Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A photograph of Joseph Lawende in 1899

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Al Bundy's Eyes
    replied
    And if the Jewish guys take their hats off, the obvious difference is.....

    What am I missing? What makes the Jewish men in the wedding photo obviously Jewish?

    Leave a comment:


  • The Baron
    replied
    I don't believe you.

    TB

    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    There is a big difference.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • The Baron
    replied



    TB
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    Originally posted by The Baron View Post

    Why? Was Jack the Ripper getting married that night?



    And I had a look at a gentile wedding from 1900 and they looked the same

    So I guess I will not believe you, I mean .. who can believe you anyway..


    TB

    If you're so sure, why don't you upload it?

    Leave a comment:


  • The Baron
    replied
    Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post

    If you don't believe me, then I suggest you take a look at a photograph taken at a gentile wedding in Whitechapel at that time and compare the two.
    Why? Was Jack the Ripper getting married that night?



    And I had a look at a gentile wedding from 1900 and they looked the same

    So I guess I will not believe you, I mean .. who can believe you anyway..


    TB

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Lawende simply doesn’t look Jewish in that photograph.

    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    you know exactly what im talking about but ill spell it out for you. why do you think the people in that photo look jewish?

    My point is that they would have been easily identifiable as Jewish in Whitechapel in 1888.

    If you don't believe me, then I suggest you take a look at a photograph taken at a gentile wedding in Whitechapel at that time and compare the two.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post


    Are you referring to my last sentence?
    you know exactly what im talking about but ill spell it out for you. why do you think the people in that photo look jewish?

    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    omg. what are you talking about?

    Are you referring to my last sentence?

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post


    Click image for larger version

Name:	LAWENDE WEDDING PIC.jpg
Views:	554
Size:	146.1 KB
ID:	799917


    I was ridiculed for saying that it was generally obvious in Whitechapel in 1888 who was Jewish and who was not.

    That wedding photograph illustrates my point.

    It would have been obvious to both Schwarz and Lawende whether the man they were describing was a gentile or a Jew.

    It is therefore inconceivable that either of them would suddenly have realised that their suspect was a Jew upon seeing him in the Seaside Home.
    omg. what are you talking about?

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    How does Lawende look ‘Jewish’ in that photograph. He looks like an English gentleman to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
    replied
    Originally posted by Chris View Post
    Earlier this year I was delighted to receive from a descendant of Joseph Lawende a copy of a group photograph taken at the wedding of his daughter Rose to Isidore Goodman Samuel in 1899. Joseph can be seen on the right at the back, standing next to his wife Annie. The bridesmaid sitting in the centre at the front is Joseph's youngest daughter Ruby. I am most grateful to the owner of the photograph for permission to reproduce it here.

    [ATTACH]9967[/ATTACH]

    Click image for larger version

Name:	LAWENDE WEDDING PIC.jpg
Views:	554
Size:	146.1 KB
ID:	799917


    I was ridiculed for saying that it was generally obvious in Whitechapel in 1888 who was Jewish and who was not.

    That wedding photograph illustrates my point.

    It would have been obvious to both Schwarz and Lawende whether the man they were describing was a gentile or a Jew.

    It is therefore inconceivable that either of them would suddenly have realised that their suspect was a Jew upon seeing him in the Seaside Home.
    Last edited by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1; 11-10-2022, 10:08 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • jason_c
    replied
    Originally posted by YankeeSergeant View Post
    If I remember correctly any movement would blur the photograph. I know when I and my wife had a glass plate photo done a few years back that it required five-10 minutes. And again, being a formal photograph I don't know that smiling was encouraged by the photographer.
    I recently read that smiling for photographs was a later trend. Most early photos do not show individuals grinning like cheshire cats. Probably due to the length of time it took to take a pic, having to remain completely still, and the cost of having to take another photograph.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sister Hyde
    replied
    Yes just like people used to keep the corpses at home untill the funerals, which is today almost not allowed I think, or just like open-casket funerals, today we find it very morbid, but it used to be the standard. Yes I'm wondering how the people would have looked if they were smiling and showing their teeth back then, what an official portrait that would have been!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X