Seed Pearl Necklace and Bracelets

[RJNorton]

I have retrieved many of the posts that were deleted. The thread that was deleted was entitled 19th Century Fashion.

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

Susan responded to Donna's initial post in the thread as follows:

The problem in not knowing anything about 19th-century fashion is that at least a working knowledge of fashion is crucial in dating 19th-century photographs, which more often than not aren't accompanied by identifying information. So it's not particularly wise to boast about your lack of knowledge in this respect, at least if you're trying to prove that a photograph was taken on a particular date.

Since you claim that the photograph is of the Lincolns, what evidence do you have to that effect? Have you or your friend had it appraised by a dealer in photographs, who could look at the format, the matte, and the case as clues to dating it? Have you compared it to known photographs of the Lincolns from 1861? Have you or your friend taken it to an auction house or to an institution like the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library in Springfield for authentication? Don't you think that these institutions would be delighted to know of such a find? I've encountered several people who have the strange notion that the Lincoln community is determined to suppress newly discovered photographs of Lincoln, when the real problem is that the photographs just aren't of Lincoln.

As for the issue of the seed pearls, which really has nothing to do with the photograph, Mary was in New York twice in early 1861 before the inauguration, once by herself and once with Lincoln. It's quite possible that on either occasion she might have stopped by Tiffany's and ordered something for herself as a gift from Lincoln; alternatively, she might have ordered them sometime after the inauguration. Neither she nor Lincoln were in New York on April 28, 1862, however, but given Mary's habit of buying on credit, it's quite possible that the set was ordered prior to April 28 and paid for on that date.

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

I then posted:

The LOC page makes no sense to me. It says:

"Notes - The jewelry came to the Library in 1937 as part of the gift from Lincoln's granddaughter, Mary Lincoln Isham - Tiffany records indicate that President Abraham Lincoln purchased the items on April 28, 1862 in Manhattan. "The pearl necklace sold for $180 and the two bracelets for $350., and that on January 24, 1863, we sold two bracelets to order for $350. - Mary Todd Lincoln wore the jewelry to the first Lincoln inaugural ball."

Both dates given are well after the first inaugural ball, so what jewelry are they talking about? This makes no sense to me...

https://www.loc.gov/item/scsm001298/

Donna, you might be interested in Donna McCreary's book here:

https://www.amazon.com/Fashionable-First...a+McCreary

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

Laurie posted:


Whoever wrote the provenance on the jewelry (whether a family member or a curator) for the LOC must have been a bit disoriented that day. One comment: Willie Lincoln died on February 20, 1862. I doubt seriously that either the President or Mrs. Lincoln was doing any buying of jewelry in NYC just two months later -- no matter how hard they were trying to escape depression.

Mrs. Lincoln visited NYC in December of 1860. I'm betting that she purchased the jewelry on credit at that time. Merchants were very happy, throughout the Lincoln years in the White House, to shower the First Lady with items on credit. That's what led to all the problems financially.

"Since you claim that the photograph is of the Lincolns, what evidence do you have to that effect? Have you or your friend had it appraised by a dealer in photographs, who could look at the format, the matte, and the case as clues to dating it? Have you compared it to known photographs of the Lincolns from 1861? Have you or your friend taken it to an auction house or to an institution like the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library in Springfield for authentication? Don't you think that these institutions would be delighted to know of such a find? I've encountered several people who have the strange notion that the Lincoln community is determined to suppress newly discovered photographs of Lincoln, when the real problem is that the photographs just aren't of Lincoln."

Thank you, Susan, for succinctly listing the things that need to be done/proved in order to reach a solid conclusion as to the authenticity of this particular photo. Most of us have tried to impress this upon the owner/defender in previous posts, but you have stated the general rules of gaining acceptance of one's theories or research. It appears to me that knowledgeable people have been approached and have given logical answers as to why they do not consider it to be a Lincoln photograph. Those who possess the item just don't want to accept the fact that it is very likely not what they want it to be.

As for period dress being questioned: I spent 25 years living in my great-grandparents' house that still had vintage clothing hanging in closets and stored in wardrobes and chests (dating to the 1860s and up). I have also worked at Surratt House for 43 years with authentically reproduced garments worn every day by our tour guides. We also have a research center onsite with several shelves devoted to 19th-century clothing styles and culture in general.

As a result of this, I have become even more familiar with the styles of Mary Lincoln's time. I can only say that I agree with the assessments of the garb, hairstyle, etc. made here by recognized experts in the field and agree that it works against the theory that the photo shows Mary Lincoln.

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

Laurie then posted:

Go here https://blogs.loc.gov/loc/2016/12/rare-i...treasures/ then scroll down to the 4th reader's comment in which the post seems to indicate that Lincoln bought the jewelry for Mary's birthday on December 13, 1860, assuring that she would be adorned in finery for the inaugural ball -- or Mary gave herself a birthday gift when visiting NYC in December 1860...

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

Eva posted:

Didn't we try to figure the Tiffany records issue (and that A. Lincoln evidently was in DC on that day) on another thread and conclude it might have been the date the bill was finally paid (belated)?

Since Gene just provided another example - obviously all 19th century photos depicting persons with the similar hairdo/beard as Mrs. /Mr. Lincoln even if little or zero other resemblance than that can per se be declared to depict the Lincolns and are in dubio pro reo to be acknowledged as such without any evidence to support the claim unless evidence has been provided that they are not. Weird.

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

Susan posted:

To say the least.

I emailed Tiffany's press office to see if the staff there could provide any other information as to the date the set was purchased. Not being a member of the press, I don't know if I'll hear back, but I figured it was worth a try.

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