“I beheld his sword… the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine, and I saw that the blade thereof was of the most precious steel.” (1 Nephi 4.9)
“I did break my bow, which was made of fine steel” (1 Nephi 16.18)
For many years critics of Joseph Smith have attacked him for the statements in the Book of Mormon regarding steel.[1] For many years this critique had merit, as no evidence of ancient steel production was found that backed up the statements made in 1 Nephi. However, today evidence has been discovered that steel existed prior to Nephi’s day, as some jewelry was discovered that contained steel. Steel is typically an alloy of iron and traces of carbon that have been hardened by a process of heating and quenching. V.C. Pigott, McGovern and Notis published findings of this jewelry and fragments that demonstrated “a uniform distribution of carbon from surface to surface, making them the earliest verified instances of mild steel from Jordan… suggesting that these may have been composed of mild steel.”[2] In the 1990’s an iron production center pre-dating Nephi by hundreds of years was also found in the Jordan valley, demonstrating skilled metal working that existed many years before the events in the Book of Mormon occurred.[3]
In the 1980’s a sword found at Vered Jericho dated to 620 BCE that was made of steel. From the Jerusalem museum’s gallery:
“This rare and exceptionally long sword, which was discovered on the floor of a building next to the skeleton of a man, dates to the end of the First Temple period. The sword is 1.05 meters long and has a double edged blade, with a prominent central ridge running along its entire length. The hilt was originally inlaid with a material that has not survived, most probably wood. Only the nails that once secured the inlays to the hilt can still be seen. The sword’s sheath was also made of wood, and all that remains of it is its bronze tip. Owing to the length and weight of the sword, it was probably necessary to hold it with two hands. The sword is made of iron hardened into steel, attesting to substantial metallurgical know-how. Over the years, it has become cracked, due to corrosion.”[4]
For a short video explaining the Vered Jericho sword, go here and here.
What about Nephi’s bow? Could this have been made out of steel? As has been previously discussed, evidence has been given demonstrating that steel production did take place as early as 1200 B.C.,[5] with jewelry containing steel. From my research thus far I have not been able to find evidence of steel bows dating to this period. An absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, however. Perhaps this bow that Nephi used was composite, made of steel and other materials. I am certainly open to that possibility. That option is explored by Hugh Nibley when speaking of Nephi’s bow, he said:
“It was in all probability a steel-ribbed bow. … Only composite bows were used in Palestine, that is, bows of more than one piece, and a steel-backed bow would be called a steel bow just as an iron-trimmed chariot was called a ‘chariot of iron.’ Incidentally the founder of the Turkish Seljuk Dynasty of Iran was called Yaqaq, which means in Turkish, says our Arab informant, ‘a bow made out of iron.’ The fact that ‘Iron Arrow’ was a fairly common name among those people, and refers actually to an iron-headed arrow is a strong indication that the name Steel Bow may also refer to a real weapon.” [6]
While steel swords were unknown at the time of the publication of the Book of Mormon, faithful believers in the message of the book can know that as time progresses, evidence continues to demonstrate the plausibility of the text. While steel swords in the area of Jerusalem at the time of Nephi does not prove the Book of Mormon an authentic text, it lends credibility to its plausibility. There will probably always be evidences that are lacking whenever religious claims are made. Part of this is due to the nature of God, in other words, I believe that God is okay with “evidentiary equilibrium.”[7] Since we live in this world of opposites and opposing evidentiary claims, a healthy approach whereby living with uncertainty is in order. Neal Rappleye gave this advice:
Psychologist Sam Wineburg found that “misunderstandings come naturally, based on intuitive assumptions, but can be overcome by developing mature historical understanding. Wineburg found that mature historical thinkers displayed patience with the unknown. They were able to call attention to apparent contradictions without immediately seeking to resolve them.” Although this is uncomfortable, “mature historical thinkers ‘sat with this discomfort’ as they continued to review additional sources.” In the process, “they exercised what Wineburg called the ‘specification of ignorance’: a practice of identifying when you do not know enough to understand something.” One must then conclude with “‘cultivating puzzlement’: being able ‘to stand back from first impressions, to question … quick leaps of mind, and to keep track of … questions that together pointed … in the direction of new learning.’”[8]
While some evidences will certainly show up over time vindicating the prophets, I would suggest that there will always places where evidence is not so obvious, places where there will be questions. Such is the matter of faith. Faith is imbedded with the idea of relational trust, and with this trust comes a certain amount of not knowing.[9] To me, this is part of not only the Book of Mormon, but also my relationship with God. From my experience, there are just some things that will require my patience and faith.[10]
Notes
[1] Even in modern literature the scientific evidence of steel in the Old World is ignored by Book of Mormon critics. For example, in their Wikipedia article, the writers perpetuate this ignorance when they state that “The Jews did not have steel at the time of this event (600 BCE), adding the notation “citation needed.” See: Criticism of the Book of Mormon, under “steel.” “This is the earliest account of steel to be found in history.” E. D. Howe, Mormonism Unvailed (1834), 25–26. “Laban’s sword was steel, when it is a notorious fact that the Israelites knew nothing of steel for hundreds of years afterwards. Who but as ignorant a person as Rigdon would have perpetrated all these blunders?” Clark Braden in Public Discussion, 1884, 109. “Laban is represented as killed by one Nephi, some six hundred years before Christ, with a sword ‘of the most precious steel,’ hundreds of years before steel was known to man!” Daniel Bartlett, The Mormons or, Latter-day Saints (1911), 15. “[The Book of Mormon] speaks of the most ‘precious steel,’ before the commonest had been dreamt of.” C. Sheridan Jones, The Truth about the Mormons (1920), 4–5. “Nephi . . . wielded a sword ‘of the most precious steel.’ But steel was not known to man in those days.” Stuart Martin, The Mystery of Mormonism (1920), 44. “Laban had a steel sword long before steel came into use.” George Arbaugh, Revelation in Mormonism (1932), 55. “Every commentator on the Book of Mormon has pointed out the many cultural and historical anachronisms, such as the steel sword of Laban in 600 B.C.” Thomas O’Dea, The Mormons (1957), 39. “No one believes that steel was available to Laban or anyone else in 592 B.C.” William Whalen, The Latter-day Saints in the Modern World (1964), 48.
[2] V.C. Pigott, P.E. McGovern, and M.R. Notis, The Earliest Steel from Transjordan, MASCA Journal (Museum Applied Science Center for Archaeology), September 1982, Volume 2, no. 2.
[3] Xander Veldhuijzen and Eveline van der Steen, Iron Production Center Found in the Jordan Valley, Near Eastern Archaeology, Vol 62, No. 3(September 1999), p. 195-199.
[4] Biblical Archaeology Review 12/4 [July-August 1986]: 33, 35.
[5] Pigott, McGovern, and Notis.
[6] Hugh Nibley, Lehi in the Desert, p. 57.
[7] Mike Day, “Moroni 10 – Evidentiary Equilibrium”,7.22.2017. For a great video explaining how supposed anachronisms in the Book of Mormon continue to be debunked as mankind progresses with our discoveries, see: Are there anachronisms in the Book of Mormon? by Saints Unscripted. See also Matt Roper’s original research on this here.
[8] Neal Rappleye, “Put Away Childish Things”: Learning to read the Book of Mormon with Mature Historical Understanding, 2017 FairMormon Conference.
[9] Faith was relational. The word is pistis πίστις – a word which has changed in meaning over time. Originally, in its early Greek context, it represented faithfulness, the foundation for any state. The Latin term is fidelia, fides and fiscus – faithfulness, trust, and confidence. All these words connote binding influences of knowledge, persuasion, faithfulness, and trust as reciprocal aspects of relationships with things or individuals. By the time of Augustine (356-430), the meaning of the word pistis changed, especially in his writings. Augustine had a major influence on the ideas and meanings of words, especially to Christians. By the time of Augustine, faith became a word that changed in meaning – it went from a word associated with a relationship and trust to one that meant an assent to the doctrines taught by the church. It became “the faith which is believed” (Fides quae creditor) – and this is the meaning used by most Christians even today. All of this (and much more!) will be laid out exquisitely by Brent Schmidt in an upcoming book entitled Relational Faith: Pistis’ Theologically and Linguistic History from a Restoration Perspective. If you like this work, you may want to check out Brent’s book on Grace entitled, Relational Grace: The Reciprocal and Binding Covenant of Charis.
[10] Richard Hinckley put it this way: Some of you struggle with certain doctrines or practices of the Church, past or present; they just don’t quite seem to fit for you. I say, so what? That’s okay. You’re still young. Be patient, but be persistent. Keep studying them, thinking about them, and praying about them. Everyone has questions. I suppose even the prophets themselves had and have some questions. But don’t throw away the jewels you do have in the meantime. Hold on to them; build on them.
Did you know that the two greatest intellectual achievements of the first half of the last century, the general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics, are in some points in conflict with each other? They cannot both be right in every detail. These are not my words but the words of Stephen Hawking, the great British physicist. Yet scientists rely on both of these theories every day to advance scientific knowledge, knowing that someday the differences will be understood, reconciled, and corrected.
So it is with the gospel and our testimonies, yours and mine. This is not to suggest that the gospel is imperfect, but our understanding of it sometimes is. Like the scientist who uses relativity and quantum mechanics, we do not discard the gospel or our testimony because not every piece “fits” today. Years ago a Church leader used the following metaphor: Have you ever watched a stonemason build a rock wall? He will sometimes pick up a rock that just does not fit anywhere in the niches in the wall. But does he abandon the wall and walk away? No, he simply sets the rock aside and keeps building until a niche appears where it fits and then proceeds until the wall is finished. So perhaps should we temporarily set aside questions that we continue to struggle with and that we cannot quite seem to answer today, having faith that at sometime in the future a niche will appear in the rock wall of our testimony where they fit perfectly. Don’t abandon the rock wall of your testimony because one or two rocks don’t seem to fit. (Richard Hinckley, Prophetic Priorities, BYU Devotional, May 15, 2007)
Further reading
William Adams, Nephi’s Jerusalem and Laban’s sword, FARMS 1999, p. 11-13
Book of Mormon Central, What was the sword of Laban like? KnoWhy #401
Iron sword from the time of Jeremiah discovered near Jericho, Ensign, June 1987
Metals, Weapons, and the Book of Mormon by Jeff Lindsay
Matt Roper, Time always vindicates the prophets: An analysis of anachronisms in the Book of Mormon.
Swords of Iron, Steel and Copper in North America by Book of Mormon Evidence, October 2019.