Reader comments: Picturing the West: 1852 lithographs of Salt Lake Valley provide unique look at the past
8 comments | Read story
Ernest T. Bass | 8:18 a.m. July 15, 2008
Is it possible to buy copies?
Dale | 9:23 a.m. July 15, 2008
Story photos gallery is inadequate when the article is specifically about visual images.Please pump up the size and quality of the images.
Comments continue below
Daniel Longmore | 11:35 a.m. July 15, 2008
Are these on display at some museum? Where can they be viewed?
Mahonri | 12:57 p.m. July 15, 2008
The grass and trees growing in SL Valley will surprise those many who believe nothing grew.
Henry Drummond | 2:17 p.m. July 15, 2008
I don't believe these lithographs are a new find. They have been around for quite a few years. It was hard to tell from the article especially without any of the pictures.
For those who are interested in seeing these I would recommend the Library of Congress web site. Go to the search engine and put in "lithographs utah" and you should get to a page with a number of them on it. I'm sorry for not just listing the URL but the D-News forums don't allow those.
For those who are interested in seeing these I would recommend the Library of Congress web site. Go to the search engine and put in "lithographs utah" and you should get to a page with a number of them on it. I'm sorry for not just listing the URL but the D-News forums don't allow those.
Thomas | 6:21 p.m. July 15, 2008
Henry, Thank You. I'm sure they will be viewed by many of us.
Biblionerd | 7:15 p.m. July 15, 2008
You can likely get an original (1852) copy of the Stansbury "report" for a few hundred bucks at most of the SLC antiquarian book shops - Ken Sanders Books, Sam Wellers, or Benchmark. If that fails, try the Alibris website. It will set you back a several hundred bucks but you'll get the whole set of images.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
If Howard Stansbury was born in 1806, he must have joined the association mentioned in the article in 1838 and NOT 1938 as it states. In 1938 he would have been 132 years old.