolving maps reflecting some of the best current thinking about the Book of Mormon New World geographical correlation.

Why Do We Care?

When John W. (Jack) Welch, John L. Sorenson, and I were first getting The Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS) up and running in the early 1980's, we encountered some resistance, particularly from faculty members in the BYU Religion Department. Joseph F. McConkie, for example, said disparagingly "I don't care what color the buttons were on Nephi's coat, and I don't think God cares." The Book of Mormon is so doctrinally rich, so abundantly Christological, and such a profoundly spiritual tour de force that proof-texting its pages for gems of plot, homily or divine inspiration yields a lifetime of treasures. The most frequently cited passage in the text - Moroni 10:4 - adjures readers to get on their knees and receive a personal witness of its truthfulness through the power of the Holy Ghost. I raise  my voice with millions of others worldwide who have done precisely as the Prophet Moroni requests. I have asked God in the name of Jesus Christ if The Book of Mormon is true and He has answered me in such unmistakable ways that I have a testimony of "plainness; in the which I know that no man can err." 2 Nephi 25:7.
--
My personal conviction, though, does not satisfy my intellectual curiosity. We are all dual beings - partly flesh and partly spirit. "And the spirit and the body are the soul of man." Doctrine and Covenants 88:15. Feed only the body and you miss the awe. Feed only the spirit and you starve to death. The Lord Himself has counseled us to "seek learning, even by study and also by faith." Doctrine and Covenants 88:118. Everything I learn about The Book of Mormon deepens my understanding of and my appreciation for this divine gift. Just like a knowledge of Greek and a map of Paul's journeys enhance our understanding of and appreciation for The New Testament, the text of The Book of Mormon becomes more real and alive the more we know about the people and cultures moving across its pages. We care because we want to better understand.
--
We also care because we want to share, and others must have some modicum of interest before they will take the time to read and investigate. There are more than 7 billion of our brothers and sisters on the earth today. How many of them have even heard of The Book of Mormon? Two or three percent, perhaps? And of that small fraction, how many have a reasonably accurate concept of what the Nephite scripture is all about? How many have actually read the book with real intent? As with all images on this blog, click to enlarge.

Graphic by Fernando Vazquez illustrating the
need for The Book of Mormon in the world

God lives. Have you read His recent book?

For many years, the German edition of Das Buch Mormon showed an image of Izapa Stela 5 on the dust jacket.

German edition of The Book of Mormon with
an image of Izapa Stela 5 on the dust jacket.

My departed friend and former Bishop, Orville C. Gunther (President of the South German Mission on August 16, 1967, when one of his missionaries, Jack Welch then serving in Regensburg, discovered chiasmus in The Book of Mormon), credited many conversions in Bavaria to an initial intellectual curiosity that when satisfied, was followed by a life-changing spiritual witness. I have talked with dozens of people over the years for whom FARMS materials were an important part of their conversion process. I have spoken with many more who decided to remain faithful through their turbulent youth because FARMS materials provided an intellectually satisfying and defensible anchor in their mental storm. So, we care because we want many others to experience The Book of Mormon for themselves and who knows what might pique or hold their interest?
--
There are many sub-disciplines within Book of Mormon studies - warfare, etymology of the onomasticon, Hebrew literary devices, Biblical law, population dynamics, holocaust psychology, etc. One of the most important from an exegetical or evangelistic perspective is geography. A convincing map would have more positive influence on the cause of The Book of Mormon around the world than almost any other study aid. So, yes we care whether the Grijalva or the Usumacinta is the River Sidon because the sooner we have the river identified the sooner we will find Zarahemla and that will really put The Book of Mormon on the map. Like Schliemann's discovery of Troy vindicating Homer, dirt, rocks and pot shards will enhance the credibility of The Book of Mormon so more of God's children take it seriously.
--
Book of Mormon studies are important enough that Pres. David O. McKay called Elder Milton R. Hunter specifically to oversee that effort around the Church, and as a member of the First Council of the Seventy (now First Quorum of the Seventy) many of Elder Hunter's General Conference addresses treated that theme. As a young missionary in Peru in 1974, I corresponded with Elder Hunter. When he realized that I was prepared to make a contribution to Book of Mormon studies, he arranged for me to be released from my mission in-country, but remain in South America for 2 extra months travelling and doing research. (Remember the old blue missionary copies of The Book of Mormon that included photographs of Pachacamac, Palenque, and Chichen Itza? That was Elder Hunter's work.) Book of Mormon studies are important enough that Elder and later President Howard W. Hunter took great personal interest in the work of the BYU New World Archaeological Foundation (NWAF) over several decades. Book of Mormon studies are important enough that when Pres. Gordon B. Hinckley invited FARMS to formally become part of BYU in 1997, he was lavish in his praise of the work FARMS had done, indicating how important it had been to the Brethren to have high quality, faithful scholarship helping move the cause of The Book of Mormon forward around the world.