Featured Family photo age?

These photos were found among my late father-in-law's belongings.
We are sure they are my husband's ancestors, but figuring out exactly who these people are is a real quandary.

These two photos were framed together. The same chair appears on both photos, so they must be from the same photo session.

I'm thinking the style of dress is 1850s...can anyone confirm this?
We think these people lived in Western Pennsylvania, and were of English or Flemish descent.
Does the lady's squarish bonnet give any clue to ethnicity? And what is on the baby's head....or is that a severe haircut?

I'm trying to piece together who these folks are.
Many thanks in advance!

 

Nice to have family images this old in the States.Are the photos on metal plates (tintypes),or some other material,and what's the size ?

 

Not tintypes. They are printed on paper. Each image is 3"x4". (75cm x 100cm)
They are glued down to writing paper which was then glued to a wooden panel. This was in a shabby old frame.
I don't think I can pull them off the paper without damaging them, to check for any writing on the back.

 

Apparently the photo backing was made from a wooden box. I cannot make out what it says above the eagle. The image was burned into the wood.

 

that's a tough crowd !!

 

If looks could kill, right?

 

The photographer probably put the fear of God in them. "This is serious business, sit still, and don't even think about smiling or you'll wish you were never born!!"

The eagle impression in the wood is really cool.

 

Fascinating photographs. And puzzling. Obviously not a typical family grouping yet... They're so protective of each other.

Debora

 

Your images at 3" x 4" are very close to a standard Carte De Visite size (2 1/4" x 3 1/2")-"patented in Paris by photographer André Adolphe Eugène Disdéri in 1854". So I think you nailed the timeline.They became really widespread during the U.S. Civil War,in which Pennsylvania & Virginia were 'ground zero'.
PS-Like the box too.

 

As if it's them against the world. The standing girl in the second photo really has that look "don't touch my sister or my mother, or else". She's great, I love her.

 

Agree. Except for the older man, I don't see any figure that could be a parent. They all appear to be children. And the mix of contemporary fashion with what appears to be traditional costume (on the girl with the lace cap) is confusing.

Debora

 

Thank you Bosko! I always value your input. This is great information.

When Father-in-law died 2 months ago, we found a hoard of really old family photos that he never shared with anyone.

I've been working on husband's family tree which has been fascinating!!!
His paternal side of the family has been in the US since the 1660s.
I think the older man in the photo is third great grandfather William L., born in 1807. The boy standing next to him may be great great grandfather John J., born in 1837.

 

Thank you Debora!
I was thinking the woman in the bonnet could be the older man's wife.
But maybe you are right, she looks too young for him?

 

I was thinking the same.

It happened sometimes, often due to (financial) circumstances, or to care for a widower and his children.

 

19th century Women married older gents at what we today would consider almost obscenely early ages.
In our town quite a few of the 'Founding Fathers' married very young NA girls.

 

Not typical family groupings for a marriage, I'd think. There you'd expect to the couple in one and the progeny in another.

Debora

 

The grouping may be - the women together and the men together. (The young child in the older man's lap could be a boy. It was common to dress young boys and girls in the same types of clothing.)

Is the paper the photos are printed on very thin, and slightly shiny? That would be characteristic of albumen prints, as bosko suggested. They were usually mounted on heavier card stock as supports. Albumen prints were most common from about 1855 to 1890.

The clothing looks more 1860s than 1850s to me. Just a thought - the ages of the sitters are a wide range. The only ones missing are men of fighting age.

 

Ditto 2many-Clothing more 1860's to me too.

 

Fascinating photos.
thanks for sharing.

 

LOL or the photographer just told them their WI-FI was down. Just kidding.