Hubbry Logo
NahomNahomMain
Open search
Nahom
Community hub
Nahom
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Nahom
Nahom
Nahom
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Part of a series on the
Book of Mormon
Origin
Peoples
Persons
Books
Geography
Analysis
Objects
Adaptations
Other

Nahom (/ˈneɪhəm/)[1] is a place referenced in the Book of Mormon (1 Nephi 16:34) as one of the stops on the Old World segment of Lehi's journey. This location is referred to as the place where Ishmael is buried. It was also at this location that the path of Lehi's journey changed from a southern to an eastern direction before continuing toward the coast and the land Bountiful (1 Nephi 17:1). (See Archaeology and the Book of Mormon.)

Nahom in the Book of Mormon

[edit]

In 1 Nephi 16, Lehi receives the Liahona and his group departs from the Valley of Lemuel. After traveling for four days in "nearly a south-southeast direction" they make camp in a place they name "Shazer." They continue to travel in the "same direction" for "many days" with the Liahona as a guide (1 Nephi 16). Verses 34 and 35 read:

And it came to pass that Ishmael died, and was buried in the place which was called Nahom. And it came to pass that the daughters of Ishmael did mourn exceedingly, because of the loss of their father, and because of their afflictions in the wilderness; and they did murmur against my father, because he had brought them out of the land of Jerusalem, saying: Our father is dead; yea, and we have wandered much in the wilderness, and we have suffered much affliction, hunger, thirst, and fatigue; and after all these sufferings we must perish in the wilderness with hunger.

In the next four verses, the dissenters plot to kill Lehi and Nephi, but the threat is not carried out. The next verse reports that Lehi's group has resumed their journey and changed the direction of their travel "eastward" (1 Nephi 17:1).

Ancient frankincense trails

[edit]

Some LDS scholars believe that Lehi's group followed the ancient frankincense trails in the northern part of Yemen at times during the initial leg of their journey (Reynolds 1997).[2] The location of NHM is near the main junction of these ancient trails at a point where the trails veer to the east.[3] According to the Book of Mormon, prior to their arrival at Nahom, the travelers had been moving in a "south-southeast" direction (1 Nephi 16:13). It was at this location "Nahom" that the Book of Mormon states that the travelers made a significant change in direction "eastward" before continuing their journey toward the coast.[4]

LDS research on the proposed location of Nahom

[edit]

In 1976, it was originally speculated by LDS member Lynn M. Hilton that Nahom might correlate with the location of the village of Al Qunfudhah, in Saudi Arabia (Hilton & Hilton 1976). In 1978 LDS member Ross T. Christensen noted the existence of a location in Yemen called "Nehhm" on an early map produced by Carsten Niebuhr as the result of a scientific expedition sent out by King Frederick V of Denmark (Christensen 1978, p. 73). After doing extensive research over several years at the site in Yemen, the location of Nahom was associated with the existing location and tribal name NHM (usually vocalized as NIHM or NEHEM or NAHM) by LDS scholars Warren and Michaela Aston in 1994 (Aston & Aston 1994). LDS scholars now consider the location and tribal area of NHM in the Jawf Valley in Yemen (15° 51' 0" North, 44° 37' 0" East, GPS coordinates 15.88, 44.615) to be the only plausible location for the place referred to as Nahom in the Book of Mormon.

LDS scholars consider NHM to be one of the locations in the Arabian peninsula that they believe confirms Book of Mormon historicity in the Old World (Givens 2002, pp. 120–21). LDS member Terryl Givens states that the discovery of the altars "may thus be said to constitute the first actual archaeological evidence for the historicity of the Book of Mormon." This conclusion is based upon archaeological evidence and inscriptions recently found on altars at a specific location in Yemen which appear to correlate with the "place called Nahom" described in the book of 1 Nephi (Aston 2001, pp. 56–61),(Brown 1999, pp. 66–67). Nahom is one of only a very few locations mentioned in the Book of Mormon that the text implies had been named prior to contact with the Lehite travelers, in contrast to Lehi's normal application of the Middle Eastern practice of naming locations after family members (Givens 2002, p. 120).

Altars

[edit]

The Bar'an Temple in Marib (70 miles (110 km) east of San'a in Yemen) was excavated by a German archaeological team led by Burkhard Vogt. Before excavation began, all that was visible at the Bar'an site were six columns projecting above the sand. The temple structure and many of the altars were found to be well preserved by the sand and desert climate (Aston 2001). One of the artifacts discovered at this location was an inscribed altar which has been dated to the seventh or sixth centuries BC. The first altar discovered was removed from the Bar'an site and placed in a traveling exhibit which began touring Europe in October 1997. Since that time, two additional altars bearing the same inscription mentioning NHM have been identified at the same temple site (Aston 2001).

Each of the altars is constructed of solid limestone. All three contain a dedication inscription, which is carved around all four sides of the altars in the South Arabian script of that period, and each bears the name of their donor: Bi'athar (Aston 2001). The first altar was dated to between the seventh and sixth centuries B.C by French researcher Christian Robin (Robin 1997, p. 144). Since Naw'um of the tribe of Nihm was the grandfather of Bi'athar, it is estimated that the Nihm tribal name must be at least two generations older than the altars themselves (Aston 2001).

Nahom and linguistics

[edit]

Early references to NHM

[edit]

The name NHM denotes both a tribal region and a location in the southern part of Arabia [citation needed]. In 1763 a German surveyor and mapmaker named Carsten Niebuhr produced a map which contained the place name "Nehhm" at a location approximately twenty-five miles northeast of the Yemen capital Sana'a (Aston & Aston 1994, p. 5). In 1792 Robert Heron published a two-volume translation of Niebuhr's first work titled Niebuhr's Travels through Arabia and Other Countries in the East Brown 2001. Niebuhr explained in his book: "I have had no small difficulty in writing down these names; both from the diversity of dialects in the country, and from the indistinct pronunciation of those from whom I was obliged to ask them."[5] Niebuhr circles the boundaries of this area of Nehhm on the map; it covers an area of approximately 2,394 square miles (6,200 km2).

Criticisms of connection

[edit]

Critics claim that the connection is coincidental in nature, noting that Nahom may simply be a spelling variant of common Semitic words, including Biblical names, and thus by coincidence, other names in the region. Specific observations include the following (Vogel 2004, p. 609):

  • It has been suggested that Joseph Smith simply created the name Nahom as a variant of the Biblical names Naham (1 Chron. 4:19), Nehum (Ne. 7:7) and Nahum (Na. 1:1).
  • It is suggested that the pronunciation of NHM is unknown and may not relate to Nahom at all.
  • The fact that the Book of Mormon does not explicitly mention contact with outsiders during Lehi's journey.

It has been said that the link between Nahom and Nehhm, as spelled in Niebuhr's work, is invalid because the vowels between the names Nahom and Nehhm do not match,[6] stating that "only three of the five letters in Nehhm agree with the spelling Nahom. The second letter in Nehhm is e rather than a, and the fourth letter is h instead of o. The variant spellings of Nehem, Nehm, Nihm, Nahm and Naham, do not really help to solve the problem."

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Nahom

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Nahom is a location mentioned in the as the burial place of , a key figure in the narrative of Lehi's family's journey through the around 600 BC. According to 1 Nephi 16:34, the group arrived at this pre-existing place, where they mourned Ishmael's death before turning "nearly eastward" toward their eventual destination of Bountiful. Latter-day Saint scholars propose that Nahom corresponds to the ancient Nihm tribal region in modern , located northeast of Sana'a near the al-Jawf and , based on linguistic, geographical, and archaeological alignments that fit the timeline and route described. The name Nahom derives from the NHM, which can mean "to mourn" or relate to "stone dressing" in contexts of and commemoration, resonating with the scriptural account of grief and interment. This aligns with ancient Arabian practices, where the Nihm controlled a territory known for its role in trade routes, including the Trail that turned eastward from the region. Archaeological supporting this identification includes three altars discovered in 1988 at the Bar'an temple near , , inscribed with references to Nihm and dated to 800–700 BC, predating Lehi's era but confirming the name's antiquity in the area. Additional findings, such as a with hundreds of cairns and turret tombs in the Nihm area dating to the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC, further corroborate its function as a significant site along ancient caravan paths. In Latter-day Saint scholarship, Nahom represents a convergence of textual, historical, and material evidence that bolsters the Book of Mormon's plausibility as a historical document, with the NHM inscriptions (e.g., CIH 673, RES 5095) from the 7th–6th centuries BC providing direct onomastic support without reliance on later interpretations. The site's position also facilitates the narrative's southward-southeastward travel prior to Nahom and the subsequent eastward pivot, matching known topography and avoiding impassable barriers like the Rub' al-Khali desert. Ongoing research continues to explore Nihm's borders and cultural continuity, emphasizing its role in pre-Islamic Arabian history.

Role in the Book of Mormon

Narrative Context

In the narrative of the , Nahom serves as a pivotal location during the exodus of Lehi's family from around 600 BCE, marking a site of profound loss and familial tension. As the group travels southward through the , guided by the Liahona, , a key ally of Lehi and father to several of the group's women, dies during the journey and is buried at this place. The text explicitly states: "And it came to pass that Ishmael died, and was buried in the place which was called Nahom" (1 Nephi 16:34). This event underscores the hardships of their wilderness trek, including physical exhaustion and emotional strain, transforming Nahom into a symbol of mortality amid their divine mission. The death at Nahom triggers intense mourning among Ishmael's daughters, who grieve deeply for their father and lament the afflictions endured since leaving . Their sorrow escalates into open murmuring against Lehi, with accusations that his decision to flee has led to unnecessary suffering: "Our father is dead; yea, and we have wandered much in the , and we have suffered much affliction, , , and ; and after all these sufferings we must perish in the with " (1 Nephi 16:35). This unrest extends to Nephi, as the daughters and others express a desire to return to , highlighting the emotional toll of isolation and uncertainty (1 Nephi 16:36). Compounding the grief, Laman and Lemuel exploit the mourning to incite rebellion, rallying the sons of Ishmael to plot against Lehi and Nephi, whom they view as overreaching leaders. Laman declares: "Behold, let us slay our father, and also our brother Nephi, who has taken it upon him to be our ruler and our teacher, who are his elder brethren" (1 Nephi 16:37), accusing Nephi of deception through claimed divine communications (1 Nephi 16:38). Divine intervention follows, as the Lord's voice chastens the dissenters, leading to repentance and renewed provision of food, averting further crisis (1 Nephi 16:39). Thus, Nahom emerges as a narrative turning point, amplifying the southward journey's challenges and deepening the family's ideological divisions between faithfulness and doubt.

Geographical Significance

In the narrative of the Book of Mormon, Nahom serves as a pivotal geographical landmark during Lehi's family's exodus from around 600 BCE, marking the southern extent of their initial southward progression through the Arabian wilderness. The journey begins in the Valley of Lemuel, a fertile area near the , where the family camps after departing (1 Nephi 2:5–10). From there, they travel nearly south-southeast for four days to the place called Shazer, maintaining a course along the borders near the and through its more fertile regions to sustain their needs (1 Nephi 16:13–14). Continuing in this general direction for many days, the group traverses increasingly barren wilderness, relying on divine guidance via the Liahona, until they arrive at Nahom, a pre-existing place name in the text (1 Nephi 16:33–34). Nahom's position underscores its role as the southernmost point in this phase of the Lehi trail model, where the family's path shifts dramatically from a prolonged south-southeast trajectory to a nearly eastward direction toward the of Irreantum (1 Nephi 17:1, 5). This directional change at Nahom represents a critical boundary in the narrative's spatial framework, transitioning from the Red Sea's coastal proximity to an inland and then coastal eastward march, enduring significant afflictions including childbirths along the way (1 Nephi 17:1–2). The site's established name suggests it functioned as a known regional reference point, aiding in the otherwise featureless expanse. Within the broader Lehi trail model reconstructed from the text, Nahom delineates the culmination of the southward leg—estimated as the longest segment of the Arabian journey—before the eastward pivot enables access to the fertile lands of Bountiful on the southeastern coast (1 Nephi 17:5–6). This configuration highlights Nahom's navigational significance, providing a fixed anchor for the family's reorientation and progression toward their promised destination, without which the route's coherence in the 600 BCE context would be disrupted.

Proposed Historical Identifications

Archaeological Evidence from NHM Altars

In 1997, during ongoing excavations at the Bar'an temple complex near in , the first of three limestone inscribed with the name "NHM" was uncovered by a German archaeological team led by the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, in with Yemeni authorities. A second altar was identified on September 12, 2000, and the third in May 2001, all within the same temple precinct. These altars, dating to the seventh or sixth century BCE based on paleographic analysis and associations with Sabaean rulers such as Yada'il Dharih II (circa 630 BCE) or Yada'il Bayyin II (circa 580 BCE), are constructed from locally quarried . Each measures approximately 66 cm in height, 55 cm in length, and 35 cm in width, with inscriptions carved in the South Arabian Musnad script on all four sides. The text on each altar records a dedication by Biʾathtar, son of Sawdum and grandson of Nawʾum "of NHM," interpreted as a reference to the Nihm tribe, to the chief Sabaean deities Ilmaqah (the moon god), ʾAthtar, and Dhat-Himyam. The Bar'an temple, situated about 5 km northwest of in the al-Jawf region, served as a significant religious center during the Sabaean period (circa 1000–500 BCE), evolving from a pre-1000 BCE sacred into a monumental structure by the sixth century BCE. The altars were found in contexts linked to votive offerings, including the raised and surrounding ritual areas, underscoring their role in Sabaean devotional practices. Archaeological analysis confirms their authenticity as South Arabian artifacts, with the inscription style aligning with contemporaneous Sabaean from the region, such as dedications naming tribal affiliations and divine beneficiaries. The Incense Route, also known as the Frankincense Trail, was a vital network of land trade paths originating in the arid regions of southern Arabia, particularly and , and extending northward to the Mediterranean ports such as Gaza and . Active from at least the 7th century BCE, with significant expansion around BCE coinciding with the rise of South Arabian kingdoms like Saba and , this route facilitated the transport of , , spices, and other by caravans, generating immense wealth for controlling tribes and cities. The primary path followed a north-south axis from production centers in Dhofar through key waypoints like Shabwa, , and before veering toward Dedan and the Nabataean centers, with caravans enduring long desert crossings supported by seasonal wadis and fortified oases. The proposed identification of Nahom with the ancient Nihm tribal region in northern aligns closely with this trade network, as the NHM altars are situated near , where secondary branches of the Route deviated eastward from the main north-south trunk to access interior desert paths toward the Hadramaut valley. This eastward turnoff, documented in reconstructions of caravan itineraries, provided a critical juncture for rerouting goods across the Rub' al-Khali, avoiding harsher coastal exposures. The Nihm tribe's territory, centered in the mountainous area northeast of Sana'a and encompassing parts of the Wadi Jawf valley, served as a strategic for these caravans, where tribal levies and protections influenced passage. and Roman accounts, such as those by and , highlight the role of Arabian tribes in monopolizing transit, with fixed itineraries passing through similar inland districts to evade sea piracy and ensure security. Environmentally, the Nihm region exemplifies the harsh arid conditions of southern Arabia's trade corridors, characterized by hyper-arid plateaus, intermittent wadis like the Jawf that channeled flash floods to sustain sparse oases, and extreme temperatures that imposed severe hardships on travelers, including and exposure during multi-week journeys. These challenges underscored the route's reliance on tribal knowledge of hidden wells and seasonal , making waypoints like Nihm essential for survival and commerce.

Linguistic and Etymological Analysis

The NHM Inscription and Name Parallels

The NHM inscriptions consist of dedicatory texts on three votive altars discovered during excavations at the Barʾān Temple (also known as Arsh Bilqis) in , led by the under Burkhard Vogt, with the three altars found in 1988, 1994/95, and 1996. These altars, dated paleographically to the 7th–6th centuries BCE, feature identical Sabaean script formulations identifying the donors as members of the NHM tribal group, such as "Nsrq son of Nsrq son of Nwʾm of NHM." The term NHM appears as a triconsonantal root (n-ḥ-m) in the ancient South Arabian monumental script, a consonantal typical of Semitic writing systems, where vowels are omitted and implied by context. In South Arabian epigraphy, NHM is vocalized as Nihm or Nāḥim, reflecting a tribal affiliation in the region north of Maʾrib, but the absence of diacritics in the script permits variant readings such as Nahom depending on dialectal or interpretive vowel insertion. This orthographic flexibility aligns with broader Semitic conventions, where the core consonants define the root while vocalization adapts to phonetic or morphological needs, allowing consistent identification across related names despite differing pronunciations. The spelling "Nahom" in the , as published in the 1830 first edition (1 Nephi 16:34), mirrors this consonantal structure when vowels are removed, yielding NHM and evoking a Hebrew-style with inserted s (nā-ḥōm) to approximate an ancient Semitic form. This parallel is notable given the 's narrative context of an ancient Near Eastern journey, where place names would derive from Semitic roots without inherent vowel notation in original scripts. Historical attestations of NHM as a tribal or toponymic designation extend back to at least the BCE in South Arabian inscriptions, with the Barʾān altars providing some of the earliest examples; additional references appear in Sabaean, Minaean, and Ḥadramitic texts from sites like the Jidran and Jawf, confirming its pre-Islamic usage across ancient Yemenite kingdoms. These occurrences, documented in corpora such as the Corpus of South Arabian Inscriptions, consistently employ the NHM root to denote a specific ethnic or regional entity, with no conflicting orthographic variants in the preserved record.

Interpretations in Semitic Languages

In ancient Semitic languages, the triconsonantal root *nhm exhibits semantic fields related to emotional expression, particularly consolation and mourning. In Hebrew, the root נחם (nāḥam) primarily denotes "to comfort" or "to console," often in contexts of repentance or sorrow, as seen in biblical usages where it conveys regret or compassionate relief, such as in Genesis 6:6 where God "repents" or is grieved. This meaning aligns with themes of mourning, as the root can imply sighing or groaning in distress, providing a linguistic basis for associations with burial or loss. In ancient South Arabian languages, the root nhm diverges semantically, referring to "dressing stone by chipping" or techniques of , as attested in epigraphic contexts where it describes practices rather than emotional states. The tribal and place name Nihm (NHM), prominent in , derives from this root without a direct of , though homophonic parallels to Hebrew or forms may suggest cultural resonance in broader Semitic usage. Comparative linguistics reveals *nhm's consolation themes across other Semitic branches. nhm centers on "to groan," "sigh," or "moan," often expressing complaint or , as in classical lexicons. These variations highlight *nhm's evolution from auditory expressions of distress to nuanced ideas of comfort. The term's persistence is evident in its trajectory from ancient inscriptions—such as South Arabian dedications from the 7th–5th centuries BCE naming NHM affiliates—to contemporary Yemeni tribal , where Nihm denotes a longstanding confederation in the Sana'a region, reflecting continuity in onomastic traditions despite semantic shifts.

Scholarly Debates

Perspectives from LDS Scholarship

Latter-day Saint scholars have long viewed the identification of Nahom with the ancient Nihm region in as compelling evidence for the Book of Mormon's historicity, particularly through the fieldwork and publications of Warren P. Aston beginning in the 1990s. Aston's expeditions across southern Arabia, including visits to in the late 1990s and early 2000s, led him to propose that the Nihm tribal area corresponds to the scriptural Nahom due to its strategic location along plausible ancient trade routes and its alignment with the narrative of Lehi's journey around 600 BCE. In works such as "Newly Found Altars from Nahom" (2001) and "A History of NaHoM" (2012), Aston documented three altars inscribed with "NHM" from the Bar'an temple in , dated to approximately 600 BCE through paleographic analysis, which matches the timeframe of Lehi's exodus from . These findings support the authenticity of Nahom by demonstrating an eastward directional shift at this site, consistent with the Book of Mormon's description of the travelers turning east after burying at Nahom (1 Nephi 16:33–34). argued that the Nihm region's position south of the trail and east of a major burial area for ancient travelers provides a geographical fit, as the terrain funnels routes toward the southeast Arabian coast, where Bountiful is proposed. This convergence of name, timing, and is seen by LDS researchers as unlikely to be coincidental, reinforcing the narrative's ancient Near Eastern context without reliance on modern invention. In the 2020s, organizations like Central and BYU Studies have built on Aston's research with updated publications emphasizing trail evidence and interdisciplinary validation. For instance, Central's 2021 evidence summary highlights GPS-mapped routes confirming the Nihm area's role as a burial and site in antiquity, integrating archaeological data with scriptural details. Similarly, Neal Rappleye's 2023 BYU Studies article, "The Place—or the Tribe—Called Nahom?," explores NHM as both a tribal and geographic name, drawing on recent Yemeni historical records to affirm its persistence from Lehi's era. The 2024 Interpreter Foundation piece by Neal Rappleye further reexamines the eastward trail, incorporating new border data from ancient Nihm inscriptions to strengthen the case. LDS scholarship employs a methodological approach that combines on-site , GPS for route reconstruction, and cross-disciplinary analysis of , , and ancient texts to test hypotheses against the . This rigorous framework, as exemplified in Aston's multi-decade fieldwork and collaborative studies through institutions like the , prioritizes verifiable data over speculation, aiming to illuminate the of Lehi's journey while acknowledging the challenges of Arabian preservation.

Criticisms and Alternative Views

Critics of the proposed identification of Nahom with the NHM inscriptions argue that the root NHM is a widespread element in ancient , often denoting concepts like or "to console," which bears no direct relation to a place of as described in the . This commonality diminishes the uniqueness of the match, as similar NHM references appear in numerous inscriptions across the without specific ties to sites or the context of Lehi's journey. Non-LDS archaeologists, for instance, view the altars as routine dedications by a Nihmite tribe rather than evidence supporting historicity, emphasizing that such tribal or familial titles are not uncommon in South Arabian . Further methodological concerns highlight issues with geographical specificity, noting that multiple locations bearing NHM associations exist in , and the Bar'an temple altars—dated to around 600 BCE—are not precisely aligned with the primary ancient trade routes postulated for the itinerary. Some geographers contend that the site's position off the main trails undermines claims of a "convergence" of evidence, as the implies a directional turn eastward at Nahom that lacks corroboration from the altar's locale. This lack of precision is compounded by the absence of archaeological indicators of burials or rituals at the site, which would provide more direct linkage to the text's description of Ishmael's death. Alternative explanations posit the similarity as mere coincidence, given the prevalence of triconsonantal roots like NHM in Semitic naming conventions, where variations could render it as , Nehem, or other unrelated forms. Others suggest a 19th-century origin, proposing that may have drawn from biblical names like (a ) or indirectly from European maps of Arabia, such as those based on Carsten Niebuhr's 1760s expedition, which included variants like "Nehem" in accessible publications by the early 1800s. In contrast to LDS scholarship's affirmative interpretations, these views stress in apologetic analyses. Recent discussions, including a 2025 podcast episode on Mormon Stories, have intensified scrutiny by questioning the designation of NHM as the "strongest evidence" for the , underscoring the evidential gaps such as no confirmed burials or inscriptions explicitly denoting a place of mourning. Vogel, in works like his 2004 Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, applies a minimalist approach akin to biblical , arguing that the inscriptions' significance is overstated without broader corroborative context.

References

  1. https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/a-history-of-nahom
  2. https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/the-nahom-convergence-reexamined-the-eastward-trail-burial-of-the-dead-and-the-ancient-borders-of-nihm/
  3. https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/sites/default/files/archive-files/pdf/aston/2022-10-26/03_part_3_the_place_which_was_called_nahom_59-93.pdf
  4. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/16?lang=eng
  5. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/17?lang=eng
  6. https://scripturecentral.org/evidence/book-of-mormon-evidence-overview-of-lehi-s-journey
  7. https://scripturecentral.org/evidence/book-of-mormon-evidence-shazer-to-nahom
  8. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1289&context=jbms
  9. https://madainproject.com/history_of_the_incense_trade_route
  10. https://www.livius.org/articles/place/incense-route/
  11. https://books.google.com/books/about/Frankincense_and_Myrrh.html?id=x_TbAAAACAAJ
  12. https://www.metmuseum.org/essays/trade-between-arabia-and-the-empires-of-rome-and-asia
  13. https://www.britannica.com/place/Arabian-Desert
  14. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/archaeology-of-prehistoric-arabia/ecological-and-environmental-diversity-in-arabia/3AF6A0BB10C9CE0F9CFFD33974DC6DF9
  15. https://www.academia.edu/13256024/The_Origins_of_the_Nihm_Tribe_of_Yemen_A_Window_into_Arabias_Past
  16. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21534764.2014.918372
  17. https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/the-place-or-the-tribe-called-nahom
  18. https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5163.htm
  19. https://scripturecentral.org/evidence/book-of-mormon-evidence-nahom
  20. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/anxiousbench/2015/06/the-nahom-follies/
  21. https://mrm.org/finding-nahom-the-continuing-search-for-archaeological-confirmation-of-the-book-of-mormon
  22. https://www.mormonstories.org/nahom-the-strongest-evidence-for-the-book-of-mormon/
  23. https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/book-of-mormon-minimalists-and-the-nhm-inscriptions-a-response-to-dan-vogel/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.