In the rugged landscape of southwestern Utah, a tragedy unfolded in September of 1857 that would stain the history of the American frontier. The Mountain Meadows Massacre, where a wagon train of settlers heading to California was attacked by a group of Mormon militia and Native American allies, is one of the most harrowing events in the violent saga of the West. The massacre, which saw over 120 men, women, and children brutally killed, would leave a deep scar not only on the region but on the psyche of the nation. The story of the massacre is steeped in fear, isolation, and religious fervor, and its legacy remains controversial to this day.
To fully grasp the magnitude of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, it is essential to understand the political and religious climate of the time. By the 1850s, the Utah Territory was firmly under the control of Mormon settlers, led by their powerful leader, Brigham Young. Having fled persecution in the eastern United States, the Mormons sought refuge in the isolated valleys of Utah, where they hoped to create a theocratic state far removed from the influences of the federal government. Tensions had been simmering between the Mormons and the government for years, primarily over issues of polygamy, governance, and the region’s strategic importance.
When President James Buchanan dispatched federal troops to the Utah Territory in 1857 to enforce federal authority, the Mormons saw it as a threat to their survival. This period, known as the Utah War, heightened paranoia and hostility, with Mormon leaders preparing for what they believed could be a second wave of religious persecution. In this volatile environment, an atmosphere of distrust spread across the territory, setting the stage for the tragedy that would occur at Mountain Meadows.
The Mormons had long been subject to persecution, driven from places like Missouri and Illinois before finally settling in Utah. Their sense of victimhood and their desire for autonomy created an insular society, wary of outsiders. The federal army’s arrival compounded this paranoia. Rumors spread that the wagon trains passing through Utah were spies or saboteurs sent by the U.S. government. It was within this cauldron of fear and suspicion that the Fancher-Baker wagon train, an innocent group of settlers heading to California, unknowingly stumbled.
The Fancher-Baker party, made up mostly of families from Arkansas, was a typical wagon train of the time, making its way westward in search of opportunity in California. The group was known for its peaceful demeanor, yet as they traveled through Utah in the summer of 1857, they were met with increasing hostility from local Mormon communities. By the time they reached the Mountain Meadows area, tensions were high, and the local Mormon militia had already resolved to take drastic action.
On September 7, 1857, as the wagon train camped at Mountain Meadows, they were suddenly attacked by a force they believed to be Native Americans. In reality, it was a group of Mormon militia men, disguised in Native attire, joined by some Paiute Indians. The initial attack did not completely succeed, and the settlers, realizing they were under siege, circled their wagons and prepared to defend themselves. For five days, they held out, hoping for a truce or relief.
During the siege, the settlers were unaware that their attackers were not rogue Native Americans but local Mormon militia members under the command of John D. Lee. The leaders of the Mormon community in Cedar City, only a few miles away, debated what to do. They were torn between their fear of outsiders and the moral implications of their actions. Ultimately, they sent word to Brigham Young in Salt Lake City for guidance, but by the time a response could come, it would be too late.
On September 11, under a flag of truce, the Mormon militia approached the besieged settlers and offered them a deal: if they surrendered their weapons, they would be escorted safely out of the territory. Desperate and exhausted, the settlers agreed. But as they began walking away, the militia turned on them. The men were shot point-blank, while the women and children were butchered with knives and blunt weapons. Only 17 children, all under the age of seven, were spared. The militia took these children and placed them with Mormon families, where they would live for years before being returned to their relatives in Arkansas.
The massacre shocked the nation. Initially, the Mormons tried to cover up their involvement by blaming local Native American tribes, but as details emerged, the role of Mormon militia became undeniable. The federal government, still in conflict with the Mormon leadership during the Utah War, was unable to launch a full investigation immediately.
In the years that followed, one man in particular would take the fall for the massacre: John D. Lee, the militia leader who had played a pivotal role in orchestrating the attack. Lee became a scapegoat for Mormon leaders, who sought to distance themselves from the crime. After nearly two decades of legal wrangling and trials, Lee was executed by firing squad at the site of the massacre in 1877, a grim closure to a dark chapter in American history.
The Mountain Meadows Massacre strained relations between the Mormon Church and the federal government for years. Brigham Young maintained that he had not sanctioned the attack, though the extent of his involvement remains a matter of debate among historians. For the Mormon community, the massacre became a source of deep shame, and for decades, it was rarely spoken of within the church. Only in the late 20th and early 21st centuries did the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints begin to officially acknowledge its role in the massacre.
The massacre has remained a point of controversy in American history. For many years, the narrative was shaped by anti-Mormon sentiment, painting the entire faith as violent and extremist. More recent historical accounts have sought to provide a balanced view, acknowledging the paranoia and fear that drove the Mormon militia to commit such a heinous act. While the massacre remains an open wound, efforts have been made to reconcile this past, with public memorials and acknowledgments from both Mormon leaders and descendants of the victims.
Today, a monument stands at Mountain Meadows, commemorating the lives lost in the massacre. The area is now a place of reflection and reconciliation, where descendants of both the victims and the perpetrators come to pay their respects. It serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of fanaticism and the heavy toll of violence in the American West.
I actually grew up in Utah, and oddly enough, you never hear about this event there. My introduction to it was found in the pages of a book…
Arthur Conan Doyle’s *A Study in Scarlet*, published in 1887, is best known as the novel that introduced the world to Sherlock Holmes. But for readers familiar with American history, the novel’s depiction of Mormonism is strikingly controversial. Doyle drew heavily on the events of the Mountain Meadows Massacre in crafting the backstory of his villain, Jefferson Hope, who seeks revenge for the death of his family at the hands of a Mormon community.
Doyle’s portrayal of Mormonism is sensational and skewed, reflecting the prejudices of his time. In the novel, Mormon society is depicted as authoritarian, with rigid control over its members, including enforced marriages and harsh punishments for dissenters. This depiction owes much to the popular, and often exaggerated, accounts of the Mountain Meadows Massacre and other frontier conflicts involving Mormons.
The Mountain Meadows Massacre is never explicitly named in *A Study in Scarlet*, but its shadow looms large over the narrative. Doyle used the massacre as a loose inspiration for his revenge plot, where Mormon leaders, akin to those who sanctioned the massacre, are portrayed as ruthless and calculating. While the novel helped solidify Sherlock Holmes as a literary icon, it also perpetuated negative stereotypes about Mormonism.
For many Victorian readers, Doyle’s depiction of Mormonism was their first exposure to the faith, and it left a lasting impression. The blending of fact and fiction in *A Study in Scarlet* complicated the historical record of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, with some readers taking Doyle’s fictional account as a reflection of reality. Today, the novel is recognized for its literary significance but is also seen as a product of its time, offering a distorted view of a complex and tragic event.
The Mountain Meadows Massacre remains a haunting reminder of the fragility of peace on the American frontier. While the violence of that day cannot be undone, the acknowledgment of history, both in academia and popular culture, allows us to reflect on the dangers of isolationism, fear, and unchecked power. The massacre, like so many dark episodes in history, continues to serve as a powerful lesson on the consequences of intolerance and violence.
DAVE DOES HISTORY 
Leave a comment