“No More Contention in All the Land of Zarahemla”

Brant Gardner

Textual: Mormon and Moroni’s Gross Structural Editing of the Book of Mormon; Chapters and Books

From Words of Mormon to the end of the Book of Mormon we have a text that has been crafted principally by Mormon, but with additional material added by Moroni. When examining Mormon as an editor, there are multiple questions to ask about his thought processes in the development of the text. There are many facets to Mormon’s editing, but at this point we shall concentrate only on the largest editorial choices. Why does Mormon change chapters, and what initializes the changes in Books?

John H. Gilbert, the first printer of the Book of Mormon commented on the manuscript from which he had to typeset the Book of Mormon:

“Every chapter, if I remember correctly, was one solid paragraph, without a punctuation mar, from beginning to end.” (cited in Mackay, Thomas W. “Mormon as Editor: A Study in Colophons, Headers, and Source Indicators.” In: Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 2/1 (Fall 1983), p. 2 of internet copy. Original pp. 90-109).

The niceties paragraphs and verses are later additions to our text, but the chapter breaks do show up in the manuscript. Therefore, we must assume that there was something in the plates that dictated the break from the close of one chapter to the beginning of a new one. Skousen suggests:

“Evidence suggests that as Joseph Smith was translating, he apparently saw some mark (or perhaps extra spacing) whenever a section ended, but was unable to see the text that followed. At such junctures, Joseph decided to refer to these endings as chapter breaks and told the scribe to write the word ”chapter“ at these places, but without specifying any number for the chapter since Joseph saw neither a number nor the word ”chapter.“ (Skousen, Royal. ”Critical Methodology and the Text of the Book of Mormon." In: Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 6/1. FARMS 1994 p. 137).

Examining the chapter breaks leads to a typology of the kinds of changes that initialized a chapter break. Of course the typology is not particularly clean, because chapters include different types of material. For instance, one of the most common chapter breaks occurs when an embedded discourse ends, and narration picks up. In between the end of the text and the beginning of the narration, we have a chapter break. However, this doesn’t mean that chapters are always created with this transition occurs. It only suggests that this type of change was used as one of the markers for a chapter break.

It is probable that chapters are always to be considered topical units, but still the types of boundary topics or texts can provide some information on the editorial process.

Types of Chapter Breaks

Note: The occurrences are always listed with the two chapters, as we are looking at the transition from one to the next. The first two numbers are from the 1830 edition. The numbers in parentheses are the modern chapter breaks that correspond to the original divisions (following the excellent chart found in Mackay, 1983). It is, of course, the original divisions that show Mormon’s editing. The modern chapters come from modern editors.

1) Transition From Inserted Speech To Narrative.

Usually with the inserted speech ending the chapter, although sometimes the narrative shifts to inserted text at the beginning of the next chapter. The division is frequently marked with a final Amen for the end of the chapter.

Mosiah 1/2 (3/4); Mosiah 2/3 (4/5); Mosiah 3/4 (5/6); Mosiah 6/7 (10-11); Mosiah 8/9 (16/17); Alma 2/3 (4/5); Alma 3/4 (5/6); Alma 4/5 (6/7); Alma 5/6 (7/8); Alma 6/7 (8/9); Alma 8/9 (11/12); Alma 14/15 (26/27); Alma 15/16 (29/30); Alma 19/20 (42/43); Alma 26/27 (58/59); Helaman 2/3 (6/7); 3 Nephi 2/3 (5/6); 3 Nephi 4/5 (10/11) [End of Mormon’s interjection, resuming the account]; 3 Nephi 11/12 (26:5/26:6); 3 Nephi 12/13 (27:22/27:23); Mormon 3/4 (7/8) [shift between Mormon’s testimony, closed with Amen, and the return to narrative]; Ether 1/2 (4/5); Ether 2/3 (5/6); Ether 3/4 (8/9) [Moroni’s interjection closes 3, narrative returns in 4]; Moroni 1/2 (1/2); Moroni 6/7 (6/7); Moroni 9/10 (9/10)

2) Break Between Two Different Discursants Or Between Two Speeches By The Same Discursant

Alma 7/8 (9/10); Alma 9/10 (13:9/13:10); Alma 17/18 (37/38) [addressing a different son]; Alma 18/19 (38/39) [addressing a different son]; Alma 27/28 (60/61); Alma 28/29 (61/62); Helaman 4/5 (12/13)

Special note for 3 Nephi. In the reporting of the Savior’s discourses, we have blocks that appear to correspond to themes, and the break in the themes makes the chapter separation. We have the same speaker, the same time period, but different embedded speeches with different themes.

3 Nephi 5/6 (13:24/13:25); 3 Nephi 6/7 (14/15); 3 Nephi 7/8 (16/17); 3 Nephi 8/9 (18/19); 3 Nephi 10/11 (23:13/23/14); 3 Nephi 13/14 (29/30); Moroni 7/8 (7/8); Moroni 8/9 (8/9)

3) Break On Year Markers

This suggests two things, first that the text is collected based on the interesting information for certain years, and that the source text was organized by year, so that such a transition was normal.

Alma 1/2 (3/4); Alma 10/11 (15/16); Alma 22/23 (50/51); Alma 23/24 (51/52); Alma 24/25 (53/54); Alma 25/26 (55/56); Alma 29/30 (62/63); Helaman 1/2 (2/3); Helaman 3/4 (10/11); 3 Nephi 1/2 (2/3); 3 Nephi 3/4 (10/11); Mormon 1/2 (3/4)

4) Obvious Change Of Source Material

Mosiah 5/6 (8/9) [insertion of the record of Zeniff]; Mosiah 10/11 (22/23); Mosiah 11/12 (28:19/28:20); Alma 11/12 (16/17); Alma 12/13 (20/21); Alma 13/14 (22/23) [in this case, the transition marks the end if Mormon’s editorial remarks and a return to the original source]; Alma 16/17 (35/36); Alma 20/21 (44/45)

5) Simple Change Of Subject

These are the least obvious of the chapter divisions.

Mosiah 4/5 (6/7); Mosiah 7/8 (13:24/13:25); Mosiah 9/10 (21/22); Mosiah 12/13 (28:19/28:20); Alma 21/22 (49/50); 3 Nephi 9/10 (21:21/21:22); 3 Nephi 12/13 (27:22/27:23); Mormon 2/3 (5/6); Ether 4/5 (11/12); Moroni 2/3 (2/3); Moroni 3/4 (3/4); Moroni 4/5 (4/5); Moroni 5/6 (5/6)

Book Introductions

Book introductions are easily noted in the 1830 edition, because most chapters are preceded by an italicized synopsis of the chapter to come. The synopsis headings were part of the original manuscript, and there is no reason to believe that they were not on the plates. In the sections that Mormon edits, all Book introductions from Alma to 4 Nephi (though not numbered “4” in 1830) have these introductions.

The Books that do not have them are; Mosiah, Mormon, Ether, and Moroni. Both Ether and Moroni are Moroni’s editing, and he does not add the introductions. Of the books Mormon edits, only Mosiah and Mormon are lacking the synoptic headers.

It is very easy to explain why the book of Mormon (as distinguished from the Book of Mormon) does not have the synoptic header. To write a synoptic header, one must know the material to come. While editing the plates of Nephi, Mormon had that requisite foreknowledge. When he wrote his own book, however, he did not have that foreknowledge. It is possible that the headers were also inserted later by some authors (Jacob’s header appears to require knowledge prior to writing that was only added after the probably close of the original record), but it this still fits into the “live” writing of the book of Mormon. He may not have had the time to return to the beginning of his text to write the synopsis, and Moroni does not continue that practice.

The Case of Mosiah Chapter 1

The first chapter of Mosiah in our current text does not begin in any expected way. In the first place, we are missing the introductory material that Mormon included with all other books he edited. This strongly suggests that our Mosiah chapter 1 was not the beginning of the book of Mosiah. Skousen’s examination of the manuscripts indicates that what we have as Mosiah 1 was originally Mosiah III, or the third chapter of the book of Mosiah rather than the first (Skousen, Royal. “Critical Methodology and the Text of the Book of Mormon.” In: Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 6/1. FARMS 1994 p. 138).

This same evidence indicates that while this was not a new book it was a new chapter. Based on the nature of chapter breaks, can we make any inference about what is missing? Unfortunately, the beginning verse of our current Mosiah 1 appears to be much more of a conclusion than a beginning. In more modern editing procedures, we might want to see “And now there was no more contention in all the land of Zarahemla, among all the people who belonged to king Benjamin, so that king Benjamin had continual peace all the remainder of his days” as the concluding section to a description of those contentions.

Mosiah V (current chapter 7) also begins with a statement of peace, but that beginning does not have the reference to anything as obviously previous as the contentions, so that chapter break does not necessarily help us. This first verse, and the very direct connection to the contentions briefly mentioned in Words of Mormon 1:12 and 17-18 suggest that Mormon is writing to directly connect the small plate material into the beginning of this chapter of Mosiah. We may suppose, therefore, that at least one of our missing chapters is being summarized in Words of Mormon 1:12-18. Since this is the record of Mosiah and not Benjamin, however, we may also speculate that the original first chapter dealt with Mosiah and his removal from Nephi to Zarahemla. This change in ruler occasioned by the change of location, would be sufficient reason to begin a new dynastic record, and to begin with the new ruler’s name, Mosiah. While the principles governing book naming are not clear, it is abundantly clear that book names do not change with every change of ruler (we have Mosiah I, Benjamin, and Mosiah II in this book of Mosiah - see also Tvedtnes, John A. “Colophons in the Book of Mormon.” In: Rediscovering the Book of Mormon. FARMS 1991, p. 36). Therefore, the change of the name to Mosiah from whatever it was before (we know that it began with the book of Lehi, but do not know if there was anything between the book of Lehi and the book of Mosiah) we may suggest a dramatic change, such as a new dynasty.

Skousen’s suggestion for the possible fit between our current Mosiah 1 and the Words of Mormon is an interesting possibility, and perhaps the best explanation of the nature of the very specific tie between Words of Mormon and the beginning of our current Mosiah 1:

“All of this leads me to believe that the lost 116 pages included not only all of Lehi, but also part of Chapter I of the original Mosiah. Joseph Smith retained from the summer of 1828 some small portion of the translation (D&C 10:41) and may have added a few additional pages in March 1829 (D&C 5:30), just prior to Oliver Cowdery’s arrival in the following month. In all, these pages probably included the following portions from the beginning of the original Mosiah; the rest of chapter I, all of chapter II, and perhaps the beginning of chapter III. In fact, these few pages could have been part of the original manuscript that was placed in the cornerstone of the Nauvoo House in 1841. If so, the could well have been crossed out so as not to repeat the end of Amaleki’s account (from the book of Omni in the small plates) and the material Mormon covered in his transitional ”The Words of Mormon.“ (Skousen, Royal. ”Critical Methodology and the Text of the Book of Mormon." In: Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 6/1. FARMS 1994 p. 139).

Since Joseph Smith did not know of the small plates text until later (D&C 10:38-42), and because Words of Mormon is clearly both an appendage to the small plates as well as a transition into our current Mosiah 1, the small plates must have been physically inserted just before Mosiah III (1). What this suggests is that when Joseph was translating the plates, either through explicit or unconscious direction, he did not translate the plates continuously, but skipped over the physical plates corresponding to the small plates (our 1 Nephi - Words of Mormon). The Lord then instructed him to return to them later.

This would not be at all surprising, as it appears that there is only the most tenuous relationship between the physical plates and the direct translation process. An 1879 interview with Emma Smith provides important information:

" Q. What is the truth of Mormonism?

A. Iknow Mormonism to be the truth; and believe the church to have been established by divine direction. I have complete faith in it. In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us.

Q. Had he not a book or manuscript from which he read, or dictated to you?

A. He had neither manuscript or book to read from.

Q. Could he not have had, and you not know it?

A. If he had anything of the kind he could not have concealed it from me.

Q. Are you sure that he had the plates at the time you were writing for him?

A. The plates often lay on the table without any attempt at concealment, wrapped in a small linen table cloth, which I had given him to fold them in. I once felt of the plates, as they thus lay on the table, tracing their outline and shape. They seemed to be pliable like thick paper, and would rustle with a metallic sound when the edges were moved by the thumb, as one does sometimes thumb the edges of a book.

(Cited in Welch, John W. and Tim Rathbone. “The Translation of the Book of Mormon: Preliminary Report on the Basic Historical Information.” FARMS reprint. 1986, p. 14).

While this is a late remembrance and subject to the vagaries of memory, it is important to not that there is no direct evidence here (nor from any other description) of the continual use of the physical plates in the translation. Indeed, what Emma remembers is that he translated by means of the seer stone in a hat (not allowing for any consultation with the physical plates) and that the plates were often (but not always!?) on the table - wrapped in a cloth!

Assuming the accuracy of this description of the physical process, the actual organization of the physical plates would not have been noticed by Joseph Smith, and there is no reason to be surprised that the included small plate material was skipped over.

Multidimensional Commentary on the Book of Mormon

References