1000 graves or 400 graves?

[kenericm]

Question.  The Stone of Remembrance.  I have 2 figures for the number of graves required for one to be placed.  Several sites list 400 and several list 1000.  Which is correct?  Many thanks in anticipation.

 

Kenericm

[EDWARD1]

When I did a recent Walk and Talk in a cemetery with CWGC headstones, in my notes I have  cemeteries with 1000 burials or more, which I am sure I took from the CWGC site.

Did you know there are no straight lines on the stone and if the curved lines were extended they would form a circle 1800 ft in dia. (from the same source)

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

The curves on the IWGC War Stones also exist on the Crosses of Sacrifice, - its an architectural technique called "entasis" which goes back as far as classical columns. Original detailed drawings of these IWGC cemetery features are in the RIBA archives at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London.

 

If you query the CWGC about the website statement about the number of burials in a cemetery which qualified a particular cemetery for a War Stone they will tell you that the website is correct. In fact it is WRONG.

Tom

[EDWARD1]

I have just checked the CWGC site searching for cemeteries in the range of 500-1000 burials  and there are a number of cemeteries with less than a 1000 burials that have a stone.

Every day is a school day.

[NigelS]

I remember being told that typically the number of burials for placement of the Stone was 1000, but there was no hard & fast rule on this so hence the placement in some with less than that. A lot depended on space & layout of any given site with it considered that in most sites with  under 1000 burials its fixed size - unlike the Cross which was available in various sizes - might  overwhelm the visual appearance of the headstones.  Similar applied to the Cross of Sacrifice where, if I remember correctly, the number of burials required is typically around 40, but there will be many cemeteries with more  than this that don't, because, even thought there are different sizes,  there either  isn't sufficient space for one, or it wouldn't fit visually.   Brookwood Military  Cemetery is said to be unique in having two Stones of Remembrance & two Crosses of sacrifice, but this has nothing to do with the number of burials, but more likely because the large WWII Canadian section (and the 1914-18 & 1939-45 memorials)  is separated from the rest of the CWGC site by the American Military cemetery.  

 

Some Stones of Remembrance have the 'THEIR NAME LIVETH FOR EVERMORE' inscription on both sides, and some Crosses of Sacrifice have the bronze sword on two sides, again this is likely to be down to the layout of the cemetery in which they're installed.

 

NigelS

[Michael Pegum]

The Garden of Remembrance at Islandbridge in Dublin has both a Stone of Remembrance and a Cross of Sacrifice, and no graves at all.

 

Michael

[imaginatian]

There are always exceptions!

 

Coriano Ridge War Cemetery in Italy has nearly 2,000 WW2 casualties and does not have a Stone of Remembrance.  Not sure why as there's plenty of space for one.

 

Ian

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

The CWGC statement about 1,000 burials being the minimum for a War Stone (aka, and latterly, Stone of Remembrance) is way off the mark. Other areas where slipping into the inaccurate "claimed fact" quick-sands are a danger are off-the-cuff theories / speculations as to why some War Stones are inscribed on both sides and others on one side only - what determines which side a singly engraved War Stone is engraved upon - why some crosses have a sword on both sides and some on just one - what determines which side a singe sword on a cross is placed relative to the position of the cross in the cemetery (and ditto for a singularly engraved War Stone) - what the relationship might be between the number of burials in a particular cemetery and the issue of 1 / 2 War Stone inscriptions and / or 1 / 2 swords on a cross - what the relationship between the number of swords and whether the particular cross is a Type A1, A, B, or C.

 

CWGC's current wording about the claimed 1,000 burial criteria has changed since they were "referred to it's inaccuracy" some considerable time ago, - but it still leans towards misleading. As for the other matters above - speculation and unresearched claims will almost inevitably lead down the wrong path.

Tom

 

Edited 29 March , 2020 by Tom Tulloch-Marshall

[kenericm]

Many thanks for your answers.  The answer is...there is no answer.!  The debate itself is a topic worth discussing.  Cheers

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

7 hours ago, kenericm said:

Many thanks for your answers.  The answer is...there is no answer.!  The debate itself is a topic worth discussing.  Cheers

 

Au contraire - there is an answer (to the question about the accuracy of the CWGC claim of a 1,000 burials criteria), and its an answer which should be definitively addressed. You should ask the CWGC to give you a definite and detailed answer based upon a simple exercise of looking at the number of burials in their various cemeteries(*) and whether or not those cemeteries have a War Stone (aka Stone of Remembrance). As the staff at CWGC's British HQ are currently "working from home" they will undoubtedly have somebody to assign to this not very complicated task.

 

(* Western Front and Germany, I'd suggest. in other theatres such as Italy [et al] the architects were often constrained by the impracticality of physically getting a nine ton War Stone to certain cemeteries, - in fact drawings were prepared when it was briefly suggested that multi-part War Stones may be used).

Tom