I’m looking for hard evidence of Joseph Smith’s 1831 plural marriage revelation. There are lots of anti-Mormon sites that mention it, but I’m looking for non-anti-Mormon primary sources. Some leads might be:
- Can anyone confirm this quote from Widstoe’s book? “The evidence seems clear that the revelation on plural marriage was received by the Prophet as early as 1831” (John A. Widstoe, Joseph Smith-Seeker After Truth, p.236).
- Can someone confirm this from a primary source? Joseph F. Smith, the sixth president of the church, once stated: “The great and glorious principle of plural marriage was first revealed to Joseph Smith in 1831, but being forbidden to make it public, or to teach it as a doctrine of the Gospel, at that time, he confided the facts to only a very few of his intimate associates. Among them were Oliver Cowdery and Lyman E. Johnson . . .” (As quoted in Historical Record, 1887, vol. 6, p.219).
- Can anyone confirm this quote: “A recently discovered document is a copy of a purported revelation of 1831 that instructed seven missionaries in Missouri as follows: ‘For it is my will, that in time, ye should take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites that their posterity may become white, delightsome and just, for even now their females are more virtuous than the gentiles.'” The Mormon Experience, page 195
Also, is there a verifiable date as to Joseph’s second marriage–to Fanny Alger?
Please help if you can.
I am away from my materials, but I don’t remember Compton or Bachmann citing the revelation. If it was extant I have to believe that they would have used it. There is the possibility that it was recently made available through the Joseph Smith Papers project…but I doubt it. I don’t remember whether Compton gives a date for the Alger marriage or not. I’ll look it up later, if no one else does.
John,
Richard Bushman deals with the possibility of an 1831 revelation on page 326 of Rough Stone Rolling. He says “…it seems possible that he received the revelation on plural marriage in 1831 while working on the Old Testament.” The footnote cites to Compton (pages 26-27), and mentions supporting accounts from Mosiah Hancock, Brigham Young, Joseph Bates Noble, Lyman Johnson, and William Phelps.
None of these are “hard evidence,” but there probably all that is out there. Hope this helps.
OOkay, first Compton states that the Alger marriage was likely in Feb or Mar of 1833. That is as good as we can get.
Bachmann posits that Joseph received a revelation in Feb of 1831 while working on the Old Testament and that it may have been the first portion of Sec 132.
The Widtsoe quote is correct. Here is the appropriate citation:
It seems that Fannie Alger was one of Joseph’s first plural wives. She lived many years after the Prophet’s death and never denied her relationship to him. (John A. Widtsoe, Joseph Smith – Seeker after Truth, Prophet of God [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1951] pg. 241)
The last question about Lamanite and Nephite women was from a letter from W.W. Phelps to Brigham Young dated August 12, 1816 (original in the LDS Church Archives). Compton mentions it but Bachman’s treatment is the most in depth (pg. 68-73). Apparently Joseph Gave a revelation in July 17, 1831 to the missionaries, but there was no paper. It is not certain whether the Phelps document is a copy of Joseph’s subsequent recitation or Phelps’ recollection. It is in double columned versed format. There is ancillary support for the content.
hmmm…your formatting doesn’t allow for nested blockquotes. This is the Widtsoe text:
I also forgot your other question. I can’t verify it with the primary sources as BYU doesn’t host electronic copies of the Deseret News that old and I am confused whether the quote is that of JSF as used by Andrew Jenson (Church Historian) or the words of Andrew Jenson used by JSF. Either way, the popular citation is that of either the Deseret News May 20, 1886, or the Historical Record (a periodical edited by Andrew Jenson), [Salt Lake City, Utah, May 1887]: 219.
Stapley: I sincerely hope the letter from W.W. Phelps to Brigham Young wasn’t dated 1816! That would blow my mind. Was it 1861?
lol, 1861 it was.
Stapley,
Thanks for highlighting that second quote from Joseph F. Smith. That sheds a lot of light on the subject. I don’t think even “Mormon Enigma” had that.
The reason they (Farms, et al) say there was a revelation is because of the considerable circumstantial evidence of the relationship. Without the revelation, the relationship was adulterous.
R.C.,
Or it was simply polygamous. Nothing wrong with it being Polygamous.
Mark
Speak The Truth