Ixtlilxochitl’s Toltec History (Obras Historicos)

English translation from the Works of Ixtlilxochitl (1610).

Read Ixtlilxochitl & Evidence for the Book of Mormon in Mesoamerican Codices for more detail and introductory information on Ixtlilxochitl and his writing’s relationship to the Book of Mormon. See “Notes” at the end for important notes on likely date corrections.

The first published Spanish version of Ixtlilxochitl's Aztec History from 1848 Kingsborough's Antiquities of Mexico.  And a quick and dirty google translation of it here.
The 2nd Spanish version of Ixtlilxochitl's 'Obras Historicas', compiled by Alfredo Chavero in 1891, book here. 
Footnotes partly by John Pratt from his page here. Chapters section from first major published English translation (2000) book here.

The section below begins on page 21 of the Chavero found here and 321 of Kingsborough here.
A list of other codices which tell many of the same stories can be found here.

First Account: Creation of the World.

Buy the Book Here!

1:1. A history of the events in New Spain [central Mexico] including many things regarding the knowledge and accomplishments of the Tultecas from the creation of the world to its destruction, and up to the arrival of the third inhabitants called Chichimecas, and on up to the arrival of the Spanish, taken from the original history of New Spain.

1:2. The creation of the world and things pertaining thereto, including the origin of man. The omniscience of God and what He has revealed to the Tultecas.

1:3. The Tultecas had a knowledge of the creation of the world by Tloque Nahuaque, including the planets, mountains, animals, etc. They also knew about how God created a man and a woman from whence all mankind descended and multiplied. They recorded many other events that are not included in this account, inasmuch as the same events are recorded by other nations in the world.

1:4. The records indicate that the world was created in the year 1 FLINT, and the period of time from the creation to the flood is called Atonatiuh, which means the age of the sun of water because the world was destroyed by the flood. And it is recorded in the Tulteca history that this period or first world, as they called it, lasted for 1,716 years, after which time great lightning and storms from the heavens destroyed mankind, and everything in the earth was covered by water including the highest mountain called Caxtolmolictli, which is 15 cubits high.

1:5. To this they recorded other events, such as how, after the flood, a few people who had escaped the destruction inside a Toptlipetlacalli, which interpreted means an enclosed ark, began again to multiply upon the earth.

1:6. After the earth began again to be populated, they built a Zacualli very high and strong, which means the very high tower, to protect themselves against a second destruction of the world.

1:7. As time elapsed, their language became confounded, such that they did not understand one another; and they were scattered to all parts of the world.

1:8. The Tultecas [Olmecs], consisting of seven men and their wives, were able to understand one another, and they came to this land, having first crossed many lands and waters, living in caves and passing through great tribulations. Upon their arrival here, they discovered that it was a very good and fertile land.

1:9. It has been reported that they wandered for 104 years in different parts of the land until they settled in Huehue Tlapallan, their homeland. This was in the year 1 FLINT and 520 years had elapsed since the flood, which represent five venus centuries.

1:10. And 1,715 [1,716?, see v. 1:13] years after the flood, the people were destroyed by a very great hurricane that carried away trees, rocks, houses, and large buildings. Many men and women escaped the storm by hiding in caves and other places where the great hurricane could not reach them.

1:11. After a short period of time, they left the caves to see how much damage had taken place in the land. They discovered that it was populated and covered with monkeys that had been driven by the winds, as they had been in darkness all this time without being able to see the sun or the moon.

1:12. From this event, the saying came about that men had turned into monkeys. This period became known as the second period, or the second world, called Ehecatonatiuh, which means sun of wind. After the destruction, men began again to rebuild and to multiply upon the face of the land.

1:13. In the year 8 RABBIT, which was 1,347 years after the second calamity and 4,779 years since the creation of the world [correct if second calamity was in 1 FLINT, 1,716 years after Flood], it is recorded in their history that the sun stood still one natural day without moving, and a myth evolved wherein a mosquito saw the sun suspended in the air in a pensive mood and said, “Lord of the world, why are you standing still and why are you in such deep thought? Why are you not doing the work you are supposed to do? Do you want to destroy the world as before?” And the mosquito said many other things to the sun, but the sun still did not move. The mosquito then stung the sun on the leg, and seeing that his leg had been stung, the sun began again to move along its course as before.

65 Venus cycles is 104 years which is
two 52 year calendar rounds.

1:14. It had been 158 [156] years since the great hurricane and 4,994 [3,588?], he added years from the sun standing still rather than from the hurricane, the big clue being 1 FLINT] years since the creation of the world, when there occurred another destruction in this land. The people who lived in this corner of the land, which they now call New Spain, were giants called Quinametzin. The destruction consisted of a great earthquake that swallowed up and killed the people when the high volcanic mountains erupted. All of the people were destroyed and no one escaped; or if anyone did escape, it was those who were in the internal parts of the land. Many Tultecas, along with the Chichimecas, who were their neighbors, were killed. This was in the year 1 FLINT, and they called this time period Tlacchitonatiuh, which means sun of the earth.

1:15. In the year 1 FLINT, which was 5,097 [3,692?] years since the creation of the world and 104 years after the total destruction of the giant Quinametzin, all of the land of this new age being at peace, a council was held of the leading scientific, astrological, and artistic scholars of the Tultecas in their capital city called Huehuetlapallan. Here they discussed many things, including the destruction and the calamities that had taken place, as well as the movements of the heavens since the creation of the world. They also discussed many other things; but because of the burning of the records, we do not know or understand any more than what is written here. Among other things, they added the leap year to the calendar to adjust it with the solar equinox; and they discussed many other interesting things as will be observed from their records and laws regarding the years, months, weeks, days, signs, and planets. These, along with other interesting things, were understood by them.

1:16. It had been 166 years since they had adjusted their calendar with the equinox and 270 years since the giants had been destroyed when the sun and the moon eclipsed and the earth quaked and rocks were broken into pieces and many other signs that had been given came to pass, although man was not destroyed. This was in the year 1 TEMPLE [10 TEMPLE [1],] which, adjusted to our calendar, happened at the same time that Christ, our Lord, suffered. And they say that this destruction occurred in the first few days of the year.

1:17. These, and many other things, from the creation of the world up to our time, were understood by the Tultecas. As I have heretofore stated, according to what appears in their histories and paintings, they only made an abridgment, primarily of their origins; I mean all of the things that are found in their paintings and histories are just an abridgment compared to the records that the first archbishop of Mexico ordered to be burned.

1:18. It had been 305 [354] years since the time of the eclipsing of the sun and the moon, 438 [387] years since the time of the destruction of the large Quinametzin [he meant since the Incarnation, see verse 1:19], and 5,486 [4,211] years since the creation of the world, when Chalcatzin and Tlacamihtzin, chief leaders and descendants of the Tulteca royal lineage, following many years of quiet peace, commenced to desire the usurpation of the kingdom, desiring to overthrow the legitimate successor. This was the year 13 REED.

1:19. They were exiled, and there began to be wars, and they cast them out of the City of Tlachicalzincan, in the region of Hueytlapallan, their homeland. And they were cast out with their families and allies, their men as well as their women, and a great number were exiled. They left in the year following 1 FLINT, banished from all that land, as you will see in that which follows [in Chapter 2:1]. And this transpired, according to our calculations, 439 years [or perhaps 388 AD? See note 8] after the birth of our Christ the Lord.

1:20. The ancestors of the natives of this land that is now called New Spain, according to the common and general opinion of everyone, as well as that which appears demonstrated in their paintings, came from the Occidental areas.

1:21. And all who are now called Tultecas, Aculhuas, and Mexicanas, as well as the other people in this land, boast and affirm that they are descendants of the Chichimecas. The reason, according to their history, is that their first king, whose name was Chichimecatl, was the one who brought them to this new land where they settled. And it was he, as can be deduced, that came from the Great Tartary [Persia, Caspian & Asia], and was part of those who came from the division of Babel. This account is described in great detail in their history, and it tells how he, their king, traveled with them crossing a large part of the world, arriving at this land, which they considered to be good, fertile, and abundant for human sustenance. As mentioned earlier, they populated the major part of the land, and more particularly that which falls along the northern part. And the Chichimecatl called the land by his own name.

1:22. In each place where the Chichimecatl settled, whether it be a large city or a small village, it was their custom to name it according to the first king or leader who possessed the land. This same custom prevailed among the Tultecas. The general area was called the Land of Tollan, after the first king who was so named. Be that as it may, this custom was prevalent in naming other cities and villages throughout the land.

1:23. Notwithstanding that some were called Tultecas, others Aculhuas, Tepanecas and Otomites, they all were proud to be of the lineage of the Chichimecas, because they all descended from them. However, it is true that there were divisions among the Chichimecas themselves. And some were more civilized than others, such as the Tultecas. And others were more barbaric, such as the Otomites, and others like them. Those who are pure Chichimecas, whose kings were direct descendants of the first king and founder Chichimecatl, were bloodthirsty men, warriors, and lovers of power, holding other nations in bondage.

1:24. Although one nation was inclined to righteousness and another nation was full of mischief idleness, being exceedingly haughty and proud and being warmongers, or although one nation was virtuous and another full of iniquity, both, as recorded in their history, came from the same lineage, the Chichimecas. And all are descended from the same forefathers; and as it has been said, they came from the Occidental areas.

1:25. In this land called New Spain, there were giants, as demonstrated by their bones that have been discovered in many areas. The ancient Tulteca record keepers called them Quinametzin. They became acquainted with them and had many wars and contentions with them, and in particular in all of the land that is now called New Spain. They were destroyed, and their civilization came to an end as a result of great calamities and punishments from heaven for some grave sins that they had committed.

1:26. It is the opinion of some of these ancient historians that these giants descended from the same Chichimecas mentioned earlier, and they say that in these northern lands, where the ancient Chichimeca Empire was located that there are villages where there are still men living who are over thirty hands tall. And it is of no wonder, that even our own Spaniards have not yet entered into the interior of the lands, but have only traveled along the coastal areas such as the lands of the Chicoranos and the Duharezases, and they have found men in these parts who are eleven and twelve hands[3] in height, and have been told that there are others even taller.

1:27. The greatest destruction that occurred among the Quinametzin was in the year and date that the natives call 1 Tochtli, signifying the date 1 RABBIT [2 RABBIT], 299 years after the birth of Jesus Christ, and with them ended the third age, which was called Ecatonatiuh, because of the great winds and earthquakes. And almost everyone was destroyed.

1:28. The Tultecas were the second civilization in this land after the destruction of the giants, and they had a knowledge of the creation of the world and of how the world had been destroyed by the flood; and many other things are recorded in their history and paintings.

1:29. … the word Tulteca means men of the arts and sciences, because those of this nation were great artisans, as you can see today in many parts, and especially in the ruins of buildings, such as Teotihuacan, Tula, and Cholula.

1:30. The most serious authors and historians of the ancient pagans included Quetzalcoatl, who is considered to be the first. Some of the modern pagans include Nezahualcoyotzin, king of Texcuco, and the two infants of Mexico, Itzocatzin and Xiuhcozcatzin, sons of King Huitzilihuitzin. And there are many others I could mention if it were necessary.

1:31. It is declared through their histories about the god Teotloquenahuaque, Tlachihualcipal Nemoanulhuicahua Tlaltipacque, which, according to the correct interpretation, means the universal god of all things, creator of them and in whose will lives all creatures, lord of the heaven and of the earth, etc. After having created all things, he created the first parents of men, from whence came forth all others; and the dwelling place and habitation that he gave them was the world.

1:32. It is said that the world had four ages. The first, which was from the beginning, was called Atonatiuh, which means sun of water, signifying that the world was terminated by a flood. The second, called Tlachitonatiuh, means sun of earth, because the world came to an end by great earthquakes, in such a manner that almost all of mankind was destroyed. This age or time occurred during the time of the giants, who were called Quinametintzoculihicxime.

1:33. The third age, Ecatonatiuh, means sun of air, because this period came to an end by winds that were so strong that they uprooted all of the buildings and trees and even broke the rocks in pieces; and the majority of mankind perished. And because those who escaped this calamity found a large number of monkeys that the wind must have brought from other parts, the survivors said man must have been changed into monkeys.

1:34. Those who possessed this new world in this third age were the Ulmecas and Xicalancas; and according to what is found in their histories, they came in ships or boats from the east to the land of Potonchan, and from there they began to populate the land.

1:35. On the banks of the Atoyac River, which is the one that passes between Puebla and Cholula, there were found some of the giants who had escaped the destruction and extermination of the second age. Taking advantage of their size and strength, they oppressed and enslaved their new neighbors.

1:36. The principal leaders of the new settlers determined to liberate themselves, and the means they employed were to invite the old settlers to a very solemn feast. After the old settlers became full and intoxicated, they were killed and destroyed with their own weapons, with which feat the new settlers remained free and exempt from bondage, and this increased the domain and command of the Xicalancas and Ulmecas.

1:37. The people were living in a time of great prosperity, when there arrived in this land a man whom they called Quetzalcoatl. Others called him Hueman because of his great virtues. He was considered just, saintly, and good, teaching them by deeds and words the road to virtue. He instructed them to refrain from vices and not to sin, and he gave them laws and sane doctrine. He told them to constrain their appetites and to be honest, and he instituted the law of the fast.

1:38. And he was the first to be worshipped and to be placed in authority, and for that reason he is called Quiauhtzteotlchicahualizteotl and Tonaceaquahuitl, which means god of the rains and of health and tree of sustenance or of life.

1:39. After he had preached the above mentioned to all of the other Ulmeca and Xicalanca cities, and especially in the City of Cholula, where he spent a great deal of time, and seeing the small amount of fruit that resulted from his doctrine, he returned to the same place from whence he had come, which was to the east, disappearing at Coatzacoalco.

1:40. And at the time of his farewell from these people, he told them of times to come. He said that in the year that would be called 1 REED, he would return and then his doctrine would be accepted, and his children would be lords and heirs of the earth. He also told them that they and their descendants would pass through great calamities and persecutions. He prophesied of many other things that would surely come to pass.

1:41. Quetzalcoatl, by literal interpretation, means serpent of the precious feathers, with an allegoric meaning of, man of exceeding great wisdom. And Huemac (Hueman), some say, was the name given to him because his hands were printed, or stamped, on a rock, like a very fine wax, as testimony that what he prophesied would come to pass. Others say that Hueman means, he with the great or powerful hand.

1:42. A few days after he left, a great destruction and devastation took place, which is referred to as the third period of the world. At that time, the great building and tower of Cholula, which was so famous and marvelous, was destroyed. It was like a second tower of Babel that these people had built, with virtually the same idea in mind. It was destroyed by the wind.

1:43. And later, those who escaped at the end of the third age, in place of the ruins, the people built a temple to Quetzalcoatl, whom they named the god of wind, because it was destroyed by the wind. They understood that this calamity was sent by his hand. And they called it 1 REED, which was the name of the year of his coming. According to the history referred to, and from the records, the foregoing took place a few years after the birth of Christ our Lord.

1:44. After this age had passed, beginning at this time, entered the fourth age called Tletonatiuh, which means, sun of fire, because it is said that this fourth and last age will end by fire.

1:45. Quetzalcoatl was a man of comely appearance and serious disposition. His countenance was white, and he wore a beard. His manner of dress consisted of a long, flowing robe.

Second Account: History of the Toltecs

2:1. In the year 1 FLINT [439. Or perhaps 388?] [2], as has been said [in 1:19], the Tultecs [Nahuatls] were banished from their country and nation. They left fleeing and as they could, while the followers of Tlaxicholiucan, their kindred, came following, harassing them, until they arrived at a point more than sixty leagues away from their lands, where they stayed, reorganizing themselves and cultivating the land and doing other things for their sustenance.

2:2. This land they called Tlapallanconco and the discoverer of this land was called Cecatzin.

2:3. … they were near their country eight years making war, until they were entirely driven out….

2:4. And before going on, I want to make an account of Huematzin the astrologer [prophet]….

2:5. Before dying, he gathered together all the histories the Tultecas had, from the creation of the world up to that time and had them pictured in a very large book, where were pictured all of their persecutions and hardships, prosperities and good happenings, kings and lords, laws and good government of their ancestors, old sayings and good examples, temples, idols, sacrifices, rites and ceremonies that they had, astrology, philosophy, architecture, and the other arts, good as well as bad, and a resume of all things of science, knowledge, prosperous and adverse battles, and many other things; and he entitled this book calling it Teoamoxtli, which, well interpreted, means Various Things of God and Divine Book.

2:6. The natives now call the Holy Scriptures Teoamoxtli, because it is almost the same, principally in the persecutions and hardships of men.

2:7. Likewise he declared that when five hundred and twelve years [495 years, 498 by Ixtlilxochitl’s own reckoning][4] had passed since they left their country, a lord (chief, master, ruler) was to inherit the kingdom [Topiltzin inherited throne in AD 883, Moctezuma II in AD 1502], with the good will of some and against the will of others.

2:8. Further, that he was to have certain marks on his body, and the main one, he was to have curly hair, and of the hair itself nature was to form a tiara on his head, from birth until he died.

2:9. And during his life time he was to be, at first, very just, wise, and of a good government. In mid-life he was to be foolish and unfortunate, for which reason those of his nation were to perish with very great punishments from heaven, and no less than three destructions would they have, and that last would be in the year 1 FLINT.

2:10. Some men of his own lineage would rise and persecute him with very great wars, until nearly all of them were exterminated. And he was to escape and return toward where his ancestors had come from. And the latter part of his life, he was to be very just, wise, and discreet, as at the beginning.

Horned rabbit caused by Shope papillona virus.

2:11. And a few years before their destruction there were to be certain unnatural signs among them, that the rabbit was to grow horns like the deer, the bird Huetzitzilin was to grow spurs like cocks, and rocks were to give forth fruit, and principal women were to go on pilgrimages as is the use and custom. They were to have carnal access to the priests of the temples, the priests breaking the chastity that they professed there in their false religions.

2:12. And he said Tloquenahuaque, seeing this, would be angry against them, and the other gods (his inferiors) would punish them with lightnings, hails, ice, hunger, vermin, and other persecutions from heaven; and after this with wars with which they would exterminate each other completely.

2:13. Further, that so many years from that time, those who escaped this destruction would have another, and even some of the Chichimecas too, because that star Tecpatl (which is a flint) would again do its part.

2:14. These and other things he declared he understood through his astrology and the signs that planets had in store for them. And also these things came to pass, with God’s will, just as he said.

2:15. And almost in the last of these years two principal leaders and five minor ones got together to discuss whether they would stay in this land or whether they would go farther.

2:16. There arose among the Tultecs a great astrologer [prophet] who called himself Huematzin, saying to them that he found that since the creation of the world they had always had great persecutions from heaven, and after persecutions their ancestors had enjoyed great well being, prosperity, and long power, and their persecutions always occurred in the year 1 FLINT … and this year 1 FLINT once past, they would enjoy great well being, that it was a great evil, prelude to a greater good.

2:17. And Huematzin went on tell them that thus it was not convenient for them to stay so near their enemies. Besides, he found in his astrology that the land toward the rising of the sun was was extensive and prosperous, where the Quinametzin had lived for many years, and it had been many years since they had been destroyed, and it was unsettled.

2:18. Besides, the fierce Chichimecas, their neighbors, very few times went that far and the planet [omen bearing comet] that governed that land lacked many years before fulfilling its threats, that in the meantime they could enjoy a golden and happy century[5], they and all of their descendants to the tenth degree, succeeding from children to parents.

2:19. Besides, that planet did not govern over their nations, but rather over the Giants–and it might be that it would not hurt their descendants very much–and that in this place, they should some people to settle it and remain as their vassals, and as time went on they would return against their enemies and recover their country and nation.

2:20. These and many other things Huematzin declared and these two leaders and the other minor ones thought it good and agreed on it, carrying it all out.

2:21. And Huematzin told them that if they were different from the others, that is, from the Giants who had done wickedly, and were good, they should remain a few days supplying themselves with everything for what was ahead.

2:22. At the time that they left this land, it had been eleven years since they had left their country because they were near their country eight years making war, until they were entirely driven out, and three years in the land they called Tlapallanconco. As has been said, they left some of the common people, their women and children, so that they might settle it.

2:23. … they left Tlapallanconco and traveled another sixty leagues. And it is to be noted that history says that they traveled 12 days to each journey of a new land that they discovered, from which it can be deduced that they traveled six leagues a day, on account of having so many people, women, and children, all loaded. And besides, once started on a day’s journey they did not stop until night made them stop to sleep and rest; and each day they made six leagues, rather more or less. And 12 days having past, according to the way I figure, they must have traveled about 70 leagues.

2:24. They arrived at a good and fertile land which was called Hueyxallan, where they stayed four years. There they likewise sowed and did what had been done before where they had been previously, preparing for what was ahead. The discoverer was Ohuatzon, one of the five minor leaders or captains. And on the third year, which year was called 1 TEMPLE, they counted a tlalpilli, which was a period of thirteen years, since they had left their country and they stayed another year.

2:25. And then, at that point, they left there and traveled toward the rising sun, and more than a hundred leagues having been traveled, because they had traveled more than 20 days uninterruptedly, they arrived at Xalixco, a land which was near the sea, and here they stayed 8 years, the discoverer being Xinhcohuatl, also one of the five minor captains. And they did what they had done at the other places.

2:26. … they left Xalixco with all of their people in pursuit of their enterprise, traveling another 20 days, which must have been some 100 leagues, in different parts, as they had done in the other parts. They arrived at some islands and seashore that was called Chimalhuacan Atenco, where they stayed 5 years.

2:27. And this was the first place where man began to have access with their wives, and here the women began to give birth to children. They had made a vow at the time they left their country that for 23 years they were not to know their wives and those who broke this vow were to be cruelly punished. And thus the women began to give birth in these islands and seashore.

2:28. On the fourth year, which was 1 RABBIT, there having been two tlalpilli of years, it was 27 years since they had left their country, which in our count was the year 466 [414] from the birth of Christ our Lord.

2:29. And the five years having passed, they began the journey, always travelling toward the rising of the sun, going up to Tochpan, where they stopped. And on this road they travelled 18 days, which must have been about eighty leagues, and having arrived at this land, they stayed another five years, doing what they had done in the other parts, and they multiplied in number. The discoverer was Mexotzin, the last of the said five captains.

2:30. They took the road again through the same way of the orient. And they traveled 20 days, covering what must have been another hundred leagues, through different parts, and on the last day of them, they arrived in Quiyahuixtlan Anahuac, which were lands of the coast and arms of the sea, passing on canoes and boats from one part to another. And the time they stayed there was six years. Always they suffered great hardships. The discoverer of them was Acapichtzin, one of the principal leaders.

2:31. And then they took their road and traveled 18 days journey, which must have been some 80 leagues, in different parts, until they arrived at Zacatlan. The discoverer was Chacatzin, likewise one of the principal leaders. And the first year they arrived here was the year 1 REED, at which time they counted a Xiuhtlalpilli since they had begun their wars against their kindred nation.

2:32. And there was born at this time a son of his and because it was such a significant year they named the son after the land and he was called Zacapantzin. At that time it was fifty-two years since they had begun to have wars one with another. And they stayed here 7 years.

2:33. They traveled another eighteen days, which must have been some eighty leagues, when they arrived at Tutzapan, and they stayed there six years. And on the last of the six years, which was the year 1 FLINT, a son of his was born, and because it was such a noted year, and because a Xiuhtlalpilli had gone by, which are fifty-two years, since the left their country, calling the son Totzapantzin.

2:34. And then, the six years having passed, they began to travel, and they traveled twenty-eight days through different parts, at Tepetlal, which must have been some hundred and forty leagues. They stayed here seven years, the discoverer being Cohuatzon, which was the second time.

2:35. And the seven years having passed, they began their road, and they travelled eighteen days, which must have been some eighty leagues, until arriving at Mazatepec, the discoverer being Xiuhcohuatl. And here they stayed eight years and the sixth, which was 1 TEMPLE, they counted sixty-six [65] years since they had left their country.

2:36. And eight years having passed, they began to travel, and they traveled another eighteen days, which must have been another eighty leagues, until they arrived at Xiuhcohuac, where they stayed another eight years, the discoverer being Tlapalmetzin, which was the second time.

2:37. And then they began to travel, and they traveled twenty days, which must have been some hundred leagues, until arriving at Iztachuexuca, which is toward the north where they stayed twenty-six years, the discoverer being Metzotzin. And the third year, which was 1 RABBIT, that they were in the land seventy-eight years since they had left their country, thirteen years hence, which was 1 REED, they counted ninety-one since they left their country.

2:38. The twenty-six years having passed, they returned to Tulantzinco and they traveled eighteen days through different parts, which must have been some eighty leagues until arriving at the said place of Tulantzinco, where they made a very large house of lumber in which there was room for all of the people; and they stayed there almost sixteen years, and on the third year they counted a venus century, which is one hundred and four years, which are two Xiuhtlalpilli, since they had left their country, being the year 1 FLINT, which according to our count was the year of 543 [492] of the Incarnation, the discoverer being Acamapichtzin.

2:39. This was the third time he discovered new land. And further on we shall give an account of their lives and permanence in this land. In all parts where they arrived they left people so that they may settle these lands, as I have said at the beginning.

The following few verses are found in another place in the Kingsborough version (p. 213), but Chavoro places it here since it deals with this timeframe]

2:40. Banished from their homeland, the Tultecas undertook their journey along the coast. Traveling through the country, they arrived at California by the sea, which they called Hueytlapallan, which today is called Cortez, which name was given because of its reddish [colorado] color. The date of their arrival was in the year CE Tecpatl, which corresponds to 387 AD.

2:41. Following along the coast of Xalixco (Jalisco) and all along the south, leaving from the port of Huatulco 30 and traveling through diverse lands, they arrived at the province of Tochtepec, which is located along the sea north. And after walking and exploring, they settled in the Tolantzinco [new Tolan?], leaving colonies in the places where they made Great Houses (hecieron mansion).

2:42. The Tultecas were the third settlers of this land, counting the giants [tall ones] as the first, with the second being the Ulmecas (olmecs) and Xicalancas. While in Tolantzinco [new or ‘little’ Tula] they counted one hundred and four years of having left their homeland. The names of the seven leaders/chieftains who led them, and among whom the government took turns, were ‘: 1- Tlacomíhua that others call Ácatl: 2- Chalchiuhmatzin: 3- Ahuecatl: 4- Cóatzon: 5- Tiuhcoatl: 6- Tlapalhuitz: 7- Huitz: whom later populated the city of Tollan, head of the monarchy. Seven years after it was founded, they elected king and supreme lord, the first being Chalchiuhmatzin Chalchiuhtlatanac which was in the year Chicome Acatl and in our dates, 510 AD.

Third Account: Kings of the Toltec Empire

3:1. In the year of 1 TEMPLE (which is the figure of a house, sign of a planet which properity and properous and abudant power, lucky in all things), the Tultecas, or rather Heutlapalanecas, arrived in Tula, a city which was the seat of their kingdoms and power for many years, and according to our count it was the year 556 [505?] of the Incarnation….

3:2. And having arrived at this place and land [Tolantzinco], the Tultecas thought it very good, and especially Huematzin, the astrologer [prophet] who led them, who was already more than 180 years old. And seeing the location so good for their purpose and the temperateness of the land, and the other things which he found in his astrology to be good for a city, they began to build it. And for six years they were building houses, temples, and other things they used and were accustomed to.

3:3. And they agreed to swear one of the principal men as king and lord of all of them; and seeing that when they were in Xiuhcohuac and Huexutla (which is a place of Panuco and Tampico) the Chichimecas, their competitors, were very near, and that the Chichimecas had bothered them at these two places, and seeing that they had them so near and fearting their would someday rise against them and take away their lands, towns and places, they agreed to go see the lord who at the time was ruled of the Chichimecas, and ask them to give a son or very near relative, so that they would swear him as their king and lord. And with this they were also to ask him upon his word that neither he nor his descendants at any time would bother them.

3:4. This agreement and opinion was considered good, for the old astrologer Heumac prophesied it. Besides, he had found in his astrology that in times to come this land was to be settled by the Chichimecas.

3:5. And thus, with this determination, some of the principal men, with presents of gold and other things, went to see the lord of the Chichimecas, who, seeing what the Tultecas asked of him, was very pleased and considered it all as good. He gave his word that neither he nor his descendants would bother them; and he gave a young son he had, whom they brought with great rejoicing all the way to Tula.

3:6. And it was already the year 7 REED and ours of five hundred sixty two [511]; and the same year they swore him as their king and married him to a lady, daughter of the principal Tultecas, who was Acapitzin. And they called him Chalchiuhtlanetzin, which means “precious stone that illumines”, meaning to say that with their new lord they were illuminated (enlightened) and were rested and were free from worry and persecutions.

3:7. And they ordered that their kings were not to reign more than fifty-two years, and that when these years passed, if he were still alive, his son, the legimate successor, was to take charge of the government; and that if he died before the fifty-two years, the republic was to govern until finishing out the term.

3:8. And thus, this Chalchiuhtlanetzin governed for fifty-two years, and almost on the last of them (the years) he died, and he was buried in the principal temple with his royal insignias, different from the way it was later done, which was to burn the bodies, as shall be related in its place.

3:9. After his death, his legitimate successor, Ixtlilcuechahuac, known also as Izacatecatl, succeeded him in the same year, and according to our count it was in the year six hundred and fourteen [563]…. And he ruled another fifty-two years like his father. At thirty-two years of his government, which was in 1 FLINT, the Tultecas counted two hundred and sixty years since they had left their country [actually this occurred in the 32nd year of the next king].

3:10. After the death of this lord, his son, legitimate successor, called Huetzin, succeeded him in the same year that his father died, which was 6 RABBIT, and ours of six hundred sixty six [614] of the Incarnation.

3:11. Turning to our history, King Huetzin, who was the successor, as we have already said, governed the fifty-two years, and on the last of them (years) he died, which was the year of 6 RABBIT, and in our count seven hundred and seventy-eight [666].

3:12. He (Heuztin) was succeeded by his legitimate son called Totepeuh, who governed his kingdom and possessions in quiet peace and his last parents as his last parents and ancestors had done, for fifty-two years. And on the last he died, being succeeded by his son Nacaxoc in the year 5 TEMPLE, which in our count was seven hundred and seventy [717] of the Incarnation. And this Nacaxoc governed another fifty-two years with the same order as his ancestors.

3:13. The fifty-two years having passed, King Nacaxoc died and was succeeded by his son Mitl which was in the year 5 TEMPLE, and this time adjusted to ours, it was in the year eight hundred and twenty-two [769]….

3:14. This Mitl reigned for fifty-nine years and broke the ancient order of the Tultecas of reigning fifty-two years. He was a man of great government, built great temples, and other memorable things, and he built among the temples he made one of the Frog, goddess of water, a very beautiful temple. All its ornaments were of gold and precious stones and the frog was of emerald. The Spaniards who came to this land got to see it, and they gave a good account of it.

3:15. Almost at the end of the fifty-nine years, this lord died, which was the year of 11 REED, and in ours of eight hundred and eighty [828]….

3:16. And after his death his wife Queen Xiutlaltzin succeeded in the kingdom. She reigned four years and died. Her son, legitimate successor, called Tecpancaltzin, inherited the kingdom.

3:17. And before going on, I want to make an account of the state in which the Tulteca nations were. At this time, almost for 1,000 leagues they had settled and built towns and cities, villages and places. Among the most famous was Teotihuacan, which means “City and Place of God”. This city was greater and more powerful than Tula, because it was the sanctuary of the Tultecas: it had very large and tall temples, the most immense building in the world, which even today appear in their ruins, and other great curiousities.

3:18. In Toluca they made some palaces all of stone carved in figures where were all of their calamities, wars and persecutions, triumphs, good happenings, and prosperities. In Cuahnahuac, another city with a famous ancient work, was a palace all built (carved) of large stones, of hewn stones without mud, nor mortar, nor beams, nor any lumber, but only some large stones placed one against the other, and they also founded other great cities like Cholula, and Xalixco, Yototepec of the South Sea [Pacific], and many other cities that were to the South and toward the Orient, which are now all destroyed, although in their ruins they show that they were the greatest cities in the world.

3:19. The Idols that the Tultecas had of old were the most principal, which were Tonacatecuhtli, and today his personage is in the highest Cu (temple of this people), which is dedicated to the Sun. The name means God of Sustenance. His wife they regarded as a goddess. They say that this god of the sustenance was a figure of the sun and his wife of the moon.

3:20. And they had other gods which they called the brothers and sisters of the sun and moon, of which there are still pieces in the Cus (temples).

3:21. And they had another idol which they have worshipped up until the time the Spaniards came. It was Tlaloc. Tlaloc temple was in the highest sierra of Texcuco, and pieces of it are still there. And they say that this idol was a god of stormy rains, and that he was very brave king of the Quinametzin (who are the Philistines) [giants]. He did great things and for that reason they set him up as a god.

Table 2. Toltec king reigns.
(Years listed match the Aztec years shown.)

3:22. These false gods were the oldest ones and the main ones of more than two thousand years of the Tultec history. In addition, Texcatiputla and Huitzilopuchtli who were over certain very brave gentlemen. It is even found that Texcatiputla was a great necromancer (conjurer, magician) and was a great cause of the persecution of the Tultecas.

3:23. Although it is true that this people were very great idolaters, they did not sacrifice men nor did they do the superstitious sacrifices that the later Mexicans [Aztecs] were accustomed to use, except to Tlaloc. They sacrificed to him five or six maidens of tender age, taking out their hearts and offering them to him, and their bodies they burned, and to Tonacateuchtli, at certain times of the year they took the greatest evil-doers who had committed great crimes, to a certain artifice (device) which they called Telimonanaiquian, which means “meeting place of the stones”, and there they placed him in the middle, so that two stones met at the corners and tore him to pieces there with the artifice of these stones. Then they would bury him.

3:24. In the feasts they had, all the chiefs would get together. They had a dance that would last nearly all day, and they went through certain ceremonies, which, as I have already related, were not as abominable as those of the Mexicans when the Marquis del Valle [Cortez] came, and the entrance of Evangelical Law (gospel rule) into the land …

Fourth Account: Birth of Topiltzin, Last Toltec King

(Fifth Relation, of the Toltec kings and their destruction. Kingsborough p. )

4:1. Tecpancaltzin having inherited the lordship of the Tultecas, after he had governed ten years there came to his palace a maiden, very beautiful, who had come with her parents to bring a certain present for him. And they even say that is found in history that black honey of maguey and some chiancacas, sugar of this honey. They were the first inventors of this delicacy; and as it was a new thing, they brought it as a gift to the king.

4:2. These gentlemen, being of noble blood and of his own lineage, the king was very pleased to see them and granted them many favors. He thought a great deal of this present, and on account of her beauty, he grew very fond of this maiden, who was called Xochitl, which means Rose Flower.

4:3. He ordered them to favor him with this present and he ordered that their daughter bring it alone with some woman servant. And the parents, not thinking of what might happen, were very pleased, and gave him their word that they would do so.

4:4. And after a few days the woman came to the palace with a woman servant loaded with honey, chiancaca, and other small gifts newly invented, or rather, maguey preserves. As soon as she arrived, they notified the king that the maiden, daughter of the gentlemen who invented the maguey honey, called Papantzin, was there. The king was very pleased and order her to be brought alone with the gift she brought.

4:5. And the servant, who was an old nurse of hers, was ordered to sit in the room and the king ordered that they give her many mantles and gold, and go entertain her until it was time for her to return with her mistress. And the servants did so, bringing in the maiden alone, and rendering all kinds of service and entertainment to the servant woman, according as the king commanded it.

4:6. The king, having seen the gift of the maiden Xuchitl and her parents, was very pleased, and he told her how he had been fond of her for days, begging her to accede to his wishes, that he would give her his word to do many favors to her parents and to her.

4:7. Consequently they were quite a while in the rendezvous until the maiden, seeing that there was no way out of it, had to do what the king ordered her to do. His low desires having been satisfied, he had her taken to a small place outside the city, placing many guards there. And he sent word to her parents that he had given her to certain ladies to be instructed, because he wanted her to marry a king, neighbor of his, as a reward for the present she had brought him.

Events in 1 FLINT.

4:8. He told her parents not to be sad, and to consider her as if she were at their home; and with this he granted them many favors and gave them certain towns and vassals so that they would be lords over the inhabitants and their descendants. Her parents, although they were sorry about it, pretended not to be, for, as it is said, where there is strength, right is lost.

4:9. And the king went often to see the lady Xuchitl, his mistress, who was in a very strong, small place, on a hill call Palpan. She was waited on and feasted to be sure, as something belonging to the king, the Tulteca monarch.

4:10. In a very short time she became pregnant and gave birth to a son whom his father named Meconetzin, which means child of the maguey, in memory of the invention and virtues of the maguey. The child was born in the year of 1 REED, which according to our count was that of nine hundred [843]…. This child had nearly all of the signs that the astronomer Hueman said the Tulteca king was to have, in whose time and government the Tultecas were to be destroyed.

4:11. The parents of the maiden Xuchitl, for they considered her a maiden, seeing that it was almost three years since they had seen their daughter, were very, very sorry, and they always tried to find out where she might be. Since the city of Tula was so large and there were so many houses of lords (gentlemen), this time period of three years passed without success on their part.

4:12. Almost at the end of the third year they found out that the king had her at a certain place with many guards, at a place called Palpan, as I have already stated, and that no person could see her. The king had ordered particularly that no relative be allowed to enter the place.

4:13. And this gentleman (the father) seeing the command of the king, was very worried and sad, and looked for a way to be able to enter without be recognized. Not finding any way, he disguised himself, dressing himself as a farmer, pretending (feigning) that he had gone to the city to sell certain things.

4:14. Since it seemed to the guards that he was a simpleton, they let him enter, he having pretended he wanted to see that place. He told the guards certain things so that they would let him enter, and thus they gave him permission and he entered looking in all directions.

4:15. And entering through some gardens he found his daughter, who held the child in her arms. As he recognized her, he was overjoyed with tenderness on seeing his daughter, and asked her whether the king had put her in that place to play with children, not knowing that it was his grandson. The daughter, although with shame, then related to her father all that had happened with the king and he was very sad. However, he let it be (tolerated it) because it was something that touched his honor.

4:16. Then taking leave of his daughter, he started back. The next day he went to see the king, complaining of the affront he had done to him. The king consoled him and told him not to be sad, that since it was a thing of the king that he didn’t suffer any affront, and besides, the child would be his heir, for he did not want to marry any lady.

4:17. And many other things were said to Xuchitl’s father by the king as he granted favors to him and to his relatives. And the king ordered that whenever he and his wife wanted to see Xuchitl, they could do so, provided that she did not go out of that place.

4:18. The king trusted his guards because they were persons of his devotion. And the king did all these things because they lived at that time with such uprightness that the Tultecas his vassals considered any small chance or fault on the part of the king as a great evil.

4:19. And with this, the good old Papantzin returned to his house somewhat consoled, consoling his wife and relatives. And from then on they often went to see the shut up daughter as often as they wanted to.

4:20. King Tecpancaltzin having governed fifty-two years and, as he was still alive, he decided to have Meconetzin, his natural (illegitimate) son sworn king. His son, known also by the name of Topiltzin, was already a man over forty years old, and very virtuous and a great wise man.

4:21. And in order that the Tultecas would not invent any novelty (there were three lords of his lineage very near heirs, who were worthy on account of their great honor and virtue and who were in his kingdom residing far away from the city of Tula more than two hundred leagues near the South Sea in Xalixco and other places), he called together some friends and relatives of his, particularly those who were devoted to him.

4:22. Among those called together were two very important leaders who controlled very large lands and many cities and provinces, the one being Cuauhtli and the other Maxtlatzin. Many other gentleman (nobles) attended. He told them what he had planned, saying that if they agreed to this, they would be in the city of Tula and they and their children would govern all the kingdoms and possessions, becoming principal heads over all kings and vassals, all three important leaders governing in close accord, although his son was to have the highest (supreme) place, as his heir to be king of kings as he was.

4:23. This agreement seemed good to these two kings, and they agreed to it, swearing that this Topiltzin as their king and monarch, with the rites and ceremonies they were accustomed to use. This swearing was in the year 2 REED and ours of 937 [883]….

Fifth Relation, of the Toltec kings and their destruction

(Kingsborough p. 329)

5:1. Topiltzin had been ruling [nearly] forty years when the signs which the astrologer [prophet] Hueman had pronosticated began to appear on earth as well as in the sky. Topiltzin, almost at the last of these forty years had committed very grave sins, and with his bad example, so had all of the people of Tula and the rest of the provinces and cities and lands of the Tultecas.

5:2. And the ladies would go on pilgrimages to the temples, sanctuaries and false gods, and would get mixed with the priests. And the Tultecs committed other grave and abominable sins.

5:3. For example, a very important lady from Tula went to Cholula to visit the temples of that city, which were founded seventy-eight years before, and especially a temple dedicated to the god 1 Reed. At the temple were two priests, one called Ezcolotli and the other Texpolcatl. As I have already said, the false priests of the Tultecas professed chastity, and it was a very great sin if they broke it. And thus, Texpolcatl, seeing this lady, who had already professed chastity, made love to her and had obtained her friendship.

5:4. And a few years later she gave birth to a child who was called Izcax. Later he and his descendants continued to inherit the office and dignity of these great false priests and pontiffs. She stayed as matron in the temple nearly all of her life until its destruction.

5:5. The inventors of these sins were two brothers, gentlemen of different parts, very brave and great necromancers. The elder brother was called Tezcatlipuca, and the younger Tlallauhquitezcatlipuca. Later the Tultecas set them up as gods.

5:6. The king, all his court and his vassals, persisted in great sin, doing things in this evil art they knew, with which they persuaded them easily to commit great sins and do ugly and abominable deeds.

5:7. The king, going one day to certain gardens and forests of his, found a rabbit that was there with deer horns, and he found the bird Huitzitzilin, sucking the nectar of the flowers, with a very long spur. And inasmuch as the king had seen many times in the Teoamoxtli that Hueman had painted that these were some of the marvels and signs he had pronosticated, he was very sorry.

5:8. He had the priests of the temples called; and when they were come he showed them what he had seen, now dead, for they shot them with a cervataua, and he also showed them the Teoamoxtli, and how these were signs of their total destruction. And so that their god could be appeased, it was necessary to make great feasts and sacrifices, rites and ceremonies to them.

5:9. But then in the following year, which was 1 TEMPLE and ours of 984 [921], at the time when wheat and fish rained, God our Lord began to punish these blind, perverse, and idolatrous people, sending them very great heavy showers, hurricanes, and toads from heaven that destroyed the greater part of their buildings. It rained almost a hundred days without stopping, for which reason they understood that the world seemed as if it were to end with another deluge. But the Lord through his mercy appeased the waters.

5:10. And the following year which was 2 RABBIT, a great heat and drought came, so that all the plants and trees dried up. And on the third year which was 3 REED, when they were beginning to be delivered from persecutions, some frosts fell that burned the whole earth and anything remaining. And on the fourth year which was 4 FLINT, such large hail and lightnings fell from heaven, and in such abundance, that they totally destroyed all the trees that escaped the previous calamities, and even the Magueyes were destroyed, without their remaining memory of anything. Even the buildings and strong walls were destroyed.

5:11. And this time of calamities having passed, the earth was quiet for nearly twelve years and the plants began to produce which was in 4 TEMPLE [937]. Then came many locusts, worms, vermin, and fowls that destroyed everything. Also there were very great wars with the three near heirs, all on account of the beautiful Xuchitl. Her son had inherited the kingdom and he governed the whole land. Although the Tultecas had had great persecutions from heaven, their forces and power were still great.

5:12. Likewise in this same year, almost at the last of it, the weevil ate up all of the grain in the granaries where the Tultecas kept it. Another four years passed with some rest, when on the fifth, which was in the year of 7 RABBIT [9 RABBIT, 942], during the first days they found a child on a hill.

5:13. It was very white and blond and beautiful. It must have been the devil. They took him to the city to show him to the king. When he saw him, he ordered him taken again to the point from whence they had brought him, because it didn’t seem to him to be a good omen; and the head of this child-devil began to rot on him, and from the bad odor many people would die.

5:14. The Tultecas tried to kill him, but they never could get to him, because all who approached would die right away. This bad odor cause a great pestilence throughout the land, so that of every thousand Tultecas, nine hundred died. All these things happened to them, and many other things, but in order to save space they are not set down here.

5:15. And the three lords, their competitors, did not cease damaging the few Tultecs who had escaped, taking little by little many provinces and cities subject to this great Topiltzin. And from that time forth there was a law that wherever a child was born that was very white and blond, when it was five years of age it was right away sacrificed. This law lasted until the coming of the Spaniards.

5:16. After a few days the pestilence relented, and Topiltzin, seeing that his competitors were little by little taking possession of his lands and provinces, decided to send them a great present of gold, mantles and precious stones, and jewels, by way of two ambasssabors, very brave gentlemen, and a game of ball equipment (for the game being sufficient to fill a medium-sized room) which game is called Tlachtli. Included among the gifts were four kinds of precious stones, that is to say, emerald, ruby, diamond, and jacinth; and also a ball, a carbuncle.

5:17. Topiltzin sent them word that enough of their wrath had been experienced, that they knew well the hardship he had had, and the persecutions from heaven, and that he was aware of his own ruination and their valor. And he asked that they accept the game of ball, which was the greatest treasure he had, and other precious stones, and other pieces of gold and jewels, and that just as the Tlachtli had four kinds of precious stones, all four very esteemed and equal, thus, neither more nor less, all four of them would govern their kingdoms and possessions, in very great peace and conformity.

5:18. And Topiltzin further stated to them that as between the four rulers, that whoever first ordered anything done that the other three would consider it as very well done, and they would live always in conformity and with each other, they and their descendants.

5:19. These and many other words the great Topiltzin sent to be told to his three competitors, fearing that they at some time might become lords of all. And Topiltzin told his three competitiors that if they did not want his friendship, they ought to desist from invading Tultec lands and cities–which is what worried the Tultecs–because the land was already so demolished that it no longer served any purpose and was very sickly.

5:20. It is found in history, besides in the account old men give, that this present and treasure was the greatest that was ever seen in the land. This Tultec treasure was so large and it weighed so much that onxi quipili tlacatl of the Tultecas were counted, which are eighteen thousand men and that it took them one hundred and forty days to move the treasure to Xalixco [Jalisco/West Mexico] in Quiyahuitztlanxalmolan.

5:21. When Topiltzin’s ambassadors arrived, they were well received and the treasure pleased the donees, but even then did the three enemies desist from pursuing their endeavor, although for the moment with feigned words did they bade the ambassadors farewell, saying to them that they would not discuss anything at all. However, they told Topiltzin’s ambassadors that they would stop doing them harm by destroying Topiltzin’s armies, and they said other words, neither very good nor very bad, but all cautious.

5:22. For this reasons the ambassadors returned very sorrowful, and gave their answers to the great Topiltzin. Although not very pleased, Topiltzin consoled himself because the greater part of the treasure had been taken to the enemy, which was made them quarrel the most. The enemy already had kingdoms and possessions; and they were very prosperous and free from calamities from heaven.

5:23. In the year of 1 REED and in ours of nine hundred and ninety-eight [947],… the three competitor kings of the great Topiltzin came into the city of Tula with a great army. They made fun of all the Tultecas as a shattered people and they entered into the very city.

5:24. Topiltzin, on learning of their entry, received them and ordered that they and their people be given whatever they needed. And he discussed with them peace and conformity again, just as he had done before by his ambassadors. They did not come for that purpose, but rather to avenge themselves, and so they refused to agree to it. They told him to get his people ready, that they would understand each other with arms.

5:25. Topiltzin, seeing himself so oppressed and that there was no way out, asked for time, for it was a law that before a battle they would notify each other some years in advance so that on both sides they would be warned and prepared. The idea was that their descendants, at some future time, could with just reason do the same. This custom was adhered to up to the time the Spaniards came to this land. They answered Topiltzin, telling him that they would give him ten years, and on the last of the ten years they would engage in battle at Tultitlan [Jalisco?].

5:26. And with the plan and agreement they returned to their lands, because their army was suffering very great hunger, for this land was such that even its inhabitants could hardly support themselves. And it is found in the histories that this journey that these three lords made with their army and so useless a journey, was made only for the purpose of seeing the Tultec land and the state of things in it, and to countermine and see the forces and resistance that Topiltzin might have. The pretext was that the soldiers were looking for food for their maintennce. They did not leave the city until they had seen it well.

Chapter 6: Fall of the Toltec Empire

(Quinta Relation, de los reyes Toltecas y de su destruction. Kingsborough p.331-332)

6:1. During the last days of the year 10 FLINT, these three chieftains returned with a greater army than at first, which was according our count the year 1008 [956]…. Already by this time the great Topiltzin had two armies stationed, one a hundred leagues [260 miles] from Tula, towards the lands and provinces of Tlahuicas [Morelos/Cuernavaca area], and the other in Tultitlan [Jalisco?], where he in person remained with his army and all his vassals. The general in command of the first army was a great captain called Huihuitenuxcatl.

6:2. Ever since their competitors had left, the Tultecs had done nothing but prepare themselves, make many arms, and gather from all the cities, provinces, and places, the people that there were, without omitting any men at all. And even women were loaded with food, for the people were few, although from the many few there came to be two very great armies, as I have clearly stated.

6:3. The scouts notified the first army that the enemy was near. The general went out to meet the army at a good place he had selected, and the two armies faced each other.

6:4. They engaged in battle, innumerable people dying on both sides. The war lasted three complete years. Those of Topiltzin had few reinforcements, while the three chieftains, their competitors, every day received great numbers of people. The Tultecs were vanquished and nearly all the people were killed in the battle. Many Tultec matrons fought very bravely, helping their husbands. Many of them died.

6:5. Having been vanquished, the great captain Huihuitenuxcatl, seeing himself lost, went fleeing from his enemies, and with some of the Tultecs he escaped to Tultitlan where the great Topiltzin was. Topiltzin was already prepared with his second army to fight with the enemy which was approaching. Topiltzin in the meantime, ordered certain of his men-servants and women-servants to take the children, his sons (the elder called Pochotl and the younger Xiloltzin) legitimate successors of the kingdoms, to the very high mountains and lands of Toluca, so that the lineage of the Tultec kings might not end with them. The servants immediately carried out the order.

6:6. When the enemy arrived, the armies fought cruelly, dying on one side and the other. They had been fighting forty days, day and night, when those of the great Topiltzin began to get discouraged with the small forces they had. Not being able to resist the great impetus of the enemy, Topiltzin in person and his old father and even their wives and other matrons of the city were obliged to go out and fight, plucking up heart, as it is said.

6:7. And among them were his mother, the beautiful Xuchital, fighting bravely and doing all they could. But finally they were vanquished, and killed, old men and young men, women, and children, none being spared. They were all there together, women as well as children, waiting to see how it would all end, for the war had been going on for fifty days.

6:8. In the year of 1 FLINT, on the last day of the month Totozoztzintli, on the first day of the week called Ollin, which according to our system was in the year 1011 [960],… the great Topiltzin, seeing himself and his people vanquished, went fleeing towards Tula, their city. But the enemy overtook them in Chiuhnauhtlan, although they couldn’t overcome them because they defended themselves.

6:9. Then they went fleeing to Xaltocan, and from there to Teotihuacan, then to Totolapan. And before they reached the place called Tultecaxochitlalpan and the beautiful Xochitl was killed by dagger stabs. Xiuhtenancatzin killed the old king who had defended himself bravely and Cohuanacoxtzin killed Xuchitl who had also defended herself bravely.

6:10. After these two were killed, these two enemy kings went pursuing Topiltzin. The two kings who swore allegiance to Topiltzin, Cuauholli, and Maxtla, and other Tultec lords, were overtaken and torn to pieces. And in the meantime Topiltzin went fleeing and got into Xico, a cave that is near Tlalmanalco, and thus they could not overtake him.

6:11. Beyond Xico the enemy overtook Huehuetunexcatl, the great captain, together with those Tultecas who had escaped, and there they had another cruel battle in which Huehuetunexcatl and the whole army died. A nurse took Topiltzin’s younger son, called Xilotzin, and with some other Tultecas she fled into the wilderness, making an escape. She went ahead with some Tultecas, nobles as well as plebians, who got into the lakes and sierras with their wives and children. Some whose swift feet saved them were those of Mallauxiuhcohuac, Macatepec, Totzatepec, Totoepec, Quauhquechallan, Tepexomacotlazallan, Chapoltepec, Culhuacan, and other parts.

Events in 1 REED.

6:12. The three kings, seeing that they had already killed everybody and that all remained uninhabited then went to the large Tultec cities. From the temples and palaces they took out all the treasures and riches that they found, and returned to their lands with the spoils of their enemies, no person remaining, because the land was very dry and sickly and fruitless.

6:13. Then a few days after that, Topiltzin left Xico with some of his servants, for his enemies were not to be seen. Seeing the land totally destroyed, he went up to Atlapallan, a province that reaches down to the South Sea [Pacific], a land very prosperous, rich, and well populated.

6:14. He said to his vassals, to the few who were in Culhuacan and who had gone there to escape from the enemy, that he was going towards the rising sun to some kingdoms and possessions of his ancestors, very prosperous and rich and that five hundred and twelve years [520] later he would return to this land in the year 1 REED and would punish the descendants of those kings, his competitors. And many other things he said, many impossible promises he made to his vassals, which would be too long to relate.

6:15. He returned once more to Xico (Xieco), and one night, with some Tultecas he left for Tlapallan [Tabasco area], travelling by night through the wilderness until he arrived at that place, where he afterwards lived almost thirty years. He was waited upon and honored by Talpaltecas, and died at the age of one hundred and four [156] years [dying in 1 REED in 999, 520 years before Cortez arrived], leaving many laws constituted, which later his descendant Netzahualcoyotzin confirmed. And he himself ordered his body to be burned with the rites and ceremonies that were later used (and he was the first to be burned), and he did and planned many other things. (“y otras muchas cosas que hizo y orden”… 1/3 way down p.332 Kingsborough)

Notes

Images and some commentary adapted from John P. Pratt Ixtlilxochitl’s Toltec History. Which was adapted from,

Brian, Amber, et al., translators, History of the Chichimeca Nation: Don Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl’s Seventeeth-Century Chronicle of Ancient Mexico (3 Oct 2019).

The translation of Chapter 1 is by Allen, Joseph L. Exploring the Lands of the Book of Mormon (Orem, UT: S.A. Publishers, 1989), pp. 139-147, where it is accompanied by excellent explanatory notes and maps. The text of that entire Chapter 11 of the book is on line at ancientamerica.org/library/media/382chapter11.htm. Another translation of the same material is included by Hunter, Milton R. and Ferguson, Thomas Stuart, Ancient America and the Book of Mormon (Oakland, CA: Kolob Publishers, 1950). That book is also excellent with many other sources also quoted. It is the source of the translation of Chapters 2-6, which was done by Arnulfo Rodriguez, a Spanish teacher at USC in 1939 from the 1891 Spanish edition.

Year names have two parts, a number from 1 to 13 and one of four glyphs. Ixtlilxochitl translated most of the numbers into digits, but left some in Nahuatl, including “ce” meaning 1, “ome” meaning 2, and “chicome” meaning 7. My translation of the glyphs are as follows: “Tecpatl” as “Flint”, referring to a flint knife for sacrifice, but also a comet which periodically causes destruction (see verse 2:13) “Calli” as “Temple” (which Ixtlilxochitl translates as “House” in v. 3:1, having lost the original meaning that a temple is a sacred house), “Tochtli” as Rabbit (v. 1:27), and “Acatl” as “Reed”.

Hunter and Ferguson detected an error of about 100 years (discussed in footnote 9) just after the time of Christ and perpetuated their correction of it all the way through to the end of the Toltec empire, dating all AD events about 104 years earlier than Ixtlilxochitl. For example, the birth of Topiltzin in 1 REED, which Ixtlilxochitl dates as 900, they date as about 785 (verse 4:10). They did not check to see if their correction matched the Aztec year names, which were clearly the primary source. Their mistake is only pointed out here to emphasize how this field is fraught with pitfalls. Overall their work is wonderful and brings together a wealth of other ancient sources. Similarly, Ixtlilxochitl perpetuated his mistake all through, and I make my best correction (52 years earlier than Ixtlilxochitl, see footnote 9) and perpetuate it thereafter.

This relationship to the Venus cycle was pointed out by L. Taylor Hansen in He Walked the Americas (Amherst, WI: Amherst Press, 1963), p. 223: “Venus, being the second planet from the Sun and Earth the third, swings around its internal orbit making thirteen revoltions to eight revolutions of the earth. Thus, among all the Indian tribes the Earth-number is eight, and the number of the Morning and Evening Star is thirteen. Eight thirteens would then bring the planets into their original position. This would be a full cycle, or one hundred and four years.” (See also Figure 3 in text for another reason that 8 and 13 are so useful.) That quotation was from her notes at the end of the book, referring to her chapter entitled “Prophecy at Cholula” which quoted the tradition that the white-and-bearded prophet Kate-Zahl had prophesied of just when the continual wars after the arrival of Cortez would end: “For five full Cycles of the Dawn Star, the rule of the warring strangers will go on to greater and greater orgies of destruction…. Know that the end will come in five full cycles …” (p. 168). Here, “full Cycle of the Dawn Star” refers a venus century, 104 years. This unit actually works out best without leap years because 5 cycles of Venus of 584 days exactly equals eight 365-day years (5 x 584 = 8 x 365 = 2,290 days). Thus, Venus realigns with the earth every 8 years. A round of 52 years is not a multiple of 8 years, but 104 years equals 13 x 8 = 104 years. Note also that five venus centuries (520 years) after the arrival of Cortez in 1519 brings one to the year 2039, 1 REED, the same year in which Quetzalcoatl was said to have promised to return to a people who would accept Him (v. 1:40).

The division into verses of Chapter 1 follows that by Joseph Allen, op. cit.

Note that the translation from the original term “hacia donde sale el sol” (see here) to “towards the rising sun” is problematic. Primarily because place names such as “Xalisco” (2:41), Tulancinco, Xiuhcohuac and Iztachuexuca do not fit with an eastward journey. We must then assume that the text has reference to some idiomatic expression when using these terms (2:17-generally, 2:25-to Xalixco, 2:29-to Tochpan, & 6:14-to “some kingdoms”). We see the same interesting opposite terminology in The Kolbrin, where the Egyptians sail from Punt (likely near the horn of Africa) “towards the sunsetting [east], past Kindia [India] to the land of Bemer [Indonesia]. Its not understood why the directions seem to be reversed, but they apparently are.

Although another explanation lies in the directions used by the Spanish Explorer Cabaza de Vaca who after being marooned in the New World lived with the Natives many years, and suggested in his book ‘Original Naratives’, Chapter 1, verse 1, that the Valley of Mexico was ‘west’ of Culiacan. (when in fact it is 257 leagues northwest). “He states, Culiacan… is 210 leagues west of Mexico”



Ancient Puebloan (aka. Anasazi) Timeline

This timeline goes along with our Book of Mormon timeline. Most notable is the idea that the Book of Mormon account of happenings after the Time of Christ which are dated in the text from 0 – 380 CE, correlate with the events among the Toltec, Chichimec/Aztlan culture of West Mexico, Southwest cultures and Cohokia which radiocarbon date from about 800 – 1180 CE. Two theories are provided to explain the dating discrepancy.

1599 CE – Don Juan de Oñate and 129 soldiers attacked and captured Acoma Pueblo, mutilating many survivors by cutting off hands and feet as punishment. Roberts/Old Ones, p. 91)

1598 CE – Oñate’s conquistadors marched to New Mexico through Chihuahua (Lekson p. 214)

Arrival of Spanish colonists (Lekson p. 246)

1541

Coronado’s soldiers camped in the Texas Panhandle (Lekson, p. 26)

1540

Coronado arrived at Zuni and “took” the pueblo (Stuart)

By this date, Cahokia was gone (Lekson, p. 26)

Coronado’s armies entered the Southwest’s deserts looking for gold (Lekson p. 247)

to 1541

Francisco Vasqueze de Coronado, inspired be de Vaca’s stories, mounted an expedition into the Southwest (Lekson, p. 25)

to 1542

Coronado’s expedition (Stuart)

1539

Spanish arrived in pueblo country (Roberts p. 218)

1537

The Papal Bull, Sublimis Deus, issued by Pope Paul III declaring Native Americans to have souls (Lekson, p. 24)

1536

Cabeza de Vaca, the shipwrecked Spaniard, wandred through a corner of New Mexico (Lekson, p. 25)

1535

Coronado arrived in Mexico City (Stuart)

Pizarro conquered the Incas (Stuart)

1530

Nuno de Guzman, one of Cortes’s more difficult lieutenants, assembled a large army at Culiacan to search for the seven cities (Lekson, p. 25)

1519

Cortés arrived as conqueror in Mexico (Stuart)

1500

By this time, Southwest populations had declined to levels of the eighth and ninth centuries (Lekson, p. 189)

By this time, no vestige remained of that earlier Anasazi political world: there was no longer any central government (Lekson p. 197)

1450

Paquimé’s fall, though it could be as late as 1500 (Lekson, p. 26)

Just about everyone (in former Anasaziland) was gathered into about a hundred large towns, clustered at Hopi, Zuni, Acoma, and Laguna in the Rio Grande Valley from Socorro in the south to Taos in the north — a very big change (Lekson p. 194)

After this date, dramatic decline in Pueblo towns; things grew much worse after European intrusion; more than fifty large Rio Grande pueblos were abandoned in historic times, leaving only twenty today (Lekson p. 197)

Little left of Hohokam’s earlier glories (Lekson p. 246)

Before this date in the south, ethnography has little useful to say (meaning oral stories of descendant puebloans has little value) (Lekson p. 249)

to 1500

Paquime sacked and burned sometime during this period (Lekson p. 214)

1440

Aztec king Moctezume I sent an expedition to the north to find Aztlan, the mythic source of the original Aztecs (Lekson, p. 191)

1420

Disastrous floods hit the Gila River drainage (Lekson p. 243)

1410

Arroyo Hondo declined again due to drought, burned in 1420 and abandoned by 1425 (Stuart)

1400

At the latest, Mogollon culture had disappeared (Martin p. 141)

Navajo arrive in Four Corners region (source?)

Mogollon uplands largely depopulated (Lekson, p. 24)

After this date, typical Anasazi village size jumped to more than 500 rooms … that effectively subugated the needs of the few to the will of the many (Lekson p. 195)

to 1450

A second large-scale “abandonment,” rivaling the Four Corners, emptied the southern Pueblo region — the big pueblos of the Mogollon uplands and along the toe of the Plateau (Lekson p. 1960

1386

to 1395

Decade of drought in Salt River (Hohokam) drainage (Lekson p. 206)

1384

Enormous floods along Salt River (Hohokam) (Lekson p. 205)

1382

Enormous floods along Salt River (Hohokam) (Lekson p. 205)

1381

Enormous floods along Salt River (Hohokam) (Lekson p. 205)

1375

Trafficking in Macaws ended (source?)

1370

Arroyo Hondo resettled (Stuart)

1360

to 1361

Catastrophic drought in drainage area of the Salt River (Hohokam) (Lekson p. 205)

1359

Disruptive flood along Salt River (Hohokam) (Lekson p. 205)

1358

Disruptive flood along Salt River (Hohokam) (Lekson p. 205)

1357

Disruptive flood along Salt River (Hohokam) (Lekson p. 205)

1350

Dental transfiguration noted in Guasave, Sinaloa (source?)

to 1400

Many of the Mexican cultures had collapsed (Martin p. 141)

to 1600

Pueblo IV: Large plaza-oriented pueblos; Kachina Phenomenon widespread; corrugated pottery replaced by plain utility types; black-on-white pottery declines relative to red, orange, and yellow types (Roberts from Lipe)

1345

Arroyo Hondo abandoned (Stuart)

1340

“The tree-ring reconstructions show that at 1300 to 1340 it was exceedingly wet,” said Larry Benson, a paleoclimatologist with the Arid Regions Climate Project of the United States Geological Survey. “If they’d just hung in there…” Though the rains returned, the people never did. —“Vanished: A Pueblo Mystery,” by George Johnson, April 8, 2008, The New York Times

1335

Precipitation declined around Arroyo Hondo (Stuart)

1325

First evidence of Kachina cult (Roberts p. 102; 150)

Mexican Aztec culture developed from anarchic post-Toltec culture in Central Mexico (source?)

1325 to 1350

Population of Pueblo IV people was as much as three-quarters lower than population of Anasazi around 1050 (Stuart)

1320

1320 to 1350s

On many mesas and isolated hillocks overlooking farmlands adjacent to the Rio Grande and Rio San Jose (in the Acoma area), people built thick-walled citadels (Stuart)

1310

Arroyo Hondo Pueblo, five miles south of Santa Fe at 7,100 feet, was founded; by 1330 the site was immense with more than 1,000 rooms (Stuart)

1300

There never was an “Anasazi tribe”, nor did anyone ever call themselves by that name. Anasazi is originally a Navajo word that archaeologists applied to people who farmed the Four Corners before 1300 AD. (BLM)

By this date, natural conditions (precipitation — the lack of) had forced Chacoan survivors to a few sites along rivers (Stuart)

By this date, only the best-watered east-facing canyons and slopes were still inhabited (Stuart)

Early this century, masked rain gods and the kachina cult, thought to have originated west of the Zuni area, began to penetrate the eastern pueblos and displace many older religious customs (Stuart)

Mid-century: Violence on the southern frontiers seems to have been largely sorted out, and settlements shifted downhill to the rivers’ open floodplains (Stuart)

By this time the Anasazi heartland (around modern Four Corners) was empty (Lekson, p. 23)

Cahokia was empty and derelict (Lekson, p. 152)

By this year, northern Chihuahua was one of the most densely settled areas in the southeast (compared to essentially empty at 1200) (Lekson, p. 176)

A watershed year, a demographic zenith for the Southwest, followed by catastrophic population decline, nearly complete reorganization of peoples and polities, and then centuries of colonization (by the Spanish) (Lekson, p. 189)

The Mexica, who would become the Aztecs, arrived in the Valley of Mexico from the north (Lekson, p. 191)

After this time, most Pueblo IV towns had only two or three large kivas — something happened around this time to radically change basic Anasazi house/village form (Lekson p.195)

End of migrations out of the Four Corners (Lekson p.195)

After this date until 1450, dramatic growth for Pueblo towns (Lekson p. 197)

T-shaped doors all but gone from the Plateau and Pueblo region, only to reappear throughout Paquime (Lekson p. 211)

Before this date in the north, ethnography has little useful to say (meaning oral stories of descendant puebloans has little value) (Lekson p. 249

Pueblos developed after this time as a reaction to state-level governments, conscious rejections of earlier hierarchies. They deliberately replaced the kings of Chaco with the priests of Zuni. (Lekson p. 251)

to 1500s

Galisteo basin pueblos controlled most of the turquoise trade by controlling Mount Chalchihuitl (“turquoise mountain”) in the Cerillos Hills — the Aztecs of Mexico actually had a place glyph for this mountain (Stuart)

to 1350

Population peaked across the whole Southwest, then plummeted sharply (Lekson, p. 189)

to 1340

“The tree-ring reconstructions show that at 1300 to 1340 it was exceedingly wet,” said Larry Benson, a paleoclimatologist with the Arid Regions Climate Project of the United States Geological Survey. “If they’d just hung in there…” Though the rains returned, the people never did. —“Vanished: A Pueblo Mystery,” by George Johnson, April 8, 2008, The New York Times

1295

“Fully half the Anasazi domain had been abandoned around 1295 and never reoccupied.” (Roberts p. 213)

1290

This decade, Tyuonyi, a great circular ruin in Bandelier National Monument, was founded, along nearby Frijoles Creek, a permanent stream (Stuart)

1286

Last construction date for Keet Seel (Roberts p. 105)

1285

Salmon abandoned by Mesa Verdeans (Frazier p. 135)

1280

It’s interesting that the BLM uses the word occupation. The Anasazi occupation of the Four Corners lasted until 1280. The Nazi occupation of France lasted until 1944.

The last villagers left Mesa Verde (Lekson, p. 163)

1276

to 1299

The great Chaco Canyon drought (Roberts p. 151)

The Great Drought (Lekson, p. 143)

1275

After this date, the erratic and declining rainfall turned into a series of deep, localized droughts (Stuart)

Even worse drought hit Anasazi region and violence spun out of control (Lekson p. 239)

1275

To enforce its failing rule [after yet another drought began in 1275], Aztec unleashed lethal force. At farmsteads, squads of warriors fell upon families failing in their duties, old and young. They were executed to intimidate other villages that might be thinking of slipping Aztec’s yoke. Men, women, and children were brutally and publicly killed and left to rot, unburied, in the ruins of their homes. These horrible scenes replayed a score or more times, but even terror could not hold Aztec’s failing polity together. —A History of the Ancient Southwest, by Stephen H. Lekson, p. 239. Image of Anasazi warriors from a website with no clear name displaying a Reproduction by Thomas Baker of an Anasazi Indian kiva mural unearthed at Pottery Mound, New Mexico.

1275 to 1300

The Great Drought brought Sinagua to collapse (source?)

1270

By this year, Aztec West’s Chaco-sized rooms had been subdivided into tiny unit pueblo rooms, and family “kivas” had been jamed into adjacent Chaco chambers (Lekson, p. 160)

1267

1267 to 1286

Construction of Betatakin (Roberts p. 96)

1263

Most Mesa Verdeans leave Salmon (Frazier p. 135)

1260

Drought struck again with a vengeance (Stuart)

Mesa Verdeans moved into Salmon this decade (source?)

1260 to 1270

Farmers on west-facing slopes were hardest hit by drought, while those on east-facing slopes survived (Stuart)

1259

A major volcanic eruption somewhere outside the Southwest dropped temperatures (Lekson, p. 162)

1253

1253 to 1284

Mummy Cave constructed (Frazier p. 77)

1250

After this time, precipitation became more erratic (Stuart)

By this decade, trade across the region increased (Stuart)

“Around 1250, you see an incredible change. Everybody’s moving into the canyons, building cliff dwellings. At Sand Canyon, 75% of the community lived within a defensive wall that surrounded the pueblo. All through southeastern Utah, northeastern Arizona, southwestern Colorado, the same thing’s happening. Suddenly, at 1250, the trade ware goes to zero. Before that, you had plenty of far-traded pottery, turquoise, shells, jewelry. Suddenly, nothing. And right at 1250, the ceramics revert from Mesa Verde-style pitches–tall, conical vessels with rounded bulblike bases–to the kinds of mugs made at Chaco 200 years earlier.” (Roberts from Bruce Bradley of Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, p. 150-151)

Construction start date for Keet Seel (Roberts p. 105)

A general breakdown in annual predictability of precipitation made farming increasingly chancy (Lekson, p. 162)

Paquimé rose to prominence (Lekson, p. 172)

After this year, platforms became elite residences (Lekson p. 202)

In the decades after this time, Chacoan ruling families were looking for someone to rule. Hohokam needed leaders and the Platueau had a surplus (Lekson p.203)

1250 to 1500

Casas Grandes in northern Mexico as center of Chacoan culture (Frazier p. 234, from Lekson)

1250 to 1450

Great migrations shifted tens of thousands of people acros the region, shaping a new Southwest (Lekson, p. 190)

1250 to 1325

All across the Pueblo world, from Hopi to the Rio Grande, population increased, doubtless from relocations from the Four Corners (Lekson p. 197)

1250 to 1450

Hohokam towns spread over large areas, prefiguring the urban sprawl of modern Phoenix (Lekson p. 210)

1230

1230 to 1240

This decade, Anasazi society regrouped and aggregated into sites in the northern Rio Grande, typically at 6,600 to 7,300 feet in elevation; all were built to withstand attack; some were attacked, leaving much evidence of violence such as skulls caved in my hard blows and burning, but no looting of valuables, suggesting an attempt to drive them away or rid the country of the people (Stuart)

1230 to 1260

Large new pueblos such as Bayo Canyon Ruin near Los Alamos were constructed on hundreds of mesa tops through the Southwest (Stuart)

1223

Mean date of pit house communities (average six pit houses) in eastern Arizona, Taos, Santa Fe district, Apache Creek [?], Cebolleta Mesa [?], and in the Sierra Blanca near Ruidoso, NM; evidence of pottery trade is substantial, with more than a dozen types at many locations (Stuart)

1220

Villages began leaving the stressed sphere around Aztec Ruins (Lekson p. 239)

1216

1216 and 1262

Spruce Tree House at Mesa Verde constructed (Frazier p. 77)

1204

Square Tower House at Mesa Verde constructed (Frazier p. 77)

1200

Early this century, trade was reestablished across the four-corners region (Stuart)

Mesa Verdeans cliff houses flourished this century (Stuart)

Most skeletons from this century are marked by evidence of overwork and an inconsistent food supply (Stuart)

Or perhaps as early as 1125, Chaco Canyon culture had collapsed (Roberts p. 161)

Rock art depictions in Four Corners region of the feathered serpent, or Quetzalcoatl (aka Xipe Totec to Toltecs; aka Maasaw to modern Hopi)

Before this time, Anasazi villages were almost always small and short-lived, with the important exception of Chaco Canyon (Lekson, p. 137)

By this year, the arc of Pueblos — Hope in the west through Zuni and Acoma to the norther Rio Grande on the east, was well settled (Lekson, p. 163)

1200 to 1230

Known as the Little Ice Age in Europe; it probably got colder and wetter in the American Southwest as well (Stuart)

1200 to 1250

Precipitation increased in quantity and reliability enough to provide some surpluses of food supply (Stuart)

1200 to 1300

Late Pueblo III; Mesa Verde Phase; Pots: Mesa Verde black-on-white, indented corrugated (rock & sherd); major re-population (Tom Windes)

Mogollon culture begins moving into the Hopi-Zuni region (Martin, p 21)

Tens of thousands of Anasazi left, never to return (Lekson, p. 162)

1190

1190 to 1206

Balcony House at Mesa Verde constructed (Frazier p. 77)

1190 to 1260

Construction of all of the cliff dwellings including Mesa Verde, Bandelier National Monument, Gallina highlands, Chuska Mountains, Montezuma Castle, Mavajo National Monument in Arizona, and Gila Cliff Dwellings in Mogollon country; most were inhabited less than 100 years (Stuart)

1185

Salmon reoccupied by Mesa Verde people (Frazier p. 135)

1170

By this decade, the Chaco culture was but a memory (Stuart)

Civil war resulted in fall of Tula, capital of the Toltecs, followed by anarchy

Fighting abated in the highland regions around Chaco Canyon this decade (Stuart)

This decade, small pueblos founded at higher elevations with no sign of palisades or defensive measures, none built on cliffs; fewer had kivas; mineral-based paint on pottery replaced by organic paint from burnt plant material  (Stuart)

1168

The Toltec capital Tula was destroyed by successive new tribes of barbarians coming from the north, among them the Aztecs (Waters p. 117)

1150

Aztec abandoned (Frazier p. 131)

Many Hohokam sites abandoned and relocated, about the time platform mounds replaced ball courts (Lekson, p. 23)

Many Mogollon districts abandoned (Lekson, p. 24)

Hohokam crashed (Lekson, p. 80)

No ball courts (Hohokam) were built after this time

T-shaped doors first appeared at Chaco Great Houses, but not commoner dwellings) (Lekson p. 211)

After this date, T-shaped doors showed up at Aztec Ruins (Lekson p. 211)

Hohokam ball courts replaces by platform mounds (Lekson p. 240)

After this time, everything sagged south, with migrations out of the northern Plateau bumping people of the southern Plateau farther south into the Mogollon uplands (Lekson p. 241)

This year, give or take a decade, was a rough one for North America — Tula fell, Cahokia and Chaco crashed, and Hohokam fell apart (Lekson, p. 150)

Tula [Toltecs] fell about 1150. [W]ith Tula’s end, the Post-Classic pattern came into focus in vibrant clarity: expansive politics, long-distance dynamics, power plays and upheavals, and a swirling world of migrations, invasions, expulsions, and fragmentation. —Lekson p. 242

1150 to 1300

The events of 1150 to 1300 [spelled] the end of Tula [Toltecs] and consequent regional reorganization marked by audacious long-distance trade and flamboyant political adventures. —Lekson p. 144

1150 to 1200

Wars of attrition and atrocities spread across the Chacoan world (Stuart)

1150 to 1300

A number of architectural features appeared in the San Juan Basin with clear Mexican derivation, such as triple-walled towers

The end of Tula (Toltecs) and consequent regional reorganization marked by audacious lang-distance trade and flamboyant political adventures (Lekson, p. 144)

Hohokam suffered destructive and sporadic floods about once per generation (Lekson, p. 167)

1150 to 1350

Pueblo III: Large pueblos; cliff dwellings; towers; corrugated gray and elaborate black-on-white pottery, plus red or orange pottery in some areas; abandonment of the Four Corners by 1300 (Roberts from Lipe)

1150 to 1200

Cahokia fell gradually (Lekson, p. 115)

Cahokia rose and began a precipitous decline (Lekson, p. 152)

1145

Construction began at the Wupatki Great House, perhaps as a rival to the northern San Juan, especially Aztec Ruins (Lekson, p. 157)

1140

Drought had lasted greater part of a decade, and the collapse of the Chacoan system was underway (Frazier p. 205)

Charoan roads had no historical precedent and were never re-used after the Chaco peak & fall of 1140 AD

The Chaco phenomenon had ended (Stuart)

This decade, Escalante Ruin was abandoned (Stuart)

1140 to 1200

Pueblo III; McElmo Phase; Pots: McElmo, indented corrugated (rock/sherd/sand); major de-population and severe drought (Tom Windes)

1140 to 1180

Between 1140 and 1180 AD, nine out of every ten skeletons found around the Mesa Verde region in Colorado show signs of violent injury.

1139

Last known construction at Salmon (Frazier p. 205, although it’s written as “1239,” which I believe is a typo)

The last roof bean was cut and raised at Bis sa’ani, 20 miles north of Chaco Canyon (Stuart)

1135

Wupatki built (Lekson p. 238)

1135 to 1180

Major drought hit Anasazi region (Lekson p. 239)

1133

Temporary relief from sharp drought (Frazier p. 205)

1133 to 1135

Cliff dwellings in Grand Gulch, Utah, constructed (Frazier p. 77)

1132

The last-known tree-cutting in Chaco Canyon at Pueblo Alto (Frazier p. 205)

1130

## women and children were burned to death in the tower kiva.

Founded just before 1100, Salmon was a Chacoan refuge until a number of its women and children were burned in the tower kiva that once arose from the main block. —Anasazi America, by David E. Stuart, p. 105. It was apparently attacked and more than 30 women and children who had sought refuge in its impressive tower kiva died horribly in a fire set to destroy the town [in about 1130]. —Anasazi America, by David E. Stuart, p. 136. Aerial view of Salmon Ruins from The Foxworthy Traveling Show.

After the drought of this year, tens of thousands of farmers and others displaced from shrinking great houses and fled to the uplands, including Chuska and Lukachukai mountains to the west, Mesa Verde and San Juan ranges on the north, Gallina highlands on the east, the foothills of Albuquerque’s Sandia and Manzano mountains on the southeast, and Cebolleta Mesa, the El Morro district, and the Zuni Mountains to the south [odd, then, that CR was abandoned this same year] (Stuart)

Beginning of severe drought that lasted 50 years (Frazier p. 205)

Doyel proposes that a prolonged and severe drought brought more than 250 years of Chacoesque development to an end

Fifth and last major construction period for Pueblo Bonito (Frazier p. 77)

Salmon abandoned; it was apparently attacked and more than 30 women and children who sought refuge in its impressive tower kiva died horribly in the fire set to destroy the town (Stuart)

The Chacoan elites who held on in a half-dozen of the more stable great houses after this year lost access to nearly all their signature trade goods: corn surplus; dried meat; etc. [turquoise?] (Stuart)

The second Chaco drought was the coup de grace that brought the Chacoan culture down (Stuart)

Pochteca, “long-distance traders and spies who hailed from Aztec Mexico…we know them only from an era well after the AD 1300 abandonment, [though] they serve as a powerful model for hypothesized earlier traders who may have brought Mesoamerican ideas to the American Southwest, particularly Chaco Canyon.” (Roberts, p. 170)

Mimbres ended — at 1100 there were five to ten thousand people living in Mimbres towns throughout southwestern New Mexico; by 1150 there weren’t any (Lekson, p. 174)

When Chaco’s move to Aztec Ruins was complete, Mimbres region emptied (Lekson p. 241)

1130 to 1140

This decade, Bis sa’ani was built, perhaps to protect the central Chaco Canyon from unrest among the Chacoan northern farming communities (Stuart)

1130 to 1135

Chimney Rock abandoned

1130 to 1150s

Fighting peaked in the highland regions around Chaco Canyon (Stuart)

1130 to 1180

Prolonged drought with precipitation below normal — coincides with gradual abandonment of Chaco (Frazier p. 181, from Judge)

Yet another great drought (Lekson, p. 154)

During the drought, unspeakable violence came out of Aztec, marked by brutality and cannibalism (Lekson, p. 160)

1127

Pueblo Bonito was “still” occupied (Frazier, p. 76)

1125

“The richest burial ever reported in the Southwest,” as described by John McGregor, at Ridge Ruin near Flagstaff, Arizona (Roberts p. 219)

Ida Jean great house established (Stuart)

Kin Kletso construction began and continued through 1130 (NPS.gov)

Wallace great house established (Stuart)

After this date, the Anasazi center of gravity and gravitas shifted north, from Chaco Canyon to Aztec Ruins (Lekson, p. 153)

Construction at Chaco Canyon declined sharply and ceased by this year — just before the nasty drought of 1130-1180 (Lekson, p. 156)

1125 to 1129

Escalante great house established (Stuart)

1120

By this date, there was more than 100,000 square meters of floor area under roof in Chaco Canyon (Stuart)

Chetro Ketl abandoned (Frazier p. 79)

Final Aztec construction (Frazier p. 131)

This decade Mesa Verde region Chacoan-style communities were constructed: Ida Jean, Wallace, Escalante Ruin, each at 6,300 feet elevation or greater; probably founded by groups of male colonists (Stuart)

1120 to 1140

No Chacoan great kivas constructed (Stuart)

1120 to 1140s

Escalante Ruin was constructed, including one large kiva, in southwest Colorado at 7,200 feet (Stuart)

1116

Eerily, [Salmon Ruin’s] last roof beams were repaired and replaced at A.D. 1116, the same year repair and expansion stopped in most great houses within the canyon. —Anasazi America, by David E. Stuart, p. 84. Image of roof beams from Aztec Ruins, not Salmon, fromThe Foxworthy Traveling Show.

End of minor refurbishing at Salmon (Frazier p. 135)

Last Chetro Ketl beam cut (Frazier p. 79)

Salmon ruin: Exodus begins; Rex Adams said, “rather dramatic internal modifications, such as the sealing of doors and the deposition of trash in the ground floor of many rooms began.” Final abandonment “was rather abrupt.” (Frazier p. 135)

The last roof beams cut and put in place at Salmon (Stuart)

1116 to 1120

Most construction in the canyon itself stopped between 1116 and 1120, and some older great houses such as Chetro Ketl were actually being abandoned. But at others, as at Pueblo Bonito, new walls and room blocks were built to close off old courtyards and limit access. —Page 121 (Stuart)

1115

Aztec constructed (Stuart)

Most Aztec construction ends (Frazier p. 131)

Spring House at Mesa Verde constructed (Frazier p. 77)

1115 to 1140

Signs of significant reorganization of Chaco culture: most construction during this period took place at sites north of Chaco Canyon (Frazier p. 203)

1112

Oak Tree House at Mesa Verde constructed (Frazier p. 77)

1111

New great houses were established at Aztec (A.D. 1111-1116, expanded in the 1200s),Escalante (1125-1129), Ida Jean (about 1125), and Wallace (about 1125), all north of the San Juan River…where good water, uncrowded conditions, and upland game were available. —Anasazi America, by David E. Stuart, p. 120-121.

1111 to 1116

Aztec great house established, expanded again in the 1200s (Stuart)

1110

Chaco ended about 1125 and rose again 60 kilometers due north at Aztec, where major construction began about 1110. That was the final outcome, but there may have been a false start or two. —A History of the Ancient Southwest, by Stephen H. Lekson, p. 154

The Great North Road line was extended north [about 10 miles] from Salmon to a stream of more appropriate size, the Animas River. Construction started on Aztec Ruins about 1110. —A History of the Ancient Southwest, by Stephen H. Lekson, p. 154. Photo of Aztec Ruinsfrom ImagesOfAnthropology.com.

Main Aztec, New Mexico, construction begins (Frazier p. 131)

Major construction began at Aztec Ruins (Lekson, p. 154) in a solsticial orientation (Lekson, p. 155)

Construction began at Aztec Ruins (Lekson p. 238)

1110 to 1121

Beams cut for Aztec Ruin (Frazier p. 77)

1110 to 1275

Aztec as center of Chacoan culture (Frazier p. 234, from Lekson)

1102

Fourth major construction period for Pueblo Bonito (Frazier p. 77)

1101

1101 to 1104

Windes claims this was tree-harvesting dates for Pueblo del Arroyo — after last was cut, they were moved into the canyon and building began (Frazier p. 227, from Windes)

1101 to 1105

North and south wings, plaza, and the tri-walled structure were added to Pueblo del Arroyo (NPS.gov)

1100

Most of the later and so-called higher developments of the Anasazi came to them from the Hohokam and Mogollon groups, so that the climax that occurred about A.D. 1100 may be regarded as an accumulations of southern and possibly Mexican traits that were taken over by the Anasazi bit by bit—by trade, by drift, perhaps by war—and reworked to fit their ideas and cultural layout. (Martin p. 20)

Large religious gatherings did not take place in Chaco Canyon after 1100. —Stuart/Anasazi America p. 143

All of this evidence of violence dates to the 1100s. —Stuart/Anasazi America p. 121

Representations of masked dancers appear on Mogollon pottery (Martin p. 131)

Small copper trinkets, probably imported from Mexico, found in some Mogollon sites after this date (Martin p. 77)

After this date, large religious gatherings did not take place in Chaco Canyon (Stuart)

By this date there were nine great houses in Chaco Canyon: Peñasco Blanco, Casa Chiquita, Kin Kletso, Pueblo del Arroyo, Pueblo Bonito, Chetro Ketl, Hungo Pavi, Una Vida, and Wijiji; plus three up on the mesa: Pueblo Alto, New Alto, and Tsinkletzin (Stuart)

By this time, most of the great houses in the southern San Juan basic were abandoned (Stuart)

During the early part of this century, Chaco’s great houses walled their courtyards and built control gates where roadways passed village walls (Stuart)

Early this century, Wijiji constructed (NPS.gov)

Early this century evidence of violence abounds in and around Chaco Canyon (Stuart)

Early this century, a pit-house community in Gallina was laboriously stockaded, from fear of the invading Chacoan farmers; many such sites exist, all of which have been breached and burned (Stuart)

Early this century: An estimated 60 percent of adults and 38 percent of children died violently in the Gallina highlands after the collapse of Chacoan society (Stuart)

Early-to-mid-century: Kin ya’a (south of Chaco Canyon) was burned and abandoned (Stuart)

Huge explosion in number of kivas built (Stuart)

Kin ya’a was expanded (Stuart)

Peak population of Chacoans during early part of this decade (Frazier p. 91)

The center of Chaco culture shifted to near the banks of the San Juan River, north of Chaco Canyon the first few decades of this century (Stuart)

The middle of this century, Navajo people invaded Chacoan territory — perhaps the cause of the fear that made Chacoans build defensive structures and cliff dwellings (Stuart)

There are 3,200 known sites dated to this decade, a ninefold increase from 500 years before (Stuart)

Trafficking in Macaws began (presumably out of Mexico and into Four Corners area) — what’s the source on this? I propose Macaw feathers appeared long before this; need to double-check this one, or ignore it

Numic tribes (Utes, Paiutes, Shoshone–linguistic roots of the modern Hopi language) were in the Great Basin of Nevada as early as this date (Roberts p. 204, 205)

Pueblo towns such as Oraibi and Acoma began, perhaps even sooner (Lekson, p. 20)

Pueblo Bonito, originally build in the 900s with a solstitial alignment, changed and adopted Pueblo Alto’s consciously cardinal orientation (Lekson, p. 127)

By this time, a few score elite Chacoan elite families (Lekson p. 236)

1100 to 1130

Chaco rainfall in excess of normal (Frazier p. 203)

1100 to 1190

Most pit house communities were constructed and occupied in the highlands surrounding Chaco Canyon, most probably with farmers dispersed from the Red Mesa Valley and other areas sound of Chaco; most of these [if not all] were attacked and burned (Stuart)

1100 to 1300

Grand Gulch on Cedar Mesa in Utah inhabited again, the cliff dwellings were built, then abandoned (Roberts p. 131)

1100 to 1200s

Chaco had a central government that sanctioned violence in the 1100’s

Chaco…had a central government, however diffuse or non-Western…. It’s likely that Chaco had a regional economy. And perhaps Chaco and its successor, Aztec Ruins [in northern New Mexico], had the use of force; witness the brutality of apparently socially sanctioned events of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. —Lekson p. 223

Hovenweep built, including tower with slits for sunlight that describes a complete solar calendar (Frazier p. 199)

1100 to 1200

Cahokia Creek split in two, spelling its ultimate doom (Mann p. 296)

1099

1099 to 1116

Chetro Ketl architecture degenerated; poor workmanship (Frazier p. 78)

1098

Full moon on the summer solstice, June 15, 1098. (Equinox & Solstice Calculator and Moon Page)

1095

1095 to 1100

MAJOR construction at chacoan pueblos. 

[Stephen] Lekson divided the construction activity into five-year segments and found that the last five years of the eleventh century, A.D. 1095-1100, were the most labor intensive. During those five years, Chacoan construction programs took up an average of 55,645 man-hours, or 5,565 man-days, or 186 man-months, per year. Thus thirty-one men working six months a year or sixty-two men working three months a year could have carried out the most intensive single period of construction at Chaco Canyon. —Page 179 (Frazier)

1094

Lunar standstill and, some claim, second wave of building at Chimney Rock Great House (building perhaps began in 1093) (Frazier p. 222)

Salmon mostly completed

Second building phase at Chimney Rock (Roberts p. 217)

1094 to 1104

Minor construction and finishing work at Salmon (Frazier p. 135)

1093

26 wood samples from Chimney Rock Great House were cut in this year; also five samples from rebuilt East Kiva match this year

Last wave of trees cut for Salmon construction (Frazier p. 135)

1090

Chaco’s shift to the north began four decades before an 1130-1180 drought, often blamed for Chaco’s demise. —A History of the Ancient Southwest, by Stephen H. Lekson, p. 154

A drought began that lasted five or six years (Stuart)

Drought, no summer rains for six years (Stuart)

Sharp drought this decade (Frazier p. 203)

Major construction began on the Salmon Ruins Great House (Lekson, p. 154)

1090 to 1140

Early Pueblo III; Late Bonito Phase; Pots: Chaco-McElmo/Gallup b/w, indented corrugated (sand); Major great-house construction north of San Juan River; Major population increase, then decrease (Tom Windes)

1090 to 1100

Proposed dates for pollen from the fill of a Chimney Rock indigenous hearth on Chimney Rock lower mesa

1090 to 1115

Pueblo Bonito was “finished” to look much as it does today, including the addition of 14 new kivas (Stuart)

1090 to 1116

The third and final wave of great-house construction in Chaco Canyon (Stuart)

1088

Salmon ruin was mostly built as one massive project between A.D. 1088 and 1090. The great house was constructed in the shape of a square C. Its back (north) wall is 450 feet long. The two arms of the C, each 200 feet long, reach south toward the Great North Road from Chaco. The great house once stood two to four stories tall, contained at least 175 rooms, and had a floor area of 90,000 square feet—nearly two acres… [I]t was built in the midst of the worst drought since the rains had become more favorable 90 years before. —Anasazi America, by David E. Stuart, p. 83. Image of Salmon Ruins from TripAdvisor.com.

1088 to 1090

Most trees cut for Salmon [great house] construction (Frazier p. 135)

Salmon [great house] was constructed as one massive project (Stuart)

1087

Tree-ring date of a partially burned branch from a domestic fire pit in an indigenous house on Chimney Rock lower mesa

1085

1085 to 1110

Windes concludes 18 households living in Pueblo Bonito; Hayes estimates 179 families (Frazier p. 157)

1080

Summer rainfall had begun to decline noticeably (Stuart)

Chaco got drier, but the drought had surprisingly little effect on building (Lekson, p. 155)

1080 to 1100

Casamero in Red Mesa district was constructed, perhaps as a last-ditch effort to hold the area together (Stuart)

Chacoans built four-story tower kivas at great expense of labor and materials (Stuart)

1079

Full moon on the summer solstice, June 16, 1079. (Equinox & Solstice Calculator and Moon Page)

1077

1077 to 1081

Widespread building at Pueblo Bonito (Frazier p. 231, from Windes)

1076

Lunar standstill and, some claim, first building at Chimney Rock Great House (Frazier p. 222)

Tree-ring date of one cross pole from ventilator shaft of Chimney Rock East Kiva; Eddy accepts this as date of building, most others suspect this is an older re-used timber

1075

After this date it appears that rooms at larger sites were no longer used for living or storage, but for possible ceremonial functions (Frazier p. 185, from Judge)

By 1075, at the latest, Hohokam had begun to unravel [just as] Chaco burst forth to dominate the Plateu from 1020 to 1125. (Lekson p. 234)

First building phase at Chimney Rock  (Roberts p. 217)

New foundations laid at Pueblo Bonito that were never completed (Stuart)

Pueblo del Arroyo construction began in the central portion (NPS.gov)

Hohokam really fell apart (Lekson, p. 116)

Things around Phoenix (for Hohokam) began to detriote — ball courts were abandoned and platforms were built over mounds (Lekson p. 203)

1075 to 1115

Around A.D. 1075 the Chacoans began an unparalleled flurry of building activity that would last forty years…. From then until 1115 the Chacoans carried out six major construction programs in Chaco Canyon. They built the east and west wings of Pueblo Bonito. —Page 177 (Frazier)

1075 to 1130

Fourth Chaco building period: major building period: east and west wings of Pueblo Bonito, added third story to Penasco Blanco, north and south wings of Pueblo del Arroyo, constructed Wijiji — yearly levels of labor were twice that of 1050 to 1075 (Frazier p. 174+, from Lekson)

1073

Cliff Palace at Mesa Verde constructed (Frazier p. 77)

1070

26 of 53 wood samples from small, down-slope Chimney Rock sites give dates in this decade; only 2 of 47 samples from Great House from this decade

After this date only Type III masonry used at Chetro Ketl (Frazier p. 78)

Hohokam ball court networks were in serious decline if not total collapse (Lekson, p. 121)

About the time of the Sunset Crater volcanic explosion? (Lekson p. 238)

1068

Salmon Ruins was as large as the largest construction at Chaco Canyon.  It was not a casual experiment.

After the initial four-room unit [started in 1068], there was nothing tentative about the move. Salmon Ruins was as large as the largest individual construction events at Chaco Canyon. This was not a casual experiment. —A History of the Ancient Southwest, by Stephen H. Lekson, p. 154.

Salmon Ruins’ east wing was built as early as 1068. About 1090 major construction began on the actual Great House, a building the size and shape of Hungo Pavi back at Chaco Canyon. —A History of the Ancient Southwest, by Stephen H. Lekson, p. 154. Diagram of Salmon Ruins from University of Idaho.

A four-room unit was the first built at Salmon Ruins (Lekson, p. 154)

1067

Pueblo Bonito’s “golden age” (Frazier p. 76)

1066

Vingta born (The Last Skywatcher Series)

March 20, 1066

Halley’s Comet appeared (Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halley’s_Comet)

1063

Sunset Crater exploded after this year, covering the Sinagua area with a thin layer of “black sand” (Lekson, p. 76, citing Colton)

1062

First use of Type III masonry at Chetro Ketl

1092 to 1070

Both Types II and III masonry used at Chetro Ketl

1060

1060 to 1061

Pueblo Pintado was built as one planned project (Stuart)

1060 to 1065

Pueblo Bonito enlarged again, mainly with the addition of stories (Stuart)

1060 to 1090

Major remodeling and rebuilding of Chetro Ketl (Frazier p. 78)

1060 to 1096, 1219, 1275

White House Ruin in Canyon de Chelley constructed (Frazier p. 77)

1057

Date of The Last Skywatcher, prequel novel to The Last Skywatcher Series

Lunar standstill (Frazier p. 222)

Full moons in 1057 (www.moonpage.com): January 23, February 22, March 23, April 22, May 21, June 19 (four days after the Summer Solstice), July 18, August 17, September 15 (two days before the Fall Equinox), October 15, November 14, December 13 (two dates before the Winter Solstice)

Solar dates in 1057 (Equinox and Solstice Calculator): Spring Equinox, March 14; Summer Solstice, June 15; Fall Equinox, September 17; Winter Solstice, December 15

Which dates would they watch the lunar standstill through the Chimney Rock twin towers? This illuminates (and surprises), from http://www.idialstars.com/mls.htm:

A major (or minor) lunar standstill always happens near an equinox; and what’s more, it happens when the Moon is at or near quarter phase. A major lunar standstill faithfully occurs within one week of a lunar or solar eclipse, and oftentimes takes place right between a lunar and solar eclipse.

This implies that the most likely date to watch a full moon rise between the twin spires of Chimney Rock National Monument, Colorado, closest to its standstill in 1057, is September 15.

1054

July 4

Crab Nebula Supernova “first observed on 4 July 1054, and that lasted for a period of around two years. The event was recorded in contemporary Chinese astronomy, and references to it are also found in a later (13th-century) Japanese document, and in a document from the Arab world. Furthermore, there are a number of proposed, but doubtful, references from European sources recorded in the 15th century, and perhaps a pictograph associated with the Anasazi Pueblo Peoples found near the Peñasco Blanco site in New Mexico.” (Wikipedia article on SN 1054) Also “Around 4-5 July 1054 the supernova was visible in broad daylight, having reached a maximum brightness about ten times that of Venus, the brightest astronomical object visible from Earth besides the Sun and Moon. It remained visible by day for 23 days, and by night for 653 days.” (Solar Astronomy in the Prehistoric Southwest on the The National Center for Atmospheric Research site)

1053

to 1103

Pueblo del Arroyo, just across the wash from Pueblo bonito, constructed (Frazier p. 77)

1050

In many cases, Chaco elites were sometimes able to co-opt Great Kivas. The largest Great Kiva of its age was built within the walled plaza of Pueblo Bonito—the first and greatest Great House—about 1050. (Lekson p. 235)

A third masonry-lined kiva was added to site 627 (Stuart)

After this date, Chacoan farmers began moving into the northern San Juan basin with few, if any, underlying Basketmater or Pueblo I houses (Stuart)

After this date, formal roadways were constructed from Chaco Canyon to the most architecturally complex buildings to the south (Kin ya’a, Casameo, etc.) (Stuart)

Basic structure of Chaco System was in place (Frazier p. 185, from Judge)

By this decade, the Chaco culture was three-tiered: farmsteads, district great houses, and Chaco Canyon great houses (Stuart)

Hohokam took a downturn (Lekson, p. 116)

to 1060

Wing additions to Pueblo Bonito (Stuart)

to 1075

Construction during the third period, 1050 to 1075, was mainly of additions to existing buildings. The Chacoan builders added wings, then less symmetrical additions, extensions and modifications. More [labor hours of] construction work was being done each year. —Page 176 (Frazier)

The second wave of great-house construction in Chaco Canyon (Stuart)

Third Chaco building period: mainly additions to existing buildings; only one new structure: Pueblo del Arroyo (Frazier p. 174+, from Lekson)

to 1080

New farming districts opened to the north of Chaco Canyon (Stuart)

to 1100

Road networks built round Chaco (Frazier p. 187, from Judge)

Sunset Crater erupted sometime between these years, the first eruption in the Southwest in more than a thousand years (Lekson, p. 156)

At its peak, A.D. 1050 to 1100, Cahokia may have been home to as many as 15,000 people. Monks Mound, the largest earthwork in North America at 100 feet tall, may have been constructed in only 20 years. More here: “Cahokia’s Monks Mound May Have Been Built in Only 20 Years” on ArchaeologicalConservancy.org.

to 1115

Judge argues that formal pilgrimages to Chaco were in place by this time (Frazier p. 186)

to 1125

At least three Chaco-style remodeling events took place between these years at Guadalupe Ruin (Frazier p. 145)

to 1130

Chaco precipitation was generally above normal, except for sharp drought in the early 1090s (Frazier p. 181, from Judge)

to 1075

Hohokam sites were depopulated (Lekson, p. 116)

1041

Tuwa born, a primary character in The Last Skywatcher Series

1041

Only tree-ring date available for Casamero (Stuart)

1040

This decade, only major Chacoan building period not linked to wetter than normal conditions; construction integrates Pueblo Bonito, Pueblo Alto, and Chetro Ketl with the great roads; Windes suggests this signifies Chaco Canyon’s emergence as a regional center (Frazier p. 231)

to 1080

Pueblo Bonito construction included only 10 rooms with hearths (Frazier p. 157)

to 1100

Late Pueblo II; Classic Bonito Phase; Pots: Gallup b/w, indented corrugated (sand & trachyte); Major greathouse construction; Major depopulation, varied climate, drought, major crop surplus (Tom Windes)

1038

Lunar standstill (calculated by me)

1033

to 1092

Third major construction period for Pueblo Bonito (Frazier p. 77)

1030

to 1070

Chetro Ketl Type II masonry (Frazier p. 78)

to 1090

Second Chetro Ketl construction and occupation — marked by rapid growth; Type II masonry (Frazier p. 78)

to 1300s

Pueblo III culture (Frazier p. 81)

1020

By this decade, the Chaco culture was two-tiered: farmers and those in charge of food storage and ritual (Stuart)

Chetro Ketl construction began, with modifications in the 1100s (NPS.gov)

Elite families flourished on the Chacoan Plateau (Lekson, p. 129)

Construction at Chaco Canyon added wings of warehouses, ritual spaces, public monuments, and barracks (at least group houseing) (Lekson p. 235)

to 1040

The great expansion of Pueblo Bonito, which added two stories of rear rooms and great thickness to the outer rear wall (Stuart)

to 1050

Chaco cornered the turquoise trade (Frazier p. 183, from Judge)

Chacoan world became much more complex, with rise of elite class and expansion of lower farming class (Stuart)

land use and settlement patterns changed rapidly in Chaco Canyon, with great-house expansions that made them enormous (Stuart)

The next major construction, from 1020 to 1050, was at Pueblo Alto, Chetro Ketl, and Pueblo Bonito (additions). The architectural forms begun in the 900s were continued. —Page 176 (Frazier) See Author Note The Anasazi Buildings of Chaco Canyon: Largest “Apartments” in the World.

The first wave of great-house construction in Chaco Canyon (Stuart)

to 1080

Formal Chacoan great houses in the southern San Juan basin were invariably established well after the farms were founded (as opposed to great houses of the north, which were not) (Stuart)

to 1120

More than 2 million man-hours of labor went into the great houses in Chaco Caynon, including an estimated 215,000 ponderosa trunks up to 30 feet long each cut by stone ax and carried 20 to 30 miles (Stuart) [Note: This is 384 hours per week all year long for 100 years, which is about 9 men working 40-hour weeks every week every year for 100 years.]

to 1125

Building boom of Chacoan Great Houses (Lekson, p. 123)

to 1130

the period generally referred to as the Chaco Phenomenon

to 1125

Chaco burst forth to dominate the Plateau (Lekson p. 234)

1019

Lunar standstill (calculated by me)

1018

Lunar standstill as reported by Chimney Rock National Monument, Colorado, website

1017

Second major construction year for Pueblo Bonito (Frazier p. 77)

1001

Lunar standstill (calculated by me)

1000

Probably light settlement of Stollsteimer Valley below Chimney Rock began

Mogollon designs on Mimbres pottery became increasingly complex, better, and more delicately executed (Martin, p. 116)

Mogollon towns after this began to break up into new separate units and move a short distance away (Martin p. 90)

The tribute-demanding and militaristic theocracy of the Toltec culture began to collapse

Mogollon before this year characterized by brownware pottery made by coiling and pit houses; after this year pueblos of stone or adobe and farming

Mogollon prior to this year were very cozy with Hohokam (Lekson, p. 64)

Mimbres architecture became more like Anasazi unit pueblos from pithouses (Lekson, p. 94)

The final demise of the West Mexican Teuchitlan polities (Lekson, p. 114)

Substantial Anasazi populations migrated into the Mogollon Rim country of Arizon and into the Mogollon highlands of west-central New Mexico (Lekson, p. 136)

to 1020

Chaco firmly established as the primary source of finished turquoise for perhaps entire San Juan Basin (Frazier p. 183, from Judge)

to 1050

Additions and improvement at site 627, including renovation of two pit houses into kivas (Stuart)

to 1100

Pueblo II; Early/Classic Bonito; Kivas appear (Tom Windes)

to 1115

Chetro Ketl was built (Stuart)

to 1130

Midsummer rains came more predictably, with only one interruption in the 1090s (Stuart)

994

to 1084

Range of tree-ring dates for Chimney Rock Great Kiva (below Great House on mesa)

990

to 1102

Northern San Juan effectively empty; Pueblo I in Chaco (Lekson, p. 99)

987

Toltec King Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl ousted for political reasons from kingdom were Mexico City is now (Mann p. 27)

982

Lunar standstill (calculated by me)

980

to 990s

Food shortages and starvation among Chaco farming communities (Stuart)

964

Lunar standstill (calculated by me)

950

By this time there were densely packed farming communities of unit pueblos on every ridge and hillock in the Red Mesa Valley (near Gallup, NM), Skunk Springs, and the Chuska Valley (Stuart)

Chaco people began building surface structures seemingly derived from Mexican culture (such as what?)

The Late Pithouse Period (Mogollon) ended with a shift from pit structures to pueblo-style architecture (Lekson, p. 92)

Turner identifies 11 cannibalized skeletons at Burnt Mesa in northwestern NM (Roberts p. 158)

to 1000

Rooms added to site 627 (Stuart)

All masonry house blocks around Kin ya’a (south of Chaco Canyon) were built (Stuart)

to 1150

Chaco Canyon boomed expansively, then collapsed (Lekson, p. 69)

to 1250

Cahokia, Mississippi, at its height. (Mann p. 291)

945

to 1030

Chetro Ketl construction and occupation — Type I masonry (Frazier p. 78)

936

to 957

Sliding Ruin in Chinle area of Navajo Reservation in Arizona constructed (Frazier p. 77)

930

to 960

Una Vida underwent expansions (Stuart)

920

to 925

The earliest construction at Pueblo Bonito, in which 17 rooms had hearths (Frazier p. 157)

919

First year of construction for Pueblo Bonito

Oldest beam cut for Pueblo Bonito (from a tree that was 219 years old when cut) (Frazier p. 76)

900

Chacoans began construction in the early 900s at Penasco Blanco, Pueblo Bonito, and Una Vida…. They gave them all remarkable similar floor plans. They created a line of large circular pit structures in the plaza. Behind them they build a row of large ramada-living rooms, a second row of large featureless rooms, and in the rear, a third row of smaller storage rooms. They formed above-ground rectangular rooms into suites, each of which consisted of a ramada-living room, a large room, and paired storage rooms. This pattern of rooms is remarkably similar to smaller sites built in Chaco and in the surrounding area at the same time. —Pages 174-175 (Frazier) See Author Note The Anasazi Buildings of Chaco Canyon: Largest “Apartments” in the World.

By 900 there were hints of hierarchy [in the Hohokam] not within but between towns, with the largest occupying positions of control at the heads of canal systems—positions of power. (Lekson)

We propose that these southerners [from Mexico, mainly the Toltecs]…entered the San Juan basin around A.D. 900 and found a suspicious but pliant population whom they terrorized into reproducing the theocratic lifestyle they had previously known in Mesoamerica. This involved heavy payments of tribute, constructing the Chaco system of great houses and roads, and providing victims for ceremonial sacrifice. The Mexicans achieved their objectives through the use of warfare, violent example, and terrifying cult ceremonies that included human sacrifice and cannibalism. Turner/Man Corn pp. 482-483

Atlatl and snares had completely disappeared from Mogollon inventory (Martin, p. 75)

Conch trumpets were first found in ruins of Southwest (Frazier p. 168)

Guadalupe Ruin, easternmost outlier at 54 miles southeast of Chaco, built in this mid- to late-century (Frazier p. 145)

Middle of this decade, the great Maya city-states collapsed [Toltecs?] (Stuart)

The feathered serpent [Xipe Totec] appears in Anasazi rock and kiva art sometime after 900 (Turner p. 466)

Toltec expeditions reached the southern outposts of Mogollon culture (perhaps even Anasazi) (source?)

Toltec invaders entered the San Juan Basin around this time, the inhabitants of which they began to terrorize with social-control cannibalism (Turner)

After this date, relations between the Southwest and Mesoamerica became notably more formal and “patterned” (Lekson, p. 137)

First hints of hierarchy among Hohokam (Lekson p. 232)

La Quemada crashed (Lekson, p. 63)

Before this date, Cotton and Clylcimeris shell armlets were widely imported from the south (Lekson, p. 68)

Cahokia (across the Mississippi from St. Louis) rose rapidly (Lekson, p. 115)

Three Great Houses built in Chaco Canyon by this time (Lekson p. 234)

At this time, only a few elite Chacoan families at most (Lekson p. 236)

Mesa Verde’s Mummy Lake was likely not built to store water. It was built as a…

 

to 1000 

(Pueblo II): skull from this period found in Pueblo Bonito of 45-60-year-old male with dental transfiguration (Turner)

As Chacoan society blossomed in the A.D. 900s and early 1000s, it probably incorporate several once-isolated tribal groups speaking different languages…. As Chacoan society came undone, those ancient linguistic, social, and religious differences would have been rich fodder for ethnic and tribal hatreds acted out in the uplands…[just as] Yugoslavia in the mid-1990s threw off…Tito’s nation and returned to medieval society. —Stuart/Anasazi America p. 143

to 1030

Pueblo II culture

to 1040

Early Pueblo II; Earlly Bonito Phase; Pots: Red Mesa b/w, narrow neckbanded (sand); Small-house aggregation and sharp increase, greathouses appear in numbers in San Juan Basin; Major population rise, beginnings of turquoise industry and crafts, corn ubiquitous in sites, water-control systems appear (Tom Windes)

to 1050

Precipitation at Chaco was unpredictable (Frazier p. 181, from Judge)

to 1100

Road networks built in Schroeder (where? source?)

to 1125

Chaco emerges as first regional center of Chacoan culture (Frazier p. 234, from Lekson)

to 1150

Pueblo II: Chacoan florescence; “Great Houses,” great kivas, roads, etc., in many but not all regions; “unit pueblos” composed of a kiva and small surface masonry room block; corrugated gray and elaborate black-on-white pottery plus decorated red or orange types in some areas (Roberts from Lipe) [Note: Frazier, p. 81, claims Pueblo II is 900 to 1030]

to 940

First Chaco building period: Penasco Blanco, Pueblo Bonito, Una Vida (Frazier p. 174+. From Lekson)

from 200

Mayan culture at its height (Mann p. 304)

to 1000

Roads and colonnades appeared at Chaco Canyon, after La Quemada, whith its elaborate system of causeway roads and colonnades crashed in 900 (Lekson, p. 63)

to 950

Hohokam canals had reached levels of technological and organizational complexity unprecedented in the Southwest and indeed most of North America — well beyond the control of village-level authority (Lekson, p. 81)

to 1150

Hohokam began its long slide down while Chaco pumped itself up; Mimbres, once closely allied to Hohokam, shifted its alliance north to Chaco (Lekson, p. 106)

The biggest, busiest, and best in the long history of the Plateau (including Chaco) (Lekson, p. 111)

Interactions at a distance were impressive: Tula in central Mexico and Chichen Itza more than 1,000 kilometers away replicated in remarkable detail each other’s major monuments (Lekson p. 234)

to 1125

Dubbed the Pax Chaco, a remarkable era of peace blessed the countryside (Lekson, p. 129)

to 1200

Chaco leaders kept the peace, promoted general welfare, enhanced its own glory, and got things done (Lekson p. 235) — and also used social-control cannibalism according to Turner

From 900 to 1200 AD Chaco kept the peace, promoted the general welfare and got things done.

Many things came to Chaco and stayed there, in the service of the kings. Maize moved into and through the canyon, from places that had plenty to places that had none. Consequently, violence and raiding almost ceased. Its success, from 900 to 1000, allowed Chaco’s leaders to expand their horizons. Its influence soon reached far beyond its original domain…. Local leaders almost everywhere on the Plateau joined with or deferred to Chaco…. From 900 to 1200, Chaco kept the peace, promoted the general welfare, enhanced its own glory, and got things done. —Lekson p. 235

One day in 1993, [physical anthropologist Christy G.] Turner and David Wilcox plotted the three dozen cannibalism sites on a large map. “Suddenly,” Turner recalled, “we had a kind of ‘Eureka!’ Nearly every site lay close to a Chaco outlier. And the dates were right—between 900 and 1200. Roberts/Old Ones, pp. 159-160

880

to 900

Center of Anasazi population was around upper San Juan and southeastern Utah (Lekson, p. 99)

875

to 925

Late Pueblo I to Early Pueblo II; Early Bonito Phase; Pots: Kiatuthlanna @ Red Mesa b/w, Lino Gray & Kana’a Neckbanded; Above-ground slab-house sites, small to moderate in size; Shift from dry to wet period (Tom Windes)

860

There were at least twenty major Pueblo I village sites with an average of 123 above-ground rooms and fifteen or more pit structures (Lekson, p. 95)

At least one third to one half of the known population in the Anasazi world was in the Northern San Juan, a relatively small corner of the Anasazi region (Lekson, p. 98)

856

Nomads known as Chichimecs from Aztlán migrated into the northern end of the Valley of Mexico and founded the capital of the Toltec empire, Tula, 54 miles northwest of Mexico City (Waters, p. 117)

850

Earliest room construction at Pueblo Bonito this decade, not 900s as originally thought (Frazier p. 229, from Windes)

Hohokam intervillage squabbles reached levels of warfare (Lekson p. 233)

to 1000

At least 10,000 farmsteads were established and agriculture reached its widest geographical limits, never to be reached again in prehistoric times (Stuart)

to 864

Longest, wettest period during the 800s (Frazier p. 231)

to 900

Chaco Great Houses began, reaching critical mass around 1000 (Lekson, p. 123)

to 1150

Pueblo Bonito built (Lekson p. 234)

840

to 860

Late Basketmaker, Pueblo I, and early Pueblo II cultures coexisted (Stuart)

to 880

Center of Anasazi population was around Montezuma Valley/Great Sage Plains/Dolores (Lekson, p. 99)

830

to 840

Pueblo II period had begun with the first construction of small blocks of masonry surface rooms on the margins of open valleys (Stuart)

828

to 1126

Pueblo Bonito…was built by the Ancestral Puebloans, who occupied the structure between AD 828 and 1126. (Wikipedia, “Pueblo Bonito”)

825

to 850

Mimbres Three Circle Phase, when lots of really big sites popped up — this means canals really kicked in about this time (Lekson, p. 94)

810

to 860

Center of Anasazi population was around Mesa Verde, Mancos (Lekson, p. 98)

800

Community houses emerged as people became more agrarian (Stuart)

Cultures near Taos, New Mexico, and the Gallina highlands flanking the west side of the Jemez Caldera turned their backs on the emerging Chacoan world and refused to trade with them (Stuart)

Pueblo Bonito built and occupied from mid-800s to 1300s (NPS.gov)

Pueblo Bonito founded sometime in this century (Stuart)

Pueblo I structures began having enclosed ramadas (Mexican influence?) (Frazier p. 90)

Una Vida constructed in mid 800s and inhabited until mid-1100s (NPS.gov)

Una Vida constructed shortly after this date (Stuart)

By this time, the Plateau was lurching toward war — not organized armies, but farily widespread and constant killing, driving people into large villages (Lekson, p. 100)

Metallurgy reached West Mexico from the Pacific coast (Lekson, p. 114)

Great Houses reappeared on the Plateau — not among the Uto-Aztecan kin in the west, but among the native peoples of the eastern Plateau (Lekson p. 232)

to 1000

[D]uring this protracted period of Toltec cultural strife, between roughly A.D. 800 and 1000, waves of diverse Mexican traits were carried into the American Southwest by cultists, priests, warriors, pilgrims, traders, miners, farmers, and others fleeing or displaced by the widespread unrest and civil war in central Mexico. —Turner/Man Corn p. 463

to 875

Pueblo I; White Mound Phase; Pots: Whitemound b/w, Lino Gray; Classic above-ground slab row house sites, small to moderate size, first greathouses appear; Major increase in storage facilities (Tom Windes)

to 900

In Chaco Canyon itself, game was already so scarce that it could not provide even 10% of the daily diet; dried meat had to be imported; the Pueblo I pithouses in the Navajo Lake District to the north had become palisaded strongholds and refused to trade with Chaco (Stuart)

to 1100

Aztatlan “horizon,” a series of city centers along 800 kilometers of the West Coast of Mexico linked by long-distance trade to Mesoamerica (Lekson, p. 114)

780

Small Pueblo I settlement across canyon from Una Vida begun: site 627 (Stuart)

770

to 830

Center of Anasazi population was in southeastern Utah (Lekson, p. 98)

750

to 900

Pueblo I: Large villages in some areas; unit pueblos of “proto-kiva,” plus surface room block of jacal or crude masonry; great kivas; plain and neck-banded gray pottery with low frequencies of black-on-white and decorated red ware (Roberts from Lipe)

750

Glycimeris shell armlets became a staple of Hohokam sites (Lekson, p. 59)

Most of the Mogollon region before this time were essentially upland Hohokam (Lekson, p. 64)

By this year, Teotihuacan was gone, removed to myth (Lekson, p. 79)

to 810

Blue Mesa-Ridges Basin, with limited occupation into the 830s (Lekson, p. 97)

Center of Anasazi population was around Durango (Lekson, p. 98)

700

People became Hohokam. Perhaps the most conspicuous and widespread markers of Hohokam were armlets of Glycimeris shell. Bivalve shells from the Gulf of California were carefully shaped into armlets and sometimes carved with symbols—birds carrying snakes, desert toads, and the like. Shell bracelets or armlets became a badge or marker of Hohokam; they had once been rarities, but after 700 they were ubiquitous. Someone in every sizable settlement had armlets prominently displayed on an upper arm. (Lekson)

Intervillage squabbles escalated after 700, occasionally reaching levels approaching warfare by 850. Increasing violence also called for leaders, military or diplomatic. (Lekson p. 233)

Reed cigarettes appeared in Mogollon culture (Martin p. 99)

Cotton became economically important to Hohokam (Lekson, p. 59)

Hohokam defined by ball courts, red-on-buff pottery, stone pallets, complex cremation burial ritual; crashed by 1150 (Lekson, p. 80)

By this time, dozens of sizable pit house village crowded the low terraces where creeks and rives left the mountains and flowed into the Chihuahuan Desert of southwestern New Mexico (Mimbres Mogollon) (Lekson, p. 89)

Mimbres heated up when red-on-brown pottery showed up and riverside village became established and lasted as long as three centuries (Lekson, p. 94)

Intervillage squabbles escalated among Hohokam after this time, approaching levels of warfare by 850 (Lekson p. 233)

to 800

Early Pueblo I; White Mound Phase; Pots: Whitemound b/w, Lino Gray; Deep pithouses that are dispersed; sparse storage facilities (Tom Windes)

to 900

The 934 known Basketmaker sites from this period increased to 1,174 Pueblo I sites by the end of this period (Stuart)

to 1000

Hohokam villages consisted of central plaza surrounded by single-room house clustered in threes or fours around courtyard (Lekson, p. 23)

Evidence of the introduction of cotton fiber to Anasazi land via trade routes through Mesoamerica. With the cotton fiber comes the technologically advanced back strap loom and the vertical frame loom. (Chronology of Textiles and Fiber Art in New Mexico) See Author Note: Anasazi Footwear: Shoe-Socks and Sandals.

to 800s

A tight package of cultural practices came together that define Hohokam (Lekson, p. 58)

Hohokam figurines all but disappeared, replaced by ritual mounds (Lekson, p. 62)

Chaco Great Houses originated in the northern San Juan region (Lekson, p. 123)

to 950

Hohokam exploded outward, then shrank back in on Phoenix (Lekson, p. 69)

Perhaps the most dynamic in the history of the Southwest (Lekson, p. 78)

to 900

Most, and all of the largest, ball courts were built (as a technique for political decision-making that is not clear to science, art, and industry) (Lekson, p. 86)

to 1130

The tenfold Anasazi population growth could not have happened through increased birthrate alone. (Wikipedia)

to 1300

Six rooms and a kiva basic form of Anasazi village

650

Teotihuacan culture in Mexico looted and violently destroyed (by whom?)

Toltec culture began to develop from the ashes of the Teotihuacan culture in Central Mexico

to 750

Grand Gulch on Cedar Mesa in Utah inhabited again, then abandoned again (Roberts p. 131)

La Quemada hit is stride, ending around 900 (Lekson, p. 63)

600

First in a long line of black-on-white Anasazi pottery type appeared (Lekson, p. 57)

By this date, Plateau potters quit digging clay in creek bottoms and began mining pottery clays from geological strata, grinding and tempering them, and firing them a good gray color (Lekson, p. 57)

Teotihuacan collapsed with great violence (Lekson, p. 79)

to 700

Late Basketmaker III; La Plata Phase; Pots: La Plata b/w, Lino & Obelisk Grays; Shallow pithouses that are dispersed; Moderate storage facilities (surface cists) (Tom Windes)

Pit houses became uniform in design (Stuart)

to 750

Burial ideas changed, from one of taboo places away from homes, to burial in abandoned pit houses and nearby kitchen middens — another evidence of shift from hunter-gatherer to farmers (Stuart)

to 800

Road networks built in La Quemada, Mexico

585

Radiocarbon date of one Basketmaker site in Chaco Canyon (Frazier p. 90)

550

Basketmaker III really heated up (Lekson, p. 65)

After the fall of Teotihuacan, Southwest Big House leaders emulated the southern kings of Mesoamerica. 

The fall of Teotihuacán [thirty miles northeast of modern-day Mexico City] (about 550) sent tsunamis of political power outward, rulers looking for places to rule. In the following decades, displaced, dispersing elites transformed cities and towns throughout Mesoamerica.…Petty chiefs and Big House leaders [of the Four Corners]…were tempted to emulate southern kings. —Lekson p. 231

Teotihuacan collapsed with great violence (Lekson, p. 79 & 231)

to 600

Teotihuacan crashed (Lekson, p. 62)

to 950

Late Pithouse Period for, particularly, the Mimbred Mogollon (Lekson, p. 89)

500

After this date, “the severe, magnificent tapering-bodied anthropomorphs of Basketmaker II grow smaller, ‘cuter,’ squatter, and more triangular.” (Roberts p. 179)

Some years before this, Cave 7 in Whiskers Draw [where is this? Near Blanding, Utah, I think] more than ninety men, women, and children were killed, perhaps ritually executed, many were scalped and tortured before death (Roberts p. 186, from Turner)

Cotton arrived in Arizona Hohokam region (Lekson, p. 59)

La Quemada began (Lekson, p. 63)

Teotihuacan was the principal fact of central Mexico and all points north (Lekson, p. 79)

to 600

Basketmaker III; La Plata Phase; Pots: La Plata b/w, Lino & Obelisk Grays; Shallow pithouses, two aggregated great communities with great kivas appear; Moderate storage facilities (surface cists) (Tom Windes)

to 750

Basketmaker III: Habitation is deep pithouse plus surface storage pits, cists, or rooms; plain gray pottery, small frequencies of black-on-white pottery; bow and arrow replaces atlatl; beans added to cultigens (Roberts from Lipe)

to 700

Hohokam socially differentiated with oversized or special architecture fronting plazas at Snaketown and Valencia Vieja, with beginnings of mortuary practices that indicate ritual and political leaders (Lekson, p. 58, citing Wallace and Lindeman)

450

A slipped redware was added to Hohokam and Mogollon assemblages but not to those of the Anasazi, who instead began to paint images on their pottery 56)

to 500

First beans and first pottery coincide (Roberts p. 185)

to 525

Hohokam populations aggregated (Lekson, p. 58)

400

From this year onward, corn cob size increased (Stuart)

A horizon of small pit houses sites, all sharing a common brownware, extended from southern New Mexico and Southern Arizona (and probably northern Sonora and Chihuahua) north to the San Juan River drainage (Lekson, p. 56)

Canal technology of Tucson and Land Between spread into the Phoenix Basin (Lekson, p. 59)

Late this century, new, more productive corn arrived in Arizona Hohokam area (Lekson, p. 59)

to 500

Late Basketmaker II; Brownware Phase; Pots: Obelisk Gray & brownware (Tom Windes)

to 750

Late Basketmaker period (Stuart)

to 500

Substrate of agricultural pit houses using brownware pottery (Lekson, p. 47)

to 700

The archaeological patterns we call Anasazi, Hohokam, and Mogollon emerged (Lekson, p. 49)

Teuchitlan cities, with their round, terraced, wedding-cake pyramids, flourished (Lekson, p. 63)

to 500

Teotihuacan peaked (Lekson, p. 62)

300

By this time the Teotihuacan culture dominated much of central Mexico

to 400

Pottery came to Four Corners area (Stuart)

200

Dental transfiguration began in Northern Mexico (Nuevo León)

to 400

Grand Gulch on Cedar Mesa in Utah first inhabited, then abandoned (Roberts p. 131)

to 900

Mayan culture at its height (Mann p. 304)

to 500

Best dates for brownware pottery in Four Corners Plateau (Lekson, p. 46)

to 550

Early Mimbre and other Mogollon areas had a notable predilection for high places: buttes, mesas, hilltops — notably unlike Hohokam, who lived down by the river (Lekson, p. 64)

to 950

Teotihuacan dominated Mesoamerica, sending emissaries and enclaves to the heart of the Maya region and to the north (Lekson p. 228)

150

Settlements in pre-Hohokam culture changed from intermittent to permanent (Lekson, p. 58)

to 200

Best dates for brownware pottery in Four Corners deserts (Lekson, p. 46)

100

Macaws found in ruins of Hohokam culture (Frazier p. 168)

The more livable portions of the Chacoan plateau were occupied, beginning the political tensions of over-crowding (Lekson, p. 128)

50

to 500

Basketmaker II (late): Habitation is shallow pithouse plus storage pits or cists; no pottery; atlatl and dart; corn and squash but no beans (Roberts from Lipe)

1

Incense burners found in Hohokam ruins at least this far back (Frazier p. 168)

Water tables rose in SW, meaning more constantly flowing streams, springs, more ponds (Stuart)

Teotihuacan began, peaked 400-500, crashed 550-600 (Lekson, p. 62)

to 300

Bow and arrow appeared, imported from northern Great Plains (Stuart)

to 400

Early Basketmaker period (Stuart)

-100

States had convincingly risen in Mesoamerica (Lekson, p. 63)

to 400

Hopewell occupied (Lekson, p. 47)

-161

“The famous Cato, a dour and hard-fisted old farmer, who treated his own slaves as they aged with notorious callousness, was then censor, an office with wide powers over morals and manners. Though himself an able speaker, he was hostile to those who taught the art. In 161 B.C., teachers of rhetoric were expelled from Rome.” (Stone, p. 42) This is an example of how the rich and powerful of a society that ultimately collapsed quashes free speech and the education of common citizens.

-200

The centralized and stratified Teotihuacan culture began developing in the Valley of Mexico

-300

Cooking, storing, and serving pottery first appears in Mogollon culture (Martin p. 83)

-500

500 BC – Around this date, waves of Uto-Aztecan speakers moved onto the western Four Corners Anasazi plateau (Lekson, p. 46)

Beans appeared in the American Southwest (Stuart)

How Old is the Earth? How the Bible Timeline Fits with Earth’s Geologic & Archaeological Prehistory.

I believe the Hebrew Old Testament was created as a response to ancient-academic histories. Just as Pharaoh Ptolemy commissioned Manetho to write Aegyptiaca, the History of Egypt in the 3rd century BC, modern scholarship seems to point toward Ezra as they key figure in assembling a sizable team of Israel’s best post-exilic scholar-priests to write the history of the world through the Jewish lens from the libraries and best resources they had in 491 BC. (Before both Herodotus’ Histories & Menetho’s Aegyptiaca)

From my experience reading fascinating channeled texts such as those written by mystics like John Ballou Newbrough (1828–1891) or John S.M. Ward (1885 – 1949), I suspect Ezra also employed skilled prophetic mystics who claimed the ability to channel/reveal large sections of impressive historic works through a type of revelation which allowed them to see history in a condensed visionary and symbolic/meaningful way. (read their impressive works here)

These scholar/mystics either foreran or followed ancient scholars like Plato, Ptolemy & Hipparchus in computing the ‘great year‘ or prophetic/symbolic version of the procession of the equinoxes. This ‘Platonic Year’ as it came to be known was a system of mystical knowledge based on the actual astronomical calculations for the length of the cycle it takes for the stars to precess and then return into their original locations. A process that relates to being able to prophecy or predict lunar & solar eclipses, as well as the metonic cycle (upon which the Jewish calendar is largely based) and which involves the mystical numbers of 7, 70, & 490 from jewish prophetic texts. (70×360°=25,500 & 490×52=25,500)

However, even though I sympathize with those who see the first chapters of Genesis as a literal accounts of the earth’s 7000 year creation. I believe it make far more intellectual and spiritual sense to see those chapters of an incredibly creative and sophisticated way of weaving the true sequence and key points of creation together with an inspired ancient prophetic timeline which seeks to condense and symbolize the earth’s long history into a shorter predictive system of sevens based on lunar-solar cycles as well as larger astronomical cycles.

Timeline correlations

Its significant to note that Genesis is separated into three main sections separated into sets of ten, pointing to its highly symbolic nature. These are; 1. Then ten demigods. 2. The ten Patriarchs 3. The history of the current cycle.

First in its timeline are the ten demigods. Most ancient histories of Ezra’s day started with the demigod’s of their culture with lifespans ranging from the hundreds to the tens of thousands. An account of many such ancient demigod genealogies can be read about in Diodorus and Eusibus Chronicle here. (Both the oldest Babylonian & Egyptian histories started with the demigods.)

For Ezra, he seems to have employed exactly ten demigods between creation and flood, followed by exactly ten patriarchs between the flood and Abraham (the father of his people). The number ten in each case seems to be symbolizing a complete age, and fulfilling multiple purposes in his chronology. By making each demigod have a lifespan approximating 1000 years he seems to symbolize an Egyptian concept of a full ‘age’ or cycle of heavenly time. Joseph Smith attempted to explain this in saying.

And I, Abraham, had the Urim and Thummim, which the Lord my God had given unto me, in Ur of the Chaldees; And I saw the stars, that they were very great, and that one of them was nearest unto the throne of God; and there were many great ones which were near unto it; And the Lord said unto me, by the Urim and Thummim, that Kolob was after the manner of the Lord, according to its times and seasons in the revolutions thereof; that one revolution was a day unto the Lord, after his manner of reckoning, it being one thousand years according to the time appointed unto that whereon thou standest. This is the reckoning of the Lord’s time, according to the reckoning of Kolob. (Book of Abraham 3:1–4) As also “Kolob, signifying the first creation, nearest to the celestial, or the residence of God. First in government, the last pertaining to the measurement of time. The measurement according to celestial time, which celestial time signifies one day to a cubit. One day in Kolob is equal to a thousand years according to the measurement of this earth, which is called by the Egyptians Jah-oh-eh.” (facsimile 2, figure 1)

This concept is further explained in the channeled apocryphal work, Oahspe. Where the Egyptian cycle is called a ‘dan’ and is said to equate to roughly 2500-3500 years of earth’s orbit wherein it passes through a celestial zodiac and makes a complete “harvest of souls” before a time of cosmic destruction. (add reference & quote). Therefore according to Oahspe, the ten demigods would roughly represent 10 past cycles of time which approximated 3000 years each, much like the Platonic Great Year of ~25,000. By adding 2 such sequences of 10 (the demigod plus the patriarchs), Ezra meant to equal 70,000 years. Seven thousand years short of the important cosmic processional number of 77,400 years. Or a period of 3 great years.

Dualistically, Ezra may have used numbers slightly less than 1000 in order to get Shem & Ham to match with the Egyptian records for Menes, called Aegyptus and the father of the Egyptian race (according with Hermes in Greek). Oahspe also has Abraham used to dualistically symbolize an entire age of ~2500 years. finish this….

.

.

.

UNDER CONSTRUCTION FROM THIS POINT

-From The Book of Inspiration in Oahspe: THE TOWER OF BABEL WAS A DAN’HA DESTRUCTION. It is what destroyed the cycle of Zarathustra. Abraham, probably lived through it and was the dispensational head of the next cycle. He is the ‘master’ spoken of in the Kolbrin as well as the Osiris/Imhotep mentioned in the Law of One who lived through the initial construction of the pyramids (which were then enlarged by Joseph who may have also taken the name Imhotep/??)

[the intro featured image to this should be the timeline… but I should really pack a TON of info and color into it]

Outline.

Put on both web sites. This is where you should explain how the fight between religion & science has ruined both. Each takes an extreme position and the truth is in the middle.

Moses 1 is the key. It explains clearly that Moses’ revelation of the earth is only PARTIAL, and gives an account ONLY of this cycle of THIS earth. In verse 30 Moses essentially asks “why did you create the universe (heavens), earth, it continents (lands) and people?” And god makes it clear that he is not going to answer that question. He responds in verse 31, “For mine own purpose have I made these things. Here is wisdom and it remaineth in me” (Moses 1:31)

Discontent with being denied an answer, Moses tries a more specific question, “Be merciful unto thy servant, O God, and tell me concerning this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, and also the heavens, and then thy servant will be content.”

The answer given to Moses question is confused in translation, as we have lost common usage of the idiom “the heavens and earth shall pass away”. The ancients understood well that the history of the earth was one of global destruction and re-creation.

38 And as one earth shall pass away, and the heavens thereof even so shall another come; and there is no end to my works, neither to my words…

40 And now, Moses, my son, I will speak unto thee concerning this earth upon which thou standest; and thou shalt write the things which I shall speak.

We have thought this mean, I’m going to tell you about the planet earth, and its creation and history. But it is actually saying I will tell you about THIS CYCLE of earth (heavens & earth)

Rewrite the above, and summarize a bit better. To just explain that its a “symbolic summary”.

Geology of the Bible

Texts such as the Kolbrin (which contains material that pre-dates the Bible) make it clear that the bible was NOT meant to be taken literally in it pre-Moses timespans. Revealed texts such as Oahspe, and Joseph Smith’s book of Moses also make this clear, although the talking snake (Egyptian apep, god of the under world) and woman coming from man’s rib should be enough of a hint that the formative periods of the book are meant to be a deeply symbolic metaphor.

Howver, what many might not have considered is that Genesis is actually meant to accord or roughly correspond to the visions seen by Moses (according to LDS theology–see Moses ch. 2) or seen by the adepts of old (see Oahspe) concerning the formation of the earth. In fact for a modern example of this, see J.S.M. Ward’s vision of the formation of the earth here. This would explain why it begins with details of the formation of energy/light, the galaxy, the planets and the plants and animals. For a more detailed ancient view of those parts of the bible, see the opening books of the Kolbrin (Link).

In correlating the bible with Geology, I believe the important geophysical events such as the creation of earth, the creation of animals (and beginnings of them dying and making fossils) as well as The Flood and separation of the Continents at Peleg at least seem to be put in the correct order, but then superimposed upon the narrative of mankind so as to create a timeline which correlates natural science with scripture. (ie. Things start living and dying in both the Garden of Eden and Cambrian Explosion, then there’s a Great Dying at the Flood/Permian Extinction, then there’s a separation of the continents at Peleg/Pangea, and then a general march to the conditions of today.

As I know there are many Jews, Muslims and Creationists who visit this site, I offer the following Geologic/Scriptural correlation that is at least somewhat rational. (Which is more than I can say for the majority of creationist biblical correlations out there). Take it for what it’s worth even though it is only meant to represent what I believe the writers might have intended or perhaps even thought in the way they saw the earth’s progression through time.

AND NOTE. The ONLY rational placement of a Global Flood is with one of the two mega-extinction events such as the Great Permian Extinction superimposing geologic events over the human timeline. Any other placement comes up against insurmountable problems. Also the separation of the ‘land’ or continents at Peleg can match only with the separation of Pangea in the Permian. The following correlation would have to assume things like 1. Current Radiometric dates are off by millions of years. 2. Man existed in the early geologic record but left no trace in the fossil record. 3. Rates of erosion and deposition in the deep past occurred under uniformitarian principles, but at vastly higher rates because of the draining of creation and flood waters from the land over hundreds of years. 4. Oogenesis is driven by rapid pole shift, not convection cells.

My Brother’s chart showing a possible literal or symbolic correlation between true prehistory and the events of scripture. If symbolic, the adepts who authored the bible (chiefly the Egyptian Moses) may have attempted to create correlations to from events they saw in vision to those they saw in vision (including a “separation of the earth” during Peleg matching Pangea’s separation, a global flood matching the End Permian extinction, etc…
Radiometric dating correlation curve showing hypothetical correlations between actual dates (bottom x axis) and hypothesized, highly skewed radiocarbon dates (left y axis) and Ar/ar & Uranium series dates. If galactic conditions involving vastly different relativistic conditions (and neutrino flux?) caused vastly faster decay in the past, then those geologic dates would skew progressively younger the farther back you go. On the other hand, largely different solar conditions might cause radiocarbon dates to skew in a wholly different timeline.

under construction:

The Bible
1- The 10 patriarchs from before the flood,
2- 10 patriarchs from after the flood to Babel/Abraham,
3-Babel/Abraham to present

Matching with New Age literature of both Oahspe, Law of One and Occultist like Blavatsky
1-Mu/Lemuria, 75-50k BP. (matching with antediluvians). see LOO 10.15
2-Atlantis, 50-25k BP (matching with Noah to Abraham)
3-Current Cycle

Problems with literally trying to Match with Geologic Time
1-Paleozoic. People would have to had lived on a Precambrian bedrock craton, which we’d have to suggest has been subducted somewhere since there’s ZERO evidence of it. (Some have suggest Lemuria or Mu are under the Antartic ice cap, or sunk in the continental crust around New Zealand… Animals would have had to have spread from the proverbial “garden of Eden” of this lost continent and slowly have begun filling the earth and creating the illusion of fossil/faunal succession from their reproduction/dispersion rates. They would have had to be evolutionarily ancient (likely more ape or big-foot like, which is what law of one says, and had the capability of breathing a VERY different atmosphere). They would have been obliterated at the Permian Extinction. Coincidentally, the Bible and NewAge literature make these assumptions
2-Mesozoic. Again, people would have lived on a Precambrian bedrock craton in a world and atmosphere of the dinosaurs. Here, their foods and plants would have just begun to proliferate but not made any meaningful inroads into the fossil record until the very end. All early hominids would need to be reassessed based on their geologic provenance, pushing the evolution of man back over 200 million years.
3-Cenozoic. During Cenozoic times, flora and fauna quickly become modern. This would have to correlate with the period symbolized in the Bible by the Tower of Babel/Abraham where remnants of Giants and Nephalim still roam the earth and things quickly become modern.

Matching with Ice Ages Somehow
1- Wisconsin, the last ice age ENDED with Abraham/Current cycle. (this is totally unworkable)
2- Illinoisan,
3- Pre Illinioan: late Mesozoic glacial periods

GET AARON TO WRITE A FICTIONAL STORY ON THIS.

-The most important part of this imaginative fictional story is the idea: what if religion and science actually tell the same story?
-Aliens have been on this earth planet seeding since the Cambrian explosion.
-They lived with highly sophisticated space ships, taking them on and off planet every since life began on earth.
-They coexisted with dinosaurs of the Mesozoic and giant trees and dragonflies of the Paleozoic.
-What story could we tell here? I’m picturing something like avatar or ewok adventures that really captures the best parts of the massive plants and animals of the past, but has humans coexisting with them.
-It needs to be marketed to creationists AND MUSLIMS! (which would require finding out what they believe of Adam and eve)
-It needs to really re-tell the story of Adam and Eve. And it needs to travel through time somehow.
-WHATS THE STORY? Maybe the idea I once had of the kid in North Korea who had no idea there was a bigger world around him, and then he goes to a space base, and the tables turn and now its the whole world that has no idea there’s a bigger world of interconnected off-planet people around them. Perhaps in the orientation you could introduce TIME-TRAVEL, which is under STRICT guard not to be used under the rules of non-intervention. But in this case THEY HAVE TO BE USED. Why would the time travel be needed?

-A big part of this movie needs to be like a near death experience. With the higher dimensional beings explaining to the hero how reality works. How gods are all connected ‘as ONE’, and how they occasionally intervene in earth’s affairs. But most importantly, how an aspect of ourselves is part of that ONENESS, and how our hero has been reincarnated over and over but now needs to go back in time to

Mormon Modesty (What I’d Like My Daughters to Know)

This is mostly a rough draft of my thoughts on modesty and advice for my daughters. Things I hope they’ll remember as they navigate this difficult issue.

1. THERE ARE NO ABSOLUTES in dress standards. In the 1800s LDS and Christian women had a FAR different standard of modesty than today.  In fact, even today, LDS and Christian saints in some parts of the world are expected to dress differently and cover more or less of themselves than in other parts of the world. And I get that the unequal expectations on girls and women in dress standards seems unfair. But there’s actually a really good reason for it that I hope you can come to understand.

2. DRESS IS A FORM OF COMMUNICATION. The way you dress says something, just as if you wore a sign on your shirt or forehead. The problem is that WHAT IT COMMUNICATES IS OFTEN AMBIGUOUS. If you walk down the street in a miniskirt and stickers on your nipples, many guys are going to think you are TRYING to communicate something like “I’m sexually available, please make advances on me”. In fact they are going to think that anytime you push the envelope of what is socially “acceptable”. And the things that men think about you are NOT ENTIRELY YOUR RESPONSIBILITY,  (although if you strongly push the envelope of accepted norms you can’t be surprised when guys think you’re attempted to communicate corresponding levels of sexual availability to them!) But it is something your going to have to deal with, so be smart about it.  If a boy gets a tattoo on his forehead that says something provocative like DTF, he’s sending a message. And whether he meant to communicate “Dare To Fly” or “Down To F#&%” might not matter as much as what OTHERS THINK HE’S TRYING TO COMMUNICATE.  So he’s going to have to deal with that in the work place, and social arena and all parts of his life. This is no different with your clothing.  Understand what different types of apparel communicate to men and other girls and make sure that’s the message you want to send.

What you wear to church or school or the swimming pool communicates something different to all the people who look at you. (Just like the type of house you live in or car you drive or bumper stickers & shirt slogans you sport). Become savvy to what you are communicating by your apparel and take responsibility for it.  But at the same time you are only responsible to a certain extent–and that extent is dictated by society as a whole NOT BY SOME FRINGE ASPECT of society.  Some will tell you that “you are NOT responsible for other people’s thoughts”. Others will tell you “You ARE LARGELY responsible for other people’s thoughts”. Both of these are extreme stances of a complex situation.  The truth is, society at large makes the rules for what’s “normal” and you as a youth must learn what is “normal” or mainstream and then decide whether you want to push the envelope of those norms or be conservative in keeping those norms.  I hope you’ll consult with me to get a feel for what’s mainstream in our social circle and be sure that you are communicating intelligently within those bounds.

But I hope you internalize this ONE takeaway. Boys are biologically programmed to interpret the way you push the envelope of dress standards to equate with your sexual availability. Just like a courting bird that ruffles her feathers or a cat in heat that walks past potential sex partners with their tail in the air, when you expose more of your body than is normal for the situation, boys will see it as an invitation to hit on you and explore your sexual availability. Be ready for it. And be firm in helping them know your intentions. If you dress provocatively… don’t be surprised when you largely attracted guys you want to sexually use you and then throw you away.

3. CLOTHING SHOULD PRIMARILY BE A TOOL. A BODY SHOULD NOT. Use clothing wisely, use it selflessly. It can keep you warm or cool you off. But you can also use clothing to gain power over others. You can use your body to gain power over others. You can use it as an object just as you would use other objects which equate to power. Power in social status, Power in sexuality, Power in relationships. Attractive bodies can be powerful. And you can use that power selfishly or unselfishly. I hope you try and use the way you dress to polarize toward selflessness. The more selfless you are, the easier your relationships are going to be to maintain.

Try to use your body, and the clothes you display it in, to serve others (within limits). Relationships that are based on power plays have a greater change of ending poorly and painfully. You need to realize how many people out there USE OTHERS BODIES to explore and validate their own power and social status. In other words, if they see a really ‘attractive’ person, they will try and get that person to like them (or have sex with them) in order to prove to themselves and others that they are ‘equal or better’ than that person. They often do this subconsciously.  You will do it subconsciously.  Once we get someone to like/love us, we prove to ourselves and others that we are ‘equal or better’ than them. If there is no other component to bind a couple together, once that goal has been ‘proven’, the relationship falls apart.

Don’t allow yourself to ever be used by selfish people. Don’t let people take advantage of you. Don’t do it yourself to others. When you are selfless in a non-equal or non-reciprocating relationship, no-one wins. When you date for power no-one wins. Pandering to a man’s selfishness simply makes him more selfish. If people see you doing this to men, they will call you a slut or gold-digger. Try to be selfless, and if you give your body in a selfless way to please someone else be sure it is building an equal relationship of give and take reciprocity.

4. Realize that a lot of what you are going to learn about “modesty” in our culture or at church is remnants of social mores dating from a less civilized time when women lived in constant fear of being raped, stalked or seduced by sexual predators. (or stolen away by the king or people of higher class, power and estate.) Other rules and social mores were created from a desire of other women to level the playing field so socially ‘attractive’ women don’t get all the attention. Standards were created to encourage attractive women to cover themselves so as to not make less “attractive” women jealous (by whatever cultural standard of beauty). In some cases women used shame as a way to deter other women from luring away their men. (such as an older woman calling a young attractive, sexily dressed co-worker of her husband’s a whore or slut and shaming her into dressing more “modestly”.)

You didn’t create these social customs, you don’t need to feel bound by them or responsible for them. But you should understand the psychology behind why they exist and navigate the ‘cultural modesty’ issue with an intelligence that is aware of the why’s and how’s behind our social and religious mores. If you ever feel tempted to shame someone because of their body, be sure to understand the fears or biases which are causing you to do it. Body shaming isn’t very productive. Don’t do it to yourself or others.

5. UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MALE & FEAMALE SEX DRIVES.  If you get on Tinder or online dating sights you’ll notice right off the bat that a huge percentage of women’s profiles say something like “no one night stands” or “not DTF” or LTR only. On the other hand essentially NO men’s profiles say this.  Why? Because much like a monkey or dog, men are programmed to desire sex with almost any eligible partner. Even if they aren’t really physically, emotionally, socially or spiritually matched with that person they still desire sex with them. This is very different than the typical female who expects physical, emotional, social & spiritual compatibility before sex. This mismatch primal desires VERY often leads to a mismatch in expectations and hurt feelings.  The female thinks if he’s willing to have sex with her, he must feel the same way she does about him!  NOTHING COULD BE MORE WRONG! Typically, until a man is older or has an innate strong spirituality, his sexual desire is based on hormones and visual/chemical triggers.  The male sex drive can be INCREDIBLY strong, and once aroused he will say/be/do many completely uncharacteristic things in order to follow that animal programming to its natural end of sex (and much of this is actually subconscious).

If you want to avoid the heartbreak that comes from believing a man is physically, emotionally, socially or spiritually matched and bonded with you, only to find out after the sexual chemicals subside that he is not, then you must go to extensive lengths to assure those physical, emotional, social and spiritual compatibilities before the hope of sex causes him to alter his behavior. You also need to realize that the hope of ‘sexual security’ and being ‘valued and cherished’ tend to be the primal drivers in the female sexual drive, and can induce the same short term changes in rational behavior in you, as his drive for sex or an attractive partner induce in him.

It is ESSENTIAL to a happy, lasting relationship that you realize early the characteristics which lead to lasting relationships and pursue THEM, instead of simply perusing your/his sexual triggers as a basis for relationships.  I hope after putting some thought into what I’ve explained above you also see the danger of getting a boy to ‘like you’ by wearing clothing which consistently evokes his sex drive as a means of encouraging him to pursue you.

6. FEEL AWESOME ABOUT YOUR BODY. No matter what stage of life or shape you are in, feel awesome about your body, AND DON’T LET ANYONE MAKE YOU FEEL BAD ABOUT IT. If they do, avoid them. If you need to wear ‘modest’ clothes or even a burka to feel good about yourself, go for it. If you need to go naked to free yourself to feel good about yourself… go for it. Don’t shame others. Don’t shame yourself. But be smart. Be confident. Be considerate. Be kind to yourself and others.  Think of the effects of your dress on other girls as well as guys, but if that responsibility brings you pain, then you likely need to readjust your thinking.  Nothing should make you feel crappy about your body.  (But at the same time, realize myself and pretty much all of us do for much of our life, so it’s pretty damn normal.)

———————————————————————————————————————————————-

Sons need a different lesson. Why? Because they typically don’t really give a damn about dress—but they do have to deal with other types of inadequacy (particularly height, muscle mass, wealth and social standing). And they’re not going to get a bunch of stupid “modesty” lessons in school or church which end up often distorting the important reasons behind modesty anyway.

And importantly men rarely get raped. Women do. Women rarely commit adultery with their hot young coworker who wears a muscle shirt.  Men do.  Modesty and purity culture have been shaped by the reality of dangers which exist in the world of sexual expression & sexual violence. We shouldn’t be a fool who pretends these realities don’t exist or that they are ONLY a social construct. Its not true. I once watched a national geographic show about some loin-cloth-only topless aborigines in Africa, where one of the attractive young ladies was talking to the translator about how she wanted to murder one of the older men in the tribe. The translator later found out she was so upset because she had been repeatedly raped by this man over the years. This problem had nothing to do “purity culture” or “being/not being responsible for other people’s thoughts”.  All of that was irrelevant. The question for parents and social leaders in nearly every culture on the planet is HOW TO WE PROTECT OUR YOUNG GIRLS FROM THESE ABUSES?!  Modesty is one way. Burkas are one way. Laws and rules concerning both modesty and rape are one way. Teaching young boys informed consent is one very important way. Carrying guns and mace is one way.  You can decide which of those ways seems to be the most logical way to balance the risk and rewards of sexual expression.  But realize this… men are driven by different sexual stimulus than women.

Tinder is the perfect place to see this through experimentation. Take a marginally attractive man or woman, with great bodies and put them on tinder–the man with his shirt off and the girl in a bikini, and see who gets more matches.  The woman will get 10x the matches every time. Because contrary to what many might try and say, men are apparently, indeed more visually driven by sex appeal.  On the flip side take the same people and put pictures of both the man and women in situation which display social standing, status and wealth and the exact opposite effect will manifest. Because woman appear to be generally more attracted to these things than simply masculine sex appeal.

On top of that we must add in the undebatable fact that MEN are far, far more prone to inflict sexual violence on a woman than vice versa.  So why do we impose modesty on women and not men?  Simple… it is to protect women. If a modesty norm, rule or lesson does not tend toward helping the goal of protecting women, it needs to be reworked.  And this includes the “protection” that comes from making one girl feel horrible about her body because it cannot ever compare to the body of another girl nor does she have any chance of attracting the positive attention and social approval that comes with the body type which men tend to be physiologically drawn to like a moth to a flame.  So we need to keep in mind that its not all about protecting girls from boys or predatory men.  It can be about leveling the playing field among girls in general—something which carries its own ethical debate.  And it can also be about helping potential mates focus on physical, emotional, social and spiritual compatibilities instead of just sexual attraction.

What I’d Like My Kids to Know About Love

To My Kids…    about this crazy thing called love.

Guys…  I’m not sure if your adolescence will be anything like mine. I know there’s a lot of different ways to guide your life that are all unique and beautiful in there own way.  I hope at very least I can give you a feeling of being loved and valued as you grow up.  And I also hope I can impart some life-learned wisdom to give you a head start on your journey.

I know when I was an adolescent, I was very confused about love. It made little sense to me. I heard one thing from movies and the media, another thing from my friends and another thing from church—and none of them made a lot of sense. I really didn’t believe much in love growing up… I saw it as a farse, or set of nearly random emotions that only the simple-minded fell pray to. I’ve always been very thoughtful and analytical, and at very least I understood at a fairly young age that the “love” I wanted in order to make my future marriage work needed to be stronger than the sorrow-filled “love” that made my parent’s marriage an ill-ending disaster. Love, to me, was a commitment. You loved by staying with and being committed to someone. I understood that there was a huge difference between love as a verb and love as a feeling or noun–but because of my lack of understanding I think I shut my heart and actions down to some extent in a misguided effort to avoid pain. In retrospect I wish I would have gotten involved in a lot more foolish flings. Put myself out there enough to have a broken heart a few times.  And had fun making out and being more sexual. I hope that my advice will help you find the right balance and harmony to make your love life a happy one.

 

What is Love

Love is not the same as romance, although that is an aspect of it. It is definitely not synonymous with sexuality. It is not simply a friendship or family bond, although that gets closer to the meat of it. It is not simply a feeling, nor are there different unrelated types of love (Eros, Agape, Phileao, Storge). All descriptions of it are mired in arguments of semantics or opinions of definitions. So I’d like to start by laying a scientific framework I read about in a book called ‘The Law of One’.  It’s probably the most powerful framework I’ve come across in respect to the idea of love.

As I’ve searched through a lot of religious and philosophical material to find the best cohesive, scientifically viable definition for love,— Fractal Theory combined with the Chakra philosophy make the most sense. I’ll try and quickly summarize them as a foundation for a discussion on how to have a beautiful love-filled life.

In short, fractal theory or the law of relative relationships teaches that everything in the universe evolves or is created to follow a similar pattern wherein the small is relatively a copy of the large. In particular it means that you can learn about yourself by studying the planet, or the solar system or the atom. Plato called this microcosm and macrocosm, but some form of this framework of parallelism exists in every global religion.

Each unit of the fractal has

The fractal

The reason why this matters is because using this framework we can compare Love (n.) to Cosmic Energy. By Cosmic Energy, I mean the energy in the cosmos that all matter is made of. Thus just as everything in the universe is made of energy… all things are made of love.  This is why God is often called ‘love’. Additionally we can compare and define Loving (v.) as the focus and use of that energy. Every “living” sphere in the galaxy lives because it has created a system of absorbing and giving cosmic energy or love, and the same is true for you. The Chinese called this cosmic energy Chi. The Hindus called it Prana. The Christians call it God’s Spirit, and Mormonism sometimes equates it with Spirit and sometimes with priesthood. Jesus and all the great pillars of humanity come to symbolize it and show its possible uses. Regardless of what we call it, in your adolescence you will decide on a delicate balance of receiving and giving that same energy or love. It will be your focus and use of love or your energy that makes you who you are, determines your joy, your happiness and your eternal identity. You can decide whether to be a sun, or a black hole, a thriving planet or a near-dead rock, a rogue asteroid or a communal pillar of the Galaxy. You can decide to focus your energy or love on yourself or others—or to shut it down and not love much at all.

 

Here’s a few points concerning love that I hope you can understand and remember.

-With the act of loving (giving or receiving energy & attention), comes emotion. Do not confuse the emotions of love, with love, loving or being in love.  But realize that the emotions of love are a measuring stick to let you know how much–and what types–of love you are giving and receiving. Think of it in regards to physics. When a system gains energy it creates heat. When it looses energy, it manifests cold. The same goes for your body. When you gain energy, you will experience emotional ‘heat’. That heat can be interpreted as passion, anger, sexual attraction, excitement or other types of love. When you lose more energy than you are gaining you will experience emotional ‘cold’. That cold can manifest as loneliness, depression, indifference, hate or certain types of love.

-Sometimes the most rewarding relationships… are the hardest ones. The ones where you feel the least feelings of love, but are challenged to be loving and giving in new and different ways.

-The increased feelings of the emotions of love that come with new relationships do not mean you love that person more than your existing relationships.

 

A Short Overview of the Chakra System

The ancient Hindus came up with an amazingly effective system of describing how the human body uses love, energy or “spirit” to affect our emotions, actions and personality. In this system, each individual finds a unique balance of dispersing their energy to 7 bodily energy centers which each have unique functions. Comparing this system to the modern understanding of biology, many have noticed that these ancient centers seem to correlate with the way in which our nervous system disperses its energy to the endocrine glands–which are in charge of translating the nerves energy signals to chemical hormones which in turn govern the bodies feelings and emotions.

The hormonal balance which dictates your emotions of happiness are said to be the result of a combination of your own decisions, the decisions of your ancestors (as passed through DNA), and the configuration your spirit brought with you from your pre-mortal existence (past lives). Each energy center or endocrine gland controls specific hormones which govern your biology and emotions such as testosterone/estrogen (which govern sexuality and physical size),  epinephrine/adrenaline (which govern your anxieties, fears & risk taking proclivities), pancreatic polypeptides like glucose/insulin (which govern your energy levels) ,  serotonin/melatonin (which help govern joy/depression and chronobiology) and many, many more. (For more information see my more detailed article on chakras/endocrine glands).

Knowing exactly what these hormones are and what they do, is not as important as understanding that your emotions are a result of the “directions” your brain sends to your endocrine glands to tell them what balance of hormones to stick in your blood stream. In other words it is important to understand that your thoughts and behaviors have a direct influence on your joys, feelings of love and emotions. At the same time, it is important to realize that many of these things are controlled subconsciously, and just like taking control of the usually subconsciously controlled speed of your heartbeat— can take great meditation, intelligence and practice. This is one important function of religion and spirituality. With religion, great masters have sought to institute ways of life which bring balance; and systems of ritual which allow you to take conscious control of otherwise subconscious biological processes. Whether it be singing in church or in your car, taking the sacrament or doing yoga and meditative breathing, or going to the temple or losing yourself in nature I hope you will learn to intelligently use the tools you have been given to manage your energy or love pathways which regulate your chemical balances and thus your emotional and spiritual well being. I pray you will not be tempted to synthetically regulate your hormonal system with drugs or tobacco—since all of the euphoric feelings drugs will give you can be gotten naturally—without the devastating addiction and toxic side effects.

 

Bonding

Other than regulating your own chemical balances, the most important thing you will do with love in your life is bonding. The same is true for any planet or atom.

 

 

 

The internal energy configuration of these bodies dictates what they will be attracted to and what they can or will bond to. Oil will not mix with water and inert gasses will not bond to much of anything. On the other hand, what Florine wants, Florine gets.

 

 

 

 

periodic table of the elements showing the electron shells of each element.

periodic table of the elements showing the electron shells of each element.

Protected: Introspection (my story?)

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Reexamining the Pride in the LDS Only True Church Doctrine

67 Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church.
68 Whosoever declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church (D&C 10:67–68).

 

Introduction

Perhaps ironically, most us Mormon’s aren’t keen about challenging religious authority or tradition.  That being, I wanted to begin by shamelessly using a cliche disney movie theme to hit home on a few important points. Specifically I would like to use the lesson taught in Pixar’s Brave to suggest that Mormon tradition & pride has created some really serious rifts which are in need of mending. In the movie, the story is told of Mor’du, a royal prince charged with ruling a kingdom with his three brothers. But Mor’du, blinded by his pride does not want to share the kingdom. He goes to a witch and asks for the strength of ten men so he can seize the entire kingdom for himself. Receiving the payment of his family ring, she turns him into an enormous bear and essentially gives him a choice… take the kingdom & remain a beast, or give up his selfish pride and be human.

After the fall of Mor’du’s kingdom, the heroine Merida finds herself making the same pact with the witch. And she is given the same choice—destroy her family to get what she wants, or make peace with her mother and “mend the bond torn by pride”.  The beauty in the show lies in how both Merida and her mother make the right choice to reconcile their differences, and find that their deepest desires are actually fulfilled by doing so.

There are many parallels we could draw between the Mormon Narrative and Pixar’s Brave, but I would like to focus on a few revolving around the ideas of tradition, pride and reconciliation. I believe that like Merida—the early Latter-day Saints put their desires above those of their Christian neighbors. Like Mordu and the Jews of the Bible, they wanted to be the sole owners of their father’s kingdom. And because this is what they desired, they were given revelations which gave them a choice— they could in their pride interpret themselves as being “the only true and living church” and the sole possessors of the kingdom of God on earth. Or they could humbly acknowledge themselves as but a symbolic part of a greater spiritual kingdom which transcends earthly organizations—and by doing so, join hands with their brothers and create a religious and political kingdom of equality.

I would like to suggest that the same pride which was caused by that early choice (epitomized in the ‘one true church doctrine), still exists in Mormon tradition & theology; and has impeded us from fully achieving our scriptural mandate to join hands with the other good people of the earth and “gather all things together in Christ” (Eph. 1:10, D&C 27:13). We have sorted through the partially ambiguous scripture given in our revelations, and picked interpretations which gratify our pride, while ignoring those I will present here which present a more pluralistic or unitarian gospel.

I’ll show from numerous scriptures in the Book of Mormon, the New Testament & the Doctrine & Covenants that the “one true church” of Jesus Christ mentioned in most of our scriptures is a non-denominational “spiritual church” or cultural movement and NOT strictly the LDS ecclesiastical organization as has been established in LDS tradition.[defs] I also hope to show in this and other articles in this series that Mormonism (and Christianity) was created to be a symbol, or type/archetype of the heavenly church, but by failing to establish Zion the early saints also failed to establish & gather the temporal “true and living church” spoken of in D&C 1:30.

 

Outline of points covered in the article
-The cultural overuse of the only true church concept in LDS testimonies too often follows the example of the Book of Mormon Zoramites. (see Alma 31:12–21)
-The Book of Mormon, Bible and Doctrine and Covenants teach that Christ’s one true church (as well as the church of the devil) are spiritual churches which transcend organizational and priesthood lines. (D&C 10:67–68, 1 Ne 14:10Moroni 7:16–17, Mark 9:38–402 Nephi 10:16Matt 12:30, etc)
-The Doctrine & Covenants (D&C 10:67–68) clearly teaches the condition required to be part of Christ’s Spiritual Church. Declaring more or less than that definition threatens Mormonisms’ membership in Christ’s one true spiritual church.
-A temporal sect or religion’s “trueness” or whether they can be classified as part of the “one true church”, depends on how well they copy, obey or “come unto” the spiritual church in heaven. (D&C 10:53–69)
-The separation of the wheat and the tares at the end of the age is synonymous with Christ’s separation of the Church of God and Church of the devil. The point of the parable revolves around the difficulty for humans to distinguish between the two. (see Matt 13:37–43, D&C 86:1–3, D&C 88:94)
-D&C 10:52–54 makes it clear that Christ’s spiritual church existed on earth before the restoration of the LDS sect. Joseph Smith’s church & priesthood were meant to “build up” the already existing spiritual church. And to be a symbol and archetype of the end-epoch separating and gathering process (see Heb 8:5;9:23-24;10:1; Alma 13:16).
-Mormonism should never boast of being the only true church until Messiah’s final gathering of all people and churches in One Body, and that universal brotherhood or kingdom is ready to “present to the Father”.
-Interpreting D&C 1:30 to suggest the LDS church is ‘the ONLY true church’, contradicts other scriptural evidence concerning the matter. We LDS people need to relook at the conditional nature of what the verse actually says. (see exegesis of D&C 1:30)

 

Zoramitism in the LDS Church

It seems to me that many Mormons have misunderstood D&C 1:30, and discount an abundance of scriptural information to the contrary, in order to support the tradition of being “the only true church”. Like the Zoramites in the Book of Mormon, we sometimes twist the scriptures in a manner that makes us think that God has “separated us” and “elected us to be saved”, while “all around us are elected to be cast by [his] wrath down to hell” (or lower kingdoms until we do their temple work). Understanding the pride inherent in our doctrines is the first step in unraveling what I believe to be the incorrect traditions and scriptural interpretations which crept into the church from its earliest days. The similarities between the Book of Mormon account of the Zoramites and the average Mormon testimony in Fast & Testimony Meeting should be enough to convict us and open our hearts to the need to look closer at what the scriptures teach concerning the only true church doctrine. For those unfamiliar with the story of the Zoramites, let’s read through Alma’s experience for some insight into this extremely prideful sect—one that LDS people don’t want to be like!

12 Now, when they had come into the land, behold, to their astonishment they found that the Zoramites had built synagogues, and that they did gather themselves together on one day of the week, which day they did call the day of the Lord; and they did worship after a manner which Alma and his brethren had never beheld;
13 For they had a place built up in the center of their synagogue, a place for standing, which was high above the head; and the top thereof would only admit one person.
14 Therefore, whosoever desired to worship must go forth and stand upon the top thereof, and stretch forth his hands towards heaven, and cry with a loud voice, saying:
15 Holy, holy God; we believe that thou art God, and we believe that thou art holy, and that thou wast a spirit, and that thou art a spirit, and that thou wilt be a spirit forever.
16 Holy God, we believe that thou hast separated us from our brethren; and we do not believe in the tradition of our brethren, which was handed down to them by the childishness of their fathers; but we believe that thou hast elected us to be thy holy children; and also thou hast made it known unto us that there shall be no Christ.
17 But thou art the same yesterday, today, and forever; and thou hast elected us that we shall be saved, whilst all around us are elected to be cast by thy wrath down to hell; for the which holiness, O God, we thank thee; and we also thank thee that thou hast elected us, that we may not be led away after the foolish traditions of our brethren, which doth bind them down to a belief of Christ, which doth lead their hearts to wander far from thee, our God.
18 And again we thank thee, O God, that we are a chosen and a holy people. Amen.
19 Now it came to pass that after Alma and his brethren and his sons had heard these prayers, they were astonished beyond all measure.
20 For behold, every man did go forth and offer up these same prayers.
21 Now the place was called by them Rameumptom, which, being interpreted, is the holy stand. (Alma 31:12–21)

Although the beliefs of the Zoramites concerning the nature of God and Christ were different than our own, we sometimes share some of the same pride concerning salvation. Like all fundamentalist sects, the Zoramites saw themselves as a “chosen and holy people”. Like us, the Zoramites truly believed that their doctrines, divine election, (and likely priesthood & ordinances)  made them the only true church, “elected by God to be saved”. They did not understand the following concepts taught by Nephi, and reiterated by Moroni, Jesus and other prophets—that until Zion is fully established & redeemed, the only true church is a spiritual church which transcends cultural and organizational lines.

 

The ‘Only Two Churches’ are ‘Spiritual Churches’ or Social Movements

I suggest the LDS concept of being the ‘only true church’ comes from a small handful of misunderstood scriptures. One example is Nephi’s vision of the two churches. In his vision given in 1 Nephi of the Book of Mormon, Nephi was taught that there are only two churches, the church of the Lamb of God (or the true church), and the church of the devil (the false church). This vision is often used to support the idea that there is only one true church on earth — however, since Nephi specifies that everyone on earth belongs to one of these two churches— it should be obvious that term “church” here is referring to a “spiritual” social movement and not just a temporal sect or ecclesiastical organization.

10 And [The angel of the Lord] said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth. (1 Ne 14:10)

It should be apparent from the context of this verse, that the term “church” in this scripture, can not be referring to the most popular modern definition of the word church (which is a specific religious denomination). Since the verse says “there are save two churches only”, defining “church” as a denomination would mean there could only be two religious denominations in existence, and everyone on earth would have to be a member of one or the other.

As implied by the context and noted by other authors, the word church anciently had a much broader meaning than it does now (Hebrew qahal or edah; Greek ekklesia). For instance, in Greek texts it referred more broadly to a general assembly, or association of people who bonded together and shared the same loyalties. Scholars have noted that the modern concept of a church as a single religious denomination, didn’t exist among Jews of the first and second temple periods. Instead the differing religious groups or sects (churches) of late Judaism were forced to work together to manage the Jewish theocratic state.

In regards to Nephi’s vision of two churches, LDS apostles and church leaders have often misunderstood what a “church” was and sometimes argued an inconsistent definition, suggesting the “church of the lamb of God” refers to a literal ecclesiastical organization (the LDS church and its ancient equivalent), but yet the “church of the devil” refers to a figurative or spiritual church that transcends organizational lines. Others have tried to define the Church of the Devil in Nephi’s vision as the Catholic or American Evangelical Churches. However any interpretation to make either “the church of the Lamb of God” OR “the church of the devil” into literal Christian organizations, contradicts the principle taught in Moroni 7 where he teaches that “every thing which inviteth to do good… is of God” and “whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil… is of the devil”.

16 For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.
17 But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him. (Moroni 7:16–17)

12 And whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do good is of me; for good cometh of none save it be of me. I am the same that leadeth men to all good… (Ether 4:12)

The idea sometimes pushed by early church leaders that every other Christian denomination BUT the LDS church is part of the Church of the devil would be a complete contradiction to Moroni’s words. How could Catholicism or protestantism for instance be a part of the “church of the devil” when the devil “persuadeth no man to do good, no not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him“! The idea is prideful and contradictory and has subsequently been abandoned by most modern LDS teachers. But at the same time, how could the LDS church be the “only true church” when according to Nephi and other scriptures THERE ARE ONLY TWO CHURCHES? According to Nephi’s vision, holding that the LDS denomination is the only true church requires all others to be part of the church of the devil, which as we will see in this article goes contrary to the words of Moroni, Christ’s and the Joseph’s Doctrine and Covenants. The answer to this apparent contradiction is that Both Moroni and Nephi understood the spiritual nature of Christ’s true church. [1]

Is it any wonder that we are scorned as being a cult by other churches when we repeatedly infer that they are part of the church of the devil? (Perhaps some LDS members don’t realize it, but our insistence that we are the ONLY true church infers by definition that unlike us, all others are false!).

Early LDS Church leaders were not alone in their misunderstanding of the spiritual nature of Christ’s true church.  In the New Testament John and other apostles make this same mistake when they forbid a man who would not follow them, from casting out demons in Christ’s name. Jesus rebuked them and teaches the same principle as Nephi and Moroni. No-one who does good in Christ’s name is of the devil. All who do good in Christ’s name are part of Christ’s spiritual church.

38 John said to Jesus, “Teacher, we saw someone forcing demons out of a person by using the power and authority of your name. We tried to stop him because he was not one of us.”
39 Jesus said, “Don’t stop him! No one who works a miracle in my name can turn around and speak evil of me.
40 Whoever isn’t against us is for us. (Mark 9:38–40 GWT)

Nephi makes essentially the same statement using reverse logic later in his writings as he explains the nature of both the true church of Christ and the False church of the devil. (Christ also says almost the exact thing in Matt 12:30)

“Wherefore, he that fighteth against Zion, both Jew and Gentile, both bond and free, both male and female, shall perish; for they are they who are the whore of all the earth; for they who are not for me are against me, saith our God.” (2 Nephi 10:16, see also Matt 12:30)

So Christ in one place says “whoever is not against us–is for us”, but then also says along with Nephi “whoever is not for us–is against us” (see Matt 12:30). Although circular in reasoning, these statements make absolutely no sense at all if you try to define a church as an ecclesiastical organization. (fn 4) They are far more in harmony if you realize that the “only two churches” are simply a restatement of the same spiritual dichotomy taught over and over in scripture which teaches that those who do good and are heading toward love are part of the spiritual church of God, and those who do evil and are fighting good are part of the church of the devil. And that every ecclesiastical church, sect, denomination, religion, person or nation is constantly aligning themselves with one or the other in everything they do.

good-vs-evil

 

The Good vs. Evil Dichotomy in Scripture

The dualism or dichotomy of good vs. evil is taught throughout the scriptures. And perhaps nowhere is the idea that these terms transcend organizational lines taught better than in the parable of the wheat and the tares. In the parable the Master commands his servants to plant wheat in a field— but when it grows he find tares MIXED WITHIN the wheat. He tells his servants to allow them to grow together, least pulling out the tares, “ye root up also the wheat with them”.  The meaning of this parable is explained not only in the New Testament but also in D&C 86 & 88, where we learn that that “the field was the world, and the apostles were the sowers of the seed” (D&C 86:2), the good seed are the children of Christ’s kingdom (true church), and the tares are the church of the devil or bad people and bad works that come from twisted doctrine (Matt 13:38, D&C 88:94).

37 …He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom [Christ’s true church]; but the tares are the children of the wicked one [ie. devil’s church, see D&C 88:94];
39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear. (Matt 13:37–43, see also D&C 86:1–3)

Verse 38 (clarified in D&C 88:94) makes it clear that in this parable the wheat are the kingdom or church of Christ, and the tares are the ‘kingdom or church of the devil’. And the whole point of the parable is that it is hard to tell the difference between the two because they look so similar and grow together within each organization! Both the wheat and the tares exist within every religion, culture and nation.  And it is not until the end of the world (end or close of the age in most translations) that Christ will separate the two; gathering the wheat into heaven and burning the tares with the stubble to prepare a new crop cycle. [2].

 

Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo (notes on the LDS Gospel Topics Essay)

This is a ver batem, yet annotated version of the article Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo at lds.org. Spin notes are derived largely from Mormonism 101, with edits and adaptations by the current author. To display the annotation which illustrate the “positive spin” of the Church Essay, click on the note numbers at the end of a paragraph (Spin Note 1, Spin Note 2, etc.). Click again to hide the note. The annotations are not part of the original article.

polygamy-essays3

Latter-day Saints believe that monogamy—the marriage of one man and one woman—is the Lord’s standing law of marriage. In biblical times, the Lord commanded some of His people to practice plural marriage—the marriage of one man and more than one woman. Some early members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also received and obeyed this commandment given through God’s prophets. Spin Note 1

The word ‘commanded’ here is a bit dishonest and without any biblical support— as the Bible does not have a single instance of god ‘commanding’ polygamy. A better wording might be ‘suffered’ his people to indulge in the cultural practice plural marriage. The Bible never states that Abraham was “commanded” to take a second wife, nor with any of the other polygamous patriarchs or prophets. There is simply no evidence that the Biblical God ever commanded or even encouraged Israel to practice polygamy. It infers Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham because she felt bad about being infertile, and Abraham suffered it so they could have promised children. And infers others were allowed polygamous unions because it was a common cultural practice. In fact Deut 17:17 explicitly forbids dynastic polygamy for the Jewish leader saying,

“Neither shall he [a Jewish King] multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.” (Deut 17:17) 

The Book of Mormon is no different, explicitly condemning David and Solomon’s use of  polygamy to multiply children and build their dynasties (see Jacob 2:23–26).  LDS leadership’s use of Jacob 2:30 in the Book of Mormon to suggest that god might command polygamy to multiply seed or increase population is an obvious twisting of the verses intent. The verse in question says,

“For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise [polygamy is to be forbidden]”. (Jacob 2:30)

To “raise up seed” does not in any way infer the use of polygamy to take many wives to multiply seed or increase the population. It is a direct quote from Genesis 38:8, referring to a caveat of the Mosaic law in Deut 25:5–7 (which Christ referred to in Matt 22:24) where if a man dies without having children, his brother was to take his widow as a (second) wife in order to “raise up seed” “in the name of his brother”. Since in ancient law, property was tied exclusively to men and their children, in this way the wife could bare children who could still lay claim to her dead husband’s assets, and preserve the family name under civil law. Both the story of the early Patriarchs as well as Judah and Tamar draw on this law of birthright to illustrate how god “rose up” seed or a “righteous branch” through the folly of his servant’s gross improprieties (see Gen 38, Gen 21, Gen 29:21–35, Jer 23:5–6). To suggest that this reference meant that God might randomly command his people to start engaging in rampant dynastic polygamy in order to increase population is unfounded in scripture and frankly a bit twisted.

After receiving a revelation commanding him to practice plural marriage, Joseph Smith married multiple wives and introduced the practice to close associates. Spin Note 2

The chronology of Joseph Smith’s polygamy is different from the way it is presented here. His first extra-marital relationship with Fanny Alger (considered a plural marriage by some, see Bradley 2010) dates back to around 1836, the revelation mentioned above came 7 years and 27 plural wives later. Fanny was a 16-17 year old domestic, hired by Joseph to help around the house while Emma was sick during the pregnancy of her second Child . The sexual relationship happened completely without Emma’s knowledge. (see Hales: JSP)

When Joseph Smith’s wife Emma discovered this relationship, there is no evidence that he appealed to the Bible or a revelation to justify his actions. Instead, he begged his wife’s forgiveness and the relationship was ended (see McLellin Letter).

In the second half of the 1830s, the Mormon situation in Missouri as well as Illinois became increasingly unstable. Joseph Smith’s reputation and allusions to polygamy generated a lot of rumours, which were denied by both Joseph Smith individually and the church as a whole (see references here. also note 15).

This changed at the beginning of the 1840s, after the Mormons settled down in their own city of Nauvoo (Illinois). Here Joseph Smith felt safe enough to test the waters by publicly hinting at what he called the restoration of Biblical polygamy. Reactions to this were usually negative, after which he would backpedal by saying the time had not yet come (see Nauvoo teachings. Newell & Avery 1994, pp. 95-96).

In secret, though, Joseph Smith went ahead and started taking on many polygamous wives in the early 1840s. In an effort to convince his wife Emma of the practice, he finally dictated a formal revelation about polygamy on July 12, 1843.“And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, receive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me,” it said, “for I am the Lord thy God, and ye shall obey my voice” (Doctrine and Covenants 2013, pp. 271-272).

This principle was among the most challenging aspects of the Restoration—for Joseph personally and for other Church members. Plural marriage tested faith and provoked controversy and opposition. Few Latter-day Saints initially welcomed the restoration of a biblical practice entirely foreign to their sensibilities. But many later [some] testified of powerful spiritual experiences that helped them overcome their hesitation and gave them courage to accept this practice.

Although the Lord commanded the adoption—and later the cessation—of plural marriage in the latter days, He did not give exact instructions on how to obey the commandment. Significant social and cultural changes often include misunderstandings and difficulties. Church leaders and members experienced these challenges as they heeded the command to practice plural marriage and again later as they worked to discontinue it after Church President Wilford Woodruff issued an inspired statement known as the Manifesto in 1890, which led to the end of plural marriage in the Church. Through it all, Church leaders and members sought to follow God’s will. Spin Note 3

This paragraph contains two errors:

– There were some “exact instructions” on how to practice polygamy;
– The Manifesto did not lead “to the end of plural marriage in the Church”.

To start with the latter point: on the very day church president Woodruff submitted the Manifesto to the general membership for approval, he advised Byron Harvey Allred, who had traveled to Salt Lake City to marry an additional wife, how to circumvent the Manifesto (read Allred’s journal here, search for the last mention of “Woodruff”).

In the Manifesto, president Woodruff denied “in the most solemn manner” the cases of polygamy which the Utah Commission had identified but these have since been amply documented and confirmed (see Quinn 1985, who was disciplined and later excommunicated from the Mormon church for publishing this research). One year later, president Woodruff again lied under oath about the clandestine continuation of polygamy in an attempt to regain seized church property (Wagoner 1989, p. 149) – possibly the real purpose of the Manifesto.

With regards to the “instructions on how to obey the commandment” of polygamy, there may not have been many but the ones that were there, were not followed. Leviticus 18 in the Bible, for instance, prohibits men from marrying a mother and her daughter, as well as marrying sisters, yet both practices were frequent among Mormons (see note 1 to the essay Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah).

Neither did Joseph Smith follow the instructions from his own 1843 revelation which states, for instance, that polygamous wives should be virgins. Joseph Smith, however, had relationships with at least 11 married women. Some girls, like Sarah Ann Whitney (17) and Flora Ann Woodworth (17) married other men within a few months after their polygamous unions to Joseph Smith, which, according to the revelation, constitutes adultery. And finally, the revelation stipulates that the first wife gives her husband permission to take extra wives but Joseph Smith took most of his plural wives without his wife Emma’s knowledge, let alone permission.

Many details about the early practice of plural marriage are unknown. Plural marriage was introduced among the early Saints incrementally, and participants were asked to keep their actions confidential. They did not discuss their experiences publicly or in writing until after the Latter-day Saints had moved to Utah and Church leaders had publicly acknowledged the practice. The historical record of early plural marriage is therefore thin: few records of the time provide details, and later reminiscences are not always reliable. Some ambiguity will always accompany our knowledge about this issue. Like the participants, we “see through a glass, darkly” and are asked to walk by faith. Spin Note 4

Throughout this essay, the authors repeatedly claim that “many details” of Mormon polygamy are unknown because the historical record is supposedly incomplete, or even “thin”. It is not clear why they would say this since the authors’ own sources disagree with that conclusion.

In endnote 29, for example, an article by apostle John A. Widtsoe is cited which reads: “The literature and existing documents dealing with plural marriage in Nauvoo in the day of Joseph Smith are very numerous. Hundreds of affidavits on the subject are in the Church Historian’s office in Salt Lake City. Most of the books and newspaper and magazine articles on the subject are found there also” (Widtsoe 1946).

In endnotes 25 and 26, the authors quote Bringhurst & Foster’s 2010 book The Persistence of Polygamy which starts with an overview of “the plethora of books articles, and essays dealing with Mormon polygamy” and speaks of a “multitude of historical documents” (p. ix). “Literally hundreds of books”, the introduction claims, “have been written on the topic of Mormon polygamy” (p. 2).

So we have hundreds of books about polygamy, hundreds of affidavits from early Mormons who were personally involved in polygamy, as well as many other historical documents like marriage records, journals, letters, newspaper articles, etc. They contain details about every aspect of the first polygamous Mormon marriages. These sources are not a matter of faith either; in fact, most of them can be consulted quite easily these days by anyone with an internet connection.

The reliability of “later reminiscences” can be determined by comparing them to the rest of the historical record. By pretending these sources do not exist, the authors exempt themselves from such methodological rigour. Instead, they ask the reader to “walk by faith”. Remarkably, the reliability of later reminiscences doesn’t seem to be an issue in the remainder of the essay when the reminiscences fit the authors’ narrative.

The Beginnings of Plural Marriage in the Church

The revelation on plural marriage was not written down until 1843, but its early verses suggest that part of it emerged from Joseph Smith’s study of the Old Testament in 1831. People who knew Joseph well later stated he received the revelation about that time. Spin Note 5

This is a first example of what was stated in note 4. The reliability of “later reminiscences” is never questioned when it suits the authors of this article, in this case to create a sequence of events that puts Joseph Smith’s relationship with Fanny Alger in the context of polygamy.

The sources quoted with this paragraph are from 1878 and 1887. That in itself does not mean they are unreliable but in view of the absence of contemporary supporting evidence, some caution seems appropriate. See note 2 for the actual chronology.

The revelation, recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 132, states that Joseph prayed to know why God justified Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, and Solomon in having many wives. The Lord responded that He had commanded them to enter into the practice.

Latter-day Saints understood that they were living in the latter days, in what the revelations called the “dispensation of the fullness of times.” Ancient principles—such as prophets, priesthood, and temples—would be restored to the earth. Plural marriage was one of those ancient principles. Spin Note 6

It is not in dispute that polygamy occurs in the Bible as a cultural practice. However, the Christian world does not generally see it as a commandment from God (see also note 1). Moreover, the justification of polygamy by claiming that “God justified Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, and Solomon in having many wives” was already anticipated – and unequivocally condemned – in the Book of Mormon (as already discussed).

Polygamy had been permitted for millennia in many cultures and religions, but, with few exceptions, was rejected in Western cultures. In Joseph Smith’s time, monogamy was the only legal form of marriage in the United States. Joseph knew the practice of plural marriage would stir up public ire. After receiving the commandment, he taught a few associates about it, but he did not spread this teaching widely in the 1830s. Spin Note 7

There is no good evidence that Joseph Smith received a revelation about polygamy in the 1830s, nor that “he taught a few associates about it”. Curiously, the sources that are quoted with this paragraph do not support this either.

The first source concerns a hypothetical question asked to Lorenzo Snow in 1892: “Could Joseph Smith receive a revelation (…)”. There is nothing in Snow’s testimony to suggest that Joseph Smith received a revelation about polygamy in the 1830s.

The second source is an 1869 sermon by Orson Pratt which actually states the opposite of what is implied in the paragraph above, namely that Joseph Smith indicated in 1832 that the time for polygamy had not yet come and that, therefore, the revelation on polygamy was only given in 1843.

The third source is not about polygamy at all but about disseminating Mormonism among Native Americans by “forming a matrimonial alliance with the Natives”. Although this letter is critical of Joseph Smith and his associates, no mention is made of polygamy. Rather, in the matter of an unnamed man from New York (possibly Martin Harris) marrying a Native American woman, the letter states that “before this contemplated marriage can be carried into effect, he must return to the State of N. Y. and settle his business, for fear, should he return, after that affair had taken place, the civil authority would apprehend him as a criminal” (Marquardt 2008; read this source online here, see the second to last paragraph of the December 6, 1831 letter).

A last source cited in other sources is from a second-hand account written in 1896 by Mosiah Hancock, who was not even born until 1834.

When God commands a difficult task, He sometimes sends additional messengers to encourage His people to obey. Consistent with this pattern, Joseph told associates that an angel appeared to him three times between 1834 and 1842 and commanded him to proceed with plural marriage when he hesitated to move forward. During the third and final appearance, the angel came with a drawn sword, threatening Joseph with destruction unless he went forward and obeyed the commandment fully. Spin Note 8

This is not a correct representation of the facts. The only source which indicates that an angel appeared three times to Joseph Smith in that period, was Mary Rollins Lightner in 1905 (Hales 2010). However, Joseph Smith did not tell this to “his associates” but to her, in an ultimate effort to convince her to enter into a relationship with him (he had been pursuing her since at least 1834, and some sources even say 1831, when Mary was only 16 or 12 years old respectively, see Newell & Avery 1994, p. 65. Read Mary’s affidavits here).

All sources for the angel-with-the-drawn-sword-story are relatively late (the earliest one is likely from 1853. possibly 1843), appear to be depending on each other and lack  supporting evidence from Joseph Smith’s lifetime. It’s possible, then, that the story was made up later to create the impression that Joseph Smith engaged in polygamy under divine duress – a concept that doesn’t really sit well with Mormon theology.

Either way, one must look suspiciously at the narrative this church Essay is trying to sell church members here. This paragraph is suggesting God sent and angel with a drawn sword to go against Joseph’s agency in commanding him take to his 16 year old house servant as his first plural bride. And that god sanctioned this “union” even though it occurred completely behind Emma’s back— Joseph having sex with her in secret, while his wife was likely pregnant with their second child Frederick (born June 1836). All this with supposed partial unwritten revelation, and no public disclosure, only to have Joseph’s first plural wife to be kicked out of the house by Emma when she finds out about it (like Hagar and Sarah right?!). “God” then says nothing about polygamy again until 5 years later when Joseph would take a second plural wife, (likely Lucinda Pendleton while her husband was away on a mission. see here for information on Lucinda and her marriage to Joseph and connection to early American anti-Masonry). Other sources suggest his second was 26 year old Louisa Beaman.

.

Fragmentary evidence suggests that Joseph Smith acted on the angel’s first command by marrying a plural wife, Fanny Alger, in Kirtland, Ohio, in the mid-1830s. Several Latter-day Saints who had lived in Kirtland reported decades later that Joseph Smith had married Alger, who lived and worked in the Smith household, after he had obtained her consent and that of her parents. Little is known about this marriage, and nothing is known about the conversations between Joseph and Emma regarding Alger. After the marriage with Alger ended in separation, Joseph seems to have set the subject of plural marriage aside until after the Church moved to Nauvoo, Illinois. Spin Note 9

It is true that a lot of information about Fanny Alger stems from “decades later”, starting with the sources cited for this paragraph, which are from 1886-87, 1903 and 1896 respectively. Of all the historical sources that mention Fanny Alger, these are the most recent. A surprising choice, in view of the concern the authors of this article have expressed about the reliability of “later reminiscences” (see note 4).

Then again, maybe not so surprising, considering that the earlier sources (until 1842) do not speak of a marriage with the blessing of Fanny’s parents but of “a dirty, nasty, filthy affair” (Oliver Cowdery), “adultery” (Far West High Council minutes), “girl business” (Joseph Smith himself), “unlawful intercourse” (Fanny Brewer) and “improper proposals” (Martin Harris).

Other aspects of the relationship between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger that can be gleaned from the sources are that Emma Smith was initially unaware of it, that she caught her husband having sex with Fanny Alger (or found out about it when Fanny’s pregnancy became visible), that Joseph Smith asked his wife for forgiveness, that the relationship ended there, and that Fanny left the Smith household (or was sent away by Emma). And that she left Joseph and the church, was later married and refused to talk about it later in life.

None of the sources mention a commandment or an angel with a drawn sword in this connection. A secondary 1896 source by Mosiah Hancock states that Fanny’s parents may have consented. They remained in the church and followed the Saints to settle in St George, Utah

Plural Marriage and Eternal Marriage

The same revelation that taught of plural marriage was part of a larger revelation given to Joseph Smith—that marriage could last beyond death and that eternal marriage was essential to inheriting the fullness that God desires for His children. As early as 1840, Joseph Smith privately taught Apostle Parley P. Pratt that the “heavenly order” allowed Pratt and his wife to be together “for time and all eternity.” Joseph also taught that men like Pratt—who had remarried following the death of his first wife—could be married (or sealed) to their wives for eternity, under the proper conditions. Spin Note 10

The distinction between “eternal marriage” and “plural marriage” is a modern interpretation that does not necessarily follow from the text of Joseph Smith’s revelation, which only mentions “this law”, “my law” and “the new and everlasting covenant” throughout the entire text.

The only distinction drawn in this revelation is between a traditional, non-Mormon marriage which ends with death and a marriage “by God’s word” which is remains valid in the afterlife.

The sealing of husband and wife for eternity was made possible by the restoration of priesthood keys and ordinances. On April 3, 1836, the Old Testament prophet Elijah appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in the Kirtland Temple and restored the priesthood keys necessary to perform ordinances for the living and the dead, including sealing families together. Marriages performed by priesthood authority could link loved ones to each other for eternity, on condition of righteousness; marriages performed without this authority would end at death. Spin Note 11

This paragraph confirms the issues with chronology that were pointed out in note 2: Fanny Alger cannot have been “sealed” to Joseph Smith if the sealing of husband and wife for eternity was only made possible three years later.

Moreover, the connection between the events of April 1836 and the “sealing power” is of later origin. No new ordinances were introduced as a result of the appearance of Elijah. The first sealings between men and women were performed in 1843 and the sealing of children to their parents only started after Joseph Smith’s death (Buerger 1994, p. 61; Prince 1995, pp. 155-172).

The sealing of men and women, then, did not originate as a result of the appearance of Elijah but in the context of Joseph Smith’s 1843 revelation on polygamy. To early Mormons, sealing and polygamy were one and the same.

Marriage performed by priesthood authority meant that the procreation of children and perpetuation of families would continue into the eternities. Joseph Smith’s revelation on marriage declared that the “continuation of the seeds forever and ever” helped to fulfill God’s purposes for His children. This promise was given to all couples who were married by priesthood authority and were faithful to their covenants.

Plural Marriage in Nauvoo

For much of Western history, family “interest”—economic, political, and social considerations—dominated the choice of spouse. Parents had the power to arrange marriages or forestall unions of which they disapproved. By the late 1700s, romance and personal choice began to rival these traditional motives and practices. By Joseph Smith’s time, many couples insisted on marrying for love, as he and Emma did when they eloped against her parents’ wishes. Spin Note 12

Love may not have been Joseph Smith’s only motivation for marrying Emma Hale. For years he had been trying to retrieve golden plates which he claimed to have found in a hill near his home. He said they were guarded by a spirit who eventually stipulated that he could take the plates on the condition that he got married. The spirit did not inform him who he should marry but in his seer stone he saw it was to be Emma (for Joseph Smith’s use of seer stones, see this article about the translation of the Book of Mormon).

Earlier attempts to take the plates home had failed and this was to be Joseph Smith’s last chance before they would sink into the earth forever. That is why he wanted to marry quickly; eloping may have been necessary because Emma’s parents weren’t too keen on their daughter marrying a young treasure hunter without a respectable, steady job (Quinn 1998, pp. 163-164; Marquardt & Walters 1994, pp. 89-94).

Latter-day Saints’ motives for plural marriage were often more religious than economic or romantic. Besides the desire to be obedient, a strong incentive was the hope of living in God’s presence with family members. In the revelation on marriage, the Lord promised participants “crowns of eternal lives” and “exaltation in the eternal worlds.” Men and women, parents and children, ancestors and progeny were to be “sealed” to each other—their commitment lasting into the eternities, consistent with Jesus’s promise that priesthood ordinances performed on earth could be “bound in heaven.” Spin Note 13

The statement that the hope of living in God’s presence with family members was a strong incentive to participate in polygamy contradicts the distinction proposed earlier between eternal and plural marriage (see note 10). If the Mormons of Kirtland and Nauvoo had made this distinction, polygamy would not have been required to live in God’s presence with family members.

Incidentally, most non-Mormons who believe in an afterlife believe they will be together with their loved ones anyway. The conditions and restrictions which the Mormon church imposes can be considered impediments rather than enablers.

The first plural marriage in Nauvoo took place when Louisa Beaman and Joseph Smith were sealed in April 1841. Joseph married many additional wives and authorized other Latter-day Saints to practice plural marriage. Spin Note 14

Between Fanny Alger (1833) and Louisa Beaman, there was also a relationship between Joseph Smith and Lucinda Pendleton Harris (Compton 1997, pp. 43-54). It is unclear why this union isn’t mentioned here, maybe because it didn’t occur in Kirtland or Nauvoo but in Missouri.

The practice spread slowly at first. By June 1844, when Joseph died, approximately 29 men and 50 women had entered into plural marriage, in addition to Joseph and his wives. When the Saints entered the Salt Lake Valley in 1847, at least 196 men and 521 women had entered into plural marriages. Participants in these early plural marriages pledged to keep their involvement confidential, though they anticipated a time when the practice would be publicly acknowledged.

Nevertheless, rumors spread. A few men unscrupulously used these rumors to seduce women to join them in an unauthorized practice sometimes referred to as “spiritual wifery.” When this was discovered, the men were cut off from the Church. The rumors prompted members and leaders to issue carefully worded denials that denounced spiritual wifery and polygamy but were silent about what Joseph Smith and others saw as divinely mandated “celestial” plural marriage. The statements emphasized that the Church practiced no marital law other than monogamy while implicitly leaving open the possibility that individuals, under direction of God’s living prophet, might do so. Spin Note 15

Rumours had been spreading since the days of Fanny Alger and had already caused problems and denials in Ohio and Missouri. The term rumour, however, doesn’t apply since Joseph Smith did indeed have relations with many women. They were only rumours because Joseph Smith and other church leaders kept publicly denying their involvement in polygamy (including in court).

From the very beginning, lying has been an integral part of Mormon polygamy (Hardy 1992). Joseph Smith lied to his wife, his associates, his followers and his community. His successors lied to the authorities, the courts and to Congress. Today, the Mormon church lies about polygamy to prospective members in its missionary program, to current members in its curriculum and to non-members in its media statements (such as this essay).

Whether these statements are called lies or “carefully worded denials”, it seems clear that they were – and are – primarily meant to mislead others from knowing the truth.

Joseph Smith and Plural Marriage

During the era in which plural marriage was practiced, Latter-day Saints distinguished between sealings for time and eternity and sealings for eternity only. Sealings for time and eternity included commitments and relationships during this life, generally including the possibility of sexual relations. Eternity-only sealings indicated relationships in the next life alone. Spin Note 16

There is no evidence that the Mormons from “the era in which plural marriage was practiced” made this distinction. As stated in note 10, the text of Joseph Smith’s 1843 revelation only distinguishes between marriages “for time” and “for time and eternity” – to this day the only two forms of marriage in the Mormon church. Marriage “for eternity only” is an apologetic term which does not appear in any primary 19th-century source (Quinn 1997, pp. 183-84; Compton 1997, pp. 12-15, 500).

The reason why the authors of this essay use the “eternity only” category may be to introduce the idea that some of Joseph Smith’s polygamous unions did not have a sexual aspect, and might be perceived as less controversial that way.
Since the “eternity only” category does not exist, however, there is no reason to suppose that Joseph Smith’s relationships did not have a sexual component, all the more so because sexual relations can be established with reasonable certainty in about half the cases – which is quite a lot for a time in which sexuality was not openly discussed.

Evidence indicates that Joseph Smith participated in both types of sealings. The exact number of women to whom he was sealed in his lifetime is unknown because the evidence is fragmentary. Some of the women who were sealed to Joseph Smith later testified that their marriages were for time and eternity, while others indicated that their relationships were for eternity alone. Spin Note 17

The endnote to this paragraph reports that the best estimates put the number of wives of Joseph Smith between 30 and 40. Mormonism101.com mostly relies on the research of Todd Compton, who lists 33 women (excluding Emma). Quinn (2012) proposes that there is also sufficient evidence that Esther Dutcher, Hannah Ann Dubois, Mary Heron Snyder and Lydia Kenyon Carter were sealed to Joseph Smith, which puts the tally at 37. Based on extensive demographic research, Smith (1994) puts in an even higher estimate of 42.

There is no evidence that any of these women ever “indicated that their relationships were for eternity alone” (see note 16, but see also Quinn 2012 for one possible exception).

Most of those sealed to Joseph Smith were between 20 and 40 years of age at the time of their sealing to him. The oldest, Fanny Young, was 56 years old. The youngest was Helen Mar Kimball, daughter of Joseph’s close friends Heber C. and Vilate Murray Kimball, who was sealed to Joseph several months before her 15th birthday. Spin Note 18

While it is technically true that most of those sealed to Joseph Smith (18 out of the 33 women) were between 20 and 40, this grouping seems arbitrary and clouds the actual age distribution of Joseph Smith’s wives:


The chart above shows that Joseph Smith had a strong preference for women who were younger to much younger than himself. To use another arbitrary grouping: most of those sealed to Joseph Smith (also 18 out of 33) were between 10 and 30. The older women, like Patty Bartlett (47) and Elizabeth Davis (50) were actively involved in recruiting the younger women and girls for plural marriage (Smith 1994; Compton 1997, pp. 179, 254-55, 260, 262).

Marriage at such an age, inappropriate by today’s standards, was legal in that era, and some women married in their mid-teens. Helen Mar Kimball spoke of her sealing to Joseph as being “for eternity alone,” suggesting that the relationship did not involve sexual relations. After Joseph’s death, Helen remarried and became an articulate defender of him and of plural marriage. Spin Note 19

Plural marriage was never legal in the US, so the question of age is moot from a judicial point of view. “Some women” did indeed marry “in their mid-teens” but they were few and far between. The chart below (from Foster et al. 2010) shows that in Joseph Smith’s time (1840), less than 2% of the women were married in their mid-teens, at 15 or younger:
The data for the above chart are for the entire United States. Zooming in on the Northeastern states where Joseph Smith lived, the rate of mid-teen marriages drops to 0.4 percent. Nine out of ten women who married in their teens did so at 18 or 19 (Compton 2010). Only three of Joseph Smith’s teenage wives were in this latter age range, the other seven (including Fanny Alger) were all younger:
Another issue is the age gap between Joseph Smith and his polygamous wiwes. Without claiming any statistical sophistication, Mormonism101 has prepared the following chart based on the ages of Joseph Smith and his wives as given by Foster et al. (2010, p. 154) and a sample from the IPUMS-USA database (Ruggles et al. 2010).
The vertical bars represent Joseph Smith’s wives at the age he married them, in order of age; the orange line represents Joseph Smith’s age at the time. The green line represents the age gap between 3,475 women of the same age and in the same area as Joseph Smith’s wives and their husbands as recorded in the 1850 US census (no earlier census data are available). The green area covers one standard deviation plus and minus from the average age gap in the sample.

Thus, whenever the orange line crosses into the green area, the age gap between Joseph Smith and that wife is within what could be considered a normal range. This is the case for 15 out of Joseph Smith’s 33 plural wives (the lighter coloured bars in the chart). The age gaps with his teenage wives and with his elderly wives generally fall outside the green area.

Click here to take a closer look at the 1850 census data.

In summary, then, we can conclude that Joseph Smith’s marital practices were well outside the bounds of normal behaviour in the time and place where he lived with regard to (1) the number of his wives, (2) their age at marriage and (3) the age gaps between them.

Nowhere in the autobiographical writings cited as sources for this paragraph does Helen Mar Kimball state that her sealing to Joseph Smith was “for eternity alone”; this quote is completely taken out of context here. What she does say, is the following:

Helen’s marriage was arranged by her father: “Having a great desire to be connected with the prophet Joseph, he offered me to him; this I afterwards learned from the prophet’s own mouth. My father had but one ewe lamb, but willingly laid her upon the altar; how cruel this seemed to my mother whose heartstrings were already stretched until they were ready to snap asunder” (Compton 1997, p. 498).

Helen supposed the marriage would be for eternity only but, according to one source, soon learned otherwise: “I would never have been sealed to Joseph had I known it was anything more than ceremony. I was young, and they deceived me, by saying the salvation of our whole family depended on it” (Wagoner 1989, p. 53).

Helen was promised salvation in exchange for her marriage to the prophet: “If you take this step, it will ensure your eternal salvation and exaltation and that of your father’s household and all of your kindred. This promise was so great that I willingly gave myself to purchase so glorious a reward” (Compton 1997, p. 499).

Helen was put under severe time pressure to make her decision: her father left her“to reflect upon it for the next twenty-four hours, during which time I was filled with various and conflicting ideas. I was skeptical–one minute believed, then doubted. I thought of the love and tenderness that he felt for his only daughter, and I knew that he would not cast her off, and this was the only convincing proof that I had of its being right. I knew that he loved me too well to teach me anything that was not strictly pure, virtuous and exalting in its tendencies; and no one else could have influenced me at that time or brought me to accept of a doctrine so utterly repugnant and so contrary to all of our former ideas and traditions” (Compton 1997, pp. 498-499).

Regardless of Helen Mar Kimball’s eloquence in defending Joseph Smith and polygamy at a much later age, she was under no illusion that polygamy had anything to offer her or her fellow female participants: “No earthly inducement could be held forth to the women who entered this order. It was to be a life sacrifice for the sake of an everlasting glory and exaltation” (Compton 1997 p. 349).

The authors of this article correctly assess that such relationships are deemed “inappropriate by today’s standards”. It is unlikely, however, that this was any different in the 1840s.

Following his marriage to Louisa Beaman and before he married other single women, Joseph Smith was sealed to a number of women who were already married. Neither these women nor Joseph explained much about these sealings, though several women said they were for eternity alone. Other women left no records, making it unknown whether their sealings were for time and eternity or were for eternity alone. Spin Note 20

These married women (12 to 14 according to the endnote to this paragraph) have said and written just as much about their relationships with Joseph Smith as the others (see note 4) and there is just as little (meaning no) evidence that these relations were “for eternity alone”(see note 16). On the contrary, as is the case for Joseph Smith’s other wives, there is ample primary evidence for sexual relations with a significant number of these married women as well (Quinn 2012).

There are several possible explanations for this practice. These sealings may have provided a way to create an eternal bond or link between Joseph’s family and other families within the Church. These ties extended both vertically, from parent to child, and horizontally, from one family to another. Today such eternal bonds are achieved through the temple marriages of individuals who are also sealed to their own birth families, in this way linking families together. Joseph Smith’s sealings to women already married may have been an early version of linking one family to another. Spin Note 21

This and the next two “possible explanations” are pure speculation for which there is no supporting evidence. Based on sources that actually exist – as opposed to the imagined feelings and thoughts of Joseph Smith and unnamed “faithful women” – only two explanations have any basis in fact:

Posterity: the stated purpose of Mormon polygamy was procreation. For a long time, Joseph Smith was thought to have fathered a handful of children with several of his polygamous wives, at least four of which were already married (Quinn 2012). By now, most of these claims have been disproved using modern DNA techniques (Groote 2011). As Quinn points out, however, the relevant fact here is not whether these children actually were Joseph Smith’s but whether their mothers thought they might be. This strongly suggests that Joseph Smith had sexual relations with these (married) women and that “raising up seed” should be considered as a possible explanation for his behaviour – which the authors of this essay don’t do.

Loyalty: Joseph Smith tested the loyalty of his closest associates by asking to marry their wives and daughters. Men who passed the test, entered a small, trusted inner circle, received leadership positions and were encouraged to start relations with other women themselves (Wagoner 1989, p. 41).

In Nauvoo, most if not all of the first husbands seem to have continued living in the same household with their wives during Joseph’s lifetime, and complaints about these sealings with Joseph Smith are virtually absent from the documentary record. Spin Note 22

That few complaints are known about Joseph Smith’s sealings to married women is, again, not an accurate representation of all the relevant facts:

Firstly, not all legal husbands were aware that Joseph Smith initiated relations with their wives (although most men knew afterwards). This was certainly true for Orson Hyde (on a mission) and Adam Lightner (out of town) and possibly for George Harris, Windsor Lyon, David Sessions and Jonathan Holmes as well.

Secondly, by focusing on “these [12 to 14]sealings”, a large group of people is left out of the picture who did not appreciate Joseph Smith’s proposals and who did have complaints about them. One of them, William Law, founded a newspaper with other Nauvoo dissidents in which they wanted to expose polygamy and other misconduct. As the mayor of Nauvoo, Joseph Smith allowed the printing press and the first edition to be destroyed. For this unlawful act, he was arrested and while awaiting judicial proceedings in prison, was murdered by an angry mob. The attempted suppression of complaints about polygamy directly led to Joseph Smith’s death.

Thirdly, complaints from legal husbands are not as absent from the documentary record as the authors of this essay suggest, especially in view of the limited scope of this practice. Church leader Daniel H. Wells, for instance, wrote about Albert Smith (no relation), Esther Dutcher’s legal husband: “He is much afflicted with the loss of his first wife. It seems that she was sealed to Joseph the Prophet in the days of Nauvoo, though she still remained his wife, and afterwards nearly broke his heart by telling him of it, and expressing her intention of adhering to that relationship” (Hales 2010a)

Another example is Henry Jacobs, whose wife Zina Huntington first married Joseph Smith but remained with Henry, then left her husband altogether for Brigham Young after Joseph Smith’s death. Although he remained a loyal Mormon, his letters reveal a deeply hurt husband and father:

“I have written so many letters to you and the children from first to last and got no letters, that I almost feel discouraged. I never have received but one from you since I left Salt Lake. O, how happy I should be if I only could see you and the little children, I would like to see the little babe.

Zina, I wish you to prosper. I wish you knew what I have to bear, my feelings are indescribable. I am unhappy, there is no peace for poor me. My pleasure is you, my comfort has vanished.

I have had many a good dream about you and the little ones. I have imagined myself at home with you and the little boys upon my knees, singing and playing with them. What a comfort, what a joy, to think upon those days that are gone by, o heaven bless me, even poor me, shall I ever see them again?

I think of you very often, Zina. Are you happy? Do you enjoy your life as pleasant as you did with me when I was home with you and the children, when we could say our prayers together and speak together in tongues and bless each other in the name of the Lord?

O, I think of those happy days that are past. When I sleep the sleep of death then I will not forget you and my little lambs. I love my affections, I love my children. O Zina, can I ever, will I ever get you again?” (minor editing for legibility by mormonism101.com, for more extensive quotations, see Compton 1997, pp. 98-100).

These sealings may also be explained by Joseph’s reluctance to enter plural marriage because of the sorrow it would bring to his wife Emma. He may have believed that sealings to married women would comply with the Lord’s command without requiring him to have normal marriage relationships. This could explain why, according to Lorenzo Snow, the angel reprimanded Joseph for having “demurred” on plural marriage even after he had entered into the practice. After this rebuke, according to this interpretation, Joseph returned primarily to sealings with single women. Spin Note 23

As stated in note 21, this explanation is purely speculative. It is based on reading Joseph Smith’s mind, a dubious story about an angel (see note 8) and a fabricated concept of marriage without “normal marriage relationships” (see note 16).

Another possibility is that, in an era when life spans were shorter than they are today, faithful women felt an urgency to be sealed by priesthood authority. Several of these women were married either to non-Mormons or former Mormons, and more than one of the women later expressed unhappiness in their present marriages. Living in a time when divorce was difficult to obtain, these women may have believed a sealing to Joseph Smith would give them blessings they might not otherwise receive in the next life. Spin Note 24

This explanation is not only pure speculation; it is also based on an incorrect portrayal of the facts. Of the eleven already married women on Compton’s list, only one had a former Mormon husband (Presendia Lathrop) while three had non-Mormon husbands (Mary Elizabeth Rollins, Sarah Kingsley and Ruth Vose).

Nor was divorce difficult to obtain, given the loose Mormon marriage morals. Of Joseph Smith’s 11 married wives (again according to Compton 1997), five divorced or simply left their prior husband (Lucinda Pendleton between 1846-1850, Zina Huntington in 1847, Presendia Lathrop in 1845, Marinda Johnson in 1870 and Elizabeth Davis in 1846).

Regardless of these factual inaccuracies, it has been explained already in note 11 that the idea of sealing originated in the context of polygamy, not the other way around. Sealing and polygamy were synonyms to early Mormons. Saying that “faithful women felt an urgency to be sealed” would be akin to saying that these women felt an urgency to engage in polygamy – an implication which is contradicted by all available sources.

The women who united with Joseph Smith in plural marriage risked reputation and self-respect in being associated with a principle so foreign to their culture and so easily misunderstood by others. “I made a greater sacrifice than to give my life,” said Zina Huntington Jacobs, “for I never anticipated again to be looked upon as an honorable woman.” Nevertheless, she wrote, “I searched the scripture & by humble prayer to my Heavenly Father I obtained a testimony for myself.” After Joseph’s death, most of the women sealed to him moved to Utah with the Saints, remained faithful Church members, and defended both plural marriage and Joseph. Spin Note 25

The women who did not unite with Joseph Smith or his associates in plural marriage also risked their good name. If they continued to refuse polygamous proposals, their reputation might get publicly tarnished to preemptively divert attention away from the proposals themselves, which would be perceived as inappropriate and scandalous should they become known to the general public. Sarah Pratt was accused of adultery, Martha Brotherton was called a “mean harlot” descended from “old Jezebel” in a newspaper, and 19-year old Nancy Rigdon was deemed “little, if any, better than a public prostitute” (Wagoner 1986).

After Joseph’s death, his wives were redistributed among other church leaders. Brigham Young took 7 to 9 of them, his counselor Heber C. Kimball 11. The other women were divided among other church leaders such as George A. Smith, Amasa Lyman, Ezra T. Benson and others (Compton 1997, p. 83).

This practice would be the foundation of the way in which the Mormons practiced polygamy in the second half of the nineteenth century: as “a symbol of status and inclusion in the inner Mormon circle of power” (Zeitzen 2008, p. 99; see also note 11 to the article Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah).

Joseph and Emma

Plural marriage was difficult for all involved. For Joseph Smith’s wife Emma, it was an excruciating ordeal. Records of Emma’s reactions to plural marriage are sparse; she left no firsthand accounts, making it impossible to reconstruct her thoughts. Spin Note 26

This is the third time the authors incorrectly claim that little is known about a certain aspect of Joseph Smith’s polygamy (see notes 4 and 20). The reason why most Mormons do not know a lot about Emma Smith is that she has been largely ignored in Mormon history ever since she chose to remain in Nauvoo after her husband was murdered, and not join the body of Mormons who emigrated to Utah.

According to author Jana Riess, “Emma’s disappearance from LDS history was so total that (…) an article about her for the Ensign in 1979 was the first writing about her to appear in any official church publication in 113 years” (Riess 2013). Polygamy is not discussed in this article, however, because that is another subject which Mormon church leaders have tried hard to ignore in official publications before the advent of internet.

Nevertheless, records of Emma Smith are not “sparse”. Linda King Newell and ValeenTippetts Avery’s biography Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith, for example, is 394 pages long, contains a 14-page bibliography of published sources and builds on research into more than 50 historical newspapers, as well as diaries, minutes, letter and (auto)biographies from 85 archive collections. Expertly put together, these sources make crystal clear how Emma Smith felt about her husband’s extra-marital relations: betrayed, deceived, hurt, sad, angry, taunted and humiliated.

However, Newell and Avery’s groundbreaking book is not cited in this essay, once again allowing the authors to pretend that little is known about things they don’t want to write about.

Joseph and Emma loved and respected each other deeply. After he had entered into plural marriage, he poured out his feelings in his journal for his “beloved Emma,” whom he described as “undaunted, firm and unwavering, unchangeable, affectionate Emma.” After Joseph’s death, Emma kept a lock of his hair in a locket she wore around her neck.

Emma approved, at least for a time, of four of Joseph Smith’s plural marriages in Nauvoo, and she accepted all four of those wives into her household. She may have approved of other marriages as well. But Emma likely did not know about all of Joseph’s sealings. She vacillated in her view of plural marriage, at some points supporting it and at other times denouncing it. Spin Note 27

The sequence of events was a bit different. These four women (Emily & Eliza Partidge and Sara & Maria Lawrence, 19, 22, 17 and 19 years old respectively) already lived in the Smith household before Emma gave her permission. The Lawrence sisters were their wards. The Partridge sisters had already married Joseph Smith two months before, without Emma’s knowledge. Nobodytold Emma this, though, but the ceremony was simply performed a second time in her presence. Even when Emma supported polygamy, she was being deceived by her husband (Newell & Avery 1994, p. 142-143).

Emma’s approval was short-lived. Apparently she did not fully realize that Joseph Smith’s plural marriages were also of a sexual nature. That same night she found her husband in a room with Eliza Partridge and “from that very hour,” Emily wrote in her journal, “Emma was our bitter enemy” (Newell & Avery 1994, p. 143-144; Smith 1994).

The speculation that Emma Smith “may have approved of other marriages as well” has no basis in fact. She didn’t even know about these unions. These four are the only ones which she approved of for a few hours, after which she immediately regretted it.

During the two months in which these events unfolded, Emma Smith’s attitude toward polygamy did indeed vacillate. The rest of her life, before and after, she was radically opposed to it. To her dying day she maintained, against better judgment, that Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy.

In the summer of 1843, Joseph Smith dictated the revelation on marriage, a lengthy and complex text containing both glorious promises and stern warnings, some directed at Emma. The revelation instructed women and men that they must obey God’s law and commands in order to receive the fullness of His glory.

The revelation on marriage required that a wife give her consent before her husband could enter into plural marriage. Nevertheless, toward the end of the revelation, the Lord said that if the first wife “receive not this law”—the command to practice plural marriage—the husband would be “exempt from the law of Sarah,” presumably the requirement that the husband gain the consent of the first wife before marrying additional women. Spin Note 28

The “law of Sarah”, then, is of no consequence. The first wife must give her consent but if she doesn’t, the plural marriage can go ahead anyway.

After Emma opposed plural marriage, Joseph was placed in an agonizing dilemma, forced to choose between the will of God and the will of his beloved Emma. He may have thought Emma’s rejection of plural marriage exempted him from the law of Sarah. Her decision to “receive not this law” permitted him to marry additional wives without her consent. Spin Note 29

However, Joseph Smith had already taken on 22 extra wives before he first told his wife about polygamy. There was no dilemma when the 1843 revelation was recorded. He had already made his choice without giving her the opportunity to come to a decision.

Because of Joseph’s early death and Emma’s decision to remain in Nauvoo and not discuss plural marriage after the Church moved west, many aspects of their story remain known only to the two of them.

Trial and Spiritual Witness

Years later in Utah, participants in Nauvoo plural marriage discussed their motives for entering into the practice. God declared in the Book of Mormon that monogamy was the standard; at times, however, He commanded plural marriage so His people could “raise up seed unto [Him].” Plural marriage did result in an increased number of children born to believing parents. Spin Note 30

This is incorrect. Mormon polygamy led to fewer children than probably would have been born in a monogamous society (see note 6 of the article Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah).

Some Saints also saw plural marriage as a redemptive process of sacrifice and spiritual refinement. According to Helen Mar Kimball, Joseph Smith stated that “the practice of this principle would be the hardest trial the Saints would ever have to test their faith.” Though it was one of the “severest” trials of her life, she testified that it had also been “one of the greatest blessings.” Her father, Heber C. Kimball, agreed. “I never felt more sorrowful,” he said of the moment he learned of plural marriage in 1841. “I wept days. … I had a good wife. I was satisfied.”

The decision to accept such a wrenching trial usually came only after earnest prayer and intense soul-searching. Brigham Young said that, upon learning of plural marriage, “it was the first time in my life that I had desired the grave.” “I had to pray unceasingly,” he said, “and I had to exercise faith and the Lord revealed to me the truth of it and that satisfied me.” Heber C. Kimball found comfort only after his wife Vilate had a visionary experience attesting to the rightness of plural marriage. “She told me,” Vilate’s daughter later recalled, “she never saw so happy a man as father was when she described the vision and told him she was satisfied and knew it was from God.”

Lucy Walker recalled her inner turmoil when Joseph Smith invited her to become his wife. “Every feeling of my soul revolted against it,” she wrote. Yet, after several restless nights on her knees in prayer, she found relief as her room “filled with a holy influence” akin to “brilliant sunshine.” She said, “My soul was filled with a calm sweet peace that I never knew,” and “supreme happiness took possession of my whole being.”

Not all had such experiences. Some Latter-day Saints rejected the principle of plural marriage and left the Church, while others declined to enter the practice but remained faithful. Nevertheless, for many women and men, initial revulsion and anguish was followed by struggle, resolution, and ultimately, light and peace. Sacred experiences enabled the Saints to move forward in faith. Spin Note 31

As can be seen from the examples above, it takes most people tremendous effort to act against their natural feelings, their socialization and their conscience. Many reports of the struggle of those who first entered a polygamous relationship, therefore, mention days and nights of prayer, fasting and sleep deprivation, combined with enormous psychological pressure and emotional distress.

Contrary to what the authors of this essay seem to think, most people will not consider this “a sacred experience” to be emulated in any way. Overriding one’s natural impulses and acting against one’s conscience in the name of faith is the domain of religious fanaticism.

Also missing from this article is the message that religious leaders who, from their position of authority, extort sex from followers in exchange for promises of salvation do not necessarily need to be obeyed (Money 2014). This may be a modern message but then again, the Mormon church chose a modern medium, the internet, to release this essay to a modern audience.

Conclusion

The challenge of introducing a principle as controversial as plural marriage is almost impossible to overstate. A spiritual witness of its truthfulness allowed Joseph Smith and other Latter-day Saints to accept this principle. Difficult as it was, the introduction of plural marriage in Nauvoo did indeed “raise up seed” unto God. A substantial number of today’s members descend through faithful Latter-day Saints who practiced plural marriage.Spin Note 32

Unfortunately, no sources are given on which the assumption that a substantial number of today’s Mormons descend from polygamists is based. What is known, however, is that the Mormon hierarchy has become intimately connected through dynastic and polygamous marriages (Quinn 1997, pp. 163-197). This confirms that polygamy was an important tool in establishing and expanding the power base of the Mormon church leadership (see note 25 to this article and note 11 to the article Plural Marriage and Families in Early Utah).

Church members no longer practice plural marriage. Consistent with Joseph Smith’s teachings, the Church permits a man whose wife has died to be sealed to another woman when he remarries. Moreover, members are permitted to perform ordinances on behalf of deceased men and women who married more than once on earth, sealing them to all of the spouses to whom they were legally married. The precise nature of these relationships in the next life is not known, and many family relationships will be sorted out in the life to come. Latter-day Saints are encouraged to trust in our wise Heavenly Father, who loves His children and does all things for their growth and salvation. Spin Note 33

Other traces of polygamy that can be seen in Mormon church policies today are:

* Although a man whose wife has passed away may be sealed to another woman in the temple, women whose husband has passed away may not be sealed to another man.

* As a side effect, it is often difficult for young Mormon widows to find a new partner in the Mormon church. Mormons believe that the children of subsequent husbands will belong to the first husband in the afterlife. The authors of this article feign ignorance about this by claiming that “the precise nature of these relationships in the next life is not known” but such ignorance would pull the rug from under the whole of Mormon sealing theology. Why create a mess in this life only to sort it out in the next?

* Divorced women who want to remarry in the temple, have to apply for an ecclesiastical divorce first. This does not apply to men, who can be married in the temple to multiple living women this way.

 

Why Does The LDS Church Need Reforms

The LDS Church can be a pretty amazing and beautiful system for millions of its faithful adherents. And its uniquely promoted by both our core scriptures and leadership as an organization led by continuing revelation. This means, that as a ‘living church’, God has promised to advance our knowledge through inspiration to its leaders and members just as fast as we are ready to advance. In this section I have attempted to very generally outline and summarize a number of reformational ideas I’ve had by appealing our own scriptures and history offering solutions from our scriptures for some of the problems I’ve seen the church grapple with recently.

Really, reforms are the hallmark of The Gospel in every dispensation. Whether it be reforms from new found information as was the case when Josiah found lost scriptures in the ancient temple, or in the case of people like Ezra, Jonah, Alma, Samuel the Lamanite, Isaiah or John the Baptist who were called mid-dispensation to correct the presiding high priests of Israel. The entire history of the gospel and human history is one of divinity sending movements of new players onto the human stage to advance the progression and evolution of mankind. When the priesthood itself becomes blind of its own issues, God calls reformers from outside the priesthood to call us saints to repentance.

In my experience in the church over the past few decades I’ve seen a huge number of members who after learning about historical or doctrinal issues have left our church when they simply cannot reconcile the new truths with some of the problematic narratives we have constructed over the last hundred years.

Many of these issues seem to boil down to the following points.

  1. Historical and theological problems in our worldview.
  2. Overly-autocratic control maintained by virtue of the priesthood. (It’s often run more like China than like democratic nations, completely ignoring the ‘law of common voice’ given in the D&C)
  3. We’ve pushed a somewhat white-washed portrayal of our history. Especially revolving around Joseph’s fall into the sin of polygamy. (Something the church has been trying hard to address!)
  4. We often push unscriptural exclusive truth claims. (over-literalization of scripture)
  5. We occasionally push hurtful and harmful social practices.

See the Needed Reformation Section for articles detailing each of these issues and scriptures suggesting more correct views and practices…

You’ll note many of these reform actions are things which Evangelical Christianity currently does very well (despite their own needed reforms). I believe strongly that the reason Evangelical Christianity quickly rose to be one of the most powerful and largest Christian Movements in the world, from its Anabaptist roots of the same Second Great Awakening which gave Joseph Smith his calling — is because in a few important respects they did a better job of obeying and implementing certain principles revealed to Joseph Smith. (Principles given by the Spirit to all reformers of the Second Great Awakening).

It’s time that Mormonism and Evangelical Christianity stop fighting and have a baby.

I’ve actually seen Mormonism and Evangelical Christianity come far more into alignment in my lifetime. I believe we need to continue to combine the good from both of these movements. Evangelicals need to accept the Book of Mormon & coming Israeli prophets, continuing revelation & prophecy, biblical errancy, the importance restored temples and the cohesion and power of the higher priesthood.  Mormons need to accept the Evangelical decentralization of church bodies, the wrongness of polygamy, the democratization of many church decision, the pre-eminence of grace over works and the focus on Jesus.  Both need to live a system of financial consecration, reform Christian exceptionalism, eliminate cult-like behaviors, and follow the lead of the coming Jewish prophets (such as Jachanan Ben Kathryn) & Jewish temple restoration.

Video coming soon.

Emphasize that ordinances are symbols, not ends of themselves

reform-banners21

Stop teaching that LDS temple and ordinances are required to make it to the Celestial Kingdom and start emphasizing that these things are important symbols which aid in salvation and eternal union but are not a requirement for it per se.

Reasoning:

In Joseph Smith’s vision of the Celestial Kingdom given in D&C 137:1–10, Joseph sees his brother Alvin (who was never baptized) in the celestial kingdom, with Adam, Abraham, Christ, God and Joseph’s parents. He marvels how his brother could be in the Celestial Kingdom seeing he was not baptised— and is told essentially that God knows people’s hearts and that all with good works and desires go to the Celestial Kingdom regardless of religion or ordinances.  D&C 128:13–18 teaches that temple ordinances (specifically baptisms for the dead are made in “similitude” or symbols of heavenly things, “that which is earthly conforming to that which is heavenly” (v.15).  My article Eternal Progression, Degrees of Glory, and the Resurrection: A Comparative Cosmology, correlates the work of many modern mystics who give similar descriptions of the afterlife/resurrection and detail how our placement is not dependant on physical ordinances. Common sense & conscience dictate that D&C 76:51 & John 3:5 are speaking of the principles of which baptism symbolizes as a necesity to entering the kingdom of God. (Death of the Mortal Body and carnal nature are needed to enter the kingdom of God. See the gnostic pearl for insight into the deep symbolism involved in the “water” of immersion, as a symbol of cleansing and re-entering the womb of creation.)  Nowhere in our scripture is it taught that temple sealings are needed to exclusively save our dead, but that a “welding link of some kind or other” (or sealing) is needed in order for us to be perfected as a group. (“For we without them cannot be made perfect, neither them without us” v.18).  Our current teachings have created a multitude of conference talks, songs, plays and anecdotal experiences which suggest that God keeps the righteous (and all non-mormons) out of the celestial kingdom until Mormon’s do their temple work. They also often senselessly believe that God somehow keeps families and couples apart in heaven. (As if some invisible being or force restricts them from being together or forbids them from being considered a couple or family?)  This irrational and unscriptural belief drives many from Mormonism. Our traditions also lead people to believe that baptizing infants is blasphemy, but yet baptising 8 year olds (who are also quite ignorant and innocent compared to an adult) is the difference between being able to enter the Celestial Kingdom (unless temple work is done for them). These silly beliefs and practices come from the inability of the lower (temporal) priesthood to see the deep symbolic principles of the higher (spiritual) priesthood which these “outward ordinances” point to.

Most religions have some sort of ancestor veneration and worship. Most religions as well as LDS scripture teaches that the dead are aware of the living and in fact influenced by our actions. LDS temple worship provides a venue for deeply spiritual ancestor veneration. LDS people believe our family history work aids in identifying and tying family lines together for both this life and the next. This richly rewarding spiritual experience is what should be taught and emphasized. Teachings which suggest temple sealings are “required” for heavenly reward go against scripture and conscience and should be eradicated.