Begin New Search
Refine Last Search
Cemetery Lookup
Add Burial Records
Help with Find A Grave

Top Contributors
Success Stories
Community Forums
Find A Grave Store

Log In
RosalieAnn (#46559872)
 member for 13 years, 10 months, 23 days
[Add to MyFriends]
Bio and Links
Bio Photo * Born : Baltimore MD - 1937
* Married 1959 to my first and only husband
* Four children 1961 - 1971
* Retired Feb 2000

* First grandchild born in 1980.
* Youngest grandchild of 11 born in 2006.
* First great grandchild born 2012

* Father died 1973
* Grandson died 1994.
* Mother died 2006

I am working on finding the graves of the descendants of Anthony Yerkes which are listed in the "Chronicles of the Yerkes Family With Notes On The Leech And Rutter Families" by Josiah Granville Leach published in 1904, and on finding the graves of those people mentioned in "Sketches of William Hicks, Abner Hicks, Jasper Hicks, George Harris, James Crews, John Earl and something of their Descendants With Comparisons of Present Conditions of Living With Those of Sixty Years Ago" by Titus Thurston Hicks, printed in 1926 and reprinted in 1954. I have virtual cemeteries for those that I have found.

Posting photos on FindAGrave does not automatically put them in the public domain. Please ask if you want to use any photos of mine and tell me what you want them for. My email is rafbeas at aol. If I find my photos used without my permission, I will take all necessary steps to redress the situation.

Do not email transfer requests. Use the Edit tab on the memorial. Transfers outside Find A Grave guidelines will be assessed on a case by case basis. Please tell me your specific relationship to the deceased and explain what you have to contribute to the memorial that I can't add. I am glad to add any links (except to memorials with no burial location) or bio information that you send. I do not add links to memorials where the final disposition has not been determined. Do not put obituaries or other information on the deceased in a flower.

 Contact: Leave Public Message
Contributions to
Find A Grave
 • 22,542 Memorials Added
 • 22,395 Memorials Managed
 • 31 Memorials/Week
 • 27,603 Photos
 • 66 Photo Requests
 • 48 Volunteer Photos Taken
 • 441 Virtual Flowers
 • 11 Virtual Cemeteries
 • 15 Famous Bios
 • 148 Fame Ratings
 • 137 Sponsorships
 • 66 Friends
Search Contributor's Records

First NameLast Name

Virtual Cemeteries
1- RosalieAnn's maternal ... (64)
1- RosalieAnn's paternal ... (53)
2 Anthony Yerkes descenda... (305)
2 Sketches by T.T. Hicks (382)
Barrington-Diggs (38)
Beasley, Johnston, Hewett... (80)
Famous Bios & Photos (57)
Interesting Graves (28)
MadameB, et al plopped (13)
No Burial Site Memorials (21)
[View all Virtual Cemeteries...]
Find A Grave Friends
Adrienne, AMC, AMC, aspring, Barbara Blanke..., Bernadette, Bette, Betty L. Schmid..., Bradley Guy, Cate, Claire Ehrhart ..., countedx58, David Roberts, Dennis Hubscher, Dorothy Little, Emerald999, eobfindagrave, Euell Nielsen, Faith, Find A Grave, [View all Find A Grave Friends...]
Messages left for RosalieAnn (89)[Leave Message]
Added by cchldrss on Oct 24, 2016 7:10 PM
Judith Lee Howard Shea
RE: Purpose of findaGrave
Just read what you wrote, again, to see if I could gain more insight into what Find-a-Grave is for. Here's a quote from you:
"The purpose of findagrave is to document what is in cemeteries. Originally there were three goals - document cemeteries was the first one, and honoring the dead was another one. But people were putting the memorializing thing above the goal of documenting cemeteries so they had to rewrite the purpose to emphasize the FINDING of the graves. The goal section now says

"Find a Grave's mission is to find, record and present final disposition information"

"Memorial contributions to Find A Grave must fulfill that mission - registration of the final disposition. If the memorial contribution corresponds with only the main mission, then the memorial fulfills its purpose as part of Find A Grave's mission."

"Find A Grave is a resource for anyone in finding the final disposition of family, friends,..._

FindAgrave is not a genealogy website."

So, First: "The purpose of findagrave is to document what is in cemeteries." does not state a purpose in doing so. "Of course" is my thought in response to this sentence. Then, "for what?"

Second: "Honoring the dead was another one."
This is definitely in the nature of a "purpose." But to me it's a very vague one. Perhaps one would look at "why honor the dead?" Well, if you believe in an afterlife, as I do, then the dead may appreciate being honored. I usually imagine the soul, "up there" or "over there" appreciating getting their flowers and sentiment. So is that why we "honor the dead" by having Find-a-Grave?

And what about those people that are always saying "Rest In Peace," do they imagine the dead being comforted as they are resting in peace, by having a photo of their gravestone on the internet? with their name? spelled exactly as it is on the stone? Does it matter to them? Well, now I'm going a bit out on a limb in my imagination.

About Honoring the dead. A great many people no longer believe in an afterlife, so for them, what is honoring the dead for? The dead? or for the living, to remember and honor the dead. That leads back to relatives looking for graves. Now, relatives looking for graves or ancestors does not necessarily signal "Genealogy." Even without constructing a Family Tree, those relative browsing around Find-a-Grave might well want to know a little more about Capt Smith or Honorable Benjamin, so the biographical information could be seen to be useful in other than a genealogical sense. So, honoring the dead, basically seems to ME to be done for the sake of the living, who remember, or who feel connected with, the deceased family member or ancestor.

So now third: You said "People were putting the memorializing thing above the goal of documenting cemeteries so they had to rewrite the purpose to emphasize the FINDING of the graves. The goal section now says

"Find a Grave's mission is to find, record and present final disposition information"

What problem occurred because people were "putting the memorializing thing above the goal of documenting cemeteries" and why did rewriting the purpose of FINDING the graves help?

That's a question for you. I don't intuit an answer to it.

So you really gave me 2 reasons for documenting graves. 1. Documenting what is in cemeteries. But oops—that doesn't say why. Okay, 2. Honoring the dead. Interesting, and I had my little thought discussion with myself about that. Is it FOR the dead, with where their souls are now? OR is it for the living? in which case, the "memorializing thing" activity starts.

You didn't go on to give me any further reasons that the Find-a-Grave site exists. You describe the task in detail, but not its purpose. So I would still like to have you address that, if you are not too tired.

I sense that somewhere along the way, whether it was within the Find-a-Grave community, or in your own sense of things, a conflict seemed to take place between the "genealogical reason" for Finding and Documenting people's graves. and the - um - Just doing it accurately, for no reason, except just to have them recorded. No reason to think about why.

I'm a philosopher, I've been mulling over the human condition for much of my life. I'm 75 y.o.
Basically, the only reason to have cemeteries is for the living. All kinds of deep emotional reasons that go into the very heart of us, all of us, who know we are going to die someday and who have lost loved ones to death. And who know that we have, on this earth, come a long long way. Even if one doesn't believe in evolution (which I can hardly believe that some people don't) we still know that we got here through people and people and people going back through the years, the eons. It fascinates us. Who WERE these people whose existence led to mine? We get tearful, we get emotional, we find so much meaning in getting to know our ancestors.

There's no other reason to have a cemetery than for the living. Whether you are making a family tree or not, the graves are there for US to see, while we live — to learn from, to send love to those who came before.

If people didn't care about these things, in order to get rid of the decaying bodies, we could just dump them into large holes—save them up every few days, get a backhoe, well you get the idea. Like they used to do with genocide. "Your race," or "your religion means nothing" We shoot you and you fall backward into that ditch and we cover you up. You have no meaning, that's why we are killing you. And there won't be any marker above where we cover you up. You were nothing and you are nothing.

But we are not like that about our dead— yes, we honor our dead, for ourselves, the living.

I see no conflict in being completely accurate with what is written on the gravestone and what it looks like in the picture and genealogy. ( And the dates that go on the memorial do not have to be on the stone but they have to be accurate.)

I don't see where there's a conflict between Genealogy and Accurate Documentation as Find-a-Grave purpose and goals, UNLESS people are trying to distort what the gravestone looked like or put false information into the memorial.

Were people doing that? Is that what the problem was that caused you to feel that there was a conflict that you must uphold one side of? And that I was on the other side?

I thought about this, and this is what I came up with— if the Find-a-Grave search engine were more sophisticated, and "Mallewille" would come up with all "Malleville" graves, then I would have had no problem with "Mallewille" being the name for the memorial.

You know that there are search engines like that. Google will say "Did you mean "Mallewille"? and you get a chance to view names like the one you want but are being spelled different ways. These search engines take one's own mis-typing and misspelling into account, too. The Find-a-Grave search engines have a long way to go, as you know. My cousins couldn't even find Thomas, spelling his name correctly etc. Sometimes I'm putting in the ancestor's name and everything correct the dates, too, and it says, "Nope" I'll try one more thing and boom, there's the memorial link.

So given that if the memorial were to going to be called "Mallewille" that no one would ever find it except by going grave by grave through the cemeteries in the Virgin Islands, and given that the purpose of Find-a-Grave IS a human thing, it IS about PEOPLE finding deceased people that are meaningful to them, then I say that in this case, it was important to have the name as it has always been spelled.

I'm not saying that Find-a-Grave would never be used for some kind of survey or record keeping—but that STILL is about people. People recording people, for people to study or keep track of, to study sociologically or statistically.

I think you might consider that there should be no conflict between the genealogical use of Find-a-Grave and the Accurate Recording aspect of it. We genealogists WANT everything as accurate as possible. I'm always writing to people on Ancestry. Today I wrote to someone letting them know that the name is not "Ann" but "Anna." It had been wrong on Find-a-Grave and then it gets into the tree websites. Right on the stone it says "Sarah Anna" and she writes it up as Sarah "Ann." One of the most prominent contributors. Well, we all make mistakes, of course. I think the "Mallewille" case is unusual. Perhaps it happens more often in places where languages mix. I asked you at the time, what do you do when the inscription is in Greek? or Arabic? The "Mallewille" thing is more a case of that. They spoke Danish, French and Dutch and Creole and all kinds of languages back then in the Danish West Indies. Who knows what the carver spoke or thought he was writing?

How to be strict but flexible? That's the ticket.
Thought, reasoning. I gave you all kinds of reasons that made sense, but there was like a wall inside you that you did not allow to be penetrated.

So I still would like to know what "they" told you about why you could change it. And what you think about why Find-a-Grave really exists, its purpose.
Added by Judith Lee Howard Shea on Oct 24, 2016 6:51 PM
Judith Lee Howard Shea
RE: in whatever state they are
Your "whatever state the grave is in" statement I am in complete agreement with.

Sometimes I have a problem with a photographer not brushing off a little debris from trees and such before photographing a flat stone, so that part of the transcription can't be seen. Loose debris, of course, you would not consider part of the "state of the grave," I would think.

I agree that the purpose of photographing grave sites is to record accurately what is there. It is not to make them look pretty. And it doesn't matter if some of the people on the stone are still living. This is not

Note: As I figure this out, I think it's important for me to tell you what my thoughts about your thoughts are.

I'll go back and read the longer message you sent, in which you said a lot. That will take longer to absorb. I, myself, am basically a follower of rules.
I like to know what the rules are and I like to follow them and I don't like it when other people don't.

However, like any philosopher, and any daughter of the American Revolution, I can have a serious problem with rules when they are not fair, when they are destructive, when they are made without enough thought and do not cover all the problems that could arise etc.

Humans are fond of making rules and many times rules get made that are not for the best. That is why our country is one of laws and justice, with courts and hearings. (Some of my ancestors were judges, I have found out. More of them were clergymen. So I have "rightness" in my genes.)

Unquestioning obedience to all laws without thought can sometimes lead to great harm, as you must know.

I sent you a message about the name "Brinsmade" etc. and how I understand that with this name, and names like this with varied spelling need to be on F-a-G as on the stone. Another example—I am descended from a long line of Allens. It was variously spelled "Allen" and "Allyn" and "Alyn" So in that case, whatever winds up on the stone would be the name that memorial goes under. People will learn to search various spellings when their ancestor's names were spelled various ways. Some of the very old stones have the name in ways I never thought the name would be spelled. I haven't taken the time to notice how that's dealt with, but from now on I shall be vigilant! I tend to report problems when I see them so that they can be made right.

I really do understand your point of view regarding keeping Thomas's name "Mallewille." But it wasn't the way it was ever spelled — unlike the examples I have cited, as of Brinsmaid, or Allyn.
I don't understand how or why it was written that way. And maybe, in the olde days, everyone would know that it was another way of writing "v" and would "search" under that spelling, too, if they had computers.

What did the folks you consulted on Find-a-Grave with say about the spelling of the name on the stone being not the way it was ever spelled and my desire to have it be the way it was, on the memorial? (It is not only so people can find it, but it is historically accurate.)

Did they say "Just let the hysterical bitch have what she wants?" Or did they shed any light on what to do when this kind of case comes up?


Added by Judith Lee Howard Shea on Oct 24, 2016 12:45 PM
I personally have relatively recent ancestors whose graves are not in a named cemetery with gravestones and in a known cemetery with no gravestone.
I have changed the memorials for Arthur Gray and Mary Gray to non-cemetery burial, which is most likely the case. Arthur Gray died in 1809 when the Chenango area was being settled and was likely buried on his property. Mary died in 1838, according to son Daniel Gray's memorial. Since she never remarried then she is likely buried beside her late husband Arthur. Which of the following would you prefer? 1) Find A Grave linking with the changed info I entered or 2) putting the link in the bios to the child's grave.
Added by cchldrss on Oct 24, 2016 11:10 AM
Judith Lee Howard Shea
RE: NAMe corrections
I just got this email, which you had sent previously, and here you address not caring whether people find the graves of their relatives.

I wrote back just now and asked you, well, what is Find a Grave for, if not to help people find their deceased relatives' graves?

In this email, already written, you have provided an answer, which is:

"I do the work I do so that the dead are 'found' in whatever state they are."

But I still don't understand what your thought is about this.

• WHO do you imagine is finding these "dead?"

• When and why are they being looked for, are you thinking?

• What do you mean, "whatever state they are in?" (since we do not actually see the dead person.)

I am very interested in hearing what you will tell me about this! (Find-a-Grave is relatively new to me and I always thought I understood what its purpose is.)
Added by Judith Lee Howard Shea on Oct 24, 2016 3:55 AM
Judith Lee Howard Shea
RE: Transfer
I am amazed to hear you say "but I do NOT regard FindAGrave as a genealogy site, so my goal is not and never has been for other people to find their relatives. That is of no concern to me at all."

For people to find their deceased ancestors and relatives it WHAT Find-a-Grave is For!! That's why it's called FIND a grave! For what other reason would people want to find graves if not for some reason, such as… Genealogy? (historical people would be an exception, but there are very few of those.)

You state that you DID ask other people their opinion and that's why you finally changed the name. If you had asked those people to begin with, you would not have had to go through all that angst. I was only asking for what was right, and your misunderstanding of what the rules are for was what caused your angst. It's not my fault that you don't understand, and you should have asked for advice at the outset.

I never want to cause someone else angst and suffering. I'm sure you don't, either, but you did cause me quite a bit of distress.

Needing to be "right" is one of the causes of human suffering. My goal was for others to be able to find their relative, not to be "right." Your goal was to be "right." You THOUGHT that my goal was to be "right" ("the way she thinks it should be.") No, it was to help others.

Ways that are "right just because" and cause suffering need to be re-examined.

What do YOU think the website Find-a-Grave is for, if not for people to find their relatives? It can't be for the people who are buried to find themselves, so what else is "finding a grave" for?
Added by Judith Lee Howard Shea on Oct 24, 2016 3:39 AM
RE: Benj Dean family
on its way
Added by cchldrss on Oct 23, 2016 6:59 PM
RE: People with unknown grave locations
People from that time period have long since had their graves destroyed except in rare cases. Personally, I think the bios properly constructed and documented are far superior to the trees on Check mine out.
Added by cchldrss on Oct 23, 2016 6:50 PM
RE: Benj Dean family
I have data which links two of your memorials in that cemetery.

New Jersey Marriages, 1684-1895

Report issue

Name: Benjamin Dean
Spouse: Euphemia Gray
Marriage Date: 8 Jun 1800
County: Hunterdon
State: NJ


Added by cchldrss on Oct 23, 2016 5:19 PM
Grave Site
According to a letter, date 26 September 1939, from Dr. Rubino of the Federal Security Agency, US Public Health Service, my grandfather was buried in grave # 5120 ( a plot set aside for seaman) on Sept. 16, 1939. Do you have any other information. Thank you for your help.
Added by Libby on Oct 23, 2016 1:52 PM
[View all messages...]

Privacy Statement and Terms of Service UPDATED