Notes on my (tentative) identication of a photo of John Kenworthy.

The above photo appears in Mollie Jenkins' book A Very English Family (2001; privately published). It is labelled as John Coleman Kenworthy (JCK), but this is not correct. Several photos of JCK exist, and this is clearly not him. He had dark hair, a longer face, and pointed ears. Furthermore, the photographic studio logo on the frame and what is discernable of the man's clothing (such as the ribon tie) both suggest that it was taken somewhere around the 1870s, when JCK would have been a teenager. The photo was apparently in the possession of Mollie's grandmother, who was JCK's cousin. It is not clear how it became misidentified as JCK.

Nevertheless there is a definite family resemblance to JCK, especially the eyes. Compare this photo of JCK (below) from 1896, and note the distinctive eyebrows which turn downwards, giving him a sort of sad appearance.

Similar eyes can be seen in this photo of JCK's uncle Robert Kenworthy

Given the age and likeness of the man in the misidentified photo, I feel sure it must be either JCK's father John Kenworthy, or one of John's brothers. Since multiple positively-identified photos exist of the younger brothers James and Robert, this leaves only John and his older brother George Williams Kenworthy. However, I think it is more likely to be John, for the following reasons:

- While it is not known exactly why the photo was mislablled as JCK, it seems more likely this would happen if it was John. For example, it may have had the name John written on the back, but was thought to be the wrong John.
- According to writings by John's wife Amelia, John had fair hair.
- A painting of John, now lost, was remembered by his great-grandson as "a kindly man with a full beard"
- The photographic studio where the photo was from was based in Barrow-in-Furness. In a letter from to John from his brother-in-law Fred Coleman, he talks about the two of them going fishing in Barrow-in-Furness.

Unfortunately, despite this evidence that the photo could be of John, we have no specific evidence that rules out George. I know of no physical descriptions of George, so he too may well have had fair hair and sometimes worn a beard. He lived in Cumbria all his life, so it is not at all unlikely for him to have travelled to Barrow-in-Furness on occasion. Perhaps he even joined John and Fred on their fishing trips.

Nevertheless, my gut tells me that the photo is of John. If I am correct it is somewhat ironic, as elsewhere in the book Mollie laments the fact that no images of John have survived.

Addendum: Another mysterious John Kenworthy photo

A large box of old family photos that was passed down through my family provides a rather mixed bag. There are an enormous number of the extended Foster and Brown families, including various siblings and cousins, some dating as far back as the 1850s. The Kenworthy family is far less well represented. There are several photos of JCK's children Agnes, Fred and George, but none of their parents, uncles, aunts or grandparents, let alone the extended family. A very strange exception is the below photograph of a man in full naval uniform.

At one point I thought this might be a photo of our John Kenworthy (father of JCK), but later ruled this out, as this is clearly a royal naval uniform and our John was in the merchant navy only. Even if he spent time in the naval reserves, the medals are for the Crimean War, the Second China War and the Indian Mutiny, and our John's whereabouts during those conflicts are very well charted. I finally worked out that the photo is of a completely different John Kenworthy, a first cousin of our John in fact. This John (1822-1895) was the son of our John's uncle (also called John). He was indeed in the navy, and records survive of him receiving those exact medals, and another extant photo of him shows a facial resemblance to the photo above.

The question is... why did this photo of a relatively distant relative end up in my family's possession, when photos of much closer relatives in the same family did not? The photo is not an original. It is a reprint, probably dating to the late nineteenth or early twentieth century. Could it be that the original was labelled as John Kenworthy, and it was perhaps assumed by a later descendent that it was our John?