In this post, I will talk about how non-LDs researchers are slowly changing their theories on how North America was settled and even in the past historians believed that different groups came to the New World over a long period of time. The prevailing theory is that all the Book of Mormon events took place in Central America. This is supported by FARMS and other popular research groups. They have done a lot of great research but I believe that they lost sight of what Joseph Smith taught and they won’t take into account ancient and more recent research into migrations in the New World.
I found this article over at livescience.com.
From the article:
Waters puts forth a new model for how the first people populated the New World and it more than rules out the Clovis people as trend-setting firsts.
“What we now need to do is recognize the fact that Clovis is not first, and move on and start developing a new model for the peopling of the Americas,” Waters told LiveScience.
“We need to, once and for all, stop thinking of the peopling of the Americas as a single event,” he added, “and instead I think we need to start thinking of the peopling of the Americas as a process with people arriving at different times, taking different routes and coming from different places in northeast Asia.”
From the second link:
“ST. LOUIS—Ancient humans from Asia may have entered the Americas following an ocean highway made of dense kelp.
The new finding lends strength to the “coastal migration theory,” whereby early maritime populations boated from one island to another, hunting the bountiful amounts of sea creatures that live in kelp forests.”
And here is one more:
The first Americans may have been European.
“ST. LOUIS—The first humans to spread across North America may have been seal hunters from France and Spain.
This runs counter to the long-held belief that the first human entry into the Americas was a crossing of a land-ice bridge that spanned the Bering Strait about 13,500 years ago.”
So, as you can see, scientists, after almost 100 years, are slowly changing their theory that the first Americans came by the Bering Strait. Now, if these very primitive ancestors could travel and migrate like this what would stop other cultures from doing the same thing after a couple of thousand years of developing boats, ships, and navigation?
I have proposed on this blog that the Nephites and Lamanites migrated into North America over time and in various sizes of groups. Hagoth built ships and that there were shipping between North and Central America. I have shown that Hagoth brought many groups of Nephites into western United States. In the first books of the Mentinah Archives they talk about many migrations of people going to all parts of North America. These groups could have encountered the descendants of these early peoples and integrated with them, creating the Asian features found in Native Americans. This goes for the Jaredites, as well, when they first came to America about a thousand years before Lehi. These two groups brought advance technology and new customs to these early peoples creating a whole new culture. There are also evidence of other groups coming into the Americas, adding to the mix. The Asian features and customs may be dominate but why is there so many different kinds of artifacts from different parts of the world? This would suggest other groups came here by boat or that there were overseas trading.
“In fact, where is the impossibility, that some prince in one of those countries, upon failing in an attempt to raise himself to the sovereign power, should leave his native country with all his partizans, and look for some new land, where, after he had established himself, he might drop all foreign correspondence? The easy navigation of the South Sea renders the thing probable; and the new map of the eastern bounds of Asia, and the western part of North America, lately published by Mr. De Lisle, makes it still more likely. This map makes it plainly appear, that between the islands of Japan, or northern coasts of China, and those of America, there are other lands, which to this day have  remained unknown; and who will take it upon him to say there is not land, because it has never yet been discovered? I have therefore good grounds to believe, that the Mexicans, came originally from China or Japan, especially when I consider their reserved and uncommunicative disposition, which to this day prevails among the people of the eastern parts of Asia.
I well know that those who know antiquity only from the pagan authors, and who are in the habit of searching there for the origins of all things, will find it incomprehensible that the Chinese and Japanese were able to pass into America long before the Phoenicians (who are regarded as the first seafarers of the world), and were then called “Ancients of the Country” by the descendants of these first Phoenician colonists. But I implore them to consider that these same profane letters which appear to us as extremely remote, are in some sense modern by comparison to the sacred letters. The great establishments of the Phoenicians are placed by the best informed chronologists around the time of the  flight of the Israelites from Egypt, and it was without a doubt a long time after this, that they dared to risk themselves on the ocean, and founded Cadiz. But since Diodorus Siculus implicates the Carthaginians in the discovery of America, one can only suppose that this happened long after the enlargement of Carthage by Dido, and since this republic was jealous of the Tuscans, navigation having lately flourished in Italy, it seems fitting to the honor of these ancient mariners, to fix the time of their first voyages to the New World one hundred years before the first Punic War. And this war began 264 years before Jesus Christ, some five hundred years after the retreat of Dido to Carthage, and twelve or thirteen hundred years after the flight from Egypt.”
There are recorded stories of a group of Jews that landed in Mexico and created the city, Tula and became the Toltecs. These Jews, from what I have read, fled from Moses while they were wandering in the desert.
And this from the History of Alabama:
“In 1822, Big Warrior, who then ruled the Creek confederacy, confirmed this tradition, even going further back than Milfort, taking the Muscogees from Asia, bringing them over the Pacific, landing them near the Isthmus of Darien, and conducting them from thence to this country. “My ancestors were a mighty people. After they reached the waters of the Alabama and took possession of all this country, they went further — conquered the tribes along the Chattahoochie, and upon all the rivers from thence to the Savannah — yes, and even whipped the Indians then living in the territory of South Carolina, and wrestled much of their country from them.”
And there is also a reference in the Mentinah Archives about people coming from the lands across the great waters to the west. It will take me a while to find but when I do I will add it here.
What I am wondering is why has it taken so long for scientists and historians to relearn and rediscover our history? Because of lack of evidence or arrogance? It would seem to me that the Native Americans would know more about our past than we do. It is in their stories and legends. And everybody laughed at Joseph Smith for presenting the very same ideas and translated a book that no one will take seriously because they can’t see it with their own eyes. This goes for the Mentinah Archives, as well. These archives have a lot of history that can be shown in ancient texts and research. I have to say that researchers into the Book of Mormon history better rethink their theories about how North America was settled or else they will fall into the same category as the scientists and historians. My theory is becoming more and more real in light of all this research. The point of this post was to show that there are alternative theories to the Book of Mormon history and that the idea that the Nephites and other groups migrated over time into the United States, as I have shown from the Book of Mormon and other sources, is largely ignored by LDS scholars. So far, I have not found any references to this idea, at least on the Internet. I hope someone will at least consider what I have presented on this blog and take up more research into this area and give me some credit for it.