This
photograph has remained a mystery to us for years. I knew it was
someone to do with my side of the family as it came to us with other
photographs, from my maternal grandparents after they died.
We
had thought it was probably one of their parents or grandparents but
there was no way of knowing. My niece before Christmas informed me
they were going to see my uncle (mums brother) whom I had no idea was
still alive. I asked her if she would get him to view some
photographs and see if he knew who they were (a long shot as most had
died before he was born).
Anyhow,
he said they were the parents and grandparents of my grandfather,
which made sense and was what we hoped was the case. Now the
conundrum begins, what is the occasion for the photograph.
The
couple on the right are my great grandparents, who married in
Hereford, close to the Welsh border in July 1884, when he would have
been 30/31 and she 24/25. Her left hand is prominent in the picture
indicating either a marriage or engagement, or possibly, a wedding
anniversary. I feel it more likely a marriage due to the buttonhole of the man behind her.
The
foliage suggests summer, would you agree? I can't quite identify the
foliage/flowers in the container at her feet.
The
lapels of his matching 3 piece suit, are narrow and short. Under a
magnifier, there is the hint of a pocket watch fastening at his
waist. His hair is short and swept back and he also sports a walrus
moustache and bankers collar. He has a rose in his lapel and appears
to be wearing a narrow, light coloured tie (not a bow tie).
All
the above are indicative of the late 1800's but mens fashions changed
more slowly than women’s and as I am no expert, who knows. At the
time of his marriage he was a labourer but had on the 1881 census
previously been and probably still was, a groom/gardener for a big,
local farmer.
Now
to her. In the upper echelons of society, the bustle was still around
at this time, as was a relatively tightly clinched waist. However, in
the countryside, where they lived and worked, fashions were more
practical but she is still wearing a corset of some type. Her blouse
collar is quite small and she is wearing a cameo brooch. Hair is
swept back in neat fashion, probably into a bun. She was a servant to
another local farmer (with the same name as his boss!).
The
couple on the left are supposedly his parents. They are both Welsh and
at the time of their son's marriage, he was a Bailiff. This older man
sports a fringe beard most popular in the 1850's and 1860's but
presumably liked it, so kept it even though it was out of fashion. He
is wearing a smart, 3 piece, pin striped suit with quite nice buttons and
shiny shoes. His suit seems older with regards to fashion than that
worn by his son.
There
is no evidence of a fob watch but he is holding a well made walking stick
with what appears to be a metal top to it. His bowler hat, according
to the invention of the bowler hat site, is not only a status symbol
but was used as a form of protection in the countryside (which
probably fits in with him being a bailiff). If this is a marriage
photograph, then he would be around 53/54 years old (looks a lot
older but was out in the countryside all his working life). He is
seated on a highly polished chair with a material covered seat.
His
wife who stands behind him is about 50. She is wearing a brooch at
the base of her over-blouse? and is holding the edge of the back of
the chair, also displaying her wedding ring (whether this display is
intentional or not, is hard to gauge). She also wears a very long chain of
some sort, which disappears out of sight.
Anyone
any idea when this type of chain was fashionable?
The
man seated on the left died in 1895. If this is a photograph of his
son's wedding, then he died 11 years after it was taken.
The
back of the photograph shows a split postcard style which only came
into use after 1902. The stamp box however, is an upside down horse
shoe with T. I. C. inside it. Research shows this was only in use in
the 1920's.
So,
my conundrum. I do feel this is my great grandfather and his parents.
To be printed on a postcard it has to be a reprint for some reason as
the chap on the left is already dead.
The
women's clothes to me seem more likely very late Victorian, early
Edwardian. If so, then it can't be who we think it is, although it
could be an anniversary of some kind very close to 1895?
Who
knows, such is the difficulty of dating ancestral photographs.
I think this photo is much later than you think - if the couple married in 1884 and were in their 20's they look like they are in their 40's/50's so that would bring the photo into the 1900's.... also the lady on the left top is quite late....
ReplyDeletehave you looked up to see when their relatives got married as it looks like they were at an occasion.
Good luck.
Lovely photo by the way
Thank you Gigibird. As you can see by the clothing historians post, it is around 1910 - 1917. No idea now who it could be but will carry on when I feel like doing so.
DeleteI have a lovely photo of a large family standing on the steps of a house circa 1880-1890. The people are obviously of my mother's maternal family-there are many resemblances. Unfortunately I only found it in my mother's things after she died 15 years ago. My father had no idea who they were and all other family members are gone now except one aunt who didn't know who they were either. I've thought of posting it on the internet as I can't help but feel there must be someone who knows who they are. Good luck on your search!
ReplyDeleteThank you Jan. It is so frustration sometimes isn't it?
Deletereally interesting, I hope you find some more info on them.
ReplyDeleteGill
So do I but don't know how at the moment.
DeleteThat is so interesting. What a beautiful photo. One to treasure!
ReplyDeleteSft x
Yes, it is a lovely photograph isn't it. Still feel it is to do with my grandparents somehow.
DeleteI dont have any photos of my ancestors from the 1890's, possibly only some from the 1920's. I wish I did. I hope you can get to the bottom of it.
ReplyDeleteI was wondering if it could any later than that but don't think so from everything I have read.
Delete