on a Barn in Kent, &c. 12,7

written in Englifh, and where, from the frequent recurrence of numerals, a more concife mode of expreffing them would have been preferred had it been commonly known. I will refer you to the petition of the citizens of Winchefter, anno 1450 fie in Archaeolog. Vol. I. p. 91 to king Henry the Vlth concerning the ruinous ftate of their houfes, in which the number of houfes unoc- cupied were ix c iiij xx and xvii, and which, when publifhed in Ar- chaeologia [&], it was judged advifable for the eafe of the reader to mark by the figures 997. Another prefumptive evidence of the no general ufe of thefe nu- merals in marking dates, may be deduced from their not appearing on feals and coins till a long time after Wullis and Ward had pro- nounced them to have been commonly ufed. Knowing that Mr. Boys was pofleffed of many fac fimiles, it was my requeft to him that he would be pleafed to communicate to me his fentiments on this matter. His anfwer, in a letter to Dr. Latham, was, "I have examined every probable part of my collection of infcriptions, and all my feals, and can find no inftance of Arabic numerals before the commencement of the fixteenth century, except on one feal, an impreffion of which I mall fend, becaufe I am folicitous to have the infcription decyphered. It is a fine feal, well engraved and preferved, and the letters plain, but I cannot appropriate it. The date is i ft 8$ (1484) the 4 being reprefented as half 8, the form then in ufe ; and you are apprized that this form was continued from the middle of the fifteenth to near the middle of the fixteenth century." From the fame motive that Mr. Boys fent me the impreffion of this feal I mail tranfmit it to you, not being able to determine to what priory it belonged; though if it be, as I much fufpect it is, {>] Vol. I. p. 91. a foreign