RootsChat.Com

Lyn
With the help of another Stokes descendant who formerly lived in Brisbane and is descended from a son named William, I have traced the children of Joseph Stokes and Dinah Spencer here in Australia, born in Brisbane.  Your Matilda was one of three children named Matilda, the earlier two dying in infancy. There were 13 known children born, 3 of whom died in infancy.
Without knowing how much you know of this line, it's difficult to know where to start. My husband is descended of one of their children, Mary Ann Stokes and I do have the names and DOBs of the other children of  Joseph and Dinah.  I have also traced Joseph back another 4 generations to a Joseph Stokes, b. 1672  (all named Joseph), but Dinah Spencer back only 1 generation to her parents William Spencer and Sarah Lloyd.
I also have the "certificate" of marriage sent to me by another kind poster, Pam. Plus various photos of the family in Brisbane.
I also have 9 children listed for William Guy and Matilda Stokes, born between 1890 and 1904 in Brisbane, but no further searches on them for their spouses or children.
These can be searched - google  "Queensland Historical BMD Indexes" for births prior to 1913, due to the 100 year embargo on births.

If you let me know how much info you have, I can hopefully fill in more details.
RobynD

Syvia
Thanks for your attempt at improving Robert and Ann.  Robert especially needs a lot of help;  afraid his photo has badly deteriorated.

RobynD

Thanks Jim for your reply and reasoning about her posy and the era of the times and types of photography.

It's obvious from all your comments and reasons that the photos were certainly later than 1842 - for Ann late 1850s: and for Robert - 1860 plus.?

Thank you  also again to Niksmum, Saddles, PrueM for your interests and insights and restoration of Ann's photo.  All much appreciated.

Is there anyone out there prepared to have a go at improving Robert? He certainly needs it!

RobynD

Thank you all so much for your most interesting and informative responses.  I had no idea so much could be determined about people and their ages and clothes from photos.  Thank you also for the  improvement to the photo of Ann.

However, I think I am going to add some confusion with some BMD info..

Robert has several birthdates (or mistranscriptions).  FreeBMD has his death in December 1869, aged 53 - therefore born abt. 1816 and age 26 on marriage;  in  1871 census he gives his age as 40 - therefore born abt 1831 - obviously incorrect as he and Ann were married in June 1842, both  "öf full age" on the copy of the marriage certificate which I have.
Ann's death on FreeBMD is recorded in  June 1858, following the birth of her 7th child. Birth is 1822 - so 20 at marriage.
In her photo she is holding a flower posy - so is  this perhaps her wedding photo ?

So, were the photos taken at different times?  Ann's obviously before 1858, even though her clothes suggest otherwise and is the photo is a copy of am ambrotype??

Robert's photo could be any time - he certainly looks older than  the 26 he would have been on his marriage, so sometime in the 1860s  before his death in 1869??

I have copies of letters written by their daughter Charlotte  (my g.grandmother) to her then fiance who had immigrated to New Zealand where she joined him in 1876. They later came to Sydney where they and their children all settled.
In her letters she tells him she will join him as "she is all alone with only her brothers and sisters",  thus confirming the deaths of her parents.
I should have provided this BMD information in my earliest post, but I had no idea the photos would produce such interesting and informative  replies.
Any further comments would be very much appreciated. Your information is extremely interesting .
Could someone have a go at "restoring" Robert please ?  The ones of Ann are great
With many thanks
RobynD

I found the  actual prints in a box of documents in a deceased aunt's "stuff" wrapped in brown paper.  On the reverse side they are marked with the name of the person - i.e. Robert James Read and the other Ann Dickson, and their marriage on 10 July1842 at St. Mary's, Newington, Surrey. Marriage date is correct with first child born July 1843.  They were supposed to be in their early 20s then, but look very much older.

Photos have obviously been neglected and kept possibly in a damp place for many, many years - hence not only the lack of quality of photography back then, but the fading.

Just hope someone can improve them a bit.
Interesting though that you think the clothing 1860s - perhaps they were taken on another occasion, and they actually were older. Look forward to hearing other opinions too.

They were factory workers in London, so can't imagine they'd have had their photos taken very often.
RobynD