Women ancestors’ identities are often obscured by the names of their husbands, whether that means written documents or images like this one from the Library of Congress catalog record. Here, for instance, is an illustration that fails to list her and her children by name despite having been taken as part of an exhibition catalog record for that collection.
These men are James William Wallack (1795-1864, sitting) and his son Lester Wallack (1820-1888), prominent members of New York theater community who resided between 1860-1864 according to Library of Congress records. This photograph may have been taken during this timeframe.
This photograph is a stereoscope, composed of two slightly differing images meant to be seen through a stereopticon for a three-dimensional effect. These were first produced around 1854, typically depicting scenes and landmarks rather than people.
George Stacy operated his studio in New York from 1854-1861 and traveled the country taking stereograph images for sale as souvenirs. Remember, though, that an unidentified photo may not provide all the clues necessary for its identification; research can provide essential support and identification candidates based on information contained within itself or unknown faces depicted in it.
Verifying the identities of these men was simple. A Google search of James Wallack produced online mentions and additional images of him.
As this photo dates from 1860, its timeline makes the 1860 census an excellent starting point to research this family. This census includes James Wallack with 6-year-old Charles Wallack as well as other characters such as a druggist with no last name stated and two servants and waiters; these relationships cannot be assumed but we can speculate as best we can about whether James could possibly be Charles’ grandfather.
Elsewhere in that same census is “J.L.” Wallack, age 40 in New York City with Emily (age 31); Arthur (12); Florence (10); Charles (6), Harrold (5) and potential relatives. A decade later in 1870 the household of “John” (Lester was an assumed stage name) included Emily, Charles Harry Florence plus several servants and maids.
This woman could belong to either man; however, because James did not list any female household members in his 1860 census entry, I suspect Emily as she may be identified in another photo from this acting family. An identified photo could help narrow this down further; additionally, when labeling photos that involve women always include both their birth name and married name for better clarity.
Stereographs typically depict scenes, rather than people. Photographer George Stacy may have taken this photograph for sale rather than keeping it for his family’s memories.
Stacy traveled extensively taking photographs. Although she lived in Manhattan herself, this may be another house they visited often during this period.
Cardstock mount colors often came and went out of vogue, helping to give an image an accurate timeline. But be careful: ivory-colored card that has yellowed over time like this ivory dress featuring a small collar typical of early 1860s dress is only an indicator.
Women wearing fashionable headgear typically opted for playful hats instead of bonnets during this era.
