Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - jim1

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 2434
The Common Room / Re: An online GEDCOM viewer
« on: Today at 11:35 »
An ahnentafel file does a better job. I think that most gen progs have them but it's easy to use & useful if you don't have one.
I notice it's also printable.

I would suggest late Edwardian & possibly up to WW1.
You can see that the beds & linen are not all the same so it looks
like this has been put together in a hurry.
It's possible this is a building given over to military use
& this was taken before the arrival of wounded men.

World War One / Re: Why the Gordon Highlanders?
« on: Today at 10:57 »
William attested Jan. 1st. 1904. So do you know where he was living at that time?
It's also worth remembering that Regiments had traditional recruiting grounds outside of their County.

Family History Beginners Board / Re: Joseph Haughton STOKES Birmingham UK
« on: Sunday 23 June 19 17:03 BST (UK)  »
It does say Navigation St. same at marriage.
Charlotte's parents are living in the tiny hamlet of Flint Green just outside Acock's Green.

I think what you have is the negative of the copy not of the original.
So the original is an ambrotype copied probably 20th. C. & you have the negative of it.

Family History Beginners Board / Re: Joseph Haughton STOKES Birmingham UK
« on: Sunday 23 June 19 11:30 BST (UK)  »
Just to add.
Married Oct. 10th. 1843. St. Martin's B'ham. By licence.
Both full age.
Add: Navigation St. B'ham for him & Yardley for her.
Occ: Grocer.
Father's names & occupations as above.
Peter Harris & Sarah Harris.
All signed own hand.
Appears they went to the USA (Hartland, Ohio) & came back.
I can't find a suitable death for Joseph (Charlotte listed as widow in 1851).
Maybe died in the USA & prompted her return.

Yes I mentioned the wedding ring being on the wrong hand as it appears in the photo which as you say indicates an ambrotype.

I know the image is separate from the "negative".
Let me explain.
Ambrotypes (glass) was the medium used in the 1850's-early 60's.
They were called positives because the glass was the finished product.
Negatives arrived later.
The lady's dress style looks like it may pre-date the arrival of negatives & therefore
would make the "negative" an ambrotype.
It's possible the image was taken from the ambrotype by photographing it.
What you don't want is someone trying to clean up the back as this will result in the loss of the image.
Before doing anything you need to establish if the "negative" is in fact such or an ambrotype.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 2434