I came across this series on Netflix last week and decided to watch it all in one hit.

Entertaining, but I don't know how accurate it is.

Johnny Behan is referred to as the Tombstone Sheriff, and not Cochise County sheriff. The Earp brothers are referred to as "his" Marshalls, employed by him to keep law in Tombstone, whereas Virgil was elected Town Marshall with Wyatt and Morgan his sometime helpers. And there is no mention of Behan telling the Earps on the way to the OK Corrall that he had unarmed the Cowboys either.

But the biggest error was in the guns. Wyatt is seen only with his supposed long barrelled Buntline Special, a gun that was probably never, according to Colt records, produced. In addition Buntline was only known to travel west of the Mississippi once, in 1869, four years before the 1973 was introduced, so together with the lack of Colt records of his purchasing five long barrelled Peacemakers makes the story, first recorded by Lake in his 1931 Earp biography, legend rather than fact.

Add that Wyatt was known to carry a S&W Number 3 (I have a replica hanging on my wall in front of me as I type), and every handgun, even those in the early 1860 Earp childhood portions of the series, are 1873's with the rifles '73 and '82 Winchesters, makes me doubt the authenticity of the whole series.

Add in the hyped political situation (Earps and the townsmen being of one political party with Behan and the Cowboys of the other) and I would say it is entertaining, but facts some factual basis.

Still, it makes the point that the Wyatt was not the hero that he was made out to be in the decades after Lakes book.

__________________
View from down under

Kiwi, I, too, watched this, the whole series, this past week. It seemed to me an attempt to be historically accurate, but it is a piece of history I know nothing about.

I think..., my impression, .. likely it reflects the best scholarship available today. He, Wyatt, was not black or white, good or bad, and how others saw him, too, evolved. I thought that was interesting. Also, in keeping with my own informed understanding of how historical events, and personages, are viewed in public opinion.

I was struck by his "buntline special," as I recall it called from TV shows in my youth. Looked like a ten or so inch barrel! Man, I can't imagine anyone with a serious interest in pulling his gun out quickly and shooting a clear and present danger would want a long barrel like that. Maybe for shooting at long distance, but defies all reason for a fellow who needs a quick draw.

(Good for pistol whipping, I'd agree, But...)

Anyway, I thought it a good show, and enjoyed it.

I trust Wyatt's advice. "Better to be a bit more accurate than a bit too fast."

__________________
No baby we aint

Suggest you all read Tombstone by Tom Clavin for a more accurate assessment of Earp, his brothers and friends (including Doc) and their time in Tombstone. The writing is a bit flippant but I don’t doubt the accuracy of the history.

__________________
"Your other right........."

Long ago, a family friend gave me a tattered copy of an autobiography of W.F. Cody. Undoubtably ghost written and there just might be a wee bit of "shine" on some of the contents. Still have it. The back part of the book covered some of his contemporaries.

While it didn't cover the Earps, it did disperse a whole lot of polishing on the lives of those contemporaries. Also on some incidents he-and some other historical figures-were involved in. Ruined westerns for me for decades.

Dunno about politics, but I've always rather suspected that Behan was in some way connected to the "Cowboys".

Period correctness in firearms is often awful. Neither the producers ,those involved, nor the audience have much knowledge about what's correct. The "History Channel" must use the lowest bidders. I've seen Garands in WWI, bolt guns in the Civil War and I think in the Revolution. Matching service rifles and armies? Nope! Long time ago I watched part of one of Audie Murphy's WWII movies. Heard exactly one MG42 burst.

What a perspective rethink about the series from Netflix! You are right to doubt it and especially where guns and roles are conc://cerned. The story about Buntline Special is myths, well done you have replica S&W Number 3. While the sentimental distortions at work in this show might well be fun for viewers, one may want to know the facts here and there. It is good to have more depth in a character that many people think they know all they need to about, including Wyatt Earp.

Oliver, beyond the buntline special, what inaccuracies did you see in the Netflix show? (And that the buntline special is a myth is in accord with commonsense, per my comments above.)


Per the Netflix show, he was in their pocket. But, more important, I think, in explaining Behan's turn from friendship to enmity with Wyatt is that Wyatt, per the show, was sleeping with Behan's girlfriend, Josephine, who he, Wyatt, eventually married. A love triangle gone bad, as is often the case.

For those who have seen the Netflix series and think it historically inaccurate — other than guns, costumes and other props — I'd love to hear it. I think the events as depicted, the chronology and motivations, are probably pretty accurate.

How about JP Morgan, silver and the railroads? How about the North vs South angle?

A well done show, in my view, although I repeat that I have no expertise whatsoever in that slice of history.

Three Cowboys fatally shot.

Doc and two Earps wounded.

Wyatt lived into 20th Century to tell what happened.

__________________
Ubi Est Mea

And therein is the reason why there is so much uncertainty about what really did happen. Most of what we know about it comes from Wyatt Earp's own stories, told decades after the event. Might he have embellished it a bit? Certainly possible, though we'll never really know.

Here's the beginning of what appears to be a good WSJ review: wsj.com

Unfortunately, I don't have a WSJ subscription so can't post a gift article for everyone. Maybe we have a subscriber here who could do this for us?

As a lifetime amateur historian I find it really challenging to judge the acts of 19th Century people through 21st Century eyes. (I do believe the lack of a Middle Class contributed to a lot of crime in those days.)

I’ve never believed the Buntline Special yarn either, if Ned Buntline ever purchased four (IIRC) Buntlines you’d think at least one would have turned up.

Actually the Tombstone Epitaph printed a very detailed account of the gunfight the day afterward, and all visitors to the OK Coral get a free reproduction. I got mine on a visit to Tombstone in 2018.

Unfortunately the editor was one of the townsfolk sympathetic to the Earps so.......

I understand the article in the other Tombstone paper was not as flattering.

__________________
View from down under

What the Netflix series makes clear is that the public's view of who were the good guys and who were the bad guys seesawed back and forth depending on who was doing the telling of the tale and why.

This is true of the events contemporaneously, and as time passes. (This is pretty much true of all historical events, BTW.) Wyatt outlives everybody else involved and in his 70s becomes a Hollywood Westerns movie consultant. His views of who the good guys were survive in popular culture, unsurprisingly.

There are a bunch of historians who've written books about the OK Corral, and who teach western history at universities, who comment on the events in the Netflix series. Quite interesting.

First off never rely on tv, movies or other such for the truth. Most of those involved with the “ production” could care less about True history, only what they deem “ will be entertaining and Make” $$$$$. There are plenty of books on most history subjects that are actually true or closer to the real truth.
tv, movies and the like are for so called entertainment.

At this point I know we will never really know what happened in the "Old West". Too many years have past, no real documentation, no living witnesses or trustworthy record keeping. All we can do is watch the movies, documentaries and video's, read the books and enjoy the stories.

I have watched Tombstone so many times, I know almost the entire dialog from all the good parts. Quigley Down Under is another fav.

I watched the 1st 2 episodes. I hope the writers did "adequate" research. Bringing in the "larger forces" angle can't be proved or disproved although they have controlled history since the dawn of man. Worthwhile entertainment considering the drivel on the tube. And fuggedabout the "news." Joe

__________________
Behavior Creates Destiny

Writers from the early 1900's who interviewed people and lived it themselves would be the best place to start. Unfortunately the media today is more inclined to ignore facts.

__________________
Front sight and squeeze

__________________
SWCA #2306
DAV in honor of POP

Was the series entertaining? It is entertainment, not a documentary. Almost nothing that Hollywood puts out is historically accurate. That is why the original director of Tombstone was fired and anther brought in........

__________________
USMC 69-93 Combat Pistol Inst.

Barely made it thru the first episode. It went against everything I've read on the subject and was spun into a love triangle. While it's no secret Josie Marcus dumped Johnny Behan for Wyatt, that was the reason the Earp brothers and Doc Holliday were arrested following the shootout? Doubtful. The most definitive works I've read are "The Last Gunfight" by Jeff Gwinn, along with "And Die in the West" by Paula Mitchell Marks. Their accounts ring truer than that TV show.

I've noticed a few cases where somewhere along the line, romantic entanglements have cropped up as explanations for some acts. I'm not sure what the sources might be, but in a couple of cases cited by Cody, the circumstances were different. The cited circumstances indicated that the gents in question were acting under very different motivations. Rather different in character from their later images.

IIRC (?) the WWI movie "The Blue Max" starring George Peppard had German Infantry armed wit Lee Enfielld No. 4 rifles

I watched a couple of episodes. Full of Pot metal revolver and rifle replicas, except for one close up of a British Webley (or Enfield) revolver being fired. Cheap Mexican Hollywood buscadero gun belts and holsters throughout. Saddles are not period correct. Wyatt Earp carrying a Buntline Special replica with the barrel sticking out of the bottom of the holster. Other than that...

If you want to read Robert B. Parker's take on The Earps, find "Gunman’s Rhapsody" (GP Putnam’s Sons, 2001), his first Western and a standalone novel. It's Parker’s contribution to the Wyatt Earp legend. It attempts to be factually correct in some areas, and, like most of Parker's novels, quite entertaining.

__________________
Lee Erickson

Thanks! I'll do that. I am somewhat of a Robert B. Parker fan, but one result is that I know that he is not exactly an expert on firearms.

__________________
Formerly Model520Fan

Watching it now. In episode 4 when Wyatt assembles a posse following Virgil's ambush, the camera focuses on an empty holster on one of the riders. I think I'd be sure I was armed chasing armed men!

Sent from my SM-S921U using Tapatalk

__________________
I used to be disgusted..

Which forces have controlled history since the dawn of man?

Sent from my SM-S921U using Tapatalk

__________________
I used to be disgusted..

Money/Power. Always has, always will. Joe

__________________
Behavior Creates Destiny

Key word here is novel, i.e., fiction.

__________________
Live long and prosper