i was at the FRC yesterday making copies of numerous PCC wills. In reading through them more carefully last night, I came across an (in my experience) unique proviso. Sir John Osborn wrote his will in 1837 (proved in 1848) with the following item included: "I desire that my funeral may be attended with as little expence as can be consistently with my situation in life and I strictly forbid the attendance of any of the female members of my family." Yes, he had a wife and daughters, from whom he did not seem to be alienated, referring to his wife as "my dear wife" and, in fact, naming her as one of the Executors. So, why could she settle his estate but not attend his funeral? I cheecked a reference book (Death in England) but found no mention of such an oddity. Thoughts anyone? Mary

In message of 21 May, MWTRE@aol.com wrote: > i was at the FRC yesterday making copies of numerous PCC wills. In > reading through them more carefully last night, I came across an (in > my experience) unique proviso. Sir John Osborn wrote his will in > 1837 (proved in 1848) with the following item included: "I desire > that my funeral may be attended with as little expence as can be > consistently with my situation in life and I strictly forbid the > attendance of any of the female members of my family." Yes, he had > a wife and daughters, from whom he did not seem to be alienated, > referring to his wife as "my dear wife" and, in fact, naming her as > one of the Executors. So, why could she settle his estate but not > attend his funeral? I cheecked a reference book (Death in England) > but found no mention of such an oddity. Thoughts anyone? I think this practice can still be foundd in some parts of the world and have heard of it before in England. Perhaps it was thought that the wailing should not be done in public? A tiny thought even tells me that wailers used to be hired to make an even more impressive racket and perhaps this caused some to say that enough was enough. -- Tim Powys-Lybbe                                          tim@powys.org              For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org

Sounds like one to ask Julian Litten - is he still at the V&A? Chris | i was at the FRC yesterday making copies of numerous PCC wills. In reading | through them more carefully last night, I came across an (in my experience) | unique proviso. Sir John Osborn wrote his will in 1837 (proved in 1848) with | the following item included: "I desire that my funeral may be attended with | as little expence as can be consistently with my situation in life and I | strictly forbid the attendance of any of the female members of my family." Yes, | he had a wife and daughters, from whom he did not seem to be alienated, | referring to his wife as "my dear wife" and, in fact, naming her as one of the | Executors. So, why could she settle his estate but not attend his funeral? I | cheecked a reference book (Death in England) but found no mention of such an | oddity. Thoughts anyone? | Mary | | -- | This email has been verified as Virus free | Virus Protection and more available at http://www.plus.net

Judith Flanders says, in The Victorian House (2003, pub Harper Perennial), p333, ISBN0 00 713189 5: Whether women attended or not was a vexed question. Many manuals said absolutely not, as women could not contain their emotions and would be overcome. Other books accepted that women did go; still others thought it was only upper- and lower class women who did so (and yet Queen Victoria was not present at her beloved Albert's funeral). In message <41c.1b90dca.31a19791@aol.com>, MWTRE@aol.com writes >i was at the FRC yesterday making copies of numerous PCC wills. In reading >through them more carefully last night, I came across an (in my experience) >unique proviso. Sir John Osborn wrote his will in 1837 (proved in 1848) with >the following item included: "I desire that my funeral may be attended with >as little expence as can be consistently with my situation in life and I >strictly forbid the attendance of any of the female members of my >family." Yes, >he had a wife and daughters, from whom he did not seem to be alienated, >referring to his wife as "my dear wife" and, in fact, naming her as >one of the >Executors. So, why could she settle his estate but not attend his >funeral? I >cheecked a reference book (Death in England) but found no mention of such an >oddity. Thoughts anyone? >Mary > > -- David G Jackson