FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows/Use of sources/Gift of salt"
< Criticism of Mormonism | Books | Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows | Use of sources
(m) |
|||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
{{Criticism label}} | {{Criticism label}} | ||
| − | + | Critics mention a gift of salt given by Brigham which he is presumed to have implied was poisoned. <ref>{{CriticalWork:Bagley:Blood of the Prophets|pages=196}}</ref> | |
| − | |||
== == | == == | ||
Revision as of 13:56, 8 April 2017
- REDIRECTTemplate:Test3
Contents
Use of sources: Did Brigham Young give a gift of poisoned salt to the army?
| Rape by Albert Hamblin | A FAIR Analysis of: Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows A work by author: Will Bagley
|
Questions
Critics mention a gift of salt given by Brigham which he is presumed to have implied was poisoned. [1]
Answer
Brigham did not try to poison the army, and his behavior was not suspicious enough to keep the troops from using the gift.
Detailed Analysis
Noted one reviewer:
- Bagley tells us how Brigham Young needled General Johnston on the high plains with a gift of salt leading Johnston to reject it with outrage when Johnston believed that Brigham Young had implied the salt was poisoned (by saying that it was not) (p. 196). It would have been nice had Bagley told us Johnston's troops covertly accepted the gift nonetheless. [2]
Notes
- ↑ Will Bagley, Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows (University of Oklahoma Press, 2002), 196.
- ↑ Robert D. Crockett, "A Trial Lawyer Reviews Will Bagley's Blood of the Prophets," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): 199–254. off-site Headings and minor punctuation changes for clarity may have been added; footnotes have been omitted. Readers are advised to consult the original review.