Brandley’s Map – Another Useless Shot in the Dark, Part VI

According to Mormon, the Land of Nephi “which was bordering even to the sea, on the east and on the west, and which was divided from the land of Zarahemla by a narrow strip of wilderness, which ran from the sea east even to the sea west” (Alma 22:27). This should be as plain as a statement needs to be not to be misinterpreted. That is, The Land of Nephi ran from sea to sea, and to the north of the Land of Nephi, between the Land of Nephi and the Land of Zarahemla, was a narrow strip of wilderness that RAN FROM THE SEA EAST EVEN TO THE SEA WEST!

What is so hard to understand about that?

The Land of Nephi, the Narrow Strip of Wilderness and the Land of Zarahemla ran in basically a straight line from the East Sea to the West Sea

Yet, Brandley, in his description of the River Sidon, claims: 1) The narrow strip of wilderness runs east and west around about on the edge of the seashore; 2) Manti is near the narrow strip of wilderness, that is by the sea; 3) The head of the river Sidon is by the narrow strip of wilderness, that is by the sea. Conclusion: As rivers run to the sea, the river Sidon runs from Zarahemla south to Manti, and through the east/west narrow strip of wilderness to the “head of the river Sidon” near the sea.

Contrary to Brandley’s comment, the Sidon River does not run from “Zarahemla south to Manti, and through the east/west narrow strip of wilderness to the “head of the river Sidon” near the sea.”

After all, south of Zarahemla is the Land of Nephi, which was in much higher ground that that of Zarahemla, which not only was in the lowlands, but probably near sea level. At least we know that the Land of Zarahemla, through which the River Sidon flowed, was at a lower level than the Land of Nephi, as attributed to numerous scriptures which point out that the Lamanites contiunually “went down” to attack the Nephites in the land of Zarahemla.

However, Brandley continually tries to point out that the Sidon River flowed north to south to the sea. This is, of course, necessary for his Land of Promise model, since he uses the Mississippi River as his River Sidon which, obviously, flows from the north to the south.

The scripture in question is: “And it came to pass that the king sent a proclamation throughout all the land, amongst all his people who were in all his land, who were in all the regions round about, which was bordering even to the sea, on the east and on the west, and which was divided from the land of Zarahemla by a narrow strip of wilderness, which ran from the sea east even to the sea west, and round about on the borders of the seashore, and the borders of the wilderness which was on the north by the land of Zarahemla, through the borders of Manti, by the head of the river Sidon, running from the east towards the west -- and thus were the Lamanites and the Nephites divided” (Alma 22:27).

In considering this statement, it should be kept in mind that its purpose is to describe the Land, not the river Sidon. The Land in this case was a narrow strip of wilderness between the Land of Nephi and the Land of Zarahemla. This land “ran from the sea east even to the sea west, and round about on the borders of the seashore, and the borders of the wilderness which was on the north by the land of Zarahemla, through the borders of Manti, by the head of the river Sidon, running from the east towards the west.” The parenthetical inclusion of the river Sidon is of secondary import to this sentence. In other words, the sentence could be rendered: “ran from the sea east even to the sea west, and round about on the borders of the seashore, and the borders of the wilderness which was on the north by the land of Zarahemla, through the borders of Manti, running from the east towards the west.” The inclusion of the parenthetical inclusion of “by the head of the river Sidon,” is meant only to convey where the narrow strip of wilderness was located—or, stated differently, that the narrow strip of wilderness ran “by the head of the River Sidon.”

However, Brandley wants to claim that the import of the River Sidon here iust to tell us that the river ran by the sea, when Mormon is describing the Narrow Strip of Wilderness which ran from Sea to Sea!

He confuses the issue when he tries to tell us that the narrow strip of wilderness ran along the Sea, and not from Sea to Sea. However, when we use Mormon’s exact words, we find that the narrow strip of wilderness, which “ran from the sea east even to the sea west,” also curved up along both seashores as shown in the image below:

The Narrow Strip of Wilderness, which ran from the sea east even to the sea west, and round about on the borders of the seashore, and the borders of the wilderness which was on the north by the land of Zarahemla

Thus, Mormon wrote: “and round about on the borders of the seashore.” Thus, with this curved border which encroached into the Land of Zarahemla, and inhabited by Lamanites, caused Mormon to add: “And thus the Nephites were nearly surrounded by the Lamanites; nevertheless the Nephites had taken possession of all the northern parts of the land bordering on the wilderness, at the head of the river Sidon, from the east to the west, round about on the wilderness side; on the north, even until they came to the land which they called Bountiful” (Alma 22:27,29).

On the other hand, the River Sidon had its “head” in or by this narrow strip of wilderness, which would have been in the highlands of the Land of Nephi, and flowed NORTH toward Zarahemla and “ran by the land of Zarahemla” (Alma 2:15). Since the bodies of the dead were thrown into the River Sidon (Alma 3:3), and that battle took place near the Wilderness of Hermounts, which was to the north and west of Zarahemla (Alma 2:34-37), we can accurately assume that the Sidon River flowed not only past Zarahemla from the South, up in the narrow strip of wilderness, but northward across the Land of Zarahemla, for Alma tells us that the last part of this battle “was beyond the borders of the land” (Alma 2:36).

The trouble Brandley has with this is because he is convince the Land of Promise was in North America and that the Mississippi River was the River Sidon. In so doing, he has to try and fit the scripture into his model, which is the wrong way to go about scriptural support. Obviously, one MUST start with the scripture, not a place. He, like almost all Book of Mormon historians, have made this classical mistake. When starting with a land, the scripture must be made to fit the land chosen. When starting with the scripture, a land can be found that fits the scripture. Obviously, Brandley's map DOES NOT fit the scripture!

(See the next post, “Brandley’s Map – Another Useless Shot in the Dark, Part VII,” for an understanding of a river’s head (headwaters) and its mouth, which Brandley tries to obscure with meaningless explanations)