Dating Photographs through Social Media - William S. and Mary C. (Cawthon) Chapman

    ©  Kathy Duncan, 2023

One strategy for determining the date of old photographs is to join a photograph dating group on Facebook. Be warned that many will make authoritative pronouncements whether they really know and even if their conclusions are illogical. Once someone offers a date, be sure to ask what it is about the photograph that helped them determine a date; otherwise, you haven't learned much.

I was hoping to receive specific information that might help narrow the date on this photograph of my great-grandparents, and I mean really narrow it down, which is always too much to hope for. The few answers I received spread possible dates over three decades. However, I think that turned out to be very helpful because I think that if I combine what I already knew about the photograph with the answers that I received, it adds an interesting new layer to the story.

William Sargent and Mary Charlotte (Cawthon) Chapman

What I knew: The photograph was taken in Titus County, Texas by an itinerant photographer. On the day he arrived on the scene, my great-grandfather was excited to have an opportunity to have their picture taken. He ran to the creek where my great-grandmother was washing clothes and rushed her back to the house. I assume that the photographer was setting up his equipment while my great-grandparents were rushing to change their clothes. My great-grandmother, however, was mad because she did not have time to fix her hair. I think her anger shows in the picture. She must have told this story to my grandfather repeatedly and with maybe a little regret because this was the only photograph ever taken of my great-grandparents together.

They married on Christmas Eve, 1889. She was ten years his senior – she was 32 and he was 22. They were married for a very short time because he was killed in a hunting accident in September of 1893. Their first child was born in late November of 1890, and my grandfather was born in late December 1892. I would think that if the children had been born when this photograph was taken, one or both of them would be in the photograph, too.

The responses I received in a Facebook group dated my great-grandfather’s lapels and pants to the 1880s and his collar to the 1890s. That makes sense and fits within the timeframe of their marriage.

Another response that I received dated my great-grandmother's dress firmly in the 1870s. The poster refused to accept that the photograph could have been taken at a later date while also admitting that his clothes were from a later period. Logically, dating photographs should work in that direction: later styles do not appear in earlier photographs because that's not how time works. Another member seconded the 1870 date for the dress because it was plaid. Several members of that group also insist that women were always fashion-forward regardless of their economic status or age so that no woman would appear in a style that was over ten years old. In fact, their logic is that all women's styles are within a couple of years of a photograph being taken. That's a broad and sweeping statement that is full of pitfalls.

At first blush, it makes little sense that my great-grandmother's dress in a c. 1890 photograph would be from the 1870s. But then maybe, again, it makes perfect sense. In the late 1870s, my great-grandmother would have been in the 19 to 22-year-old range. She was one of two daughters that her father had with his first wife. When the first wife died, he married her younger sister. Together they had a house full of children. My great-grandmother’s beloved stepmother/aunt must have died between 1878 and 1800 because her youngest child was two in 1880. In 1880, my great-grandmother’s father died, leaving her and her sister to raise their younger siblings. The sister married, had three babies who died, and then died herself in 1886. Times might have been easier while the sister was married, but overall things were very bad for this family from 1880 on. My great-grandmother struggled to raise her younger siblings by taking in laundry and by relying on the kindness of her neighbors. As a result, my great-grandmother did not marry until her younger siblings were all almost raised. When she married, she married her sister’s brother-in-law. In other words, my great-grandfather was the brother of my great-grandmother's sister’s husband.

So that problematic dress: I would think that if it had been my great-grandmother’s dress from the late 1870s, it would have been worn out by 1890ish. However, when her stepmother/aunt died, her clothes might have been stored in a chest and left untouched. It’s reasonable to think that there might have been a dress that accommodated her last pregnancy. It’s also possible that the same thing happened when my great-grandmother's sister died in 1886, but for some reason, I think it is less likely to be her sister’s dress. I think her clothes would have been well worn, too, and post-1880.

At this point, I think that on the day this picture was taken, my great-grandmother’s only option for a presentable dress might have been one that belonged to her stepmother and that had been stored in a chest. I also think it is possible that she might have been in the early stages of her first pregnancy although no one in the Facebook jumped to the conclusion that she was pregnant. The waist on the dress seems oddly high. I’m wondering if she had pulled it up and then spread the skirt out to conceal her little baby bump.

My best guess is that the photograph could be narrowed to the late spring or early summer of 1890.

Family Search's Experimental Search Tool - Benajah and Hannah Brown

   ©  Kathy Duncan, 2023

In the later part of July, researchers on Facebook started sharing a link to Family Search's United States Wills and Deeds Experiment Search tool. Family Search's experimental prototypetext tool came with the warning that they made no guarantees regarding the availability of the tool. I think we all took that as a warning that it would be short-lived.  

While it lasted, it was phenomenal, and I am looking forward to it being re-released in its "final" form. The beauty of the search tool was that it ran an every-name search so that it went well beyond the principal parties in a record. It found records that were in unindexed county record books. Most importantly, it shortened the length of time required to wade through records county by county. 

My ancestor, Nathaniel Holcomb's wife, serves as a prime example. Up until now, I could only theorize that her name was probably Hannah. I knew that whatever her name was, she had married Benajah Brown of Ste. Genevieve County, Missouri as her second husband after Nathaniel Holcomb died - which was by 1814.

My previous research indicated that the woman, who was Benajah Brown's wife and Nathaniel Holcomb's widow, was old enough to be the mother of all of Nathaniel Holcomb's children, but I don't know that for a fact.

The experimental search tool pulled up a deed in Ste. Genevieve County from Benajah and Hannah Brown to James Skaggs, the husband of Nathaniel Holcomb's daughter Hannah Holcomb. Hannah Brown is named in the deed and released her dower rights before Robert Jameson, the husband of Nathaniel Holcomb's eldest daughter Esther. This indicates that Hannah was still alive as of 1834 and that she could not write her own name. Of most interest is that it provides the location of their land: the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of sec 29 Twp 39 N Range 7E. 

Click to Enlarge

The next deed record that the experiment search tool located was from Benejah Brown of Newton County, Missouri to John C. Brickey of Ste. Genevieve County, Missouri in 1843. Hannah Brown was not included, which is an indication that she was deceased by 1843. This deed confirmed my theory that Benajah Brown was the elderly man living with his son James Brown in Newton County, Missouri in 1840. This land was located at SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec 29, Twp 39N, Range 7E in Ste Genevieve County.

Click to Enlarge

This 1930 Plat Map Book of Ste. Genevieve provides the location Sec 29 Twp 39N Range 7E:

Benajah Brown's land was roughly here:

Mary (Kelly) Fair, Daughter of John Kelly Sr. - Update

  ©  Kathy Duncan, 2023

This post has been decades in the making. Most of the other researchers who were interested in Mary (Kelly) Fair are deceased now.

While on a brain break from working on my husband's Brown family, I decided to have another go at one of my ancestor's sisters - Mary (Kelly) Fair. I've seen a lot of new researchers ask what they should do when they have run out of steam while researching an ancestor or family line. I always work on something else that I have not touched for a long time. It's a good use of my time and beats frustrating myself with material that I can't find anything "new" in - or I just need a break from something tedious that I'm working on. Usually, new information for an old problem has become available, and I can make progress. In this case, the Hinds County, Mississippi estate files for Mary (Kelly) Fair and her husband William Fair were available on Family Search. I've attached those files to both of them as sources on Family Search. Here are the highlights from Mary's file.

Mary Fair, wife of William Fair, appears in the estate records of John Kelly Sr. of Fairfield County, South Carolina, as one of his children. She was to receive three slaves from the estate: Nelly, Tom, and Serena. A Fairfield District, South Carolina, equity court document stated that Mary and William Fair resided in Mississippi as early as 1843. Tracking them from there has been difficult. A William Fair lived in Hinds County, Mississippi in the same timeframe that other children of John Kelley Sr. lived there, but it has been impossible to know for sure if it was the same William Fair. In 1850, neither Mary nor William Fair appeared on the census. Their children, if they had any, were unidentified.

As it turns out, both Mary and William Fair were deceased by 1850. Mary died first in 1846, and there is an estate record for her in Hinds County because she owned four slaves in her own right. Therefore, William Fair, filed to administer her estate. This document provides her death date, the names of the four slaves, and the names of her heirs:

According to the document, created on 24 January 1848, the Fairs were residents of Hinds County, where Mary died on 17 April 1846. At the time of her death, she owned four slaves: Jesse, his wife Lina, and their children Caroline and Ben. Note that these are not the slaves that Mary Fair was to receive from her father's estate. Her brother Littleton Kelly inherited a slave named Jesse. It's possible that they traded slaves. It is also possible that rather than transporting three slaves from South Carolina to Mississippi they were sold in South Carolina and the money was used to buy slaves in Mississippi. In that event, the slaves purchased with that money would still be considered Mary's property. 

The document names Mary Fair's legal heirs: Sarah Harris, John Farr, Isaac Milton Farr, Frances Hutson, Mary Taylor, Mariah Floyd, Jane Farr, William H Farr, and Eliza Mitchell. The last three are noted as being minors. Farr is a frequent alternate spelling for Fair. 

Additionally, the document states that the William Fair who is filing to administer the estate was Mary's husband. The document also requests that Littleton Kelly, Mary's brother, be named as one of the appraisers.

The estate record indicates that at the time of her death, Mary (Kelly) Fair was old enough to be the mother of four married daughters: Sarah Harris, Frances Hutson, Mary Taylor, and Mariah Floyd. Eliza Mitchell is a bit of a puzzle. Is Mitchell her middle name or a surname? Would a married daughter also be considered a minor??

In other documents in William Fair's estate records, Isaac M. Fair is called Isaac Middleton Fair, which seem like a more likely name for him, given that Mary had a brother named Middleton Kelly.

By 1851, William Fair was also deceased and Mary Fair's estate was being administered by Francis Stubbs.

This document states that Stubbs had been administering the estate since October of 1849. In another document that Stubbs filed when seeking to administer the estate, he stated that William Fair died in April 1849. This document names heirs and their whereabouts as of October 1851: Isaac M. Fair and William H. Fair who reside in the state of Lousiana; and Mariah Floyd, wife of Thomas H. Floyd, who reside in the state of Arkansas; also Eliza Tyler, wife of Joseph A. Tyler who reside in the state of Texas; and the following persons who reside in the state of Mississippi, to wit: Elizabeth J. Seastrunk, wife of Joseph Seastrunk, of Copiah County; Sarah C. Harris, wife of James Harris, of Claiborne County; John J Fair of Rankin County, and Mary Taylor wife of William Taylor, and Harriett Hutson wife of Jefferson M. Hutson deceased - each reside in Hinds County. All of them were of full age except for William H. Fair, who was under the age of 21. 

Note the addition of John J. Fair to the list of heirs. Jane Fair seems to be the same person as Elizabeth J. Seastrunk. Is Eliza Tyler also the same person as Elizabeth Mitchell [Fair]?

In other documents, there are dealings with Obediah K. Kelly and F. J. Kelly - two of Mary Fair's brothers.

This is a wealth of information about Mary Fair's children, who her daughters married, and where they lived as of 1851. However, tracking them has not proven to be that easy. Only about half of them can be found on the 1850 census at this point. Even fewer can be found on the 1860 census. Even fewer of their children can be tracked forward.

Next, I need to go through the key documents in William Fair's estate records.

Mollie F. Brown's Photo Album

  ©  Kathy Duncan, 2023

A few months ago, I was contacted by Jim McCabe, who had read my blog post that connected Squire Brown and Isaac S. Brown as brothers. Jim had a family photo album that was kept by a young woman named Mollie F. Brown who was a daughter of James A. and Margaret (Ryan/Rian) Brown of Scott County, Illinois. Mollie's album was unusual in that it contained many identified photographs, but Jim was trying to positively identify who those people were and how they might be connected to James A. Brown.

One photograph was of "Uncle Squire Brown" of Alton, Illinois:

A photograph of "cousin Joe Brown," who was the son of Squire Brown:

One of "Aunt Kate" Brown. Aunt Kate would be Catherine E. (Hay) Brown, wife of Isaac S. Brown of Pike County, Illinois:

A photograph of "Cousin Hank E. Brown, Milton, IL." This is a photograph of Henry E. Brown, a son of Catherine E. (Hay) and Isaac S. Brown of Pike County, Illinois:

A photograph of "cousin Clara Grimes." Clara Grimes was the daughter of Ellen Elizabeth (Brown) and Eli Cox Grimes. Clara was also the granddaughter of Catherine E. (Hay) and Issac S. Brown:

A photograph of "cousin Katie Grimes." Catherine Grimes was Clara's sister:

A photograph of "Uncle William Brown" of Woodville, IL. I believe that this was William Brown of Woodville Twp in Greene County, Illinois rather than Woodville, Illinois:

My interpretation is that in order for Mollie to be related to these Browns in the way that the photographs are labeled, her father James A. Brown would be a brother to Squire Brown of Upper Alton, Madison County, Illinois; Isaac S. Brown of Milton, Pike County, Illinois; and William Brown of Woodville Twp, Greene County, Illinois. 

There are other photographs in Mollie's album that need to be identified. 

This was the most exciting genealogy "discovery" of the summer of 2023. I never thought that I would ever see a photograph of Catherine E. (Hay) Brown.