A new roof for the old house

[whirlaway]

Great House!!!

Mine was built in 1938,looks very similar in the front,I had Green shingles put on mine it is a dutch colonial.The 2 people on the porch in the second picture appear to be very sharp dressers.Could this have been at Easter? My Grandmother had similar shoes only hers looked like the ones Eunice and Mama wore.

 

[rickr]

.

Could this have been taken at Easter? Very possible, and I never thought of that. The couple on the porch are my parents, and they were not yet married until Oct. 1948.

The old woman with the shoes, is really not that old in the picture. People just looked older back then. She was born in 1878, so she was 69 years old in the photo. She died at 92 years old in 1970. She was quite a looker back in her day though. This is scan of an old tin type photo I have of her. I don't know what year it was taken, but most likely before the turn of the 20th century.

The house purchased for $400.00 in 1930, and was moved during the depression. My grandparents had purchased the lot it now sits on in 1927 before the stock market crash, and intended to build a new house. The cost of moving the house was $900.00,and that included digging the basement. If you look at the limestone caps on the porch, chip marks can be noticed at the bottom of the stones. This was from the the brickwork being pryed apart with crowbars during disassembly of the porch for the move. The bricks were cleaned up as best as possible and re-used. This included the bricks for the basement as well. I have no photos of the house being moved, these were hard times, and people couldn't afford luxuries like cameras and film. Too bad, as photos of that would be really cool to have. I do know where the house was located originally. It is about 2 miles from here, and is a church parking lot now.

 

[rocky2]

Rick

The house is looking great as usual!

 

[polkanut]

Do you have all of the house's history documented such as the previous owner before your family purchased it, the builder etc?  This would make for a very valuable archive for the next owners if, God forbid, the next owner should happen to be outside of your family. 

 

[danemodsandy]

Rick:

I'm wondering if the woman in the tintype is really your great-grandmother - if perhaps it's another relative.

The reason is her dress, which is more from the 1860s, before your great-grandmother was born. Women's fashion changed dramatically in the years after the Civil War, going from the hoop-skirted look seen here, to narrow skirts with a bustle in the back. The movie version of Gone With the Wind shows the change very well - Scarlett loves her hoopskirts until the war, and then afterwards, begins dressing in the new fashions.

The hairstyle seen in the photo is also pre-war; it's called a chignon, meaning that the hair was pulled back and gathered into a large bun at the nape of the neck. After the war, hair was worn more on top of the head. The woman's lace mitts (the fingerless, decorative gloves) are another pre-war touch.

Women everywhere in America were as fashion-conscious as they could possibly afford to be back then. There was Godey's Ladies' Book and the Woman's Home Companion to show them the latest styles from Paris, and the new widespread availability of the Singer sewing machine made it possible for them to make what they saw.

There are, of course, other explanations for the fashion in the photo - it could be a case of a young woman dressing up for a costume party in something of her mother's, or similar (people were very social back then; there were not many amusements nor much entertainment, so social events were what they did for leisure). But the dress is way more 1860's than 1890's, when your great-grandmother would have been a young woman. And by the 1890's, a tintype is not likely.

So, it makes me wonder. Whoever she is, she's beautiful. And she has your eyes.

[this post was last edited: 1/24/2013-06:51]

 

[rickr]

I have the names of the previous owners of the house, and I have the original address also. And it is documented. I found that information at the local library years ago.

Hi Sandy, I can assure you that the woman in the tin type photo, and the old woman with the shoes, are in fact the same person. It is documented also. Her parents came from Germany in the mid 1860's, and I have a copy of the ships name, and passenger lists. The woman in the pictures grew up in a log house in the country. That house still stands, but has been abandoned since the 1940's.The land is still rural to this day. These people were not wealthy, or up with fashion at all. They were country people. I have pictures and other items from my family history, from even prior to this time.

 

[pulltostart]

I think the 1947 photo of the older lady is very cool. Maybe it was taken on an Easter Sunday, as these people were dressed up. I would never say that the lady in question was wearing orthopedic shoes, rather, I think this would be how a woman of her age, at that time, would dress. Think about it - what would be her options? In 1947 you would not find a 69-year-old wearing high heels; these were her dress shoes. I love the modesty and simplicity of those earlier times. Thanks for sharing the photos!

lawrence

 

[jeb]

Tintype

I too am puzzled by the tintype. Could this be your great,great grandmother ? I work at two museums and I really think this is pre 1870. We do get this from time to time, were family history is off by a generation. Just a thought Jeff

 

[rickr]

Great-great grandparents

And the parents of the girl in the tin type photo/old woman with the shoes.

They changed their last name from Munch to Minick after moving from Germany to the USA.

 

[rickr]

And last...

A later photo of the same lady in the tin type, and shoes, My great greandmother, and great grandfather.

I looked up information about tin type photos. because I didn't know much about them, other than they are very old. They were popular from 1853 until about 1910. So I guess we all learned something new.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tintype

 

[alr2903]

I really appreciate, your pics and stories.

Rickr.  It is a wonderful thing that your family maintained the house and their history. Are those the same lions on the steps, that the pranksters stole long ago? IIRC, it was them and you were beyond pssssd.  What did you finally adhere them to the steps with?  arthur

 

[polkanut]

I can see a definite resemblance between you and your great-grandmother.  She was a very pretty woman.  I meant no disrespect when I made the comment about her footwear.  If I offended you, I sincerely apologize.

 

[rickr]

Thanks! Yes those are the same lions that were stolen years ago. The thief didn't get very far with them, and the lady across the street spotted the lions beside a vacant house down the street. My brother in law cemented the lions down to the limestone with a special concrete adhesive.

No offense about the shoes, of course. I remember as a kid, that my great grandmother was a very sweet, soft spoken kind lady, but I thought she dressed weird. She always wore dresses, with those funky shoes, and usually had an apron on. She spent lots of time in the kitchen, helping with meal preparation, baking bread, ect.
I also recall if we acted out as children, she would simply say, in her soft slow voice, "oh, you musn't do that" And usually, by the time she got to "musn't" we already had whatever we were doing wrong, done! LOL!!

 

[petek]

Rick, the house looks great and I love reading about family history's as well. Sent you an email.

 

[alr2903]

Rick thanks for jogging my memory, I thought that was the way, with the lion story. TV news covered a story about angel statues being stolen from a cemetary, of all places.  Nice to see your post.  arthur

 

[kenmoreguy89]

Really enjoyed photos of the house and family. Nice house!

Wished I had a scanner to save old photos like those in my computer as well, I love watching old pics of my family and ancestors.

 

[circlew]

Shoes

My dad's Aunt Mabel always wore those kind of shoes. She passed away in '78 in her mid 80's. Dad's Aunt Hazel however, who died in '69 at age 79, would never have worn such shoes. She was very "downtown" and wore high heels if dressed up.

 

[petek]

I seem to recollect my grannys wearing shoes like those as well.
When it comes to portraits taken back in the 1800 & early 1900's you have to remember that having a picture taken was a big event and a big expense. At the time it was probably on most peoples mind that that one picture may be the only picture of themselves they'd ever have taken. Many working class people didn't even own the "fancy" clothes they were photographed in. They were props belonging to the photographer. I have numerous old family portraits taken back then showing great great aunts etc all resplendent in fashion yet they lived in tiny 2 or 3 room industrial rowhouses (tenements basically) and they worked as servants, a cotton mill and selling fruit from a cart on the streets. There was no way the dresses they wore were their own, they couldn't have afforded them and there was no place they would be going that they would even need such finery.

 

[oldskool]

Rick thanks for sharing. Such a fine home, rich in character, nostalgia, and quality. You've obviously taken careful thought into every aspect of it's maintenance. Just excellent!

Oh, and I love the fence!

John

 

[foxchapel]

Wonderful job on the new roof. The house looks almost exactly like the one my in-laws lived in, and now my BIL. I'll bet I know the floor plan, too.
This was a very popular style house at that time. You did a lovely job with the restoration and preservation.