Seibal, currently known as Ceibal, is an ancient Maya ruin that is located in the south central region of the Peten in Guatemala. The features contained on this site make it a strong candidate for a location in the Land of Zarahemla and even the possibility of Zarahemla itself. This ancient city is located on the highest point in the region and is on the West Bank of the river De la Pasion. This river is one of the main tributaries of the Usumacinta river, one of the largest rivers in the Central America. During the years 1964 to 1968 Gordan Willey and A.L. Smith performed systematic studies which included the investigation and restoration of several of the principal structures and the erection of the steles. These studies were associated with the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology of the University of Harvard, Cambridge Massachusetts. Ceibal was the largest settlement during the Late Classic Period with great power over the west margin of the river De la Pasion, having a very favorable regional situation as a checkpoint of interaction of commercial activities, transportation, and also of political-military importance.

The proposed Zarahemla location of Seibal is based on evidences in the following general categories.

• Chronological comparisons between the Book of Mormon time line and the chronological tables published by the Peabody Museum of Archeology and Ethnology.

• The geographical similarities between Book of Mormon descriptions of geographic locations and the locations that currently exist in Central America.

• The content of the excavations that have been completed in Seibal and other pertinent sites.
• Early histories and traditions
• Unresolved.problems between the Book of Mormon requirements and current evidences in the proposed site of Seibal and Central America in general.

The following four events that have been proposed by archeological studies at Seibal have strong comparisons to major Book of Mormon events.

1. The Mayas appear to have had a small encampment at the Seibal site at approximately 800 BC. Between 500 and 700 BC, an infusion of settlers arrived at the site which correlates well with the Mulekite migration.

1. Another dramatic increase in Siebal's population occurred approximately 300 BC could be tied to the Nephite migration that was under Mosiahs leadership when they discovered Zarahemla and the Mulekites. The pottery in the Cantutse period as outlined in Salbloffs analysis suggests that there was an "influx from people from the south". This could be either the Nephites or the Ammonites that moved north from the land Southward. "During the early facet (300 BC - 0) Seibal enjoyed a population boom, registered in both constructional and refuse mass in the site main center, as well as in an real expansion and filling in of the community with residential structures. …. Although we do not have the excavation exposures to give us the dimensions and details of all of this Cantutse building, there are numerous clues to its impressiveness." PP 195

1. During the first century AD, Siebal experienced a dramatic decline in population. This correlates well with the destruction and loss of life that occurred at the time of Christ's crucifixion. In late Cantutse (early years after AD 0) it is possible that there was a rather sudden decline in Seibal population and a concomitant retrenchment in public as well as in residential construction. PP 195 ….one interpretation holds that there was marked decline in the late facet, a reduction to perhaps only 25 percent of the 10,000 person's figure. (PP241)
2. Seibal was completely abandoned between 300 and 450 AD which could represent the time when the Lamanites drove the Nephites out at 350 AD. This destruction is similar to the "serious decline" that is described by Sabloff around 300 AD. He emphasis's this further by stating that "By the beginning of the Classic Period (300 AD), Seibal's fortunes had dropped to a very low level as much of the site was abandoned to the jungle." PP 232 From our present consideration of the evidence, it would seem that Seibal was almost totally abandoned during this time (Junco Tzakol Phase 300 AD to 450 AD). PP 196 (Excavations at Seibal Number 2 Ceramics: Jeremy A. Sabloff)

The number of locations that relate to the ancient city of Seibal are too numerous to list in this report. However, the following items will give an indication of the remarkable comparisons that correspond with the Book of Mormon:

• The proposed Land of Nephi site near Guatemala City has an elevation of approximately 1500 feet which is 1400 feet higher than the Passion river at the Seibal location. This ties very well to the Book of Mormons constant reference of going up to the Land of Nephi and going down to the Land of Zarahemla. The elevation in Santa Rosa, Chiapas, Mexico is very similar to the proposed site of the Land of Nephi which creates a problem for the Santa Rosa/Zarahemla theory.

• The 100 mile distance between Seibal and the Bay of Honduras fits well with the frequent travel between Zarahemla and the East sea cities. There is a host of coastal archeological sites east of Seibal could easily fit into the pattern of cities described in the Book of Mormon.

• A mountain pass in the Cuchumatane mountains is located near the ancient ruin of Sebol could be location of Manti. This location would fit well with the Zarahemla being located at Seibal.

• The headwater of the Sidon, located in the land of Manti correlate well with the headwaters of the Usumacinta River and the Sebol ruins.

• The current and only road that leads from the Guatemala Highlands through the center of the Cushumatane Mountains and down into Peten jungle comes out in the center of Passion river basin. It is very likely that when Mosiah lead his people north from the Land of Nephi to escape the Lamanites that he would have selected this route. If this were the case he would have probably moved down the river until they found a good area to settle in. It was at this point where they found the Mulikites living in Zarahemla.
• Seibal was a major settlement during the existence of Zarahemla, which is a major requirement for Siebal to be a Zarahemla candidate.

• The distance of 100 air miles between Guatemela City and Siebal corresponds to the time it took Book of Mormon travelers to go from the City of Nephi to Zarahemla.

• The Mulekites avoided the Jaredites by navigating up the Sidon river which was either the Grijalva or the Usumasinta rivers. When the Mulekites landed on the proposed site on the Mexican coast in the Gulf of Mexico they probably ran into the warring Jaredite civilization and decided that they should put some distance between them and the Jaredites. When they reached the Grijalva and the Usumacinta rivers they probably chose the one that would lead them the farthest away from the Jaredites.

• The Sidon River must be wide enough to force the crossings to be upstream near Manti. The Pasion River, a principal tributary of the Usumacinta River is a very large river. At flood stage the river is at lease one half of a mile wide at the site of Seibal.

• The Usumacinta River is easier to navigate, leads to a more desirable place to live and moves away from the Olmec's or Jaredites. Therefore the Usumacinta would clearly be their first choice. If they had decided to chose the Grijalva river they would have found the direction heading back towards the Jaradites which would have been a serious problem to them and they would probably have turned around and looked for other options. If they chose to proceeded up the Usumacinta they would also have a tendency to take the east fork which would have put them on the De la Pasion River. And the prominante rise in elevation at the Ceibal site might have been attractive to them in locating an initial settlement.

• At Seibal the De la Pasion River is running north for a considerable distance which would satisfy the discriptions of the Sidon River in the Book of Mormon.

• Ceibal is located on the west bank of the river which meets the requirements of the Book of Mormon for the City of Zarahemla.

• It is easy to understand how the Limhi party missed the Zarahemla. Both tributaries (Chixoy and De la Pasion) of the Usumacinta river have tributaries that originate at the main pass down into the Peten. If they had chosen the wrong one they would have missed Zarahemla.

• The city of Bountiful is located on the east sea and if the east sea is Houndouras Bay it is easy to put in perspective the traveling that took place between Bountiful and Zarahemla (Seibal) as described in the Book of Mormon.

• The "narrow strip of wilderness" that is mentioned numerous times in the Book of Mormon is a barrier between the Nephites and Lamanites could be the prominent 3000 foot Sierra de Los Minas Mountians in central Guatemala. They stretch from the east sea to the west sea and fits perfectly with the position of Seibal (Zarahemla).
• There are two possibilities of correlating with the "narrow neck of land":

1. Fifty miles north of Seibal is a narrow neck of land approximately 60 miles wide that would fit the requirement of 1.5 days travel time. One half of the distance could traversed over the water ways in the area, thereby reducing the travel time. The areas on both sides of this neck are very lands that are full of wetlands and marshes and would be difficult to travel through especially during the Book of Mormon time. However, this narrow neck of land is not particularly obvious at the current time. During the last 2000 years these low lands have been built up with the sediment from the rivers and streams that flow into these areas. These natural actions have pushed seas and the waterways out and the low lands have become stabilized.
2. There are several possibilities for the narrow neck of land in the area where the Usumacinta and the Grijalva rivers reach the Gulf of Mexico near the Bay of Campeche. This area is considered a delta and is in a constant state of change so it is very difficult for anyone to speculate on the lay of the land 2000 years ago. It is very possible that an aerial photo taken 200 BC would readily reveal the illusive narrow neck of land that has been so difficult to locate. Even today there are several locations in the area that might possibly qualify for the narrow neck of land however it would probably be considered a stretch.

• The proposed site of the City of Nephi located near the present day Guatemala City and corresponds well with the northern direction of Seibal or Zarahemla. One of the scriptures that refers to these directions is found tin Helaman 6:10 "Now the land south was called Lehi and land north was called Mulek, which was after the son of Zedekiah; for the Lord did bring Mulek into the land north, and Lehi into the land south".
• The following mountain ranges mentioned in the Book of Mormon have a remarkable connection to the mountain ranges that surround Siebal:

The Maya Mountains compares with the East Wilderness.

The Sierra de Los Minas Mountains compare with the Narrow Strip of Wilderness.

The Altos Cuchumatanes Mountains compare with the West Wilderness.

The Mountains of NorthEast Chiapas compare with the Wilderness of Hermounts.

The following items provide further proof that the ancient city of Seibal is a strong candidate for the Book of Mormon City of Zarahemla:

• In a neighboring archeological site, a recent dig revealed the remains of a horse at depths that probably represent the Book of Mormon period. If this proves to be correct it would dispel one of the major criticisms of the claim that the Book of Mormon was a part of ancient MesoAmerican history.
• The site of Seibal has two major cultural centers, which would suggest that there might have been two cultures living within the city. This compares favorably with the Book of Mormon's reference to the fact that the Mulikites and Nephites lived separately within the city of Zarahemla.
• The cultural center that would most likely be the one where the Nephites resided has a large plaza that could hold thousands of people. In the center of plaza is a modest tower that could be used as a platform to address the crowds gathered for socializing or other activities. The acoustics are outstanding and everyone who would be in the plaza could clearly hear someone speaking from the plaza. King Benjamin's speech could easily have taken place at this location.
• Seibal has over thirty steles' that have been well preserved and have unique features that set them apart from other Maya sites. Some of the stele's have are distinctly European others are clearly Maya. Most of these monuments appear to be post Book of Mormon times; however, one has to wonder if there isn't a tie to the Book of Mormon. One of the steles is made out of different material and appears to be older. It has some very unique features and that would lead one to surmise that it was probably built at an earlier time period. Most of the other stele's have dates carved on them, this is void of anything that has specific dates. It would be very interesting to run a carbon dating test on this monument to see if it extends back into the Book of Mormon period. Another interesting aspect of this older stele is the fact that it is represented as being an ancient king, however, this individual has agriculture tools in his hands. Maya kings don't work with hands, which creates a perplexing problem for archeologists. This stela is located the edge of the large plaza that was mention in the previous paragraph which one to ask the question "could this monument be of King Benjamin".
• Seibal was a major cultural center during the high population period of the Book of Mormon. This fact corresponds well with the prominent place that Zarahemla had in the Book of Mormon civilizations.
• In Alma 50:1-4 describes the fortifications that were built by Moroni; "…Moroni caused that his armies…commence in digging up heaps of earth round about all the cities, throughout all the land which was possessed by the Nephites. And upon the top of these ridges of earth he caused that there should be timbers, yea, works of timbers built up to the height of a man, round about the cities. There are numerous ancient cities that surround Seibal that have similar fortifications. These cities include Dos Pilas, Tikal, Coban, Becan, El Meridor, Coba and others.
• Defensive walls around Zarahemla were never mentioned in the Book of Mormon even though many of the surrounding cities had extensive well-detailed fortifications. Seibal is has natural defenses with the steep two hundred-foot slopes that surround the city.
• Seibal has evidence of a massive decline in the first century AD that could relate to the destruction that took place after the death of Christ. It appears from archeological evidence that this ancient city lost approximately two thirds of its population.
• Extensive building took place in the first century AD that corresponds with the rebuilding that took place in the Book of Mormon. This rebuilding commenced approximately 59 years AD that was needed due to the destruction that took place during the crucifixion of Christ.

There are several traditions that may tie the Mulekite migration to the Peten region thereby building a stronger case for the Seibal site to be Zarahemla. These traditions and histories describe a group of foreigners that landed north of Veracruz and then worked their way down the shores of the Gulf of Mexico to the Bay of Campeche. It is very likely that Jaredites/Olmecs were attempting to put some distance between them and the Jaredites because of the internal conflicts that were developing at that time. After spending time near the Bay of Campeche there is evidence that they moved inland through either or both of the Graijalva or Usumacinta rivers. The Usumacinta River seems like the more likely choice because (1) it takes them farther from the Jaredites, (2) the river is easier to navigate and (3) the Peten is a more desirable place to live when compared with the dry basins of Chiapas. In addition the archeological and historical evidence suggests that they took the Usumacinta River route. And it also fits well with the Book of Mormons description of how the Mulekites came from the North, which lines up perfectly with the Nephites coming from the South. The South being the Land of Nephi (Guatemala City) and the North being the Land of Many Waters (Bay of Campeche). The following list of sources supports the Usumacinta River theory:

• Sahagun, a 16th century Catholic writer, records the following; "Countless years ago the first settlers arrived in these parts (Mexico)…. They came in ships by sea approaching northern port". This may put the Mulikites north of Veracruz during the time the Olmec/Jaridites were still in existence. In order to avoid the conflicts that were going on at that time amongst the Jaradites they probably moved south along the Gulf of Mexico shore.
• Another Spanish writer records the following; "Some years after the origin and beginning of Tulla, there came from the northern part of Mexico a certain people that landed in the vacinity of Panuco. (North of Veracruz) Concerning this nation is not known where they originated…".
• Ixtilxochitl states; "Those who possessed this new world ….were the "Ulmecas and Xicalancas," and according to their history they came in ships or boats from the Eastern Hemisphere…".
• Choney, Title of the Lords of Totonicapan: This native Quiche Maya document describes a group of people who were descendants of Abraham and Jacob who crossed the ocean and settled in the area of the Bay of Campeche…(From Joseph Allen's "Exploring the Lands of the Book of Mormon")
• …toward 600-400 BC some groups from the metropolitan Olmeca zone began moving out and settled in the basin of the Middle Usumacinta: their influence was then felt more clearly, to the extent that local cultures were transformed.(Ocha and Castor 18).

• ... compelled by the necessity of establishing themselves in propitious spot and harried perhaps by their enemies, the tribes once more went up the Usumacinta and Tabasco rivers and their tributaries and penetrated into the territory of present Guatemala. (Recinos and Goetz 1953:39)
• The Annals of the Cakchiquels (From the Joseph Allen's "Exploring the Lands of the Book of Mormon") A native Mesoamerican document similar to the "Title of the Lords of Totonicapan" describes what is apparently the same group of people states that this Guatemala tribe (1) came from the north (Tampico), (2) arrived at the Gulf of Mexico (Veracruz and Tabasco), and (3) lived many years in the region of the lagoons of Bay of Campeche. (Recinos and Goetz)

With every passing year there are additional resolutions to some very perplexing problems. The most recent being the probable proof that horses existed during the Book of Mormon times. Many of these problems have been solved in recent years, however, many problems continue to cast doubt on the theory that the Book of Mormon took place in Central America. Some of the problems include use of metals and different agricultural crops and animals. Their also continues to be a number of geographic and chronology issues, however, if the Seibal theory can be resolved, these issues would be greatly diminished.

The lack of discovery of some of these vital issues may be explained by the fact that the archeologists are probably looking in the wrong places. The Nephites were a small element in the early history of Mesoamerica and their cities were probably fairly conservative when compared with Classic and Post Classic periods of the Maya's. Therefore the archeologists focus their efforts on the spectacular and avoid the modest ruins of the Nephites.

Sources

Allen, Joseph, "Exploring the Lands of the Book of Mormon"

Hauck, F. Richard, "Deciphering the Geography of the Book of Mormon" Deseret Book Company, Salt Lake City, Ut. 1988.

Kelly, Joyce, "An archaeological Guide to Northern Central America" University of Oklahoma Press, 1993.

Ruz, Alberto, "The Mayas" Printed in Mexico in 1992 by: Graficas Monte Alban, S.A de C.V.

Sorenson, John L., "An American Setting for the Book of Mormon", Deseret Book Company, Salt Lake City, UT. 1985.

Sorenson, John L., "The Geography of Book of Mormon Events: A Source Book" The Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, Provo UT. 1992

Sabloff, 1-255. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Harvard University, Cambridge.

Sabloff, Jeremy A., 1975, "Excavations at Seibal" in Ceramics by Jeremy A.

Graham, John A., 1990, "Excavations at Seibal" in Monumental Sculpture and Hieroglyphic Inscriptions by John A. Graham, pp. 1-50 . Memoirs of the Peabody Museum, vol. 17, no. 1. Harvard University, Cambridge.

The final and most notable aspect of the importance of Seibal's art is the dramatic appearance of non-Classic peoples during this period of the final moments of southern lowland Classic Maya civilization. (p1)

No one can doubt the importance of the clues the art of Seibal holds for understanding at least some aspects of the demise of southern lowland civilization. It is frustrating, therefore, that so many of these clues remain ambiguous and continue to allow various alternative interpretations. (p.10 and 11)

is recognized by non-Classic physiognomy from his non-Classic facial characteristics, his alien derivation is further borne out in elements of his costuming. (p5)

AND RECAPITULATION

Real Xe phase at Seibal has slightly earlier beginnings (than Altar de Sacrificios). P 195

Escoba (600 BC to 300 BC) was much larger than Real (pp 195)

Real it was questionable, but for Escoba it seems definite. Small temple pyramids appear at several places within the larger Seibal community.Chicanel is the Seibal Late Preclassic Period phase, dated by us about 300 BC. to AD. 300. We have divided it into early (300 BC. -0) and late (0-a.d 300) facets. jadeite artifacts in the Escoba Mamom cache at Seibal are evidence for Olmec contacts. (pp240)

... there was a notable population upsurge in the early facet of this Chicanelaffiliated phase. (pp 241)

The best we can assert with assurance is that Cantutse Chicanel population at Seibal was at least five times, or possibly ten times, larger than it was in the preceding Escoba Mamom phase.…..had a high bluff-top location and as such was easily defensible. (pp 265)

the Pasion Valley foreigners did appear in the ninth century AD. (pp265)