Seed Pearl Necklace and Bracelets

[James]

(06-03-2019 09:50 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(06-02-2019 04:24 PM)James Wrote:  There are several colorful descriptions describing Abe's right side, a couple of which are highlighted in the Kunhardt's book I mentioned. Something to the effect that he teetered to one side like a sailor trying to find his sea legs. There are more descriptions that I've run across over the years that I can't recall at the moment but they are well documented, and coupled with the photographic record, leave little doubt about his right side being "compromised" for lack of a better term.

James - this morning I went through my copy of Dr. John Sotos' The Physical Lincoln. As far as I know, this is the most complete study of the physical Abraham Lincoln that has ever been published. I cannot find anything in the book where Dr. Sotos finds that Lincoln's right shoulder, arm, and hand were "compromised." I am 100% confident that if what you say were true Dr. Sotos would have spent time discussing it in his study.

I find this particularly interesting because Dr. Sotos believes Lincoln suffered from a rare genetic cancer syndrome called MEN2B (multiple endocrine neoplasia, type 2B). So he is especially looking for any weaknesses, irregularities, oddities, etc. in Lincoln's physique. Yet there is no mention of this right side weakness you indicate you have read about.

You say that you have run across "more descriptions" over the years - please do your best to post these "well documented" descriptions. I will look forward to reading your citations.

Roger - Is Dr. Sotos still alive? I have no knowledge of him or his work but I'm curious if he studied the entire photographic record of Abraham Lincoln in conjunction with the written materials he must have poured over to complete his analysis. I would be interested to hear any reasonable explanation for the rolled up papers and piece of whittled broomstick Abe is clutching in photos and plaster castings of his hands.
Since Dr. Sotos obviously was unable to actually examine Abraham Lincoln, he's reliant on hearsay (contemporary sources) to reach his conclusions. Lincoln was a beloved figure, and it's not unreasonable to assume that certain information was withheld in an effort to cast him in a reverential light. Franklin Delano Roosevelt comes to mind. How many American citizens were even aware that he was, for all practical purposes, bound to a wheelchair as the result of polio?
On the subject of the watch chain you mentioned earlier, there is a photo on page 270 of the Kunhardt's book ... Lincoln - An Illustrated Biography ... that show a watch chain. Not sure if it's the same one as depicted in the dag image, but it shows a similar effect as the one in question. Parts of the chain appear wider than other sections due to angles and lighting and possible distortion. The image on 270 is not a daguerreotype and less likely to be affected by distortion, and yet still shows some of the same effects as the other one.

---

(06-03-2019 08:31 AM)davg2000 Wrote:  

(06-03-2019 01:10 AM)James Wrote:  Dave - just my personal opinion, but anyone who conflates geocentric THEORIES and dwarf planets that no one can see ... with an unassailable truth shall hereby forfeit all rights and privileges for membership in the Common Sense Community.
Not to worry though, this in no way impacts the eligibility requirements for admittance into an antithetical entity known as the Lincoln Community.

James and Donna (and I'm beginning to think it might be only Donna)-- Bona fide Lincoln relics are in a special niche in history. A true Lincoln relic, once discovered, must be authenticated by an authority, or the owner must be able to establish a chain of ownership from the Lincolns to the present. If you can't cite the photograph's provenance (maybe you have, and I missed it), then you must rely on authority. Have you consulted Daniel Weinberg, at the Abraham Lincoln Book Shop? I've heard him speak--he's objective. How about Harold Holzer, who has made studies of Lincoln's image? Both of these people would tell you what they sincerely believe to be the truth. And if they agreed with you, their opinions would truly matter. Suppose they didn't agree with you--then what? If you have no clear provenance, then the only course left to you is public opinion. Write a book, and hope it is read.

I have been again to abeandmarydag.com and re-read the photograph's history--history and provenance aren't the same thing. Where is the dag's connection to Lincoln?

About the "Unassailable Truth"--If truth were unassailable, then none of us would have to think. The maddening fact is that the future often enough reveals that an idea once derided, is in fact so. Maybe you will just have to wait for the rest of us to see the truth.

When I responded to Donna some time ago, I mentioned that one main effect of sarcasm, which you employ in a way similar to Donna, is to undermine the user's credibility. You do your cause no favors. I understand that you are frustrated, and your long recent post does indicate that you are sincere. But I think that you are also wrong.

Dave - Mr. Weinberg was contacted right after the discovery of the daguerreotype. He (and Timothy Bakken) stated the couple were of equal height, that the gentleman was too neatly and nattily dressed to be Abraham Lincoln, even to the point of holding a "hanky" in his left hand. Objectivity is only one part of the equation. Rudimentary powers of observation and reasoning also have to be applied in authenticating a photograph.
Obviously, you're right about the sarcasm, but let's be honest; it cuts both ways. It's a contentious debate. Both sides are convinced they're right. That's why I'm attempting to allow the visual evidence to do the speaking. But at some point, people have to come to their senses. You folks are throwing everything in your arsenal at what you are convinced is a phony pane of glass. You're convinced that the next rock, the next bottle, the brick ...is going to break it. It's BULLETPROOF! You can't break it. It's the real deal. You're just going to have to deal with reality at some point. And that's not sarcasm, that's just the honest-to-god's truth.