RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Free Photo Restoration & Date Old Photographs => Topic started by: Flemming on Monday 11 February 19 17:17 GMT (UK)
-
Hope this photo uploads ok. It's not in the best of health even before being scanned. We're looking for suggestions on a date as it may give a clue to who the people are. We used to think it was a wedding photo with a bouquet on the bride's lap, but it could be her bonnet. Probably taken in Plymouth, Devon although there's nothing on the reverse to help with this. Any ideas welcome.
Thanks, flemming.
-
Hi, flemming.
I can't help with a date but I've converted your pic to a jpeg, cropped off all the white and loaded it so that it can attract the attention of the expert dating people.
Peter
-
I think that could be 1860s.
Suggest you add 'Date please' to the original title of the thread, to bring in those who are more 'up with dating skills' ;)
Wiggy
-
I also think it is 1860s . A classic front-on pose of the period.
-
Thanks to McGroger for tidying up the photo, and also to Wiggy and Gadget for the dating (and I've amended the heading as suggested).
If it is 1860s, it helps greatly. We had wondered if it was a husband and wife who died in 1860 (age 50) and 1858 (age 40) respectively but it seems unlikely, especially given the last years of their life were spent in near poverty. In fact, most of their lives were poor so presume this means a posh dress and having the photo taken at all would put them out of the frame?
One of the family tales is that a multiple great aunt and uncle went to Australia, made good, and used to send home gold in small bags. Perhaps the photo came with one of these? The main gold rush era started in 1851 so it could fit.
-
I agree with 1860s date too.
Carol
-
Thanks, Carol. Do you think it could be a wedding photo? I've found a possible marriage in Plymouth in 1865, bride would have been 21, groom 28, although he looks older than this - but could it be just a sign of the times and a hard life? I suppose losing a leg wouldn't have helped his demeanour much, and perhaps I should be trying to find out whether my target, Robert Henry DRAKE, had lost one of his by the time the photo was taken.
Thanks again to all who have helped - much appreciated.
-
It could be but I would need to see it in Photoshop to be a bit more sure. I thinks she is holding a hat. Not sure if he has a beard or whether its damage.
Carol
-
Here's a copy with some of the colorcast removed. Not sure if this helps or not.
-
It could be but I would need to see it in Photoshop to be a bit more sure. I thinks she is holding a hat.
Carol
Agree - it looks like a bonnet with ribbons. Interestingly, he seems to be wearing a slipper or similar.
Gadget
-
Yes, it does look like a hat.
-
I reckon 1870s not later than 1880. Is he a Crimea veteran?
-
Don't think it is as late as 1870s. :-\
-
Don't think it is as late as 1870s. :-\
Me neither, her outfit doesn't fit for that decade.
Carol
-
If anything it is nearer the late 1850s than the 1870s.
Crimean War was 1853-56
-
It seems Robert Henry DRAKE was a fisherman, licensed boatman, etc., until 1911 and so could have lost his leg on the ships and carried on working with a stump, or been born that way and still found fishing work. He died in 1924, age 82. His only child was also Robert Henry DRAKE who, I recall, married in 1890. Perhaps I should delve deeper and see if there are any related family histories on-line.
Ref the Crimean War, it's not come up with any of the ancestors before but will look out for it.
Thanks to all for your help - further forward today than in a few people's lifetimes :)
-
Don't think it is as late as 1870s. :-\
A long way from London fashions were frequently 10 years or more behind the times. Indeed in Bournemouth last week I saw s woman dressed in middle class early 1950s style, and she thought she was wonderful.
-
It's not just the style of the clothing that is late 1850s/1860s - it's the pose.
-
Agree v. late 1850's-early 1860's.
They look to be well into their 50's at least.
A long way from London fashions were frequently 10 years or more behind the times
Not sure where this has come from.
Disagree that some women were 10 years behind.
With quarterly periodicals being circulated throughout the Empire
women were no more that a few months behind the latest fashion.
Even women on the lowest social scale always had something up to date
as Sunday best.
-
Jim has made me wonder if this chap is the original candidate after all. Silvander SIMSON (known as Samuel) was born in 1810 and died in 1860. His wife, Mary PALMER, bp 1818, died in childbirth in 1858. The baby went to the workhouse and died six months later. Perhaps the photo was taken when she was pregnant, or perhaps it was taken after Mary’s death and the woman is one of Silvander’s daughters. The deaths could explain why he looks so unhappy. He was a quay porter, though, and I wonder how he’d have managed this with a stump. There was an inquest into his death and the certificate includes the note that he ‘…rambled into said Beer House…’ where he died. Can a man with a wooden leg ramble? And could poorer people afford photos?
I’ve uploaded another photo of his youngest daughter, Mary Jane SIMSON, born 1855, married 1876. We thought this was taken before she married, perhaps for her future husband who was in the merchant navy. There’s something about her eyes and nose that look similar to the chap with the wooden leg but could be just wishful thinking.
-
This is also 1860's but late decade.
It always helps dating if you show the whole card & the back.
-
Hello Jim, this is the whole card. It was cut and stuck in a frame and later in an album. It's stuck so securely that the old backing won't come off. Same for the older photo.
If the second photo is late 1860s, it means Mary Jane is younger than she looks there. The ID is one we're pretty sure of. Jane was alive until 1930 and passed on these photos.