Author Topic: Multiple wedding group, 1861 perhaps f Henry Sampson, Photgrapher, Southport.  (Read 644 times)

Offline ainslie

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,629
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
The wedding group on the attached c de v is in an album where very few are named, but some are dated 1861.  This bears the imprint of Henry Sampson, Photographer, Southport.
Opinions on the group are invited.  Was it common to held several weddings, or receptions, together?

The album belonged to my gt-grandfather George H Daglish who lived at Wigan  at the time, and worked at St Helens.

Thanks
Ainslie

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 Viktoria

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,302
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Multiple wedding group, 1861 perhaps f Henry Sampson, Photgrapher, Southport.
« Reply #1 on: Wednesday 05 June 19 20:27 BST (UK) »
I wonder if it was some religious sect where multiple weddings took place?
Perhaps Mormons.?
Are you aware of the religious persuasion?
If it was a society wedding there could have been quite a number of Bridesmaids.So not all the ladies would be  brides ,yet they do seem to be wearing veils.
Best of luck with your enquiries.
Viktoria.

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 ainslie

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,629
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Multiple wedding group, 1861 perhaps f Henry Sampson, Photgrapher, Southport.
« Reply #2 on: Wednesday 05 June 19 21:09 BST (UK) »
Thanks for comments.  Iím sure there were no unorthodox religions in the family and have only C of E ceremonies on record.

Scarcity of bridesmaids noted, good point.

This may not relate to my family at all, as I have been told that it was common practice to exchange cards.

A

Offline Wiggy

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,951
  • coloured by Gadget
    • View Profile
Re: Multiple wedding group, 1861 perhaps f Henry Sampson, Photgrapher, Southport.
« Reply #3 on: Wednesday 05 June 19 22:17 BST (UK) »
Can't answer the question except to say it seems unlikely to be 1861    :-\

 - I don't think photography was advanced enough for this type of photo in 1861.

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 Viktoria

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,302
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Multiple wedding group, 1861 perhaps f Henry Sampson, Photgrapher, Southport.
« Reply #4 on: Wednesday 05 June 19 23:28 BST (UK) »
Just before I read Wiggyís post I was looking at American Civil War photographs,they were very clear.1861-1865.
The big crinoline was in fashion at that time and also before.
Queen Victoriaís  wedding photo shows her wearing a smallish one.
That was the late 1830ís/ early 1840ís.
The Great Exhibition was 1851 and she was wearing one on the official photograph.
The style did vary through the years.
It is a mystery why so many brides on one photograph.
Viktoria.

Offline CelticAnnie

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Multiple wedding group, 1861 perhaps f Henry Sampson, Photgrapher, Southport.
« Reply #5 on: Wednesday 05 June 19 23:43 BST (UK) »
Goodness me; this is very intriguing!  I agree that all the ladies look like brides -- don't think any of them are bridesmaids, because of the veils; and, to point out the obvious, there are the correct number of grooms standing around to match the brides.  But why on earth would you have so many of them together at one time?

How big is the original photo?  I have never come upon a carte de visit that was not a studio portrait before. Anyway, I shall continue to follow this thread with interest!


CELTICANNIE   
PEPLOE/PEPLOW: Shropshire, Inverness
DAVIES: Inverness, Montgomeryshire, Ruabon
OWEN: Edinburgh, Aberystwyth, Middlesex, Essex, Kendal, Berwick, Montgomeryshire
TROLLOPE: Warwickshire, Middlesex
TAYLOR & McKAY: Montreal, Canada

Offline McGroger

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,431
  • Convicts, Commoners and Outlaws
    • View Profile
Re: Multiple wedding group, 1861 perhaps f Henry Sampson, Photgrapher, Southport.
« Reply #6 on: Thursday 06 June 19 00:21 BST (UK) »
It might only be one wedding. Iím thinking it is of the couple in the middle standing side-by-side; with the couples either side of them the man is standing behind his partner.

In some 1860s weddings the bridesmaids were dressed in white, often with veils.

As you can see from the building behind the party, this would have been a very substantial family, which would have been able to go to the considerable expense of bringing a photographer to their home.

If you do a bit of googling you can find other wedding photos like this (but I havenít found another quite as grand) taken in the 1860s.

Peter
Convicts: COSIER (1791); LEADBEATER (1791); SINGLETON (& PARKINSON) (1792); STROUD (1793); BARNES (aka SYDNEY) (1800); DAVIS (1804); CLARK (1806); TYLER (1810); COWEN (1818); ADAMS[ON] (1821); SMITH (1827); WHYBURN (1827); HARBORNE (1828).
Commoners: DOUGAN (1844); FORD (1849); JOHNSTON (1850); BEATTIE (& LONG) (1856); BRICKLEY (1883).
Outlaws: MCGREGOR (1883) & ass. clans, Glasgow, Glenquaich, Glenalmond and Glengyle.

Offline Mckha489

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,356
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Multiple wedding group, 1861 perhaps f Henry Sampson, Photgrapher, Southport.
« Reply #7 on: Thursday 06 June 19 00:40 BST (UK) »
There are a number of weddings in the 1860-s reported in the newspapers with twelve (which is what I have counted) bridesmaids. But I cannot see any that would have been likely to have a Southport photographer unless he travelled to London or Ireland especially.


One of them I think was this woman. Photo here dated 1861

https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/person/mp95022/lady-mary-catherine-henrietta-aldworth-nee-bernard
currently concentrating on NUTCHER & MARSHALL families, Hampshire.
and family of Thomas ANDERSON a Tailor of Perth, Scotland

Offline Ruskie

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 22,806
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Multiple wedding group, 1861 perhaps f Henry Sampson, Photgrapher, Southport.
« Reply #8 on: Thursday 06 June 19 00:54 BST (UK) »
Amazing photograph!

As well as those at the front there seem to be more wearing veils or head-dresses towards the back of the group (and a little one on the far left) ... it is unclear if they are also wearing wedding dresses, though the majority of the women in the photo seem to be.  :)

I wonder if it could be an extreme interpretation of dressing the bridesmaids the same as the bride to confuse evil spirits, wife thieves or jealous suitors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridesmaid (see 'origin and history')