The dates are uncertain and both might be up to two years later than shown above.
The inscription is only partially readable. The name is clear: Emanuel Solomon of Canterbury. This is the only part of the inscription in English which indicates that it is an early headstone. The remaining Hebrew inscription is very worn, apart from the conventional last line, ת נ צ ב ה, ‘May his soul be bound up in the bond of eternal life’ .
Above this, the letters are probably בו לא שנים הלך - he walked on it for 31 years. But the key piece of information, the year of death, is not readable.
No Emanuel Solomon died in Bath or the surrounding area after death certificates were introduced in England on 1 July 1837. So he must have died before this date, and after April 1812 when the Burial Ground was consecrated.
The Canterbury synagogue records for marriages and births date from 1831. There are two relevant records for Emanuel Solomon which would fit with his likely age at death as 31: a son born 22 February 1831, who dies after 8 days, father Emanuel Solomon, and a son Solomon Solomon born 22 June 1832, father Emanuel, mother Hannah.
Hannah Solomon, aged 40, is listed in the 1841 census living in Canterbury with her two daughters born in 1827 and 1830, and her son Solomon Solomon aged nine which is consistent with the above synagogue records. This, the first census, did not record marital status. But by the 1851 census Hannah is recorded as a widow.
So this indicates that Emanuel died between 22 June 1832 when his son was born and before the 1841 census. The likely date of death can be narrowed down further as the Canterbury Chronicle of 13 January 1935, includes a letter from Emanuel Solomon of Canterbury concerning his wife Hannah’s successful treatment by a surgeon. There are no record as to his occupation but Emanuel had enough money to pay for a surgeon to treat his wife.
If this is right man, the Emanuel Solomon buried in Bath died between 14 January 1835 when he wrote to the local paper and before 1 July 1837 when death certificates were introduced.
However, why he was in Bath is a mystery. It is a long way from Canterbury so he must either have been visiting family or was travelling for his work. His occupation is unknown and no familial connection with the Solomon families later living in Bath has been established.