In this passage the earliest text seems to be a conflation of the two ways of referring to the yearly chronology in the Book of Mormon. Normally, the choice is between “the/this Xth year passed away” and “X years had passed away”. Here in Mormon 5:5, the original manuscript apparently had a the before the following plural cardinal number (since both 𝓟 and the 1830 edition agree), yet this extra the appears to be a mistake. Such usage is impossible in English; not surprisingly, it is found nowhere else in the Book of Mormon text. The 1920 LDS edition removed this intrusive the.
Another difference worth noting here in Mormon 5:5 is the lack of the perfect auxiliary had. Elsewhere in the text we get the following statistics regarding the occurrence of this auxiliary verb in these two constructions that refer to the passing away of years:
| simple past | past perfect | |
|
singular ordinal usage “this/the Xth year” |
18 | 8 |
|
plural cardinal usage “X years” |
1 | 32 |
We see from these statistics that the text favors the simple past (“passed away” or “did pass away”) with the singular ordinal construction, but the past perfect (“had passed away”) dominates the plural cardinal construction. The statistics show one more case where we have the plural cardinal construction without the perfect auxiliary, namely, in 4 Nephi 1:41: “and thus did two hundred and fifty years pass away”. One could argue that in this other passage the did is a mistake for had. Note that in this case the preceding clauses show a similar syntax with did, and so the use of did at the end of verse 41 seems appropriate for the passage:
In this case, the last did must have been in 𝓞 since both 𝓟 and the 1830 edition have it (for this passage each of these textual sources is a firsthand copy of 𝓞). Consequently, the lack of had in Mormon 5:5 is not conclusive evidence that the original text read as an ordinal construction. Yet we should note here that one could interpret the last did in 4 Nephi 1:40–41 as an error resulting from the two previous occurrences of did in the passage. And there is evidence for this kind of error, although from scribe 2 of 𝓟 rather than from Oliver Cowdery (the presumed scribe in 𝓞 for 4 Nephi):
Even so, the reading with did in 4 Nephi 1:41 is possible and will therefore be retained in the critical text.
Here in Mormon 5:5, in order to get “the three hundred and seventy and nine years” from an original “three hundred and seventy and nine years” (the plural cardinal construction), only the definite article the needs to be inserted. On the other hand, if the original text was “the three hundred and seventy and ninth year”, two errors would be involved: the loss of the ordinal -th ending for the number and the addition of the plural s for the word year. (Of course, if the occurrence of had is also at issue, then from an original “three hundred and seventy and nine years had passed away” the had would have to be lost in addition to adding the the.)
If a clause begins with thus and is followed by a reference to a particular year or a number of years as passing away, we can get either the singular ordinal construction (11 times) or the plural cardinal construction (4 times, excluding the case here in Mormon 5:5). But there is always a crucial systematic difference. With the ordinal construction, the narrative has already indicated that we are in that particular year, either by explicitly stating so or by referring to the previous year. But with the cardinal construction, the use of thus indicates a summarizing statement, namely, that the events described over a number of years are now finished. And the narrative here in Mormon 5:5 follows this second pattern. In Mormon 4:16–17, Mormon describes a major Lamanite campaign against the Nephites in the “three hundred and seventy and fifth year”. After describing the resulting devastation from that campaign, Mormon concludes in Mormon 5:5 that “three hundred and seventy and nine years” had passed away. Since there is no indication until then that the narrative is in that specific year, the use of the ordinal construction would be inappropriate.
The most probable reading for the original text in Mormon 5:5 appears to be “and thus three hundred and seventy and nine years passed away”, even though the lack of the had makes the reading somewhat unexpected. Nonetheless, the example from 4 Nephi 1:41 shows that the had is not necessary. The 1920 emendation will be retained, although the possibility remains that there was a had in the original reading and that it was lost during the dictation of the text.
Summary: Accept the 1920 reading in Mormon 5:5 as the most probable reading of the original text (namely, “and thus three hundred and seventy and nine years passed away”); this emendation proposes the least amount of accidental change in the transmission of the text; there is a possibility, however, that the original text was in the past perfect (“and thus three hundred and seventy and nine years had passed away”); but in either case, internal evidence strongly argues that the cardinal construction, not the ordinal one, is appropriate for this clause that begins with the summarizing thus.