This site, " Lincoln Portrait " , makes (to me at least) a rather convincing argument for the authenticity of this daguerreotype - even though at first glance it seems quite different from the older Lincoln we are much more familiar with. And it seems (from the first link I proved to the photo) that many historians doubt that the young man is Abraham Lincoln.
Are there any people here who have a stand on whether the portrait is Abraham Lincoln or not?
Much as any portrait with an unidentified young male Elizabethan sitter is a candidate for someone suggesting they’re Shakespeare, I suspect the same is true for any gawky bloke from the 1840s and Lincoln.
Comparing the disputed photo with the authenticated photo of the younger Lincoln, there are several differences:
[ul]
[li]the earlobe of the disputed picture hangs much closer to the side of the face than that in the authentic portrait[/li][li]there is a bump on the nose that doesn’t exist on the authentic portrait[/li][li]the angle of the tip of the nose is different and the philtrum is proportionately longer on the disputed portrait[/li][li]the upper lip is fuller on the disputed portrait[/li][li]the lower jaw is larger on the authentic portrait[/li][li]the crease in the cheek and lines around the mouth in the authentic portrait are completely absent from the disputed portrait[/li][/ul]While you could argue that the lines around the mouth are due to age, the photos were purportedly taken at most 7 years apart. Lines that deep don’t appear out of a vaccuum.
The eyes are strikingly similar and I can see why the question is asked, but I’m 99.9% sure it’s not Lincoln.
