Interpreting Interpreter: Helaman’s Secret Service

This post is a summary of the article “Nameless: Mormon’s Dramatic Use of Omission in Helaman 2” by Nathan J. Arp in Volume 62 of Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship. All of the Interpreting Interpreter articles may be seen at https://interpreterfoundation.org/category/summaries/. An introduction to the Interpreting Interpreter series is available at https://interpreterfoundation.org/interpreting-interpreter-on-abstracting-thought/.

[Author’s Note: Hey everyone! This happens to mark the 100th summary I’ve done for Interpreter. I’ve been trying to think of a way to celebrate, and the best thing that comes to mind is hearing from you! If you’ve been getting value out of these, please leave a comment below.]

The Takeaway

Arp proposes that Mormon deliberately withheld the name of Helaman’s servant, as well as details of the potential comrades (termed by Arp as the “Secret Service”) that may have assisted him in opposing the Gadianton Robbers. This silence could have fit the themes of visibility/invisibility in the narrative, or allowed readers to more easily identify themselves with these unnamed heroes.

The Summary

In this article, Nathan J. Arp proposes another example where Mormon appears to have carefully crafted the Book of Mormon text, in this case by omitting names and details when crafting the narrative of the Gadianton Robbers (note that Arp spells it “Gaddianton” throughout as recommended by Skousen’s The Earliest Text). As Mormon details the Nephite’s existential struggles against that band, Arp suggests that the Nephites may have organized a group of trained individuals to infiltrate the group and protect the chief judge. As this group is not named in the text, Arp refers to them as a “Secret Service”. He argues that this service includes more than just the unnamed servant in Helaman 2:6 who killed Kishkumen before he could murder the chief judge—he suggests that its members could have been involved in a number of related episodes, including (1) the infiltration of Paanchi’s conspiring group, helping to apprehend him before he could incite an insurrection, and (2) the contest for the judgment seat between Helaman and an implied Gadianton.

Arp recognizes that there are alternative explanations for each of these episodes. Yet he argues that the skills of Helaman’s servant would require the kind of training that only a professional group could provide, and that Mormon has access to information that would only have been available if the Gadianton robbers had been successfully infiltrated. As for why Mormon would remain silent on the identity of this group and its dealings, Arp provides a few suggestions. Though their names could have been withheld by Nephite recordkeepers to reduce the risk of their work being compromised, Arp favors a literary purpose, in line with Mormon’s apparent rhetorical use of names within the Book of Mormon text. He cites biblical examples where a purposeful silence has been proposed, including the unnamed status of Mary in the Gospel of John and the identity of Abraham’s servant in Genesis 24, suggesting that the careful way in which Mormon revealed or withheld information (1) allowed him to create a sense of drama and suspense, (2) may have allowed readers to more readily adopt the servant’s point of view, and (3) helped set up the relatively invisible Secret Service as a thematic contrast to the Gadianton Robbers, who were meant to be clandestine, but whose dealings and names were well-documented.

As Arp concludes:

“Without access to the full records Mormon used to compose his abridgment, we cannot be sure, but it seems possible that Mormon might intentionally have omitted a name to make a point in a similar fashion as he did playing on a name’s etymology or repeating a name… Mormon’s narrative art displayed in this thrilling episode of espionage and murder identifies Mormon as a careful editor capable of the rare literary magic of revealing hidden truths through silence.”

The Reflection

It’s always tricky to make an argument from silence, but, in my view, it’s usually a safe bet to assume that Mormon knew what he was doing, rather than to assume a lack of intent. As a next step, it would be interesting to see a more complete overview of these kinds of literary silences, what they generally communicate, and how one might be able to distinguish meaningful silences from accidental ones. The fact that they’re silences would make that kind of analysis especially difficult, but it would probably be necessary before we can definitively attach meaning to Mormon’s apparent silence. In the meantime, I’ll admit it’s entertaining to think about the possibility of Arp’s proposed Secret Service. If anyone wants to start penning an associated screenplay (think Bourne Identity meets the Testaments), I’d probably be among the first in line to see it.

Contents