Helaman 13:24 Textual Variants

Both 𝓟 and the 1830 edition read “and do do all manner of iniquity”. Here the first do is the auxiliary verb and the second do is the main verb. 𝓞 undoubtedly had both do’s since in this part of the text the 1830 edition and 𝓟 are each firsthand copies of 𝓞. The 1837 edition reduced the double do to a single do (thus omitting the auxiliary do). Nonetheless, each of the preceding conjoined predicates maintained their initial do auxiliary: “do cast out … do mock them and cast stones … do slay them”. Although there are no other examples in the text of the present-tense do do, there are 15 of the past-tense did do, of which three were emended to simply did in the 1837 edition (see the discussion under 1 Nephi 2:14, 2 Nephi 5:18, and Ether 11:14 for these three cases).

One might wonder here in Helaman 13:24 if there isn’t a missing do before the conjoined verb phrase “and cast stones at them”; that is, perhaps the original text read “and do mock them and do cast stones at them”. Note, however, that the verb phrases “mock them” and “cast stones at them” may be expected to occur together: one could mock the prophets and at the same time cast stones at them. On the other hand, casting out the prophets and slaying them could be considered separate actions. One could argue that here in Helaman 13:24 there is an auxiliary do for each of four actions: (1) casting out prophets, (2) mocking and casting stones at prophets, (3) slaying prophets, and (4) doing “all manner of iniquity unto them” (thus ending with a general all-purpose action). Still, the casting of stones at a prophet could lead to his death, so perhaps the boundaries between types is not that firm.

Another example where the auxiliary do may not be repeated for semantically similar verb phrases is found earlier in this book:

• Helaman 3:8
  • and it came to pass that they did multiply and spread and did go forth from the land southward to the land northward and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth

In this passage, there is no did before the first occurrence of spread (“they did multiply and spread”). One reason for this lack of repetition may be that the verbs multiply and spread can be considered semantically related and part of the same action, with the result that the closeness is represented by not repeating the auxiliary do for this pair of verbs. We may have a similar situation in Helaman 13:24, and thus the critical text will accept the earliest reading without any do for the conjoined verb phrase “cast stones at them”