I.
Central and Western New York an Ancient Battle Field.
According to the Book of Mormon the Hill Cumorah of the Nephites—the Ramah of the Jaredites—must be regarded as a natural monument overlooking ancient and extensive battle fields. Around it early in the sixth century B. C., the Jaredites were destroyed. Here, also, a thousand years later, at the close of the fourth century A. D., the Nephites met with practical annihilation in a battle which, whether judged by the importance of the changes it wrought2 in the affairs of one of the world's continents, or the number slain3,[1] ranks as one of the world's great battles. In view of these Book of Mormon facts one would naturally expect to find some evidences in this section of the country for such wonderful historical events. Here one has a right to expect the evidences of military fortifications; for, though a thousand years had elapsed between the destruction of the Nephites and the discovery of America by the Europeans, still some military monuments would doubtless survive that length of time. Fortunately we are not without kind of evidences that may be reasonably expected. We find such historical monuments described in the "American Antiquities4" of Josiah Priest, published in Albany, New York. Before quoting, however, I call attention to the fact that Mr. Priest regarded the fortifications and other evidences of great battles fought south of lake Ontario as marking the struggle between the descendants of Tartar races (our American Indians, in his view) and Scandinavians, whom he assumes had penetrated5 into middle New York during the first half of the tenth century A. D. Of course, I am of the opinion that both the Tartar theory of the origin of some of our American Indians, and Mr. Priest's assumption that Scandinavians had pushed their way into the interior of New York, are both improbable; but his theories do not vitiate the facts of which he is the compiler and witness; but these facts, I am sure, better fit the statements of the Book of Mormon than they do his speculations6. The reader will therefore bear in mind that it is the facts of Mr. Priest that are of value to us, not his theories; and here are the facts:[2]
There are the remains7 of one of those efforts of Scandinavian defense8, situated9 on a hill of singular form, on the great sandplain between the Susquehannah and Chemung rivers, near their junction10. The hill is entirely11 isolated12, about three-fourths of a mile in circumference13, and more than one hundred feet high. It has been supposed to be artificial, and to belong to the ancient nations to which all works of this sort generally belong. In the surrounding plain are many deep holes, of twenty or thirty rods in circumference, and twenty feet deep—favoring a belief that from these the earth was scooped14 out, to form the hill with. It is four acres large on its top, and perfectly15 level, beautifully situated to overlook the country to a great distance, up and down both rivers; there is on its top the remains of a wall, formed of earth, stone and wood, which runs round the whole, exactly on the brow. The wood is decayed and turned to mould, yet it is traceable, and easily distinguished16 from the natural earth: within is a deep ditch or entrenchment17, running around the whole summit.[3] From this it is evident that a war was once waged here; and were we to conjecture18 between whom, we should say between the Indians and Scandinavians, and that this fortification, so advantageously chosen, is of the same class of defensive19 works with those about Onondaga,[4] Auburn,[5] and the lakes Ontario, Cayuga, Seneca, Oneida[6] and Erie. * * * * * * * In Pompey, [Onondaga county] [7] on lot No. 14, is the site of an ancient burying ground, upon which, when the country was first settled, was found timber growing, apparently20 of the second growth, judging from the old timber reduced to mould, lying round, which was one hundred years old, ascertained21 by counting the concentric grains. In one of these graves was found a glass bottle about the size of a common junk bottle, having a stopple in its nozzle, and in the bottle was a liquid of some sort, but was tasteless. But is it possible that the Scandinavians could have had glass in their possession at so early a period as the year 950 and thereabout, so as to have brought it with them from Europe when their first settlements were made in this country? We see no good reason why not, as glass had been known three hundred years in Europe before the northern Europeans are reputed to have found this country, the art of making glass having been discovered in A. D. 664. But in other parts of the world, glass had been known from time immemorial, even from the flood, as it has been found in the Tower of Babel[8] * * * * * * In the same grave with the bottle was found an iron hatchet23, edged with steel. The eye, or place for the helve, was round, and extended or projected out, like the ancient Swiss or German axe24. On lot No. 9, in the same town, [Pompey] was another aboriginal25 burying ground, covered with forest trees, as the other. In the same town, on lot No. 17, were found the remains of a blacksmith's forge; at this spot have been ploughed up crucibles26, such as mineralogists use in refining metals. These axes are similar, and correspond in character with those found in the nitrous caves on the Gasconade river, which empties into the Missouri, as mentioned by Professor Beck's Gazetteer27 of that country. In the same town [Pompey] are the remains of two ancient forts or fortifications, with redoubts of a very extensive and formidable character. Within the range of these works have been found pieces of cast iron, broken from some vessel28 of considerable thickness. These articles cannot well be ascribed to the era of the French war, as time enough since, then, till the region round about Onondaga was commenced to be cultivated, had not elapsed to give the growth of timber found on the spot, of the age above noticed; and, added to this, it is said that the Indians occupying that tract29 of country had no tradition of their authors.[9] * * * * * * The hatchets30 or iron axes found here were likely of the same origin with the pieces of cast iron. In ploughing the earth, digging wells, canals, or excavating31 for salt waters, about the lakes, new discoveries are frequently made, which as clearly show the operations of ancient civilization here, as the works of the present race would do, were they left to the operations of time for five or six hundred years; especially were this country totally to be overrun by the whole consolidated32 savage33 tribes of the west, exterminating34 both the worker and his works, as appears to have been done in ages past. In Scipio,[10] on Salmon35 creek36, a Mr. Halsted has, from time to time during ten years past, ploughed up, on a certain extent of land on his farm, seven or eight hundred pounds of brass37, which appeared to have once been formed into various implements38, both of husbandry and war; helmets and working utensils39 mingled40 together. The finder of this brass, we are informed as he discovered it carried it to Auburn, and sold it by the pound, where it was worked up, with as little curiosity attending as though it had been but an ordinary article of the country's produce: when, if it had been announced in some public manner, the finder would have doubtless been highly rewarded by some scientific individual or society, and preserved it in the cabinets of the antiquarian, as a relic41 of by-gone ages of the highest interest. On this field, where it was found, the forest timber was growing as abundantly, and had attained42 to as great age and size, as elsewhere in the heavy timbered country of the lakes. [11] * * * * * * In Pompey,[12] Onondago county, are the remains, or outlines, of a town, including more than 500 acres. It appeared protected by three circular or eliptical forts, eight miles distant from each other; placed in such relative positions as to form a triangle round about the town, at those distances. It is thought, from appearances, that this stronghold was stormed and taken on the line of the north side. In Camillus,[13] in the same county, are the remains of two forts, one covering about three acres, on a very high hill; it had gateways43, one opening to the east, and the other to the west, toward a spring, some rods from the works. Its shape is eliptical; it has a wall, in some places ten feet high, with a deep ditch. Not far from this is another, exactly like it, only half as large. There are many of these ancient works hereabouts; one in Scipio, two near Auburn, three near Canandaigua,[14] and several between the Seneca and Cayuga lakes.[15] A number of such fortifications and burial places have been discovered in Ridgeway, [16] on the southern shore of lake Ontraio. There is evidence enough that long bloody45 wars were waged among the inhabitants. * * * * * * From the known ferocity of the ancient Scandinavians, who with other Europeans of ancient times we suppose to be the authors of the vast works about the region of Onondaga, dreadful wars with infinite butcheries, must have crimsoned46 every hill and dale of this now happy country.[17] * * * * * * In the fourteenth township; fourth range of the Holland Company's lands in the state of New York, near the Ridge44 road leading from Buffalo48 to Niagara Falls[18] is an ancient fort, situated in a large swamp; it covers about five acres of ground; large trees are standing49 upon it. The earth which forms this fort was evidently brought from a distance, as the soil of the marsh50 is quite another kind, wet and miry, while the site of the fort is dry gravel51 and loam52. The site of this fortification is singular, unless we suppose it to have been a last resort or hiding place from an enemy. The distance to the margin53 of the marsh is about half a mile, where large quantities of human bones have been found, on opening the earth, of an extraordinary size: the thigh54 bones, about two inches longer than a common sized man's; the jaw55 or chin bone will cover a large man's face; the skull56 bones are of an enormous thickness; the breast and hip47 bones are also very large. On being exposed to the air they soon moulder57 away, which denotes the great length of time since their interment. The disorderly manner in which these bones were found to lie, being crosswise, commixed and mingled with every trait of confusion, show them to have been deposited by a conquering enemy, and not by friends, who would have laid them, as the custom of all nations always has been, in a more deferential58 mode. There was no appearance of a bullet having been the instrument of their destruction, the evidence of which would have been broken limbs. Smaller works of the same kind abound59 in the country about lake Ontraio.[19] But the one of which we have just spoken is the most remarkable61. * * * * * * North of the mountain, or great slope towards the lake, [Ontraio], there are no remains of ancient works or tumuli, which strongly argues, that the mountain or ridgeway once was the southern boundary or shore of lake Ontario; the waters having receded62 from three to seven miles from its ancient shore, nearly the whole length of the lake, occasioned by some strange convulsion in nature,[20] redeeming63 much of the lands of the west from the water that had covered it from the time of the deluge64." [21]
These described fortifications and burial mounds65 make it clear that Central and Western New York at some time have been the scenes of destructive battles; and the fact constitutes strong presumptive evidence of the statements of the Book of Mormon that great battles were fought there. The only thing which leads modern writers to ascribe a comparatively recent date to the wars whereof central and western New York was the battlefields is the discovery of glass, iron and brass within these fortifications. It is assumed that these metals and glass were unknown to the ancient Americans, hence Mr. Priest sets forth66 the theory that the battles were fought between wild tribes of Indians and Scandinavians. Instead of taking this view of the case, however, I shall rely in part upon the finding of these implements made of iron and brass as sustaining the statement of the Book of Mormon that the Nephites were acquainted with and used these metals; but of this I shall have more to say later, when considering the objections urged against the Book of Mormon. Meantime I merely call attention to the fact which here concerns me, namely, that central and western New York constitute the great battle fields described in the Book of Mormon as being the place where two nations met practical annihilation, the Jaredites and Nephites; and of which the military fortifications and monuments described by Mr. Priest are the silent witnesses.
II.
Miscellaneous Book of Mormon Historical Incidents and Nephite Customs Found in the Native American Traditions.
Besides what has already been set forth on the confirmation68 of Nephite historical incidents in native American traditions and mythologies69, there remains several other Lamanite and Nephite historical incidents and customs, mentioned in the Book of Mormon, that are preserved in the traditions of the native Americans, and which ought to receive consideration here.
Blood Drinking.
One of the customs of the Lamanites, in the matter of eating raw flesh and drinking the blood of animals, is mentioned in the book of Enos, where a description is given of the barbarity of the Lamanites as follows:
And I bear record that the people of Nephi did seek diligently70 to restore the Lamanites unto the true faith in God. But our labors71 were vain; their hatred72 was fixed73, and they were led by their evil nature that they became wild, and ferocious74, and a bloodthirsty people; full of idolatry and filthiness76: feeding upon beasts of prey77; dwelling78 in tents, and wandering about in the wilderness79 with a short skin girdle about their loins and their heads shaven, and their skill was in the bow, and in the cimeter, and the axe. And many of them did eat nothing save it were raw meat.[22]
Jarom mentions substantially the same thing:
And they were scattered80 upon much of the face of the land; and the Lamanites also. And they were exceeding more numerous than were they of the Nephites; and they loved murder and would drink the blood of beasts.[23]
Such the statement of the Book of Mormon. And now the native American tradition bearing on this from Bancroft. Speaking of the Toltecs as an enlightened race of native Americans, who are credited with the first introduction of agriculture in America, our author says:
But even during this Toltec period hunting tribes, both of Nahua and other blood, were pursuing their game in the forests and mountains, especially in the northern region. Despised by their more civilized81, corn-eating brethren, they were known as barbarians82, dogs, Chichimecs, "suckers of blood," from the custom attributed to them of drinking blood and eating raw flesh.[24]
III.
Human Sacrifices. Cannibalism83.
Another statement in the Book of Mormon with reference to a Lamanite custom concerning their treatment of prisoners taken in war is as follows. Speaking of an invasion of the Lamanites into Nephite territory the Book of Mormon says:
And they did also march forward against the city of Teancum, and did drive the inhabitants forth out of her, and did take many prisoners both women and children, and did offer them up as sacrifices unto their idol75 gods. And it came to pass that in the three hundred and sixty and seventh years, [A. D.], the Nephites being angry because the Lamanites had scattered their women and their children, that they did go against the Lamanites with exceeding great anger, insomuch that they did beat again the Lamanites, and drive them out of their lands.[25]
Later, referring to a second invasion of the Nephite lands, Mormon also says:
And when they had come the second time, the Nephites were driven and slaughtered85 with an exceeding great slaughter84; their women and their children were again sacrificed unto idols86.[26]
Some years later, Mormon, in an epistle to his son Moroni, speaking of the awful depravity which characterized both Nephites and Lamanites, says of them: "They thirst after blood and revenge continually."[27] Of the treatment of certain prisoners taken from one of the cities he also says:
And the husbands and fathers of those women and children they have slain; and they feed the women upon the flesh of their husbands, and the children upon the flesh of their fathers; and no water, save a little, do they give unto them.[28]
And after they had done this thing, they did murder them in a most cruel manner, torturing their bodies, even unto death; and after they have done this, they devour88 their flesh like unto wild beasts, because of the hardness of their hearts; and they do it for a token of bravery.[29]
This, doubtless, was the beginning—in the later part of the fourth century A. D., "not early in the fourteenth century," as held by Prescott[30]—of those horrible human sacrifices and acts of cannibalism found among the Aztecs at the time of the Spanish invasion of Mexico, and which so shocked even the cruel Spaniards. Bancroft, in telling of the treatment of prisoners taken in war among the Aztecs, describes an unequal battle for life that was sometimes accorded the male prisoners, and then adds:
Those who were too faint-hearted to attempt this hopless combat, had their hearts torn out at once, whilst the others were sacrificed only after having been subdued89 by the braves. The bleeding and quivering heart was held up to the sun and then thrown into a bowl, prepared for its reception. An assistant priest sucked the blood from the gash90 in the chest through a hollow cane91, the end of which he elevated towards the sun, and then discharged its contents into a plume-bordered cup held by the captor of the prisoner just slain. This cup was carried round to all the idols in the temples and chapels92, before whom another blood-filled tube was held up as if to give them a taste of the contents; this ceremony performed, the cup was left at the Palace. The corpse94 was taken to the chapel93 where the captive had watched and there flayed95, the flesh being consumed at a banquet as before. The skin was given to certain priests, or college youths, who went from house to house dressed in the ghastly garb96, with the arms swinging, singing, dancing, and asking for contributions; those who refused to give anything received a stroke in the face from the dangling97 arm.[31]
Prescott, referring to the chief object of war among the Aztecs, and the treatment of prisoners taken, says:
The tutelary98 deity99 of the Aztecs was the god of war. A great object of their military expeditions was, to gather hecatombs of captives for his altars. * * * * * * At the head of all, [i. e., all the Aztec deities] stood the terrible Huitzilopotchli. * * * * * * * This was the patron deity of the nation. His fantastic image was loaded with costly100 ornaments101. His temples were the most stately and august of the public edifices102; and his altars reeked103 with the blood of human hecatombs in every city of the empire. * * * * * The most loathsome104 part of the story—the manner in which the body of the sacrificed captive was disposed of—remains yet to be told. It was delivered to the warrior105 who had taken him in battle, and by him, after being dressed, was served up in an entertainment to his friends. This was not the coarse repast of famished106 cannibals, but a banquet teeming107 with delicious beverages108 and delicate viands109, prepared with art, and attended by both sexes, who, as we shall see hereafter, conducted themselves with all the decorum of civilized life. Surely, never were refinement110 and the extreme of barbarism brought so closely in contact with each other.[32]
Such are the depths of depravity to which a people may sink when once the Spirit of God is withdrawn111 from them. It is not to excite reflections upon this condition of refined barbarism, however, that these quotations113 are made. I am interested here only in pointing out the fact that these revolting customs found among the native Americans confirms the statement made in the Book of Mormon, that such horrible customs had their origin among their Nephite and Lamanite ancestors.
IV.
Burying the Hatchet.
Doubtless the native American custom of "burying the hatchet" (that is, in concluding a war, it is the native custom, as a testimony114 that hostilities115 have ceased, and as a sign of peace, to bury the war-hatchet or other weapons of war), had its origin in the following Book of Mormon incident: Early in the first century B. C., a number of Nephites, sons of King Mosiah II., succeeded in converting a number of Lamanites to the Christian116 religion; and such became their abhorrence117 of war, which aforetime had been one of their chief delights, that they entered into a covenant118 of peace and determined119 no more to shed the blood of their fellow men. In token of this covenant they buried their weapons of war, their leader saying:
And now, my brethren, if our brethren seek to destroy us, behold120, we will hide away our swords, yea, even we will bury them deep in the earth, that they may be kept bright. * * * * And now it came to pass that when the king had made an end of these sayings, and all the people were assembled together, they took their swords, and all the weapons which were used for the shedding of man's blood, and they did bury them up deep in the earth; and this they did, it being in their view a testimony to God, and also to men, that they never would use weapons again for shedding a man's blood.[33]
This circumstance of burying weapons of war in token of peace is several times afterwards alluded121 to in the Book of Mormon.
V.
Another historical event very apt to live in the native traditions is the first Nephite migration123 in ships after their landing in the western hemisphere. This event took place in the latter half of the century immediately preceding the birth of Christ. One Hagoth, described in the Book of Mormon as "an exceedingly curious man,"
Went forth and built a large ship on the borders of the land Bountiful, by the land Desolation, and launched it forth in the west sea, by the narrow neck which led into the land northward125. And behold, there were many of the Nephites who did enter therein and did sail forth with much provisions, and also many women and children; and they took their course northward.[34]
Subsequently other ships were built and the first returned, and migration by this method of travel was kept up for some time. Finally two of the vessels126 conducting this migration by the way of the west sea, were lost; and the Nephites supposed them to have been wrecked127 in the depths of the sea.[35] So marked a circumstance as this, I repeat, occurring as it did among a people that can not be considered as a sea-faring people, would be apt to live in the traditions of their descendants. Such a tradition, I believe, exists. Bancroft, speaking of a war of conquest waged by the Miztec and Zapotec kings against a people inhabiting the southern shores of Tehuantepec, called the Huaves, says:
The Huaves are said to have come from the south, from Nicaragua, or Peru, say some authors. The causes that led to their migrations are unknown; but the story goes that after coasting northward, and attempting to disembark at several places, they finally effected a landing at Tehuantepec. Here they found the Mijes, the original possessors of the country; but these they drove out, or, as some say, mingled with them, and soon made themselves masters of the soil. * * * * * * * But the easy life they led in this beautiful and fertile region soon destroyed their ancient energy, and they subsequently fell an unresisting prey to the Zapotec kings.[36]
A tradition which locates the landing of a similar maritime128 expedition still further north is related by Nadaillac. Speaking of the "Kitchen-Middens" or shell-heaps found here and there on the Pacific coast, and which our author takes as indicating the location of the former homes of numerous tribes, says:
When the Indians were questioned about them [the shell-heaps] they generally answered that they are very old, and are the work of people unknown to them or to their fathers. As an exception to this rule, however, the Californians attributed a large shell heap formed of mussel shells and the bones of animals, on Point St. George, near San Francisco, to the Hohgates, the name they give to seven mythical129 strangers who arrived in the country from the sea, and who were the first to build and live in houses. The Hohgates killed deer, sea-lions, and seals; they collected the mussels which were very abundant on the neighboring rocks, and the refuse of their meals became piled up about their homes. One day when fishing, they saw a gigantic seal; they managed to drive a harpoon130 into it, but the wounded animal fled seaward, dragging the boat rapidly with it toward the fathomless131 abysses of the Charekwin. At the moment when the Hohgates were about to be engulfed132 in the depths, where those go who are to endure eternal cold, the rope broke the seal disappeared, and the boat was flung up into the air. Since then the Hohgates, changed into brilliant stars, return no more to earth, where the shell heaps remain as witness of their former residence.[37]
The word "Hohgates," I believe is but a variation of the word "Hagoth," the name of the man who started these maritime expeditions, and it would be altogether in keeping with Nephite customs[38] for those who sailed away in his vessels to be called "Hagothites" or "Hohgates." The vessel of this tradition may be one of those lost to the Nephites, which finally found its way to the Californian coast where its occupants landed with their ideas of Nephite civilization, and lived as described in the tradition. One is tempted133 to smile at the childish ending of the tradition; but under it may not one see that it is but the legendary134 account of the fact that the vessel sailed away from the California shores and was lost, or, at least, was heard of no more by the natives of those shores.
VI.
Native American Race Unity.
The subject of American antiquities should not be closed without a brief reference, at least, to the unity of the American race. Barring such migrations of other races to America as may have taken place since the fall of the Nephites at Cumorah, at the close of the fourth century A. D., and such as to a limited extent may have been going on in the extreme north via Behring Strait at an earlier date, the Book of Mormon requires substantial unity of race in the later native American people. That is to say, they ought to be of Israelitish descent, a mixture of the tribes of Ephraim, Manasseh and Judah—but chiefly, if not all, of Hebrew descent; and even the Jaredites were but a more ancient branch of the same stock.[39]
On this subject, as upon all others pertaining135 to American antiquities and peoples, writers are divided; yet it is not difficult to marshal in support of race unity for native Americans the very highest authority; and what is of most importance is the facts are beyond question behind their theory.
Citing the facts on which certain authors rely to establish the unity of the American race, Bancroft says:
It was obvious to the Europeans when they first beheld136 the natives of America, that these were unlike the intellectual white-skinned race of Europe, the barbarous blacks of Africa, or any nation or people which they had hitherto encountered, yet were strikingly like each other. Into whatsoever137 part of the newly discovered lands they penetrated, they found a people seemingly one in color, physiognomy, customs, and in mental and social traits. Their vestiges138 of antiquity139 and their languages presented a coincidence which was generally observed by early travelers. Hence physical and psychological comparisons are advanced to prove ethnological resemblances among all the peoples of America. * * * * * * Morton and his confreres, the originators of the American homogeneity theory, even go so far as to claim for the American man an origin as indigenous140 as that of the fauna141 and flora142. They classify all the tribes of America, excepting only the Esquimaux who wandered over from Asia, as the American race, and divided it into the American family and the Toltecan family. Blumenbach classifies the Americans as a distinct species. The American Mongolidae of Dr. Latham are divided into Esquimaux and American Indians. Dr. Morton perceives the same characteristic lineaments on the face of the Fuegian and the Mexican, and in tribes inhabiting the Rocky mountains, the Mississippi valley, and Florida. The same osteological structure, swarthy color, straight hair, meagre beard, obliquely143 cornered eyes, prominent cheek bones, and thick lips, are common to them all. * * * * * * Humboldt characterizes the nations of America as one race, by their straight glossy144 hair, thin beard, swarthy complexion145 and cranial formation.[40]
Dr. Daniel G. Brinton, professor of American archaeology146 and linguistics147 in the University of Pennsylvania—than whom no higher authority upon the subject can be quoted—says:
On the whole, the race is singularly uniform in its physical traits, and individuals taken from any part of the continent could easily be mistaken for inhabitants of numerous other parts. * * * * * * The culture of the native Americans strongly attests148 the ethnic149 unity of the race. This applies equally to the ruins and relics150 of its vanished nations, as to the institutions of existing tribes. Nowhere do we find any trace of foreign influence or instruction, nowhere any arts or social systems to explain which we must evoke151 the aid of teachers from the eastern hemisphere. * * * * American culture, wherever examined, presents a family likeness152 which the more careful observers of late years have taken pains to put in a strong light. This was accomplished153 for governmental institutions and domestic architecture by Lewis H. Morgan, for property rights and the laws of war by A. F. Bandelier, for the social condition of Mexico and Peru by Dr. Gustav Bruhl, and I may add for the myths and other expressions of the religious sentiment by myself. * * * The psychic154 identity of the Americans is well illustrated155 in their languages. There are indeed indefinite discrepancies156 in their lexicography and in their surface marphology; but in their logical sub-structure, in what Willhelm von Humboldt called the "inner form," they are strikingly like. The points in which this is especially apparent are in the development of pronominal forms, in the abundance of generic157 particles, in the overweening preference for concepts of action (verbs) rather than concepts of existence (nouns), and in the consequent subordination of the latter to the former in the proposition.[41]
Following the same general line of thought Nadaillac says:
The Indians, who were successively conquered by foreign invaders158, spoke60 hundreds of different dialects. Bancroft estimates that there were six hundred between Alaska and Panama. Ameghino speaks of eight hundred in South America. Most of these, however, are mere67 derivatives159 from a single mother tongue like the Aymara and the Guarani. We quote these figures for what they are worth. Philology160 has no precise definition of what constitutes a language, and any one can add to or deduct161 from the numbers given according to the point of view from which he considers the matter. As an illustration of this, it may be mentioned that some philologists162 estimate the languages of North America at no less than thirteen hundred, whilst Squier would reduce those of both continents to four hundred. These dialects present a complete disparity in their vocabulary side by side with great similarity of structure. "In America," says Humboldt, "from the country of the Esquimaux to the banks of the Orinoco, and thence to the frozen shores of the Straits of Magellan, languages differing entirely in their derivation have, if we may use the expression, the same physiognomy. Striking analogies in grammatical construction have been recognized, not only in the more perfect languages, such as those of the Incas, the Aymara, the Guarani, and the Mexicans, but also in languages which are extremely crude. Dialects, the roots of which do not resemble each other more than the roots of the Slavonian and Biscayan, show resemblances in structure similar to those which are found between the Sanscrit, the Persian, the Greek, and the Germanic languages."[42]
The fact that the different dialects, or languages, as some call them, "are mere derivatives from a single mother tongue," argues strongly, of course, for ultimate race unity.
The following summary of evidences on the substantial unity of race in American peoples is from Marcus Wilson, and will be found valuable:
Nor indeed is there any proof that the semi-civilized inhabitants of Mexico, Yucatan, and Central America, were a race different from the more savage tribes by which they were surrounded; but, on the contrary, there is much evidence in favor of their common origin, and in proof that the present tribes, or at least many of them, are but the dismembered fragments of former nations. The present natives of Yucatan and Central America, after a remove of only three centuries from their more civilized ancestors, present no diversities, in their natural capacities, to distinguish them from the race of the common Indian. And if the Mexicans and the Peruvians could have arisen from the savage state, it is not impossible that the present rude tribes may have remained in it; or, if the latter were once more civilized than at present, as they have relapsed into barbarism, so others may have done. The anatomical structure of the skeletons found within the ancient mounds of the United States, does not differ more from that of the present Indians than tribes of the latter, admitted to be of the same race, differ from each other. In the physical appearance of all the American aborigines, embracing the semi-civilized Mexicans, the Peruvians, and the wandering savage tribes, there is a striking uniformity; nor can any distinction of races here be made. In their languages there is a general unity of structure, and a great similarity in grammatical forms, which prove their common origin; while the great diversity in the words of the different languages, shows the great antiquity of the period of peopling America. In the generally uniform character of their religious opinions and rites163, we discover original unity and an identity of origin; while the diversities here found, likewise indicate the very early period of the separation and dispersion of the tribes. Throughout most of the American tribes have been found traces of the pictorial164 delineations, and hieroglyphical165 symbols, by which the Mexicans and the Peruvians communicated ideas, and preserved the memory of events. The mythological166 traditions of the savage tribes, and the semi-civilized nations, have general features of resemblance—generally implying a migration from some other country—containing distinct allusions167 to a deluge—and attributing their knowledge of the arts to some fabulous168 teacher in remote ages. Throughout nearly the whole continent, the dead were buried in a sitting posture169; the smoking of tobacco was a prevalent custom, and the calumet, or pipe of peace, was everywhere deemed sacred. And, in fine, the numerous and striking analogies between the barbarous and the cultivated tribes, are sufficient to justify170 the belief in their primitive171 relationship and common origin. * * * * * * With regard to the opinion entertained by some, that colonies from different European nations, and at different times, have been established here, we remark,[43] that, if so, no distinctive172 traces of them have ever been discovered; and there is a uniformity in the physical appearance of all the American tribes, which forbids the supposition of a mingling173 of different races.[44]
The well established fact, of race unity, is one more evidence for the truth of the Book of Mormon to be added to that cumulative174 mass of evidence we are here compiling, since unity of race is what the Book of Mormon requires for the peoples of America.
VII.
Did the Book of Mormon Antedate175 Works in English on American Antiquities, Accessible to Joseph Smith and His Associates.
In the presence of so many resemblances between native American traditions and Book of Mormon historical incidents and Nephite customs, I can understand how the question naturally arises in some minds whether the ancient historical incidents, and the customs of American peoples—purported to be recorded in the Book of Mormon,—whence the traditions come, or is it from the native American traditions that the alleged176 historical incidents and customs of the Book of Mormon come. That is to say, was it possible for Joseph Smith or those associated with him in bringing forth the Book of Mormon to have possessed177 such a knowledge of American antiquities and traditions that they could make their book's alleged historical incidents, and the customs of its peoples, conform to the antiquities and traditions of the native Americans? The question may appear foolish to those acquainted with the character and environment of the Prophet; but to those not acquainted with him or his environment the question may be of some force, and for that reason it is considered here.
In the first place, then, it must be remembered how great the task would be to become sufficiently178 acquainted with American antiquities and traditions to make the Book of Mormon story and the alleged customs of its people agree with the antiquities and traditions of the American natives, in the striking manner in which we have found them to agree. In the second place the youthfulness of the Prophet must be taken into account—he was but twenty-five years of age when the Book of Mormon was published, and it is the concensus of opinion on the part of all those competent to speak upon the subject, that he was not a student of books. But what is most important of all, and what settles the question on this point (whether Joseph Smith, Solomon Spaulding, or Sidney Rigdon be regarded as the author) is the fact that the means through which to obtain the necessary knowledge of American antiquities, the body of literature in English now at one's command on the subject, was not then (1823-1830) in existence. The Spanish and native American writers previous to 1830 may be dismissed from consideration at once, since their works could not be available to Joseph Smith and his associates because written in a language unknown to them, and such fragmentary translations of them as existed were so rare as to be inaccessible179 to men of western New York and Ohio. About the only works to which Joseph Smith could possibly have had access before the publication of the Book of Mormon would have been:
First, the publications of the "American Antiquarian Society, Translations and Collections," published in the "Archaeoligia Americana," Worcester, Massachusetts, 1820; but this information was so fragmentary in character that it could not possibly have supplied the historical incidents of the Book of Mormon, or the customs of its peoples, even could it be proven that Joseph Smith had been familiar with that collection.
Second, the little work of Ethan Smith, published in Vermont—second edition 1825—in which the author holds the native American Indian tribes to be descendants of the ten lost tribes of Israel. In fact his work bears the title, "View of the Hebrews; or the Tribes of Israel in America."
Third, "The History of the American Indians," by James Adair, published in England, 1775. Mr. Adair confines the scope of his work to the North American Indians.
Fourth. The translation of some parts of Humboldt's works on New Spain, published first in America and England between the years 1806 and 1809, and later Black's enlarged translation of them in New York, 1811.
These are the only works, so far as I can ascertain22, that could at all be accessible to Joseph Smith or any of his associates; and there is no evidence that the Prophet or his associates ever saw any one of them. Moreover, notwithstanding some of these writers advance the theory that the native Americans are descendants of the ten lost tribes of Israel, and their books contain fragmentary and disconnected information concerning American antiquities—no one acquainted with these works could possibly regard them as being the source whence Book of Mormon incidents or customs of Book of Mormon peoples were drawn112, a fact which will be more apparent after we have considered—as we shall later consider—the originality180 of the Book of Mormon. Since, therefore, from the very nature of all the circumstances surrounding the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, neither Joseph Smith nor his associates could possibly have become acquainted with the location of the chief centers of ancient American civilizations, nor with native American traditions and customs, it must be evident that Book of Mormon historical incidents and the customs of Book of Mormon peoples were not derived181 from works on American antiquities and traditions.
VIII.
The Value of the Evidence Supplied by American Antiquities
The evidence I have to offer from American antiquities is now before the reader. Not all the evidence that could be massed upon the subject, but all that my space in this work will permit me to present. I do not claim that the evidence is either as full or perfect as one could wish it to be, nor that it is free from what some will regard as serious difficulties; but this much I feel can be insisted upon:
The evidence establishes the fact of the existence of ancient civilizations in America; that the said civilizations are successive; that their monuments, overlay each other, and are confused by a subsequent period of barbarism; that the monuments of the chief centers of American civilizations are found where the Book of Mormon requires them to be located; that the traditions of the native Americans concerning ancient Bible facts, such as relate to the creation, the flood, the Tower of Babel, and the dispersion of mankind, etc., sustain the likelihood of the forefathers182 of our American aborigines, in very ancient times, being cognizant of such facts either by personal contact with them, or by having a knowledge of them through the Hebrew scriptures183, or perhaps through both means. All this is in harmony with what the Book of Mormon makes known concerning the Jaredite and Nephite peoples; for the forefathers of the former people were in personal contact with the building of Babel, the confusion of languages and the dispersion of mankind; while the Nephites had knowledge of these and many other ancient historical facts through the Hebrew scriptures which they brought with them to America. The evidences presented also disclose the fact that the native American traditions preserve the leading historical events of the Book of Mormon. That is, the facts of the Jaredite and Nephite migrations; of the intercontinental movements of Book of Mormon peoples; of the advent185 and character of Messiah, and his ministrations among the people; of the signs of his birth and of his death; of the fact of the Hebrew origin and unity of the race. All these facts so strong in the support of the claims of the Book of Mormon—whatever else of confusion may exist in American antiquities—I feel sure can not be moved. It should be remembered, in this connection, that it is not insisted upon in these pages that the evidences which American antiquities afford are absolute proofs of the claims of the Book of Mormon. I go no further than to say there is a tendency of external proof in them; and when this tendency of proof is united with the positive, direct external testimony which God has provided in those Witnesses that he himself has ordained186 to establish the truth of the Book of Mormon, the Three Witnesses and the Eight, this tendency of proof becomes very strong, and is worthy187 of most serious attention on the part of those who would investigate the claims of this American volume of scripture184.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
unity
|
|
| n.团结，联合，统一；和睦，协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
wrought
|
|
| v.引起；以…原料制作；运转；adj.制造的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
slain
|
|
| 杀死，宰杀，杀戮( slay的过去分词 )； (slay的过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
antiquities
|
|
| n.古老( antiquity的名词复数 )；古迹；古人们；古代的风俗习惯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
penetrated
|
|
| adj. 击穿的，鞭辟入里的 动词penetrate的过去式和过去分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
speculations
|
|
| n.投机买卖( speculation的名词复数 )；思考；投机活动；推断 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
defense
|
|
| n.防御，保卫；[pl.]防务工事；辩护，答辩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
situated
|
|
| adj.坐落在...的，处于某种境地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
junction
|
|
| n.连接，接合；交叉点，接合处，枢纽站 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
isolated
|
|
| adj.与世隔绝的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
circumference
|
|
| n.圆周，周长，圆周线 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
scooped
|
|
| v.抢先报道( scoop的过去式和过去分词 )；（敏捷地）抱起；抢先获得；用铲[勺]等挖（洞等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
entrenchment
|
|
| n.壕沟，防御设施 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
conjecture
|
|
| n./v.推测，猜测 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
defensive
|
|
| adj.防御的；防卫的；防守的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
ascertained
|
|
| v.弄清，确定，查明( ascertain的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
ascertain
|
|
| vt.发现，确定，查明，弄清 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
hatchet
|
|
| n.短柄小斧；v.扼杀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
axe
|
|
| n.斧子；v.用斧头砍，削减 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
aboriginal
|
|
| adj.（指动植物）土生的，原产地的，土著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
crucibles
|
|
| n.坩埚，严酷的考验（ crucible的名词复数 ） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
gazetteer
|
|
| n.地名索引 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
vessel
|
|
| n.船舶；容器，器皿；管，导管，血管 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
tract
|
|
| n.传单，小册子，大片(土地或森林) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
hatchets
|
|
| n.短柄小斧( hatchet的名词复数 )；恶毒攻击；诽谤；休战 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
excavating
|
|
| v.挖掘( excavate的现在分词 )；开凿；挖出；发掘 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
consolidated
|
|
| a.联合的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
savage
|
|
| adj.野蛮的；凶恶的，残暴的；n.未开化的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
exterminating
|
|
| v.消灭，根绝( exterminate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
salmon
|
|
| n.鲑，大马哈鱼，橙红色的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
creek
|
|
| n.小溪，小河，小湾 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
brass
|
|
| n.黄铜；黄铜器，铜管乐器 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
implements
|
|
| n.工具( implement的名词复数 )；家具；手段；[法律]履行（契约等）v.实现( implement的第三人称单数 )；执行；贯彻；使生效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
utensils
|
|
| 器具，用具，器皿( utensil的名词复数 )； 器物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
mingled
|
|
| 混合，混入( mingle的过去式和过去分词 )； 混进，与…交往[联系] | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
relic
|
|
| n.神圣的遗物，遗迹，纪念物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
gateways
|
|
| n.网关( gateway的名词复数 )；门径；方法；大门口 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
ridge
|
|
| n.山脊；鼻梁；分水岭 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
bloody
|
|
| adj.非常的的；流血的；残忍的；adv.很；vt.血染 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
crimsoned
|
|
| 变为深红色（crimson的过去式与过去分词形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
hip
|
|
| n.臀部，髋；屋脊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
buffalo
|
|
| n.(北美)野牛；(亚洲)水牛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
marsh
|
|
| n.沼泽，湿地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
gravel
|
|
| n.砂跞；砂砾层；结石 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
loam
|
|
| n.沃土 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
margin
|
|
| n.页边空白；差额；余地，余裕；边，边缘 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
thigh
|
|
| n.大腿；股骨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
jaw
|
|
| n.颚，颌，说教，流言蜚语；v.喋喋不休，教训 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
skull
|
|
| n.头骨；颅骨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
moulder
|
|
| v.腐朽，崩碎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
deferential
|
|
| adj. 敬意的，恭敬的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
abound
|
|
| vi.大量存在；(in，with)充满，富于 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
remarkable
|
|
| adj.显著的，异常的，非凡的，值得注意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
receded
|
|
| v.逐渐远离( recede的过去式和过去分词 )；向后倾斜；自原处后退或避开别人的注视；尤指问题 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
redeeming
|
|
| 补偿的，弥补的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
deluge
|
|
| n./vt.洪水，暴雨，使泛滥 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
mounds
|
|
| 土堆，土丘( mound的名词复数 )； 一大堆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
confirmation
|
|
| n.证实，确认，批准 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
mythologies
|
|
| 神话学( mythology的名词复数 )； 神话（总称）； 虚构的事实； 错误的观点 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
diligently
|
|
| ad.industriously;carefully | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
labors
|
|
| v.努力争取(for)( labor的第三人称单数 )；苦干；详细分析；（指引擎）缓慢而困难地运转 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
hatred
|
|
| n.憎恶，憎恨，仇恨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
fixed
|
|
| adj.固定的，不变的，准备好的；(计算机)固定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
ferocious
|
|
| adj.凶猛的，残暴的，极度的，十分强烈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
idol
|
|
| n.偶像，红人，宠儿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
filthiness
|
|
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
prey
|
|
| n.被掠食者，牺牲者，掠食；v.捕食，掠夺，折磨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
dwelling
|
|
| n.住宅，住所，寓所 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
wilderness
|
|
| n.杳无人烟的一片陆地、水等，荒漠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
scattered
|
|
| adj.分散的，稀疏的；散步的；疏疏落落的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
civilized
|
|
| a.有教养的，文雅的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
barbarians
|
|
| n.野蛮人( barbarian的名词复数 )；外国人；粗野的人；无教养的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
cannibalism
|
|
| n.同类相食；吃人肉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
slaughter
|
|
| n.屠杀，屠宰；vt.屠杀，宰杀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
slaughtered
|
|
| v.屠杀，杀戮，屠宰( slaughter的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
idols
|
|
| 偶像( idol的名词复数 )； 受崇拜的人或物； 受到热爱和崇拜的人或物； 神像 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
defiled
|
|
| v.玷污( defile的过去式和过去分词 )；污染；弄脏；纵列行进 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
devour
|
|
| v.吞没；贪婪地注视或谛听，贪读；使着迷 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
subdued
|
|
| adj. 屈服的，柔和的，减弱的 动词subdue的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
gash
|
|
| v.深切，划开；n.(深长的)切(伤)口；裂缝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
cane
|
|
| n.手杖，细长的茎，藤条；v.以杖击，以藤编制的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
chapels
|
|
| n.小教堂， （医院、监狱等的）附属礼拜堂( chapel的名词复数 )；（在小教堂和附属礼拜堂举行的）礼拜仪式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
chapel
|
|
| n.小教堂，殡仪馆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
corpse
|
|
| n.尸体，死尸 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
flayed
|
|
| v.痛打( flay的过去式和过去分词 )；把…打得皮开肉绽；剥（通常指动物）的皮；严厉批评 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
garb
|
|
| n.服装，装束 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
dangling
|
|
| 悬吊着( dangle的现在分词 )； 摆动不定； 用某事物诱惑…； 吊胃口 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
tutelary
|
|
| adj.保护的；守护的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
deity
|
|
| n.神，神性；被奉若神明的人(或物) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
costly
|
|
| adj.昂贵的，价值高的，豪华的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
ornaments
|
|
| n.装饰( ornament的名词复数 )；点缀；装饰品；首饰v.装饰，点缀，美化( ornament的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
edifices
|
|
| n.大建筑物( edifice的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
reeked
|
|
| v.发出浓烈的臭气( reek的过去式和过去分词 )；散发臭气；发出难闻的气味 (of sth)；明显带有（令人不快或生疑的跡象） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
loathsome
|
|
| adj.讨厌的，令人厌恶的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
warrior
|
|
| n.勇士，武士，斗士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
famished
|
|
| adj.饥饿的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
teeming
|
|
| adj.丰富的v.充满( teem的现在分词 )；到处都是；（指水、雨等）暴降；倾注 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
beverages
|
|
| n.饮料( beverage的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
viands
|
|
| n.食品，食物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
refinement
|
|
| n.文雅；高尚；精美；精制；精炼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
withdrawn
|
|
| vt.收回；使退出；vi.撤退，退出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
drawn
|
|
| v.拖，拉，拔出；adj.憔悴的，紧张的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
quotations
|
|
| n.引用( quotation的名词复数 )；[商业]行情（报告）；（货物或股票的）市价；时价 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
testimony
|
|
| n.证词；见证，证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
hostilities
|
|
| n.战争；敌意(hostility的复数)；敌对状态；战事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
abhorrence
|
|
| n.憎恶；可憎恶的事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
covenant
|
|
| n.盟约，契约；v.订盟约 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
behold
|
|
| v.看，注视，看到 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
alluded
|
|
| 提及，暗指( allude的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
marine
|
|
| adj.海的；海生的；航海的；海事的；n.水兵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
migration
|
|
| n.迁移，移居，（鸟类等的）迁徙 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
migrations
|
|
| n.迁移，移居( migration的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
northward
|
|
| adv.向北；n.北方的地区 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
vessels
|
|
| n.血管( vessel的名词复数 )；船；容器；（具有特殊品质或接受特殊品质的）人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
wrecked
|
|
| adj.失事的，遇难的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
maritime
|
|
| adj.海的，海事的，航海的，近海的，沿海的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
mythical
|
|
| adj.神话的；虚构的；想像的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
harpoon
|
|
| n.鱼叉；vt.用鱼叉叉，用鱼叉捕获 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
fathomless
|
|
| a.深不可测的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
engulfed
|
|
| v.吞没，包住( engulf的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
tempted
|
|
| v.怂恿（某人）干不正当的事；冒…的险（tempt的过去分词） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
legendary
|
|
| adj.传奇（中）的，闻名遐迩的；n.传奇（文学） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
pertaining
|
|
| 与…有关系的，附属…的，为…固有的(to) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
beheld
|
|
| v.看，注视( behold的过去式和过去分词 )；瞧；看呀；（叙述中用于引出某人意外的出现）哎哟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
whatsoever
|
|
| adv.（用于否定句中以加强语气）任何；pron.无论什么 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
vestiges
|
|
| 残余部分( vestige的名词复数 )； 遗迹； 痕迹； 毫不 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
antiquity
|
|
| n.古老；高龄；古物，古迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
indigenous
|
|
| adj.土产的，土生土长的，本地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
fauna
|
|
| n.(一个地区或时代的)所有动物，动物区系 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
flora
|
|
| n.(某一地区的)植物群 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
obliquely
|
|
| adv.斜； 倾斜； 间接； 不光明正大 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
glossy
|
|
| adj.平滑的；有光泽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
complexion
|
|
| n.肤色；情况，局面；气质，性格 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
archaeology
|
|
| n.考古学 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
linguistics
|
|
| n.语言学 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
attests
|
|
| v.证明( attest的第三人称单数 )；证实；声称…属实；使宣誓 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
ethnic
|
|
| adj.人种的，种族的，异教徒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
relics
|
|
| [pl.］n.遗物，遗迹，遗产；遗体，尸骸 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
evoke
|
|
| vt.唤起，引起，使人想起 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
likeness
|
|
| n.相像，相似（之处） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
accomplished
|
|
| adj.有才艺的；有造诣的；达到了的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
psychic
|
|
| n.对超自然力敏感的人；adj.有超自然力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
illustrated
|
|
| adj. 有插图的，列举的 动词illustrate的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
discrepancies
|
|
| n.差异，不符合（之处），不一致（之处）( discrepancy的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
generic
|
|
| adj.一般的，普通的，共有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
invaders
|
|
| 入侵者，侵略者，侵入物( invader的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
derivatives
|
|
| n.衍生性金融商品；派生物，引出物( derivative的名词复数 )；导数 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
philology
|
|
| n.语言学；语文学 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
deduct
|
|
| vt.扣除，减去 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
philologists
|
|
| n.语文学( philology的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
163
rites
|
|
| 仪式，典礼( rite的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
pictorial
|
|
| adj.绘画的；图片的；n．画报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
hieroglyphical
|
|
| n.象形文字，象形文字的文章 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
166
mythological
|
|
| adj.神话的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
allusions
|
|
| 暗指，间接提到( allusion的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
fabulous
|
|
| adj.极好的；极为巨大的；寓言中的，传说中的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
posture
|
|
| n.姿势，姿态，心态，态度；v.作出某种姿势 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
justify
|
|
| vt.证明…正当(或有理)，为…辩护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
primitive
|
|
| adj.原始的；简单的；n.原(始)人，原始事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
172
distinctive
|
|
| adj.特别的，有特色的，与众不同的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
173
mingling
|
|
| adj.混合的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
174
cumulative
|
|
| adj.累积的，渐增的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
175
antedate
|
|
| vt.填早...的日期，早干，先干 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
176
alleged
|
|
| a.被指控的，嫌疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
177
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
178
sufficiently
|
|
| adv.足够地，充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
179
inaccessible
|
|
| adj.达不到的，难接近的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
180
originality
|
|
| n.创造力，独创性；新颖 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
181
derived
|
|
| vi.起源；由来；衍生；导出v.得到( derive的过去式和过去分词 )；（从…中）得到获得；源于；（从…中）提取 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
182
forefathers
|
|
| n.祖先，先人；祖先，祖宗( forefather的名词复数 )；列祖列宗；前人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
183
scriptures
|
|
| 经文，圣典( scripture的名词复数 )； 经典 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
184
scripture
|
|
| n.经文，圣书，手稿；Scripture:(常用复数)《圣经》，《圣经》中的一段 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
185
advent
|
|
| n.(重要事件等的)到来，来临 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
186
ordained
|
|
| v.任命（某人）为牧师( ordain的过去式和过去分词 )；授予（某人）圣职；（上帝、法律等）命令；判定 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
187
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |