The rejection of the
ideology of romantic love was characteristic of many accounts of Mormon plural
marriages. Some of the memoirs of plural wives revealed that they accepted
marriage with a man whom they did not initially like. Mary Elizabeth Cox Lee
recalled that she did not like Bishop Lee when he first proposed but married
him a year later after following her mother’s advice to pray for guidance (Mary
Elizabeth Cox Lee, “An Inspired Principle and a Remarkable Lady.” Mormon File,
Huntington Library [microfilm]). Martha Spence Heywood (1812-1873) accepted her
husband’s proposal although she had apparently been romantically interested in
another man shortly before. She also noted that her husband possessed annoying
qualities similar to her brother and that while he was a good man, he was not
interesting (Juanita Brooks, ed., Not by Bread Alone: The Journal of Martha
Spence Heywood, 1850-1856 [Salt Lake City, Utah State Historical Society,
1978], 36)!
There are examples of
romantic bonding between husbands and wives in polygamy among the recollections
of first marriages. Sarah Rich (1814-1893) recorded in her journal a marriage
of destined, true love. She and her husband, though they had only corresponded,
recognized each other at first sight and married only four months after their meeting
(Journal of Sarah Rich. Mormon File, Huntington Library, San Marino CA, 19-20
[microfilm]). By contrast, courtship of a plural wife might be undertaken in
the company of the first wife. On occasion, the first wife made the marriage
proposal. Courtships of plural wives were often “short and direct,” to avoid
the appearance of impropriety, i.e., married men chasing younger women (Stephanie
Smith Goodson, “Plural Wives,” in Mormon Sisters, edited by Bushman, 99).
One of the daughters of a polygamist family concluded that polygamists never
knew the meaning of romantic love (As quoted in Young, Isn’t One Wife
Enough?, 117).
This is not to say
that there was not the love and affection in Mormon marriages. Plural wife
Ellis Reynolds Shipp (1847-1939) confided to her diary that her husband of five
years was her “dearest friend—companion of [her] inner soul.” Similarly, after
many years of marriage, Mary Ann Freeze (1845-1912) was thrilled at the prospect
of being able to celebrate her anniversary in the company of her husband (Ellis
Reynolds Shipp, Diary, 9 May 1871, Utah Historical Society; Mary Ann Freeze,
Diary, 8 March 1891, LDS Archies.). The histories of Mormon marriages contain
many examples of love, loyalty, and extraordinary sacrifice. But the need to
restrain jealousy and avoid exclusivity in plural marriage—the very nature of
polygamy—of necessity required a detachment and emotional distance. Historian
Lawrence Foster, commenting on the detachment required within plural marriage, noted
that it was required of the men as well as the women (Lawrence Foster, Religion
and Sexuality, 209-12). Brigham Young’s daughter reported that her father said
that polygamy taught him to curb his temper but that it was not easy: “I have
to walk carefully as if I was walking between bayonets” (As quoted in Susa
Young Gates, “Woman Suffrage,” typescript [microfilm], reel 4. LDS Archives).
Zina D.H. Young (1821-1901),
who was the plural wife of the late Joseph Smith and then Brigham Young,
described the need for detachment when she observed that “a successful
polygamous wife must regard her husband with indifference . . . [because] love
we regard as a false sentiment; a feeling which should have no existence in
polygamy” (As quoted in Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History [Salt
Lake City: Signature Books, 1986], 102). When her husband married a few plural wife,
Mary Ann Freeze observed in her diary that she had no “sorrowful” feelings.
Rather, she felt as if “it had been someone that was nothing to me” (Mary Ann
Freeze, Diary, 29 April 1879). This evidence of emotional distancing emerges
again and again in the sources. Ida Hunt Udall recalled how tense and careful
she was on her wedding trip so that she would not make any gesture that might
cause further unhappiness to the very reluctant first wife (Ellsworth, ed., Mormon
Odyssey, 54).
In conclusion, while
Mormon plural marriages certainly demonstrated affection and commitment, the record
suggests that romantic love as the monogamous, exclusive, sexual relationship
of a man and a woman could not be incorporated into the successful practice of
plural marriage. Perhaps, as one historian observed, romantic love was a “salient
feature of monogamy” and simply not adaptable to polygamy (Reymond Lee Munch, Sex
and Marriage in Utopian Communities [Bloomington: Indiana University Press,
1973], 158-59). (Joan Smyth Iversen, The Antipolygamy Controversy in U.S.
Women’s Movements, 1880-1925 [London: Routledge, 1997], 65-66)