What happened to Patience?

This cabinet card by the Wellington (New Zealand) studio of Connolly and Herrmann shows a young woman, perhaps looking slightly unhappy, in a typical late 1880s dress with high collar, tight boddice, rounded shoulders and bustle.


The studio set up is fairly rudimentary, showing a two-panel backdrop crudely painted with wood panelling, ornamented column and an open window, showing some vaguely tropical plants outisde. The centrepiece is an extraordinary home-made contraption, looking like something between a tree trunk and a bird's nest, the latter acting as a receptacle for a fern of some kind. To complete the furnishings, two rectangular fur rugs - one looks like sheepskin, while the other may be possum fur - have been placed on an unpatterned floor.

James Connolly and Richard Hermann (also spelled Herrmann) both worked as photographers in Wellington in the 1880s. Connolly was in partnership with Pierce Mott Casneau on Lambton Quay from c.1882 until 1885. He then collaborated with Richard Hermann, the studio being referred to as either Connolly & Co. or Connolly & Herrmann, until that partnership was dissolved in 1889. Wise's New Zealand Directory for 1890/1891 lists the firm of Connolly, Beauchamp and Price with a studio on Lambton Quay, but this was probably also fairly short-lived, since it was reported to have been taken over by William Henry Scott Kinsey in 1892. Richard Hermann and his wife Louisa arrived in New Zealand (from Birmingham, England) in 1880. After 1889, they established their own studio in Cuba Street. Richard died in 1892; his widow Louisa M. Hermann took over and continued to run the business until at least 1902.


The reverse of the card mount is a fairly typical mid-1880s design, with diagonal "signature," coat of arms, the use of several fonts and ornate scrollwork. An inscription in ink pen on the reverse, apparently contemporary with the photograph itself, identifies the subject as, "Patience Amanda Pinhey" and states that the portrait was "taken in N.Z. aged 22 yrs 1889."

I eventually managed to track down Patience Amanda Pinhey through the indexed census records at Ancestry. She was born in late 1867 in the village of Loddiswell, South Hams, Devon, England, the eighth of ten children of farmer William Henry Pinhey (or Pinhay) and his wife Susan. In 1881, the census shows Patience working as a domestic servant in the household of farmer Richard Pinhey and his wife Betsey, presumably relations of some sort, in the nearby village of South Brent. Her parents had moved to Middle Bradleigh Farm, where her father was working as an agricultural labourer.

Some time between April 1881 and 1891, the family appear to have emigrated, as I can find no evidence of them on the UK Census. From information provided by Graeme Ardern, who is distantly related to the family, it appears that Patience's eldest brother Nelson Albert Pinhey (1858-1926) was married at Ippleton in Devonshire and emigrated shortly after, arriving in Wellington on board the early steamship SS Aorangi on 15 September 1884, after a journey of six and a half weeks. After a few weeks "they settled on a farm called Fernridge, at Wangaehu, Masterton."

I presume that the remainder of the family also went to New Zealand at about this time, from the existence of this portrait, taken in Wellington. It seems quite possible that Patience was married not long after the date of the portrait, and her surname would have changed, but what happened to the rest of the Pinheys? It was a big family, so there must be some sign of them somewhere.

William Henry (or John) PINHEY b. c.1825 Diptford DEV m: Susan (surname unknown) b. c.1830 Stockingham DEV
- Nelson Albert PINHEY b. 1857 Diptford DEV
- Dora Anne/Anna PINHEY b. 1859 Diptford DEV
- Alice PINHEY b. 1860 Loddisham DEV
- Valentine PINHEY b. 1862 Loddisham DEV
- John Southwood PINHEY b. 1863 Loddisham DEV
- Stanley & William Oscar PINHEY (twins) b. 1865 Loddisham DEV
- Patience Amanda PINHEY b. 1867 Loddisham DEV
- Reginald PINHEY b. 1869 Loddisham DEV
- Susan Southwood PINHEY b. 1871 Loddisham DEV
- Matilda PINHEY b. 1873 Loddisham DEV

It is possible that the parents later returned to England, as I found some potential death index entries on FreeBMD, as follows:
Deaths Dec 1900 - Pinhey William Henry, aged 74, Kingsbridge R.D., Vol 5b Fol 127
Deaths Mar 1908 - PINHEY Susan, aged 77, Totnes R.D., Vol 5b Fol 131

If any readers out there are able to find this family after 1881, I would be most grateful to hear from you (Email).

References

Auckland City Libraries Photographers Database
Knight, Hardwicke (1971) Photography in New Zealand, A Social and Technical History, John McIndoe, Dunedin
Knight, Hardwicke (1981) New Zealand Photographers, A Selection, Allied Press Ltd., Auckland.
Roger Vaughan's Date an old UK Photograph
Transcribed Indexes to the GRO Birth, Marriage & Death Records from FreeBMD
Indexed 1841-1901 Census Records & Images from Ancestry

Family portraits on cabinet cards in the 1880s and 1890s

I have posted this photograph not for any particularly remarkable features, but because it is a typical example of the family portraits on cabinet cards which appear to have become particularly popular in the late 1880s and 1890s.


The family, unfortunately unidentified, consists of the mother and father, perhaps in their mid-50s, with two daughters and five sons, aged from the mid-teens to the late 20s. The group of nine have been arranged in a standard pose within a studio setting fairly typical for the early 1890s, with the photographer taking great care to keep the arrangement symmetrical.

This period saw an increased use of palms, ferns and other tropical plants, often contained in urns of classical design, and one of these has been painted on right of the elaborate studio backdrop. The photographer has used an intricate filigree screen on the left, behind the two young women, coupled with a change in style of design on the backdrop - perhaps even a separate backdrop - showing a more distant view of wooden panelling, apparently adjacent to a window (only the edge of which is seen), with the sunlight streaming in. This was presumably to give the impression of space - or natural or homely surroundings - in the portrait, a device commonly used by photographers, and not just restricted to this period, although with widely varying results.

Dating accurately using clothing styles is a little difficult with this portrait. The sleeves of the dresses worn by the two young women, raised at the shoulders in manner which heralded the appearance of the "leg of mutton" style of sleeve, first appears in the fashion magazines of the era in 1889 and 1890. At the same time, the "hourglass" figure, with tightly corseted waists, tended to replace the bustled look of the 1880s. The dress of the mother, with its more square shoulders, narrow sleeves, and tight boddice with a row of buttons, is more characteristic of the 1880s. It is likely, however, that the younger members of the family would be more up with the latest fashions, and I suspect, therefore, that it was taken in the very early 1890s, perhaps between 1890 and 1892. The drawing up of the young women's hair into buns high on the back of their heads is also typical of the period 1888 to 1894.


The design on the reverse of the cabinet card continues the classical concept suggested by the studio props in the studio portrait on the front. A mark at the bottom right of the card mount shows the design to have been registered by "C.E. & C.," a firm estimated by Roger Vaughan as having been in business from c. 1887 to 1895. It has been printed in two colours using a different process from that commonly founded in the 1880s and earlier - possibly photogravure, which permitted the reproduction of a much greater range of tones. The design depicts two lady artists, classically dressed, carrying the various tools of the trade, such as brushes, palette and portfolio case, and leaning on what appears to be a large camera. The rose climbing on a wooden structure in the upper right background is a carry over of similar, more extensive designs commonly used in the 1880s. The front and reverse of a medal awarded to Berry (Class II No. 266) in 1887 at the Triennial Exhibition of the Photographic Society of Ireland is prominently displayed at upper right, again reminiscent of a style which started in the late 1870s, became very commonly used in the 1880s, but declined somewhat in popularity during the 1890s.

The photographer R.B. Berry & Co. of Moses Gate, near Bolton had been in that business for some years, and always described himself as an "artist & photographer." As explained by Robert Pols in his "Family Photographs 1860-1945" (publ. 2002 by Public Record Office Publications, ISBN 1 903365 20 1) many Victorian photographers portrayed themselves as part of the romantic world of the painter, thus countering "the patronizing argument that mere copying by mechanical means, though doubtless quite clever, could not be classed as art." Although he initially worked in his home town of Chorley, Richard Brown Berry (born in 1845) arrived in Farnworth in the late 1870s. I have been unable to find any of his studio locations listed in contemporary trade directories, but other references to his working from Moses Gate start from 1884, when he exhibited with the Royal Photographic Society [Source: Catalogue records from the annual Exhibitions of the Royal Photographic Society (1870-1915)]. From at least 1891 until 1901, the family lived at number 13 Bolton Road, Farnworth, which appears to be immediately adjacent to the current Moses Gate Railway Station. This suggests to me that the studio may have been operated from their home.

P.S. Further portraits by the studio of R.B. Berry & Co., and its successor, R.B. Berry & Sons, both of Mosesgate, were sent to me by Kathryn Nauta, and feature in another Photo-Sleuth article here.

The Boys' Day Out

Kevin Rhodes recently sent me a set of three rather charming postcard photographs featuring a couple of family members. Although there is no photographer's imprint, and the photographs have been printed on a fairly standard generic design of card, it is likely that they were taken somewhere in or near Derby - Kevin suggests around 1910.


Samuel Arthur Rankin (the slighter of the two young men in the left hand portrait shown above) was born at Derby in 1888, a middle son of telegraph mechanic, and former brass finisher, Frederick Rankin and his wife Agnes née Porter. The other man, who features in all three photos, is probably a brother and most likely Percy, who was four years older than Sam. Their parents were originally from the Braintree area of Essex, but moved from Bocking to Derby in about 1892, shortly after their marriage and the birth of their first child Henry Frederick (c. Nov 1881). They lived in Peartreet Street, Litchurch, which was where Samuel and his brothers and sisters grew up. Sam's younger sister Frances Rankin featured in a postcard portrait by Pollard Graham, which was the subject of an earlier post on Photo-Sleuth, "Mending Day in Arboretum Square."

Samuel emigrated to Australia some time before the First World War, and settled in Adelaide. Kevin has photos of him taken both in Adelaide and Melbourne. Mr & Mrs Sam Rankin, in Australia, are reported to have sent flowers to the funeral of his parents, which took place on April 23rd 1916. He also "has a valedictory letter sent by Sam from Adelaide to all the family towards the end of his life regretting that he will never be able to afford the boat or 'new' airways to see his family before he died, and remembering his Father seeing him of on the boat at Tilbury Docks. There is a family story that he arrived in Adelaide just before some big celebration (Centenary, Royal Visit ?) and as an electrician immediately found work hanging electric light bulbs along the streets. I have been unable to tie this to any actual event and likewise I've been unable to spot any sign of War service in the First War."

The third photograph in the series has a much less formal character, and clearly betrays the real purpose of the day's excursion.


I have two confining dates for this series of postcards, based on the design on the reverse:
- The divided back shows that it was post-1902, as prior to this date no message was permitted to be written on the address side
- The internal postal rates for postcards increased from a half-penny to one penny on 3 June 1918.


I found a possible departure for Melbourne, Australia of a Samuel RANKIN born c. 1888 from London in 1915. There was another Sam RANKIN (age unspecified) who departed for Sydney (Australia) from London in 1909. These were from "Passenger Lists Leaving UK 1890-1960" a database on Findmypast.com - unfortunately, without a subscription to this database, you may only view the index, and must pay to see the actual records.

Samuel Rankin looks to be somewhere between 18 and 25 in the photos, perhaps towards the lower end of that range. If he was born in late 1887/early 1888, then the photo could have been any time between 1906 and 1913, and I suspect it is more likely to have been during the period 1906-1910.

Kevin notes, "I am pretty sure by their staged nature that they are done by a professional, but I think the over printing on [the group photo] is very amateurish." As Kevin suggests, I believe the series of photos to have been taken by an itinerant, or travelling, photographer, rather than an amateur. The two vertical portraits of the Rankin brothers appear to have been posed against a rather rough stone wall, and in the single portrait of Sam's brother, there seem to be some scraps of arbitrary foliage draped over the wall. However, the telling feature is that in both of these, the same painted backdrop has been used. It is a simple one, but not the sort of photographic accessory an amateur would normally have had access to.

The printing on the group photo does, I agree, appear a little amateurish. However, many postcard photos of this era had words written by hand onto (or scratched into) the negative. If they were written in Indian Ink they would appear white on the print, and if they were scratched onto the negative, they would appear black. I'm not sure about this one, but I suspect that it was some kind of stencil - perhaps an early version of "Lettraset." It is unfortunate that the photographer/printer/studio got the title "The Boys Day Out" upside down - my guess is that it was a mistake rather than intentional - but I think it just adds to the fun of the occasion. It reminds me of a postcard format photograph from my own family collection, of a similar vintage and in much the same vein.


My great-grandfather Charles Vincent Payne (1868-1941) is standing in the back row, second from the right, but I have no idea who any of the other people are. Charlie, as he was known, was a talented singer, and it may be that the "Ding Dongs" were a singing group of which he was a some time member. However, the occasion of the group portrait was more likely to have been a festivity of a more liquid nature. Two of the men are clutching quart bottles of, presumably, ale or porter, and a third has a large mug on his lap, into which a fourth appears to pouring something from a jug. Several have cigarettes or pipes in their mouths, and most look decidedly "jolly."

The only one decidely not having a good time is the lone woman seated in the centre, who is either concerned that she is about to be doused with beer, or wondering how on earth to extricate herself ... or both! The porter or busboy standing on the left of the group, judging by his broad grin, has no such qualms - he has what appears to be "Bell Hotel" on his cap, so presumably they are at a hotel. Unfortunately, the reverse of the postcard shows no indication of where it was taken. It could be Derby, where Charlie Payne lived in the 1900s and 1910s, but it could just as easily be further afield, as I have many photos of him in holiday spots around the country.

Kelly's 1912 Directory of Derbyshire lists a Bell Hotel (family & commercial, Prop. Frank H. Phillips) at 52-53 Sadler Gate, Derby, and it is tempting to assume that it was the venue for their "boy's day out." The Bell Hotel still operates on this site, having been built in the late 17th Century. Andy Savage has a recent photo of the exterior of the Bell Hotel on his web site, DerbyPhotos. Apparently the fake Tudor framing (or half-timbering) was added to both the facade and the walls of the internal yard after the First World War.

I wonder if anyone can shed some light on the "Ding Dongs," please?

P.S. Nigel Aspdin very kindly paid a visit to the Old Bell Hotel in Sadler Gate today, and thinks it is very likely that the "Ding Dongs" had their group photo taken in the yard at the back. The large windows appear to have been completely replaced with smaller ones, and the framing and plastering is, of course, new.


Internal Yard of The Old Bell Hotel, Sadler Gate, Derby
© April 2008 Nigel Aspdin
The satellite images provided by Google Maps also give a very good bird's eye view of the yard behind the Old Bell Hotel.


View Larger Map
I wonder if there are any other pre-WW1 photographs or other pictures of the Bell Hotel, with which we might be able compare these?

Identification of photo subjects - Lessons to be learnt

In January this year, Kevin Rhodes sent me a batch of images, among which were these two cabinet cards, taken by John Mayle & Sons of 124 Parliament Street, Derby.


Kevin had the following to say about them:

These presumably are siblings taken at the same time. I am unsure of the ill-fitting uniform and the sex of its wearer. I have wondered about the possibility of this being a male-impersonator outfit from the music-hall. The uniform certainly has no insignia on it and by the address on the card we are well before both the First World War and the Boer War.

As I had no clues as to the identity of the subjects, I posted the images in the Portfolio section of my profile of this photographer, and thought nothing more of them. Then, a fews days ago, I heard from Kevin again:

A comment on the ones I previously sent at Mayles photographers - census records of the family only show four sisters in the family, and the two people in the pictures have hands and fingers that are identical; leading me to think they both are of Lucy Saddington, of whom I have later studio photos with no photographers identity on them (poss trimmed off on purpose). Also, of the three sisters Mary is older, Jane had straight hair, and Edith was much younger.

So, I had a better look at the images, in particular the faces and hands of the subject(s):



They are indeed very similar, if the absence/presence of the grin is taken into account, and the ring is present in both cases. From the similarity of the studio setting and props, the portaits were probably taken on the same occasion. Kevin had more to say on the provenance of the photographs:

Last year, on the death of two elderly relatives, I came by two photo collections. The first belonged to my Mother Betty Rhodes née Rankin (1925-2006) (daughter of Mary, the elder Saddington sister), and includes the pictures from Mayle & Sons and a carte de visite by (Thomas) Frost of Derby (see below). These were clearly of a relative of Mary, but identifying her was difficult.

The second collection was from Edith "Edie" Falconer née Smith (1912-2006), the daughter of Lucy Saddington. Amongst these photos was a studio cabinet photo of Lucy Saddington with her husband George Smith, and a postcard picture of George in uniform (presumably during the First World War.)

Lucy Saddington married George Smith in 1906 and had Edie in 1912, but died of unknown causes whilst Edie was young. I have a photo of Edie as a child (see below) with a lady which could be Lucy but I am unsure. It was of course the photo of George and Lucy together which helped me in the identification process, not only tying up with George in uniform, but also if you look carefully she is wearing the same brooch as in the earlier Frost picture from my mother’s collection, and although no proof in itself, doesn’t the skirt look like the work of a proud young tailoress!

This is an excellent account of careful detective work which resulted in the provisional identification and tying together of a whole series of pictures from separate inherited family collections. It demonstrates the usefulness of examining photographs together with other family photos, and in the light of their provenance.

It also illustrates the importance of being cautious about making assumptions without reasonable cause. For example, the wearing of what appears to be a military uniform doesn't necessarily mean that the subject actually served in the military. Although the photo probably was taken during or shortly after the Boer War, it is obvious that Lucy never served in the army.

An early family portrait from Alfreton

This family portrait is an early landsape format example of the genre, probably taken in the early 1870s. The image is of a carte de visite, unfortunately not inscribed with the name of the photographer, was sent to me by Alan Craxford.


Back Row (left to right, standing): Joseph (aged 17-18) and Thomas (aged 15-16); Middle Row: Mary (standing, aged 8-9), John (standing, aged 6-7), Ann Naylor (seated, aged 37-38), Arthur (seated on his mother's lap, aged 1), John Naylor (seated, aged 38-39) and Alfred (standing, aged 5-6); Front Row: Edwin (seated on the ground) and Maurice (standing between his father's legs, aged 2)
The rudimentary setting of this photograph, with a plain backdrop, and little attention paid to the usual pretense of an artificial studio, suggests that it was almost certainly taken by a travelling photographer. Perhaps he was associated with a travelling show, but he may just as easily have been an itinerant working on his own. Such photographers became common in the 1870s and 1880s, and often serviced the smaller towns and villages in the rural English countryside which didn't have large enough populations to support a resident studio. Several aspects of the photo suggest that it may have been a "practice" shot, or at least hurried, as their has been no attempt to hide the fake window seen on a stand at the right of the image. One of the advantages of the outdoor shot, however, was that the enhanced lighting reduced the need for lengthy exposure times, and made it somewhat easier to keep young children still for the duration of the shot.

Alfreton was not well served by permanent photographic studios until the 1880s, when Robert Taylor opened for business in nearby Codnor Park. George Edgar worked briefly in the town in 1859 and 1860 as a travelling photographer, but no data is available to show who catered for the portrait photo market in Alfreton in the mid-1870s, when this picture was taken.

I found it useful to establish an outline of the family of Alan's ancestor John Naylor to identify some or all of the children by their respective ages, and therefore confirm my estimate of the age of the photograph. From the 1871, 1881 and 1891 Census records, I managed to ascertain the following:

John NAYLOR b. c.1835 Somercotes/Alfreton DBY m: Ann b. c.1836 South Normanton DBY
- Joseph NAYLOR b. c.1855 South Normanton DBY
- Thomas NAYLOR b. c.1857 South Normanton DBY
- Edwin NAYLOR b. c.1863 South Normanton DBY
- Mary NAYLOR b. c.1865 Alfreton DBY
- John Henry NAYLOR b. c.1867 Alfreton DBY
- Alfred NAYLOR b. c.1868 Alfreton DBY
- Maurice NAYLOR b. c.1871 Alfreton DBY
- Arthur NAYLOR b. c.1872 Alfreton DBY
- Miriam NAYLOR b. c.1879 Alfreton DBY

Although the hairstyle of Ann Naylor is reminiscent of the mid- to late 1860s, her clothes suggest a date closer to the mid-1870s. It's far more difficult to date the clothing of men and children with much degree of accuracy, but in general the men and older boys are dressed for this period as well. It's my estimate, therefore, that this photo was taken some time around 1872-1874. This has led to my tentative identifications of the people in the family photo above, together with their approximate ages.


(Standing) Thomas, Joseph, John Henry, Arthur, Edwin, Maurice, Alfred
(Seated) Miriam & Mary
Alan also sent me the group photograph shown above:

The family of John and Ann Naylor does appear to have been a very tightly knit unit (living in neighbouring houses through the censuses of 1881 and 1891) but after John's death the branches seem to have drifted apart. Miriam Naylor was my maternal grandmother and died five days after my mother was born in May 1916. Mum was raised by Miriam's sister, Mary and husband who by that time had two adult sons. We heard talk of Mum's older uncles. Our only link was a (I think quite remarkable) group photograph of the seven brothers and two sisters drawn together sometime around 1900. I do not know where this was taken or what the occasion was. They appear to be "dressed up" with button holes but their expressions are generally quite sombre!

I think the family resemblances among the brothers is remarkable!

Many thanks to Alan, whose maternal grandmother Miriam's album has provided a wealth of interesting material for his family history research, and some nice pictures for me to feature here.

Henry Lawless of Exeter - a portrait of a portrait

Old photos were frequently copied long after the original portrait had been taken, often subsequent to the death of the subject, and I have come across many examples in the compilation of my Derbyshire Photographers & Photographic Studios collection. However, sometimes the memory of a departed family member was celebrated in a slightly different fashion.

A style not often encountered, this "portait of a portrait" was sent to me recently by Angela Johnson. The cabinet card probably shows her great-great-grandfather Henry Lawless (1826-1877), an Exeter wine merchant, churchwarden and town councillor. She writes:

"It has been suggested that the photo was taken of a portrait after his death....of course, it may not be him ... I have tried to make out what the bits and pieces are by blowing up the picture, but it just isn't quite clear enough to decipher the titles of the books etc. - the folded bit of paper looks like a cartoon about the Town Council."

The photographer William S. Sugden died at Brighton in 1880, so this portrait must have been produced before then. William Sugden was in partnership with Edward Williams at 88 High Street, Exeter briefly between April 1877 and February 1878. However, in March 1878 the two went their separate ways. Scott (1985) shows them both with premises in March 1878 - Sugden at 88 Queen Street, and Williams at 241 High Street, Exeter - but no later listings in that town.

This photo is a rather unusual one, and I believe it must have been taken after the death of the subject. The arrangement of the framed portrait on the writing desk with the books, ink well, quill pen, lamp and loose papers was meant to portray his life and work, and the distinguished person that he was. His clothing looks tailored to me - you don't often see people this well-dressed in photographs from the 1870s. The portrait style, card mount design and known dates for Sugden's studio operation in Exeter, confirms a date of between 1877 and 1880. I suspect that it was taken shortly after his death, either in 1877 or 1878.

The clothing style suggests to me that the original portrait, which appears to have been enlarged considerably from the size of a standard studio portrait, was taken not long before the presumed subject's death in 1877. All of the items placed on the desk are likely to have had some significance, if only we could work out what it was.

I would be interested to hear from any other viewers who have come across studio portraits such as this one, not just copied from older photos, but incorporating the older photograph, in a separate frame, with carefully selected and arranged accessories to embellish the portrait and give an impression of his importance.

References:
History, Gazetteer & Directory of Devon (1878-79), Historical Directories from the University of Leicester
Photographers in Devon 1842-1939 : a brief directory for photograph collectors, by C.G. Scott, 1985, The PhotoHistorian Supplement No. 101, ISSN 0957-0209

Thomas Gallimore, maltster & brewer of Ashbourne

This photo, sent to me by Jo Bevan, was among a small collection of photographs possibly acquired in Ashbourne, Derbyshire, and including several early CDVs by photographers (George Edgar, Robert Bull & Louis Twells) in that town.

The carte de visite mount is clearly marked, "Copied by Winter Derby" and is similar to others by W.W. Winter taken and/or copied at the Midland Road studio in the late 1870s and early 1880s. However, the man's clothing, his pose, and the portrait style suggest that the photograph was originally taken much earlier, perhaps in the early to mid-1860s.

The inscription on the sack clearly stands for "Gallimore, Ashbourne." Thomas Gallimore (1820-1874) was a maltster, brewer and publican, proprietor of the Old Red Lion Inn in the Market Place, Ashbourne. At the time of the 1861 Census, George Edgar was lodging next door to Gallimore at the Red Lion. In fact, he was the only photographer working in Ashbourne at this time, and it seems likely that he was the original photographer who took this portrait. It also seems highly probably that the subject is Thomas Gallimore himself, holding a sack of barley (or perhaps hops), used in the brewing and malting process.

This photo is a good example where the studio name is a red herring with respect to finding out where it was taken. In this case, it is fortunate that a knowledge of the provenance of the photo, in conjunction with a detailed examination of the subject and "studio accessories," reveal enough clues to discover not only the original location, but also to provide a likely identity for the subject.

It is also a nice illustration of how accessories were often used by portrait artists, as they often styled themselves, to convey an image, in this case of an industrious, down-to-earth middle-aged man, proud of the business that he had built up over some twenty years. If it was indeed taken in the early 1860s, then it would have been quite a novelty for someone of moderate means in this small Derbyshire market town. Although photography had already been existence for over two decades, the high price of daguerreotypes and ambrotypes had largely limited their availability to the more wealthy clientele. Only with the widespread introduction of the carte de visite in 1860 had it become affordable to a wider proportion of the population.

Early pictures of working folk, or at least ordinary people in their working clothes, were fairly uncommon. There were some photographers who took a special interest in documenting the lives or workers, but these generally tended to be of domestic staff, mine and factory workers and other employees. Portraits or self-employed people in their working clothes were rather unusual in the 1860s, so this image is particular interesting from that point of view.