Can Anyone Provide a Date For This Unknown Ridler Lady

[hettyhen]

Found this photo and am trying to match it to a lady born c1814, Chatham, Kent  and died 1888, Greater London Middlesex .  She had a second marriage in 1867  registered at W.Ham.
Going by the dates of "The London school of Photography", the date range could be approx 1857-1876.  Will try to attach a scan of the back as well where there is a number 82073 written top left hand corner, which may or probably not mean anything.
Your expert help will be much appreciated.
Cheers
HeatherR

[chinakay]

Early 1860s even though the corners of this are a little rounded (early cardstock is generally square). Nice old photo 

Cheers,
China

[jim1]

Agree with China looks very early-mid 1860's, however the Soho Bazaar studio didn't open until March 1867 according to the blurb also there are a couple of addresses from 1866 which don't appear on here.
It could of course be a copy from the original negative taken by the same studio at a later date.
This would make the lady in question 50-55 & she looks about 40 to me.

[hettyhen]

Whoops, messed up the heading but thank you to whoever sorted it out.

China & Jim1, 
Your answers would point to it being a photo of Rebecca POSWILLO nee HYMAN, but in 1867 she would have been in her early 50's, and with having at least 5 children between 1840 and 1853 she appears to have aged very well. Maybe it is a reprint and the number on reverse could be the reprint number . I have a photo of one of her children, my great grandfather, looking probably about the same age so will post them together and see if anyone can see a resemblance between them.
Just another question for you.
Is the way she is dressed common about that time or would it have been for a special occasion?
Cheers
HeatherR

[Jool]

Just my opinion, but I though the lady looked about 50.  But, as China would say, I would never disagree with Jim (who says she looks about 40) 

[chinakay]

She could be 50ish...hard to tell in these old prints because some lack definition and detail. This is a bit pale as well. Of course, as Jool reminds us I would never, ever, argue with Jim 

The number on the back will be a daybook number...the daybook records who ordered what and how much was paid. The order number, if you like. One famous Belfast daybook has survived and is in the Public Records office, they're that rare!

The lady is wearing a common style for the time and actually this particular dress looks a bit dowdy and seems to have been altered, which was common. A lady's dress may have been altered numerous times as it was expected to last a long time. So in comparison with some of the dresses of the period, this one's ordinary 

The undersleeves are called engageants and were detachable for laundering.

Lovely piece of the past, this photo.

Cheers,
China

[hettyhen]

China,
Thanks for the explanation about the dress, don't think the family were very well to do so likely she did remake it, and Jool for your estimate of age,  it seems it could well be a photo taken about the time of her second marriage in 1867.   Will file it away as Rebecca in the meantime.

Cheers
HeatherR