Amalekite(s) Amlicite(s) Variant

From Book of Mormon Onomasticon
Revision as of 13:40, 29 April 2016 by JKeenerInd (talk | contribs) (Format update)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Variant spelling of AMALEKITES

Alma 2:11

  • P: Amlikites
  • 1830-1981: Amlicites

Alma 2:12

  • P: Amlikites
  • 1830-1981: Amlicites

Alma 21:2

  • P-1840: Amalekites
  • 1841: Amelekites
  • 1849-1981: Amalekites

Alma 43:6

  • O: Amelekites
  • P-1981: Amalekites

Alma 43:6

  • O: Amaleckites
  • P-1981: Amalekites

Alma 43:13

  • O: Amalickites
  • P-1981: Amalekites

Alma 24:1

  • O: Amelicites
  • P-1981: Amalekites
  • Alma 24:28
  • O: Amelicites
  • P-1981: Amalekites

Alma 24:29

  • O: Am( )
  • P-1981: Amalekites

Alma 27:2

  • O: Amelic( )
  • P-1981: Amalekites

Alma 43:20

  • O: Amelickites
  • P-1981: Amalekites

General Discussion: Amalekites is standard in all instances of P, but O shows variation. The gentilic may have been spelled Amalekite because of the earlier occurrence of AMALEKI in the Book of Mormon, or the biblical group of the same name. The variation Amelicites is identical to AMLICITES except for the "intrusive e". Skousen thinks this intrusive e was influenced by other Book of Mormon names where a vowel is found between the m and l, as in AMALEKI, AMULEK, and AMULON. The current spelling, AMALEKITES, is actually only found once in O (as the last occurrence), in Alma 43:44; other instances are not extant. Fletcher and [John A. Tvedtnes|Tvedtnes]] also argue that these two groups should be merged (Lyle Fletcher, unpubl. paper, early 1990s; John Tvedtnes, The Most Correct Book [ SLC: Cornerstone, 1999 ], 324-325).

General Source: ATV 3: 1605-9.

General Summary: Skousen believes this gentilic should be merged with AMLICITES in all cases, to be only AMLICITES, because of textual evidence about the apostate group and variations in O. Other occurrences discussed in ATV: Alma 21:3, 4 (2x), 5, 16; 22:7; 23:14; 24:1b, 29; 27:12; 43:44 discussed on pp. 1607-9.