and the judge executed authority and sent forth officers that the man should be brought before him and [𝓢① NULL > 𝓢② he 1|he ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST] judgeth the man
according to the law
Here scribe 2 of 𝓟 seems to have omitted the subject pronoun he, which Oliver Cowdery supplied when he proofed 𝓟 against 𝓞. Clearly, the text here reads better with the he, so
Oliver’s correction could have been due to conscious editing on his part. Although 𝓞 is not extant here, there is enough room between nearby surviving fragments for the he.
There is considerable evidence that scribe 2 of 𝓟 sometimes omitted the subject pronoun he; except for the last example listed below, Oliver Cowdery was the one who supplied the
he in 𝓟 (as here in Alma 11:2):
- Mosiah 27:19
- therefore he was taken by those that were with him and carried helpless even until [𝓢① NULL > 𝓢② he 1|he ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST] was laid before his father
- Alma 5:41
- therefore if a man bringeth forth good works [𝓢① NULL > 𝓢② he 1|he ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST] hearkeneth unto the voice of the good shepherd and he doth follow him
- Alma 8:22
- and it came to pass that Alma ate bread and [𝓢① NULL > 𝓢② he 1| ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST] was filled and he blessed Amulek and his house and he gave thanks unto God
- 3 Nephi 26:15
- and it came to pass that after [𝓢① NULL > 𝓢② he 1|he ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST] had ascended into heaven the second time that he shewed himself unto them …
- 4 Nephi 1:48–49
- and it came to pass that when three hundred and twenty years had passed away Ammaron being constrained by the Holy Ghost did hide up the records which were sacred … even until the three
hundred and twentieth year from the coming of Christ and [ 1|he ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST] did hide them up unto the Lord
For the last two examples, the 1830 edition was set from 𝓞, thus arguing that 𝓞 itself had the pronoun and that scribe 2 was responsible for omitting it in 𝓟.
