Talk:Doc Holliday/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Doc Holliday. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Folks, a few points:

First, the entry states that Holliday found his way to the "Hotel Colorado" in Glenwood Springs. This is untrue. Doc Holliday died on November 8, 1887. The Hotel Colorado opened for business on June 10, 1893. Holliday's last residence was the Hotel Glenwood. The Hotel Colorado still stands; the Hotel Glenwood burned to the ground some years after Holliday died. The Hotel Glenwood stood at the Northeast corner of Grand Avenue and 8th Street, opposite the Colorado (then called the "Grand") River from the Hotel Colorado and the hot springs. The Hotel Glenwood was a spectacular, three-story hotel. Unfortunately, it was stick-built, so it burned like a roman candle.

Second, the entry states "Holliday's grave is in Glenwood Springs cemetery." This is also untrue. There is no "Glenwood Springs cemetery." There are two cemeteries in Glenwood Springs: Rosebud Cemetery and Linwood Cemetery. Holliday's headstone is in Linwood Cemetery, which hasn't been used for burial since the early 20th century.

Third, when Holliday died on November 8, 1887, early winter snows prohibited access to Linwood Cemetery, which sits on a hilltop above the town of Glenwood Springs. Hence, he was buried temporarily in a plot of land at the base of the hill. Most say that Holliday's body was never moved, which means his remains were displaced by housing built in the area, or he's literally pushing up the daisies in someone's backyard. This became an issue about thirty years ago when Holliday's family tried to have his remains moved to Valdosta, Georgia. The city of Glenwood Springs had to sheepishly admit that even though Holliday's headstone sits in Linwood Cemetery, there's no telling where his remains might be.

Mitch.Mulhall 03:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)Mitch Mulhall, Glenwood Springs, Colorado

Except that the Gary Roberts bio has discovered undisputable evidence that bodies were being buried in the Linwood cemetary up the hill, as late as Doc died in 1887. So the ground was NOT frozen, and the road to the cemetary WAS passable at that date, in that particular year. The idea of a temporary grave for Doc due to snows is an urban myth, promulgated by people who'd LIKE him to be in somebody's backyard. But he's probably right where he's supposed to be, unromantically. I'll have to add this. SBHarris 20:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Getting the 1879 photo and cropping the head out for comparison is exactly what I'd intended to do, but hadn't got around to (and probably could not have figured out how to, so neatly). As it stands, this is probably the best available comparison of the controversy that exists, even in the published literature. And it's one bit of a Wiki. Awesome. Way to go! SBHarris 20:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Citation is needed for the assertion that Margaret Mitchell said she based Ashley Wilkes on Holliday to some extent. If there was ever a character in fiction that does NOT resemble Doc Holliday it's the guy Rhett Butler called "the godlike wooden-headed Mr. Wilkes."

Comment: The above statement is irrelevant to the article. The article states: "Doc's cousin Martha Anne (Mattie) Holliday(The Life and Legend-Doc Holliday pg 63), who remained in correspondence with him after he moved west, became a nun as a young woman. In old age she was a revered figure among Georgia Catholics, and Margaret Mitchell acknowledged that she was the inspiration for the saintly wife Melanie Wilkes in Gone With the Wind.[citation needed] There is a legend that Martha Anne "Mattie" was in love with Doc and took her religious vows when he would not marry her, but this seems to be based on mere speculation.[The Life and legend-Doc Holliday by Gary L Roberts pgs 61-63 ]" SerenityFair (talk) 14:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC) The Life and legend-Doc Holliday:Author Gary Roberts states that it was Mattie who would not marry Doc and aside from his health she is the reason he left Georgia and did not want to return though he did maintain correspondance with her his entire life and the letters were said to have been burned after Doc died and then a few remaining ones destroyed by an unknown family member after mattie died. She was in the order of The Sisters Of Mercy-Savannah Georgia. pgs 62-63 pg 120 pg 340 SerenityFair (SerenityFair (talk) 14:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)). SerenityFair (talk) 14:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Note that it refers to Martha Anne "Mattie" Holliday, not Doc. Also, it refers to Melanie Wilkes, not Ashley. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.202.96 (talk) 03:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

"It is possible he contracted the disease from his mother, as tuberculosis was not known to be contagious until 1882."

What does this mean? Was tuberculosis not contagious until 1882 or was its mode of infection not known before 1882? Either way how does the second half of the sentence connect to the first? Does it mean: "It is possible he contracted the disease from his mother but this would not have been thought possible at the time as TB was not recognised as being contagious until 1882" or "It is possible he contracted the disease from his mother but this is unlikely as TB didn't become contagious until 1882" TheOneOnTheLeft (talk) 14:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I believe the interpritation is that Doc Holliday contracted tuberculosis from his mother, whereas if the knowledge that it was contagious was known, those who had the disease would have been quarentined to prevent further spread. Flag-Waving American Patriot (talk) 17:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

why was he called doc? and what does this stands for (doctor ?) ? 84.16.123.194 (talk) 00:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC) he was a dentist, that's probably the reason? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.16.123.194 (talk) 00:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes. D.D.S. = Doctor of Dental Surgery. SBHarris 06:10, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

In the article it says "1852", but under his photo it is "1851". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.95.169.211 (talk) 11:43, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Might I suggest that someone with the time and inclination create a separate section near the bottom of the entry concerning "Doc Holliday in Historical Fiction"? The list, including author, title, and copyright date, while not extensive--perhaps a dozen works total--would be, IMO, both an interesting and edifying addition. Thanks.

I added a section for "fiction" right under films before I read this. While I remember his being in other books I didn't have the ISBN title and author data at hand, so I only listed Emma Bull's _Territory_ which is both fantasy and historical fiction. I hope people can add other titles. 65.79.173.135 (talk) 17:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Will in New Haven65.79.173.135 (talk) 17:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, everybody. For some reason there's no discussion about changes being made to the Doc Holliday page, and here's the place to have them.

Is it just me, or is this section heavy on original research and/or persona opinions? It's also somewhat self-contradictory. For example, there's this part:

"This man shows some slight differences from the Holliday in the two authentic photos, but he's clearly the same person, just older."

And then there's this part below it:

"Although perhaps described by Earp as "squared jawed," his graduation photo shows arched eyebrows and a pointed chin matched by the second photo but not the rest."

Unrelated to the two above, these two sentences directly contradict each other (the first one is from the Health section, the second one from the Photo issues section):

"However, the repair is visible in Holliday's upper lip-line in the one authentic adult portrait-photograph which survives, taken on the occasion of his graduation from dental school."

" Also, it must be noted that there are no sign of a cleft-lip surgical scar in these pictures, as there aren't any in the earlier ones, for that matter."

Is it even reasonable to expect a cleft-lip scar to be visible on the photos of a man with a thick, heavy mustache?

--89.216.155.238 (talk) 15:49, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Your points are all good, and I've removed the lip discussion and softened some of the rest. Tanner and Roberts, Holliday's main modern (and only really good) biographers both accept the authenticity of the 1872 grad and 1879 Precott photos, as these are authenticated (the last being signed). It's the third set of the dark-haired man (one of which has historically been used most often AS Holliday) which gives problems. This due to the hair, eyebrows, squarer jaw and perhaps ear-level. I don't have a strong opinion on them myself, and looking at them vs. the "good" ones in the portrait gallery, I go one way on some days, and the other on others! I don't think Tanner and Roberts have strong opionions, either. Karen Holliday Tanner, I think, has said she doesn't think dark-hair man is Holliday, but I can't find that in her bio. SBHarris 18:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I just found another photo of Doc (actually one of the first returning google picture search), which I think should be considered for adding as well:

http://symonsez.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/doc_holliday_1851-1887.jpg

I think, this one looks very alike the one in the graduation photo (despite the darker hair though), and could serve as a link to the 1882 pictures, especially if you compare the ears to those in the 1879 photo. I think the issue of the square chin and the seemingly much to heavy eyebrows in the 1882 pictures is solved, if we consider, that photographs in that period often were strongly reworked; especially the skin was lightened up to look smoother, which could be the reason for the dark shadows around his eyes (if e.g. this section was not reworked), which make it hard to spot the actual range of his eyebrows and let them appear much heavier. Accordingly the shadow in the lower part of his chin could make it appear broader (squarer).

I am no historian, nor do I have proof, that the man in the above photo actually is Doc Holliday, so I completely rely on the mere comparison of the photos. So if someone has any way to proof the authenticity of the above photo, I think it should be added.

Razh Muur (talk) 13:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

It has been proposed to delete the biography of Frank Stilwell, due to notability problems. You are invited to go to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Frank_Stilwell#Frank_Stilwell and leave any opinions you have about this matter. SBHarris 02:13, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

This was many years ago, buti think i remember a Doc Holliday being present in Arcanum (the video game), in the first town, where you help him to foil a bank robbery (gunfight ensues). Should this go in?Idonthavetimeforthiscarp 16:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Somewhat off-topic, but I recall hearing sometime back that Holiday's dental tools turned up- anyone have information on this? Probably just a fake though.

No there's a photo of them in several doc bios. It's not a office set of tools as we think of dentistry today. It's an engraved pocket-portable set of basic stuff like picks and ligament elevators and so on. No syringe, but that would have been glass anyway. I'm not sure if dentists in doc's day even used injectable anethesia; I would guess not (though a solution of cocaine would have worked). There would have been no nitrous oxide in the West. In some cases I think you just had to get drunk and, ah, grit yer teeth. We don't know anything of Doc's actual techniques (we know he once won a prize for making a best set of false teeth, and was said by at least Bat Masterson to have been a good dentist, which is notable since Masterson didn't like him). We do know that injectable morphine, ether and chloroform were all freely available in the 1870's, even in towns of the Old West, and were widely used. Billy Clanton got local injections of morphine around his wounds before he died, so my guess is that dental patients in severe cases might have gotten something similar (albeit not with today's nice thin needles).SBHarris 02:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I personally saw this engraved pocket set in 2006, at the 125th anniversary of the OK Corrall fight, in Tombstone. The local historical society sponsored an exhibit of Tombstone artifacts drawn from collectors all over the globe, which was displayed in the courthouse. The pocket set held picks and other dental tools, and was quite elegant. As for anaesthesia, Holliday's own uncle John Stiles Holliday was a noted surgeon, and his friend Crawford_Long was the first American doctor to use ether in surgery. Doc's kinswoman, author Karen Holliday Tanner, asserts that John Henry Holliday was born with a cleft palate, which his Uncle John and Crawford Long repaired when the boy was two months old. Whether this story is true, ether was widely available when John Henry Holliday studied dentistry in Philadelphia. He would have used it if available. Ether would not have been administered by injection but by inhalation, so needles were superfluous. Munchkyn (talk) 16:43, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll call it the OK Corrall fight to save time, because we all know the fight happened BEHIND the corrall.

An earlier contributor stated that "either Doc or Warren Earp" fired the final shot at Frank McLaury in the gunfight. This cannot be the case, as no account of the gunfight lists Warren Earp among the combatants. I will assume the original contributor meant to say Wyatt, not Warren; even so the implication -- that Wyatt fired the final shot at Frank McLaury -- has no supporting evidence. I have edited the entry to remove the reference to Warren; I have not substituted Wyatt's name as there is no evidence to support the implication.Munchkyn (talk) 16:53, 6 May 2011 (UTC)