Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

'Highlighted' names on Family Gravestones


apanderson

Recommended Posts

My apologies if this question has been asked before.

When there has been a CWGC Burial, but the family have decided to erect their own stone, is there a 'policy' of sorts for the CWGC maintenance folk to 'highlight' the man/woman concerned (and sometimes the name of their father)?

The particular stone I'm referring to is in Camelon Cemetery in Falkirk as it bears the name of two Ferrier brothers:

L.Cpl. William Ferrier, (1700) A. & S. H., died 15.02.1917 - buried in Camelon Cemetery

and A.S. Joseph Ferrier, (Clyde Z/4138) R.N.V.R., died 17.11.1915 - buried in Twelve Trees Copse Cemetery

William's name has been 'highlighted' but not Joseph's, so does this mean that it's only people who are actually buried there whose names are picked out in this way, and if so, why?

Anne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks John.

Do you mean I'm right about their places or burial or right about William's name being the only one highlighted because he's the only one buried there - or both?

Another point I meant to raise at the same time was . . . .

Why are only a few of these family stones given this attention while others aren't. I'm referring specifically to family stones where servicemen/women are definately buried. I would have though that if one stone was done, the policy would be that all they all should? I'm intrigued.

Anne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andy - I should have explained more clearly, sorry.

Typically, most inscriptions on gravestones are carved into the face rather than having letters 'stuck-on' and over time they become eroded, some a lot worse for wear than others. When I said 'highlighted', it was the best way I could think to describe parts of these inscriptions that have been 'coloured-in' (for lack of a better description) so that the name of the serviceman/woman stands out.

On the Ferrier family stone, William's name has been highlighted but Joseph's name immediately underneath it, hasn't.

(*with a bit of luck a cropped image will appear)

Now and again, the father's name is also 'highlighted'.

I thought if this was CWGC 'policy' to undertake to do this, then all the stones would get the same treatment, but this doesn't seem to be the case.

Anne

*Edit - don't have a clue how to upload images so it's vanished!!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah. I think I may have misunderstood you, Anne.

I have no idea why, or even, if this would be done by CWGC.

William's burial there is a war grave so will be in the care of CWGC, Joseph's is just a family commemorative inscription on the stone. In my understanding, when the family inscription on a war grave stone becomes illegible through wear, the Commission would usually add one of its own stones to the grave plot to commemorate the soldier. Perhaps, as an interim, they "colour it in". However, as you mention the father's name is also "coloured in", my guess is that this work has not been done by the Commission but by A N Other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes - as John says - A N Other comes along and uses a lovely highlighter pen or similar so that the name stands out more clearly when they photograph the stone. Lovely, wot? Depending on the light at a certain time of day, or how worn the stone is, some of the inscriptions can be difficult to photograph.

Allie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure I understand what is meant here.

CWGC never highlights names on their gravestones. If anyone has done this, it is criminal damage. The stone will be replaced or cleaned as soon as practicable. The only colouring in of names ever done is on official CWGC stones made of granite - to assist legibility.

If the stone in question is a private one, it is nothing to do with CWGC and is the resposnsibility of the grave owner - war grave or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure I understand what is meant here.

CWGC never highlights names on their gravestones. If anyone has done this, it is criminal damage. The stone will be replaced or cleaned as soon as practicable. The only colouring in of names ever done is on official CWGC stones made of granite - to assist legibility.

If the stone in question is a private one, it is nothing to do with CWGC and is the resposnsibility of the grave owner - war grave or not.

I was photographing all the CWGC graves in my town cemetery (Kilsyth). They are a mix of traditional stones and gray granite, the granite ones having the names coloured in. One of these has two brother's names - one buried there and the other in France - both names are picked out in black. I'll be passing through Camelon when I'm back in a couple of weeks time so I could check out the Ferrier brothers' headstone, and take a pic.

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I might be better starting at the beginning again . . . .

The stone I was referring to is a family stone which is on the grave of L/Cpl. William Ferrier (Service No. 1700), A. & S. H., died 15.02.1917. This fact that this is his burial place is verified by his CWGC details.

His brother A.S. Joseph Ferrier, (service No. Clyde Z/4138) R.N.V.R., died 17.11.1915 and is buried at Twelve Trees Copse Cemetery and although obviously not buried there, his name has been added underneath that of his brother along with umpteen other members of the family.

The stone is pink/red granite and the whole inscription has been carved into the surface, the letters appearing as a lighter colour. William's details have been 'coloured-in or highlighted' with some sort of black colourant.

I have a photograph of the stone but as I said earlier, I don't know how to upload it.

The reason I thought this was maybe done by CWGC is that many, many family stones are the same (family ones only - not the standard CWGC stones). I've been photographing stones for years and this appears to be common practice, so rather than speculate on the reason why, I thought I would ask.

Going back to the Ferrier Brothers stone, it's only William's name which is 'highlighted' and not Joseph's, so I'm puzzled as to why this would be the case. If this was done by A.N. Other, for whatever reason, why was Joseph's name not done too - there was only about 15 months between their deaths. William was buried there, Joseph wasn't, but I can't help but think that if it was a family member, they would do both? Unless this A.N. Other had studied CWGC burials and is going up and down the country colouring-in the names of thr servicemen/women whom they know to be buried in those locations.

I'm actually quite surprised no-one else seems to have noticed it as I would think at a rough guess, about 50% of family stones are like this.

There is a thread running on The Scottish War Graves Project on this same issue so be assured - it's not just me and I'm not imagining things!!

http://scottishwargraves.phpbbweb.com/view...ottishwargraves

Anne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now it is clear.

This is not a CWGC activity as it involves a private stone and they are not permitted to amend these.

Obviously the decision to highlight certain parts of the stone is a family act. I have photos of similar stones in Scotland.

The varying practice may be down to timing. The fashion when one name was inscribed was to highlight names but, by the time of later additions, it had become not the 'done thing' - or had become too expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Terry.

At least that answers the CWGC side of the question.

I hope I'm not getting on anyone's nerves by banging on about this but there's another wee niggle . . . .

You said it could be down to 'fashion'. This would makes sense if it was a single name, but in the case of the Ferrier Brothers, Joseph died (1915), BEFORE William (1917) and yet William's name is the first on the inscription.

I'm thinking this is a case where the stone wasn't erected until some time after the deaths of the brothers and William is mentioned first as his was a CWGC burial? Was it the case if a family chose not to have a standard CWGC stone, they were subsidised towards a family one?

The next person mentioned on the incsription died in 1902 so presumably, the Lair was already owned by the family. (The others mentioned were 1920 & 1923)

Anne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not a CWGC activity as it involves a private stone and they are not permitted to amend these.

Terry, would they renew the lettering on a private stone if it had become illegible and no family could be traced?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Private stones are entirely the family's responsibility and no cash was paid towards the memorial by CWGC (many were erected before CWGC existed!). If the family chose a private stone they also chose to accept the perpetual maintenance cost and responsibility.

Greyhound.

No they would not as it is private property and not their responsibility. That is what the relatives chose.

However, the usual course of action is that CWGC would try to obtain permission to erect an official stone on the grave as well as the private one. This happens quite often where such permission has been obtained. They cannot remove the remains of any previous private memorial though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...