Transcription
Hello. I have not disappeared, nor am I stopping my series on polygamy, but I had a health issue that really slowed me down. And so that's why I've been quiet on YouTube lately.
Thankfully, I've received good medical care. And now I'm working on my next episode about section 132, which I'm really excited about. And I'm also implementing the peer reviewer suggestions for my paper in the Journal of Mormon Polygamy, about the topic of today's video, actually.
But I wanted to pause that and briefly respond to one of the articles recently published about historian John Turner's new biography on Joseph Smith. This article is an interview with John Turner by Janna Ree and appears in her flunking statehood column which is printed in the religion news service. It was also reprinted in the Salt Lake Tribune and is titled Yes, Joseph Smith practiced polygamy.
Now, I want to be clear that I don't take any issue with someone examining the documents, testimonies, and evidence and concluding that Joseph Smith did secretly marry dozens of teenage girls and women. The historical record is an absolute mess with conflicting accounts that are compounded by the fact that immediately after Joseph's death in 1844, records were changed under the direction of the 12. So, if you look at this mess and find the evidence of Joseph Smith's polygamy compelling, I'm okay with that.
But as someone who does not believe that the documents, testimonies, and evidence demonstrate that Joseph Smith was a polygamist, but rather that Christian polygamy began to be experimented with during that time, and that there is evidence of polygamy entering the church through multiple directions, despite Joseph Smith's best efforts to put it down. The thing I do take issue with is the straw man that Janna Ree and John Turner and many scholars I've listened to construct on this topic and then easily take down. I think this article is a good example of the narrative that's being perpetuated. And I'm going to give some context to some of the claims and assumptions made and explain why I come to a different conclusion.
Ree begins the conversation. In the book's opener, you point out that Smith was beloved by most who knew him, that he was a generous man with a great sense of humor. You also say on that same page that he had flaws, and that I wouldn't trust him with my money, my wife, or my daughter, after some discussion about finances, Turner says, "Joseph pursues plural marriage so recklessly. Regardless of whether one accepts plural marriage as a divinely instituted principle for that time and place or not, Joseph goes about it with a disregard for existing human relationships on Earth. He proposes to the wives of some of his followers, including some close followers, and he proposes to Sydney Rigdon's daughter. Even Brigham Young was worried Joseph Smith was going to take his wife."
Let's pause right here so I can respectfully disagree with Turner's historical assertions. Like much of the early Mormon polygamy narrative, believing that Joseph Smith proposed to Nancy Rigdon requires us to ignore the contemporaneous and later records left by the principal players, including Sydney Rigdon and Nancy Rigdon herself. So, briefly, John Bennett is the one who published the story about Joseph Smith proposing to Nancy Rigdon, the daughter of Joseph Smith's first presidency counselor, Sydney. John Bennett had joined the Saints in Nauvoo and was discovered to have a wife and children back in Ohio, even though he was acting like an eligible bachelor in Nauvoo. After Bennett had ingratiated himself with Joseph Smith, Bennett and some other men were accused of using Joseph's name to commit sexual immorality, saying Joseph approved of men and women essentially fornicating in secret. There was other drama too and ultimately Bennett ended up leaving the church and he went to war against the saints.
Bennett's main weapon of assault was words. He and a few men accused of similar indiscretions told lots of stories and soon rumors were flying, including one about Joseph Smith proposing to Nancy Rigdon. Joseph filed a criminal complaint against one of the accusers for slander. Joseph's Journal records multiple meetings with Sydney Rigdon during this time. Sydney's son-in-law got involved, and there seemed to be a lot of hurt feelings about various issues, money owed, things like that.
A couple months after John Bennett's departure, newspapers began publishing a series of letters from Bennett exposing the Mormons. And these letters were just a deluge of defamation and slander. Readers were assured that Joseph Smith's villain and imposture surpasses in criminality and infamy anything that has been brought to light in the history of civilized society. Just about everyone in the church was included in Bennett's condemnation. He said that his experience with Mormons had shown him that most of them are liars, thieves, robbers, murderers, and everything that is vile, low, and gring.
Included in the many accusations was a story which Bennett repeated a few times in which he asserted that Joseph Smith, who himself was married with four living children at that time, proposed to 19-year-old Nancy Rigdon. Bennett named several individuals who would back his claim, including Nancy Rigdon herself and her brother-in-law, Sydney's son-in-law, George Robinson. George published a response that he did not support Bennett's accusations even though George himself was done with the church and used his public letter to formally withdraw.
The church also published a response on August 1st, 1842 in the Times and Seasons newspaper, which Joseph Smith oversaw as editor. The issue was essentially an expose on John Bennett, laying out the entire history of Bennett's wicked deeds among the saints. Bennett's accusations were denounced as false with multiple testimonies witnessing against his lies. You see here a statement by Pamela Michael who was cited in a different story or different rumor. She said, "In as much as JC Bennett has referred the people to me for testimony against President Joseph Smith, I take this opportunity to state before the public that I know nothing derogatory to his character, either as a Christian or a moral man." Mr. Bennett made use of my name without my knowledge or consent.
This issue also included a statement by Sydney Rigdon that had been published in the Wasp newspaper a few days earlier. As there seems to be some foolish notions that I have been engaged with JC Bennett in the difficulties between him and some of the citizens of this place, I merely say in reply to such idle and vain reports that they are without foundation in truth.
Bennett then published another volley of letters, this time quoting a letter Joseph Smith allegedly wrote to Nancy Rigdon, what is now referred to as the happiness letter. Quoting just a short portion of Bennett's introductory narrative. What Joe's morality amounts to can be learned from his letter to Miss Rigdon. Joe Smith in the letter alluded to undertakes to sustain by the scriptures by reason, argument, and God's revelation to himself the lawfulness of his spiritual wife doctrine. The argument is very specious, and had it been addressed to a young lady of only ordinary attainments, a believer in Joe's divine mission, it is not improbable it might have accomplished the object designed by Smith. But happily for Miss Rigdon, she was too well-informed, possessed too much moral firmness, and was too deeply imbued with the true religion of the Bible to be overcome by Smith's hellish schemes.
After quite a bit more commentary, Bennett presents what he says is an exact copy of Joe Smith's letter to Miss Nancy Rigdon to William Richards, one of the Holy Mormon apostles. And we see the text, happiness is the object and design of our existence and will be the end thereof if we pursue the path that leads to it. At the close of the text, Bennett explains, "Thus reads the prophet Joe's love letter to Miss Rigdon. To understand it, I refer you to the spiritual wife doctrine Hidor alluded to. I told you before that the great Solomon was a novice in these matters compared to Joe." and he goes on from there.
Soon after, Sydney Rigdon published another statement in the Wasp newspaper. It reads, "Dear sir, I am fully authorized by my daughter Nancy to say to the public through the medium of your paper that the letter purporting to have been written by Mr. Joseph Smith to her was unauthorized by her, and that she never said to General Bennett or any other person, that said letter was written by said Mr. Smith, nor in his handwriting, but by another person and in another person's handwriting. She further wishes me to say that she never at any time authorized General Bennett to use her name in the public papers, as he has done, which has been greatly to the wounding of her feelings, and she considers the obtruding of her name before the public to the manner in which it has been done, to say the least of it, is a flagrant violation of the rules of gallantry, and cannot avoid to insult her feelings, which she wishes the public to know. I would further state that Mr. Smith denied to me the authorship of that letter. P.S. I wish the Sangamo Journal and all papers that have copied Bennett's letters to copy this also as an act of justice to Miss Rigdon."
Following Joseph's death, lots of interesting things happened. John Bennett went and joined the Strangites and then the Strangites adopted polygamy as a doctrine. People sometimes point to the Strangites' polygamy as evidence that Joseph instituted polygamy because James Strang was not a breakoff from Brigham Young's group. But John Bennett was the common denominator here. And John Bennett was also kicked out of the Strangites for sexual misconduct, just as he was with the Latter-day Saints in Nauvoo. I think John Bennett wasn't a polygamy insider, he was a polygamy instigator.
But back to the Nancy Rigdon story. After Joseph's death, Sydney Rigdon was excommunicated by the 12 who had been elected to lead the church, and he permanently relocated to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania with other followers who opposed the 12 leadership. He was adamant that the 12 had been and were committing polygamy in secret, but did not believe the Smiths were involved. Here's one statement from October 1844. "It is a fact so well known that the 12 and their adherence have endeavored to carry on this spiritual wife business in secret that I hardly need mention it here and have gone to the most shameful and desperate lengths to keep it from the public." However, a very thorough snow job was well underway, as I'll explain more in a few minutes. And by 1846, Rigdon had changed his conclusion, believing that Joseph and Hyrum had indeed introduced polygamy. "This system of polygamy was introduced by the Smiths sometime before their death, and was the thing which put them into the power of their enemies, and was the immediate cause of their death." Importantly though, Rigdon did not reference his own personal experience to give weight to this claim. He believed what others said about Joseph and his brothers. Rigdon never claimed or even implied that Joseph proposed to his daughter. He did not even address the rumored story again.
Later in her life, however, Nancy Rigdon did address this story. In 1884, a reverend in the Church of God debated an elder in the RLDS church. Quoting from the history of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. During this discussion and at other times, it had been asserted that Nancy Rigdon, daughter of Sydney Rigdon, had testified to some very damaging things against the character of Joseph Smith. This prompted elders William H. and Eel. Kelly to interview the lady. May 14th, 1884. Elder Eel Kelly wrote of this interview as follows. On being questioned with reference to her knowledge of sealing and polygamy, Nancy Rigdon said that she lived with her father in Kirtland till the year 1838 when they went to the state of Missouri, that she never heard tell of such a thing as sealing or polygamy in Kirtland. We called her attention to the fact that one William Smith, a Campbellite exhorter, stated to us in Kirtland that he heard he thought that she was sealed to Joseph Smith in Kirtland. She says, "It is absolutely false. I never heard of such a thing while in Kirtland as sealing." We asked, "Were you ever at any time or place sealed to Joseph Smith?" "I was never at any time." She then said her father went from Missouri to Nauvoo, arriving in Nauvoo in the year 1840. They lived there till the 18th of June 1844 when her father started with his family to this city, Pittsburgh. And they arrived here the same day Joseph Smith was killed in Illinois, June 27th, 1844. We then asked her, "When did you first hear of polygamy in Nauvoo?" She said she never heard of it while they lived in Nauvoo. Did you know any person while you lived in Nauvoo who was married to more than one wife or had more than one wife at the same time? "I did not." When did you first hear of the so-called revelation on polygamy? "I never heard of it until after we came to Pittsburgh and sometime after. I could not say just how long." Did you not hear talk that there was such a thing while you lived in Nauvoo? "I never did." When did you first hear about sealing? "I heard about this first about the year 1842. I believe it was in this year." How old were you at this time? "I was born in the year 1822." What was this sealing and what was the object of it? "I cannot say that I ever understood it fully. Cannot give the object." Was it a state of marriage and did it contemplate living together as husband and wife? "I never so understood it." She then stated that she thought Joseph Smith was quite a different man in spirit and manner the last year or two that she knew him from what he was in the other time she had known him from 1831 to 1842. In her language, she said, "He seemed entirely different, but I never knew or even heard that he had more than one wife."
It is astonishing to me that historians ignore Nancy Rigdon's own words. I know why we Latter-day Saints ignore them, because it's from the RLDS history, and we think we're right and they're wrong. But I'm astonished that historians ignore Nancy's consistent public statements and the good evidence that Joseph was not the author of the Happiness Letter in favor of rumors that were called slander and lies at the time they were published and later served to support the Utah church's power structure and its claims of authority. These sources claiming Joseph proposed to Nancy coalesced together over time for a purpose. And then historians like Fawn Brody, Richard Van Wagoner, Richard Bushman, and now John Turner have continuously repackaged them so that it's pretty easy to just repeat what's already been said a thousand times. Never mind what Sydney, Joseph, and Nancy herself said. It's easy, but I don't think that that sort of thing makes for reliable history. Nancy Rigdon understood Joseph Smith was doing some sort of sealing ordinance, but she never understood it to be related to polygamy. Polygamy had to be written over Joseph's works. And that is why the saints that ended up in Utah understood sealing differently than those that stayed behind. Those ceilings, they were told, "Well, this is what it actually meant. Sorry you didn't understand it at the time, but that's what it is. Joseph told us."
Before I move on to the next question in Ree's interview, I want to address what Turner said about Brigham Y. Young. Now, John Turner wrote a biography of Brigham Y. Young that was published in 2012. And obviously, he's read and studied a lot about Brigham Y. Young. So honestly, I'm surprised that he gives Brigham stories as much credence as he does, especially when they're about Joseph Smith. Brigham Young told a lot of stories, and he believed that he was right to tell those stories. But that doesn't make the stories that Brigham told factually true. Moral judgment about Brigham's character aside, you can clearly see in the historical record that he factually misrepresented Joseph Smith to give his own desires legitimacy. Let me show as one example some records that I discussed in my recent video on women as the tower. The contemporaneous records leave no question that Joseph Smith was in favor of the women forming and participating in Relief Society. The Relief Society minute book is straightforward about Joseph's approbation. The Relief Society published public statements in the church's newspaper. They had a declaration against polygamy, actually read at a gathering of about 8,000 saints at the temple where Joseph was presiding over a meeting. I've never heard any suggestion that Joseph did not encourage the women to begin meeting as a Relief Society. But 9 months after Joseph was killed, when the Relief Society traditionally would have resumed their meetings after a winter hiatus, Brigham Y. Young spoke to the high priest quorum and the 70s and said the following. "When I want sisters or the wives of the members of this church to get up Relief Society, I will summon them to my aid, but until that time, let them stay at home. And if you see females huddling together, veto the concern. And if they say Joseph started it, tell them it is a damned lie. For I know he never encouraged it." Joseph Smith 100% encouraged the females to meet as a society. And Brigham Young called that historical fact a damned lie. One of my friends calls this sort of thing a "Brigham special." And I love that so much. There are a lot of Brigham specials in church history and we treat all of these Brigham specials as fact unless it is literally impossible for them to be true and those we kind of just ignore as obvious exaggerations like the previous statement. But I think taking Brigham's statements at face value yields a pretty bad historical narrative. Historians today say that Joseph was lying about polygamy because we can see that the men who succeeded him in the church lied about polygamy. I think it makes more sense to critically examine the testimonies of men who we know lied such as Brigham Young. Because if he was willing to lie about something like Joseph's encouragement of Relief Society, why would he not be willing to lie about Joseph's polygamy?
All right, back to the interview. "Recently, we've seen a rise in what some scholars are calling polygamy denial, with some Latter-day Saints now claiming Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy, or at least not sexual polygamy. What do you think?"
I object to the way this question is phrased. Polygamy denial, polygamy deniers. This is clearly a pejorative. It's meant to convey contempt or disapproval. This is a label that calls to mind Holocaust deniers and is not a scholarly term. If a scholar or scholar-adjacent person labels someone a polygamy denier, they are using a rhetorical device meant to manipulate you into dismissing this person and their ideas as kooky. You could simply say, "Recently, we've seen increasing numbers of Latter-day Saints claiming that Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy, or at least not sexual polygamy. What do you think?"
Anyway, here's Turner's answer. "I think the evidence for Joseph's polygamous ceilings is pretty overwhelming. It's true that a lot of that evidence is retrospective in the form of affidavit or court testimony from many decades later, but there are some persuasive pieces of evidence from the 1840s. The William Clayton Journal is a very exhaustive account of Joseph's plural marriages, his Joseph's own and his promotion of the marriages of others. There's the revelation on marriage itself. And while it's true that you can't necessarily trace the extent copies of those documents to 1843, the sum total of the evidence is simply overwhelming. And there's a lot of corroborating evidence in Joseph's own journals and the journals of his associates. I think it boggles the mind to presume Brigham Y. Young introduced polygamy after Joseph's death and then so many people conspired in such incredibly clever ways to corroborate Joseph's polygamy."
There is a lot to unpack here, but let me start with saying that I respectfully disagree with Turner's conclusions about the evidence. And his answer makes me think that he didn't really dig into the new evidence that's emerged because embedded within his answer is a straw man. The evidence for Joseph's polygamous ceilings is pretty overwhelming for a very specific reason. After Joseph Smith's death, members of the quorum of the 12 engaged in an organized, dedicated effort to revise the records, making hundreds of deletions, additions, and alterations to Joseph Smith's history. As Richard Van Wagoner said, "Few outside Brigham Young's inner circle were aware of the behind-the-scenes alterations so seamlessly stitched into church history." An assistant church historian in 1845 observed after Joseph's death, "his memoir was doctored to suit the new order of things." Even with the changed records that were published then as original statements, there was a problem articulated succinctly by Joseph F. Smith in a letter to Orson Pratt in 1875. Joseph was 5 years old when his father Hyrum Smith was killed and he came to Utah with his mother who died when he was 13. Joseph F. believed that polygamy was a commandment from God to his uncle Joseph and that it was necessary for exaltation. After his cousins, Joseph Smith's sons, began preaching in the West proclaiming that their father did not institute polygamy, Joseph F. Smith wanted to prove to them that their father irrefutably did. From Joseph F. Smith's own words, "When the subject of Joseph Smith's polygamy first came before my mind, I must say I was astonished at the scarcity of evidence, I might say almost total absence of direct evidence upon the subject, as connected with the prophet Joseph himself. There was nothing written and but few living who were personally knowing to the fact that Joseph taught the principle."
So, there were no children. Now, we have DNA evidence that there really were no children, despite later efforts to suggest that there were, despite historians reciting lists of likely children. And despite what Turner says about the evidence for Joseph's polygamous ceilings being pretty overwhelming, there are no marriage or sealing records. Well, correction, there are sealing records for Joseph's polygamous marriages, but they were all done after Joseph's death. Joseph was polygamously sealed to dozens of women by proxy after he died in Nauvoo. I think that's kind of significant counter evidence and I'm genuinely confused that historians would just go ahead and count that as part of the overwhelming evidence that Joseph was a polygamist as opposed to the men who succeeded him in leadership using his name to indoctrinate polygamy. So anyway, Joseph F. Smith had this dilemma of essentially no evidence of Joseph's polygamy. And so he wrote affidavits and collected statements that have some significant problems. If you want to read more about this, Cheryl Bruno and Michelle Stone just published an article in the Journal of Mormon Polygamy that I would recommend and I've linked to it in the show notes. This is what Joseph F. Smith said about his effort. "Such testimonies may not appear very important just now. Perhaps not while personal witnesses are living. And perhaps I might not live to witness their true value, but my children may. I am in favor of leaving no vacancies in the foundation walls, but want to see them laid solid, at least so far as the record of facts may be truthfully and consistently made."
I find this to be tragically prophetic because the court testimony John Turner mentions as part of the overwhelming evidence, that testimony from living personal witnesses, including women who claimed to have consummated marriages with Joseph. When they were actually interrogated about Joseph Smith's polygamy in court in front of a federal judge as part of the Temple Law trial, they were found to be not credible. Their stories fell apart and the federal judge ruled against their side. And it's important to know the context because otherwise you might think that these women's voices are being silenced. In September 1856, those women were told they had two weeks. And at the end of those two weeks, they needed to bow down and submit to polygamy or they were free to leave. Free to walk out into the frontier wilderness of Utah at the onset of winter and go their way. The Relief Society, which was the women's organization, had been shut down and would be for decades until the women were safely in line. The women married to these polygamous leaders lived in an environment of "bow down and submit" for more than 20 years before their testimonies were needed. More than 20 years of very firm indoctrination, their eternal salvation and exaltation hanging on whether they accepted and embraced polygamy. When testimonies are given under such conditions, they tend to be testimonies that include what they think they need to say, not what the verifiable facts support. And that's what happened. That's why their testimonies were not believed. It's not that I don't believe them. The federal judge didn't believe them. But now that they are long dead, the amount of sources that they collectively produced is considered to be overwhelming. And that is presented as historical fact.
According to another interview John Turner gave, the church gave him access to William Clayton's Nauvoo Journal. But there are serious problems with William Clayton's Nauvoo Journal, and there are serious problems with the polygamy revelation itself. Neither of those sources is clean with a straightforward provenance. Joseph Smith's own journals were revised to turn anti-polygamy statements into pro-polygamy statements. And of course, there is corroborating evidence in the journals of his associates because that's who we think indoctrinated polygamy into the church. Those of us who believe Joseph's private behavior was consistent with his public teachings and persona do not believe Brigham Y. Young introduced polygamy after Joseph's death. You can find evidence of budding polygamy testimonies and behavior among the apostles before Joseph's death, particularly among those who served missions to England between 1838 and 1840. In fact, they later testified that they gained their testimonies of polygamy while in England. England had recently had a great debate over the virtues of biblical polygamy following the example of Abraham. I do not think it boggles the mind to consider that perhaps this was one of those times when a few people conspired in incredibly clever ways to corroborate a story that enabled them and then later protected their way of life.
Next question. "So, why do you think some Latter-day Saints are so determined to absolve Joseph Smith of involvement in polygamy? Some of this has come up in my research on Mormon faith crisis with people very much wanting to maintain Joseph Smith on a pedestal."
Again, I must respectfully disagree with the way this question is phrased. It exhibits such a bias. Just those two sentences make it perfectly clear what this journalist's opinion is. There may be some people who see it this way, but I would say most of us don't. And this question's phrasing automatically steers the answer away from what many of us actually believe. I think this question could be better rephrased as, "So, why do you think some Latter-day Saints are so determined to contest the narrative that Joseph Smith was a polygamist?" I think an unbiased question would yield a better answer, but based on Turner's understanding of my position, I don't know that he would be able to answer it. So, I'll speak for myself and answer Ree's question. I am not determined to absolve Joseph Smith of involvement in polygamy. And I have no desire to maintain him on a pedestal. All I can do when forming a historical opinion is gather as much information as I can, use my best judgment, and accept that I may be wrong. I had always believed our Utah polygamy narrative because that's what I was taught. But at some point, the conflicting testimonies about polygamy doctrine and theology spurred me to really seek out God's mind on marriage, spiritual truth. I've come to believe that polygamy is a fallen world solution, that it's not part of God's plan for women. And when I made that shift in belief, my historical opinion on Mormon polygamy became, "Wow, that's pretty crazy and sad that every single one of our church leaders got deceived by this." When I first heard that Joseph Smith had actually preached against polygamy right up until his death and had not left any records in favor of polygamy, that his wife Emma had always asserted that Joseph never had any other wife than her, I was shocked. "There is no way. We have so many stories," I thought, "especially the testimonies of the women he was married to." But then I started looking at each piece of evidence more carefully and I began to consider possible motivations that could have influenced people to say what they did. And pretty soon I could make out a basic outline of how it happened. And it actually makes way more sense to me than this Joseph was a polygamist narrative that keeps getting repeated. So, I think some Latter-day Saints are determined to contest the narrative that Joseph Smith was a polygamist because we found out that what had been strongly asserted to us about polygamy was not true. We can now look at the documents from that time and they tear down all the excuses and justifications that have been perpetuated. So, we no longer outsource our trust on this issue to anyone, especially people who repackage the curated sources that we've already seen don't match up with the documentary history. The Nancy Rigdon story I just showed is the perfect example. If you've heard that Joseph Smith proposed to Nancy Rigdon, but this was the first time you've heard that Nancy Rigdon herself said that it didn't happen, not just at the time of the alleged proposal, but also 40 years later, ask yourself why. Why didn't you know that? Why are people so determined to have you believe that Joseph Smith was a polygamist? What do they lose if he wasn't? What do the scholars who have been publishing this lose if Joseph wasn't a polygamist? What do the church leaders who testify of Joseph's polygamy lose if Joseph wasn't a polygamist? I think it's time to turn these questions right back around because there is some real motivated reasoning going on here.
But here's how Turner answers it. "Joseph's activity in terms of plural marriage is very uncomfortable material. He pursues it so assiduously, in my opinion, recklessly in ways that were very hurtful to Emma Smith. I mean, Emma Smith clearly understands this as a moral betrayal."
Wow. I respectfully disagree because there is no evidence that Emma felt betrayed by Joseph in all of their letters or in any of Emma's later interviews. When my husband and I are on the outs about small things just between us, not big things like him marrying other people, but little things, you can clearly see it in our private text messages. Our children can sense something is wrong. But Emma and Joseph's children never recalled observing anything suspicious in that regard. And Emma never gave any indication that she felt betrayed. In fact, all of her letters to Joseph were very loving. And none of Joseph's letters to her communicate that he's trying to win her back. Here is one written when Joseph was in hiding over the assassination attempt on Governor Boggs. "Dear husband, I am ready to go with you if you are obliged to leave. And Hyrum Smith says he will go with me. I shall make the best arrangements I can and be as well prepared as possible. But still, I feel good confidence that you can be protected without leaving this country. There is more ways than one to take care of you, and I believe that you can still direct in your business concerns if we are all of us prudent in the matter. If it was pleasant weather, I should contrive to see you this evening, but I dare not run too much of a risk on account of so many going to see you." She goes over various business interests and then signs the letter. "Yours affectionately forever, Emma Smith."
At the time Emma wrote that letter, Joseph supposedly had at least 14 other wives. And the story now goes that he kept it all a secret from Emma that she had no idea. But you find me a woman in any century whose husband has 14 other women on the side who isn't just the least bit suspicious. But you don't see anything like that reflected in Emma's letters. In this one, Emma isn't communicating some 19th-century version of, "You know what? I don't like what this place is doing to us. You seem kind of distant. Let's get out of here together." We don't see anything like that. Emma's like, "We don't have to go. Stay. We've got this." Now, this August 1842 letter is the last one that we have from Emma to Joseph. And in fact, the original copy is extant. You can see this is a recopied version in William Clayton's handwriting. There are later letters from Joseph to Emma, none of which give any indication that he was trying to quell Emma's feelings of moral betrayal or that he had entanglements with any other women. Where did Emma's letters to Joseph go? And what would we have read? We don't know.
But if we want to see how Emma clearly felt about her marriage to Joseph, we can look at later records that she left, ones that didn't end up in the hands of the Utah polygamists. There are no fewer than eight unique documented statements or interviews with Emma after Joseph's death, the last taking place only 2 months before her death in 1879. And every single account reports something similar to this report by Edmund Briggs. "She spoke so endearingly of Joseph in confidence, tears filling her eyes that I could see she reverenced his very memory and had full faith in Joseph's inspiration as a prophet of God. And she always denied to me in the most emphatic language that he taught or practiced polygamy." The stories told about Emma in Utah portrayed her as a bitter woman who considered herself betrayed. But Emma herself didn't. She said Joseph never married any woman but her. And when asked if Joseph could have had other wives without her knowing it, she said, "No, sir. No one had a better chance and way of knowing this than myself."
All right, let's wrap up this interview. "You have a poignant moment in the biography where Joseph finally tells Emma about polygamy, but he spiritualizes it. She consents in a limited way and says she wants to have some control over the people he's going to be bringing into their family. So, she selects four young women who've already been living in their household, not knowing they are already married to her husband."
Listening to this, I actually kind of get why the historians at least have decided to maintain this narrative about Joseph Smith. There is so much material to choose from and the stories are so poignant, heartbreaking, salacious, and as Turner says in other interviews, fun to weave together. I personally find it disappointing to see how easily people accept stories that in many cases are verifiably untrue, but I guess it's always been that way. Seems like part of human nature that we're easily deceived.
When Emma was asked about the particulars of the polygamy claims, like the story Brigham being told that she burnt the original polygamy revelation manuscript in a fit of anger. Emma said on multiple occasions, "It is false in all its parts, made out of whole cloth without any foundation in truth." "It must have been hard for Emma to have so many lies told about her life by people who were once her friends. But I admire the way that she handled it. She spoke up to set the record straight, but she didn't seem to harbor anger, resentment, or bitterness. She lived a happy life."
Listen to a portion of a letter Emma wrote to her son Joseph III in 1866 as he was preaching to his Utah cousins. "Now, you mustn't let those LDS's trouble you too much. You may know that you are not the first one who has been misunderstood or misapplied or misquoted and misrepresented in every way and in every conceivable space. Neither is it certain that you will be the last afflicted one." I think this is a great attitude. We can speak the truth that we personally know as well as our well-informed opinions and allow everyone else their beliefs. And that's what Joseph's polygamy is. It's a belief, not a fact. A more accurate title for this article would be, "John Turner believes Joseph practiced polygamy." I don't. And I think that regardless of where you fall on the religious spectrum, you should know that there's more to this story than what you've been led to believe. Thanks, and I'll see you again soon.