ZEEZROM

Lehite PN	1.	Lawyer and convert from Ammonihah, ca. 82 BC (Alma 10:31; Helaman 5:41)
	2.	City, probably named from No. 1, ca. 65 BC (Alma 56:14)

Some commentaries have suggested the name of the 3rd Dynasty Egyptian king, Djoser, written in Egyptian dsr (LID, 30; see also ABM, 234). However, unless the double initial vowel in the orthography represents a long vowel and not two separate vowels (as the “Pronouncing Guide” suggests), the connection with Egyptian dsr seems unlikely.

More likely is a combination with Zeez- possibly from the PNs Zizah ( zīzāh, 1 Chronicles 23:11) or Ziza ( zīzaʾ, 2 Chronicles 11:20), and rām, “exalted.” and -rom, the latter coming from the common Semitic rām, “to raise up, exalt.” The common West-Semitic zz, a weight or coin, would make sense, especially if metonymy is involved. Punic ṣṣ is of uncertain meaning, but could have something to do with birds (DNWS), which would make some sense in this PN. Hebrew ṣyṣ, “blossom, to bloom,” does not make sense in this PN. Neither does Hebrew zyz, “udder, teat,” make sense.

Possibly Hebrew zeh and Ezrom, “this is Ezrom” (JAT, GT). If so read, the seeming digression on Nephite coinage (otherwise a great waste of precious space in an explicit condensation) links directly from Alma 11:12 and the silver coin Ezrom to vs. 21 and the person Zeezrom, and in vs. 22 to the offer “Behold, here are six Onties (= 10.5 Ezrom) of silver, and all these will I give thee if thou wilt deny the existence of a Supreme Being.” Zeezrom becomes linked with those who would sell their signs and tokens for money on the one hand, and with Judas’s 30 pieces of silver on the other. Viewed in this light, Zeezrom might mean “the one with money.” Also internal to the text might be the Zoramite city of pride and wealth, Antionum (Alma 31:3ff). Its name seems to be built upon the most valuable unit of Nephite coinage, the gold Antion (Alma 11:19) (GT).

The lengthy digression in the Zeezrom account, however, may simply have been added for purposes of informing the future reader concerning the monetary matters to be discussed, in order to stress how much was being offered in the bribe. For the same reason, there is another lengthy digression from the story in Alma 22:27–35 to discuss the geography of the Nephite/Lamanite lands. This information was evidently placed in the text to impress upon the future reader how much was involved in the sending forth of the proclamation by the king of the Lamanites. And, as in the Zeezrom story, after the digression, the story begins again by repeating the last sentence of the main story (Alma 23:1). Thomasson’s case for metonymy in the name Zeezrom is certainly not endangered by this observation. But it would be considerably strengthened were he able to show that a similar reason exists for the digression in Alma 22 (JAT).

Cf. Book of Mormon ZORAM, CEEZROM, SEEZORAM, ESROM, EZROM, et al.