Historical: Because the introduction to this occasion is explicitly connected with the Law of Moses (Mosiah 2:3) we may legitimately look to the scriptures for an explanation of the type of festival to which the people were invited. Szink and Welch have examined the possible connections, and link Benjamin’s speech to the “Autumn Festival Complex.” Specifically they note:
Of the three annual festival times in ancient Israel, the autumn festival complex was the most important and certainly the most popular in ancient Israel. In early times apparently was called the Feast of Ingathering. According to many scholars, the various components of the autumn festival were celebrated as a single season of celebration in the earliest periods of Israelite history. Its many elements were not sharply differentiated until later times, when the first day of the seventh month became Rosh ha-Shanah (New Year), followed by eight days of penitence, then followed on the tenth day of the month by Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) and on the fifteenth day by Sukkot (Festival of the Tabernacles), concluding with a full holy week“ (Szink, Terrence L. and John W. Welch. ”An Ancient Israelite Festival Context." In: King Benjamin’s Speech. FARMS, 1998 p. 159).
The authors discuss their reasons for relating King Benjamin’s situation to the historical Israelite festivities, and there are important correlations. What is also important, however, are the differences, a subject to treated in their examination. As we examine this gathering, we will look at both aspects of King Benjamin’s gathering. Given the 476 years that have passed since the departure from Jerusalem (Mosiah 6:5) we should expect that there would be some changes to the nature of the festivals, and in particular, some type of interaction with customary festivals of the New World which would surely have been known, and probably practiced by the Zarahemlaites prior to their union with the immigrant Nephites.
One point of conjunction between the Israelite and New World practices occurs in the New Year celebration. As noted, the autumn festivals included the New Year celebration. Indeed, we will also examine this particular speech in the context of a special type of New Year celebration from an Old World context. Prior to that, however, we should also note the Mesoamerican background for new year’s celebrations. The changing to a new year was also heralded with great ceremony. However, there is another very important type of New Year celebration that may enter into Benjamin’s New World accounting. To understand the possible Mesoamerican context, we must take a short side trip into the Mesoamerican calendar, with which the Zarahemlaites were most certainly familiar, and the Nephites would have had difficulty avoiding:
"The 260-day cycle, already in use during Preclassic times, formed a basic part of all Mesoamerican calculations. Among the Mexica, this cycle was known as the Tonalpohualli…; the Maya called it the Tzolkin. This cycle was composed of 20 day signs, which ran consecutively, combined with a number from 1 to 13 as a prefix. A day would be designated, for example, as 5 Atl (water) or 8 Tochtli (rabbit) in the Tonalpohualli. In order for the exact day 5 Atl to come around again, 260 days would have to elapse (or 20 x 13, since there is no common denominator). This 260-day cycle is not based on any natural phenomenon and we do not know how to account for its invention.
In addition to the Tonalpohualli or Tzolkin, another cycle ran concurrently, resembling our solar year of 365 days. This was made up of 18 months of 20 days each (18 x 20 = 360), plus 5 additional days of apprehension and bad luck at the end of the year. Days were numbered from 0 to 19. The Mexica called the 360-day year the Xihuitl, and the 5-day period of bad luck the Nemontemi. The equivalent Maya periods were named the Haab (360 days) and Uayeb (5 days)" (Weaver, Muriel Porter. The Aztecs, Maya, and their Predecessors. Seminar Press, 1972, p. 103).
These two independently running calendars both began again every 260 and 360+5 days. However, every 52 years they both coincided:
"The Tzolkin and the Haab ran concurrently, like intermeshed cog-wheels, and to return to any given date, 52 years, or 18,980 days, would have to elapse (because both 365 x 52 and 260 x 73 = 18,980). In other words, the Tzolkin would make 73 revolutions and the Haab 52, so that every 52 calendar years of 365 days one would return to the same date. A complete date in this 52-year cycle might be, for example, 2 1k 0 Pop (2 1k being the position of the day in the Tzolkin, 0 Pop the position in the Haab). Fifty-two years would pass before another 2 1k 0 Pop date returned.
One cannot overemphasize the significance of this 52-year cycle for Mesoamerican peoples. It is called the Calendar Round or Sacred Round. Aside from the Maya and Mexica we know it was in use by the Mixtecs, Otomis, Huastecs, Totonacs, Matlazinca, Tarascans, and many other groups (Figure 14). The cycles of time are believed to have been primarily divinatory in purpose. When these coincided, it was an event of great importance, marked by special ceremonies and perhaps by the enlargement of architectural structures.
It was expected that the world would end at the completion of a 52-year cycle. At this time, among the Mexica in the Valley of Mexico, all fires were extinguished, pregnant women were locked up lest they be turned into wild animals, children were pinched to keep them awake so that they would not turn into mice, and all pottery was broken in preparation for the end of the world. In the event the gods decided to grant man another 52 years of life on earth, however, a nighttime ceremony was held in which the populace followed the priests through the darkness over a causeway to the top of an old extinct volcano that rises abruptly from the floor of the basin of Mexico, known today as the Hill of the Star, the hill above Ixtapalapa. There, with all eyes on the stars, they awaited the passage of the Pleiades across the center of the heavens, which would announce the continuation of the world for another 52 years. When the precise moment came, a victim was quickly sacrificed by making a single gash in his chest and extracting the still palpitating heart. In the gory cavity the priests, with a fire drill, kindled a new flame that was quickly carried by torches across the lake to the temple in Tenochititlan, and from there to all temples and villages around the lake. This was known as the New Fire Ceremony among the Mexica, and in some way this same completion and renewal of each 52-year cycle was recognized by all Mesoamericans. It was probably rare for a person to witness more than one of these celebrations in his lifetime, so undoubtedly it was an event approached with great anticipation and relived many times after its passing." (Weaver, Muriel Porter. The Aztecs, Maya, and their Predecessors. Seminar Press, 1972, p. 103-4).
For our purposes, we note that the 52 year cycle is not only extremely significant, but also the occasion at times marked by the “enlargement of architectural structures.” (Weaver, 1972, p. 103). Once again we return to the possible beginning of the temple in Zarahemla. The building of this new temple on an auspicious beginning of a 52 year cycle would both fit the context, and provide a powerful symbolic marking of both the new “century” and new “covenant” for the people.
Another alternative for the special occasion is the Old Testament concept of the Jubilee year. Every seven years was a Sabbatical, and every seven Sabbaticals was the Jubilee. Szink and Welch describe the relevant context for seeing this particular festival as a Jubilee year:
"The jubilee text of Leviticus 25 compares closely with two sections of Benjamin’s speech.’ Leviticus 25 reflects the words and phrases associated with the jubilee in ancient times. A considerable density of phrases and ideas from these chapters can be found in the latter portions of Mosiah 2 and 4, sufficient to indicate a textual dependency of Benjamin’s words on these or similar jubilee texts. The main parallels between these passages and Benjamin’s speech can be outlined as follows:
· Benjamin’s “return the thing” (Mosiah 4:28) recalls “return every man unto his possession” (Leviticus 25:10).
· His injunction “Ye will not have a mind to injure one another” (Mosiah 413) echoes “Ye shall not oppress one another” (Leviticus 25:14, 17).
· At the jubilee, it was required: “He shall reckon with him” (Leviticus 25:50; compare 15—16). Similarly. Benjamin said: “Render to every man according to that which is his due” (Mosiah 4:13).
· “And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: yea though he be a stranger or a sojourner; that he may live with thee” (Leviticus 25:35) has the same import as “Ye… will succor those that stand in need, ... ye will not.., turn him out to perish” (Mosiah 4:16).
· “I am the Lord your God, which brought you forth” (Leviticus 25:38) implies the same conclusion as “Do we not all depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have” (Mosiah 4:19).
· The promise in Leviticus reads: “Wherefore ye shall do my statutes and keep my judgments, and do them; and ye shall dwell in the land in safety And the land shall yield her fruit” (Leviticus 25:18—19); and in Benjamin, “If ye would keep his commandments ye should prosper in the land” (Mosiah 2:22).
These relatively specific parallels, coupled with similarities in the overall tone and concerns of the jubilee texts and Benjamin’s speech, indicate Benjamin’s intense feelings about helping the poor, establishing God’s covenant among his people, being conscientious in walking in the paths of righteousness, and realizing man’s utter dependence on God for life and sustenance. These may well be attributable to the heightened sense of these principles felt by the ancient Israelites during the jubilee season.
A further parallel, expressing the spirit behind all sabbatical and jubilee laws, is found in Deuteronomy 15:9: “Beware that there be not a thought in thy wicked heart, saying, The seventh year, the year of release, is at hand; and thine eye be evil against thy poor brother, and thou givest him nought; and he cry unto the Lord against thee, and it be sin unto thee.” This compares closely with Benjamin’s injunctions to his people to impart freely of their substance to the poor without grudging (see Mosiah 4:22—25).“ (Szink, Terrence L. and John W. Welch. ”An Ancient Israelite Festival Context." In: King Benjamin’s Speech. FARMS, 1998 p. 195-6).
We now have two legitimate explanations for the background of Benjamin’s speech. It may be on a jubilee year, or it may be on a Mesoamerican “century.” Which was it? It is possible that the true answer is “both.” Jubilee years occur every 50th year (after the seventh set of seven years). The Mesoamerican “century” occurred every 52 years. With the close proximity of the cycles, it would not be unexpected at all for the two to become merged into a single ceremony. The process of adaptation of religion is called syncretism, and most religions which come into close contact with other religions (particularly dominant ones) will exhibit some form of syncretism, whether mild or extensive.
In modern Christian practice there are any number of cases of syncretism, particularly where a symbolism is borrowed from another context. An early example is the Christian appropriation of the figure of the youth with a ram on his shoulders, the pagan figure representing Humanity (Crossan, John Dominic. The Essential Jesus. Harper Collins. 1995, p. 13). Later (and more current) examples would be the Yule log and the Christmas tree, both appropriations from pagan religions. The point is not the borrowing, for that is normal, but rather the importance of realizing that the borrowing can occur within the context of continued faith. The modern Christian is fully capable of enjoying an Easter with standard symbols of rabbits and eggs, without understanding the relationship of the rabbits and eggs to ancient pagan spring fertility symbols.
In this same way, we may suppose that Nephite/Zarahemlaite culture also borrowed some from the surrounding cultures (as would be quite evident in their architecture). Thus we would have a unique combination of events behind King Benjamin’s speech. The hypothesis would be that he has the unique opportunity to live at the important juncture of a New Year/New “Century” time period, that also correlates to an actual or assimilated Jubilee year. This auspicious combination of events provides both the background for the specific ceremonies, the details of the speech, and for the occasion of the building/renewal of the temple that is posited for Zarahemla at this point in time. It also helps explain why King Benjamin chose to name Mosiah II as king three years before King Benjamin’s death (see Mosiah 6:4-5). While King Benjamin does indicate that he is old (see Mosiah 2:30), a survival of three years after this ceremony suggests that he was not physically near death, but rather selected this particular time to both name the new king, and name his people precisely because it fit into a time of renewal – a new century.