Comments on: Book Review: Liberty to the Downtrodden

By: Matt Grow

Matt Grow — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 19:53:50 +0000

Thanks for the generous review of the book. I appreciate the close and thoughtful reading.

By: Clark

Clark — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 03:55:13 +0000

I didn’t know Kane was so responsible for the reverse. Kind of interesting. I wonder how things would have played out had that not happened? I suspect it would only have delayed things by a few years…

By: David G.

David G. — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:24:44 +0000

Thanks, Jordan. I agree with your assessment. These types of questions are always a bit difficult, since we have to first ask what are the major themes that dominate contemporary Mormon historiography from ca. 1847 through the mid-1860s. The problem is exacerbated by the paucity of synthetic works that deal with the period (aside from Campbell’s Establishing Zion I can’t think of many works that use that rough periodization). But I’d agree that the Matt’s book should make historians who deal with the interconnections between Utah and the U.S. rethink their assumptions.

By: Jared T.

Jared T. — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:02:52 +0000

Thanks for the review, Jordan.

By: Jordan W.

Jordan W. — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:50:39 +0000

David, great questions. I think Matt’s work offers a more nuanced understanding of the Mormon’s image on a national scale during the period you mentioned. Grow evidences that during the period from 1848-1852 in particular, Kane’s use of print fostered a widespread sympathetic view of Mormonism. The public announcement of plural marriage largely reversed this view, but it marks a break in anti-Mormon sentiment which, until Matt’s publication, had been overlooked.

In a similar vein, I think Matt’s work highlights the impact of the Civil War on the Mormon image in America. Grow’s insight that the Mormon Question brought a dividing nation together before the outbreak of the Civil War reveals the impact of national crises on the Mormon’s public image. Further, I think that following the Civil War the Mormon Problem fostered reunion, in line with Blight’s argument in Race and Reunion.

Your second question, I think, is more difficult to address. Perhaps those who have read Matt’s work can chime in. I think it’s possible Matt’s work will help American historians understand the salience of the Mormon Question in the antebellum period. Matt’s work certainly highlights the evangelical nature of anti-Mormonism during this period, which carries into the twentieth century.

Just a few thoughts, but I’ll keep thinking about your questions.

By: Ben

Ben — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:47:50 +0000

Thanks for the review, Jordan; the book is on my bookshelf, but I probably won’t be able to give it any in-depth look until summer.

I also echo David’s questions in #1.

By: Brandon

Brandon — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:44:41 +0000

Jordan-

Thanks for the review.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:38:04 +0000

Thanks for the review, Jordan. I definitely need to make time to sit down and read the book.

By: David G.

David G. — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:28:06 +0000

Thanks for the review, Jordan. I’ve got a couple of questions about how this book fits historiographically. First, how does Matt change our understandings of Mormon history during the 1840s, ’50s, and ’60s? Second, and more broadly, how do you think Matt’s treatment will change how American historians of the antebellum period understand Mormonism? I realize these are big questions, but I’d like to hear your thoughts, however underdeveloped they are at this point.