Excerpt from a review by Patricia Nelson Limerick
Washington Post, 3 August 2003
"And yet in much of American Massacre Sally Denton conveys a sense of certainty, noting the contradictions in the record and then dismissing them by choosing the construction or interpretation that holds the leadership of the Church directly responsible for the murders at Mountain Meadows. Statements by John D. Lee, for instance, are treated as credible when they implicate the Church leaders and doubtful when they exonerate them or himself. Early in Denton's narrative of the violence at Mountain Meadows, she makes the requisite admission: 'Like much of the rest of the story, the truth would be mired in a lack of solid evidence' and then goes on to tell the story of the massacre in clear, definitive terms, as if she had found a way to unearth 'the truth' from its mire."
Patricia Nelson Limerick chairs the board at the Center of the American West at the University of Colorado
A recent opinion editorial by Sally Denton published in The New York Times (24 May 2003) inaccurately stated some of the facts relating to the Mountain Meadows Massacre. The following two letters offer clarification:
Telling the story of Mountain Meadows Massacre requires a steady, objective approach, where all the facts are strenuously sought, collected and combined into a full picture and context, and then applied to reach the best possible understanding of past events.
Unfortunately, these qualities do not characterize investigative reporter Sally Denton’s recent column on the event. Instead, her account of this most tragic incident contains factual errors as well as dark innuendos that masquerade as historical truth.
Denton claims the massacre undermines The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) by calling into question Brigham Young’s “divinity.” In fact, the Church has never taught that its leaders are divine or infallible. On the other hand, there is no persuasive evidence that Brigham Young orchestrated the event. Nor is there reliable evidence that the Church’s cooperation at the trial of John D. Lee — who played a leading role in the killing — was part of a deal for Utah statehood, as Denton claims. Denton even gets the number of emigrants killed wrong by more than a dozen.
Tying the massacre to the present, Denton suggests that current Church president, Gordon B. Hinckley, has been the target of descendants’ criticisms or demands. While it can hardly be expected that such a diverse group should be unanimous in their views, most have acknowledged and thanked President Hinckley for the newly restored monument at Mountain Meadows and the efforts to build bridges between perpetrators’ and victims’ descendants.
Denton links the tragedy to present-day events by alleging that the offending local militia aimed at “ridding the world of infidels” and claims that the massacre has parallels with “9/11.” These emotionally charged comparisons, however, have little to do with historical evidence or to the actual circumstances which occurred.
Finally, the actions of the modern Church seem anything but a struggle to suppress its history, as Denton alleges. My co-authors, Richard E. Turley Jr. and Glen M. Leonard, and I have received full Church cooperation for what must be the most extensive research ever conducted on this episode. That research will be published in 2004 by Oxford University Press, and will shed more light and understanding on the event than any other previous publication.
Ronald W. Walker, Professor of History
Brigham Young University
3 June 2003
To the editor of The New York Times:
In "A Utah Massacre and Mormon Memory" (Op-Ed, May 24), Sally Denton tells only half the story of the tragedy at Mountain Meadows in 1857. She does not mention that for a quarter of a century, Mormons had repeatedly been driven from their settlements by mobs that burned their homes and killed their children.
In 1857, the United States Army was on its way to Utah, and Mormons foresaw another expulsion. Some of them panicked and performed a terrible act that has stained Mormon history ever since.
Richard Bushman
Emeritus Professor of History, Columbia University
25 May 2003
(Published by permission)