Coeditor of the reed smoot hearings and investigation of a mormon senator and the making of American Religion who is reed smoot reed smoot . He was a Mormon Apostle back in the 80 or late 1800s, and in the early 1900s he was elected to the senate as a republican and once he was elected to the senate, a lot of people had a problem with that because not is he mormon, which was a big problem the rest of the country. But he was an apostle. So one of the hierarchy in the church and one of the themes people were worried about were that the church basically ran politics because the church ran the economy in utah the church ran society in utah and so reed smoot as part of the hierarchy of mormons at the time people were saying, well, what are you doing bringing the mormon hierarchy into the capital america . And so a lot of people found that very worthy of distrust. And so that led to a whole series of hearings that lasted several years. And so thats kind of what this whole book is about, is not just so much about the hearings, but what did they mean, you know, why were so concerning to people. And and so thats kind of what the book is seeking to get into. How long had utah been a state by the time he ran for the senate, utah had only been a state for, i believe, less than ten years is in 1896 that utah became a state. So but they had been trying to become a state for half century. And so you could imagine when they first get into utah in 18, late 1840s, people are saying you cant become a state, we cant trust you because youre mormons. We kicked you out right. And so it took like half century for them to actually become a state which came with certain promises and one of those big promises is that youre not doing polygamy right. And so that was a big promise at church made. Youre not involved into. The politics, right . Youre not controlling politics. These are promises that the church made. But to oh, they to the nation, basically to a state to be accepted. So the that would pass the senate, all of that. So once reed smoot elected, it became a kind of moment to say, okay, what about your and people didnt them that they had been keeping their promises about ending polygamy for example staying out of politics but. What we see with the hearings is there were some legitimate concerns. For example, polygamy was still happening, right . Just secretly. But the question was, is that being condoned by the church because the country was really changing its tune to what the what america was to look like. For example are we being governed by religion or. Are we being governed by individuals who happen to be religious . So you had the whole secularization of america happening that moment and that is going to determine what the is then going to be looking like when it comes into reed smoot being an apostle but also being a senator. And so that became a big question why did reed smoot run . What party . Did he write he was a republican um and he was also one who was. Well, the big concern was how affiliated. Can you be with a church also be in politics and so you had other people who were um, they seemed more independent who were running for house. For example, there is a hearing that happened with b. H. Roberts just a few years before in the 1890 is in fact the cover of the book dealing with him when he was going to the house as a representative. But he was a polygamist. He actually did get kicked out. He didnt sit in his seat. Reed smoot now is coming to the senate and the question is, can he retain his seat . This is just a few years later. Was reed smoot a polygamist . He not a polygamist. He was from a polygamous family. His father, abraham smoot, prominent in utah, was a polygamist, but he was in the hierarchy. And the question and people thought that the hierarchy was still polygamy. For example, Joseph F Smith was the president , the church at the time. So president of the apostles, if president of the entire and he was polygamist and when he came he was actually brought in as a witness to be a witness in the hearings. And he admitted yeah, im still practicing polygamy. Im doing it. And that caused a firestorm with the rest of nation because the question is, didnt you guys polygamy but yet here is your president , the prophet still doing it and so the question was, is reed smoot a polygamist . There were actually petitions came in to congress saying that he was a polygamist. So the hearings also to ask, are you are you still doing this . And so were even trying to find his wives. But thankfully for him, he had a journalist had to try and find my way. So my journals so he was a monogamist and was kind of his significance. He was coming the senate showing that are monogamous but this is very different than what his family was but the church was a few years later in some ways where the church still so he was kind of a shift the face of that shift that was happening. So the senate seats when he comes in after his election how long after he was seated did these hearings that this book is about begin the hearings . Well, he was elected in 1902. The hearings began in 1903, and they end in the end of 1906. And its three years. Yeah. So three years. But they dont take the final vote in the whole senate. The beginning of 1907. So three less seven years, but really. The hearings are going on for these three years. So hes going into these hearings and his colleagues are the ones who are trying to find this evidence them. What was this relation like his relationship like with his fellow senators . He had a very timid, id say a tense relationship, some who were his opponents. Right. Because they were doing their best to get rid of him. Were these mostly republicans against democrats . I believe the republicans were in a lot of ways supporting, supportive him. Democrats, not so much, of course. But you had, Theodore Roosevelt, republican, president who was his foremost supporter and is because of that support that he got a lot of colleagues to the senate itself. If voted to they recommended to oust him, to get rid of him within that committee. It was with the whole senate that they said its a high threshold. Get rid of somebody thats been elected. So werent able to meet that threshold. So he the support of Theodore Roosevelt was to retain that seat. So he kind of went and i think little bit jaded perhaps from some of the people who had voted against him. But he had enough friends that he able he was in there for like three decades. So he had a long tenure, three decades. What is what did he do in those three decades . What else he known for besides the reed smoot here . Hes mostly known for this smoothawley tariff, which what . That was the one that actually led to the what didnt lead to, but definitely helped push the Great Depression into a more severe, which led to a type of. Um, now im not an economist and so im not, i dont have the great details of this. How all worked but basically had a type of basically. The rest of the world starting to pull back their trade with the United States out of a type of retaliate to retaliatory effects with that and so that led to global trade problems the United States and so you had the Great Depression even more so but again thats not my area specialization but mostly once you get past the hearings, i lose interest in reed smoot in his career and so but basically thats what hes mostly known infamously and he actually ended up losing his election after that. So it didnt go well for him. Well, lets get into your area of specialization. Youre a professor here at the university of arizona. My specialization is 19th century american religious history. And so my first book charted from the half century from 1857 to 1907. And so i was looking at religious fights basically between and mormons specific as to what were these fights and what does it say about america was so offensive about the church in utah versus how protestants were trying to build a nation the time and so how did they what led to the blows guess and so i actually teach courses in religion and violence and american religious history so those are things that i find intriguing. So i start with the whole utah war in the 1850s and but one thing i noticed was that once you get into the 1850s and once youre seeing mormons versus protestants, youre starts starting to see a different of america, too, where you get to reed smoot 50 years later. And so in a lot of ways thats one thing that kind of led to this book was a kind of a frustration to how secular historians were speaking about religion, how religious historians speaking about religion, and how mormon historians speaking about religion. And so i that all three of them were speaking in different places. And so my whole focus was to bring three historiography into single book and to find out what, does it mean about america that we had these different happening . Whos your coeditor on this project . How did you get involved in this project . The first book, frontier religion mormons in america. Thats my own, this one. The second book is an edited volume with Michael Paulos and. The way i got into that, i didnt know Michael Paulos, but he out that i was researching reed smoot the hearings and hes one who loves reed smoot one who could answer all the questions about as a person and, as a career and all of that. And so his career with reed smoot started right where interest ends and in some ways my Current Research goes beyond that, but thats a different story. But so he me in and he wanted to do an edited volume on the reed smoot hearings and so one thing he was interested is in the details the the very life of reed smoot himself and those around him and what was happening at this Pivotal Moment. But my interest was in the nation, what was happening by way of america. What does it mean to be american at this time . So my focus was really to bring in the context. So i had this. The introduction really goes, what does it mean in this this whole political context . The whole religious context and one reason that led me to want to write this introduction in the first chapter in this was because i was frustrated at what i wasnt seeing and also what i was seeing in american religious historiography more broadly on the political context, this book comes out in 2021. Americans no stranger to high profile hearings in recent years. Congressional hearings. How did this hearing play out in the nation . How much was it a part of americans consciousness and in the newspapers on a daily or basis . This was one thing that intrigued me about this project. I first started researching it as a grad student, the history department, but one thing i was intrigued by is just how it was so interesting to people. Why people were so drawn to it and, um, and so it wasnt so mormons in utah who were so drawn to this in some ways dont think they wanted to listen to things were being said and discovered because it caused a personal crisis of, faith and all of that. But you saw people who were testifying who actually went on circuits, went traveling and did lectures throughout the United States and made quite a bit of money doing. And it shows you kind of the popularity. It was covered in the newspapers throughout the country as well. And so a lot of people outside of utah found it fascinating. And i think one of the reasons they found it so fascinating is because, again, i think this question of what it meant to be american was at stake because theres a lot of anxieties. And in the early 1900s, you had urbanization happening. You had a shift in how people understood religion, how religion relates to the state. Right. In politics, you also this, um, this new focus on the relationship of religion and the was under challenge at that time. So had a lot of anxieties and those anxieties go pretty deep in a lot of different directions. And so i was looking at anxieties that came from secular ization, you know, the whole ideology of how religion is not removed from the state but defined in a very different way. Well, you talk about in the book about the effort at time to amend the constitution, put language in the constitution to to put christianity into the constitution. Yeah. And so and were talking about 18 between 1870s and up until reed smoot, you had people too who were saying we need to amend the constitution because its not explicitly christian. And that was a problem to a lot of protestants. They wanted it to be explicitly but lot of protestants were also saying it already is implied. So we dont need to change it. But then you had others who were saying. No, we need to make sure you dont mistake it as a secular document. And so we didnt make sure that god isnt in it. So you had these competing sides with this and so reed smoot i think and this is happening as the hearings are going on as well, whats happening during this time. But it started three decades earlier. So kind of shows you how long its been a big argument, but it really took steam in the 1890s and so by reed smoot think it wasnt so much solved as it was kind of a, um, a point of like where do we go now . How do we deal with this . And it almost feels like reed smoot wasnt a distraction from that, but more of a continuation of that question because read smoot was not protestant, therefore not religious, therefore christian, all of these kind of concerns. And so the way that the nation saw mormonism and were specifically talking the branch of mormonism, the church of jesus christ of latter day saints, which a very specific branch that was within utah. Right. And one thing to remember too is you dont have the further 20th century branches yet like the fundamentalist movement, which theres a bunch of different ones of those they were still coalesced within the lds church in utah and. So when we think of mormonism today, youre seeing the polygamous branches and um, and, but at the time theyre all connected right. Still of course had different branches who in missouri and places like that but so this became a real question for the nation saying if we bring in non protestants into the capitals of power, what does that say about america anymore . It protestant is a christian. Are we going too far to open it up is secularism a threat to the country. Um whereas people like Theodore Roosevelt were. No this is the new meaning of protestantism. The protestant in america. Some people mistaken that protestant or that secularism means religion. But what were seeing though it means a different definition of religion and so sick there actually is a religious concept. It basically what it means. And what i look at in the book is, you go from a theological definition of religion and therefore religious belonging in the senate, to be specific to with the secularization under people like Theodore Roosevelt are saying no. What it means is that its protestant ethics, protestant character that were going to use to. Judge who sits in the senate. And so now the question this actually allows and this is a new thing, secularism was an invention. It started at this time. It didnt always exist. And so with this new concept this New Invention of this new relationship of what america means and who can be in power, this means that non can act protestant. So thats a whole thing. Its about non protestants kind of showing, look we can also look, we can also act like you and were still dealing with whiteness were still dealing with patriarchy. So its about white men expanding white men can be right. And so its definitely not really including racial and gender issues yet. Thats something thats going to come in later decades. But what we have here is, this really significant shift in what it to be religious and so think that was kind of the whole thing with when it comes to the constitution bending it were defining religion in a lot of ways when it comes to how mormonism is viewed today, what what did you think of the conversation around when mitt romney was for president . Um, it was hard for me not to make connections of the reed smoot with that because i found that mitt romney in a lot of ways was the kind the epitome of what i think reed smoot would expect. Right. Um, i think reed smoot would have expected, say, the of or the glenn becks of mormonism definitely not seeing the Trump Movement as something connected. You had something focused on mormons got into power saying we have protestant ethics, have protestant character. Right. They proved that. But once you get to today, its i mean, mitt romney is the epitome that in a lot of ways, the the characteristics. In other words, becoming a boy scout is kind of something that began during the reed smoot time. Right. I mean, the boy scouts, america, the ymca, they all emerged at this time to show that we are protestant ethics building. But now and id say all the way up until the running of mitt romney for president was about character right about these of protestant ethics. Mormons are american but then of course today thats a different story. Your personal interest in mormonism. Are you mormon . No, im not. Where is the interest come from . Why this focus . The interest for me began. Well, i did grow up mormon, so am familiar with the whole world in a lot of ways and so but in grad school i, i still mormon during grad school. And so was intrigued by mormon history mormon studies. And so i really got into that. But then i started becoming with how mormon studies was done. I was frustrated within mormon context, how secular history was done. I thought it didnt really look at religion seriously. It saw this sense its invisible. Its not relevant. Thats kind of how secular history often looked at it. Um, at least when i was in grad school and then id look at religious historians and, they would focus on protestantism. And so the marginal groups were not really discussed. Well, if discussed at all. And then mormon studies is study of a marginal group and. I didnt like how there was really so context it was almost like lets just focus on ourselves, right . And so i wanted to bring three of those together. So the more i got into it, the more i started reading, id have foot in the history department, one foot in religious studies and was just trying to kind of bring that body in a lot of ways. So thats my book really was first. It was my dissertation, right . And my committee says, why dont you just focus on reed smoot or focus on the utah war . Because its a half a century and in a dissertation you dont want to have too big of a project. But i was interested not in reed smoot. I wasnt interested in the utah war. I wasnt interested in the anti polygamy hearings, which are not hearings, the anti polygamy. Um, what i was interested in is what happens when you take all of these conflicts and put them together over a 50 year span. What is the overarching theme thats i wanted to find out. And so what i found out was youre not same america in 1858, in 1907. And so i thought the more you kind of go out in a helicopter and go out and see a bigger perspective thats you start seeing things. Well, you talked about americans view the reed smoot hearings at the time. What about a viewing high profile hearings today . What as somebody who studied that back the early 20th century, whats sense of how much americans Pay Attention to these select Committee Hearings . We just the most recent one, the select committee on the january six select committee. Whats your sense of that . The thing thats intriguing to me is the ones that people tune in to versus not, for example, when had hearings on or peter king, not many years ago. To me that was intriguing as an academic looking at religion because he was dealing with muslims right where they fit in with america and. I was intrigued by it because that was the same thing. Being asked about smoot 100 years before, but not a lot of people noticed those hearings in the early 2000s. And i intrigued by that. But the january six committee. Yes they that was tuned in by i dont know how many millions watch those. And i found that what was intriguing then there seems to be more relevance to the january six hearings and the reed smoot hearings, because both of them seemed be high points as to people tuning in. And the thing that i was thinking about, well, is it then that makes them so tuned into i think whats happening is a fight over meaning of america, a contestation over who wins. What does it look like, and people for will watch it almost as though. They have interest. They have at some stake. Theres anxieties are being solved by watching and think. We can also learn by those not watching them, because the anxieties they dont those dealt with in that certain way. For example it seems like a lot of Trump Supporters didnt watch the january six hearings. Right. As opposed those who did not like trump would be tuning in almost this hoping that hell get some , will come out type of thing. And it was the same thing with the smoot hearings. Those did not like smoot tuned in because they wanted to find ammunition, wanted to find out, will this finally put the nail in the coffin of that religion out in utah . Um, by the end of the hearings were those anxieties resolved . Um, i think they were resolved. His victory in retaining senate seat, um, as one author put it, theres no success like. And so think once he wins, thats the conclusion but during the hearings i mean smoot own secretary carl beecher which we have a chapter in there about that is him losing faith in whole mormon structure because hes sitting there watching hearings about beloved prophets and apostles, testifying, being witnesses and finding out that not only are they not inspired, sometimes with what they did and are doing, but theyre even good people at times. And so he lost faith in the mormon religion at that point and his whole story about trying to reconcile that with what he was seeing. In other words, he wrote home to his wife saying, these guys arent even good, right . Theyre at best, theyre just normal people. And course thats a problem. So youre watching into the hearing, the smoot hearings. It can be a problem . And one of the things that were happening is, um, you had cannon who was really member in utah publishing them in the salt tribune. And so in other words, people in utah are now reading this. Theyre now seeing it as causing a problem in some ways. So and i think that is the same with the january six hearings. Well the 2019 book was frontier religion, 2021 book, the reed smoot hearings. Whats the next project . Um, i have right now i started doing. Research in the 1960s to bring this up into what was happening. Ive really looking at world affairs. So frontier religion really hinges upon the 1893 chicago world fair. And that as a Pivotal Moment of right and where mormons and religion and all that comes in it was really the of the study of religion in the United States on a secular platform. So my own discipline comes from that. And so i was looking at the new york worlds fair in 1960s and finding out how, does religion look . And it looked very different. What i found was the frontier still alive and well, but being defined in a very different way. And so i was trying to take what happened in the first book in the 19th century and finding out is that frontier still this idea of the frontier, this religion of the is it persists into the 1960s and i found out in a very in very real way it was i mean, you had, for example, the hells angels, the countercultural movement, theyre seeing themselves the outlaws of the frontier. You have the whole beat generation, you know, on the road about being an outlaw, on the road you also have the popular idea of john wayne, in other words, the white suburbs were very much still the frontier. Billy graham, his revivals, his tent at worlds fair was a revival. This tent in other this homage to the 19th century frontier. So thats what im looking at and how its a very racial thing, how its a very religious thing. And i was intrigued by that. What are we going to see that book . Im im still with it. I kind of put it on hold right now. Im thinking about making a graphic novel instead of, a monograph. So my mind is like, well, why not . Why a graphic novel . Um, i love our i find it so fascinating and i, i think that history isnt enough storyteller. I feel like sometimes we like to do storytelling through words and through, um, through that. But what visual and can i do a book on the frontier thats a graphic visual storytelling. Can it be done . Because i think academia sometimes, um, now a lot of it gets out of the ivory. I think it tries to, um, but i kind of feel like i want to try a little bit harder at getting out of the ivory and produce something that is something my family read will find more interesting. One of these longer books, right . So that so right now. Im kind of im working on a graphic novel. Im doing a graphic novel on my mission. I would a San Francisco and im trying to like do that but im that to kind of learn how do it for my own research ive already done a bunch of the research but now a do i want to do it in visual form or not . Konden smith hansen is a professor of religious studies, coeditor of the reed smoot hearings. The investigation of a mormon senator and the making of an american of religion. Appreciate