Historicity of _American Primeval_

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
I Have Questions
God
Posts: 1794
Joined: Tue May 23, 2023 9:09 am

Re: Historicity of _American Primeval_

Post by I Have Questions »

drumdude wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2025 1:53 am
FairMormon has released a "fact-checking" webpage dedicated to the series:

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/hom ... n-primeval

I'm eager to watch the show when I have some spare time. I've skimmed through the Mormon Stories video in the OP, and googled a bit about the show.

I have to admit it seems like Lindsay Hansen Park may have allowed the show to portray early Mormonism as much more violent than it actually was. At one point in the Mormon Stories video above (1 hour 10 minutes in), they're even laughing at how historically inaccurate it is.

I hope we get to hear from Lindsay herself soon.
On example from the FAIR fact checker.
CLAIM:
Jim Bridger sold Fort Bridger to Brigham Young.
RATING: FALSE

Clarification:

Jim Bridger did not personally sell Fort Bridger to Brigham Young. The fort was sold by his business partner, Louis Vasquez, after Bridger fled the area due to rising tensions with Mormon settlers.
Explanation:
Fort Bridger, co-owned by Jim Bridger and Louis Vasquez, was a key trading post in the Utah Territory. By 1853, tensions escalated when Bridger was accused of illegally trading alcohol and firearms with Native tribes, leading him to leave the region before any formal sale occurred. The fort was later sold by Vasquez in 1855 to Mormon settlers acting on behalf of Brigham Young. Bridger himself had no direct involvement in the transaction and did not profit from the sale. This portrayal of Bridger personally selling the fort to Young misrepresents historical events, as he had already distanced himself from the area and later allied with the U.S. government during the Utah War.
Why It Matters:
This claim exaggerates Jim Bridger’s role in the events surrounding Fort Bridger and misrepresents the historical timeline. Understanding that the sale was conducted by Vasquez clarifies the complex dynamics between Bridger, Mormon settlers, and the U.S. government.
https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/hom ... n-primeval

Were people confused as to the complex dynamics between Bridger, his business partners, Mormon settlers, and the U.S. Government in such a way that it was damaging to faith or the reputation of the Church?
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
I Have Questions
God
Posts: 1794
Joined: Tue May 23, 2023 9:09 am

Re: Historicity of _American Primeval_

Post by I Have Questions »

Here is FAIR's fact checker of the Mountain Meadows portrayal.
Clarification:
While it is true that Mormon militia members, along with some Native American recruits, attacked the emigrant wagon train, they did not initially kill all the emigrants. The massacre occurred in phases, and some individuals, including children under the age of seven, were spared. Furthermore, Brigham Young was unaware of the attack until after it occurred.

Explanation:
The Mountain Meadows Massacre took place in September 1857, involving a wagon train of emigrants from Arkansas. A few members of the local militia from southern Utah, along with a few Native American recruits, may ha{ve} initially attacked the emigrants disguised as Native Americans. After a prolonged standoff, the emigrants surrendered under the promise of safe passage, but most were subsequently killed, except for 17 children under the age of seven who were taken in by local families until they were returned to relatives. Brigham Young’s role in the event has been a subject of historical debate, but contemporary evidence—including the testimony of James Haslam—indicates that Young actively sought to prevent violence. Haslam, who rode 300 miles in three days to deliver a message warning of potential conflict, stated that Brigham Young instructed him to tell local leaders to protect the emigrants and avoid any harm. Haslam’s message, however, arrived too late. Young’s reaction upon hearing of the massacre was reportedly one of sorrow and anger, not complicity.
https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/hom ... n-primeval

So they take issue with the portrayal of it happening in one event, rather than a more prolonged and terrifying series of events for the victims. They attempt to downplay Mormon involvement by using terms like "They did not initially kill all the emigrants", "some...were spared", "A few members...a few Native American recruits...", "...may have initially attacked the emigrants disguised as Native Americans".

Here is an official Church recounting of the event, which shows the FAIR attempt to disparage American Primeval to be mealy mouthed at best.
In September 1857, a branch of territorial militia in southern Utah composed entirely of Latter-day Saints, along with some American Indians they recruited, laid siege to a wagon train of emigrants traveling from Arkansas to California. The militiamen carried out a deliberate massacre, killing 120 men, women, and children in a valley known as Mountain Meadows. Only 17 small children—those believed to be too young to be able to tell what had happened there—were spared.
https://web.archive.org/web/20220926174 ... e?lang=eng
The arrival of the wagon train in Utah Territory occurred in the midst of a period of “reformation” within the Church. Concerned about spiritual complacency, Brigham Young and other Church leaders delivered a series of sermons in which they called the Saints to repent and renew their spiritual commitments.1 At times during the reformation, Brigham Young, his counselor Jedediah M. Grant, and other leaders preached with fiery rhetoric, warning against the evils of sin and those who dissented from or opposed the Church.2 Such preaching led to increased strain between the Latter-day Saints and their relative few neighbors in Utah, including federally appointed officials.
That's Brigham Young rallying his troops to action, inciting them to violence.
Over the next few days, events escalated, and Latter-day Saint militiamen planned and carried out a massacre. They lured the emigrants from their circled wagons with a false flag of truce and, aided by Paiute Indians they had recruited, slaughtered them. Between the first attack and the final slaughter, 120 were killed.
As Gadianton points out, American Primeval, if anything, makes the Mountain Meadows Massacre less horrific than the Church admits it really was. Brigham Young inciting his people to arms was directly responsible for the increased state of tension and alert that led those Mormon militiamen to do what they did at Mountain Meadows. FAIR's weasel words and attempted downplaying on the subject denigrate the memory of the victims and they should be ashamed of themselves. At least their Church (belatedly) admits the reality of the event.

Despite FAIR’s cheap attempts to exonerate Young from all responsibility for the Mountain Meadows Massacre…
After the massacre, Young stated in public forums that God had taken vengeance on the Baker–Fancher party.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigham ... s_Massacre
That’s Young glorifying the massacre as God’s work.
When Young sent his report on the massacre to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs in 1858, he said that it was the work of Native Americans.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigham ... s_Massacre
That’s Young knowingly lying about the event, putting the blame on the Native Americans and hiding Mormon involvement.

FAIR might want to factcheck their factcheck.
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 7702
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Historicity of _American Primeval_

Post by Moksha »

The podcast mentioned by Brent Metcalf is a much better source of information than FAIR, even if your Stake President tells you otherwise!!!
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
Markk
God
Posts: 1525
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2022 1:49 am

Re: Historicity of _American Primeval_

Post by Markk »

drumdude wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2025 1:53 am
FairMormon has released a "fact-checking" webpage dedicated to the series:

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/hom ... n-primeval

I'm eager to watch the show when I have some spare time. I've skimmed through the Mormon Stories video in the OP, and googled a bit about the show.

I have to admit it seems like Lindsay Hansen Park may have allowed the show to portray early Mormonism as much more violent than it actually was. At one point in the Mormon Stories video above (1 hour 10 minutes in), they're even laughing at how historically inaccurate it is.

I hope we get to hear from Lindsay herself soon.
I haven't listened to the podcast yet, I will today during my commute, but I did watch the series.

What I got out of it indirectly is that it helps put the early settling of Utah into a "wild west" mindset. The trappers, the dead animals hanging and being dressed, dirty people lacking hygiene. There was a scene when BY was addressing male members at night, with torches, outside while they sat on stumps. For what ever reason that was a scene that sparked some thought for me, and spoke to me.

I was brought up with a more white washed Pollyanna version of the saints coming across the planes singing "All is well," with the wind plowing in their faces, moving forward step by step. And that the Utah Territory was much more settled, and "pleasant" frontier, with Walnut Grove type of communities. I get that is a naïve mindset, but right or wrong that is how my mind, being born and raised from pioneer stock, organized and formed "mind portraits" of my heritage, culture, and past faith.
Brent Metcalfe
Nursery
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 1:09 am

Re: Historicity of _American Primeval_

Post by Brent Metcalfe »

I Have Questions wrote:
Wed Jan 15, 2025 10:30 pm

Were people expecting a Discovery Channel documentary?
Probably not. I think it’s fair to say, though, that a swath of folks expected historical verisimilitude. I don’t think it achieved that.
User avatar
Doctor Steuss
God
Posts: 2118
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:48 pm

Re: Historicity of _American Primeval_

Post by Doctor Steuss »

[Deleted. Thank you Tom for catching my embarrassing error.]
Last edited by Doctor Steuss on Thu Jan 16, 2025 7:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I Have Questions
God
Posts: 1794
Joined: Tue May 23, 2023 9:09 am

Re: Historicity of _American Primeval_

Post by I Have Questions »

Brent Metcalfe wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2025 5:07 pm
I Have Questions wrote:
Wed Jan 15, 2025 10:30 pm
Were people expecting a Discovery Channel documentary?
Probably not. I think it’s fair to say, though, that a swath of folks expected historical verisimilitude. I don’t think it achieved that.
Well I’m unsure why that swath of folks would hold that expectation when Netflix presents the show as follows…
This is America…1857. Up is down, pain is everywhere, innocence and tranquility are losing the battle to hatred and fear. Peace is the shrinking minority, and very few possess grace — even fewer know compassion. There is no safe haven in these brutal lands, and only one goal matters: survival. AMERICAN PRIMEVAL is a fictionalized dramatization and examination of the violent collision of culture, religion, and community as men and women fight and die to keep or control this land.
https://media.netflix.com/en/only-on-netflix/81457507

I think the show does a very good job of delivering exactly what it set out to deliver.
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
User avatar
bill4long
Apostle
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2021 3:56 am

Re: Historicity of _American Primeval_

Post by bill4long »

They most definitely take liberties. It's not a documentary. But it's a fine production, I think. Worth watching, in my opinion. And The Diplomat.
Identifying as African-American Lesbian who is identifying as a Gay Man and a Gay Journalist
Pronouns: what/me/worry
Rocker and a mocker and a midnight shocker
Fence Sitter
High Councilman
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:02 am

Re: Historicity of _American Primeval_

Post by Fence Sitter »

Brent Metcalfe wrote:
Wed Jan 15, 2025 10:01 pm
You’re very kind. My time is limited given other projects. A couple of weeks ago Mormon Stories and Mormonism Live collaborated on a podcast interviewing me...

https://www.youtube.com/live/G6le6mltJw ... rvq9C6oo_b
Brent,

In this podcast at the 2:00:35ish mark you talk about Smith using a KJB while he is dictating the Book of Mormon and you mention a specific edition that was used, a 1769 Oxford Standard Edition KJB. What more is known about this specific Bible? Who did it belong to and is it still extant? If they were using the Oxford Bible in Mar-June 1829, why did they purchase another Bible (the 1828 Phinney) in Oct of the same year? Maybe the Oxford Bible belonged to someone else besides Smith?

Thanks
Brent Metcalfe
Nursery
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2021 1:09 am

Re: Historicity of _American Primeval_

Post by Brent Metcalfe »

I Have Questions wrote:
Thu Jan 16, 2025 7:13 pm

I think the show does a very good job of delivering exactly what it set out to deliver.
... Perhaps. I doubt most folks read the Netflix summations—my wife & I rarely do because we understand it’s entertainment. I don’t know what others do.

What I do know is that the actual historical record of the massacre at Mountain Meadows is potentially more harrowing than the limited series portrayed. So why not reenact the actual history?
Post Reply