The earliest text reads “because of the numerority of their forces having slain a vast number of our men”. This reading presents two problems. First, the word numerority seems problematic. Second, the construction itself is syntactically difficult. These two problems led Joseph Smith to edit the text for the 1837 edition by deleting “of the numerority of ” and by replacing the participial form having with the finite verb form had. Joseph’s editing replaced the original prepositional construction “because of NP” with the subordinate conjunctive construction “because S” (NP stands for a noun phrase and S for a finite clause).
The word numerority is not found in the Oxford English Dictionary nor on Literature Online. If numerority is an actual word, it seems to be a blend of numeral and superiority, meaning perhaps something like ‘numerical superiority’. There is only one instance of it on (beyond numerous references to its occurrence in the earlier text of the Book of Mormon):
This citation derives from a Belgium website, , which makes one wonder if the unnamed author of the text is a native speaker of English.
A more reasonable possibility is that the word numerority in 𝓞 is an error. One possible emendation would be the word numerosity, which differs from numerority by a single letter. Although numerosity is in the OED (with the meaning ‘the state of being numerous’), it is not independently found anywhere in the scriptures. In the OED, citations of numerosity with this meaning date from 1611 up into the 1800s.
A more reasonable emendation for numerority is the word enormity, which is found twice in the Book of Mormon text (and both instances are extant in 𝓞):
This last example is particularly interesting. Although the original manuscript reads enormity, in the printer’s manuscript Oliver Cowdery initially wrote enumerority for this word but then crossed it out and supralinearly wrote enormity. Oliver’s tendency to replace enormity with enumerority strongly suggests that the similar numerority in Alma 56:10 is also an error for enormity. Moreover, in both these passages, there is a following instance of number that could have led to an original enormity being replaced by numerority in the first case and enumerority in the second:
One could argue, of course, that the enumerority in Alma 57:13 was prompted by the numerority in Alma 56:10, but the distance of 4.3 manuscript pages between the two occurrences makes this possibility rather unlikely. Since the word numerority is very problematic, the critical text will assume that it is an error for enormity.
The second problem with the original text here in Alma 56:10 is the awkwardness of a presentparticipial clause as the noun phrase for the prepositional because of. One way to deal with this construction would be to place a comma (or perhaps a dash) after forces:
Such an addition in punctuation would help the reader interpret the present-participial clause “having slain a vast number of our men” as modifying “their forces” rather than “the enormity of their forces”. The intent of Joseph Smith’s editing here (where he deleted “of the numerority of” and changed having to had) was to create an easier reading with that same basic meaning (“because their forces had slain a vast number of our men”).
Summary: Restore the earliest text in Alma 56:10 except that numerority should be emended to enormity (“because of the enormity of their forces / having slain a vast number of our men”); this emendation is supported by Alma 57:13, where Oliver Cowdery initially wrote enumerority in 𝓟 instead of the correct enormity; in Alma 56:10 a comma or a dash could be placed after forces to assist the reader in interpreting the following present-participial clause as modifying “their forces”.