This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hickok鈥揟utt shootout article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 21, 2011, July 21, 2013, and July 21, 2015. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
After reading this account about the Tutt-Hickok fight, I had some real problems with several aspects of what had been written, especially the statement that Hickok "rested his pistol on his off arm, took aim and fired." Not only is this not mentioned in the eye-witness accounts I've read, but it just doesn't make sense that he would take the time to do this in a gun fight where seconds can be the difference between life and death. I contacted Marshall Trimble, of True West Magazine, regarding the fight and the authenticity of the Wikipedia article. Trimble has been a published author for over thirty years, taught Arizona and Western history at Scottsdale Community College since 1972, and he regularly lectures about the Old West. In 1977, the governor of Arizona appointed him Official State Historian.
My question was this:
"After reading an article regarding the Hickok-Tutt fight, I have some reservations with certain aspects of the account, primarily with the scenario where Hickok "rests his pistol on his off arm", takes aim and fires. This just doesn't ring true, and doesn't hold with the accounts I've read. Did this actually happen?"
Today I received an E-mail from Trimble that reads as follows:
"Here's what the foremost expert on Wild Bill, Joe Rosa had to say:
'I do not know who started the story of the arm-rest hold, but probably the same one who claimed that Hickok shot Tutt when using a Colt's Dragoon.
In fact he used one of his Navy pistols from the holster and there was no "fast draw" but rather a carefully aimed shot, from 75 yards away, while on the move. Tutt who had turned sideways in dueling fashion, fired and missed, but Hickok did not.
I fear that too many people are misled by the crap about fast draw which never existed in the Old West, at least by that name. Rather, it was described as "quick" which means physically quick or "quick as thought" as Hickok's actions were described when he shot Coe at Abilene after being shot at twice.
All my best, old friend,
Joe'"
Other aspects of this article are suspect, such as where it is stated that Hickok "cocked his gun and returned it to his holster", that Tutt was hit in the "left side" (a right-handed person, standing sideways in a dueling stance would be hit in the right side, and the coroner's report substantiates this), and that the two faced each other down in the classic "Mashall Dillon" gunfighter scenario (they were actually walking towards each other when Tutt reached for his gun and Hickok responded).
I've made several attempts to correct this post, but each time my correction has been replaced with the same erroneous account that I originally questioned.
One must note that the reference cited for the bulk of the gunfight "information" is "Wild Bill and His Era: The Life and Adventures of James Butler Hickok", published in 1933, an era infamous for liberal interpretations of history. The editors of the '20s and '30s are known for wanting an exciting yarn, not excruciatingly accurate history, and so allowed much legend, hearsay and speculation to be published as "fact". The idea was to sell books, not to give a history lesson. In the 60-odd years that have gone by since the publication of this book, attitudes towards historical accuracy have changed, and much new information has come to light. For a more accurate and thoroughly researched account of the fight, see "Wild Bill, gunfighter" by the above cited Joseph G. Rosa. Rosa is considered the authority on Wild Bill, having spent a lifetime researching the gunfighter, and is the only researcher who actually was granted access to original source material by the Hickok family, including letters, diaries and other materials. 216.17.175.181 ( talk) 07:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC) R. Larkins 5/17/09
Have to agree with the first writer, here. I've read some of the accounts and transcripts of the actual trial and Coroner's Inquirey and not once was this form of gunplay mentioned. To the second writer: If you want to rely on reports written for a minor County magazine during a time when writers were extremely loose with the truth and never allowed the facts to get in the way of a good yarn, versus the scholarly research by an internationally recognized authority on the subject, go right ahead, just don't try to convince me (or others) that you know anything about the subject. Do yourself a favor: read some Rosa for the real story, and leave the tall tales to the kiddies. 鈥擯receding
unsigned comment added by
216.17.251.163 (
talk)
06:03, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
A dollar in 1865 could easily purchase what a hundred will today. Therefore, $200 then was more like $20,000 now, unless my math is off. Changed the article.
"Hickok had been born in Illinois, coming west after mistakenly thinking he had killed a man in a drunken brawl."
Who is he? No context and no context directly implied. 76.117.72.131 ( talk) 00:57, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
What happened to the Waltham repeater gold pocket watch? Did it shatter when Hickok's bullet struck Tutt (or when the latter collapsed), and did Wild Bill recover it? 藴藴藴藴
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hickok鈥揟utt shootout article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 21, 2011, July 21, 2013, and July 21, 2015. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
After reading this account about the Tutt-Hickok fight, I had some real problems with several aspects of what had been written, especially the statement that Hickok "rested his pistol on his off arm, took aim and fired." Not only is this not mentioned in the eye-witness accounts I've read, but it just doesn't make sense that he would take the time to do this in a gun fight where seconds can be the difference between life and death. I contacted Marshall Trimble, of True West Magazine, regarding the fight and the authenticity of the Wikipedia article. Trimble has been a published author for over thirty years, taught Arizona and Western history at Scottsdale Community College since 1972, and he regularly lectures about the Old West. In 1977, the governor of Arizona appointed him Official State Historian.
My question was this:
"After reading an article regarding the Hickok-Tutt fight, I have some reservations with certain aspects of the account, primarily with the scenario where Hickok "rests his pistol on his off arm", takes aim and fires. This just doesn't ring true, and doesn't hold with the accounts I've read. Did this actually happen?"
Today I received an E-mail from Trimble that reads as follows:
"Here's what the foremost expert on Wild Bill, Joe Rosa had to say:
'I do not know who started the story of the arm-rest hold, but probably the same one who claimed that Hickok shot Tutt when using a Colt's Dragoon.
In fact he used one of his Navy pistols from the holster and there was no "fast draw" but rather a carefully aimed shot, from 75 yards away, while on the move. Tutt who had turned sideways in dueling fashion, fired and missed, but Hickok did not.
I fear that too many people are misled by the crap about fast draw which never existed in the Old West, at least by that name. Rather, it was described as "quick" which means physically quick or "quick as thought" as Hickok's actions were described when he shot Coe at Abilene after being shot at twice.
All my best, old friend,
Joe'"
Other aspects of this article are suspect, such as where it is stated that Hickok "cocked his gun and returned it to his holster", that Tutt was hit in the "left side" (a right-handed person, standing sideways in a dueling stance would be hit in the right side, and the coroner's report substantiates this), and that the two faced each other down in the classic "Mashall Dillon" gunfighter scenario (they were actually walking towards each other when Tutt reached for his gun and Hickok responded).
I've made several attempts to correct this post, but each time my correction has been replaced with the same erroneous account that I originally questioned.
One must note that the reference cited for the bulk of the gunfight "information" is "Wild Bill and His Era: The Life and Adventures of James Butler Hickok", published in 1933, an era infamous for liberal interpretations of history. The editors of the '20s and '30s are known for wanting an exciting yarn, not excruciatingly accurate history, and so allowed much legend, hearsay and speculation to be published as "fact". The idea was to sell books, not to give a history lesson. In the 60-odd years that have gone by since the publication of this book, attitudes towards historical accuracy have changed, and much new information has come to light. For a more accurate and thoroughly researched account of the fight, see "Wild Bill, gunfighter" by the above cited Joseph G. Rosa. Rosa is considered the authority on Wild Bill, having spent a lifetime researching the gunfighter, and is the only researcher who actually was granted access to original source material by the Hickok family, including letters, diaries and other materials. 216.17.175.181 ( talk) 07:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC) R. Larkins 5/17/09
Have to agree with the first writer, here. I've read some of the accounts and transcripts of the actual trial and Coroner's Inquirey and not once was this form of gunplay mentioned. To the second writer: If you want to rely on reports written for a minor County magazine during a time when writers were extremely loose with the truth and never allowed the facts to get in the way of a good yarn, versus the scholarly research by an internationally recognized authority on the subject, go right ahead, just don't try to convince me (or others) that you know anything about the subject. Do yourself a favor: read some Rosa for the real story, and leave the tall tales to the kiddies. 鈥擯receding
unsigned comment added by
216.17.251.163 (
talk)
06:03, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
A dollar in 1865 could easily purchase what a hundred will today. Therefore, $200 then was more like $20,000 now, unless my math is off. Changed the article.
"Hickok had been born in Illinois, coming west after mistakenly thinking he had killed a man in a drunken brawl."
Who is he? No context and no context directly implied. 76.117.72.131 ( talk) 00:57, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
What happened to the Waltham repeater gold pocket watch? Did it shatter when Hickok's bullet struck Tutt (or when the latter collapsed), and did Wild Bill recover it? 藴藴藴藴