78: Explosive History in the William Clayton Diaries w/ Bryan Buchanan

So the next part is the journals themselves or the diaries, however you want to frame them.

But Brian, I wanted to ask.

So I guess a lot of people I'm confused by these theories of his journals, because to me, they look like day to day regular things.

Like I know that you said some of them are repeated.

So maybe he's copying.

I just can you explain what they are? Just I know that's a silly question, but.

I

mean, that's been a question that's been asked.

So the MHA presentation, Robin Jensen talks about how it seems like, like others, Clayton may have recorded short, brief notes on something that he then fleshes out in a journal, you know, a bound journal.

This is not at all uncommon.

Some people would use day books, like a pocketbook that you keep with you, or like something else that you would physically haul around with you and you'd jot down things.

Heber J.

Grant did this.

Wilford Woodruff did this from time to time.

Willard Richards apparently did this.

But there's this one particular one that's one of the entries that we talk about that, to me, I don't know how you don't see this as a contemporary record.

And Robin talked about how if you look at the ink flows, there's just really no good reason to think this is not a contemporary diary unless you just don't like it.

And again, that's not a historical... attack, that's an apologetic attack.

Which, again, you can not like polygamy and think this.

That's fine.

That's not how history works.

That's not how historians work.

There's been talk like...

Michelle pointed out, she says, you know, I can understand why believing Mormons don't, you know, that believe that Joseph Smith was a polygamist.

I can understand why that ex-Mormons want to think that Joseph Smith was a polygamist.

So the next part is the journals themselves or the diaries, however you want to frame them.

But Brian, I wanted to ask.

So I guess a lot of people I'm confused by these theories of his journals, because to me, they look like day to day regular things.

Like I know that you said some of them are repeated.

So maybe he's copying.

I just can you explain what they are? Just I know that's a silly question, but.

I

mean, that's been a question that's been asked.

So the MHA presentation, Robin Jensen talks about how it seems like, like others, Clayton may have recorded short, brief notes on something that he then fleshes out in a journal, you know, a bound journal.

This is not at all uncommon.

Some people would use day books, like a pocketbook that you keep with you, or like something else that you would physically haul around with you and you'd jot down things.

Heber J.

Grant did this.

Wilford Woodruff did this from time to time.

Willard Richards apparently did this.

But there's this one particular one that's one of the entries that we talk about that, to me, I don't know how you don't see this as a contemporary record.

And Robin talked about how if you look at the ink flows, there's just really no good reason to think this is not a contemporary diary unless you just don't like it.

And again, that's not a historical... attack, that's an apologetic attack.

Which, again, you can not like polygamy and think this.

That's fine.

That's not how history works.

That's not how historians work.

There's been talk like...

Michelle pointed out, she says, you know, I can understand why believing Mormons don't, you know, that believe that Joseph Smith was a polygamist.

I can understand why that ex-Mormons want to think that Joseph Smith was a polygamist.