Brent Kerby (personal communication, 17 September 2008) wonders whether the him here might be a mishearing for them, so that the original text would have had reference to persecuting Alma and his brethren rather than persecuting Alma alone.
Nonetheless, there are places in the text where a pronominal reference to a leader can stand for the whole group, as in Alma 43:53, where the text refers to Zerahemnah but means him and his whole army. Other examples of this kind of usage are also listed under that passage. Here in Mosiah 24:8, by referring to Amulon as persecuting Alma, the reader can also assume that Alma’s brethren are included. To be sure, the him here could be an error for them, but him will work. Also note that in this passage Amulon is a leader, as is Alma. Undoubtedly not only Amulon but also his fellow priests would have been persecuting Alma and his brethren, but the other priests are not mentioned here.
Interestingly, in the next verse the text returns to focusing its attention on Alma alone by referring to the anger Amulon had against Alma. But then the text suddenly switches the focus of attention from Alma back to Alma and his followers, yet the reference is only to the pronominal them:
Thus earlier in verse 8, the text can refer to Amulon as individually persecuting Alma, just as it states in verse 9 that Amulon was individually angry with Alma.
Summary: Maintain in Mosiah 24:8 the reference to Amulon persecuting Alma, but apparently meaning Alma and his brethren; nonetheless, the him that refers to Alma could be an early transmission error for them, thus specifically referring to Alma and his brethren.
Mosiah 24:11, page 1459, line –17
In the last paragraph before the summary for Mosiah 24:11, for accuracy’s sake the text should read that “there are two similar examples in the earliest text” (that is, two rather than a few).
Mosiah 25:5–6, page 1472
Robert Baer (personal communication, 14 June 1989) suggests that the difficulty in this passage could be dealt with by emending Zarahemla to Lehi-Nephi, thus:
The error of writing Zarahemla instead of Lehi-Nephi could have come from the occurrence of “the land of Zarahemla” in the preceding verse:
The main problem with this proposed emendation is that Alma and his brethren never did return to the land of Lehi-Nephi.
Mosiah 25:5–6, page 1474
Before the beginning of the last paragraph on this page, the following paragraph should be added:
As further support for referring to the return of Ammon and his men as well as the return of the people of Zeniff, we have the following statement earlier in the book of Mosiah where Limhi has Ammon tell the people what had been happening in the land of Zarahemla from the time that Zeniff “went up out of the land” until Ammon “himself came up out of the land”:
Thus the proposed parallelism in referring to Zeniff and his people and to Ammon and his men (here in Mosiah 25:5–6) is found elsewhere in the text.
Mosiah 26:15, page 1485, line 2
The word alone is missing in the scriptural citation; the original text here reads as follows: “thou art blessed because of thy exceeding faith in the words alone of my servant Abinadi”.
Mosiah 26:20 [26:20–21], page 1486, line 1
The passage cited here is from Mosiah 26:20–21, not just Mosiah 26:20.
Mosiah 26:33, page 1494, line 20
The third line in the citation of Mosiah 26:33 should have an and at the beginning, thus “and that he might judge the people of that church”.