RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: River Tyne Lass on Saturday 16 December 17 10:08 GMT (UK)
-
On a previous post I attached a photo of my Great Grandmother Eliza sitting in a chair. I presumed this to be taken of her as an old lady shortly before she died in 1946. Another RootsChatter has raised a question about this being from this period, and thinks the photo is from as much earlier time.
Now I am wondering if this photo may actually be Eliza's Mother and not Eliza. Her Mother who was originally called Lucy Gamesby died in 1919. Perhaps Mother and daughter looked similar. I just presumed the photos I posted this week of Eliza and baby and the old lady on the chair were one and the same. Lucy was the illegitimate daughter of Eliza Gamesby. The latter went on to marry William Ditchburn and they had more children. Lucy married Thomas Simpson my Great x 2 Grandfather then widowed married John Parkinson. She also went by the name of Louisa.
Thanks in anticipation.
Link to other topic
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=784042.0
-
Hi, RTL,
I’m often wrong, but I’ll have a stab at it; perhaps more reliable daters will follow.
I think it’s the same person in both photos, and I think they could be about 20-25 years apart. That is, I think she looks to be in her 60s rather than her 70s in the later photo (if it were in the 1940s). Jim has dated the earlier one as 1905-10 or a little later. Say then that this photo depicts your great grandmother and your aunt in 1911, so making Eliza about 42 years old. If the other photo was taken 20-25 years later she would have been in her mid-60s (roughly-speaking) which would date that later photo to the early to mid-1930s. In the 1930s hemlines did fall again (following the Depression) and the spotted dress pattern was quite typical of the 1930s.
It would be nice to know the age of that unusual-looking seat. While it is obviously not new, it looks more modern (and less long-lasting) than the solid wooden chairs seen in most old photos. Dating it might help to establish an earliest-possible date (but after a lot of googling I haven’t found anything quite like it).
Anyway, I hope this helps.
Peter
-
Thank you Peter. I tend to think that these are both photos of Eliza too. The faces look very similar so I do think these are one and the same person. I think this is very likely now that the second photo was from the 1930s. From what I have heard about Eliza she was a person who sewed. The dress looks home-made so I wouldn't be surprised if Eliza made this herself. My cousin told me that she was told by her Mother ( now deceased) that Eliza made their pinnies. According to Cousin her Mother told her she was the baby in the photo. I believe that this is what my Aunt thought but I think this was actually her older sister who was the first Grandchild who was born on 4 July 1910. This fits in with the dating suggested. They only had one other sister but she was born in 1919 and died in 1920.
The chair and back drop makes me think the second photo was taken in a photographers establishment of some sort.
Many thanks again for post. It definitely seems plausible that the second photo is from the 1930s.
Merry Christmas Peter :)
-
My cousin has now got back to me and has sent a photo of the back of the photo of Eliza sitting in the chair.
I have tried to attach this directly but the file size is too big so I am trying to get around this by putting photo on a word document and photographing.
Does this help any with dating or tell anything more?
Thank you in advance of any replies.
-
This one's about the same timeframe as the other, WW1 or maybe just a bit after.
The white studio furniture isn't seen much pre war.
Is there a stampbox on this?
-
Hi Jim1,
Many thanks for responding so quickly. :)
My cousin sent photos of the back of both photos with the front of each one again. On the attachment size on the email she sent the photo of Eliza and the back of the one I have just attached are 3MB. The one of Eliza with baby is 2MB and the back I will now attach is also 2MB on my email. I wonder if I have attached the wrong back? If so I am sorry. I may have to get back in touch with cousin to clarify which is which. Sorry about this, photography is definitely not my forte. :-\
Anyway, I am attaching the second back ... unfortunately this is blank .. so don't know how helpful this may be. Neither back has a stamp.
-
Both postcard backs are post 1902 as that was when divided back postcards were introduced in the UK and 1907 in America.
Carol
-
Hi Jim1,
Your post may have actually opened a new avenue for research for me ;D!
If the back of the first photo is actually the one of Eliza holding the baby then this could mean that Eliza moved back to Hartlepool where she was from originally. If the photo of her with the baby is around the war years I believe the baby will have been my aunt - Elizabeth Ann Conroy who was her first Grandchild who was born on 4 July 1910 in Dudley, Northumberland (now deceased). My Dad who was born in 1913 (he was the second child of Louisa Conroy who was Eliza's daughter in law) and all of his following siblings were baptized at St John, Annitsford, Northumberland. I have never been able to find a baptism for Elizabeth Ann in this area. I am now wondering if they may have all gone to Hartlepool for a brief time. I am very sure that she would have had a baptism as I have heard that my Grandfather and his family were very strict Catholics indeed and something like this would not have been overlooked. Perhaps I now need to find out what Catholic Churches were near the street on the back of the postcard to see if my Aunt may have been baptized there.
I will contact my cousin again, and ask her to hunt out the photos again to ascertain which back is for which photo. So sorry, that there may be a muddle up here. :-\
-
Thank you Carol,
I have just seen your post after having posted my last one. I didn't know that fact - I will pass this information on to my cousin. I am sure this will interest her too. It is great how you can always learn new things about the past on here at RootsChat. :)
Best Wishes :)
-
I have had an email from my cousin who is the owner of the two photos I have posted. I have asked her to clarify which of the two photos has the photography studio address written on the back. She has now confirmed that this is of the one of our mutual ancestor sitting on the chair.
Jim1 you have posted that this photo is around WW1 or just after. Eliza died in 1946 - her Mother Lucy Parkinson (formerly Simpson/nee Gamesby) died 1919. If you look at the two photos which are posted side by side they both look very similar facially and in hairstyle although I think in the second photo taken in the studio the face shown has a slightly longer, thinner nose. Although that could just be the angle. The lady in the second photo looks significantly older than in the first photo.
If this studio photo was also around WW1 or slightly previous to this then the photo may be of Lucy rather than Eliza. I suppose sometimes mothers and daughters can look very similar. Can it definitely be ruled out that the studio photo may have been taken around the 1930s or early 40s?
If it definitely is thought to be around WW1 I do think it will have been Lucy.
-
Not 30's/40's.
-
Thank you Jim1 for your speedy reply.
It seems now that the photo of the lady in the chair will be of my Great x 2 ancestor then, who was called Lucy Gamesby at birth. Lucy sometimes known as Louisa died in 1919 - so perhaps this photo may have been taken shortly after death. She was Eliza's mother. Eliza holding baby who I now suspect was my Aunt Elizabeth Ann Conroy born 4 July 1910.
Cousin originally thought this was of her Mother who was born in 1929 and who was the youngest child. I thought not because I thought the clothes too old-fashioned for around 1930. On RootsChat this photo has been dated as pre or during WW1 which makes me think the baby was my Aunty Betty. My Dad was the second child born 1913 - however baby in picture looks like a girl and to me the Baby does seem to have a look of my Aunty Betty with her high forehead.
It is great to think that my cousin and I may have photos of both our Great and Great x 2 Grandmothers! I will be speaking to her soon and will let her know your response Jim1. Thank you. :)
-
so perhaps this photo may have been taken shortly after death
I would hazard a guess that it was taken shortly before
-
Jim1 I think your hazarded guess likely to be right ;D
Your post pointing out my error in writing has made me burst out laughing in a public place. Yes, I did mean that I thought the photo may have been taken shortly before death. I am having such a job here trying to pull myself together.
I know there used to be Victorian death photos but as far as I know my ancestors never went in for anything like that :o!!! ;)