This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2009)

This article relies on references to primary sources or sources affiliated with the subject, rather than references from independent authors and third-party publications. Please add citations from reliable sources. (September 2010)

This article improperly uses one or more religious texts as primary sources without referring to secondary sources that critically analyze them. Please help improve this article by adding references to reliable secondary sources, with multiple points of view.

According to the Book of Mormon, a religious text of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a Nephite ( /ˈniː.faɪt/^[1]) is a member of one of the four main groups of settlers of the ancient Americas. The other early settlers described in the Book of Mormon include the Lamanites, Jaredites and Mulekites. Some LDS scholars believe that the forebears of the Nephites settled somewhere in present-day Central America after departing Jerusalem.^[2] However, both the Smithsonian Institution and the National Geographic Society have issued statements that they have seen no evidence to support these claims in the Book of Mormon, and furthermore, no secular archeologist or historian has supported their existence.

Within the context of the Book of Mormon, the Nephites were a group of people descended from or associated with Nephi, the son of the prophet Lehi who left Jerusalem at the urging of God c. 600 BC^[3] and traveled with his family to the Western Hemisphere, arriving in the present-day Americas c. 589 BC.^[4] The Book of Mormon describes the Nephites as an initially righteous people, who eventually "had fallen into a state of unbelief and awful wickedness"^[5] and were destroyed by their brothers the Lamanites c. AD 385.^[6]

Context in the Book of Mormon[link]

The Book of Mormon uses the term Nephite in many different ways, usually contrasted with the term Lamanite. These ways are familial (or clan-based), religious, political, and cultural. Although the Nephites and Lamanite groups are said to have merged for a while in 4 Nephi 1:17, the Nephites were never considered a majority in the Book of Mormon. This is because the term Lamanite after its earliest usage became a word meaning "non-Nephite", much in the way that a Gentile in modern usage means "non-Jew".^{[citation needed]} This may have been to assure Alma of his understanding of the gospel and therefore his preaching abilities, encouraging Alma to accept him as a missionary partner.

Religious[link]

The ancient Nephites practiced Judaism before the coming of Christ on the American continent, and Christianity after his resurrection until the early 4th century. Throughout the Book of Mormon the term "Nephite" in the religious sense refers to a believer in Jesus Christ, either before his coming, or after. Such usage is found in Alma 3:11, which states, "Whosoever would not believe in the tradition of the Lamanites, but believed those records which were brought out of the land of Jerusalem, and also in the traditions of their fathers, which were correct, who believed in the commandments of God and kept them, were called the Nephites."

Political[link]

Although the Book of Mormon states explicitly that Nephi was the first king of the Nephites (Jacob 1:11), the word "Nephite" does not seem to be used in a clearly political sense until later. In the first and 2nd centuries BC the Lamanite and Nephite societies created sophisticated kingdoms and the Nephites later created a sort of republic. The political Nephite state existed with clear borders (Alma 22:27) and within it lived people who were religious Nephites and also those who did not practice the Nephite religion (Alma 31:8), due to freedom of religion which was upheld by their laws (Alma 1:17; 30:7).

Cultural[link]

Cultural usages of the word Nephite are harder to discern in the record, because they usually overlap with religious or political usages. However, the word Lamanite is used in a much more cultural context, and since it is usually an antonym of Nephite, we can usually deduce from its usage characteristics of the Nephites. According to the Book of Mormon, Lamanites are "a lazy and idolatrous people" (Mosiah 9:12), and "wild, and ferocious, and a blood-thirsty people . . . dwelling in tents, and wandering about the wilderness" (Enos 1:20). The Nephites are, in turn, industrious (2 Nephi 5:17), civilized (Moroni 9:12), and God-fearing. Also, many Nephites were outside of the political influence of the Nephite state, yet still presumably carried with them Nephite culture (Alma 63:10)

History[link]

It is accepted as true by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that the Nephites existed, although secular archeologists and historians claim there is no external evidence to corroborate the account given of Nephite history in the Book of Mormon.^{[citation needed]}

Book of Mormon Tradition[link]

Many details about Nephite society, government, laws, and culture can be inferred from the Book of Mormon. Three main epochs in the Nephite history as described in the Book of Mormon, separated by two periods where Nephite society experienced particularly significant changes. The first major change occurred c. 150–91 BC, during the reigns of Mosiah I, Benjamin, and Mosiah II. The entire populace moved northward, the Nephite and Mulekite societies merged, the government form changed, and traditional laws were codified. The second major change was c. 200 AD, after the Zion society began to crumble. The Nephite and Lamanite societies had integrated for two centuries, only to separate again, probably along ideological lines more than ethnic lines. This blending and dividing likely resulted in additional social changes. The greatest amount of information about Nephite society comes from the middle epoch, from about 150 BC to 200 AD (recorded in the books of Mosiah, Alma, Helaman, 3 Nephi, and 4 Nephi).

One of the best examples of a characteristic that distinguishes these three epochs of Nephite history is the form of government.

Kings[link]

From the time the Nephites arrived in America to the reign of King Mosiah II (c. 592–91 BC), the Nephites were ruled by kings. Nephi's brother Jacob explains that subsequent kings bore the title "Nephi."

The people having loved Nephi exceedingly,… were desirous to retain in remembrance his name. And whoso should reign in his stead were called by the people, second Nephi, third Nephi, and so forth, according to the reigns of the kings; and thus they were called by the people, let them be of whatever name they would.

— Jacob 1:10–11

This is comparable to the Roman practice of giving each emperor the title "Caesar" in honor of the first emperor, Julius Caesar (e.g., Augustus Caesar, Claudius Caesar). Thus, just as the later history of the Romans is sometimes called "the reign of the Caesars," the early history of the Nephites could be called "the reign of the Nephis."

Judges[link]

The last Nephite king was Mosiah II. About 91 BC, he declared that, instead of naming a new king, he would finish out his reign as king, after which the Nephites would elect judges to govern them. There were at least three levels of judges: one chief judge, several higher judges, and several lower judges. (Some passages speak of multiple "chief judges," probably synonymous with "higher judges"; e.g., Alma 62:47; 3 Ne. 6:21)

Judges were paid according to the amount of time they spent officiating. Mosiah II set the rate at one senine of gold (or the equivalent senum of silver) for one day's work (Alma 11:1, 3). He also arranged for checks in this system to avert corruption as much as possible. He explained,

And now if ye have judges, and they do not judge you according to the law which has been given, ye can cause that they may be judged of a higher judge.

If your higher judges do not judge righteous judgments, ye shall cause that a small number of your lower judges should be gathered together, and they shall judge your higher judges, according to the voice of the people.

— Mosiah 29:28–29

After announcing the governmental shift from kings to judges, Mosiah explained the principle behind this change by saying,

The sins of many people have been caused by the iniquities of their kings;…

Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people.

— Mosiah 29:31, 26

The system of judges lasted for 120 years, when it was briefly overthrown for about three years (c. 30–33 AD) by an aristocratic cadre led by a man named Jacob. It was replaced by a loose system of tribes and kinships, which lasted until the Savior appeared in America and established a society that approached the ideals of Zion. This society last for about two centuries before the people fell into wickedness again.

After 4 Nephi, no mention is made of whether the Nephites used judges or kings. Mormon mentions that "the Lamanites had a king" (Morm. 2:9). His inclusion of this detail, phrased as it is, could be seen as a contrast to the Nephites having a chief judge. Coupled with the fact that no change in government form is specifically mentioned after 4 Nephi, most assume that the Nephites continued to use judges until their destruction in c. 385 AD.

Archaeological evidence and disputes[link]

Main Article: Archaeology and the Book of Mormon

The Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), part of Brigham Young University, has performed extensive archaeological research in this area, and publications on this subject and other historical topics are issued regularly by the FARMS organization.^[7] This research is disputed by many researchers, including, Michael Coe, a scholar in pre-Columbian Mesoamerican history, as well as the Smithsonian Institute and others.

In 1973, Michael Coe addressed the issue in an article for Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought stating:

"Mormon archaeologists over the years have almost unanimously accepted the Book of Mormon as an accurate, historical account of the New World peoples.... Let me now state uncategorically that as far as I know there is not one professionally trained archaeologist, who is not a Mormon, who sees any scientific justification for believing the foregoing to be true, and I would like to state that there are quite a few Mormon archaeologists who join this group....

"The bare facts of the matter are that nothing, absolutely nothing, has even shown up in any New World excavation which would suggest to a dispassionate observer that the Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith, is a historical document relating to the history of early migrants to our hemisphere." ^[8]

— Michael Coe, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought

In 1996, the Smithsonian Institute issued a statement addressing claims made in the Book of Mormon, stating that the text is primarily a religious text and that archeologists affiliated with the institute found "no direct connection between the archeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book". The statement further describes that there is genetic evidence that the Native American Indians are closely related to peoples of Asia, and that archeological evidence indicates that the Native Americans migrated from Asia over a land bridge over the Bering Strait in prehistoric times. The statement said that there was no credible evidence of contact between Ancient Egyptian or Hebrew peoples and the New World, as indicated by the text of the Book of Mormon. The statement was issued in response to reports that the name of the Smithsonian Institute was being improperly used to lend credibility to the claims of those looking to support the events of the Book of Mormon. ^[9]

Society and Culture[link]

Civil laws[link]

The record, according to the Book of Mormon, is scanty, but it appears that for the first couple centuries, little distinction was made between religious laws and civil laws. The law of Moses covered all aspects of life, both temporal and spiritual. There was no need to distinguish between religious and civil law since everyone practiced the same religion. Mosiah II seems to be referring to the civil aspect of this legal system when he refers to "the law which has been given to us by our fathers" (Mosiah 29:15, 25).

This changed when the Nephites migrated north from the land of Nephi into the land of Zarahemla. They assimilated the Mulekite society, and this appears to have raised several new issues that had never been encountered before, one of which was the question of what to do when someone commits an act considered a violation by the majority but considered permissible by the individual. The answer was not to leave judgment in each individual's hands, for that would lead to anarchy ("I think stealing is fine, so you can't punish me."). But neither could the law of Moses be applied across the board when many members of the new Nephite-Mulekite nation were not adherents of the Nephite religion ("The police are punishing me for praying to my statue?").

Mosiah II resolved the problem by apparently establishing a distinction between civil crimes and religious crimes when Alma brought several church members to him to be judged.

And he [Alma] said unto the king: Behold, here are many whom we have brought before thee, who are accused of their brethren; yea, and they have been taken in divers iniquities. And they do not repent of their iniquities; therefore we have brought them before thee, that thou mayest judge them according to their crimes.

But king Mosiah said unto Alma: Behold, I judge them not; therefore I deliver them into thy hands to be judged. (Mosiah 26:11–12)

Mosiah left it in Alma's hands to decide the consequences of religious infractions. Alma received a revelation that "whosoever will not repent of his sins the same shall not be numbered among my people" (Mosiah 26:32). Under the law of the land, as high priest of the Church of Christ, Alma could exercise this power to excommunicate unpenitent members of the Church.

On the other hand, only judges could apply consequences for civil infractions. Defining exactly what constituted a civil crime (versus a religious crime) was apparently decided by Mosiah and submitted for acceptance by the vote of the people. This process is alluded to at the beginning of the book of Alma.

Mosiah … had established laws, and they were acknowledged by the people; therefore they were obliged to abide by the laws which he had made. (Alma 1:1; see also 1:14)

This distinction between civil law and religious law may seem mundane and obvious today, but for an ancient society, such a distinction was relatively uncommon. The laws that Mosiah established were so significant in their impact that sixty years later, instead of referring to "the laws which have been given you by our fathers" (Mosiah 29:25), people referred to "the laws of Mosiah, or that which the Lord commanded him to give unto the people" (Hel. 4:22).

When delineating the division between civil and religious laws, most would agree that laws against murdering and stealing are obvious. Further distinctions are heavily dependent on cultural norms and values. It is interesting to note which actions the Nephites considered to be civil crimes, regardless of religion.

Robbing may be distinguished from stealing in that robbing is a violent crime, stealing from a person under threat of harm, rather than stealing unattended property. The nature of the prohibition against lying is difficult to nail down, but it may be akin to perjury. It is interesting that adultery was not just a religious crime, but a punishable civil offense. The Nephites clearly saw a relationship between unchastity and temporal social breakdown. It is also interesting to note that the prohibition against priestcraft apparently applied not just to Christians but to society at large, for this was one of the crimes Nehor was punished for (Alma 1:12), and Mosiah's proclamation against paid priests was given in the context of "unbelievers," "all the churches," and "every man" (Mosiah 27:1–3).

Actions that were contrary to the laws of the Church of Christ but apparently not illegal are also mentioned.

The exact nature of some crimes is unknown, such as "babbling." The legal toleration of idolatry may indicate how thoroughly ingrained the practice was in local cultures, including the Mulekites. It also implies that this New World idolatry was not identical to the Old World idolatry mentioned in the books of Moses. In Canaan, idolatry was virtually inseparable from fornication and thus merited the Lord's command to His people to purge the region. In America, idolatry was apparently separate enough from adultery that the former was considered legal and tolerable, while the latter was not.

In Alma 1:32, Alma lists the vices of unbelievers. He does not distinguish between civil crimes and religious crimes, since to him they are all sins. However, it is notable that his list begins with religious crimes and ends with civil crimes. He explains that, although as chief judge he could not punish unbelievers for religious crimes, "the law was put in force upon all those who did transgress it, inasmuch as it was possible."

For those who did not belong to their church did indulge themselves in sorceries, and in idolatry or idleness, and in babblings, and in envyings and strife; wearing costly apparel; being lifted up in the pride of their own eyes [religious crimes]; persecuting, lying, thieving, robbing, committing whoredoms, and murdering, and all manner of wickedness [civil crimes]. . . . (Alma 1:32)

An illustration of the distinction made between civil and religious crimes occurs in Alma 30. As long as Korihor preached against beliefs like the coming of Christ, "the law could have no hold upon him" (Alma 30:12). But he was apparently arrested once his actions crossed the line into instigating others to commit civil crimes (Alma 1:18) —in this case, adultery.

Measuring system[link]

In Alma 11, Mormon lists "the names of the different pieces of their gold, and of their silver" and their relative value (Alma 11:4). It is unclear what kind of system "reckoning" and "measure" refer to, although most Book of Mormon scholars^[who?] now believe they were weights, not coins. Mormon explains that

the names are given by the Nephites, for they did not reckon after the manner of the Jews who were at Jerusalem; neither did they measure after the manner of the Jews; but they altered their reckoning and their measure, according to the minds and the circumstances of the people, in every generation. (Alma 11:4)

Mormon then explains that this fluctuating system was replaced with a standard system established by Mosiah². Such a uniformity of measuring systems would have done much to unify the newly formed society, streamline the calculation of exchange rates in long-distance trade, and increase trade revenue.

One of the apparent purposes of this system was economy of use. A set of weights that contained one of each unit could be used to measure out increments of up to 14 units without needing two of the same weight. Thus, a Nephite merchant could use his small personal set of weights for a range of products being sold instead of relying on a large quantity of weights.^[10]

Calendar base year[link]

Like many ancient societies, the Nephites counted their years from a significant founding event. During their thousand-year history, the Nephites changed their base year according to three significant events:

1. The year Lehi and his family left Jerusalem (c. 600 BC)
2. The year the judges replaced the king (c. 91 BC)
3. The year the sign of the Savior's birth was given (c. AD 1)

This calendric progression is exemplified in a passage in the book of 3 Nephi.

And also an hundred years had passed away since the days of Mosiah, who was king over the people of the Nephites.

And six hundred and nine years had passed away since Lehi left Jerusalem.

And nine years had passed away from the time when the sign was given, which was spoken of by the prophets, that Christ should come into the world. (3 Nephi 2:5–7)

See also[link]

	Book of Mormon portal
	Latter-day Saints portal

• Angola (Book of Mormon)
• Archaeology and the Book of Mormon
• Book of Mormon
• Jaredite
• Lamanite
• Linguistics and the Book of Mormon
• Three Nephites

References[link]

External links[link]

• How Many Nephites?: The Book of Mormon at the Bar of Demography by James E. Smith

Alan Wright

Personal information
Full name	Alan Geoffrey Wright
Date of birth	(1971-09-28) 28 September 1971 (age 40)
Place of birth	Ashton-under-Lyne, England
Height	5 ft 4 in (1.63 m)
Playing position	Defender
Club information
Current club	Northwich Victoria
Youth career
	Blackpool
Senior career*
Years	Team	Apps†	(Gls)†
1989–1991	Blackpool	98	(0)
1991–1995	Blackburn Rovers	74	(1)
1995–2003	Aston Villa	260	(5)
2003–2004	Middlesbrough	2	(0)
2003–2004	→ Sheffield United (loan)	9	(0)
2004–2007	Sheffield United	33	(1)
2006	→ Derby County (loan)	7	(0)
2006	→ Leeds United (loan)	1	(0)
2006–2007	→ Cardiff City (loan)	7	(0)
2007	→ Doncaster Rovers (loan)	3	(0)
2007	→ Nottingham Forest (loan)	9	(0)
2007–2009	Cheltenham Town	56	(1)
2009–2011	Fleetwood Town	55	(2)
2012-	Northwich Victoria	0	(0)
Total		614	(10)
National team
1992	England U21	2	(0)
Teams managed
2012-	Northwich Victoria
* Senior club appearances and goals counted for the domestic league only and correct as of 12:00, 24 May 2011 (UTC). † Appearances (Goals).

Alan Geoffrey Wright (born 28 September 1971 in Ashton-under-Lyne) is an English professional footballer. He was a coach in the Centre of Excellence at his first club, Blackpool, a role he assumed in June 2011, until he became player/manager at Northwich Victoria in February 2012.

He has played over 750 league and cup games for eight clubs, including an eight year spell for Aston Villa. He has also played for Blackburn Rovers, Blackpool, Middlesbrough and Sheffield United plus he has had loan spells at Derby County, Leeds United, Cardiff City, Doncaster Rovers and Nottingham Forest

His position is left back, and he is famous for being the shortest player in Premier League history standing at only 5 feet 4 inches tall - once straining his knee trying to reach the accelerator of his new Ferrari.^[1]

Playing career[link]

Blackpool and Blackburn Rovers[link]

Wright began his career as a trainee at Blackpool, for whom he made 98 league appearances between April 1989 and October 1991. The new Blackburn Rovers manager Kenny Dalglish noticed Wright, and brought him to Ewood Park as his first signing for £500,000, making him Blackpool's most expensive sale as well as the most expensive sale by any Fourth Division club.

He spent four years at Ewood Park, but, after the arrival of England left back Graeme Le Saux, made only 67 appearances, seven as a substitute. He left Blackburn just before they won the Premier League title in the 1994-95.^[2]

Aston Villa[link]

Wright was signed from Blackburn Rovers for a fee of £1,000,000 in February 1995, brought to the club by then Villa manager Brian Little. Wright made an immediate impact,.

His first goal for Aston Villa came later nearly a year after his arrival when he found the net against Middlesbrough, opening the scoring in a two goal victory on New Years Day 1996, in which Wright was also in a defence that kept a clean sheet. Wright scored one other goal that season, rounding off the scoring in a 3-0 home defeat of Leeds United. Wright was also part of the Aston Villa 1996 League Cup winning side, beating Leeds once again, this time at Wembley.

In the 1996–97 season, Wright scored only once, this time against Wimbledon, scoring the second in a 2-0 win. Despite playing in the majority of the fixtures in the 1997–98 season, Wright failed to find the net. He appeared in the Aston Villa side that lost the 2000 FA Cup Final to Chelsea.

With the emergence of the younger J Lloyd Samuel from the Villa academy, he transferred to Middlesbrough for free in August 2003.

To date, Wright is currently in third place in Aston Villa's European appearances list, having made 26 appearances between September 1996 (a draw with Helsingborgs IF) and July 2002 (a 2-0 loss to FC Zürich), behind Gordon Cowans and Dennis Mortimer on 29.

Sheffield United[link]

Wright appeared only twice for Middlesbrough, one a 4-0 reverse at home to Arsenal, before being loaned out to Championship side Sheffield United on 31 October 2003, signing for them permanently on 12 January 2004. He scored his first goal for United in a 2-1 loss against Nottingham Forest on 3 April 2004.^[3]

Playing in the Championship, Wright continued his impressive disciplinary record (never sent off to date) and was also part of the Sheffield United side that upset Aston Villa 3-1 in the 3rd round of the FA Cup in the 2004–05 season.

Wright made a couple of appearances for United at the start of the 2006–07 season, the last against Arsenal on 23 September 2006. Since then he was sent out on loan playing 1 game with Leeds United and seven games for Cardiff City. On 16 February 2007 he joined Doncaster Rovers on a month's loan.

Wright joined Nottingham Forest on loan until the end of the 2006–07 season in March 2007,^[4] where he linked up with former Aston Villa team mate Colin Calderwood, ostensibly as cover for the suspended Julian Bennett. Wright extended his loan with Nottingham Forest in May 2007 and played in the League One play-off semi-final against Yeovil Town, in which he scored an own goal.^[5] He was released by Sheffield United in May 2007.

Cheltenham Town[link]

In July 2007, Wright was offered a trial by Oldham Athletic but eventually joined Cheltenham Town on non-contract basis on 8 October 2007. He subsequently signed a contract until the end of the 2007–08 season. He scored his first goal for Cheltenham in a 2-2 draw with Crewe Alexandra on 27 October 2007.^[6]

On his return to the City Ground on 5 April 2008, playing for Cheltenham, Wright was given a standing ovation by all four stands when substituted, where the fans commonly knew him as the Big Man.^{[citation needed]}

Fleetwood Town[link]

In July 2009, Wright signed for Conference North outfit Fleetwood Town,^[7] a move which brought him back to the Fylde coast where he began his career with Blackpool. During his first season for Fleetwood he played over 30 matches for the club including all 3 play-off matches to help the club win promotion to Conference National for the first time in their history. The club finished 2nd, 1 point behind winners Southport.

He was not offered a new contract at the end of the 2010-11 season and was released, along with a number of other players.^[8]

Coaching career[link]

In June 2011, Wright was named as a coach at Blackpool's Centre of Excellence.

Wright was appointed Assistant Manager at Northwich Victoria in February 2012.^[9] He oversaw his first match as manager during Paul Simpson's absence on 21 February 2012 against Rushall Olympic. Following Simpson's departure for a career in Portugal, Wright remained in his role as assistant manager to Martin Foyle. At the end of the 2011-12 season Wright was promoted to the manager's job after Martin Foyle departure and Andy Mutch was appointed as Wright's assistant manager for the 2012-13 Season.

Blackpool F.C. Hall of Fame[link]

Wright was inducted into the Hall of Fame at Bloomfield Road, when it was officially opened by former Blackpool player Jimmy Armfield in April 2006.^[10] Organised by the Blackpool Supporters Association, Blackpool fans around the world voted on their all-time heroes. Five players from each decade are inducted; Wright is in the 1980s.^[11]

Honours[link]

Blackpool

• Division Four play-off winner: 1990-91

Blackburn Rovers

• FA Premier League championship: 1994-95

Aston Villa

• League Cup winner: 1995-96

References[link]

Further reading[link]

• Calley, Roy (20 October 1992). Blackpool: A Complete Record 1887–1992. Breedon Books Publishing Co Ltd. ISBN 1-873626-07-X. 
• Singleton, Steve, ed. (2007). Legends: The great players of Blackpool FC (1 ed.). Blackpool: Blackpool Gazette. ISBN 978-1-84547-182-8. 

External links[link]

• Alan Wright player profile at ctfc.com
• Alan Wright player profile at mfc.co.uk
• Alan Wright player profile at avfc.co.uk
• Wright in the Blackpool Supporters Association Hall of Fame
• Alan Wright career stats at Soccerbase