From http://www.shallcross-ancestry.org.uk/
Shallcross family: The name is derived from an ancient cross. This five-foot long eighth-century Christian stone relic is located at the junction of Elnor Lane and the Roman Road to Buxton near the Hamlet of Fernilee, in the Peak District National Park, Derbyshire.
Shallcross /Shawcross family members can trace the origin of our name to a five-foot long eighth-century Christian stone relic located
at the junction of Elnor Lane and the ancient Roman road to Buxton, in Derbyshire, England. The Danes, who invaded this area circa 900 A.D., referred
to it as a Shackle-Cross, due to the shaft's resemblance to a shackle pin. The people who dwelled in the vicinity of this relic came to have the surname
of Shacklecross. The cross stone that once sat atop the square-chamfered end of the cross-shaft may have disappeared at the same time that our Danish ancestors usurped this land from the native Celts, who had made the cross. Only the cross-shaft remains today.
I suspect that more than one family of Danes may have settled here, and thus several non-related families may have come to share the same surname. Although our genetic relationship to each other is unclear, I think that all of us with the Shawcross name had ancestors that once lived in the tiny hamlet of Shallcross, which adjoins the Shackle-Cross (or Shall-Cross).
I have talked with several Shawcross’ in Canada, England, and the United States and all of us have traced our ancestry to England’s Greater Manchester area. The hamlet of Shallcross is near Manchester, which became a major job centre during the Industrial Revolution.
Many Shawcross’ (including my great-great-great-grandfather, James Shawcross) found employment in Manchester’s cotton manufacturing industry. Another significant segment of Shawcross' worked as bricklayers, or masons. Other Shawcross family members worked as architects, clergy,
merchants, photographers, and teachers. Chapter 4 of this book includes some of the Shawcross occupations that were listed in nineteenth century business directories of the Manchester area.
The earliest recorded spelling of our family name dates to the eleventh century. Of the ninety spelling variations identified, three forms have survived Shacklecross, Shallcross, and Shawcross. The Shawcross spelling originated in the sixteenth century. It may seem odd to us today that so many spellings of the same name could exist, but we need to keep in mind that spelling standards in earlier centuries were quite lax, due to high rates of illiteracy and a lack of standardized spellings or dictionaries. The following excerpt from the Shallcross Pedigrees º describes the evolution of our name.
From wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shallcross
The name Shallcross itself comes from an ancient stone cross, known as the Shall Cross, only the shaft of which is still standing. This cross is traditionally dated to the year 832, when St. Paulinus visited the area, although the existing stone shaft may have been erected at a later date. The name comes from the Old Norse shakal, denoting a tapering pole, which describes the shape of the shaft. For a time it was removed and used as the pedestal for a sun-dial in the garden of one of the local homes, but it was discovered and has been restored to its original location.[5]
And from: http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2390353276&topic=8106
On 6 February, 1994, I drove to England's Peak District from London and viewed the relic from which our family name has been derived. A sun-dial now sits atop the stone shaft which was created to bear a Christian cross. The cross that may have capped the shaft over a millennium ago had vanished by the time of the Norman invasion. Only the cross-shaft, with its square-chamfered top, was in place when the Normans displaced the native Celts, who had been converted to Christianity some two hundred years earlier. The cross-shaft resembled a shackle to the Normans, who called the relic “Shackle-Cross”, after the Anglo-Saxon sceacel, or sceacul, a shaft, or shackle. It should be recognized that a cross-shaft, even if it no longer supports a cross, is nonetheless considered to be a cross. Otherwise, the relic might have been called the “Shackle-Cross-Shaft,” and our family name might have become “Shawcrosshaft.”
Erected by the missionary Paulinius in 632, the cross was originally made of wood. It was replaced by a stone replica in the eighth century. Located on an ancient parish boundary line, the cross gave its name to its location. Subsequently, this locative name became the surname of the people that settled there. It is surrounded now by a protective drystone wall and is located in its original position at the intersection of Elnore Lane and an ancient road that dates to Roman times. The hamlet of Shallcross is there also.
After remaining at its original site for one thousand years, the shaft was moved some time during the nineteenth century to the estate of nearby Fernilee Hall, where it was used to support a sun-dial in the garden. Interestingly, the last heir male of “Shacklecross of Shacklecross” died in 1733; it has been speculated that perhaps this “Shacklecross” could not survive the other's loss. At some time after its movement to Fernilee Hall, the true historical significance of what is now called the Shall-Cross was understood, and the cross was replaced in its original position.
The following is a transcript of an article written by W. J. Andrew, titled “The Shall-Cross: A Pre-Norman Cross, Now At Fernilee Hall,” published in the Journal of the Derbyshire Archæological and Natural History Society, Vol. XXVII, 1905:
The familiar appearance of the shaft of a sun-dial in the gardens of Fernilee Hall, the residence of Mr. H. S. Cox, some five miles north-west of Buxton, attracted my attention. It then appeared to be about eighteen inches in height, resting upon a square base stone, and surmounted by a Victorian capital bearing the dial. That it was the upper portion of a Saxon cross shaft was certain, and it was natural to assume that it had been mutilated to the length desired for its present purpose. A close inspection, however, raised a suspicion that the cross instead of resting upon the base stone might possibly pass through it; in other words, the base stone might have been bored and passed over the head of the cross.
Mr. Cox at once showed his interest in archaeology by ordering an excavation. This resulted in proving the surmise to be correct, and disclosed a cross of the “pillar” type, nearly five feet in length and, near the base, three feet in circumference. The circumstance is curious, for it shows that whoever converted the cross to the purposes of a sun-dial had sufficient regard for its antiquity to preserve it intact. It is not in situ, but it is believed to have been at Fernilee Hall for about a hundred years. The shaft is complete, save that perhaps an inch or so at the top has been removed to level the stone for the capital, which probably dates from about a quarter of a century ago, but as it is a large square cap it is eminently suitable for the preservation of the relic from further weathering.
Mr. Haslam offered to photograph it for these pages, but an unexpected difficulty arose; the cross would not pass through the heavy base stone, and the latter would not pass over the capital. All attempts to remove the capital only disclosed that it was deeply doweled into the head of the cross, and Mr. Cox's men were of opinion that to persist would result in splitting the relic. Mr. Haslam was therefore restricted to photographing that portion, exactly four feet, which could be raised above the base stone. Hence the illustration in the plate is but four-fifths of the full length.
For 4 feet of its length it is cylindrical, with a girth of 35 inches at the foot, tapering to 32 inches at a point 13 inches from the present top. Here it is encircled by a double roll moulding 3 inches in breadth, and immediately above that the stone is chamfered to a square, which gradually narrows to 7 inches at the top. Upon each face of the chamfered portion is a compartment formed of a single moulding, following the lines of its face, thus in form resembling a staple. Across one of these compartments, not shown in the illustration, the initials “H.L.” above the date 1720* have been neatly carved.
This cross is of a well-known type, of which Mr. J. Romilly Allen, F.S.A., wrote: “Judging from the relative number of monuments of this class in each county [Derbyshire, Cheshire, Staffordshire, Nottinghamshire, and Cumberland], it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the type had its origin in Cheshire or Staffordshire, and it is therefore Mercian rather than Northumbrian,”† and he adds a list of the twenty examples known to him, but he only credits Derbyshire with one example.
The following table of twenty-six specimens, including six specimens in this county, without in any way aspiring to be comprehensive, may be sufficient for the object of this paper, which is special rather than general:—
______________________________________________________________________________________
* The last two figures are not quite distinct.
† Chester Archæological Journal, vol. v., p. 145 .
THE SHALL-CROSS.
CROSS AND PLACE. NUMBER. REMARKS.
Derbyshire —
The Shall-Cross, Fernilee Hall .. 1 Not in situ. Roll, double Wilne Church 1 Ditto. Fragment converted to a font,
Bakewell Church 2 Ditto. Fragments in the porch possibly more than two crosses. Roll, single. The Picking Rods, Ludworth Moor 2 In situ, standing in a single block of stone.
Cheshire —
Macclesfield Park 3 Removed from Ridge Hall Farm. Roll, double.
Pym Chair, Taxal 1 In situ, a cross stump with
circular socket.
Clulow Cross 1 In situ upon a partially artifi- cial mound. Fillet double.
Upton 1 Near its site.
Cheadle 1 Found underground with an example of another class. The Bow Stones, Whaley Moor 2 In situ, standing in a single block of stone. Roll single.
Staffordshire —
Ilam Churchyard 1
Chebsey 1
Stoke 1
Leek 1
Nottinghamshire —
Stapleford 1 In situ, a few yards over the
Derbyshire border.
Denbighshire —
Eliseg's Pillar, Vale Crucis 1 An inscribed stone.
Cumberland —
Beckermet St. Bridget's 2 In situ, but with separate base-stones. Rolls, single and double, one inscribed. Gosforth 1 In situ. Long chamfered
portion.
Penrith 2 In situ, but 15 feet apart, connected by hog-backed ______ stones.
26
Although included in the above list, Eliseg's Pillar and the Penrith Stones have distinct characteristics, and were probably erected for different purposes than the rest. Several of these crosses bear typical Saxon ornamentation, such as interlaced knot-work within the upper compartments, as at Bakewell, Macclesfield, and in Cumberland; or elaborated carving round the cylindrical portions, as at Stapleford, Wilne, and Gosforth; or cross-heads, as at Ilam, Leek, and Gosforth. Some have a single circular roll moulding as the Bow Stones, or double as the Shall-cross, and at Macclesfield and Clulow; but where the shaft is perfect the single staple moulding is uniform.
It will be noticed that all these crosses are north of the Trent, and therefore as Mr. Allen suggested, they are distinctly Mercian in origin, and located in that portion of Mercia which, until the commencement of the seventh century, had remained under the rule of the Britons. That they are subsequent in date to the introduction of Christianity is also beyond doubt, as a reference to Wilne, Stapleford, and inscribed examples will prove. Therefore they may with confidence be dated between the seventh and the tenth centuries, but most of them indicate art of, probably, the earlier half of that period, and the example before us is of the early type. Probably the plain crosses were earlier than the ornamented, the knot-work pattern in the upper compartments prior to the carved cylinders, and, last of all, the figured designs as at Stapleford and Wilne. But fashions then, as now, would often overlap. I hope, however, presently, to offer further evidence for assuming that these crosses were already old at the date of the Norman Conquest.
Although, to quote Mr. Allen, they are “Mercian rather than Northumbrian,” they are closely allied to the Northumbrian crosses, and in Mercia, south of the Trent, this particular type of cross is entirely absent. Therefore we must look for their origin to a condition of affairs which would bring the inhabitants of Derbyshire and Cheshire under the religion and customs of their neighbours north of the Humber, whilst it left those of the rest, and greater portion of Mercia, under its old regime, a condition which would sever all associations and intercourse between the two peoples.
This can only, I think, be found between the years 627 and 685. In 607, Ethelfrith, King of Northumbria, by his victory over the Britons at Chester, had extended his kingdom to the Dee, and was slain at the battle on the Idle, in Nottinghamshire, in 617. Thus the district comprising the whole of the crosses in question came under the Northumbrian sway, and remained so, with temporary exceptions, until the year 685, when Ecgfrith of Northumbria was defeated and slain at the battle of Nechtansmere, and the Northumbrians lost a considerable portion of their territories. During this period, namely in 627, Christianity was introduced into Northumbria by Paulinius, and we know that in 632 he extended his mission throughout the boundaries of the then province, and as Beda tells us, “preached the Word on the south side of the Humber,” journeying as far as the Trent, in which, in the presence of King Edwin, who accompanied him, he baptized a multitude of the people near a town called Tiovulfingchester, which is usually accepted as Southwell. Thence he journeyed into Cumberland, preaching as he went; so his mission would embrace the very ground now sprinkled with this type of cross, namely, along the banks of the Trent and the Dove, passing Stapleford and Wilne into Staffordshire, by Chebsey, Stoke, Leek, and Ilam, and thence northward through the western borders of Derbyshire and Cheshire, past Bakewell, Shallcross, and Ludworth on the right, and Clulow, Macclesfield, Upton, Pym Chair, Bow Stones, and Cheadle on the left, on his way towards Cumberland. Thus he would pass within a few miles of every one of these monuments.
At this time the whole of the country south of the Trent was under the rule of Penda, of whom Beda writes: “Penda, with all of the nation of the Mercians, was an idolater, and a stranger to the name of Christ,” and in the following year King Edwin was slain by him at the battle of Heathfield. Therefore, if Paulinius introduced the custom of erecting crosses to commemorate the stages of this great religious movement, and this was the particular design of cross set up in Mercia on that occasion, we can well understand that the custom would not be tolerated across the Trent, and the design then popularized would have become old-fashioned and obsolete when, after the death of Penda in 655, Christianity was finally established in Mercia proper. Hence a type which had been introduced by the first great missionary for ages there; whilst south of the Trent another form of cross would remain the symbol of another preacher and of another period.
That it was customary where there was no church, to set up a cross upon such occasions, is well authenticated by our early historians. Beda tells us that in the year following the death of Edwin, King Oswald, marching against Penda, and finding there was neither church nor altar at a place called Havenfield, erected the sign of the Holy Cross, and whilst the earth was thrown in, ordering the people to kneel and pray for the safety of the nation. This cross, however, was “made in haste,” and was of wood, but others of the same or the following century are recorded as being of carved stone.
It seems probable that the original crosses, which I have suggested were erected by Paulinius, were also of wood, for they would be set up in haste as occasion required. This is important in view of the peculiar form of this type. The usual and natural Saxon stone cross shafts have a rectangular cross section, but I think that these pillar cross shafts bear a close resemblance to a felled and lopped tree trunk, especially to that of the pine, which would be the most common and most convenient tree of the district. They are rounded at the base where the tree would be felled, and their curious tapering square at the top, with its oval faces, exactly reproduces the effect of lopping off the rest of the trunk with an axe, for saws were not then used by woodsmen. To demonstrate this a pencil has only to be sharpened with four cuts of the knife. The cross before us and its colleagues are, I believe, reproductions in stone of these early wooden prototypes and if we imagine that the single and double roll mouldings are representations of the ropes which originally bound the cross pieces to the wooden shaft, we have a very close picture of what the shafts of the crosses of Paulinius must have been. This is the more marked when we remember that on some crosses this moulding actually assumes the rope or “cable” pattern, as it is termed. Exactly the same system of imitation was extended to Anglo-Saxon stone architecture, where the tie beams and other details of the wooden buildings were carefully reproduced in the courses and ornamentation of the masonry.
The wooden crosses of Paulinius would soon perish, for apart from their natural disintegration, they would be the prey of the devout relic searcher, as, indeed, a story of Beda implies was the fate of King Oswald's cross. But before fifty years had elapsed another great revival passed over the land, which, I suggest, led to their reproduction in their present durable form. Towards the close of the same century Theodore of Tarsus, Archbishop of Canterbury, originated the parochial system, by which the whole country was intended to be divided into ecclesiastical parishes, and each to be assigned to the ministration of a single priest. As a matter of fact, it took centuries to complete the system, but the work was then commenced and intermittently continued until the reign of Edward III.
In June of last year I had the privilege of accompanying Dr. Cox in a search, extending over several days, for the lost crosses of the Peak. The results are given by him in a paper to the Athenæum for July 9th, 1904, entitled “Early Crosses in the High Peak.” He had obtained tracings of sixteenth and seventeenth century maps of the Forest, which disclosed many crosses now entirely unknown either to the ordnance surveyors or others. The stumps of some of these we found, but — with the exception of the well-known crosses on Ludworth Moor, Robin Hood's Picking Rods, as they are now called, but the “Standing Stones” and the “Maiden Stones,” as the old maps called them — none appeared to have been of the type which is the subject of this paper. But we noticed that almost invariably, and in the one or two instances when this was not the case it is probably accounted for by modern diversions, the cross was upon the line of the parish boundary, and not only upon the line, but the face of the cross, as indicated in the stump, was always true to the direction. Hence there is little doubt that the crosses were originally placed to record the boundary of each parish, and they are usually at its corners. One instance in particular demonstrated this. From the Picking Rods, one of the boundaries runs in a south-easterly direction to the stump of a cross we discovered, and then in a straight line to the Abbot's Chair, which is a Saxon cross stump of the ordinary rectangular section set true to line. Here the boundary turns sharply to the north-east, but only for a length of about fifty yards, where it crosses the road called Monk's Road; yet here, although so close to the other, is also a cross stump, but seemingly of a later date, and thence the boundary once more assumes a south-easterly direction, though not quite in the same line as before. From this I am now inclined to deduce that originally the Abbot's Chair marked the corner of the whole, but that at the date of the later cross a small deviation was made, possibly in consequence of some charter to the Abbot of Basingwark, who held a grange in this neighbourhood. In this relation I would suggest that the word “chair” here, is really the old Anglo-Saxon cérre, which means a turn, corner, or bend, hence it was the abbot's boundary-corner. We note the same word in Pym Chair, the Saxon cross stump at Taxal, which is also on the boundary line of its parishes.
Cheers
Jon.
