I would have said 1860's from the mother's styling. however, what fascinates me is the child's hairstyle. It looks quite modern. I have a photo of my great grandmother c1885 and she has what looks like a neat bob. I always thought Victorian girls had long hair which they brushed for hours. Obviously not.
This is the first time I have been able to successfully scan a photo in lol !
Nell, I thought that, too!
On the back it says Baker & Son, 30, Bute Street, Luton.
I have another picture of a lady with a bustle that I am trying to get scanned in without success, lol! (Seems I have lost the knack immediately lmho)
On the second picture on the back it says King Brothers 30 Bute Street Luton. I never thought of checking the census for them, will have a look later on.
Are we sure it's her hair and not the hat that looks like flickups?
If her hair IS short, it could be because she had been ill, or was a sickly child - it was "well known" that long hair sapped your strength and it was usualy to cut it off if fever was present.
Just Barbara
Yes, dear, we noticed the pantaloons, lol!!!
Oh yes, I'd say 1860s-70s - they both look very Queen Victoria-ish and the Scottish dress was popular then for little girls.
Sorry peeps, have been locked out of the site all day :(
Never mind, thanks, some really interesting comments ! They definitely weren't Scottish though. She would have been a farmer's wife.
Rachel, thanks for that, I never noticed the hat before !!
I don't know if it helps, but I wonder if the lady seems to be holding onto the child's right arm, as if to support her?
Could the child have been born in 1866 approx? Or 1863 ?
The reason why I ask is that it could be my 2 x great grandmother, she had a daughter called Louisa that is recorded as "feeble minded" on the 1901 census, & died when she was 33.
Thanks OC, thought it was just maybe she was a bit bored, lol!
Do you think she was about 7 or 8 when the picture was taken? That would put the date around 1873-5. Would the mother's dress fit in with the fashions then, bearing in mind she was a farmer's wife so maybe the dress would be a little outdated, lol!
If it is Louisa then I am not surprised she probably had a genetic fault, because Louisa was the daughter of my 2 x great grandfather & his niece!! The lady in the picture would have been around 35 when the photo was taken. After her parents died Louisa went to live with her older married sister but sadly by 1901 her sister was widowed. After that she disappears, apart from a possible death for her when she was 33.
How tempted am I to send off for the poor thing's death certificate. I expect she died of pneumonia or something though. How sad, but exciting I have narrowed it down to her, & my 2 x great grandmother who would also be my 3 or 4 x great aunt, lmho !!
Did anyone manage to find the photographers on the census at all?
Comment