Ernie, Find original stones all the time...just found one( 4 marble fragments with fist name and the first letter of the surname) this week in the farm fence. A granite replacement stone is there so the fragments will be documented,photographed and then buried behind the stone. The husband's stone is also there in poor condition, but still able to go back up...so a slotted base will go in and his stone will be put in beside the granite stone. If at all possible I try to put up the marble stone....they just have a lot more character than a modern slant granite stone. Mark Original Message: ----------------- From: Ernie & Connie Lasley [email protected] Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 18:47:34 -0500 To: [email protected] 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_fiel d.htm 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 [email protected] or to [email protected] (for DIGEST version) -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .