The Economic and Practical Considerations of Slate vs. Granite Headstones in 1820s Pennsylvania

Introduction

In the early 19th century, the choice between slate and granite headstones was influenced by a myriad of factors, including availability, labor requirements, and transportation costs. This article explores why slate headstones might have been a more economical choice than granite for a typical grave marker in 1820s Pennsylvania. We will delve into the practical considerations, historical context, and regional variations of headstone materials during this period.

Cost and Availability

Slate Headstones

Cost: Slate headstones were generally more affordable, as they required less labor and specialized tools to carve compared to granite. In 1820, the labor and materials necessary to produce a slate headstone made it the more economical option for a typical grave marker. Availability: Slate was readily available in many regions and could be easily quarried and cut. Quality: The quality of slate varied, with some areas producing better-quality slate than others. This affected the durability and legibility of the headstones.

Granite Headstones

Cost: Granite was much harder and required more labor and specialized tools to work with, which increased its production cost. Transportation: The transportation of granite could be more expensive, as it required specialized equipment and expertise to move. Availability: While granite was available, it was often more difficult to access and quarry compared to slate.

Historical Context and Regional Variations

The use of slate headstones was prevalent in the colonial period and early years of the United States, particularly in New England and the Mid-Atlantic region. In Pennsylvania, slate headstones were commonly used in the 18th and early 19th centuries. Historical records from Salem, Massachusetts, demonstrate that slate headstones were already being used in the early 18th century, with the example of a 1725 headstone.

The quality and durability of slate headstones varied. Some were intricately designed, while others were barely readable. Slate could be flaky and did not always weather the years well, much like sandstone, another cheaper and easier-to-work material. However, the quality of slate depended on the specific region. 'Boston slate' was generally considered better than 'Newport slate,’ leading to its continued use in certain areas.

Carvers and Carving Techniques

The carvers and carving techniques used in the production of headstones were diverse. In the early colonial period, many of the carvers were masons, carpenters, or even farmers who had multiple skills to support their families. One 18th-century farmer was also known to be a shoemaker and another to run a tavern.

As the population grew and the need for professional carvers increased, more ornate and detailed headstones began to appear. These carvers often produced work that was more finely crafted and represented a higher level of skill.

In some rural cemeteries, especially older ones, slate and sandstone headstones of varying quality could still be found. Local historical societies might provide valuable information about the carvers active in the area, and possibly even information about the quarry in the vicinity.

Conclusion

While slate headstones were generally less expensive than granite headstones in 1820s Pennsylvania, the choice between the two materials was influenced by local availability, labor costs, and the quality of the stone. Slate headstones, particularly those from better-quality regions like 'Boston slate,’ could be more durable and legible than their granite counterparts. Understanding the historical context and regional variations can provide valuable insights into the material choices made in early 19th-century cemetery markers.