Another photo conundrum - Anna Burnett

Here's another person I'd like to identify, and have done a little looking but have not found anything. Her name is written on the front and back of the photo: Anna Burnett. The photo was taken in January 1898.

The photographer imprint is hard to see - It's Richards of Newark, New York.

I'm interested in this because I had an ancestral line of Burnetts in that area (Wayne County) in the early 19th century. My direct ancestors left that area by about 1850 or so, but there were two brothers who stayed in that area. So am trying to figure out who she was and whether she could have been related to them.

One challenge: I don't know whether her surname was a maiden name or married name.
Another challenge that would be for later: there was at least one other Burnett family in that area that were unrelated to my line, and also quite prolific.

This is the type of project that could take a lot of tedious looking... not sure whether I'm up for it, but if I had a direction I might take it. What might be best... the 1900 census?

 

Figtree, I notice that her last name is spelled two different ways on the photo (one with an "e" and one without an "e"). I don't think the handwriting on the front is the same as the handwriting on the back. And the "8" in the year is written differently on the front and back.

In your family history is the surname consistently spelled either with an "e" or without an "e"?

Have you already done a "gravesite" / church records search with just "Anna Burnette / Anna Burnett"?

 

Now I am wondering if perhaps the name on the front of the photo is "Unna."

 

-- The 1892 Wayne County NY state census for Arcadia records a 17 year old Anna Burnette working as a servant

-- From the Wayne County historical society, HERE are some Anna Burnetts in the Wayne County NY area.

 

The February 1, 1905 Arcadian Weekly Gazette had this small reference: "Minnie Winslow, now of Newark, came out Sunday to spend, the day with her mother and brought Anna Burnette her friend with her."

 

The July 31, 1913 Newark NY Courier newspaper announced: "An event of interest took place on ___day evening, July 19th, at the ___age of the Baptist Church ____ Miss Anna Burnett, a popular young lady of Newark, was united in marriage to Mr. Stanley Hamer, also of the village. The pastor performed the ceremony."

 

...and just to confuse the issue, the August 7, 1915 Newark (NY)-union Gazette announced: "Mr. and Mrs. Henry Beckham (of Marion) have as guests Miss Nettie Beckham of Farmington and Miss Anna Burnett of Rome."

 

Thank you! What I've noticed in Burnett research in the past is that usually a certain family will consistently spell it one way or the other. So the difference in spelling seems to indicate that one person or the other did not know how Anna spelled the name. However, related families can also spell it two different ways, in two different branches.

They are in two different handwritings. I suspect the one on the back is the earliest (but it doesn't mean that one is the correct spelling). Really I have to keep both spellings in mind when searching, and not eliminate either. You may know that in genealogical research all spellings are considered when doing searches.

 

Morgen,
Thanks for all of this information!

The question I have is about the age. The woman in my photo appears to be at least 30 years old, and that is the youngest I'd consider. She really looks in her 40s to me. So I think she would have been born in the 1850s-1860s.

I did check the 1900 census on Ancestry last night. No Anna Burnett of the appropriate age in Wayne County... there was just an 11 year old girl.

I also started checking Ontario County, close by. I need to go back to that, as there were a couple there. I didn't have much time last night.

Thanks for any thoughts!

 

Oh, thanks for the Wayne County historian's site (it's not the historical society, I don't think.) I will check that out. Unfortunately, about a year ago I wrote to them to get a copy of a record in their database. They require pay up front, and I sent a check and they never cashed it and also never sent the info. And another person I was in contact with at that time about the family we were mutually searching (not Burnett) had the same exact experience. But the database could help.

Here is the main page on the County Historians site. One great thing about New York state is the presence of county historians! I wish that all states did this. http://www.co.wayne.ny.us/Departments/historian/historian.htm

 

Fig it appears that her hair is pulled back and tied behind her head. Isn't that a style more consistent with a younger woman? Wouldn't someone in their 30s or later be wearing their hair up?

The person in 1892 at 17 would be about 25 in 1898. She has that kind of thin pinched mouth that makes some look older than they really are.

Just throwing it out there for thought.

 

I agree with clutteredcloset that the woman in the photo could very well be in her mid-20's. When I first saw the picture I guesstimated her age at late 20's-early 30's, but after researching her a bit I went back to the photo and agreed that she could very well be a bit younger.

 

Thanks for the replies, clutteredcloset and morgen. I might go with an age in the 20s in 1898, but would have to look at the actual photo again. It's rather faded. Maybe I can put an enhanced version up here? It might not be for a while, though.

 

Here is an edited close up of Anna. I think that the part showing up at the back of her neck to our left is a mixture of the tied collar and some hair. I can see some of the little jewelie things that are on the tied part also on that side. But some looks more like hair.

Although she has lines coming down from her nose along the sides of her mouth, and also has what look like slightly wrinkled lips that do not appear young to me, I'm thinking that she could be in her 20s after all. I don't see a lot of wrinkles around her eyelids, for example.

Still haven't done more work to identify her.