Review
======
Title: The Lost City of Zarahemla: From Iowa to Guatemala—and Back Again
Author: Jonathan Neville
Publisher: Self-published
Genre: Book of Mormon Geography; Benjamin Winchester
Year Published: 2015 (2nd edition)
Number of Pages: 390
Binding: Paperback
ISBN: 978-1515337997
Price: $19.99
Reviewed by Kris Wray for the Association for Mormon Letters
Since its initial publication 184 years ago, questions over Book of Mormon geography still invoke heated debate. Like most LDS members in the last few decades, I grew up assuming a Mesoamerican model was what everyone agreed on, other than occasional people from an older generation who thought the events described in the Book of Mormon occurred from somewhere in South America, all the way up to North America. The recent consensus of most folks from any position who study this subject is that it had to take place within a limited area, say within several hundred miles.
While the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has no official position concerning Book of Mormon geography, the majority of members today who believe in the literal historicity of the scripture brought forth by Joseph Smith can basically be divided into two camps: those who hold it took place in Mesoamerica, and those who embrace the Heartland Theory, arguing the story occurred mainly in North America-specifically the United States. The author of “The Lost City of Zarahemla” maintains the Heartland model is correct, and this book is one of several written by attorney Jonathan Neville, dealing with this topic. This work specifically tries to answer who first introduced the idea that the setting of the Book of Mormon was in southern Mexico, Guatemala, and the surrounding area.
In “The Lost City of Zarahemla,” Neville examines three anonymously written articles printed in 1842, in the LDS periodical Times and Seasons. Some scholars have concluded that Joseph Smith is the authoritative source of the Mesoamerican theory, partially based on these published articles. Neville maintains that, despite what many historians may think, the true author of said articles, which contained excerpts from a recently released book entitled “Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan,” was a member of the Mormon Church named Benjamin Winchester, and that just because Joseph Smith was editor at the time the articles were included in the Times and Seasons, doesn’t prove he condoned what they contained, or that he wrote them himself.
Neville points out that prior to these 1842 articles, statements had been made by the founding members of the LDS Church, including Joseph Smith, which assumed that the Book of Mormon had occurred from the area of the Midwestern United States to New York State. In addition, Native Americans of the US were occasionally identified as the descendants of Book of Mormon peoples. Mesoamerican adherents claim that while that may be true, Joseph Smith seems to have become convinced in the last few years of his life that Central America/southern Mexico was the most likely location, and they often point to these articles in the Times and Seasons as an indication of the strength of their position. They have analyzed the language used in the three anonymous 1842 articles and are fairly convinced that the word print study demonstrates Joseph Smith, John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff were the authors. Neville came to a different conclusion however, believing that the person who actually penned them had not been included in the study, and therefore had not been identified. As stated, his research led him to suspect Benjamin Winchester was the brain behind them. Most of “The Lost City of Zarahemla” is spent investigating the life, thought, and writings of Brother Winchester, and chronologically focuses on how, why, and when Winchester would have formulated these beliefs. Neville concludes his case by insisting that circumstantial evidence shows these articles could have been written by Winchester, delivered to the printing office of the Times and Seasons, and published without the endorsement of the Prophet Joseph Smith.
I have heard several Mesoamerican theorists blow off adherents of the Heartland theory as ignorant of the sciences necessary to truly understand the questions at hand. They criticize their knowledge of archaeology in particular, and argue that the United States model does not provide the setting nor the artifacts necessary to match details described in the Book of Mormon. Whether or not that is true, I do think pushers of the Heartland model suffer from the disadvantage of not having had the same amount of time, money, people, and expertise that the Mesoamerican theorists have had to formulate their position, and thus, in comparison, are still in the early stages of their school of thought. And whether or not archaeological evidence will eventually bear them out, to immediately dismiss the premise of the Heartlanders as absurd is the same as considering the stand of early leaders of the LDS Church, who essentially believed many of the same things, as ridiculous.
Those interested in reading this book ought to also consider the reviews given by Matthew Roper, Paul Fields, and Larry Bassist (adherents to the Mesoamerican model), which discuss the problems they see with Neville’s arguments, available at:
And Jonathan Neville’s responses to their criticism:
http://interpreterpeerreviews.blogspot.com/
“The Lost City of Zarahemla” reads like a detective story, prepared by a lawyer collecting evidence for his case. It includes twelve appendices which contain a number of the sources used in the book. This contribution to the Heartland theory succeeds in stirring up more speculation over what Joseph Smith himself actually believed about Book of Mormon geography by the time he died. I don’t think many other books have looked at the context of the anonymous 1842 Times and Seasons articles in such detail. As much as Mesoamerican adherents wish the Heartland theory would die out, works like “Lost City of Zarahemla” are only going to fan the flames.