File talk:USCapitol1877.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Date of photograph[edit]
@Stilltim, Kelly, Clindberg, and Ankax Hayastan: Every indication from [1], [2], [3], and [4] is that this was taken on March 4, 1869. The URL cited in the edit summary as indicating a date of 1877 appears to no longer exist, and the conclusion appears to be original research anyway. Can someone please present the evidence to support this change, if it exists? —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 05:15, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
- Look at the decorations (flags etc.) on the photos at https://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/inaugurations/hayes/index.html and compare from this one. Yes, the LoC says this is 1869, but it does not match other photos of 1869 and it does match photos of 1877. A photo of the 1869 inaugural is here; there are decorations hung on top of the flags and fewer rows of stars are visible -- as opposed to the 1877 photos. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:29, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
- OK, I agree with your assessment that [5] and [6] show the same event, based on the identical placement of the flags. I think somebody at the Library of Congress should reanalyze these photographs, and others in the collection, to identify which event they actually depict. (It seems the misidentification flows through most mentions and uses of the photograph.) @Dominic: Might you be able to help us out in this matter? —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 23:50, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
- File:Inauguration of President Grant - NARA - 528934.jpg is a photo of the 1869 inauguration -- Grant is actually recognizable, speaking with a sheet of paper in his hands. Salmon Chase (who died in 1873) is behind him. That obviously can't have been 1877. I think I based the date of 1869 there on File:GrantInauguration1869HarpersWeekly.jpg, which was positively of the 1869 inauguration, and the drawing of the flag decorations matches that photo. Photos of 1873 seem harder to find -- apparently the temperature never got above 20 F and the winds were 20mph all day -- may not have been conducive to photographs. But, that would also have been Grant being inaugurated by Chase. The decorations changed a bit every year though, so it would be a bit surprising to see identical decorations in 1873. And indeed, this drawing of the 1873 inauguration does depict different decorations. So, I'm pretty sure the photo linked above was 1869, and this photo does not match the 1873 drawing either, so pretty sure this is 1877. Additionally, some of the details match this Harper's Weekly drawing of the 1877 inauguration. Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:15, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- I agree with your assessments (though the 1877 Harper's Weekly drawing seems to have taken some artistic license, despite its caption referring to a Brady photograph being used as a source). So how many photos do we have misidentified? Two? 00650932 is 1869, not 1873, and 96506818 is 1877, not 1869? —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 18:54, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- File:Inauguration of President Grant - NARA - 528934.jpg is a photo of the 1869 inauguration -- Grant is actually recognizable, speaking with a sheet of paper in his hands. Salmon Chase (who died in 1873) is behind him. That obviously can't have been 1877. I think I based the date of 1869 there on File:GrantInauguration1869HarpersWeekly.jpg, which was positively of the 1869 inauguration, and the drawing of the flag decorations matches that photo. Photos of 1873 seem harder to find -- apparently the temperature never got above 20 F and the winds were 20mph all day -- may not have been conducive to photographs. But, that would also have been Grant being inaugurated by Chase. The decorations changed a bit every year though, so it would be a bit surprising to see identical decorations in 1873. And indeed, this drawing of the 1873 inauguration does depict different decorations. So, I'm pretty sure the photo linked above was 1869, and this photo does not match the 1873 drawing either, so pretty sure this is 1877. Additionally, some of the details match this Harper's Weekly drawing of the 1877 inauguration. Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:15, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Some artistic license for sure, but some of the details of the drapes and flag in the background do match -- little details like that seem to cement the dates. I was not aware of 00650932 -- our version is from NARA, not LoC, which didn't guess at a date -- but yes, that appears incorrect as well. No way an 1869 Harper's Weekly could have drawn the decorations that accurately for something which occurred four years later ;-) 96506818 is already marked as 1877, which seems correct -- does match the Harper's Weekly drawing. It is http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/brh2003004958/PP/ which is marked 1869 but is actually 1877 (based on that previous photo, and the Harper's drawing). Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Ah, yes, I got my links mixed up. I meant 00650931 is 1877, not 1869. (This is a print of the negative you linked to, which is also available here.) I'll submit corrections via the LOC website and see what they have to say. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 05:28, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
- Some artistic license for sure, but some of the details of the drapes and flag in the background do match -- little details like that seem to cement the dates. I was not aware of 00650932 -- our version is from NARA, not LoC, which didn't guess at a date -- but yes, that appears incorrect as well. No way an 1869 Harper's Weekly could have drawn the decorations that accurately for something which occurred four years later ;-) 96506818 is already marked as 1877, which seems correct -- does match the Harper's Weekly drawing. It is http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/brh2003004958/PP/ which is marked 1869 but is actually 1877 (based on that previous photo, and the Harper's drawing). Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Corrections[edit]
I got confirmation on January 4 that 00650932 was being corrected to report a date of 1869, rather than 1873, and that appears to have been completed (though they report the inaugural address was given March 20). I have not yet received a response to the correction I submitted for 00650931, which continues to report a date of 1869. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 04:17, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- Ah, great -- thanks for doing that. The March 20 is wrong obviously, although the "date created" on the same page has March 4. Hopefully they will fix the other one too, though that mistake has spread to more places so it may take them longer to fix. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:17, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
