Alma 46

Alma 45:24

24 But they grew proud, being lifted up in their hearts, because of their exceedingly great riches; therefore they grew rich in their own eyes, and would not give heed to their words, to walk uprightly before God.

Alma 46:1

1 And it came to pass that as many as would not hearken to the words of Helaman and his brethren were gathered together against their brethren.

Alma 46:2

2 And now behold, they were exceedingly wroth, insomuch that they were determined to slay them.

Alma 46:3

3 Now the leader of those who were wroth against their brethren was a large and a strong man; and his name was Amalickiah.

Alma 46:4

4 And Amalickiah was desirous to be a king; and those people who were wroth were also desirous that he should be their king; and they were the greater part of them the lower judges of the land, and they were seeking for power.

Textual: The last verse of chapter 45 is included here because it more properly belongs with the information that begins chapter 46 in our current edition. Of course we remember that there was no such chapter break in the 1830 edition. This information was intended to be conceptually adjacent to the material we are considering at the beginning of chapter 46.

Social: Mormon introduces this “problem” from the general to the specific. In general, the people grew proud because of their riches, they turn from God, and then there were a lot of people “gathered together against their brethren.” The specific deals with the leader Amalickiah. When we get the information on the specific person, we also get the information that is going to allow us a better picture of what is happening, and why.

We see in verse 4 that Amalickiah was “desirous to be a king.” It is no mistake at all that this desire to be a king, and the desire of others to have a king, should come as a result of “their exceedingly great riches” (Alma 45:24). This is the same theme we have seen before in the Book of Mormon. Once again the combination of riches, turning from God, and turning to kings all occur as a set. These are the conditions we have seen that were precisely the major cultural pressure from the non-Nephite cultures in Mesoamerica. The only piece of the typical puzzle that is not explicitly mentioned here is the costly apparel. That, however, is the display location for wealth in Mesoamerica, so it is part and parcel of this complex of issues.

What we see in these verses is a continuation of the types of problems we have already been seeing in the Nephite lands. First we had the apostasy of Ammonihah, which began to turn away from pure Nephite religion and toward the almost half and half religion of Nehor (and Nephite, half Lamanite). Within too short a period of time we have the apostasy of the Zoramites at Antionum which is followed by their complete defection to the Lamanites. In both of those cases, entire cities fell form the Nephite religious/political alliance. What we are beginning to see now is that the same seeds that bred the apostasy in those more distant cities is beginning to effect the Nephite heartland. The Nephites are no longer simply fighting a Lamanite army from without, there are “Lamanite-sympathizers” who want to have a Lamanite-style government, complete with the king and the social hierarchies that go along with that style of government. This is completely opposed to the Nephite concept of egalitarian rule. The people who are pushing for a change to a kingship are therefore also looking for a complete overthrow of Nephite society – a destruction of that way of life that the prophets had always feared would come.

That this movement is heading inexorably to a hierarchical society is evidenced by the nature of the support that Amalickiah is receiving from judges. Note his power base: “they were the greater part of them the lower judges of the land, and they were seeking for power.” These are “the lower judges” which tells us little except perhaps that they were not the highest ranking judge in each of the cities. The reason that these “lower” judges would want power rather than the “higher” judges is that the “higher” judges would already enjoy a form of power because of their position in the current political system. Thus they had little to desire, having already the pinnacle of their current political power structure’s capabilities. For the “lower judges” however, there could be an improvement in power and particularly in conceptual rank if the egalitarian ideal were replaced with a more hierarchical system. These judges would be able to move into an elite status that would still provide greater personal power and position.

The last issue that we should briefly address is the reason that the lower judges might assume that they would be given some power in the new kingdom. Once again we must use our analogy to Mesoamerican society to give us hints as to how this would have worked. First, we have noted that Nephite society was kin based, and the kin based society maintained its kin groups even within the larger political system. This is very much the same social structure as we see in virtually all Mesoamerican cultures.

The ruling elite tend to come from the leadership of clans. In the cases of the judges, the men assigned to the first judgeships would have been the prominent men of the clans. Thus these men and their attendant families form a ready-made interest group. In our analysis of the mechanism of the voice of the people we noted that judgeships could be hereditary. Thus the position of a lower judge was likely still tightly tied to a clan, and the respect and social position of that particular clan could be tied to the position held by a prominent member who was a judge. When the lower judges championed the idea of the king, it was with the understanding that while a king might be at the top of the hierarchical pyramid, the judges would become the elite status functionaries of the king, and the entire clan would rise in status and wealth. Thus these lower judges had both the reason to want the power, and the clan connections to supply the large numbers of people that we begin to see associated with this new “king” movement.

The timing of these conflicts is also important in connection with the Mesoamerican backdrop. At the time of Christ the Mesoamerican cultures are in the final couple of hundred years of what is termed the Preclassic. When this period ends, the cultures emerging from the other side are full blown kingships with all of the stonework and glory we see in the most magnificent of the Maya ruins. Those Classic Maya cultures did not develop overnight, and the political stresses that were developing those full blown kingships are well underway in precisely the time period we see such difficulties among the Nephites. Amalickiah is not pulling the idea of a king from thin air, but from an air thick with the idea.

Alma 46:5

5 And they had been led by the flatteries of Amalickiah, that if they would support him and establish him to be their king that he would make them rulers over the people.

Social: There is a subtle difference in the position of the “lower judges” and the promise that they would be “rulers over the people.” As judges, they are directly empowered to be in a position “above.” The relative authority to other people cannot be the only consideration that these lower judges were interested in. Their interests lay in the development of the hierarchies that would truly establish them as “over” the people. They are interesting in the social hierarchies that we saw Benjamin preach against so forcibly.

Alma 46:6

6 Thus they were led away by Amalickiah to dissensions, notwithstanding the preaching of Helaman and his brethren, yea, notwithstanding their exceedingly great care over the church, for they were high priests over the church.

Textual: This is Mormon’s conclusion. What he has in his historical information is two pieces of information. Helaman and his brethren preach. There is tremendous social unrest that is pulling people into apostasy and civil rebellion. What Mormon must do is reconcile the dissonance between those two facts. Helaman is a good man, and faithful. The gospel should prevail – but it wasn’t. Thus Mormon feels the need to specifically note that the failure was in the hearers, not in the preachers. The people were led away, in spite of all Helaman could do. Mormon is declaring that the fault of the problem does not lie with Helaman and his brethren, but rather with Amalickiah.

Alma 46:7

7 And there were many in the church who believed in the flattering words of Amalickiah, therefore they dissented even from the church; and thus were the affairs of the people of Nephi exceedingly precarious and dangerous, notwithstanding their great victory which they had had over the Lamanites, and their great rejoicings which they had had because of their deliverance by the hand of the Lord.

The fragile nature of the Nephite political structure is made evident here. To review the essential information, we had a Nephite religion and political system that were one and the same until the ending of Mosiah II’s reign. Alma the Elder began establishing churches, and that sub-organization of the society created internal structures that allowed for some separation of religion and politics, a rather remarkable social distinction for that time and place. Mosiah continued that division, and the unique Nephite religious ideal continued to be dominant in the political arena, but was clearly not mandated, nor was it universally accepted and practiced, particularly as time progressed.

At this point in Nephite history, this sub-organization of the church exists along side members of the political hegemony who do not belong to the church. Those are the ones that we would first expect to be susceptible to the outside “Lamanite” ideas of social hierarchy. What we learn in this verse is that even inside of the church, that location which should most zealously guard the Nephite egalitarian idea. There were those who were beginning to believe that there was another way. Since this other way was couched in more political terms, the very division between the church and the political government might have allowed them to think that they might have a king and still have their religion. After all, they had had kings not all that long before.

The reason that this logic fails them is twofold. The first is that the nature of early Nephite kings is decidedly different from the kings that they see in cities around them. The best indication of the difference between Nephite and Lamanite kings might be seen in Benjamin’s speech where he implicitly contrasts himself with other kings, and particularly notes that he supports himself with the labor of this own hands (see especially Mosiah 2:10-14).

The second reason that this new king is so dangerous is that it is not simply the king, but an entire system that is being sought. It is an attractive system because they see it all around them in cities that are being made grand by the labor supplied to their kings. They see it in the riches so visibly displayed in these other areas. Their own riches are increasing to the point where a similar display of wealth is becoming attractive. The people in the church aren’t necessarily looking for a new religion, but a new socio-political order. What they do not see, and what the prophets saw all too clearly, is that the adoption of this new social order would signal the destruction of the Nephite society, and ultimately the destruction of the church itself.

Alma 46:8

8 Thus we see how quick the children of men do forget the Lord their God, yea, how quick to do iniquity, and to be led away by the evil one.

Alma 46:9

9 Yea, and we also see the great wickedness one very wicked man can cause to take place among the children of men.

Mormon is creating Amalickiah as a focal point for the ills of Nephite society. From this long distant vantage point we can understand that this was not all to be laid upon Amalickiah’s shoulders. He may have been a persuasive catalyst, but the Nephite “pot” was already near the boiling point. Amalickiah simply added the right amount of extra heat to send it into a roiling boil.

Alma 46:10

10 Yea, we see that Amalickiah, because he was a man of cunning device and a man of many flattering words, that he led away the hearts of many people to do wickedly; yea, and to seek to destroy the church of God, and to destroy the foundation of liberty which God had granted unto them, or which blessing God had sent upon the face of the land for the righteous' sake.

Mormon understands the real threat of Amalickiah, even though his followers did not. First and foremost Amalickiah was a threat to the church of God. Even though he was attempting to be a king, the ultimate problem was not political, but religious. The type of kind Amalickiah wanted to be would be destructive to the underpinning egalitarianism of Nephite religion. With that principle destroyed, the destruction of the rest of the belief system might easily follow when the society adopted the religious ideas that propped up Mesoamerican kings and their hierarchical societies.

It is unclear how Mormon saw this threat as a specific threat to “the foundation of liberty.” It is probable that he is specifically speaking of the liberty to believe in God, something that he sees being threatened. Certainly the new king as a political leader would not have less liberty that did kings Benjamin and Mosiah. Even in the Mesoamerican hierarchical society, the kings provided benefits that the people wanted, or the people would discontinue servicing the kings. Indeed, it appears that at the end of some cities, this was precisely the situation. The kings no longer served the needs of the people, and so the people simply abandoned their kings and the whole city-hierarchy behind them. (see the analysis of the end of dynastic rule at Copan as discussed in David Drew. The Lost Chronicles of the Maya Kings. University of California Press, 1999, pp. 348-9)

Alma 46:11

11 And now it came to pass that when Moroni, who was the chief commander of the armies of the Nephites, had heard of these dissensions, he was angry with Amalickiah.

It is not hard to imagine why Moroni would have been angry with Amalickiah. Moroni had just finished fighting a difficult battle with an external foe, only to find that a new one had arisen from within.

Alma 46:12

12 And it came to pass that he rent his coat; and he took a piece thereof, and wrote upon it—In memory of our God, our religion, and freedom, and our peace, our wives, and our children—and he fastened it upon the end of a pole.

Historical: Moroni creates a banner as a means of super-communication with his people. This “super-communication” was a method by which a message could be easily proclaimed widely. We should remember that Moroni lived in a world devoid of our modern methods of communication, and he used a form of communication that had several advantages. It could be seen in addition to the oral message that came from the one carrying the banner, and the message could communicate without being able to hear the carrier of the banner. We must assume that what was written on the banner was sufficiently recognizable to enough people that the banner itself was an effective mode of communication. In addition, this banner quickly assumed the characteristics of other replicated banners – it became symbolic. Once the form had been replicated, it was not only able to say its message if people could read, it could present its message even when the individual could not read it directly. If he understood from others around him what the banner meant he could be inspired without being able to read it. We have a similar phenomenon in the most familiar of all banners, the flag. The flag is able to symbolize many messages simply because we can see it. The rapid proliferation of American flags in the wake of the September 11, 2001 tragedy is ample evidence that the banner can focus a common sentiment in a population.

Banners have a long tradition in both Asia and in Mesoamerica. Of the Asian banners, Nibley notes:

“Another Book of Mormon custom on which the discovery of the Scrolls has thrown brilliant light is what might be called the cult of the banner. A text designated by the modern title of "The Rule of Battle for the Sons of Light" shows that the Jews shared with other people of antiquity "a mystical conception of war," according to which the carnage of the battlefield was "a sacred act" surrounded by definite ritual.

The document in question contains special instructions for the Children of the Covenant on the marshaling of the hosts for war: "On the great ensign placed at the head of all the army shall be inscribed: 'Army of God' together with the name of the twelve tribes of Israel. On the ensign of the thousand group shall be inscribed: 'Wrath of God, full of anger, against Belial and all the people of his party, without any survivors.' On the ensign of the hundred group shall be inscribed 'From God comes the energy to fight against all sinful flesh.' " Other inscriptions are given for the other military units, all of them more or less lengthy and proclaiming some inspiring principle or program to guide the hosts, and there are special inscriptions for entering battle, engaging in battle, and returning from battle.

The flag is an Asiatic invention, fn and there is a very ancient legend of how in the beginning when Iran was under the rule of the serpent, a blacksmith named Kawe put his leather apron upon a pole, and "that was the flag of Iranian independence, which, under the name of dirafsh-i-kâwiyâni [Flag of Kawe], remained the national standard down to the time of the Arab conquest." To lead the nation under its new flag of liberation, the hero Threataona was raised up in the mountains. This Threataona is a doublet of King Cyrus, founder of the Persian nation, who holds such a high and holy place in Jewish tradition that he is next to Solomon alone the holiest of kings. (Hugh Nibley, The Prophetic Book of Mormon [Salt Lake City and Provo: Deseret Book Co., Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1989], 93.)

Moroni did not invent the concept of the banner. It was well known in Mesoamerica by Moroni’s time. What Moroni did was adopt that known method of symbolic communication to a new need, a renewal of the fundamental commitment of the Nephite people to their way of life.

Variant: In the manuscripts and editions through 1911, the final phrase was “and he fastened it upon the end of a pole thereof.” The word “thereof” was deleted as redundant.

Alma 46:13

13 And he fastened on his head-plate, and his breastplate, and his shields, and girded on his armor about his loins; and he took the pole, which had on the end thereof his rent coat, (and he called it the title of liberty) and he bowed himself to the earth, and he prayed mightily unto his God for the blessings of liberty to rest upon his brethren, so long as there should a band of Christians remain to possess the land—

Alma 46:14

14 For thus were all the true believers of Christ, who belonged to the church of God, called by those who did not belong to the church.

Alma 46:15

15 And those who did belong to the church were faithful; yea, all those who were true believers in Christ took upon them, gladly, the name of Christ, or Christians as they were called, because of their belief in Christ who should come.

Alma 46:16

16 And therefore, at this time, Moroni prayed that the cause of the Christians, and the freedom of the land might be favored.

Social: Mormon tells us that those who did not belong to the church termed those who did “Christians.” Mormon is our narrator here, and he apparently understands “Christian” in a favorable light, because he has that word in Moroni’s mighty prayer. However, Mormon is aware that this term was originally an “outsider” name for the members of the church.” It is quite probable that the members of the church did not have a specific name for themselves, other than Nephite, since that term would, for most of Nephtie history, designate both the religion and the political allegiance of the person so designated. For those who were politically “Nephite” but religiously opposed, they would need a different term by which they could make a distinction that was probably not made internally. Thus “Christian” would be applied from the outside. It is quite certain that the original application of this designation was derogatory, for the outsiders were precisely those who denied the Christ, and contended against a belief in the atoning Messiah.

This is quite similar to the situation for the early members of the “church” in the Old World. We hear that these disciples of Christ are first called “Christian” in the city of Antioch (Acts 11:26). Antioch would have had a similar problem of differentiation. There were Jews in Antioch, and the first “Christians” were also Jews. The need to separate the types of Jewishness would have been more important to the outsider than the insider. Inside the group, we know who we are, and need not have unique names for ourselves when we are with others in the group. This is very similar to the phenomenon known from several pre-modern peoples where their self-name translates to “the people.” Specific modifiers are needed for other groups, and since we humans tend to think our own group is the best, out-group names not infrequently have pejorative connotations.

The notion that the appellation of Christian was intended to be pejorative in the Book of Mormon instance may be deduced from the care with which Mormon explains the adoption of the name by the members of the church. The very fact that Mormon must take time to explain the adoption of the name suggests that it was not necessarily intended to be complimentary in the beginning.

Alma 46:17

17 And it came to pass that when he had poured out his soul to God, he named all the land which was south of the land Desolation, yea, and in fine, all the land, both on the north and on the south—A chosen land, and the land of liberty.

Geographic: Mormon gives us a picture of what Moroni considered the Nephite lands. They extend south from the land of Desolation, which was the Nephite term for the Jaredite lands (Alma 22:30). This gives us a northernmost border. What we do not get in this description, however, is the southern border. Moroni considers “all the land” to be “on the north and on the south.” This suggests that Moroni is located somewhere nearer the center than the edges of the land, and that he is giving a northernmost limit to that land. What he does not give is the southern border, and that may be implicit in that it is the disputed land between the Lamanites and the Nephites.

Moroni’s designation of this limited land as a “chosen land” is clearly evocative of Lehi’s promise upon the land:

2 Nephi 1:5-7

5 But, said he, notwithstanding our afflictions, we have obtained a land of promise, a land which is choice above all other lands; a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the inheritance of my seed. Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me, and to my children forever, and also all those who should be led out of other countries by the hand of the Lord.

6 Wherefore, I, Lehi, prophesy according to the workings of the Spirit which is in me, that there shall none come into this land save they shall be brought by the hand of the Lord.

7 Wherefore, this land is consecrated unto him whom he shall bring. And if it so be that they shall serve him according to the commandments which he hath given, it shall be a land of liberty unto them; wherefore, they shall never be brought down into captivity; if so, it shall be because of iniquity; for if iniquity shall abound cursed shall be the land for their sakes, but unto the righteous it shall be blessed forever.

Moroni takes the two foundational themes for the relationship of the Nephites to the land, that it is a land of promise, or a chosen land, and that it is a land of liberty. By extracting these and placing them on the banner he was invoking the promise of the Lord to the people, and reminding them of their heritage and the promise of their God to them.

Variant: Up until the 1920 edition, this verse read “he gave all the land which was south….” The intended meaning of “gave” is clearly to “give as a name” and so the alteration simply clarifies that meaning instead of leaving the more ambiguous word, “gave.”

Alma 46:18

18 And he said: Surely God shall not suffer that we, who are despised because we take upon us the name of Christ, shall be trodden down and destroyed, until we bring it upon us by our own transgressions.

Social: Note the nature of Moroni’s lament. He says that the Christians are despised. What we must remember here is the context. We are quite accustomed to supposing that the Lamanites might despise the Nephites, but Moroni’s provocation for this prayer is not an external Lamanite confrontation, but an internal one. He is actually speaking of Nephites who despise Nephite-Christians! Because the political system of the Nephites allows for multiple religious beliefs, there is no longer a uniform religion in the cities under Nephite control. Thus we have civil war brewing over both religion and politics, but the non-Christians are apparently gaining much greater numbers than ever before.

Alma 46:19

19 And when Moroni had said these words, he went forth among the people, waving the rent part of his garment in the air, that all might see the writing which he had written upon the rent part, and crying with a loud voice, saying:

Alma 46:20

20 Behold, whosoever will maintain this title upon the land, let them come forth in the strength of the Lord, and enter into a covenant that they will maintain their rights, and their religion, that the Lord God may bless them.

Moroni is asking for a covenant to remain loyal to the promises indicated by the banner. Since the banner evoked the promise of the Lord for the land, it also evoked the essential requirement to fulfill that promise: righteousness. There could be no other interpretation of what the covenant would mean. The people were to covenant to be righteous, to follow the Nephite gospel, and by that righteousness invoke the promise and protection of the Lord.

Alma 46:21

21 And it came to pass that when Moroni had proclaimed these words, behold, the people came running together with their armor girded about their loins, rending their garments in token, or as a covenant, that they would not forsake the Lord their God; or, in other words, if they should transgress the commandments of God, or fall into transgression, and be ashamed to take upon them the name of Christ, the Lord should rend them even as they had rent their garments.

Alma 46:22

22 Now this was the covenant which they made, and they cast their garments at the feet of Moroni, saying: We covenant with our God, that we shall be destroyed, even as our brethren in the land northward, if we shall fall into transgression; yea, he may cast us at the feet of our enemies, even as we have cast our garments at thy feet to be trodden under foot, if we shall fall into transgression.

Moroni’s call is headed by many. They come “with their armor girded about their loins.” This suggests that there is widespread understanding of the nature of the civil rift, and a recognition that this rift is about to erupt in violence. The people may come making a covenant to invoke the blessing of God, but they realize that they will be participating in the fight as well.

As the people come, they tear their clothing. This is a visual and physical sign of the covenant that they are making. They indicate that if they should falter in their covenant, the “Lord should rend them even as they had rent their garments.” The physical tearing of the clothing is symbolic of the fate that they would accept if they were to fail in their covenant. Notice that one of the most important parts of the covenant is righteousness: “they would not forsake their Lord their God; or, in other words, if they should transgress the commandments of God….” They are returning to the original covenant which promises protection in return for righteousness.

Alma 46:23

23 Moroni said unto them: Behold, we are a remnant of the seed of Jacob; yea, we are a remnant of the seed of Joseph, whose coat was rent by his brethren into many pieces; yea, and now behold, let us remember to keep the commandments of God, or our garments shall be rent by our brethren, and we be cast into prison, or be sold, or be slain.

Alma 46:24

24 Yea, let us preserve our liberty as a remnant of Joseph; yea, let us remember the words of Jacob, before his death, for behold, he saw that a part of the remnant of the coat of Joseph was preserved and had not decayed. And he said—Even as this remnant of garment of my son hath been preserved, so shall a remnant of the seed of my son be preserved by the hand of God, and be taken unto himself, while the remainder of the seed of Joseph shall perish, even as the remnant of his garment.

Moroni takes the oath-making symbol of tearing the garment to make another point. He plays on the torn garment to make a connection to Joseph, and a particular legend about Joseph. The ultimate source of this legend is not known, but Moroni and the people are clearly aware of a legend that suggests that a torn piece of Joseph’s coat had been miraculously persevered over time.

Moroni uses this legend and its tangential relationship to a torn garment to make a point with his new covenant makers. He allows that should they transgress they might be “cast into prison,” a reference to Joseph’s captivity. However, Moroni also uses this example for the positive encouragement, noting that should they be righteous (as Joseph was righteous, by implication) that they should also be “preserved” just as Joseph’s cloak has been preserved. Nibley provides important background to this legend:

“After the fall of Jerusalem and the scattering of the Jews, many of the sectaries, such as those that once lived around the Dead Sea, moved East to be under the protection of the Persians. Thus groups of Jews representing various sects and shades of belief were scattered all over central Asia in the Middle Ages, and it is from such, no doubt, that Tha'labi gets his amazing fund of information, which is worthy to be set up beside the most enlightening volumes of Apocrypha. Among other things, Tha'labi tells a number of stories, which we have not found anywhere else, about Jacob and the garment of Joseph. In one, Joseph's brethren bring his torn garment to their father as proof that he is dead, but Jacob after examining the garment ("and there were in the garment of Joseph three marks or tokens when they brought it to his father") declares that the way the cloth is torn shows him that their story is not true: "Behold, if the bear had eaten him he surely would have rent his garment, and since he would (naturally) have fled towards the gate, verily the garment should have been torn behind." But since this is not the case it may be that Joseph still lives. Another account is the case of "the vizier" Potiphar, who by examining the tears in Joseph's garment, knew that he was innocent and spared his life, "for he knew that if he [Joseph] had attacked his wife the tear would have been in front." So again his torn garment declared that Joseph should live.

Most significant is Tha'labi's discussion of the two remnants of Joseph's garment, from which we quote:

And when Joseph had made himself known unto them [his brethren] he asked them about his father, saying, "What did my father after [I left]?" They answered, "He lost his eyesight [from weeping]." Then he gave them his garment [qamis, long outer shirt]. According to ad-Dahak that garment was of the weave [pattern, design] of Paradise, and the breath [spirit, odor] of Paradise was in it, so that it never decayed or in any way deteriorated [and that was] a sign [omen]. And Joseph gave them that garment, and it was the very one that had belonged to Abraham, having already had a long history. And he said to them, "Go, take this garment of mine and place it upon the face of my father so he may have sight again, and return [to me] with all your families." And when they had put Egypt behind them and come to Canaan their father Jacob said, "Behold, I perceive the spirit [breath, odor] of Joseph, if you will not think me wandering in my mind and weakheaded from age." . . . [for] he knew that upon all the earth there was no spirit [breath, odor] of Paradise save in that garment alone. . . . And as-Sadi says that Judah said to Joseph, "It was I who took the garment bedaubed with blood to Jacob, and reported to him that the wolf had eaten Joseph; so give me this day thy garment that I might tell him that thou art living, that I might cause him to rejoice now as greatly as I caused him to sorrow then." And Ibn-Abbas says that Judah took the garment and went forth in great haste, panting with exertion and anxiety . . . and when he brought the garment he laid it upon his face, so that his sight returned to him. And ad-Dahak says that his sight returned after blindness, and his strength after weakness, and youth after age, and joy after sorrow. [Then follows a dialogue between Jacob and the King of Death].

Note here that there were two remnants of Joseph's garment, one sent by Joseph to his father as a sign that he was still alive (since the garment had not decayed), and the other, torn and smeared with blood, brought by Judah to his father as a sign that Joseph was dead. Moroni actually quotes Jacob ("Now behold, this was the language of Jacob" [Alma 46:26]) as saying: "Now behold, this giveth my soul sorrow; nevertheless, my soul hath joy in my son" (Alma 46:25). Compare this with Judah's statement in the Old World account, that the undecayed garment caused Jacob as much joy as the bloody garment caused him sorrow. In both accounts Jacob is described as being near to death—hence Judah's haste to reach him with the garment and make amends for the evil he has done.

Surely there is "a type and a shadow" in this story, for the particular concern of Israel is with Joseph and Judah and how, after working at cross purposes, they were reconciled after many years by the magnanimity of the one and the remorseful repentance of the other. It is another form of the symbolic story of the Two Sticks told in Ezekiel 37. But aside from the great symbolic force of the tale, there can be no doubt that the story told by Moroni as one familiar to all the people actually was one that circulated among the Jews in ancient times and was taken to the East by them, being like much early Jewish lore completely lost in the West. It was totally unknown to the world in which Joseph Smith lived.” (Hugh Nibley, An Approach to the Book of Mormon, 3rd ed. [Salt Lake City and Provo: Deseret Book Co., Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1988], 220.)

Alma 46:25

25 Now behold, this giveth my soul sorrow; nevertheless, my soul hath joy in my son, because of that part of his seed which shall be taken unto God.

Jacob contrasts his joy in the knowledge of the preservation some of the seed of Joseph, but sadness to know that some will also be lost.

Alma 46:26

26 Now behold, this was the language of Jacob.

This statement has the function of closing the quotation from Jacob. This Jacob is the father of Joseph, not the Book of Mormon brother of Nephi. The text is not known from the current Old Testament, and is another of the variant scriptures found on the brass plates.

Alma 46:27

27 And now who knoweth but what the remnant of the seed of Joseph, which shall perish as his garment, are those who have dissented from us? Yea, and even it shall be ourselves if we do not stand fast in the faith of Christ.

Moroni makes a further interpretation of the scripture. The final words of Jacob were expressing sorrow for the lost as well as joy for the preserved. Moroni builds upon that concept to apply it to their current situation. He asks if these who “shall perish as his garment” are not those who have dissented. Once again this highlights the internal nature of this conflict. Moroni’s analysis works precisely because both the faithful and the dissenters are of the same original cloth, that is now being torn by the current dissent.

Moroni finishes by concluding that they must stand steadfast in the faith in Christ, or that same fate will apply to them. This is the basis for Moroni’s invocation of the fundamental promise of liberty in the land. There is a direct connection in the promise between the benefit and the required righteousness. Moroni reminds them that if they cease to be righteous, then they too are subject to perishing.

Alma 46:28

28 And now it came to pass that when Moroni had said these words he went forth, and also sent forth in all the parts of the land where there were dissensions, and gathered together all the people who were desirous to maintain their liberty, to stand against Amalickiah and those who had dissented, who were called Amalickiahites.

Geographic/political: Our analysis of the political system of the land of Zarahemla is one of multiple cities, each with their own government under an alliance headed by Zarahemla. This is the basic model that we see in Mesoamerican that is forming at this time and becomes much clearer in the next few hundred years when the monuments have texts that can now be read. This fragmentation of the society into mostly independent cities with a loose confederation is behind the picture that we see from Moroni. Mormon tells us that Moroni “sent forth in all the parts of the land where there were dissensions…” Of course this also suggests that there were parts of the land where there were not such dissensions (for instance, we would not expect any such dissension in Jershon).

What appears to be happening in the land of Zarahemla is that there are regionalized trends that appear to follow the surrounding land’s tendencies to kings and hierarchical societies. While we cannot be certain of the specific location of all of these dissensions, we know that the earlier Ammonihahite dissension was northwest of Zarahemla. It is quite probable, from the archaeological record, that other downriver sites would have been involved. Sorenson’s analysis of this situation in historical terms has the movement towards kingship being related to the lineages of the pre-Mosiah Zarahemlaites who were superseded in power by Mosiah and the Nephites:

“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. fn 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. fn 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.” (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], 196.)

Alma 46:29

29 And it came to pass that when Amalickiah saw that the people of Moroni were more numerous than the Amalickiahites—and he also saw that his people were doubtful concerning the justice of the cause in which they had undertaken—therefore, fearing that he should not gain the point, he took those of his people who would and departed into the land of Nephi.

Moroni’s tactic of gathering people from out of the lands of the dissenters and bringing the population of the faithful together created a visual contrast in the numbers. Solely within their own lands, it might have seemed that the dissenters would have been in the majority, but a majority with a strong minority population. When that minority was pulled out, it diminished the apparent size of the dissenting cities, and greatly increased the size of the loyal Nephites. Seeing this disparity, Amalickiah and those who would follow him left the land of Zarahemla and went to the land of Nephi. The direction of their travel tells us even more about the nature of their dissention. They were more comfortable in Lamanite territory than Nephite, precisely because they had adopted more Lamanite concepts. They, as the Amlicites and Zoramites before them, failed to convert the main Nephite population to “Lamanitism” and therefore they left and went to a land where they could live in the form they had decided to adopt.

Alma 46:30

30 Now Moroni thought it was not expedient that the Lamanites should have any more strength; therefore he thought to cut off the people of Amalickiah, or to take them and bring them back, and put Amalickiah to death; yea, for he knew that he would stir up the Lamanites to anger against them, and cause them to come to battle against them; and this he knew that Amalickiah would do that he might obtain his purposes.

Moroni didn’t need a long memory to understand what a significant number of defectors to the Lamanites might mean. He had just fought a significant battle against Zoramite fortified Lamanite armies, armies that were incited to battle because of the Zoramites. He could easily see the same situation occurring again, and so he decided not to allow this body of Amalickiahites to easily pass to the Lamanites.

Geographic: While specifics of geography are not given, Moroni’s assumption that he might “cut off” the route of the Amalickiahites suggests that they were north of Zarahemla, or in the downriver locations suggested above. This would put Moroni and Zarahemla further south, in the path that the Amalickiahites would have to travel to reach the land of Nephi, which was yet further south. The overall picture of the downriver locations being those with the greatest tendencies to dissent would appear to be confirmed here.

Alma 46:31

31 Therefore Moroni thought it was expedient that he should take his armies, who had gathered themselves together, and armed themselves, and entered into a covenant to keep the peace—and it came to pass that he took his army and marched out with his tents into the wilderness, to cut off the course of Amalickiah in the wilderness.

Geographic: The Amalickiahites had to pass from the north to the south. In doing so they had to pass through Nephite controlled territory. The path they didn’t take, for obvious reasons, was directly upriver through Zarahemla. Since Moroni attempts to cut them off in the wilderness, clearly the Amalickiahites are using the wilderness area as the means of bypassing more settled locations.

There are two wilderness areas described for Nephite lands, one to the west and one to the east of Zarahemla. We do not know which of the two is meant in this verse.

Variant: The 1981 printing restored a phrase that had been lost in intervening editions. Until the 1981 printing, the phrase “with his tents” had been missing from printed texts, even though the phrase was present in the original manuscript.

Alma 46:32

32 And it came to pass that he did according to his desires, and marched forth into the wilderness, and headed the armies of Amalickiah.

Alma 46:33

33 And it came to pass that Amalickiah fled with a small number of his men, and the remainder were delivered up into the hands of Moroni and were taken back into the land of Zarahemla.

Moroni clearly took sufficient force to detain this moving body. Amalickiah and some of his men were able to escape, but the larger body would have been too large to scatter. They are captured and returned to Zarahemla.

Alma 46:34

34 Now, Moroni being a man who was appointed by the chief judges and the voice of the people, therefore he had power according to his will with the armies of the Nephites, to establish and to exercise authority over them.

Political: In the reign of the judges there was at least one more position empowered with the ability to judge. Moroni is the chief captain of the army, and apparently that position carried with it the right to exercise judgments subsequent to military actions.

Alma 46:35

35 And it came to pass that whomsoever of the Amalickiahites that would not enter into a covenant to support the cause of freedom, that they might maintain a free government, he caused to be put to death; and there were but few who denied the covenant of freedom.

Moroni pronounces a judgment that seems harsh, but which was actually quite merciful. What he had was a group of people who were traitors, and who had willingly left the Nephite political protection and were attempting to join with the sworn enemies of the Nephite people. In that traitorous condition, all of the people merited the death penalty. Rather than execute that penalty, Moroni gave the people the opportunity to “enter into a covenant to support the cause of freedom.” Those who did enter in to the covenant were brought back into Nephite society with no penalty. Those who refused remained in their traitorous state and were subject to the death penalty.

As at other times in the Book of Mormon we see the power of the oath in these people. The power of the personal covenant was strong enough that Moroni trusted those who accepted the covenant. The oath was so strong that those who could not enter in to the covenant chose death instead. These ancient oaths bound the people better than all of our signed contracts do today.

Alma 46:36

36 And it came to pass also, that he caused the title of liberty to be hoisted upon every tower which was in all the land, which was possessed by the Nephites; and thus Moroni planted the standard of liberty among the Nephites.

Moroni causes replicas of the title of liberty to be placed on “every tower which was in all the land, which was possessed by the Nephites.” In each of the Nephite cities, this banner was placed in a location where it was easily visible. In our Mesoamerican setting for these events, the towers would be the stepped pyramids. These were not simply higher locations, but very symbolic locations. They were the places where the eyes of the people would normally turn as the symbols of their society. Placing the banner in that location provided a means of visual communication of the message to all of the people in Nephite lands. This would have been particularly important in a society with limited means of mass communication. The banners on the towers was Moroni’s way of broadcasting the message.

Alma 46:37

37 And they began to have peace again in the land; and thus they did maintain peace in the land until nearly the end of the nineteenth year of the reign of the judges.

Historical: The nineteenth year of the reign of the judges would fall in approximately 75 BC in the correlation used in this commentary.

Alma 46:38

38 And Helaman and the high priests did also maintain order in the church; yea, even for the space of four years did they have much peace and rejoicing in the church.

Textual: Mormon is telling a very sad story with the dissentions from the Nephites and the wars of these years. In the midst of the stories of the wars and contentions, he still has the story of the gospel to tell, and it is important for him to make sure that the story of the gospel continues even though the emphasis is on conflict. As Mormon makes a transition from one set of events to the next, he interjects these verses to give us the parallel history of the gospel at that time.

Alma 46:39

39 And it came to pass that there were many who died, firmly believing that their souls were redeemed by the Lord Jesus Christ; thus they went out of the world rejoicing.

Alma 46:40

40 And there were some who died with fevers, which at some seasons of the year were very frequent in the land—but not so much so with fevers, because of the excellent qualities of the many plants and roots which God had prepared to remove the cause of diseases, to which men were subject by the nature of the climate—

Alma 46:41

41 But there were many who died with old age; and those who died in the faith of Christ are happy in him, as we must needs suppose.

These verses all note people who have died. Both 39 and 41 speak of people who die in the faith, and confirms the ultimate joy in the Lord for both sets. The people who die in verse 41 are those who die of old age. Those who die in verse 40 die of fevers. The three verses tell us of ways that people die, but only verse 39 does not specifically note the reason. While it is not given, the context of the wars suggests that these are people who have died as a direct of those conflicts.

Cultural: Sorenson has suggested that the fevers mentioned here are suggestive of a tropical climate (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], 27.) Of course this fits well with the Mesoamerican location of Book of Mormon events.

We also learn that while there were fevers, there were medicinal plants that were known to the Nephites. There was certainly a large body of botanical knowledge among the Mesoamerican peoples. While not all of the plants have known modern medicinal properties, many do.

Textual: There is no chapter break in the 1830 edition.