Tad photo?

[Gene C]

Just guessing but, IF Mrs Lincoln gave Corporal Crounse a picture of Tad there would be a story behind it, and one Corporal Crounse would value as much as the photo. So why do we not have the story? Maybe because it didn't happen.

According to Anita's post #11, in the auction lot there are also three diaries from 1863, 1864 and 1865 by Corpral Crounse. If Mary Lincoln gave him a photo of Tad (for whatever reason) surely he would have made a diary entry about it.

[Anita]

(01-20-2020 10:35 PM)Gene C Wrote:  Just guessing but, IF Mrs Lincoln gave Corporal Crounse a picture of Tad there would be a story behind it, and one Corporal Crounse would value as much as the photo. So why do we not have the story? Maybe because it didn't happen.

According to Anita's post #11, in the auction lot there are also three diaries from 1863, 1864 and 1865 by Corpral Crounse. If Mary Lincoln gave him a photo of Tad (for whatever reason) surely he would have made a diary entry about it.

Yes, one would think he Crounse would have written about and/or told others.

[AussieMick]

Yes. I think the lack of provenance is often more telling than the existence ... if you know what I mean.
But ( I'm a Libran and allowed to be indecisive ) , the ear brings my opinion to yes its Tad. Probably.

http://Medicaldaily.com/ears-better-fing...id-234507/

[RJNorton]

(01-21-2020 02:42 AM)AussieMick Wrote:  Yes. I think the lack of provenance is often more telling than the existence ... if you know what I mean.
But ( I'm a Libran and allowed to be indecisive ) , the ear brings my opinion to yes its Tad. Probably.

http://Medicaldaily.com/ears-better-fing...id-234507/

Michael, I cannot find the quote right now, but Dr. Blaine Houmes once posted the importance of ear matching when trying to identify people in photos. This photo makes me wonder how difficult it must be to place a proper value on photos such as this when the provenance is weak and the evidence leads in two directions - IMO, Gene is right in comment #16 where he writes, "If Mary Lincoln gave him a photo of Tad (for whatever reason) surely he would have made a diary entry about it."

[AussieMick]

Roger, that's what I meant by lack of provenance. .... a comment in the diary would be expected. ... the lack of one is a "negative-provenance" .... maybe theres already a technical term , if not I'll claim ownership of 'negative-provenance'. It points to the image not being what is claimed .
Like a "photo " of Lincoln without the mole.

[Susan Higginbotham]

I would think a lot depends on how detailed the diary is (assuming that the photo was given during one of the years for which there is an extant diary). And a photo of the young Tad during the war years wasn't such a unusual thing that someone was sure to record receiving one. It's also possible, of course, that Crounse acquired it at some later point in his long life and didn't bother to record how he acquired it.

[AussieMick]

Ok. How about a score of 80 out of 100 for the ear (I think they are very similar) .... and -40 for the lack of diary entry or detail of source (quite suspicious to my mind).
So a score of 40 out of 100 on my somewhat arbitrary scale.

[RJNorton]

Personally I am unaware of Mary giving out family photos to the wounded soldiers. I am not saying she did not ever do it...just that I have never read this. I have read that she gave the soldiers food and flowers, and she sometimes read to them and wrote letters for them, but not that she was in the habit of giving them photos of her family.

[RJNorton]

Many thanks to Steve for sending these images. Steve writes, "I looked up the military record of Amos Crounse and he was in Washington DC following the loss of his left hand during battle on May 31, 1864."





https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/28239987

"Following his discharge in January 1865, he returned to his parents' home in Roseboom, Ostego County, New York. I don't know if he was in Washington DC for all of the rest of service before discharge or moved to a different hospital. He was still in Roseboom, NY on 19 June 1865 when he was recorded as living/being at his parents home in the 1865 NY state census. Crounse doesn't appear in Washington DC directories until 1866 So contrary to the auctioner's speculation, he hadn't gotten a government job in DC before Mary Lincoln had left the city. But he had been recovering as a wounded soldier in DC before his discharge.

I find it surprising that there's no written record by Crounse claiming that it was Tad in the photograph or even a written account by a family member who knew Crounse who said they remembered Crounse claiming the boy in the photograph is Tad. Without that all we have is that the boys resemble each other and that Crounse was in Washington DC late in the war.

Looking at the photograph I did notice that the boy is wearing a ring on his left index finger (remember, tintypes are reversed images). In several NARA photos of Tad with his hands visible he's wearing a ring on his left middle finger. I don't know if this has any significance or not."

[Anita]

Thank you Steve. I had wondered about the ring. Also how many young children the age of eight or nine had civil war uniforms? I can't find a source documenting military uniforms were a used as props for young children. Those that were actually drummer boys were older than the boy in the Tad photo.

Also now the time he was hospitalized in Washington DC opens the possibility of a visit by Mary to the hospital. This makes me more open to the possibility the auction photo is Tad. "n 1862, the Lincolns visited injured soldiers at the various hospitals.[2] Many Union soldiers in 1863 received gifts "From Tad Lincoln", as Tad had been deeply moved by the plight of Union soldiers when he was taken by his father to see them. The gifts were mostly books and clothing.[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_..._Civil_War

On the other hand, when was the photo separated from the other items in Crounse's collection? Before doing so I would think the diaries would have been read to see if there was a link to the Tad photo.

Also, the photo is a 9th tinplate plate image suggesting there were multiples of these made. Can't image only one was made when they were inexpensive and the subject was Tad. Wonder if others are out there.

[Steve]

Looking at online family trees on Ancestry.com, it looks like Crounse youngest brother, Eli, born in 1852 - a year earlier than Tad. Unfortunately, none of the family trees mention a photograph of Tad or Crounse meeting any of the Lincolns.

[STS Lincolnite]

This may be end up being a bit of a lengthy post (and I do hope somewhat coherent). So my apologies up front.

As Roger mentioned, Blaine Houmes had posted on photo identification in the past (and I had as well). The posts were included in the threads titled: “Willie?” and “Earliest Photo of Lincoln”

The web address I referred readers to in one of the earlier threads is no longer active but here is a replacement: https://www.facecomparisons.com/index.html

Blaine (first) and I both mentioned a book entitled: Face to Face: Analysis Comparison of Facial Features to Authenticate Identities of People in Photographs, by Joelle Steele. Ms. Steele runs the website that I linked to above (as well as the ones I had linked to in one of the previous posts). Subsequent to the original threads/posts about this book, Ms. Steele has written and published 3 more books on facial identification/anatomy, etc. They are all listed on the site linked above. I don’t have the 3 new books so I don’t know much about them, but I do recommend the original. It looks like all the books can be purchased from her website.

Now on to the supposed photo of Tad.

The lack of a solid provenance is of great concern to me. Heritage Auctions seems to make LOTS of assumptions in their item description and there is a lack of any real solid evidence detail. As has been mentioned, the times that a photo could have been gifted is questionable, the fact there is not reference to a photo of Tad (or it sounds like any gift from the Lincoln family) in related writings of the supposed recipient is worrisome, and the fact this item is split from a larger collection is problematic. I did a general online viewing of civil war era photos of children. A number of the children (more than I expected) were uniformed. Many were as drummers or buglers and there were even some dressed in little zouave style uniforms. So just because the photo depicts a boy in a soldier’s uniform, is no evidence that the subject is Tad Lincoln. Just like a 19th century image that depicts a handsome man with a mustache doesn’t mean the subject is John Wilkes Booth (although it often seems many people believe that to be the case).

The description on Heritage Auctions website regarding the photo in question states: “A comparison with known images of Tad demonstrates the many striking similarities.”

Hmm. “many striking similarities..” Paired with the lack of solid evidence, that does not seem nearly enough to me to put this item forward as a photo of Tad Lincoln.

There are definitely some facial and other similarities – the most notable to me being the general shape of the ear when compared to the known image of Tad that Roger posted (as others have commented on). However with a more extreme close up examination (when I get a chance, I will try to get some more close up photos and ask Roger to post) , there does seem to be some subtle differences in some details. Some difference in ear shape shows up just above the lobe with the tintype subject having a somewhat different contour than what appears in the photo of Tad. Also, the cheeks don’t match up for me. Tad always had sort of full cheeks (especially just under the eyes). This does not seem to be the case with the subject in the tintype. I looked at other photos of Tad and that fullness of his cheeks seems to me to present in all (both when he is younger and when he is older). Further the shape of the tip of Tad’s nose seems different that the subject of the tintype. Of course those things are as it appears to my eyes (and very subjective) and it is hard to be certain in cases of photos (especially old ones) due to image quality and other issues such as the potential that the photo(s) was/were “touched up” at some point.

For me at least, there is just not yet enough here for me to conclude the image is question depicts Tad Lincoln. I do concede that I am an amateur and that there are some similarities in images. If there is a different opinion based on a more extensive and informed photo analysis performed by a real expert I suppose I might tip the other way.

I considered sending the images to Ms. Steele for analysis, and though I am interested in this, I am not sure I am $50-$75 dollars interested (the fee she charges for analysis). That being said, if some other people are interested enough to chip in on cost, I would be willing to connect with her and have her do an analysis. If we have a relatively few people willing to chip in five or 10 dollars each we could get this done without much difficulty.

[STS Lincolnite]

I have put together some images for comparison. I tried to attach them to this post but it didn't work. I am sending to Roger to post but here are the descriptions.

First are images of 3 facial crops. In order from left to right they are:
1) tintype purported to be Tad in about 1862 on Heritage Auctions
2) image of Tad in 1862 per LOC collection
3) image of Tad in uniform that Roger originally included for comparison

When viewed in more close-up form, the differences in appearance seem stand out more.


The second set are close ups of the left ear in each the images. In order from left to right they are:
1) tintype purported to be Tad about 1862 on Heritage Auctions
2) image of Tad in 1862 per LOC collection
3) image of Tad in uniform that Roger originally included for comparison

Though the general angle of the ear is similar, in the close ups one can more clearly see the differences in the contour of the outer edge of the ear on the tintype as compared to the known images of Tad.

[Anita]

(01-23-2020 09:00 PM)STS Lincolnite Wrote:  I have put together some images for comparison. I tried to attach them to this post but it didn't work. I am sending to Roger to post but here are the descriptions.

First are images of 3 facial crops. In order from left to right they are:
1) tintype purported to be Tad in about 1862 on Heritage Auctions
2) image of Tad in 1862 per LOC collection
3) image of Tad in uniform that Roger originally included for comparison

When viewed in more close-up form, the differences in appearance seem stand out more.


The second set are close ups of the left ear in each the images. In order from left to right they are:
1) tintype purported to be Tad about 1862 on Heritage Auctions
2) image of Tad in 1862 per LOC collection
3) image of Tad in uniform that Roger originally included for comparison

Though the general angle of the ear is similar, in the close ups one can more clearly see the differences in the contour of the outer edge of the ear on the tintype as compared to the known images of Tad.

Thank you! Looking forward to seeing these.

[RJNorton]

Many thanks to Scott for sending these images (as described in his post above): (depending on your display settings,
you may have to scroll the screen to see all comparison images)