# Talk:William S. Hamilton

I have passed this article according to the requirements of the GA critera. I made a few minor corrections, but other than that the article looks fine. The article is well-sourced, and maintains a NPOV. If possible consider adding another image. Keep up the good work, and I hope you continue to bring articles up to GA quality. To anyone that reads this review, please consider helping with the current backlog at WP:GAN by reviewing an article or two. Any new editors who assist are greatly appreciated. Instructions can be found here. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. If you have any further questions about the review, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 07:11, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

On the image:  Chernow's book says that portrait is of Philip Hamilton, Alexander Hamilton's eldest son, who was killed in a duel in 1801.  Is the image mislabeled, or was Chernow wrong?--Idols of Mud (talk) 20:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Hard to say, the source on the image is a 1901 book on the Black Hawk War. I haven't seen any other images of either Hamilton so I wouldn't be a good judge, perhaps some comparison links might help, if there are any images online. IvoShandor (talk) 21:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmm.  The Google search I just did is inconclusive:  That image appears for both Philip and William Hamilton (though Wikipedia is obviously leaning on that).  The Chernow book cites the image from a book from 1911 on Alexander Hamilton.  I haven't seen anything citing the original source of the drawing, or where it may be found today, if it still exists.--Idols of Mud (talk) 19:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
I'll keep looking around, should we remove the image? Its on Commons, so the name would have to be changed there if we discover anything. IvoShandor (talk) 19:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Northern Illinois University sources the image to: Stevens, Frank E. The Black Hawk War. Chicago: Frank E. Stevens, 1903 (which is what I have in the image description. Their page can be seen here. They have the text of that book here, if the link works. It has a section for portraits and illustrations which states next to the link for the Hamilton portrait: "From the original, owned by the Wisconsin Historical Society, at Madison". Here is what the Wisconsin Historical Society has to say about it. Based on that, Chernow might be mistaken. What do you think? IvoShandor (talk) 19:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Based on everything you've found, it would appear that Chernow's mistaken.  Besides your good data, it seems to me the man in the portrait is wearing a suit that would probably not have been in fashion in 1801 (when Philip was killed).  It looks more in line with clothing from the late 1810s or early 1820s, which would fit with William's age.  I think the portrait is a keeper.  Nice work.--Idols of Mud (talk) 15:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, internet sleuthing is one of my specialties. Perhaps now we should add the original, it is much better quality. IvoShandor (talk) 22:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I've come across this now from Philip Hamilton, where someone posted the version from the 1911 book mentioned above. (William S. Hamilton at the Internet Archive) That book (also cited by Chernow, a serious author) is written by an actual family member. I'm inclined to lean to it as a more reliable cite. (That said, it does say in the caption that it is Philip Hamilton at 20... when he died at 19.) Thoughts? —Luis (talk) 16:06, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Further followup: on re-reading the introduction, the book that says this is Philip was written by Philip's nephew, which I had not previously realized. Obviously he never knew his uncle (his father, the second Philip, was born after the uncle was killed) but I'm inclined to treat it as more accurate than the other book. So I think it should be removed from this article.—Luis (talk) 00:02, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 Allan McLane Hamilton (nephew of Philip and of William) identified the subject as Philip – and he would have been told who it was by his grandmother Eliza, his father, or his uncles. A reasonable explanation for a portrait of Philip that's dated a year after his death is that the family either had it painted posthumously, or received it as a sympathetic gift. Posthumous portraits certainly weren't unusual, including several paintings of Alexander Hamilton by John Trumbull. Given the Hamilton family's social position, it seems likely enough that there was an artist in their circles who knew Philip's face well enough to paint him from memory. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 15:40, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
The Wisconsin Historical Society thinks it's William. 32.218.39.106 (talk) 03:00, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

The Wisconsin Historical Society is a fine institution, but what they've got is a photograph taken of an original painting in Poughkeepsie, N.Y.; the actual Hamilton family in New York identified that painting as Philip. See discussion below (quoted from Talk:Philip Hamilton): The photograph, your link says, was taken in 1880 (and presumably labeled or identified at that time) — long after William and Philip were dead. The linked site goes on to state that it was a photo of an original painting in Poughkeepsie, N.Y. — which happened to be the home of Allan McLane Hamilton's father, Philip Hamilton (the second). Dr. Hamilton identified the painting as his uncle Philip Hamilton, not his uncle William S. Hamilton, in his 1910 book. I am more inclined to believe that Alexander Hamilton's grandson knew his own uncles and his own family history, and knew the provenance of that painting in Poughkeepsie, rather than to believe that the Wisconsin Historical Society is more reliable than Dr. Hamilton. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 08:11, 4 December 2017 (UTC) (rev. 08:17, 4 December 2017 (UTC)) Lwarrenwiki (talk) 04:26, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

We find "Billy" with a cattle contract to supply Fort Howard in Green Bay 8.15.185.0 (talk) 12:17, 31 August 2025 (UTC)