(10-04-2019 06:55 PM)AussieMick Wrote:  Thanks, Rob. Some very useful comments in there. These 'trivia' questions can bring out real gems of which some of us would be forever unaware.

regards,
Mike.

(10-05-2019 06:03 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  The only book (as far as I can find) ever published on Catherine Eddy Beveridge was put out by her grandson, Albert J. Beveridge III in 2005 and was called The Chronicle of Catherine Eddy Beveridge. It is based on a diary that she kept at the turn of the century. I have the book, but seem to have misplaced it on one of my shelves. Therefore I was able to borrow a copy from the Internet Archive.

One note. I made a mistake on the year the photo was taken. She was presented to Czar Nicholas II in 1902, not 1905. As for the tiara, she writes in the book about the Czarina, who was "wearing a tiara in the Russian manner," so I imagine it was a custom of that time there.

There is no wedding picture of Catherine and Albert. Even the newspaper announcement reprinted in the book shows them in individual portraits.

Best
Rob

(10-05-2019 08:02 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  Is it possible that the photo has been misdated and mislabeled, and the man resembles Beveridge because he actually IS Beveridge? There is a photo of a woman I am currently researching that is generally identified as being taken in 1859, but I always had my doubts, because the woman's hairstyle, dress, and apparent age all pointed to a later date. One day I was browsing on Ancestry and saw the photo from which all of the published copies are taken, and my suspicions were confirmed--the woman was holding her two oldest children, which have been obscured in the published versions, which meant that it could not have been taken before the early 1870s.

(10-05-2019 08:15 PM)L Verge Wrote:  

(10-05-2019 08:02 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  Is it possible that the photo has been misdated and mislabeled, and the man resembles Beveridge because he actually IS Beveridge? There is a photo of a woman I am currently researching that is generally identified as being taken in 1859, but I always had my doubts, because the woman's hairstyle, dress, and apparent age all pointed to a later date. One day I was browsing on Ancestry and saw the photo from which all of the published copies are taken, and my suspicions were confirmed--the woman was holding her two oldest children, which have been obscured in the published versions, which meant that it could not have been taken before the early 1870s.

I think we both may have been posting at the same time, Susan. Did you get a chance to see my very last post about Miss Eddy's formal attire as a debutante being presented at a royal court? That seems to confirm the date of the photo at least.

(10-05-2019 08:27 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  

(10-05-2019 08:15 PM)L Verge Wrote:  

(10-05-2019 08:02 PM)Susan Higginbotham Wrote:  Is it possible that the photo has been misdated and mislabeled, and the man resembles Beveridge because he actually IS Beveridge? There is a photo of a woman I am currently researching that is generally identified as being taken in 1859, but I always had my doubts, because the woman's hairstyle, dress, and apparent age all pointed to a later date. One day I was browsing on Ancestry and saw the photo from which all of the published copies are taken, and my suspicions were confirmed--the woman was holding her two oldest children, which have been obscured in the published versions, which meant that it could not have been taken before the early 1870s.

I think we both may have been posting at the same time, Susan. Did you get a chance to see my very last post about Miss Eddy's formal attire as a debutante being presented at a royal court? That seems to confirm the date of the photo at least.

Yes, we did cross-post! The veil, etc. do seem consistent with the ones mentioned in the piece you linked to.

(10-05-2019 10:25 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  Another thing that makes me think it isn't Beveridge is the face of the man doesn't seem to have Beveridge's features. Most pictures of Beveridge show him to be a taciturn man.

This is a picture of Beveridge dated no later than 1901 when he was a senator from Indiana.



His jaw appears to me to be much more square than the man in the second picture, and his eyes seem different as well.

Catherine talks about her dresses in the book, but she really didn't seem to remember that much about them. I definitely don't remember ostrich feathers, but she very well might have left that out.



Best
Rob

(10-06-2019 01:28 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  I never really thought about that, but you're right. Beveridge certainly thought of himself as Superman, given the outstretched size of his ego.

Best
Rob