Old photo, cardboard mounting. Photographer unknown. Circa 1890s.
Price: $6.00 Size of photo: About 2 and 3/4 x 3 and 7/8″ Size including frame: About 5 x 6 and 3/4″
Lottie Bather (on our right) and friend or relative: The two ladies appear in uniforms; they might be housemaids or perhaps nurses, and this photo was probably taken in the 1890s, note the wider sleeves (than the 1880 decade) and the Gibson Girl hairstyles. We searched census records for Lottie or Charlotte and even Lollie, as well as possible spelling variations for what appears to be Bather, but nothing definitive was found. But it’s a lovely photo, and you might have noticed the bottom right corner being raised just a tad. Yep, we looked underneath, ever so slightly, but no inkling of writing appears.
Lottie may be Charlotte Alice Beaumont 1850-1935 who married Andrew Bather 1838-1916 and lived in Clinton, Iowa after her marriage. Does the photo show where it was taken?
Best regards
Hi Robin, unfortunately there is no location, written or embossed, anywhere on the photo or matting. The photographer is unknown. I think you meant Clinton, Iowa so I’ll edit your comment for that. I see that your Charlotte Alice Beaumont was born in Ohio, though. I checked my original estimate of 1890s for the photo and it still holds up. Everything from the cuff links and the bows, the hairstyles, the sleeves and the minimalist background, as well as the type of matting – in this case the deep brown reverse with cream-colored front, with an embossed design around the photograph. Narrowing down, it’s likely 1895 or ’96. I’m thinking the ladies in the photo are in their 20s, maybe early 30s but your Charlotte Alice would have to have been about 45, and unless she’s a very well-preserved 45 (!) I don’t think this is her. Now, Charlotte Alice’s husband, Andrew Bather was a florist in Clinton, Iowa and these outfits do look like high-end maid or shopkeeper or maybe nursing uniforms. An interesting possibility is that these two ladies could have worked at the Bather florist shop and whoever had written on the back had just gotten it wrong. Or if there was a different and younger Lottie Bather that was a relative. It’s interesting though, because Bather is not a common surname.