What’s the real story? Was Earp a good guy? Was there a gunfight? Was it at the O.K. Corral? Were the Clantons unarmed?
The only thing certain is that an eyewitness saw a man shoulder an AK-74 rifle.
Unfortunately all we have to go by is eyewitness testimony and virtually everyone involved had a vested interest on the side of the cowboys or the republicans. Under the best circumstances witnesses can be unreliable so we may never know.
About the only factual thing I can reply to is that the actual gunfight took place in a vacant lot near the OK Corral next to Fly’s photography studio. At least one of the Earp brothers was wounded so I doubt it the Clantons were unarmed.
Subscribe to some magazines about the history of the Old West. My library gets three of them. And it seems that every issue has an article on this topic.
And they all have different points of view.
Stick to easier questions such as the meaning of life.
Ike Clanton and Tom McLaury were unarmed, and I believe everyone else was armed.
Maybe this is an issue for Cecil then.
Maybe this is an issue for Cecil then.
Actually, the details of the gunfight are pretty well established. If you watch either of the two early 90s movies, Kurt Russel’s Tombsone or Keven Costner’s Wyatt Earp, you’ll notice that the sequence of who shot whom and who said what during the gunfire are pretty close and that they follow the “script” that has been laid out by reporters and historians for 120 years.
What is more controversial is what led up to the gunfight and what happened afterward. Whether the Earps were simply good townsfolk (who happened to own some gambling establishments–and probably a brothel or two) pressed into service because of their prior experience in law enforcement or whether they were murderous and larcenous extortionists who got into a turf war with an opposing group over control of Tombstone’s vice economy is where most of the controversy lies.
(While both movies stayed fairly close to the accepted script for the gunfight, each invoked major streams of fantasy regarding the surrounding events.)
Inventing Wyatt Earp: His Life and Many Legends, by Allen Barra is a good recent book that examines the known facts and tries to sort them out. It’s very readable.
Resurrecting a somewhat dormant thread rther than starting a new one…
I was going to ask what’s the deal with Wyatt Earp, because I just got through reading Wyatt Earp : The Life Behind the Legend, by Casey Tefertiller. He seems to have done a fairly unbiased job of reporting Earp’s life, including his various jobs as a peace officer.
The definitive work for so long was Stuart Lake’s Wyatt Earp: Frontier Marshall, which basically portrayed Earp as a demigod that shot lightning bolts out of his ass. Tefertiller debunks a good portion of Lake’s book and sheds new light on several other episodes, such as the famous shootout in back of the O. K. Corral and his referring of the Fitzsimmons-Sharkey prizefight that caused such a ruckus.
So - is Tefertiller right? It sure seems to me that after his brother Morgan was murdered, Wyatt got a commission as a deputy U. S. Marshall and proceeded to get some payback by serving a bunch of warrants without worrying too much about whether the perps made it to jail in one piece or not. Not exactly Hugh O’Brian’s character, so to speak.
I tend to agree with him. Earp was a product of his time. He was unquestionably brave and was considered by his peers to be an honest man by the definitions of the time. But he was first and foremost a gambler who happened to do law enforcement as a sideline.
What do you think?