These dogs belonged to a Mr. Chapman of Glenboig, Scotland. They were featured in Country Life Illustrated on 8 May 1897.
These dogs, especially the one on the left, are very retriever-like. The one on them left may actually be a retriever, but it is not outside of reason for a Gordon setter to have those features at that time.
I don’t see much tan coloring on these Gordons, which raises the question of the misidentifying the pictures in the article.
I’ve thought about this all day.
I can’t see any tan on these dogs. Country Life often misidentified dogs.
So these are probably retrievers.
But historically, some Gordon setters looked more like retrievers.
The two dogs in the middle have tan on their legs; the quality of the reflected light on those areas is totally different than the black areas on top of their heads and backs (not as shiny.) The shadows on their legs are also not as dense, due to the lighter color. See how the legs blend into the ground, as opposed to the side of the dog where it meets the ground.
Red areas frequently read as very dark in black and white photography; I find photos of early Salukis in the UK which look very, very dark, but are obviously not black dogs, and checking the color against records if I know the name will identify it as red or fawn.
Thanks.
It is an old b&w photo, the tan is nearly invisible. But it can be there.
Also, some setters were all black or had very little tanning.
Like this gordon called “Grouse”, too: http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/13479371/aview/1882gordonsetter.jpg
This is a typically tanned Gordon Setter of about the same time:
http://www.stonegateprints.com/store/proddetail.php?prod=34734&cat=15&PHPSESSID=d57dc13a91a6c26de05ed35d0b2eedf8