Ross Geddes (personal communication, 6 June 2006) suggests that the noun phrase tribes here in 3 Nephi 7:3 may be an error for chiefs of tribes. In other words, the original text had a conjoining of two parallel noun phrases: “and thus they became chiefs of tribes and leaders of tribes”. Note that in the immediately preceding clause we have both chief and leader: “and every tribe did appoint a chief or a leader over them”. If the original text read chiefs of tribes in verse 3, then the loss of chiefs of must have occurred as Joseph Smith dictated the text to Oliver Cowdery; 𝓞 itself undoubtedly read “tribes and leaders of tribes” since both 𝓟 and the 1830 edition read this way. Geddes points out that there is support for a conjunctive structure involving their chiefs and their leaders, two parallel noun phrases, later on in this chapter:
3 Nephi 7:2 explains that the people became tribes (“and they did separate one from another into tribes”).There are other references to a people becoming a distinct group:
Therefore the reading in 3 Nephi 7:3 (“and thus they became tribes”) is quite possible. But if we emend tribes to chiefs of tribes, then the subject pronoun they can no longer refer to the people or to the tribes (not everyone can be a chief or a leader). In addition, it seems rather implausible, although not impossible, that chiefs of would have been lost during the dictation of the text.
Returning to the earliest reading (“tribes and leaders of tribes”), we find a different difficulty with the subject pronoun they —namely, the they refers to all the people in “they became tribes” but to only part of the people in “and thus they became ... leaders of tribes”. This difficulty suggests an alternative emendation for 3 Nephi 7:3: the they in “they became tribes and leaders of tribes” could be an error for there. In other words, the original text may have read “and thus there became tribes and leaders of tribes”. Unlike the proposed loss of a noun and its following preposition (that is, chiefs of ) during the dictation for this passage, there is considerable evidence in the history of the text for mix-ups between they and there. In fact, most instances involve the change of an original there to they. In the printed editions, we find examples of only that kind:
In Oliver Cowdery’s manuscript work, there are three instances where he initially replaced there with they; there are also two in the opposite direction, where he momentarily replaced an original they with there (each of the two latter instances is marked below with an asterisk):
Thus it is quite possible that Oliver could have mistakenly written they instead of there in 𝓞 for 3 Nephi 7:3. In fact, in the preceding verse there are two instances of they that may have prompted Joseph Smith to dictate they or Oliver Cowdery to write down they instead of the correct there: “and they did separate one from another into tribes … and thus they did destroy the government of the land”. Note especially that the second they, the nearer one, starts out with and thus, just like here in verse 3. So it is quite possible that an original “and thus there became tribes and leaders of tribes” could have been mistakenly written down in 𝓞 as “and thus they became tribes and leaders of tribes”.
In addition, there are two examples in the Book of Mormon text of “there became”, both of which are found nearby:
Note that the first of these examples begins “and thus there became”, just as we would have here in 3 Nephi 7:3 if the original text read “and thus there became tribes and leaders of tribes”.
The difficulty of the earliest reading in 3 Nephi 7:3 (“and thus they became tribes and leaders of tribes”), plus the evidence from Oliver Cowdery’s tendency to replace there with they in the manuscripts (although all examples are momentary errors), argues that the original text in 3 Nephi 7:3 read “and thus there became tribes and leaders of tribes”. The critical text will adopt this emendation.
Summary: Emend 3 Nephi 7:3 by replacing they with there, giving “and thus there became tribes and leaders of tribes”; during the dictation of the text, an original there was replaced, it would appear, with they, most likely prompted by the occurrence of they (especially the nearer one) in the preceding verse: “and they did separate one from another into tribes … and thus they did destroy the government of the land”.