Seed Pearl Necklace and Bracelets

[L Verge]

(06-05-2019 12:04 AM)James Wrote:  Dave - I disagree with your synopsis. Sarcasm or irony has been used by nearly all respondents on this particular thread, including you. It's not juvenile. It's a tool used by reasonably intelligent people to strike a nerve or even in a humorous manner. I've borne the brunt of it here and I don't whine about it, I just respond in kind.
Condescension, on the other hand, is a tool used by elitists to demean and belittle.

Provenance has absolutely nothing to do with authenticity when a photograph is the subject of scrutiny. Authenticity does not mean accurate.
Reproductions can be authentic to a period, but not originals. Visual evidence is the sole determining factor. What do you think the odds are that members of this forum would reconsider their position should future research tie the Abe and Mary dag directly to either Abe or Mary? Zero. I for one, would change my opinion if the evidence was rock solid -- but I doubt you will ever be able to prove that...

Laurie - I'm not going to quibble about a pockmark versus a scar. I never ever mentioned the word injury. It's simply another in a long laundry list of identifying characteristics. That was my point.
I'm well aware that there are a lot of folks who have poured countless hours, days, years, even decades into researching both Abe and Mary. Which is why it was so mind-boggling that the scar (pockmark) on her forehead has never been documented in a biography. I am still trying to see that photo. We used to sell the Kunhardts' book at the museum, but that was years ago. I suspect that the scar is either non-existent or not important to Mary's life. And, most men and women of the 19th century (and before and after) had scars from routine childhood illnesses and accidents. Want me to start counting mine? There were no vaccines when I was growing up, so I went through chicken pox, measles, mumps, and even had polio. I do have two smallpox scars, however, from vaccinations.

---

(06-05-2019 09:20 AM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  I would say the people in the photo are in late 40s or early 50s.

I am going to guess mid-50s, judging by the cheek jowls on the lady and especially her hands. And speaking of hands, please take a good look at the gentleman's hand that is holding the cane and also the watch chain. That hand and the cane and the chain sure look photoshopped to me...