Abstract: This paper examines the claim that Joseph Smith was not the author of the verses in Doctrine and Covenants 132 related to the doctrine of plural marriage. Our examination first describes the current controversy on the authorship of section 132. We next present historical evidence on the provenance of this section. We then present stylometric evidence on the possible authorship of the text. While it has been asserted that Brigham Young or perhaps some other individual was the author of section 132, our examination provides solid support for the Church’s claimed origin of the section. Our extensive statistical analyses indicate there is no stylometric evidence that Brigham Young or any other potential candidate provided the words in the text of the revelation.





There is an ongoing debate over Joseph Smith’s teachings about and involvement in plural marriage. Polygamy revisionists are currently asserting that Joseph Smith did not practice polygamy and that the revelation on plural marriage documented in Doctrine and Covenants 132 was added to the text sometime after his death. Some have suggested that Brigham Young was the author of the words related to plural marriage. For example, Richard and Pamela Price state:

Those familiar with Joseph Smith’s prophetic linguistic style have long recognized that Section 132 just does not sound like him when compared to other prophecies by him in the [Page 2]Doctrine and Covenants. In his private writings and letters, Joseph’s style is remarkably erudite, poetic, upbeat, and greathearted. And his verifiable prophetic writings that were published by the Church during his lifetime are known for their marvelous ideation and spiritual majesty. The above words [Doctrine and Covenants 132] . . . do not flow melodically, nor do the ideas build empirically to an uplifting crescendo, as do Joseph’s. Instead, they are delivered haltingly and grate at the listener’s sensibilities. They sound as if they were authored by a man whose writings are known for their desultory and gruff style. They sound like the words of Brigham Young.3:22 6. The entire book is available, online, as Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy Online, restorationbookstore.org/pages/joseph-smith-fought-polygamy-online. (The online version is the one that is referenced throughout this paper.) In support of their position, the Prices direct the reader to see Enid S. DeBarthe, “Who Wrote Section 132,” an appendix in A Bibliography on Joseph Smith II …">1

We examine the issues related to the authorship of Doctrine and Covenants 132 in three parts:



* Part One: Current Controversy About the Authorship

* Part Two: Historical Evidence for Authorship

* Part Three: Authorial Stylometric Analysis



It is the goal and purpose of this paper to evaluate the claims regarding the authorship of section 132, both from a historical and a stylometric perspective, taking into consideration not only the claims that someone other than Joseph Smith is the source of the text, but also the claim that the revelation was received years earlier than when it was transcribed.

Part One: Current Controversy About the Authorship of Section 132

Among the various groups of people on the Internet who discuss issues related to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are groups that are sometimes called “polygamy deniers.”<a id="footnote2anc" href="#footnote2sym" title="2. Mark Tensmeyer has referred to the belief that Joseph Smith only had one wife as the “Monogamist Model” and to a person who would follow this model as a “polygamy skeptic.” Mark Tensmeyer, “ ‘Old Wom[e]n’s Tales’ versus the Historical Verification of Joseph Smith’s Polygamy,” in Cheryl L. Bruno, ed.,