RootsChat.Com
Scotland (Counties as in 1851-1901) => Scotland => Topic started by: Andi R on Friday 04 September 20 21:37 BST (UK)
-
Going back over my family history an filling in blanks and came across something I'd missed
I've done many trips to Hobkirk parish church and never noticed that a name on a grave stone isn't who it says the person in the grave, Quite often I know you get a few years out on occasions which happens, but anyone else came across a grave where its a totally different person. a person who lived a full life got married and had a family
I have a family member aged just nine when she died, who has been laying in a grave for 160 years under her sisters name, as memorial stones are not in some cases done for years after burials, but sometimes I think people years ago did this on purpose just to confuse people like us later on, thankfully there is a burial record
I am gutted for the little girl who has been forgotten. Well I haven't forgotten you Helen Rutherford who died in 1860 of a seizure (something in common)
-
I read this a few times, but am not sure I follow ....
Are you saying that Helen was buried in 1860 and other people were later buried in the same grave? Their names are on the headstone, but Helen’s is not? She is buried with her sister?
If I have understood you correctly, then no, I do not think that is unusual.
If Helen is buried with family I wouldn’t be too upset just because her name is not on the stone. Whoever agreed to bury persons there after Helen would have been aware that someone was already in the grave. If the headstone was erected after Helen’s death and after later burials, the family may not have been able to afford to add her name to the stone. It may also depend on who paid for the stone, and if they were a blood relative of Helen or in-law perhaps?
There could be any number of scenarios, and I am not sure you can read too much into this. It is really not surprising that after being buried for 160 years that a nine year old is “forgotten” - name on headstone or not.
If it is something you feel strongly about perhaps there is a process by which you can add her name to the stone?
-
If you get the chance to see the lair records you often find that up to 6 people may be buried in one plot. At the time of the first burial people were often too poor to buy a headstone. It may be a long time before one is erected & therefore the person who pays for it may not have known everyone in there.
flst
-
Ruskie
Everytime I read this i read it differently
Robert was married to Isabella, and they had a son called James and a daughter called Isabella, Isabella was born not in 1851 but in 1855 so she couldnt be 9 in 1860, (but I thought its a mistake it happens as there can be a delay in erecting stones) but on checking I found a Helen born, baptised and on census 1851
Thats still fine, until I found records of Isabella born 1855 ......... still with me
Then the 1861 census mentions Isabella Helen has disappeared again no big deal she could be elsewhere that night, no father either but thats because he left his pregnant wife and died in the US
The 1871 census then picks up Isabella aged 15 again but no Helen,
So I started looking for helen and found church records for her death and funeral, even states buried at Hobkirk Jan 1860
Isabella goes on to marry in 1886. So it must be Helen and not Isabella in the grave (I find this weird)
I just think its a shame a girl is in a grave under the wrong name, which she is, I have no plans to do anything do you know how many gravestones I'd be correcting
fist. I know about graves and number of people in them and I did say that a gravestone might not be done for years after often leading to minor error in dates and omissions but never totally mixing a childs name up. Omitting Helen is understandable or even to say like many graves do "also a child aged 9, or unknown child", her sister Isabella is buried with her husband, after the date this stone was erected (Masons date on the rear)
I was merely making an observation
-
I think basically Im trying to say they get the dates perfect, the age perfect where she died correct who her parents are/were then get her name wrong
andi
-
The vast majority of people in Scotland lie in unmarked graves!
Skoosh.
-
The lair records (if they exist) should be a more authoritative statement of who lies there.
For many reasons, a monument may be inaccurate. e.g. never placed, never updated, wrong information, monument lost or removed.
Often, all our ancestors had was a common grave and a wooden cross, if that..
-
I think I understand ...
Helen is born in 1851.
Her sister Isabella is born in 1855.
Helen dies in 1860.
Isabella marries in 1886.
Stone is erected (what date?).
Isabella dies - her husband dies and both are buried in this grave.
Are you saying that that details on the headstone mixes up Isabella and Helen's years of birth, and says that Isabella was born in 1851?
It might help to know the date the stone was erected and exactly what is engraved on it.
....So it must be Helen and not Isabella in the grave (I find this weird)
Sounds like either Helen is not in the grave, or simply the incorrect year of birth for Isabella was given to the stonemason. Do you have Isabella's death certificate and does her age at death tally with her being born in 1851 or 1855?
-
Ruskie
I think I understand ...
Helen is born in 1851.
Her sister Isabella is born in 1855.
Helen dies in 1860.
Isabella marries in 1886.
Stone is erected (what date?).
Isabella dies - her husband dies and both are buried in this grave.
Are you saying that that details on the headstone mixes up Isabella and Helen's years of birth, and says that Isabella was born in 1851?
It might help to know the date the stone was erected and exactly what is engraved on it.
....So it must be Helen and not Isabella in the grave (I find this weird)
Sounds like either Helen is not in the grave, or simply the incorrect year of birth for Isabella was given to the stonemason. Do you have Isabella's death certificate and does her age at death tally with her being born in 1851 or 1855?
Ruskie
I am saying it has to be Helen in the Grave Just two people in the grave
It must be Helen who is buried there not Isabella, Isabella married in 1886
The full text is "In memory of Js Rutherford (Joiner), son of the late Robert Rutherford (Joiner) Bonchester Bridge, and Isabella Hall his wife.
Died at Effledge 11th December 1881, aged 29 years, also Isabella their daughter who died at Hallrule, Jan 1860, aged 9 years"
James is helen and Isabella's brother
Timeline:
Helen born in 1851 (Birth/Baptism records)
James born in 1852
Isabella born 1855 (named after her mum) But Robert the father walked out when his wife was expecting Isabella hence no father's name on her birth records, Robert died in America before 1868
Helen dies in January 1860, church records confirm and say buried in Hobkirk (fits in with gravestone though wrong name)
James Dies 1881 (is a date on stone of 1883 or 5)
Isabella marries in 1886 in Effledge,
Mother Isabella dies 1896
Isabella never used the name of her father, but her mothers "Hall" but all documents fit.
The book 'Rulewater and its people' mentions Helen's birth and death, and James birth
It has to be Helen in the grave
-
The full text is "In memory of Js Rutherford (Joiner), son of the late Robert Rutherford (Joiner) Bonchester Bridge, and Isabella Hall his wife.
Died at Effledge 11th December 1881, aged 29 years, also Isabella their daughter who died at Hallrule, Jan 1860, aged 9 years"
I read that as Isabella who died aged 9 is the daughter of Js Rutherford and Isabella Hall. But I may be wrong. :-\
Either your theory is correct, or the date of death of the Isabella mentioned on the stone is incorrect. You say "James Dies 1881 (is a date on stone of 1883 or 5)" so perhaps there were issues with dates - unknown or illegible on the stone?
Might there be another Isabella you are not aware of?
I think the previous advice to check lair records is your best way forward. Let us know how you get on. :)