FAIR Questions: Are William Clayton’s journals and other evidences suggesting Joseph Smith practiced plural marriage just “revised history”?

FAIR has a service where questions can be submitted and they are answered by volunteers. If you have a question, you can submit it at https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/contact. We will occasionally publish answers here for questions that are commonly asked, or are on topics that are receiving a lot of attention.

 

QUESTION:

My dear friend shared with me some information suggesting Joseph Smith’s involvement in plural marriage was doctored in after the fact by Brigham Young and his associates, especially William Clayton. To support this, they refer to public speeches by Joseph and Hyrum Smith, denying participation in plural marriage. So much of what we know depends on what is in the William Clayton diaries, which they say is possibly “revised history.” I also noted that it was announced that the William Clayton Diaries would be made available a few years back, but haven’t been yet. Do you know of any further information on that?

ANSWER FROM FAIR EMPLOYEE SARAH ALLEN:

Was evidence altered to suggest Joseph Smith practiced plural marriage?

There is no evidence whatsoever that Brigham Young and William Clayton colluded to “doctor” official records to implicate Joseph in plural marriage, or that Clayton’s journals were revised after their initial recording. Joseph Smith instituted plural marriage, and no serious, credentialed historian agrees with the claims that he didn’t. There is a wealth of evidence, from journal entries, letters, affidavits, and sworn witness testimony, all backing that up. There are recorded minutes of Hyrum introducing a revelation that sounds remarkably like D&C 132 before the Nauvoo High Council a few months before his death. The Nauvoo Expositor summarized and quoted excerpts from it, showing that it was known by at least some people outside of Joseph’s inner circle in June 1844. Many of his wives and friends signed affidavits and gave deposition testimony under oath. Etc.

William Clayton did what Wilford Woodruff, Willard Richards, and others of the time did: he took notes which he then copied into his journal and into Joseph’s. He wouldn’t always copy his notes word for word, but sometimes rephrased them or incorporated memories he may have left out of his notes.

Sometimes, he copied them a few days or weeks later, as he was a busy man. However, these were not entries he copied years after the fact. By any historical method, they were contemporaneous entries. This practice has been labeled by some non-historians who aren’t educated in historical standards and practices as non-contemporaneous, but that’s only because they don’t know what the professional standards are. No credible historian would ever claim journal entries recorded so shortly after the events were non-contemporaneous.

William Clayton’s Nauvoo Journals

Excerpts from Clayton’s Nauvoo journals have been published in a book called An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton, edited by George D. Smith. The full journals will be published by some of the Joseph Smith Papers editors early next year, in 2026. I believe they’ll be published through Yale University Press, if I’m not mistaken. Yale is a respected academic press which reviews its books thoroughly before publication to ensure they meet professional scholarly standards. The volume should include introductions and other historical explanations similar to those in the Joseph Smith Papers volumes. The journals are not “revised history,” they have been professionally maintained and edited, the editing process and book’s content were put through professional review, and the book containing the journals is being published by a well-respected academic press. None of the claims made by those denying Joseph’s practice of plural marriage have undergone the same scrutiny.

Polygamy Denials

As far as denials by Hyrum and Joseph Smith go, it’s important to note that they, and those in the Anointed Quorum with Joseph, very carefully differentiated between celestial plural marriage, polygamy, adultery, and “spiritual wifery.” In their minds, they were four separate things. The eternal order of marriage was when endowed, married Saints were sealed to one another by one with authority. Polygamy was what Muslims and other foreigners practiced, a copy of divine plural marriage without the command to practice it or priesthood authority to seal the union. Adultery was, obviously, having marital relations with someone other than one’s spouse. And “spiritual wifery” was the system that John C. Bennett concocted, wherein he convinced women to commit adultery with him and some of his friends by claiming it came from God, was approved by Joseph, and that it wasn’t wrong if nobody told anyone else. The denials given by Joseph and Hyrum referred explicitly to polygamy, adultery, or spiritual wifery. They never denied practicing celestial plural marriage.

To learn more about plural marriage in general, this booklet by FAIR volunteer Greg Smith gives a fantastic overview, including the history, theology, and denials: https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/smith-Polygamy_Prophets_and_Prevarication.pdf

 

Sarah Allen is a Senior Researcher with FAIR, a former member of Scripture Central’s research team, and the 2022 recipient of the John Taylor: Defender of the Faith Award. An avid reader, she loves studying the Gospel and the history of the restored Church. After watching some of her friends lose their testimonies, she became interested in helping others through their faith crises. That’s when she began sharing what she’d learned through her studies. She is a co-moderator the LDS subreddit on Reddit and the author of a multi-part series rebutting the CES Letter. She is also the co-host of FAIR’s “Me, My Shelf, & I” podcast. She’s grateful to those at FAIR who have given her the opportunity to share her testimony with a wider audience.