It is fascinating that even though we were introduced to Abish by name earlier, when it comes to the most important part of her participation in this story, she loses her name. She is no longer Abish, but “the woman servant who had caused the multitude to be gathered.” Certainly, the name was shorter, and perhaps the writer (presumably Alma) wanted to reiterate that she had gathered the multitude, but the reader is not so deep into the story that it is likely that she would have been forgotten. Unfortunately, we are dealing with a text from a very patriarchal society, where writing about the important actions focused on the role of men, with women only making rare appearances.
What this also suggests is that the presence of the name “Abish” really was intended as a signal for meaning in the story, rather than her personal name. If it had the meaning of “my father is a man,” then ironically, even her name served a patriarchal function to identify her in relationship to her father’s vision.
What modern readers should understand as we read this ancient text is that while custom emphasized the men, it is obvious that the women played important roles in society, as well as in moving events ahead. Their absence in the text is because they were downplayed, not that they were not important. Abish is very important as she is the actor that brings the miracle to many influential people who needed to be impressed and to understand Lamoni’s conversion.
Similarly, the queen is designated by title, rather than by name, and is seemingly pushed into the background. Nevertheless, it is also very clear that she was so crucial to the story that her part in the story could not be totally suppressed and needed to be told. Indeed, it is the queen’s ability to believe Ammon’s words that provides us with a more realistic model for how we typically accept the gospel, and it validates the true value of that seemingly simple, yet, still powerful, conversion.