So here we have two photos of the Lincoln Memorial. The one with grass and landscaping is dated 1917, while the one showing a barren, gutted scape is dated 1920.
I wanted to make sure that these were properly dated, and here’s how I approached it. I always first look for a reference point, so I looked at the photos and saw that there was a barn in the background. There are mature trees in the photo dated 1917, and freshly planted ones in the photo dated 1920, which makes no sense. Did they unmature?
No, this may be an example of improperly dated photos. One came before the other, and that’s the one with the freshly planted trees. It could be a seasonal difference, but mature trees vs saplings? Spot the difference.
I pulled these dates from the National Geographic website, which is a major “educator” for the general public, so I expect the data to be accurate.
But when you switch the dates, which one actually makes more sense?
Now, I’m not saying this building was already here, but it is possible this building was founded and refurbished on existing bones.
I’m noticing some very stained and weathered stone on the foundation. Like I said, I’m not saying this building was already here, but it doesn’t resemble a fresh or new construction to me. Also, I’m coming to find out this building has a basement, and yet there are no photos of the construction of the basement, only the top exterior.
Looking over the only photo of the floor construction, the sky is completely blanked out and I can’t place any landmarks to orient the image and know for sure. I did notice a shred of mature trees (see above) in the background, so it’s possible this is a photographed dismantling and reassembly of the building itself that continued through the 1920s, instead of being completed by 1920.
From what I’ve seen, these “memorials” get hijacked. One begs to question: when was the Lincoln Memorial actually built?
