Alma 41:4 Textual Variants

Here in Alma 41:4, Oliver Cowdery corrected 𝓞 in an attempt to eliminate two conflicts in grammatical number. The ink flow for both corrections is uneven and distinctly different from the ink flow for the inline text; overall the ink flow for the corrections is sharper and somewhat heavier. Both corrections replace a singular possessive pronoun with the plural their, but for different reasons.

For the first change, Oliver Cowdery replaced his with their in the if-clause, probably because the preceding verse consistently refers to mankind in the plural:

• Alma 41:3
  • and it is also requisite with the justice of God that men should be judged according to their works and if their works were good in this life and the desires of their hearts were good that they should also at the last day be restored unto that which is good

One reason for the original singular his in the if-clause in verse 4 is that the plural they in that verse does not refer to mankind but to works: “if his works are evil / they shall be restored unto him for evil”. Finally, although Oliver changed his to their in 𝓞, he did not notice the contradiction with the following him in his emended reading (“if their works are evil / they shall be restored unto him for evil”). But the editors for the 1920 LDS edition did, and they corrected the him to them. One could argue that the him, the reading in 𝓞, was a mishearing based on the phonetic similarity of them and him, both pronounced /ßm/ in casual speech. See the general discussion under 1 Nephi 10:18–19 for possible mix-ups in the early textual transmission of these two pronouns. Here in Alma 41:4, the earliest reading with his and him will work. Such switches in grammatical number for pronominal reference in generic statements can be found elsewhere in the text, as explained under 1 Nephi 10:18–19. The critical text will restore the singular pronouns his and him here in Alma 41:4 since the correction of his to their in 𝓞 appears to be secondary.

For the second emendation here in 𝓞, Oliver Cowdery replaced its with their because of the preceding plural all things; in other words, “all things shall be restored to its proper order” was replaced by “all things shall be restored to their proper order”. One could argue that Oliver originally wrote its here in 𝓞 because the following text restates the same idea but in the singular: “every thing to its natural frame”. Not only is Oliver’s emendation of its to their supported by grammaticality, but earlier in verse 2 he had just made this same change in 𝓞:

• Alma 41:2
  • for it is requisite that all things should be restored to [its >% their 0|NULL > their 1|their ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST] proper order

Oliver’s correction in verse 2 was immediate: the its was initially erased, then crossed out, and the their was supralinearly inserted. Nonetheless, the original text in verse 2 appears to have actually read their (in accord with standard grammar). For this earlier occurrence, Oliver may have been prompted to write its because that is what he had written down five verses earlier, near the end of Alma 40: “but all things shall be restored to its proper and perfect frame” (Alma 40:23). Only later in the textual history was this earlier instance of its emended to their (by Joseph Smith for the 1837 edition). Another possible reason, one could argue, for Oliver writing its initially in 𝓞 for Alma 41:2 was because of the preceding occurrence of it in that verse (“for it is requisite that all things should be restored to its proper order”), even though that it is existential.

There is clear evidence in the earliest text of cases where the singular pronoun it refers to all things (for a list of five other examples, see under Alma 11:41). Of course, the immediately corrected reading in Alma 41:2 shows that their can also refer to all things. And there are other examples in the earliest text where plural pronoun forms are used to refer to all things, as in the following example:

• 1 Nephi 14:26
  • and also others which have been / to them hath he shown all things and they have written them and they are sealed up to come forth in their purity

Thus either singular or plural pronouns can be used to refer to the plural all things. The critical text will in each of these cases follow the earliest textual sources. Here in Alma 41:4, the critical text will accept the singular pronoun its in “therefore all things shall be restored to its proper order”. The correction in 𝓞 of its to their appears to be secondary.