Notes and Queries, Number 27, May 4, 1850

P. 57. Convocation, subscribers to the judgment of, xxxi. 9. British Magazine, Sept. 1849, p. 317.

P. 68. Ely, Altars, suppression of, 1550, xxx. 213. Brit. Mag. Oct. 1849, p. 401.

P. 77. Several of the papers relating to Bishop Fisher will be found in Dr. Hymers' edition of The Funeral Sermon on Lady Margaret.

P. 80. Gloucester, Abbey of, &c., a Poem by Malvern, v. 285-7. Brit. Mag. xxi. 377.; Caius Coll. MSS. No. 391. art 13.

Goodman, Declaration concerning the articles in his book. Strype's Annals, I. i. 184.

P. 89. Henry VII., Letter to Lady Margaret, xix. 262. See Dr. Hymers, as above, p. 160.

P. 91. Henry VIII., Letter to, giving an account of the death of Wyngfield, &c. See Sir H. Ellis, Ser. III. No. 134.

P. 94. Humphrey, Bishop, Account, &c., xxxv. 1-19. Rend xxvi. 1-19.

Humphrey, Bishop, Images and Relics, &c., xxx. 133-4. Brit. Mag. Sept. 1849, p. 300.

P. 121-2. Lady Margaret. Several of the articles relating to Lady Margaret have been printed by Dr. Hymers (ut sup.).

P. 137. Pole Card. Oratio Johannis Stoyks, &c., v. 310-312. Dr. Lamb, p. 177.

P. 143. Redman, Dr., Particulars of, xxxii. 495.—Brit. Mag. Oct. 1849, p. 402.

P. 151. Spelman's Proposition concerning the Saxon Lecture, &c. Sir H. Ellis Letters of Eminent Literary Men, Camd. Soc. No. 59.

P. 169. Noy's Will, xxxvi. 375., read 379.

Many of the articles relating to Cambridge in the MSS. have been printed by Mr. Cooper in his Annals of Cambridge: some relating to Cromwell are to be found in Mr. Carlyle's work; and several, besides those which I have named, are contained in Dr. Lamb's Documents.

    J.E.B. MAYOR.

Marlborough Coll., March 30.

ARABIC NUMERALS AND CIPHER

Will you suffer me to add some further remarks on the subject of the Arabic numerals and cipher; as neither the querists nor respondents seem to have duly appreciated the immense importance of the step taken by introducing the use of a cipher. I would commence with observing, that we know of no people tolerably advanced in civilisation, whose system of notation had made such little progress, beyond that of the mere savage, as the Romans. The rudest savages could make upright scratches on the face of a rock, and set them in a row, to signify units; and as the circumstance of having ten fingers has led the people of every nation to give a distinct name to the number ten and its multiples, the savage would have taken but a little step when he invented such a mode of expressing tens as crossing his scratches, thus X. His ideas, however, enlarge, and he makes three scratches, thus [C with square sides], to express 100. Generations of such vagabonds as founded Rome pass away, and at length some one discovers that, by using but half the figure for X, the number 5 may be conjectured to be meant. Another calculator follows up this discovery, and by employing [C with square sides], half the figure used for 100, he expresses 50. At length the rude man procured a better knife, with which he was enabled to give a more graceful form to his [C with square sides], by rounding it into C; then two such, turned different ways, with a distinguishing cut between them, made CD, to express a thousand; and as, by that time, the alphabet was introduced, they recognised the similarity of the form at which they had thus arrived to the first letter of Mille, and called it M, or 1000. The half of this DC was adopted by a ready analogy for 500. With that discovery the invention of the Romans stopped, though they had recourse to various awkward expedients for making these forms express somewhat higher numbers. On the other hand, the Hebrews seem to have been provided with an alphabet as soon as they were to constitute a nation; and they were taught to use the successive letters of that alphabet to express the first ten numerals. In this way b and c might denote 2 and 3 just as well as those figures; and numbers might thus be expressed by single letters to the end of the alphabet, but no further. They were taught, however, and the Greeks learnt from them, to use the letters which follow the ninth as indications of so many tens; and those which follow the eighteenth as indicative of hundreds. This process was exceedingly superior to the Roman; but at the end of the alphabet it required supplementary signs. In this way bdecba might have expressed 245321 as concisely as our figures; but if 320 were to be taken from this sum, the removal of the equivalent letters cb would leave bdea, or apparently no more than 2451. The invention of a cipher at once beautifully simplified the notation, and facilitated its indefinite extension. It was then no longer necessary to have one character for units and another for as many tens. The substitution of 00 for cb, so as to write bdeooa, kept the d in its place, and therefore still indicating 40,000. It was thus that 27, 207, and 270 were made distinguishable at once, without needing separate letters for tens and hundreds; and new signs to express millions and their multiples became unnecessary.

I have been induced to trespass on your columns with this extended notice of the difficulty which was never solved by either the Hebrews or Greeks, from understanding your correspondent "T.S.D." p. 367, to say that "the mode of obviating it would suggest itself at once." As to the original query,—whence came the invention of the cipher, which was felt to be so valuable as to be entitled to give its name to all the process of arithmetic?—"T.S.D." has given the querist his best clue in sending him to Mr. Strachey's Bija Ganita, and to Sir E. Colebrooke's Algebra of the Hindus, from the Sanscrit of Brahmegupta. Perhaps a few sentences may sufficiently point out where the difficulty lies. In the beginning of the sixth century, the celebrated Boethius described the present system as an invention of the Pythagoreans, meaning, probably, to express some indistinct notion of its coming from the east. The figures in MS. copies of Boethius are the same as our own for 1, 8, and 9; the same, but inverted, for 2 and 5; and are not without vestiges of resemblance in the remaining figures. In the ninth century we come to the Arabian Al Sephadi, and derive some information from him; but his figures have attracted most notice, because though nearly all of them are different from those found in Boethius, they are the same as occur in Planudes, a Greek monk of the fourteenth century, who says of his own units, "These nine characters are Indian," and adds, "they have a tenth character called [Greek: tziphra], which they express by an 0, and which denotes the absence of any number." The date of Boethius is obviously too early for the supposition of an Arabic origin; but it is doubted whether the figures are of his time, as the copyists of a work in MS. were wont to use the characters of their own age in letters, and might do so in the case of figures also.

    H.W.

ROMAN NUMERALS

There are several points connected with the subject of numerals that are important in the history of practical arithmetic, to which neither scientific men nor antiquaries have paid much attention. Yet if the principal questions were brought in a definite form before the contributors to the "NOTES AND QUERIES," I feel quite sure that a not inconsiderable number of them will be able to contribute each his portion to the solution of what may till now be considered as almost a mystery. With your permission, I will propose a few queries relating to the subject,

1. When did the abacus, or the "tabel" referred to in my former letters, cease to be used as calculating instruments?

The last printed work in which the abacal practice was given for the purposes of tuition that I have been able to discover, is a 12mo. edition, by Andrew Mellis, of Dee's Robert Recorde, 1682.

2. When did the method of recording results in Roman numerals cease to be used in mercantile account-books? Do any ledgers or other account-books, of ancient dates, exist in the archives of the City Companies, or in the office of the City Chamberlain? If there do, these would go far towards settling the question.

3. When in the public offices of the Government? It is probable that criteria will be found in many of them, which are inaccessible to the public generally.

4. When in the household-books of royalty and nobility? This is a class of MSS. to which I have paid next to no attention; and, possibly, had the query been in my mind through life, many fragments tending towards the solution that have passed me unnoticed would have saved me from the necessity of troubling your correspondents. The latest that I remember to have particularly noticed is that of Charles I. in the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge; but I shall not be surprised to find that the system was continued down to George I., or later still. Conservatism is displayed in its perfection in the tenacious adherence of official underlings to established forms and venerable routine.

    T.S.D.

Shooter's Hill, April 8.

[Our correspondent will find some curious notices of early dates of Arabic numerals, from the Rev. Edmund Venables, Rev. W. Gunner, and Mr. Ouvry, in the March number of the Archæological Journal, p. 75-76.; and the same number also contains, at p. 85., some very interesting remarks by the Rev. Joseph Hunter, illustrative of the subject, and instancing a warrant from Hugh le Despenseer to Bonefez de Peruche and his partners, merchants of a company, to pay forty pounds, dated Feb. 4, 19 Edward II., i.e. 1325, in which the date of the year is expressed in Roman numerals; and on the dorso, written by one of the Italian merchants to whom the warrant was addressed, the date of the payment, Feb. 1325. in Arabic numerals, of which Mr. Hunter exhibited a fac-simile at a meeting of the Institute.]

Arabic Numerals.—In the lists of works which treat of Arabic Numerals, the following have not been noticed, although they contain a review of what has been written on their introduction into this part of Europe:—Archæologia, vols. x. xiii.; Bibliotheca Literaria, Nos. 8. and 10., including Huetiana on this subject; and Morant's Colchester, b. iii. p. 28.

    T.J.

ERROR IN HALLAM'S HISTORY OF LITERATURE

If Mr. Hallam's accuracy in parvis could be fairly judged by the following instance, and that given by your correspondent "CANTAB." (No. 4, p. 51.), I fear much could not be said for it. The following passage is from Mr. Hallam's account of Campanella and his disciple Adami. My reference is to the first edition of Mr. Hallam's work; but the passage stands unaltered in the second. I believe these to be rare instances of inaccuracy.

"Tobias Adami, … who dedicated to the philosophers of Germany his own Prodromus Philosophiæ Instauratio, prefixed to his edition of Campanella's Compendium de Rerum Naturæ, published at Frankfort in 1617. Most of the other writings of the master seem to have preceded this edition, for Adami enumerates them in his Prodromus."—Hist. of Literature, iii. 149.

The title is not Prodromus Philosophiæ Instauratio, which is not sense; but Prodromus Philosophiæ Instaurandæ (Forerunner of a philosophy to be constructed). This Prodromus is a treatise of Campanella's, not, as Mr. Hallam says, of Adami. Adami published the Prodromus for Campanella, who was in prison; and he wrote a preface, in which he gives a list of other writings of Campanella, which he proposes to publish afterwards. What Mr. Hallam calls an "edition," was the first publication.

Mere accident enabled me to detect these errors. I am not a bibliographer and do not know a ten-thousandth part of what Mr. Hallam knows. I extract this note from my common-place book, and send it to you, hoping to elicit the opinions of some of your learned correspondents on the general accuracy in biography and bibliography of Mr. Hallam's History of Literature. Has Mr. Bolton Corney, if I may venture to name him, examined the work? His notes and opinion would be particularly valuable.

As a few inaccuracies such as this may occur in any work of large scope proceeding from the most learned of men, and be accidentally detected by an ignoramus, so a more extensive impeachment of Mr. Hallam's accuracy would make a very trifling deduction from his great claims to respect and well-established fame. I believe I rightly understand the spirit in which you desire your periodical to be the medium for emending valuable works, when I thus guard myself against the appearance of disrespect to a great ornament of literature.

    C.

NOTES FROM CUNNINGHAM'S HANDBOOK FOR LONDON

We have already shown pretty clearly, how high is the opinion we entertain of the value of our able contributor Mr. Peter Cunningham's amusing Handbook for London, by the insertion of numerous Notes upon his first edition. We will now give our readers an opportunity of judging how much the second edition, which is just published, has been improved through the further researches of that gentleman, by giving them a few Notes from it, consisting entirely of new matter, and very curious withal. When we add that the work is now enriched by a very copious Index of Names, it will readily be seen how much the value and utility of the book has been increased.

Hanover Square.—"The statue of William Pitt, by Sir Francis Chantrey, set up in the year 1831, is of bronze, and cost 7000l. I was present at its erection with Sir Francis Chantrey and my father, who was Chantrey's assistant. The statue was placed on its pedestal between seven and eight in the morning, and while the workmen were away at their breakfasts, a rope was thrown round the neck of the figure, and a vigorous attempt made by several sturdy Reformers to pull it down. When word of what they were about was brought to my father, he exclaimed, with a smile upon his face, 'The cramps are leaded, and they may pull to doomsday.' The cramps are the iron bolts fastening the statue to the pedestal. The attempt was soon abandoned."

Hyde Park Corner.—"There were cottages here in 1655; and the middle of the reign of George II. till the erection of Apsely House, the small entrance gateway was flanked on its east site by a poor tenement known as 'Allen's stall.' Allen, whose wife kept a moveable apple-stall at the park entrance, was recognised by George II. as an old soldier at the battle of Dettingen, and asked (so pleased was the King at meeting the veteran) 'what he could do for him.' Allen, after some hesitation, asked for a piece of ground for a permanent apple-stall at Hyde Park Corner, and a grant was made to him of a piece of ground which his children afterwards sold to Apsley, Lord Bathurst. Mr. Crace has a careful drawing of the Hyde Park Corner, showing Allen's stall and the Hercules' Pillars."

Pall Mall.—"Mr. Fox told Mr. Rogers, that Sydenham was sitting at his window looking on the Mall, with his pipe in his mouth and a silver tankard before him, when a fellow made a snatch at the tankard, and ran off with it. Nor was he overtaken, said Fox, before he got among the bushes in Bond Street, and there they lost him."

Lansdowne House.—"The iron bars at the two ends of Lansdowne Passage (a near cut from Curzon Street to Hay Hill) were put up late in the last century, in consequence of a mounted highwayman, who had committed a robbery in Piccadilly, having escaped from his pursuers through this narrow passage by riding his horse up the steps. This anecdote was told by the late Thomas Grenville to Sir Thomas Frankland Lewis. It occurred while George Grenville was Minister, the robber passing his residence in Bolton Street full gallop."

Newcastle House.—"The old and expensive custom of 'vails-giving,' received its death-glow at Newcastle House. Sir Timothy Waldo, on his way from the Duke's dinner table to his carriage, put a crown into the hand of the cook, who returned it, saying: 'Sir, I do not take silver.' 'Don't you, indeed?' said Sir Timothy, putting it in his pocket; 'then I do not give gold.' Hanway's 'Eight Letters to the Duke of –,' had their origin in Sir Timothy's complaint."

Red Lion Square.—"The benevolent Jonas Hanway, the traveller, lived and died (1786) in a house in Red Lion Square, the principal rooms of which he decorated with paintings and emblematical devices, 'in a style,' says his biographer, 'peculiar to himself.' 'I found,' he used to say, when speaking of these ornaments, 'that my countrymen and women were not au fait in the art of conversation, and that instead of recurring to their cards, when the discourse began to flag, the minutes between the time of assembling and the placing the card-tables are spent in an irksome suspense. To relieve this vacuum in social intercourse and prevent cards from engrossing the whole of my visitors' minds, I have presented them with objects the most attractive I could imagine—and when that fails there are the cards.' Hanway was the first man who ventured to walk the streets of London with an umbrella over his head. After carrying one near thirty years, he saw them come into general use."

Downing Street.—"Baron Bothmar's house was part of the forfeited property of Lee, Lord Lichfield, who retired with James II., to whom he was Master of the Horse. At the beginning of the present century there was no other official residence in the street than the house which belonged, by right of office, to the First Lord of the Treasury, but by degrees one house was bought after another: first the Foreign Office, increased afterwards by three other houses; then the Colonial Office; then the house in the north corner, which was the Judge Advocate's, since added to the Colonial Office; then a house for the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and lastly, a whole row of lodging-houses, chiefly for Scotch and Irish members."

Whitehall.—"King Charles I. was executed on a scaffold erected in front of the Banqueting House, towards the park. The warrant directs that he should be executed 'in the open street before Whitehall.' Lord Leicester tells us in his Journal, that he was 'beheaded at Whitehall Gate.' Dugdale, in his Diary, that he was 'beheaded at the gate of Whitehall;' and a single sheet of the time reserved in the British Museum, that 'the King was beheaded at Whitehall Gate.' There cannot, therefore, be a doubt that the scaffold was erected in front of the building facing the present Horse Guards. We now come to the next point which has excited some discussion. It appears from Herbert's minute account of the King's last moments, that 'the King was led all along the galleries and Banqueting House, and there was a passage broken through the wall, by which the king passed unto the scaffold.' This seems particular enough, and leads, it is said, to a conclusion that the scaffold was erected on the north side. Where the passage was broken through, one thing is certain, the scaffold was erected on the west side, or, in other words, 'in the open street,' now called Whitehall; and that the King, as Ludlow relates in his Memoirs, 'was conducted to the scaffold out of the window of the Banqueting House.' Ludlow, who tells us this, was one of the regicides, and what he states, simply and straightforwardly, is confirmed by any engraving of the execution, published at Amsterdam in the same year, and by the following memorandum of Vertue's on the copy of Terasson's large engraving of the Banqueting House, preserved in the library of the Society of Antiquaries:—'It is, according to the truest reports, said that out of this window King Charles went upon the scaffold to be beheaded, the window-frame being taken out purposely to make the passage on to the scaffold, which is equal to the landing-place of the hall within side.' The window marked by Vertue belonged to a small building abutting from the north side of the present Banqueting House. From this window, then the King stept upon the scaffold."