Jump to content

An Even Newer Proposed Daguerreotype Of Joseph


jmhughes

Recommended Posts

As I've been reading this thread, I found it funny how long it took before someone actually linked to the original web site and story. I am the one who discovered the daguerreotype seven years ago. I am the one who broke the story last October. I am the one who tracked it down. I am the one who posted a scan of it two days ago. Just visit the page quoted above to be alerted of new updates on this story and to get the information directly from the horse's mouth.

LDS Anarchist

I apologize, I should have given you credit along with LDSTempleStudy.com since I'm the OP. Please forgive me, I'll do a better job next time. I just saw it on LDSTempleStudy first and didn't follow it through as I should have. :P

Link to comment

I, for one, would like to be the first to denounce this find as not being Joseph Smith.

The countenance is insufficiently venal, nor does it convey the proper level of sinister craftiness.

The Jupiter talisman, seer stone, and pepper box pistol are no where to be seen. Nor is the individual displaying the proper Masonic signs and tokens.

Unless the horns and fangs have been cleverly photoshopped out, this photo simply cannot be the Joseph Smith our critics have come to know and love.

Link to comment

I apologize, I should have given you credit along with LDSTempleStudy.com since I'm the OP. Please forgive me, I'll do a better job next time. I just saw it on LDSTempleStudy first and didn't follow it through as I should have. :P

You're dead.

I, for one, would like to be the first to denounce this find as not being Joseph Smith.

The countenance is insufficiently venal, nor does it convey the proper level of sinister craftiness.

The Jupiter talisman, seer stone, and pepper box pistol are know where to be seen. Nor is the individual displaying the proper Masonic signs and tokens.

Unless the horns and fangs have been cleverly photoshopped out, this photo simply cannot be the Joseph Smith our critics have come to know and despise.

;)

Link to comment

As I've been reading this thread, I found it funny how long it took before someone actually linked to the original web site and story. I am the one who discovered the daguerreotype seven years ago. I am the one who broke the story last October. I am the one who tracked it down. I am the one who posted a scan of it two days ago. Just visit the page quoted above to be alerted of new updates on this story and to get the information directly from the horse's mouth.

LDS Anarchist

Uncle Dale must have been pretty quick on his feet to get his Joseph Smith pic page updated that fast. Good find, and congratulations on being humble. :P

Link to comment

I apologize, I should have given you credit along with LDSTempleStudy.com since I'm the OP. Please forgive me, I'll do a better job next time. I just saw it on LDSTempleStudy first and didn't follow it through as I should have. :P

No need to apologize. I suspect that Bryce (I think that's his name) at LDSTempleStudy didn't want to mention that horrid word anarchy when referring to my site, so he just called me "the finder" in his link. Later, he even abbreviated my name to LDSA, again, avoiding any mention of anarchy. I appreciate his article, but I think it's funny how he (unconsciously, perhaps?) avoided that word at all cost. If I didn't know where the original source was myself, upon reading his article I would have missed it, too.

Link to comment

Uncle Dale must have been pretty quick on his feet to get his Joseph Smith pic page updated that fast. Good find, and congratulations on being humble. :P

Yeah, he was quick, alright!

Yeah, I wasn't sure how to say that with humility, but I wanted to say it anyway because the museum said they were going to send me the color image next week and there might be other updates that occur (which I'll post on the blog) that might be missed if you go through secondary sources.

Also, if anyone here does any scientific analization of that daguerreotype, be sure to enter the blog and post a link to it in the comments section so that people visiting can get access to it, too.

Thanks for the encouragement, too. (To everyone.) So far the scholarly folks won't give an opinion, not even an off the record opinion, and they give me the impression I should have just ignored the image when I saw it seven years ago! I guess I'm causing too much anarchy with this image, as it is not the proper way to approach historical documents, which of course makes me feel good, as I am an anarchist, after all...

Link to comment

Yeah, he was quick, alright!

Yeah, I wasn't sure how to say that with humility, but I wanted to say it anyway because the museum said they were going to send me the color image next week and there might be other updates that occur (which I'll post on the blog) that might be missed if you go through secondary sources.

[â?¦]

I was just razzinâ?? you. Iâ??m the same way (and I havenâ??t even ever found something potentially important). Credit needs to be given where credit is due. I will be sure to check back. I originally ran into it on Runtu/John Wâ??s blog. Interesting stuff.

Good luck LDS Anarchist :P Conventionalist.

Link to comment

As I've been reading this thread, I found it funny how long it took before someone actually linked to the original web site and story. I am the one who discovered the daguerreotype seven years ago. I am the one who broke the story last October. I am the one who tracked it down. I am the one who posted a scan of it two days ago. Just visit the page quoted above to be alerted of new updates on this story and to get the information directly from the horse's mouth.

LDS Anarchist

Sometimes it takes a while for the posters here to find the links--but we usually get around to them eventually.

No doubt, we'd all be interested in following your progress with the Museum and I hope you will keep us updated.

Link to comment

Yeah, he was quick, alright!

...

Sthumb12a.jpg

Then again, this does not appear to be the pic that

Elder Rand Packer obtained from the Nauvoo area.

So, perhaps still another prophetic countenance is "in the works."

I think I'll have to retire to a secluded grove, and pray to know

which of all of these Josephs is true.

UD

Link to comment

Sthumb12a.jpg

Then again, this does not appear to be the pic that

Elder Rand Packer obtained from the Nauvoo area.

So, perhaps still another prophetic countenance is "in the works."

I think I'll have to retire to a secluded grove, and pray to know

which of all of these Josephs is true.

UD

:P

Unc, do you have a copy of the one you mention--the one Elder Rand Packer has? I looked on your site at the pics. and didn't see it. I'm wondering what it looks like.

Link to comment

:P

Unc, do you have a copy of the one you mention--the one Elder Rand Packer has? I looked on your site at the pics. and didn't see it. I'm wondering what it looks like.

There are some conflicting intellectual property rights yet to be worked out...

Stay tuned...

UD

Link to comment

At the risk of being redundant, let me add that one way of approaching this problem is to have a specialist in period clothing, etc., examine the dress of this person to see whether the garb fits the time and place of Joseph. To the non-specialist it may look good, but to the specialist...? That's what I would like to know.

Link to comment

Sthumb12a.jpg

Then again, this does not appear to be the pic that

Elder Rand Packer obtained from the Nauvoo area.

So, perhaps still another prophetic countenance is "in the works."

I think I'll have to retire to a secluded grove, and pray to know

which of all of these Josephs is true.

UD

I find it quite astounding that, to this day, no one really knows what Joseph Smith looked like. The wide variation in renderings of his image are, to me, a fascinating commentary on the man -- as though no one saw him quite the same as the next guy. Several contemporary paintings were done -- all of them with significant differences one from another. And now these three different (four different?) alleged daguerreotypes -- no one of them quite like the other.

It just adds to the mystery of the man, of whom he himself said, "no man knows my history."

And, it would seem, no one will ever know just what he looked like . . .

Link to comment

I find it quite astounding that, to this day, no one really knows what Joseph Smith looked like. The wide variation in renderings of his image are, to me, a fascinating commentary on the man -- as though no one saw him quite the same as the next guy. Several contemporary paintings were done -- all of them with significant differences one from another. And now these three different (four different?) alleged daguerreotypes -- no one of them quite like the other.

It just adds to the mystery of the man, of whom he himself said, "no man knows my history."

And, it would seem, no one will ever know just what he looked like . . .

He probably looked pretty much like his death masque image:

http://www.olivercowdery.com/smithhome/1886WWyl.htm#front

UD

Link to comment

Sthumb12a.jpg

Then again, this does not appear to be the pic that

Elder Rand Packer obtained from the Nauvoo area.

So, perhaps still another prophetic countenance is "in the works."

I think I'll have to retire to a secluded grove, and pray to know

which of all of these Josephs is true.

UD

LOL either you are increasing in your humorous skill, or I am just getting soft.

Link to comment

LOL either you are increasing in your humorous skill, or I am just getting soft.

Just testin' you, pilgrim.

Yer Unk

Link to comment

The daguerreotypes that has always seems correct to me is the one Wikipedia uses.

Is it not still in the list of possiblities?

Richard

A photograph of a portrait painting.

A similar photo once existed of the companion Emma portrait, I believe.

UD

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...