RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Sussex => Topic started by: Maggott on Wednesday 16 May 07 11:22 BST (UK)
-
Hi
This pic has "the Holland family" written on the back - From the women's clothes it dates from late 1890's. This is confirmed by the name of the photographer, which is on the back of the original.
The chap at the back is probably John Holland, has anyone any ideas about the others?
Here's hoping!
Maggott.
-
That's a tall order, Maggott ;D Great picture & I would agree with you about the date, 1890's probably nearer 1895 when the large leg-of mutton sleeves were at the height of fashion.
Do you have dates for John Holland. Who/ when/where he married? The only people in the pic who might be of another generation, possibly daughters are the 2 girls seated in front.
jane
-
Hi Jane Yes, it is a tall order :) but I was hoping for the million to one chance - another Rootschatter recognising one of the people. As you say, the young girls look to be daughters/grand-daughters of the people behind them. A cousin suspects the girl on the left may be a daughter of William Wood & Ann (nee) Holland - she married & became Mrs Wooldridge.
I personally wouldn't mess with the woman on the extreme left in the middle row- but was she my 4xGt Granny....
Best Maggott
-
So -what Hoolands are there on 1891 and 1901 census, that might fit in with this group? you say they were in Horsham, so that would narrow it considerably
-
FREECEN shows 1891 Census for Hollands in Horsham as:
Alfred Head 21 Agri.
Avis Wife 18
Frederick Son 9
George Holland Lodger 35 Lab.
Harry Head 35 Lab
Harry Son 7
Sarah Daug. 10
But these would all appear to be too young to fit the photo. The address was Bonfire Hill in Southwater a village just outside of Horsham, are you sure they came from Horsham?
-
Maggott,
This might make an interesting exercise for Sussex Rootschatters ;) It's surprising what can be found out from very little information, okay, it's all speculation at the end of the day as to who is who, that will never be known with any certainty but it could be fun.
If you're up for it we'll need dates of birth, marriages, siblings, deaths etc. You seem to know the photographers dates of trading, who was he & when did he trade?
To start the ball rolling, my insinctive reaction to the photo was that all the adults are of about the same generation so maybe brother's & sister's? The 2 girls might be daughters?
Anyone else going to join in?
jane
-
sounds fun
Now, Maggot knows that one of the ladies is his GGGGgranny, so maybe she is the one to start with - did she by any chance have this many brothers and sisters?
They do seem to all a family resemblamce, same eyes, if you ask me.
-
Obviously up for a challenge, Liz :D
Maggott said the gent in the back was John Holland (holding a cheroot) & the portly lady seated far left was his/her 4x grandmother.
My observations: Was this a wedding? 4x great granny seems to be sporting a flower & the lady standing far right also (although it might be a bit of the background foliage :)) All the others look to be in their Sunday best also. Was this set -up in the churchyard as
it's an outside photograph? If the family decided to have a group photo I'm sure it would have been in a studio.
The adults all appear to be in their fifties maybe early sixties. I agree with you Liz that their is a resemblence but very markedly between the three men, brother? The older of the 2 girls (the one with her arm on the ladies knee) looks like the lady standing on the left.
We now need Maggott to come in with the vital details :)
jane
-
Thank you all very much- off to work now but will get names & dates to the site tomorrow. But yes, they were from Horsham & Slinfold
Best Maggott
-
Hi Now the computer has gone phut -I'm using a daughter's today. Don't go away - I'll get the Holland info up as soon as I can
Best Maggott
-
Hi Computer doing its best again.
So - the Holland family we think the pic shows are the kin of William Holland & Martha nee Charman. They were b too early to be the subjects themselves, but they had ten children. The first generation included a John (b 1814) - so I think too old to be in the photo, even if he was still alive.
There was a grandson John b 1849, who seems much more promising
Also a Gtgrandson b 1886, so too young.
As yet I know virtually nothing about any of them. Any ideas at all?
It's good to have other eyes on the pic - you're all seeing things I didn't notice. From the original it seems to have been posed out of doors. Many of the family worked for the Field Place estate near Horsham.
Wedding- hadn't thought of that- but I wonder of the women would have been wearing hats if they'd been to church? But some other family celebration, perhaps?
I scanned in a copy - have been in touch with the cousin who actually has the original & have asked for the photographers name. I remember I checked & he was on C91 but not C01.
I don't know whether the formidable lady was 4xgt grandmother (Henry & Martha's gdaughter Ann) -I was just speculating. Incidentally several of them were in the licensed trade- Selsey Arms Coolham & Hare & Hounds Cowfold.
Any ideas would be most welcome - thank you all for your interest
Best Maggott
-
Here we go with the marriage of William & Martha,
Horsham, West Sussex, 21 Nov 1799:
William HOLLAND, bach
Martha CHARMAN, sp (B)
From the IGI extracted records baptism's for their children all at Horsham;
Nanny (from the actual register which I have it might not be Nanny, difficult to read) 16/11/1800
Mary 21/3/1802
William 6/11/1803
Henry 17/2/1805
James 20/7/1806
Richard 6/1/1808
George 5/11/1809. Buried 18/8/1813
Thomas 31/3/1811. Buried 24/8/1813
John 21/8/1814
Edward 2/6/1816
Fanny 2/10/1822
So of the males, that leaves, William, Henry, James, Richard, John & Edward.
William (1803) Possibly married;
Horsham, West Sussex, 14 Jan 1827:
William HOLLAND, bach
Elizabeth RAGLASS, sp botp (B)
Henry possibly married;
Horsham, West Sussex, 10 Apr 1833:
Henry HOLLAND, bach
Harriet DEANE, sp botp (B)
James possibly married;
Horsham, West Sussex, 23 Oct 1827:
James HOLLAND, bach
Rebecca GIBSON, sp botp (B)
Richard possibly married;
Horsham, West Sussex, 21 Oct 1834:
Richard HOLLAND, bach
Charlotte SEAGRAVE, sp botp (B)
John possibly married;
Warnham, West Sussex, 23 Mar 1839:
John HOLLAND, bach farmer otp
Mary BURDFIELD, sp otp
wit; Helen & Geo. B.; Jane STONE
Edward has gone off my radar & there's nothing showing at the moment on FreeBMD. Maybe someone can look for an Edward Holland born Horsham 1816 on the 1841 or 1851 census to see who he's with (if anyone)
The 3 gents (who all look like brothers to me) seem to be in their late 40's, early 50's, so if this photo was taken around 1895 that gives them a dob of about 1845 - 1855, quite possibly children of the younger males mentioned above as they married later, John or Edward?
I noted that there are 3 gents & 4 ladies, 3 wives of the gents & a sister?
Any objections if I send this link over to the photo experts for their opinion as to the photograhs date?
I'm going to look for any burials of this Holland family in the pr's to rule out any of the males, so I'll get back to you on that.
jane
-
Hi I didn't know about the Burdfield marriage but the others are all familiar. My ancestors are Harriet & Henry via daughter Ann & William Wood.
Do please copy the pic to anyone who may be able to help. There really is a strong family likeness isn't there- similar eyes, as you suggest.
Along with this group portrait there were two photos of two of the guys, taken when they were younger. One was the chap at the back, who I mentioned, the other was the man on the right hand end of the seated row. Both taken in a studio from the look of it & just their top half. No writing (apart from John Holland) or other clues.
Again with many thanks
Best, Maggott
-
Just surmising, but i wouldnt say it was a wedding.
The men are not generally im suits, but rather 'sports' jacket and trousers, and one seems to have a cravat rather than a tie, which speaks of 'upper class' casual wear.
At least one female has a skirt and blouse, rather than a dress, again I would have thought that was more casual than formal.
So I would say it is more of a social occasion rather than a formal occasion.
It is almost like they are out on a jolly old family picnic and decide to take a family photo! But having a professional photographer makes it more planned and organised, rather than a family snapshot. Maybe that is how it worked, as people didnt have their own cameras in those days.
So - why would they pose outside, in 'smart casual' wear?
Was it cheaper than inside as the photographer didnt need flash?
Cant see any wedding ring on any of the women's hands, where their left hand is visible. But not that clear.
Will keep looking and thinking
-
Hi Maggott, can you elaborate on your connection, do you mean Henry who married Harriet Deane in 1833, through their daughter Ann?
I'm going to stick my neck out a bit & suggest the photo might have been taken later in the 1890's perhaps 1898 - 1900. The younger ladies would have been more likely to have been up-to-date with their fashions than the older one's & blouses & skirts were popular in the late 1890's rather than the tight bodices the older ladies are wearing.
Did you notice that the gent in the middle is holding something between his fingers? I've zoomed into it but I can't make it out. Another observation is that it looks like high summer with the trees & hedges in full leaf.
Liz, it's certainly a family occasion, maybe not a wedding or christening. The gent on the right is wearing a tie with a wing collar not a cravat. Me thinks that 'formal' attire for country folk would look like this, with the high-buttoned jackets, waistcoats & pocket watches.
I too looked for wedding rings but couldn't spot any. It looks like a lovely day, so either the photographer set up a little seating arrangement in the churchyard & plonked down the family groups or they invited the photographer along to their house after a church ceremony & took all the photo's in the garden. I still feel it's some form of family occasion as if they had decided to have a family group photo they would have all trooped along to the photographer & done it there as I'm sure that sort of thing was regarded as a family outing :)
jane
-
I would agree with the date given by Jane in her first posting on this subject as being c1895. The sleeving known as Leg of Mutton was introduced into ladies fashion for the second time in 1893 and went out of fashion in 1897. From what I can make out all the women are wearing a seperate bodice and skirt and although there are difference's to the collar areas all have full sleeving from shoulder to wrist which again fits in with Janes date. The men are all wearing ties and again each outfit that they are wearing is different. The gent on the end is wearing a sack coat which would be fastened at the top button only, as shown here. The gentleman at the back has a half smoked cigar in his hand whilst the gentleman sitting in the middle of the group has his cap in his left hand and a small cigar or cheroot in the other hand.
old rowley
-
Thanks for that Old Rowley...only I can't see a cap ::) His right hand is obscured & his left is holding something but I wouldn't have said it was a cheroot or cigar as it's between the thumb & next finger not perhaps the way a cigar would have been held....more correctly held by the gent standing behind.
jane
-
Hi Jane,
re the gentleman holding a cap. If you look at the woman sitting in front of him to his left you will see that there is a darker grey (to his suit that is) circular area which is to the right of her face (as you look at it) and is above her shoulder, this is what I am referring to as his cap. On blowing the picture up it does come across abit clearer than shown here and you can see a form and shape to it more better.
old rowley
-
Hi Jane & thank you all again for your interest. Yes, correct - my connection to the Hollands is that Ann (d of Henry & Harriet) m William Wood & their s Henry Alfred was my GtGrandfather.
I agree with you about the clothes - those sleeves may have been in fashion in London 94-98 but I reckon they were current in Horsham later & longer :)
I agree too, that it has the look of an informal family jolly: no black so it's not a funeral, & anything involving church would surely have meant hats & formal clothes, as you say. I know people made a lot more of a visit in those days than we (with cars) do now-I've wondered if siblings who had moved away came back for a reunion - just a guess this. Or if they all visited one of the mob who had moved to a new pub...
Incdentally when I got a magnifier on the original it looks as if the dragon-lady on the left, middle row, has not a flower in her bodice but a piece of lace/edge of hanky showing.
Wouldn't they have been amazed if they knew the scrutiny we've given their picture
Best Maggott
-
Yes, I see it now, Old Rowley. You can't be THAT old, Rowley if you spotted that ;D
jane
-
Okay. Bear in mind that the following information is not confirmed, it's just me putting 2 & 2 together & hopefully coming up with 4 :D
Henry & Harriet married 10/4/1833, Horsham.
Their children (extracted IGI entries)
William 2/5/1833 Horsham
ANN 23/8/1835 ditto
Elizabeth 6/8/1837 ditto
Henry 28/2/1841 ditto
Isaac 23/2/1845 Warnham
Harriet 2/5/1847 ditto
JOHN 30/9/1849 ditto
Martha 25/4/1852 ditto
Mary Helen 29/6/1856 ditto
So John Holland that you think is the gent standing at the back of the photo is Ann's (your 2x great grandmother) brother.
William: 1833 - died Q2 1912, Horsham aged 79 (2b 373)
1881 - North St. Portslade (police station)
William Holland 47 b. Horsham Police Constable
Maragret 31
Lydia dau 19 b. Newhaven
William seemed to have married twice, (1) Lydia Huggett Q3 1860, Lewes (2b 235). Death of Lydia, Q1 1875 aged 34 Steyning (2b 228) Marriage (2) Q3 1877, Margaret Mitchell, Steyning (2b 447) Margaret died Q4 1903 Horsham aged 54 (2b 192)
So William could be a candidate for one of the gents as he would have been about 62 in 1895.
Ann 1835 - possible death Q1 1910 aged 74 Horsham (2b 221)
Married William Wood Q2 1858, Horsham. Possible candidate for one of the ladies as she would have been 60 in 1895.
Elizabeth 1837 - nothing known
Henry 1841 - possible death Q2 1887 aged 45, Horsham (2b 195) so not a candidate.
Isaac 1845 - Possible death Q2 1908 Steyning aged 64 (2b 185)
Married Elizabeth Hills Q1 1871, Lewes (2b 181)
1881 in Horsham. 1891 The George Inn, Portslade, Syening.
Possible candidate. As he seems to live in Portslade & died there he probably made the journey up to Horsham for this event. My money would be that he's the gent on the right as he looks a little more dapper than the others & running an inn on the fashionable south coast in Victorian times might give him the edge as far as fashions go ::)
Harriet 1847 Nothing known
John 1849 Possible death Q4 1908 aged 59, Horsham (2b 188) so he could be in the photo as he would have been 46 in 1895.
Martha 1852 Nothing known
Mary Helen 1856 Nothing known
jane
-
Hi You guys are absolute whizzes :) I think Mary Helen died young -the name may have been Mary Ellen in some records. And the eldest of Henry & Martha's children was probably Fanny rather than Nannie - & again died young.
But thank you for sorting through the family so efficiently- it really does help to have people who are used to research & who aren't bogged down by family myth.
I'm going to pass the info you've given me to the cousins-all related to William Holland & all family historians- to see what they make of it. You've made more progress in 48hours than we did in ten months!
Thank you again
Best Maggott
-
So the three brothers in the photo might be William, John & Isaac? Possibly Ann on left side? The other 3 ladies posssibly 3 surviving sisters. The 2 younger ladies, children of the brothers? Although the lady sitting on the grass on the right doesn't look as young as the other seated lady, probably in her thirties?
If it said, "Holland Family" on the back I would presume all of the sitters are Holland by birth rather than by marriage...just a thought :)
Glad that's been of help, Maggott, it was an interesting exercise especially when there's a picture of the people in front of you!
jane
-
Hello I saw the photo of the Holland family.
Ann Holland (born 1835) was my 2xGGrandmother through her son William Wood.
My Aunt may have some photos of Hollands to compare with the photo on this message board. I will ask her.
Thanks, Hilary
-
Hi Very excited to read your post Sounds as if we may be quite closely connected. May I ask which of William's children was your ancestor? I'll send you a PM (personal message) with my private email details.
Looking forward to seeing any pix your aunt manages to find
Best
Maggott
-
Hi
Just wondered whether any of these people are connected to my Hollands? I have an Ann Holland born in Shipley 1769 dau of Phillip Holland & Mary Greenfield. I haven't got any more on them as yet.
Regards
Gary
-
Yes I am descended from Ann's brother William.
He is my 4 x Great Grandfather who was married to Martha Charman.
Happy to talk further.
Hilary
-
Hi Hilary
Seems like we are 4th cousins then as Ann is my 4xgt granny.
I haven't got any further back on the Holland side but on the Greenfield side I have gone back a bit & on Mary Greenfield's maternal side back to late 16c
Regards Gary
-
Hi my research has led me to William Holland, Martha Charman.I believe their daughter Fanny born 1822 was my ggggrandmother,I have a copy of her marriage cert to my ggggrandfather in 1853 stating she was a widow (married name Sharp daughter of William Holland). I can't find her in a marriage or 1841 census by this name but 1851 census has her as a widow Sharp, living in London where she remarried,my cert. all later census after her marriage say's born in Horsham, any help would be most appreciated.
-
That's interesting. Thank you.
I have sent you a personal message.
Hilary
-
thank you for your reply. I look forward to hearing from you.
-
I have realised I can't send you a personal message until you have made 3 postings. It says this in the forum rules:
"New members must make at least three postings before being allowed to use the PM facility."
If you reply to this, that will be your 3rd posting so I should then be able to send you a personal message. You get notifications of personal messages right at the top of this page.
Thanks, Hilary
-
Hi, if my Fanny is the right one I have got a lot of confirmed facts for her. from her 2nd marriage until her death, all census from 1851 and her family up to me. I am willing to pass on. I have been looking for the link for a few years now. I am so pleased I have found this site,
-
Hi we have been in contact before re William and Martha Holland my connection being Fanny born 1822, was just wondering if you have got any further with her marriage to a Mr Sharp/Sharpe prior to 1851.
-
hi all , I am completely new to family histories , my mother asked me if I could find anything out and probably by sheer luck I have got to ann Holland 1769 as being my g x5 grandmother , any information on phillip Holland and mary greenfield would be great , regards mickey
-
Hi Mickey
Ann Holland is also my great Grandmother x4. Daughter of Phillip Holland & Mary Greenfield. I have Mary Greenfield's line going back to the 1550's on her monther's side. Phillip Holland's has proved to be more complicated with several of the same name at that time. Although several Holland lines do go back to 1550 & beyond with interesting Wills & land records.
How are you descended from Ann Holland? Do you have the Leggett information also? as these go way back also.
Gary
-
hi gary , the way I have worked out my family is this
1. mother is rosemary jean rhoder - 1947-present
2. g/mother is frances c p lee - 1916-1967
3. gg/mother is rosina may Leggett - 1885-!!!!
4. g2g/father is George Leggett - 1849-1933
5. g3g/father is Charles Leggett - 1826-1914
6. g4g/father is Benjamin Leggett - 1801-1887
7. g5g/father is joseph Leggett - 1759-1835
''. g5g/mother is anne Holland - 1769-!!!!
going back on the Leggett side -
8. g6g/father is Thomas Leggett - 1716-1768
9. g7g/father is William Leggett - 1680-1749
that's as far as I have got
here is a link to everything you want to know about the Leggett family
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~mugridge/leggett.htm#jo
kind regards mickey
-
Hi Mickey
I have sent a message to your inbox with my email & number for you to contact me so as to share info. Too much info to put on here.
Regards Gary
-
hi gary , reading the earlier posts I have to make 3 posts to receive a pm , so this is my third post
regards mickey
-
Hi
I've been away from the Hollands for a bit, but I too, am descended from Ann Holland. I'd be very interested indeed to learn any details about the earlier Greenfields
Maggott
-
Hi, I've only just stumbled across this, but thought I'd add that I'm also descended from the same William & Martha Holland, through their last child Fanny (1822-1882)'s second marriage (to Thomas Hill in 1853).
Paul