Customer Reviews

Nauvoo: A Place of Peace, a People of Promise

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I found myself easily immersed in Leonard's book, Nauvoo, A Place of Peace, A People of Promise. He has done a magnificent job bringing to life the story of the Latter-day Saints in Nauvoo. Loaded with factual references, he offers a perspective not here-to-fore given the serious student of Nauvoo history.

Some have said that Nauvoo and its temple were the crowning achievement of Joseph Smith's ministry. As an active Latter-day Saint, and after reading this book, I would agree with this statement. However, the achievements most might think of are the temporal achievements. Building a city of 12,000 residents out of a swamp in six years, or undertaking the erection of a temple this magnificent was at the time a major leadership and temporal accomplishment. Latter-day Saints recognize, though, that these crowning achievements are more about Joseph's prophetic call. It was during those turbulent Nauvoo years that Joseph received many of the revelations that truly define the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Mr. Leonard helps drive this point home.

I would have liked more information about a few things. Early in the book, when Leonard discusses the number of elected government officials who are LDS versus non-LDS, he does not provide any comparative population statistics. This would be important to know to help the reader assess for himself whether or not the ratio was "fair." He merely comments that the ratio of LDS to non-LDS politicians favored the non-believers. I would like to know the facts.

At the end of chapter five, he leaves us with a bit of a cliffhanger regarding John C. Bennett. This might work in fiction, but it seemed out of place for this historical work. We all know what a scalawag Bennett turned out to be. Just tell us he is a crook and adulterer and get it over. In fact, later when we learn more about Bennett's wrong doings, Leonard never really comes out with the charges.

In chapter six, we read good material about the agrarian lifestyle those in and around Nauvoo chose to live. Given the comparative nature of earlier chapters, it would have been good to read more about how the Latter-day Saints farming practices differed from those of their non-LDS neighbors. I would also like to have read how trading ensued between LDS farmers and their non-LDS neighbors.

When he gives his summarization of James Strang and the Strangite group, Leonard talks about the troubles Strang had on Beaver Island. We never hear about any positive contributions. One more sentence or even a short paragraph on Strang's contributions to northern Michigan might have made this work a little more credible. For example, few people realize that Strang published the first newspaper north of Grand Rapids, and that he was in the state legislature. A little balance helps build credibility.

Leonard is at times too proper. A serious student of church history can take the truth, even if it might make us blush. There were times when I just wish he had said, "Person X had an adulterous affair with Persons A, B, and C." Rather than cloaking it in words like "conduct unbecoming of a church member," or words and phrases that are even more ambiguous.

About half way through the book, I began to wonder for a moment if I was reading an in depth historical reference, or something that was biased toward the purposes of the church. At this point, I read the front and back flaps and came away even more confused. Leonard said that he was going to portray this from a religious perspective. In many ways, he did, but he did so with great care to ensure that facts were set in the proper context. Religious perspective? Perhaps, but only in how he shows why the Prophet Joseph and other church leaders made the kinds of decisions they did at the time. In the end, though, it still makes me wonder if this is truly the last word in authoritative, well documented, fair and balanced reporting of the history of this great city, its people and its religion.

Criticisms aside, this book is a must read for anyone interested in a serious study of Nauvoo. While I still think there are a few things missing, most of the truth about the events during the Nauvoo era has now been brought to light. Nice work, Mr. Leonard.

I will be living in Nauvoo and wanted to know some of the history of the city. This book is a great read and has provided a lot of very useful information about a place and time that is often overlooked or distorted by historians. Great book.

Leonard has been working on this book for over twenty years, and the result is an impressive, comprehensive history of Nauvoo. He traces the history of the area, of course focusing on the years 1839-1846 when the Mormons were there, but not exclusive to that period. It describes the first settlers, the Mormon War after the main exodus, the Icarian period, and all the way through the re-dedication of the Nauvoo Temple in 2002.

Leonard's detailed research debunks some things we always thought were true (for example, he claims that John Taylor's pocketwatch didn't stop a bullet--it was crushed when he fell) and provides more detail on many familiar stories we thought we knew (like the conference where Brigham Young and Sidney Rigdon vied for leadership of the Church).

The book gets bogged down from time to time going over who owned what parcel of land, and describing every possible profession that was followed in Nauvoo. Descriptions of Nauvoo's economy aren't nearly as exciting as stories of the lives of the early Saints.

As an active Latter-day Saint, Leonard treats doctrinal topics, revelations, and divine manifestations matter-of-factly without discussion as to their truth. His focus, instead, is the story of the people of Nauvoo. He claims to be writing for a universal audience, but a non-LDS reader may have difficulty with his passing mentions of prominent Mormon figures who are poorly identified because Mormons generally are familiar with them. For example, he uses the names "Orrin Rockwell" and "Porter Rockwell" interchangably (never "Orrin Porter Rockwell"), without telling us they are the same person.

The theme of the book is that the Nauvoo period was crucial in defining the LDS Church against the rest of Christianity. Eternal marriage, temple endowments, vicarious ordinances, and man's divine potential are uniquely Mormon doctrines that Joseph Smith taught in Nauvoo. Leonard spends some time describing how many of Joseph's associates, including Sidney Rigdon and Joseph Smith III, rejected many of the Prophet's Nauvoo teachings and thereby formed their own religious groups. The understanding of these concepts increased my appreciation for the Prophet Joseph Smith and the city of Nauvoo itself.

I wish I could be more positive about "Nauvoo: A Place of Peace, A People of Promise," but it is astoundingly disappointing. Glen Leonard is a fine historian who has been working on this subject for more than twenty years. This should have been his magnum opus, instead it adds virtually nothing to understanding about the subject and in many areas is a significant step backward.

The fundamental problem is summarized in Glen Leonard's book title, "Nauvoo: A Place of Peace, A People of Promise." Nauvoo may have been a beautiful place, as Joseph Smith Jr. thought, but it was never a place of peace. Political, economic, religious, cultural, and social divisions both within and without the church constantly swirled between 1839 and 1846. Some who have spent significant time in Nauvoo, including myself, would conclude that they still exist and rumble just below the surface of a seemingly quiet little town. In addition, there is abundant reason to question the "people of promise" aspect of Glen Leonard's title. Were they a "people" in a unified sense of the term? What promise did they hold?

What the title suggests is that this overview of the history of Nauvoo is a thoroughly faithful construct that seeks to show God working among the Mormons in every aspect of their lives. In essence, it represents a return to an overtly mythic history not seen since the time of Andrew Jensen and B. H. Roberts. Leonard asserts repeatedly that Nauvoo represented the first major explication of Joseph Smith's vision of the world. Nauvoo represented, and this is what he emphasizes to the exclusion of anything that might be contradictory, the first instance of Mormonism as a new religious tradition substantively different from what has gone before. It was in Nauvoo that Joseph Smith Jr. taught, admittedly to a small group sworn to secrecy, his most unique religious conceptions. In so doing, Leonard suggests, it was at Nauvoo that Joseph Smith Jr. fulfilled his religious mission. With such a perspective, mythic interpretations of the Mormon experience in western Illinois represent the only possibility for this book.

The reason for Leonard's myopic concern with Mormon theology is that the Latter-day Saints do not so much have a theology as they have a history. Confusing theology with history, therefore, requires that believing church members accept a specified set of affirmations that are grounded in the "pure" thoughts and actions of past individuals, especially those of Joseph Smith Jr. Without acceptance of these truths, Mormonism could and probably should fall of its own weight. The perception of truth or falsity about the religion, therefore, rests on what historians say about those who have gone before. Glen Leonard, therefore, is fulfilling the Mormon equivalent of St. Thomas Aquinas by systematizing the Nauvoo "truths" for the faithful.

Unfortunately, this expounding of his thesis leaves the reader wanting, or alternatively frustrated and angry, that the effort is not more sophisticated. In the end there is a wealth of detail in this lengthy book on the history of Nauvoo. It is not the historiographical triumph that I had hoped. Glen Leonard seems to attribute virtually all positive developments in both Nauvoo's history and the evolution of the church to inspired leadership by Joseph Smith Jr. or Brigham Young and to the righteousness of the rank and file. Any negative developments, and there were many, Leonard too often blames on "apostates" and anti-Mormons with sinister intentions. In that context, he accepts virtually without question, the Mormon myth of persecuted innocence. Leonard's Nauvoo is far too black and white for any historian to accept, and I would hope that the non-historians interested in the subject would be more discerning as well. Leonard also steps away from the role of the historian as analyzer to moralize on the tragic results of sin and rebellion against Joseph Smith Jr.'s authority. In every instance, this work is a morality play and not a history.

Glen Leonard does a fine job in this book of explaining the different things going on during the Nauvoo period of the LDS Church. Joseph Smith, the central figure of the drama, emerges as powerful leader and passionate prophet. The chapters on the martyrdom and the Nauvoo temple are particularly well done, and should be read by everyone seeking a better understanding of these important aspects of the church's history. In his review, Launius spends far too much time complaining about the title of the book. And certainly a reader cannot expect that Leonard will take his position on every topic. Whether you agree with Leonard's conclusions or not, he has done a commendable job of making the Nauvoo years more understandable.

This alleged "history" of Nauvoo is filled with inaccuracies, unsupported mind-reading, and biased propaganda.

For example, Leonard boldly claims that the Council of Fifty was merely "an advisory committee under the direction of the First Presidency and the Twelve" that was only "symbolic" of a future millenial kingdom of God. Had Leonard bothered to cite any evidence supporting this extremely novel interpretation, it could be respected as an alternative view. He fails to do so, however, and thus appears to intentionally distort the facts, in order to avoid the prophetic succession questions that the Council of Fifty posed.

Likewise, Leonard's discussion of Freemasonry in Nauvoo is contradictory and grossly inaccurate. On the one hand, Leonard takes the highly conservative view that Freemasonry's origins are found in the trade guilds of the 1600s and 1700s. On the other hand, Leonard explains parallels between Masonry and the LDS Temple on the basis that both go back to a common "ancient" origin. Leonard further claims that John C. Bennett was the first to notice these parallels, ignoring the earlier letters of Heber C. Kimball which noted the same.

Leonard also perpetuates the myth that Joseph Smith became a Mason merely for friendship and political advantage. Informed Masons, however, realize that this is a high insult to the Prophet's memory. If these were Joseph's true motives, he would have had to lie to be admitted. Further, the Nauvoo Lodge continued to practice Masonry long after the Grand Lodge of Illinois declared them clandestine (illegitimate). By this time, any dreams of "friendship and political advantage" had been hopelessly crushed.

Leonard seems to attribute almost every positive development in Nauvoo's history to inspired leadership and righteous Saints. Negative developments, Leonard blames on apostates and anti-Mormons. Leonard's Nauvoo is black and white--oversimplified at best. Worse, Leonard becomes "preachy" as he overtly moralizes on the tragic results of sin and rebellion against Joseph Smith's authority.

This book could have been a terrific overview of a critical period in Mormonism. Instead, it is nothing more than ill-supported propeganda, some of which seems to be purposely misrepresented. I can not recommend this book whatsoever.