pictures of lizzie......

This the place to have frank, but cordial, discussions of the Lizzie Borden case

Moderator: Adminlizzieborden

User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 4457
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by twinsrwe »

First of all, I want to comment on the alleged portrait of Emma Borden that MB posted. I find the seller’s description of the painting interesting. Here is what the deller stated (Highlighting and underline are mine.):

Antique American Folk Art Painting:
Portrait of Emma BORDEN !

* In August / 04 / 1892, Abby Borden and Andrew Borden were murdered in
their home on 92nd street,Fall River, Mass.
They had 2 daughters: Emma BORDEN & Lizzie BORDEN;
Lizzie was double murder suspect.
Its still mystery, who murdered Abby & Andrew BORDEN...

* I bought this painting from an local Auction in NC.
Painting was coming from Alabama, an Antique Shop, which was closed...
They sold it as "Lizzie BORDEN's Mother's portrait"
(they said, there was an old tag on painting described it so.)

* After i bought it, i made some research,
because i didn't know anything about Borden family...
I realized that, women in painting, looks like / could be Emma Borden.
Somehow, she was like Mother to Lizzie...

* Emma Lenora BORDEN (1851 - 1927)...was born in Fall River, Massachusetts.

* Painting came from Alabama, an Antique dealer's estate.

* Period frame.

* I couldn't find artist, i don't have proper resources to find it...

* CONDITION: It has 2 patches on the back, lower part of canvas.
Patches and retouching barely noticeable from front, because of dark paint.
As i see, face is untouched.
Frame has chips and paint has cracks...

* As is.

PLEASE SEE PHOTOS FOR DETAILS AND CONDITION !

* Dimensions, Approx.: ... Canvas: ... 30" H x 24" W
Frame: ... 38" H x 32" W

PLEASE SEE PHOTOS FOR DETAILS AND CONDITION !

* No partial refunds, I accept returns. Buyer pays return shipping.

THANK YOU FOR VISITING !


The sentence of They sold it as "Lizzie BORDEN's Mother's portrait" :

I assume they are referring to Sarah Borden, but just for the heck of it, I will post a picture of both Sarah and Abby.
Sarah.png
Emma 1.png
Abby.png
Granted we are comparing a painting to photos, which may or may not throw off our conclusions, but I don’t believe they will be very far off. Personally, I do not see a resemblance of the woman in the portrait to either Sarah or Abby; the eyes, eyebrows, chin line and lips say it all!

Here is the picture of Emma that the seller used to compare the woman in the portrait with her.
Emma 2.png
Emma 1.png
The eyebrows appear to be a closer match, but the eyes, nose, chin line, and particularly the lips are very different.

The frame is not a period frame; Victorian Era frames were very ornate, unlike the plain one shown.

My conclusion: That painting is not of Emma Borden.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by twinsrwe on Wed Jul 05, 2017 6:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
In remembrance of my beloved son:
"Vaya Con Dios" (Spanish for: "Go with God"), by Anne Murray ( https://tinyurl.com/y8nvqqx9 )
“God has you in heaven, but I have you in my heart.” ~ TobyMac (https://tinyurl.com/rakc5nd )
User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 4457
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by twinsrwe »

Regarding this photo:
28828510_121807915137.jpg
Interested, I agree with you. I have thought for a long time that Sarah and Abby greatly resembled each other. However, I did a bit of research and found that this photo was added to the find-a-grave web page for Sarah Anthony Morse Borden, by Frances Earp Meyer. If you go into the photos section, and click on the photo, you will find the following information (Underlining is mine.):

Sarah Anthony Morse was the first wife of Andrew Jackson Borden and the mother of Emma Lenora, Alice Esther, and Lizzie Andrew.
I would say this was taken at the time of her marriage.


Source: http://tinyurl.com/y76gew2z

Source: Sarah Anthony Morse Borden: http://tinyurl.com/y6w75qh2

I recall that we had a forum discussion regarding the portraits of Andrew and Sarah Borden that were taken when they were young. So, I did a forum search and found the thread I remembered. :smile: A huge THANKS goes to mbhenty, for the information and pictures he provided us with in the thread titled, Lizzie Borden Gothic Ballad. See if you don’t agree that the picture above was cropped from the portrait of Sarah Borden when she was young: http://tinyurl.com/yaxkjvgv

MB, you stated in the above thread that Stefani was the one who discovered the portrait of Andrew. Did she also discover the portrait of Abby? What is the name of the museum where the portraits were found, and how did they obtain them?

Frances Earp Meyer also added this photo (1 of the 3) of Sarah with baby Emma Lenora, to the find-a-grave web page for Sarah Anthony Morse Borden:
28828510_121807936649.jpg
Here is the statement she wrote regarding that photo (Underlining is mine.):

Sarah Morse Borden with eldest daughter, Emma Lenora. Taken about 1853 in Fall River, Massachusetts.

Source: http://tinyurl.com/ybw3q7a6

It’s unfortunate that the date was cut off; you can barely see it at the bottom of the photo. However, I agree that Emma appears to be about 2 years old in that photo. If the 1853 date is correct, then Sarah would be at least 7 years older than when she had her picture taken for the portrait.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by twinsrwe on Sun Jul 22, 2018 8:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
In remembrance of my beloved son:
"Vaya Con Dios" (Spanish for: "Go with God"), by Anne Murray ( https://tinyurl.com/y8nvqqx9 )
“God has you in heaven, but I have you in my heart.” ~ TobyMac (https://tinyurl.com/rakc5nd )
User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 4457
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by twinsrwe »

InterestedReader wrote:... Pinterest has this one - below, badly reproduced - as Emma. Is this a known one of Emma?

image.jpg
Yes, this is a known photo of Emma while she was attending the Wheaton Female Seminary. Here is the photo that reproduction was taken from:
emmayoungfix.jpg
Here is some information that you may find interesting: http://tinyurl.com/y95kdl7k
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
In remembrance of my beloved son:
"Vaya Con Dios" (Spanish for: "Go with God"), by Anne Murray ( https://tinyurl.com/y8nvqqx9 )
“God has you in heaven, but I have you in my heart.” ~ TobyMac (https://tinyurl.com/rakc5nd )
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

Yes :smile:

The photo of Sarah above (without baby Emma) was taken around the same time or the same day as the portrait discovered in Swansea. While browsing through Luther's General Store and Museum, Stefani discovered the framed portrait of Andrew and Sarah. The Swansea historian had no idea who they were or what he had. Stefani made it plain and opened the discovery to the Borden world. I was fortunate enough to be there to take photos.

The black and white photo of Sarah posted above, and the sepia sarah found at Luther's store, are very similar.... same outfit, me thinks. Though, the sepia photo displays her with a much more pleasant face. She actually looks pretty. These were believed to be taken around the time of their marriage. A third portrait was found with a similar frame, that one of an older woman, but of unknown presence. Who knows? May be Andrew's mother. :!:

The portrait below of Sarah is of great interest since she has a finger in her ear..... :shock: :roll: :oops:

:study:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

Last frame is of an elderly lady. Unknown. I have a better photo of it somewhere? Will try to find it. :wink:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

Yes, the photograph is evidently the one used to work the portrait. Judy, yes, I saw the photo posted by an Earp on Findagrave - on a quick search it seemed to be there and nowhere else much. Someone had written a Message asking her to take it off the Borden page for not being Sarah. As to it dating to the Andrew & Sarah marriage - 1846 - no. It would date some 20 years later.

With the definitely-Sarah photo, Sarah holding Emma, I find the cachemire very disconcerting. About 1853 if it's Emma? In Europe a nice cachemire such as this would edge the date a few years later. Alice, apparently, was born in 1856 and lived one year 10 months. I wonder if it's actually inscribed as being baby Emma?
If you look to the left there seems to be something like a studio stamp - could be handwritten script - either erased or worn away...
...Just trying to read Alice's Cause of Death and it looks like 'Dropsy on Brain'..?
image.jpg
Mb, it would be fascinating to see the third portrait, if you have a photo of it.
The 'Andrew and Sarah' - need to be 1863 or earlier... Have they been past any kind of art historian?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

Can you see it? Perhaps if you play around with the contrast... And it looks as if there might have been a date at the top.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

The photo below was taken by me. Taken from my picture file. The older lady is more than likely a relative of Sarah or Andrew... mother of Andrew or Mother-in-law. Good chance she is a Morse. Sadly there is no way to prove who she is. When the Borden images were discovered, the one of the older lady was with them. The frames are the same. So we know they are related. But unfortunately there is no sign or description of who she is. But a great find in any event. Definitely someone connected closely with the Bordens.

It has always been my contention that it is a portrait of Andrew Borden's Mother. But there is no way to prove it.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

Don't see it Interestedreader.

Be careful.

Stare at the sky and clouds long enough and you begin to see horsies and bunny rabbits. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :roll: :oops:
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

My goodness that is an odd article. Is it an over-painted photograph?
(The Andrew in drag looking one).

...I just looked her up and she died at 64. This one looks seriously old!
Also she died in 1853. If this isn't an over-painted photograph, then it's a very unflattering idiom to find in the 1850s :smile: .
Last edited by InterestedReader on Thu Jul 06, 2017 11:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

Where the red arrow points, the beginning of script - A gothic-script 'F' for Fall River perhaps? A studio stamp? And at the top some numerals in nineteenth century penmanship.

(I haven't upped the contrast because it can become too chatty. But open to enlarge.)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

This is hand-tinted. They did do a lot of hand-tinting in the 1850s.

She's one of the Hathaways. She's like a perky little ostrich.
image.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

Yes:

It's called a 'crayon portrait'. A photograph that is colored.

With further investigation the comparison of Andrew and the old lady above is not a valid one. Upon inquiring a Fall River historian who is very familiar with the Borden case, he reminded me that Andrew's father was married twice and that the portrait is not Andrew's mother. In any event, a fun way to take up all our useless time... eh?

I see what you mean InterestedReader. I can see an 8 in there somewhere. Could be.
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

Page 13 of Parallel Lives has a picture of Andrew Borden's Father's second wife. Not the same person as the portrait above.
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

So...there's Phebe Davenport Borden, and then a second one? Who else did he marry? if you just have it in memory...
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

One thing about the Andrew and spouse portraits, what a very good artist he got there. It's really accomplished work. Was the artist identified on the reverse?
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

Yes: Abraham Borden's second wife was one, Phebe Wilmarth.

Dropsy on the brain is a condition called hydrocephalus, or water on the brain. It is caused by a blockage of sorts somewhere in the brain upon which brain fluid builds up and can not drain. To die from such a condition must have been a terrible death. Some baby's heads swell to almost twice the size causing a host of terrible disabling conditions. Today treatment is straight forward if not somewhat manageable or completely successful. A shunt is installed to allow drainage of brain fluid into the stomach.

Poor Alice. How would history have played out if Lizzie was the one to die as an infant and Alice was allowed to live, or if Bill Gates money suddenly appeared in my bank account. We will never know. :-? :-? :roll: :oops:
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

I supposed it would be hydrocephalus. We had a case in our family, my grandmother's brother. Even then there was no attempt at surgical intervention - he was put in a home and survived to his 40s. He became a non-person. The first Mum knew of him was the day he died. Then later we always heard how cruel it is on the parents also because a child showed no signs of the condition at birth, or none discernible to medicine at the time. We'd also hear that it's caused by a structural malformation, so siblings may have trouble to a lesser extent. Our mother and grandmother both had debilitating migraines and severe pain in the occipital region of the skull. 'Normal' siblings can have the abnormal pressure on the brain, so hydrocephalus in Alice might indicate some kind of related issues in Lizzie Borden.

I know Lincoln does all that epilepsy-fugue nonsense, but... Lizzie says some things which do make one wonder if she suffered from migraine. Her alleged sense of foreboding - such a sense is a recognised type of migraine aura.
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

twinsrwe wrote:
InterestedReader wrote:... Pinterest has this one - below, badly reproduced - as Emma. Is this a known one of Emma?
Yes, this is a known photo of Emma while she was attending the Wheaton Female Seminary. Here is the photo that reproduction was taken from:
The Pinterest would be a smaller, younger Emma wouldn't it.

What a strange-looking child she was. Like a hobgoblin from the world of faery.
I'm very struck by how she's dressed in the 'elder' image. Flashy taffeta and heavy bracelets on a girl of what.. 13 or 14? The Bordens liked to show off their wealth, on the back of this slight girl... If she was sent to boarding-school gussied up like this it's amazing - you can see it's silk from the lustre, and cut for evening wear.
What age would you say she is in the small child photo? It's incredible, she's wearing an almost-crinoline. On a child.
Even with allowance made for the customs of the time... she's being dressed older than her years. In both images.

...Very ostentatious clothes on both Emmas... They wanted people to know they had money!
(The cachemire on mother Sarah - the shawl - would also be a very expensive item. At that time the best ones were imported from the East.)

image.jpg
image.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 4457
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by twinsrwe »

mbhenty wrote: ...
The photo of Sarah above (without baby Emma) was taken around the same time or the same day as the portrait discovered in Swansea. While browsing through Luther's General Store and Museum, Stefani discovered the framed portrait of Andrew and Sarah. The Swansea historian had no idea who they were or what he had. Stefani made it plain and opened the discovery to the Borden world. I was fortunate enough to be there to take photos. ...
Thank you for sharing this information with us! What a thrill it must have been for Stefani to discover such a magnificent treasure, and how cool for you to have been there to share in the excitement! :grin:
mbhenty wrote: ...
The black and white photo of Sarah posted above, and the sepia sarah found at Luther's store, are very similar.... same outfit, me thinks. Though, the sepia photo displays her with a much more pleasant face. She actually looks pretty. ...

The portrait below of Sarah is of great interest since she has a finger in her ear..... :shock: :roll: :oops: ...
untitled A.png
untitled B.png
Well, I'll be. I see what you mean, MB, and I stand corrected, the black and white photo was not cropped from the portrait of Sarah. Dang, I would have caught the facial difference if I had placed the to photos together before I had submitted my post. :roll:

Hmmm, maybe Sarah has a more pleasant facial expression in the her portrait photo, because she has someone's finger in her ear! :lol: :lol: :lol:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by twinsrwe on Sat Jul 08, 2017 12:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
In remembrance of my beloved son:
"Vaya Con Dios" (Spanish for: "Go with God"), by Anne Murray ( https://tinyurl.com/y8nvqqx9 )
“God has you in heaven, but I have you in my heart.” ~ TobyMac (https://tinyurl.com/rakc5nd )
User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 4457
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by twinsrwe »

mbhenty wrote:The photo below was taken by me. Taken from my picture file. The older lady is more than likely a relative of Sarah or Andrew... mother of Andrew or Mother-in-law. Good chance she is a Morse. Sadly there is no way to prove who she is. When the Borden images were discovered, the one of the older lady was with them. The frames are the same. So we know they are related. But unfortunately there is no sign or description of who she is. But a great find in any event. Definitely someone connected closely with the Bordens.

It has always been my contention that it is a portrait of Andrew Borden's Mother. But there is no way to prove it.
Whoever the older lady is, Emma sure took after her in looks!
borden.jpg
17322256_125839590702.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
In remembrance of my beloved son:
"Vaya Con Dios" (Spanish for: "Go with God"), by Anne Murray ( https://tinyurl.com/y8nvqqx9 )
“God has you in heaven, but I have you in my heart.” ~ TobyMac (https://tinyurl.com/rakc5nd )
User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 4457
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by twinsrwe »

InterestedReader wrote:Where the red arrow points, the beginning of script - A gothic-script 'F' for Fall River perhaps? A studio stamp? And at the top some numerals in nineteenth century penmanship.

(I haven't upped the contrast because it can become too chatty. But open to enlarge.)
I didn't see what you were referring to until you posted the picture with the red arrow. When photo is enlarged, I see where the red arrow is pointed, what appears to be the year '1883', which doesn't make any sense. I do not see a gothic-script of 'F'. :sad: Perhaps a bit of contrast would help to make it clearer.
image.jpg
I can't make out what is within the small circle at the top of this photo. :sad:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
In remembrance of my beloved son:
"Vaya Con Dios" (Spanish for: "Go with God"), by Anne Murray ( https://tinyurl.com/y8nvqqx9 )
“God has you in heaven, but I have you in my heart.” ~ TobyMac (https://tinyurl.com/rakc5nd )
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

Rorschach test!

The possibly-Gothic text begins at the red arrow and is on an upward slant. There's a word that might be 'Fall', there's a capital Gothic letter. And then where the next word should be all I can see is a downstroke flourish. At the top in the oval shape, there's a suggestion of a date. It looks as if there might have been a studio stamp and an inscription, originally.
image.jpg
image.jpg
The problem with such photos if there's no original inscription intact, is they can show the 'wrong' people. An Emma is of more use to the industry than a dead Alice so there's a will to identify the child as Emma.

It's the same with the 'Sarah'. It would be a shame if a good depiction of the younger Abby is being identified as 'Lizzie's mother'. The Luther Museum should consult an art historian. There's a good chance an 1860s dating would be favoured over an 1850s. If it is Sarah you have the interesting possibility Andrew commissioned it after she was dead; the artist adheres to the 'Sarah' photograph very intently to work the features, while we see more of an expected process with 'Andrew'. The known photo of Sarah shows a thinner, more fragile woman. She has the Morse eyes and she looks ill - even in the 1850s. If the new portrait is Sarah then she did some wasting afterwards. But it's the artistic idiom and also the costume which suggest the 1860s to my own eyes.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 4457
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by twinsrwe »

InterestedReader wrote:Rorschach test!

The possibly-Gothic text begins at the red arrow and is on an upward slant. There's a word that might be 'Fall', there's a capital Gothic letter. And then where the next word should be all I can see is a downstroke flourish. At the top in the oval shape, there's a suggestion of a date. It looks as if there might have been a studio stamp and an inscription, originally.

The problem with such photos if there's no original inscription intact, is they can show the 'wrong' people. An Emma is of more use to the industry than a dead Alice so there's a will to identify the child as Emma. ...
OK, I think I see it now. Thanks for the further explanation. :grin:
In remembrance of my beloved son:
"Vaya Con Dios" (Spanish for: "Go with God"), by Anne Murray ( https://tinyurl.com/y8nvqqx9 )
“God has you in heaven, but I have you in my heart.” ~ TobyMac (https://tinyurl.com/rakc5nd )
User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 4457
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by twinsrwe »

InterestedReader wrote:
twinsrwe wrote:
InterestedReader wrote:... Pinterest has this one - below, badly reproduced - as Emma. Is this a known one of Emma?
Yes, this is a known photo of Emma while she was attending the Wheaton Female Seminary. Here is the photo that reproduction was taken from:
The Pinterest would be a smaller, younger Emma wouldn't it.

What a strange-looking child she was. Like a hobgoblin from the world of faery.
I'm very struck by how she's dressed in the 'elder' image. Flashy taffeta and heavy bracelets on a girl of what.. 13 or 14? The Bordens liked to show off their wealth, on the back of this slight girl... If she was sent to boarding-school gussied up like this it's amazing - you can see it's silk from the lustre, and cut for evening wear.
What age would you say she is in the small child photo? It's incredible, she's wearing an almost-crinoline. On a child.
Even with allowance made for the customs of the time... she's being dressed older than her years. In both images.

...Very ostentatious clothes on both Emmas... They wanted people to know they had money!
(The cachemire on mother Sarah - the shawl - would also be a very expensive item. At that time the best ones were imported from the East.)
image A.jpg
image B.jpg
Yes, the Pinterest image appears to be a younger Emma, although I have no idea how old she would have been when that image was taken. We know the older image of Emma was taken when she was attending Wheaton Female Seminary in 1866-1868.

The thing I find interesting is Emma's pose in both of the photos; she has her right hand on the back of a chair, her left arm is positioned straight down her side, and the expression on her face is very similar.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
In remembrance of my beloved son:
"Vaya Con Dios" (Spanish for: "Go with God"), by Anne Murray ( https://tinyurl.com/y8nvqqx9 )
“God has you in heaven, but I have you in my heart.” ~ TobyMac (https://tinyurl.com/rakc5nd )
User avatar
stargazer
Posts: 228
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 3:23 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Jandolin Marks
Location: Mohave Desert Arizona
Contact:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by stargazer »

Slight widows peak on the bottom image hair. (holding the baby girl)
Neglect is a one way street to nowhere
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

Clothing may be dated very precisely on account of the human foible for fashion. A costume will tell you the time reliably. Which image are you interested in dating?
User avatar
snokkums
Posts: 2545
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 10:09 am
Gender: Female
Real Name: Robin
Location: fayetteville nc,but from milwaukee
Contact:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by snokkums »

:popcorneyes: To me there is a resemblance but I don't think it's her. The face is to soft and narrow. Even in her youth, Mozzie always had a wide square face . Jaw to be exact. And she had a ruddy complextion.
Suicide is painless It brings on many changes and I will take my leave when I please.
User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 4457
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by twinsrwe »

I ran across an article in The Herald News, that was posted on August 8, 2015, by Deborah Allard, titled, Swansea’s 200-year-old J.G. Luther Store is a step back in time.

Scroll down to the slideshow titled, Inside the J.G. Luther Store in Swansea, and then check out the 9th slide in the 9 picture slideshow. It shows the portrait of the elder lady that MB posted above. The caption under this slide states (Underlining is mine): This portrait at the J.G. Luther Store in Swansea may be of Lizzie Borden’s maternal grandmother.

Here is The Herald News article: http://tinyurl.com/y9834veu

Lizzie’s maternal grandmother would have been Rhoda Morrison Morse, Sarah Borden’s mother. I have been trying to find a photo of Sarah’s mother to compare it to the photo of the elderly lady, but have come up with nothing.

I have to disagree with the caption that is indicated under the framed portrait of the elderly lady. I believe she is most likely Phebe Davenport Borden, Lizzie’s paternal grandmother, and Andrew’s mother.
In remembrance of my beloved son:
"Vaya Con Dios" (Spanish for: "Go with God"), by Anne Murray ( https://tinyurl.com/y8nvqqx9 )
“God has you in heaven, but I have you in my heart.” ~ TobyMac (https://tinyurl.com/rakc5nd )
vemis98
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 5:54 pm
Real Name: Jessica Mollens

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by vemis98 »

Finnegan wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2017 2:40 am
Tworkeets wrote:The 2 eyes pictures do look similar. I would love to see the new photo. As for possible post-mortem in the twins photo, it would be a good job. Though I know what you mean about the crazy bulk supplements being "vacant." I would guess they are both alive and it's just that twins are creepy. Hard to be positive, though.
Great pics, thanks for posting them.
Oldies but goldies!
User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 4457
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by twinsrwe »

Hello, vemis98, welcome to the forum.
In remembrance of my beloved son:
"Vaya Con Dios" (Spanish for: "Go with God"), by Anne Murray ( https://tinyurl.com/y8nvqqx9 )
“God has you in heaven, but I have you in my heart.” ~ TobyMac (https://tinyurl.com/rakc5nd )
User avatar
twinsrwe
Posts: 4457
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:49 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Judy
Location: Wisconsin

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by twinsrwe »

Hello, Arydigital, welcome to the forum.

I am editing this post to apologize to Arynews for my failure to welcoming her/him to the forum. I am truly sorry. :oops: I want to now correct my rudeness by saying: Welcome to the forum.
Last edited by twinsrwe on Mon Jul 23, 2018 10:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
In remembrance of my beloved son:
"Vaya Con Dios" (Spanish for: "Go with God"), by Anne Murray ( https://tinyurl.com/y8nvqqx9 )
“God has you in heaven, but I have you in my heart.” ~ TobyMac (https://tinyurl.com/rakc5nd )
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

We see what we want to see sometimes. The supposed images in the photograph of Sarah Borden are most likely just the complexion of the backdrop. We each see what our minds mold.... at times. Stare long enough and the brain will discover spurious images. You don't have to stare long before you may depict a male genitalia. Not trying to be vulgar here, you must understand. Just that what you see is not evident. That's the way these things work at times. What you see is not what's really there.

More interesting, but common for the times, is Sarah wearing leather gloves. The glove is an interesting piece of clothing. Today it is used mostly to ward off the elements. Through history it had more to do with fashion. Which is also true today. In Victorian times the glove was a display of style, and more importantly, wealth.

Below is an interesting pictorial history of "The Glove."

http://www.goleathergloves.com/history-of-gloves.htm
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

mbhenty wrote: Thu Jul 19, 2018 10:50 am We see what we want to see sometimes. The supposed images in the photograph of Sarah Borden are most likely just the complexion of the backdrop. We each see what our minds mold.... at times. Stare long enough and the brain will discover spurious images. You don't have to stare long before you may depict a male genitalia. Not trying to be vulgar here, you must understand. Just that what you see is not evident. That's the way these things work at times. What you see is not what's really there.

More interesting, but common for the times, is Sarah wearing leather gloves. The glove is an interesting piece of clothing. Today it is used mostly to ward off the elements. Through history it had more to do with fashion. Which is also true today. In Victorian times the glove was a display of style, and more importantly, wealth.

Below is an interesting pictorial history of "The Glove."

http://www.goleathergloves.com/history-of-gloves.htm
I see the remains of script, the vestiges of a photographic studio stamp. You see nothing. Neither you nor I can advance our empirical findings as a verdict in the matter, but isn't your seeing nothing perhaps the more adventurous of the options? How and why you should see nothing in the place of something is quite interesting in itself.

These photographs should be dated by historians, and they won't stand up to much scrutiny until they are. Supposing the Sarah Morse photo does bear the traces of a studio stamp and an inscription - this information can easily be recovered with infra-red image analysis.
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

I need to be more explicit or honest here. So what I wrote was removed and made clearer below.
Last edited by mbhenty on Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

Yes InterestedReader:

Thinking about it further....

I believe you when you say that you see remains of a script and/or studio stamp.

That is the point that I was trying to make.

With all regard, what you see is not there.

You may not be able to advance the empirical findings as a verdict, but you are wrong when you say I cannot. When infact......I can.

Part of the "interest" that I swagger or "adventure" that I embark on has nothing to do with my opinion but in knowing what I'm talking about before I do so. Sure, I'm wrong at times. When I'm wrong I am free and willing to admit so. But not this time.

That there are no notable or intelligible markings on the photo is fact not opinion.

Please understand. I know better. I have the facts behind the photo and you don't. Because you never asked. Just assumed that I was wrong.

Not trying to be discourteous or belligerent. If I come across that way you have my apology.

But your eyes are playing the "dog and pony show" with your faculties, and that's ok and at times fun. (Look at that cloud. Does it not look like a bunny rabbit?) That is the point I was trying to politely make in my post.

I have the facts and you don't.
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

More interestingly....

Photos in the early sixties and fifties were time sensitive and one had to sit still for a few seconds without moving before the camera could capture the image.

In the photo below we see Sarah trying to keep little Emma still for the shot. Little Emma's leg is blurred a little because she is probably moving it up and down. We can see Sarah clutching Emmas hands trying to prevent her from moving. A telling and darling moment frozen in time. Love Emma's pudgy little face. The photo was taken sometime around 1854, assuming that Emma was around 3 years old. What does this tell you about the photo?

:study:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
InterestedReader
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:52 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Wendy A.
Location: UK

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by InterestedReader »

My mistake. I didn't think to ask you if you have 'the facts behind the photo'. Which was silly, because if there's arcane knowledge behind a Borden artefact you are likely to be in possession of it. Another reason is, that an image may be read by anyone, even those uninitiated into secret knowledge, & my own training permits me to date such images with accuracy.
The marks in the top left area are presumably on the original. Did the script wear away with time or was it eraced? The reason I ask is that artefacts held in amateur conservation will often gravitate to a dating most useful to mythology.

This reminds me of your argument about the sheet covering Abby Borden's corpse. You invite us to see the sheet, and when asked where 10 square metres of sheeting is packed away exactly, you tell us we can't see the sheet - it can only be seen in high definition at the FRHS by someone like yourself. One or two people duly agreed to seeing your bedsheet only to be told they wouldn't be able to see it. If so, then we're obviously at a disadvantage & have to resort to common sense estimates of where to put 10 square metres of sheet.

Children wriggle, women wore kid gloves. You can decree that's "more interesting", it's your Forum. You can decree that your opinions count, other people's don't. You can be flat out rude, as you were last year, to the author of the most critically acclaimed Lizzie Borden novel of recent times. It's your Forum, & if you can't get shot of it altogether with autocratic ill manners, just make it your blog.
User avatar
Stefani
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 12:55 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Stefani Koorey
Location: Fall River, MA
Contact:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by Stefani »

Michael doesn't run the forum. I do. :-)
Read Mondo Lizzie!
https://lizzieandrewborden.com/MondoLizzie/

Remember, amateurs built the ark. Professionals built the Titanic.
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

Sorry you feel so strongly about things, Wendy. I don't see myself as rude. I see it as assertive. Stefani agrees with you that I was very rude. But there's no emotion behind my post. I did not call you names or insult you or flip out, etc.. I just said you were wrong and stated a couple of facts. You should of asked me why I felt so strongly on the issue, rather than dismiss me. But that's ok. I don't take it personal nor the fact that you gave me the 3rd degree. I don't find it disconcerting. And you should not, either.


Once again, sorry you feel so strongly.
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

A little back story on the Sarah/Emma photo.

The photo of little Emma and Sarah is an ambrotype. It is imposed on glass. No paper, no stamps, no date. Ambrotypes came onto the scene right after daguerreotype… around 1850 to 1860s when it was replaced by tintypes, which were displayed on a thin sheet of metal instead of glass.

When taken, the picture of Sarah was originally stored in a leather case surrounded by a gold frame. I’m sure many of you have seen these on ebay. You can see example below. When the photo was taken out of it’s case there was damage to the perimeter and edges of the photo, left there by the gold frame that surrounded it. That is what we see and which looks like writing or stamping, etc. It is a deterioration of the emulsion which is sensitive to moisture or mold.

From what I remember, the original photo is with the Morse Family, somewhere. There are two copies in existence. The image we see it the better copy and was taken by the Fall River Historical Society from one of the originals. It can be viewed at the Lizzie Borden exhibit at the society. It is stored in a glass display case with other items. The Society does not have the original but a quality impression.

If you call the historical society they will tell you. There is no writing or stamping on the photo. After all, the original was on a glass plate. What we think we see is distortion of the image on the glass plate. Tintypes were not around that long and were replaced by CDVs (carte-De-Viste), the first paper/card photos.

That is the story behind Sarah’s photo.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
KGDevil
Posts: 549
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by KGDevil »

mbhenty wrote: Sat Jul 21, 2018 1:31 pm I just said you were wrong and stated a couple of facts. You should of asked me why I felt so strongly on the issue, rather than dismiss me. But that's ok.

Or, instead of going on about time sensitive photographs, how children wiggle, when gloves were in fashion, how someone sees things in a photo that they want to see, and that you knew something about the photo that she didn't know, you could have just said "This photograph is an ambrotype." But that would've saved your paragraphs of incite into the photo and attempts at making Wendy look foolish. Wiggling children and gloves had nothing to do with it being an ambrotype, which you could have just stated upfront if you were keen to explain how exactly you knew. But that's ok.

I still don't understand how you invite everyone to see a sheet that allegedly cannot be seen except under a microscope by yourself and Stefani. And when we cannot see it, say it's because it cannot be seen.
Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell. - Arthur Conan Doyle
User avatar
Stefani
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 12:55 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Stefani Koorey
Location: Fall River, MA
Contact:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by Stefani »

Hi KGDevil,

The factual details about the photo were not known until yesterday. I asked Michael Martins about it because of the dispute over what people were seeing in the background. Michael didn't know until I told him late yesterday. So he didn't know all along. But was, I think, actually waiting for Wendy to ask him how he now knew something.

Well, I think this entire controversy is about how people talk and what they hear when they read what people post. Wendy said she saw certain things in the image. Michael said that that is what she thinks she sees. Nobody likes being told they are wrong, even if they are. But that is not why I am writing this.

I never wondered about the image until the broo-ha-ha here. And so in inquired. I was treated to a very complex story about photography, glass plates, distortions, and how glass images deteriorate in time. If I had asked sooner, and gotten the answer sooner, perhaps none of this would have transpired. That is my fault.

But I still find it very interesting what Wendy thought she saw. Our brains are wired to see patterns. The background of the original image is plain grey with no pattern. The distortions from the aging of the glass plate is what creates what we now see. Simple deterioration. Fascinating stuff.

This is like a mini lesson in going to sources, instead of our thoughts and guts. But then, this is the Borden case. It has a long history of that! :oops: :oops:

In a way both Michael and Wendy were passionately advocating for their positions. No names were called, which is a total no-no here. They both guessed, and it turned out Michael's guess was correct. But he didn't know that ahead of time and in no way was trying to make Wendy look bad. He only found out yesterday, from me, as I said.

Does this help?
Read Mondo Lizzie!
https://lizzieandrewborden.com/MondoLizzie/

Remember, amateurs built the ark. Professionals built the Titanic.
KGDevil
Posts: 549
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by KGDevil »

Not really.
Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell. - Arthur Conan Doyle
mbhenty
Posts: 4427
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:20 am
Real Name:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by mbhenty »

I did not know much about the Sarah picture myself. The case I was trying to make was that sometimes what you see in not what is there. When I made that claim Wendy knew as much about the picture as I did.

After making my claim I did some research.

When I returned with my research I had discovered that Wendy became somewhat surly and gave what I saw as a rude reply. Thus I was rude back. I did not know the particulars about the picture until after she implied that her findings were more valid than mine. I was just telling her that we must take care in what we think we see. I did not set Wendy up. Just shoveled it back to her like she did to me. Yes, I may have jumped the gun. I admit that. But I do not take it personal like she did. And I apologized for hurting her. I apologize again, sincerely. If my apology is not accepted then there is not much more I can do, and for others to take sides and poke the dispute only makes matters worst.

To wallow in anger, grief, or carry this out any further is fruitless and self defeating. But that is the complexion of social media and perhaps we need to accept some of the bad with the good, and when the time calls for it, reach out and communicate or become more like Spock or Data. But we are human after all, are we not.

I apologize... to Wendy, that is. Can't do more than that.
KGDevil
Posts: 549
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by KGDevil »

mbhenty wrote: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:41 pm
I believe you when you say that you see remains of a script and/or studio stamp.
Please understand. I know better. I have the facts behind the photo and you don't. Because you never asked. Just assumed that I was wrong.

If you didn't know until yesterday, then how could anyone, let alone Wendy, ask you about any facts you had? And not assume there is a chance you could be wrong? You are saying you needed to be asked specifically "Well, what are those facts that you just acquired, apparently late in the evening, that make you so sure you are right?" Instead of just spitting it out in the first place. I have come to find the whole attitude tiresome.

I am not looking for any sort of apologies to myself for anything. Just expressing my growing disenchanment here.

For instance, I too own a high powered magnifying glass. Many people do. I see no sheet on Abby Borden. But the answer to that will be that I don't have access to the photo's at the Historical Society. Nobody said a word about getting a sheet to cover Abby, or seeing her covered. But now it is certain Abby was covered. And a cool new finding in the case. The fact that I do not see it, that no one I have shown it to can see it, that this picture has been studied for over 100 years and nobody has seen it, even under a microscope, wouldn't matter. You all see it, so it's there.
Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell. - Arthur Conan Doyle
KGDevil
Posts: 549
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by KGDevil »

My point being, if I had come onto the forum and said I saw this sheet on Abby under the magnifying glass, and MB or nobody in good standing with the historical society could see it, could I announce it as a cool new find? No. Because then the sheet really wouldn't be there. It would just be a trick of my eyes.
Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell. - Arthur Conan Doyle
User avatar
Stefani
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 12:55 pm
Gender: Female
Real Name: Stefani Koorey
Location: Fall River, MA
Contact:

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by Stefani »

Very funny. No the discovery was confirmed by the FRHS---they also don't see everything we do. It was not a trick of the eyes to see the sheet. Just a trick that we didn't until now.

BTW, the photo in question in this thread was photographed THROUGH a glass display case of an enlarged photo in a glass frame of a glass plate image. How's that for tricking your eyes! It makes sense that there are distortions. I just never thought about it before. Until I went to the FRHS and was reminded of its display and told its history, did I know anything definitive.

Same thing with the man standing in the right corner of the Andrew death on the couch image. We at the hatchet tried to figure out who it was. We came to no conclusions. And there is no way to know for sure as it is an unidentified person, but it was interesting to try and figure it out.
Read Mondo Lizzie!
https://lizzieandrewborden.com/MondoLizzie/

Remember, amateurs built the ark. Professionals built the Titanic.
KGDevil
Posts: 549
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by KGDevil »

Stefani wrote: Sun Jul 22, 2018 11:48 am Very funny. No the discovery was confirmed by the FRHS---they also don't see everything we do. It was not a trick of the eyes to see the sheet. Just a trick that we didn't until now.

Couldn't we go back to MB's argument that sometimes people see what they want to see? Do they have any more experience confirming things than someone else who doesn't work at the Fall River Historical Society? I asked a woman at a historical society here where I live to look at it, and she didn't see it either. Thank you, for simply underling my point. I think I have gone as far as I can here.
Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell. - Arthur Conan Doyle
KGDevil
Posts: 549
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm
Real Name: John Porter

Re: pictures of lizzie......

Post by KGDevil »

What trick is there, exactly, to putting a photograph under a magnifying glass and looking at it, that nobody else is qualified to possess?
Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell. - Arthur Conan Doyle
Post Reply