Subject: Re: Marcel<br/>
Date: Dec 04, 2001 @ 01:47<br/>
Author: orc@orcoast.com (orc@...)<br/>
<a href="4889.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="4897.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic4801.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="4895.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="4897.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-829185421">it is a thin line but when modern stones actually abut or are combined with=
<br/>
 their predecessors  it might be fair to say the predecessors are still regu=
<br/>
lar working rocks  but i agree if the ancients dont touch working rocks & ar=
<br/>
ent mentioned in the text as working rocks then clearly they have gone the w=
<br/>
ay of all other ghosts<br/>
<br/>
it hardly seems fair but thats punctology for you<br/>
<br/>
m<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="qreply"> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., &quot;Peter Smaardijk&quot; &lt;smaardijk@y...&gt; wrote:<br/>
<br/>
&gt; --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., &lt;marcelmiquel@n...&gt; wrote:<br/>
<br/>
&gt;  (...)I think the &quot;pedra dreta&quot; as a undisputed boundary limit is  <br/>
<br/>
&gt; clear, because the marker number 1 is placed there, and according the <br/>
<br/>
&gt; delimitation act :&quot;next to the old stone who has been the boundary of <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; Llívia, Ur and Càldegues&quot;. So we can assume that from 1660 from <br/>
<br/>
&gt; 1868 this stone was a international boundary marker &quot;de facto&quot;, <br/>
<br/>
&gt; despite it was not mentioned in a treaty, just because a treaty of <br/>
<br/>
&gt; limits didn&#39;t exist. <br/>
<br/>
&gt; <br/>
<br/>
&gt; Do (or don&#39;t) I understand correctly that it isn&#39;t a working stone <br/>
<br/>
&gt; anymore? Because I see here the Pyrenean habit of putting boundary <br/>
<br/>
&gt; stones (new ones) next to older boundary stones, which releaves the <br/>
<br/>
&gt; old one of its duty. This happened at both St. Martins Stone and <br/>
<br/>
&gt; Irumugak, if I recall correctly.<br/>
<br/>
&gt; <br/>
<br/>
&gt; Peter S. </span></blockquote></div>