|
|
| (No se muestran 2 ediciones intermedias del mismo usuario) |
| Línea 13: |
Línea 13: |
| | |H=Las edades de las esposas polígamas | | |H=Las edades de las esposas polígamas |
| | |S= | | |S= |
| − | |L1= | + | |L1=Pregunta: ¿Fue Joseph Smith un "practicante serio de violación legal?" |
| | }} | | }} |
| | </onlyinclude> | | </onlyinclude> |
| − | | + | {{epígrafe|El presentismo, en el peor de los casos, fomenta una especie de complacencia moral y autocomplacencia. Interpretar el pasado en términos de preocupaciones actuales por lo general nos lleva a encontrarnos moralmente superiores ... Nuestros antepasados constantemente fallan a la altura de nuestros estándares actuales. <ref>Lynn Hunt, "Against Presentism," (President's Column) ''Perspectives'' 40/5 (May 2002).</ref><br>—Lynn Hunt, President of American Historical Association}} |
| − | Los críticos de José Smith a veces se llenan de indignación cuando se plantean la cuestión de las edades de sus esposas.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Las acusaciones de violación de menores son absurdas, ya que ninguna ley o convención aplicarse a cualquiera de las esposas de José. Porcentaje de José de las esposas en sus años de adolescencia era menor que el porcentaje serie de esposas adolescentes en Kirtland, Nauvoo, o el censo de 1850 EE.UU., incluso entre los hombres de su misma edad. En todo caso, José se casó con un mayor porcentaje de mujeres de más edad, lo que sugiere que otros factores ajenos a la atracción sexual condujo estos partidos.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Las grandes diferencias de edad del cónyuge no eran infrecuentes antes y después de Nauvoo, entre los miembros y no miembros. Para atacar a José Smith de la edad de sus esposas es no entender el momento histórico que le tocó vivir. Los lectores modernos han sido tratados injustamente por autores que, engañados por o cazando sobre el presentismo, o bien no saben, o se negó a mencionar, que la práctica era habitual en la época de José.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | {{epígrafe|El presentismo, en su peor momento, alienta una especie de complacencia moral y autocomplacencia. Interpretando el pasado en términos de las actuales preocupaciones por lo general nos lleva a encontrarnos a nosotros mismos moralmente superior ... Nuestros antepasados constantemente fallan a la altura de nuestros estándares de hoy en día. {{ref|fn1}}<br>—Lynn Hunt, Presidente de la Asociación Americana de Historia}} | |
| | {{parabreak}} | | {{parabreak}} |
| | + | {{:Pregunta: ¿Fue Joseph Smith un "practicante serio de violación legal?"}} |
| | | | |
| − | Los críticos de José Smith a veces se llenan de indignación cuando se plantean la cuestión de las edades de sus esposas. Nunca uno a ser excesivamente cargados con datos históricos o matiz interpretativo, ateo Christopher Hitchens salvajes vocal José como "practicante serie de violación de menores." {{ref}} | Fn2 miembros modernos e investigadores, con más sinceridad que Hitchens, también se han preocupado (y hasta un poco sorprendido) para aprender, por ejemplo, que José se casó con una mujer de unos meses tímidos de sus quince años.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Esta sorpresa es una primera reacción natural, aunque un autor como Hitchens-que pretende ser proporcionar razonó-podrían análisis se espera que aporte algo más que consignas viscerales a la discusión. Lamentablemente, los comentarios Hitchens sobre la religión en general, ofrecen poco más que grandilocuencia, por lo que los Santos de los Últimos Días no tienen por qué sentirse señalado. Hitchens sí nos asegura, sin embargo, con un ejemplo de libro del presentismo.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==¿Qué es el presentismo?==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Imagina un niño en edad escolar que se pregunta por qué los caballeros franceses no resistieron el Inglés durante la Batalla de Agincourt ( en 1415 ), utilizando carros de combate Sherman . Podríamos responderemos con cuidado de que no había tales tanques disponibles . El niño , una especie precoz, replica que los generales franceses deben haber sido incompetente, porque todo el mundo sabe que los tanques son necesarios. El niño ha caído en la trampa del presentismo - que ha supuesto que las situaciones y circunstancias en el pasado son siempre el mismo que el actual . Claramente , no había tanques Sherman disponibles en 1415 ; no podemos ser justos criticar a los franceses por no utilizar algo que no estaba disponible y no imaginado .
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Al ver estos ejemplos anacrónicos de presentismo es relativamente simple. Los problemas más difíciles implican cuestiones de la cultura , el comportamiento y la actitud. Por ejemplo , parece perfectamente obvio para la mayoría del siglo XXI los norteamericanos que la discriminación por motivos de raza es erróneo. Podemos juzgar a un político moderno , racistas bastante dureza. Corremos el riesgo de presentismo , sin embargo, si suponemos que todos los políticos del pasado y los ciudadanos deberían haber reconocido el racismo , y luchó él. De hecho , para la gran mayoría de la historia , el racismo ha sido casi siempre presente . Prácticamente todas las cifras históricas son , para los estándares modernos , racistas . Identificar George Washington o Thomas Jefferson como racistas , y para juzgarlos fracasos morales , es ser culpable de presentismo .
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Una advertencia contra el presentismo no es afirmar que no hay juicios morales son posibles sobre los hechos históricos , o que no importa si somos racistas o no . Washington y Jefferson nacieron en una cultura en la que la sociedad , la ley y la práctica habían institucionalizado el racismo. Para ellos , incluso para percibir el racismo como un problema habría exigido que a salir de su tiempo histórico y lugar. Como peces rodeadas de agua , el racismo era tan frecuente y generalizada que incluso imaginar un mundo sin ella habría sido extraordinariamente difícil. No vamos a entender bien Washington y Jefferson, y sus opciones, si nos limitamos a los condenamos a que viola los estándares modernos de la que nadie en su época era consciente .
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==La violación estatutaria?==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Ataque de Hitchens sobre Joseph Smith por " violación estatutaria" es un ejemplo de libro de la historia presentista . " Violación ", por supuesto , es un delito en el que la víctima es forzada en el comportamiento sexual en contra de ella (o su ) voluntad. Tal comportamiento ha sido ampliamente condenada en las sociedades antiguas y modernas. Al igual que el asesinato o el robo , viola sin duda la conciencia moral de cualquier persona normal. Sin duda fue un crimen en la época de José Smith, y si José era culpable de relaciones sexuales forzadas , sería apropiado para condenarlo .
| |
| − |
| |
| − | " La violación estatutaria ", sin embargo , es un asunto completamente diferente. La violación estatutaria es la relación sexual con una víctima que se considera demasiado joven para dar su consentimiento legal - es violación bajo la " ley ", o leyes penales de la nación. Así, una mujer de veinte años de edad, quien decide tener relaciones sexuales no ha sido violada . Nuestra sociedad ha llegado a la conclusión , sin embargo, que un niño de diez años de edad, no tiene la madurez física , sexual o emocional para comprender verdaderamente la decisión de tener relaciones sexuales . Incluso si un niño de diez años de edad, está de acuerdo en tener relaciones sexuales con un joven de veinte años , de sexo masculino , el hombre es culpable de " violación estatutaria". El consentimiento del niño no es excusa para la conducta del adulto , porque el adulto debería haber sabido que el sexo con un menor de edad es ilegal.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Incluso en el moderno Estados Unidos, las leyes de estupro varían según el estado . A veinte años de edad, que tiene relaciones sexuales consentidas con un adolescente de dieciséis años de edad, en Alabama tendrían nada que temer ; mudarse a California le haría culpable de violación de menores , incluso si su pareja tenía diecisiete años .
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Por analogía , Joseph Smith probablemente poseía un arma de fuego para la que no tenía licencia - esto no es sorprendente , ya que no hay ley requería armas para ser registrados en la frontera en 1840 , sería ridículo que Hitchens se queje de que José " llevaba. un arma de fuego no registrada " . Si bien es cierto que el arma de José no estaba registrado , esto nos dice muy poco acerca de si José era un hombre bueno o malo. La pregunta clave , entonces, no es "Las acciones de Would Joseph Smith son ilegales hoy en día? " Sólo un fanático condenaría a alguien por violar una ley que no se había hecho .
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Más bien, la pregunta debería ser: " ¿Cambió José violan las leyes de la sociedad en que vivía ? " Si José no se rompió la ley, entonces podríamos pasar a preguntar: "¿ Por qué su comportamiento, a pesar de no ser ilegal, violar las normas comunes de la conciencia o de la humanidad? " Por ejemplo , incluso si el asesinato no era ilegal en Illinois, si José asesinado en varias ocasiones , bien podríamos cuestionar su moral .
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==Cuatro preguntas claves==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Debemos, pues, frente a cuatro preguntas:
| |
| − |
| |
| − | # ¿Cuáles son las edades de esposas de José?
| |
| − | # ¿Cambió José tienen relaciones sexuales con estas mujeres? Si no, entonces el tema de la violación de menores es discutible. Si es así, no hemos demostrado la violación de menores, pero podemos pasar a la siguiente pregunta.
| |
| − | # ¿Cuáles fueron las leyes de estupro de la época, y lo hicieron José los violan?
| |
| − | # Si José no era culpable de violación de menores, hizo, sin embargo, violan las normas comunes de la conciencia o de la sociedad?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ===1. La edad de las esposas de José===
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Incluso SUD autores no son inmunes a las falacias presentistas: Todd Compton, convencido de que el matrimonio plural fue un error trágico "desaprueba firmemente [s] de los matrimonios polígamos que involucran a mujeres adolescentes."{{ref|fn3}} Esto incluiría, probablemente, aquellos matrimonios que Joseph insistió fueron ordenados por Dios. Compton observa, con cierta desaprobación, que un tercio de las esposas de José eran menores de veinte años de edad. El lector moderno puede ser sorprendido. Debemos tener cuidado, sin embargo, del presentismo-es tan inusual que un tercio de las esposas de José habría sido adolescentes?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Cuando estudiamos los demás en el entorno de José, nos encontramos con que no lo era. Una muestra de 201 Nauvoo-era el matrimonio civil encontró que el 33,3% tenía menos de veinte años, con una novia de tan sólo doce años. {{ref|fn4}} Otra muestra de 127 matrimonios Kirtland encontró que casi la mitad (49,6%) tenían menos de veinte años. {{ref|fn5}} Y, un estudio asistido por ordenador de LDS matrimonios encontró que 1.835 a 1.845, el 42,3% de las mujeres estaban casadas antes de los veinte años de edad. {{ref|fn6}} Lo único sorprendente de un tercio de José es que más de sus esposos no eran más jóvenes.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Por otra parte, este patrón no parece limitarse a los mormones (véase gráfico 12 1). Una muestra de 1% a partir del censo de 1850 EE.UU. encontraron 989 hombres y 962 que se había casado en el último año. Los adolescentes componen el 36,0% de las mujeres casadas, y sólo el 2,3% de los hombres; la edad media del matrimonio fue de 22,5 para las mujeres y 27,8 para los hombres.{{ref|fn7}} Incluso cuando se extraen los hombres en edad de José (34-38 años) en el Censo de EE.UU., Joseph todavía tiene un porcentaje más bajo de mujeres más jóvenes y las mujeres más mayores que los no miembros de la mitad de una década más tarde.{{ref|fn8}}
| |
| − |
| |
| − | <center>Chart 12-1
| |
| − | [[Image:Chart 12-1.png]]</center>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Sospecho que Compton sale de su manera de inflar el número de esposas jóvenes, ya que agrupa a todos entre "14 y 20 años de edad", junto {{ref | FN9}}. No está claro por qué este grupo de edad se debe elegir-mujeres de dieciocho o mayores son adultos incluso para los estándares modernos.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Un desglose más útil por edad se encuentra en la Tabla 12-1. En lugar de agrupar a todas las mujeres menores de veintiún años juntos (un tercio de todas las mujeres), nuestro análisis muestra que sólo una quinta parte de las mujeres sería menor de dieciocho años. Estas son las únicas mujeres en riesgo de problemas de violación de menores, incluso en la era moderna.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | <center> Tabla 12-1: Edades de esposas de José {{ref|fn10}}</center>
| |
| − | {| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%"
| |
| − | !El rango de edad!!Porcentaje (n=33)
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | style="width:50%" valign="top"| 14-17 ||21.2%
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 18-19 ||9.1%
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 20-29|| 27.3%
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 30-39 ||27.3%
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 40-49 ||3.0%
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 50-59|| 12.1%
| |
| − | |}
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ===2. ¿Hubo relaciones maritales?===
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Como se muestra en otro lugar, los datos de las relaciones sexuales en el matrimonio plural de José son muy escasos (véase el capítulo 10-fuera de línea). A los efectos de la evaluación de los cargos de "violación estatutaria", sólo una pocas relaciones son relevantes.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | El más destacado es, por supuesto, Helen Mar Kimball, quien era la esposa más joven del profeta, se casó tres meses antes de su cumpleaños número 15.{{ref|fn11}} Como hemos visto, el tratamiento de Todd Compton es algo confusa, pero aclara su postura y escribe que "[t]odas las pruebas apuntan a que este matrimonio como una unión dinástica principalmente."{{ref|fn12}}Otros historiadores han concluido también que el matrimonio de Helen Joseph fue consumado.{{ref|fn13}}
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Nancy M. Winchester se casó a la edad de catorce o quince años, pero no sabemos nada más de su relación con José.{{ref|fn14}}
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Flora Ann Woodruff también era dieciséis años de su matrimonio, y "[a] n importante motivación" parece haber sido "la creación de un vínculo entre la" familia de la Flora y José. {{ref|fn15}} We know nothing of the presence or absence of marital intimacy.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Fanny Alger habría sido dieciséis años si la fecha de Compton para que el matrimonio se acepta. Teniendo en cuenta que estoy a favor de una fecha posterior para su matrimonio , esto la haría dieciocho años. En cualquier caso , ya hemos visto cómo se encuentra disponible para este matrimonio poca información fiable ( véase el Capítulo 4 - fuera de línea) , aunque a fin de cuentas probablemente fue consumado .
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Sarah Ann Whitney, Lucy Walker, y Sarah Lawrence eran cada diecisiete años en el momento de su matrimonio. Aquí, por fin tenemos evidencia confiable de intimidad , ya que Lucy Walker sugirió que las hermanas Lawrence habían consumado su matrimonio con José. La intimidad en el matrimonio de José pudo haber sido más raro que muchos han asumido -Walker testimonio sugirió relaciones maritales con las hermanas Partridge y Lawrence , pero no dijo nada acerca de la intimidad de su propio matrimonio ( véase el Capítulo 10 no - online).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | El matrimonio de Sarah Ann Whitney tenía connotaciones dinásticas pesados , vinculante a José a fieles obispo Orson F. Whitney. No sabemos nada de una dimensión sexual , aunque Compton supone que uno está implícito en las referencias a la "posteridad " de la pareja y de los "derechos " del matrimonio en la ceremonia de cierre.{{ref|fn16}} Esto es ciertamente plausible , aunque la doctrina de la adopción y posible deseo de José para establecer un patrón para todos los matrimonios / juntas nos pueden advertir en contra de asumir demasiado.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | De las siete esposas de José menores de dieciocho años, entonces, sólo uno ( Lawrence ) tiene incluso pruebas de segunda mano a la intimidad. Fanny Alger tiene cuentas hostiles tercera mano de la intimidad , y no sabemos nada acerca de la mayoría de los otros. Lucy Walker y Helen Mar Kimball parecen candidatos improbables para la consumación.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | La evidencia simplemente no soporta reclamo salvaje Christopher Hitchens , ya que hay poca evidencia para la sexualidad en la mayoría de los matrimonios de José. Muchos presumen que José practicaba la poligamia para satisfacer deseos sexuales , y con una mirada lasciva sugieren que , por supuesto, José habría consumado estas relaciones, ya que era el punto. Tal razonamiento es circular , y condena a los motivos y las acciones de José antes de que se escuchó la evidencia.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Incluso si fuéramos a la conclusión de que José consumado cada uno de sus matrimonios - una reclamación en ninguna parte sostenida por la evidencia que esto no probaría que él actuó de forma incorrecta , o era culpable de " violación estatutaria". Esto requiere un examen en el clima legal de su época .
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ===3. Violación Estatutaria y la Ley===
| |
| − |
| |
| − | El propio concepto de violación de menores que sufren de quince o diecisiete años de edad, en la década de 1840 es el presentismo flagrante. La edad de consentimiento en virtud del derecho común Inglés tenía diez años. La ley estadounidense no levantó la edad de consentimiento hasta finales del siglo XIX, y en la época de José Smith sólo unos pocos estados habían elevado a doce. Delaware, por su parte, bajó la edad de consentimiento para las siete. {{ref|fn17}}
| |
| − |
| |
| − | En nuestro tiempo, los menores de edad a menudo pueden estar casadas antes de la edad de consentimiento con la aprobación de los padres. Joseph duda buscó y recibió la aprobación de los padres o tutores masculinos para sus matrimonios con Fanny Alger, Sarah Ann Whitney, Lucy Walker y Helen Kimball. {{ref|fn18}} Su costumbre de acercarse a los familiares varones en esta cuestión podría sugerir que el permiso fue ganada por otros matrimonios de los que sabemos menos.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Claramente, entonces, el ataque de Hitchens es irremediablemente presentista. Ninguna de las novias de José estaba cerca de diez o doce. E incluso si las edades de sus esposas habían presentado los riesgos legales, a menudo tenía la sanción de los padres para el partido.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ===4. ¿Cambió José violan las normas sociales?===
| |
| − |
| |
| − | No puede haber ninguna duda de que la práctica de la poligamia estaba profundamente ofensivo para monógama , América victoriana. Como todo lo de la '' Nauvoo Expositor '' a los últimos espectáculos de las vías anti- mormones , los santos fueron atacados continuamente por sus matrimonios plurales .
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Si dejamos a un lado la cuestión de la pluralidad , sin embargo , la única cuestión que queda es si habría sido considerado extraño, inadecuado o escandalosa para un hombre de unos treinta y tantos años a casarse con una mujer en su mediados o finales de la adolescencia. Claramente , el matrimonio de José a las mujeres en edad adolescente era completamente normal para los mormones de su época . La única pregunta que queda es , fueron todas estas mujeres en edad adolescente casan los hombres de su misma edad , o fue el matrimonio de los esposos de mayor edad también se considera adecuado ?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Que yo sepa, el tema de la disparidad de la edad no era un cargo planteado por los críticos de la época de José . Es difícil probar un hecho negativo , pero la ausencia de muchos comentarios sobre este punto se explica probablemente por el hecho de que el matrimonio plural fue escandalosa , pero los matrimonios con mujeres adolescentes eran , si no la norma , al menos no lo suficientemente raro para ocasionar comentario . Por ejemplo , para disfrazar la práctica del matrimonio plural , José tenía dieciocho años de edad, Sarah Whitney pretende casarse con José Kingsbury , que era día de distancia de treinta y uno. {{ref|fn19}} Si esta diferencia de edad habría ocasionado comentario , José Smith no hubiera utilizado Kingsbury como señuelo .
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Ciento ochenta Nauvoo la era matrimonios civiles tienen esposos y esposas con edades conocidas y las fechas de matrimonio. {{ref|fn20}} Gráfico 12-2 demuestra que estos matrimonios siguen el patrón general de las esposas son más jóvenes que los maridos.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | <center>Gráfico 12-2
| |
| − | [[Image:Chart 12-2.png]]
| |
| − | </center>
| |
| − | Cuando la edad del esposo se representa frente a la edad de cada mujer, se pone de manifiesto que casi todas las novias menores de veinte hombres casados de entre cinco y veinte años mayor (véase el gráfico 3.12).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | <center>Gráfico 12-3
| |
| − | [[Image:Chart 12-3.png]]
| |
| − | </center>
| |
| − | Este mismo patrón aparece en 879 matrimonios del Censo de EE.UU. 1850 (ver Gráfico 12.04). Diferencias de edad no mormones fácilmente superaron José excepción de los catorce años. No hay que hacer demasiado de esta, ya que el tamaño de la muestra es muy pequeña (uno o dos casos de José; tres para el censo) y motivos dinásticos probablemente jugó un papel importante en la elección de José, como se mencionó anteriormente.
| |
| − | <center>
| |
| − | Gráfico 12-4
| |
| − | [[Image:Chart 12-4.png]]
| |
| − | </center>
| |
| − | En resumen, mormones patrones de matrimonio civil, probablemente imitaban las de sus vecinos gentiles. Ni los mormones o los críticos habrían encontrado diferencias amplios de edad para ser un impedimento para el matrimonio conyugal. De hecho, la diferencia de edad entre las esposas y sus maridos fue mayor en los años de la adolescencia, y disminuyó de manera constante hasta alrededor de la edad de José, entre 30 a 40 años, cuando el diferencial entre las edades de los cónyuges era más estrecho (tenga en cuenta las barras de color rosa brillante en el gráfico 12 -5).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | <center>Gráfico 12-5
| |
| − | [[Image:Chart 12-5.png]]
| |
| − | </center>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Como Thomas Hine, un estudioso no-LDS de la adolescencia señaló:
| |
| − |
| |
| − | : Hasta el siglo XX, las expectativas de los adultos de los jóvenes estaban determinados no por la edad sino por el tamaño. Si un chico de catorce años de edad, se veía grande y suficiente para hacer el trabajo de un hombre en una granja o en una fábrica o una mina fuerte, la mayoría de las personas lo veían como un hombre. Y si un adolescente de dieciséis años de edad, fue desarrollado más lentamente y no podía actuar como un hombre, que no era uno. '' 'Para las mujeres jóvenes, el problema era mucho lo mismo. Para contraer matrimonio era lo mismo que ser leído por la maternidad, que fue determinado por el desarrollo físico, no la edad ....'' '
| |
| − |
| |
| − | : Lo importante, sin embargo, fue que la madurez de cada joven fue juzgado individualmente.{{ref|hine.16}}
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ==¿Por qué el mundo moderno es diferente?==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ¿Por qué los pueblos pre-modernos no ven nada malo en los matrimonios de adolescentes? Parte de la explicación probable reside en el hecho de que la esperanza de vida se reduce considerablemente en comparación con el tiempo (véase la Tabla 12-2).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | <center>Tabla 12-2 - Esperanza de vida en los Estados Unidos</center>
| |
| − |
| |
| − | {| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%"
| |
| − | !Grupo!!Expectency vida en 1850 (años){{ref|fn21}}!!Expectency vida en 1901 (años){{ref|fn22}}!!Expectency vida en 2004 (años){{ref|fn23}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | Los varones al nacer||38.3||47.9||75.7
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | Los varones a los 20 años||60.1||62.0||76.6
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | Las mujeres al nacer||40.5||50.7||80.8
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | Las mujeres a los 20 años||60.2||63.6||81.5
| |
| − | |}
| |
| − | La era moderna también ha visto la "extensión" de la infancia, como muchos más años se gastan en la educación y la preparación para el trabajo de adultos. En la década de 1840, estos temas simplemente no estaban en juego para mujeres, hombres necesarios para poder mantener a su futura familia, ya menudo tenía las funciones de aprendizaje que impedían el matrimonio precoz. Prácticamente todo lo que una mujer necesita saber sobre el mantenimiento y la crianza de los hijos, sin embargo, fue enseñado en el hogar. No es de extrañar, entonces, que los padres en la década de 1840 consideran la adolescencia capaz de funcionar como adultos casados, mientras que los padres en 2007 saben que los matrimonios de adolescentes por lo general fundador en los temas de la inmadurez, el subempleo y la falta de educación.
| |
| | | | |
| − | {{notas finales}}
| |
| − | #{{note|fn1}} Lynn Hunt, "Against Presentism," (President's Column) ''Perspectives'' 40/5 (May 2002).
| |
| − | #{{note|fn2}} Christopher Hitchens, "Holy Nonsense: Mitt Romney's Windy, Worthless Speech," ''slate.com'' (6 December 2007). < http://www.slate.com/id/2179404/>
| |
| − | #{{note|fn3}} Todd M. Compton, Response to Tanners, post to LDS Bookshelf mailing list, no date. <!-- <www.lds-mormon.com/compton.shtml> -->(15 May 2005).
| |
| − | #{{note|fn4}} Susan Easton Black, "Marriages in the Nauvoo Region 1839-1845," on-line database, using sources: Lyndon W. Cook, ''Civil Marriages in Nauvoo and some outlying areas (1839-1845)'' (Liberty Publishing Co., 1980); with additional data from ''Times and Seasons, The Wasp, Nauvoo Neighbor, '' and "A Record of Marriages in the City of Nauvoo," located at the Historical Department of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. <http://www.worldvitalrecords.com/indexinfo.aspx?ix=usa_il_nauvoo_marriages> I am indebted to David Keller, who performed the initial data extraction, and saved me hours of work by sharing his raw data files.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn5}} Kirtland marriage data from Milton V. Backman, Jr. with Keith Perkins and Susan Easton, "A profile of Latter-day Saints of Kirtland, Ohio and members of Zion's Camp 1830–1839 : vital statistics and sources," complied in cooperation with the Department of Church History and Doctrine, Brigham Young University, in Family History Library, Salt Lake City, Utah. The indefatigable David Keller also provided me with this data.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn6}} M. Skolnick, L. Bean, D. May, V. Arbon, K. De Nevers and P. Cartwright, "Mormon Demographic History I. Nuptiality and Fertility of Once-Married Couples," ''Populations Studies'' 32 (1978): 14, table 3. {{link|url=http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0032-4728%28197803%2932%3A1%3C5%3AMDHINA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-D}} I appreciate John Gee bringing this reference to my attention.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn7}} Data from Steven Ruggles, Matthew Sobek, Trent Alexander, Catherine A. Fitch, Ronald Goeken, Patricia Kelly Hall, Miriam King, and Chad Ronnander, ''Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 3.0'' [Machine-readable database]. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota Population Center [producer and distributor] (2004), accessed 14 July 2007. <http://usa.ipums.org/usa/> I'm grateful to David Keller for sharing the raw data with me.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn8}} The U.S. Census data included marriages within the last year since the census, so some marriages could have occurred prior to the wife's recorded birthday. Presumably this effect would be equally distributed throughout the year—to adjust for this, the data was convolved via a moving average. This did not materially affect the data plots; see Appendix 1 for both versions of the Nauvoo data plotted. My thanks to David Keller for discussions and help with the statistics.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn9}} {{Sacredloneliness1|start=11}}
| |
| − | #{{note|fn10}} Despite debates about whether all these wives should be included, I have simply used the data from {{Sacredloneliness|start=4|end=7}} If a marriage date is uncertain, I have used the earliest possible age.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn11}} B. Carmon Hardy, ''Works of Abraham'', 48; Compton, ''In Sacred Loneliness'', 6.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn12}} Todd M. Compton, Response to Tanners, post to LDS Bookshelf mailing list, no date. (Accessed 15 May 2005).
| |
| − | #{{note|fn13}} See Stanley B. Kimball, "Heber C. Kimball and Family, the Nauvoo Years," ''Brigham Young University Studies'' 15/4 (Summer 1975): 465; see also Richard Lloyd Anderson and Scott H. Faulring, "The Prophet Joseph Smith and His Plural Wives (Review of ''In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith'')," ''FARMS Review of Books'' 10/2 (1998): 67–104; citing Stanley B. Kimball, ''Heber C. Kimball: Mormon Patriarch and Pioneer'' (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1981), 98.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn14}} Compton, ''In Sacred Loneliness'', 606.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn15}} Compton, ''In Sacred Loneliness'', 390.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn16}} Compton, ''In Sacred Loneliness'', 347–349.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn17}} Melina McTigue, "Statutory Rape Law Reform in Nineteenth Century Maryland: An Analysis of Theory and Practical Change," (2002), (accessed 5 Feb 2005). < http://www.law.georgetown.edu/glh/mctigue.htm>
| |
| − | #{{note|fn18}} Compton, ''In Sacred Loneliness'', 31–33, 347–349, 464, 497–502.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn19}} Kingsbury was born 2 May 1812, and "married" Sarah Whitney on 29 April 1843.
| |
| − | #{{note|fn20}} Of 883 married individuals, there were 219 men and 201 women with exact birth and marriage dates. Of these, 180 marriages were identified in which the husband and wife's birth date was known. I matched these couples for data analysis. Since it is not clear how many of these marriages were ''first'' marriages, these data represents a conservative estimate of teen-age marriage in Nauvoo in the early 1840s. If second marriages were excluded, there would likely be an even greater percentage of teen marriages. The data is again from Susan Easton Black, "Marriages in the Nauvoo Region 1839–1845," ''op. cit.'' as originally extracted by David Keller.
| |
| − | #{{note|hine.16}} {{Book:Hine:Rise and Fall of the American Teenager|pages=16}}
| |
| − | #{{note|fn21}} These data are from Massachusetts only; U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, on-line at < http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html> (accessed 10 December 2007).
| |
| − | #{{note|fn22}} James W. Glover, United States Life Tables: 1890, 1901, 1910, and 1901–1910 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1921), 56, 60, tables 3, 5; on-line at <http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/lifetables/life1890-1910.pdf > (accessed 10 December 2007).
| |
| − | #{{note|fn23}}U.S. Center for Disease Control, National Vital Statistics Reports 55/19 (21 August 2007): 25–26, tables 7–8, < http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_19.pdf> (accessed 10 December 2007). The figures used are for whites.
| |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | [[en:Polygamy book/Age of wives]] | | [[en:Polygamy book/Age of wives]] |
Revisión actual del 09:24 1 oct 2017
Tabla de Contenidos
Las edades de las esposas polígamas
Las edades de las esposas polígamas
Saltar a subtema:
El presentismo, en el peor de los casos, fomenta una especie de complacencia moral y autocomplacencia. Interpretar el pasado en términos de preocupaciones actuales por lo general nos lleva a encontrarnos moralmente superiores ... Nuestros antepasados constantemente fallan a la altura de nuestros estándares actuales.
[1]—Lynn Hunt, President of American Historical Association
∗ ∗ ∗
Pregunta: ¿Fue Joseph Smith un "practicante serio de violación legal?"
NEEDS TRANSLATION
Charges of statutory rape are inapplicable, since no such law or convention applied to any of Joseph's wives
Charges of statutory rape are inapplicable, since no such law or convention applied to any of Joseph's wives. Joseph's percentage of wives in their teen years was less than the series percentage of teen wives in Kirtland, Nauvoo, or the 1850 U.S. census, even among men his own age. If anything, Joseph married a greater percentage of older women, which suggests that motives other than sexual attraction drove these matches.
Large spousal age differences were not uncommon before and after Nauvoo, among members and non-members
Large spousal age differences were not uncommon before and after Nauvoo, among members and non-members. To attack Joseph Smith on the age of his wives is to misunderstand the historic time in which he lived. Modern readers have been unfairly treated by authors who, misled by or preying upon presentism, either did not know, or declined to mention, that the practice was routine in Joseph’s time.
Critics of Joseph Smith are sometimes filled with righteous indignation when they raise the issue of his wives' ages. Never one to be over-burdened by historical details or interpretive nuance, vocal atheist Christopher Hitchens savages Joseph as a "serial practitioner of statutory rape." [2] Modern members and investigators, with more sincerity than Hitchens, have also been troubled (and even a little shocked) to learn, for example, that Joseph married one woman a few months shy of her fifteenth birthday.
Such surprise is a natural first reaction, though an author such as Hitchens—who purports to be providing reasoned analysis—might be expected to bring something besides knee-jerk slogans to the discussion. Sadly, Hitchens' remarks on religion generally provide little but bombast, so Latter-day Saints need not feel singled out. Hitchens does provide us, however, with a textbook example of presentism.
What is Presentism?
Imagine a school-child who asks why French knights didn't resist the English during the Battle of Agincourt (in 1415) using Sherman battle tanks. We might gently reply that there were no such tanks available. The child, a precocious sort, retorts that the French generals must have been incompetent, because everyone knows that tanks are necessary. The child has fallen into the trap of presentism—he has presumed that situations and circumstances in the past are always the same as the present. Clearly, there were no Sherman tanks available in 1415; we cannot in fairness criticize the French for not using something which was unavailable and unimagined.
Spotting such anachronistic examples of presentism is relatively simple. The more difficult problems involve issues of culture, behavior, and attitude. For example, it seems perfectly obvious to most twenty-first century North Americans that discrimination on the basis of race is wrong. We might judge a modern, racist politician quite harshly. We risk presentism, however, if we presume that all past politicians and citizens should have recognized racism, and fought it. In fact, for the vast majority of history, racism has almost always been present. Virtually all historical figures are, by modern standards, racists. To identify George Washington or Thomas Jefferson as racists, and to judge them as moral failures, is to be guilty of presentism.
A caution against presentism is not to claim that no moral judgments are possible about historical events, or that it does not matter whether we are racists or not. Washington and Jefferson were born into a culture where society, law, and practice had institutionalized racism. For them even to perceive racism as a problem would have required that they lift themselves out of their historical time and place. Like fish surrounded by water, racism was so prevalent and pervasive that to even imagine a world without it would have been extraordinarily difficult. We will not properly understand Washington and Jefferson, and their choices, if we simply condemn them for violating modern standards of which no one in their era was aware.
Hitchens' attack on Joseph Smith for "statutory rape" is a textbook example of presentist history
Hitchens' attack on Joseph Smith for "statutory rape" is a textbook example of presentist history. "Rape," of course, is a crime in which the victim is forced into sexual behavior against her (or his) will. Such behavior has been widely condemned in ancient and modern societies. Like murder or theft, it arguably violates the moral conscience of any normal individual. It was certainly a crime in Joseph Smith's day, and if Joseph was guilty of forced sexual intercourse, it would be appropriate to condemn him.
"Statutory rape," however, is a completely different matter. Statutory rape is sexual intercourse with a victim that is deemed too young to provide legal consent--it is rape under the "statute," or criminal laws of the nation. Thus, a twenty-year-old woman who chooses to have sex has not been raped. Our society has concluded, however, that a ten-year-old child does not have the physical, sexual, or emotional maturity to truly understand the decision to become sexually active. Even if a ten-year-old agrees to sexual intercourse with a twenty-year-old male, the male is guilty of "statutory rape." The child's consent does not excuse the adult's behavior, because the adult should have known that sex with a minor child is illegal.
Even in the modern United States, statutory rape laws vary by state. A twenty-year-old who has consensual sex with a sixteen-year-old in Alabama would have nothing to fear; moving to California would make him guilty of statutory rape even if his partner was seventeen.
By analogy, Joseph Smith likely owned a firearm for which he did not have a license--this is hardly surprising, since no law required guns to be registered on the frontier in 1840. It would be ridiculous for Hitchens to complain that Joseph "carried an unregistered firearm." While it is certainly true that Joseph's gun was unregistered, this tells us very little about whether Joseph was a good or bad man. The key question, then, is not "Would Joseph Smith's actions be illegal today?" Only a bigot would condemn someone for violating a law that had not been made.
Rather, the question should be, "Did Joseph violate the laws of the society in which he lived?" If Joseph did not break the law, then we might go on to ask, "Did his behavior, despite not being illegal, violate the common norms of conscience or humanity?" For example, even if murder was not illegal in Illinois, if Joseph repeatedly murdered, we might well question his morality.
Four Key Questions
We must, then, address four questions:
- What were the ages of Joseph's wives?
- Did Joseph have sexual intercourse with these women? If not, then the issue of statutory rape is moot. If so, we have not proven statutory rape, but can move on to the next question.
- What were the statutory rape laws of the time, and did Joseph violate them?
- If Joseph was not guilty of statutory rape, did he nevertheless violate common norms of conscience or society?
1. The Age of Joseph's Wives
Even LDS authors are not immune from presentist fallacies: Todd Compton, convinced that plural marriage was a tragic mistake, "strongly disapprove[s] of polygamous marriages involving teenage women." [3] This would include, presumably, those marriages which Joseph insisted were commanded by God. Compton notes, with some disapproval, that a third of Joseph's wives were under twenty years of age. The modern reader may be shocked. We must beware, however, of presentism—is it that unusual that a third of Joseph's wives would have been teenagers?
When we study others in Joseph's environment, we find that it was not. A sample of 201 Nauvoo-era civil marriages found that 33.3% were under twenty, with one bride as young as twelve. [4] Another sample of 127 Kirtland marriages found that nearly half (49.6%) were under twenty. [5] And, a computer-aided study of LDS marriages found that from 1835–1845, 42.3% of women were married before age twenty. [6] The only surprising thing about Joseph's one third is that more of his marriage partners were not younger.
Furthermore, this pattern does not seem to be confined to the Mormons (see Chart 12 1). A 1% sample from the 1850 U.S. census found 989 men and 962 who had been married in the last year. Teens made up 36.0% of married women, and only 2.3% of men; the average age of marriage was 22.5 for women and 27.8 for men. [7] Even when the men in Joseph's age range (34–38 years) in the U.S. Census are extracted, Joseph still has a lower percentage of younger wives and more older wives than non-members half a decade later. [8]
Chart 12-1
I suspect that Compton goes out of his way to inflate the number of young wives, since he lumps everyone between "14 to 20 years old" together. [9] It is not clear why this age range should be chosen—women eighteen or older are adults even by modern standards.
A more useful breakdown by age is found in Table 12-1. Rather than lumping all wives younger than twenty-one together (a third of all the wives), our analysis shows that only a fifth of the wives would be under eighteen. These are the only women at risk of statutory rape issues even in the modern era.
Table 12-1: Ages of Joseph's Wives [10]
| Age range |
Percent (n=33)
|
| 14-17 |
21.2%
|
| 18-19 |
9.1%
|
| 20-29 |
27.3%
|
| 30-39 |
27.3%
|
| 40-49 |
3.0%
|
| 50-59 |
12.1%
|
2. Were there marital relations?
As shown elsewhere, the data for sexual relations in Joseph's plural marriages are quite scant (see Chapter 10—not online). For the purposes of evaluating "statutory rape" charges, only a few relationships are relevant.
The most prominent is, of course, Helen Mar Kimball, who was the prophet's youngest wife, married three months prior to her 15th birthday. [11] As we have seen, Todd Compton's treatment is somewhat confused, but he clarifies his stance and writes that "[a]ll the evidence points to this marriage as a primarily dynastic marriage." [12] Other historians have also concluded that Helen's marriage to Joseph was unconsummated. [13]
Nancy M. Winchester was married at age fourteen or fifteen, but we know nothing else of her relationship with Joseph. [14]
Flora Ann Woodruff was also sixteen at her marriage, and "[a]n important motivation" seems to have been "the creation of a bond between" Flora's family and Joseph. [15] We know nothing of the presence or absence of marital intimacy.
Fanny Alger would have been sixteen if Compton's date for the marriage is accepted. Given that I favor a later date for her marriage, this would make her eighteen. In either case, we have already seen how little reliable information is available for this marriage (see Chapter 4—not online), though on balance it was probably consummated.
Sarah Ann Whitney, Lucy Walker, and Sarah Lawrence were each seventeen at the time of their marriage. Here at last we have reliable evidence of intimacy, since Lucy Walker suggested that the Lawrence sisters had consummated their marriage with Joseph. Intimacy in Joseph's marriages may have been more rare than many have assumed—Walker's testimony suggested marital relations with the Partridge and Lawrence sisters, but said nothing about intimacy in her own marriage (see Chapter 10—not online).
Sarah Ann Whitney's marriage had heavy dynastic overtones, binding Joseph to faithful Bishop Orson F. Whitney. We know nothing of a sexual dimension, though Compton presumes that one is implied by references to the couple's "posterity" and "rights" of marriage in the sealing ceremony. [16] This is certainly plausible, though the doctrine of adoption and Joseph's possible desire to establish a pattern for all marriages/sealings might caution us against assuming too much.
Of Joseph's seven under-eighteen wives, then, only one (Lawrence) has even second-hand evidence of intimacy. Fanny Alger has third-hand hostile accounts of intimacy, and we know nothing about most of the others. Lucy Walker and Helen Mar Kimball seem unlikely candidates for consummation.
The evidence simply does not support Christopher Hitchens' wild claim, since there is scant evidence for sexuality in the majority of Joseph's marriages. Many presume that Joseph practiced polygamy to satisfy sexual longings, and with a leer suggest that of course Joseph would have consummated these relationships, since that was the whole point. Such reasoning is circular, and condemns Joseph's motives and actions before the evidence is heard.
Even were we to conclude that Joseph consummated each of his marriages—a claim nowhere sustained by the evidence—this would not prove that he acted improperly, or was guilty of "statutory rape." This requires an examination into the legal climate of his era.
3. Statutory Rape and the Law
The very concept of a fifteen- or seventeen-year-old suffering statutory rape in the 1840s is flagrant presentism. The age of consent under English common law was ten. American law did not raise the age of consent until the late nineteenth century, and in Joseph Smith's day only a few states had raised it to twelve. Delaware, meanwhile, lowered the age of consent to seven. [17]
In our time, legal minors can often be married before the age of consent with parental approval. Joseph certainly sought and received the approval of parents or male guardians for his marriages to Fanny Alger, Sarah Ann Whitney, Lucy Walker, and Helen Kimball. [18] His habit of approaching male relatives on this issue might suggest that permission was gained for other marriages about which we know less.
Clearly, then, Hitchens' attack is hopelessly presentist. None of Joseph's brides was near ten or twelve. And even if his wives' ages had presented legal risks, he often had parental sanction for the match.
4. Did Joseph violate societal norms?
There can be no doubt that the practice of polygamy was deeply offensive to monogamous, Victorian America. As everything from the Nauvoo Expositor to the latest anti-Mormon tract shows, the Saints were continually attacked for their plural marriages.
If we set aside the issue of plurality, however, the only issue which remains is whether it would have been considered bizarre, improper, or scandalous for a man in his mid-thirties to marry a woman in her mid- to late-teens. Clearly, Joseph's marriage to teen-age women was entirely normal for Mormons of his era. The sole remaining question is, were all these teen-age women marrying men their own age, or was marriage to older husbands also considered proper?
To my knowledge, the issue of age disparity was not a charge raised by critics in Joseph's day. It is difficult to prove a negative, but the absence of much comment on this point is probably best explained by the fact that plural marriage was scandalous, but marriages with teenage women were, if not the norm, at least not uncommon enough to occasion comment. For example, to disguise the practice of plural marriage, Joseph had eighteen-year-old Sarah Whitney pretend to marry Joseph Kingsbury, who was days away from thirty-one. [19] If this age gap would have occasioned comment, Joseph Smith would not have used Kingsbury as a decoy.
One hundred and eighty Nauvoo-era civil marriages have husbands and wives with known ages and marriage dates. [20] Chart 12 2 demonstrates that these marriages follow the general pattern of wives being younger than husbands.
Chart 12-2
When the age of husband is plotted against the age of each wife, it becomes clear that almost all brides younger than twenty married men between five and twenty years older (see Chart 12-3).
Chart 12-3
This same pattern appears in 879 marriages from the 1850 U.S. Census (see Chart 12 4). Non-Mormon age differences easily exceeded Joseph's except for age fourteen. We should not make too much of this, since the sample size is very small (one or two cases for Joseph; three for the census) and dynastic motives likely played a large role in Joseph's choice, as discussed above.
Chart 12-4
In short, Mormon civil marriage patterns likely mimicked those of their gentile neighbors. Neither Mormons or their critics would have found broad age differences to be an impediment to conjugal marriage. In fact, the age difference between wives and their husbands was greatest in the teen years, and decreased steadily until around Joseph's age, between 30–40 years, when the spread between spouses' ages was narrowest (note the bright pink bars in Chart 12-5).
Chart 12-5
As Thomas Hine, a non-LDS scholar of adolescence noted:
- Until the twentieth century, adult expectations of young people were determined not by age but by size. If a fourteen-year-old looked big and strong enough to do a man's work on a farm or in a factory or mine, most people viewed him as a man. And if a sixteen-year-old was slower to develop and couldn't perform as a man, he wasn't one. For, young women, the issue was much the same. To be marriageable was the same as being read for motherhood, which was determined by physical development, not age....
- The important thing, though, was that the maturity of each young person was judged individually. [21]
Why the modern world is different
Why did pre-modern peoples see nothing wrong with teen marriages? Part of the explanation likely lies in the fact that life-expectancy was greatly reduced compared to our time (see Table 12 2).
Table 12-2 -- Life Expectancy in the United States
| Group |
Life Expect in 1850 (years) [22] |
Life Expect in 1901 (years) [23] |
Life Expect in 2004 (years) [24]
|
| Males at birth |
38.3 |
47.9 |
75.7
|
| Males at age 20 |
60.1 |
62.0 |
76.6
|
| Females at birth |
40.5 |
50.7 |
80.8
|
| Females at age 20 |
60.2 |
63.6 |
81.5
|
The modern era has also seen the "extension" of childhood, as many more years are spent in schooling and preparation for adult work. In the 1840s, these issues simply weren't in play for women—men needed to be able to provide for their future family, and often had the duties of apprenticeship which prevented early marriage. Virtually everything a woman needed to know about housekeeping and childrearing, however, was taught in the home. It is not surprising, then, that parents in the 1840s considered their teens capable of functioning as married adults, while parents in 2007 know that marriages for young teens will usually founder on issues of immaturity, under-employment, and lack of education.
- ↑ Lynn Hunt, "Against Presentism," (President's Column) Perspectives 40/5 (May 2002).
- ↑ Christopher Hitchens, "Holy Nonsense: Mitt Romney's Windy, Worthless Speech," slate.com (6 December 2007). < http://www.slate.com/id/2179404/>
- ↑ Todd M. Compton, Response to Tanners, post to LDS Bookshelf mailing list, no date. (15 May 2005).
- ↑ Susan Easton Black, "Marriages in the Nauvoo Region 1839-1845," on-line database, using sources: Lyndon W. Cook, Civil Marriages in Nauvoo and some outlying areas (1839-1845) (Liberty Publishing Co., 1980); with additional data from Times and Seasons, The Wasp, Nauvoo Neighbor, and "A Record of Marriages in the City of Nauvoo," located at the Historical Department of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. <http://www.worldvitalrecords.com/indexinfo.aspx?ix=usa_il_nauvoo_marriages> I am indebted to David Keller, who performed the initial data extraction, and saved me hours of work by sharing his raw data files.
- ↑ Kirtland marriage data from Milton V. Backman, Jr. with Keith Perkins and Susan Easton, "A profile of Latter-day Saints of Kirtland, Ohio and members of Zion's Camp 1830–1839 : vital statistics and sources," complied in cooperation with the Department of Church History and Doctrine, Brigham Young University, in Family History Library, Salt Lake City, Utah. The indefatigable David Keller also provided me with this data.
- ↑ M. Skolnick, L. Bean, D. May, V. Arbon, K. De Nevers and P. Cartwright, "Mormon Demographic History I. Nuptiality and Fertility of Once-Married Couples," Populations Studies 32 (1978): 14, table 3. off-site (Inglés) I appreciate John Gee bringing this reference to my attention.
- ↑ Data from Steven Ruggles, Matthew Sobek, Trent Alexander, Catherine A. Fitch, Ronald Goeken, Patricia Kelly Hall, Miriam King, and Chad Ronnander, Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 3.0 [Machine-readable database]. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota Population Center [producer and distributor] (2004), accessed 14 July 2007. <http://usa.ipums.org/usa/> I'm grateful to David Keller for sharing the raw data with me.
- ↑ The U.S. Census data included marriages within the last year since the census, so some marriages could have occurred prior to the wife's recorded birthday. Presumably this effect would be equally distributed throughout the year—to adjust for this, the data was convolved via a moving average. This did not materially affect the data plots; see Appendix 1 for both versions of the Nauvoo data plotted. My thanks to David Keller for discussions and help with the statistics.
- ↑ Plantilla:Sacredloneliness1
- ↑ Despite debates about whether all these wives should be included, I have simply used the data from Plantilla:Sacredloneliness If a marriage date is uncertain, I have used the earliest possible age.
- ↑ B. Carmon Hardy, Works of Abraham, 48; Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 6.
- ↑ Todd M. Compton, Response to Tanners, post to LDS Bookshelf mailing list, no date. (Accessed 15 May 2005).
- ↑ See Stanley B. Kimball, "Heber C. Kimball and Family, the Nauvoo Years," Brigham Young University Studies 15/4 (Summer 1975): 465; see also Richard Lloyd Anderson and Scott H. Faulring, "The Prophet Joseph Smith and His Plural Wives (Review of In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith)," FARMS Review of Books 10/2 (1998): 67–104; citing Stanley B. Kimball, Heber C. Kimball: Mormon Patriarch and Pioneer (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1981), 98.
- ↑ Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 606.
- ↑ Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 390.
- ↑ Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 347–349.
- ↑ Melina McTigue, "Statutory Rape Law Reform in Nineteenth Century Maryland: An Analysis of Theory and Practical Change," (2002), (accessed 5 Feb 2005). < http://www.law.georgetown.edu/glh/mctigue.htm>
- ↑ Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 31–33, 347–349, 464, 497–502.
- ↑ Kingsbury was born 2 May 1812, and "married" Sarah Whitney on 29 April 1843.
- ↑ Of 883 married individuals, there were 219 men and 201 women with exact birth and marriage dates. Of these, 180 marriages were identified in which the husband and wife's birth date was known. I matched these couples for data analysis. Since it is not clear how many of these marriages were first marriages, these data represents a conservative estimate of teen-age marriage in Nauvoo in the early 1840s. If second marriages were excluded, there would likely be an even greater percentage of teen marriages. The data is again from Susan Easton Black, "Marriages in the Nauvoo Region 1839–1845," op. cit. as originally extracted by David Keller.
- ↑ Plantilla:Book:Hine:Rise and Fall of the American Teenager
- ↑ These data are from Massachusetts only; U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, on-line at < http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html> (accessed 10 December 2007).
- ↑ James W. Glover, United States Life Tables: 1890, 1901, 1910, and 1901–1910 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1921), 56, 60, tables 3, 5; on-line at <http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/lifetables/life1890-1910.pdf > (accessed 10 December 2007).
- ↑ U.S. Center for Disease Control, National Vital Statistics Reports 55/19 (21 August 2007): 25–26, tables 7–8, < http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_19.pdf> (accessed 10 December 2007). The figures used are for whites.
