High WASP Weddings, The Age of Innocence

The bride in the photo above is not related to me. But she might have been. The text does come from a description of the wedding of one of my grand-somethings in the New York Times.

Then there’s this, from another, earlier wedding, of another one of my grand-somethings at the turn of the century. What do you think, is the Times tongue in cheek here? The “usual fall”? The “number of which was very large”?

I like the idea that the Times was teasing gently.

Although all this is true, I know it doesn’t matter. Fun to dig around anyway. Have you ever noticed when people hit 50 they suddenly become much more interested in their genealogy?

Images: Bride: buyvintageweddingdress.com. Accoutrements: floral head wreaths, Michael C. Fina, The Madison Room at the Palace Hotel

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


  • okay, more on weddings, please. :)

  • But thank god the bridesmaids were demure and pretty. If one remembered by only one adjective and one adverb, it should be those. Er. Right?

  • I am the oldest daughter of the oldest daughter and so on, being the fifth generation of oldest daughter I have known the genealogy since birth, I know when who came to the US from England, which great-(times eight)-Uncle signed the declaration and who arrived on the Mayflower, and what became of every child. I think it’s nice to know where one fits in the chronology and where one has come from, to know that I am Hannah after my great-great-great-great-grandmother. My younger siblings don’t know the history, neither do my cousins, I think that must be a loss

  • I think as long as everyone dresses identically you’ve got it covered…I have found some more documents. They are if anything funnier….

    Family histories *are* important. The names we choose, the details we reveal, the way we see our own children in light of who came before. At the same time you build your own history, finding that the way in which the family stories mirror or confuse your choices shifts.