Reading Tombstones
You might have notice in my post about the Lambeth family cemeteries I mentioned baby powder. There are some genealogists who may be fuming at the thought of using baby powder to aid in the transcription of tombstones. However, if the tombstone is not readable then the point of having a tombstone has been lost. Tombstones are erected in places of remembrance (cemeteries) for future generations to visit, reflect and remember. When I am not doing genealogy, I make my living teaching science, including a bit of Chemistry. Placing baby powder on a tombstone will not destroy, harm or accelerate the rate of deterioration of the stone. The effects of weather, neglect and cows are far worse on our native limestone tombstones than any bit of powder will ever be. I have also resorted to shaving cream; again the negative effect on the stone is minimal at best. The bottom line is if the stone is so far gone and the only way to get an accurate reading is to enhance the etching with powder or as a last resort shaving cream then the pursuit for accuracy and remembrance far out weigh any potential damage you might do to an already unreadable stone. If the tombstone is unreadable, your are not going to make it worse by enhancing the etching. Below is an example of a stone which was unreadable, this person was lost to future generations. The application of a bit of shaving cream and photoshop revealed a name, date of birth and death. Now, Benjamin can be remembered. Is this not what his parents and family intended when they placed his little body and marker in the cemetery? Digital photograph has helped tremendously allowing for negative imaging and photo enhancement, but when all else fails I feel it is appropriate and necessary to move to a more aggressive method. Many inaccurate facts have been passed from genealogist to genealogist due to poor cemetery transcriptions. Genealogy is not about I think so, but about I know so because it has been accurately documented. I anticipate a fair amount of flack for my position, but the precision of information must take precedence. Chemically, there is no damage done to these stones by using these methods. In genealogy important information needs to be gathered, saved and transmitted to the next generation in a correct manor. Cows will break stones, rain, lichens and disuse will take a far greater toll than any data retrieval method we use. Of course, if a reading can be accomplished without any extraordinary measures then this route is preferable. If you do use these methods do so as a last resort, not because damage can occur but to preserve the “natural” state of the stone. I always pack a couple of bottles of water to wash away any power or shaving cream I might use only because I wish to leave the stone and cemetery the way I found it. However, this is another controversial issue. If a stone is broken and you fix it did you destroy the integrity of the stone? If a cemetery is over grown and you restore it are you violating some unwritten rules of genealogy engagement? I believe our ancestors want to be remembered accurately, they were proud of their accomplishments and wish for us to know the details of their lives as accurately as possible.
You might have notice in my post about the Lambeth family cemeteries I mentioned baby powder. There are some genealogists who may be fuming at the thought of using baby powder to aid in the transcription of tombstones. However, if the tombstone is not readable then the point of having a tombstone has been lost. Tombstones are erected in places of remembrance (cemeteries) for future generations to visit, reflect and remember. When I am not doing genealogy, I make my living teaching science, including a bit of Chemistry. Placing baby powder on a tombstone will not destroy, harm or accelerate the rate of deterioration of the stone. The effects of weather, neglect and cows are far worse on our native limestone tombstones than any bit of powder will ever be. I have also resorted to shaving cream; again the negative effect on the stone is minimal at best. The bottom line is if the stone is so far gone and the only way to get an accurate reading is to enhance the etching with powder or as a last resort shaving cream then the pursuit for accuracy and remembrance far out weigh any potential damage you might do to an already unreadable stone. If the tombstone is unreadable, your are not going to make it worse by enhancing the etching. Below is an example of a stone which was unreadable, this person was lost to future generations. The application of a bit of shaving cream and photoshop revealed a name, date of birth and death. Now, Benjamin can be remembered. Is this not what his parents and family intended when they placed his little body and marker in the cemetery? Digital photograph has helped tremendously allowing for negative imaging and photo enhancement, but when all else fails I feel it is appropriate and necessary to move to a more aggressive method. Many inaccurate facts have been passed from genealogist to genealogist due to poor cemetery transcriptions. Genealogy is not about I think so, but about I know so because it has been accurately documented. I anticipate a fair amount of flack for my position, but the precision of information must take precedence. Chemically, there is no damage done to these stones by using these methods. In genealogy important information needs to be gathered, saved and transmitted to the next generation in a correct manor. Cows will break stones, rain, lichens and disuse will take a far greater toll than any data retrieval method we use. Of course, if a reading can be accomplished without any extraordinary measures then this route is preferable. If you do use these methods do so as a last resort, not because damage can occur but to preserve the “natural” state of the stone. I always pack a couple of bottles of water to wash away any power or shaving cream I might use only because I wish to leave the stone and cemetery the way I found it. However, this is another controversial issue. If a stone is broken and you fix it did you destroy the integrity of the stone? If a cemetery is over grown and you restore it are you violating some unwritten rules of genealogy engagement? I believe our ancestors want to be remembered accurately, they were proud of their accomplishments and wish for us to know the details of their lives as accurately as possible.
