"In all works of preservation, restoration or excavation, there should always be precise documentation in the form of analytical and critical reports, illustrated with drawings and photographs."

Article 16, Venice Charter, ICOMOS, 1964

The Survey

In 1981, a full survey of St. Louis 1 Cemetery was made by Save Our Cemeteries, Inc., and all documentation was housed at The Historic New Orleans Collection (THNOC). The surveyors documented all tablet locations and inscriptions, names, and dates. Minimal information was collected on the materials of construction, decoration, and tomb condition. Each tomb was photographed. Tombs were numbered generally according to an earlier hand-drawn survey map from the Archdiocese and were cross-referenced to an older Archdiocese numbering system that locates tombs by their street or alley address.

After reviewing various models of surveys used for other cultural landscapes and cemeteries, a pilot survey form was developed and the development group prepared a field manual to assist and aid in the use of the survey on site. The manual covered all sections of the physical survey including identification, environment, description, condition (masonry), landscape, and metals. While the survey form and manual were developed for the St. Louis Cemetery No. 1 survey, they are meant to serve as models for future cemetery and burial ground surveys.1

The purpose of providing a manual for participants in the survey was twofold. First, it contained clear guidelines as to how the survey form was to be completed, thereby controlling the process in which the data was collected. It was necessary that elements and conditions were accounted for in a uniform and controlled manner in order to accurately map the information and analyze the data by querying the database. Second, the manual provided a specific definition and complete explanation for each item in the survey. To supply further clarification for certain items on the survey, such as tomb type and planting materials, illustrations or photographs accompanied the definitions. By providing a manual to those involved, the survey team hoped to ensure accurate observations in the field and to record standardized, uniform results.

Before the site visit, historical images and references to landscape features were collected and analyzed. On site, a complete inventory of the current features, vegetation, ground covers, path materials, drains, and individuation plantings was taken. Further topographic mapping information was collected and all interior and exterior paths and sidewalks were surveyed. Each tomb or marker was surveyed for location and placement, typology and features, condition and integrity. All tombs, markers and landscape features were photographed and key areas were further documented with measured drawings.

To help participants locate the tombs within the cemetery, each tomb on the original Archdiocese map was numbered. A grid was superimposed over the entire cemetery and assigned alphanumeric designations. The cemetery was divided into 25 sections, with 30 tombs per section. Each surveyor was assigned one section. During the week of March 10, 2001, each surveyor completed his or her assigned survey section. In October, 2001, after an analysis of the March results, a team of 4 field-checked the entire survey particularly for condition and integrity ratings and added additional clarification to notes on construction and additions.

Creating, organizing, and implementing a physical survey of the over 700 tombs and markers at St. Louis 1 Cemetery was itself a challenging undertaking. However, in terms of the overall objectives of the Collaborative Studio, the survey was only the beginning. The information gathered was entered into a Microsoft Access® 2000 database then into Arc View® 3.2, a geographic information system, where data could be plotted and analyzed through spatial mapping.

1. Work referenced included: Earlier St. Louis Cemetery No. 1 and 2 surveys, Lafeyette Cemetery No. 1, New Orleans, LA; The Center Church Crypt, Temple Street, New Haven, CT; Colonial Park Cemetery, Savannah, GA; King's Chapel Burying Ground and Granary Burying Ground, Boston, MA; Old Swedes' Burying Ground, Wilmington, DE; Trinity Episcopal Cathedral Burying Ground, Pittsburgh, PA; Trinity and St. Paul's Churchyards, New York, NY; Congressional Cemetery, Cenotaph Survey, Washington, DC; and The Protestant Cemetery, Rome, Italy; plus Bandelier National Monument, Los Alamos, NM and Mesa Verde National Park, Mesa Verde, CO Condition Assessments. Other publications consulted included: Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management, Preservation Guidelines for Municipally Owned Historic Burial Grounds and Cemeteries (Boston, MA); Canadian Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, Landscape of Memories: A Guide for Conserving Historic Cemeteries (Canada); English Heritage, Stonehenge World Heritage Site Management Plan (England); Matero, Frank G. New Orleans Historic Cemetery Conservation Program. (LA State Historic Preservation Office, 1987); Historic Tallahassee Preservation Board, Historic Cemetery Preservation Handbook (Tallahassee, FL); Matero, Frank G. "Toward a Methodology for the Conservation of Historic Burying Grounds and Funerary Monuments." Annual Conference of the Association for Preservation Technology, (1991); Matero, Frank G. The Conservation of Historic Funerary Monuments and Burying Grounds, (The Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation, 1988).