Children in costume? Any ideas?

My first reaction like Bakers is Shakespearean look but more so that they are actually in a play... The second same premise though Dickens, but also isn't this one more like what they would have actually worn daily?

 

Wow, thank you everybody, I really appreciate all the input!

I totally understand why opinion is divided on this. I've spent a long time studying the postcards, side by side. Bookahtoo, you've done a brilliant job of lining the faces up and it makes comparison easier. Many thanks!

For me, there is some similarity between the faces which has made me think they are the same children. But I agree the similarities are quite subtle.... and therein lies the problem!

My thoughts and observations:

1. The postcards came together, in the same job lot. It was quite a while ago now, but if I can remember where they came from I might be able to find the studio... it's a shot in the dark... I have a vague recollection it was the London area.

2. The background is the same, therefore the same studio? So it makes me wonder if the family had a yearly photograph as the children were growing up.

3. The oldest child didn't seem to have aged all that much (if it is the same child, of course). But then I compared his height to the chair and he had indeed grown a few inches ;-). Looked tired and grumpy though!

4. The clenched fist of the oldest child in the first photo makes me think they didn't like all the fuss!!!

5. The long hair and outfits intrigue me. 'Theatrical' fits, and I hadn't thought of that angle before. I've spent ages looking for similar jewellery/necklaces but been unlucky so far. A boy with a bracelet?! Maybe that's why his fist was clenched!

6. And finally... the date might help, but I'm no expert on costume... there's lots of lace, and the Little Lord Fauntleroy collar on the youngest boy implies 1890s? Or a little later?

Thanks again - you've all given me more food for thought!

 

Gotta say, my initial impression was that they were the same children, and Book's side-by-sides just confirmed it for me. Wonder if the costumes were some the photographer had on hand to go along with the backdrop, the older boy's seems too large for him...

To my eye, the comparisons show:

Same high bulbous forehead and chubby cheeks on the three younger kids, same lower forehead and close-set eyes on the older one.

Same down-turned brows on the two older, same asymmetry to the older one's face, which slimmed down, same good-sized ears with prominent lobes, visible in both shots of younger two, who also have the same high cheekbones.

Same haircut and growth pattern on the youngest boy, and thankfully, the older boys had their hair cut, with the oldest very short, but forelock left on the other, probably in hopes of disguising that giant melon with it's 'Godfather' cheeks.

The chins all appear to be about the same, they all, with the exception of the girl as an infant, have visible circles under the eyes, and all shots appear to show the same relatively small, short noses with fairly long philtrums.

Find the little girl just too cute in both shots, love the way she's reaching back for her brother in the first, and that very serious look with cocked head in the second (she looks to be quite pigeon-toed too).

~Cheryl

 

Thanks DragonflyWink, for your close inspection! I'm more and more convinced it's the same family

I also love the little girl - she's very cute.

According to information I've just read, the divided back on the postcards didn't come into existence until 1902 in the UK, so I'm revising my date and thinking now that the photographs were taken post-1902.

 

I also think they are the same. Slight possibility the pics of the 2 oldest might be switched. Like the second oldest boy is out growing the oldest boy??

--- Susan

 

I don't think the older boy is in the second photo. I think the second photo is of the three younger children plus one younger boy who wasn't born when the first photo was taken.

 

@Bookahtoo - Nice job

#1 #2


#3 #4


#5 #6


#7 #8

I think #5 & 6 definitely show the same child at different ages. Maybe age 2 then 4.

Keep in mind as children grow so does their face, and some of the baby fat falls away.
Look back at your own pictures ages 2-5 still babiesh, then look at ages 7 and 9. You should see some elongation and thinning. I think that is what you are seeing with the older boys. Plus the fact that they got hair cuts.

I still think the photographer put the fear of something into those kids. They look intimidated and worried.