The sad story about these stones.  The webmaster has seen the works plan, given to the contractors, as to how to erect the frame and position these stones.

The order that they were originally placed against the wall was that recorded in the Scottish Genealogical Society book of Memorial Inscriptions, dating from the 1960's when they were likely more legible.

Some of these stones were once the horizontal part of TABLE monuments, in other words they likely stood on four legs, and may have had infill panels between the legs to form a box shape.  Here are are several like this at Inverarity Kirkyard nearby.

Here is an original rough translation of the Latin but on review is amended - see below.

"In this sepulchre on this day is committed (her) soul (to) the Virgin and Holy Christ for ever after until the inevitable, our beloved wife and mother Margret <the 'et' of Margret wraps to the corner> 

* Io (possibly John the father & husband?) * Agn(es) * Rob(ert) * Will(iam) * Eliz(abeth) Skirling"

The space following SKIRLING appears to be completely blank - I really did look again for more, but nothing to be seen. Problem is - NO DATE/S.  Were they elsewhere on the stone?

====================================================================

From CAG, 25 MAY 2005
The "rough translation" above wrongly implies that Margaret was the deceased and that John was possibly the father and husband and the following gives an up-to-date opinion.

The stone begins: "In this terrible sepulchre on this day" and goes into some fairly difficult text  because of the lichen breaking up the words and often hiding the very necessary  root.  Additionally, there are some spelling errors in the Latin, suggesting the mason was not at all literate in the language (occasionally typical of the stones of the "country" gentry). For example "sepulchre", which in Latin is 'sepulchrum' is spelled here "sepultur". Finally, it was necessary to look up 'grave' in English and work backwards from there to get back on track - the insertion of the "t" was that problematic. Tenses and conjugations are difficult, too, because of the obliteration by lichen, and they don't often seem to match their context. The word 'terrible' (and in this case an unusual choice, as the word used literally means 'sacrificial victim' or 'enemy') which modifies sepulchre at the very beginning, appears about midway through the text.

The text picks up again fairly legibly at the the bottom when it  says "resolved Patrick, most beloved husband of Margaret with the children John, Agnes, Robert William (and) Elizabeth Skirling."

It is not at all obvious from what can be made out of the intervening text  exactly WHOSE stone it is. There is a suggestion, based on the possible plural of "animae" (souls), that the stone commemorates a couple of family members, perhaps children, taken by an infectious illness. There is also a suggestion that something terrible had happened, because of the odd modifier for 'sepulchre'. 

What is clear is that this is the family of Patrick Skirling in Brigton (now Douglastown, nearby).  He was the father of  William Skirling, burgess and baker in Dundee, Convener of the Nine Trades. (This identification based on the names of the children and the order of their appearance, oldest to last (except that Agnes came AFTER Robert in baptismal order), all consistent with the kirk records of this family.

The family may have included a Christian as suggested by the SGS, a somewhat uncomfortable suggestion.  The visible words on the stone seem to refer to religious matters of souls, and suggest that 'Christ" is probably the word. Finally, what you can read of the word is "C-H-I-R".  The latter may have been another mason's misspelling, but the only way to know for certain would be to attempt to clean off the problematic text.  In any event it "may have included" because, while there was a Christian, daughter of Patrick Skirling, baptised 10th June 1698, but ROBERT was baptised 25th October 1698. The possibility of Christian being correctly with this family cannot be ruled out  because, with one exception, Patrick's children are all recorded by their dates of baptism and not birth. The order on the stone may be the correct birth order.

There are also two children missing from the stone who are known to have lived to be adults.  Both are  known to have been siblings of William based on their being called "aunt" and "uncle" at the baptisms of his children in Dundee, namely a Margaret and a David.  (c.f: Margaret Skirline, baptised at Dundee 21st November 1736, 282/00/04, and David Skirline, baptised Dundee 15th June 1730, 282/00/04). A satisfactory explanation for this problem cannot be offered at this time.  Margaret, daughter of Patrick Skirling of Scroggarfould, was baptised in Glamis 31st Jan 1692, and that is consistent with known son John, son of Patrick Skirling of Scrogarfould, baptised at Glamis on 23rd June 1693, and is probably sufficient identification.  David is a bit of a mystery - there is no record of a David born or baptised  in these years to a Patrick that has not already been identified as belonging to other families.  This could be considered unusual in a family that seems to have recorded vital events rather methodically.  All of the other children and possible children are in the OPRs, most are on the Kinnettles stone (or even on other stones in the Old Howff, Dundee and Kinnettles), so this is odd.

The only explanation offered is that either David happened to have been born away from home (if so, why wasn't he baptised at home?) or he *may* have been born and baptised abroad.  There is a 17-year gap between the second to last and last child (Euphon, bapt 17th May 1706 at Kinnettles, and Charles, baptised 5th May 1723,at Brigton, Kinnettles).   Euphon, also not included on the stone, very probably died as a child.  The same is possibly true for Charles - but there is a LARGE gap between those two children.

The suggestion of the family being abroad is that, if the family was as associated with the Lyons of Strathmore, as they appear to have been, then there is a very real possibility that Patrick Skirling was involved in the '15 and may have had to leave Scotland for a while. The IGI has no records of Skirlings born in Continental Europe, but that doesn't mean they weren't. The timing is awfully coincidental, and the family's associations with the Lyons a bit too strong. The Lyons of Strathmore were known to have been Jacobites, the fifth earl died at Sheriffmuir in 1715, and his brother, Charles, the sixth earl, entertained the Old Pretender at Glamis a year later. Other branches of the family seem, by substantive, circumstantial evidence, to have had Jacobite leanings, and this is especially true of the families that remained in, or near, Kinnettles and Glamis.

It must be borne in mind, however, that William Skirling, burgess of Dundee -- the William recorded on this stone as a child, was on the other side of the issue.  His son Cumberland was baptised in 1746, with the Duke of Cumberland as his baptismal witness. (Dundee OPR 282/00/04).

Finally, the SGS says there were two cherubs and a shield between Agnes and Rob, except, on looking at digital photos of the stone,  these are clearly in the centre  - above the word "Skirling". Their existence can be made out (one to the right of the shield, the other to the left)  but the shield is unclear.  SOMEWHERE near that shield will be the date, and it would be most interesting to discover if there was anything on the shield.

The date on the stone will likely be near the shield in the middle, and if something can be done for that Latin text, it would be worth looking again.