Esihetically and Ethically Considered. 329 



is that they are apt to degenerate into sentimentality. Conventional 

 objects and emblems may be indulged in, but they should be evidently 

 appropriate and in harmony with our religion. I even think that the 

 pagan butterfly would be more appropriate than a lamb over the grave 

 of a child, for although the latter is the emblem of innocence, it may 

 occasionally, in spite of the proverb that the good die young, find a 

 phace over a particularly terrible child, and so lose the advantage of 

 truth ; but the butterfly is the classic emblem of immortality and 

 resurrection, and so is always appropriate. But it is quite safe to leave 

 off such things. Again, all devices which simply draw attention to the 

 personality of the deceased are inappropriate at the grave. For 

 example, although every monument should exhibit the surname and 

 the several christened names, what is the use of parading in addition 

 the monogram of the head of the family? This is too much like the 

 stationer's art, and makes one think of " no cards. " The only mono- 

 gram that I ever saw on a monument that is tolerable is one com- 

 posed of alpha and omega. But no monogram, or any other device, 

 ever ought* to be cut on the shaft. For the same reason, I think coats 

 of arms are objectionable. The graveyard is no place for the boast 

 of heraldry." Reserve them for carriages and plate. Besides being 

 misplaced, they are in this country generally as false as epitaphs them- 

 selves. I have objected to portraiture. Occasionally I have seen 

 medallions of the deceased on monuments, but it seems to me they 

 are not in correct taste. The monument is designed to mark the 

 resting place, and to perpetuate the memory, not the face or figure. 

 Why should we struggle to preserve for the public gaze what God 

 has decreed to perish ? Banish such memorials to county histories. 

 Let the perpetuation of the form exist in memory alone, so far as the 

 monument is concerned. Another advantage in this course; imagina- 

 tion may convey to the stranger and to posterity a more favorable idea 

 of the physiognomy than portraiture would do. A good many years 

 ago there was a fashion in ^ew England, in rural districts, of insert- 

 ing a daguerreotype of the departed in the upper part of the grave- 

 stone ! I suppose this ridiculous custom no longer obtains, but except 

 in dignity of material and excellence of execution, it is only less absurd 

 than carving a portrait medallion in the same place. 



But if there is any thing better deserving the prize for offensiveness 

 than all others, it is any indication of an assumption that the tenant 

 of the grave is a partaker of the glory reserved for the saints. Ex- 

 pressions of hope and trust in this regard are all well, but we ought to 

 be a little modest about taking it for granted. A hand with an index 

 finger pointing upward is a common example of what I mean. There 

 42 



