Mormons who are desperate to offer some form of archaeological evidence of the Book of Mormon often turn to the mention of ‘Nahom’ in First Nephi. Not only is this incorrect, it is laughable. I used to blow it off by countering with the ‘River Laman’ argument (from the same book), and allow the two to cancel each other out. However, I was never really happy with that solution. The more I researched, the more I learned about the absurdity of the Nahom folly. Philip Jenkins has written a wonderful piece which sums everything up nicely (link below). Of particular note is: ‘The map evidence makes it virtually certain that Smith encountered and appropriated such a reference, and added the name as local color in the Book of Mormon.’

see patheos.com/blogs/anxiousbench/2015/06/the-nahom-follies/