Chapter V: T. Sternberg

_Crieff Compensation._--During the rebellion in 1715, the village of Crieff, Perthshire, was burnt by the Highland army, on account of the attachment of its inhabitants to the royal cause. It has been stated that, some years ago, the descendants of the sufferers received from government a sum equivalent to a certain proportion of the loss which had been sustained.

Is there any official record in reference to this compensation?

D.

_Admission to Lincoln's Inn, the Temple, and Gray's Inn._--Have there ever been published, or do there exist anywhere in MSS., lists of the persons who have been from time to time matriculated as students of those inns of court?

A publication of them would be of the greatest value to the biographical department of literature.

G.

_Orders for the Household of Lord Montagu._--The second Viscount Montagu, grandson and heir of Anthony Browne, created Viscount in 1554, ob. 1592, compiled a detailed code of regulations for his family, thus entitled:

"A Booke of Orders and Rules established by me, Anthony, Viscount
Mountague, for the better direction and government of my howsholde and
family, together with the generall dutyes and charges apperteyninge to
myne officers and other servantes. Anno D[=n]i 1595."

Has this curious illustration of ancient domestic manners ever been published?

ALBERT WAY.

* * * * *

Minor Queries with Answers.

_Cateaton Street._--I am anxious to ascertain the meaning and derivation of this word: the London Cateaton Street, I believe, is changed into Gresham Street. I have lately learnt that there is a Cateaton Street in Liverpool also.

ETYMO.

[Cateaton Street, or "Catteten Street," says Stow, "is a corruption of
Catte Street, which beginneth at the north end of Ironmonger Lane, and
runneth to the west end of St. Lawrence Church." In 1845, this street
was renamed Gresham Street.]

_Portrait of Lee, Inventor of the Stocking-frame._--In Hatton's _History of London_ (published in 1708), it is stated that a picture (by Balderston) of Lee, the inventor of the stocking-frame, hung in the hall of the Framework Knitters' Company. The inquirer wishes to ascertain whether the picture is yet in existence or not; and, if still in existence, where it can be seen.

M. E.

[In Cunningham's _Handbook of London_, p. 527., s. v. _Weavers' Hall,
Basinghall Street_, is a quotation from the _Quarterly Review_ for
January, 1816, in which the picture is spoken of as then existing in
the Stocking Weavers' Hall.]

_Cocker's Arithmetic_ (Vol. iv., pp. 102. 149.).--Some correspondence appears in "N. & Q." about the first edition of "Old Cocker." I should be glad to ascertain the date of the latest edition.

TYRO.

[The British Museum contains the following editions of Cocker's
_Arithmetic_:--the 20th, Lond. 1700; the 37th, perused and published by
John Hawkins (with MS. notes), Lond. 1720; 41st, Lond. 1724; 50th,
corrected by Geo. Fisher, Lond. 1746. Watt notices one revised by J.
Mair, Edinb. 1751. In Professor de Morgan's _Arithmetical Books_, p.
56., where a full history of Cocker's book is given, mention is made of
an Edinburgh edition, 1765, and a Glasgow edition of 1777.]

_Lyke Porch or Litch Porch._--What is the proper name for the porch found, not unfrequently, at the churchyard gate under which the body was, I believe, supposed to rest before the funeral? Is it _lyke_ or _litch_? The derivation may be different in different parts of England, as they were originally Saxon or Danish. _Lueg_ Dan., _lyk_ Dutch, and _leiche_ Ger., are all different forms of the same word. The first two approach nearer to _lyke_, the latter to _litch_.

J. H. L.

[In most works on ecclesiastical architecture it is called _lich-gate_,
from Anglo-Saxon _lich_, a corpse: hence _Lich-field_, the field of
dead bodies. In the _Glossary of Architecture_ we read "_Lich-gate_, or
corpse-gate, _leichengang_, Germ., from the Ang.-Sax. _lich_, a corpse,
and _geat_, a gate; a shed over the entrance of a churchyard, beneath
which the bearers sometimes paused when bringing a corpse for
interment. The term is also used in some parts of the country for the
path by which a corpse is usually conveyed to the church."]

_Henry Burton._--Henry Burton was born in 1579; studied at Oxford, and was at one time minister of St. Matthew, Friday Street. In 1636, he drew upon himself the vengeance of the Star-Chamber, by two discourses in which he severely inveighed against the bishops. For this offence he was fined, deprived of his ears, and sentenced to imprisonment for life. He was liberated by {541} the parliament in 1640, and died in 1648. What theological works did he write?--From the _Navorscher_.

DIONYSIUS.

[Burton's pen was so prolific, that we cannot find room for a list of
his works; and must refer DIONYSIUS to the Bodleian Catalogue, where
they fill nearly a column, and to Watt's _Bibliotheca_, s.v.]

_British Mathematicians._--I am anxious to learn if there is any book which contains an account of the lives and works of eminent British arithmeticians and mathematicians?

EUCLID.

[Consult the following:--_Biographia Philosophica_: being an Account of
the Lives, Writings, and Inventions of the most eminent Philosophers
and Mathematicians, by Benjamin Martin: London, 1764, 8vo. There is
also a Chronological Table of the most eminent Mathematicians affixed
to John Bossut's _General History of Mathematics_, translated from the
French by John Bonnycastle: London, 1803, 8vo. Some notices of our
early English mathematicians will also be found in the _Companion to
the Almanac_ for 1837, and in the _Magazine of Popular Science_, Nos.
18. 20. and 22.]

_"Les Lettres Juives."_--Will any of your correspondents inform me who is the author of _Lettres Juives_? The first volume of my edition, in eight volumes 12mo., has the portrait of Jean Batiste B., Marquis de ----, ne le 29 Juin, 1704.

J. R.

Sunderland.

["Par le Marquis D'Argens," says Barbier.]

* * * * *

Replies.

ATTAINMENT OF MAJORITY.

(Vol. viii., pp. 198. 250.)

In replying to Professor DE MORGAN'S last communication on this subject, it may be as well, in order to avoid future misunderstanding, to revert briefly to my original question. I pointed out Ben Jonson's assertion, through a character in one of his plays, that about the beginning of the seventeenth century, it was the custom to regard the legal rights of majority as commencing with six o'clock A.M., and I asked to have that assertion reconciled with our present commencement at midnight, and with the statement that the latter is in accordance with the old reckoning.

Thus I started with the production of affirmative evidence, to rebut which I cannot find, in the replies of PROFESSOR DE MORGAN, any negative evidence stronger than his individual opinion, which, however eminent in other respects, has undoubtedly the disadvantage of being two hundred years later than the contemporary evidence produced by me. I afterwards cited Arthur Hopton as authority that lawyers in England, in his time, did make use of a day which he classifies as that of the Babylonians; but inasmuch as he apparently restricts its duration to twelve hours, whereas all ancient writers concur in assigning to the Babylonians a day of twenty-four hours, there is evidently a mistake somewhere, attributable either to Hopton or his printers.

This mistake may have arisen either from a misprint, or from a transposition of a portion of the sentence.

The supposition of a misprint is favoured by the circumstance that Hopton was, at the time, professing to describe natural days of _twenty-four_ hours; of these there are four great classes of commencement, from the four principal quarters of the day; viz. from midnight, from mid-day, from sun-setting and from sun-rising. Hopton had already assigned three of them to different nations, and the fourth he had properly assigned, so far as its commencement at sunrise was concerned, to the Babylonians. What, then, can be more probable than that he intended this day also, like the rest, to be of twenty-four hours' duration; and that the words "holding till sun-setting" ought, perhaps, to have been printed "holding till sun-_rising_?"

This way of reconciling seeming anomalies, by the supposition of probable misprints, receives great encouragement in the occasional occurrence of similar mistakes in the most carefully printed modern books. I lately noticed, while reading Sir James Ross's _Southern Voyage of Discovery_, a work printed by the Admiralty, and on which extraordinary typographical care had been bestowed, the following, at page 121. of vol. ii.:

"It was full moon on the 15th of September, at 5.38 A.M."

But the context shows that "full moon" ought to have been printed _new moon_, and that "5.38 A.M." outlet to be 5.38 P.M.: and what renders these two mistakes the more remarkable is, that they have no sort of connexion, nor is the occurrence of the one in any way explanatory of the other.

Now, the misprint of "sun-setting" for _sun-rising_, which I am supposing in Hopton's book, would be much more likely of occurrence than these, because these form part of a series of carefully examined data from which a scientific deduction is to be drawn, while Hopton's is a mere loose description. And, moreover, a twenty-four hour day, commencing and ending with _sunrise_, does not, after all, appear to be so wholly unknown to English law as PROF. DE MORGAN supposes, since Sir Edward Coke, to whom the professor especially refers, describes such a day in these words:

"Dies naturalis constat ea 24 horis et continet diem solarem et noctem;
and therefore in Inditements for Burglary and the like, we say in nocte
ejusdem diei. Iste dies naturalis est spatium in quo sol progreditur ab
oriente in occidentem et ab occidente iterum in orientem."

{542}

But there is another way of reconciling the discrepancy--Hopton may not have intended the words "holding till sun-setting" to apply to the Babylonians, but only to "the lawyers in England," whose day, he says, _commenced_ at the same time as the Babylonian day. The transposition of the words in question to the end of the sentence would give such a meaning, viz. "The Babylonians begin their day at sun-rising, and so do our lawyers count it in England, holding till sun-setting." Altered in this way, the latter clause does not necessarily apply to the Babylonians.

Here again we have a lawyers' day almost verbally identical with one assigned to them by Sir Edward Coke: "Dies artificialis sive solaris incipit in ortu solis et desinit in occasu, and of this the law of England takes hold _in many cases_."

Nor does Lord Coke strengthen or vary his description in the least, when speaking of the day commencing at midnight; he uses again the same expression with regard to it, "The Egyptians and Romans from midnight, and so doth the law of England _in many cases_."

Hence the authority of Chief Justice Coke, is at best only neutral; for who will undertake to prove to which of these classes of "many cases" Lord Coke meant to assign the attainment of majority?

In support of Ben Jonson's testimony, it may be urged that the midnight initial of the day was itself derived by us from the Romans; and it is nearly certain that _they_ did not perform any legal act, connected with birthday, until the commencement of the _dies solis_.

A proof of this may be observed in the discussion by Aulus Gellius (_Noct. Attic._, iii. 2.) as to which day, the preceding or the following, a person's birth, happening in the night, was to be attributed. He quotes a fragment from Varro,--

"Homines qui ex media nocte ad proximam mediam noctem his horis XXIV
nati sunt, uno die nati dicuntur."

On which Gellius remarks:

"From these words it may be observed that the arrangement of (birth)
days was such, that to any person born after sunset, and before
midnight, the day from which that night had proceeded should be the
birthday; but to any person born during the last six hours of the
night, the day which should succeed that night must be the birthday."

This explanation might seem almost purposely written in reply to some such difficulty as occurred to PROFESSOR DE MORGAN (_ante_, p. 250.), when he remarks that, if birthday were to be confined to daylight, "a child not born by daylight would have no birthday at all!" But since it was notorious amongst the Romans that the civil day began at midnight, such a _quaeri solitum_ as this could never have been mooted, if the birthday observance had not been known and acknowledged to have a different commencement. In continuation of the same subject, Gellius proceeds to quote another passage from Varro, which I shall also repeat, not only as furnishing still farther proof that the Romans did not regard the night as forming any part of the birthday, but also as affording an opportunity of recording an opinion as to the interpretation of Varro's words, which, in this passage, do not appear to have ever been properly understood.

After stating that many persons in Umbria reckon from noon to noon as one and the same day, Varro remarks:

"Quod quidem nimis absurdum est; nam qui calendarum hora sexta natus
est apud Umbros, dies ejus natalis videri debebit et calendarum
dimidiatus, et qui est post calendas dies ante horam ejusdem diei
sextam."

Now why should _beginning one's birthday at noon_ appear so absurd to Varro? Simply because the hours of the night were not then supposed to be included in the birthday at all, and therefore Varro could not _realize_ the idea of a birthday continued through the night.

He says that, according to the Umbrian reckoning, a person born on any day _after_ the point of noon, would have only half a birthday on that day; and for the other half, he would have to take the forenoon of the following day. Varro had no notion of joining the afternoon of one day to the forenoon of another, because he looked upon the unbroken presence of the sun as the very essence of a natal day.

Nothing can be plainer than that this was the true nature of the absurdity alluded to; but it would not suit the prejudices of the commentators, because it would compel them to admit that _sexta hora must have been in the afternoon_, in opposition to their favourite dogma that it was always in the forenoon.

For if Varro had intended to represent sexta hora in the _forenoon_, he would have said that the other half-day must be taken from the _after_noon of the _pridie_, instead of saying, as he does say, that it must be taken from the _fore_noon of the _postridie_ of the Calends.

Consequently, Varro means by "qui Calendarum hora sexta natus est," a person born in the sixth hour of the day of the Calends; the sixth hour being that which immediately succeeded noon--the _media hora_ of Ovid. But what Varro more immediately means by it is, not any particular point of time, but generally any time _after noon_ on the day of the Calends.

That the true position of _sexta hora_, when implying duration, was in the afternoon, has long been a conviction of mine; and I have elsewhere produced undeniable evidence that it was so {543} considered by ancient authors. But this passage from Varro is a new and hitherto unnoticed proof, and certainly it ought to be a most convincing one, because it seems impossible to give Varro's words a rational meaning without the admission of this hypothesis, while with it everything is clear and consistent.

The commentators, driven by the necessity I have just pointed out, either to admit the afternoon position of _sexta hora_, or to abstain from reading it as a _space_ of time, have attempted to force a meaning by reading _sexta hora_ in its other sense, an absolute mathematical point, the _punctus ipse_ of noon.

In so doing they have not scrupled to libel Varro's common sense; they represent his idea of the absurd to consist in the embarrassment that would be caused by the birth occurring at the critical moment of change,--split as it were _upon the knife-edge of noon_; so that, in the doubt that would arise as to which day it should belong, it must be attributed partly to both!

This interpretation is so monstrous, and so evidently wide of the meaning of the words, that its serious imputation would scarcely be believed, if it were not embalmed in the Delphin edition of Aulus Gellius, where we read the following footnote referring to the _argumentum ad absurdum_ of Varro:

"Infirmum omnino argumentum, et quod perinde potest in ipsum Varronem
retorqueri. Quid enim? Si quis apud Romanos Calendis hora vi. noctis
fuerit natus, nonne pariter dies ejus natalis videri debebit, et partim
Calendarum, et partim ejus dici qui sequetur?"

It is not worth while to inquire what may have been the precise dilemma contemplated by the writer of this note, since most certainly it is not a reflex of Varro's meaning. The word _dimidiatus_ is completely cushioned, although Gellius himself has a chapter upon it a little farther on in the same volume.

The anomaly that amused Varro was the necessity of piecing together two halves not belonging to the same individual day and with the hiatus of a night between them; a necessity that would assuredly appear most absurd to one who had no other idea of birthday than the twelve consecutive hours of artificial day, which he would call "the natural day."

This proneness of the Romans to look upon the _dies solis_ as the only effective part of the twenty-four hours, is again apparent in their commencement of horary notation at sunrise, six hours later than the actual commencement of the day. And in our own anomalous repetition of twice twelve, we may still trace the remains of the twelve-hour day; we have changed the initial point, but we have retained the measure of duration.

It is, however, certain that the two methods of reckoning time continued for a long time to exist contemporaneously. Hence it became necessary to distinguish one from the other _by name_, and thus the notation from midnight gave rise, as I have remarked in one of my papers on Chaucer, to the English idiomatic phrase "of the clock;" or the reckoning of the clock, commencing at midnight, as distinguished from Roman equinoctial hours, commencing at six o'clock A.M. This was what Ben Jonson was meaning by attainment of majority at _six o'clock_, and not, as PROFESSOR DE MORGAN supposes, "probably a certain sunrise." Actual sunrise had certainly nothing to do with the technical commencement of the day in Ben Jonson's time. For convenience sake, six o'clock had long been taken _as conventional sunrise all the year round_; and even amongst the Romans themselves, equinoctial hours were frequently used at all seasons. Actual sunrise, in after times, had only to do with "hours inequall," which are said to have fallen into disuse, in common life, so early as the fifth or sixth century.

I trust I may now have shown reasonable grounds for the belief that Ben Jonson may, after all, have had better authority than his license as a dramatic poet, for dating the attainment of majority at six o'clock A.M.; and that nothing short of contemporary evidence directly contradictory of the custom so circumstantially alluded to by him, ought to be held sufficient to throw discredit upon it. It is one of the singular coincidences attending the discussion of this matter by Gellius, that, at the conclusion of the chapter I have been expatiating upon, he should cite the authority of Virgil; observing that the testimony of _poets_ is very valuable upon such subjects, even when veiled in the obscurity of poetic imagery.

A. E. B.

Leeds.

* * * * *

LORD HALIFAX AND MRS. CATHERINE BARTON.

(Vol. viii., p 429.)

Your Correspondent PROF. DE MORGAN has so ingeniously analysed the facts, which he already possesses, bearing on the connexion of Sir Isaac Newton's niece with Lord Halifax, and her designation in the _Biographia Britannica_, that I am tempted to furnish him with some additional evidence. This question of Mrs. Catherine Barton's widowhood has often been canvassed by that portion of her relatives who do not possess the custody of Sir Isaac Newton's private letters.

The Montagues had a residence in the village of Bregstock in Northamptonshire, where the Bartons lived. The Bartons were a family of good descent, and had long been lessees of the crown with the Montagues for lands near Braystock.

There were several Colonel Bartons, whose respective ages and relationship can best be {544} exhibited by a short pedigree. Thomas Barton had two sons, Thomas and Robert.

Robert (born in 1630, and who died in 1693) married Hannah Smith, Newton's half-sister, by whom he had Hannah (born 1678), Catherine (born 1679, died 1739), Colonel Robert (born 1684).

Thomas (born in 1619, died in 1704) married Alice Palmer, by whom he had Thomas, who married Mary Dale, by whom he had Thomas (d. s. p.), Colonel Matthew (born 1672), Colonel Noel (born 1674, died 1714). Thomas had a second son, Geoffrey, who married Elizabeth ----, by whom he had Charles (born 1700), Cutts (born 1706), Catherine (born 1709), Montague (born 1717), and others.

In a family paper written by a granddaughter of Colonel Noel Barton, at her mother's dictation, it is stated that Colonel Matthew married a relative of Sir Isaac Newton, and was Comptroller of the Mint; but this paper is not very correct in its other statements.

On the other hand, a connexion of the family who signs himself H. in an old number of the _Gentleman's Magazine_, says of Newton:

"He had a half-sister, who had a daughter, to whom he gave the best of
educations, the famous witty Miss Barton, who married Mr. Conduit of
the Mint."

Mr. Conduit writes, that his wife lived twenty years before and after her marriage with Sir Issac.

I had always thought that Catherine Barton's brother Robert had died too early to attain the rank of Colonel. In the British Museum, in the Register, there is an account of a sermon preached at the funeral of Robert Barton in the year 1703. I could not find the sermon.

The famous Duchess of Marlborough thus satirises Mouse Montague:

"He was a frightful figure, and yet pretended to be a lover; and
followed several beauties, who laughed at him for it."

It is worth mentioning that Colonel Noel Barton died in London in 1714, while in attendance on his patron Lord Gainsborough, soon after he had been appointed Governor of the Leeward Islands. This was the year before Lord Halifax's _Life_ was written, and possibly might have been the cause of the designation "Widow" being applied to Catherine Barton by mistake. Whatever the connexion of this lady with Lord Halifax may have been, it does not seem to have given any offence to her relatives. You will observe that Geoffrey Barton names his sons Charles and Montague, and his daughter Catherine. Charles afterwards received the rectory of St. Andrew's Holborn from the family of Montague; and Cutts was Dean of Bristol under Bishop Montague. And Montague obtained preferment from Mr. Conduit. Neither the family of Montague, nor that of Barton, seem to have thought the connexion discreditable. Moreover, the births of these children of Geoffrey Barton, a clergyman, occurred at the very period when the name of Catherine should have been most distasteful, had the intimacy been dishonourable.

Mr. Conduit died in the year 1738, and Mrs. Conduit in the year 1739; and Catherine Conduit did not become Lady Lymington till 1740. Probably both Mr. and Mrs. Conduit made wills. Have they been examined at Doctors' Commons?

J. W. J.

* * * * *

MILTON'S WIDOW.

(Vol. viii., pp. 12. 134. 200. 375. 452. 471.)

It is pleasing to find so much interest excited among the readers of "N. & Q." relative to the parentage of this lady; and we may fairly hope that the spirit of research which has thus been awakened, will not die away until the last spark of error and mystery has been extinguished.

T. L. P. has favoured us with quotations from a little pamphlet, entitled _Historical Facts connected with Nantwich and its Neighbourhood_. Now, after giving this work a most careful perusal, I cannot but think that the title of the book is, in this instance at least, a misnomer. The authoress, for it was written by a lady long resident in the vicinity, has evidently wrought upon the foundations of others; and taking the veteran Ormerod as a sufficient authority, has given full vent to her imagination, and pictured, with "no 'prentice hand," the welcome visits of Milton to Stoke Hall, a place which, in all probability, was never once honoured with the presence of this great man. There is no evidence whatever adduced to give even the semblance of colour to this unfortunate error; whereas, on the side of the Wistaston family, the proofs of its identity as the family of Mrs. Milton are numerous and, to my notion, incontrovertible.

As if, indeed, to give us "confirmation sure" of the truth of this position, our old friend CRANMORE starts up, "like a spirit from the vasty deep," and, after an absence of many months from our ranks, pays off his ancient score by producing the evidence he so long ago promised us. From it we gather that Thomas Paget, the father, named his _cousin_ Minshull, apothecary in Manchester, overseer of his will; and that his son, Nathan Paget, eighteen years afterwards, names in his will John Goldsmith and Elizabeth Milton as _his cousins_, and makes bequests to them accordingly. Now, it so happens that Thomas, son of Richard Minshull of Wistaston, was an _apothecary_, and that he settled in _Manchester_, and thereupon founded the family of Minshull of Manchester. This {545} gentleman was doubtless the _cousin_ referred to in the will of the elder Paget. It farther happens, that Thomas Minshull, the grandfather of this Manchester apothecary, married a daughter of Goldsmith of Nantwich. The John Goldsmith of the Middle Temple would then doubtless be the nephew or grand-nephew of this lady, and in either case a _cousin_ of Thomas Minshull of Manchester, and of Elizabeth Minshull of Wistaston. This is another, if not a completing link in the genealogical chain, and convinces me, now more than ever, of the correctness of my conclusions.

I may add that the whole of the deeds referred to by MR. SINGER are now in the safe and worthy keeping of Mr. J. Fitchett Marsh of Warrington; and that they are published _in extenso_, together with a valuable essay on their historical importance by their present possessor, in the first volume of _Miscellanies_ issued by the Chetham Society.

T. HUGHES.

* * * * *

ANTICIPATORY USE OF THE CROSS.

(Vol. viii., pp. 132. 417.)

I am not sure that any of your correspondents have noticed the resemblance between the letter T t, especially in some of its ancient forms, and the form of the cross. In the Greek, Etruscan, and Samaritan forms of this letter, we have representations of the three principal forms which the cross has assumed: [Tau cross], +, x. It is also remarkable that in Ezekiel ix. 4. 6.: "Set a mark on the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry," &c., the word rendered "mark" is [Hebrew: T\dagesh\W] (_Tau_), the name of the Hebrew letter answering to the above: and as the Samaritan alphabet, which the present Hebrew characters have superseded, was then in use, it is highly probable that the "mark" referred to in Ezekiel's vision was the Samaritan _Tau_, as seen on ancient Hebrew shekels, resembling a St. Andrew's cross.

A circumstance relating to the Paschal sacrifice mentioned by Justin Martyr, in his conference with Trypho the Jew, and which he asserts without contradiction from his learned opponent, is worthy of a note:

"This lamb, which was to be roasted whole, was a symbol of the
punishment of the cross, which was inflicted on Christ, [Greek: To gar
optomenon probaton, k.t.l.] For the lamb which was roasted was so
placed as to resemble the figure of a cross; with one spit it was
pierced longitudinally, from the tail to the head; with another it was
transfixed through the shoulders, so that the forelegs became
extended."--Vid. Just. Martyri _Opera_, edit. Oberther, vol. ii. p.
106.

Your correspondent H. N. appears to have fallen into several errors, which (having appeared in "N. & Q.") ought not to pass unnoticed.

1. He confounds the basilica with the cruciform cathedral, and with "the plan of the Roman forum."

Basilica (from Gr. [Greek: Basilike], a royal dwelling) was the name given by the Romans to those public edifices in which justice was administered and mercantile business transacted. Several of these buildings, or the remains of them, still exist in Rome, each forum probably having had its basilica. Vitruvius, who constructed one at Fanum, says it ought to be built "on the warm side of the forum, that those whose affairs call them thither might confer without being incommoded by the weather." Yet H. N. says: "The basilica seems to have originally been the architectural plan of the Roman forum." The most perfect specimen of the antique basilica is that discovered at Pompeii, on the south side of the form and at right angles with it. By consulting a good plan of Pompeii, or glancing at a plan of its basilica, any one may see that it was not cruciform, but "in the form of a long parallelogram," with a central space and side porticoes, answering to the nave and aisles of a church. The early Christians adopted the basilica form for their churches: those built in the form of a Greek or Latin cross are of much later date. Yet H. N.'s learned friend exclaims, when viewing the temple of Muttra, "Here is the cross! the basilica carried out with more correctness of order and symmetry than in Italy!"

2. H. N. assumes that the Jews practised crucifixion as a punishment, and "may have imitated the Assyrians, as crucifixion may have been adopted long before that of Christ and the two thieves (Qy. robbers)." Crucifixion appears to have been in use from a very remote period, but was never adopted by the Jews. The Romans, who with all their greatness were an atrociously cruel people, employed it as the peculiar and appropriate punishment of delinquent slaves. Christ was "crucified under Pontius Pilate," the Roman Procurator of Judea, at a time when that country had become subject to the Romans, and its rulers could say, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death."

3. When H. N. refers to "the advocates of conversion and their itinerant agents," it is difficult to perceive exactly what he intends, except "to hint a fault and hesitate dislike." But before a writer undertakes to cast a reflection on those great societies who have been labouring--not by coercion, but by instruction and persuasion, by the circulation of the scriptures and the preaching of the Gospel--to substitute Christianity for idolatry among those who are under the government of Great Britain, he should well understand the grounds of his censures, so as to be able "to explain to the conversionists that, unless this doctrine be openly refuted, the missionaries may in truth be fighting their own shadow." {546}

How then has H. N. explained the doctrine which they are to refute--the meaning of the "cross and basilica" in India? The only witness in proof of it has disappeared "by falling into a volcanic crater." He himself professes to be quite ignorant of cathedral architecture and the English government, and English gentlemen generally, who have shamefully secreted such a treasure, are equally ignorant. Why had they not consulted the living Church of Hindooism, and shown it a little sympathy and respect with a view to getting enlightened? Whereas "the little they do know is derived from books." Farther, "the elder civilians, men of ability, classical scholars, and first-rate Asiatic linguists," when assembled in that very building, though they descanted on the sanctity of the place, "not one of them knew nor remarked the 'cross and basilica.'" And when visiting the great temple of Benares, H. N. does not recollect that the cross was either noticed to him or by him.

It may be true that when the Hindoo "system of government existed in efficiency, there was neither crime nor punishment"--a shadowy tradition, I presume, of the state of innocence! It may also be true that "the mythology of the Nile agrees with that of the Ganges." But it would not follow that the cross is a myth derived from the mysteries of Egypt or the astronomy of India. It would still remain an unquestionable fact, that the cross, for ages an instrument of ignominious torture under Pagan Rome, only ceased to be so when Christianity had won its way through all ranks of society up to the imperial throne; then its employment was abolished by Constantine, partly from the humanising influence of the new faith, and partly out of reverence to Him who had suffered on it for the world's redemption.

The anticipations of Christianity supplied by Paganism, of which Krishna "burnishing the head of the serpent" is a striking example, may be easily accounted for, and their source pointed out. As a corruption of the earliest revelation, Paganism contains, as might be expected, a portion of truth blended with much error. Indeed, it would be no difficult task to prove that classical and oriental mythology is in some sense, and to a great extent, the shadow of biblical truth. What then? In endeavouring to supplant idolatry in the Roman empire, were the Apostles and first preachers of Christianity merely "fighting their own shadow?" They recognised those truths which even heathens admit, but opposed and overthrew the accumulated errors of ages. Yet there were some even then who condemned the preaching of the cross as "foolishness," till success demonstrated its wisdom.

Lastly, H. N., having "travelled much in this country and on the Continent," is convinced "that superstition prevails comparatively _less_ in Asia than in Europe," and that "the pages of 'N. & Q.' abundantly corroborate the opinion."

This is far more startling than the discovery of the "cross and basilica" at Muttra. To admit it, however, would require us to disregard the testimony of a cloud of witnesses, and to ignore all our former reading. The vast systems of Asiatic superstition, it seems, are less objectionable than our own folk lore; the tremendous shades of Brahma and Budhu, of Juggernaut and the goddess Kali, with their uncouth images and horrid worship, are harmless when compared with Puck, the Pixies, and Robin Goodfellow; and Caste, Suttee, and Devil-worship[3] are evils of less magnitude than cairns, kist-vaens, and cromlechs. The mental balance must be peculiarly constructed that could lead to such a decision. Certainly H. N. is no Rhadamanthus. "Dat veniam corvis, vexat censure columbas."

The appeal to "N. & Q." in corroboration of his opinion forms a pleasant and suitable conclusion of the whole: for while in India superstition still undeniably lives and "prevails," it is one special object of "N. & Q." to embalm the remains of local superstitions in Great Britain that have either breathed their last, or are _in extremis_; to collect the relics of long-departed superstitions that were once vigorous and rampant in our island, but are now in danger of being lost and forgotten. Their very remnants and vestiges have become so rare that they are unknown to the great mass of the community; and the learned, therefore, especially those versed in ethology, are urged to hunt them out wherever they exist in the different districts of the country, before they fall into utter oblivion.

J. W. THOMAS.

Dewsbury.

[Footnote 3: For proof of the existence of Devil-worship, see _Yakkun Nottanawa_, a Cingalese poem, translated by John Callaway, printed for the Oriental Translation Fund: J. Murray, 1829.]

I would beg to suggest to H. N. that if his friend Count Venua saw in the Hindoo temple at Muttra both the form of a perfect cross and of a "basilica, carried out with more correctness of order and symmetry than in Italy," he must have been so totally ignorant of early architecture as to make his observations quite worthless, since there is no more similitude between the cruciform church and the basilica than there is between two parallel lines (=) and two lines crossing each other at right angles (+).

"The precise shape of the cross on the Temple of Serapis" can only be inferred from the words of the historian cited, and the inference therefrom is strong that it was the _crux ansata_.

EDEN WARWICK

Birmingham.

* * * * *

{547}

DECORATIVE PAVEMENT TILES FROM CAEN.

(Vol. viii., p. 493.)

The tiles presented, in 1786, to Mr. Charles Chadwick, of Mavesyn-Ridware, Staffordshire, are preserved in the church at that place. They form two tablets affixed to the wall in the remarkable sepulchral chapel arranged and decorated, at a great cost, by the directions of that gentleman towards the close of the last century, when the greater portion of the church was rebuilt. The north chapel, or aisle, containing the tombs of the Mavesyns and the Ridwares, the ancient lords of the estates which descended to Mr. Chadwick, was preserved; and here are to be seen two cross-legged effigies, a curious incised portraiture on an altar-tomb, representing Sir Robert Mavesyn, 1403, with other incised slabs and interesting memorials; to which were added, by Mr. Chadwick, a series of large incised figures, which surround the chapel. These last are not shown in the view given in Shaw's _History of Staffordshire_, vol. ii. p. 191., having been executed since the publication of that work; and it is stated that they were engraved by the parish clerk under Mr. Chadwick's direction, being intended to pourtray the successive lords of the place from the Norman times to the sixteenth century, each in the costume of his period. There are also numerous atchievements and other decorations attached to the walls; amongst these are the pavement tiles from Caen, one of which bore the same arms as are assigned to the family of Malvoisin-Rosny, and on that account probably Mr. Chadwick placed these relics from Normandy amongst the enrichments of his mausoleum.

In regard to MR. BOASE'S first inquiry, "Who was Charles Chadwick, Esq.?" it may suffice to cite the detailed account of the family given by Shaw, and the short notice of that gentleman which will be found in the _History of Staffordshire_, vol. ii. p. 185.

On a visit to Mavesyn-Ridware in 1839, I was struck with the appearance of these tiles; their design and fashion at once recalled those from Caen with which I had been familiar in Normandy. Having ascertained their origin, I took occasion to state the fact of their preservation at this church in the "Notes on Decorative Tiles," communicated to Mr. Parker by me, and given in the fourth edition of his useful _Glossary of Architecture_, in 1845: see p. 367.

It should be observed that the number of tiles composing the two tablets now to be seen is forty; whilst the number, as stated _Gent. Mag._, vol. lix. part i. p. 211., and in a second letter from Mr. Barrett, in vol. lx. part ii. p. 710., not cited by MR. BOASE in his Query, is twenty. MR. BOASE is probably aware that the sixteen tiles from the Great Guard Chamber at Caen, which supplied the subject of Mr. J. Major Henniker's memoir, were presented by him to the Society of Antiquaries of London, and are now in their museum, as noticed in the catalogue, compiled by myself, p. 30.

A coloured drawing of an heraldic pavement at Caen, taken about 1700, is preserved in a volume of the great collection formed by M. de Gaignieres, and bequeathed by Gough to the Bodleian Library. It comprises chiefly drawings of French sepulchral monuments, arranged by localities; and there is one volume, entitled _Recueil de Tapisseries, d'Armoiries et de Devises_, in which may be found the interesting memorial of this decorative pavement of tiles, which was destroyed during the fury of the Revolution.

ALBERT WAY.

Charles Chadwick, Esq., of Healy Hall, Lancashire, and Mavesyn-Ridware, in the county of Stafford, to whom the monks of St. Stephen, at Caen, presented, in the year 1786, a series of encaustic tiles with heraldic devices taken from the floor of the (so called) "Great Guard Chamber of the Palace of the Dukes of Normandy," died in 1829. I infer that the tiles were brought to the Lancashire residence of Mr. Chadwick because the description and the drawing for the engraving were both supplied to the _Gentleman's Magazine_ by a Lancashire antiquary, Thomas Barnett, of Hydes Cross, Manchester: but as the descendants of Mr. Chadwick no longer reside in Lancashire, the hall being occupied by a woollen manufacturer, I have been unable to obtain any information respecting the tiles, though long desirous to do so.

I direct attention to another series of the same tiles, sixteen in number, which were presented to the Society of Antiquaries through the president, the Earl of Leicester, in 1788, by John Henniker, Esq., M.A., F.R.S., S.A., and M.P., who afterwards took the additional name of Major. This gentleman received the tiles from his brother, Captain Henniker, then resident at Caen; and in 1794 he published an interesting account of them with engravings, entitled _Two Letters on the Origin, Antiquity, and History of Norman Tiles stained with Armorial Bearings_ (London, John Bell, Strand). The engravings both in this volume and in the _Gentleman's Magazine_ are indifferently executed, and too small in scale to be of use. Mr. Henniker describes the colours of his tiles to be "yellow and brown," while Mr. Barnett states that the tiles in Mr. Chadwick's possession were "light grey and black;" a curious discrepancy, seeing that in all other respects they were exactly similar. These tiles are of so much heraldic and antiquarian interest that if either set could be made available for the purpose, it is very desirable that they be engraved of full size, and printed by the modern easy process to imitate the colours.

GILBERT J. FRENCH.

* * * * *

{548}

MOTTOS OF THE EMPERORS OF GERMANY.

(Vol. viii., p. 170.)

With your permission I shall enlarge the list of mottos of the German emperors, as well by commencing with the Germano-Frankish era as by supplying those omitted in the series given by MR. JOSHUA G. FITCH. My authorities are Reusneri _Symbola Imperatoria tribus classibus Caes. Rom. Italic., C. R. Graecorum, C. R. Germanico_; and Sadeler, _Symbola divina et humana Pontificum, Imperatorum, Regum_, &c.:

Caroli Magni. 752. _Christus regnat, vincit, triumphat._

Ludovici Pii. 814. _Omnium rerum vicissitudo._

Lotharii I. 840. _Ubi mel, ibi fel._

Ludovici II. 855. _Par sit fortuna labori._

Caroli II. (Calvi.) 875. _Justitiam injustitia parit._

Caroli III. (Crassi.) 881. _Os garrulum intricat omnia._

Arnulphi. 888. _Facilis descensus Averni._

Ludovici III. 899. _Multorum manus, paucorum consilium._

Othonis Magni. _Aut mors aut vita decora._

Othonis III. _Unita virtus valet._

Henrici II. (Claudi.) _Ne quid nimis._

Friderici I. (AEnobarbi.) _Aliud. Qui nescit dissimulare nescit
imperare._

Friderici II. _Minarum strepitus, asinorum crepitus._ The following is
the correct reading of the words given in Vol. viii., p. 170.:
_Cumplurium triariorum ego strepitum audivi._

Adolphi. _Animus est qui divites facit._

Alberti I. _Aliud. Quod optimum idem jucundissimum._

Henrici VII. _Aliud. Fide et consilio._

Ludovici IV. _Sola bona quae honesta._
_Aliud. Deo et Caesari._[4]

Caroli IV. _Optimum aliena insania frui._
_Aliud. Nullius pavet occursum._

Wenceslai. _Morosophi moriones pessimi._
_Aliud. Tempestati parendum._

Sigismundi. _Aliud. Sic cedunt munera fatis._

Alberti II. _Aliud. Fugam victoria nescit._

Friderici III. _Rerum irrecuperabilium foelix oblivio._
_Aliud. A. E. I. O. U._

That these vowels are supposed to signify "Austriae est imperare orbi universo" has already been communicated in "N. & Q." Reusner has given then another interpretation "Aquila electa iuste vincit omnia."

"Aliud. Hic regit, ille tuetur. Leges et arma in promptu habes, illae regunt, haec tuentur imperium. A Justiniano habet," &c.--Sadeler, p. 43.

Maximiliani I. _Aliud. In manu Dei Regis est [cor]._
_Aliud. Per tot discrimina._

Caroli V. _Aliud. Nondum in auge [Sol]._
_Aliud. Fundatori quietis [laurea]._

Ferdinandi. _Fiat justitia aut pereat mundus._
_Aliud. A. I. P. Q. N. S. I. A._

"Accidit in puncto quod non speratur in anno;
Temporis in puncto qui sapit, ille sapit."

Maximiliani II. _Comminuam vel extinguam._
(_Puta semiplenam Turcarum lunulam._)

Rudolphi II. _Aliud. Ex voluntate Dei omnia._
_Aliud. Sic ad astra._
_Aliud. Tu ne cede malis._

In Reusner's work the mottos are accompanied by copious and erudite comments; and in Sadeler's by engravings also; the devices or achievements of distinguished men, denominated in the Italian language _Imprese_, and in the Latin _Symbola Heroica_.

BIBLIOTHECAR. CHETHAM.

[Footnote 4: "Symbolum [aquila solem contra tuens] quo jam se non tantum adversario opponit sed cum Deo parum modeste ponit. Est quidem aquila Jovi sacra ut ad fabulas rem revolvamus. Sed absit mihi omnis cum Deo comparatio."--Sadeler, p. 39.]

* * * * *

PHOTOGRAPHIC CORRESPONDENCE.

_Simplicity of Calotype Process._--The session of the Photographic Society was commenced with a paper from our original correspondent, DR. DIAMOND, under the above title. Our journal having led to such facilities of question and answer, has induced many of our readers to ask upon several points additional instructions, some of which we have ourselves thought might have been made more clear and having written to DR. DIAMOND he has promised us a revised copy for our next Number. Replying to some of our Querists, he says, "The plain photographic facts are correct; but I wrote the paper on the morning of the day on which the Society met, and was not aware it was to be printed in the _Journal_ until I received my copy."

_Albumenized Paper._--As my only object writing on this subject was to communicate to others the plan which _I_ had found _in practice_ most successful, I think it necessary to correct some points of misapprehension which it is evident your correspondent K. N. M. has fallen into, Vol. viii., p. 501.

In the process I recommended, the paper, if cockled up, readily becomes flat and even if kept in a portfolio or any similar receptacle; and as I _never float_ my paper to sensitize it, I have not the inconvenience of the silver solution becoming spoiled by particles of the albumen. The 100 grains to the ounce for the solution I do not find more extravagant when applied, as I have indicated, with a glass rod, than one of 30 grains to the ounce when the paper is floated, because in the former case I use only just enough to cover the paper, viz. forty-five minims to a half-sheet of {549} Canson's paper, and there is no loss from any portion adhering to the dishes, evaporation, or filtering. This is far more than would be imagined when only a sheet or two of paper is required at one time. Lastly, with regard to the _strokes_ being visible after printing the positive, I do not find them so in general, though occasionally such a thing does happen when sufficient care has not been taken in the preparation; but I find striae quite as visible on two positives prepared by DR. DIAMOND himself, which he kindly gave me: however, I will forward a sample of my paper for your judgment, and also a portion for K. N. M. if he will take the trouble of trying the same.

GEO. SHADBOLT.

_New Developing Mixture._--Having for some months past used the following developing mixture, and finding it very bright and easily applied, I beg to offer it to your notice. It does not cost more than three farthings per ounce, and therefore may be worth the consideration of beginners. I do not know a better where the metallic appearance is not desired.

No. 1. Pyrogallic acid 2 grains.
Glacial acetic acid 1 drachm.
Water 1 oz.

No. 2. Protosulphate of iron 10 grains.
Nitric acid 2 drops.
Water 1 oz.

To six drachms of No. 2. add two of No. 1.

I pour it on, but do not return it to the bottle, as it is apt to spoil if so used.

T. L. MERRITT.

_Queries on the Albumenized Process._--Allow me to put a few questions through your valued paper.

In the albumen process on glass, Messrs. Ross and Thomson, in Thornthwaite's _Guide_, recommend 10 drops of sat. solution of iodized potassa to each egg. Now is it meant _ten drops_, or _ten minims_? If the former, a drop varies with the bottle and quantity of liquid in it; and ten drops are nearly half the bulk of ten minims, generally speaking. Then as to the egg: an egg in this country is only at most 6 [drachm]; in England an egg appears twice as large.--Could you state the general bulk of an egg in England, and to what quantity by bulk or weight of albumen the 10 drops or minims are to be applied? When I say an egg is only 6 [drachm], I mean the white of one.

A SUBSCRIBER.

Bombay.

* * * * *

Replies to Minor Queries.

_Poems in connection with Waterloo_ (Vol. vii., p. 6.).--A correspondent of the _Naval and Military Gazette_ of November 19, 1853, signing himself "M.A., Pem. Coll., Oxford," has pointed out an error into which I had fallen "respecting the elm-trees at and connected with Waterloo."

I certainly was given to understand, when I received the monody, that it was written by the public orator on the death of his son _who fell at Waterloo_: whereas it clearly appears by the obituary in the _Gentleman's Magazine_, that _Ensign William Crowe_, first battalion, 4th foot, _son of the public orator_ at Oxford, _was killed at the attack_ upon New Orleans Jan. 8, 1815.

I hasten to acknowledge my mistake, though I am glad that the two copies of verses found place in your columns.

BRAYBROOKE.

_Richard Oswald_ (Vol. viii., p. 442.)--Your Querist will find many letters to and from him in Franklin's _Memoirs_. He was for some years a merchant in the city of London. In 1759 he purchased the estate of Auchincruive, in the county of Ayr, and died there in 1783. No memoir of him has ever been published. He was for many years an intimate friend of Lord Shelbourne, who sent him to Paris in 1782, and again in 1783, to negotiate with Franklin, with whom he had been for some time acquainted. During the Seven Years' War he acted as commissary-general to the allied armies under the Duke of Brunswick, who said of him in the official despatches, that "England had sent him commissaries fit to be generals, and generals not fit to be commissaries."

J. H. E.

_Grammont's Marriage_ (Vol. viii., p. 461.).--In one of the notes to Grammont, originally, I believe, introduced by Sir W. Scott in his edition, but which appears at p. 415. of Bohn's reprint, we are told on the authority of the _Biographia Gallica_, vol. i. p. 202.:

"The famous Count Grammont was thought to be the original of _The
Forced Marriage_. This nobleman, during his stay at the court of
England, had made love to Miss Hamilton, but was coming away from
France without bringing matters to a proper conclusion. The young
lady's brothers pursued him, and came up with him near Dover, in order
to exchange some pistol shot with him. They called out, 'Count
Grammont, have you forgot nothing at London?' 'Excuse me,' answered the
Court guessing their errand, 'I forgot to marry your sister; so lead
on, and let us finish that affair.'"

My object in this communication is to supply an omission in MR. STEINMAN'S very interesting Notes, who does not show, as he might have done, how the letters of M. de Comminges prove the truth of this story. For, from the passage quoted by MR. STEINMAN from the letter to the king, dated Dec. 20-24, 1663, it is evident that the count was about on that day to leave England "without bringing matters to a proper conclusion;" while that he married the lady within a day or {550} two of that date may fairly be inferred from the announcement on Aug. 29-Sept. 8, 1664, that "Madame la Comtesse de Grammont accoucha hier au soir d'un fils." MR. STEINMAN'S omission was probably intentional; I have supplied it in the hope that the date and place of the marriage may now be ascertained, and for the purpose of expressing my hope that we shall soon be favoured by MR. STEINMAN'S return to this subject.

HORACE WALPOLE, Jun.

_Life_ (Vol. vii., p. 429.).--Let me give A. C. the testimony of two poets and a philosopher in support of the "general feeling" about the renewal of life, which will surely bear down the authority of three writers mentioned by him.

Cowper's notion may be gathered from the couplet:

"So numerous are the follies that annoy
The mind and heart of every sprightly boy."

Kirke White must have had a similar idea:

"There are who think that childhood does not share
With age the cup, the bitter cup, of care;
Alas! they know not this unhappy truth,
That every age and rank is born to ruth."

The next four lines may also be attentively considered. I quote from his "Childhood," one of his earliest productions by the way--but what production of his was not early?

Still more decidedly, however, on the point speaks Cicero (_de Senectute_):

"Si quis Deus mihi largiatur ut ea hac aetate repuerescam, et in cunis
vagiam, _valde recusem_."

The following passage is also at A. C.'s service, provided you can find space for it, and there are "no questions asked" as to its whereabouts:

"I have heard them say that our childhood's hours are the happiest time
of our earthly race; and they speak with regret of their summer bowers,
and the mirth they knew in the butterfly chase; and they sorrow to
think that those days are past, when their young hearts bounded with
lightsome glee, when, by none of the clouds of care o'ercast, the sun
of their joy shone cheerily. But, oh! they surely forget that the boy
may have grief of his own that strikes deep in his heart; that an angry
frown, or a broken toy, may inflict for a time a cureless smart; and
that little pain is as great to him as a weightier woe to an older
mind. Aye! the harsh reproof, or unfavoured whim, may be sharp as a
pang of a graver kind. Then, how dim-sighted and thoughtless are those,
who would they were frolicsome children and free; they should rather
rejoice to have fled from the woes that hung o'er them once so heavily.
In misfortune's rude shocks the practised art of _the man_ may
perchance disclose relief; but _the child_, in his innocence of heart,
will bow 'neath the stroke of a trifling grief."

W. T. M.

Hong Kong.

_Muscipula_ (Vol. viii., p. 229.--_The Name Lloyd._--Besides the translation of this poem by Dr. Hoadly, of which a note in Dodsley informs us that the author, Holdsworth, said it was "exceedingly well done," I have before me another, printed in London for R. Gosling, 1715, with an engraved frontispiece, illustrative of the triumphant reception of Taffy's invention. The depredations of the mouse are illustrated in the various figures around, as cheeses burrowed through, even the invasion of a sleeping Welshman's very [Greek: erkos odonton], &c. The title is, _The Mouse-Trap, a Poem done from the original Latin in Milton's Stile_:

"Ludus animo debet aliquando dari,
Ad cogitandum melior ut redeat tibi"--_Phaed._

Both translations are in blank verse, but that of the latter is very _blank_ indeed, and possesses little in common with Milton's _style_, except the absence of rhyme. It thus begins:

"The British mountaineer, who first uprear'd
A mouse-trap, and engoal'd the little thief,
The deadly wiles and fate inextricable,
Rehearse, my Muse, and, oh! thy presence deign,
Auxiliar Phoebus, mortal foe to mice:
Whence bards in ancient times thee Smintheus term'd," &c.

Muscipula must have made some sensation to have been translated by two different persons. _Welsh rabbits_, and their supposed general fondness for _cheese_, have furnished many a joke at the expense of the inhabitants of the principality. Among others the following quiz may not be out of place on the famous Cambro-Britannic name of Lloyd:

"Two gibbets dejected, LL
A cheese in full view, O
A toaster erected Y
And a cheese cut in two, D."

Ballard MSS. in the Bodleian, vol. xxix. p. 80.

BALLIOLENSIS.

_Berefellarii_ (Vol. viii., p. 420.).--M. PHILARETE CHASLES has misrepresented JOHN JEBB'S Query and conjecture about _berefellarii_ (Vol. vii., p. 207.). He never spoke of these officers as "_half ecclesiastics_ (!), dirty, shabby, ill-washed attendants." They were priests of an inferior grade, answering to the minor canons of cathedrals, and superior to the vicars choral, who were also called _personae_ and _rectores chori_. He has far too great a respect for collegiate foundations to use such opprobrious terms when speaking of any class of ministers of divine service. The only conjecture J. JEBB made was, that the word might possibly have been a corruption (arising from incorrect writing) of _beneficiarii_, which is continually used abroad for the inferior clergy of collegiate churches, though not common in {551} England. It is just _possible_, though not very probable, that this somewhat foreign word was misread, and gave rise to a blundering corruption conveying ludicrous ideas, the "turpe nomen" alluded to by the Archbishop of York tempore Ric. II. The conjectural derivation of the word from Anglo-Saxon words was not my own, but that of a subsequent correspondent. It is just one of those conjectures which, like that of "Mazarinaeus," may be quite as likely to be false as true. I could suggest twenty that would be quite as likely; such as _bier-followers_ (attenders on funerals, as did the clerks and inferior clergy in cathedrals), or _bury fellows_ (query, burying fellows), or _beer fellows_ (like the _beerers_ in Dean Aldrich's famous catch), or _belly fillers_, &c., or lastly, some corruption of _Beverly_ itself. _Barefellows_ is as likely as any. Still I cannot think that these functionaries were low or contemptible. Their position corresponded to a very honourable status in cathedral churches.

JOHN JEBB.

_Harmony of the Four Gospels_ (Vol. viii., pp. 316. 415.)--I am greatly obliged to MR. HARDWICK, MR. BUCKTON, and J. M. for their valuable and satisfactory replies to my Query. To the list of those Harmonies published since the Reformation, may be added that of John Hind, 1632, under the title of

"The Storie of Stories, or the Life of Christ, according to the foure
holy Evangelists: with a harmonie of them, and a table of their
chapters and verses, collected by Johan Hind. London, printed by Miles
Flesher, 1632."

It is dedicated to the "Lady Anne Twisden," with whom, and her son the learned Sir Roger Twisden, this John Hind, "a German gentleman of Mecklenburgh, a most religious honest knowing man, lived above thirty years," &c.

Surely Doddridge's _Family Expositor_ should be added to the list.

Z. 1.

_Picts' Houses and Argils_ (Vol. viii., p. 264.).--Malte-Brun, in his _Universal Geography_, English translation, vol. vi. p. 387., has a passage in his description of Russia which applies to this matter. The steppes of Nogay lie immediately to the north of the peninsula of the Crimea, both being included in the Russian government of Taurida, and both countries were formerly inhabited by the Cimbri or Cimmerians. Malte-Brun says:

"The colonists are in many places ill provided with timber for
building; they live under the ground, and the hillocks, which are so
common in the country, and which served in ancient times for graves or
monuments of the dead, are now converted into houses, the vaults are
changed into roofs, and beneath them are subterranean excavations.
Kurgan is the Tartar name for these tumuli; they are scattered
throughout New Russia; they were raised at different times by the
different people who ruled over that region. The Kurgans are not all of
the same kind; some are not unlike the rude works of the early
Hungarians, others are formed of large and thin stones, like the
Scandinavian tombs. It is to be regretted that the different articles
contained in them have been only of late years examined with care."

This does not establish the identity of the Argil and Kurgan, but I think it shows more particular information is likely to be met with on the subject. M. Malte-Brun, vol. vi. p. 152., in his description of Turkey, mentions a curious town on the hills of the Strandschea, a little to the west of Constantinople. It is called Indchiguis, and is inhabited by Troglodytes; its numerous dwellings are cut in solid rocks, stories are formed in the same manner, and many apartments that communicate with each other.

W. H. F.

_Boswell's "Johnson"_ (Vol. viii., p. 439.).--

"Crescit, occulto velut arbor aevo,
Fama Marcelli: micat inter omnes
Julium sidus, velut inter ignes
Luna minores."--Hor. _Carm._ I. xii. 45-48.

F. C. has overlooked the _point_ of Boswell's remark, viz. that Johnson had been "inattentive to metre."