Some stones were obviously professional in design and form yet amatuer in inscription. Others appeared amateur in all respects - a real labour of love by the bereaved. Or perhaps the bereaved had written on paper the words he/she wanted on the stone and someone else who happened to have a hammer and chisel copied it onto the stone without thought to spacing, with the result that words were split from one line to the next; or where a letter was accidently missed out was chipped above the space where it should be. Occasionally there was evidence of using letters too large then being crowded in an attempt to fit, not always successfully. As an example the name Wotherspoon became so crowded that in one position there was no room for the last two letters and they were omitted altogether.

Walking about in all weathers, our feet were telling us more stories. Underfoot we could actually feel the presence of many more stones buried under the grass. These were obviously flat stones and only an inch or so (2 or 3 centimetres ) under the grass. The temtation to dig around and peel away the turf was resisted. Yet in those positions there must be stones older than any of those identified.

Time and again visitors would appear in the graveyard and we enjoyed giving them 'guided tours' even though it all meant lost time. They were always worth while when we were thanked. The casual visitor would miss so much when not shown. The question we were always asked was " which is the oldest stone? ". The oldest has to be the crusader stone but we cannot put a date to it.

We found a stone with some initials which we felt, but have no proof, belonged to a family called Wilson ( put it down to a hunch ). the date on it was either 1698 or 1798 BUT the 7 had a very distinct tail on it which could have made it a 6. We so wanted it to be 6 but this was an instance where feelings should not enter into our readings. However, some way from it we found a stone with two sevens. One was a very definite 7 - no tail. The other had a very distinct tail. So if one was a 7 then the other had to be a 6. Therefore our 1798 stone was in fact a 1698 alongside a 1721 with a cordiners knife and a crown. The 1698 stone is of a style which makes it definitely the earlier date.

Stone.153 proved of double interest. It was Mr Smallbone who first read and transcribed this stone with the family name Clarke and a reference to Shottermill in Surrey. His wife's maiden name is Clarke. They lived nearby and were married in Shottermill Parish Church in Surrey. The other point which we realised on the double check was the quality of the sandstone; so superior to anything else and the indication with Maltese crosses that there was something ecclesiastical about the stone. Not only that but a small stone we had numbered 167 practically in the row in front of 153 was of the same qaulity and had only the Maltese cross emblems and a Latin inscription. It became obvious that the two stones were connected, probably the smaller had been a ' foot stone ' but closer to the headstone than would be expected. As a result and at a later stage stone 167 has been renumbered 153A and 167 as a number has been abandoned - too late to renumber all the stone numbers which followed; they had been photographed with the original numbers showing on the phtographs.

Next page

Previous page

Home

Old Churchyard

Plan of Graveyard

Index

Other (info)