|
Post by gabrielg2706 on Dec 27, 2012 20:29:06 GMT -5
need help, found this in itica, nebraska, from a woman who passed away, family used to own a corn seed factory, name can be provided if needed, the woman lived in the same era, we were asked to clean out her house and it was found in a drawer, she seems to have collected many old photos and lots of calendar art, and old religous photos, and newspaper articles, is the signiture authentic? we are currently debating it because if the signiture is real then how could it be a 1267-lithograph from 1929, made in the usa? also, on the back it says no. 12 in the famous american series, made by forbes litho co. clueless on item, is in beautiful condition Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by akhummingbird on Dec 28, 2012 2:41:54 GMT -5
I am not an authority, and will let other comment, but my opinion, it could be a reproduction of an original signature. My family owns an original Sitting Bull signature in a personal autograph book, and also a photograph of Sitting Bull by Palmquist - and at the bottom it looks like an original signature...and for years my Dad thought it was an original autograph, but I have since seen the exact same photo with the exact same signature for sale at various auction sites, which leads me to believe that when the photo was reproduced they also copied an original signature with it. Anyway, it is the same handwriting as Sitting Bull's, but probably just a reproduction and not an original autograph. Thank you for sharing. Barbara
|
|
|
Post by gregor on Dec 28, 2012 4:36:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by akhummingbird on Dec 30, 2012 0:38:36 GMT -5
Not all original Sitting Bull autographs have the little bird. My family has an autograph book of Annie Galpin Kennedy (Eagle Woman That All Look At/Matilda Picotte Galpin's youngest daughter). It has Sitting Bull's original signature with no dot/bird over the i and no t crossed. There is no date on that page, but the next page is signed by James McLaughlin Standing Rock Agency D.T. Feb 24 1882
|
|
|
Post by gregor on Dec 30, 2012 12:39:50 GMT -5
Oops, it seems Beethoven wasn't the only one to leave an 'Unfinished' work. Happy New Year to everybody! Gregor
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on May 9, 2013 14:38:24 GMT -5
I'm a (silent) member of the Plains Indian Seminar II group and the inestimable Mike Cowdrey posted the best yet view of the photo by George Anderton purporting to be of Sitting Bull at Fort Walsh in 1878. Hope he doesn't mind me re-posting his edit. Cowdrey sees Sitting Bull at the right of the flagpole and the Blackfeet leader, Crowfoot, at the left. I have to admit, this close, it does seem like him. I wonder what the specific occasion was, Both leaders - and a couple of the other men - seem to be wearing the same kind of hat, as if it had just been doled out to mark the occasion. Many of the men are hiding behind their blankets. I don't see Walsh there. In the photos I'm familiar with, he sports a natty goatee or a bushy moustache that would've done Joseph Stalin proud. Unless he's the shorter man with the braidwork on his jacket, The man to the left is possibly James Macleod, when compared to this photograph. The close up reveals some of the men I originally thought to be Indians are likely Metis types - the man in the capote and hat to the (our) right of Sitting Bull and the mounted man directly behind him. If it is Sitting Bull (and I see less of a resemblance to Crowfoot), I think this is the first Anderton photo I've seen, apart from the one of Long Dog, that shows the Lakota at Fort Walsh; others I've seen labelled 'Sioux' seem to be Cree or Blackfeet people.
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on May 12, 2013 6:39:23 GMT -5
For comparison - although these photos of Crowfoot were taken about eight years later than the 1878 date given to the Anderton photo.
|
|
|
Post by kingsleybray on May 13, 2013 4:03:49 GMT -5
I've tried, but I can't see the resemblances to either Sitting Bull or Crowfoot!
|
|
|
Post by carlo on May 13, 2013 4:58:45 GMT -5
I also do not see Sitting Bull in this picture, both men seem to have a much more elongated face that Sitting Bull had.
I actually do see more of a resemblance of the man on the right to Crowfoot, based on the prominent right (his left) cheekbone.
Great picture btw!
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on May 13, 2013 6:22:29 GMT -5
I don't think the man at the left looks anything like Crowfoot; perhaps the man on the right, a little bit more - bearing in mind the seven year difference - but still not close enough. The dress and hairstyle of several of the other men (the two mounted men to the left of the pole, for instance - doesn't immediately strike me as Lakota either.
Like I said earlier in the thread, wouldn't the first image of the man who wiped out Custer have been so valuable that it would have appeared in newspapers soon after it was taken?
Either way, it's a great image.
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on May 16, 2013 10:22:52 GMT -5
And again - portrait photos from 1881 and ca. 1885:
|
|
|
Post by kingsleybray on May 16, 2013 13:52:17 GMT -5
it's not like me to be negative, but I can't see the slightest resemblance to either Sitting Bull or Crowfoot!
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on May 16, 2013 14:24:59 GMT -5
I agree. I can see no resemblance to Crowfoot and the man 'identified' as Sitting Bull seems to have too angular a face.
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on Mar 6, 2014 11:38:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by grahamew on Mar 6, 2014 11:42:18 GMT -5
Last Conference of Jean Legare and Sitting Bull, 1881. I saw this photo at Fort Walsh a few years ago and I didn't think Sitting Bull was on it - and I feel the same way now; in fact, I'm not sure there are any Indians on it all.
|
|