Context
How a memory became a quotation
Andrew Dickson White was US minister to Russia in the early 1890s, and in March 1894 he spent several days in Moscow talking with Tolstoy. He wrote the visit up at length. In one exchange Tolstoy, who had been reading Latter-day Saint books, asks White about the Mormons, calls two thirds of their religion deception, and remarks that he would rather have a faith that claimed to dig its scriptures out of the ground than one that claimed they were let down from heaven. White answers that Mormonism cannot yet be judged, because this is its heroic period, and that the real test will come when the pressure lifts and the next generation starts asking questions.
In 1900 White told a version of that meeting to a young Utah student at Cornell. In 1939 the student, Thomas J. Yates, published what he remembered, and in his telling the generational test sits in a different mouth and points the other way: it is Tolstoy speaking, and the outcome is not fragmentation but the greatest power the world has ever known. Fetzer’s suggestion is that the two got swapped in memory — could Yates have recalled White’s own prediction and, over the years, attributed it to Tolstoy instead, simplifying it and altering its thrust? He puts it as a question rather than a finding, adding that there will never be a solution to the question of the reliability of Yates’s version. Either way, Yates’s is the version the internet inherited.
Both accounts predict a third-and-fourth-generation test. Whether one became the other is a question Fetzer says will never be settled.
Why the scholarship rejects it
Fetzer’s 1971 article in Dialogue is still the standard treatment. He does not accuse Yates of inventing anything; his objection is structural. The story reached print through two long stretches of memory — White recalling 1894 in 1900, Yates recalling 1900 in 1939 — and nothing else in the record corroborates it.
Tolstoy’s genuine interest in Mormonism is not in question; White’s own pages document that he had been reading some of the movement’s books. What is missing is any evidence that he ever predicted its triumph.