he Bishop of Rochester; but I am entitled to question the
_interpretation_ which E. S. T. tells us (Vol. ii., p.27.) he puts upon the
Castleacre inscription. My title to do so is this:--that in the year of
grace 1084 the Arabic numerals were not only of necessity unknown to the
"plaisterers" of those walls, but even (as far as evidence has been yet
adduced) to the most learned of England's learned men.

As to the regular order in crossing himself, that will entirely depend upon
whether the plaister was considered to be a knight's shield, and the
figures the blazonry, or not. Is it not, indeed, stated in one of your
former numbers, that this very inscription was to be read 1408, and not
1048? I have already hinted at the necessity of _caution_ in such cases;
and Mr. Wilkinson of Burnley has given, in a recent number of your work,
two exemplifications. The Bishop of Rochester certainly adds another;
though, of course, undesignedly.

T. S. D.

Shooter's Hill, June 7.

_Comment. in Apocalypsin_ (Vol. i., p. 452.).--There was a copy of this
volume in the library of the Duke of Brunswick; and in the hope that Sir F.
Madden may succeed in obtaining extracts, or a sight of it, I intimate just
as much, though not in this kingdom. (See Von der Hardt's _Autographa
Lutheri et Coaetaneorum_, tom. iii. 171.) You do not seem to have any copy
whatever brought to your notice. This collection was, it appears from the
_Centifolium Lutheranum_ of Fabricius (p. 484.), bequeathed by the Duke to
the library at Helmstad.

NOVUS.

_Robert Deverell_ (Vol. i., p. 469.).--If my information is too scanty to
deserve a place among the Replies, you may treat it as a supplement to Dr.
Rimbault's Query. Mr. Deverell also published (according to Lowndes) _A New
View of the Classics and Ancient Arts, tending to show the invariable
Connexion with the Sciences_, 4to. Lond. 1806; and _Discoveries in
Hieroglyphics and other Antiquities_, 6 vols. 8vo. Lond. 1813,--which was
suppressed by the author after a few copies had been sold. I have the
second and third volumes, being all that relates to Shakspeare. They
consist of an edition of Hamlet, Lear, Othello, Merchant of Venice, and the
third satire of Horace, copiously illustrated with notes and woodcuts,
intended to prove that in the works in question, in common with "all the
classics and the different specimens of the arts which have come down to us
from the ancients, no part of them is to be understood