By Jerald and Sandra Tanner
We are very happy to report to our readers that all of Joseph Smith’s diaries are now available. A number of years ago we set out to publish Smith’s diaries. With the help of H. Michael Marquardt, who made the transcriptions from microfilms and photocopies, we were successful in printing the diaries written between 1832 and 1839.
Unfortunately, the fact that the Mormon Church would not allow us access to the original diaries and the poor quality of the microfilms which were then available prevented us from publishing the important Nauvoo diaries written between 1842 and 1844. Some people felt that the Mormon Church would never allow these diaries to be published, and although we felt we had a right to publish them, we feared that we might have a costly legal battle with the church. Fortunately, the confrontation never took place, and now Signature Books has printed all of the diaries in one volume. As far as we know, the Mormon Church has not filed a suit against this company. Church leaders apparently realized that even though they have possession of the original diaries, they do not own the manuscript rights. Scott H. Faulring, whom we consider to be one of the best Mormon scholars, made the transcriptions from microfilm copies of the originals which were better than the ones available to H. Michael Marquardt. The Church Historical Department could have made Mr. Faulring’s work much easier by allowing him access to the original documents; instead, however, Faulring sadly admitted that
I was not allowed access to the originals of any of the documents, all of which are currently housed in the archives of the Historical Department, . . . (Introduction, page xv)
Scott Faulring’s monumental work is published under the title, An American Prophet’s Record: The Diaries and Journals of Joseph Smith. Unfortunately, the edition was “strictly limited to five hundred copies.” Signature Book has almost sold out this printing and we were only able to obtain 50 copies. At the present time they are available from Utah Lighthouse Ministry for $50.00 a copy. While this price may seem high, the value of the first printing of all of Joseph Smith’s diaries will no doubt increase as it becomes a collector’s item. Signature Book previously published a limited edition of the Wilford Woodruff Journals for $400 and we understand that they are now worth twice that amount.
The Joseph Smith diaries are extremely important because of the light they throw on the printed History of the Church. The reader will remember that many years ago, before we had ever seen a microfilm of the diaries, we charged that although the title page for the History of the Church claimed that it was the “History of Joseph Smith, the Prophet BY HIMSELF,” evidence derived from many sources showed that a large portion of it was written after his death (see Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? pages 126-142D). Dean C. Jessee, who was a member of the staff at the LDS Church Historian’s Office, later admitted that only about 40% of the History was actually written during Joseph Smith’s lifetime, and that 60% was actually authored by church officials after his death!
We noted that although Joseph Smith’s diaries were probably used, there was no way to know whether they were accurately cited and that many things had come from diaries, newspapers and other publications written by other people. We produced evidence showing that these entries were altered to the first person to make it appear that they were actually written by Joseph Smith. Later we learned that portions of it were not even based on other people’s written records, but instead on whatever the Mormon leaders felt Joseph Smith should have said. The precarious nature of trying to write Joseph Smith’s history after his death and palm it off as though he were the author is demonstrated by an amusing incident. Under the date of December 26, 1842, the following is recorded in Joseph Smith’s diary:
[At] Home. Sister Emma sick, had another chill. (An American Prophet’s Record, page 258).
In a speech delivered at BYU on August 6, 1987, the Mormon scholar Dean Jessee, who is an expert on Joseph Smith’s history, said that the
compiler of the [Joseph Smith] history misread the word chill for the word child, and thereby created an event that did not occur.
In the History of the Church, vol. 5, page 209, the statement concerning Emma’s illness was expanded from seven words to twenty-two, and the chill was transformed into “a son”:
On my return home, I found my wife Emma sick. She was delivered of a son, which did not survive its birth.
The Mormon officials who worked on Joseph Smith History after his death were obviously aware that there was no child living at that time who could have been born on December 26, 1842. They, therefore, made Joseph Smith say that the child “did not survive its birth.” How they were able to determine that this nonexistent child was “a son” rather than a daughter is somewhat of a mystery. While this humorous incident is not really too important as far as history goes, it certainly shows the folly of forging a first-person type of history after someone’s death. In his new book, Trials of Discipleship: The Story of William Clayton, a Mormon, the Mormon scholar James B. Allen acknowledges that Joseph Smith was credited for things he did not do:
Comparing the entries in Clayton’s journal with the History of the Church provides an interesting insight into the way the History was compiled. It is obvious that Clayton was the source for this part. But in the History of the Church Clayton is not mentioned at all—on either date—and Joseph Smith is portrayed as the one selling the property and receiving the money. Clayton, of course, was always acting as Joseph’s agent, and it appears as if whoever compiled this portion of the History of the Church was simply trying to give the prophet credit for doing as much as possible. This is also an example of the way Clayton was frequently subordinated—his activities overshadowed or ignored. But the fact that he was one of those who worked on compiling the History of the Church may be evidence that he willingly took the subordination without complaint. (Trials of Discipleship, page 106)
James B. Allen also made these revealing comments about Joseph Smith’s History:
The history was only partially complete when Joseph died, and it was finally finished in 1858. . . .
One problem with Joseph Smith’s published History of the Church, however, is that it does not reflect Joseph himself as much as it reflects the image of Joseph as he was seen by scribes and journalists. The History is written in the first person, as if Joseph were doing the writing, though usually the first person account of an event is really a paraphrase or adaptation of someone else’s account. At times the only essential difference is that “Joseph,” “he,”or “President Smith”is changed to “I.” . . . William Clayton’s journal provided many such entries, which suggests that much of the “first person” Joseph Smith portrayed in the History is, in reality, only the Joseph Smith that William Clayton or someone else saw and heard. Even with that qualification, however, the work is invaluable, but there is a continuing concern with whether the history as reported is always the way Joseph saw it or would have written it himself . . .
The Kinderhook episode was only a sidelight, and nothing came of it, but William Clayton made other, much more important, contributions to what became Joseph Smith’s official history. Several entries in Clayton’s Nauvoo Journal were the direct sources for entries in the history. . . . In addition, Clayton was one of several scribes who kept the “Book of the Law of the Lord.” . . . it also contains some manuscript sources used in compiling the History, and about sixty-one pages of this material were written by Clayton, mostly in the third person, and then later transposed to the first person for the sake of the published history. (Ibid., pages 115, 116 and 118)
Mormon apologists have often referred to Joseph Smith’s prophecies concerning the Latter-day Saints coming to the Rocky Mountains and the fact that Steven A. Douglas would aspire to the presidency of the United States but fail if he opposed Mormonism as evidence of Smith’s divine calling. The evidence, however, shows that both these famous prophecies found in the History of the Church are forgeries added after Joseph Smith’s death. The evidence against the Rocky Mountain prophecy is clearly detailed in Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? pages 133-135, and 142B-142C and that concerning the fraudulent nature of the Steven A. Douglas prophecy is found in The Tanners on Trial, pages 18, 19, 134 and 135. For a long time James B. Allen has hoped to find some contemporary evidence for the Douglas prophecy. So far, however, he has found no support for it, and even though he has not completely given up, he admits the possibility that “Clayton, who was still working with the church historians and clerks when the History was being completed, was asked about the prophecy and, drawing on a vivid memory of the occasion, provided the expanded account” (Trials of Discipleship, page 120). A “memory of the occasion,” more than a decade after the purported prophecy is far inferior to a contemporary document. In all likelihood, the prophecy is about as accurate as the information concerning Joseph Smith’s “son, which did not survive its birth.”
The Mormon leaders are now condemning Mark Hofmann as a wicked deceiver for forging documents about Mormonism. They refuse, however, to face the facts concerning their own foundational documents. It appears to us that although Hofmann was lining his own pockets with the money from his forgeries, he was merely following in the footsteps of the early Mormon officials. He was taking actual historical sources and modifying them to the first person and supplying additional material from his own imagination. He felt, in fact, that he was helping restore what he believed to be the true history of the Mormon Church. Is this not exactly what church leaders did to Joseph Smith’s writings after his death? If Mark Hofmann had been alive in Brigham Young’s time, he would have had all the creative qualifications necessary to write Joseph Smith’s History. In fact, instead of being a prisoner, he might have been Church Historian!
Originally appeared in: