RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: Lisa in California on Monday 12 February 18 02:18 GMT (UK)
-
I do not know who has the original copy of this photograph; I hope it is ok to post it so that I may ask a question, please? (My aunt gave it to me perhaps 5-10 years ago; she obtained it from another relative.)
The photo is of my great-grandmother, Dora. I am wondering approximately when the photograph may have been taken, please? Actually, I am also wondering if anyone might know the occasion for the flowers(?). I believe she has coins near the collar but I cannot see them clearly enough to determine if that is true. She was born in Ontario, Canada; her parents were born in Ireland.
Any details about the photograph would be appreciated. Thank you, Lisa
-
Hi Lisa
What a lovely photo.
I think it's late 1880s - I have some photos in my books of ladies wearing dresses like that which are dated 1888-9.
I wonder why she had her hair cut :-\
Gadget
-
I was thinking early mid 1880s....could be a wedding photo....do you know when she got married Lisa? Her hair style wouldn't look out of place today...I wonder if she had an illness resulting in her cutting her hair. The old fashioned idea that long hair saps the energy springs to mind.
Carol
-
Just read underneath the photo that I was talking about - late 1880s - 'hair is also characteristic of these years, worn with a fringe and having a very modern, short appearance'. Also notes the military-like trimmings on otherwise fairly plain top.
Gadget
-
Thank you both; your replies are quite interesting. I am attaching a photo that is of Dora and her fiance/husband and it was identified on RootsChat as possibly mid-1880s. To me, she looks quite different (keeping in mind that her head positioning could make a difference) in the two photos.
(Gadget, Dora is the lady we were discussing last week with the possible hidden foot.)
Dora did marry in 1888. To me, its a bit odd that her face is so full in the photo attached above (compared to the one below). :-\
-
Just been looking up her marriage, Lisa, I see that she was married in July 1888, aged 26. She looks older in the photo with William.
Think the skirt suggests a smaller bustle, which was second part of 1880s.
-
Hope you don't mind but I got rid of a few spots and the blue line. I couldn't resist but kept changes to a minimum.
-
You're quick and correct. She was born c1861 (he in 1863). But reading that you think she could be older brings to mind that there are date problems with two census returns. I will have to look into that again. I'll explain in a moment - it takes me forever to type and think about how to phrase some things. ;)
-
Thank you Gadget - I really appreciate it! It is beautiful.
-
I am not sure when she was born. Her death certificate stated that she was born in 1861. She is shown on various documents as born in Aug/Sep 1861/62. However, the 1861 Canada census (which I believe was taken in January 1862) has (among other Stuart children):
Dorando/Dorendo - female, age 5
Infant - female, age 1 - was this Dora?
My great-grandmother's name was Dora Emmeline. Did her parents give two daughters similar names? I've cannot find little Dorando anywhere except this census. Or, was my Dora actually Dorando? :-\
Sorry, in my rush to reply, I thought you meant she looked older than William. :-[ Oops. My apologies.
-
(I added a note to the bottom of my last reply after I posted the reply.)
I will have a look around to see if there was another event in the family that could have prompted the photograph with the flowers. Thank you both for the approximate date and for the clean-up Gadget. :)
-
I am not sure when she was born. Her death certificate stated that she was born in 1861. She is shown on various documents as born in Aug/Sep 1861/62. However, the 1861 Canada census (which I believe was taken in January 1862) has (among other Stuart children):
Dorando/Dorendo - female, age 5
Infant - female, age 1 - was this Dora?
My great-grandmother's name was Dora Emmeline. Did her parents give two daughters similar names? I've cannot find little Dorando anywhere except this census. Or, was my Dora actually Dorando? :-\
I'm thinking that Dorando died and Dora was possibly named for her. No proof (will have a look) but that seems to be what families did in those days.
-
1901 census has her birth date as 15th August 1862.
Added - William as 2nd June 1864
-
Find a Grave has her birth date as 11 Sept 1861. I wonder who informed :-\
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/158415916
Think her birthdate when alive would be more accurate!
-
Hi Gadget:
I've actually found (not for my family) a census with three children with the same name, I suppose to keep the name going should one or two die.
At least 25 years ago, I found a document (headstone? - I will check) with her birth date of 11-Sep-1861. However, there are several documents that have August 1861.
So that it isn't a waste of your time, a couple of RootsChatters have helped me immensely with this family. We have searched and searched (although it was a few years ago) and could not come up with what happened to Dorando. But, I appreciate any time that you may be willing to take. I also have done a lot of research for her siblings and parents.
Added: I really have to check where I obtained my dates. I see the note about William's year. Thank you very much for pointing it out.
Also, the Stuarts and Dora's husband's side were known for handing down names.
-
1901 census has her birth date as 15th August 1862.
Added - William as 2nd June 1864
Find a Grave has her birth date as 11 Sept 1861. I wonder who informed :-\
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/158415916
Think her birthdate when alive would be more accurate!
-
Death entry has her as 73 on 9 July 1835
???
-
I believe I have a photograph of the headstone (it will take a while to find it). FindAGrave has a date of 1863 and I have as well. How could both Dora's and William's date be incorrect? William's death certificate shows a date of death as 23-Sep-1924; he was age 61.
-
Death entry has her as 73 on 9 July 1835
???
She was born Aug/Sep 1861/62. She died July 1935, so she had not yet had her birthday for that year which should make her year of birth 1861. I think (math is my worst subject).
I will check the census returns to see what the comment is for the age column. I believe at least one states "age at last birthdate" and I believe 1861 (taken in Jan 1862) states age at next birthdate. That could be making a difference.
Update: My computer was acting up (responding very slowly). Hopefully, after turning it off and on again it will go back to normal. Thank you so much for your help, I really appreciate it. :)
-
I just think that the birth dates on the the 1901 (15 August 1862) might be the best indication. The person who informed on her death would not necessarily know her birth date - FaG has it as 11 September 1861. Do you have the death cert available to see who was the informant?
-
This could explain minor variations in her ages (for Canadian Census returns):
1851 - age next birthday
1861 - age next birthday
1861 - age next birthday
1871 - age
1881 - age
1891 - age
1901 - month and date of birth, year of birth, age at last birthday
1911 - month of birth, year of birth, age at last birthday
1921 - age at last birthday
I appreciate your inquiries about Dora - I was wondering (out loud - to myself) how the dates could be off, not wondering about your findings. ;)
-
Just adding this before I go and do some other things. This from the 1901, giving William and Dora's birthdates.
-
I do have the certificate - one of her sons - my grandfather - was the informant. But also included on the certificate is the birth date of Aug 12. I have September 11 on a 5-generation chart that I printed in 1993. I am going to spend a few minutes looking for the photograph of the headstone - I think it only has a year, but now I am wondering where I found September as her month of birth.
-
Thank you for posting the image. I appreciate your help and I will delve into all of my paperwork to sort things out. Thank you again; I hope you have a good evening.
-
Find a Grave has her birth date as 11 Sept 1861.
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/158415916
-
Thank you, Gadget. I just dug through one binder - I do not have any birth, marriage or death papers that state her exact birth information. I either obtained the date from my father/aunt, or more than likely it was obtained from the headstone (which doesn't make it correct, of course).
I will continue to have a look around after I do some much-needed work in the front garden (we don't want to lose any possible visitors in the tall grass). ;D
-
Thank you both; your replies are quite interesting. I am attaching a photo that is of Dora and her fiance/husband and it was identified on RootsChat as possibly mid-1880s. To me, she looks quite different (keeping in mind that her head positioning could make a difference) in the two photos.
(Gadget, Dora is the lady we were discussing last week with the possible hidden foot.)
Dora did marry in 1888. To me, its a bit odd that her face is so full in the photo attached above (compared to the one below). :-\
She does look older in this photo doesn't she....I did think I had seen her face before. Dating photos is not an exact science and there are always exceptions but Gadget is more experienced than me.
Carol
Carol
-
Pity there's not more of her dress showing, Carol.
-
Apologies about posting a third topic about Dora, but I have yet another question.
Years ago, I was told by my aunt that the image with two photos is the same woman, Dora.
Written on the back of the photo of the lady leaning on the fur(?) is "Great Aunt Carrie".
Dora was born c1861, in Ontario, Canada. She married William (who is in her photo) in 1888.
Carrie was born c1859, in Ontario, Canada. Carrie was William's sister. (Carrie married in 1904.)
Dora and Carrie appear to be wearing similar if not identical necklaces. Since it looks like at least one necklace had a locket (or coin?), is there a chance that they were given the items at the same time, to place a loved one's photo or other item inside? Or, it is more likely that for whatever reason one gave the other the necklace to wear/keep? Another thought: they both possibly knew each other by the time the photos were taken and by chance bought the same necklace? I do not know anything about jewellery from this time period.
Less likely since she appears to have different features, this wouldn't be the same person in all of the photos, perhaps?
Again, as in recent postings about Dora, I appreciate any guidance or explanations about the photographs. It was noted earlier that Dora's photographs were taken around mid 1880s. Thank you for any guidance you may share. Lisa
PS Before I started researching my family I knew nothing about Dora. Any personal information that can be obtained about her is precious to me, even if it is to just find out about her necklace.
-
Sorry, attaching images now. :-\ ;)
-
Hi Lisa,
There is no need to post 3 topics on the same subject. When you reply to any topic with your questions this will immediately refresh the topic and bring it to the top again.
Regards
Sarah
-
I have wondered about the wedding photo of Dora and the younger looking portrait for a few days, Lisa. I now think that the young girl with the cropped hair and the woman with the fur (Carrie) are the same.
What other info do you have on Carrie?
Gadget
-
I thought the same as soon as I saw it.
Carol
-
Hi Gadget and Carol:
While looking through all of the (copied, not original) photographs that I was sent years ago, it reminded me of the family photo that was taken c1901-1902. I can attach that image if it might help? If I figured out the individuals correctly, it includes Dora (and her sister, Sarah), Caroline Anna/Carrie (who became Dora's s-i-l) and William (who was Dora's husband).
When I received the photograph I only knew the names of three individuals. By looking at how they are positioned in the photograph, I believe I have correctly identified the individuals.
Carrie/Caroline Anna was born in Ontario, Canada c1859. Her parents settled in Toronto in 1857. She was one of four siblings, the only girl. She didn't marry until 1904 (also in Toronto). She lived with family members prior to her marriage.
Thank you for your interest. Without the reminder about the difference between the two earlier photographs, I wouldn't have thought of looking at the c1901 photo. ::) I will wait until I see if the 1901 photo is wanted, as I've already added so many. Also, I am not sure how to make the image smaller so that it is easier to view? Or, perhaps a small image is not preferred.
I have one last photograph of a lady who looks like the lady leaning on the fur, but perhaps it is a photo of Carrie's niece? I cannot date it. She is also wearing a locket, but it doesn't have the extra link of chain dangling from the necklace. If I had to guess, I would guess that the lady leaning and the lady with the shorter locket necklace are the same.
Note: I am waiting for a phone call which may take me away for a bit.