Customer Rating: 
Summary: The Best and Most Accurate Rendition of This Very Tragic Event!!!!
Comment:
In this new, more complete and accurate telling of a most misunderstood time in Mormon History, we get to get inside the researchers/authors heads to understand how this most horrific tragedy occurred and why. The authors take us back to the early days of The Church, when we were persecuted for our beliefs and driven from their homes, women even raped. In the mid 19th Century, times were rough on the trail for the Mormons, having to contend with Indians, the elements, disease, the Military and all they could think of was getting to the Salt Lake Valley. This horrible tragedy took the lives of 120 men, women and children as they were gunned down execution style. For the Mormon people, they were afraid for their lives when emigrants came through their setlements on their way to California. These emigrants would taunt and threaten the Mormons and were worried about the soldiers coming to stir up things. It wasn't until I was reading the names of the Militiamen, that I found that two of my ancestors were involved. Luckily, they were not involved in any of the murders. This is the third book on this subject and feel this current rendition is the best by far, as it doesn't try to sugarcoat what happened or point fingers. If you haven't heard of this tragedy, I would recommend you read this book. It's a riveting story, one you couldn't imagine happening. It's interesting that the date this occured was 9/11, but in 1857.
Customer Rating: 
Summary: Better Than I Anticipated
Comment: To be honest, I read this book anticipating a good deal of "spin", believing the church would look for ways to convincingly distance themselves from any responsibility for the massacre at Mountain Meadows. It was vastly better than I expected.
Some of the reviews have already covered adequately the criticisms, namely that it appears the authors--although exhaustive in their research--were still motivated to demonstrate a lack of complicity on the part of Brigham Young et al. The authors do not appologize (much) for the actions of either the men who perpetrated the crime, or the local leaders (most notably Haight) who ordered it, nor do they jump on the "it was just John D. Lee" bandwagon. They couch the event in terms of war-time hysteria, and good people who got caught up in a bad situation.
I agree with all of that, and I am HARDLY a church apologist.
However, as has been noted, the authors leave the reader with the clear impression that Brigham Young is ONLY responsible to the degree to which he was engaged in excitable rhetoric in the face of the US military marching on Utah. They reproduce the letter he sent by courier to the local leaders in Cedar City that demonstrates that Young advised them to let the emigrants go in peace--which unfortunately arrived too late. In the end, I have never personally believed that evidence would ever be produced that would tie Young directly to an order to massacre the emmigrants and take control of their wealth--he was smarter than that, and could see the long-term consequences of such a decision.
But that's not enough. The culture of any institution is created first at the highest levels of the organization, and it flows down from there. Young's Utah was a direct reflection of Young himself, and the responsibility for what happened in Utah is his, in the same manner that what happens in the national economy, the military, education, and so on are ultimately the responsibility of the President. Not that he orders (necessarily) illeagal or unethical acts on the part of lower level personnel, but that culture is established at the top, and the responsibility for what happens in that culture is borne by those who occupy that top seat.
In that way, the buck stops with Brigham Young, regardless of what he may or may not have ordered.
And the authors of this book are reluctant to accept it. There are hints here and there, but at the end of the day, they are more than happy to lay the blame at the feet of Dame, Haight, Higbee, Klingensmith and Lee. Personally, I don't think that's necessary. History is by its very nature a colorful thing, and Brigham Young was one of the American West's most colorful figures. The modern church is quite comfortable distancing itself from Young's theory that God is Adam, or his extreme racist policies, his teachings on blood atonement, or most famously, his adoration of the doctrine of polygamy, all of which were taught from the pulpit as points of doctrine. Why, then, are they so reluctant to consider the possibility that as a governmental leader, he may have been responsible for establishing the culture and context within which the West's most infamous crime could occur?
ONLY when the church steps up to the plate and acknowledges that role of Brigham Young will this issue ever be laid to rest.
That said, the book most certainly helps the reader gain a sense for the hysteria that was created in Southern Utah at the time, and they do a good job of entertaining the likelihood that many of the stories that have often been told justifying the Saint's anger toward the emigrants (poisoning of Corn Creek, claiming to have been at Carthage when Smith was murdered, threatening talk about Young, snapping the heads off chickens, harassing the Mormon women...) were likely a gross exageration or complete fabrication by men who would understandably like to distance themselves from the crime they committed. The authors make no appologies for any of the participants in the crime, and in fact, provide a complete list of all the Mormon men who were involved.
Furthermore, they do make an effort to humanize the emigrants, and try to establish who they were, the conditions under which they traveled, a glimpse at the conditions while they were under seige, and to help the reader appreciate that these were families with hopes and dreams of a good life in California, traveling with their wives and little children. In so doing, they help the reader appreciate the magnitude of the crime, and the last few chapters are hard to read.
No book is likely to ever satisfy us all on the topic of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, but among the services the authors of this particular book have rendered is a brutally honest account that Mormons can read without fear that it is "anti-Mormon" material, and yet force them to face a dark chapter in their history. I would recommend this book to anyone, but to really understand the complexity of the crime, you'll have to read MORE than this book.
Customer Rating:
Summary: A little short on some background facts
Comment: First of all, for the record, I am LDS, but the fact of being LDS does not necessarily makes me an apologist for this work of research, from which I expected much more, being a work that tries to clarify what really happened in Mountain Meadows and specially considering the fact that the authors had so much access, at least, as they state, to Church archives and other records.
This book is well researched, very well written, at the surface it appears to take an unbiased approach to the Mountain Meadows events, but when it comes to describe the responsability of the Church in the context that lead to this massacre, the authors are quite shallow.
In the begining of the book, the authors spend some time describing the persecutions suffered by the early
Latter-Day Saints, how they were driven out of NY, Pensilvannia, Missouri, Illinois, etc. He describes how the prophet Joseph Smith was covered in tar and feathered, and later killed in Carthage, Ill, etc. The authors use a discourse that seems to show the prophet Joseph Smith as an innocent marthyr, but is that completely true? Why was the prophet feathered? Why was he killed? The authors do not provide this detail and that makes them quite biased. they fail to describe that the Prophet was covered in tar and feathers because of his earlier rants on Poligamy, and although they explain that what took the prophet to jail in Carthage and ultimately to his death (I would not call it martyrdom because for that, he would need to be completely innocent and free of any responsability), was related to the shutdown and destruction of a newspaper in Nauvoo, what the authors fail to explain is that Joseph Smith did so because an article published in the previous issue of that newspaper denounced his Poligamyst practices, which apparently, didn't seat well with Joseph Smith.
This is not a book about the persecutions of the Saints, but these facts are quite important to understand the historical context of all this persecutions, killings, and hatred towards Latter-Day Saints.
Other authors do a better job in describing this background in an unbiased manner. In my personal opinion, the book looses it's credibility due to this fact.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Pros, Cons and Bottom line
Comment: My Impression and Thoughts:
* It is a good book, a real page turner
* I liked it better than Will Bagley's book. It does not preach. Bagley's request that I "repent" of my ancestors violent past was offensive
* Those times were definitely more violent. I'm sure that the large mobs that expelled the Mormons from the east were made up of otherwise good people. Why did they join the mob and do those things? Different times different people.
* "Over Landers" were tough people. When the Indians rustled cattle the men of the wagon trains chased after the Indians.
* The Mormons had a cozy relationship with the Indians. "Allies"? Maybe not. The Mormons exerted control over them.
* The book tries to move beyond religiosity. I remember reading in a psychology book about Kitty Genovese (go to Wikipedia). She was brutally murdered while several people did nothing (bystander effect). The MMM belongs in the same book right after that story. This book calls it "Group think"
* You can argue that this was a "Fatwa" issued by Haight. I disagree.
* The Indians were upset about perceived poisoning of an animal that resulted in the deaths of several Braves. In this case perception is reality. It contributed to the massacre. I like the anthrax theory. I think this explains the Indian's deaths.
* The train was not destroyed for its plunder. The Mormons rescued from the Indians that freight train coming right behind the ill-fated train 2 times. Why wouldn't they plunder that train
* No wonder the men thought they had to go along with the massacre. The leaders were 3 things
o Ecclesiastical leaders
o Civic leaders
o Militia leaders
My Criticisms:
* I thought they built up Lee too much as a straw man and softened others like Haight. This was a crime with many criminals.
* They needed to give more details in certain parts. They say they were worried about the page count. The references were too long. Make the book longer and put the extended references on the internet.
* The visuals were not good. A more detailed map of Southern Utah and the MMM site would have been helpful
* The writing at times was choppy. The reasons: 3 authors and Oxford's peer review process
* They say they could follow events day by day. So why not write it like Robert Graysmith did in the "Zodiac".
Bottom Line Conclusions
* Wherever that wagon train went in Utah, for lots of reasons, settlers and Indians were upset.
* Mormons riled up the Indians and participated in and led the massacre
* The Indians were there at the beginning, middle and end
* Brigham Young had no knowledge of the attacks or massacre. His part was in the cover up. The evidence is very clear and believable.
Additional Thoughts which I have edited in
* I marvel at how much interest there is in this massacre. When there have been many massacres.
* I remember what Walsh of America's Most Wanted said about murder mysteries and what determines which stories he profiles. He said it has to have a good beginning, middle and end or unresolved end. The MMM has 2 beginnings (the wagon train and the Mormon persecution). Then there is the middle as the wagon trail travels through Utah. There is of course the massacre which is actually the beginning of the unresolved end. Throw antipathy for the Mormon Church and a endless desire to prove Brigham Young a false prophet for having ordered the massacre and you have quite a story. Does this book provide an end? It should be obvious that Brigham Young did not order the massacre. Is there an end?
* This book got me interested in the Haun's Mill Massacre. There is a good write up on Wikipedia. This help you understand the Mormon mindset as the settlers interacted with the wagon train. You can also imagine what Haight thought when several men came to his house in Cedar City to protest their treatment. He thought they were a mob and ran out the back door. He then plotted to kill them.
* The parallels for MMM and Haun's Mill Massacre are interesting. It is not remembered that much because there is no beginning middle or end.
o The massacre was carried out by Missouri militia
o Men, women, and children were fair game
o The perpetrators were all known by name and never brought to justice, not even one scapegoat
o The bodies were hurriedly buried
o The site is maintained (owned?) by a church
o There is film made of the massacre
* This book talks about the prevalence of massacres 1800's. When the women saw the militia at Haun's Mill, they ran for the forest. They instantly knew what was going to happen. Afterwards nearby cities made plans to flee--they feared a Mormon counter massacre.
* I reviewed the motivations of several massacres. Many of them started out with a desire to punish not massacre. The MMM, Bear River Massacre, Centerville, and even the My Lai Massacre started out like this. Haight, et al initially wanted to kill but not wipe out everyone at the Santa Clara Narrows.
* This is from a report on the My Lai Massacre. I got it from Wikipedia. It will help to understand how aggressors behave in a massacre.
o Soldiers went berserk, gunning down unarmed men, women, children and babies. Families which huddled together for safety in huts or bunkers were shown no mercy. Those who emerged with hands held high were murdered. ... Elsewhere in the village, other atrocities were in progress.
o This is "group think"
Customer Rating:
Summary: Massacre at Mountain Meadows
Comment: A brilliant book concerning one of the most horrible atrocities recorded in American history. This book is extemely well documented, unbiased and written in novel form to keep the reader glued to each page. This book is a must for anyone interested in the history of the Morman infulence in Utah, the truth about the massacre, and the Morman and Indian involment in the death of more than 120 Arkansas emigrants.
|
