That says his remains are in said tomb... as shown in your linked photo.
The only reference I can see to a 'cenotaph' are your words ... where do you get it from?

On 20-Sep-16 08:36 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote:

In what way is it not a cenotaph? It is clearly a structural monument. It is in memory of a deceased person. Said deceased person is not entombed there, although his remains are thought to be in an unmarked grave somewhere nearby. It looks like a tomb, but nobody is entombed in it.

On Sep 19, 2016 6:31 PM, "Warin" < <>> wrote:

    On 20-Sep-16 12:51 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
    tomb=cenotaph sounds perfect, if unusual.
    is the cenotaph that I was mapping when the question arose. Baron
    von Steuben's remains are in an unmarked grave somewhere nearby.
    The 'memorial tomb' was erected, contrary to his express wish to
    be buried in an unmarked grave, decades after his death. It is
    claimed, but by no means certain, that the memorial covers his
    remains. He is most certainly not entombed within it.

    Not a 'cenotaph'. _Cenotaphs are not tombs_!

    A definition of cenotaph is;
    a) a structural monument in memory to a deceased person whose body
    is elsewhere (so not a tomb)
    b) a municipal, civic, or national memorial to those killed in war.

    On the LPI data base (for Australia, New South Wales) there are 13
    listed 'cenotaphs'.

    On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
    < <>> wrote:

        2016-09-19 13:17 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer
        < <>>:

            there's only one memorial:type=cenotaph

        btw., those cenotaphs wikipedia has as examples in osm would
        rather be historic=monument than memorial I think:


        Tagging mailing list <>

    Tagging mailing list <>

    _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing
    list <>
Tagging mailing list

Tagging mailing list

Reply via email to