Ned Heite asked:
>Are there other instances of cemeteries being used by successor
>congregations on the same church site?  It might be interesting to
>see if burial customs changed.


Jim Gibb and I did survey of a cemetery that was not quite part of a
succession of churches on the same site, but was more interestingly one of
a series of cemeteries in a sequence of movement of a single
congregation.  What was incredibly unique was the manner of marking the
graves.  Jim might better answer this as he has the data, and we have
always said we would publish it (maybe he has already???)

The Dennis cemetery, in Shady Side, Anne Arundel County, MD contains no
less than 86 graves and historical research indicated that there was a
small church adjacent.  Records show that the Dennis family were Free
Blacks as far back as the 1820s, and clearly more well-off than the other
blacks in the area, but there are at least four other surnames on stones or
markers, indicating that it was used as a community or congregational cemetery.

Most graves were marked by sunken areas in general rows, and of the 13
stones the dates ranged from 1873 to 1895.  Several plank markers were
present in 1994 and some had initials still visibleindicating at least 20th
century use of the cemetery.

What was most interesting in the Dennis Cemetery were the several graves
marked by small wooden posts on either end of the grave, at head and
foot.  These posts, presumably of cedar or locust were of the whole round
of the post, or were split as if from a fence post or rail.  Some were
round posts which had been flattened on a side as for a name tag or other
identifier.  One had a plank of standard dimensional lumber nailed to it
with a 10d wire nail, also indicating 20th century placement.

One of the three graves in the nearby "Jenifer" Cemetery, where Joseph
Jenifer Jr, died 1810, is buried, had no stone but was marked by small
wooden stubs still present in the ground.  I imagine this was similar, but
much earlier than the Dennis Cemetery noted above.

After our survey and report we found that the congregation had moved at
least twice since this site.  I was able to visit an intermediate cemetery
as well as the congretagion's present cemetery and talk with the minister
and several members of the congregation about the old cemetery.  They did
not know much about the old cemetery in our study area, but knew that it
was of their people.

In visiting these other cemeteries of this congregation, it was remarkable
to not only see many of the same names on the markers, but also see the
number of graves that are still marked by posts stuck at the head and foot
of the grave.  In the active cemetery these posts were clearly placed on
even the most recent graves, in some cases even when tombstones and other
markers were present.  When I asked members of the congregation about why
they placed and then left posts at the graves, even when the stones were
set, the general response was something to the effect of "I don't know, we
always do that, I guess."

I looked for other cemeteries in that section of the state that had similar
uses of posts but I was unable to find a single one.  I did not do an
exhaustive or systematic search, but in my wanderings I checked well over a
hundred cemeteries.

This does not directly address Ned's comments and question, but I saw these
cemeteries as wonderfully clear evidence that continuity of burial pattern
can continue even if the cemetery and church site are abandoned and the
congregation moves.  I am certain that people came back to visit the old
burials, but to have so strictly carried the pattern to the new cemetery,
and then to not really know why they did it is, in my mind, unique.

         Dan W.