In The Cavity of a Rock

In The Cavity of a Rock
Father Lehi

Friday, June 17, 2011

The Name Moroni in Mayan Stone pt.2

Moroni burying the plates
After showing the origins of the name Moroni in Mayan stones Dr. Robert Pate then offers an interesting but speculative theory on Moroni. Shortly after the death of his father Moroni states that he was alone and would write more if he had more room on the plates but he can’t because he has no ore to make more plates and can’t get more because he is alone. Moroni then went on to finish his father section of the Book of  Mormon (Mormon 8:5-Mormon 9:37) which was about 7 more pages followed by the book of Ether which is 31 pages and then does his own account (the book of Moroni) which is 13 pages. This total’s up to 51 more pages to complete what we know of as the Book of Mormon. We know that we have only a portion of the sealed plates, roughly one third of the plates (531 pages worth). This would mean that there was still roughly double that amount that were written to complete the other two thirds of the “golden plates” after Moroni finished his portion.

 We know that the sealed portion contain the writings of the brother of Jared which were written in a confounded language (ether 3:24) and the sealed interpretation thereof (Ether 4:5). This includes the vision of the brother of Jared of the history of the earth from the beginning to the end. So if we add it all up we have the 51 finish pages of the Book of Mormon plus the sealed portion roughly 1062 for a total of 1,113 pages written after Moroni says that he is out of ore and is alone and has basically run out of room on the plates. What changed to allow his situation to all of the sudden be able to add about 1,113 pages. How did he get more ore? It sounds like he was no longer all alone.

Dr. Pate professes that in order for Moroni to have stumbled into 50-pounds of gold that he would have stumbled into friendly Nephites but even more so he would have to have become the King of this group of people in order to obtain that amount. He states that he realized how this took place when he stumbled across “The Rulers of Tikal” (Michel 1989). He said, there was a section about Frog Sky Mah K’ina who due to the name Mah K'ina could easily be our Moroni.  And look at the years he was the ruler, 406 AD to about 426 AD. Moroni was still making entries into the Book of Mormon through about 421 AD.

Angel Moroni appears to the boy Joseph Smith jr.
He then goes on to state that according to the history shown in stele 31 at Tikal that Frog Sky Mah K’ina came to power in Long-Count date, which is 19 November, 406 AD. His predecessor was Ruler 9 which is Curl Nose and his successor was Ruler 11, Stormy Sky. Ruler 9 was the father of Ruler 11. Ruler 10, Mah K’ina, just shows up in between these two and somehow obtains the throne. This is accounted for because the Maya practiced primogeniture. The closest male descendant became king-(this dates back to Nephi). Dr. Pate supports his theory about kingship with Mormon Moroni’s father. Mormon states he was a direct descendent of Nephi (Mormon 8:13). He also states that it is very possible that
Mormon was a king because the not only does he refer to the Nephites as “my people” but because the Lamanite king communicated directly with Mormon which is something he wouldn’t have done if Mormon were not the king (Mormon 6:2-3). If this is the case, being a pure descendent of Nephi, Maya primogeniture would make Moroni the next king. He could walk into town and declare who he was showing the records the sword of Laban and his Nephite armor and this would allow him to obtain kingship especially since he and his father were known from Cumorah.

Since reading Dr. Robert Pates book "Mormon Names in Mayan Stone" and writing these last two blog posts it has been pointed out to me that understanding of Mayan heiroglyphics has grown in leap and bounds.  Although the last two posts are completely speculative theories there are interpretations that Dr. Pate has since come to understand that he was incorrect.  His theory is still interesting none the less although I would suggest reading Dr. Jerry Ainsworths theory as well...there is no doubting their passions to gain a better understanding of the Book of Mormon.


  1. The note above that, "Dr. Pate has since come to understand that he was incorrect."
    For the record, See the REBUTTAL at where Dr. Pate addresses several "flaws" in his first book. They do not change the results significantly. Dr. Pate has NEVER renounced the work he has done (with the sole mention of the several flaws identified in his rebuttal-posted at his site).
    To the contrary, the subsequent research of each of his other 3 books, has confirmed and added to the specificity, refinement, and certainty of his original work. Each succeeding work of his four books has brought additional corroborating discoveries.

  2. thanks for the update. I just finished reading the rebuttal and can appreciate his point of view. I will be doing an update to these two posts in regards to the rebuttal. I've always tried to keep an unbias stance on this blog. I will eventually be purchasing his other books and hopefully they will continue to bring more content to my blog.

  3. Thank You for your approach. Many sites available today have their own axes to grind, while claiming totally "unbiased", "expert", "scholarly" objectivity. The truth is where you find it. Many appear to be wearing "blinders" - - lest perhaps a new thought should cross their minds, and upset their preconceived mindset. An honest search for truth requires one to sometimes consider new developments. Thank you for your openness and willingness to search.
    -I noted that you are in the PHX area, as am I - :)