Skip to main content

Welcome to the Jungle! Ceibal


Structure A-3
Yesterday, we made our way to Rio Pasión, a major tributary of Rio Usumacinta. Although I personally favor Rio Grijalva as the River Sidon, Usumacinta is also a leading candidate. We took a boat along the Pasión for about 2 hours, and the scenery was gorgeous! We were far from civilization, in the midst of the jungle by the time we got off the boat. From there, we hiked into the depths of the jungle until we came to Ceibal.
A shot from Rio Pasion

Some of my fellow travelers, on the trail to Ceibal
Just getting there was quite the adventure. The trail was uphill and muddy. It is a rainforest, so we did experience intermittent showers. Never in a million years did I think I would ever be tromping through the jungle like this! On the way back, the howler monkeys—which sound more like a ferocious beast that can eat you alive—were getting very close, on both sides of the trail. We couldn’t see them, but we could hear them, and it was a little terrifying.

A small part of the 3D site map
Ceibal is a Pre-Classic and Classic site, first founded in the 9th century BC, flourishing between 400 BC–AD 200 before experiencing a collapse sometime in the early Classic, ca. AD 200–600. It recovers in the Late Classic, peaking in the 9th century AD before again experiencing a collapse (along with the rest of the Maya region). Ceibal is a fairly large site, though much of it remains unexcavated and unrestored.

Mark Wright lectures with
Structure A-3 in the background
If the Usumacinta is Sidon, then Ceibal may very well have been involved in Book of Mormon events. The dates of its Pre-Classic flourishing are squarely within the Book of Mormon timeframe, and its collapse between AD 200–600 is consistent with the Book of Mormon, which reports a decline ca. AD 200, or 4 generations after Christ’s visit, with the ultimate collapse of Nephite society coming late in the 4th century AD.

Me, at the base of a large Ceiba Tree,
one of the many in the Ceibal area
The name Ceibal was given to the site by the Spanish, because of the many Ceiba trees there at the site. The Ceiba is the largest tree in the Mesoamerican region, and was the sacred tree to the Maya and many other cultures throughout the area. While probably not the tree Lehi saw in vision, the Ceiba is probably what Alma and his audience envisioned as he discoursed on planting the seed of faith and cultivating it into the great tree of life (Alma 32).

A Ceiba Tree, actually from Tikal
In the Maya mythos, the Ceiba, or “World Tree,” connected waters of the underworld, the earth, and the heavens. This tripartite worldview is similar to that found among the Hebrews, and expressed in Exodus 20:4, which is quoted by Abinadi in Mosiah 13:12: “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of things which are in heaven above, or which are in the earth beneath, or which are in the water under the earth.


From cruising along the river, to hiking in the rainforest, to seeing the ruins, it was all-in-all an incredible experience. We were able to catch the sunset on the river on our way back. A picturesque ending to an incredible day!
Sunset on the River

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Nephite History in Context 4: The Iron Dagger of King Tutankhamun

Editor’s Note: This is the fourth contribution to my new series Nephite History in Context: Artifacts, Inscriptions, and Texts Relevant to the Book of Mormon. Check out the really cool (and official, citable) PDF version here. To learn more about this series, read the introduction here. To find other posts in the series, see here.
The Iron Dagger of King Tutankhamun
Background
The discovery of King Tutankhamun’s tomb in 1922 was a worldwide sensation, and to this day is widely regarded as one of the greatest archaeological discoveries of all-time due to the veritable treasure trove of artifacts found inside. The treasure was so great that to this day many of the items have yet to be studied. Likewise, Tutankhamun (ca. 1336–1327 bc) remains the best-known Pharaoh of Egypt in popular culture today, but details about his actual reign and accomplishments are still generally unknown among the public. Some are aware that he ascended to the throne as a mere child, about 8 years old, but few r…

Nephite History in Context 3: Vered Jericho Sword

Editor’s Note: This is the third contribution to my new series Nephite History in Context: Artifacts, Inscriptions, and Texts Relevant to the Book of Mormon. Check out the really cool (and official, citable) PDF version here. To learn more about this series, read the introduction here. To find other posts in the series, see here.
Vered Jericho Sword
Background
Vered Jericho was a small ancient Israelite fortress first excavated in the winter of 1982 by archaeologist Avraham Eitan. It’s located roughly 3.7 miles (6 km) south of Jericho proper, on the northern side of Wadi es-Suweid. The walls still stand over 6 and half feet tall (2 m) and nearly 3 feet (0.9 m) wide, with two towers on each corner flanking the gate. Inside the fort is a courtyard and two dwelling structures. The fort may have also had cultic or ritual functions as a “high place” (beit bamah). It dates to the late seventh to early sixth century BC, and was destroyed by fire, quite likely in either the Babylonian siege of …

Responding to the New Video on Nahom as Archaeological Evidence for the Book of Mormon

Many of my (few) readers have probably already seen the new video by Book of Mormon Central on Nahom as archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, starring my good friend (and co-author on a related paper) Stephen Smoot. If you haven’t, check it out:


As usual, comments sections wherever this video is shared have been flooded by Internet ex-Mormons insisting this not evidence for the Book of Mormon. I’ve actually had a few productive conversations with some reasonable people who don’t think Nahom is, by itself, compelling evidence—and I can understand that. But the insistence that Nahom is not evidence at all is just, frankly, absurd. So I’ll just go ahead and preempt about 90% of future responses to this post by responding to the most common arguments against Nahom/NHM now:
1. The Book of Mormon is false, therefore there can be no evidence, therefore this is not evidence. First, this is circular reasoning. It assumes the conclusion (Book of Mormon is false) which the evidence pre…