Quote:I think the lady with spectacles is probably from the 1850's, when I think necklines on everyday (non-ball-gown) dresses were somewhat lower than in the 1860's.

You are correct, Susan. That image is more or less 1850s - love the watch-chain at her neck!

(08-05-2015, 05:50 PM)L Verge Wrote:

(08-05-2015, 03:36 PM)Jim Garrett Wrote: Hey Laurie:

If you need a home for Hooty, I will oblige.

Dave Taylor beat you with an offer. I will discuss his (Hooty's) future with my daughter and grandson, and Dave will get first dibs if they agree. Frankly, I can't imagine life without Hooty somewhere looking over me. But, he's hell to dust!

Dave - when you get Booty, please post a 21st-century remake (you and Hooty) of the photo you posted.

(08-05-2015, 07:33 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: Dave - when you get Booty, please post a 21st-century remake (you and Hooty) of the photo you posted.

Oh I've already got plenty of Booty, Eva.

(08-05-2015, 05:36 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: Which one, Gene?

Sad Miss Bunny
http://travislouieartworks.com/artworks/#jp-carousel-43

Thanks, Gene (sadly she became a victim of artwork and musing...)!

---

(08-05-2015, 07:40 PM)Dave Taylor Wrote:

(08-05-2015, 07:33 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: Dave - when you get Booty, please post a 21st-century remake (you and Hooty) of the photo you posted.

Oh I've already got plenty of Booty, Eva.

You're a hoot-y, Dave! : )

Many thanks to Gene for sending these links to Elizabeth Keckly photos (two of these were new to me anyway):

http://civilwartalk.com/attachments/keckley-jpg.50092/

http://civilwartalk.com/attachments/k1-jpg.50089/

http://civilwartalk.com/attachments/roof...jpg.50094/

Thanks to Blaine for sending this image to add to "Our Favorite Victorian Photographs." Blaine writes, "I have an uneasy feeling these are my ancestors."

(07-12-2016, 07:58 AM)RJNorton Wrote: Many thanks to Gene for sending these links to Elizabeth Keckly photos (two of these were new to me anyway):

http://civilwartalk.com/attachments/keckley-jpg.50092/

http://civilwartalk.com/attachments/k1-jpg.50089/

http://civilwartalk.com/attachments/roof...jpg.50094/

Our former librarian at Surratt House is quite knowledgeable on Elizabeth Keckly, and we have been amazed at how many supposed photos of the lady keep popping up in the past decade or so. The first one here was new to me. The other two are supposedly in a private collection. I can't remember the name of the collector, however.

Thanks for posting Roger, I don't know about the authenticity of the photo's for Mrs. Keckley, so I hope some one will be able to verify if they are, or are not of her.
I discussed with Roger, we both have our doubts.

Great photo Blaine

Here's another to brood about (could it be a painting?):
http://ourhairourskin.com/?p=461

(07-12-2016, 06:08 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: Here's another to brood about (could it be a painting?):
http://ourhairourskin.com/?p=461

Could be a painting, but very doubtful that it is Mrs. Keckly. I doubt that the other three posted on this thread are Elizabeth either. I'll try to find time to search for ones that have been better verified.

When the Surratt Society raised the funds to mark her grave, renowned Lincoln scholar, Thomas Schwartz, sent us a photo of Mrs. Keckly in later years for us to use on the dedication program. I just have to find it in our computer files again.

---

The computer refuses to let me transfer some photos of Mrs. Keckly to this forum, but if you go to the Wiki bio of the lady and an article on her from the Smithsonian magazine (obtained by googling Photos of Elizabeth Keckly), you will see a photo that was obviously taken at the same time as the one that Tom Schwartz sent to the Surratt project. Dr. Schwartz's pose, however, is more of a profile.

There is also an earlier photo of the lady that has all the younger features of the aforementioned photos above. Go to http://blackpast.org/aah/keckley-elizabe...-1818-1907 You will definitely see that others posted here do not have the same resemblance to these verified ones.

(08-04-2015, 03:27 PM)RJNorton Wrote: Great photo. Dave, I think that is Abbott H. Thayer.

Thayer is in Wikipedia.

Thanks Roger for sharing the link to the Archives of American Art. They have the Jervis McEntee Diaries online. Some of the diary entries mentions Edwin Booth.

Great site!

Thanks, Carolyn!

(07-12-2016, 08:05 PM)L Verge Wrote: When the Surratt Society raised the funds to mark her grave, renowned Lincoln scholar, Thomas Schwartz, sent us a photo of Mrs. Keckly in later years for us to use on the dedication program. I just have to find it in our computer files again.

Laurie, here is the program cover:

(07-12-2016, 08:05 PM)L Verge Wrote:

(07-12-2016, 06:08 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote: Here's another to brood about (could it be a painting?):
http://ourhairourskin.com/?p=461

Could be a painting, but very doubtful that it is Mrs. Keckly. I doubt that the other three posted on this thread are Elizabeth either. I'll try to find time to search for ones that have been better verified.

When the Surratt Society raised the funds to mark her grave, renowned Lincoln scholar, Thomas Schwartz, sent us a photo of Mrs. Keckly in later years for us to use on the dedication program. I just have to find it in our computer files again.

---

The computer refuses to let me transfer some photos of Mrs. Keckly to this forum, but if you go to the Wiki bio of the lady and an article on her from the Smithsonian magazine (obtained by googling Photos of Elizabeth Keckly), you will see a photo that was obviously taken at the same time as the one that Tom Schwartz sent to the Surratt project. Dr. Schwartz's pose, however, is more of a profile.

There is also an earlier photo of the lady that has all the younger features of the aforementioned photos above. Go to http://blackpast.org/aah/keckley-elizabe...-1818-1907 You will definitely see that others posted here do not have the same resemblance to these verified ones.

If it's a photo and supposed to be her - she looks very young. Until the age of 30 she was a slave - how likely is it in those days photos were taken of slaves? (A painting could, of course have been painted later from imagination, it's just strange and makes it suspicious IMO that such items remain such "secrets". If authentic they would probably have long been known of in "public".)