Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/iron-and-steel-industry#ixzz36LoaQBSH
Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/iron-and-steel-industry#ixzz36LoaQBSH
I believe this picture dates to around 1870. Not much before and possibly a little later, but not much later than 1880. I've based this conclusion on basic observations and on guidelines published at PhotoTree.com. Thanks, PT.
First, how old does Britta look in this picture?
I dunno. To me she looks anywhere from twenty to forty-five.
She lacks the deep, toothless sockets of her later pictures, so young to middle-aged seems right. Her hair looks dark, not gray or white as in the other pictures. She looks relatively prosperous with a nice dress and fripperies around the collar. Not like a penniless widow; more like a middle-class housewife.
From 1854 - 1864, Britta was 20 - 30. From 1868 to 1880 she was 34 - 46. Though either range is possible, I'm inclined to think that the latter one is closer, and that this picture was taken after she married Mike Flynn, which would place it after 1868.
> > Point: Eh. Not enough information to pinpoint her age.
Secondly, in 1854 at age 20 Britta married John L. McGuire, son of a landowning farmer. John L. was also a farmer, and they had $50 in the 1860 Census. Not poor, but not rich, either. John L. died in 1864, leaving Britta widowed with three or four mouths to feed. Britta moved to Shelby County by the 1866 AL State Census. At that point she probably had little income; likely too poor to have a dress that "nice." In 1868 Bibb County aged 34 she married Mike Flynn, 50, who was a puddler, a highly skilled and relatively well-paid job in the iron industry.
According to Answers.com:
"Puddling required many judgment calls based on experience. Therefore, it could take up to two years of training to become a skilled puddler. Many puddlers in the mid-nineteenth century were successful enough to later move into the ranks of owners."
Britta's dress has lots of fripperies, which indicates some money, so most likely from right after she married John L. or after she married Mike Flynn.
> > Point: hard to say.
Third, the shape of the photo:
It's hard to tell the exact shape of the page itself because this is only a copy of a picture. However, the image of the left side of the picture "frame" or mat is quite straight and sharp, suggesting square corners. Square corners are typical of pre-1870 pictures. Truthfully, though, it's hard to tell if the left side is part of the original matting, or part of a frame.
According to PhotoTree:
"This is one of the easiest and most dependable dating techniques. Square corners dominated the cards until 1870."
>> Point: before 1870 to around 1870
Fourth:
According to PhotoTree.com, the mat's oval shape was typical of cartes de visite in the 1870s. See this case study:
According to PhotoTree.com, the mat's oval shape was typical of cartes de visite in the 1870s. See this case study:
http://www.phototree.com/case_021312.htm
> > Point to 1870s.
Fifth, the background:
Fifth, the background:
If you look closely or even enlarge the image, you can see a pattern in the background. After so many generations of the picture, it's hard to tell exactly what the pattern is. Most likely a decorative column of some sort. According to PhotoTree:
"Until the late 1860s the background was either void or consisted of only a chair, small table, or other object which the subject used to steady themselves. Around 1870 decorative backdrops and props were used, sometimes to the point of absurdity. Too many fences, rocks, and other decorations detracted from the phototgraph's subject."
> > Point to the 1870s.
Sixth, Britta's hairstyle:
Looking closely, we can describe it as center part, uncovered ears, flat-lying, curls or bow on top near the crown, possibly covered by a snood. (Check out the Bing Crosby ears.) If you look at Phototree.com's "Snood" collection, you can see that typical 1860's hairstyles indeed featured a center part, hair flat-lying or close to the head, and uncovered ears. However on closer examination, none of the 1860's hair samples has the bow or curls on top near the crown of the head. On the sides, yes, but not on the top.
Then look at the collection of 1860's cartes de visite for hairstyles. Of more than 50 samples, only three have curls on the top near the crown; the vast majority do not. Curls on top didn't really become fashionable until the 1870s. Hair fashions in the 1880s had lots of curly curls in front, not at the crown, so the picture is less likely to be from the late 1880s.
Then look at the collection of 1860's cartes de visite for hairstyles. Of more than 50 samples, only three have curls on the top near the crown; the vast majority do not. Curls on top didn't really become fashionable until the 1870s. Hair fashions in the 1880s had lots of curly curls in front, not at the crown, so the picture is less likely to be from the late 1880s.
Knowing that Britta lived her entire life in Alabama, not exactly the fashion capital of the U.S., it's probable that her hairstyle reflected a trend AFTER it hit the mainstream, and not before. So there's one strike each against the 1860s and 1880.
Compare 1860 - 1880 hairdos on these three sites:
1860s: http://www.phototree.com/gallery.asp?cat=60s&f0=1860s
1870s: http://www.phototree.com/gallery.asp?cat=70s&f0=1870s
1880s: http://www.phototree.com/gallery.asp?cat=80s&f0=1880s
> > Point to the 1870s.
Lastly, her collar area, which is really the most telling clue. Look at how many things are going on in the collar area: a scarf, a flower, an outlined collar; maybe more. According to PhotoTree.com:
"{The} collar and necklace was part of the 'busy' look of the 1870s. Her type of stylish hair came into vogue in this time period, with the plain, pulled back look of the 60s disappearing."
"Busy collar and necklaces the rage in the 1870s..."
http://www.phototree.com/case_021312.htm
> > Point: 1870's.
So there you have it. My best guess without more information than the image supplied by HillSeeker (thank you) is that the photo was taken about 1870, plus or minus a few years. Assuming so, Britta would be between 36 and 46, probably married to Mike Flynn, and living in Bibb County, where she lived from 1870 - 1880.
Not bad for a 40 plus or minus year old. I myself have turned 42 many times. I wonder how many times Britta turned 42????
> > Point to the 1870s.
Lastly, her collar area, which is really the most telling clue. Look at how many things are going on in the collar area: a scarf, a flower, an outlined collar; maybe more. According to PhotoTree.com:
"{The} collar and necklace was part of the 'busy' look of the 1870s. Her type of stylish hair came into vogue in this time period, with the plain, pulled back look of the 60s disappearing."
"Busy collar and necklaces the rage in the 1870s..."
http://www.phototree.com/case_021312.htm
> > Point: 1870's.
So there you have it. My best guess without more information than the image supplied by HillSeeker (thank you) is that the photo was taken about 1870, plus or minus a few years. Assuming so, Britta would be between 36 and 46, probably married to Mike Flynn, and living in Bibb County, where she lived from 1870 - 1880.
Not bad for a 40 plus or minus year old. I myself have turned 42 many times. I wonder how many times Britta turned 42????
