Well, I can't tell you the girl's name, but I managed to find the photo on [**Getty Images**](https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/girl-around-the-age-of-16-years-in-light-dress-a-book-in-news-photo/503048135), which lists it as "Girl around the age of 16 in light dress, a book in her right hand" and dates it from the 1870s, taken by photographer August Red, whose studio was in the Promenade area of Linz, Austria. If Getty knew the girl's name, they'd probably have listed it.
[**The photo's owned by Brandstaetter Images**](https://brandstaetterimages.com/?83233398844018378201), an Austrian firm, and they list her anonymously too. Sadly this young girl will likely be unknown unless someone for whom she's an ancestor ends up doing research to find this.
FWIW, I dug up some info on Mr. Red on an Austrian photo site. He lived from 1822-1888, and had studios in both Linz and Wels from the late 1850s to his death. There are some [**listings on ebay of collections of his CDVs**](https://www.ebay.com/itm/315193295025?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=13N6DK0YTiG&sssrc=2047675&ssuid=V5g67ZtdRYK&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY), i.e., *Cartes de Visitiers --* what English-speaking Victorians would've called calling cards, but ritzier since these folks could afford to get a portrait taken, rather than solely text as was more common.
That's all I got!
Does it say when or can you use fashion to indicate about what year? Then you could look at census records to see what families in the area had daughters. She may also show up in transportation records like ships manifests.
I found this when I googled Leta Hunt. It’s the same description as what you found with the addition of 1925 Texas. Definitely different girls and different eras.
https://ancientfaces.tumblr.com/post/109405598027/1920s-pleated-dress-leta-hunt-in-a-beautiful/amp
That photo is absolutely not 1925. Much earlier than that! I'd have to have a proper look to try to work out when, but 1900 or a bit earlier is my guess.
I saw that too. So I can't confirm. The other mentioned the name on the back of the photo. Not sure of the story on the second. Hard to be sure. Can't find anything else.
I found this that says cir. 1870, but since I don’t have instagram I can’t read the comments which might have more info
https://www.instagram.com/p/BnkXhPqA9Zk/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
You are not missing anything. It's a bunch of fools who think it's a "postmortem" photograph because they think her feet look weird.
1870 is a pretty likely date for the photo; her dress and hairstyle are consistent with fashionable dress for tween girls at that time.
Unlikely, given the class indicators from her dress. Ballet girls in the 19th century were incredibly poor, frequently from mothers involved in sex work, as the ballet was understood as a wealthy man's brothel. Whilst it was slightly better in the Russian Empire with the Imperial ballet academy enjoying some status as a particular delight of the Tsars, ballet and theatre were seen as immodest professional for women because it required them to "display their bodies" to an audience of men.
She looks to be a middle to upper class girl in the 1870s or 80s, and her feet are in 3rd position because that was considered an elegant stance for young women. Unless she was the daughter of someone particularly important, it's unlikely that her name will emerge. It's the same as trying to put a name to family snapshots you find in a book at the thrift store. Without much more information, she'll just be an anonymous girl.
Degas was painting and sculpting children, as the girls were trafficked to wealthy patrons starting around age 14. Degas took part in that. One of his paintings showed the men in chairs on the stage watching their victims perform, a privilege they paid for.
I get sick now whenever I see his work.
True, but as an artist myself it’s hard for me to separate the art from the artist. I guess it’s because I, personally get attached to my work. I don’t know if that’s true of all artists.
I used to own a vintage clothing store. Vintage shoes tend to run really narrow. They were handmade and deliberately made to fit like a glove. Also narrow feet were considered elegant and high class-looking, so if you had big, chunky feet you would feel social pressure to stuff them into too-tight, too-narrow shoes. Like corsets for your feet, come to think of it. Plus people used to be smaller in general--not just slimmer, statistically, but smaller in height and overall build. That went for feet as well. Go to the Chinese Theatre in Hollywood sometime and look at the foot prints of all those 1930s-40s era actresses. Much smaller than average feet nowadays--even if they were deliberately wearing very tight/small shoes.
They might be that big. She looks like she's somewhere between 11 and 13. A lot of children have a feet growth spurt around that age and look a bit disproportionate until the rest of their body catches up. My 11 year old currently looks like a Great Dane puppy and I, myself, went up three shoe sizes the summer I turned 12. I had grown up size feet and a little kid build. It was mighty awkward!
Yeah I kinda "grew into my feet" for a little while there. So many awkward things kids go through! I had one of those damned back braces too, I hated it. :/
Her dress is suggesting vaguely 1870s due to the collar but not the skirt. The photo setting and her hair and shoes say 1890s. So im going to say 1890s. As for her name... youll never be able to find out unless you find other info related to this photo
She looks like she could be a model for Tenniel’s illustrations, but the real Alice Liddell didn’t look anything like what we’re used to from the books.
I like Alice Liddell. She kind of looks like Scout from To Kill a Mockingbird when she was small. Also, I love the Cameron photos when she was a young woman. I would love to go back in time and meet her, considering she was such a muse.
I can see why people think so, though. She's the right age in approximately the right era, wearing her hair in a headband ribbon like the Tenniel illustrations. She's very book - Alice looking, and C.L.D. probably would have gladly written her a mirror letter.
Beautiful pic, pretty girl, but massive feet! Look at the stompers she’s wearing.
Probably just a matter of perspective. But it looks like she has big old feet.
Getting your photograph taken was super common at this time. Cabinet cards and cdvs were like the equivalent of instagram or face book. There are tons out there, many without names, not usually anyone well known or famous just a middle or upper class family.
I think the legs and shoes are props. Possibly she had a medical issue that kept her from standing. From an artist’s point of view, her waist to knee to ankle ratio is way too long.
Maybe you could link to where you found the photo? The photo seems to be very sharp and clear for that era.
The feet are unusually long and thin but that's probably the camera angle. Do you think these boots are similar to hers? They are from the 1880-1890 so maybe that's when the photo was taken? https://www.pinterest.com/pin/196962183688987105/
Shoes were built differently back then, usually of MUCH thinner/suppler leather so they conformed to the foot very well, and were made much tighter than shoes today are made. Which overall led to shoes looking much narrower and smaller than they do today.
Exactly. :-) I have small, skinny feet so have been able to wear many pairs of vintage shoes over the years. On me, they are extremely comfortable and have great arch support--but for a lot of people with more modern feet, they are very uncomfortable.
This looks like it may be a photo of a deceased person. This was done frequently in Victorian times. Her feet are in an odd position, most people don’t stand this way, she has a book in her hand, these photos often had a book in the hand, she has a very still look in her eyes. She could be tied to a stand in order to take the photo.
Unless it’s a family member it’s not likely you will find her name
See comment below.
Well, I can't tell you the girl's name, but I managed to find the photo on [**Getty Images**](https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/girl-around-the-age-of-16-years-in-light-dress-a-book-in-news-photo/503048135), which lists it as "Girl around the age of 16 in light dress, a book in her right hand" and dates it from the 1870s, taken by photographer August Red, whose studio was in the Promenade area of Linz, Austria. If Getty knew the girl's name, they'd probably have listed it. [**The photo's owned by Brandstaetter Images**](https://brandstaetterimages.com/?83233398844018378201), an Austrian firm, and they list her anonymously too. Sadly this young girl will likely be unknown unless someone for whom she's an ancestor ends up doing research to find this. FWIW, I dug up some info on Mr. Red on an Austrian photo site. He lived from 1822-1888, and had studios in both Linz and Wels from the late 1850s to his death. There are some [**listings on ebay of collections of his CDVs**](https://www.ebay.com/itm/315193295025?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=13N6DK0YTiG&sssrc=2047675&ssuid=V5g67ZtdRYK&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY), i.e., *Cartes de Visitiers --* what English-speaking Victorians would've called calling cards, but ritzier since these folks could afford to get a portrait taken, rather than solely text as was more common. That's all I got!
☝️👌
Does it say when or can you use fashion to indicate about what year? Then you could look at census records to see what families in the area had daughters. She may also show up in transportation records like ships manifests.
That would be a lot of people
Found this on Google. [Possible Name](https://ibb.co/r2WdTDM)
I found this when I googled Leta Hunt. It’s the same description as what you found with the addition of 1925 Texas. Definitely different girls and different eras. https://ancientfaces.tumblr.com/post/109405598027/1920s-pleated-dress-leta-hunt-in-a-beautiful/amp
That photo is absolutely not 1925. Much earlier than that! I'd have to have a proper look to try to work out when, but 1900 or a bit earlier is my guess.
I saw that too. So I can't confirm. The other mentioned the name on the back of the photo. Not sure of the story on the second. Hard to be sure. Can't find anything else.
solved, i think.
This photo is circa 1870 though.
I found this that says cir. 1870, but since I don’t have instagram I can’t read the comments which might have more info https://www.instagram.com/p/BnkXhPqA9Zk/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
You are not missing anything. It's a bunch of fools who think it's a "postmortem" photograph because they think her feet look weird. 1870 is a pretty likely date for the photo; her dress and hairstyle are consistent with fashionable dress for tween girls at that time.
Not a postmortem. A CDV portrait of a pretty girl, classic studio setting. Date is correct about 1870.
Pretty!
She may have been a ballerina because of her foot position, but it's unlikely you'll ever find her name.
Unlikely, given the class indicators from her dress. Ballet girls in the 19th century were incredibly poor, frequently from mothers involved in sex work, as the ballet was understood as a wealthy man's brothel. Whilst it was slightly better in the Russian Empire with the Imperial ballet academy enjoying some status as a particular delight of the Tsars, ballet and theatre were seen as immodest professional for women because it required them to "display their bodies" to an audience of men. She looks to be a middle to upper class girl in the 1870s or 80s, and her feet are in 3rd position because that was considered an elegant stance for young women. Unless she was the daughter of someone particularly important, it's unlikely that her name will emerge. It's the same as trying to put a name to family snapshots you find in a book at the thrift store. Without much more information, she'll just be an anonymous girl.
very interesting!
Degas was painting and sculpting children, as the girls were trafficked to wealthy patrons starting around age 14. Degas took part in that. One of his paintings showed the men in chairs on the stage watching their victims perform, a privilege they paid for. I get sick now whenever I see his work.
Yep. It was horrible to learn this. Whenever I see the famous sculpture of his of the dancer (obviously a child) I cringe.
I did not know that… Degas is now ruined for me forever now. 😩
His art can still be appreciated
True, but as an artist myself it’s hard for me to separate the art from the artist. I guess it’s because I, personally get attached to my work. I don’t know if that’s true of all artists.
Have you heard of the Degas was Jack the Ripper theory?!
Source for this
This is so interesting! Thanks so much for sharing!
Now that you mentioned it... Are her feet big or is that just the fashion of her footwear?
Her feet could be that big, but from what hat I’ve been taught, it is just as likely that her shoes were bought big so that she could grow into them.
Her feet also look really narrow to me.
I used to own a vintage clothing store. Vintage shoes tend to run really narrow. They were handmade and deliberately made to fit like a glove. Also narrow feet were considered elegant and high class-looking, so if you had big, chunky feet you would feel social pressure to stuff them into too-tight, too-narrow shoes. Like corsets for your feet, come to think of it. Plus people used to be smaller in general--not just slimmer, statistically, but smaller in height and overall build. That went for feet as well. Go to the Chinese Theatre in Hollywood sometime and look at the foot prints of all those 1930s-40s era actresses. Much smaller than average feet nowadays--even if they were deliberately wearing very tight/small shoes.
They might be that big. She looks like she's somewhere between 11 and 13. A lot of children have a feet growth spurt around that age and look a bit disproportionate until the rest of their body catches up. My 11 year old currently looks like a Great Dane puppy and I, myself, went up three shoe sizes the summer I turned 12. I had grown up size feet and a little kid build. It was mighty awkward!
Yeah I kinda "grew into my feet" for a little while there. So many awkward things kids go through! I had one of those damned back braces too, I hated it. :/
Solidarity. I had headgear on my braces from when I was 12 and 13. As if 7th and 8th grades aren't awkward enough!
They look like big'ens to me, lol.
Her dress is suggesting vaguely 1870s due to the collar but not the skirt. The photo setting and her hair and shoes say 1890s. So im going to say 1890s. As for her name... youll never be able to find out unless you find other info related to this photo
Alice Liddell?
No not her
It does look like her, but I don't think it is her.
I was thinking that!!
my first thought!
I'm glad someone else said it! Definitely who I thought of first.
She looks like she could be a model for Tenniel’s illustrations, but the real Alice Liddell didn’t look anything like what we’re used to from the books.
I like Alice Liddell. She kind of looks like Scout from To Kill a Mockingbird when she was small. Also, I love the Cameron photos when she was a young woman. I would love to go back in time and meet her, considering she was such a muse.
I love Tenniel’s illustrations!
Same
What a gorgeous photo, I wonder what book she is holding
This is not Alice Liddell or anyone associated with Lewis Carroll
I can see why people think so, though. She's the right age in approximately the right era, wearing her hair in a headband ribbon like the Tenniel illustrations. She's very book - Alice looking, and C.L.D. probably would have gladly written her a mirror letter.
There is another thread with this picture in it amongst others [the post](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheWayWeWere/s/9wQtEbQbSH)
Her feet look very weird
She looks like my therapist’s supervisor
Loving the combo of the murderous stare and ballet first position stance.
She could be a model for Alice in Wonderland.
Given the time this was taken probably Mary.
Beautiful pic, pretty girl, but massive feet! Look at the stompers she’s wearing. Probably just a matter of perspective. But it looks like she has big old feet.
Probably not her shoes. She might be just wearing them for the photo.
It’s Alice from wonderland
that was my first thought
Getting your photograph taken was super common at this time. Cabinet cards and cdvs were like the equivalent of instagram or face book. There are tons out there, many without names, not usually anyone well known or famous just a middle or upper class family.
Alice in Wonderland
It's Estella from Charles Dickens' Great Expectations. :)
Steve Martin calls her Dollface.
Lulabelle
Her face looks like someone just dared to tell her ‘no’ for the first time
Those shoes make her feet look huge!
I think the legs and shoes are props. Possibly she had a medical issue that kept her from standing. From an artist’s point of view, her waist to knee to ankle ratio is way too long.
Idk but she’s lovely
Maybe you could link to where you found the photo? The photo seems to be very sharp and clear for that era. The feet are unusually long and thin but that's probably the camera angle. Do you think these boots are similar to hers? They are from the 1880-1890 so maybe that's when the photo was taken? https://www.pinterest.com/pin/196962183688987105/
Shoes were built differently back then, usually of MUCH thinner/suppler leather so they conformed to the foot very well, and were made much tighter than shoes today are made. Which overall led to shoes looking much narrower and smaller than they do today.
That's a good point. She seems like she's from an upper class family so her family would have access to well made shoes.
Exactly. :-) I have small, skinny feet so have been able to wear many pairs of vintage shoes over the years. On me, they are extremely comfortable and have great arch support--but for a lot of people with more modern feet, they are very uncomfortable.
Wow those look spot on!
Her parents had money into ballet. I hope you update here when you find out who she is.
Reminds me of Alice in Wonderland
She looks like a Margarette
Little Miss Fancy Pants
I don’t know but she has a scowl indicative of some serious childhood trauma.
Or being bored from having to stand still for the photo.
Alice
Pardon Me, but why are you trying to figure out her name?
#
Missy Bigfoot.
This looks like it may be a photo of a deceased person. This was done frequently in Victorian times. Her feet are in an odd position, most people don’t stand this way, she has a book in her hand, these photos often had a book in the hand, she has a very still look in her eyes. She could be tied to a stand in order to take the photo.
Probably something like Martha I would guess. Or Gertrude
What makes you think you’ll ever find a name?
Ronalda McDonaldson?