RootsChat.Com
Some Special Interests => Occupation Interests => Topic started by: mariotcameron on Monday 07 December 09 18:41 GMT (UK)
-
Hi,
I have been analysing19th century photos from Scotish family members (Moray, Rose Cromaty); I have the feeling that there is a mismatch between their ocupation as indicated in the databases and the aparent social status at the photos;
I have the feeling that some "photo services" included the dress and haircut;
Can somebody comment on this?
Cheers
Mario
-
Mario; I wouldn't know about the photographers providing the clothes etc. But, I would suggest that the typical 'portrait' photo's we see were not exactly just 'throw away' snap shots.
I have a photo of my own Grandparents and they're both clearly in their Sunday Best and have scrubbed up for the occasion.
Added to that is the back drops used by professional photographers of the era. They'd usually have a few very nice bits of furniture and drapes for their subjects to be photographed with. This could quite often add up to a cultured looking subject in a rather refined setting.
In a word; Illusory!
Could this be what ye driving at?
-
I'd completely agree !
This is a picture of my grandmother ... high status, wouldn't you say ?? Don't you believe it ... her father was still an ag. lab, her mother a button maker at the time this was taken !
-
May be they were not trying to signify a status in the Photo's.
But simply some self pride and confidence in there future.
2c
-
We always used to dress up at Christmas, Easter and Whit Sunday,to go to the threatre, to have our photos taken (in a studio), etc. but how many people bother to do that now. As 2c says, I think people had a lot of self pride in the 19th century (and early 20th century) and would certainly have dressed up for photographs.
Lizzie
ps. Lydart - I love the photo of your granny
-
I have posted on this site (Ayres/Brignell wedding 1896) the wedding photo of my maternal grandparents. Front the dresses etc. it could be thought they were quite well to do, in fact my grandfather was an agricultural labourer, and my grandmother a domestic servant.
-
Many photographic studios at this time did have a selection of "nice" clothes for the poorer clients to wear.
Often though the sitters would borrow from family & friends for a good turnout for their often annual or jsut special occassion photos.
;)
-
That's worth knowing, from what my grandmother told me about many people's personal hygene in the late 19th century it is to be hoped that they were thoroughly cleaned between clients.
-
it is to be hoped that they were thoroughly cleaned between clients.
I doubt it, the people didn't realise they were not clean did they. Even when I was young some people only bathed and washed their hair once a week. I went to stay with a friend in 1951 when my parents went off to the Festival of Britain. I'd had a bath just before I went to stay for the night, so when the father asked if I wanted a bath that night, I said no I'd just had one, but I'd have another one the next day when I got up. His answer was that they only bathed on a Friday night and if I didn't have a bath then, too bad I couldn't have one. Needless to say I didn't have a bath at their house, I was going home the following day so I knew I'd get another bath at home.
-
When my son was a biology student in the late 1980s they were advised by their lecturer to stop washing their hair, and preferably stop washing to see what the effects were. Many of them did so, strangely with no ill effects. Even today it is obvious in crowds that many people never bother. Some of us, myself included would welcome the opportunity to wash our hair once a week , the statement does presuppose hair.
-
Some of us, myself included would welcome the opportunity to wash our hair once a week , the statement does presuppose hair.
I'm guessing you had hair in 1951, unless you were a new baby then. ::)
-
I was very bald when I was a new baby in 1940, but by 1942 I had a lot of hair. This began to recede c1960, and now is a distant memory.
Incidentally while I was at school I fortunately never had nits, though I did pick up a flea from time to time. Straight in the bath on arrival home!!
-
Fleas can swim ... ::)
-
Yes I know, sometimes took more than 1 bath!
-
hi,
I hope you don't mind me joining in this topic. I just had to tell you about my nan. She was born 1906.
I used to live with her in the late 70's. And, she only ever washed her hair at Christmas, and once in the summer. She had beautiful hair, always took pride in it. And, only had a bath once a week too. I never, ever remember her looking scruffy.
I think that was normal for people of the day. After all, most houses didn't have a bathroom, so having a bath was a huge rigmarole!!
Red :)
-
I think the opinions here about the photos are spot on.
Like so many of us, my family tree ranges quite widely across social classes in the 1800s, but I have a large collection of family photographs from all strands and in all of them they look well dressed and sometimes extremely prosperous, though that was by no means the case for some. I agree that 'Sunday best' meant something then, and certainly still did right up until the 1960s.
I treasure the photos I have, but don't see them as any indicator of status or wealth - it's the faces, and the character, that matter.
As to the not washing as often bit - it wasn't as easy with no running hot water, but I do remember reading not many years ago that if we stopped washing our hair it would become dull or possibly greasy, depending on hair type, but only for a few weeks. After that it would recover and be fine, because washing hair in shampoo is not good for it.
I've often wondered if I could give that a try, but never had the nerve - it's those 4-5 weeks in between that put me off!
Maggie 1895
-
That is what our son's biology lecturer told his students about washing, the effects of not washing only lasted a few weeks. Incidently my tree is almost entirely working class etc. None of these aristos in my ancestry, or if there are they keep their heads down.