Author Topic: Two photographs to date  (Read 929 times)

Offline rlw254

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Two photographs to date
« Reply #9 on: Saturday 03 March 18 00:12 GMT (UK) »
Let's assume that the two young women in the family photo are generation two. This generation consisted of two daughters born 1882 and 1885, and a son born in 1883. The older daughter was married in 1901, the younger daughter in 1903. The first child of the older daughter was a boy born in 1902. The first child of the younger daughter was a girl born in 1905. I'm also going to assume that the child in this photo is the first child since others would probably be included if not. I can't personally tell if it's a boy or a girl...

If this photo were taken around 1904, for example, the girls would be 22 and 19. Their mother would be approximately 47. The gen 2 daughter born in 1885 lived to be 96 years old, hence the more modern photograph. In this case, one of the two young women would have to be her.


RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline rlw254

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Two photographs to date
« Reply #10 on: Thursday 08 March 18 02:07 GMT (UK) »
Bumping this to the top of the board - I'd love some more opinions!  :)

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline iforani

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Two photographs to date
« Reply #11 on: Thursday 08 March 18 09:19 GMT (UK) »
Looking at the two photos I think that they were different women. The women in the photo with the older woman (mother?) I think was taken at a later date. These women look more attractive than the women in the wedding photo.  :) Deb
McKay (Kildare, Ireland), Aldred (Manchester), Smith, Cooper (Kent), Howlett, Bodill, Atkins (Northamptonshire), Smart (UK, Africa), Brown, Bryant, Dixon, Walton

Offline rlw254

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Two photographs to date
« Reply #12 on: Sunday 30 December 18 00:41 GMT (UK) »
I'll give a little bit of an update here. In photo #1, the woman seated at the left is most likely the older woman from photo #3, and I believe this was taken around 1905.

I am still working on photo #2. I would love to get a good date range on this one as I think it would be very helpful for ID. Personally I think it looks a good bit older than photo #1. Maybe it contains the oldest woman in the back of photo #1 at her marriage? Somehow it is related to this family.

Any input on photo #2 is much appreciated. Any clothing experts?

Offline Wiggy

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,740
  • coloured by Gadget
    • View Profile
Re: Two photographs to date
« Reply #13 on: Sunday 30 December 18 01:08 GMT (UK) »
I have looked again, but can add nothing new to what has been said by everyone.     :-\

Wiggy
Gaunt, Ransom, McNally, Stanfield, Kimberley. (Tasmania)
Brown, Johnstone, Eskdale, Brand  (Dumfriess,  Scotland)
Booth, Bruerton, Deakin, Wilkes, Kimberley
(Warwicks, Staffords)
Gaunt (Yorks)
Percy, Dunning, Hyne, Grigg, Farley (Devon, UK)
Duncan (Fife, Devon), Hugh, Blee (Cornwall)
Green, Mansfield, (Herts)
Cavenaugh, Ransom (Middlesex)
 

 Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.

Offline maddys52

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,005
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Two photographs to date
« Reply #14 on: Sunday 30 December 18 01:31 GMT (UK) »
Perhaps if you could scan the whole of the wedding photograph (including the edges) and the back it may help in dating the photograph?

Offline rlw254

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Two photographs to date
« Reply #15 on: Sunday 30 December 18 01:39 GMT (UK) »
Great idea! I've had it in a frame knowing there was nothing to see on the back. I looked again at the full scan of the front to find a very faint signature at the bottom - E. J. Davis, a photographer in Philadelphia around 1908. I'll use this information and try to reference everything in my tree around these people to find anyone married around this time.

I still have a hard time believing that either of the two girls are the same as those in photo #1. I don't see the resemblance.

Offline Creasegirl

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 64
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Two photographs to date
« Reply #16 on: Sunday 30 December 18 13:54 GMT (UK) »
I think the woman in the right hand of the wedding photo could be the same woman in the right hand side of the second photo as there mouths look same quite wide.  I don't think the girls in wedding photos look related as one on left very distinctive looking.  Maybe 2 brothers marrying at same time.  I think the wedding photo quite early 1900 as veil seems a bit over the top like something from 1890s.
Garnock (lothian, fife)
Valet (london, switzerland)
Butcher (ramsgate, glasgow)
Blackbird (durham,  newcastle)
Barr (ayrshire, ireland)
Fleming (paisley)
Crone, croney ,(dumfriesshire, ireland)