Well, it *is* Easter, after all! (g) The actual question is -- does anyone know if the physical size of a grave has changed much over the past 150 years? I'm walking a cemetery, and there are places in it where I KNOW there should be graves, but there are no markers. The empty place is too big to be two graves, but not quite big enough for three modern graves. So, I was wondering ... Cheryl

Is it possible that you're in a section that was reserved for infant burials? "Singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message news:3C9FD642.E0632442@erols.com... > Well, it *is* Easter, after all! (g) > > The actual question is -- does anyone know if the physical size > of a grave has changed much over the past 150 years? > > I'm walking a cemetery, and there are places in it where I KNOW > there should be graves, but there are no markers. The empty > place is too big to be two graves, but not quite big enough for > three modern graves. So, I was wondering ... > > Cheryl

Thanks for the thought, but no; this is a country cemetery, and the infants are interspersed. Cheryl Max Schneider wrote: > > Is it possible that you're in a section that was reserved for infant > burials? > > "Singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message > news:3C9FD642.E0632442@erols.com... > > Well, it *is* Easter, after all! (g) > > > > The actual question is -- does anyone know if the physical size > > of a grave has changed much over the past 150 years? > > > > I'm walking a cemetery, and there are places in it where I KNOW > > there should be graves, but there are no markers. The empty > > place is too big to be two graves, but not quite big enough for > > three modern graves. So, I was wondering ... > > > > Cheryl

On Mon, 25 Mar 2002 21:00:34 -0500, Singhals wrote: > Well, it *is* Easter, after all! (g) > > The actual question is -- does anyone know if the physical size of a > grave has changed much over the past 150 years? > > I'm walking a cemetery, and there are places in it where I KNOW there > should be graves, but there are no markers. The empty place is too big > to be two graves, but not quite big enough for three modern graves. So, > I was wondering ... > > Cheryl Graves sold in Calvary Cemetery in Queens, NY City, in the 1870s are described on the deeds as being 2 ft x 8 ft. Graves sold in St Peter's Cemetery in Staten Island, NY, in the late 1980s are described on the deeds as being 3 ft x 9 ft. The difference may be that many, if not, most cemeteries in recent years require the use of concrete grave liners. This was not true in 1870 in Calvary Cemetery - there are 9 burials in a single grave there from one branch of my family.

If the cemetery is still in use, it is possible that some of the graves have been moved. As an example, my father had his parents' graves relocated to another, new part of the cemetery where they were buried, so that there would be space for additional family members to be buried next to them. This created a new "family plot", but left 2 unused grave spaces back in the old part of the cemetery. Bob Singhals <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message news:<3C9FD642.E0632442@erols.com>... > Well, it *is* Easter, after all! (g) > > The actual question is -- does anyone know if the physical size > of a grave has changed much over the past 150 years? > > I'm walking a cemetery, and there are places in it where I KNOW > there should be graves, but there are no markers. The empty > place is too big to be two graves, but not quite big enough for > three modern graves. So, I was wondering ... > > Cheryl

Cheryl....... My sister and I decided to put our mother's name on her parent's tombstone, along with her brother who died in 1960. We were rather 'taken aback' to find that no one (meaning my mother and grandmother) had even put a marker on my uncle's grave!! And there were a few unmarked ones to the left of his. We had a diagram from the cemetery people and eventually found the spot........but could this be your same situation? They are now both engraved on their parents' tombstone, but neither coffin or cremation urn is there.......not important to us. Simply having their names there to be seen for future generations was enough. As a side topic......where will people look in future generations, if things go on as they are now doing. In both my family and my husband's anyway. No one is buried anywhere......cremation and scattering of ashes in most cases. This is why we made sure there was a tombstone engraving for all of them.......it certainly is not like the old days!! Last summer, I stood there in absolute awe, looking at my (scottish) PEI ancestors' tombstones from 1820. We had a great time, finding obscure old graveyards in Prince Edward Island where there would be at least two tombstones of one line or another. Anyone else seeing this as the way burials are going? Is it the high cost of funerals? In our case, it was not that.......Dad just wanted his ashes scattered in PEI at his favourite old fishing hole. Yet my neighbour has a 'family plot' nearby.......different outlooks? Be interested to hear any comments. Heather > Singhals <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message news:<3C9FD642.E0632442@erols.com>... > > Well, it *is* Easter, after all! (g) > > > > The actual question is -- does anyone know if the physical size > > of a grave has changed much over the past 150 years? > > > > I'm walking a cemetery, and there are places in it where I KNOW > > there should be graves, but there are no markers. The empty > > place is too big to be two graves, but not quite big enough for > > three modern graves. So, I was wondering ... > > > > Cheryl

Cheryl, I ran across the same problem in my search in the past. It turned out that the gravesite was used but no marker was placed for various reasons. You have few choices if you have this condition. One: probe the grave to sound for a coffin or box, two: you can exhume but is extremely difficult and expensive. One superintendent actually tried dowsing with metal rods to determine if any remains were present. His observation was that it works if enough metal was present to respond to a magnetic field. I know this doesnt directly respond to your question but I offer it as an aid if your basic problem is the same as mine was. EB "Singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message news:3C9FD642.E0632442@erols.com... > Well, it *is* Easter, after all! (g) > > The actual question is -- does anyone know if the physical size > of a grave has changed much over the past 150 years? > > I'm walking a cemetery, and there are places in it where I KNOW > there should be graves, but there are no markers. The empty > place is too big to be two graves, but not quite big enough for > three modern graves. So, I was wondering ... > > Cheryl

I've been in cemeteries where the small headstones are sunk down in the ground and even had grass growing over. You need to poke a little something in the ground to see if you hit something. Or is that rude? The Cranky Genee On Mon, 25 Mar 2002 21:00:34 -0500, Singhals <singhals@erols.com> wrote: >Well, it *is* Easter, after all! (g) > >The actual question is -- does anyone know if the physical size >of a grave has changed much over the past 150 years? > >I'm walking a cemetery, and there are places in it where I KNOW >there should be graves, but there are no markers. The empty >place is too big to be two graves, but not quite big enough for >three modern graves. So, I was wondering ... > >Cheryl

I belong to our local historic society's cemetery crew. During the spring and fall we make the rounds of the local abandoned cemeteries to do clean-up and restoration. We use "headless" golfclubs to poke for gravestones. One member really has the touch. She finds gravestones that have been completely buried for years. Leslie Genee wrote: > I've been in cemeteries where the small headstones are sunk down in > the ground and even had grass growing over. You need to poke a little > something in the ground to see if you hit something. Or is that rude? > > The Cranky Genee > > On Mon, 25 Mar 2002 21:00:34 -0500, Singhals <singhals@erols.com> > wrote: > > >Well, it *is* Easter, after all! (g) > > > >The actual question is -- does anyone know if the physical size > >of a grave has changed much over the past 150 years? > > > >I'm walking a cemetery, and there are places in it where I KNOW > >there should be graves, but there are no markers. The empty > >place is too big to be two graves, but not quite big enough for > >three modern graves. So, I was wondering ... > > > >Cheryl

Several years ago we went up to Chama, NM (pop 1200) in northern NM hoping to find the gravesite of an ancestor who died there. Finally found the cemetery, 5 miles from town, on dirt road, and found a decimated graveyard full of tumbweeds and thorny locust trees. The gravesites were well marked with little weathered wooden fences, rock piles, etc. The "headstones" were weathered wooden crosses, with unreadable engravings or little paper markers with names written on by pencil. Nothing readable, even if current year's plantings. It was a memorable visit, but fruitless. Don leslie wrote: > > I belong to our local historic society's cemetery crew. > During the spring and fall we make the rounds of the > local abandoned cemeteries to do clean-up and > restoration. > > We use "headless" golfclubs to poke for gravestones. > One member really has the touch. She finds gravestones > that have been completely buried for years. > > Leslie > > Genee wrote: > > > I've been in cemeteries where the small headstones are sunk down in > > the ground and even had grass growing over. You need to poke a little > > something in the ground to see if you hit something. Or is that rude? > > > > The Cranky Genee > > > > On Mon, 25 Mar 2002 21:00:34 -0500, Singhals <singhals@erols.com> > > wrote: > > > > >Well, it *is* Easter, after all! (g) > > > > > >The actual question is -- does anyone know if the physical size > > >of a grave has changed much over the past 150 years? > > > > > >I'm walking a cemetery, and there are places in it where I KNOW > > >there should be graves, but there are no markers. The empty > > >place is too big to be two graves, but not quite big enough for > > >three modern graves. So, I was wondering ... > > > > > >Cheryl -- ~~~~~ Visit our NICKELL, GAUNCE, MOOTY genealogy Web Page http://nickell.tierranet.com ~~~~~

The Santa Fe, NM National Cemetery has changed specifications in the past "n" years. They are running out of room and changed over from vertical headstones to flat because it saved space. They didn't explain but I heard it had to do with the underground footing. They were also considering VERTICAL burials to saved considerable space. The New Mexico National Guard was one of the first called up after Pearl Harbor, and, of course they were some of the first into the Philippines, etc. They suffered many casualties resulting in a very large National Cemetery for a town of 10,000 in 194x. The SF National is sandwiched in between large Texas ranchetts and downtown so there's not much room to grow, that's why the space saving considerations. Don Singhals wrote: > > Well, it *is* Easter, after all! (g) > > The actual question is -- does anyone know if the physical size > of a grave has changed much over the past 150 years? > > I'm walking a cemetery, and there are places in it where I KNOW > there should be graves, but there are no markers. The empty > place is too big to be two graves, but not quite big enough for > three modern graves. So, I was wondering ... > > Cheryl -- ~~~~~ Visit our NICKELL, GAUNCE, MOOTY genealogy Web Page http://nickell.tierranet.com ~~~~~