[Tagging] RFC: tomb key

[Bert -Araali- Van Opstal]

The most well known is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasubi_Tombs 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasubi_Tombs>.

In nearly all of them you can walk in yes. The Kasubi Tombs, mentioned 
above are definitively tombs as being structures build to contain and 
commemorate human remains.  But as said before, many are not that strict 
complying with the definition.

Actually, the central Kasubi Tombs contain only the remains of the last 
4 kings. Before, it was a cultural tradition to put the jawbone in a 
separate structure, more considered like a shrine although many of them 
just look the same, more like a shrine in the same tafted hut structure 
and named by the British as a tomb. These separate shrines believed to 
contain the deceased's spirit.  Of course one can argue that it is just 
like a tomb, a structure with  human remains (although it's just the 
jawbone) and the spirit. However, the body is in a different location in 
a different tomb.
Other tribes, as said before, even have different traditions. Many of 
them don't contain bodies, just artificats remembering them of the 
deceased, so tomb definitively doesn't go there in the pure sense, 
referring to human remains. However, the spirit is considered as the 
most important "body part" although not material, but materialised 
through the artefacts or the jawbone.
It's a very delicate issue and we don't really have an English word to 
describe this, at least not as far as I know.  And as you understand, 
the British colonialists tradition of calling them all tombs is also a 
sensitive issue, as it was imposed by a colonial ruler, without consent 
of the different local tribes.

I had to contact Wikipedia to find out what is a cenotaph. I surely 
think it is, in it's pure materialistic definition, a similar feature.  
However the tombs here are not empty, they contain the spirits, which 
for all of these local cultures is the most important body part or human 
remain.  So from more cultural respect point of view, I wouldn't use any 
definition as "empty" - not containing human remains, as suitable.
That of course doesn't solve the issue here, find a suitable English 
term for OSM to use as a value in tagging, but so far I am out of ideas, 
any hints or tips are very welcome.

Greetings,

Bert Araali

On 27/02/2021 01:03, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Am Fr., 26. Feb. 2021 um 22:42 Uhr schrieb Bert -Araali- Van Opstal 
> <bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com 
> <mailto:bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com>>:
>
>
>     So there is no common practice to tag these, what is your general
>     opinion and best tagging practice for these examples ?
>
>
>
> it seems they could be seen as cenotaphs and historic=monument could 
> apply. I did not find any monument=cenotaph, but there are 3 
> memorial=cenotaph. From what you tell, the monument tag seems more 
> appropriate (you can walk into them, they are not just plates or similar).
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210227/324faa11/attachment.htm>