Leisa, please tell us what you know.
In particular can you positively identify anyone on the picture? The more the better.
Can you save us time by filling in the family tree background?
My initial thought is post WW1.(ladies hair styles, though I am no expert)
The Uniforms are identical and one is Sergeant and one is corporal. Looks like a dress uniform rather than combat.
What are the apparent "medals" around the necks of 2 of the ladies. Anyone any suggestions?
I see a few buttonholes. Was this a wedding ?
Leisa, first I have checked the hair style and it is earlier than I said, It is Edwardian.
Charles Harrop married Ellen Eliza sylvester in 1894 sheffield.
They had Cissy Alma in 1895, Dorothy in 1897, Ellen Maud in 1899 and Amy in 1901.
I cannot find any other children. Are you aware of others?
Presumably Charles Harrop is on there and presumably the baby on Ellen's knee is Amy.
Will need more ifamily info. Why did you include the name Barnsley? Where do they fit in please.
The 2uniformed men must be regular army since this predates Ww1. Need some family names to go on.
The names are families who are related to each other. Given it looks like there is 3 generations there it's likely those names belong to the people there.
My tree is on Ancestry and I have their births and deaths on the tree.
We only know a couple of them in the photo and as I said Cissie is a guess.
Charles Harrops parents were Henry Harrop and Elizabeth Barnsley (Barnsley Tools)
Ellen Eliza Silvester's parents were Alfred Silvester & Eliza Kezia Condon
This is why we think those 3 families could be in the photo.
Cissie Alma B 1895
Dorothy B 1897
Ellen Maude B 1899
Amy Silvester B 1901
Muriel B 1903
Jessie Anne B 1905
Constance Vera B 1907
Charles Harrop siblings:
Sarah B 1861
George B 1862
Jessie B 1865
Arthur B 1869
Maurice B 1871
Charlotte B 1875
Flora B 1877
Harold B 1879
Bernard B 1882
Emma B 1885
Ellen Eliza Silvester siblings:
William B 1874 D 1874
Harry B 1876 D 1876
Ada B 1877
Florence B 1877
Beatrice B 1880
Martha B 1882
Harry B 1882 D 1882
Alfred B 1884 D 1918
Annie B 1885
Mabel B 1887 D 1887
Charles B 1889
Looking at the 1911 census I note that Flora Loiusa is married to Robert Watkinson who is a POLICE Sergent (Sheffield City).
Looking at the 1901 census I see that Robert & Flora are living in Rockingham Sq along with a number of other Policemen or Firemen.
Leisa do you have any certificates?
Do you know where Charles & Ellen Eliza were married.
They seem to be in the Nether Hallam area of Sheffield. I have found two baptisms so far for Dorothy & Jessie at St Bartholmews in our database. Jessie's mother is a Nellie???
Have a look at it please.
Elaine in Ottawa.
I wonder as Robert is in the middle of the picture was it a celebration party on a promotion or as the babies are also there could it be a christening. They all look very smart.
The Barnsley family I see where a very affluent family. George left 14,000 pounds in
1874. File manufacturer & Steel refiner.
Have you noticed that the girl front far left looks like the one 4th from right? Also both those girls and the one standing far right have identical ribbons in their hair. It looks like they may have been got ready by the same mother.
If that is right then we have the four sisters . And we can date the photo to 1904 plus minus 1
I cannot think of a reason why the Harrops family and the Sylvester family would get together in about 1904. The usual reason for 2 families to be together would be wedding. Therefore I suspect that this is likely to be a wedding of either a Harrop or a Sylvester in about 1904. The only one that fits is Arthur Harrop marrying Alice Annie Spick in Q1 1904.
I suspect that if you follow up all the siblings and parents of Charles Harrop and all the parents and siblings of Alice Annie Spick you will see if they fit the overall picture, in terms of number of boys and girls and unmarrieds and ages.
In particular you should find possibilities for those 2 youngest babies. Could they be siblings (twins?), one with mother, one with father? It needs a bit of work on several marriages and births, with some help from censuses.
Edit just seen Elaine's brilliant reply. That also fits perfectly with the same scenario.
I think you are on to something. However, from GRO Flora Louisa Harrops mother maiden name was Giles, not Barnsley.
The Flora Harrop mmn Barnsley married a Howard (Free BMD) and their children are shown in GRO.
If & I say if the two main people were Robert Watkinson and his wife Flora Louisa nee Harrop. I would like to speculate that their three daughters are either sitting on the parents knees with Margaret Mary sitting to the right of her father.
They would be Mary Margaret Dec qtr 1897 EB 9c 399
Maud Dec qtr 1898 Sf 9c 483
Flora Beatrice March qtr 1900 Sf 9c 502
Dorothy Mabel was born Dec qtr 1902 Sf 9c 529.
Flora Beatrice died Sep qtr 1906 Sf9c 286 aged 6.
Could there also be an older brother of Roberts behind him (Arms crossed)
Two over to the left from him could that be a much younger brother. OR son of the chap with his arms crossed.
Dave I can't see any medals where are they. I can see two chokers which would be a narrow ribbon with a locket hanging at their throats. Is that what you are looking at?
I must admit when I first looked at this photo what went through my head was a Methodist gathering of some sort.
Elaine, the things I referred to as medals are the things on the shoulders of several of the women coming down in a V shape at the breast. A couple of the m look as if they do not join in a V. I have the impression it may be of religious significance
My tree is called Gomer Family Tree on Ancestry. It's public too.
Thank you for your educated guesswork and it appears you may have isolated a few of them. My intention is to seek people who know who any of the people are or have photos of any of them who would be willing to share with me.
Flora Louisa Harrop was born in 1877 and was the daughter of the Roman Catholic Joseph and Marguerite (nee Giles). Her baptism at St Marie is on this site.. She is not part of the Harrop Barnsley family
A different Flora Harrop was also born in 1877 and she was daughter of Henry and Elizabeth (nee Barnsley). Her baptism is on this site. She is the Flora who is referred to by Leisa as part of her Harrop Barnsley family.
Flora Louisa married Robert Watkinson
Flora (mmn Barnsley) married a man called Howard..
Leisa, may I suggest that you and I are both wrong about the identification of Cissie. That girl standing on the right is too old. I would like to suggest that Cissie is the one on (our ) right of the young boy on the front row. I also note that she has the same ribbon.
The photo is somewhat out of focus so I am struggling to pick out the three generations you referred to. Is it possible to get a clearer picture please? Alternatively can you please indicate which people are of the older generation. It would also be useful to if you could point out the teenagers (other than the two obvious ones of the boy in the middle and the girl standing far right)
Regardless of the occasion, looking at only the Harrop family, we would expect to see:
Sarah Elizabeth (1861),her husband George Hudson and their children Ethel (1887), Mary Alice (1888), John William (1890), George (1890), Charles (1892), Ernest (1896), Anne (1898)
Jessie (1865) and her husband surname Llewellyn and their children Elsie (18956 and Constance (1901) (1901)
Arthur (1869) and his wife Alice Annie Spick
Charles (1872) , his wife Ellen Eliza your g smother, and children Cissie(1895), Dorothy (1897), Ellen Maud (1899), Amy (1901)
Maurice and maybe his partner
Charlotte (1875) And her husband Charles Furness.
Flora (1877) and her husband Albert Howard and children Marion (1901) and Lottie ((q1 1904)
That seems to account for almost all the younger children, but where are those teenagers?
Ok Leisa, thanks. That eliminates Arthur. Do you know what happened to George Barnsley Harrop. I cannot find a marriage. I have a death in his 70s if I am right.
I am working on the principle that you need to trace people who have photos of their ancestors who are on that picture. Those people alive today will be descendants of those children on the picture. Those descendants will, like you, be grandchildren of those small children. They could be anywhere in the world.. Therefore, if we can identify the names(without necessarily identifying them on the picture ) we may find people who have them as ancestors. Unfortunately they are almost all girls so that just makes it more difficult, but not impossible.
I have already identified one person, almost by accident. 10 years ago I contacted someone on Genes Reunited about one of our common ancestors in Sheffield. She allowed me to see her tree at the time. It turns out that in her tree she also has Henry And Elizabeth and some of those children I named. You may be able to contact her. I shall not name her on this forum. I shall send you a private email with those details.
Leisa, I have sent you 3 names to try to contact. Please let us know if you have any joy.
I am certain Elaine is right about the police uniform. Find the one with the baby and you will be able to identify a lot more on the picture. I shall leave the picture live for a while in the hope that someone comes forward.
Got your email Dave. I'm checking with family because I think 1 of them is on Genes United.
1 name is on Ancestry so will write to him.
As stated previously I'm hoping of finding descendants on this website because my family is unable to identify any of them beyond the sisters and their mother. None of us can work out which one is the father LOL.
Leisa, I have gone back to square one on this and believe I can see how we can take a step forward.
Two pieces of detailed info would help.
1. I know Amy Harrop was birth registered in Q1 1901. Do you know her birth date (or at least the birth month) of Amy Harrop?.
2. As I already said the image is not very clear. There are 4 babies being held on knees. Can you see on the original whether or not the furthest right of those babies is wearing shoes?
Both Elaine and I have really caught the bug on this one.
I've decided the bloke behind Ellen Eliza is her husband Charles Harrop. So the bloke in the middle that looks a lot like him could be a brother.
Interesting how many of the women have the same hair do.
All the kids in the front have shoes on.
Maybe all the kids with hair ribbons are the Harrop girls?
Looking at original photo (which has names written on the actual photo) We have Ellen Eliza holding Connie. In front of her on the ground is Amy move 3 kids along and we have Jessie being held by god knows who. Next is Dorothy and then Ellen Maud.
Still cant work out which one is Cissie (4 years older than Ellen Maud).
Cissie has to be one of the 2 girls between the boy and Jessie. All the other girls are too old to be Cissie.
Leisa, great that you found some names on it. That is already a step forward.
You just pitched an enormous curve ball. Did not know about Connie That changes everything, and makes more sense with regard to the dress and hair styles.
The reason I wanted AmyS birth date was to date the photo? Now need Connies birth date, or at least month and year. Do you have that please?
Back to the drawing board. Watch this space.
"Looking at original photo (which has names written on the actual photo) We have Ellen Eliza holding Connie. In front of her on the ground is Amy move 3 kids along and we have Jessie being held by god knows who. Next is Dorothy and then Ellen Maud."
As both grandmothers are called Ellen Eliza which one are you referring too?
Moira, that is brilliant. Connie has been positively identified by Leisa as the baby on the left . I am certain that baby is at least 6 months old and less than 18 months old (little hair and no shoes so not yet walking).
We can definitely date the photograph to 1908. That makes much more sense from the viewpoint of the hairstyles and dress style.
Now we try to find the uniformed man with the baby.
it is my understanding that she took it from its frame to get a clearer picture and discovered that all but one of her family members were identified in handwriting on the picture.You can see this on this improved picture
She would still like to know who the many others were, and what was the occasion.
Leisa, I believe the standing girl far right is also identified, very faintly, with the word Cissy. Also if you look carefully at the hand positions you will see that Jessie is being held by Dorothy.
Can anyone suggest what the apparent uniform is on several of the girls particularly on the right side. Is it Nurses uniform, or are they servants perhaps?
I would respectfully disagree that the young ladies to the right are nurses. As an old school nurse, albeit not as old as this photo, and a Canadian nurse at that, I am certain that no respectable nurse of that era would pose in a formal photograph without her cap and apron. Even in the early days of my career, a nursing cap was an essential part of the uniform and identified not only that you were a nurse, but where you trained as a nurse. I will suggest that one of the young men in uniform is Albert Henry Foweather. Charles Harrop's sister Sarah Elizabeth Harrop married Albert Foweather, see parish records on this site, and they had 3 daughters and 2 sons. Albert Henry (1882),Jessie Elizabeth (1885), Ethel Greaves (1887), May (1893)and Frederick (1896). Some of the young ladies on the right may be these young ladies as they would have been in their late teens or early 20's when this photo was taken and were still single. Albert Henry Foweather was married to Beatrice Barber in 1906 and he was a police constable. They had 2 daughters at this time: Jessie (1906) and possibly Elsie born in the fall of 1908 so not sure if she had arrived yet when this photo was taken.
Helen, absolutely fantastic. That is the big breakthrough. It fits perfectly because it not only explains the police uniform but it also explains why he, not the mother, is holding Elsie . His wife imust be holding holding their older child. That means the lady on his right as we look must be Beatrice his wife and on her knee is 2 year old Jessie.
If we have Elsie's baptism record, we have the exact date of the photo..
That opens up new avenues for search. Is the other uniform Albert's brother?
Who is the other baby , who must have been born in 1907. From the Barber side? .That will identify its mother.
There must be members of Beatrice Barber's family, Her parents? If still alive.
Three of the girls on the front row are likely to be Constance May Llewellyn (7), Marion Howard (7)and Lottie Howard (4), maybe the others are from the Barber side.
A lot of loose ends to tie up. Who wants to join in , or does Leisa want to do it herself.
In pointing out that Albert Henry Foweather was a police officer, I hope I'm not sending you off down a false path. Albert could be the uniformed gent seated in the front row or he could be the uniformed gent in the back row. I do feel that correctly identifying the uniformed gent in the front row is key to solving what the occasion is and who the people around him are. Notice that he is the only man seated and he is seated front and center. If he weren't central to whatever this occasion is, then as an officer and a gentleman, he would be standing to the back or to the side with the other fellas and one of the ladies who is standing behind him, would be seated. Initially I had thought that this gentleman and the lady immediately to his right, were a couple and that the babies they are each holding were twins. However, Albert Henry and Beatrice Foweather did not have twins and for that matter, I can't see any Harrop twins registered either. I would lean more to the idea that Beatrice is the lady immediately to his left with the child on her lap being 2 year old Jessie Foweather. However, this raises the problem of who are the 2 infants, one in the arms of the officer and one in the arms of the lady next to him. Infants do not have the muscle tone to hold their head up independently until at least 3 months of age. Both of these infants are clearly holding their heads up on their own so they are both between the ages of 3 months and 12 months. If Elsie Foweather was born Sept. 16, 1908, then the earliest she would have been holding her head up would have been mid Dec. 1908. You have already stated that this photo was taken in 1908, but if Elsie is the infant on the officer's knee, then the only time this photo could have been taken would have been the end of Dec. It does not appear from the attire of all in this photo, that the photo was taken outside in Dec. So possibly the photo was taken earlier in 1908, and Beatrice is still pregnant with Elsie. But that still leaves the question of who are the babies being held by the man and woman in the center of the photo. There still is not enough information to positively identify who this man is.
I admit I am a real dinosaur when it comes to social media, but maybe you need to attempt to contact any Foweather or Harrop families still living in Sheffield via Facebook or Twitter. A simple Google search of either name in Sheffield, reveals at least 2 Harrop's with telephone numbers listed in Sheffield, there are at least 7 Foweather's on electoral roles for Sheffield and several mentions of Facebook postings by Foweather's and Harrop's with Sheffield in the text. If worse comes to worse, try phone or regular mail. There is an entry on Rootschat forum dated 2014 from someone also researching this Foweather family, perhaps you could contact them and collaborate. I'll keep looking into this as time allows, but I'm afraid that's all I have at the moment.
Following on from Helen's weather reference, 1908 was a record year for the lateness of snow in the south of England. There were very heavy falls in late April and there were very deep frosts in the north.
Is it my imagination or are there traces of snow or ice on the wall tops in the background of the picture, and on the bush at the back, left of centre?
If the front policeman is married to the lady to his right (left as we look at it) then their two children must have been born in very quick succession.
Charles Harrop's brother, Bernard Harrop born 1882 was in the military. I don't have access to FMP to see his service record. But he seems to have enlisted about 1900. In 1901 he is in Cheriton, Kent. There are several newpaper reports of Corporal Bernard Harrop being involved in action in Koonstad, South Africa. He then became dangerously ill with "enteric ?" in Apr. 1902 and was presumably sent home. He married Florence Lucy Bond in 1905 in Canterbury, Kent and they had 2 children 13 months apart. Flora Jessie Harrop born Nov. 7, 1906 in Kent and Bernard Harold Harrop born Dec. 30, 1907 in Kent. By 1911, Bernard along with Florence Lucy and children are posted to India. They returned to live in Sheffield. Bernard became a postman and was very involved in bowling in Sheffield but died age 48 in 1930 and was buried in Crookes Cemetery. His widow never remarried and was buried with him in 1974 age 91. I propose that the uniformed gent in the front row is Bernard and the lady to his right is Florence Lucy. Bernard Howard is the infant that Bernard is holding as he would have been old enough to hold his head up by the spring or summer of 1908, and Florence is holding Flora Jessie who would be around 16 to 18 months of age. I would suggest that the family gathered for this photo prior to Bernard and family being posted to India. If that is so, then all the people in this photo should be Harrop's or Silvester's as Florence Lucy's family were in Kent. If you agree with this then my suggestion would be to try to contact the descendants of Bernard Harrop to see if they have photos to corroborate my theory. Flora Jessie married Arthur Bridges in Sheffield in 1933 and died in 1998. She had 2 sons born in 1936 and 1945 who may still be living. Bernard Howard married Eileen Butcheer in 1937 and died in 1991. He had 5 children, 3 sons and 2 daughters between 1941 and 1953, the one daughter's burial is on this site. Bernard Harold also served in the army in 1927. Just a guess, but possible that Bernard Sr. died at such a young age due to whatever illness had struck him down in 1902. Can any one explain the difference between a military uniform and a police uniform? That may help with confirming this gentleman.
On close inspection the 2 uniforms are definitely military and almost identical. The only difference being the front one is sergeant and the back one corporal. There have never been corporals in the police. Also a policeman in those days would have had his number printed around his collar.
So the policeman was a red herring. -Albert Foweather must be there in civvies.
It looks like a large number of the people can now be pretty certainly identified from age, family likeness and association with the people around them. They are all Bernard's siblings and their families, with the possible exception of Charlotte Furness Nee Harrop and her husband Charles and their son Charles (who was born in Plymouth in 1898).
There still remains an extra family with matriarch seated probably third from left , her husband probably third from left behind her and a group of people , mainly female, at the right side, including the couple at back right.
Who is the second uniform?
I suggest he is brother at arms with Bernard, is unmarried and he is also going to foreign climes. Therefore his family is also in the gathering. They are the ones displaying the strange neckwear.
Do you know who wrote those names on your photo? There is clearlly something not right. In 1908 Maud was 9 years old and Amy was 7 years old. The girl labelled Amy looks a lot older than the one labelled Maud. Also the child labelled Maud is clearly much younger than 9. The names of G dad and G ma would indicate that the person who wrote them was either one of your parents or one of your uncles or aunts. If that is the case then they should be right , having seen their grandparents grown up., so they would recognise them. However they would be guessing about the children because they would have only seen them grown up, not as babies.
Leisa, thank you.
I am sure the ids written for the children are wrong. I think only the one for Jessie is correct
I think you will find that Cissy 13 and Dorothy 11 (standing) are the 2 obvious sisters at the right hand side. That makes Ellen Maud 9 the one at front left (currently labelled Amy).