Yes I have found a few stones that were hand carved.
Even made a pages to show folks.
I'm not a great webpage designer.
Hopefully it will gets the idea across to someone.
One more thing to remember.. Sure is a bunch to learn.
;-)
LAC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernie & Connie Lasley" <elasley(a)spamcop.net>
To: <INPCRP-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 6:47 PM
Subject: Re: [INPCRP] Routh Cemetery -Left over pieces
If there are no more possibilities of finding additional stones, then
I
would do like you suggested and set them in a base in the row near where
they were found. They can also be set temporarily as you suggested in
case a matching headstone is found later. I would NEVER bury a footstone
behind a headstone that it did not match. I agree on setting fragments
in
a slotted base also. Nothing should be discarded or buried unless it is
identified. Even stones or larger rocks should not be discarded, they may
be "fieldstones" marking the grave of someone that could not afford a
marker. We had a large stone like that in Gibson County, a closer
inspection revealed the initials "K F" roughly carved on it. Turns out it
marked the grave of Keen Field, an immigrant pioneer who died in 1815.
His
descendants had a stone made in the style of other headstones in the
cemetery and set it beside the original stone. See:
http://www.rootsquest.com/~jmurphy/gibson/gibcem/wr_field-morrison/keen_f...
Wondering, have you ever discovered fragments of a stone that was
replaced? I found fragments of a Hindostan Whetstone gravestone that
looked like it had been hit in the center with a sledge hammer and
shattered. After many hours of careful digging with a small trowel, a
spatula and brushes, I recovered enough of it to fit the fragments
together
good enough to read the information, only to discover they were buried
directly over a grave that had a marble headstone with the same name and
dates. Apparently 75 - 100 years ago the stone was replaced for some
reason with the marble stone, and buried behind it. I put it back where
it was.
Ernie
At 05:42 PM 10/24/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>I understand Ernie...I thought that there were no more possibilities of
>finding addditional headstones. So if that is the case then what
>headstone
>would you bury the footstones behind if no matched are found? My idea
>would
>be put up the footstones as some type of memorial, and if the headstone
>is
>found later then dig out the footstone and base and move it to the
>appropriate headstone.
>
>The headstone fragments that are not able to be set vertically will be
>tough decisions. I have set headstone fragments in slotted bases where
>only
>25% of the stone remains. I feel it still is better than burying the
>stone.
>
>I never consider the plight of the lawn mower man..if we are restoring
>pioneer cemeteries to their original state then footstones should be
>placed
>just like they were originally.(just my opinion)
>
>Mark Davis
==== INPCRP Mailing List ====
To UNSUBSCRIBE, send message consisting only of
"UNSUBSCRIBE" to INPCRP-L-REQUEST(a)rootsweb.com
or to INPCRP-D-REQUEST(a)rootsweb.com (for DIGEST version)