|
MDC Contents
|
|
|
 Alma
2:1
1 And it came to pass in the commencement of the fifth year of their reign there began to be a contention among
the people; for a certain man, being called Amlici, he being a very cunning man, yea, a wise man as to the wisdom
of the world, he being after the order of the man that slew Gideon by the sword, who was executed according to
the law-
The story of Nehor
that was just concluded is a necessary prelude to the story of Amlici. Amlici is "after the order of the man
that slew Gideon by the sword, who was executed according to the law." This circumlocutious reference to Nehor
tells us much about Amlici before we understand any more about him. We know what his political/economic ideas are,
and we know that they are considered subversive in Nephite culture. Mormon's rather unsubtle reference to Nehor's
execution sets up Amlici as undesirable even before we truly meet him.
What we will find in the story of Amlici is that he is of far greater importance to Nephite history than Nehor
was. While Nehor would appear to get top billing, Amlici has a much greater negative impact on Zarahemla. In addition
to learning that Amlici is after the order of Nehor (without mentioning that name) we learn also that Amlici is
a "wise man as to the wisdom of the world," a condition that appears directly related to being after
the order of Nehor. It would appear that there is a tight correlation between the ideals of the "Nehors"
and the learning of the world.
To what world does Mormon refer? If we read this in a modern sense we read it as a church/secular division. It
is clearly a reference to a competing idea, but in Mormon's world, that division was not between church and secular
but between completely different competing political/religious systems. As we have seen, the Nehors fit into a
complex of ideas that fit well with the general nature of Mesoamerican culture that is known from archaeology.
These are the kingmen, who espouse not only kings, but the social stratification that attends kingdoms. These are
also those who are accused of wearing "fine clothing," which we have also seen as a key element of social
stratification which was antithetical to Nephite ideals. To what world does Mormon refer? He refers to the competing
religions and social systems of the various cultures that surround the Nephite society in Zarahemla.
Alma
2:2
2 Now this Amlici had, by his cunning, drawn away much people after him; even so much that they began to be very
powerful; and they began to endeavor to establish Amlici to be a king over the people.
That the followers
of Amlici should desire him to be a king should be no surprise at all, as Amlici has been identified as being of
the order of Nehor, and that complex includes pressure to kingship along with the concomitant pressures to social
stratification through vertical economic distribution and the wearing of costly apparel. What is also significant
is the ease with which Amlici appears to develop a following. Even more than the following is that these people
are described as "powerful." How does this happen in the reign of judges?
There is no way to be sure, but it is quite likely that the people who supported Amlici were also followers of
the order of Nehor, and as adherents to the competing politico-religious ideals, were likely those in a position
to become more wealthy. With their wealth, and presumably their connections to outside communities, they might
easily be seen as more "powerful" than the more egalitarian societies of the faithful Nephites. Sorenson
suggests that Amlici might have been a lineal descendant of Zarahemla (king of the city when Mosiah I arrived)
and thus would have had a strong political base of those who were also more directly descended from Zarahemla.
(Sorenson, John L. An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon. FARMS 1985, p. 196). While this is certainly
a good explanation for why he was considered kingly material, the power base is much more likely derived from the
later division between Nephites and Nehors.
The kinship affiliations had been part of Zarahemla history since the arrival of the Nephites, but Benjamin brought
a new basis for integration. The Book of Mormon history best indicates that Benjamin fought against the "Lamanite"
ideals of social stratification, which erupted significantly in the order of the Nehors. The internal information
clearly points to these as the most important factors. It would not be surprising, however, to find that the Nephite/Nehor
split might have followed the kinship lines Sorenson suggests.
Alma 2:3
3 Now this was alarming to the people of the church, and also to all those who had not been drawn away after the
persuasions of Amlici; for they knew that according to their law that such things must be established by the voice
of the people.
Alma 2:4
4 Therefore, if it were possible that Amlici should gain the voice of the people, he, being a wicked man, would
deprive them of their rights and privileges of the church; for it was his intent to destroy the church of God.
The faithful Nephites
are afraid of Amlici because the law of the land allows for the voice of the people to make changes, and the followers
of Amlici were growing more numerous. They fear that these followers of Amlici might be sufficiently numerous to
carry the day in a "voice of the people" vote, and that the ruling order might be changed.
This is a simple declaration of what might happen, and modern readers understand this fear all to well. In a democratic
society, we may be worried when a faction with which we disagree gains enough support to enforce their ideas upon
us. However, to see this verse in such a light diminishes the nature of the threat to the Nephites. This was not
a simple political choice. It was not a shift between Democrats or Republicans in the majority. What the Nephites
fear is that Amlici "would deprive them of their rights and privileges of the church."
Why would Amlici as a king be so thoroughly destructive to the church? Why would a return to the a previous political
system (kingship) that the Nephites had abandoned only five years earlier be such a complete threat to their religion?
Once again there is a simple answer, and that is that Amlici is an evil man. This answer is too simplistic, as
it presupposes that either Amlici dupes all of his followers with his evil intent, or that all of his followers
are equally evil.
The most reasonable answer lies not in the individual morality of the people who will be called Amlicites, but
in their espousal of the order of the Nehors. These are people who not only espouse a change in politics, but a
change in religion. Their basic tenets of their belief system are antithetical to Nephite religion. As a single
example of how the implementation of a Nehor-style rule could destroy the church, we need look only to the vertical
versus horizontal assumptions of the distribution of economic goods. Nephite society is adamantly horizontal and
egalitarian. The order of the Nehors is just as adamantly vertical and stratified. Domination by the Amlicites
would forcibly implement the vertical distribution of wealth, and that would forcibly stratify the Nephites. This
would place them in a situation where they were unable to live their social ideal, and the social aspect of their
religious world view would be completely destroyed.
When we remember that there have already been contentions between the Nephite faithful and the "other"
religion, it is also easy to see that these tensions would erupt into persecutions. The order of the Nehors denied
the atoning Messiah, an essential tenet of Nephite religion. As the dominant religion, and one believing in social
stratification, it is not a far stretch to see Nephite religion as persecuted, and relegated to the lowest and
least empowered levels of society, if it were allowed to continue at all.
The Nephites feared this movement because they rightly feared that its success would destroy their culture and
religion, as they knew it.
Alma 2:5
5 And it came to pass that the people assembled themselves together throughout all the land, every man according
to his mind, whether it were for or against Amlici, in separate bodies, having much dispute and wonderful contentions
one with another.
Social: The
Operation of the Voice of the People
When Mosiah makes the momentous change from a kingship to the rule of the judges, he introduces this new political
organization with the following:
25 Therefore, choose you by the voice of this people, judges, that ye may be judged according to the laws which
have been given you by our fathers, which are correct, and which were given them by the hand of the Lord.
26 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.
27 And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments
of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto
visited this land. (Mosiah 29:25-27)
Read in our modern context, it is very easy to see this as the introduction of a democratic system of voting
for elected leaders among the Nephites. It would be a mistake, however, to impute too much of the modern US democratic
system backwards into the Nephite political world. In Sorenson's discussion of Nephite politics, he notes:
"The discourse on the subject of kingship delivered by King Mosiah II further points
up features of the conventional system of kingly rule, with which he saw many problems (see Mosiah 29:5-7, 13-19,
21-24, 33-35). He mandated a change in the Nephite system of rule, providing for a chief judge whose powers were
more limited than those of a king. However, in many ways the old customs and notions surrounding the king as head
of government continued under the "new" system. For instance, judges too were considered "rulers,"
who not only "reigned" and sat on "thrones" but controlled the distribution of the government's
resources obtained by tribute or taxation. The chief judge also led Nephite armies in battle. (See Alma 12:20 on
a judge as "a chief ruler" in the city of Ammonihah; Alma 35:5, 8, on "rulers" among the Zoramites;
Helaman 7:4-5, judges "do according to their wills" and enrich themselves; Alma 60:1, 7, 11, 21, rulers
"sit upon your thrones"; Alma 1:2, judges "reign," the same term used regarding kings; Alma
2:16, and compare Words of Mormon 1:14, the chief judge leads his forces into battle as had the king; Alma 60:19,
34-35, control of tax resources.)
Moreover, while the modified system of rule under the judges the people are said to have "cast
in their voices" (Alma 2:6) to choose the judges who would "rule" them, this would not have been
anything like a "one-man, one-vote" election but probably was an expression of preference by the senior
males who led the various kin groups (lineages) who would have arrived at their decision by consultation within
their groups and spoke for their unit." (Sorenson, John L. "The Political Economy of the Nephites."
In: Nephite Culture and Society. New Sage Books, 1997, pp. 202-3).
The Nephite mechanism that was employed to create this modified system of rule was the "voice of the people."
To understand how Nephite political though differs from our own, we need to understand what we can of this process
that was called the "voice of the people."
Sorenson noted that some of the features or trappings of the kingship carried over to the reign of the judges,
particularly in such terms as "reigning" and sitting on "thrones." One of the holdovers from
the kingship was the very function that has been claimed as a democratic vote, the "voice of the people."
This was a process that functioned prior to the reign of the judges.
The earliest point in time where the "voice of the people" is used in conjunction with a king comes from
the story of Zeniff, who left Zarahemla to return to the land of Nephi. Zeniff was the leader of the people who
eventually colonized the city of Lehi-Nephi. We have from his own record:
"Mosiah 7:9 And he said unto them: Behold, I am Limhi, the son of Noah, who was the son of Zeniff, who came
up out of the land of Zarahemla to inherit this land, which was the land of their fathers, who was made a king
by the voice of the people."
It might be possible to read this statement as Zeniffs "election" to kingship, since he apparently
did not rule by lineal right (though his son, Limhi, would). However, we find probable confirmation that this function,
called the voice of the people, operated prior to the reign of the judges in events from both Benjamin and his
son Mosiah, both of whom did rule by lineal right. In the case of Benjamin, he notes in his great discourse:
"Mosiah 2:11 But I am like as yourselves, subject to all manner of infirmities in body and mind; yet I
have been chosen by this people, and consecrated by my father, and was suffered by the hand of the Lord that I
should be a ruler and a king over this people; and have been kept and preserved by his matchless power, to serve
you with all the might, mind and strength which the Lord hath granted unto me."
King Benjamin duly credits the Lord as the ultimate grantor of his position as king, but he begins by noting
that he was chosen by the people. This participation of the people in the transference of the kinship comes again
very vividly in the description of Mosiah's attempt to find a successor:
"Mosiah 29:1 Now when Mosiah had done this he sent out throughout all the land, among all the people, desiring
to know their will concerning who should be their king.
2 And it came to pass that the voice of the people came, saying: We are desirous that Aaron thy son should be
our king and our ruler."
Just as Benjamin was "chosen" by the people, Mosiah sent word throughout the land to find the will
of the people, the voice of the people concerning which of his sons should be the king, and position to which they
should have been rightful heirs in most monarchies. While these examples show that the voice of the people functioned
in the most important of political decisions, that of the change of king, it was not confined to the transference
of power. When Ammon is with King Limhi in the land of Lehi-Nephi, they make plans to free themselves from bondages,
and significantly consult the "voice of the people:"
"Mosiah 22:1 And now it came to pass that Ammon and king Limhi began to consult with the people how they
should deliver themselves out of bondage; and even they did cause that all the people should gather themselves
together; and this they did that they might have the voice of the people concerning the matter."
We do not know of all of the occasions when the voice of the people could be used, but we may surmise that prior
to the reign of the judges the voice of the people became involved in decisions which would effect the entire community,
and to which they would have to submit, such as to the reign of a king or the plan of escape that would require
all to work together, accepting the same risks.
Even after the reign of the judges, the voice of the people continued to function in the election of officials
in a parallel manner to its function under the reign of the kings. That is, an official may have been appointed,
or assumed his position by lineal right, but was subject to the voice of the people as confirmation. For instance,
we have Helaman filling the judgment-seat of his father:
"Hel. 2:2 And it came to pass that Helaman, who was the son of Helaman, was appointed to fill the judgment-seat,
by the voice of the people."
Note that Helaman is appointed to fill the judgment-seat of his father. The lineal connection appears to provide
a presumption of appointment to Helaman the son. This is not an elected position, but one that was decided by other
means. Nevertheless, it could be said that the appointment comes, "by the voice of the people." Lest
we misread the mechanism that was doing the appointing, let us turn to the case of Pacumeni:
"Hel. 1:13 And now behold, Pacumeni was appointed, according to the voice of the people, to be a chief
judge and a governor over the people, to reign in the stead of his brother Pahoran; and it was according to his
right. And all this was done in the fortieth year of the reign of the judges; and it had an end."
Pacumeni reigns as chief judge both by right and by the voice of the people. This same conjunction of the voice
of the people and an appointment in which they did no direct selection occurs when Alma transfers the position
of chief judge to Nephihah:
"Alma 4:16 And he selected a wise man who was among the elders of the church, and gave him power according
to the voice of the people, that he might have power to enact laws according to the laws which had been given,
and to put them in force according to the wickedness and the crimes of the people. 17 Now this man's name was Nephihah,
and he was appointed chief judge; and he sat in the judgment-seat to judge and to govern the people."
In this case, there is a tenuous relationship to the voice of the people. Alma appears to have the prerogative
of appointing his successor. This man is clearly not elected, but directly appointed due to Alma's selection. He
is given authority, and that authority comes through the voice of the people. We are not given the specific details
of how this was obtained, but based on the evidence examined to this point, it would appear that in the case of
transference of power, the voice of the people frequently functioned as confirmation rather than election.
The process of confirmation was not at all like the LDS confirmation of appointments in a sacrament meeting.
Where there is a presumption of unity in sustainings, the voice of the people was active even when there were disputes.
Indeed, it is in the occasions of those disputes in which we get an idea of how the voice of the people functioned.
One such dispute concerned the seating of Pahoran as chief judge:
"Alma 51:6 And those who were desirous that Pahoran should remain chief judge over the land took upon them
the name of freemen; and thus was the division among them, for the freemen had sworn or covenanted to maintain
their rights and the privileges of their religion by a free government. 7 And it came to pass that this matter
of their contention was settled by the voice of the people. And it came to pass that the voice of the people came
in favor of the freemen, and Pahoran retained the judgment-seat, which caused much rejoicing among the brethren
of Pahoran and also many of the people of liberty, who also put the king-men to silence, that they durst not oppose
but were obliged to maintain the cause of freedom."
The first important fact is that Pahoran was already sitting as the chief judge. The division arose as to whether
or not Pahoran should remain as the chief judge. The dispute is settled by the voice of the people. In this case,
the voice of the people appears to function politically as a "vote of confidence" might in some modern
governments. If Pahoran had lost his majority confirmation, he would have been required to step down. What is also
important in this case is that the ruling of the voice of the people had the power to quell (at least in this case)
the opposing voice of the kingmen.
What can we learn of how the voice of the people operated? Of course we are not told nearly as much as we would
like, but there are some observations that can be made from the information that is present. The first point is
that the voice of the people was not only a representation of a statistical community voice, it required the assemblage
of the people to invoke the voice of the people. When Ammon and king Limhi discuss the plans for escape, they specifically
"did cause that all the people should gather themselves together; and this that they might have the voice
of the people concerning the matter" (Mosiah 22:1). When it was impractical to physically gather the people
together, it was apparently important to take the question to the people. This approach reaffirms the communal
nature of the voice of the people. When possible, they would gather to take the community "voice," and
when that was not possible, the "voice" of the entire community was still sought, presumably through
representatives of the kin groups, as Sorenson has suggested (see Mosiah 29:1 where Mosiah sends "throughout
all the land" to get the voice of the people concerning the next king, and Alma 27:21 where the chief judge
sends a proclamation "throughout all the land" to obtain the voice of the people on the fate of the people
of Anti-Nephi-Lehi).
In one case, we have a little more information as to how the "voice of the people" might actually function
to create a decision:
3 Now this was alarming to the people of the church, and also to all those who had not been drawn away after
the persuasions of Amlici; for they knew that according to their law that such things must be established by the
voice of the people.
4 Therefore, if it were possible that Amlici should gain the voice of the people, he, being a wicked man, would
deprive them of their rights and privileges of the church; for it was his intent to destroy the church of God.
5 And it came to pass that the people assembled themselves together throughout all the land, every man according
to his mind, whether it were for or against Amlici, in separate bodies, having much dispute and wonderful contentions
one with another.
6 And thus they did assemble themselves together to cast in their voices concerning the matter; and they were laid
before the judges.
7 And it came to pass that the voice of the people came against Amlici, that he was not made king over the people.
(Alma 2:3-7).
These verses are the best example we have of how the process might have worked. The first important facet of
the "voice of the people" was the assembling into bodies, as has already been noted. We may suppose that
this occurs severally across the land, and that there were multiple bodies in multiple locations. The population
of the land was too large to allow for a single assembly split into two. Based on the principles we have previously
discussed, these separate divisions would occur at the village/town/hamlet level, and perhaps even along kin-compound
lines. These are the main independent bodies that reappear throughout the Book of Mormon.
Once gathered together into a body, the two opposing bodies had "much dispute and wonderful contentions on
with another." While it is possible that this division into bodies is figurative, and that the debates were
individual rather than communal, it is more likely that we should take this verse literally, and presume the debates
to be collective. The "voice of the people" appears to be quite literally tied to the people in a group
rather than a euphemism for ballot-casting. This grouping into bodies would create a situation where there were
rather vocal and "wonderful" shouting matches between the two groups, with perhaps a physical movement
of people from one group to another as they might be persuaded by the arguments. As one group attained the majority,
the collective "voice" would be manifest in their increasing numbers as opposed to the decreasing numbers
of the opponents, and therefore the "vote" was determined for that village/town/hamlet.
Of course this is speculative based upon the evidence, but the details fit the descriptions given. It is also
quite probable that in some cases, the contentious nature of assembling the voice of the people could have been
absent. When a king was seated who already had the weight of lineage upon his selection, it is most probable that
the voice of the people was a fairly quick and uneventful process. We see the process best, however, in cases where
it was tested. In all cases, however, the process that is called "the voice of the people" appears very
different from modern voting.
Alma
2:6
6 And thus they did assemble themselves together to cast in their voices concerning the matter; and they were laid
before the judges.
Political:
The voice of the people was not normative in and of itself. If the Nephite "voice of the people" were
a democratic vote, then the majority would carry the day, and there would be no need to bring the "voice of
the people" before the judges. Thus the voice of the people functions as an indicator of the public opinion
which the judges might perhaps ignore, but would do so knowing that they were contrary to the statistical will
of the people. It is also probable that some part of their continued reign as a judge was related to the support
of the people, if we remember that kings such as Benjamin declared that he ruled at the sufferance of the people.
Thus while the voice of the people was not normative, it would be influential.
Alma 2:7
7 And it came to pass that the voice of the people came against Amlici, that he was not made king over the people.
Here we have the
reverse of the sustainings of Zeniff, Benjamin, etc. Amlici could not achieve the voice of the people, therefore
he could not be king - even had he been appointed one. This still appears to argue against the democratic notion,
as kings do not rule by election of people, but selection of the gods. It does fit, however, with the notion of
Benjamin ruling at the sufferance of the people, and the polling of the voice of the people for the choice of the
son to be successor to Mosiah.
Alma
2:8
8 Now this did cause much joy in the hearts of those who were against him; but Amlici did stir up those who were
in his favor to anger against those who were not in his favor.
Alma 2:9
9 And it came to pass that they gathered themselves together, and did consecrate Amlici to be their king.
In the greater land
of Zarahemla there was no support for Amlici's kingship. Nevertheless, there continued to be support for him, in
some locations. The solution was succession. Amlici's people "gathered themselves together." This would
require a removal from other locations and a relocation to a new community. Within that community Amilci would
both have the "voice of the people" necessary to rule, but he would have a location where he could rule
and be obeyed. The Amlicite scenario doesn't work unless they become a separate community. This separation from
the people of Zarahemla both indicates the reason that Amlici could function as a king over a people as well as
the reason why they initiated military action against the Zarahemlaites. As a people removed from the land of Zarahemla,
they were also removed from the economic power base of Zarahemla. As a people with fewer resources due to the lesser
population (the majority having rejected Amlici's kinship) they would be envious of the greater material wealth
of the more established community. Since the amassing of the trappings of wealth was one of the concomitant aspects
of Mesoamerican kingship, it is virtually certain that the was a desire for this economic prosperity in addition
to the fact of the king himself. In the Mesoamerican tradition, the increase in wealth came through trade or conquest.
Clearly, the Amlicites chose conquest.
Geography: When the Amlicites removed themselves from the land of Zarahemla, where did they go? Sorenson
suggests:
"But where was home to the rebels, where they "gathered" and whence they "came"?
While we are not told, we can infer the location. They would not have come from upriver, of course. Had that been
their location, they would simply have joined with the Lamanite force as it came through their territory. Nothing
said at any point in the Nephite record suggests sizable populations away from the river zone on either its eastward
or westward sides. But there was room downstream. The downriver stretch is rarely mentioned in the Book of Mormon.
It was once, during the later attack led by one Coriantumr. Then the Lamanites seized Zarahemla without warning
and pushed on downriver through "the most capital parts of the land" (Helaman 1:27).
The geography we are following makes that area coincide with the lower central depression of Chiapas, where the
speakers of the Zoquean language had long lived. They had been in the land long before the Nephites arrived. Their
ancestors had been bearers of the Olmec culture in the time of the Jaredites. There is little reason to question
that they were of basically the same stock as the folk followers of chief Zarahemla. Their leaders would have lost
a great deal of power and privilege when the Nephite intruders took over rulership in Mosiah I's day. At the time
we are now considering, the expansion of the Nephite elite's power throughout the entire valley could well have
spurred this "nobility" to wish to regain rulership for one of their own lineages. This is the logical
base from which an Amlici probably proceeded. The variety of peoples under Nephite domination was so geographically
divided by river and "wilderness" areas and so linguistically and culturally varied that "dissension"
and power struggles among the localized groups, like the one started by Amlici, long continued to challenge the
"Nephis," the ruling line descended from the original king, Nephi. Evidence from Chiapas suggests that
the Santa Rosa/Zarahemla area might be at loggerheads with the area downstream. The Chiapa de Corzo site, the largest
city within the entire central depression at this time and the heart of that downstream sector, was larger and
more prosperous than Santa Rosa. No wonder it might rebel against overlordship located upstream. Furthermore, at
this period of time (the second century B.C.) Chiapa de Corzo maintained clear-cut cultural ties to the Mayan speakers
to the south, that is, to Lamanite country in our Book of Mormon terms. An alliance between Amlicites based in
the Chiapa de Corzo area and the Lamanites in Nephi (highland Guatemala) would have formed a vise, putting pressure
on the Nephite center. Of course, we cannot say for sure that this geographical arrangement is how things really
were. No one knows enough facts yet to be sure, but it very reasonably could have been so." (Sorenson, John
L. An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon. FARMS 1985, p. 196-7).
Alma
2:10
10 Now when Amlici was made king over them he commanded them that they should take up arms against their brethren;
and this he did that he might subject them to him.
The very fact that
Amlici is willing to consider military action suggests that there were a significant number of people in his community.
This also reinforces the need to remove themselves from within Nephite society, as a military action requires a
support base. Following Sorenson's suggestion, this separate community would have existed prior to this time, and
the removal noted in the text would have been of those supporters who did not already live in the separate city.
In the proposed setting, both the physical separation and the connections to the Maya lands ("Lamanite"
at this point in Book of Mormon history) would have supported the adoption of Mesoamerican culture, including kingship
and its Mesoamerican trappings. At this time in the history of Mesoamerica, wars were increasing. Some of the fighting
was territorial, and some was religious. In all of these facets, the Amlicites are fitting well into the known
Mesoamerican patterns of the time.
Alma
2:11
11 Now the people of Amlici were distinguished by the name of Amlici, being called Amlicites; and the remainder
were called Nephites, or the people of God.
Alma 2:12
12 Therefore the people of the Nephites were aware of the intent of the Amlicites, and therefore they did prepare
to meet them; yea, they did arm themselves with swords, and with cimeters, and with bows, and with arrows, and
with stones, and with slings, and with all manner of weapons of war, of every kind.
Most curious in
verse 12 is the "therefore." The word "therefore" appears to be the logical conclusion of the
information in verse 11. In verse 11 the people of Amlici call themselves Amlicites, and therefore the Nephites
understood the military intent of the Amlicites and armed themselves for defense. It is somewhat unusual that the
naming of the people would trigger this reaction when the separation of the people to a new community and the naming
of a king contrary to the voice of the Nephite people did not. It is possible that this simply emphasizes the power
of a name among ancient peoples. Just as Benjamin wanted a new people by giving them a new name, so do the Amlicites
declare themselves to be something different by proclaiming a new name. The separation to a new community was likely
the way any of the new communities dependent upon Zarahemla had been created. Unlike those other new communities
(presumably) the Amlicites broke not only physically, but conceptually from the Nephites. That more complete change
was heralded by a change in name.
It is very possible that there were among these Amlicites kin of the Nephites of the land of Zarahemla. As kin,
they would be expected to behave in certain ways, and internal military action would clearly have been prohibited
to kin. The naming of the new community might effectively break kin ties. This declaration of a new people might
establish the new alliances, and thus military action would be conceivable when the formal kin relations had been
declared to be severed.
The new people are also named for their king. As has been continually noted, the nature of Mesoamerican kingship
brought with it a correlated set of concepts that the Amlicites would have accepted as well. The naming of the
people for a king would perhaps be seen as strengthening the conceptual division between Amlicites and Nephites.
The Nephites would have been quite aware of the economic trappings associated with the Mesoamerican kings, having
fought internal contentions over those same tendencies in their society for many years. The acceptance of a king
and the king's name may have signaled the full acceptance of Mesoamerican actions, including the wars for tributaries.
For more information on the Nephite weaponry, see the discussion following Enos 1:20.
Alma
2:13
13 And thus they were prepared to meet the Amlicites at the time of their coming. And there were appointed captains,
and higher captains, and chief captains, according to their numbers.
Social: We
have the beginnings of information on the organization of the Nephite military.
"The Book of Mormon suggests that the Nephite military structure was based on the decimal
system, similar to that in use in the vicinity of ancient Palestine and in many other regions. There are references
to units of fifty (see Mosiah 11:19), thousands (see Alma 43:5; 60:22; 3 Nephi 3:22), and ten thousand (see Mormon
6:10-15). The only Israelite-sized units not specifically mentioned in Nephite-Lamanite organizations are formations
of tens and hundreds. Possibly these too existed among Book of Mormon people but were not mentioned because of
their relative unimportance and because they comprised part of other units, like fifties and thousands." (Merrill,
A. Brent. "Nephite Captains and Armies." In: Warfare in the Book of Mormon. FARMS 1990, pp. 268-269).
It should be noted that the numbers used in the Book of Mormon may or may not represent actual counts. This
will be discussed following Alma 2:19 below.
Merrill further notes:
"Perhaps the best single description of Nephite military organization during the reign
of the judges is found in Alma 2:13. This verse states that the Nephites "appointed captains, and higher captains,
and chief captains, according to their numbers" - meaning according ot the number of men each type of captain
commanded. This all sounds very similar to the statements reported earlier by Ixtlilxochitl and other sixteenth-century
writers about Mesoamerican captains. These accounts speak of "captains," "five minor leaders or
captains," and "great" captains or "chiefs."
Confirming how many men each captain, higher captain , or chief captain supervised is impossible with the data
currently available. It is tempting to say each chief captain commanded unit of ten thousand, but he Book of Mormon
text does not always support this assertion. Some chief captains commanded all the armies of the Nephites while
others almost certainly commanded units smaller than ten thousand (see Alma 52;19, 27-28; 55:23; 56:12;57:29).
It seems impossible that every chief captain mentioned in these verses had ten thousand troops under his command.
Battle conditions and casualty reports do not support such a conclusion.
Most likely the term "chief captain" was part of a title for commanders with units of one thousand or
more: "chief captain of a thousand," "chief captain of ten thousand, or "chief captain of the
armies of the Nephites." If these assumptions are correct, the "higher captains" possible commanded
formations of one hundred or more men, and "captains" as used in Alma 2:13) might have commanded units
of fifty or fewer." (Merrill, A. Brent. "Nephite Captains and Armies." In: Warfare in the Book
of Mormon. FARMS 1990, pp. 278-279).
Alma
2:14
14 And it came to pass that Amlici did arm his men with all manner of weapons of war of every kind; and he also
appointed rulers and leaders over his people, to lead them to war against their brethren.
Similar to the Nephite
preparations, Amlici also prepares his army. This includes arming them and appointing leaders. While we do not
know that the military positions mirror precisely those of the Nephites, there is still a hierarchical organization
in the Amlicite military.
Alma
2:15
15 And it came to pass that the Amlicites came upon the hill Amnihu, which was east of the river Sidon, which ran
by the land of Zarahemla, and there they began to make war with the Nephites.
Geographic:
Zarahemla lies on the West bank of the Sidon. Since the hill Amnihu is east of the Sidon, it is a hill guarding
the approach to Zarahemla from the East. Using Sorenson's geographic correlation, the Sidon flows down a valley
bounded by a mountain range on the east. Thus the guarded approach is not from the East directly, but rather from
the North on the East side of the Sidon. As a raised hill in the valley floor, the hill Amnihu would provide elevation
for vision of approaching troops, as well as the higher ground guarding that approach to Zarahemla. (see Sorenson,
John L. An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon. 1985, p. 154 map 7).
Military: While it is not stated, we may presume that the Nephites would have used fairly standard military
practice and have occupied the hill Amnihu. The Amlicites were the aggressors, and this means that they would have
traveled to Zarahemla to engage the Nephites. The Nephites would be defending territory, and this close to Zarahemla
should have created a defensive position on the hill. It is quite probable that this hill was near the main way
into Zarahemla from the East.
Alma
2:16
16 Now Alma, being the chief judge and the governor of the people of Nephi, therefore he went up with his people,
yea, with his captains, and chief captains, yea, at the head of his armies, against the Amlicites to battle.
Nephi defended his
people with his own arm (Jacob 1:10), as did Zeniff (Mosiah 9:16) and Benjamin (Words of Mormon 1:13). It is very
probable that Limhi also fought alongside his people (Mosiah 20:8 implies that Limhi was among those fighting,
even though it is not clearly stated). Alma now also goes up to battle. The wording makes it appear that he does
so primarily as the chief judge - or the political leader of the people of Zarahemla. It would appear that there
is a long Nephite tradition of the armies being led by their leader, even though that leader might be aged, as
Benjamin surely was at the time he wielded the sword of Laban in defense of his people. It would not be unwarranted
to assume that many of these leaders did actually participate in armed combat, as well as to assume that some were
symbolic leaders in deference to age and position.
In any case, Alma is head of the army due to his position as chief judge. This leadership does not preclude the
other officers of the army, and we may suppose that the majority of the military actions were carried out by these
other captains and chief captains. This combat by chief leader will become an important facet of the main battle
that will be the final focus of this chapter.
Alma
2:17
17 And they began to slay the Amlicites upon the hill east of Sidon. And the Amlicites did contend with the Nephites
with great strength, insomuch that many of the Nephites did fall before the Amlicites.
Alma 2:18
18 Nevertheless the Lord did strengthen the hand of the Nephites, that they slew the Amlicites with great slaughter,
that they began to flee before them.
Redaction:
The term "uphill battle" has become a description of any difficult task, and we should not miss the reality
of the difficulties in waging such a fight. The common term follows from the accuracy of the military problem.
The Amlicites not only fought an uphill battle, but they were fairly successful. Mormon gives them their credit
where the credit was due. However, it is also important to note how Mormon juxtaposes the success of the Amlicites
against the eventual victory of the Nephites.
Mormon's account of this battle is crafted so as to highlight the ultimate battle, which is between God and those
who oppose them. As those who seek to destroy the way of the Nephites the Amlicites are godless (to Mormon). They
are battling the Nephites (with God on their side). The Amlicites are fearful and worthy opponents, who are so
effective in what they do that they are able to successfully wage war uphill. They are in a disadvantaged position,
yet they are prevailing. In so describing the Amlicites, Mormon portrays them as militarily mighty - and perhaps
mightier than the Nephites, who appear to be on the verge of losing the battle in spite of their superior tactical
position.
What Mormon does with this is turn the tide of the battle not on the strategic position of the Nephites, but upon
the strength of the Lord. In his words; "nevertheless the Lord did strengthen the hand of the Nephites."
The tide of the battle and turned, and the Nephites are eventually victorious. Whereas the Amlicites were mighty
in and of themselves, the Nephites were mighty only after the strengthening by the Lord.
Alma
2:19
19 And it came to pass that the Nephites did pursue the Amlicites all that day, and did slay them with much slaughter,
insomuch that there were slain of the Amlicites twelve thousand five hundred thirty and two souls; and there were
slain of the Nephites six thousand five hundred sixty and two souls.
Geography:
The Amlicites have approached from the North on the East side of the Sidon. Their retreat was on a more Southerly
route, as they eventually meet with the Lamanites who are coming up from the South through the valley containing
the upper Sidon.
Social: Counts and Estimates in the Book of Mormon
The world of numbers constitutes an important mental category, and most societies have a fascination with numbers
that tends to exceed the utilitarian. In addition to counting specific numbers of things, we also use numbers to
mark important mental constructions as well as to estimate quantities. The Hebrews used numbers as markers of religiously
important mental constructions, with numbers from the Old Testament becoming symbolic of types of periods rather
than specific counts. For instance, the numbers 7 and 40 will appear multiple times in the Old Testament, based
upon the days of the week and the 40 days in the wilderness/40 days and nights of rain. With the New Testament's
emphasis on the godhead, we add 3 as an important recurring number.
Among many Mesoamerican cultures, the number 4 recurs frequently, as well as 20, or multiples of 20 (theirs
was a base 20 counting system, hence 20 would be as significant as 10 in a decimal-system society). These cultures
added other numbers that were significant to their particular calendar (such as 52 years in a "century.")
The way we humans use numbers can range far from a simple numbering of objects. We use numbers not only as estimates
of counts, but also for uncountable categories. It is not uncommon in English to say "I've done it a thousand
times," or "there were millions of ants at the picnic." When the Million Man March reached Washington,
D.C. there were estimates of ten to twenty thousand, but certainly not a million. Nevertheless, the name signified
the movement, not the number.
The Book of Mormon is a document written by humans, and it includes numbers. We should understand how the Book
of Mormon understands those numbers. Certainly the writers of the Book of Mormon knew how to count, and so discussing
proof of that notion is quite unnecessary. What is more interesting is how the Book of Mormon might use numbers
apart from counting.
The very first important point to be made about numbers in the Book of Mormon is that they both appear and behave
according to the decimal system. While this is the mathematical system with which the modern world is most familiar,
it is by no means the only option available to the ancients. The Babylonians used a base 60 system from which we
derive 60 minutes in an hour, and 360 degrees in a circle. The Mesoamericans typically used a base 20 system. Even
though the Mesoamerican cultural area is proposed for the Book of Mormon, the numbers as we have them reflect the
decimal system rather than base 20. For instance, the most common estimator numbers in the Book of Mormon are hundreds
and thousands. These are benchmark numbers in a decimal system, where the presence of the one followed by all zeroes
gives the number some conceptual value as a threshold. We need look only as far back as the turn of the millennium
(and previous to any century change) to note how humanity pays more attention to these numbers than to those that
do not end with zeros.
Numbers as estimates
Other than counting specific numbers of items, the simplest use of numbers is in estimating a count. The presumption
is that while smaller numbers may be counted, there are numbers large enough that counts are unlikely, and they
are estimated rather than counted. The Book of Mormon includes some clear examples of numbers that are being used
as estimates:
Alma 24:27 And there was not a wicked man slain among them; but there were more than a thousand brought to the
knowledge of the truth; thus we see that the Lord worketh in many ways to the salvation of his people.
Alma 28:10 And from the first year to the fifteenth has brought to pass the destruction of many thousand lives;
yea, it has brought to pass an awful scene of bloodshed.11 And the bodies of many thousands are laid low in the
earth, while the bodies of many thousands are moldering in heaps upon the face of the earth; yea, and many thousands
are mourning for the loss of their kindred, because they have reason to fear, according to the promises of the
Lord, that they are consigned to a state of endless wo. 12 While many thousands of others truly mourn for the loss
of their kindred, yet they rejoice and exult in the hope, and even know, according to the promises of the Lord,
that they are raised to dwell at the right hand of God, in a state of never-ending happiness. (See also Alma 49:23;
Alma 57:14; Alma 62:17; 3 Ne. 3:24; 3 Ne. 17:25; Morm. 1:11)
The most common obvious estimator number is 1,000 in the Book of Mormon, but hundreds are infrequently used
in a clear case of estimation:
Jacob 4:4 For, for this intent have we written these things, that they may know that we knew of Christ, and we
had a hope of his glory many hundred years before his coming; and not only we ourselves had a hope of his glory,
but also all the holy prophets which were before us.
What is more interesting that the clear cases of estimates is where there is a probable estimate that it treated
as a firm count. Note that in the following verses the clear lexical markers of the estimates ("many,"
"about," "more than") are absent:
Alma 51:19 And it came to pass that there were four thousand of those dissenters who were hewn down by the sword;
and those of their leaders who were not slain in battle were taken and cast into prison, for there was no time
for their trials at this period.
Alma 53:18 Now behold, there were two thousand of those young men, who entered into this covenant and took their
weapons of war to defend their country.
Alma 56:28 And also there were sent two thousand men unto us from the land of Zarahemla. And thus we were prepared
with ten thousand men, and provisions for them, and also for their wives and their children.
Hel. 5:19 Therefore they did speak unto the great astonishment of the Lamanites, to the convincing them, insomuch
that there were eight thousand of the Lamanites who were in the land of Zarahemla and round about baptized unto
repentance, and were convinced of the wickedness of the traditions of their fathers.
In each of these cases, we have a number ending in a thousand that is given with the assurance of a counted
number. However, it is quite probable that these are still estimates, and not counts. The very fact that the number
is precisely even in each of these cases, combined with the large number that would make a count difficult, suggests
that these numbers are still estimates. A. Brent Merrill makes a similar caution in regards to what appears to
be a standard military unit of ten thousand (see Alma 56:28 and Morm. 6:11-15):
"The foregoing discussion further suggests that one must be careful when interpreting references to Nephite
field armies normally composed of ten thousand men. To illustrate this point, the army of Antipus mentioned earlier
almost certainly numbered about ten thousand when originally deployed. Through casualties and capture, this number
was reduced to about six thousand. If, however, the Nephite reference to "ten thousand" was a form of
unit designation-an organizational title-then one might properly say that, although his forces were seriously depleted,
he still commanded an Army of Ten Thousand. An example of this can be seen in early Roman military organization.
A unit called a "century," meaning one hundred, originally consisted of one hundred soldiers commanded
by a "centurion." Later, because a unit of one hundred men was too large for a single officer to control
readily, the size varied from sixty to eighty men, but the designation "century" was retained. In other
words, it is not certain whether Nephite armies of "ten thousand" always maintained this number of troops.
There could have been more, or less, depending on battlefield attrition or evolving Nephite usage of this description
as an organizational title. The phrase "ten thousand" might not always be an accurate count of manpower."
(Merrill, A. Brent. "Nephite Captains and Armies." In: Warfare in the Book of Mormon. FARMS 1990,
p. 270-271).
Just as an army of ten thousand might not equal precisely ten thousand, some of the other numbers given make
most sense as estimates rather than specific counts. The very fact that the benchmark number is used suggests that
these numbers are estimates rather than counts. Particularly when they are counting casualties, it is extremely
unlikely that the dead always managed to occur in even thousands.
Combining counts and estimates
With this background on estimate numbers, there is a category of numbers that require more investigation. Numbers
in the thousands can be reasonably presumed to be estimates because of the difficulty of accurately counting that
many people, particularly when the counts always end up in even thousands. Counts in the hundreds, however, are
a little more difficult to deal with, because hundreds are amenable to a count, particularly in the lower hundreds.
Thus there are times in the Book of Mormon when it does appear that we do have relatively specific counts of populations:
Mosiah 9:19 And I, myself, with mine own hands, did help to bury their dead. And behold, to our great sorrow
and lamentation, two hundred and seventy-nine of our brethren were slain.
In this case, the low number of hundreds, and the very specific 279 makes this a number that appears most reasonable
as a count rather than an estimate. In spite of this, hundreds are also used as estimates:
Mosiah 18:34 And it came to pass that Alma and the people of the Lord were apprised of the coming of the king's
army; therefore they took their tents and their families and departed into the wilderness. 35 And they were in
number about four hundred and fifty souls.
Here the 450 number is potentially small enough to be a count, but it is specifically qualified as an estimate;
"about four hundred and fifty souls." The most fascinating of these "estimates" is in Mosiah
18:16:
Mosiah 18:15 And again, Alma took another, and went forth a second time into the water, and baptized him according
to the first, only he did not bury himself again in the water. 16 And after this manner he did baptize every one
that went forth to the place of Mormon; and they were in number about two hundred and four souls; yea, and they
were baptized in the waters of Mormon, and were filled with the grace of God.
In this case we have the curious example of a number that appears to be a count, 204, but which is expressly
qualified as an estimate. Estimates are typically marked by benchmark numbers (10's, 100's, or 1,000's). This number
ends in four, a very countable number. This case opens the possibility that there was a system for using a combination
of estimates and counts. This might be the explanation for the way in which Helaman discusses his band after the
addition of a small number:
Alma 57:19 But behold, my little band of two thousand and sixty fought most desperately; yea, they were firm
before the Lamanites, and did administer death unto all those who opposed them.
This number, like the two hundred and four, appears to be a specific count. Nevertheless, it may be a composite
number, just as the estimated two hundred and four could be an estimate. This number is composed of two parts that
correspond to two different types of members of Helaman's command:
Alma 57:6 And it came to pass that in the commencement of the twenty and ninth year, we received a supply of
provisions, and also an addition to our army, from the land of Zarahemla, and from the land round about, to the
number of six thousand men, besides sixty of the sons of the Ammonites who had come to join their brethren, my
little band of two thousand. And now behold, we were strong, yea, and we had also plenty of provisions brought
unto us.
Helaman appears to make a distinction between his original force which is always designated as an even two thousand,
and these additional sixty. He may refer to the two thousand, or to the two thousand and sixty. The two thousand
is most likely an estimate number. It is unlikely that there were precisely two thousand young men (and not one
more nor one less) who were willing to take up the burden of fighting to spare their parents from breaking the
oath. The sixty, on the other hand, could very easily have been a counted number. In Helaman's usage we have a
parallel to the interesting estimate of 204. The thousands units are counted, and then added to them are the more
specific counted numbers.
It is also possible that some of the mixed thousand/hundred type numbers are similar estimates, even though
they appear to have the flavor of counts when the appear in English, such as:
Alma 4:5 And it came to pass in the seventh year of the reign of the judges there were about three thousand
five hundred souls that united themselves to the church of God and were baptized. And thus ended the seventh year
of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi; and there was continual peace in all that time.
3 Ne. 17:25 And the multitude did see and hear and bear record; and they know that their record is true for
they all of them did see and hear, every man for himself; and they were in number about two thousand and five hundred
souls; and they did consist of men, women, and children.
In these cases, the numbers are clearly estimates, but combine thousands and hundreds. Interestingly, they combine
a thousand number with five hundred, which is half a thousand. There is one case, however, where the thousand is
combined with four hundred rather than five hundred (Alma 63:4).
Anomalous numbers
With all of this tedious background, we are ready to tackle the most specific numbers in the Book of Mormon.
These numbers come in descriptions of battle, both in the numbers of troops as well as the numbers of casualties.
The first set of anomalous numbers comes in describing troop strength:
Morm. 2:9 And now, the Lamanites had a king, and his name was Aaron; and he came against us with an army of
forty and four thousand. And behold, I withstood him with forty and two thousand. And it came to pass that I beat
him with my army that he fled before me. And behold, all this was done, and three hundred and thirty years had
passed away.
Morm. 2:25 And it came to pass that we did contend with an army of thirty thousand against an army of fifty
thousand. And it came to pass that we did stand before them with such firmness that they did flee from before us.
In both of these cases we are dealing with military units. If we assume that each unit is ten thousand, and
that the ten thousand is a standard designation rather than a count (as noted above) then these numbers could be
counts of divisions, rather than counts of personnel. If the unit of ten thousand can be distinguished, then the
various units could easily be counted.
The next set of anomalous numbers appears to follow the model of the estimate of two hundred and four:
Mosiah 9:18 And God did hear our cries and did answer our prayers; and we did go forth in his might; yea, we
did go forth against the Lamanites, and in one day and a night we did slay three thousand and forty-three; we did
slay them even until we had driven them out of our land.
Alma 24:22 And thus without meeting any resistance, they did slay a thousand and five of them; and we know that
they are blessed, for they have gone to dwell with their God.
Both of these numbers appear to be counts because of the very explicit 43 and 5. However, they fit the model
of the estimated 204, in that they are a number of thousands, plus the additional counted number. Counts in the
thousands would be difficult to obtain precisely, especially in the aftermath of battle. These numbers should be
estimates, even though they have the feel of a count. They are similar to other estimate numbers that are not declared
to be estimates, and analogous to the specific instance where two hundred and four is declared to be an estimate.
By far the most intriguing numbers in the Book of Mormon appear in Alma 2:19:
Alma 2:19And it came to pass that the Nephites did pursue the Amlicites all that day, and did slay them with
much slaughter, insomuch that there were slain of the Amlicites twelve thousand five hundred thirty and two souls;
and there were slain of the Nephites six thousand five hundred sixty and two souls.
These numbers have all of the earmarks of specific counts. They are not rounded, and they have very detailed
numbers in their digits. What makes these numbers most fascinating is that they appear to be interrelated. Using
numerals instead of words, we have 12,562 and 6,532. There are comparisons that are difficult to explain between
the two. First, there is 12,000 versus 6,000. Whatever we might think of the 12 and the 6, the very fact that one
is precisely twice the other is suspicious. On top of the precise doubling of the thousands, and have an absolute
match in the hundreds, with both having 500. In the final set of numbers, there is a difference, but a fascinating
one. In the tens column we again have a doubling, and then in the ones column an exact match. The gross match is
then described as doubled/exact/doubled/exact. The more exact pattern, from the larger to the smaller number, is:
halved/exact/doubled/exact. This most specific set of counts in the Book of Mormon is highly suspicious, and appears
to be a created number.
Speculating on the number system
It was noted at the beginning of this discussion that the number system is clearly decimal in the Book of Mormon.
That is correct, but there is an intriguing possibility behind the numbers in the Book of Mormon. The numbers in
the Book of Mormon appear to function as discrete units rather than the way we typically expect them to work. That
is, we have a thousand category that is matched with a hundreds category, and then a tens and ones. The nature
of the way the estimates work suggests that the original language was describing the language in these categories,
rather than as the numbers as we have them. Thus the original appears to be saying (in the case of the most complex
number) that there were 12 thousands, 5 hundreds, 6 tens, and 2 ones, rather than the more compact number that
we write.
This method of adding units together to reach the total has an interesting match in Mesoamerican number systems:
"Although the bar-and-dot numbers are most common, numerals sometimes had head variants
when carved in stone. For example, 4 could be represented by the head of the sun god with a very square eye, 6
by a head with a cross in the eye, and 8 by a representation of the young corn god. The number 10 was a death's
head, and the glyphs for larger numbers were composed of a death's head (10) plus the attributes of the lower number.
For example, 14 equals 10 plus 4, or a death's head (10) plus the attributes of the sun god (4)….
Among the Mexica, who also used a vigesimal system, numbers from 1 to 19 were made up of the
corresponding numbers of dots or circles. Symbols were arbitrarily selected to represent greater quantities. A
flag equaled 20, strands of hair or a feather 400, and a bag of copal incense 8000. (Weaver, Muriel. The Aztecs,
Maya, and Their Predecessors. Seminar Press 1972, p. 101-102).
The structure of the Mesoamerican system for naming larger numbers matches precisely with that described in
the Book of Mormon. What is clearly different is the base 20/base 10 difference.
The general evidence of numbers in the Book of Mormon suggests that they functioned on some system of estimates
that differs from the one with which we are familiar. That system appears to be best described as one that names
important categories of numbers (in our text, the tens, hundreds, and thousands). The last interesting question
is whether or not the numbers we have accurately represent the numbers of the original, or whether or not they
are in the decimal system because that is what Joseph understood.
Regardless of how the original system operated, he could easily translate the units into decimals, and the general
relationships between numbers would continue to work, although they would not describe precise numbers. There is
insufficient evidence to support this hypothesis, but it is a possibility that the decimal system was not the native
system of the plates. However, it may have been imported with the Nephites, and retained in their culture. In any
case, it would appear that the mode of estimates supports a language structure more similar to the Mesoamerican
system than the modern English system.
Alma
2:20
20 And it came to pass that when Alma could pursue the Amlicites no longer he caused that his people should pitch
their tents in the valley of Gideon, the valley being called after that Gideon who was slain by the hand of Nehor
with the sword; and in this valley the Nephites did pitch their tents for the night.
Geography:
For the city of Gideon to be in the valley of Gideon rather requires that the valley of Gideon be a different valley
from the greater valley in which we find the river Sidon. Sorenson suggests that this is a valley on the Eastern
side of the mountain ridge ringing the valley of Zarahemla (see Sorenson, 1985 p. 154, Map 7. See Sorenson, John
L. The Geography of Book of Mormon Events. FARMS1990, p. 246 for information on distances from the valley of Gideon
to Zarahemla).
It is perhaps tempting to think that the valley and city of Gideon were named for Gideon after his death at the
hand of Nehor, since we do not hear of these names until after Gideon's death. Since the names appear in the fifth
year of the reign of the judges, and Gideon is slain in the first year of the reign of the judges (Alma 1:1), it
is much more likely that the valley of Gideon was given to him and his lineage when they arrived from the land
of Lehi-Nephi. It is unlikely that the valley and city would have been begun and become well established in only
five years. Indeed, it is possible that Gideon was slain in the valley of Gideon. That valley would surely have
been his home, and Nehor may have been attempting to gain influence in the outlying areas before working his way
in to Zarahemla proper.
Alma
2:21
21 And Alma sent spies to follow the remnant of the Amlicites, that he might know of their plans and their plots,
whereby he might guard himself against them, that he might preserve his people from being destroyed.
Alma 2:22
22 Now those whom he had sent out to watch the camp of the Amlicites were called Zeram, and Amnor, and Manti, and
Limher; these were they who went out with their men to watch the camp of the Amlicites.
After the Nephites
had sufficiently prevailed in battle to force the Amlicites into flight. Alma has his army pursue them. This pursuit
was necessary to make sure that the Amlicites were sufficiently driven from Nephite lands that they did not quickly
regroup and attack again. In the valley of Gideon he calls off the pursuit, but he is not yet satisfied that they
are out of danger. There is still the possibility that the Amlicites might regroup. To obtain intelligence as to
the disposition of the remainder of the Amlicite army, Alma sends out spies to watch what becomes of the Amlicites.
Textual: Mormon gives us the names of the four men who are sent to be spies. This is the only time that
their names appear in the Book of Mormon (as personal names). These men have no other historical role that we have
recorded in our text. Why did Mormon choose to name them? Of course we cannot know. It is obvious that their names
were duly recorded in Mormon's source material. Perhaps Mormon's military sensibilities required him to make sure
that credit was given where credit was due.
Two of the names do appear again in the Book of Mormon, but not as personal names. Manti is a hill, and a land.
Amnor is apparently a measurement:
Alma 11:6 A senum of silver, an amnor of silver, an ezrom of silver, and an onti of silver.
7 A senum of silver was equal to a senine of gold, and either for a measure of barley, and also for a measure of
every kind of grain.
8 Now the amount of a seon of gold was twice the value of a senine.
9 And a shum of gold was twice the value of a seon.
10 And a limnah of gold was the value of them all.
11 And an amnor of silver was as great as two senums.
We can only speculate on the relationship between the personal name and the measurement. Since the measure appears
to be tied to the thing measured (an amnor of silver apparently corresponding to a seon of gold), it is possible
that the name was more than a measure, but a measure of something of value. This latter meaning might reasonably
be used as a personal name.
Alma
2:23
23 And it came to pass that on the morrow they returned into the camp of the Nephites in great haste, being greatly
astonished, and struck with much fear, saying:
Alma 2:24
24 Behold, we followed the camp of the Amlicites, and to our great astonishment, in the land of Minon, above the
land of Zarahemla, in the course of the land of Nephi, we saw a numerous host of the Lamanites; and behold, the
Amlicites have joined them;
Alma 2:25
25 And they are upon our brethren in that land; and they are fleeing before them with their flocks, and their wives,
and their children, towards our city; and except we make haste they obtain possession of our city, and our fathers,
and our wives, and our children be slain.
Geography:
The geography of the this event is critical because we have to explain how it is that the Amlicites could have
gone farther than the Nephites, and yet be in a position to return to Zarahemla as fast as, or potentially faster,
than the Nephites who had not traveled as far. Using Sorenson's map of the topography of the proposed area, the
Amlicites have a rough crossing over a mountainous region, and then a crossing of the Sidon. When the Nephites
gain word of the Lamanite army, they travel directly over the mountains to a ford in the river Sidon. Both the
Amlicites and the Nephites likely took advantage of breaks in the mountain range rather than climb to the tops
of the mountains. (See Sorenson 1985, p. 154 Map 7).
Social/Historical: The are several aspects of this particular event that are noteworthy. The first is that
the Amlicites joined with the Lamanites. This is given as a quick statement, and almost as though this would be
such a simple thing to do. We must remember that the Amlicites were fleeing from a battle. Thus they would be dressed
for battle, armed for battle, and rushing. While it is true that they were rushing in retreat, they were still
approaching the Lamanite position rapidly in full battle regalia and weaponry. That very fact would have necessarily
caused some immediate consternation and defensiveness on the part of the Lamanites.
The Nephite spies do not describe this initial meeting of the Amlicites and Lamanites, but it surely began with
some tense moments that required some rapid reconciliation. It is also obvious that there was some recognized mechanism
for joining with the Lamanites. The priests of Noah were able to do it quite easily, and the Amlicites appear to
have been able to do so with equal ease, despite being Nephites and dressed for war. The ethnic identity of the
Amlicites apparently held no inherent impediment for joining with the Nephites. We may freely surmise that there
was some type of lingua franca available to the two peoples. The circumstances of this particular meeting would
fairly necessitate full mutually intelligible communication to overcome the militaristic appearance of the Amlicites.
On the other hand, Sorenson suggests that this meeting was planned beforehand, and that the Amlicite attack on
the East side of the Sidon was calculated to draw the Nephite army off away from Zarahemla, and thus leave it more
vulnerable from the main Lamanite attack on the West side of the Sidon (Sorenson 1985, p. 196). While there is
no direct hint at collusion between the Amlicites and the Lamanites in the text itself, the particulars of the
Amlicite attack make this scenario quite plausible, and perhaps best explains how the Amlicites could come upon
the Lamanite army in full battle regalia and be accepted so quickly. If they were already allies and the retreat
to the Lamanite army were part of the plan, then the explanation is simple. This plan would have had two contingencies.
The first would be that the Nephites curtailed pursuit (which was what happened). The second contingency would
be if the Nephites continued their pursuit of the Amlicites. This would have changed the location of the battle,
but the Lamanites could still have engaged a Nephite army that was not necessarily prepared for a full battle formation
of the Lamanite army.
The next important aspect of this meeting was that the Lamanites were there at all. The meeting takes place in
the "course of the land of Nephi." This appears to indicate that they Lamanites have come up from the
Land of Nephi. This is first clear indication of Lamanites from the Southern lands coming to battle in the land
of Zarahemla. While there have been other skirmishes with Lamanites, none of those tell us where the Lamanites
came from. When we remember that the physical connection between the lands of Nephi and Zarahemla was difficult,
and the Book of Mormon records various groups getting lost moving through it (Limhi's expedition attempting to
find Zarahemla misses the land of Zarahemla entirely, and the Lamanite army following Limhi's people gets lost)
then we can appreciate the significance of this large Lamanite army appearing at this particular location.
This very difficulty of finding Zarahemla from the more Southerly Lamanite lands further strengthens the suggestion
that the Amlicites were in collusion with the Lamanites. As Sorenson noted above, Chiapa de Corzo had connections
to the area that the Book of Mormon would consider the Lamanite lands (Sorenson, 1985 p. 197). They could have
exploited those connections to create this plan for the conquest of Zarahemla.
Alma
2:26
26 And it came to pass that the people of Nephi took their tents, and departed out of the valley of Gideon towards
their city, which was the city of Zarahemla.
Alma 2:27
27 And behold, as they were crossing the river Sidon, the Lamanites and the Amlicites, being as numerous almost,
as it were, as the sands of the sea, came upon them to destroy them.
Geography:
"The Nephite army departs "out" of the valley headed full tilt downhill to
a precise point on the river upstream from the city, obviously a ford (probably the ford across that stretch, for
they knew just where to head.) If they left the valley in the morning (v. 23, "morrow"), headed on the
shortest route to the river, they had time to fight at the crossing and then pursue the enemy to the wilderness
of Hermounts all in the one day. So from the valley to the river would be a distance perhaps a bit less than ..
20 miles." (Sorenson, 1990, p. 246).
Military: The nature of the engagement at the river for would appear to be a rather limited one. The Nephite
army must necessarily be forced into a more narrow presentation rather than a wide one due to the nature of fords
(they had to pass where the river was passable, not at deeper locations). This creates a very concentrated military
front with the reinforcements coming up narrowly from the rear. Militarily, the Nephites were in a terrible position
to meet the full Lamanite army. Note that at the time of the engagement, the majority of the Nephites had not yet
emerged from the river (see verses 33 and 34).
Alma
2:28
28 Nevertheless, the Nephites being strengthened by the hand of the Lord, having prayed mightily to him that he
would deliver them out of the hands of their enemies, therefore the Lord did hear their cries, and did strengthen
them, and the Lamanites and the Amlicites did fall before them.
For Mormon, the
disadvantaged military position of the Nephites would have highlighted their reliance upon the Lord for their salvation.
Just as Mormon discounted the Nephites' advantaged position in the battle with the Amlicites, here is emphasizes
their disadvantaged position to highlight the necessity of their reliance upon the Lord as the true source of their
success.
Redaction: This verse is a summary of the day, and is interestingly placed prior to the description of the
events that lead to the defeat of the Lamanites. Mormon's point is that the Lord preserved the victory. Since that
is his most crucial point, he states it first, and then shows how it was true.
Alma
2:29
29 And it came to pass that Alma fought with Amlici with the sword, face to face; and they did contend mightily,
one with another.
Alma 2:30
30 And it came to pass that Alma, being a man of God, being exercised with much faith, cried, saying: O Lord, have
mercy and spare my life, that I may be an instrument in thy hands to save and preserve this people.
Alma 2:31
31 Now when Alma had said these words he contended again with Amlici; and he was strengthened, insomuch that he
slew Amlici with the sword.
Alma 2:32
32 And he also contended with the king of the Lamanites; but the king of the Lamanites fled back from before Alma
and sent his guards to contend with Alma.
Alma 2:33
33 But Alma, with his guards, contended with the guards of the king of the Lamanites until he slew and drove them
back.
Alma 2:34
34 And thus he cleared the ground, or rather the bank, which was on the west of the river Sidon, throwing the bodies
of the Lamanites who had been slain into the waters of Sidon, that thereby his people might have room to cross
and contend with the Lamanites and the Amlicites on the west side of the river Sidon.
Alma 2:35
35 And it came to pass that when they had all crossed the river Sidon that the Lamanites and the Amlicites began
to flee before them, notwithstanding they were so numerous that they could not be numbered.
Order of Battle:
When read carefully, this account has some interesting information about the nature of the battle between the Nephites
and the Lamanites. We are told in verse 27 that the Lamanites were "being as numerous almost, as it were,
as the sands of the sea." Additionally, the Nephites had pursued the Amlicites on the East side of the river,
but they had managed to meet with the Lamanites and march on Zarahemla such that they were now approaching Zarahemla
from the West side of the river. Alma and his troops are approaching from the East.
This difference in approach is significant, because it means that Alma has an entire army that must ford a river
to reach the battlefield, upon which a vastly larger army was waiting. In conditions such as these, one might suppose
a simple and overwhelming Lamanite victory. The Lamanites could occupy dry land, and simply wait for the Nephites
to emerge from the river. With the higher and drier ground, not to mention the great superiority of numbers, this
should have been an easy Lamanite victory. It was not.
Two facets of the Nephite attack are important. Undoubtedly the individual battles between Alma and Amlici and
the king of the Lamanites are most significant. Equally as significant, however, is the information in verses 34
and 35. In those verses we learn that Alma's actions clear the way for his army to cross. In other words, not only
is there a numerical superiority of the entire Lamanite force over the entire Nephite force, but that this numerical
superiority was not brought to bear! The entire Lamanite army does not clash with the entire Nephite army. Alma
fights with the leaders of the two factions of the Lamanite army, Amlici as leader of the Amlicites, and the king
of the Lamanites.
What we have in these verses is a description of individual battle of kings as representatives of their armies
rather than the battle between the armies themselves. If we accept the account before us, Alma crosses the river
with some smaller number of men under his immediate command, and begins combat with Amlici himself. Out of all
of the numbers of the Lamanites, so numerous as to be like grains of sand, Alma just happens to begin his battle
with an opponent of equal social position in the opposing army. This could not have happened by chance. The order
of this particular battle somehow called for combat by the king (or chief judge, in Alma's case).
Such a mode of battle is relatively rare, but certainly not without precedence. In the Old Testament we have the
story of David and Goliath, where the entire outcome of a battle rested upon a battle of champions. Thus Alma is
allowed to fight Amlici through to the conclusion of that skirmish without the rest of the Lamanite army being
brought to bear. With the defeat of Amlici, Alma then continues to direct combat with the king of the Lamanites.
Verse 32 indicates that the king of the Lamanites withdrew and sent his guards against Alma. This indicates that
he could have sent those guards prior to this point in time, and that the very presence of the king fighting with
Alma must have been an arranged combat. With the defeat of the two leaders of the Lamanite armies, Alma secured
sufficient victory to allow his army to cross the river.
Redaction: Once again Mormon's selection of the facts to present allows him to place Alma in a position
where only his reliance on the Lord will save the day. For Mormon, the point of the conflict is to demonstrate
the power of the Lord, which he does by emphasizing the relative size of the two armies. When he has Alma attacking
the opposing kings directly, once again Mormon paints Alma as an underdog, thus highlighting the miraculous salvation
by the Lord.
Alma
2:36
36 And they fled before the Nephites towards the wilderness which was west and north, away beyond the borders of
the land; and the Nephites did pursue them with their might, and did slay them.
Once Alma's army
is out of the water and on the West bank, we next see them in pursuit of the fleeing Lamanite army. There is no
description of any further battle on the West bank of the Sidon. Rather, we have an army that retreats after Alma's
defeat of the kings, and the whole of the Nephite army becomes a pursuing army, but not one that has fought for
the victory. That victory was won by Alma, and the Nephite army is now attempting to ensure that the Lamanite army
leaves the land of Zarahemla.
Alma
2:37
37 Yea, they were met on every hand, and slain and driven, until they were scattered on the west, and on the north,
until they had reached the wilderness, which was called Hermounts; and it was that part of the wilderness which
was infested by wild and ravenous beasts.
Alma 2:38
38 And it came to pass that many died in the wilderness of their wounds, and were devoured by those beasts and
also the vultures of the air; and their bones have been found, and have been heaped up on the earth.
The rout of the
Lamanite and Amlicite armies is complete. The battle continues in their retreat, and eventually many of them die
in the wilderness called Hermounts. To be devoured by the beasts suggests that those who so died would have been
injured and left behind. In this area of the world there are jaguars that would certainly prey upon men, but which
would certainly not take on an army.
Mormon's description of what happened to the army does not appear to be a first hand account, but rather one that
is made of conjecture. His evidence for those who died by being devoured is the bones which have been found. When
those bones were found is a question, but certainly it was not during the pursuit, but some time later.
What we have with Mormon's relation is second hand information and inference. The bones that are found are presumed
to relate to this incident, but there would be little clear evidence for that fact. This type of "historical"
recording is very typical of ancient writers. The supposition is easily taken as declaration of fact, a presumption
that would not pass modern historical practices.
Textual: The 1830 edition does not have a chapter break at this point. While this is the end of the Lamanite/Amlicite
army, it really is not the end of the story from Mormon's point of view. Textually, the next verses at the beginning
of chapter 3 belong to this narrative unit, as it discusses the aftermath of the war from the Nephite perspective.
Mormon's whole narrative unit shows the Nephites in peace, then a terrible war, and then the return to peace. The
break at this point misses his intended conclusion to this unit.
|
