Unusual Gravestone Inscriptions (by ordinary people)

One thing is certain - she was not a poor widow. Working class and lower middleclass families, particularly those in rural areas did not place gravestones and if they did they were simple grave markers and did not have elaborate inscriptions.

Before the last century, the vast majority of people could not afford a gravestone. Even in the 20th century, many people didn't have any.
Only yesterday, I was in Glasnevin, seeking the grave of a pioneering journalist who died in Ireland in 1954, having returned from a career in America. Her death was mentioned in the New York Times but her grave is unmarked.

Another problem when a monument is present, is that it was often erected many years after the deaths occurred, by people who did not know the correct details, and so the inscription can be misleading.

However gravestones are fascinating and should be used more.

Old genealogists never die, they just hang around in graveyards.

I have found that the majority of people do not have gravestones and that, even when present, gravestones often contain errors. As Tabbey said, gravestones often contain errors due to the info provided, also true of death certs for that matter. I have also found they contain outright lies, as do obits. I have a great-great grandmother, born Meath, died in a nursing home far from her Brooklyn home. But the family wrote in obits that she died at home with her loving family gathered round. And that's what all the Ancestry trees say. I tracked the correct info down thru a one-word note on the cemetery's record.

Another error I have encountered is when a name is put on a gravestone before death, such as when a spouse dies. Both names are put on the stone. Then the surviving spouse moves to a family member's home far away and eventually dies there but the body is never returned to the grave with the name.

That said, gravestones can provide valuable clues if documented with accurate supporting records.

I've always been fascinated by graveyards and cemeteries. However, it's true that the gravestones don't always tell the whole story. I discovered an uncle I never knew I had. He wasn't mentioned on the family gravestone but he was in the cemetery records as having been buried in the family grave.

Idle Passerby wrote: »

I've got some documented ancestors marked with a stone in an old graveyard. There's an older horizontal slab on the same grave with the same surname but if they are related there's a missing generation or two so I can't connect them but I'd love to know if they are the same family since the older slab dates to the mid 1700s.

Where the older stone is same Surname, same or adjacent grave, it can be taken that its the same family, beyond all reasonable doubt.

A few comments –
I've found gravestones to be of huge help both in genealogy and historical research. The earliest ‘marker’ in my paternal line is for an ancestor born 1720. Some family members in between have no headstone. For those who have, all are simple. My grandfather was nine when his father died and very much later erected a headstone for him and included three generations which goes back to the 1700’s. He was wrong by a year on the date of death of his father. Perhaps the stone with the verse was erected later.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

…………... I don't think they owned anything more extensive than 50 acres, from penal times to the 20th century…………I suppose the widow wasn't poor, but she was young during the penal laws and prior to national education -- you wouldn't necessarily expect her to be literate, let alone interested in verse. I'm fascinated by that.

What I'm trying to say is it really challenged my preconception that the penal laws deprived small farmers among the catholic population of education……..

You have encapsulated your issue there. If the family ‘owned’ 50 acres they were well-off (if it was good land). What do you mean by ‘the Penal Laws’? Most people have an incorrect understanding of them and what they involved. Their primary aim was to break the power of the Irish nobility/upper class Catholics and they largely left the ordinary mass of people untouched. The laws were on the Irish statute book to give a sense of power and security to the ruling Protestant minority and enforcement depended more on political rather than religious considerations. Also, education was available for Catholics. What minimised access to it for the ‘underclass’ was not the law but was a twofold reason -economics (cost & lost potential income) and perceived need (most rural jobs did not require reading/writing skills).Although the sons of wealthy families had to go abroad to the Irish Colleges for 3rd level, TCD admitted Catholics from the 1790's (it was the RC Church that prevented them from attending, (and people my age had to get a special dispensation from the bishop to attend!)

The Penal Laws were hijacked by the Nationalist cause post-Famine, misinterpreted for use as propaganda and as a result a huge amount of misperception and disinformation about them lingers on to today.

Idle Passerby wrote: »

. Do you have any tips on filling in the gap between the generations on both stones?

Not really, you can only hope to find some evidence in other sources, such as the registry of deeds, which is closed like the other repositories, due to the misinterpretation of covid risks and precautions.

Jellybaby_1 wrote: »

The parish records, if properly kept, may help.

I had assumed that the op had already studied these. But if not, then yes of course start with parish records followed by Griffith's valuation and tithe applotments.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Thank you, this post was quite enlightening.

From memory, but I'd need to check the record, I'm pretty sure the widow was renting 50 acres (45 acres, if memory serves) in the mid-19th century. They were not destitute, but it seems to me that they weren't rich. I highly doubt they had anything to do with the celtic nobility.

Do you know how available was education to young catholic women of modest backgrounds, during the 18th century? Is it not strange that girls would be able to read, or appreciate verse?

I would have thought there was no particular education available, except for girls intending to become catholic nuns.

I noticed this gravestone because it's the only one of its type. Every other 18th/19th century gravestone in the Catholic section is just a list of names and dates.

You don’t know the date when the gravestone was erected– it could be a later addition, for e.g. put there by the widow’s son long after her death when he had acquired some wealth. Don't get hung up on it.

Education in the 1700’s for the average Irish person was closely linked to the practice of their religion. The Catholic bishops were fully aware of this and provided dozens of books – sermons, catechisms and pious works for use by travelling preachers (many were published in Irish) thus education was brought closer to the teachings of the Catholic Church. (In the 1800's the RCC deliberately screwed up a good system because they did not control it.) In the late 1600’s Jesuits were operating schools in Munster and a couple of decades later a survey carried out at parish level shows that there was one priest for every 1,700 parishioners, whereas today the figure is one for every 2,500. So much for the Penal Laws!

Similar to other European countries, the vast majority of Irish country-dwellers had no education. There was no perceived need for a labourer or small farmer to read or write, and conditions were such that almost all children did not attend school for long – if at all – due to cost and a need to work to contribute to the family unit. The position was worse for females. Even looking at birth and marriage records in the 1860’s many females signed ‘her mark’ whereas a smaller number of males did so.

The continuing strength of Irish Catholicism led to a Lords’ Committee that in1731 produced a “Report on the State of Popery” in Ireland. It did not cover the whole of the country (large parts of Munster were not covered – and it showed that there was a total of 892 Mass-houses, more than 100 huts/sheds/moveable altars, and 549 ‘Popish schools’.

Catholic schools were forbidden under the Penal laws. However, in operation those laws targeted religious education by the religious orders, rather than education itself. Education took place openly in ‘hedge schools’, so called due to their rural nature rather than being held outdoors, although a few were rudimentary sod-built cabins. Although these schools were illegal, no hedge-school teachers are known to have been prosecuted. Many of the teachers were mendicant scholars, often clerical students or ‘failed priests’. Any family with a few pence to spare could afford education. The subjects taught usually were reading, writing and arithmetic, pupils paying per subject, sometimes in the form of turf or lodgings for their teacher. The ‘Visitation Books’ (journal records of bishops who travelled around) often mentioned who was teaching and where. Sons and daughters of one of my ancestors are recorded in one (Bishop Butler’s, 1750’s) as pupils of a clerical student. That family was ‘comfortable but not particularly well-off. So yes, some girls were educated but it was by no means the norm, it depended on family wealth, location and interest. I’m not aware of any special induction program run for nuns – there was an entry hierarchy, where the daughters of rich(er) farmers brought their dowries with them for the convent and were ‘professed’ whereas the poorer girls, usually uneducated, were treated as skivvies and often did not progress.

“The Society for Promoting the Education of the Poor in Ireland”, founded in 1811 was known as the Kildare Place Society,after its address in Kildare Place, Dublin probably was the first of what we would today recognise as a type of ‘’national school’. Even then that did not bring education to the masses.

(MOds - more H&H than genealogy? move if you want to.

I love this newish headstone in Kilnaboy cemetery, Co. Clare.
Have been here many times as half my family are buried here.


https://www.flickr.com/photos/harve64/3741425221/

(Not my photo! Or my relation.)

Peregrinus wrote: »

I wouldn't read too much into renting; practically everybody who farmed land in Ireland at the time rented it. If she rented as much as 50 acres she was definitely at the upper end of the social scale among the farming classes.

And this is corroborated by the fact that she was prosperous enough to commission a headstone.


The fact that she could appreciate verse doesn't mean that she could read. Verse forms exist, if you think about it, partly because they lend themselves to being memorised and recited. There are plenty of examples of societies in which literacy is limited but verses thrive.

But, in fact, it wouldn't be surprising or unusual if she could read. Because . . .


It comes down to utility. A farm of 50 acres is an enterprise large enough to require some management, and basic literacy and numeracy is definitely useful. Somebody has to be able to keep the farm accounts, read and understand invoices, etc.

So, if she came from a background where she might aspire to marry into such a farm, it would make sense for her to be educated to at least that level. Her parents might well have arranged for this, and she likewise might do the same for her daughters (and sons, naturally). There was widespread demand for basic literacy and numeracy, and hedge schools (mostly conducted, in fact, in chapels) existed to meet this demand, and were attended by both boys and girls. Formal Catholic church schools were also legal from 1780 onwards though in fact the church had very little resources to provide them; it wasn't until well into the nineteenth century that the teaching religious orders began to make much of an impact.

I disagree with some of that post. There was no widespread demand for literacy and numeracy. Cottiers and labourer families saw no need for it. Schools both RC and CoI were available but the ordinary people had other needs and also were too poor to pay. Several government reports highlight low school attendance and widespread illiteracy. This was not resolved until the passing of the Irish Education Act of 1892, which made education free and mandatory for students between the ages of 6 - 14yrs.

I’ve heard the ‘chapel’ assertion before but never have seen proof that hedge schools were mostly conducted in chapels, the official designation for a RC place of worship. . Most hedge schools were rural and in areas too poor to have a chapel, which is why several Acts make reference to ‘outdoor religious services’. It was the 1782 Irish Act that allowed Catholic schools, but subject to the teachers taking the Oath of Allegiance and obtaining a license from the local Church of Ireland Bishop. An earlier act, the Act for Catholic Relief (18 George III c. 60) was in 1778 and it repealed the ‘perpetual imprisonment for keeping a school’ but did not authorise them. The Presentation sisters opened their first school in 1775; the Christian brothers opened theirs in 1802.

Slightly later, and more or less to replace the Charter schools and the (Protestant) Association for the Discountenancing of Vice, the non-sectarian ‘Kildare Place’ Society came into being which, since inception until 1825, had trained about 800 teachers, was operating about 1500 schools and had educated about 100,000 pupils. That was a tiny proportion of the ‘minor’ population. The census of 1821 shows that Ireland had about 1,500,000 children aged between 5 and 15 years: of that number about 1,300,000 were devoid of education. Of the 200k that had some education, it was minimal and amounted to just a few weeks in total. Basic accounting ‘casting accounts’ was taught exceptionally, but it was to the brightest and oldest pupils, invariably male.

The RC Church was unhappy it did not have full control of the KPS schools (even though several board members were RC) and tried to scupper it. Equally, its Established Church faction was forging links with the London Hibernian Society, a proselytising body. That led to the RC Church putting the boot in, creating the opening for the National Schools Act of 1825 which was followed by a report from Lord Stanley, the Chief Secretary for Ireland in 1831. His idealistic vision was to promote peace and harmony in Ireland through a multi-denominational education system. A National Education Board was established and obtained the money to build schools, establish a system of school inspection, pay teachers and establish teacher training facilities. It too was scuppered by the RCC. However, most would regard it as the first block in the foundation of the system we have today

As for general literacy, even as late as 1881 about 50% and in 1911 about 35% of pupils attended school for more than 100 days annually (today it’s 183 days). Before 1918 the majority of children received less than 5 years of schooling, the minimum considered necessary to be considered literate. Secondary schooling was even worse – the number of pupils in 1848 was 5,000, it doubled to 10,000 in 1878 and doubled again by 1914. Despite this apparent ‘growth’, only 10% of the 15-18 year old age group were receiving secondary education that year.

While girls did receive some mathematical instruction, it was not widespread, and usually only in the smaller schools with a shared room and one teacher. Generally female instruction was in the ‘useful arts’ of needlework and housekeeping. A farmer’s daughter who in c1820 could read and write was a very rare bird!

I don't think you'd put up two separate headstones for a mother and newborn infant who died on the same occasion.

I think it's more likely that the smaller stone was erected first, and later the larger stone was commissioned to replace it. Perhaps Captain Adams was away on service in India or wherever when his wife died? Perhaps money was tight at the time? Anyway, at a later date he commissioned a larger and better stone and had it erected, but the smaller stone was not removed (or was relocated but on the same grave).

I think the intertwined "CHA" is actually "EHA", and it stands for "Emily Helen Adams"

Re Emily's death, I see she was aged 52 and died from TB ("phthisis") so childbirth definitely wouldn't have been a factor. I think the theory of the smaller stone being an early market sounds likely, especially given the ornate carving of the crest, which must have taken a while.

Also, the informant was William Adams, so it doesn't look like he was away at the time of death.

The late William Adams would be deceased. William Adams, the late captain, is not dead; he's just not a captain any more. This wording suggests that when the stone was erected William Adams was still alive.