Woodborough Churchyard Survey

A gravestone recording and condition survey, map

and subsurface survey of St Swithuns churchyard,
Woodborough, Nottinghamshire

NCA-017
17th-21st May & 4th-6th August 2010
Andy Gaunt and Emily Gillott
Nottinghamshire Community Archaeology
Nottinghamshire County Council

Contributors
The survey was undertaken by Andy Gaunt and Emily Gillott of
Nottinghamshire County Council Community Archaeology, along with
members of the Woodborough Photographic Recording Group and members
of the community archaeology volunteers group, and was funded by the
Nottinghamshire County Council Local Improvement Schemes.

Acknowledgements
St. Swithuns PCC through churchwarden Alan Wright
Woodborough Photographic Recording Group
Woodborough WI for 1982 survey records
Nottinghamshire Family History Society for transcripts of burial records
Archive Location
Nottinghamshire Historic Environment Record, Nottinghamshire County
Council, Trent Bridge House, Fox Road, West Bridgford, Nottinghamshire,
NG29BJ.

Contact Details
Nottinghamshire Community Archaeology, Nottinghamshire County Council,
Trent Bridge House, Fox Road, West Bridgford, Nottinghamshire, NG29BJ.
community.archaeology@nottscc.gov.uk

Contents

1 Introduction
2 Site location, geology and topography
3 Historical and archaeological background
4 Aims and objectives
5 Methodology
5.1 Surface survey
5.2 Subsurface survey
5.3 Gravestone survey
6 Results
6.1 Mapping and sub-surface survey results
6.2 Gravestone condition survey results
6.2.1 Monuments in the Graveyard
6.2.2 Monuments inside the church
7 Conclusions
8 References and Bibliography
Appendix I: Graveyard survey map and data
Appendix II: Internal memorials map and data
Appendix III: Cremation memorials map and data
Appendix IV: Example record sheet

1. Introduction
Members of the Woodborough Photographic Recording Group (WRPG)
commenced a social history survey of the headstones in the St. Swithuns
churchyard in June 2009. The aim was to expand on the survey undertaken
by the Womens Institute in 1982. The work consisted of a photographic record
of the headstones, along with a record of the details from the headstones.
This was compared with the WI list, and resulted in an updated record. The
new record was cross-reference with the parish records. The exercise
resulted in 75% of headstones being recorded, an increase from
approximately 50% achieved by the WI. As part of a Nottinghamshire County
Council Local Improvement Scheme, and in conjunction with the WPGR, a
graveyard condition survey of Saint Swithuns Churchyard was carried out by
Nottinghamshire County Council Community Archaeology. The survey was
undertaken in three parts; firstly a map of the locations of grave stones on the
surface was created, secondly a sub-surface probing survey searched for
stones that had been lost or buried, thirdly a full gravestone recording
condition survey of the stones and memorials in the churchyard, and church
was undertaken. The survey took place to the specifications for graveyard
recording prescribed by the Council for British Archaeology and English
Heritage (Mytum 2002).

Michael Harrison and Margaret Kirk

recording memorial inscriptions in 2009

David Bagley, Margaret Kirk and John Hoyland

probing for hidden memorials in 2010

Figure 1: The Village Woodborough

Figure 2: Area of survey

2. Site location geology and topography

The Churchyard of St Swithuns, Woodborough is at OSGR 463170,347710
(see figures 1 and 2). The area is underlain by bedrock of the Triassic Mercia
Mudstones Group. The rocks of this group present at this location are
mudstones and siltstones of the Radcliffe formation, siltstones and
sandstones of the Sneinton formation (known locally as Skerry), and sands of
the Sneinton formation. These bedrock formations are overlain by superficial
Quaternary deposits occupying the lower sections of valleys. These consist of
clay, silt, sand and gravel deposits, including Head (erosional) deposits, and
alluvium (water borne) deposits of Holocene age.

Figure 3: Geology of Woodborough.

Woodborough is situated in a valley, a tributary of the Doverbeck. The village

is surrounded by high ground to the north, south and western sides.
St Swithuns church is recorded on the Nottinghamshire Historic Environment
Record as Monument M1892. The graveyard is well maintained, with mown
grass and tended vegetation.
3. Historical and archaeological background
St Swithuns church dates at least from the Norman period, with the north reset doorway (blocked) being Norman, of three orders, with colonnettes with
scalloped capitals and cable zigzag mouldings of the voussoirs (Pevsner
1979). The chancel dates from the mid-14th century, but much of the church
was restored in the period 1891-97 and the mid-20th century. The majority of
window glazing dates from the period 1907-1910. The tower has a 13th
century base and a perpendicular top (HER). The church is notable for graffiti,
especially on the external south wall, with a number of mass dials being
preserved.
Previous archaeological work within the churchyard includes the excavation of
foundation and service trenches for the construction of a new extension to the

south aisle of the church by JSAC in 1999. An inhumation was encountered

lying immediately below the Southwest drainage pipe. This extended outside
the evaluation trench and was left in situ. Also during the excavation work
significant numbers of disarticulated human remains were recovered. A dump
of bones was found below the existing tarmac footpath at the southeast
corner of the new foundation trench. The dump consisted of fragments of at
least four and up to seven human skulls along with a number of larger bones.
The lack of smaller bones pointed to this feature being a re-interment. All
bones were re-buried (JSAC 1999).
A watching brief conducted in 2000 found no archaeological remains (Brooke
2000).
The Nottinghamshire HER also locates a mound in the northeast corner of the
churchyard as element number L10293.
4. Aims and Objectives

To record the locations of all gravestones in the churchyard, and to

produce a two-dimensional map showing their positions.

To discover if there are buried gravestones in the churchyard, and to

map their locations. The number of extant gravestones at 154 is far
less than the 2462 burials listed in the parish records from 1572 to
1879 when the records were kept.

To produce a 3-dimensional model of the site using data recorded

during the survey.

To record details form the stones including full transcript of surviving

text, measurements of dimensions, photographic and fully illustrated
record.

5. Methodology
5.1 Mapping of surface features

The survey was carried out using a Leica Flexline TS06 Electronic Distance
Measuring (EDM) Total Station. Points were recorded for each gravestone.
Control of survey was maintained using initial coordinates and height taken
from Ordnance Survey data, further control points were then pegged out
around the site. These points provided lines of site for optical survey, acting
as station location points. Data was prepared and final maps created using
MapInfo Geographical Information Systems (GIS) software.
5.2 Mapping of Subsurface features
The total station mentioned above was used to peg out a 25m baseline in the
south eastern area of the churchyard. From this baseline a grid of 5m squares
was pegged out around the churchyard. This grid was then used as a guide
for probing the ground at 0.5m intervals in both x and y axis. The probe
survey was undertaken using 1m long metal rods, 1cm in diameter. The rods
were entered into the ground to a depth of 10-20cm. Where a subsurface
feature was encountered more intensive probing established its extent.
Shallow features 10-20cm below the surface were uncovered and recorded.
5.3 Gravestone survey
The third phase of the project was to conduct a survey of the monuments in
the graveyard, recording the details, construction materials, decoration, size,
and condition. An example record sheet can be seen in appendix I. The
survey work was carried out by the WPRG Group alongside volunteers from
the

community

archaeology

database.

Nottinghamshire

community

archaeologists supervised the survey to ensure that standards and guidance

for recording were adhered to. A photographic record consisting of five
photographs per memorial was taken. Each record included an overview
photograph to show the graves location, and photographs with and without a
photographic board.
6. Results
6.1 Mapping and subsurface survey results

Figure 4: St Swithuns Churchyard map showing surface gravestones, subsurface features and
cremation memorials.

The mapping survey recorded 158 standing gravestones within St Swithuns

churchyard. The survey also recorded the names and locations of 103 square
stone cremation memorials, and the location of two buried stones discovered
by the probing survey. The mapped gravestones were given a number and

details taken to allow comparison with previous work, and to facilitate use of
the map in the gravestone recording survey. The map containing these details
is available as part of the archive, and working copies were given to WPRG
(see figure 4 for the locations of the features mentioned above). The survey
also mapped 18 memorials within the church as shown in figure 5 below.

Figure 5: Map of internal memorials.

The subsurface probing survey discovered only two features present in the
churchyard, which are marked on figure 4. These were photographed and
appear below in photographs 1 and 2. Photograph 1 shows feature 001. The
feature consists of the base of a gravestone broken at ground level. The stone
is 50cm in width and approximately 5cm thick. To the east side of the stone
are five clay bricks used as packing stones to prevent the stone collapsing
due to subsidence above the burial.

Photograph 1: Buried feature 001 facing west.

Photograph 2: Buried feature 002 facing west.

Photograph 2 shows what appears to be the top right corner fragment of a

gravestone. The remaining fragment is 35cm left to right by 40 cm bottom to
top as seen in the photograph. Carved bordering can be seen to the top and
right hand sides of the stone. The stone is broken to the left and bottom sides
as seen in the photograph. The illegible remains of carving can be seen
towards the top left of the stone. The stone is of a similar kind to that in
photograph 1, but no definite association is possible from the remains.
As part of the survey height or Z coordinates were recorded alongside x and
y locations. This enabled a 3-dimensional digital terrain model (DTM) of the
churchyard to be created in Vertical Mapper software, an extension of
MapInfo GIS software. The results are shown in the image in figure 6.

Figure 6: 3-Dimensional model of St Swithuns Churchyard.

6.2 Gravestone condition survey results

6.2.1 Monuments in the Graveyard
A total of 158 monuments were recorded in the graveyard over the course of
3 days. As figure 7 below shows the vast majority (149) of the monuments
are headstones. The other monument types include a chest tomb, flatstones,
and low kerbstone surrounded flat monuments.

Headstones
Chest Tombs
Memorial Stone
Flatstone
Other

Figure 7: Pie chart showing the type of monuments in the graveyard.

The earliest readable date visible in the graveyard is 1700 (monument No

133), and the most recent readable date is 2004 (No 054), although this late
one is a memorial stone rather than a grave marker. As the chart below
shows there is a steep drop-off in monuments from the 1870s to the 1880s,
and this presumably coincides with the closure of this graveyard and the
referral of subsequent burials to a nearby cemetery. A reference to this is
seen on monument No 048 which reads;
In Loving Memory of Ann, Wife of John Mellows, who died June 30th 1873
Aged 69 Years. Also of John Mellows who died December 2nd 1884 Aged 82
years, Interred in the Cemetery Grave No 20. This is clear evidence that St.
Swithuns graveyard was closed to burials prior to 1884.

With the exclusion of No 054, which is a memorial stone rather than a grave
marker, there is only one burial after the 1800s, and this is memorial No 140.
This marks the grave of Mansfield Parkyns, the mid 19th century owner of
Woodborough Hall who carved the Victorian stalls inside the church (Pevsner,
384).

20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2

1790

1800

1810

1820

1830

1840

1850

1860

1870

1880

1890

1900

s
1750

s
1740

1780

s
1730

1770

s
1720

s
1710

1760

s
1700

Figure 8: Bar chart showing the number of memorials from each decade period.

3
22

Sandstone; Readable
Sandstone; Partially Readable
Sandstone; Unreadable
Slate; Readable
Slate; Partially Readable

66

55

Figure 9: Pie chart showing the relative legibility of sandstone monuments against the slate monuments
in the graveyard.

All but 6 of the monuments within the graveyard are made of slate or
sandstone. There are slightly more sandstone memorials (83) than slate ones
(69), but as is very clear from the chart in figure 9 the sandstone monuments
are far less legible than the slate ones. Just over 26% of the sandstone
graves are fully legible, as opposed to over 95% of the slate ones. In addition
none of the slate graves are completely illegible. Clearly inscriptions in slate
survive much better than those in sandstone.

Monuments constructed of

marble and other materials total 6, and all are legible, and have not been
included in the above chart.
Not only was the condition of the inscription recorded, but the condition of the
overall monument was noted in the survey. The chart in figure 10 shows that
the by far the most common noted factor under the condition survey was that
many stones were leaning; 43% of the memorials in the graveyard in fact,
which is equal to 68 stones.

This is partly due to the large number of

headstones in the graveyard, which are prone to leaning as the soil around
the grave settles. Just over 9% of the memorials were recorded as sunken.
Gravestones become sunken through the same mechanism, and through
ground levels rising gradually over the years. Only 11 stones were recorded
to have lost pieces through breakage.

Lost Pieces
Become Broken
Lost Decorative
Elements
Repositioned
Become Buried
Collapsed
Leaning
Sunk
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Figure 10: Chart to show the factors recorded under the condition survey. It is clear that many of the
stones in the graveyard are leaning.

Another factor that can affect the condition of the monuments is vegetation.
The condition survey recorded instances of lichen, moss, algae and other
vegetation around the monuments. The chart in figure 11 shows the results of
the survey of vegetation, and indicates that over half of the graves have lichen
present on them. This is perhaps an indication of clean air in the area. The
presence of moss and ivy on a number of graves is likely to be related to a
number of the graves being under the canopy of trees, resulting in damper
shaded conditions, ideal for the growth of these organisms. A total of 74
monuments are under the canopy of a tree, reflecting the shaded nature of
the graveyard.
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Lichen

Algae

Moss

Ivy

Other

Figure 11: Chart showing the types of vegetation present on the monuments, and the percentage of
graves that they are present on.

The monuments within the graveyard are generally in good condition. Some
show signs of slight damage from grass-cutting activities, 43% are leaning
slightly. Very few are leaning at a great angle, and the greatest cause of
illegibility in the stones is through natural weathering of the construction
materials.

6.2.2 Monuments inside the church

It is harder to apply statistical analyses to the memorials on the interior of the
church, as there are only 18 and they are of very different styles and dates,
but they can be summarised in the following points.
There are 18 memorials recorded in the church interior. Of these 11 are
sandstone, and 7 are another material (mostly copper alloy plaques). Four
are wall-mounted and the rest are in the floor of the church.
The earliest visible recorded date is 1668 (No. 175). There are a number of
graves with incised cruciform decoration, but no written date or other details
(Nos. 160, 161, 164). These grave slabs may date back as far as the 14th
century.

Photograph 3
Photograph 4
Fragments of grave slabs with incised cruciform decoration (Left; No. 164, Right; No. 161)

It is possible to make out the surnames on all but 1 of the 15 inscribed

monuments, and from this it is clear that the Lacock family were influential in
the 1700s, although the name Lacock does not appear on any of the
readable monuments in the graveyard.
Surname
Lacock
Bainbrigge
Bond
Cartwright
Wood

Occurrences
6
2
1
1
1

Surname
Alvey
Jones
Helton
Slight

Occurrences
1
1
1
1

Figure 12: Table showing the surnames readable on the interior monuments. (Note No. 173 contains
both Cartwright and Lacock surnames).

The chart in figure 13 shows clearly that the majority of the monuments within
the church are either readable or uninscribed, with only 5 being partially
readable, and none being completely illegible.

Not Inscribed, 3

Readable, 10
Partially
Readable, 5

Figure 13: Pie chart showing the legibility of monuments within the church.

Of the 14 memorials laid into the floor 8 have been significantly worn and
damaged by footfall and other scuffing. Of the 6 not significantly damaged in
this way, 4 are copper-alloy. The copper alloy plaques throughout the church
interior are in better condition than the sandstone monuments.

The wall mounted monuments are in generally good condition, with the
exception of No. 172; the only wall monument constructed of sandstone rather
than copper alloy. This monument, although still readable at the moment, is
suffering surface flaking, peeling and blistering. The other wall monuments
are in good condition, with some tarnishing being the only real sign of age.

Photograph 5: Monument No 172 shows signs of damage to the sandstone surface, perhaps through
damp.

7. Conclusions
The subsurface survey discovered only two features. These were in close
proximity to each other, with at least one being in-situ. The absence of any
fallen or buried gravestones is an interesting discovery. Although it is
disappointing to not discover new stones, this in itself raises a number of
questions. The absence could either suggest that older gravestones have
been removed, or that stone grave markers were not used of for all of the
burials recorded in the parish records for the 18th and 19th centuries. The 3dimensional digital terrain model in figure 6 above highlights two raised areas
associated with dumped material including rubble and charcoal indicating
possible garden fires and management of the graveyard, the mound
mentioned in the northeast corner of the graveyard (L10293 on HER) appears
to be one of these areas of dumped material.

The work done by the WPRG and the volunteers represents the first
comprehensive survey of monuments both in the graveyard and in the church,
including a condition survey and photographic record. It demonstrates that
there are a number of graves, particularly those of sandstone construction,
that are already partly or completely illegible, but that the general condition
otherwise, of the churchyard and memorials within it, is relatively good.
Investigative work using parish records, and attempting to decipher gaps in
the surviving text on graves within the churchyard is being carried out by
WPRG, the information gathered in this survey should be a useful platform for
this ongoing work. The information also acts as a benchmark for monitoring
the condition of the monuments, and their rate of decay. The condition of
stones affected by cleaning and or the actions of maintaining the vegetation in
the churchyard can also be monitored.

10. References and bibliography

Ainsworth, S., Bowden, M., McOmish, D. & Pearson, T. 2007. Understanding the
Archaeology of Landscape. English Heritage.
Bannister, A., Raymond, S. and Baker, R. 1998. Surveying. Longman, Essex.
Bettess, F. 1990. Surveying for Archaeologists. Penshaw Press: University of
Durham.
Bowden, M. 1999. Unravelling the landscape. An inquisitive Approach to
Archaeology. Tempus, Stroud.
Bowden, M. 2002. With Alidade and Tape Graphical and plane table survey of
archaeological earthworks. English Heritage.
Brown, A. 1987. Fieldwork for Archaeologists and Historians. Batsford, London.
Chapman, H. 2006. Landscape Archaeology and GIS. Tempus.
Gaffney, C. & Gater, J. 2006. Revealing the Buried Past: Geophysics for
Archaeologists. Tempus Publishing.
Howard, P. 2007. Archaeological Surveying and Mapping. Routledge, Oxford.
IFA 1994 (updated) 2008. Standards and Guidance: for archaeological field
evaluation. Institute of Field Archaeologists.
Lutton, S. 2003. Metric Survey Specifications for English Heritage. English Heritage.
Menue, A. 2006. Understanding Historic Buildings: A guide to good recording
practice. English Heritage
Muir, R. 2004. Landscape Encyclopaedia: A reference guide to the Historic
Landscape Windgather Press.
Mytum, H. 2002.Recording and analysing graveyards. Practical handbook in
Archaeology 15. Council for British Archaeology in association with English Heritage.
Ordnance Survey. OS Mastermap Part 1: User Guide. V6.1.1-04/2006 Crown
Copyright.
Pevsner, N. 1979. The Buildings of England: Nottinghamshire. Penguin Books Ltd.
Websites:
http://www.bajr.org
http://www.bgs.ac.uk
http://www.english-heritage.org.uk
http://www.leica-geosystems.com
http://smartnet.leica-geosystems.co.uk
http://www.woodborough-heritage.org.uk

Appendix I
Graveyard Survey Map and Data

Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29

Surname 1
Cumberland
Cumberland
Cumberland
Lees
Baxter
Glover
Stephenson
Toplis
Toplis
Baguley
Pinder
Smith
Bradley
Cumberland
Baguley
Parker
Hallam

Person 1
William
Ann
John
Mary
James
Mordecla
Ann
Samuel
Ann
Harriett
Joseph
Abel
Henry
William
Elizabeth
Ann
Joseph

Date
1808
1806
1823
1802
1851

Clay
Hanson
Hucknall
Hucknall
Hucknall
Hucknall
Winfield
Winfield

Mary
Mary
Mary
Joseph
William
Hannah
William
Mary

1830
18?4
1844
1835
1837
1838

Southorn
Southorn

1862
1814

30

Lealand

31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38

Lealand
Aslin
Toplis
Spencer
Ford

Elizabeth
Samuel
Edward
Newham
Ann
Newham
Sarah
John
Martha
Mary

1829
1831
1858
18??
1857

Hogg
Robinson

William
Georgina

1820
1853

39

Foster

Ann

1842

1831
1843
1837
1878
1875
187?
1872
1850
18?2
1828
1840

Person
2

Date

Elizabeth
Hannah

Mark

18??

Mary

18??

Sarah

1840

Mary

1854

1857

1782

Christine
Elizabeth

Others

40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53

54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64

65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78

Oliver
Robinson
Robinson
Robinson

George
William
Frederic
Easter

Ward
Ward
Wood
Mellows
Bousfield
Richardson
Wood
Alvey

William
Hannah
James
Ann
Sarah Jane
Paul
Annie
Francis

Studley
Alvey
Wakefield
Alvey
Wood
Wood
Wood
Ragsdale
Pool
Poole
Poole

Vera Maud
Samuel
Ann
Emily
Sarah
Thomas
Thomas
Elizabeth
William
John
William

1811
1828
1875
1831
1806
1873
1872
1864
1870
1835

1989
1840
1873
18??
1861
1841
1851
1874
1849
1875
1835

Wyld
Lee
Lee
Lee
Lee
Lee
Speechly

William
Frances
Elizabeth
Frances
John
Samuel
John

1838
1849
1847
1850
1836
1823
1800

Donnelly
Donnelly

William
Charles
Thomas

1856
1828

John

1884

Elizabeth

1864

Ann
Dorcas
Ethel
Mary

2004
1858

Mary
Sarah

1844
1831

Elizabeth

1852

Elizabeth

1859

Mary 1854,
Edwin
1865

79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106

Richardson
Southorn
Southorn
Robinson
Robinson
Donnelly
Donnelly
Donnelly
Donnelly
Orme
Dixon
Jerram
Brett
Brett
Osborn

Hannah
Jane
Robert
Elizabeth
Edward
Hannah
Thomas
Thomas
James
Thomas
Rosetta
Joseph
Ann
John
Elizabeth
Mary
Mary

Flinders
Flinders

Samuel
Elizabeth

1869
1845

Thorp

Hannah

1824

1800

1849
1806
1806
1838
1870
1855
1853
1827
1853
1867
1873
1827
1838
1828

107

Oldacres

108
109

Hewes
Andrews

John
Mary
Kirkby
William
Rev.
Samuel
Lealand
Thomas
Oldacres
Joseph

110

Hewes

Sarah

1824

111

Oldacres

1808

112
113
114
115
116

Oldacres
Hinpier
Lee
Southorn
Glover

Alice
Rev.
Thomas
Robert
John

Blanson
Wotton
Collisham

17??
1820

Love

1875

John

1870

Elizabeth

1826

Ann

1797

Mary
Rev.
James
Rev.
Richard

1831

Charles
Alice

1817
1739

1876
1872
1784

1779
17??
1712
1720

1837
1785

117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125

Glover
Glover
Southorn
Southorn
Southorn
Rose
Rose
Richardson
Patching

126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136

Patching
Howitt
Sellars?
Sellars?
Sellars
Brown
Alvey
Alvey
Alvey
Alvey

1758
John
George
Mary
Mary
Miriam
John
Marian
Henry
Watson
Sarah
Sarah
Christopher
Christopher
Ann
George
Elizabeth
Mary

1753
1777
1789
1785
1791
1878
1867

George

1764

Mary

1878

1868
1850
1727
1752
1705

Maria

1837

Emma
Louise

1877

Frances

1833

1833
1700
1724
170?
1718

137
138
139

Clay

Frances
Hucknall

Clay

Mary

1876

140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156

Parkyns
Warot
Lee
Lee

Mansfield
Elizabeth
Samuel
John

1894
1824
1732
1770

Wyld
Donnelly
Glazebrook
Cliff

Christopher
John
Ann

1792
1780
1767
1768

Wyld
Wyld
Cliff
Foster
Foster
Chouler
Oakley

William
Elizabeth
Daniel
Thomas
John
Louisa
James

1780
1778
1768
1833
1851
1872
1868

1874

Mary 1840

157

Wyld

Joseph

1819

Ann

1809

Appendix II
Internal Memorials Map and Data

Names and dates from internal memorials

Number
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166

Surname 1
Helton
not visible
not visible
not visible
Ailwe
(Alvey)
not visible
Jones
Bond

167
168
169
170
171

Slight
Lacock
Lacock
Lacock
Lacock

172
173
174
175
176

Wood
Cartwright
Bainbridge
Lacock
Bainbridge

Person 1
John

Date
1767

Other Persons

Date

Emily Kate

1912

William
John Birch
Samuel Rev
Frederick
Goode
Carolus
Charles
Robert
Philip
John
Mary
Philip
Philip
William

1918
1912
1891
1683
1707
1700
1707

Catherine, John,
Bridget, Montagu
1693
Ann, Dorothy,
Charles
1668
1737

Mary

Appendix III
Cremation Memorials Map and Data

Names and dates from cremation memorials

Number
177

Surname
Murphy

178
179
180
181
182

Hayward
Gorski
Clark
Woodland
Tew

183

Smith

184
185

Hall
Reeves

186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194

Rothera
Brewill
Brewill
Cotterill
Fairchild
Turner
Limb
Clay
Redmayne

195
196

Redmayne
Richardson

197

Smith

198
199
200
201

Hird
Hanson
Lawson
Lee
Scattergood
Musson
Williams
Hind
Litchfielfd
Molloy
Guest
Pidd
Welch

202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209

Person 1
Alan Michael
Douglas
Graham
Brenda
Claude Stuart
Edward
Peter William
Christone
Elizabeth
Pamela
John Henry

Date
2003
2009
2009
2007
2002
2006

Person 2

Date

Margaret

2009

Donald
Arthur

1972

Maurice S
Rothera

2007

Irene
Eleanor

1994
2002

Lucy

2006

2007
2007
2006

Margaret
Royce
Wendy
Joy
Frank
John Henry
Walter
Evelyn May
Rosemary Clare
Cecil Procter
Vere
Bertha
Mary (nee
Richardson)
Norman
Geoffrey
Arthur Cyril
Derek Peter
Donald

2007
2004
2008
2005
2002
1998
2006
1997
1996

May
Arthur Wynne
Arthur
Sydney Arthur
Gladys May
William Henry
Jack
Herbert

1995
1983
1992
1992
1993
2001
1993
1999

2002
1996
2001
1995
1993
1998
1992

210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227

Bleay
Butler
Bray
Cram
Welch
Stanley
Burton
Paulson
Taylor
Jamson
Atherton
Van Herrewege
Small
Kennell
Turner
Round
Riggott
Fairchild

Sheila
Charles
Charles Stanley
Maureen Helen
berenice
florence
Donald William
Tom
Betty Evelyn
Gaenor Gladys
Frederick O
Peggy
John

1983
1985
1986
1985
1987
1991
1993
1996
1995
1996
1997
1997
1998
1999
1999
1999
2000
2001

228
229
230
231

Parr
Pereira
Green
Skeen

232
232
233
234
235
236
237

Dunthorne
Duckitt
Clarke
Charlton
Ashton

Anne Christine
Jane
Andrew
Sally Anne
Joan Muriel
Frances
Margaret
Kevin
Iris
Olive
Greta
Marguerite
Leonard
Donald
Hildegard
Margaret

Lamb

Geoffrey Arthur

1991

238
239

Drury
Redmayne

1981
1981

240
241
242
243
246
246
247
248

Jones
Redmayne
Harrisson
Baguley
Bingham
Richardson
Trotman
Cooper

James Roy
Harold
Dora Eleanor
Catherine
Vera Florence
Stan R
Richard Wilfred
Percy
Nell
Peter Vaughan
Alice

2001
2004
2007
1981

May

1994

Minnie
Ro

1997
2007

Richard
William

2008

Thomas
Eric

2002

James

2003

Eileen
Mary

1997

1981
2003
1981
1983
1986

1983
1986
1987
1983
1971
1973
2001
2005

249
250
251

Gard
Lyon
Humber

252
253
254
255
256
257
258

Andrews
Brooks
Geary
Broome
England
Mee
Spencer

259
260
261
263
264
264

Green
Calthorp-Owen
Chapman
Burston
Perkins
Rook

Cara
Valerie
William Harold
John Henry
Don
Gordon
Stanley
Lewis William
Mick
Charles Edwin
Thomas
Kenneth
William Gordon
Stephen
Marian V
Barbara
Keith Muir

2003
2007
1998
1998
2004
2006
2006
1999
1995
2001

Reavill

Ernest W J

1977

266

Chapman

Harold Norman

1969

267
268
269
270
271

Taylor
Saunders
Enderby
Leslie
Hanson

Joyce
Archer
Iva Myrtle
Edith
Andrea

1998
1978
1985
1987
1987

Clarke
No inscription
Walker
Parker
Bianchina
Godfrey
Godfrey

278

Wilkinson

279

Mitchell

2007

Marjorie
Althea

2004

Rosemary

2001

2002
2001
2005
1992
1981
1995

265

272
273
274
275
275
276
277

Maurice

Mary Starr

1998

Hilary
Alan William
Enid Mary
Shriley Elzabeth
Simon Charles
Capt. Septimus
Richard
Thomas
Kenneth

2003
2008
2006
2007
1991
1969

Stephanie
M
Sarah
Ann
Frederick
Copley
Helen M

William
Norman

1980
1983
2004
1978

2004

Appendix IV
Record Sheet example

NOTTINGHAMSHIRE COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY GRAVESTONE RECORDING FORM

KEY INFORMATION
GRAVEYARD REF:

____________________ MEMORIAL REF:__________

SURVEYOR(S):_______________________________________________
DATE:
WEATHER AND LIGHT CONDITIONS

SURNAME(S) VISIBLE ON STONE AND YEAR OF DEATH

MASON/MAKER:
TRANSCRIPT OF TEXT

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

MONUMENT IS MADE FROM;

MAIN MATERIAL

ENTIRELY STONE

SANDSTONE

STONE AND ANOTHER MATERIAL

GRANITE

ENTIRELY ANOTHER MATERIAL

MARBLE
SLATE
OTHER ___________________

OTHER MATERIALS
(TICK ANY OTHERS THAT ARE USED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OR DECORATION)

IRON

PORCELAIN

BRONZE

CERAMIC TILES

TERRACOTTA

WOOD

BRICK

PHOTOGRAPHY

ARTIFICIAL STONE

OTHER_____________________

CONCRETE

OTHER_____________________

LETTERING
(TICK ALL APPLICABLE)

INSCRIBED

INLAID

LEADED

RELIEF

PAINTED

OTHER__________

PAINT
HAS THE MEMORIAL BEEN PAINTED?

NO

YES

TOTAL COVERAGE

WELL PRESERVED

PARTIAL

WORN/FLAKED

CANT TELL

FRAGMENTARY

NUMBER OF STONES USED ______________________

DO NOT INCLUDE FOUNDATIONS OR COUNT INDIVIDUAL FRAGMENTS OF BROKEN
MEMORIALS.

DIMENSIONS (IN CM)

HEIGHT

WIDTH

DEPTH

ARE THE FOUNDATIONS VISIBLE?

NO

YES

BRICK

CONCRETE

STONE

OTHER _____________________

TYPE OF MEMORIAL

HEADSTONE

STANDING CROSS

WALL MONUMENT

LEDGER/FLATSTONE

SCULPTURE

OTHER

OBELISK

CHEST TOMB

__________________

SCULPTURE, DESIGN AND SYMBOLS

USE THIS SPACE TO DESCRIBE ANY SCULPTURE, DECORATION OR SYMBOLS ON THE
MONUMENT.

YOU CAN ALSO DRAW DESIGN OR DECORATION ON THE SKETCH SHEET IF

YOU WISH.

INSCRIPTION EXTENT (MAIN FACE ONLY)

NEVER INSCRIBED

INSCRIBED BUT NO LONGER READABLE

UP TO SURFACE INSCRIBED

UP TO SURFACE INSCRIBED

OVER SURFACE INSCRIBED

SKETCH OF MONUMENT
USE THIS SPACE TO SKETCH THE MONUMENT TO SHOW SHAPE, DESIGN, TEXT LAYOUT,
AND ANY OTHER INFORMATION YOU FEEL IS RELEVANT

LOCATION

THE MEMORIAL IS

NOT ENCLOSED

ENCLOSED WITHIN A STRUCTURE

BUILT INTO A WALL

EXPOSED FACES:

ALL

UPWARD

NONE

NORTH

EAST

SOUTH

WEST

LANSDCAPE FEATURES NEAR TO THE MEMORIAL

MARK WHETHER THEY ARE TOUCHING THE MEMORIAL, OR NEARBY (I.E. WITHIN
APPROXIMATELY 5 METRES OF THE MEMORIAL).

TOUCHING

NEARBY

GRASSED SURFACE

SHRUBS / FLOWER BEDS

EXPOSED SOIL

OTHER MEMORIALS

CHURCH / CHAPEL

GRAVEYARD PATH

GRAVEYARD ENTRANCE

BURIAL ENCLOSURE; WALLED

BURIAL ENCLOSURE: OTHER (E.G. RAILED)

ROAD / PUBLIC FOOTPATH

OTHER FEATURE __________________________

OTHER FEATURE __________________________

OTHER FEATURE __________________________

SLOPE
MEMORIAL IS:

AT TOP OF A SLOPE

AT BOTTOM OF A SLOPE

PART WAY DOWN A SLOPE

ON LEVEL/GENTLE INCLINE

ORIENTATION OF MAIN FACE

NORTH

EAST

DOWN/FALLEN

SOUTH

WEST

UPWARDS

CONDITION
GENERAL POINTS; (TICK ALL THAT APPLY)
MONUMENT HAS;

SUNK

STARTED TO LEAN

BECOME BURIED

COLLAPSED / FALLEN OVER

BEEN REPOSITIONED

LOST DECORATIVE ELEMENTS (SUCH AS INLAY)

BECOME BROKEN (I.E. LOST THE TOP HALF)

LOST PIECES THROUGH BREAKAGE

REPAIR AND REUSE: HAS THE MONUMENT BEEN;

CLEANED

REUSED

REPAIRED

MATERIALS USED:

STONE

STEEL

CONCRETE

OTHER

RESIN

____________

LEAD
VEGETATION (TICK ANY THAT APPLY)
LICHEN

IVY

ALGAE

OTHER PLANTS

MOSS

____________________________

TREES: MEMORIAL IS

NOT UNDER TREE CANOPY

WITHIN 1M OF TREE TRUNK

UNDER WIDER TREE CANOPY

TOUCHING TREE TRUNK

GRASS (TICK ANY THAT APPLY)

GRASS KILLER HAS BEEN USED AROUND BASE OF STONE

TURF HAS BEEN REMOVED AROUND BASE OF STONE

GRASS CUTTINGS HAVE BEEN LEFT ON SURFACE OF STONE

EVIDENCE OF DAMAGE CAUSED BY GRASS-CUTTING (GIVE DETAILS)

DAMAGE
DESCRIBE ANY DAMAGE BEING CAUSED TO THE MONUMENT BY TREES, VEGETATION, OR
ANIMALS (BURROWING ETC).

PEOPLE
IS THE GRAVE VISITED / TENDED?

NO

YES

IS THERE GRAFFITI ON THE MEMORIAL?

NO

YES

STONE DECAY
USE THE C.S.A. INFORMATION TO HELP YOU FILL IN THIS SECTION.
ARE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING VISIBLE? (TICK ALL THAT APPLY)

SURFACE LOSS

SCALING AND FLAKING

DIFFERENTIAL WEATHERING

POLLUTION DEPOSIT

CRATERING AND PITTING

SALTS DEPOSIT

DELAMINATION

MISC. STAINING

CONTOUR SCALING

CRACKING AND CRAZING

SURFACE BLISTERING

ANY OTHER _______________

ANY OTHER INFORMATION:

CONDITION SKETCH
USE THIS SHEET TO SKETCH THE OVERALL MONUMENT, MARKING THE EXTENT OF
DAMAGE/VEGETATION.