Seed Pearl Necklace and Bracelets

[Donna]

I’m sorry about any confusion caused by deleting the 19th century fashion thread. As I explained to Roger, had there been significantly more than the 5 replies, I would have left it alone, but after the replies stopped, I felt it was more appropriate to continue the continuity with the seed pearl thread, and the only way to accomplish this was to delete it and then re-post it. Fortunately, Roger re-posted the entire thread. Again, Thank You, Roger.
As far as some underlying conspiratorial angle to rid this thread of unwanted responses,.....are you serious??? Really??? I sincerely hope each and every response posted to date, along with any others that may be forthcoming, are preserved for perpetuity. To any objective, reasonable observer the evolution of this thread is very illuminating, and clearly illustrates.............well, we’ll leave that to the observer.
In response to those of you (everybody) who seem to think that being asked to provide a concise, factual, delineated argument to back up your beliefs is somehow unwarranted or akin to being asked to ‘prove a negative’, I would point out that the owner of the daguerreotype has done exactly that. He states every known scar or identifying characteristic unique to Abraham and Mary Lincoln is present on both sitters, most of which are itemized on his website. Not ONE scar or identifying characteristic foreign to either Abe or Mary is present. THAT is the very definition of incontrovertible or unassailable evidence. Which is why, once again, there has never been a serious (as in concise, factual, delineated) challenge to the dag’s authenticity. “It doesn’t look like them” simply isn’t good enough. And if they are indeed just a couple of imposters who ever so vaguely resemble Abe and Mary Lincoln as Gene alluded to, I would think that it would be a relatively simple task to rattle off what would certainly be a multitude of inconsistencies, given the distinctive identifying characteristics of Abraham Lincoln. Not to mention Mary.
So, Gene, Susan, Anita, Donna McCreary, Laurie, etc., if you think he just isn’t getting the response he’s looking for.....BINGO! Or, in millennial lingo.......DUH!
Incidentally, I would agree that the image isn’t a dead ringer for the few images that the public generally associates with Abraham Lincoln. The reason being that it’s a daguerreotype. A dag image is different than any other photographic image. Different than an ambrotype, a tintype, a carte-de-visite, albumen print, etc., and many experts in the field of photographica have argued that it is in fact the truest representation of reality ever produced. I would challenge anybody to find Abraham Lincoln in the circa 1846 - ‘48 dag of Abe currently housed in the Library of Congress. When the image was first brought to the public’s attention in McClure’s Magazine in 1896, there was severe push-back and skepticism not only by the public but also by the fledgling Lincoln community. As most of you know, it was only after Robert Lincoln repeatedly and vehemently vouched for its authenticity that it was finally accepted as the genuine article. If that dag were to surface today sans everything but the image in a gutta-percha case with no provenance whatsoever, there is zero likelihood that a single solitary soul would step forward and declare....That’s Abraham Lincoln!” Well......with the possible exception of Albert, who has an uncanny ability to ferret out dag images of mid-nineteenth century famous personages that have eluded all others. While it is true that appearance changes as one ages, 13 or 15 years does not a completely different visage make. Unless one is comparing an earlier dag image to an array of ambrotype and paper photo images.