Joe---
Speaking of the evaluation of the stone maps, the quotes of the professionals which were posted, that commented on the age of the stones, seemed to only talk about the trail maps. Because they said that there was no sign of them having been buried or in the weather for a long period of time.
For all of the stones, I'm not sure if any of the pictures available are of the originals, and I know some of them are of the reproductions. But in most of the pictures, the trail stones appear to be all one color, while the priest/horse stone to be kind of blotchy. Do you have any idea if that's due to the stone color, or if it could be due to aging, either under or on top of the ground?
If all the pictures are reproductions, it seems odd that they would discolor just the one stone, and not the trail stones. Unless that's what the originals looked like, and they went to some effort to make them look like the originals.
The "stains," if that's what they are, on the priest/horse stone does look like it was half buried for a long time, is what I'm trying to say. And that's the first one found, according to the story, because it was "partly sticking out of the ground," if I remember correctly.
What's your take on these points?