Does anybody here know any of the powers-that-be at Adair, OK? I ask because fairly recently the city put up a website (www.adairok.com) that presents a history of the town, including the Dalton train robbery of 14 July 1892. In my considered opinion almost every detail they present is wrong, something I have e-mailed them about in as polite a manner as I can manage.

To cite only a few of the misrepresentations, they claim that the Katy train had 20 armed men aboard it, hoping to ambush the Daltons. At most, there were eight or nine guards on the train. They claim the Daltons met with "no opposition," which is hardly a way to describe a gun battle that lasted some forty minutes (not twenty, as they assert). There certainly was more than the one casualty that they report. It was not Dr. Goff but Dr. Youngblood who was hit in the heel by a bullet. Goff died because of blood loss through a wound in his upper leg. And so on.

The larger question here is, what are the obligations of a historian when he or she encounters information believed to be false? To what extent is it incumbent upon one to correct a public record?

--meursault

I believe your quest to correct statements placed before the public is a correct one. I recently decided to write something about Big Jim French, a character associated with Billy the Kid and the Lincoln County War. While gathering notes, I quickly realized French has remained an enigma in that story because all of the people who have contributed writings to this historic event have painted over their lack of knowledge of the man with a variety of literary techniques. Some writers simply repeated the obtuse inferences of previous works, relying on the power of the myth to carry them through. Others postulated probable scenarios to fit the known facts, and a few simply invented plausible stories from scattered facts and raced on with suppositions. No one determined exactly who French was; what he was doing in Lincoln; why he became involved; or even if “Big Jim” was physically exceptional as his nick name implied. With so little information at hand, it became clear that if I was going to write anything meaningful about French, then the myths, assumptions, and out right lies told over the years would have to be identified and chased away from the facts.
Big Jim French purportedly hailed from the Indian Territory and should have over the years necessarily required serious researchers of the Lincoln County War to explore the connection. However, what I found was that in the rush to contribute to the legend, early Oklahoma historians and writers jumped on a small time thug from the Cherokee Nation who also traveled under the moniker of Jim French, and who happened to be a temporary consort of the notorious female outlaw, Belle Starr. The possible connection was just too thrilling for the Oklahoma experts to ignore and, for nearly 50 years, countless assumptions were hammered out and published as fact. Fans accepted this tripe as truth and endlessly repeated the nonsense. Writer/historian Glenn Shirley traced the lineage of James K. French; the Jim French connected with Belle Starr, and discovered that man was born far too late to have been involved in Lincoln County. But, because Shirley buried his conclusions in the body of a little read book, the myth has been slow to crumble and fans and writers alike continue to largely ignore Shirley’s findings and many people still believe they are the same man. This is unacceptable and must be challenged whenever found.
Unfortunately, there are many sources of bad information. And, a lot of that information comes from historians too eager to get notice. I think we also have a responsibility to clean up our own back yard before we critize our neighbor's. We have to realized that developing historical stories is largely a matter of putting together scattered facts into a whole. Sometimes the clues are plentiful, locking together easily to recreate the event or person; other times the pieces of information are few providing a fragmented picture. Care must be taken, when writing, to treat one’s facts with imagination, rather than imaging one’s facts.
And,just so you don't think you're the lone crusader, I, too, have been guilty of informing web site managers that they are wrong, and giving them the facts--with sources.

quote:

---

Care must be taken, when writing, to treat one’s facts with imagination, rather than imaging one’s facts

---

Thanks, Mike, for a great reply. The line I leave above is very well said indeed. Can you tell me the book of Shirley's that has the information on French? What gets me is that people are proud of their history, but don't seem willing to expend the effort to get it right.I suppose it's easier to repeat what has been said than to expend the effort necessary to, upon their own, find out what actually happened. Here history surrenders to myth

--meursault

That was a wonderful statement and all along I thought this was the place that declared Oklahombres and their misdeeds the best book on Bert Casey there ever was! The truth of the matter is, that as an author of a non-fictional work one should do his utmost that the facts that he lays bare are just that - facts.

As to the powers to be, one should drop a letter to the nearest newspaper chiding them for their performance with the historical facts,and if that's how they perform in office.

Master Meursault, As to Shirley's book, my memory fails me. A trip to the library is in order. However, in "Belle Starr and her Times," Shirley states Jim (James K.) French was a youth, still living with his father, Tom French, a well to do citizen of Ft. Gibson." Shirley also asserts Jim French did not begin a criminal career until 1889. The Fort Smith court cases support this. In the "Law West of Fort Smith," Shirley cites as references articles from the Daily Oklahoman, Cherokee Advocate, Indian Chieftain, and Indian Journal between 2-9-1895 and 4-15-1895. In one of them, the article gives his age and the fact that he was taken to Fort Gibson for burial. French was slain on 2-6-1895. In the Fort Gibson Citizens Cemetary there is a: J. K. Jim French, 6-8-1872/2-6-1895. If this dude was in the Lincoln County war he was 6 years old.
The quote you encapsulated is not mine, it's just something in neddlepoint I keep on my study wall. The quote is: “To treat your facts with imagination is one thing; to imagine your facts is another.”---John Burroughs
A second quote favorite is: “Historians can be defined as detectives who put together scattered facts into a whole.”--Bob Blackburn, Director, Oklahoma Historical Society.
And to Master Guest: I couldn't agree with your last sentence more or disagree more with the implication of your first. If we had all the answers, there'd be no need for a board; nor is the purpose to sing our praises. You got a beef, put it up.

"Correcting False Information"

An author (of historical, non-fiction*) has a great responsibility to be objective; to thoroughly research a topic (for the facts*) before rushing into print; and, to state the TRUTH.

Sadly, these principles are often ignored. Sometimes an author's methods say more about the author than the subject discussed. A writer must never transfer personal prejudices (or bias*) to a story and make it something it is not.

One must uncover the TRUTH of each story and relate that. It is more important to tell the TRUTH than to sell a book.

Sloppy research is a leading cause of historical distortion. One writer will make a mistake and other writers of that type will pick it up and repeat it without checking the facts.

(* added)

SOURCE: "Barney K. Riggs - The Yuma and Pecos Avenger" by Ellis Lindsey & Gene Riggs (2000 p.189).

I have no beef, but to claim a rehash is a definitive moment is like seeing J. D. Hoover in a blue dress and saying that's whatever man should wear. Examples: ever thought about his grandpa living in thw washita bottoms? several uncles living in the area? all killers - including his Dad? You may overlook me because of my lack of experience in the research department and my lack of education, but, "I find the gullibility of other writers and historians to be rather disturbing." - Nancy Samuelson; says exactly what I feel, and anyone that markets just rehash- many historians do - without adding something new to the mix is a poor excuse for a historian and there is much undiscover information left to expose to the light of day. Back to the question at hand, you have not defined how many Jim Frenches there were roaming in the area during the time period to try to say for certain which is which. Example how three-fingered Jacks where there roaming the Nations?
And your wecome Master Tower

You point is well said and well taken.
First, in answer to your question re the number of Jim French(es)running around Oklahoma, and getting into trouble, therefore, making them worthy of notice. A bunch. James K. was the poorest of the lot to try and associate with "Big" Jim French.
Second, I ain't over looking you. Experience can be had and education is what you make of it. In reading, the whole purpose of writing, communicating an interesting idea is what matters. And, that's where opinion comes in, and pard, your opinion as to what is interesting and good counts as much as anyone's. If you think a re-hash is a poor effort, then it is.
In writing history, fact is of paramont importance, unfortunately it's hard to get the facts right, especially when writing 19th century Oklahoma history. Many of the stories out there are incomplete because the records they come from are incomplete. They exist only as Melvin Whipple,the cowboy poet said, "in some old man’s memories, underneath a greasy hat."
Athough some of her work is exceptional,I'm not a great fan of Ms. Samuelson, she's too harsh. But,her gimmick works, so she's the new fad. And, I might add that she puts her boots on one at a time, like the rest of the population, and is therefore subject to mistakes. Because the discovery of history is dynamic, new information is constantly being discovered which changes the picture. And, that is what started this whole discussion, the use of outdated material in a public forum and the need to bring it to the attention of the presenters. On a broader scale, Ms. Samuelson does that well and I hope she continues 'cause the puzzle of Oklahoma history is only going to be solved through constant discovery and the sharing of those discoveries.

Old West, the truth of the matter is, every writer and reader should watch out for such mis-information. When I was in collage back in the '60s, my Zoology book listed the coelacanth as being extinct by 40 million years, but further studies showed by the year of my birth a museum was in place celebrating it's existance.
If a book is suppose to be non-fiction it is the duty of the author to make it so.

John,

What "COLLAGE" did you attend, and is it too late to get your money back?

Well, Guestwho, I tried, but they said not all collage edukashun sticks and after two weeks no refunds;I guess I'm a lucky one for I think it made my head thicker.

That must have made you very popular with the cheerleaders!

Naughty, naughty, but nice.