NOM

During the events after my fathers recent death, my Mom mentioned something that I'd never heard before. She said something about his step-grandmother. Huh? So, I went digging yesterday.

I found that a few years after his grandmother died, his grandfather married the widow of his (grandfathers) brother. I dug some more and found that this brother had died while on a mission to an eastern state, but he is buried in one of the colonias. Double Huh?

More digging showed that step-grandma is one of the half-sisters to Mitt Romney's grandfather. Not a small world when it comes to the colonias.

So I call one of my sisters to discuss. She and my other sister had gone to visit one of my Dad's cousins and they'd found out more of this story. Apparently, this grandfather had wanted to become a polygamist and move to Mexico, but grandmother objected. Then, after he remarried his widowed sister-in-law, she turned out to be (in Dad's cousins words) a total nutcase that made life miserable and ran off all the children from the first marriage except the one uncle that was only 11 when his mother died (the cousins Dad).

The official story of the death of step grandmas first husband was that he died of typhoid, but the verbal version was that he had gotten in a fight and was later found hanging from a bridge. Sounds to me like it was a mission to recruit women to be polygamist wives for fresh blood in the colonias.

Anyway, all that being said, the whole story just made me angry. Why did this woman drive my grandmother and her siblings away from their father? She didn't have any children with him and she only had one daughter with her previous husband. I have such fond memories of my great-uncle (the one too young to be kicked out), yet, in hindsight, there was a sadness in him. I wonder if that was a carryover from some abuse taken out on him by this woman.

Was this a common occurrence in families in that time? I remember my ex-MIL's story of finding out (at the age of 18) that her father had 3 older children from a previous marriage. Her mother had insisted that he would have nothing to do with them after their marriage. Again, I was stunned and somewhat angry that a woman would do that to their husband and his children.

I guess we still see this type of thing nowadays but I just have a hard time understanding it. I would have welcomed my husbands children with open arms and treated them as my own if their mother had not estranged them from us, just as he has raised my children as his own.

I know that my ancestral family skeletons are long in the past, but damn, it really angers me.

It can be interesting to explore family history.
It can help explain things more.

Newme wrote: ↑Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:38 am It can be interesting to explore family history.
It can help explain things more.

And open up more questions! I used my sister's log on for Family Search since I have no idea what my membership number is and spent a big chunk of the day digging into more history.

I recently came across an ancestors journal who was a younger polygamy wife and younger sister of the senior wife in the 1850s. She cursed the concept of polygamy and had many regrets about entering into a polygamist relationship. Life in 1850s Utah was miserable for many women.

I got bit by the "Flamily History" bug for a while after I found out the truth about the LDS Corporation.

The itchiness of that bug bite wore off rather quickly when I started doing some simple math and... G-G-Grandfather married TWO 16-year-old's when he was FIFTY. Funny how all the legendary family stories about that guy never included those details, eh?

(Maybe he was just a few months past his 50th birthday? Nope, that still doesn't make it any better.)

Yeah, WTFluff, that does kinda make you go ewwwww. At least my great grandmother and her sister were in their 20s when they became second wives (different men).

They are why I have to laugh whenever I hear the old "polygamy was to take care of all the widows from crossing the plains" nonsense. They both came to Utah by train, as did my great- grandfather.

My G-G-G-grandfather was an early polygamist with 16 wives. I used to take pretend/not-pretend pride in being from his first wife's line. I am now ashamed I had those feelings. Looking at his wives, quite a few were actually pretty old (post-menopausal) when he married them, so I wonder if there was at least some truth to the whole "taking care of widows" talk. He only had children from 4 of the marriages. He married one woman close to his age, then later after her father died was also sealed to her mother who was 20 years his senior. He did marry a 16 year old and a 19 year old when he was in his thirties. But after that he mostly married women within a few years of his age.

I'm having a hard time painting him with a single brush. On one hand, 30-something marrying a 16 year old is messed up (full-stop? is that a discussion ender?). 30-something marrying a 19 year old is weird, but not to the same level. Mother-daughter pairs sounds really bad, but taking a recent 50-something widow as a wife on the frontier who is much older than you doesn't sound as bad. And marrying 50, 60, 70 year olds as you age? It's weird, but not necessarily abusive.

But it is certainly eye-opening to see my family's stamp on the polygamy of the past. I wish I knew where to find more and unbiased information.

Linked wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2017 9:22 am I'm having a hard time painting him with a single brush.

Honestly, I'm probably more upset with my CURRENT family members, and the mormon-bragging about my G-G-Grandfather, than I am with Grand-dad himself.

And I should also give my current family credit in that it's possible that they didn't know about the under-age brides. Though they honestly have NO EXCUSE for NEVER mentioning the polygamy. And there comes the anger again... I guess I should use a mormon platitude for my anger issues: I'll stop being angry when I'm dead!

I searched through my family history for a few minutes on Family Search. Not as many practicing polygs as I expected in my tree. Two guys had 2 concurrent wives, 1 guy had 4. The other 30+ were monygs.

Interestingly a few guys were robbing the cradle, marrying or remarrying girls in their late teens or early 20's when they were 38+.

The most interesting thing is how many children some of the women had. Several 10+ kids and then died when they were about 35 yrs old. The husband then remarried another 18-year-old wife and had another 10 kids. To me, this is almost as disturbing as polygamy.

These women literally spent their entire marriage pregnant pushing out kids until it killed them, only to be replaced with a baby machine.

I would be curious if this was a unique experience to early Mormonism or if lots of babies and replacing spent wives was common on the frontier.
------------
EDIT, after a little digging, I have more polygamous relatives than I stated above. I started a new thread about it.

The most interesting thing is how many children some of the women had. Several 10+ kids and then died when they were about 35 yrs old. The husband then remarried another 18-year-old wife and had another 10 kids. To me, this is almost as disturbing as polygamy.

These women literally spent their entire marriage pregnant pushing out kids until it killed them, only to be replaced with a baby machine.

I would be curious if this was a unique experience to early Mormonism or if lots of babies and replacing spent wives was common on the frontier.

Hmmm very similar story as my ancestor. Did the two wives (the one who died and the younger one) happen to be sisters living in Cache county and Southern Idaho?

FiveFingerMnemonic wrote: ↑Tue Aug 01, 2017 8:59 am

The most interesting thing is how many children some of the women had. Several 10+ kids and then died when they were about 35 yrs old. The husband then remarried another 18-year-old wife and had another 10 kids. To me, this is almost as disturbing as polygamy.

These women literally spent their entire marriage pregnant pushing out kids until it killed them, only to be replaced with a baby machine.

I would be curious if this was a unique experience to early Mormonism or if lots of babies and replacing spent wives was common on the frontier.

Hmmm very similar story as my ancestor. Did the two wives (the one who died and the younger one) happen to be sisters living in Cache county and Southern Idaho?

I'd have to double check, but this scenario was rather common.

Linked wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2017 9:22 am My G-G-G-grandfather was an early polygamist with 16 wives. I used to take pretend/not-pretend pride in being from his first wife's line. I am now ashamed I had those feelings. Looking at his wives, quite a few were actually pretty old (post-menopausal) when he married them, so I wonder if there was at least some truth to the whole "taking care of widows" talk. He only had children from 4 of the marriages. He married one woman close to his age, then later after her father died was also sealed to her mother who was 20 years his senior. He did marry a 16 year old and a 19 year old when he was in his thirties. But after that he mostly married women within a few years of his age.

I'm having a hard time painting him with a single brush. On one hand, 30-something marrying a 16 year old is messed up (full-stop? is that a discussion ender?). 30-something marrying a 19 year old is weird, but not to the same level. Mother-daughter pairs sounds really bad, but taking a recent 50-something widow as a wife on the frontier who is much older than you doesn't sound as bad. And marrying 50, 60, 70 year olds as you age? It's weird, but not necessarily abusive.

But it is certainly eye-opening to see my family's stamp on the polygamy of the past. I wish I knew where to find more and unbiased information.

Sounds to me like we're related, because I'm 99-percent sure you're describing Erastus Snow.

Linked wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2017 9:22 am Looking at his wives, quite a few were actually pretty old (post-menopausal) when he married them, so I wonder if there was at least some truth to the whole "taking care of widows" talk.

My opinion is it wasn't so much 'taking care of the widows' as much as a notch on the celestial bed post. They weren't marrying post menopausal women for mortal sexual fulfilment, but adding more feathers in their cap for the eternities. Sounds to me an awful lot like the 40 virgins for righteous muslim radicals.

Taking care of the widows was a convenient side benefit to appear pious. Would he marry them for the sake of their remaining mortal years or did he do it expecting a celestial enhancement?

Enoch Witty wrote: ↑Tue Aug 01, 2017 12:25 pm Sounds to me like we're related, because I'm 99-percent sure you're describing Erastus Snow.

Yep. What's up cuz?

Korihor wrote: ↑Tue Aug 01, 2017 12:43 pm

Linked wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2017 9:22 am Looking at his wives, quite a few were actually pretty old (post-menopausal) when he married them, so I wonder if there was at least some truth to the whole "taking care of widows" talk.

My opinion is it wasn't so much 'taking care of the widows' as much as a notch on the celestial bed post. They weren't marrying post menopausal women for mortal sexual fulfilment, but adding more feathers in their cap for the eternities. Sounds to me an awful lot like the 40 virgins for righteous muslim radicals.

Taking care of the widows was a convenient side benefit to appear pious. Would he marry them for the sake of their remaining mortal years or did he do it expecting a celestial enhancement?

Perhaps. I don't know the answers.

Linked wrote: ↑Tue Aug 01, 2017 2:09 pm Perhaps. I don't know the answers.

Exactly, no one does. That's what makes it so fun and so aggravating.

Korihor wrote: ↑Tue Aug 01, 2017 12:43 pm My opinion is it wasn't so much 'taking care of the widows' as much as a notch on the celestial bed post. They weren't marrying post menopausal women for mortal sexual fulfilment, but adding more feathers in their cap for the eternities. Sounds to me an awful lot like the 40 virgins for righteous muslim radicals.

So it seems.

Benjamin Johnson, brother of Almera (plural wife to Joseph Smith):

The First Command was to 'Multiply' and the Prophet taught us that Dominion & powr in the great Future would be Comensurate with the no [number] of 'Wives Childin & Friends' that we inheret here and that our great mission to earth was to Organize a Neculi of Heaven to take with us. To the increase of which there would be no end.

From In Sacred Loneliness:
Thus in Smith's Nauvoo ideology, a fullness of salvation depended on
the quantity of family members sealed to a person in this life. This
puts the number of women Joseph married into an understandable
context. This doctrine also makes it clear that, though Joseph's
marriages undoubtedly had a sexual dimension, theological concepts
also drove his polygamy, as well as the related purpose of gaining the
highest possible exaltation by linking elite families to him for both
earthly and eternal reasons.

An interesting review that touches in part on this:
http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/view ... ontext=msr

Benjamin Johnson quoted above is my prominent ancestor, so that's my disgusting heritage. He seemed to constantly brag about his sister being a possession of Joseph's.

Polygamy never made any women happy, I don't believe. The way these quotes treat women like chattel makes me sick.

I remember, years ago hearing someone say, "if you study the holocaust for 6 months, you'll be clinically depressed."

I've been dipping my toe into the history of polygamy for about six months and I'm ready to call a doctor and see if they can help me because I do believe I've ended up with a low grade depression simmering.

Thoughtful wrote: ↑Wed Aug 02, 2017 9:09 pm Benjamin Johnson quoted above is my prominent ancestor, so that's my disgusting heritage. He seemed to constantly brag about his sister being a possession of Joseph's.

Polygamy never made any women happy, I don't believe. The way these quotes treat women like chattel makes me sick.

I remember, years ago hearing someone say, "if you study the holocaust for 6 months, you'll be clinically depressed."

I've been dipping my toe into the history of polygamy for about six months and I'm ready to call a doctor and see if they can help me because I do believe I've ended up with a low grade depression simmering.

I agree about the depression comments. As I mentioned earlier, After finding out about my G-G-Grandfather's polygamous exploits, I've given up looking any further. I just don't want to know.

In the throes of my enlightenment about the church's truth-crisis, when I was attempting to give faith-promoting literature equal time with not-so-faith-promoting literature, I attempted to read In Sacred Loneliness. It's one of the only books I've ever set aside and not finished, it was just too depressing...

wtfluff wrote: ↑Wed Aug 02, 2017 10:25 pm

Thoughtful wrote: ↑Wed Aug 02, 2017 9:09 pm Benjamin Johnson quoted above is my prominent ancestor, so that's my disgusting heritage. He seemed to constantly brag about his sister being a possession of Joseph's.

Polygamy never made any women happy, I don't believe. The way these quotes treat women like chattel makes me sick.

I remember, years ago hearing someone say, "if you study the holocaust for 6 months, you'll be clinically depressed."

I've been dipping my toe into the history of polygamy for about six months and I'm ready to call a doctor and see if they can help me because I do believe I've ended up with a low grade depression simmering.

I agree about the depression comments. As I mentioned earlier, After finding out about my G-G-Grandfather's polygamous exploits, I've given up looking any further. I just don't want to know.

In the throes of my enlightenment about the church's truth-crisis, when I was attempting to give faith-promoting literature equal time with not-so-faith-promoting literature, I attempted to read In Sacred Loneliness. It's one of the only books I've ever set aside and not finished, it was just too depressing...

I want to read it, but I don't. I've only dabbled in learning because I'm scared, but what little I've come across so far is awful. I point it out regularly to TBM, as diplomatically as possible, that these women went through was not just "faith promoting" but often abusive,
Coerced, oppressive, and benefited no one except sexual benefits for the men involved. Actually, I think what I really want is for more TBM to learn this history and learn enogh of it that they can't excuse it (which IMO really isn't that much to get to that point).