Author Topic: Ring finger significance circa 1900s  (Read 2107 times)

Offline jen56johns

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • View Profile
Re: Ring finger significance circa 1900s
« Reply #9 on: Friday 03 February 12 08:14 GMT (UK) »
Hi,

Thanks to all of your for your comments and questions.

Yes, it's definitely the right person. My problem is that I don't think it's an engagement ring as this photo would have been taken in Port Adelaide and then my g-grandmother, her two sisters and her mother moved to Perth some time around 1905/6 and then my g-grandmother met and married my g-grandfather Stephen Johns in March 1907 and she was 3 months pregnant.

I have no reason to think that Stephen had gone to Adelaide and met her there.  I believe they moved because my g-g-grandmother had a sister in Perth.

Anyway, it might help if I attach the photo.  Beatrice is at the back on the far right.

Thanks,

Jenni
Johns - Cornwall
McNerney - Manchester
Speakman - Manchester
Warman - Faringdon
Utting - Norfolk

Offline PrueM

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 12,637
  • Please don't try to PM me :)
    • View Profile
Re: Ring finger significance circa 1900s
« Reply #10 on: Friday 03 February 12 09:42 GMT (UK) »
Hi Jenni :)

Now, that looks like a wedding photo to me.  Not of your g-grandmother, and possibly not of anyone in the group, but the fact that there are buttonholes being worn and posies being held suggests "wedding" to me.

Is there a reason that you believe the photo to have been taken prior to 1906?


Offline jen56johns

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • View Profile
Re: Ring finger significance circa 1900s
« Reply #11 on: Friday 03 February 12 10:38 GMT (UK) »
Prue,

That's something I hadn't considered - a wedding.  The reason I believe this was taken in Adelaide and before Beatrice got married is that Alonzo did not move to WA so the whole family was never together again.

The little girl in the photo was born in 1895 so that gives me a rough idea of when this was taken.  Beatrice's sister Clara married in 1900, Alonzo in 1902 and Arthur in Aug 1906.  Arthur is in the middle at the back.  I wonder if it could have been Arthur's wedding?

Still doesn't solve the question about Beatrice's ring, but if this could be Arthur's wedding it gives me a more exact timeframe at least.

Thanks for your help.

Jenni.
Johns - Cornwall
McNerney - Manchester
Speakman - Manchester
Warman - Faringdon
Utting - Norfolk

Offline sparrett

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 18,293
    • View Profile
Re: Ring finger significance circa 1900s
« Reply #12 on: Friday 03 February 12 10:43 GMT (UK) »
The child is ten or possibly eleven years old.
Sue
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline jen56johns

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • View Profile
Re: Ring finger significance circa 1900s
« Reply #13 on: Friday 03 February 12 11:10 GMT (UK) »
I thought she would be 10 or so too.

Only problem is that the WA Postal Directory has Grace (my gg- grandmother) living in WA in 1906.  WOuld this have been published at the end of the year?  I don't think she had sufficient money to have travelled back and forth from WA to SA.
Johns - Cornwall
McNerney - Manchester
Speakman - Manchester
Warman - Faringdon
Utting - Norfolk

Offline cati

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,528
  • I'm the one in the middle...
    • View Profile
Re: Ring finger significance circa 1900s
« Reply #14 on: Friday 03 February 12 11:16 GMT (UK) »
The information in the Postal Directory would have to be collected, collated, typeset and then published:  so if a person moved, the information in the  Directory would be out of date as soon as it was published.

Cati
Bagot, Bate, Dominy,  Cox, Frost, Griffiths, Eccleston(e), Godrich, Griffiths, Hartland/Hartlin, Westwood, Spicer, Peake, Pass, Perry, Nuttle, Warrender

Catch the Blog at http://familytreeblogs.com/kate