To see the context for this and other questions in this series, please see the introduction, parts 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Zoram—Na‘ar or Stock Character?
A year or two before I retired
from BYU Studies, we considered an article that I argued against publishing (“Rediscovering
Zoram: The Chief Na‘ar of the Commander of the Fortress”). I felt it fell under
the category of apologetics that read way too much into the Book of Mormon
account. Eventually, after some (but in my mind not enough) revision, we did
publish the article. The main premise of the article, in a nutshell, was that
Laban was the commander of the fortress in Jerusalem, and Zoram was his chief na‘ar,
or right-hand man. Because of this assumption, the author also assumes that the
brass plates that Laban had in the fortress’s treasury actually belonged to the
king (even though the text says that Laban had the plates because he was a
descendant of Joseph, as was Lehi). Zoram, being the commander’s right-hand man
not only had the keys to the treasury but was also an experienced soldier and
trusted advisor to Laban who would likely have been present when Nephi and his
brothers came asking for the plates.
When I say nutshell, I mean it.
This article is 38 pages long and goes into great depth in making the case for
both Laban as commander of the fortress and Zoram as his na‘ar. Some of it
seems reasonable, but the overall assumptions in the article just feel too
far-fetched, based on what we are actually told about both Laban and Zoram.
Laban was obviously some kind of important
man in Jerusalem. The only indications we have in the text that Laban was a
military leader, however, are Laman’s complaint that Laban “is a mighty man,
and he can command fifty, yea, even he can slay fifty; then why not us?” (1 Ne.
3:21) and the fact that when Nephi found him unconscious from too much wine, Laban
was wearing armor and had a sword (1 Ne. 4:9, 19). There is no mention of a
fortress. In fact, when Laman goes alone to ask for the plates and then when
all four brothers go to barter for them, they go to Laban’s “house.” And when Laban
covets their possessions and tries to have the brothers killed, he sends “servants,”
not soldiers. This may be nitpicking, but even after Nephi has chopped off
Laban’s head and has donned his clothing and armor, he goes straight to Laban’s
treasury (not the king’s). I’ve always wondered how Nephi could chop off Laban’s
head and take his clothing off without getting any blood on the attire, but that’s
a mystery for another day. Significantly, there is no mention of Nephi having
to gain access to a fortress, where guards would certainly be posted. Of
course, maybe Nephi (apparently with the Lord’s help) can pass himself off as
Laban, but that isn’t mentioned. In the account, he meets only the servant who
has the keys to the treasury. And Zoram is perfectly fooled and willing to
accompany Nephi out of the city with the brass plates.
Here’s where my major problems
with the article begin. If Zoram really is the commander’s chief na‘ar and is
an accomplished soldier, he certainly wouldn’t leave the city at night without
his sword. And when it becomes apparent that Nephi is not Laban but is instead
a large teenager who has stolen Laban’s clothing, armor, and sword, wouldn’t he
put up a fight for the plates? Yes, he’s outnumbered once the three brothers show
up, but if he’s the na‘ar, he would not be so easily cowed. But Young Nephi is
able to put him in a half-nelson and extract a promise from him that he will
accompany them as a free man into the wilderness. The assumption here, I
suppose, is that Zoram is likely not a free man already, which, by the way, a
chief na‘ar would be.
The story here just seems too
convenient for me. Zoram doesn’t put up any sort of fight, which suggests he’s
probably more a clerk than a soldier. He also apparently has no family in the
city who will miss him. Certainly no wife and children. A little later, he
marries the oldest daughter of Ishmael, which suggests that he is older than
Laman. And yet he is endlessly devoted to Nephi, who is likely a teenager when he
extracts the oath from the older Zoram. When Lehi blesses all his children and
grandchildren in the promised land before he dies, he also blesses Zoram and
tells him he is “a true friend unto my son, Nephi, forever” (2 Ne. 1:30). Zoram
also goes with Nephi when the family splits after Lehi’s death. But if Zoram
were some sort of accomplished soldier, why does he not come to Nephi’s aid
when his brothers tie him up and otherwise mistreat him? No, Zoram just
disappears during these fraternal conflicts. He’s sort of a shrinking violet.
In fact, the odd convenience of this whole account makes Zoram seem more like a
stock character than a real person. He’s certainly a conundrum, which is probably
why this particular author goes to such great and creative lengths to try to
account for who he is—and
goes well beyond the evidence in the book to make Zoram into some sort of
larger-than-life soldier/hero type.
The article points out that Zoram’s
descendants are apparently a militaristic bunch. But that is hundreds of years
later. In Nephi’s actual account of Zoram, there is nothing to suggest that
Zoram himself is some sort of military man. Even in the wars with the
Lamanites, it is Nephi who leads them to battle, not Zoram (see Jacob 1:10). To
me, he seems to be a stock character added to make some of the plot work out.
He’s rather one-dimensional.
Indeed, the whole brass plates
adventure has me scratching my head. If it was so important for Lehi to have
the brass plates, why didn’t the Lord just send an angel, put Zoram to sleep, extract
the plates from the treasury, and deposit them on the doorstep of Lehi’s tent, as
he did with the Liahona? Why cause Laban to be drunk, have Nephi murder him, and
steal Zoram away from whatever family he had in Jerusalem? All this creates a
more complicated storyline, but some of it doesn’t add up for me, at least not
as it is told in the account of Nephi.
So, in conclusion, is Zoram a na‘ar
or just a stock character? Maybe neither. Maybe he’s just a largely
insignificant element in the story once they have the brass plates, and since
engraving on plates is difficult and time-consuming, maybe Nephi just didn’t find
him compelling enough to include more about him, his actions, or his
background. Same goes, apparently, for Sam and the sons of Ishmael and younger
brother Joseph and all the wives except maybe Sariah. And, while Laman and Lemuel
are more two-dimensional, they too are pretty flat characters in the story.
They serve as Nephi’s big nemesis, but what do we really know about their thoughts
or feelings or motivations? Not much. Nephi’s
account is pretty much all about him and his dad.
