SORENSON'S GEOGRAPHY

The most fundamental geographical problem associated with Sorenson's model has to do with issues of directionality. This is revealed clearly in Map 2. In order for his model to fit the geography of Mesoamerica, one must assume that the Nephites had a system of directions with cardinal directions skewed “45 degrees or more" off of the usually observed cardinals (Sorenson 1985, 39). Unfortunately Sorenson never gives an exact figure and provides no map showing Nephite cardinals. Works by David Palmer (1981, 241-50) and Bruce Warren and Thomas Stuart Ferguson (1987, 334-35) do have maps, based on Sorenson's model, showing true north and "Nephite north" which are more than 60 degrees apart. In other words, the whole directional card must be shifted more than 60 degrees to the west for this model to fit the geography of the chosen area. Otherwise, as Vogel (1985) has pointed out, the land north will be on the west, the land south on the east, and so forth. Also the River Sidon (Grijalva River) would be flowing from east to west through the Land of Zarahemla. Making this shift in directions creates its own set of problems, however, because in such a Nephite directional system the sun would come up in the south and set in the north.

Sorenson advances several arguments to explain why Book of Mormon peoples might adopt such a system. He provides examples from a number of cultures to demonstrate that human societies handle directionality and the labeling of directions in diverse ways. Still the Book of Mormon account offers what appears to be a standard scheme of cardinal directions, presumably a scheme brought from the Near East. Picking up a line of argument advanced by Palmer, Sorenson singles out one Hebrew directional scheme which had east as forward, north as left hand, south as right hand, and west as seaward. According to this argument, when Lehi's party landed on the Pacific coast of Mesoamerica, they were confused by their new surroundings and, relying on this scheme, assumed that west was seaward. Later when they realized this could not be so, they somehow retained this altered system of directionality.

As Mormon writer John A. Tvedtnes has noted, the ancient Israelite directional system discussed by Palmer and Sorenson was one of two systems. In the second and more common Israelite system, the term for east means "dawn" and the term for west means "entering, setting" (1982, 9). Both Israelite directional systems were sun-oriented, specifically oriented toward the rising sun. In the directional system mentioned by Palmer and Sorenson, east was "forward" precisely because when facing east one faced the rising sun. The basis of the directional system was the path of the sun not the location of the sea. Sorenson in his discussion of the temple built by Nephi and his people points out that it would have been oriented as was the Temple of Solomon so that the rising sun on equinox day (either March 21 or September 21) sent its first rays through the temple doors (Sorenson 1985, 143). This equinoctial orientation would seem to indicate that Lehi's group was well aware of the positions of the standard cardinal directions soon after their arrival.

. . .

Another approach to the problem of directional systems is to investigate what is known about the directional systems of Mesoamerican peoples, particularly those located within the area chosen by Sorenson. Barbara Tedlock has studied modern directional terminology of the Quich6 Maya, who live in the highlands of Guatemala (1992, 2-3). She notes that the Quiche words for east and west make overt reference to the motion of the sun. East is referred to as "at the rising of the sun" and west as "at the setting of the sun." North and south are given indirect terms referring to the sun's right and left sides as it travels west. Other Maya languages have similar terminologies.

Of course this modern terminology might not relate to ancient concepts. Thanks to the decipherment of directional glyphs found in Classic Maya inscriptions and in Postclassic Maya codices, it is possible to discuss the Classic Maya directional system. Although some ongoing debate on the topic continues, most epigraphers suggest that the Classic directional system was much like the modern one described by Tedlock. It emphasized the daily route of the sun across the sky and through the underworld (east, zenith, west, nadir) rather than the cardinal directions (Tedlock 1992,173-78). Early Classic period Tomb 12 at Rio Azul in the northeastern Peten of Guatemala has a directional glyph painted on each of its four walls. The glyph that indicates "sun" or "day" is infixed in the superfix above the directional glyph on the east wall; the glyph for "night" or "darkness" is infixed over the directional glyph on the west wall. The moon glyph is similarly associated with the directional glyph on the north wall, and the Venus glyph is associated with the directional glyph on the south wall. Thus this directional system may have been in existence during the proper time in at least part of the area chosen by both Sorenson and Hauck. The fact that the terms for east and west were sun related in many languages argues strongly against a shift of these same terms to a different orientation.

Certainly the problem of directionality is a critical issue in the Sorenson geography, but there are other problems as well. For example. Bruce Warren has rightly pointed out that the Yucatan Peninsula remains a "sore thumb" in the Sorenson and Hauck geographies (1990, 134). The constraints of their models force both to ignore this large area for the most part, yet some of the most important developments occurring during the Book of Mormon period took place there. Many examples and analogies have been taken from the Maya culture of Yucatan by various authors to support aspects of Sorenson's model, but the model itself cannot accommodate the area. It is clear from the archaeological record that trade and other forms of contact between various parts of the Maya area began early and continued throughout the Book of Mormon period. It is difficult to explain why this large and important area containing some of the largest cities ever built in Mesoamerica would escape even the barest mention in the Book of Mormon. This is a significant weakness in both the Hauck and Sorenson models.