Maud Cunnington Photographs

I was pleased to find on Ancestry.com a couple of photographs of Maud Cunnington, which can be used as alternatives to the widely known, slightly unflattering, one.

Birth 24 SEP 1869 • Vernon House Asylum, Briton Ferry, Glamorgan, Wales
Death 28 FEB 1952 • 33 Long St., Devizes, Wiltshire, England

Maud Cunnington - 12/9/1896 Age 27 - The fashion suggests the date is accurate.

Maud Cunnington née Pegge captioned as ca.1919 age 50 (I think it is about 1908 judging from the fashion which would mean she is about 39)

Maud Cunnington - an unprovenanced photo from the Wiltshire Museum DZSWS:2018.7040 - From the fashion 1910 -1915 age 40-45

Wiltshire Museum DZSWS:1983.8618 black and white photograph of B.H. Cunnington, Maud Cunnington and Heywood Sumner at Tisbury, 1924

Click photos to embiggen

An online discussion of whether the two Ancestry photos are actually of Maud lead to further analysis including the use of AI to compare the pictures which included a simulated rotation of the Museum portrait:

Key Feature Comparison

Strong similarities (these are the diagnostically important ones):

• Nose shape (best identifier across angles): The profile nose in both the 1896 and 1908 images shows a straight-to-slightly convex bridge with a refined, slightly rounded tip. When you mentally rotate the 1930 frontal view, the nose proportions, bridge width, and tip shape align very well. This is one of the strongest matches.
• Jawline and chin: The lower facial structure is consistent. The 1896 and 1908 profiles show a gently rounded chin and a moderately defined jaw. In the 1930 photo the face has naturally softened and filled out with age (typical subcutaneous fat redistribution), but the underlying bone structure of the mandible and chin point remains compatible.
• Eye–brow–orbit relationship: Even though angles differ, the spacing, the slight hooding that develops with age, and the position of the eyebrows relative to the nose bridge are coherent.
• Overall cranial proportions and head shape: The relationship between forehead height, mid-face width, and lower face width is consistent when you allow for normal aging. No major disproportions.
• Ears: Visible in the two profile shots; the helix curve and lobe attachment appear to match.

Differences (all explainable):

• Ageing (34 years between 1896 and 1930): Expected changes in skin texture, slight jowling, loss of facial volume in some areas, and softening of features are all present and natural. The 1908 photo sits perfectly as an intermediate stage.
• Hairstyle, clothing & lighting: Completely different eras and fashions (late Victorian vs Edwardian vs interwar). These are not diagnostic for identity.
• Photo angle & quality: Two strict profiles vs one more frontal view + different photographers, lighting, and print quality. The 1930 image is less “studio retouched” than the earlier two.
• Expression & pose: Neutral in all, but not identical — again, not diagnostic.

Likelihood Assessment

High likelihood — these are almost certainly all Maud Cunnington.

The core craniofacial geometry (especially nose + jaw/chin structure) holds together convincingly across the three images. The 1908 photograph functions as an excellent “bridge” image. There are no red-flag discrepancies in bone structure that would suggest these are different people.