Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sun, 25 May 1997 22:38:45 -0500 |
Content-Type: | TEXT/PLAIN |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Howdy:)
I too would be tempted to mention dowsing which yields
inconsistent results but may give you a place to start. My crew has
removed 600-700 burials this year including one cemetery (1872-1950s)
containing over 500 interments. Although often scoffed at by
contemporaries we have tried many methods and firmly believe that
subsurface testing provides the only quaranteed method of identifying and
locating graves. We have used GPR but still have to excavate to
conclusively prove that there are graves present. The reason for this as
stated in other replies is lack of experience by the equpment operator.
Often we have attempted to use a tech with experience in tracking
groundwater. In one situation, I dowsed two additional unmarked graves on
the end of a row of marked graves and then removed the overburden to
visibly expose the graveshafts. Six months later the GPR operator pulled
his machine over the graves and never said a word. I had neglected tell
him about the unmarked graves. He did however tell us that there were
additional graves in an area we had dowsed with negative results. Guess
what:):):) subsurface testing was required and there weren't any
additional graves:)
One method I have always wanted to try was infrared photography.
If you could remove the vegetative overburden and get the right ground
moisture conditions, it seems to me that the graveshafts would retain the
moisture longer than the undisturbed strata resulting in a thermal
difference that could be photographically recorded. I will be conducting
a removal during June which fits the temporal period you requested
nicely and may just be the perfect site to try this method. If the
method works I will post the results to the list.
Dan Sumner Allen IV
Staff Historical Archaeologist
Mortuary Specialist
DuVall & Associates, Inc.
|
|
|