One might wonder if the place name Bountiful is found in Mesoamerica (the area most scholars associate with the lands of the Book of Mormon)? Hunter and Ferguson write:
According to Ixtlilxochitl, the name for “the seat of the kingdom” as of 132 B.C. was Huehuetlapallan, which means “ancient Bountiful land.” Hue-hue is from the Nahua (Mexican) tongue and means “old, old” or “ancient.” Tlapallan (Tula-pallan) is derived from the primary Maya root Tul, meaning “bountiful or abundance.”
They cite Dr. Marcos E. Bercerra of the Mexican Society of Geography, who wrote on the native geographical names of the state of Chiapas (where Izapa is located). In his writings Bercerra shows that many of the place names of Chiapas include the important root-name Tula or Tulan or Tlan, meaning “bountiful” or “abounding.” He uses the Spanish word abundancia to define it. Some 19 place names in which tula appears are listed. [Milton R. Hunter and Thomas Stuart Ferguson, Ancient America and the Book of Mormon (1950), pp. 149-150]
“And the Land on the Southward Was Called Bountiful”
According to Clate Mask, several primary historical documents, The Popol Vuh, The Annals of the Cakchiquels, The Title of the Lords of Totonicapan, as well as the historian Ixtlilxochitl spoke of “Tullan,” or “Tulan” which both mean “bountiful” or “abundance.” Because the Maya root word “tul” means bountiful and the ancients landed at Tulan, some claim that Tulan was on the Gulf Coast. [See illustration] Some place Tulan on the west coast. Others claim that the archaeological site of Tulum on the Caribbean east coast of Mexico is the city of Bountiful. Still others, like Hauck, maintain that the Izapa area, or the fertile Soconusco, was the land of Bountiful. Teotihuacan near Mexico City was anciently called Tulan (there were many places named after Tulan, the first seat of power). There is as much confusion on this complex issue as there are “Bountifuls.”
How many locations are there in our country named Green Valley or Pleasant View? Why are they called that? Obviously, there are many place names that are derived from a descriptive term. There are many areas of Mesoamerica that are “bountiful,” “abundant” or “abound with” something. Dr. Marcos E. Bercerra of the Mexican Society of geography, wrote on the native geographical names of the state of Chiapas, Mexico (where Izapa is located). In it, he shows that many of the place names include “tula,” “tulan,” “tlan,” and “tan,” all of which come from the Maya root “tul” meaning “bountiful” or “abounding.” Six locations within a 30 mile radius of Izapa end in “tlan” or “tan”: Comaltitlan, Malacatan, Mazatan, Tuzantan, Cacahoatan (where the cacao trees abound), and Huehuetan (Bountiful place of the ancients)… . [See illustration]
Izapa is located in the fertile tropical piedmont zone known as the Soconusco. [See illustration]
It is rich with volcanic soil and its year-round rainfall has been renowned since pre-Hispanic times… . I have searched detailed maps of El Salvador, Guatemala and Mexico and have found scattered locations with this Maya suffix “tan” but, curiously, only near Izapa on the Pacific west coast have I observed such a heavy concentration of “bountiful” used in the place names. [Clate Mask, “New Insights into an Old Problem: The Land of Bountiful,” pp. 15-17, unpublished]
Geographical Theory Map: Alma 22:31 ([Illustration]) The landing and migration of the people of Zarahemla
Geographical [Theory Map]: Alma 22:31 The Landing & Migration of the People of Zarahemla (Year ???)
The Land Was Called Desolation the Land Was Called Bountiful
Alma 6:8 states the following, “Now it was the custom of the people of Nephi to call their lands and their cities and their villages, Yea, even all their small villages, after the name of him who first possessed them” Strangely, there is no evidence of this Nephite practice in the names “Desolation” and “Bountiful.” Does this present an internal dilemma? We are told that the Nephites named a land in the Old World “Bountiful” because of the abundance of fruit and also wild honey“ (1 Nephi 17:5). In the New World, the Nephites referred to a land as ”Bountiful“ because of the abundance of wild animals (Alma 22:31--emphasis mine). Nephi mentions that where they first landed in the promised land, the people of Lehi planted seeds and ”they grew exceedingly; wherefore, we were blessed in abundance“ (1 Nephi 18:24--emphasis mine). The Nephites referred to a land as ”Desolation“ because the people of that land had been destroyed (Alma 22:30). They also referred to another place as ”Desolation of Nehors“ because of the destruction of that people (Alma 16:11). According to Hugh Nibley, Near Eastern scholars have stated that the ancient Semites denoted any scene of defeat with the name Hormah, which translates as ”Destruction“ or ”Desolation". (Hugh Nibley 1976:195) Additionally, the Zarahemla Research Foundation Staff has published the following:
“The Hebrew word samem and its derivatives are translated ”desolate“ or ”desolation.“ The meaning is ”a barren, empty land, wasted and made bleak by some disaster. The disaster may be natural or a result of war. But usually this word group is associated with divine judgment.“ It usually applies to places and things (Richards 1985:222). This is a perfect description of the land of Desolation in the Book of Mormon. (ZRF Staff, ”Why Bountiful? Why Desolation?," in Recent Book of Mormon Developments, Vol. 2, p. 148)
Perhaps some references to the land Bountiful or the land Desolation, imply that the lands Bountiful and Desolation were not “possessed” by a people in the usual sense. Perhaps the regions extended over specific “possessed” lands or boundaries rather than being specific boundaried lands. It is hard to tell. The situation of regions extending over specific “possessed” lands or boundaries rather than being specific boundaried lands is similar to national parks, or the “plains area,” or even the “desert Southwest” in the United States which spreads across state lines. [See “Why Bountiful? Why Desolation?,” in Recent Book of Mormon Developments, Vol. 2, p. 148)