In message , John McCarthy <[log in to unmask]> writes
>--Boundary_(ID_9WzNaBS3f8Y2m/wXWF48BQ)
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>Damm spell checker - not "theory" but "they" !
And,  indeed, not 'manes of ships' but 'names of ships' in my original
email.

Thanks for your reply, John.

It makes much more sense for these stones to be on the quay rather than
on the ships (which is what I'd imagined at first).  Still doesn't make
a _terrible_ lot of sense.  The mails were for people _on_ the ship, not
at its destinations, I presume (otherwise you would put the name of the
destination on the stone). Probably an incredibly Eurocentric
perspective (I blame all the rain we've been having): why put the mails
out on the harbour side, when (again, presumably) there would have to be
official contact with someone, and that someone presumably had a nice
dry office where the mails could be securely stored?

I must not get too distracted by postal history!  Do you know if they
were reused simply as stone, or were the names of the ships and people
ever displayed?

With best wishes,

Pat
--
Pat Reynolds
[log in to unmask]
   "It might look a bit messy now,
                    but just you come back in 500 years time"
   (T. Pratchett)