According to John Sorenson, two readings make equal sense in the reading of the phrase "Zarahemla, who was a descendant of Mulek, and those who came with him" (Mosiah 25:2). If the comma after "Mulek" was inserted correctly (initially by the printing crew, who did most of the punctuation for the first English edition), then the meaning would be that the "Mulekites" consisted of people whose ancestors included both Mulek and others, "those who came with him." But an alternative reading would be possible if the comma after "Mulek" should be omitted; in that case, Zarahemla himself would be represented as descended from both Mulek and others of Mulek's party. Sorenson takes the former meaning and supposes that other groups than Zarahemla's coexisted with them (though apparently not at the capital, the city of Zarahemla). According to Sorenson, this may be part of the reason the man Zarahemla is nowhere called king--because he had political authority only over one of those groups springing from the Mulek party and that one very localized. Consequently a lesser title--something like "chief"--would have fitted him better. [John Sorenson, "When Lehi's Party Arrived, Did They Find Others in the Land?" in the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Fall 1992, F.A.R.M.S., p. 15]