Laura 1785/1897

[Joeytrom]

1897 Laura Collins is unique in many ways but one is that she was there with the pre-cursed Collins family of the 1780's, and Barnabas is the one other character who can actually make that claim. 

[spoiler]When she returns from Egypt she has a unique perspective comparing the grim, despair state of the current family as opposed to the content, normal family she probably left behind over a hundred years before. 

...Possibly wondering why Jeremiah took over a decade to marry again and both he and his wife dying so soon after and then almost the entire family she knew after that.

...Joshua managed to build the larger house on the hill he always talked about, telling people he expected a larger family (with Jeremiah, Sarah, & Barnabas and their families being too crowded for the former mansion) though she suspected it was to better look down at the common townsfolk. 

...Moving into this new house seems to have brought a curse as the family experienced tragedy immediately afterwards and continuing to the present.[/spoiler]

[Gothick]

The real reason for the curse on the family had nothing to do with the house.  It was Angelique.

I really don't care for the revised history of the core narrative unveiled in the 1840 storyline.  But I guess, Lela, who was running the show at that point, felt they had to go somewhere different.

G.

[Patti Feinberg]

Hmm...I would have thought for a least part, was from Judah Collins.

Patti

[michael c]

as much as I enjoyed seeing Diana Millay again Laura's presence in 1897 and the rewritten 1795 threw so much previously established continuity out of whack it was impossible to ever try and reconcile or make sense of it.

it was a rewrite. 

[Joeytrom]

I meant that from Laura's point of view, she wouldn't have known about Angelique and would have thought it was the house itself that caused the trouble.

[Gothick]

In PT 1970, it's hinted a few times that the house itself was cursed.  But that got dropped in favor of other developments in the final phases of the storyline.

G.

[DarkLady]

Oooh, I don't remember that, Gothick! Definitely something to look forward to.

[Gothick]

They are just little hints--a line here, an anxious grimace there.  Effective, and quite understated.

I enjoy the finale, but the whole storyline pretty much goes right off the cliff.  Thayer David gets one of my favorite roles, however, and some wonderful moments.

G.

[DarkLady]

Very cool, Gothick. And yes, TD is wonderful here, especially in the finale, even as the whole story goes right off the cliff as usual!

[Patti Feinberg]

as much as I enjoyed seeing Diana Millay again Laura's presence in 1897 and the rewritten 1795 threw so much previously established continuity out of whack it was impossible to ever try and reconcile or make sense of it.

it was a rewrite. 

I'm sorry, I'm not getting this.
When Barn went back to faux 1795/6, was Diana Millay there? I really have no memory of this.

Roger Davis wasn't there either, correct?

Patti

[MagnusTrask]

We never saw Laura onscreen in the 1700s, but we find out in 1897 that she had been Jerimiah's first wife, when Barnabas was a child.   It's rewritten plot, because originally with Laura in 1967, her history was that she married into a different family each generation.  In the 1897 story, they changed it so that Laura always married into the Collins family, generation after generation.  So in order, she married Jerimiah Collins, Edward Collins, and Roger Collins.  Except if you're watching Laura in black and white, in which case Roger was the only Collins she snagged.  History was changed, without any time travel from Barnabas!

[KMR]

We never saw Laura onscreen in the 1700s, but we find out in 1897 that she had been Jerimiah's first wife, when Barnabas was a child.   It's rewritten plot, because originally with Laura in 1967, her history was that she married into a different family each generation.  In the 1897 story, they changed it so that Laura always married into the Collins family, generation after generation.  So in order, she married Jerimiah Collins, Edward Collins, and Roger Collins.  Except if you're watching Laura in black and white, in which case Roger was the only Collins she snagged.  History was changed, without any time travel from Barnabas!

I'm not up on the whole Collins genealogy (original, revised, or whatever).  Would this have resulted in Laura marrying any of her descendants?!?  Perhaps Roger's "incestors" line was accurate, after all...

[Mysterious Benefactor]

We never saw Laura onscreen in the 1700s, but we find out in 1897 that she had been Jerimiah's first wife, when Barnabas was a child.

Actually, that's a misconception, though an easy misconception to make because of the way Barnabas delivers the dialogue. Yes, Barnabas makes a remark about seeing Laura as a child (I believe he was 10?), but at that point she wasn't Jeremiah's wife. It's established in 1795 that Barnabas and Jeremiah are the same age, so Jeremiah would have also been 10 at the time - and presumably Laura was around their age.

[DarkLady]

Jerimiah's age depends on which story line you're following. In the big 1795 flashback, he and Barnabas are age mates despite being uncle and nephew. But way back in the beginning, when we heard about Josette for the very first time, Barn said that she was a young woman, roughly his age or a little younger, who was forced (more or less) into an arranged marriage with his much older uncle.

I think that when they decided to add Laura to the 1795 story, they had to go back to that much earlier version of events. Otherwise, Jerimiah would have been the same age as Barn--10 years old!--when he married Laura.

Although, knowing the Collinses....

[Mysterious Benefactor]

Though we subsequently learn that everything we thought had been the backstory of the past (which wasn't actually 1795 but somewhere around 1830) either wasn't the whole truth or indeed completely made up, so that's why for the purposes of the storylines from the point of the 1795/96 flashback onward we need to discount everything we were ever led to believe in Eps #1 through #365 as if we were never led to believe it (one of the major problems with retconning  ). Plus, in 1897 Barnabas doesn't flat out say that when at the age of ten he saw Laura she was already married to Jeremiah.    He could have simply been referring to the first time he saw Laura at a point in the past before the marriage. For example, anyone could make a comment about something that was a part of their past life (in this case Jeremiah and Laura's marriage) and then also correlate it to something that took place ever further back in their life (Barnabas seeing Laura when he was ten) and it wouldn't mean both events were concurrent with one another. (Plus, at one point in 1897 Barnabas refers to Jeremiah as his cousin, which certainly was never the case, so...)