Can anyone suggest a date for this, please?

It looks to me a bit like a mish-mash of fashion styles If the tiny lady in the centre with the glasses and string of pearls is who I think she is, she was born in 1870. And if anyone could clean it up a bit, that would be lovely.

[Margaret in Burton]

I would say 1930's

[peppie]

That's interesting Margaret.....
Hubs was looking over and said 1930's without taking a breath!

Thank you Margaret and Peppie

That fits in with another photo I have of the tiny lady dated 1948, where she looks well into her 70's.

She is the subject of one of the greatest mysteries in my family tree!

[JessBow]

2nd from My left & 'sitting with pearls'' must be sisters, aren't they? They are very alike

Blimey -s she isnt sitting, she's standing up - she is a tiny lady indeed

Yes, she is really tiny - I have other photos of her.

What is confusing is that all the relatives I managed to make contact with, some of whom met her, are convinced that she is Maud, yet one of my parents, who knew her very well is certain that she is Maud's sister, Beatrice who was well built and dark!!! If she is Maud, as most people think, then she appears to have impersonated Beatrice at my parent's wedding

Either Beatrice or Maud was my "adoptive" grandmother, I am sure.

It's a bit confusing

[Merry]

Originally Posted by JessBow

2nd from My left & 'sitting with pearls'' must be sisters, aren't they? They are very alike

Blimey -s she isnt sitting, she's standing up - she is a tiny lady indeed

Jess, did you mean second from left or third? I think the one with the bow on her shoulder looks like a sister for the pearls lady.

I would go for 1930s too.

Thank Merry & Jess - actually I think all 3 on the left look like the tiny lady
(She had many sisters)

Does anyone think the tiny lady could be the same lady as in this photo? The little girl in the photo was born in 1909, so I guess the photo is about 1920?


And a version beautifully restored by Rachel -

[Jill]

I'd say the child looks about 7, which would make the lady quite short, her age would be likely to make her even shorter in the frst picture. The lady's chin is also very distinctive in both pictures and the nose seems to be of the same proportions so I'm tempted to say "Snap!"

Thanks Jill - I hadn't noticed the nose!

If they are the same lady, could this also be her in 1938 ( there is a date on this one)