the connection of obelisks with boundaries may seem fortuitous
yet both arise from & express the singular idea of sovereignty
according to
http://twenj.com/obelisks.htm etc
obelisks were originally created by the ancient egyptians
to symbolize contact between the earth & the heavens
or between humanity & the gods
especially the sun god
& according to
http://www.kent.wednet.edu/curriculum/soc_studies/Egypt/obelisks.html etc
the egyptian obelisks actually represented shafts of sunlight
& their tops were covered with gold & silver to amplify the rays of the sun
& they commonly served as sundials
http://www.ontalink.com/archaeology/obelisks/index.html gives many good
links to historic obelisks & strong impressions of their grandeur
& also gets into their association with divinity both in large & pharaonic
obelisks were later romanized along comparable lines of sovereign apotheosis
& they were even christianized by the holy father in a subsequent renaissance
when simplified & reduced to miniature size
obelisks do seem to make excellent boundary point markers
not only because their rectangular shafts are helpful for orientation
but especially since their pointy tips act like center dimples or cross hairs
however all such miniforms as we are likely to find along boundaries might
be better described as obeliskoids
rather than as obelisks per se
to acknowledge not only the huge reduction of dimensionality & estate
but also the great variability in their forms when used as markers
thus happily the mud turtle is obeliskoid
flat out
yet just as happily obeliskoid as the free flowing thames & ural gibson
onionoids
as for what ctmari is
anyone may say
at all events
such or nonesuch obelisks or obeliskoids have been widely employed along
the intramural borders of nafta
tho i have no idea if or where they have gone beyond that
they seem ideally well suited to marking the most multisovereign points tho
by standing for & elevating the idea of sovereignty itself
m