Strange date notation. Were they uncertain of the year because time passed before they could erect a stone or was it because of how close to New Year's it was?

I believe the Perfesser or GravenImageCat told me that this (the 1691/2) was meant to refer to a death in late in the year (when digging a grave in frozen ground would be difficult with the tools available in the late 17th Century) but an internment early the next, with the body kept 'stored' until the work could be done. The static death 'date' (by the month & day) would still be the same, and would be understood to be so. but it (the 'special notation') was meant to define this unusual circumstances of burial (and that burial's timing: January the 2nd in the climate still manifest in New England winters today, I understand remains quite harsh).

-2Paw.

I was going to do a lil journal on the subject, but the wiki entry on that kind of double-dating said it better than I could. Basically it has to do with 2 calendars being in use at the same time. The old one had the year starting in March, the new in January. Both were in use til 1754 when IT WAS DECREED the new one would be standard. So the double dates were to denote "old style/new style".

I remember this now, and it was you who told me so! ^_^ Thank you kindly for the correction, GiC, and I apologize to you and Threetails for my mistaken minding above. :)

-2Paw.

An unusual handling of the urn motif. The floral garlands are great.