1896-97-1 COrNTING AND TIME RECKONING. 319 



frequently in the quaint form now under consideration. I have not met 

 with this last class of dates after the close of the i8th century. The last 

 one I have in my possession is 1799- It is an instrument of sasine, and 

 what is rather singular, the body of the document is written in English ; 

 it is certified in Latin by Joannes Wilson, clericus, and the certificate 

 of registration is in English, signed by John Boyes, Jr., " fifth day of 

 April Mvij-^ and ninety nine years." I have corresponded with a 

 number of gentlemen regarding the meaning of these letters, but I find 

 there is quite a diversity of opinion, no two of them agreeing in all 

 respects. An Edinburgh gentleman, who is an expert in deciphering old 

 manuscripts, says that taking Jajvij']^ for i/oo, the first three letters area 

 corruption of the original Runic form of M = i,ooo, then the vij, or as it 

 is given in most of these old writings bij, is 7, and the twirl at the 

 end is a C for centum. Not having a sufficient knowledge of Runic 

 characters, I am not disposed to dogmatize, but I have very grave 

 doubts as to the correctness of this explanation, and I think other 

 evidence will show that I am justified in making this statement. In a 

 letter received from Dr. Dickson, who has only recently retired from the 

 Registry House in Edinburgh, and who is a recognized authority in 

 matters of this kind, he says : — " Your question is one that is very often 

 asked, and yet I do not remember to have seen it explained in any 

 book ; of the explanations you suggest, the second is substantially 

 correct. The number i,ooo written J ^ was by a slight change in the 

 form of the fO written j >U . Ignorance then interposed and put f dot 

 over the last stroke of ^U, and closing up the first part of it, made the 

 whole jaj ; bij^' is simply vij*^', with an unmeaning terminal flourish 

 (•|J), common in the 17th and i8th centuries." He further states 

 that these letters are constantly heard used in law offices, read pho- 

 netically. With all due deference to Dr. Dickson's superior know- 

 ledge of matters of this kind, unless I have misunderstood his state- 

 ment, I feel disposed to question the sufficiency of his explanation, 

 as he makes no reference to the origin of the first letter (j), and for the 

 following reasons :— In palaeographic writings of the 17th and i8th 

 centuries the m is written thus ^, without the j preceding it, and by 

 the change suggested by Dr. Dickson, when writers did not know its 

 origin, it might readily become aj. In confirmation of this view, 

 subsequent to receiving Dr. Dickson's letter, I found in the Scottish 

 National Manuscripts, a copy of which is in the Toronto Public 

 Library, a copy of the oath taken by William and Mary on their 

 acceptance of the crown of Scotland, concluding as follows : — " Signed 

 by us at Whitehall the eleventh day of May jajbi^ four score nyne 

 years." WiLLIAM R. Marv R. 



