View source for Gardner: "a correct approach to a Mesoamerican battle required all three elements: king, litter, and battle beast"

{{Main Page}}
<onlyinclude>
==Gardner: "a correct approach to a Mesoamerican battle required all three elements: king, litter, and battle beast"==
Wrote Mesoamerican expert Brant Gardner, who believes the Book of Mormon was situated in Mesoamerica:
<blockquote>
Regardless of the reason for the presence of "horse" and "chariot" in the text, we must still deal with the question of what the original text might have meant the animal and conveyance that Joseph translated as "horse" and "chariot" to be.  From this point on, all is speculation&mdash;but speculation consistent with the Mesoamerican world.

The wording describing horses and chariots is at least suggestive that the king would be transported in connection with the horse and chariot: "they should prepare his horses and chariots, and conduct him forth."  "Conduct him" does not necessarily mean that Lamoni was conducted in the horse/chariot.  Indeed, verse 9 mentions horses and chariots, but only the king is "conducted."  It is possible that we are dealing with several ritual objects rather than a conveyance.  Verse 12, however, does suggest that conveyances are available for the king and his servants; but if would be highly unusual for servants to ride in a culture where everyone walks.  Riding would confer upon them the same social status as the king&mdash;not to be thought of unless chariots were so common that they were in universal use.  And nothing in the text suggests that they were.

If we are dealing with a conveyance, there is a Mesoamerican possibility.  A king might be conveyed in a litter, but the litters were carried by men, not pulled by animals.  However, an interesting connection between the litter and an animal occurs on what has been termed a battle litter.  Freidel, Schele, and Parker note:
<blockquote>
''Lintel 2 of Temple 1 shows Hasaw-Ka'an-K'awil wearing the balloon headdress of Tlaloc-Venus warfare adopted at the time of the Waxaktun conquest, and holding the bunched javelins and shield, the original metaphors for war imported from Teothuacan.  He sits in majesty on the litter that carried him into battle, while above him hulks Waxkluha=un-Ubah-Kan, the great War serpent....''
''Graffiti drawings scratched on the walls of Tikal palaces, depicting the conjuring of supernatural beings from the Otherworld, prove that these scenes were more than imaginary events seen only by the kings.  Several of these elaborate doodles show the great litters of the king with his protector beings hovering over him while he is participating in ritual.  These images are not the propaganda of rulers, created in an effort to persuade the people of the reality of the supernatural events they were witnessing.  They are the poorly drawn images of witnesses, perhaps minor members of lordly families, who scratched the wonders that they saw during moments of ritual into the walls of the places where they lived their lives.''
</blockquote>
Thus, Maya art represents the king riding on a litter. In battle, capturing the litter was tantamount to capturing that king's gods.  However, the graffiti litters at least open the possibility that these were simply formal litters and not limited to battle context.  These litters were accompanied by a "battle beast," or an animal alter ego, embodied in the regalia of the king and litter.  Thus, a correct approach to a Mesoamerican battle required all three elements: king, litter, and battle beast.

If Joseph Smith, while translating, came upon an unfamiliar idea but which seemed to describe a kingly conveyance associated with an animal, would it not have seemed logical to him to describe it as a horses and chariot for the king?  I see the plausible underlying conveyance as an elaborate royal litter, accompanied in peacetime by the spiritual animal associated with the king.  This animal was a type of alter-ego for the king, and was called the ''way'' [pronounced like the letter "Y"]....<Ref>{{SecondWitness1|vol=4|start=287&ndash;288}} Footnotes and one obvious typographical error have been silently omitted.  Italics added to the internal quotation.</ref>
</blockquote>

Gardner's case may be strengthened by the mention of chariots being brought to the lengthy siege in 3 Nephi&mdash;suggesting again a possible ritual use associated with warfare. 

The most frequent loan-shift applied to the horses by the native americans who first received the Spaniards was "dog". This was the case 45% of the time. Images of these conveyances associated with what appear to be dogs have been documented before. <ref> "Put Away Childish Things: Learning to Read the Book of Mormon with Mature Historical Understanding" by Neal Rappleye; FairMormon Conference 2017 - pg. 23 https://www.fairmormon.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Rappleye_2017FM_Presentation.pdf </ref>
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}




<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->
[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]
[[Category:Losing a Lost Tribe]]
[[Category:Difficult Questions for Mormons]]

[[es:Fuente:Gardner:SecondWitness:4:287:Mesoamericano rey, litera y bestias de batalla]]
[[pt:Fonte:Gardner:SecondWitness:4:287:Mesoamericana rei, liteira e batalha besta]]