Our story begins in the sleepy little Midwestern town of Monmouth, Illinois, famous for two "native sons." Ronald Wilson Reagan lived in Monmouth for several years ago as a boy, consequently he is claimed as "native." Ironically, in the film Law and Order, Reagan once played the most famous person to be born in Monmouth, Wyatt Earp. Earp is one of the Wild West’s most famous lawmen, being a participant in the Gunfight at the OK Corral and the subject of numerous books and movies, the most famous recent film being Tombstone.
During the War with Mexico Nicholas Porter Earp was off fighting in the war, and insisted his fifth child, if it was a boy, be named after his commanding officer, Wyatt Barry Stapp. Virginia Cooksey Earp, pregnant, and at home by herself with three other little boys, Newton, James and Virgil, and daughter, Martha, did not want to give birth by herself. Family stories state that Virginia wasn’t well, so she went to stay with Elizabeth “Betsy” Earp Ezell who was renting the little house at 406 South 3rd Street. The house, listed on the National Register of Historic Sites as the Pike-Sheldon home, was built in 1841 by Samuel Pike. This is where Wyatt Earp was born on March 19, 1848.
Or was he?
Dr. William Urban, professor emeritus of history from Monmouth College has for years debated the actual location of Wyatt Earp’s birth, ignoring family history, tradition, and documentary evidence. Urban bases his thesis on the recollections of Weldon Earp, making special emphasis on the last name “Earp.” While Weldon Earp is indeed an Earp relative, he is a descendant of Wyatt’s grandparents, Walther and Martha, not Nicholas Porter Earp. The only “Earp” named descendants of Nicholas are through his first born, Newton. Of the other Earp sons, James, Virgil, Wyatt, Morgan, and Warren, only Virgil had a child to survive, a daughter. Weldon, an “Earp by blood” changed his last name to “Earp” at his grandfather’s request. In recent years, Weldon has been surprisingly quiet about the information he gave to Dr. Urban.
Over the years, like a Pac-man running a maze, Urban, like clock-work, appears when necessary to debunk anything that might disprove his theories about the birth place of Wyatt Earp and in a small part anything written about the Earps in the Monmouth region. It is all rather petty. His research is poorly documented, and has a tendency to become a bit personal. Part of Urban’s complain is the fact that critical legal documents HE must see in order to authenticate the 406 South 3rd Street address are missing.
Article comments
1 - Jeff Rankin
As a public relations officer for Monmouth College (the alma mater of Mrs. Matson and current employer of Professor Urban), I must remain neutral on this controversial subject. However, I would like to issue a call for fairness.
You question Professor Urban's research methods, yet you yourself failed to conduct such basic research as determining his correct title. He is not professor emeritus of history as you state; he is the current Lee L. Morgan Professor of History and International Studies.
I also must take issue with your implication that although Professor Urban is an authority on Baltic history, he lacks credibility as a local historian. A good historian is a good historian; the methods used to conduct solid historical research are identical whether you are investigating Medieval warfare or the history of western Illinois. In 1998, for example, Urban's article titled "The People vs. Nicholas Earp" won the prestigious Harry E. Pratt Memorial Award for the best article published the previous year on Illinois history. This is an award given by the Illinois State Historical Society--certainly a reputable scholarly organization.
So please, let's be more civil and open-minded. History is never cut and dried. It's constantly evolving as we uncover additional details about our treasured past.
Sincerely,
Jeff Rankin
Monmouth, Illinois
2 - SJ Reidhead
Getting the facts wrong isn’t fun, is it. I was under the impression that William Urban had retired and am wrong. I did, however, make a notation of his murder mystery that comes out this month. I also apologize for not properly listing his title. It is my fault.
Fairness is a two way street. I apologize for improperly quantifying Professor Urban’s area of expertise. But " as an “Expert” on the subject of Wyatt Earp, and a lesser “expert” in the field of the Wild West, I must take exception with his scholarship. Unfortunately, in the rarefied, hot-house atmosphere of academia that often has little actual contact with reality, there is a tendency to ignore, and sometimes belittle those who might not have the actual academic credentials, but are far more expert and knowledgeable in a subject than is the credentialed academic.
I have a tremendous amount of respect for Professor Urban as a medieval scholar, and would never begin to impugn his expertise in medieval warfare, etc. I ask for the same respect in return " for any number of Earp scholars who totally and completely disagree with his conclusions about the Wyatt Earp Birthplace Museum. The argument has reached the point where it is pathetic and quite petty. Unfortunately you are ignoring the considerable amount of scholarship that has gone into debunking his findings.
In order to be “fair and balanced” a person must give cold-blooded consideration to all sides of an argument. Unfortunately this is not being done, academically, when it comes to the overwhelming and preponderance of material available that documents the claim that Wyatt Earp was indeed born at 406 South 3rd Street. I gather you are completely unaware of the considerable amount of time, effort, and actual scholarship that has gone in to rebutting Professor Urban’s inaccurate claims.
Let me put it more simply, for those of us who aren’t involved in academia. To us, it appears as though more credence is given to William Urban because he has a Ph.D. in history by individuals who are impressed with that kind of title. It also appears as though Professor Urban and his associates are using his Ph. D. in history TO BULLY anyone who dares to disagree with his conclusions. The perfect example of this is the comment from Mr. Martin about balancing his news article with ‘experts’. Professor Urban may be an expert on other fields, and may have won an ‘award’ about an article about Nicholas Earp. but this does not qualify him to be considered one of the leading experts in the field. Currently that honor belongs to Allen Barra, Mark Dworkin, Tim Fattig, Jane Lee, Jeff Morey, Bob Palmquist, Gary Roberts, Casey Tefertiller, and humbly, myself. There are also a number of individuals who are also far more qualified to debate the subject than Professor Urban, but are not professional writers. There are other individuals, people like Larry Knuth, who may not be a writer, but is far more expert in the field than is Professor Urban.
One of the shoddiest and most poorly researched books about the Earps and Tombstone was written by a highly respected academic. Being a professor of history does not grant one license to ride rough-shod over others who may not be degreed but are far more expert in a field. It also should not blind the media to the expertise of far more knowledgeable individuals.
The most remarkable aspect of “Earp” scholarship is the way people take certain aspects of Wyatt Earp’s life and become extremely knowledgeable. Once again, many if not most of these people are not academics. Many are not writers. They are just people who are interested in something and become rather obsessive about it gaining knowledge in that field. Professor Urban is quite knowledgeable about the Earps in Monmouth, but he is by far not the leading expert. Jane Lee is far more expert than is he. For local entities, media, etc to take the word of one individual with an advanced degree over the collective conclusions of a number of other people is rather foolish I think. It is also short-sighted, demeaning, and in my opinion, horribly and unfairly biased.