Nancy Hanks' lineage

[Steve Whitlock]

(03-10-2016 04:46 PM)Gene C Wrote:  Thanks Steve & Roger.
I'm still undecided.

Roger,

We seem to be missing the assessment of Eva Elizabeth that was here earlier. At any rate I wanted to comment that the coat worn by John Hanks is not the same coat worn in the "Thomas Lincoln photo". If we concentrate on the area of the rever/revers where it attaches on the right side of the photo to the collar/lapel the angle of the notch is much smaller on the John Hanks photo and the bottom portion comes to a point; whereas the same area of the T. Lincoln photo has a bigger notch and the area mentioned above is clearly rounded. Also, the material appears different.

As to my previous comment about Dennis Friend Hanks being the most likely seller of the photo, the following establishes his urgent need for money.

"Abraham Lincoln and Coles County

News Items Concerning the Lincoln Family

Dennis Hanks, cousin of Abraham Lincoln, and Elizabeth, his wife, daughter of Sarah Bush Lincoln by a former marriage, were born in Hardin Co., Ky. and came to Illinois from Spencer Co., In. with the Lincoln family in 1830. They finally located in Charleston in 1832. Their residence at that time was in an old log cabin situated on the southwest corner of the public square, which is now occupied by the Charleston Odd Fellows block.
Dennis Hanks was a shoemaker by trade and followed this occupation in this city until 1864 when his shop and residence was destroyed in the great fire which burned the greater part of the west side of the square. He was raised by the Lincoln family and is credited with giving the great emancipator his first lessons in reading and penmanship.
Mr. and Mrs. Hanks were the parents of eight children, two of whom are now living. They are Mrs. Harriet Chapman of Charleston, and Mrs. Amanda Poorman of Chicago. There are now living thirty-three grandchildren. Mrs. Hanks died in 1869 and Mr. Hanks in 1892 in his 93rd year. Both are buried in the old cemetery in West Madison street. [Charleston newspaper, submitted by Src #196]"

Note that Dennis' shop and residence was destroyed in a Charleston, IL fire in 1864. Also in a letter to Herndon: "Dennis F. Hanks to W. H.H.

This Bible was bought in Philadelphia about 1801 — by my Father & Mother & was mine when Abe was taught to read in it. It is now burned together with all property — deeds if any & other records — This fire took place in Charleston — Coles Co Ills Decr. 5th 1864 — lost all I have — my wife died December 18th 1864."

If he lost everything we might expect photos to be lost as well, but I don't have an accounting for what was lost. The only point here is that Dennis was indeed desperate for money.

Still we are no closer to a resolution for the "Thomas Lincoln" photo. I'm not so sure that the man in the photo is John "The railspliter" Hanks either.

There is one other thing to point out that I've wrestled with for several days as to whether to mention it. I have what seems to be a photo of the Thomas Lincoln photo confined to a head shot. Note that he is now facing the other way, and is in alignment with the 1860 photo for John Hanks wearing the dark suit. On the Thomas Lincoln head shot there is a very noticeable gouge, or something that disrupts the photo in the left cheek as we face the photo (his right cheek).

If you take a close look on the right cheek (his left cheek) as we face the already posted O. V. Flora photo for "Thomas Lincoln" there is a circle there that is difficult to see, but is in the same spot.

Now, if we enlarge the John Hanks photo we can also see on the left side as we face the photo (his right cheek) there is a disruption of some sort in the same exact area. I'm wondering whether a birth mark or scar could cause such an affect on early photography. The main point to make is that the photos for "Thomas Lincoln" and John Hanks are 9 or 10 years apart, and involves quite a coincidence that the area in question seems so identical, at least to me.

I was going to quote more sources which speak to Thomas Lincoln having a large, prominent, bulbous nose just as corroboration for the George B. Balch description; however, that's already been pointed out here at the Symposium by others as well. That by itself says the Thomas Lincoln photo is bogus, and we are merely attempting to figure out who it really is in the photo. Personally, I change my mind every time I compare the photo to John Hanks, and wouldn't put money on it. The face appears more round in the John Hanks photo, and something about the eyes seems different. Still, the cheeks, etc.....