Non-LDS historians often ignore Mormon women, researcher says

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Few women of the 19th century were as controversial or as maligned as Mormon women because critics, angered by polygamy, often portrayed them as victims of lecherous husbands and a despotic church.

This stereotype has influenced the treatment of Mormon women by historians, an influence that persists in modern times, said Catherine A. Brekus, an associate professor of the history of Christianity at the University of Chicago Divinity School.

Brekus, a non-Mormon, delivered Saturday's Obert C. and Grace A. Tanner lecture at the 45th annual Mormon History Association Conference convening in Kansas City this weekend. Traditionally, the Tanner lecture features the perspective of an outstanding scholar who does not normally publish or research in Mormon history.

"On one hand, historians outside of the LDS community seem to have been influenced by the caricature of the degraded polygamist wife, and although they have never articulated their reasons for ignoring Mormon women, they seem to assume that they aren't worth studying," observed Brekus, whose research took her to the LDS Church History Library in Salt Lake City,

"On the other hand, scholars who specialize in Mormon history have been so determined to defend 19th century LDS women against lingering stereotypes that they have sometimes exaggerated their agency," she said. "The result is that we are left with a fractured picture of Mormon women as either deluded, downtrodden slaves or fiercely independent matriarchs."

Brekus defined agency as "the ability to take action, to do something." She said an agent is someone or something that has the power to make something occur.

"Given the controversy surrounding polygamy, it is not surprising that Mormon historians have struggled to find the right tone to write about plural wives," Brekus said. "Yet their difficulty suggests they need to think more deeply about their understanding of women's agency."

The field of Mormon history stands at a crossroads, she said.

"While previous generations of historians virtually ignored women, recent scholars have been so determined to portray them as historical agents that they have sometimes exaggerated their freedom to make choices about their lives," Brekus said. "It's almost as if there are two boxes that can be checked: 'oppressive' or 'liberating,' and you can only check one. I think that's never the case in any religion."