pwt 42 2015

TRANSMISSION 42 CONTENTS :

Tintypes, ambrotypes and daguerreotypes to be compared with BTK 1-17

BTK or A Rare Occasion to Investigate an Alleged Lost Treasure 16-27

National Geographic recent broadcast producer’s opinion 28-34

WEEKLY TRANSMISSION N°42 THURSDAY 22 OCTOBER 2015

INVESTIGATING BILLY THE KID (BTK): A GALLERY OF TINTYPES

n°1

The e-bulletin presents aselection of books, albums, photographs andancient documents as they have been handed down to the actualowners by their creators and by amateurs from past generations.

The physical descriptions, attributions, origins, places and dates of printing of the books and photographs have been carefully

ascertained by collations and comparisons with comparable.

The books and photographs consigned from all around the world are presented in chronological order. It is the privilege of ancient and authentic things to be presented in this fashion, mirroring the flow

of ideas and creations.

Bidding generally starts at 50 euros, with rare explicit exceptions.Offers are received by email during a week, until next Thursday at9.00 am Paris time. Results are published in the next transmission.

Payment in euros, Paypal is accepted.

N°42 : A Gallery of Tintypes

n°7

Weekly Transmission 42 1 42th week 2015

Tintype, 85x64 mm, delicate hancoloring.


Tintype, 231x178 mm, hancolored.


Tintype, 225x164 mm, found with a vintage label, verso.


Tintype, 66x49 mm, known as French, found in original case with vintage labels.


Tintype, 97x66 mm.


Tintype, 99x63 mm.


Ambrotype, 153x117 mm.


Tintype, 153x117 mm.


Ambrotype, 67x55 mm, handcolored.


Tintype, 218x169 mm.


Tintype, 84x60 mm.


Daguerreotype, 27x21 mm, known as French, found in a (later ?) box indicating Nîmes.


Ambrotype (on glass), 73x59 mm, know as Mexican, found in a ranch, Guanajuato.


Daguerreotype, 77x62 mm, known as French.


Anbrotype (collodion on glass), 104x76 mm, known as Japanese, found in Kyoto.


Panotype (collodion on black leather), 53x43 mm.


Tintype, 107x80 mm.

Comparing with BTK 42th week 2015

1: Young Man. No evidence

2: Young Man, BTK never had such a haircut (Elvis Presley ?)

3: Couple. BTK was not married

4: Mr Grivolas. BTK never used that name

5: Young Child with White Shirt. The ears do not match

6: Young Boy with a Chair. No evidence

7: Trapper with a white pipe. BTK never had such a pipe

8: Young Lady in an urban atmosphere. BTK left New York for the West

9: Old and Rich Man with a golden watch. BTK died at 21

10: Young Man in photo studio. No evidence

11: Young woman in photo studio. BTK was a male

12: French Gentleman in 1850’s. BTK is known to have no beard

13: Guanajuato cowboy. Serious doubt about BTK going so far south

14: French Gentleman in 1840’s. BTK was not born yet

15: Japanese erased figures, BTK never dressed as a Geisha

16: Mature French Man, BTK never visited France

17: Urban boy, BTK’s childhood was quite different

CONCLUSION : We can conclude with certainty that Nos 2-5, Nos 7-9 andNos 11-17 ARE NOT Billy-the-Kid. We have no evidence for Nos 1, 6 & 10.

QUESTION: How do those Tintypes, ambrotypes and daguerreotypescompare with authenticated Billy the Kid’s portrait ?

Who is speaking of Billy the Kid ?

International medias are widely informing our planet of the coming auc-tion of a tintype (a photograph) which could become the most expensive

(desirable ?) photograph on Earth.

National Geographic just released a broadcast they have produced.


The value being established on therecognition of a human characterof XIXth century, BTK, by compari-son with a unique photographicdocument.

Without the match the value is 20us $, with the match it could even-tually convince some collector tobe more than a million us $.

BTK or A Rare Occasion to Investigate an Alleged Lost Treasure 42th week 2015

The Ttintype was bought in 2010 forless than 20 $ and the BTK authenti-cated portrait surfaced in 2013, rea-ching over 2 M$.

This article will not give any answer,just propose a method and quotesome published comments.

Randy Guijarro, the owner of this photograph, claims the picture includes William Bonney(inset), Tom Folliard, Sallie Chisum, Paulita Maxwell, Josiah “Doc” Scurlock, “Big Jim”French and Antonia Scurlock.


Here is a list of 12 not sufficient questions which can help making an opinion:

1. Is the picture an actual tintype as claimed : a late-1870s plate ?

2. How can we describe and understand the picture without enlargement ?

3. For which use was it created ?

4. Can we comment the clothing worn by the sixteen subjects ?

5. Has the person believed to be BTK (Billy The Kid) in the photo several matching mar-kers to the icon-photo ?

6. Can we try to recognize any other character ?

7. What can we say about the location where the photo was taken ?

8. Can we comment the light, the moment in the day, and the season in the year ?

9. Do we have a provenance ?

10. Do we have any publication of the image, any published evidence or comment since130 years ?

11. Can we investigate in libraries and meet elements in archives which could fit withthis image ?

12. Is they any element which could give us an indication about the tintypist ? The pho-tographer ?

We propose you to answer on a paper sheet after looking the picture, compare the iconicportrait of BTK with the enlargement, and to answer the 12 questions.

Then we propose you in a second time to read the following comments and to updateyour answers.

A variant is to apply the 12 questions to the iconic BTK portrait. You can find many infor-mation in the short article of the History Blog, with a link at the end next to Dan Dedrickportrait.


TRUE WEST MAGAZINE’s editors opinion : «We think the publicity is genius, but no onein our office thinks this photo is of the Kid». We polled some of our writers and researcherswho have spent a good part of their lives studying the Kid. These are the guys we trustand respect. Here are their responses:

“…that photo described as ‘Billy the Kid playing croquet’ [was] supposedly found in aFresno, California, ‘junk shop’ by a certain Randy Guijarro—who paid ‘a couple of bucks’for it ( some accounts state he paid 67 cents ). These accounts go on to say that this junkshop photo is ‘now worth $5 million.’ I guess I’ll have to see how many millions I canmake by selling the photo I found in a dumpster in East Overshoe, which shows BelleStarr and Calamity Jane playing hopscotch on the Brooklyn Bridge.” —Jack DeMattos, au-thor of “The Search for Billy the Kid’s Roots is Over,” Real West, January 1980

“Without a solid provenance linking a historic photograph to the Kid, it can never be any-thing more than simply a photo of a goofy-looking juvenile who bears a resemblance toone William H. Bonney. Such images are hardly rare—unfortunately.” —Mark Lee Gardner,author of To Hell on a Fast Horse: The Untold Story of Billy the Kid and Pat Garrett

“Aside from lacking any provenance, this photo is from such a long distance that it’s im-possible to discern physical attributes, much less facial features. This is simply another ofthe long chain of want-it-to-be-the-Kid pictures. This one poses even less credibility thanits predecessors. We so-called experts have been showered with a flood of Billy picturesthat their owners were sure were Billy because they looked like Billy.” —Bob Utley, authorof Billy the Kid: A Short and Violent Life

“When I first saw it two years ago, the owner only thought the one was Billy the Kid be-cause he had a sweater on, and he thought the hat looks like the one in the authenticphoto. But the promoters he was somehow able to get involved are leaving money on thetable at $5 million because they failed to identify Jesse James, Wyatt Earp, Calamity Janeand Wild Bill Hickok who are also obviously in the photo.” —Robert G. McCubbin, world-famous collector of historical Old West photographs

“Regardless of what is said by paid ‘experts,’ their conclusions are CONJECTURE, notFACT. No matter how sophisticated the hype that accompanies them, it’s still hype andnothing else. The ‘proof’ they offer is nothing more than wishful thinking, and the historicalvalue of the image is zero.” —Frederick Nolan, author of The West of Billy the Kid


“Bob McCubbin and I told the owner two years ago it is not a photo of Billy the Kid. Herefused to believe us and kept dragging it around to various auctioneers, trying to convincethem it was real. Finally, he got Don Kagin to accept it. Bob and I have explained in detailto everyone involved why the image has no value. This photo has no more provenancethan any of the scores of alleged Billy the Kid images which have appeared on ebay thepast 15 years. And don’t talk to me about facial recognition software. When it comes totwo-dimensional historic images, it just doesn’t work.” —John Boessenecker, Californiaoutlaw historian

“I’ve looked at that photo, and I don’t see how anyone can definitely ID anybody in it. It’shard enough to took at a head shot and be sure without other provenance. Heck, I couldlook at old photos of Brad Pitt and Robert Redford and swear it’s really me in that photo.—Marshall Trimble, Arizona’s Official Historian and True West’s answer man


“Yes, the documentary has yet to beshown. But from what I’ve seen andread and heard, I think the photo is atempest in a teapot—or worse, it’ssheep dip. No id’s. No date. No loca-tion. No provenance. No way.” —Mark Boardman, True West’s featureseditor

“There is a big difference betweendocumentation, which is a documenttrail that leads back to day one, andauthentication, which merely identi-fies the picture as being from a parti-cular period and sometimes, a place.Personally, I still have to go with do-cumentation.” —Drew Gomber, Lin-coln County historian

“The Times of London called me yes-terday for a quote on the photo. As al-ways, Billy is an internationalphenom. The fascination is, well, fas-cinating. Part of this is lost treasure in-terest, but most of it reflects theenduring appeal of Billyiana. A photowith no provenance whatsoeverpicked up in a flea market causes allthis commotion—and a tv special toboot. Billy the Kid just keeps riding…” —Paul Andrew Hutton, distingui-shed professor of history at the Uni-versity of New Mexico and author of“Dreamscape Desperado,” True West,May 2007REBUTTAL BY Jeff Aiello


Jeff Aiello, Co-Executive Producer of the upcoming documentary Billy The Kid: New Evi-dence, sent a rebuttal to the True West Magazine.

“True West – “experts” chime in on Billy The Kid – croquet photograph authenticity.

The newly discovered photograph of Billy The Kid and The Regulators has certainly igniteda firestorm of interest and controversy. The remarkable tintype featuring William Bonneyand several of the men that called themselves The Regulators, posed in an outdoor sceneplaying croquet has, unfortunately, divided a community of those who deeply care abouthistory of The Kid and the Lincoln County War.

Randy Guijarro came to possess this photograph purely by luck, or what some would callfate. He walked into a junk shop in Fresno, California in 2010 after hearing that two youngmen were selling old photos and documents out of a shoebox, not realizing what valuableinventory they carried. Randy bought 3 ferro-types for $2. One was the photo the worldknows about today. He didn’t realize what he had until he got home.


After bringing it home and studying it under his loupe, he quickly noticed a resemblanceto the icon-photo of Billy The Kid the world has known for generations. After doing a littleresearch, he also noticed that two other figures in the photograph closely matched knownphotos of two men that are well-known to have ridden with Bonney; Tom O’Folliard andCharlie Bowdre. Figuring that the chances three individuals that were all known to ridetogether in Lincoln County, New Mexico between 1878 – 1880, all seen in one photographwere extraordinary, he began to do what anyone would do…seek out the experts for theiropinions to see if what he had was real.

In 2011, after the Upham-photo of Billy The Kid sold for $2.3 million, Randy reached outto the experts for the first time. He met with Brian Lebel at a show in Grass Valley, CA andshowed him the actual tintype along with a high-quality enlargement of the image. BeforeBrian could really comment, another historian-author, John Bossenecker, quickly crowdedinto the meeting, glanced at the image and dismissed it immediately citing that the land-scape and trees didn’t match New Mexico and, with a fair amount of conviction, statedthat the scene was most likely in California. After Bossenecker left, Lebel pulled Randyaside and told him he had some work to do to prove the photo was authentic, but if itwas, it could be worth 10-times that of the icon-photo of The Kid…Lebel’s words.

Randy, being sure of what he had, was not deterred. In fact, without even realizing it,John Bossenecker was the inspiration for a long journey Randy would take to find thetruth.

The next person Randy showed the photo to was John McWilliams, a noted expert in 19thcentury photography best known for his Texas Rangers collection. McWilliams has lookedat and shot-down 4 purported BTK images before…all in a matter of seconds. McWilliamslooked closely at Randy’s image and two hours later, was still looking at it. John identifiedthe actual tintype as a late-1870s plate and verified clothing worn by the subjects in thephoto to be accurate to the late-1870s. He also felt the person believed to be Bonney inthe photo had several matching markers to the icon-photo including the hat, sweater-type,stance, sloped-shoulders and eyebrows. He also felt the person believed to be CharlieBowdre in the photo strongly matched known photos of the famous gunman. Like BrianLebel, McWilliams told Randy to keep on searching for more information and documen-tation to support the image. He ended the meeting by telling Randy that if he could findthe location the photo was taken and it all matched up, that would be the clincher forproving the photo’s authenticity.

In 2013, after having looked at the photo several more times, McWilliams finally arrangeda meeting between Randy and photo-collector Robert McCubbin. The meeting was setup so McCubbin could see the tintype and enlargement and hopefully, for Randy, givethe photo a hard look to determine if it was the real deal. When Randy walked into a LasVegas hotel room to share his photo with McCubbin, John Bossnecker was there too, andRandy knew he was sunk. Still, he rolled out the large image for McCubbin who lookedat it for only seconds and dismissed it quickly for the same exact reasons Bossnecker hadgiven in 2011.

The meeting quickly ended and Randy started the next phase of his journey with an im-portant question; how could two experts in old-west photography (McWilliams andMcCubbins) have such a different take-away on the same image? Randy was dejectedand put the effort to authenticate the photo aside for a while.

I met Randy in October of 2014 by chance and learned of the story written above. Afterspending two months working with Randy’s tintype and diving into the history of the Lin-coln County War, studying photographs and doing some low-tech photo-matching, I be-came convinced that the photo was probably authentic but was certain the system forphoto-authentication in Western Americana needed an overhaul. Important pieces of Ame-rican history and whether they are real or not, should not be left up to one or two menarmed with nothing more than their own large collections and opinions. This is why I setout to make the documentary that will air Sunday night on National Geographic Chan-nel.

I wanted to share this back-story above because knowing the context of what really hap-pened and the players involved should help better frame the story for those that will nowjudge the evidence discovered for the ‘croquet kid’ tintype. As for my direct rebuttal tothe comments made in the True West post/article yesterday…here we go:

First off, True West and the gentleman quoted in the post made a rather large error in judg-ment (in my humble opinion) without knowing or seeing the full body of evidence thathas been discovered on this image. With the exception of Dr. Hutton, who does appearin our film and is very helpful in discovering documentation that supports the photo, theother’s comments were snarky, wining and lacking any facts to support their positions. Weknow, as the people bringing the photo to the public, that the burden of proof is on uswith this image. The documentary on Sunday is our presentation of that proof.


True West and these highly respected gentlemen should have waited until Monday tomake their positions known simply because none of them have seen the full amount ofevidence and proof that the led to the tintype’s authentication. I repeatedly asked Mr.McCubbin to look at all the proof but he was defiant and rejected the invitations. Aheadof the airing of the film, here are some bullet points to set the record straight and to refutethe error-laden claims of True West’s “dream team” of historians and photo-collectors:

“The photo has no provenance or documentation”; Actually, we’ve discovered both. Thefirst and most important piece of provenance in photography is the location the picturewas taken. This is where the chain of custody begins. We have found the exact locationthe photo was taken and it has been verified by three, separate teams of investigators in-dependent of the production of the film. Its also been verified by the current land-ownerof what was the old Tunstall Ranch on the Felix River, Sterling Hendricks. The lumber struc-ture seen in the croquet photo, which we now know was the Felix School built in 1874(most likely by Casey), was actually built over in 1935 and became the Flying H School.We know this because we found some of the original boards and foundation elementsunderneath the structure that stands there today. Additionally and most compelling, thewidth of the building there today is 21’6’ wide.

The measurements of the old building in the croquet photo are 21’6” wide. These mea-surements were made using the same computer application that positively identifies Bon-ney, Bowdre, Chisum and O’Folliard. The configuration of roof-pitch, windows and doorshas certainly changed over time but the building’s measurements are strong facts, alongwith many others from the site, that prove this is the spot. Provenance established.

Next, facial-recognition. This is one is tough because quite simply, older people find ac-cepting this technology difficult to accept out of a lack (or willingness) to understand it.Bossnecker’s comments about facial-recognition not working on 2D images is completelyout of line and untrue. The facial-recognition expert we used on this project, Kent Gibson,is one of the most highly-respected forensic analysts in this field. The software used in po-sitively identifying Billy The Kid, Tom O’Folliard, Sallie Chisum and Charlie Bowdre inRandy’s photo is the same system used to protect the United States from terrorist attacks.It works. Its finds and helps bring to justice people that would do us harm everyday anddoes this using 2D images. In fact, most of the time, the source material used is moregrainy and in poorer shape than the croquet tintype. Its tough for me to understand howsomeone can sit safe in their office in San Francisco, protected by technology like thatused in our film but then claim that same technology is incapable of matching WilliamBonney from two, usable sources.

80 % match ?

Nearby ranchs in 1930 and 2015. The aspect would be explained by climate change.

“We don’t have any documentation”; Again, yes we do. Sallie Chisum’s hand-written jour-nal from 1878 quite clearly explains when and where all of the people in the photographcame together and, when cross-referenced to known, historical movements of the players,establishes a narrow timeline the photo was taken within. This documentation also leadsto and points directly at the Tunstall Ranch for where the photo was taken. History well-records the fact that Charlie Bowdre and Doc Scurlock moved their families from Ruidosoto Fort Sumner the first week of September of 1878. Evidence that will be shown in thefilm points to the croquet tintype being taken during this event.

“It doesn’t look like New Mexico…the trees don’t match”; This was the first citation ofBossnecker and McCubbin. According to Professor Owen Burney, at the University ofNew Mexico’s forestry studies, the trees have been identified as White Oaks. While on thefringe of their natural habit in the late 1870s, its well-documented that the nearby townof White Oaks, New Mexico in Lincoln County was named for a large stand of White Oaktrees that grew near the stream east of town. Additionally, naysayers point out that if thisphoto was taken in early September, why are there no leaves on the trees?

Again, Professor Burney cites that in times of severe drought, large trees will drop theirleaves early to protect against mortality. We have documentation to prove that a severedrought was in play in south-eastern New Mexico between 1876 and 1883. In my opinion,Bossenecker and McCubbin should be disqualified as contributing “experts” in photo-au-thentication after missing this one so badly.

“Why would they being playing croquet?” “Where are their guns?”; The croquet elementto the photo is the most interesting to me. When I emailed Fred Nolan back in March toask him to look at the photo and contribute to the film (which he denied both), he thoughtthe element of croquet in the photo with Billy was outrageous. Really? Does he forget thatJohn Tunstall was English? Does he forget that on page 69 in his own book “The Life andDeath of John Henry Tunstall” he writes about how much Tunstall loved the game anddocuments that he played it here in North America after immigrating from England? Whilewe can’t prove with facts or evidence that the croquet set seen in the photo is Tunstall’s,its at the very least a compelling link between the game and the people in the photo. Asfor the lack of guns, this is obviously a staged photo to celebrate some kind of specialevent. Our photo experts believe it was to celebrate the marriage of the two people seenon horseback in the photo based on how the photo is composed. We uncovered new do-cumentation in our search that proves Charlie Bowdre and Manueal Herrera were actuallymarried in 1878 and not in 1876 or 1880 as historians have guessed at for years.

These documents have been provided by decedents of both and in probate court recordsof San Miguel County, the county Fort Sumner was located in 1878. We believe the recordof their marriage was entered after they arrived in Fort Sumner.

The tintype itself was analyzed by noted wet-plate collodian photographer Will Dunniway.Will is considered one of the best itinerate artists in the world today. He date-stamped thecroquet photo to a plate made between 1877 and 1881. The chemical process used tomake the plate tells the tale. Residue and a close look at the media material itself is consis-tent with photographs made in that time-frame. Dunniway also confirms McWilliams fin-dings that clothing worn is period-correct.

These are just some of the facts and findings we uncovered over years of research andwork on this photo. Claims of a new Billy The Kid image should be met with skepticismsimply due to the amount of false claims made. But at some point, with an image like thecroquet photo, the over-whelming circumstantial evidence combined with solid prove-nance proves the image to be authentic.

Never before has an image been put through such scrutiny or testing from a wide-rangeof photo-experts, historians and researchers and every one of them, close to this project,agrees with the finding of authenticity and the verification of that authenticity by DonKagin and David McCarthy.

We are at the point now, with this amount of evidence, that it is more outrageous to sug-gest this isn’t Billy and The Regulators.

For Mr. Nolan, the above is based on FACT, not conjecture.

Again, we welcome naysayers to bring forward specific, empirical proof or evidence thatrefutes our findings. Snarky statements from historians and “world-famous” photo-collec-tors aren’t good enough anymore. We and those who love the history of the Wild West,expect and demand more.

We’ve done our work to prove this photo is real. If you disagree, stand up and show usthe proof why it isn’t.”

Jeff Aiello, Co-Executive Producer – “Billy The Kid: New Evidence”National Geographic Channel18THIRTY Entertainment

Two extracts of the « documentary » are available on National Geographic Site :

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/videos/the-sweater-cowboy/

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/videos/billy-the-kids-face/

Direct links : WIKIPEDIA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_the_Kid

TELERAMA: http://www.telerama.fr/scenes/billy-the-kid-capture-pour-la-deuxieme-fois-5-millions-de-dollars-a-la-cle,132878.php

REUTERS: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/16/usa-history-billythekid-idUSKCN0SA19R20151016

TRUE WEST MAGAZINE : http://www.truewestmagazine.com/billy-the-kid-experts-weigh-in-on-the-croquet-photo/

JEFF AIELLO : http://www.truewestmagazine.com/billy-the-kid-experts-weigh-in-on-the-croquet-photo/

HISTORY BLOG: http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/11800

Number Forty-Two of the Weekly Transmission has been uploaded on Thursday, 22th October at 15:15 (Paris time).

Upcoming uploads and transmissions on Thursdays : Results of bids : Thursday 29th October, 15:1 (Paris time).

[email protected]

Phone (10 am-5 pm) : (+33) 6.50.85.60.74

Portrait of Dan Dedrick :

«Billy The Kid gave his portrait tohis cattle rustling colleague DanDedrick, who claimed he was pre-sent when the photo was taken,and who in turn gave it to his ne-phew Frank L. Upham in the1930s».

pwt 42 2015

Documents