Identifying crew in photos

[Gaston Sam]

I actually think that man is Robert Couper, also 5' 2½". But they have the same look.

Regarding #5 man sitting in the first firemen photo, I say we reconsider him later on.

 

[Gaston Sam]

So Michael, that's a great examination. Definitely #10 is one of the most difficult ones in this photo. I think we should dismiss everyone who survived climbing on Collapsible B; I find it hard to imagine they would still keep their hats after struggling in the water to reach the overturned boat.

Unfortunately, the lack of Ellis' photographs and the available photo of Neal doesn't help with it.
Just for now I'd say Windebank is a good choice. #10 is skinnier and has more hair than what we see in Windebank's photo, but some seven years had elapsed from then, and those physical changes would be comprehensible. Besides, it looks like the age of #10 is closer to 38 than 28.

 

[Gaston Sam]

Paul also suggested two crewmen for #4 and #9 that I admit I didn't take into greater consideration, but taking a better look at them, I'd say Paul is absolutely right!

 

[Alex Kiehl]

Only six bakers and cooks survived the sinking. Their names are Windebank, Maynard, Ellis, Joughin, Burgess and Neal.

Alfred Windebank joined the ship in the last moment as substitute for another cook who failed to sign on. He was 38 years old. He was rescued, probably in lifeboat 13.

View attachment 48735

Isaac Maynard was 31 years old. He survived on the overturned collapsible boat B.

View attachment 48736
John Ellis was 28 years old. He left the ship in lifeboat 2. His presence was recalled by Steward James Johnstone. There are no known pictures of John Ellis.

Chief baker Joughin survived on the overturned collpsible boat B. I personally exclude him here because his hair looks darker on the pictures taken after the sinking. Besides, he was a very small man. He stood at just 5' 3 1/2'' (1,61m). The man on the pictures looks bigger, even though he is sitting. What do you guys think?

View attachment 48738
Charles Burgess was 18 years old an survived the sinking in lifeboat 13. It is very likely that he is the man standing right (5).

Harold Neal was 25 years old. He was rescued, probably in lifeboat 13. Neal stood at 5'8'' (1,72m). He had fair hair and a fresh complexion. There are no known pictures of young Harold Neal, only one picture from his later life.

View attachment 48739
There is another seventh survivor I have to mention. Thomas Knowles (44 years old) signed on as firemens' messman. He recieved monthly wages of £6. According to Günter Bäblers Crewbook (2013) Thomas Knowles was a cook for the engineering crew and not a steward. In the night of the sinking he was off duty but maybe his chef hat was the only hat he had.

View attachment 48740

One of the admins on here (Sam Halpern?) told me once that we should only go by the crew sign-on sheets or by the words of the crew themselves when ascertaining a crewman's occupation. Later sources often misidentify crew occupations, such as elevating their ranks, or listing them by the position they held at the end of their careers. I think we should count Tommy Knowles as a steward, not a cook

 

[Alex Kiehl]

Only six bakers and cooks survived the sinking. Their names are Windebank, Maynard, Ellis, Joughin, Burgess and Neal.

Alfred Windebank joined the ship in the last moment as substitute for another cook who failed to sign on. He was 38 years old. He was rescued, probably in lifeboat 13.

View attachment 48735

Isaac Maynard was 31 years old. He survived on the overturned collapsible boat B.

View attachment 48736
John Ellis was 28 years old. He left the ship in lifeboat 2. His presence was recalled by Steward James Johnstone. There are no known pictures of John Ellis.

Chief baker Joughin survived on the overturned collpsible boat B. I personally exclude him here because his hair looks darker on the pictures taken after the sinking. Besides, he was a very small man. He stood at just 5' 3 1/2'' (1,61m). The man on the pictures looks bigger, even though he is sitting. What do you guys think?

View attachment 48738
Charles Burgess was 18 years old an survived the sinking in lifeboat 13. It is very likely that he is the man standing right (5).

Harold Neal was 25 years old. He was rescued, probably in lifeboat 13. Neal stood at 5'8'' (1,72m). He had fair hair and a fresh complexion. There are no known pictures of young Harold Neal, only one picture from his later life.

View attachment 48739
There is another seventh survivor I have to mention. Thomas Knowles (44 years old) signed on as firemens' messman. He recieved monthly wages of £6. According to Günter Bäblers Crewbook (2013) Thomas Knowles was a cook for the engineering crew and not a steward. In the night of the sinking he was off duty but maybe his chef hat was the only hat he had.

View attachment 48740

John Collins said in his own words at one of the inquiries that his actual occupation was a cook, despite signing-on as a scullion So, you could list seven cooks and bakers among the survivors, if you prefer.

 

[Gaston Sam]

One of the admins on here (Sam Halpern?) told me once that we should only go by the crew sign-on sheets or by the words of the crew themselves when ascertaining a crewman's occupation. Later sources often misidentify crew occupations, such as elevating their ranks, or listing them by the position they held at the end of their careers. I think we should count Tommy Knowles as a steward, not a cook

I've never seen the sign-on sheet for the Engine Department (except that of the engineers themselves), but ET has Thomas Knowles as firemen's messman.

 

[Michael Hinz]

One of the admins on here (Sam Halpern?) told me once that we should only go by the crew sign-on sheets or by the words of the crew themselves when ascertaining a crewman's occupation. Later sources often misidentify crew occupations, such as elevating their ranks, or listing them by the position they held at the end of their careers. I think we should count Tommy Knowles as a steward, not a cook

Thomas Knowles recieved £6. No other other „normal“ steward recieved such a high pay. He worked obviously as a crew cook. William Wright as a glory hole Steward recieved 3£15 and he cleaned the crew‘s cabins and bathrooms. He certainly got no tips. Why should he earn less than a messman serving in the firemans‘ messroom? Thomas Knowles was definitely a cook.

 

[Samuel Halpern]

One of the admins on here (Sam Halpern?)

Thank you for the appointment to forum administrator, but you have me mixed up with someone else.
By the way, the advice given to you by whoever it was looks very reasonable. Also, I believe a firemen's messman job would be to prepare meals for the firemen who were part of the engine department staff.

 

[Paul Burrell]

I forgot to say that Charles Joughin was treated in a hospital in New York after his rescue. This picture was taken on 19th of April, so it is unlikely that Joughin appears on it.

Michael

My rationale for selecting Isaac Maynard as #2 is that I think he looks remarkably similar to the chap on the right of this photo. Interestingly, the book Titanic Voices identifies Maynard as the chap on the left, mistakenly I think. This website identifies Maynard as the chap on the right. The fella on the left looks much older than 31. It would be interesting to see a side by side comparison of #2 (sorry, I cannot do that) so we can see if we can agree on the identity of this crew member.

t

 

[Michael Hinz]

Hello Paul,

It is great to see this picture in a high quality. The right men is definitely Isaac Maynard. I dont know who the other gentleman is.

I tried to do a side by side comparison of #2. Unfortunately, the quality of the picture is so bad that when #2 is enlarged, not much can be seen. But I still agree that #2 could be Isaac Maynard.

I had the same problem with #1. Luckily the man appears also on the other big group picture in front of the building. Now I can say that #1 is probably Frank Port.

 

[Gaston Sam]

I first thought #2 was a bit older and a little bit shorter to be Maynard but they are certainly a very good match.

And Frank Port seems to be good candidate for #1 too

 

[Michael Hinz]

These are our results now:

#1 Frank Port
#2 Isaac Maynard
#3 Probably Arthur McMicken
#4 Harold Prior
#5 Charles Burgess
#6 Horace Ross
#7 Leo Hyland
#8 Maybe Arthur Burrage or Albert Victor Pearcey?
#9 Joseph Wheat
#10 Maybe Alfred Windebank or Thomas Knowles?
#11 Alfred Pugh
#12 Allen Baggott

 

[Michael Hinz]

I need your help with #8. Victor Albert Pearcey was 25 years old and had a height of 5'6'' (1,67m). He had brown hair. The first picture here was taken in england, I think on the day he gave his testimony: Thursday, May 16, 1912. It seems he had a small moustache that is not visible in our group picture. Is it possible that he got a moustache in less than four weeks?

Or is #8 actually plate steward Arthur Burrage (20 years old)?

The third picture was taken on the Lapland, the ship that brought the surviving crewmen back to england. I am not absolutely sure that this man is Burrage...

What do you guys think? Will we be able to identify #8 or will he remain a mystery like #10?

 

[Gaston Sam]

Is it possible that he got a moustache in less than four weeks?

It is possible

The third picture was taken on the Lapland, the ship that brought the surviving crewmen back to england. I am not absolutely sure that this man is Burrage...

I personally don't think that man on the third photo is Burrage. To me he looks more like McMicken.

Let's solve the mistery around #8.

 

[Gaston Sam]

#8 steward seems to be between 20-25 years old, probably up to 5'6'' tall, dark brown hair and fair complexion. Everything is already pointing to Pearcey, who also wears his hair with a similar part.

The only difference is that Pearcey seems to have a little bit larger face compared to #8's more rounded one. But it is not much, and it might be related to the lightning conditions and the resolution of the pictures. The nose wings also look a bit different, but again it could be a matter of lightning and resolution.

It is a shame there is not a better photo of Wilfred Foley, to make a better comparison. But other than that I would dismiss Burrage and I think Pearcey is the best option for #8.
*I may also be wrong with the second man of the above picture, who might not be the same as #8, and that being the case Pearcey would fit just great.