Interpreting Interpreter: A Martyrdom-Based Macro-Chiasm

This post is a summary of the article “The Literary Structure of Alma 23–27” by Derek Squire in Volume 64 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/.

A video introduction to this Interpreter article is now available on all of our social media channels, including on YouTube at https://youtube.com/shorts/2DWSHHv_8LU.

The Takeaway

Squire proposes a macro-chiasm that spans Alma 23:16 to Alma 27:30, suggesting that it helps establish a connection between Abinadi—whose prophecy of the deaths of Amulon’s seed saw fulfillment in that passage—and the martyred Lamanite converts the chiasm describes, each dying by fire because of their faith. He also identifies several micro-chiasms within the larger structure that reinforce similar themes.

The Summary

In this article, Derek Squire presents and evaluates a macro-chiasm spanning Alma 23:16 to Alma 27:30, covering the narrative of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies, including their conversion and martyrdom. The chiasm is proposed to contain the following elements:

- A and A’. The converts of the Sons of Mosiah are distinguished via a new name, the “Anti-Nephi Lehies” (Alma 23:16–Alma 24:4). This corresponds to them being distinguished by a different name (the people of Ammon) after taking possession of the land of Jershon (Alma 27:25-30).

- B and B’. The words of King Anti-Nephi-Lehi, as recorded in Alma 24:5-19 and Alma 27:4-24, include a number of parallel elements, including a common key phrase (“Now when Ammon and his Brethren”, with both describing them seeing work or preparation for destruction), key terms regarding “sins” and “murders” being committed (and the terms are reversed in the two passages), the phrase “take up arms”, mentions of angels, the theme of repentance, and a contrast between the soft hearts of the converted Lamanites and the hearts of the Amalekites.

- C and C’. This element covers the two episodes (Alma 24:20-22 and Alma 27:1-3 where converted Lamanites are slain after refusing to take up arms in their own defense, both containing the key terms the people of Anti-Nephi Lehi and destroying/destroy, which appear in an inverted order in C’.

- D and D’. Following the initial martyrdom, there are repeated elements (Alma 24:23-27 and Alma 25:13-17) involving those who attacked the people of Anti-Nephi Lehi throwing down or burying their weapons of war. There is also a repeated reference to covenant language in Deuteronomy 5:31-33, and key terms (join/joined, people of God) that appear in inverted order within the elements.

- E. The battle and narrative-filled passage of Alma 24:28 to Alma 25:12 marks the centre of the chiasm. Squire argues that the passage is tied together by themes of martyrdom—it is one of only two places that the word “martyrdom” is used, it explicitly mentions Abinadi and his own martyrdom, and those responsible for the deaths of the converts are themselves destroyed. He also suggests that the shared fate of death by fire may have helped convince the Nephites to take in the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi as fellow citizens and believers.

After outlining these elements, Squire evaluates this proposed chiasm using criteria proposed by Neal Rappleye. He argues that it largely conforms with these criteria, though at times in unexpected ways. For instance, though the chiasm crosses the original chapter boundaries of the text (which span Alma 23-26 and 27-29), it includes the entire narrative of the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi until they are given a different name by the Nephites, suggesting a relevant literary boundary. Squire also argues on behalf of its central martyrdom theme, its balance (30 verses before and 35 after the central element), and the relative lack of competing literary structures (despite alternate structures proposed by Donald Parry).

He also discusses the role of Alma 26, which does not feature in the chiasm, but which Squire frames as a “strategic interruption of the narrative”, similar to how the Zoramite rebellion introduced in Alma 35 is interrupted by Alma’s instruction to his sons in Alma 36-42 before the rebellion is described in Alma 43. Ammon departs from the narrative of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies to describe rejoicing with his brothers, perhaps in connection with the good news of additional conversions that he relates in Alma 25. This joyous aside may help strengthen the structure of the chiasm, taking the place of the positively-framed conversion of the Lamanites which is present in D but absent in D’.

Squire also identifies two micro-chasms within that larger structure, both of which also feature nine units, that appear to emphasize similar themes, including:

- Alma 25:5-8, which is centered on the theme of conversion and is framed by a repeated element describing the seed of Amulon fleeing “into the east wilderness”.

- Alma 25:9-12, centered on belief in God, and including repeated elements regarding being hunted by the Lamanites, words being verified/brought to pass, and suffering or being caused to be put to death by fire.

As Squire concludes:

“The chiasm has . . . distinct framing, multiple inverted parallels, significant repeated phrases only found in matching elements, and an illuminating center that can deepen readers’ appreciation for the legacy left by the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi. It focuses upon their incomparable zeal towards God and their heroic willingness to “suffer death in the most aggravating and distressing manner which could be inflicted by their brethren” (Alma 27:29) because of their faith in Christ.”

The Reflection

This is a fun proposal, and it’s hard to deny that there’s something intention about many of these repeated elements. The associated micro-chiasms with identical elements is a neat touch—if indeed intended, it fills me with an even deeper adoration of Mormon’s literary skill. Now that Squire has outlined two such macro-chiasms in Alma, I wonder if we’ll get to see a third at some point. Even if not, he provides yet another example of how rewarding it is to take the Book of Mormon seriously on its literary merits.

Contents