Talk:Clara Harris

Untitled

Clara Harris has the distinction of being one of three people present at the assasination of Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln's wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, was fond of her and invited her to Ford's Theater on the day of the assassination, and to other previous events that took place at the White House. She consoled and comforted Mrs. Lincoln during her "death vigil". Any in depth history regarding the assassination of Lincoln makes mention of Clara Harris and her involvement with it. This article is pretty much a stub and needs to be expanded and improved rather than deleted. I hope to work on it soon.Dr. Dan 14:51, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Please keep us posted if, as i often find, it takes a while to carry out that intention. I'm holding off for now on the {{prod}} tag, & taking away the comment that was hiding her entry on List of people by name: Harr#Harris, A-J. Thanks, doc; look'g forw'd.
--Jerzy•t 10:44, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, Jerzy, I'm waiting for a book about her that will help me expand the paltry stubb, that was not started by me in the first place. BTW are you a historian? I'm a little surprised that you would question the notability of Clara Harris. Did you send that note to the originator and other contributors to this stubb, too? Dr. Dan 16:32, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

_ _ Sounds great, and taking on tasks on articles we didn't start is common and good; it's the reason we use Wiki markup and many other institutions here. I think your stated vision of the article is promising, and a sufficient justification for being patient with the current state of the article. I didn't mean to rush you, nor to suggest i have some kind of deadline in mind.

_ _ I relied solely on the content of the article, which seemed to present her significance as being a witness. If Booth had had less sense of drama, she might have been notable in connection with identifying him, but her witness role still seems significant only re what it may have meant to the widow in their subsequent relationship. I understand you as anticipating the bio will eventually show the accepted significance of that relationship, in light of Ms. L's accepted role in the nation's formal and informal mourning process, which could satisfy my earlier concern.

_ _ I don't think i understand your question that reads

Did you send that note to the originator and other contributors to this stubb, too?

I put a tag into the article, and i responded to your msg on this talk page. Did i otherwise communicate to you something others should have had notice of, and then forget i had? (The others you mention may of course, for all i know, have followed this discussion.)
--Jerzy•t 03:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

My apologies, I didn't understand that the tag was a generality. Thought you were addressing me personally. Still new to the game. Sorry Dr.Dan 68.77.149.215 14:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Clarity welcome; apologies far from justified. The only sense in which i'm not new to this is that i've given up waiting for being new to stop.
--Jerzy•t 20:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Amen Dr. Dan 21:44, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Clara Harris, the tendist

Can someone please do a disambugation thing that links to Suburban madness or some other page that describes the what the other Clara Harris is famous for ? -- Nic Roets —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.242.187.18 (talk) 14:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Selling dress for profit

Does anyone have a cite for the fact that she let Lincoln bleed onto her dress? Seems like a harsh accusation for a long dead woman that was eventually murdered by her husband. 86.19.209.84 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:51, 20 March 2012 (UTC). Euphemie777 (talk) 16:54, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

About her grave site

Does anyone have any other information about her grave?? I find it just aweful that the grave was destroyed, and was it destroyed DUE to unattendence? Or was there some other reason? and If this isnt the place to ask these questions please advise me on where to go =) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.172.153.89 (talk) 16:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Harris and her husband's graves weren't "destroyed" per se. I read a snippet somewhere that the cemetery in which they were buried sustained heavy damage during World War II (this was "alleged" which is why I didn't include it in the article) so moving some bodies out was more out of necessity. I think the more likely explanation is that they were moved because it was (and may still very well be) a European standard to disinter the bodies of people whose graves are not visited. It may seem awful but there is limited space in most countries which is generally a motivating factor along with money - remember, it costs money for a cemetery to maintain a staff that maintains the grounds, etc. Besides, the bodies aren't just thrown in a ditch. They're either buried elsewhere or cremated. In the Rathbones' case, they were cremated and their ashes were supposedly scattered somewhere. 199.15.104.149 (talk) 12:20, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't see how it's a good idea to try to make excuses for the horrendous "European standard to disinter the bodies of people" by fabricating stuff like "limited space in most countries". The money factor is regularly the only determinative one in cases like this, but it is not at all a matter of wages. Cemeteries, usually run by churches (!) make big money on reselling graves, and bodies previously buried are normally not disinterred with any such piety, but just broken up and scattered in the dirt when new burials take place in the prime real estate upon which those cemeteries make huge moolah in reusing unattended graves every 25 years or so. Hence, the covers you often see over the little earth mounds next to them, when such a grave is open for burial, lest people should see just how many old bone pieces are in those mounds. That's the ugly truth (sickening as it is), I'm sad to say. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 02:51, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

New image

Updated as per new info at Commons. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:03, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Henry Rathbone rank - contradiction?

The family section concludes by saying "Henry Rathbone joined the Union Army that year and became major in 1869 upon joining the 5th United States Infantry". However the next section starts "On April 14, 1865, Major Rathbone and his fiancée Clara accepted an invitation...". This would seem to be inconsistent (if not wrong) as if Henry Rathbone only became a major in 1869, the he would not have been "Major Rathbone" in 1865. However every source I have read about the assassination gives major as his rank. My guess would be that either the 1869 date is wrong, or, and I suspect more likely, Rathbone had received a wartime brevet or temporary promotion to major in the Union Army by 1865, but did not receive promotion to the substantive rank of major in the United States Army until 1869. Whatever the case, I think a bit of rewording is needed here as at the moment the two statements read as is if they contradict each other. Dunarc (talk) 19:04, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Contradictory info if Rathbone achieved US Consul

This page states that he did achieve becoming US Consul, but Rathbone's page and source say that he was unsuccessful and that it was actually his brother who was consul Clayel (talk) 23:54, 10 August 2023 (UTC)