Ruination of Transliteration: How Two Loanwords Changed History

Source

Transliteration happens all the time. We often call them loanwords. Some examples from Arabic (remember, it reads from right to left):

• القرآن‎ (Al-)Quran: The holy book of Islam. It's a verbal noun of the word قرأ (qar'a), meaning "he read" or "he recited".
• مسلم Muslim: A follower of Islam. Its meaning is "one who submits", derived from the verb أَسْلَمَ (aslama), meaning "he resigned". إِسْلَٰم (Islam) is the verbal noun meaning "voluntary submission to God". You can see the relation in the S-L-M root.

Here are just some other random words that we've appropriated from other languages (note: some of the transliterations have changed over time):

• Czech: dollar, pistol, robot
• Etruscan: antenna, arena, autumn, serve
• Old French and Latin: letter, person, budget
• Icelandic: saga, geyser
• Algonquin: Mississippi, Wyoming, Chicago, Illinois, Wisconsin, caribou, hickory, moose, muskrat, pecan, raccoon, skunk, squash
• Nahuatl (Aztec): avocado, cocoa, chocolate, coyote, guacamole, tomato
• Arawakan: barbecue, canoe, hammock, hurricane, potato, tobacco
• Various American Languages: cougar, cashew, bayou, manatee, igloo, kayak, jerky

There are many other loanwords that I didn't include (safari, zen, chi, zebra, luau, ukulele, guru, buddha, fjord, tundra, et cetera, et cetera), but I think you get the picture. We like to borrow words instead of translating them. A noteworthy exception to this rule is Icelandic, though more loanwords are creeping in. Instead of using a variant of telephone (a Greek word), they resurrected the word sími, an old word for "long thread". Another one is læknastokkrós, meaning marshmallow. As far as I can deconstruct this one, að lækna means to heal and stokkrós means hibiscus, a member of the mallow family. The healing hibiscus. They do this so that the new words will comply with Icelandic grammar.

The Biblical Conundrum
Now that we've overviewed transliteration in English, let's look at two Greek to Latin transliterations that changed the world.

First, βαπτίζω, baptizo. This comes from the word bapto meaning to dip; therefore, baptizo means to immerse or submerge. This was all fine until around the fourth century when Latin became the primary language of Christianity. At that time, baptizo was transliterated into Latin. It was adapted to Latin grammar and changed to baptizare, making baptizo the first person singular present tense, i.e. "I baptize".

What this did is sever the tie between the root understanding and the definition. What was once understood intrinsically as an act of immersion became an act of mere ablution (ceremonial washing), and was altered to include aspersion (sprinkling) and eventually exclude immersion. The alteration of one holy ceremony is a beautiful precedent for further alteration.

Second, βιβλία, biblia. This is the plural of biblion, book. Once again, before the fourth century, the extant holy writings of Christianity weren't compiled into one body. Rather, they were a collection of texts called ta biblia, the books. As Latin became Christianity's primary language, they once again transliterated this word from Greek. Biblia is what they called them—it. To explain, Latin has a conjugation system that allows you to distinguish between singular and plural. What started as "the books" eventually migrated to take on the meaning of "the book". 

What this did is set in the minds of Christians that canon was immutable post fourth century. You had the Book, what more could you need? Gone were the days when God could speak as He pleased through servants that He chose. Because who needs the Books when you have the Book?

The Beginning of God's Creations

A quasar via Wikipedia.

This post was inspired by a crazy Kolob theory, specifically one that said that God resides at the center of our galaxy and that the extent of his dominion is the fringes of the Milky Way. I'm here to prove that wrong. Deeply wrong.

Our friend Enoch, in Moses 7:30, says, "Were it possible that man could number the particles of the earth, yea, millions of earths like this, it would not be a beginning to the number of thy creations." The Milky Way contains perhaps 300 billion stars, 100 billion planets, 100 million black holes, and is about 120,000 light years across. The number of atoms in the Earth is about 10^50, approximately 10^40 times greater than the number of celestial bodies in the galaxy. Millions of earths would yield greater than 10^56 atoms. And that's not even the beginning of Elohim's creations.

It's estimated that the number of stars in the universe is about 7x10^22; we can round up to 10^23. If we want to be nice, we can say there are about the same number of planets. That brings us up to 2x10^23. If you factor in black holes and nubulae and stuff—being quite generous—you might have double that. That brings you to 4x10^23 astronomical objects, or not even .0000000000000000000000001% of the particles in the Earth (10^-25%). That means to not even reach the beginning of God's creations, you would need approximately 10^32 universes like ours.

For comparison, the sun is on the order of 10^30 kg (~1,000,000 times Earth's mass) and a pineapple is about a kilogram. If you were to compare a pineapple to the universe, you would need enough pineapples to weigh as much as 100 suns, or 100,000,000 Earths. In other words, 10^32 pineapples. One hundred nonillion pineapples.

And you would not have even reached the beginning of how many pineapples God has made.

Dating the Death of Shiz

A question I think most LDS members consider lightly or not at all is, When did the Jaredites perish? I think the reason behind this is most people make sweeping, cursory assumptions about the Jaredite timeline. The common mentality is that as Lehi's foot first pressed the American shores, Shiz' head fell from his shoulders. I would like to show that this is conception utterly false.

Absolute Upper Limit
If we only take into account one event, namely Mulek's landing, we find that the soonest the Jaredites could have foregone is about 530 BC. We learn that Mulek was the only son of Zedekiah not slain (Hel 8:21). From the Bible, we learn that Zedekiah died at 32 (2 Kings 24:18). By common concession, Jerusalem was razed in 587 BC. The oldest Mulek could have possibly been at the time is 20 years old. The oldest he could have plausibly been is 14-16. The problem with imagining him as a stripling is that all of Zedekiah's sons were killed by Babylon. A teenager, especially the eldest son, would be hard to miss—for invader and historian alike—so it's improbable.

The leading theory is that Mulek was either an infant (so he could have been disguised as a girl or more easily snuck out in a basket), or he was unborn. The leading theory for how Mulek got to the Americas is through the Phoenicians. This is supported by (1) the identification of the Jaredites as the Olmec people, and (2) the fact that Mulek and his party first landed among the Jaredites in the land northward (Alma 22:30). The Olmecs lived primarily along the eastern coast of Mexico, meaning Mulek would have to take an Atlantic route to arrive there.

So the earliest Mulek could have landed in the Americas is 586 BC, five or so years after Lehi. The oldest he could possibly be at that point is about 20, but more likely he would have been an infant. It's more likely that he lived in the eastern hemisphere for a time, gained a few years under his belt, then made the voyage. One of my main sources for that inference is Hel 6:10 where it says, "the Lord did bring Mulek into the land north, and Lehi into the land south." I'm assuming that Mormon is making parallel references to the leader of the traveling parties. It's also easier to imagine a 20+ year-old man as the leader of the party than a baby. That puts a more likely date of Mulek's earliest arrival at ~565 BC, though it could have been even later.

However, we cannot yet assume that 565 is when the Jaredites perished. Omni 1:16 tells us "[the people of Zarahemla's] language had become corrupted; and they had brought no records with them; and they denied the being of their Creator; and Mosiah, nor the people of Mosiah, could understand them." Verse 21 tells us that Coriantumr (the "last Jaredite") dwelt with the people of Zarahemla for nine moons. It may just be me, but a people who put no emphasis on records and who had forgotten God don't strike me as the type to remember a single man who lived with them more than 400 years before. That indicates that the Jaredite civilization ended closer to 130 than 587 BC.

Chemical Degradation Factors
That was a fun exercise using chronology alone, but now I'd like to introduce the factors of corrosion and decomposition. Mos 8:8-11 (the Limhi expedition, ca. 130 BC) reports that Limhi's scouts found

1. Bones (ch. 21 specifies dry bones) of man and beast of a very numerous people
2. Ruins of buildings
3. 24 gold plates
4. Perfectly sound brass and copper breastplates
5. Sword with perished hilts and rusted blades

In my mind, I also identify the Jaredites with the Olmecs, but even if you think they lived in North America, this will be relevant. This brings up some questions, namely

1. How long does it take corpses to skeletonize in the open air, but not for bone decomposition to take place?
2. How long does it take blades to rust in open air, but not oxidize entirely?
3. How long does it take wood to decompose (the hilts)?

Copper and brass don't come into the question because they tarnish and don't rust. Gold also doesn't rust.

I've done a lot of searching on the internet, but haven't found too much conclusive material. To summarize my findings, I set an upper limit for the destruction of the Jaredites at 100 years before the Limhi expedition. A more likely limit in the tropical climate of Mexico is 50 years. Heat and humidity will make all of the applicable processes go faster. Taking decomposition into account, a new time frame for the end of the Jaredites is 180-230 BC.

This site dedicated to "online information regarding the funeral and cremation process" states that "decomposition in the air is twice as fast as when the body is under water and four times as fast as underground." It also states that "When buried six feet down, without a coffin, in ordinary soil, an unembalmed adult normally takes eight to twelve years to decompose to a skeleton." Using these two statements, bodies above ground would take two to three years to skeletonize (in the UK). Add in the higher heat and insect population in Mexico and the number will be even lower.

Wikipedia says that "After skeletonization has occurred, if scavenging animals do not destroy the bones, acids in many fertile soils take about twenty years to completely dissolve the skeleton of mid- to large-size mammals, such as humans, leaving no trace of the organism. In neutral-pH soil or sand, the skeleton can persist for hundreds of years before it finally disintegrates." I looked but couldn't find any good information on the pH levels of the soil in Olmec areas.

Here's a site for a high school rusting experiment with pictures. It states that visible rust (Iron (III) Oxide) forms within hours. In this article, Tim Scarlett, archaeologist, says, "Put partly corroded nails in a zip-lock bag, store them awhile, open the bag years later, and end find 'lumps of rust powder,'” I don't know what "end find" means (likely bad editing), but it's clear that iron doesn't have that long of a lifespan. I just can't find exact numbers on that lifespan. Also, everywhere I've found says that heat and humidity will make rusting faster.

Answers.com says that wood an inch in diameter can take 3 years to decompose, and logs a foot across can take ten years. It's safe to say that the hilts of the swords were gone within five years of the final battle.

Conclusion

Pictured: the head of Shiz

There's much more that can be said on the topic, but I think I'll stop here. If you have any further information about rusting and decomposition, please drop it in the comments! I just wanted to point out that the Jaredites lived on the same continent as the Nephites for about 400 years before they perished.

In conjunction with Alma 22:30 (which states that the land northward where Limhi's expedition found the bones was the people of Zarahemla's first landing site), Mos 25:2 talks about "Zarahemla, who was a descendant of Mulek, and those who came with him into the wilderness." That means that some of the Mulekites stayed with the Jaredites, and it also likely means that the two groups had intermarried. So even though Coriantumr is appellated "the last Jaredite," Jaredite blood (and culture) still lived on in the people of Zarahemla. That's probably why their "language [was] corrupted; and Mosiah, nor the people of Mosiah, could understand them."

Anyways, my thoughts.

Phelps' Miscalculation

An obscure tidbit that you as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints may have heard is that "Joseph Smith said that an eternity is 2.555 billion years long." I heard this again the other day, so I instigated an investigation. Christopher C. Smith, he exposes the origins of this idea in a 2008 blog post. Apparently the number comes from Times and Seasons, the Church's periodical at the time (1844). W. W. Phelps sent a letter to William Smith that was reproduced in the January 1st edition. The paragraph of concern is

[E]ternity, agreeably to the records found in the catacombs of Egypt, has been going on in this system, (not this world) almost two thousand five hundred and fifty five millions of years: and to know at the same time, that deists, geologists and others are trying to prove that matter must have existed hundreds of thousands of years;-it almost tempts the flesh to fly to God, or muster faith like Enoch to be translated and see and know as we are seen and known! (empasis added)

 Bruce R. McConkie quoted this figure in a 1987 speech given at BYU. It was written about in the Mormon Interpreter. So where did this number come from, and does it even make sense?

Look at the universe.

All analysts seem to agree that W. W. Phelps took the statements in Peter and Abraham that 1000 years on Earth is but a day to the Lord, the statement in D&C 77 that the Earth has 7000 years of temporal existence, and the fact that a terrestrial year consists of approximately 365 days, and derived a value from these. 1000*7000*365 = 2.555E9, precisely the number Phelps states. But let's perform unit analysis on this.

1000 Earth years	x 7000 Kolob years x	365 Kolob days	= 2.555E9 Earth years
1 Kolob day		1 Kolob year

Seems kosher, right? Not. There are a few grievous assumptions made in this calculation. First, there is no way of know how many years are in a Kolob year. Even in our own solar system you have planets whose years range from 0.24 to 248.1 Earth years (if you include Pluto). A planet that orbits our sun called Sedna has a year of around 12,000 Earth years. At is aphelion, it's over 900 times father from the sun than Earth is. So assuming a 365-day Kolob year is erroneous when most planets in existence vary from this.

Second false assumption, 7000 Kolob years. First, the 7000 number comes from D&C 77:6 where it's said that the 7 seals on the book that John the Beloved saw are the seven thousand years of the Earth's temporal existence. It further states that only about 6000 of those years have passed, so even if the calculation was accurate, you'd have to replace 7000 Kolob years with 6000. Reading the actual revelation of John reveals characteristics of each of the seals that are identifiable with historical events. The 7000 years are clearly referring to Earth years. It's silly to start assuming every period of time given in the scriptures are not what it appears. That would imply that the Millennium is going to be 365 million Earth years long, the same length as each of the seals.

Another issue. The creation story begins with the Earth; it doesn't touch upon previous events. In Moses 1:35 God says, "There are many worlds that have passed away by the word of my power." He's made countless worlds like Earth that have already passed through existence. If this universe is about 14 billion years old and the Earth 4.5, God's been around a lot longer than Phelp's calculation proposes. And He hasn't done anything that disagrees with what we observe. If we find proof that the Earth is 4.5E9 years old, then goshdarnit, that's when God made it. 

But proof is hard to find. Evidence is easier. You can draw multiple conclusions from evidence. You can only draw one (sound) conclusion from proof. People will debate how to interpret collected data. I am currently quite convinced on the dating of the Earth and universe.