1^6 



A. D. 14. 



From thefe defcrlptions we may almofl: prefume to fay, that the ^d- 

 veffaria were what the Romans had in place of our Waste-book, or 

 Blotter, as fome call it. But they were far inferior to it in accuracy 

 and authenticity ; and they differed very materially from it in not be- 

 ing thought worthy of prefervation. — They ieem to have had nothing 

 equivalent to our Journal, which is only a different modification of the 

 Waffe-book, and is even omitted by fome book-keepers. — The Codex 

 nccepti et expenfi anfwers to our Ledger, and the Tabulce, with their two 

 pages or columns * to the particular accounts. 



I believe, there is nothing extant, which can inform us, whether they 

 raifed accounts for the feveral articles of merchandize in their books, 

 or whether each tranfadion was entered in two accounts ; or, in other 

 words, whether they underftood any thing of double entry. 



As book-keeping is an art fo effentially neceffary to commerce, and 

 fo fimple in its principles, it cannot be fuppofcd, that the Phoenicians, 

 or indeed any nation carrying on trade, and underflanding arithmetic, 

 could be deftitute of it. With the Phoenician colonies it may have 

 fpread into Rhodes, Crete, Thebes in Greece, and other places, where 

 they were mixed with the Greeks : and from the Greeks, it is mofl pro- 

 bable, that the Romans received it along with the other branches of 

 their knowlege. 



20 — Soon after the death of Auguflus Strabo flnifhed his great and 

 valuable geographical work ; wherein he lays down the globofity, and 



^dverfaria ; ' non liahere fe Iioc nomen in codice 

 accepti ct expeiiil rtlatum confitetm ; fed in ad- 

 • verfariis patcre comendit.' — The learned Fr. 

 Hotman, in liis Commentary on this oration, has 

 never once conceived an idea of any refemblance to 

 the modern books of accounts. 



Aulus Gclh'us [L. xiv, c. 2] gives an account of 

 a caufe tried before himfelf for money faid to be 

 owing, but ' neque tabuh's nequc ttftibus ;' and 

 he alfo notices the want of the chirogniph or hand 

 writing and figning of the tabuU. This feems to 

 lead to an inquiry, wlictlur the debtor figned the 

 account in the creditor's books ; or wliether tlie 

 tahuU in this cafe may mean a bond : for the po- 

 verty of the Latin language, wherein many very 

 different meanings are cxpreffed by the one word 

 tabula, leaves iis m obfcurity. 



• We might almoil take it for granted from the 

 reafon of the thing, iliat every titbiila 01 account 

 had two pages, or ratlicr columns ; for the books 

 of the ancients were not like ours, which are bound 

 together by the inner fides of the leaves, but were 

 long rolls containing divifions cvWui^ fia^itm, which 

 we call columns. But we have apparently the au- 

 thority of I'liny, \_L. ii, c. 7] who fays allcgorically 

 ofForlunc, ' Huic omnia f.v/>tn/a, huic omnia /ir- 

 « runtiir auefa ; et iu tola ratione mortalium fola 

 * iilran.qiie pj^'mam Tacit.' I mull tlierefor pre- 



fume to differ from the learned Scaliger, who, hav- 

 ing occafion incidentally to touch upon ad-verfaria, 

 &c. fuppofes the account of what is given or paid 

 away to have been on the face of the paper, and 

 that of what is received, on the back of it ; which 

 would be a very awkward and inconvenient ar- 

 rangement. {_Scali^cr in Gui/iinJiuiim, Opiifc. p. 

 48.] 



In thefe two notes I have given the quotation! 

 thus at large, contrary to my ufual cuftom, in or- 

 der to fave trouble to the reader, and becaufe they 

 arc particularly nfeful in ilhiflrating a very curious 

 point of commercial antiquity : and they are fc- 

 Ictted, as mod to the purpole, from a large col- 

 leftion of paffages of Cicero and other authors. 

 To do jullice lo the fubjcft, an ample diflertation, 

 or rather a whole volume, ought to be devoted to 

 it. And fucli a work, entitled, Lii'ic dc comple de. 

 prince a la manitrc d'Jtnlis en domains ti finance ordi- 

 naire. — conlenant cc in quoi s\xerce it Ires-illuflre el 

 trts-excclleni prince ct feigneur Maurice prince 

 d'Orange, l^c. par Simon Slevin, Leyden, 1602, fo- 

 lio, is quoted by Mr. Anderfon \_l^. i, p. 409] af 

 being in his own polTeffion. I have never been able 

 to obtain a fight of this fyftem of princely book- 

 keeping, though I have applied at every place, 

 where there feeraed to be any probability of find- 

 ing it. 



