Alma 44

Alma 44:1

1 And it came to pass that they did stop and withdrew a pace from them. And Moroni said unto Zerahemnah: Behold, Zerahemnah, that we do not desire to be men of blood. Ye know that ye are in our hands, yet we do not desire to slay you.

With a break in the fighting a distance is created between the two opposing forces. Note that we immediately have Moroni and Zerahemnah in a formal discourse. Neither Moroni nor Zerahemnah would likely have been on the very front line, but the formal discourse between armies is properly carried out between the leaders of each army.

Textual: We have an inserted declaration by Moroni. Mormon has been telling the story, but when it comes to the formal words of the occasion, he copies them in from his source. Moroni will give a fairly protracted request for surrender.

Alma 44:2

2 Behold, we have not come out to battle against you that we might shed your blood for power; neither do we desire to bring any one to the yoke of bondage. But this is the very cause for which ye have come against us; yea, and ye are angry with us because of our religion.

Moroni declares that the Nephites do not desire to shed the blood of Zerahemnah’s troops. This is the formal offer of surrender. In this part of the discourse Moroni verifies his understanding of the reason for the attack of the Lamanites. The first reason is economic. The Lamanites wanted to bring the Nephites “to the yoke of bondage.” As we have noted, this would have been an economic relationship with the city state represented by Zerahemnah. To this reason, Moroni adds that the Lamanites are angry “because of our religion.” Once again, we should understand that religion encompassed an entire way of life. Why were the armies of Zerahemnah angry because of the religion of the Nephites? There were many apostate Nephites in this army, and they had openly rejected both the religion and the lifeway of the Nephites. They would still have an attachment to their former life, but one that reflected the more recent separation from it.

In the Mesoamerican world, these were two completely different ways of seeing the world. This was not simple religion, but religion and science rolled up into one. There was a fundamental difference between the two religions that permeated all of society, particularly in the egalitarian ideal of the Nephite religion. If it nothing else, the hierarchical nature of the Lamanite society and the egalitarian nature of Nephite society were not only opposite ideas, each idea was inherently destructive to the other. Each would have seen influence from the other religion as dangerous to their way of life.

Alma 44:3

3 But now, ye behold that the Lord is with us; and ye behold that he has delivered you into our hands. And now I would that ye should understand that this is done unto us because of our religion and our faith in Christ. And now ye see that ye cannot destroy this our faith.

Alma 44:4

4 Now ye see that this is the true faith of God; yea, ye see that God will support, and keep, and preserve us, so long as we are faithful unto him, and unto our faith, and our religion; and never will the Lord suffer that we shall be destroyed except we should fall into transgression and deny our faith.

Even though the Lamanites might be angry with the Nephites on account of their religion, Moroni declares that it is precisely their religion that has allowed this victory. God has been with them, and Moroni declares that to Zerahemnah. Why does Moroni declare this to Zarahemnah? Moroni is attempting to have Zerahemnah declare a peace at to swear to leave the Nephites alone. If Nephi can convince the Lamanites that God has been behind their victory, then they might assume that any future attacks would have the same result.

Alma 44:5

5 And now, Zerahemnah, I command you, in the name of that all-powerful God, who has strengthened our arms that we have gained power over you, by our faith, by our religion, and by our rites of worship, and by our church, and by the sacred support which we owe to our wives and our children, by that liberty which binds us to our lands and our country; yea, and also by the maintenance of the sacred word of God, to which we owe all our happiness; and by all that is most dear unto us—

Alma 44:6

6 Yea, and this is not all; I command you by all the desires which ye have for life, that ye deliver up your weapons of war unto us, and we will seek not your blood, but we will spare your lives, if ye will go your way and come not again to war against us.

Alma 44:7

7 And now, if ye do not this, behold, ye are in our hands, and I will command my men that they shall fall upon you, and inflict the wounds of death in your bodies, that ye may become extinct; and then we will see who shall have power over this people; yea, we will see who shall be brought into bondage.

Literary: Of course we have a very simple dichotomy here. Zerahemnah surrenders or the fighting will continue. Past that general command we have the way in which Moroni phrases the command to surrender. Moroni is very formal in that declaration, and lists a number of things that become “witnesses” to his promise of safe conduct for Zerahemnah’s men should they surrender.

Moroni begins by commanding in the name of God. Of course this is the highest oath. This is an oath by the God who has won the battle. After that declaration we have “by our faith, by our religion, and by our rites of worship, and by our church….” While it would appear that Moroni is swearing by different things, these are all intended to be the same, with slight differences. This is a well known literary technique among Mesoamerican peoples, where the same thing would be repeated with slight alterations. We need not attempt to find a difference between their faith and religion, because Moroni intends these to be parallel equivalencies, but with slight differences for a cumulative effect.

Alma 44:8

8 And now it came to pass that when Zerahemnah had heard these sayings he came forth and delivered up his sword and his cimeter, and his bow into the hands of Moroni, and said unto him: Behold, here are our weapons of war; we will deliver them up unto you, but we will not suffer ourselves to take an oath unto you, which we know that we shall break, and also our children; but take our weapons of war, and suffer that we may depart into the wilderness; otherwise we will retain our swords, and we will perish or conquer.

Zerahemnah has picked up on the significance of the last phrase in verse 6, where Moroni says: “but we will spare your lives, if ye will go your way and come not again to war against us.” Zerahemnah is willing to surrender, but not to swear that they will no longer come against the Nephites in war. Note the importance of honor here. Moroni has set a condition for the Lamanites’ lives. They are willing to accept defeat, but they are not willing to sear an oath that they will no longer come against the Nephites. Zerahemnah attempts to separate the two promises. He wants to surrender, but not accept Moroni’s second condition.

Alma 44:9

9 Behold, we are not of your faith; we do not believe that it is God that has delivered us into your hands; but we believe that it is your cunning that has preserved you from our swords. Behold, it is your breastplates and your shields that have preserved you.

Moroni had invoked God as the author of their victory, but Zerahemnah does not see the hand of God in the battle. Of course he knows nothing of the intelligence about the attack on Manti that Alma received from the Lord. What Zerahemnah did understand was that Moroni had used unfamiliar tactics (“your cunning”) and had provided armor that had made a difference.

The reason Moroni had invoked God was to indicate that the outcome would be the same in any future engagement, so the Lamanites might as well swear not to fight. However, Zerahemnah does not recognize God in the process, so he does not accept the inevitability of future similar loses. Zerahemnah is willing to surrender the present, but not the future.

Alma 44:10

10 And now when Zerahemnah had made an end of speaking these words, Moroni returned the sword and the weapons of war, which he had received, unto Zerahemnah, saying: Behold, we will end the conflict.

The truce is not accepted, so Moroni returns Zerahemnah’s weapons. Once again we note the assumption of honor in this exchange. The giving of Zerahemnah’s weapons was a formal offer of treaty, and the return of those weapons signals Moroni’s rejection of Zerahemnah’s attempt to modify the conditions of surrender.

Alma 44:11

11 Now I cannot recall the words which I have spoken, therefore as the Lord liveth, ye shall not depart except ye depart with an oath that ye will not return again against us to war. Now as ye are in our hands we will spill your blood upon the ground, or ye shall submit to the conditions which I have proposed.

Vocabulary: When Moroni says he “cannot recall the words which I have spoken” he is not using recall as “remember” but rather as “bring back.”

Social: Why cannot Moroni accept Zerahemnah’s offer of surrender? Moroni had offered surrender with a condition, and Zerahemnah did not accept that condition. Why cannot Moroni change his mind? Certainly accepting the surrender will save lives, why not accept it? Moroni had sworn upon God. That was binding. Moroni could not change his mind because he had invoked God in the declaration of his offer.

Alma 44:12

12 And now when Moroni had said these words, Zerahemnah retained his sword, and he was angry with Moroni, and he rushed forward that he might slay Moroni; but as he raised his sword, behold, one of Moroni's soldiers smote it even to the earth, and it broke by the hilt; and he also smote Zerahemnah that he took off his scalp and it fell to the earth. And Zerahemnah withdrew from before them into the midst of his soldiers.

Since the conditions of the surrender have not been met, there was no surrender, and the battle is engaged again. Zerahemnah is less than honorable in pressing the attack immediately, but he was clearly in a disadvantageous position, as Moroni was well protected by his surrounding troops.

Cultural: While the idea of scalping typically invokes visions of the Indian wars of the American northeast, the idea of scalping was not foreign to the Mesoamerican scene. While there is not as much information available on the practice, there is nevertheless evidence that scalping was a part of Maya warfare (see Linda Schele and Mary Ellen Miller.The Blood of Kings. George Braziller, Inc., New York, 1986, pp. 218, 228).

Alma 44:13

13 And it came to pass that the soldier who stood by, who smote off the scalp of Zerahemnah, took up the scalp from off the ground by the hair, and laid it upon the point of his sword, and stretched it forth unto them, saying unto them with a loud voice:

Cultural: The nature of the “sword” in the Book of Mormon has been the subject of much heated debate. For those who suggest that the Book of Mormon is of modern origin, they point to the anachronism of the term sword in reference to any of the populations of the Western hemisphere prior to contact with European civilizations. On the other hand, others point to Mesoamerican weapons that have also been labeled as “swords” even though they have more technical names. This verse becomes one of the points in issue because it specifically speaks of a sword with a point. The argument for the anti-Book of Mormon camp would be that this indicates a sword with a point for thrusting, a comment to be followed by the assertion that there were no such weapons in Mesoamerica.

This verse does not completely clarify the issue, because it is unclear as to the functionality of the “point” of the sword:

“Only in one case is there description of a "sword" with any kind of point: a Nephite soldier "smote" a Lamanite leader, accidentally scalping him; then he carefully picked up the scalp, "laid it" on the "point" of his sword (rather than spearing it, as we might expect), and raised it aloft (Alma 44:12-13). This odd description fails to make clear exactly how the weapon looked.” (John L. Sorenson, An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon [Salt Lake City and Provo: Deseret Book Co., Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1985], 262.)

Regardless of the possible interpretations of having the scalp “laid” upon the point of the sword, there are pointed weapons known for Mesoamerica:

“Be that as it may, some pre-Columbian "swords" were clearly pointed, as several Mesoamerican codices clearly show. According to Hassig, "Drawings indicate rectangular, ovoid, and pointed designs.” The Mendoza Codex, for example, shows Aztec and Tlaxcalan warriors with pointed, wood-bladed swords. One of the most impressive battle scenes portrayed in Maya art can be found at the three-room palace of Bonampak in Chiapas, Mexico. On the west wall of room 2, "A large leaf-shaped blade with a short handle is brandished by a warrior at the top center left of the battle." This weapon is clearly pointed. Some Mesoamerican stone-bladed swords were definitely pointed as well. According to Solis, when marching to battle, the Tlaxcalans "carried their Macanas, or two-handed Swords, under the Left Arm, with their Points upward." White ignores evidence for this in Hamblin's original article, which shows an early representation of a pointed macuahuitl in the right hand of the warrior figure at the Loltun Cave. The structure of this weapon is very similar to the obsidian-pointed macuahuitl held in the hand of a Tlaxcalan noble during Aztec times. Examples of the curved Mesoamerican blade, which Hassig calls a "short sword," are also known to have had points of obsidian. (Matthew Roper. Review of: James White. "Of Cities and Swords: the Impossible Task of Mormon Apologetics." FARMS Review of Books, 9:1: 1997.)

Alma 44:14

14 Even as this scalp has fallen to the earth, which is the scalp of your chief, so shall ye fall to the earth except ye will deliver up your weapons of war and depart with a covenant of peace.

Textual: The soldier who has taken the scalp uses the scalp as a visual metaphor for the curse he pronounces upon the Lamanite army. This is known in the Old Testament as a simile curse:

“In sight of the exiles in Babylon, Ezekiel was commanded to pack up his knapsack by day and to depart by evening while they still watched. This pantomime was to symbolize the fate of those who were yet in Jerusalem and other parts of the land, who would be taken captive and forced to become vagabonds in order to sustain themselves (Ezek. 12:1-10). This pantomime reflects, in fact, what happened to some of those at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians. Even King Zedekiah attempted to escape from Jerusalem by night but was captured by the Babylonians and blinded (2 Kgs. 25:3-7; Jer. 39:4-7; 52:6-11).

Then the interpretation of the pantomime is given, and the entire act is interpreted as a type of what would happen to the people: "Like as I have done, so shall it be done unto them: they shall remove and go into captivity" (Ezek. 12:11). The symbolic acts of the prophets are similar to the simile curses found in the ancient Near East, in which a curse is dramatized by some kind of symbolic action. (Kent P. Jackson, ed., Studies in Scripture, Vol. 4: 1 Kings to Malachi [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1993], 277.)

Alma 44:15

15 Now there were many, when they heard these words and saw the scalp which was upon the sword, that were struck with fear; and many came forth and threw down their weapons of war at the feet of Moroni, and entered into a covenant of peace. And as many as entered into a covenant they suffered to depart into the wilderness.

The simile curse tells us that the scalp fell to the ground, but Mormon never provides that detail. He does tell us the effect of this curse, however, and that is to convince many of the Lamanites to surrender their weapons and enter into a “covenant of peace.” The reason for this change of heart is likely centered in the significance of the scalp. In Maya artistic representations of captivity the hair of the head is becomes symbolic of capture, with many of the captives being grabbed by the hair on the top of their heads. The scalping is also indicative of capture. Thus what the Lamanites may have been seeing was a symbol of the surrender of their captain, and therefore their army. They would have seen the lifting of the scalp as an indication that Zerahemnah was a captive. Once the leader was captive, the entire army could be considered captive as well.

Of course Zerahemnah had not surrendered, and his personal will to fight will continue this fight. The point is not what Zerahemnah intended, however, but the way in which his men would have seen the raising of his scalp.

Alma 44:16

16 Now it came to pass that Zerahemnah was exceedingly wroth, and he did stir up the remainder of his soldiers to anger, to contend more powerfully against the Nephites.

Alma 44:17

17 And now Moroni was angry, because of the stubbornness of the Lamanites; therefore he commanded his people that they should fall upon them and slay them. And it came to pass that they began to slay them; yea, and the Lamanites did contend with their swords and their might.

In spite of what might have been seen as Zerahemnah’s symbolic surrender, he did not actually surrender, and returned to his troops and stirred them to further combat. Moroni kept his promise to fall upon them. Since the Lamanites were already in an inferior position, the outcome was fairly well decided before this part of the battle began.

Alma 44:18

18 But behold, their naked skins and their bare heads were exposed to the sharp swords of the Nephites; yea, behold they were pierced and smitten, yea, and did fall exceedingly fast before the swords of the Nephites; and they began to be swept down, even as the soldier of Moroni had prophesied.

Once again Mormon notes the difference that was made by the defensive armor of the Nephites. In this case, he does not specifically mention it, but rather refers to it by its absence from the Lamanites. Again this does not mean that all Nephites had such armor, but certainly the troops of Moroni and Lehi did have such armor, even if the militia from the land of Manti did not. The end result is the greater slaughter of the Lamanites, no matter how fiercely they fought.

Note the contrast between this skirmish and the one closer to Manti where the courage and fighting will of the Lamanites almost carried the day. When the Lamanites turned and ran back to the ford, they encountered the more experienced troops of Moroni and Lehi who had been the ones to attack from the south. These were the ones where we know that they had the defensive armor, so it appears that Mormon would be correct in noting the difference between this fight and the one previous, even though the Lamanites might still have outnumbered the Nephites. Their tactically fragile location, their lack of defensive armor, the battle against more seasoned warriors with protection; all led to the great slaughter of the Lamanites.

Alma 44:19

19 Now Zerahemnah, when he saw that they were all about to be destroyed, cried mightily unto Moroni, promising that he would covenant and also his people with them, if they would spare the remainder of their lives, that they never would come to war again against them.

Zerahemnah is still in charge. He has been scalped, and no doubt lost blood because of that. Nevertheless, we may suppose that he retired to a more central point in his army, and was bandaged to slow the blood loss. At some point he notes that the situation is truly hopeless, and he signals that he will now accept the conditions of surrender that were first offered. Noticed that he expects that those conditions will still be offered, even though he had previously refused them.

Alma 44:20

20 And it came to pass that Moroni caused that the work of death should cease again among the people. And he took the weapons of war from the Lamanites; and after they had entered into a covenant with him of peace they were suffered to depart into the wilderness.

This story is as much a story of honor as it is a story of Nephite good guys and Lamanite bad guys. Both sides approach this battle with a sense of honor that is played out in this final battle. Moroni offers surrender under certain terms. Zerahemnah cannot accept the terms, and rather than lie about his intentions, he returns to fight. When the battle becomes hopeless, Zerahemnah now accepts the terms. He is willing to make a promise now that he was not willing to make earlier. In spite of the coerced nature of this final promise, Moroni nevertheless accepts the promise of Zerahemnah and allows the Lamanites to depart “into the wilderness.” There is no fight to destruction. There is nothing that will every allow Moroni to know whether or not Zerahemnah will keep his promise. Nevertheless, Moroni accepts the verbal treaty, and the enemy is allowed to depart. It is a story of honor of both sides.

Alma 44:21

21 Now the number of their dead was not numbered because of the greatness of the number; yea, the number of their dead was exceedingly great, both on the Nephites and on the Lamanites.

Alma 44:22

22 And it came to pass that they did cast their dead into the waters of Sidon, and they have gone forth and are buried in the depths of the sea.

This war took a tremendous toll on both sides. We are not told anything more about the disposal of the dead other than “they did cast their dead into the waters of Sidon.” It is possible, but not probable, that his included Nephite dead. We know that the Nephites had a preference for burying their own dead which we have seen in Alma 3:1. The denial of the burial to the Lamanites by casting them in the river to be “buried” in the sea would have been a religious and social insult to the warriors of the Lamanites who had fought against them. This would appear to be a parallel to a situation we have seen before:

Alma 3:1-3

1 And it came to pass that the Nephites who were not slain by the weapons of war, after having buried those who had been slain—now the number of the slain were not numbered, because of the greatness of their number—after they had finished burying their dead they all returned to their lands, and to their houses, and their wives, and their children.

2 Now many women and children had been slain with the sword, and also many of their flocks and their herds; and also many of their fields of grain were destroyed, for they were trodden down by the hosts of men.

3 And now as many of the Lamanites and the Amlicites who had been slain upon the bank of the river Sidon were cast into the waters of Sidon; and behold their bones are in the depths of the sea, and they are many.

In Alma 3 we have two different types of disposal of the dead. We have burial for the Nephites, and dumping in the Sidon for the Lamanites. It would appear that we should read these verses in this chapter with the same understanding of the two different types of disposal of the dead. The dumping in the Sidon was a mode of disrespect, and while Mormon does not make the distinction clear, to him it would have been understood and not worth clarifying.

Alma 44:23

23 And the armies of the Nephites, or of Moroni, returned and came to their houses and their lands.

Even though there were more highly trained troops with Moroni, it is likely that they also returned to their “houses and their lands” just as did the militia from the land of Manti. Note that this also parallels what we learned in Alma 3:1:

“Alma 3:1 And it came to pass that the Nephites who were not slain by the weapons of war, after having buried those who had been slain—now the number of the slain were not numbered, because of the greatness of their number—after they had finished burying their dead they all returned to their lands, and to their houses, and their wives, and their children.”

The Nephite army, as with all other Mesoamerican armies, was not a standing army, but one called up when needed.

Alma 44:24

24 And thus ended the eighteenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi. And thus ended the record of Alma, which was written upon the plates of Nephi.

Historical: We have the closing of a year-record. The events of the eighteenth year have been many, from the blessing of Alma’s sons to this major war. The eighteenth year of the reign of the judges figures to be about 76 BC in our modern calendar.

Textual: This is the end of a chapter in the 1830 edition. What is most interesting is that it is not the end of a book, even though it appears to indicate that it is. At the end of verse 24 it says “thus ended the record of Alma, which was written upon the plates of Nephi.” Very certainly we are told that we have the end of “the record of Alma” yet we have not reached the end of the Book of Alma. There is a different principle operating on the book names than there is on the chapter breaks. The book of Alma is not named because of the author, but rather because of the nature of the record keeper.