Having configned thefe infcriptions to the neglect which they deferve, Mr. D. next notices that on a brafs fepulchral plate in Ware church (1454) as being the earliest yet discovered; whence Mr. Gough had deduced a weighty argument, that from their not appearing on fepulchral monuments till this time, the Arabic numerals could not have been common among us before the 15th century. After an enquiry into the earliest use of these characters, in fpecifying the dates of deeds, and in numbering the leaves or pages of books in MS. Mr. D. examines the well-known paflage in Matt. Paris's hiftory, relative to the introduction of the Greek numerals by the Archdeacon of Leicefter, and Mr. North's comment upon it in Archæologia, X. 375.

"It being exprefsly mentioned, that John de Bafing imported into this country the Greek numerals, is it not an overstrained critical amendment to affert, that the characters were not Greek, but Indian numerals, and new named by fome uncertain continuator of the hiftory, because they paffed from India through Greece to England? Such a fundamental alteration will be deemed lefs juftifiable, if it be confidered, that the perfon in question was the most eminent Greek scholar of his age; that he travelled into Greece, and abided at Athens, for the purpofe of improving himfelf in the Greek language. That when he returned home, he brought with him feveral Greek MSS. that he fpirited youths to the ftudy of the Greek language; and that for the use of the ftudious he tranflated into Latin an edition of a Greek grammar. Nor from the relation we have of him does it appear, that he extended his travels beyond Athens, or that he was converfant in the eastern literature and fciences. We learn, however, that he communicated to his intimate acquaintance the knowledge and the fignification of thefe figures; and from the brief explanation given of them by the hiftorian, who has likewife contrafted them with two other kinds of numerals, it may, I think, be demonftrated, that he muft have meant Greek figures." P. 150.

When Matthew Paris, in fpeaking of the Greek numerals, observes that the thing most to be admired in them was, that by a fingle figure any number is reprefented, he adds, quod non eft in Latino vel Algorifmo," which is not the cafe in the

Latin

Edit. Watts, p. 721. In the copy of his history in Corpus Chrifti Coll. Cambr. this paffage is given more fully, and, as the late Dr. Pegge thought, from his own pen; where a fpecimen is also added of thefe Greek characters, with their value in Roman numerals annexed.. The curious reader may fee this in Dr. Pegge's life of Bishop Groffetefte, P. 347, who remarks upon this mode of numeration, that it may be juftly admired for its fimplicity; but could not be fo well applied to

the

Latin numeration, or in Algorifm. Now as it is agreed by the gioflarifs, that the word algorifmus is of Arabic etymology, 2nd denotes numbering, Mr. D. thinks, that Arabic figures mult be meant by it; which, though they might be known to the hiftorian, yet that it may be reafonably inferred, he was not aware of their amazing capabilities; otherwife," he could never, as figures, have given a preference to the Greek letters."

"But fince it is clear, that Arabic numerals were not unknown to Matt. Paris, how are we to account for Chaucer in his Dreme*, ftyling them newe figures? The probable folution of this difficulty is, that thele figures ten had been then but lately used for the addition and fubtraction of pounds, fhillings, and pence; and the furmife acquires weight from the concomitant words of the poet, that “ Argus, the noble contour, counted with them in his countour." And yet proof is wanting of this ufe of the vulgar figures from the time of Chaucer, to an advanced period of the 16th century. In books (writes Mr. North) they were doubtlefs first used, and books have been examined to no purpofe. Imagining, that though the fearch had been fruitlefs in the libraries of feveral colleges in Oxford, fome examples might be traced in the books of accompts upon the fhelves, and in the boxes of the Burfar's apartments, I hinted a wifh to Mr. Ellis to pursue, when quite conven ent, this new line of enquiry." P. 156.

This gentleman, whom Mr. D. mentions as being then a very young ftudent in St. John's College in Oxford, with a trong and very useful propenfity to antiquarian researches, very readily acceded to this request, and the result of his examination was, that, in the Burfary accounts of All Souls, the Roman numerals are used till the beginning of the 18th century; in thofe of Exeter, till within about 30 years ago; and of the other college accounts," none occur, wherein the Arabic numerals are ufed, till within the last 50 or 70 years."

Notwithstanding the circulation in print of different treatifes of arithmetic, from an early period of the 16th century (most of them being here enumerated) "which were to teach to reckon in a speedier method than had been hitherto pursued," this is an additional proof of the little progrefs made in the art. It is, however, well accounted for by Mr. D. who further afcribes it to the inattention of the first founders of public

the purposes of arithmetic as our prefent figures, because the fimilarity of the characters would fubject us to perpetual, and fometimes important, mistakes. It would require a very nice and accurate pen in a writer, which difqualifies it for ready and common ufe." Rev.

Line 430, & feq. See alfo Gent. Mag. vol. liii, p. 406, where Chaucer's verfes are quoted.

fchools,

fchools, who made no kind of provision for arithmetical knowledge.

"that

"Of grammar fchools there was not a fcarcity, "there having been more erected and endowed within 30 years before the Reformation, than there had been in 30 years preceding. So that, as Dr. Knight fuggefted, there wanted rather a regulation than an increase of them." But not in any grammar fchool, as I fuipect, was the fcience of arithmetic a branch of the original inftitution. A knowledge of the primary rules of it was not a previous qualification for admiffion into them. What was required of a fcholar expectant was, he should be able to rede and write fufficiently his own leffons in Latyn and Englyfhet." Not any ufher or affiftant was provided to teach this "ground of arts," or to fupply to the scholar a cup out of this "well-fpring of fciences:" nor was an hour in a week appropriated for this effential branch of erudition. This was an overfight in the eftablishment of fchools, which at that time, and long afterwards, had its inconveniences. And, whatever may be the prefent ufage, it is within recollection, that 50 years ago there were fent from capital schools to the univerfity, youths of good abilities, and not by any means wanting in grammar and claffical learning, yet fo little verfed in the vulgar figures, as to be obliged to have recourfe to the mafter of a day-fchool in the town, for inftruction in the four fundamental rules of arithmetick." P. 164.

To the truth of this remark, every perfon of any confiderable standing in the university can bear witnefs; and even at this time it is notorious, that the ftudents from the northern fchools, where attention is paid to arithmetic and mathematics, go up to college with particular advantages over thofe, who have been educated in the public fchools of the metropolis, and other ancient seminaries; efpecially at Cambridge, where all the honours are affigned to a proficiency in the various branches of mathematics.

If we have given thefe differtations a very minute examination, we think ourfelves fully juftified by the importance of the fubject, as it is generally allowed, that, next to the art of printing, there is no invention of more extensive use than that of the numeral figures or cyphers." Mr. D. has purfued the investigation, through 62 pages, with fingular affiduity; having directed his fearch to fources unexplored by former enquiries. In our ftrictures on the preceding volume of this publication, it may be recollected, that we did not beftow our commendation upon his mode of reafoning; but we are happy, at

* The Life of Dr. John Colet, Dean of St. Paul's, p. 100. + Ibid. p. 124.

F

BRIT. CRIT. VOL. XVII, JAN, 1801.

parting,

parting, to be able to fpeak thus favourably of thefe papers. We have, indeed, beftowed upon them a fuller attention than common, both on account of their intrinsic merit, and because, with regret we write it, they are the laft that will come under our review from this author.

(To be continued.)

ART. XII. An Attempt to illuftrate fome of the Prophecies of the Old and New Teftament. By Thomas Zouch, A. M. 12mo. 240 pp. 3s. 6d. Wakefield printed; fold by Payne, &c. London. 1800.

THE importance of this book muft by no means be efti

mated in proportion to its fize. It contains within a narrow compass much scriptural learning; much wife and able confideration; and much temperate, though firm oppofition, to opinions which the author confiders as ill-founded. Mr. Zouch (we prefume, the fame who published, in 1796, the valuable edition of Ifaac Walton's Lives) has here brought together fome lately agitated paffages of the prophetic Scriptures, with a view to illuftrate their defign. He particularly opposes the application of the prophecies concerning Antichrift to atheistical France, adhering to the opinion established by fuch a weight of Proteftant authority, that Papal Rome is the true object of thofe predictions. On this ground, he is obliged immediately to oppofe the late Mr. Jones of Nayland, whofe difcourfe on the Man of Sin" certainly took up that idea in too hasty a manner. He oppofes him, however, with the respect and esteem due to fo valuable a character.

"If any name be dear to facred literature, it is that of the late Mr. Jones of Nayland. In his difcourfe on the Man of Sin, he declares, that "one remarkable Sign of the last day has not hitherto received an adequate interpretation"" that volumes have been written with great uncertainty of interpretation, depending upon facts, which, however bad in their way, did certainly never come up to the defcription of St. Paul." He confiders the term apoftacy as implying " an apoftacy from the Chriftian faith"-" a total rejection from the Chriftian Religion, not a partial deviation from it by the admiffion of fome particular doctrines or practices." When the Man of Sin is reprefented as oppofing and exalting himself above all that is called God, Mr. Jones explains the words as denoting an oppofition to Kings and Rulers. He fuppofes the reftraining power mentioned by the Apoftle to be the reftaining power of government, and the obligations of law,"

"

which, He obferves, are taken out of the way and abolished by the Revolutionists of France. In fhort, He applies the prophecy of this great defection to a neighbouring country, where the Chriftian religion hath been renounced, not negatively, through corruption of manners or neglect of truth, but pofitively, publicly, and in folemn forin :" where the reftraining power of government, and the obligation of law, have not been interrupted and defied, but abfolutely taken out of the way, and abolished," where we fee "a portentous Company rifen up, who take to themfelves the fublime denomination of Legiflators, not under the authority of God, but in their own right, exclufive of his legiflation, and in oppofition to his power:" where "the churches have been fhut up from the worship of God, and opened to admit the worship of reafon-the reafon of man, or man himself, who now, as God, is actually feated in the temple of God, to be worshipped*."

"Does this defcription of the great apoftacy correfpond with that of St. Paul? The Apoftle clearly and in the most explicit language informs us wherein it confifts :-not in a dereliction of all religion, not in a change of political principles, not in a rebellion or revolt from the Roman, or any civil government-not in the annihilation of all law and order; but in a falling away from the purity of the gospel by admitting certain tenets and practices which he fpecifi cally enumerates:-the worship of demons-the prohibition of marriage-abstinence from certain meats. Where this triple Complication of erroneous doctrines is found, there and there only we are to look for the predicted apoftacy, the feeds of which were fown in the firft ages of the Church, have long fince taken deep root, and brought forth fruit abundantly+. Thefe three doctrines have abfolutely been promulgated by the hypocrify and effrontery of men noted for falfhood, for lying miracles, and forged writings, and, in the emphatic language of the Apostle, having their conícience feared with a hot-iron."

P. 2.

This is furely very folid arguing against the opinion of Mr. Jones; and it is followed by other judicious obfervations, directed alfo against Mr. Wrangham, and those who have held a fimilar doctrine: after which, he inferts a caution, too valuable at the prefent moment to be omitted by us.

"The adaptation of events to the prophetic parts of feripture requires great care and circumfpection. A warm and lively fancy is

"* Jones's Man of Sin, 3d edit. p. 9, 19, 20.

"The words in the original which exprefs this Apoftacy are of a fimilar import with the Hebrew and which by no means fignify an entire defertion of all religion. When the Ifraelites added to the worship of the true God the Worfhip of Baal, Afteroth, and other heathen idols, they were pronounced to be guilty of Apoftacy. -See Mede's Application of 2 Pet. II, to the Church of Rome, Mede's Works, p. 238."

F 2

apt