The Stone Girl Of Eyeworth

Wolstan Dixie

Wolstan Dixie

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
100
OK - I won't give any more details other than the usual 'No one saw her' because I would like people to come to this fresh - but what is your opinion of this?

hounds2.jpg


hounds3.jpg
 
Hmm. Certainly looks strange. The figure almost looks like it is playing a harmonica - well, maybe that or taking a photo on a mobile.

I look forward to hearing some more info about it, and other people comments.

As a side issue, one of the blurry figures in the distance looks a little odd to me too. The one ringed below - though I am likely to be seeing oddness where there isn't any.

Screenshot_20240714_134624_Samsung Internet.jpg
 
Isn't it Eyeworth rather than Eyworth?
Just checking.
 
LymeswoldSnork said:
Why can't it just be a statue?
Click to expand...
Well or course it can be, and indeed it might be. Without some more details (like was - or is - there a statue like that positioned there?) I am assuming it is thought to be anomalous by whoever took the photo or other people who were present or who know that area.

And if it is just a statue, the slightly ethereal quality of the figure could just be due to lighting conditions.
 
A good one.

My first thought was pareidolia due to some cloth caught on that fence. Then I saw the enhanced image and thought maybe a statue has been left there...?

This looks a bit odd:

Screenshot 2024-07-14 at 15.15.43.jpg


What is going on on the right side of her body...?

Will say straight away that there is a definite resemblance to the iPhone ghost image app that allows you to add ghostly images to photographs.
 
Is this one of those places with two spellings?

Eyworth, Bedfordshire​


Historical Description​

Eyworth, a village and a parish in Beds, near the boundary with Cambridgeshire and Herts, 3 miles SE from Potton station on the L. & N.W.R., and 4 E by N of Biggleswade town. Post town, Sandy; money order and telegraph office, Potton. Acreage, 1254; population, 140. The living is a vicarage in the diocese of Ely; gross value, £87. The church is an ancient edifice of grey stone and cobble in the Early English style. It contains some monuments belonging to the family of the late Judge Anderson.

Yes:

Eyeworth is an Ancient Parish in the county of Bedfordshire.

Alternative names: Eyworth

Aha, Google Image Search comes up with the goods:

The Mysterious Stone Ghost Girl of Eyeworth Pond​


"A lady called Lisa was chatting with my partner, Nick. He told her I write about ghosts (and other strangeness, of course) and she was keen to share a story she had heard about as a child. Lisa had grown up in The New Forest and remembered visiting The Royal Oak pub in Fritham. On the pub wall, she recalled an old newspaper clipping about a phantom carriage and horses. It was driven by a spooky headless carriage driver. This must have been in the 1970s.

She recalled that the ghostly carriage had been sighted crossing a bridge in the village and then fallen over the side. She thought there had been a terrible accident at some point and this phantom horse and carriage has been seen recreating the sad event. This was all Lisa could remember, but she had mentioned it as she wondered if I had ever heard of this story. I hadn’t!

Nick took it upon himself to do a bit of internet digging during his break time from work. He found nothing about a phantom carriage. But he did find a bizarre photo and back story, also from the Fritham area, just down the road at Eyeworth Pond. This led me to the weird stone ghost girl image.

It was found on The New Forest Hounds website.

In the first photo, you can see the hunt approaching a wooden bridge at a trotting pace. It would have been only seconds before the second photo was taken. Horses moving at a ‘hunting trot’ pace cover the ground quickly. Have a look at what appears in the second photo.

hounds1.jpg


hounds2.jpg


Read on...


https://weird-wiltshire.co.uk/2021/11/20/the-mysterious-stone-ghost-girl-of-eyeworth-pond/
 

Attachments

  • hounds1.jpg
    hounds1.jpg
    95.6 KB · Views: 83
Last edited:
The photographer's statement:

Pat Hudson’s Backstory​


This was pulled straight from the New Forest Hounds website and is written by Pat Hudson, a member of the hunt.

“The photograph was taken at the end of a Saturday meet in January l987. The meet was at the gatehouse cottage by the entrance to Eyeworth Lodge. It was a frosty morning so the meet had been put back to midday. A friend was riding with me and as hounds left the meet, his wife ran over the bridge to take a photograph of hounds coming towards her. They went back to London where a few days later she had the film developed at a branch of Boots. The two photographs are shown just to indicate that the figure appeared within a few seconds, between the two photographs being taken. Who or what she is is open to discussion. All we are certain of is that there was no one there on the day that looked or was dressed remotely like her. The film has been looked at by an expert and it is definitely not a case of double exposure. Some people say she is holding a camera but, even if she is, how was it that no one saw a very grey person dressed in these clothes on the day?

I thought the photograph was interesting enough to take it to the local paper and they printed a story with the pictures which lead to an approach from an independent photographer who asked if he could buy the negatives from us. I suggested that we let him exploit the photographs, as he had the expertise, and we go 50%/ 50% on anything he made out of the story. He agreed to this and over the course of the next year a double page spread appeared in the Sunday Mirror, the National Examiner in the States ran a big story on it and a glossy Japanese magazine also picked it up – and that is but a few. I was sure we were going to enhance hunt funds by thousands of pounds and be able to do some much needed repairs to our property- if not a total rebuild! Alas, when I tried to get some of our 50%, the man had turned to straw – or maybe to a ghost!!”

https://weird-wiltshire.co.uk/2021/11/20/the-mysterious-stone-ghost-girl-of-eyeworth-pond/


Screenshot 2024-07-14 at 15.39.38.jpg


Screenshot from the first photo and I can see the outline of the 'ghost', can anyone else...?
 
Paul_Exeter said:
View attachment 79561

From the first photo. I can see the outline in the correct place but also that white in the bushes isn't in the second shot...?
Click to expand...
The 'obvious' speculative assumption to make is that the apparition is starting to form in the first photo and has solidified significantly a few seconds later by the time the second photo is taken.

Whatever the explanation, taken on face value, it is an intriguing pair of images. It's a shame one of the hounds isn't casting a wary look in her direction though!
 
From my understanding of the witness statement this is a candidate for the location today:

Screenshot 2024-07-14 at 16.10.56.jpg



Google "Eyeworth Pond" and this is as close as Streetview gets. The scene has changed over the intervening nearly 40 years but the bridge is visible and a candidate for Eyeworth Lodge is just up to the left
 
One small observation : I looked at the 2 photos again, as in Paul’s post #9 above, this time on a larger screen. The lighting seems to differ between the two photos. In the second one, the one with the clear figure, there is a slightly more orange-y quality to the light, as if maybe the sun had come fully out between the taking of the photos. Whether that would have any bearing on something becoming more clearly defined, such as something like a piece of discarded clear polythene caught up in the undergrowth beside the road, which might have been less visible in the less intense light. Unlikely, I admit. Just a thought.
 
None of the horses or hounds are taking any notice. If there was something there I would have expected at least the leading horse to have shied or the hounds to have gone for a sniff. The hounds I can allow - they are working and they can be quite single minded on their way to draw but horses will take the hump about a tree stump being there that wasn't there yesterday, and at least turn to have a look.
 
CharmerKamelion said:
One small observation : I looked at the 2 photos again, as in Paul’s post #9 above, this time on a larger screen. The lighting seems to differ between the two photos. In the second one, the one with the clear figure, there is a slightly more orange-y quality to the light, as if maybe the sun had come fully out between the taking of the photos. Whether that would have any bearing on something becoming more clearly defined, such as something like a piece of discarded clear polythene caught up in the undergrowth beside the road, which might have been less visible in the less intense light. Unlikely, I admit. Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Th zoomed in image of the 'ghost ' appears colourised to me, I don't see that blue hue in the original.

So perhaps there is something caught in the bushes that has blown into view - cue pareidolia - then this has been photoshopped into the blue-tinged ghost woman image...? '
Screenshot 2024-07-14 at 18.54.40.jpg


If it is purely pareidolia then it would be one of the best ever examples.
 
Last edited:
Paul_Exeter said:
Th zoomed in image of the 'ghost ' appears colourised to me, I don't see that blue hue in the original.

So perhaps there is something caught in the bushes that has blown into view - cue pareidolia - then this has been photoshopped into the blue-tinged ghost woman image...? 'View attachment 79585

If it is purely pareidolia then it would be one of the best ever examples.
Click to expand...
Do we know if it was a windy day? Because it could have been a bit of cloth caught in the branches, blowing in the wind. So in the first shot it's half behind the branches, but billowing up in the second shot. Then someone has thought it looked a 'bit' like a girl and given it a tweak?
 
How I came across it - I was asked by 'Weird Wiltshire' to comment.

It was taken in 1987 - way before Photoshop.

Dogs - actually I think the 'before' photo does show at least one, and possibly two, dogs investigating her location.

Pat Hudson - I am in contact with her and she can add nothing extra to what we already know, please don't contact her, she must be very old.

The 'girl' - she obscures the background and is obscured by the bushe's branches, and is lit correctly - I definitely think that a solid 3D object was photographed. It was a cold January morning, it is not surprising 'she' would be wearing a heavy coat. I don't think 'her' waist is as small as it appears, the shadow of her arm is cast across her stomach - if you allow for this she becomes quite stout and her dress becomes less anachronistic.

Personally I think she is holding an Instamatic camera, and it has been suggested she was a hunt saboteur hiding in the bushes to photograph the hunt.
 
I'm thinking a piece of plastic or other rubbish caught on the branches, or tied there, and blowing about in the wind. It is a bridge, and floodwater often leaves plastic etc. tangled in the branches at the high water mark, although this does look very high.
 
Paul_Exeter said:
A good one.

My first thought was pareidolia due to some cloth caught on that fence. Then I saw the enhanced image and thought maybe a statue has been left there...?

This looks a bit odd:

View attachment 79555

What is going on on the right side of her body...?

Will say straight away that there is a definite resemblance to the iPhone ghost image app that allows you to add ghostly images to photographs.
Click to expand...
Does seem peculiar that what the girl appears to be holding is one of those slim cameras (Kodak and others) which were popular at the time. I had one. The lense in particular seems to be a standout feature. Strange.
 
I am really torn on this. I can 'see' the camera but I am struggling with the hunt saboteur angle, not least because the tend to operate in groups and also because the hunt are VERY alert to their activities and yet seem oblivious to her presence and also how does that explain the outline in the first photo...?

shopping.jpeg


https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/36499016...MIy4GkssSohwMVnZVQBh16mAE_EAQYBCABEgIhyPD_BwE

Another issue is that looking at photos of hunt saboteurs over the ages they have dressed 'rough and ready' for the outdoors and getting wet and muddy:

2_edited-2.jpg



https://www.huntsabs.org.uk/sabotage-the-history-of-hunt-saboteurs-association-is-out-now/

Maybe a slightly eccentric holidaymaker to hunt follower?
 
Last edited:
So it's someone walking into shot and taking photos of the hunt. Doesn't have to be a saboteur, just someone who likes taking photos of people on horseback. In the first picture she's behind the undergrowth, so can only see bits of coat etc, and in the second she's between branches and therefore more visible?
 
catseye said:
So it's someone walking into shot and taking photos of the hunt. Doesn't have to be a saboteur, just someone who likes taking photos of people on horseback. In the first picture she's behind the undergrowth, so can only see bits of coat etc, and in the second she's between branches and therefore more visible?
Click to expand...
That's just what I was about to post!

If the figure is a real solid person, she (I assume) does look odd in the context of the rest of the picture. Like a child or a doll. Maybe she is a bit further away than she seems to be. Light clothing and intense winter sunshine could account for the seeming 'radience' that adds to her ethereal appearance.

The limitations of photography back then might also play a part. I remember back in the day sometimes things closer to the edges of photos looking a bit less sharp than the stuff in the centre.

This might add weight to the idea that the odd looking white ectoplasm-y stuff seen the 'before' picture might be the lighter coloured patches on 2 or 3 of the hounds who are heading 'off piste'. They are moving quickly and their outlines are confused and their darker areas are blurry and less defined. There does definitively seem to be what looks like an erect tail visible near the white stuff in the 'before' photo.

Of course, if the girl is a ghost dressed in some sort of Elizabethan period clothes, one item that looks quite well defined is what looks like a muff - now, now - a hand-warming type thing, on the girl's right arm. The hole of the muff (oh dear) is visible, quite distinctly, if you want to interpret it as such.

That said, it is probably not a ghost. Just a really good example of how we can misinterpret an odd image - often quite readily.

That said - again - I would love to be wrong and remain to be persuaded!
 
Last edited:
catseye said:
So it's someone walking into shot and taking photos of the hunt. Doesn't have to be a saboteur, just someone who likes taking photos of people on horseback. In the first picture she's behind the undergrowth, so can only see bits of coat etc, and in the second she's between branches and therefore more visible?
Click to expand...
Seems rational but this appeared in the hunt magazine and there would have been plenty eyewitnesses to a woman all in white (including it would seem her face) taking that photo, so why did nobody come forward and let Pat know they had seen her?

Or are we dealing with another Solway Spaceman here i.e. the woman is over-exposed in the photo?

One thing of note is that you can see her feet (right foot in particular) and so she is taller than you would think at first glance. Bare lower leg and wearing some sort of plain shoe that look a bit like a clog...?

Then in the first image I see what could be a camera flash but also the clear outline of a figure, especially the top half and down the left hand side


Screenshot 2024-07-15 at 09.04.34.jpg


@CharmerKamelion Now I see the hound with its tail erect:


Screenshot 2024-07-15 at 09.08.54.jpg
 
Last edited:
Paul_Exeter said:
Seems rational but this appeared in the hunt magazine and there would have been plenty eyewitnesses to a woman all in white (including it would seem her face) taking that photo, so why did nobody come forward and let Pat know they had seen her?

Or are we dealing with another Solway Spaceman here i.e. the woman is over-exposed in the photo?

One thing of note is that you can see her feet (right foot in particular) and so she is taller than you would think at first glance. Bare lower leg and wearing some sort of plain shoe that look a bit like a clog...?

Then in the first image I see what could be a camera flash but also the clear outline of a figure, especially the top half and down the left hand side


View attachment 79615
Click to expand...
That picture does look to me very like one of the hounds. Blurry and indistinct due to lighting and the speed it is moving. The suggested erect tail (such as you would expect from a hunting hound) is visible at the top centre of your zoomed in image above the 'flash'.

The thing that looks like it could be a clog type shoe is also identifiable in the 'before' picture. Maybe the ghost materialised from her feet upwards? Maybe 'feet first' is a thing for ghosts?
 
Well it is certainly to ghosts what Jim Templeman's Solway photo is to UFOs, I expect Pat is glad she wasn't subjected to the same media attention (although I think Jim enjoyed it) or driven to the middle of the Forest by two "men in black" and left there...

I think it needs to be established if that original 'blown up' image from the article has been coloured to make the woman look more stone-like. I can't see that blue hue in the original. If it has been doctored then it would suggest to me that perhaps someone knew her real identity
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top