Summary Of The Book On Zion's Mount: Mormons

In the book “ On Zion's Mount : Mormons, Indians, and the American Landscape” Jared Farmers argument is that early pioneers not only displaced and misunderstood the native peoples living the in West, but they also displaced and replaced their sacred, essential symbols with others and made a false history to support the sacredness of their newly chosen emblems. For example, they replaced Native Americans vital, life-giving, Utah Lake with the lifeless, unimportant and unworthy emblems that reminded them of home, because they did not then, nor do they now, understand the real importance of Native American places like Utah Lake.
Some of the best evidence Farmer gives to support his argument are the names of well known landmarks such as the
Devil’s Tower, as well as, topographical maps that bear few names as they were known as by the Native American population. His points are whether intentional or accidental Native Americans were moved, enslaved, exploited and their religious, sacred and important sites where plowed over or taken over by those who felt they were more important to them.
One of his main themes is the duality of places and of people.
As an example of the duality of places he gives of Mount Rushmore and how it is viewed starkly different by different groups of people. By the Native Americans as deeply religious place and by others as the location of a monument dedicated to important white American leaders. He also writes about this same duality between Utah Lake and Mount Timpanogos. Mount Timpanogos would become an emblem for the Mormons elevated by a false history, but I reminder of home. While the Mormons would dismiss Utah Lake in favor of Timpanogos, its meaning for tribes who live by the lake and understand it’s vital life giving essence is sacred and important. Duality is a common theme within the
book.
The Mormon migration as explained by Farmer shows another duality, between what Mormons of Nauvoo 1840’s believe to be sacred and what the people around them perceive to be important to them. Mormons believe the land they are inhabiting is sacred ground, but the non-believing locals only see the land as there own and the Mormons as land grabbers trying to keep it for themselves. He parallels this the same struggle to be played out later between the Mormons being forced out from the religious places and the what they will do to the native populations of Utah.
A final duality mentioned by Farmer is the Native population themselves and how they are viewed by Joseph Smith and his followers. Farmer says that Joseph taught that the were inferior and cursed but in their future they were going to be superior. He also said they were taught to believe the Indians were a chosen people who would save the world, but in reality they couldn’t save themselves. The way they are treated by the Mormons settlers further illustrates this point because after moving into the Salt Lake Valley they began to move the Indians of the more choice lands so they could use them for themselves. The duality of these are the chosen people, but meeting them with suspicion not respect. The final duality is of sacred places of healing such as the warm springs in the Salt lake Valley would become renowned for curing the body by the settlers, would also become a place of great sorrow of the Indians. The Indians knew of the miraculous properties of the springs they had been using them for generations. Originally native populations had cured themselves in the warm springs like the Mormon settlers, however, after several bad winters of disease inadvertently brought to the natives by Mormons these same healing springs would be the source of many Native American deaths. Indians had contracted measles from the Mormons among other things in an effort to cure themselves deceased Indians would jump into the springs trying to use the soothing water to heal them, but instead they would catching cold and die. Such stories serve to illustrate how the Mormon took what had been vital to the Indians and through their interference they inadvertently caused disaster to the native population.
Not all of Farmer’s book paint a negative image of the Mormon’s. Farmer does include supporting information for the settlers trying to work with and for the indians out of genuine concern for their welfare. As important leaders became aware of the damage that was being done they instituted efforts to reverse this and find a way to bring about programs that were help feed the starving fish-eaters since their game and lands had been cut-off from them. The efforts did not typically work, but their was a sincere effort to protect some of the native population and there was also sincere regret to the Mormon part in their suffering.
For me Farmer does not make his case as he seems to prefer to blame Mormons as a whole for the misuse of land and suffering of the native population.
It is certain that they are not blameless, but Mormons did not make a concerted effort in destroying the Indians they merely were self-serving, misguided people trying to succeed they way that generation did. We are looking back with a better understanding and an enlightened sense they lack and blaming them for not having our modern sensibilities. One of Farmer's point in the collective memories and how there was and is an effort to change the true story to one of falsehood that fits the desired senorio. For instance, fish-eaters lived along Utah lake and this was vital to their survival. Fishing made up nearly 30% of their diet. In contrast, the pioneers did not rely heavily on fish and instead looked at the granite peaks as emblems of strength, unchanging that reminded them of home. To solidify this they created a back story of Indians living from generations on Timpanogos to validate their claim. Over time even native population began to believe and share this false collective memory. In a way of all his claims I agree with this the most. For most people as a whole we see what we want to see and believe what we want to believe. In other words collective memory can be
wrong. While Farmer proves some of his points his book is an overly negative interpretation of the settling of Utah by the Mormons and more over, the Mormons themselves. It feels like an attack on Mormons and less about the history of Utah as he relegates all but the Indians and Mormons as players in the settlement and conflict of Utah.