Stiffleaf's photos with the keyword: solly

tomb of the solly family, probably made for isaac solly +1802 rather than edward +1776 given the initials on the end of the sarcophagus. it is unsigned and may or may not be coade stone; other firms including one in mile end produced similar work. marks on the feet aided erection on site.

tomb of the solly family, probably made for isaac solly +1802 rather than edward +1776 given the initials on the end of the sarcophagus. it is unsigned and may or may not be coade stone; other firms including one in mile end produced similar work. marks on the feet aided erection on site.

tomb of the solly family, probably made for isaac solly +1802 rather than edward +1776 given the initials on the end of the sarcophagus. it is unsigned and may or may not be coade stone; other firms including one in mile end produced similar work. marks on the feet aided erection on site.

tomb of the solly family, probably made for isaac solly +1802 rather than edward +1776 given the initials on the end of the sarcophagus. it is unsigned and may or may not be coade stone; other firms including one in mile end produced similar work. marks on the feet aided erection on site.

heraldry on tomb of the solly family, probably made for isaac solly +1802 rather than edward +1776 given the initials on the end of the sarcophagus. it is unsigned and may or may not be coade stone; other firms including one in mile end produced similar work. marks on the feet aided erection on site. fish and crescent crest

tomb of the solly family, probably made for isaac solly +1802 rather than edward +1776 given the initials on the end of the sarcophagus. it is unsigned and may or may not be coade stone; other firms including one in mile end produced similar work. marks on the feet aided erection on site.

tomb of the solly family, probably made for isaac solly +1802 rather than edward +1776 given the initials on the end of the sarcophagus. it is unsigned and may or may not be coade stone; other firms including one in mile end produced similar work. marks on the feet aided erection on site.

tomb of the solly family, probably made for isaac solly +1802 rather than edward +1776 given the initials on the end of the sarcophagus. it is unsigned and may or may not be coade stone; other firms including one in mile end produced similar work. marks on the feet aided erection on site.

tomb of the solly family, probably made for isaac solly +1802 rather than edward +1776 given the initials on the end of the sarcophagus. it is unsigned and may or may not be coade stone; other firms including one in mile end produced similar work. marks on the feet aided erection on site.

tomb of the solly family, probably made for isaac solly +1802 rather than edward +1776 given the initials on the end of the sarcophagus. it is unsigned and may or may not be coade stone; other firms including one in mile end produced similar work. marks on the feet aided erection on site.

tomb of the solly family, probably made for isaac solly +1802 rather than edward +1776 given the initials on the end of the sarcophagus. it is unsigned and may or may not be coade stone; other firms including one in mile end produced similar work. marks on the feet aided erection on site.

tomb supposed to be primarily of edward solly, + 1776, and to be of coade stone. the earliest date now easily visible is isaac solly, 1802, and given the initials i.s. on the sarcophagus I suspect this to be its date. unusually, this is nowhere signed, and bears rather obvious marks to help it to be put together on site. could it be by a local firm rather than coade? there was one at mile end....

tomb supposed to be primarily of edward solly, + 1776, and to be of coade stone. the earliest date now easily visible is isaac solly, 1802, and given the initials i.s. on the sarcophagus I suspect this to be its date. unusually, this is nowhere signed, and bears rather obvious marks to help it to be put together on site. could it be by a local firm rather than coade? there was one at mile end....

tomb supposed to be primarily of edward solly, + 1776, and to be of coade stone. the earliest date now easily visible is isaac solly, 1802, and given the initials i.s. on the sarcophagus I suspect this to be its date. unusually, this is nowhere signed, and bears rather obvious marks to help it to be put together on site. could it be by a local firm rather than coade? there was one at mile end....

tomb supposed to be primarily of edward solly, + 1776, and to be of coade stone. the earliest date now easily visible is isaac solly, 1802, and given the initials i.s. on the sarcophagus I suspect this to be its date. unusually, this is nowhere signed, and bears rather obvious marks to help it to be put together on site. could it be by a local firm rather than coade? there was one at mile end....

tomb supposed to be primarily of edward solly, + 1776, and to be of coade stone. the earliest date now easily visible is isaac solly, 1802, and given the initials i.s. on the sarcophagus I suspect this to be its date. unusually, this is nowhere signed, and bears rather obvious marks to help it to be put together on site. could it be by a local firm rather than coade? there was one at mile end....