Last night I discovered a great story and fell down a rabbit hole. In 2008 this photograph of a leaf, thought to be from 1839, was withdrawn from auction when one historian raised the possibility that it might actually be from the 1790s. Which would rewrite history if true.

It was thought to have been made by William Henry Fox-Talbot, a pioneer of photography, which would already make it one of the very oldest photographs in existence. But then someone noticed that it was signed with 'W' and people got very excited. Here's why.

Thomas Wedgewood, heir to the Wedgewood fortune, is is known to have experimented with creating images on light-sensitive paper in the 1790s. But he had no way of fixing the images, so they would soon fade away completely.

The key innovation by Fox Talbot and the other pioneers was working out how to fix the image permanently. Such as this, the oldest known photograph in existence, by Nicéphore Niépce in 1927. (Doesn't look like much but it's the view from a window - with modern enhancement).

But obviously if one of Wedgewood's 'photographs' somehow did survive, that changes everything. For a start, it would mean photography as we know it is now in its 4th century! You can see why Sotheby's didn't want to risk a pretty big under-selling at the estimated $100,000.

After years of further study, the historian, Larry Schaaf, concluded that the date of c 1839 was probably right after all. BUMMER. But it wasn't a Fox Talbot either. Instead he decided that it was almost certainly the work of a woman called Sarah Anne Bright (1793-1866).

The W signature turned out to be that of a Bristol printer named William West. But there was another set of initials: HB. Schaaf suspected this was Henry Bright, an artist and collector from Bristol. But on closer inspection he realised this was wrong too. It actually said 'SAB.'

Henry had a sister, Sarah Anne. She was known to have painted too, but until now there was no record of her having experimented with photography. So Schaaf compared the signature on the photograph to that on her will. They matched.

Schaaf published his research in 2015. It did not conclude that photography was now in its 4th century. But while the possibility of a surviving Wedgewood photograph remains but a tantalising myth, photography gained a new name on its roll-call of pioneers in Sarah Anne Bright.

You can read a piece by Larry Schaaf here. https://talbot.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/2015/06/19/tempestuous-teacups-and-enigmatic-leaves/ And if you happen upon an ancient-looking photograph, perhaps tucked inside an old book, and signed with a W... keep it safe, and in the dark! You might just be rewriting history.