yes make that even money & i will spot you 90 years
meaning i bet the leaner proves not only not to be 1790 but actually 1881 or later
& i know we are equally fools but i dont think you are fool enough to put your money where your mouth is in this case
m
--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "bjbutlerus" <bjbutler@b...> wrote:
> I agree that the leaner probably is not Ellicottian, but I disagree
> that NYSW, PANE, and NJE are "similar" to PAN. True, they are all
> made of stone. But, in my view, the similarity ends there. With
> respect to proportions, finish of the stone faces, inscription style,
> shape of the top, shape of the botton, and taper NYSW, PANE, and NJE
> are identical. PANE differs markedly in all of these parameters.
>
> My notes do not indicate any date on the PANE monument other than
> 1790, but if you are saying the style and quality of the stone
> indicates a later vintage I would agree. Maybe we could conduct a
> virtual field trip by asking the folks at the Lakeside RV Park to walk
> over and transcribe the entire inscription on that monument.
>
> BJB
>
> > you are right mr butlerus about the nje njnypa witness match as
> these 2 came first & both date from 1882 but dont you also see that
> all 5 ny witness stones including pane nysw & pan all dating from the
> early 1880s are far more similar than dissimilar in size shape etc as
> well as distinctly unlike any others & certainly not of ellicott
> vintage in any case or are you still believing that too
> >
> > m
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "bjbutlerus" <bjbutler@b...> wrote:
> >
> > > I mentioned NJE because the monument at the top of the cliffs near
> >
> > > there (on the NJ/NY line) is IDENTICAL in form to the witness
> >
> > > monument near NJNYPA (also on the NJ/NY line). As I said, I have
> >
> > > not seen the one near PANE. However, the two I have seen differ
> >
> > > markedly from the monument near PAN. They differ in size, shape,
> >
> > > finish, and inscription style.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > BJB
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > you are right that there are some slight differences among the 4
> >
> > > witness monuments i am talking about & i have no idea why you
> >
> > > mention nje even if you really mean pae because their markers if any
> >
> > > dont in either case announce nypa into its distinct sectors the way
> >
> > > the monuments at dry pan nysw delpane & njnypa all together do if
> >
> > > you see what i mean for you can on a map of the entire boundary
> >
> > > which was remonumented between 1881 & 1885 so for that reason & to
> >
> > > that extent these 4 rocks do differ stylistically & of course the
> >
> > > leaner was also unique in specially commemorating the original
> >
> > > ellicott survey but you really should see delpane because once more
> >
> > > it will be like deja vu all over again
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > m
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "bjbutlerus" <bjbutler@b...> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > The monument near PANE-On-Erie is not of the same design as the
> >
> > > ones
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > near NJNYPA, NYSW, or NJE for that matter. The former is not
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > tapered and has no pediment, the radius at the top is larger and
> >
> > > the
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > top is flat istead of roof-shaped. It also has an inscription
> >
> > > on
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > the skinny side, whereas the latter do not. I don't know about
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > PANE-On-Delaware because I have not seen it.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > BJB
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > nor was the tall leaning monument near dry pan the one placed
> >
> > > by
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > ellicott there as some others believe but is recognizably a
> >
> > > relic of
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > the same 1880s nypa doings that left very similar witness rocks
> >
> > > near
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > njnypa & nysw & that other pane point on the delaware thus
> >
> > > totalling
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > 4 in all some of which you & some others here may also recognize
> >
> > > by
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > their distinctive appearance
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > > > m