Net54baseball.com Forums

Net54baseball.com Forums (http://www.net54baseball.com/index.php)
-   Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions (http://www.net54baseball.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Circa 1846 Daguerreotype – Alexander Joy Cartwright debate (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=142624)

bmarlowe1 10-20-2011 12:11 PM

Corey - I do appreciate your skillfully raised sincere arguments and the challenge they bring to me in answering them.

>>> As to perceived differences in wrinkles at the corner of the eye, that is precisely the sort of thing touch up and/or placement of lighting would conceal in the half plate.

Your are partly misinterpreting me on this one. Even if that is AJC in the half-plate - he would be likely too young to have such wrinkles. What I am saying is that the AJC depicted in your dag repro (see botom p. 7, or ill. 4 p. 39) is not likely an 1840's image as you claimed because we can see wrinkles at the outer corner of his right eye (in spite of all the touch-up) - I believe that this is most probably at least a middle-aged or a bit older AJC.

oldjudge 10-20-2011 12:31 PM

"But that is exactly what we are dealing with here"--right. The odds are realllllllllllllllllly long that it is AC in the half plate and very high that it is not.

bmarlowe1 10-20-2011 06:12 PM

Here is another thought on provenance.

The heavily over-painted photo, below right, originating with the Cartwright family, was used by Corey in his response to me in the newsletter. For some reason that completely escapes me, Corey feels that this person resembles subject C in his dag. Except for a slightly similar hat shape, I really don't know what it is he sees. But, what is most interesting is that some members of the Cartwright family say that this colored image depicts Alexander Cartwright, while others disagree. How could that happen?

subject C:
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...jectCcm266.jpg http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...we1/Ill6cr.jpg

Note the two photos below, with the one on the right being subject E from Corey's dag. These two photos below that obviously depict two different human beings have been claimed by (different?) Cartwright family members to depict brother Alfred Cartwright. Is that surprising? I think not. In fact such things are very common.

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...righttrio1.jpg http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...cker6flash.jpg

Runscott 10-20-2011 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1 (Post 933277)
Note the two photos below, with the one on the right being subject E from Corey's dag. These two photos below that obviously depict two different human beings have been claimed by (different?) Cartwright family members to depict brother Alfred Cartwright. Is that surprising? I think not. In fact such things are very common.

The 20th century Cartwright family members who knew young Alfred so well?

benjulmag 10-20-2011 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1 (Post 933277)
Here is another thought on provenance.

The heavily over-painted photo, below right, originating with the Cartwright family, was used by Corey in his response to me in the newsletter. For some reason that completely escapes me, Corey feels that this person resembles subject C in his dag. Except for a slightly similar hat shape, I really don't know what it is he sees. But, what is most interesting is that some members of the Cartwright family say that this colored image depicts Alexander Cartwright, while others disagree. How could that happen?

subject C:
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...jectCcm266.jpg http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...we1/Ill6cr.jpg

Note the two photos below, with the one on the right being subject E from Corey's dag. These two photos below that obviously depict two different human beings have been claimed by (different?) Cartwright family members to depict brother Alfred Cartwright. Is that surprising? I think not. In fact such things are very common.

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...righttrio1.jpg http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...cker6flash.jpg

Mark,

I'm a little confused here. Are you saying that in the 1930's there was a split decision among Cartwright family members as to who was who? Or are you referring to family members 4 or 5 generations removed? If the latter, I feel that has little relevance to this discussion to the extent they are at variance with what descendants 3 generations removed from them were saying. Finally, do you refer at all to identifications made by Anne Cartwright, deceased widow of AJC's great grandson William? I had spoken to Mrs. Cartwright a number of times, thought her to be a fine woman, and am aware of many of the statements she made (which covered a great many things). If you want more information about Mrs. Cartwright and what she said, I would be happy to discuss this with you off line.

I also think something I said earlier bears repeating. One can always come up with a hypothetical to make a point. Very little if anything in the world is black and white, and there will always be counter arguments. But I believe it is the far more likely scenario that the Cartwright family knew precisely what it was doing in the 1930's when, for this family-defining moment they had labored many years to arrive at, they identified AJC in the half plate. Could they have erred? Yes. But I believe that possibility to be the far less plausible possibility.

EDITED TO ADD that regardless of one's view of the probative value of what modern Cartwright family members are saying about AJC's sibbling(s), to the best of my knowledge there is no record of any Cartwright family member, now or in the past, ever challenging the half plate identification.

Runscott 10-20-2011 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1 (Post 933277)
Here is another thought on provenance.

The heavily over-painted photo, below right, originating with the Cartwright family, ......
.....what is most interesting is that some members of the Cartwright family say that this colored image depicts Alexander Cartwright, while others disagree. How could that happen?

This resemblance is sort of hard to ignore. Perhaps you've found the photo they used to paint up fireman #2.

http://runscott.homestead.com/Photos/Alfreds_Chin.jpg

bmarlowe1 10-20-2011 07:43 PM

My information on the family disagreement with respect to the colored image came from you. I was told by another source that Anne Cartwright ID'd the man with the beard as Alfred (if that is wrong I stand corrected). I was also informed that author Jay Martin ID'd subject E as Alfred based on modern family information. And, I intend no disrespect towards Anne Cartwright or any Cartwright family member whom I can only presume said what they thought to be true.

>>>the Cartwright family knew precisely what it was doing in the 1930's....

As far as what happened in the 1930's, I can only find a record of Bruce Jr. claiming subject C was Cartwright. There is no record of this being a "family decision." (If there is please inform me). I don't know of any other family member who was theoretically in a better position to know and I can't imagine any family member publicly disputing it regardless of what they may have thought.

smokelessjoe 10-21-2011 06:47 AM

Anthony & Co
 
6 Attachment(s)
I am sure all of these have been seen... But I thought I would post them for whatever it is worth... Wilcox was a Vice President of the company.

bmarlowe1 11-18-2011 10:05 AM

FYI - there is a mis-ID in the photo of the 3 older gentlemen just above. They are L to R, Edward Anthony, V. M. Wilcox, Henry T. Anthony. Hence, the man in the Civil War uniform is Wilcox, not Anthony.

I've received some interesting commentary about all of this. This link was emailed to me today:

http://whitebetsy.wordpress.com/

smokelessjoe 11-21-2011 07:14 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Hi Mark,

You are correct, I was wondering if anyone was going to bring up the misidentifications of Anthony & Wilcox....

It seems it was even noticed back in 1881. Please see the attached article from the Philadelphia Photographer January 1881!


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:32 AM.