When I was about eleven-years-old and first began thinking critically about polygamy in the early Church, I was offered this explanation: while Brigham Young and the other early saints were crossing the plains, they had to marry other women because there were too few men to take care of them. This is sometimes coupled with the additional “fact” that women could not legally own property, and so had to marry in order to survive.
This was the explanation that fueled me for several years, probably until I was around seventeen. During those years, I heard it repeated several times and unfortunately probably repeated it to other people.
This explanation is demonstratively untrue, and once aware of that, it is deceptive and dishonest to perpetuate it. Actually, once aware of any of the facts surrounding the beginnings of plural marriage, it’s difficult to see how anyone could believe this anyway.
- The doctrine of plural marriage was conceived of by at least the mid-1830s when Joseph Smith had a relationship with Fanny Alger; Joseph was probably aware of it as early as 1831. Plural marriage in Joseph’s lifetime increased exponentially once in Nauvoo (although, it should be noted, that plural marriage was more esoteric while Joseph was alive).
- Historical records do not demonstrate a demographic imbalance between males and females while crossing the plains. In fact, throughout the 1800s, there were periodic episodes where men would write to the First Presidency complaining about how they had “run out of women”, and there was no one left to marry.
- Plural marriage was first recorded as a commandment in 1844 as the “new and everlasting covenant”. In the minds of the early saints, the concepts of “celestial marriage” and “plural marriage” were not separate concepts. Brigham Young and other early leaders taught that it was impossible to enter the Celestial Kingdom without entering into this covenant.
- Plural marriages were intimate. Joseph Smith was intimate with several of his wives, and Brigham Young had 50+ children by his. Obviously they weren’t just caring for widows who’d lost their husbands.
- If it was against the law for women to own property, why break the law and enter into polygamous marriages instead of breaking the law and giving them property? This is silly, anyway, as women could own property.
A lack of men and trying to protect women by supporting them across the plains does not explain the origin or reasoning behind polygamy, and we should be wary about trying to frivolously explain away the commandments of God.
