Polygamy Stuff in the Joseph Smith Papers
The Joseph Smith Papers is a project researching, collecting, and publishing all manuscripts and documents created by, or under the direction of Joseph Smith. Some interesting, polygamy-related findings are coming out of this project.
Here’s an unedited journal entry dated 5 October 1843. It says plurality of wives is forbidden. Period.
Unedited Journal 5 October 1843 - Thursday
From Source Notes: Willard Richards inscribed most of the journal entries in these memorandum books…
Here’s the same entry, but now it’s an edited journal entry dated 5 October 1843. This editing happened after Joseph’s death and the edits flip the meaning to support plural wives.
Edited 5 October 1843 - Thursday
History Draft [1 March–31 December 1843], Page 72…History draft; handwriting of Thomas Bullock, John L. Smith, Jonathan Grimshaw, Robert L. Campbell, Leo Hawkins, Richard Bentley, and Wilford Woodruff
Here’s the final draft that keeps those edits with the switcheroo to multiple wives.
Final 5 October 1843 - Thursday
History, 1838–1856, volume E-1, constitutes the fifth of six volumes documenting the life of Joseph Smith and the early years of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The series is also known as the Manuscript History of the Church and was originally published serially from 1842 to 1846 and 1851 to 1858 as the “History of Joseph Smith” in the Times and Seasonsand Deseret News. This volume contains JS’s history from 1 July 1843 to 30 April 1844, and it was compiled in Utah Territory in the mid-1850s.
Here’s an entry showing a blank spot dated 12 July 1843 when the revelation (Section 132) was supposed to have been received.
Here’s the revelation that will become Section 132 dated 12 July 1843 copied flawlessly.
The Historical Introduction provides a summary of the history, including how we came to use the Kingsbury copy of this revelation. Here’s some highlights:
“Unbeknownst to Emma, a copy of the revelation was made, either the evening of 12 July or the next day, before she destroyed the original.45 After reviewing the revelation, Newel K. Whitney asked JS whether a copy could be made, and JS consented. Joseph Kingsbury—who was Whitney’s former brother-in-law, a clerk in JS’s brick store, and legal husband to Whitney’s daughter Sarah Ann—carefully copied the revelation, after which the copy was compared against the original for accuracy.46 As scribe for the original dictation, Clayton affirmed in 1874 that ‘the copy made by Joseph C. Kingsbury is a true and correct copy of the original in every respect.’”
“For the remainder of the nineteenth century, the Kingsbury copy of the revelation provided the textual support for Latter-day Saint belief in eternal marriage and the practice of plural marriage. All other extant versions are based on the Kingsbury copy.57 As the earliest extant version of the 12 July 1843 revelation, it is featured here.”
“Plural marriage ran counter to both social customs and existing laws. Illinois law included an antibigamy statute.18 Such laws reflected a general antagonism in Anglo-European society toward polygamy.”
“Given the cultural opposition to polygamy, Latter-day Saints who were invited to participate in plural marriage generally required explanation and persuasion before they agreed to do so. Most of this instruction occurred in private conversations that were rarely recorded contemporaneously…”
“Although details regarding Emma’s reactions to JS’s practice of plural marriage prior to 1843 are scarce, she evidently came to accept the doctrine, albeit temporarily, by May of that year, on the condition that she could choose the women to whom JS would be sealed. That month, she selected Elizaand Emily Partridge, who were then ages twenty-three and nineteen and living in the Smith household, as potential marriage partners to JS. In fact, JS had already been sealed to the sisters two months earlier. JS and the Partridge sisters sought to avoid confrontation by repeating the marriages, with Emma’s blessing, as if for the first time.”
“By the end of June, JS’s scribe William Clayton noted, Emma was treating JS ‘coldly & badly’ and ‘was disposed to be revenged on him,’ saying ‘she thought that if he would indulge himself she would too.’”
Here’s the original Section 101 , (Article on Marriage) from the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants that requires one wife.
Section 101 verse 4 reads:
“All legal contracts of marriage made before a person is baptized into this church, should be held sacred and fulfilled. Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again…”
And here’s Section 109 of the 1844 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants that again requires one wife:
The 1844 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants carried over the same language from the 1835 edition. Again, verse 4 reads:
“All legal contracts of marriage made before a person is baptized into this church, should be held sacred and fulfilled. Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again…”
Section 109, commanding monogamy, was removed in 1876 when it was replaced with Section 132, commanding polygamy. This polygamy revelation had first been made public when Elder Orson Pratt, under the direction of President Brigham Young, announced it at a Church conference in 1852.