Social: The description of the treatment of the poor in Antionum presents some problems. On the one hand, we have the separation of the poor from the rich in the synagogues. On the other hand, we have the description of the intentional separation of the rich and the poor. The basic description is easily seen as accurate, but the intentional separation, the denial to the poor of entry in the synagogue, should not be accurate.
It is with trepidation that any commentator should suggest that the text is incorrect, but that is precisely what I suggest here. We have Mormon writing this description from a vastly different time period, and with tendencies we have already seen in Mormon to clearly favor sides in this war between the gospel and all apostates. It is most probable that in this case Mormon is overstating the case. He is accurately describing the segregation of the rich and the poor, but the idea that there would be an intentional prohibition of having the poor inside the synagogue would appear to be Mormon’s analysis, and it is most likely incorrect. Of course such a bold proposition requires some support, so we must look at the situation closely.
First, we must understand the nature of Zoramite society. This is a separate city that is physically apart from other Nephite locations. As with virtually all cities that were not at the top of the political feeding chain, Antionum would be required to supply most of its food for its own people. In Mesoamerica, as well as other early agricultural cities, this means a large number of people dedicated to farming supporting a smaller number of people in the center of the city. Lacking a monetary base, the elite in the city are absolutely dependent upon the support of the farmers to maintain their position. They exchange their religious and political services for the agricultural support of those who actually farm the fields.
What we have just described is essentially a two-tiered social system, with the farmers and the elite. Using Mesoamerica as our model, we know that there was no real middle class this early (though traders and merchants became such much later). To place this two-tiered system into the descriptions of Zoramite society, we have the poor being the farmers, and the ones inside the synagogue, the rich, as the elite rulers of the city. There are any number of reasons why the lower farming class would be willing to support the city-elite, but coercion is not likely to be a major one of them. The farmers are in the fields, and physically separated from the city. If there is undue pressure on them, they could leave. In particular, we have the city of Antionum being fairly new, and the probability is that these farmer class people came with the elite to the area, though there were probably already people in the area.
What we must understand is that the relationship between the farmer-poor and the elite-rich had to have some type of beneficial mutual dependence, or else it would be severed. It is this reason that we must question Mormon’s interpretation of the events. We can believe that the farmer-poor were not found in the synagogues for reasons that we will describe below. What would have been socially fatal, however, was an elite mandatory exclusion of the poor. That would have create a rift between the two tiers of the society, and would have led to the destruction of the society as the farmers began to be alienated from the elite and refused to provide them the necessary food and support.
If they were not prevented physically or by law from entering the synagogues, what created the defacto separation that Alma and his brethren found? In this case, Mormon has preserve the clue, though it could have been deduced from the evidence even without Mormon’s clue. The clue comes from verse 2: “… they were cast out of the synagogues because of the coarseness of their apparel.” It is extremely significant that the apparel of the poor be contrasted with the apparel of the rich. This was the very reason that the Nephite prophets have disparaged costly apparel from the days of Jacob (around five hundred years earlier). We see in Antionum among the Zoramites the very social segregation that the Nephite prophets predicted would come from this emphasis on costly apparel.
To understand how this difference in clothing created a de facto segregation in the society, we need to return to the nature of Zoramite worship. The essential facts are that it is very public, it is designed to physically highlight a particular person, and the text of the prayer declares cultural superiority. When an elite stood on the platform, the “cultural superiority” of the Zoramites was visually displayed in the costly apparel of the person on the platform. That visual presentation reinforced the words of the prayer by presenting the economic evidence of prosperity in public view.
Imagine the effect of a farmer-poor standing on the Rameumptom. The very first thing that happens is that the individual is singled out. As a person with little political force, and most likely no social standing, the person is immediately out of place on the platform. The difference in apparel further highlights the difference between them, and the farmer-poor would feel tremendously self-conscious on the top of this very public platform. Next, he would have to present this speech of superiority, when his own position was demonstrably not superior to anyone. Thus he would not only be in a very public and exposed position, but reciting a prayer that highlighted differences in a way that did not favor him. The very public display of the Rameumptom favored the elite, and naturally excluded the poor. The elite did not have to prohibit the poor from entering the synagogue, as everything about the construction of the place and the ceremony was more effective prohibition than any law could have been.