BUCKS-L Archives

Archiver > BUCKS > 2003-04 > 1050590566


From: "Jeanne Ross" <>
Subject: Re: [BKM] Funeral rings
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 08:42:46 -0600
References: <ZnIQvvAKddn+EwJA@varneys.demon.co.uk>


I have also heard of mourning rings that contained a lock of hair -- perhaps
a crossover betwen the two traditions you mention?

Jeanne Ross
Cranbrook, BC Canada
RootsWeb's WorldConnect Project Site
http://worldconnect.genealogy.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=rossbus
Guppy Research
http://worldconnect.genealogy.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=guppy
Our primary source documents
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~guppyross/

----- Original Message -----
From: "Eve McLaughlin" <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: [BKM] Funeral rings


> In message <>, Celia
> Renshaw <> writes
> >I wish I knew the answer to your questions Terry - but you've given me
> >another one to ask the list.
> >
> >My ancestor George NELSON, banker of Buckingham, bequeathed mourning
rings
> >to his friends and family when he died in 1836. One of the rings has
come
> >down the generations to my mother, so in this case, one at least was
> >definitely purchased (from Godwins of Holborn as it happens). However,
in
> >about two dozen other English wills I've now read, mourning rings are not
> >bequeathed - and no-one else I know researching English families has
> >mentioned them, in fact I've been asked several times what a mourning
ring
> >is. So, is it perhaps a Scottish tradition?? I'm keen to know the
answer
> >because I'm investigating the possibility that my NELSONs (banker
George's
> >father or grandfather) were originally from Wigtown.
>
> It was quite normal in English families, though the custom was dying out
> by 1836 and being replaced by gifts of chunks of the deceased's hair or
> tiny photos/paintings in a locket.
> A mourning ring was a tangible reminder of the testator, but could
> also be used as currency if times became hard -easier to sell than an
> oil painting or suit of clothes.
> >
>
> >
> >1600's Wills often leave money to buy rings for relatives and friends.
> >While the idea of a permanent object as a reminder of the deceased is
clear,
> >rings were given so often that members of large well-to-do families would
> >have had more rings than fingers before they reached middle age!
> so you can wear two or three per finger, since you will not have to do
> any manual work with them.
>
> --
> Eve McLaughlin
>
> Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians
> Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society
>
>
> ==== BUCKS Mailing List ====
> Advertising is not permitted on this List, although subscribers may
include a link to their website in their signature.
>
>


This thread: