Victorian Era Post-Mortem Photography

**Kazimiera** · 10-08-2013, 12:53 AM

The invention of the daguerreotype in 1839 made portraiture much more commonplace, as many of those who were unable to afford the commission of a painted portrait could afford to sit for a photography session. This cheaper and quicker method also provided the middle class with a means for memorializing dead loved ones.

Post-mortem photography was very common in the nineteenth century when "death occurred in the home and was quite an ordinary part of life." Due to photography being a new medium, it is plausible that "many daguerreotype post-mortem portraits, especially those of infants and young children, were probably the only photographs ever made of the 'sitters.'" According to Mary Warner Marien, "post-mortem photography flourished in photography's early decades, among clients who preferred to capture an image of a deceased loved one rather than have no photograph at all."

These photographs served as keepsakes to remember the deceased. This was especially common with infants and young children; Victorian era childhood mortality rates were extremely high, and a post-mortem photograph might have been the only image of the child the family ever had. The later invention of the carte de visite, which allowed multiple prints to be made from a single negative, meant that copies of the image could be mailed to relatives.

The practice eventually peaked in popularity around the end of the 19th century and died out as "snapshot" photography became more commonplace, although a few examples of formal memorial portraits were still being produced well into the 20th century.

Infants and children

Photo source: http://io9.com/the-strangest-traditi...mort-472772709

**Kazimiera** · 10-08-2013, 12:58 AM

Family portraits

Adults

With coffin

But how do these bodies stand?

Photo source: http://io9.com/the-strangest-traditi...mort-472772709

**Kazimiera** · 10-08-2013, 01:03 AM

**Smaug** · 10-08-2013, 01:06 AM

I am divided between creepy and sad.

**Proctor** · 10-08-2013, 01:09 AM

extremely eery, especially how they put them standing up like that, as if they're alive, got the jitters.

**Kazimiera** · 10-08-2013, 01:15 AM

Originally Posted by Uhtred

I am divided between creepy and sad.

I think that looking at it with today's eyes, it is creepy.

But we are at a point today where our entire lives are documented by photos and video. There are hundreds photos of us and our family members while they were alive, which is why this type of photography has no purpose in today's day and age.

For these people, it may have been the only photograph they ever had of that person, or even together as a family. And the one and only thing they had to remember them by. It's the only way they could capture that this person had even existed.

**Smaug** · 10-08-2013, 01:20 AM

Originally Posted by Kazimiera

I think that looking at it with today's eyes, it is creepy.

But we are at a point today where our entire lives are documented by photos and video. There are hundreds photos of us and our family members while they were alive, which is why this type of photography has no purpose in today's day and age.

For these people, it may have been the only photograph they ever had of that person, or even together as a family. And the one and only thing they had to remember them by. It's the only way they could capture that this person had even existed.

Exactly, that's what I was thinking, was trying to see the pictures as if I were a Victorian Era man, and under this perspective it is indeed very sad, and quite depressing, mainly the way the living are standing by the bodies as if they were together and happy.