Notes and Queries, Number 214, December 3, 1853

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 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:

, †, ×. 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 תּו (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, Το γαρ οπτωμενον προβατον, κ.τ.λ. 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. Βασιλικὴ, 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."

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 - 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.] 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.

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.

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.