(05-12-2015 04:19 PM)loetar44 Wrote:  Never thought that I ever would write some words about facial hair! So this is an unique moment for me! After reading all the comments I did some research today and found that indeed the majority of men who were U.S. president have been always clean shaven. I think that John Quincy Adams was the first U.S. President to have notable facial hair, with long sideburns. But after him the first with facial hair was (indeed) Abraham Lincoln. I don't think Martin van Buren would qualify Laurie. From Lincoln through the end of William Howard Taft’s term in 1913, every president (excepting just two, Andrew Johnson and William McKinley) sported a significant beard, moustache, or both. Since 1913, and before 1861, not a single president wore a beard or moustache of any kind (except JQA). Lincoln grew a full beard in September 1860.

In answer on Bill's remarks, I also found that facial hair began to enjoy unprecedented popularity in the second half of the 19th century. By the end of this century, men in Europe and the United States wore facial hair almost universally. Side-whiskers gained popularity first, becoming commonplace in Europe by 1810. Moustaches followed close behind, and by the 1830s, beards, too, became increasingly mainstream. After the French revolution, beards soon spread from France to Britain, and then, in the 1850s, to the United States. Is there an explanation? I think yes. The nineteenth century was a period of profound social change in Europe and the United States. It was then that the social roles of men and women changed. Until then, men had laid claim to public places like taverns and city streets, while women were confined the home. But suddenly nineteenth century women increasingly made themselves a vocal and visible part of the places and spaces men had previously claimed as their own. This challenged and troubled many men. Were they now creating a distinct masculine appearance to distinguish themselves from women as a reaction to women’s changing role in American social life? Why I’m wearing a moustache? Where is Freud?

I think you've hit on something about men wearing facial hair in response (perhaps) to the women's revolution in the late 1800's. I have noticed more and more men sporting beards today. Does it indicate anything socially and/or culturally? Don't know!

Abraham Lincoln's beard is the most bizarre I have ever seen. Sparse, scraggly, and poorly or absently trimmed. He looked better with no beard, in my opinion. The lack of a (usual) mustache part of the beard, makes it more bizarre. My guess is that the mustache portion was so sparse and (what hairs there on the lip) probably were so curly that he immediately realized it just wouldn't work with a mustache portion at all. But that Lincoln actually kept that beard once he saw how 'limited' it would be. Add the stovepipe hat, the always black clothes, then the odd beard. I can't believe he thought he was making a dapper fashion statement. For some reason, did Abraham Lincoln want to make himself appear different?

(12-20-2015 01:59 AM)maharba Wrote:  I can't believe he thought he was making a dapper fashion statement.

IMO the beard looked different (somewhat less sparse) depending on the photo. I am not sure Lincoln's goal was ever to appear "dapper." I think Mary complained, but I don't think he cared. At the Cooper Union (before the beard was added) one witness said, "one of the legs of his trousers was up about two inches above his shoe; his hair was disheveled and stuck out like rooster’s feathers; his coat was altogether too large for him in the back, his arms much longer than his sleeves."

(12-20-2015 01:59 AM)maharba Wrote:  I can't believe he thought he was making a dapper fashion statement. For some reason, did Abraham Lincoln want to make himself appear different?

I think he just got caught up in the "No Shave November" trend

His beard is ok with me!

(12-20-2015 07:56 AM)HerbS Wrote:  His beard is ok with me!

While I prefer beardlessness, too (for most men, including Lincoln), I agree. It's ok with me. Also we don't know what look the toll of war would have made out of his shaved face. And he would have looked worse with a moustache IMO. And I like the photo Roger posted.
I think in that era a beard symbolized also some riper/wiser age and dignity and was proper for office holders and scientists of a certain age?
Did Mary ever comment (- I can't recall)?

I just have one question for backwards Abraham (sorry, I'm not good at spelling things backwards), is there anything about Mr. Lincoln that you do approve of? You have complained about his grammar, his religion (or lack there of), and now his sense of style. What's left?

(12-20-2015 12:42 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I just have one question for backwards Abraham (sorry, I'm not good at spelling things backwards), is there anything about Mr. Lincoln that you do approve of? You have complained about his grammar, his religion (or lack there of), and now his sense of style. What's left?

I would like to know the same - all that comes from you (on any topic) seems to be some kind of negative criticism (at least that's my perception). What is positive in your world(view)? (And I'd be very curious as for a photo of your fashion and hairdo statement...)

PS: Here is some info: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chin_curtain
   

Also we don't know what look the toll of war would have
made out of his shaved face>>

That's a very good point. A beard would be useful, there.

Is there anything about Mr. Lincoln that you do approve of? You have complained about his grammar, his religion (or lack there of), and now his sense of style. What's left? >

Lincoln was very candid, early on, in asserting his atheist worldview, even writing out a book or tractate on the subject (lost in the fire), and in denying Christ. As I said, I don't think any atheist need apologize for their point of view. On the other hand, it appears Christians just don't want to believe any part of it. I think Abraham Lincoln would be more proud of his atheism, than in the fabulous narratives which have been generated over the years --arranging marriages, delivering virtual Last Rites to clients, etc. Lincoln's tastes in arts and literature and poetry were of a very broad and generally pleasing and familiar nature, as well.

Thanks for your reply. Why is it so impossible for you to consider Lincoln might have developed a kind of believe in whatever God in the course of events, or at least seriously tried to? Even his wife said so, how can you claim to know him better than she did?

Mary's interview with Herndon (from Wilson, Douglas L., ed.; Davis, Rodney O., ed.: "Herndon's Informants..."):

"Mrs Lincoln's Conversation in substance with me at the St Nicholas Hotel — She Said — [...]
...he was [a terribly] firm man when he set his foot down — none of us — no man nor woman Could rule him after he had made up his mind. I told him about Sewards intention to rule him — : he said — 'I shall rule myself — shall obey my own Conscience and follow God in it.' Mr Lincoln had no hope & no faith in the usual acceptation of those words: he never joined a Church: he was a religious man always, as I think: he first thought — to say think — about this subject was when Willie died — never before. he felt religious More than Ever about the time he went to Gettysburg: he was not a technical Christian: he read the bible a good deal about 1864."
(254. Mary Todd Lincoln/William H. Herndon Interview of September 1866)

I would never expect anyone to apologize for their religious views (except when those views do serious bodily and cultural harm to others - as we face in our world today). I just find it unorthodox to claim someone is an atheist without 100% proof that it's true. I am happy to see you approve of Mr. Lincoln's taste in the humanities. That's a big relief!

(12-20-2015 07:51 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I would never expect anyone to apologize for their religious views (except when those views do serious bodily and cultural harm to others - as we face in our world today). I just find it unorthodox to claim someone is an atheist without 100% proof that it's true. I am happy to see you approve of Mr. Lincoln's taste in the humanities. That's a big relief!

Yes, exactly what I think! It is unorthodox to claim someone is an atheist without 100% proof (and you haven't provided ANY evidence as for his later years while you have been confronted with a lot of evidence suggesting the opposite was likely the case) - what makes it even offensive IMO though is your repeated claim Lincoln "abused" religious platitudes (as you called these) and wordings just to cast votes and support while scoring them.

And although kindly asked four times by two people, you have yet shared your thoughts on Lincoln's "Meditation on the Divine Will," privately written in 1862. I try again and if no reply comes conclude that you are unable to contradict/disacknowledge this strong indication that Abraham Lincoln, in whatever God he referred to, was unlikely an atheist at this point in his life.
http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussio...age-7.html

To makes it easier for you, here it goes again:
John Hay wrote, "It is a paper which Mr. Lincoln wrote in September, 1862, while his mind was burdened with the weightiest question of his life, "the weightiest with which this country has had to grapple. Wearied with all the considerations of law and of expediency with which he had been struggling for two years, he retired within himself and tried to bring some order into his thoughts by rising above the wrangling of men and parties, and pondering the relations of human government to the Divine. In this frame of mind, absolutely detached from any earthly considerations, he wrote this meditation. It has never been published. It was not written to be seen of men. It was penned in the awful sincerity of a perfectly honest soul trying to bring himself into closer communion with its Maker."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Washington, D.C.
September, 1862

The will of God prevails. In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong. God cannot be for and against the same thing at the same time. In the present civil war it is quite possible that God's purpose is something different from the purpose of either party -- and yet the human instrumentalities, working just as they do, are of the best adaptation to effect His purpose. I am almost ready to say that this is probably true -- that God wills this contest, and wills that it shall not end yet. By his mere great power, on the minds of the now contestants, He could have either saved or destroyed the Union without a human contest. Yet the contest began. And, having begun He could give the final victory to either side any day. Yet the contest proceeds.

Maharba - please share your thoughts on this. Thanks.

I don't know if there is any real meaning to it, but the earliest written words we have from Lincoln were scribbled in the margin of his school book. Lincoln was in his teens when he wrote:

"Abraham Lincoln, his hand and pen, he will be good but god knows When."

After Willi's death, Abraham Lincoln said:
"My poor boy, he was too good for this earth. God has called him home. I know that he is much better off in heaven, but then we loved him so. It is hard, hard to have him die!" (Elizabeth Keckley: "Behind the Scenes", pp. 101-104.)

He said this privaltely to Elizabeth Keckley, not in public, thus certainly not "for show".

Mahabra, why should he have said this as an atheist?

The pressure of a war has had a great effect on the aging process of all presidents,especially[in my opinion]-Lincoln,Wilson,and FDR!