Dating a photograph

[stepmars]

I have uploaded a photo - see:
http://talkingscot.com/gallery/displayi ... ?pos=-1544

It depicts two women and a baby and was taken in northern England. I'm having trouble identifying the ancestors in the photo but it would help if I could put a date to it. Can anyone suggest possible dates from the clothing, hairstyles, accessories etc?

Thanks,

Steve.

[Currie]

Hello Steve,

My first reaction was Cabinet Photo about 1910 or thereabouts. Ankles are still covered so probably pre WW1. No puffy sleeves so not 1890s. But I’d definitely get a second opinion.

The photographers address is currently occupied by a firm of Solicitors.

There’s a very small Fred Ash photo on this page that looks to be maybe 10 years earlier. (4th down on left side) http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.anc ... llery3.htm

In 1901 Fred Ash, age 40, born Mansfield, Nottinghamshire was working as a photographer in Blackpool, Lancashire. In 1881 he was Frederick J Ash photographing at home in Moss Side Lancashire. In 1891 he’s Fred J Ash still somewhere in Lancashire.

There’s some good information on this site http://www.cartes.freeuk.com/time/time.htm

Hope this helps,
Alan

[stepmars]

Hi Alan,
That was a great help.
Many thanks,
Steve

[Isabel H]

Have you looked for Fred J Ash in trade directories for Bolton? If you can find when he was at that address it might help date the photo.

[Currie]

Good idea Isabel,

There’s some English Directories here http://www.historicaldirectories.org/hd/
(search each Trades directory for photographers) I couldn’t see one specifically for Bolton.

Slater's Manchester, Salford & Suburban Directory, 1911. [Part 3: Trades, Ecclesiastical, etc.]
Listed under Photographers: Ash Fred, 40 King Street.

Slater's Manchester, Salford & Suburban Directory, 1909. [Part 3: Trades & Official Directories, etc.]
Still at 40 King St.

Slater's Manchester, Salford & Suburban Directory, 1903. [Part 3: Trades & Official Directories, etc.]
Still at 40 King St.

Slater's Manchester & Salford Directory, 1895. [Part 2: Trades, Institutions, Streets, etc.]
Can’t see him there.

Maybe the photo is mid WW1. The two women are probably working class dressed up in their best clothes but can’t afford anything flash, probably related (same nose?), maybe sisters? Presumably the one holding the baby is the mother. Where’s the father? Neither is dressed in mourning clothes. It’s the sort of photo you might send to a father who is away somewhere, maybe with the military, to show him his new child.

Just guessing,
Alan

[stepmars]

We think the sitting woman holding the baby is the mother. This woman gave birth in 1905, 1907, 1909, 1912, 1914, 1918, & 1924. The standing woman has us puzzled. She was not a sister but may have been a sister-in-law.

The mother was a working class woman probably dressed in her Sunday best.

The father was born in 1878 but we don't think he served in WW1.

Would anyone like to speculate on the age difference between the sitting and standing women? Does anyone think they could be mother and daughter? We don't, but it is a possibility.

Thanks,

Steve

[garibaldired]

Hi Steve,

I'm not very good at likenesses or dating photos but have found it very useful to try and establish how this photo has come down to you. Who has saved it and why? Have you any more like this one or is it a one-off? Are you presuming that the woman holding the baby is the relative you know when it might not? I've been caught out like this so many times!
Could the photo be a christening photo taken for the benefit of the godmother - in which case she could be the standing or the sitting woman!

Just some thoughts and probably not very helpful - sorry

Meg

[Currie]

Back again Steve,

A few city scenes from the years in question would come in handy. You could get a much better idea of the variety of everyday fashions for a particular year.

Based on the birth years mentioned, for the standing woman to be the child’s sister she would have to be the 1905 birth and the child the 1924 birth. That would make her 19 and I guess she could be that. Perhaps she’s a bit of a plain-Jane. The mother could be aged in her mid 40s if she carried her age well although she looks much younger. The fashions, especially hem length, look a bit outdated to be 1924. Both women are youngish and are wearing similar fashions and would look a bit of an oddity if too far out of date.

It might be worthwhile having a closer look at the photographs measurements etc. to see if it is a cabinet photo or something else. They’re about 11.5 cm x 16.5 cm. I would have thought cabinet photos might still be around in places in 1914 but would probably have been long out of fashion by 1924. But there’s no hard and fast rule with clothing or photograph fashions as all changes were gradual etc.

I would still guess the photo was WW1. I think it likely that the standing woman would have to be someone very close to the child’s mother and any person the photo was intended for especially as she has her arm ‘around’ the seated woman but it seems unlikely she would be the child’s sister. A visit to a photo studio was something special and you would think all of the kids would be there if it was intended for an absent father, so maybe it could be as Meg suggested.

Still guessing,
Alan

[marilyn morning]

Hi Steve,

Here are a few links that may help date your photo?


http://www.cartes.freeuk.com/time/time.htm

http://www.corsetsandcrinolines.com/timeline.shtml

http://www.billblanton.com/date.htm


Regards
Marilyn

[Anne H]

Hi Steve,

Try this site also http://www.cartes.freeuk.com/dec/dated.htm and take a look at the early 1900's. ( just realized Marilyn gave you that website )

I'm hopeless at dating photographs but the woman standing appears to be wearing a wedding ring and could be the baby's mother. The woman sitting looks quite a bit older and could be the grandmother.

If all else fails, Rootschat has an excellent photography section...you might try there!

Regards,
Anne H