Showcasing vintage male photography, mostly nude. You must be 18 years of age or older to visit this blog! If you hold a copyright on any material shown on this blog, notify me, and it will be removed immediately.
Followers
Wednesday, November 8, 2023
1870
I've always wondered why they had this model from 1870 take off only
his shoes and pants, but keep his socks, shirt and necktie on. Very odd.
There are similar Civil War photos of men in shirts but naked from the waist down showing off gun shot fractures of the femur (the bone in the upper leg). You can see a black area on the upper right leg which looks like a healed wound of where the bullet went in. The photo does not show the greater damage of where the bullet went out. Do you think this is a post- civil war photo?
I have seen a few of those Civil War photos, and I think you may well be correct about this being one. It is dated at 1870, which puts it very close to the time period for such.
After the Civil War, wounded soldiers who applied for pensions were required to undergo a medical exam and photographs were taken to provide proof of injury. You can see the bullet wound on his right leg.
According to alamy.com and getty.edu, this is "Priv. John Hamilton 1st Del. Vol. - Wounded at Hampton Va. April 1861; Attributed to William H. Bell (American, 1830 - 1910); 1861."
'Vintage Fan 1952' above seems to be right on the mark -- this photo is one of many depicting Civil War victims displaying their war wounds. Some pics show frontal nudity, but others were more discreet with a fig leaf in place, or a cloth draped over the bits.
My own opinion is that, at least in this case, the model probably thought the photo would be buried in some archive. In the case of photos used for artistic studies, there might have been some expectation of longevity, but I doubt anyone thought it would be 150 years.
Odd, but strangely attractive.
ReplyDeleteThere are similar Civil War photos of men in shirts but naked from the waist down showing off gun shot fractures of the femur (the bone in the upper leg). You can see a black area on the upper right leg which looks like a healed wound of where the bullet went in. The photo does not show the greater damage of where the bullet went out. Do you think this is a post- civil war photo?
ReplyDeleteI have seen a few of those Civil War photos, and I think you may well be correct about this being one. It is dated at 1870, which puts it very close to the time period for such.
DeleteAfter the Civil War, wounded soldiers who applied for pensions were required to undergo a medical exam and photographs were taken to provide proof of injury. You can see the bullet wound on his right leg.
ReplyDeleteRight. I thought the wound was a flaw in the image.
DeleteI have the date 1861 and the name Bichi if either helps.
ReplyDeleteInteresting. Now I'm confused.
DeleteHe's pretty nice-looking.
ReplyDeleteMaybe someone just had a fetish.
ReplyDeleteAccording to alamy.com and getty.edu, this is "Priv. John Hamilton 1st Del. Vol. - Wounded at Hampton Va. April 1861; Attributed to William H. Bell (American, 1830 - 1910); 1861."
ReplyDelete'Vintage Fan 1952' above seems to be right on the mark -- this photo is one of many depicting Civil War victims displaying their war wounds. Some pics show frontal nudity, but others were more discreet with a fig leaf in place, or a cloth draped over the bits.
Thanks. This is absolutely the least gruesome photo of this sort I've ever seen. Pvt. Hamilton was lucky compared to many.
DeleteFascinating and interesting. Could they have imagined people looking at the photo over 150 years later?!!
ReplyDeleteMy own opinion is that, at least in this case, the model probably thought the photo would be buried in some archive. In the case of photos used for artistic studies, there might have been some expectation of longevity, but I doubt anyone thought it would be 150 years.
Delete