Advertisement
Advertisement

Samuel and Sarah Biddle

Updated Jun 26, 2025
Loading...one moment please loading spinner
Samuel and Sarah Biddle
A photo of Samuel and Sarah Biddle - Believed to be a wedding photo.
Date & Place: in Jefferson County, Tennessee USA
Comments
Leave a comment
The simple act of leaving a comment shows you care.
As far as is known, the first (camera) photo of a person was taken in 1838. The owner says that this photo was taken in 1836, we think it's closer to 1860 - what do you think?
Photo of Jan Burrell Jan Burrell
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I Have several in those gold colour frames, do you know what the metal is?
Photo of AncientFaces AncientFaces
via Facebook
08/26/2019
It's common with daguerreotypes - part of the process of making them (they generally used a gold foil mat).
Photo of Jan Burrell Jan Burrell
via Facebook
08/26/2019
AncientFaces thank you
Photo of Jan Burrell Jan Burrell
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Thought it must be gold as not tarnished after a century
Photo of Jennie Marxer Pak Jennie Marxer Pak
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Definitely 1860 era
Photo of Dawn DeVries Dawn DeVries
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Maybe they meant 1863
Photo of Carlotta Barnes Carlotta Barnes
via Facebook
08/26/2019
1860’s definitely - their clothes make it obvious.
Photo of Teressa Siler Asbury Teressa Siler Asbury
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Looks like Tin type
Photo of Jeanne Walsh Heyworth Jeanne Walsh Heyworth
via Facebook
08/26/2019
it's fabulous
Photo of John Millican John Millican
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Yes all these are right around the Civil War period and were book like with a metal clasp to keep them closed. A lot of Civil War soldiers had their portraits taken and they were sent back to family members during the war. I did notice however, that their clothing they are wearing does seem early 1850’s ?
Photo of Billie James Billie James
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I love her fancy gloves!!!
Looks closer to 1860 to me.
The neckline of the woman's dress and the collar certainly look like the 1860's. Necklines in the 1830's was very different, as were the hairstyles.

It's possible that the owner of the photo was told the wrong year or, if the year is written on the photo, the date could have been transposed.

I have dyscalculia, a learning disability that deals with numbers, math, time, etc. I often transpose numbers. Learning disabilities did exist before anyone came up with the discovery that there were learning disabilities. So, transposition of the year could explain it.
Photo of Donna Appleby Donna Appleby
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Her hair is def earlier than 1860's.
Linda Rushing I know collars were detachable. Collars were being used like that into the 1950s. I have some of the ones my mother crocheted for that purpose.

However, the neckline was different requiring the sleeves to be set in differently. Her dress has the sleeves set in at the shoulder seam. In the 1830's, the shoulder seams would have been lower than the top of the shoulder. Her collar would not have set right with a 1830 neckline.

Full sleeves were fashionable for many decades, but in the 1830's, the fullness was at or near the top of the sleeve. BY the 1860's the fullness of the sleeve..if it wasn't simply fitted all the way...started at the elbow or lower.

Not every woman dressed in the height of fashion, but I would assume that to have her photo taken back then, she would have worn her best, most fashionable outfit, not an everyday working dress.

The hairstyle is typical of the 1860's as well.

Although most women in the working classes could not afford to to keep up with fashion, and fashion didn't change drastically every year or two back then. Lower middle class women usually had only one or two dresses (hence, the detachable collars that could be rotated for different looks), there is a 3 decade time span between the fashions of the 1830s and the 1860s. Dresses could be refashioned to fit current styles, but only to a certain extent. Most dresses simply did not last 30 years, and 30 years later, a woman wasn't necessarily the same size either.

One more thing...it's possible this photo was misidentified and this is not Samuel L. and Sarah Biddle. There is a photo taken in 1920 of the "Six Biddle Brothers," the sons of Samuel L.Biddle. The old men are listed correctly with their birth years and ages at the time of the photo...except for the last one. He is identified as Samuel L., born 1814 and aged 68 years old in the 1920 photo.

Obviously, someone misidentified the man. It is no doubt Samuel M. Biddle (Samuel L.'s youngest son) who was born in 1852 and was 68 in 1920.

The couple in the photo wearing clothes that are much more fitting for the 1860's and 1870's could be Samuel M. Biddle and his wife.

In researching my family...and extended family..history, I found many errors with names and dates, especially in the census records, and mislabeled photos in old albums.
Donna Appleby "Hair was worn parted in the middle and smoothed, waved, or poofed over the ears, then braided or "turned up" and pinned into a roll or low bun at the back of the neck."

If you had plentiful hair,, it could be done up with braids, buns low at the nape of the neck or higher up. But if you had straight, thin, fine hair (like mine and my mother's and her mother's), it mostly stayed flat against the head with little volume even in a bun or roll at the back.

The woman in the photo below is from the 1860's.
Photo of Kat Fox Kat Fox
via Facebook
08/26/2019
No expert but I say 1860's going by the hairstyles and clothing . My husband and I are Civil war re enactors and her hair is exactly that period and the high collar even her sleeves on the dress the way they are fitted at the top and drop off the shoulder and become full towards the elbow . Not long after the American civil war the fashion changed a good bit and not looking so conservative for woman and woman could wear bangs and do a side part . His suit is the same period also it does not look 1830's to me at all . Maybe a mistake marked on the photo or I am wrong .
Photo of DeJean Melton DeJean Melton
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Kat Fox I agree. That shiny fabric she's wearing and the cut of their clothes clearly indicate a time closer to 1860-1880.
Photo of Kat Fox Kat Fox
via Facebook
08/26/2019
DeJean Melton That is what I was thinking more to the 1860's maybe but I see in the comments someone knows the name of the couple and with more information it is looking like the correct date. I really am no expert just my own experience on what I have read on what I wear at re enactments . I did look up dressing in the 1830's and it is a bit different. Now my curiosity it truly peaked and I am going to get in touch with fellow re enacting friends that know much more than I do . I love a good mystery .
Photo of P.d. Lovato P.d. Lovato
via Facebook
08/27/2019
Did you notice the gloves? Matched with the pattern of her dress!
Photo of Kat Fox Kat Fox
via Facebook
08/27/2019
P.d. Lovato That lace is Beautiful ! I was trying to zoo in I think that might be a lace Shawl ?? I have gloves similar tough to cover my long nails are re enactments so public can't see them lol.
Photo of Jim Millican Jim Millican
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I think they both need a tater.
Photo of Rose Pankratz Rose Pankratz
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I am going to say 1850s.
Photo of Melissa Lowman Melissa Lowman
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Supposedly this a wedding picture of Sarah -1817, Samuel 1814 ages 19 and 22. So, 1814 + 22 is how they got the date of 1836 for the picture.

If you date the picture to 1863 that makes them in their 40s, but they look really young.

So either their birth years are wrong or 🧐🧐🧐🧐
Or this is actually Samuel Marion Biddle, Samuel L. Biddle's son, and his wife...and taken around 1870 or so.
Photo of Janet Messmer Janet Messmer
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Ree Young not 1870 for sure. Fashions and hair wrong for that. I would say 1857-62.
Photo of Linda Woody Linda Woody
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I think at earliest 1847-48 and more likely 1850-1855. Sometimes ancestors get mis-identified by descendants who sincerely believe their identification is correct. At times, it may be a generation down.
Photo of Vicki Snyder-Sonstegard Vicki Snyder-Sonstegard
via Facebook
08/26/2019
The fist workable photograhic process disdn't happen until the 1830s in Europe. Based on that and her hair and style of dress, I would guess mid 1850s to 1860s.
Photo of Tish Reed Tish Reed
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Definitely a very cool photo, but her arm and hand look very weird and kinda creepy.
Photo of Karen Sheridan Costanzi Karen Sheridan Costanzi
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Tish Reed I thought that too.
Photo of Jan Richeson Davis Jan Richeson Davis
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Tish Reed Maybe she moved during photo sitting?
Photo of Tish Reed Tish Reed
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Jan Richeson Davis - I thought maybe that was it. But, her fingers are skeletal and extraordinary long and her sleeve looks like there is no arm in it. I wonder if she had an amputation and was trying to camouflage it.
Photo of Cricket Mcarn Cricket Mcarn
via Facebook
08/27/2019
She's wearing what looks like a lace glove on her hand.
Photo of Lynda Lerum Lynda Lerum
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I'm going with 1840's.
Photo of Charles Justice Charles Justice
via Facebook
08/26/2019
This isn't a daguerreotype, that I can tell. Looks more like an ambrotype or tintype. Either way, I think about mid-1850s, late-1850s, possibly. From what I can see of the matte, it looks slightly older, early 1850s.
Photo of Nikkiya Fraser Nikkiya Fraser
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I’m no fashion expert, but the lady’s hairstyle and dress is 1840’s at the very earliest.
Photo of Carol Holmes Keene Carol Holmes Keene
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I’m just fascinated by her hand!
Photo of Stephanie Ungar Stephanie Ungar
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Fashion says 1860s... 1830s had empire waste on ladies, different hair styles and different sleeves. The man also looks 60s fashion...very civil war area high end fashion.
Photo of Bea Clarissa Bea Clarissa
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Thinking they were the Ingalls.
The costume on the woman is late 1850's.... The hair could be earlier, but, often people would settle on a look, and keep it for many years.
I also think it's closer to 1860s.
Photo of Stephanie Ungar Stephanie Ungar
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I think what is throwing us off is that they state it's a wedding photo....i dont believe it is. Does not look wedding like of the times, esp for someone who had money. Most likely its them a bit older. Their first of 6 sons was born in 1839. So they were married in 1836. I think this is them older...perhaps early 1850s??? Thats why it looks very much fashion wise like the 1860s.
Photo of Trisha Strickland Trisha Strickland
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I would put it at early to mid 1840's. It would have been new tech, yes, but if they travelled to a city or fair then it would have been the "latest thing" Imagine how far cell phone have come in 10 years. The cheek shading is something particularly notable...
Photo of Bob Gaines Bob Gaines
via Facebook
08/26/2019
NO WAY that is 1836. Probably has the date backwards - 1863!
Photo of Sarah Bolocan Sarah Bolocan
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Is she wearing lace gloves?
Photo of Ernest Robbins Ernest Robbins
via Facebook
08/26/2019
1860s based on hair and clothing
Photo of Dee Donaldson Witt-Kearney Dee Donaldson Witt-Kearney
via Facebook
08/26/2019
That is later than 1836.
Photo of Tom Goodson Tom Goodson
via Facebook
08/26/2019
No way it’s 1830s.
Photo of June San Filippo-Noon June San Filippo-Noon
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Quite an attractive looking young couple.
Photo of Gloria Rodas Gloria Rodas
via Facebook
08/26/2019
c. Civil war
Very striking.
Photo of Debbie Wheeler Debbie Wheeler
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I think that is a lace shawl draped over her arm and hands.
Photo of Kat Fox Kat Fox
via Facebook
08/26/2019
It is zoomed in you can see it is a stunning shawl .
Photo of Carine Munro Carine Munro
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Lovely couple!
Photo of Puente Diane Puente Diane
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Im guessing 1860s...little house on the prairie!
Photo of Linda Beron Linda Beron
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Are they alive??? Post Mortems???
Photo of Suzanne Gibson Suzanne Gibson
via Facebook
08/27/2019
Linda Beron I am wondering the same thing.
Photo of Alesia Lachenauer Alesia Lachenauer
via Facebook
08/26/2019
They were the hip couple of their day 😀👍
Photo of Laura Harmon Vickers Laura Harmon Vickers
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Look at the woman's dress . Sleeves aren't 1830. Neither is her hair . I'm leaning toward late 50's to 60's .
Photo of Marty McConnell Marty McConnell
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Yes it looks like a Dagurreotype. Which was used in the 1830s.
Very well could be a picture from 1838.
Actually, daguerreotype photos were used extensively in the 1840 and 1850s. The tintype process was patented in 1857 and gained in popularity, but daguerreotypes were still being produced.

The daguerreotype process was not announced publicly until 1839...though Louis Daguerre had invented it around 1836 and kept it a secret.

So, if this is a daguerreotype, it could not possibly have been taken before 1839 at the very earliest.
Photo of Andreé Wheeler Jones Andreé Wheeler Jones
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Looks more like 1840s
Photo of Judy Hagan Judy Hagan
via Facebook
08/26/2019
What about his tie? Could that date the picture some?
Photo of Mark Simmons Mark Simmons
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Interesting. Very similar to my great-great - grandparents' photo. Born 1827 and 1846. The man may possibly be her brother but we think it's her husband.
Photo of Kat Fox Kat Fox
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Beautiful photo !
Photo of Michael Guenther Michael Guenther
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I also think 1850s-Civil War era. I wish this picture of my gg-gf Charles Mathis 1822-1906 was still as clear as this couple.
Photo of Drusilla Pratt Drusilla Pratt
via Facebook
08/27/2019
Michael Guenther 1850's is the most likely. Good call.
Photo of Kim West Wagner Kim West Wagner
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Looks like there is an Abraham Lincoln look here. I’m guessing 1860’s.
Photo of Mary Jo Willis Mary Jo Willis
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Nice looking for the time!! I have some of very sad looking folk
Photo of Wendy Smith Wendy Smith
via Facebook
08/26/2019
I did some quick checking and here's what I found. From Maryland, United States. Died in circa 1718 (24-32).
Photo of Clara Tanoli Clara Tanoli
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Not so wealthy, they couldn't afford a good hair stylist.
Photo of Sarah Farless Sarah Farless
via Facebook
08/27/2019
Clara Tanoli you do realize this photo is from the 1800’s right?? 🤦🏻‍♀️
Photo of Clara Tanoli Clara Tanoli
via Facebook
08/27/2019
Sarah, you do realize this is sarcasm.
Photo of Tom Goodson Tom Goodson
via Facebook
08/28/2019
Clara Tanoli You’re confusing sarcasm with wit or humor apparently. Do yourself a favor and look up the word sarcasm in the dictionary. A dictionary is one of those big books that has all the words and their definitions in it. That is sarcasm.
Photo of Irene Andrews Irene Andrews
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Is the woman alive when the photo was taken? The ancestors used to pose dead relatives when they passed? Anyway, she looks strange. Check out the gloves. She looks different, but I could be wrong.
Photo of Sarah Farless Sarah Farless
via Facebook
08/27/2019
Irene Andrews she’s dead now. Hahaha!
Photo of Irene Andrews Irene Andrews
via Facebook
08/27/2019
Sarah Farless 🤣
Photo of Lee Ann Forester Train Lee Ann Forester Train
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Definitely the Victorian era
Look at her earbobs and her detailed gloves.
Photo of Joan Brown Joan Brown
via Facebook
08/26/2019
This picture is so much more primitive than the ones from Lincoln and the Civil War. I think it's a bit before 1860.
Photo of Patricia Armstrong Patricia Armstrong
via Facebook
08/26/2019
No way 1836 for photos. Look up when this type of photography began .The style of clothes are more c 1860.
Photo of Kateřina Marie Farlíková Kateřina Marie Farlíková
via Facebook
08/26/2019
Between 1840-1850 i think
The clothes certainly make me think of US Civil War era or slightly before.
Photo of Drusilla Pratt Drusilla Pratt
via Facebook
08/27/2019
The fashion says not later than 1850s.
Photo of Ann Rockwell Theriault Ann Rockwell Theriault
via Facebook
08/27/2019
Looks like someone added color to their cheeks
Photo of Tom Goodson Tom Goodson
via Facebook
08/28/2019
Ann Rockwell Theriault I’m a photo restorationist and hand painting parts of photos was a common practice.
Photo of Ann Rockwell Theriault Ann Rockwell Theriault
via Facebook
08/28/2019
Tom Goodson Even back in the 60s, B&W photos of my kids were a bit colorized.
Photo of Tom Goodson Tom Goodson
via Facebook
08/28/2019
Ann Rockwell Theriault You are correct. I’ve seen it dozens of times on 50s & 60s era photos.
Photo of Sherry Richmond Sherry Richmond
via Facebook
08/28/2019
Hard to tell the actual date. I usually can tell by the clothing, but we can’t see their entire outfits from the photo. I think an earlier date than 1860 (date of US Civil War) is more likely. I think they look American.
Photo of Au Sable Au Sable
via Facebook
08/28/2019
With all due respect, and I mean that (yet still feel compelled to say): can you imagine really stepping into that moment in time, and when you were next to them it looked all sepia toned and creepy, and the air smelled like overly sick body perfumes and a hint of mildew?
Photo of Jennifer Cullen-Chalupnik Jennifer Cullen-Chalupnik
via Facebook
08/29/2019
She has lace gloves on.
Photo of Mimi Thomas Mimi Thomas
via Facebook
08/29/2019
I’m betting 1863 and they transposed digits. “When Abraham Lincoln became president in 1861, he ushered in a new beard style that caught on with many men: the "chin curtain." For those who didn't want to sport the sideburn look, they chose to grow their beard along the jawline and clean-shave the mustache.”
Photo of Mimi Thomas Mimi Thomas
via Facebook
08/29/2019
Photo of Mimi Thomas Mimi Thomas
via Facebook
08/29/2019
An attractive couple!
Photo of Lisa Hill Lisa Hill
via Facebook
08/30/2019
Mimi Thomas we missed you at the reunion. Everyone brought old photos of Kares/Wagner family. Denny Kares has photos of Johan and Julia when they were younger.
Share this photo:

People tagged in this photo

Sarah M. (Quinn) Biddle
Sarah M. (Quinn) Biddle was born on October 22, 1817. Family, friend, or fan, this family history biography is for you to remember Sarah M. (Quinn) Biddle.
Age in photo:
19
Samuel L. Biddle
Samuel L. Biddle was born on May 4, 1814. Family, friend, or fan, this family history biography is for you to remember Samuel L. Biddle.
Age in photo:
22
Advertisement

Topic related photos

Popular Photos
Popular Photos
These historical photos have generated quite the buzz!
This collection of historical photos has got people talking. These photos - either because of the subject and/or the story - have generated a lot of comments among the community. What do you have to s...
344 photos
1800s
1800s
The 1800s where the end of the industrial revolution and the birth of scientists.
The Industrial Revolution began around 1760 and ran through the 1840's. Then began the birth of the profession of science. Louis Pasteur, Charles Darwin, Michael Faraday, Thomas Edison, and Nikola Te...
Tennessee
Tennessee
Tennessee has played a significant role in shaping American history.
Get a glimpse of Tennessee's past with this collection of photos shared by the community - from its early settlers and pioneer days to its growth into a thriving state. These photos showcase not only ...
725 photos
Quinn
Last name
30.0k+ people96 photos
Biddle
Last name
3.72k+ people6 photos
Advertisement

Followers

T.Patton Biddle
I'm a family history researcher working on my family and my wife's. I'm looking for information on the surnames Biddle, Dietz, Park, Vittetoe, Dyer, Cordell, Rhodes, Jones, Cunningham, Northcutt, Francis, Atkinson and Jackson.
Cari Urbanczyk
About me:I haven't shared any details about myself.
Linda Eaton
About me:I haven't shared any details about myself.
Missis Jonathan
About me:I haven't shared any details about myself.
Beth Shopmeyer Thompson
About me:I haven't shared any details about myself.

Show more

Advertisement
Back to Top