66

in 1824, gives (i. 577) a narrative of the affair. It seems that a gentleman offered a guinea for the discovery of a date, but the workmen sought in vain. Disinclined to lose the reward, they selected one of the roof-timbers, technically termed a pan" (or "purlin"), and inscribed upon it, in rude Roman characters, the letters "D.C.LXXV" (675), to which they contrived to give an appearance of antiquity. The artifice succeeded tolerably well, and with the aid of a few more c's, might have gone down to posterity as the true date of the ancient structure. Daresbury church, in the county of Chester, has, or had recently, the date of "1110" inscribed upon the tower, in the type of figures current a century ago. The old church at Bowdon, Cheshire, prior to its being rebuilt a few years since, displayed, in modern figures, "A.D. 1040," inscribed on the battlement over the north door. At Overton, in the parish of Frodsham, also in Cheshire, the church-tower, which is in the Perpendicular style of architecture, has, according to a recent county history and gazetteer, the date of "1350" upon it. An antiquarian friend (Mr. John Owen), after a recent inspection, states the inscription to be "в. н. о." in Old English or black letter. The first two probably represent the initials of the master builder, and the latter may stand for Overton, the place of his residence. Memorials of that kind are elsewhere met with in the county, as for instance at Mobberley church, and also at Witton church, near Northwich. A singular misconception has arisen with respect to a memorial on the tower of Didsbury church, near Manchester. The Rev. John Booker, in his History of the Ancient Parochial Chapel of Didsbury, printed for the Chetham Society, says (p. 16), "On the east side of the tower is the date 1620' and the letters 'W.R.', probably the initials of the builder." The date, though a comparatively modern inscription, is correct as to the period when the tower was erected, but not so Mr. Booker's surmise about the letters w. R., which are not only modern, but represent the initials of an ambitious workman employed during some repairs a few years since. Denton chapel is a quaint half-timbered structure, in the ancient and very extensive parish of Manchester. The year of erection is "indisputably" ascertained to have been 1531-2, and yet a late learned incumbent placed over the southern door this memorial:

"STRVXIT.

ANNO EDVARDI IV. SEPTΙΜΟ

[1467-8]." It should be stated, however, that he was misled by a random assertion in Britton & Brayley's Beauties of England and Wales (ix. 288.) The town of Knutsford, in Cheshire, furnishes a couple of illustrations. The Rev. Henry Green, A.M., in his very pleasant and interesting little volume, Knutsford, its Traditions and History (1859), mentions (pp. 17-18) an old "half

timbered" cottage at the turn of the road from Brook House to the Cross Town, and gives "1411" as the year of erection. A few years since, on visiting the place, we found the cottage displayed in its front a beam, upon which were carved or indented the initials "H.M.I.", and the supposed very ancient date. Neither of the twain (Mr. O. and myself) for a moment doubted that the date had originally been 1711, as both the letters and figures were in the type of that period, when the 4s and 7s made by village carpenters differed but little from each other. Further, the sparsity of posts and beams, with the slimness of the timber, and the character of the structure generally, all indicate that it was erected several centuries later than the period assigned in the history. Possibly the person who re-incised the date laboured under a misconception of its meaning, or he might be actuated by a desire to make the house famous, or even waggery may have been his purpose. A short distance away was the "Rose and Crown," a double-gabled structure, with "T. I. s. 1047" carved upon it, in remembrance of its origin. Doubtless the date stood originally "1647," but the head of the 6 has been erased, it maybe to outdo the old cottage. At any rate, surnames were in vogue at the period of its erection, as is further evidenced by one of the beams being lettered " I.B., R.S. CARP." in allusion to the fabricators of the framework. At Castleton, in Derbyshire, a similar freak has been perpetrated. About eight or nine years ago, placed over the back entrance-door of a house near the vicarage, we perceived a stone label, bearing an eleventh century date (either 1072 or 1078) in Arabic numerals. Like that at Knutsford, this was clearly a tampering with a date of the seventeenth century. The case of Levenshulme Hall (as it was sometimes called), near Manchester, may be cited as an instance of the mistakes and misconceptions often made by rustics, and even by more pretentious persons, when attempting to decipher ancient memorials. This structure, which disappeared not many years ago, was a picturesque half-timbered pile, built in the style locally known as "radlings-and-daub." The main edifice comprised a centre and two gables in a line, with a projecting entrance porch. The initials of the worthy couple who built it, "T. S. A.," and the year of their undertaking, "J703," were incised upon the moulded lintel of the doorway entering the principal structure. A neighbouring woman said the figures represented 1103, whilst a man who came up asserted they were 1503; a third person declared they had been read 1403 by a Frenchman; and a fourth individual insisted upon 1603 as being the correct reading. But my friend, Mr. O., who has had great experience in matters of the kind, affirmed that they represented 1703 (the second figure cut more conventionally even than that at Knutsford), and indeed there was nothing about the place to countenance an older reading of the memorial. At Gorton, near Manchester, there remains an old Nonconformist chapel, which at the period of erection had the year incised on the stone lintel of the door of the chapelhouse, which adjoins the sacred structure, and contains the staircase leading into the gallery. Within the recollection of not very aged persons, the record, whatever it may have been, was recut as 1705; but some years later, and now ten years since, it was altered to 1703-certainly only a difference of two years, but still one of the recuttings must be false. The roof-timbers were alleged to bear certain initials, and one of the above dates; but, upon examination, one of the kingposts proved to have different initials to those accredited, and the figures proved to be 1763, incised upon it.

Gravestones are liable to be misread and misrepresented. At Frodsham (or Overton) church, about seven years ago, the clerk pointed out a small slab as a great curiosity, commemorating the interment, as he thought, in "1510," of one Hannah Jackson, the wife of William Jackson of Morley. After considerable study I arrived at the correct solution. The good woman died on May 10, 1708. What had been taken for 1510 was simply "Ma: 10," which being cut in rather conventional characters, has been mistaken for a mixture of Roman numerals and Arabic figures. The true year of our Lord (1708) occurs within the folds of some drapery appurtenant to a cherub's head and shoulders, grotesquely treated. At Burslem, in Staffordshire, Mr. O. lately noticed a gravestone with the date "J428," which had evidently once been 1628, or probably 1728, but having become almost obliterated, had been recut. Indeed the sexton recollected when it was last touched up. If there were any doubt about the matter, the old border which enclosed the original date was just perceptible. It was of a type clearly not older than the middle of the seventeenth century, and which remained in use for a long time after. No trace is now to be seen of the inscription which must once have been above it. Another stone bore the date "1300,” which had evidently been cut not many years ago. At Hill Cliff near Warrington, there was a very ancient Baptist chapel which has been rebuilt within memory. In the graveyard there is a flat gravestone with the date 1599 cut in the centre. The stone is doubtless original, and the memorial, from the type of the figures, is believed to be genuine; this being one of, if not the oldest, Nonconformist places of worship in the kingdom. There are still earlier dates upon other stones, but we did not copy them, as they are undoubtedly spurious! The falsification of dates, as might be expected, extends to those figured upon furniture more or

less ancient. Some few years since we noticed an imposition of this sort upon an article of furniture in Barlow Hall, near Manchester. We think the date was "1428," but felt too disgusted at the time to make a note of it. There used to be an old clock in Clayton Hall, near Manchester, bearing the name of its maker, "Georgius Leycester, Knutsford," who was said to be living in 1662. The long narrow case was inscribed "1511," but the figures we considered to be apocryphal. In the very interesting museum at Warrington there is an old clock, upon the face of which is inscribed the ancient date of "1547"; but the figures are modern, and are simply struck on with a small punch. Would some of your correspondents kindly say when, or about what period, Arabic figures began to replace Roman numerals? Lastly, according to the popular account of the Tower of London, yclept Her Majesty's Tower, there are various dates (1537, '53, '54, '55, '62, '66, '68, &c.) scratched upon the walls, or alleged to have been, by prisoners in that sullen old fortress. Would some competent person certify that those figures are genuine (or appear to be so), for the benefit of those who may never have an opportunity of inspecting them? JOIN HIGSON.

Lees, near Oldham.

EARLY REFERENCE TO THE GOSPELS.
(4th S. v. 118, 230.)

Permit me to return thanks to MESSRS. BUCKTON and TEW for the trouble they have taken to answer my question regarding early reference to our four Gospels.

No doubt if the fourth chapter of Paley's Evidences, and the first volume of Lardner's Credibility, dealt with genuine and authentic documents, nothing could be more satisfactory than the connection there endeavoured to be shown between the time of the supposed Apostles and the time of the real Irenæus.

By far the best edition of Clement the Roman is that of Dr. Lightfoot, published last year. Dr. Lightfoot does not even attempt to defend the second epistle attributed to Clement. Regarding the first epistle he says: "not long after the middle of the second century, testimony is borne to the authorship from two independent quarters"! Add to this the fact that there is only one extant copy of this supposed and anonymous epistle, namely, that appended to the codex Alexandrinus in the British Museum-a codex not older than about A.D. 450.

Such is the evidence for the best authenticated writing attributed to any of the so-called Apostolical Fathers!

According to the best evidence and arguments, ings attributed to this source are more than doubtful. Moreover, taking these writings as we find them, and seeing in them instances of agreement between these writings and our Gospelsinstances chiefly of short maxims-can any one prove whether these instances, or echoes, came to the writers from written or oral sources of knowledge?

From a long train of reasoning, much thought, and more than thirty years' study and examination of evidence, I am myself convinced that

If a hero be distinguished, chiefly, for performing supernatural exploit, both hero and exploit are purely mythical.

This rule does not admit of any exception, and I venture to predict that it will stand the test of the most rigorous criticism.

Ignorance of this rule has led Paley and Lardner to mistake rubbish for solid material. The writings attributed to the Apostolical Fathers are not any better evidence of early reference to our four Gospels than the so-called Apocryphal Gospels. Why so called is more than I know; for, according to external evidence, they are just as old as our Gospels; and the so-called Apocryphal Gospels bear internal evidence that they are older than our four Gospels. I have here space for only one argument. The so-called Apocryphal Gospels relate miracles of a cruel and even malignant character, and are therefore older than benign miracles attributed to the same source. For it is a decided mistake to suppose that any religion has originally sprung forth in perfect purity, like a river from its mountain spring. On the contrary, all that has been ascertained concerning the primitive state of any religion proves that its origin is for the most part that fear of the unknown future which has influenced man so powerfully in all ages, and that the rites which this fear has originated are of a cruel and revolting character. I beg to draw particular attention to this statement, and to refer to an article on "Chthonian Worship" in the first volume of the new Journal of Philology, published in the year

1868.

Before leaving this most interesting subject, permit me to suggest respectfully that the so-called Apocryphal Gospels bear the same relation to our four Gospels, exactly, that the Cyclic Poems bear to our Iliad and Odyssey.

In conclusion, permit me to narrow my original question concerning Irenæus.

Can it be that Irenæus stands to our four Gos

pels in a relation exactly analogous to that in which Plato stands to our Iliad and Odyssey? In each case are the writings quoted regarded, for the first time, as of supreme authority concerning the subjects of which they treat?

THOS. L'ESTRANGE.

DR. JOHN MORE.

(4th S. v. 224, 330.)

John More was an eminent M.D. of London, and I happen to know somewhat of his and his family's history from the circumstance of his having been the owner of Thelwall Hall and the manor of Thelwall, which are now my property. In addition to his Thelwall property, Dr. More or Moore, for he is described in both ways, was owner also of several other estates in Cheshire, and of the manors of Kirtlington and Langford in the county of Nottingham, purchased from the Earl of Kingston, and also of the lordship of Hockerton, in the latter county, which he bought from Gilbert Bourne, Esq., Serjeant-at-Law. Dr. More purchased the manor of Thelwall from the Brookes of Norton in 1621, and by indenture dated November 23, 1642, he settled his estates on his nephews, Sir Edward More, Bart., and John More, Esquire, and the heirs male of their bodies. He died issueless about 1645, and was thereupon succeeded in the manor of Thelwall and his other estates by his nephew Sir Edward More, Bart., so created by Charles I. A.D. 1636. In the Leigh MSS. in the British Museum, No. 2155 Harl. MSS., speaking of Thelwall in 1650, it is said"Thelwall, by the gift of Dr. More, Dr. in physic, now belongs to his nephew, whose coin hath created him a Bart. and Knight of Nova Scotia." During the time of the Commonwealth, Sir Edward More's estates were seized by order of the Parliament, and continued under sequestration for several years, full particulars of which appear in the Harl. MS., No. 2137, fol. 9. Sir Edward More married a daughter of William Whitmore, Esq., of Leighton, in the county of Chester, by whom he had issue four daughters. He resided at Thelwall prior to the decease of his uncle Dr. More, and continued to make it his residence for some time subsequently. Dying without male issue, the baronetcy became extinct, and the estates devolved, according to the settlement made by Dr. More, upon John More, Esq., younger brother of Sir Edward. He was succeeded by a son, also John, who was possessed of the Nottinghamshire estates at the time of Thoroton's History of that county in 1677, in which the writer observes:

"All Kirtlington, except the park belonging to the Marquis of Dorchester, is now the inheritance of John More, son and heir of John More, brother of Sir Edward More, Bart., nephew and heir of Dr. More, which Sir Edward having only daughters, four I think, the said

John, his brother, succeeded by settlement of his uncle

the Dr., and hath made a fair park, into which he hath taken part of Hockerton Lordship, which he left well

stored with deer to his said son John."

The last-named John More married the Hon. Catherine Constable, daughter of John, second

Viscount Dunbar, by Lady Mary Brudenell, only daughter of Thomas Earl of Cardigan, and sister of William, fifth and last Viscount Dunbar. From reference to the archives of the Heralds' College, it appears Dr. More had the unusual privilege of bearing in succession five coats of arms, which are duly registered there, and are also recorded in Harl. MSS., No. 1422. Mr. Wanley, one of the compilers of the Harleian Index, comments in somewhat sarcastic terms on the unusual circumstance of one individual having five grants of arms, and adds:

"Whatever fancy the Dr. might get into his head about his family and arms, the heralds, we see, took not only his money but care to preserve his name and all the alterations he had procured from time to time."

Thelwall Hall, Warrington.

JAMES NICHOLSON.

Tickets will be given to the Workmen who are to dine at Darlington, specifying the Houses of Entertainment. The Proprietors, and such of the Nobility and Gentry as may honour them with their Company, will dine precisely at Three o'clock at the Town Hall, Stockton.Such of the Party as may incline to return to Darlington that Evening, will find Conveyances in waiting for their Accommodation, to start from the Company's Wharf there precisely at Seven o'clock.

The Company take this Opportunity of enjoining on all their Work-people that Attention to Sobriety and Decorum which they have hitherto had the Pleasure of observing.

The Committee give this Public Notice, that all Persons who shall ride upon, or by the side of, the Railway on Horseback, will incur the Penalties imposed by the Acts of Parliament passed relative to this Railway.

Any Individual desirous of seeing the train of Waggons descending the incline plane from Etherley, and in progress to Darlington, may have an opportunity of so doing by being on the Railway at St. Helen's, Auckland, not later than half-past 7 o'clock.

AUSTRALIAN LAW COURTS (4th S. v. 60.) - In reply to R. C. L., I think that a great number of the counsel at the Australian bar, like most other colonial counsel, have been called to the English bar, but attorneys can of course serve their articles, and no doubt be regularly admitted in the colony. As a rule the law in both professions was poorly served up to a few years ago, when many home counsel and attorneys went out there. Although I believe a barrister may practise as an attorney, and an attorney as a barrister, I have been told by old colonial practitioners that practically the profession is divided into the two distinct branches, or rather grades, it is here. In small colonies there is not that necessity perhaps for a division of labour there is in larger or older communities; but the custom has grown up in America of vesting in a single practitioner the most responsible but more mechanical duties of the attorney with the higher duties of counsel, and which, bringing him into too frequent and intimate contact with every condition of the laity, and that from an early age, together with the impossibility of his acquiring a real knowledge of any branch of a profession confessedly exacting, or retaining much of his general education, has-far more than any influence of the manners and habits of the people utterly impossible is

for any one

equity is being considered, as I think it occupies - much the same ground; and I feel convinced that although such a fusion may in the first instance save a suitor's purse, he will get inferior stuff for his money. For it man to become a great lawyer in both branches; and, to say nothing of many other great commonlawyers, even Lord Brougham was a dead failure in chancery. But, I presume, as men so eminent in their profession as the present Law Lords have given their consent to the introduction of a bill on the subject this session, they will so modify the one proposed as to avoid all the inconveniences to which I have referred, and, instead of a

fusion of law and equity, secure us the advantages of unity of administration.

T. HELSBY.

XENOPHON (4th S. v. 92, 236.) - LOYOLA says

that ὀλίγοι τῶν ἐπὶ πᾶσιν, Hellenics, lib. I. cap. i. 34, evidently means "a few out of the whole body," and asks if anybody can quote a parallel use of ἐπὶ in this sense. But is this its meaning? Matthiæ, 586, γ. (Blomfield's translation) says of ἐπὶ with the dative "it frequently signifies not so much 'a being together' as an immediate 'following upon' (a connection of time and space). Xen. Cyr. II. iii. 7, ἀνέστη ἐπ ̓ αὐτῷ Φεραύλας, 'immediately after him,' and Madvig (Syntax of the Greek Language, ed. Arnold, chap. vi. 73), gives the meanings "in addition to, after (of accompaniment and immediate sequence)': Ἡ ἐπὶ τῇ νυκτί, ἡ ἐξῆλθον, ἡμέρα (Xen. Hell. Iv. iv. 9), οἱ ἐπὶ πᾶσι, the last." Cf. Buttmann, 147, where the citation ἡμέρα ἐπὶ τῇ νυκτὶ ταύτη is also given as an example of the use of ἐπὶ with the dative in the sense of after. Schneider's translation of the whole passage in question (Edin. ed. 1821) is as follows:

"Quod quum vidisset Agis, celeriter abduxit suos amissis paucis extremo in agmine, quos velites intere

mere."

The italics are, of course, mine. If then the phrase signifies not "a few out of the whole body," but a few of those in the rear, as I venture to think that it does, the use of ἐπὶ is not without parallel.

So far what I may call the theoretical view of the matter, but a learned friend whom I have consulted informs me that ἐπὶ πᾶσι is in fact a regular military term, meaning "in the rear," and promises to furnish me with examples from Thucydides. T. STEWARDSON, JUN. Philadelphia.

ARMS ON A LATIN BIBLE (4th S. v. 61.) -There can be no doubt, I fancy, that the arms referred to by MR. W. SPARROW SIMPSON are foreign, the Continentals not being particular about quartering fruit and other savoury viands on their shields-a

custom, however, that seems to have been adopted as late as the sixteenth century, by which time every more masculine device appears to have been appropriated to the feudal families. The student in heraldry can tell, with a good deal of certainty, the ancient arms of our own land from those of modern grant or adoption, and, I think, with still greater ease, the like coats of the foreigner.

On referring to a French work in my possession, which I believe to be very rare (?)-"L'Art héraldique, par A. Playne à Paris, 1717"-I find a family named Brucelles bearing (crest and supporters not named): Or, a chevron gules between two bunches of grapes leafed proper, in base a wolf or fox rampant gules; and this is the nearest approach I can make to the arms described by MR. SIMPSON. It is not improbable that the Brucelles family was a younger branch of the family of the three grapes, and bore the base charge as a difference (?). Another French family, Pommereiul, bore-Azure a chev. between three apples, leafed, of the second.

The study of foreign heraldry is very curious, and affords amusing illustrations of the characters

of various nations.*

T. HELSBY.

"A PIN A DAY 'S A GROAT A YEAR" (4th S. iv. 363; v.163.) -At the close of "Necessary Hints to those that would be Rich," written anno 1763 (The Life and Works of Benjamin Franklin, Nelson, 1853, p. 182) is the couplet given by Mr. MACPHAIL. JOHN HOSKYNS-ABRAHALL.

BURIAL IN AN ERECT POSTURE (1st S. viii. 5; 4th S. v. 249.)-Your correspondent VEBNA may perhaps like to be reminded of another instance, already noted by me in these pages, of burial in an erect posture in Breckles chancel, Norfolk. The motto on the nearly circular slab is "Stat ut vixit erecta." W. H. S.