Interpreting Interpreter: Jarom’s Chiasmus

The Takeaway

Ehat proposes a detailed verbal and thematic structure for the book of Jarom, with a chiasm centered on the theme of prosperity stemming from obedience to God’s commandments.

The Summary

In this article, Stephen Kent Ehat summarizes and extends past chiastic proposals for the book of Jarom, ones that structure the book’s 15 verses both thematically and verbally. In both cases the structure is centered on the theme of righteousness-driven prosperity allowing for defense against attacks from the unrighteous, with Jarom citing various aspects of material prosperity in a way that mirrors a similar list from Nephi, forming an example of Distant Chiasmus, where an author intentionally completes a chiasm based on elements written by a previous author.

He begins by outlining the chiasm’s themes (including a simplified version with only seven elements) and repeated verbal elements (featuring, among other things, an interesting parallel between “taught” and “threaten” based on the underlying Egyptian sbȝyt, meaning both “punishment” and “instruction”). These include:

• A and A’, featuring the only two uses of Jarom’s name, and the description of commandments to write on “small” plates.
  
• B and B’, with the repeated element of “their hearts” and discussion of being swept off or destroyed from off the face of the land.
  
• C and C’, including time-related references and strength/contentions.
  
• D and D’, with references to the law of Moses.
  
• E and E’, comparing the Lamanites’ wickedness with a description of what would happen to the Nephites if they failed to keep the commandments.
  
• F and F’, including Lamanites coming against the Nephites but failing to prosper against them.
  
• G and G’, describing the spreading of the Nephites and their preparations for war.
  
• H and H’, enumerating six forms of riches in two sets, the first four being materials (e.g., gold, iron) and two being made from those materials (e.g., buildings, weapons).

Ehat then evaluates the proposal based on established criteria, concluding that the raw number of correspondences help establish objectivity, that the organization appears to have a clear purpose, that it has strong boundaries (covering the entirety of Jarom’s book), doesn’t compete with other rhetorical forms, has substantial length and density of dominant repeated elements, doesn’t randomly repeat elements, has a strong central message, is well balanced (394 words for the first half vs. 339 for the second), and has a meaningful climax and return to its original elements. Though Jarom doesn’t give us much material with which to compare his style, the structure appears both intentional and aesthetically pleasing.

Ehat takes special care in his proposal for “distant chiasmus” between Jarom and Nephi, providing examples where Ezekiel completes a chiasm formed in Deuteronomy, and where Deuteonomy completes a lengthier set of ideas from Genesis. In the case of Jarom, his listing of material prosperity is in a specific order (precious materials, workings in base materials, and making weapons of war), one that reverses Nephi’s list or items in 2 Nephi 5, where he describes making swords and working in wood, iron, brass and steel.

As Ehat concludes:

“Jarom seemingly uses the device of chiasmus to draw attention to two significant types of prosperity that result from righteousness: prosperity in things and prosperity in what is done with those things… The effect of the chiastic structure seems to focus the reader on a truth relevant to Jarom’s time and other times: that a righteous society may survive the murderous attacks of an unrighteous society, even when that survival is secured by a form of prosperity that is manifested in making successful preparations for righteous, defensive war.”

The Reflection

Ehat has produced an interesting analysis of the book of Jarom (even if I could see some having questions about the ordering of the second half of his proposed verbal chiasm). I was especially interested in his discussion of Distant Chiasm, as those who watch my video summary will see. It’s hard to argue that Jarom is doing anything but directly referencing Nephi in his central passage, and the way that allusion is ordered seems far from accidental. To me, this is yet another example of how the Book of Mormon’s literary structure is as far from haphazard as can be imagined. It doesn’t just provide long examples of chiasm or produce them en masse. It doesn’t just distribute them appropriately (which it does). The meaning and subtlety embedded in its application strikes me as very hard (impossible?) for an untrained person of any intellect to produce. The more time I spend summarizing Interpreter’s pages, the more I’m convinced of the strength of the chiastic argument, and of the deep necessity to uncover more of the Book of Mormon’s literary secrets.