Title: Proposal to Add Ancient Roman Weights and Monetary ... · 1. Title: Proposal to Add Ancient Roman ... ++ in the Unicode column indicates that the symbol ... GREEK CAPITAL REVERSED - [PDF Document] (2024)

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2 PROPOSAL SUMMARY FORM TO ACCOMPANY SUBMISSIONS

FOR ADDITIONS TO THE REPERTOIRE OF ISO/IEC 10646TP

1PT

Please fill all the sections A, B and C below. Please read Principles and Procedures Document (P & P) from HTUhttp://www.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/principles.html UTH for guidelines

and details before filling this form. Please ensure you are using the latest Form from HTUhttp://www.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/summaryform.htmlUTH.

See also HTUhttp://www.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/roadmaps.html UTH for latest Roadmaps. A. Administrative

1. Title: Proposal to Add Ancient Roman Weights and Monetary Signs to UCS 2. Requester's name: David J. Perry 3. Requester type (Member body/Liaison/Individual contribution): Individual Contribution 4. Submission date: May 5, 2006 5. Requester's reference (if applicable): 6. Choose one of the following: This is a complete proposal: Yes (or) More information will be provided later: B. Technical – General 1. Choose one of the following: a. This proposal is for a new script (set of characters): Proposed name of script: b. The proposal is for addition of character(s) to an existing block: Yes Name of the existing block: Ancient Numeric Systems, 10100–101FF 2. Number of characters in proposal: 11 3. Proposed category (select one from below - see section 2.2 of P&P document): A-Contemporary B.1-Specialized (small collection) B.2-Specialized (large collection) C-Major extinct X D-Attested extinct E-Minor extinct F-Archaic Hieroglyphic or Ideographic G-Obscure or questionable usage symbols 4. Proposed Level of Implementation (1, 2 or 3) (see Annex K in P&P document): 3 Is a rationale provided for the choice? If Yes, reference: 5. Is a repertoire including character names provided? Yes a. If YES, are the names in accordance with the “character naming guidelines” in Annex L of P&P document? Yes b. Are the character shapes attached in a legible form suitable for review? Yes 6. Who will provide the appropriate computerized font (ordered preference: True Type, or PostScript format) for publishing the standard? David Perry If available now, identify source(s) for the font (include address, e-mail, ftp-site, etc.) and indicate the tools used: David Perry ([emailprotected]); Fontlab Studio 5.0 7. References: a. Are references (to other character sets, dictionaries, descriptive texts etc.) provided? Yes b. Are published examples of use (such as samples from newspapers, magazines, or other sources) of proposed characters attached? Yes 8. Special encoding issues: Does the proposal address other aspects of character data processing (if applicable) such as input, presentation, sorting, searching, indexing, transliteration etc. (if yes please enclose information)? No 9. Additional Information: Submitters are invited to provide any additional information about Properties of the proposed Character(s) or Script that will assist in correct understanding of and correct linguistic processing of the proposed character(s) or script. Examples of such properties are: Casing information, Numeric information, Currency information, Display behaviour information such as line breaks, widths etc., Combining behaviour, Spacing behaviour, Directional behaviour, Default Collation behaviour, relevance in Mark Up contexts, Compatibility equivalence and other Unicode normalization related information. See the Unicode standard at HTUhttp://www.unicode.orgUTH for such information on other scripts. Also see HTUhttp://www.unicode.org/Public/UNIDATA/UCD.htmlUTH and associated Unicode Technical Reports for information needed for consideration by the Unicode Technical Committee for inclusion in the Unicode Standard.

TP

1PT Form number: N3002-F (Original 1994-10-14; Revised 1995-01, 1995-04, 1996-04, 1996-08, 1999-03, 2001-05, 2001-09, 2003-11, 2005-01,

2005-09, 2005-10)

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 2

C. Technical - Justification 1. Has this proposal for addition of character(s) been submitted before? No If YES explain 2. Has contact been made to members of the user community (for example: National Body, user groups of the script or characters, other experts, etc.)? Yes If YES, with whom? Email discussion groups for epigraphy and Unicode issues in Classics If YES, available relevant documents: 3. Information on the user community for the proposed characters (for example: size, demographics, information technology use, or publishing use) is included? Reference: 4. The context of use for the proposed characters (type of use; common or rare) Reference: Common among classical scholars, especially epigraphers 5. Are the proposed characters in current use by the user community? Yes If YES, where? Reference: Scholarly publications (see examples in proposal) 6. After giving due considerations to the principles in the P&P document must the proposed characters be entirely in the BMP? No If YES, is a rationale provided? If YES, reference: 7. Should the proposed characters be kept together in a contiguous range (rather than being scattered)? Yes 8. Can any of the proposed characters be considered a presentation form of an existing character or character sequence? No If YES, is a rationale for its inclusion provided? If YES, reference: 9. Can any of the proposed characters be encoded using a composed character sequence of either existing characters or other proposed characters? No If YES, is a rationale for its inclusion provided? If YES, reference: 10. Can any of the proposed character(s) be considered to be similar (in appearance or function) to an existing character? Yes If YES, is a rationale for its inclusion provided? Yes If YES, reference: Discussion on page 5 of proposal. 11. Does the proposal include use of combining characters and/or use of composite sequences? No If YES, is a rationale for such use provided? If YES, reference: Is a list of composite sequences and their corresponding glyph images (graphic symbols) provided? If YES, reference: 12. Does the proposal contain characters with any special properties such as control function or similar semantics? No If YES, describe in detail (include attachment if necessary) 13. Does the proposal contain any Ideographic compatibility character(s)? No If YES, is the equivalent corresponding unified ideographic character(s) identified? If YES, reference:

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 3

Proposal to Add Ancient Roman Weights and Monetary Signs to UCS

Introduction The ancient Romans used a variety of symbols to represent weights and values of their coinage. These symbols, many of which are currently not in the Universal Character Set, are found in literary texts as well as in inscriptions and are needed to publish texts containing them properly. Background on Roman Coinage For a long time Romans of the early Republic did not use coins, relying on lumps of bronze (aes rude, “rough bronze”) as a medium of exchange. The first real coins for domestic use were introduced in the early 3rd century B.C. This is referred to as aes grave, “heavy bronze,” because the unit (as)2 contained one pound3 of bronze. There were several smaller coins, also of cast bronze. This system continued in use until the economic problems caused by the Second Punic War (218–201 B.C.) caused the currency to collapse. About 211 B.C., the Romans introduced a new system of coinage. Its unit was a bronze as weighing half the old one-pound coin, with silver coins valued at multiples of the as. This sys-tem remained in use for about 500 years, although the metallic content of both the bronze as and the silver coins was devalued repeatedly over time. At the time system was established, the rela-tive values of the coins were as follows:

as, the basic unit, bronze coin; the as was divided into many smaller units, as shown in the chart below and Figure 1

sestertius, 2 ½ asses (the name derives from semis tertius; semis = ½, so the name means “one half [subtracted from] three,” i.e., two and a half); silver coin and the most common Roman accounting unit in the Republic and early Empire

quinarius, five asses; name derived from quinque, five; silver coin denarius, ten asses; name derived from decem, ten; silver coin

Another bronze coin, the dupondius (“two pounder”) was introduced as part of the aes grave coinage, when the as was theoretically one pound, and had a value of two asses. It was not much used until the Empire, when it became common. There were also several other Roman coins produced over the centuries which never acquired special signs to represent them and so will not be discussed here.

2 The word as carried the notion of a basic or indivisible unit, although the as coin was sometimes subdivided. Cf.

Balbus, De asse 1: Quidquid unum est et et quod ex integrorum divisione remanet assem ratiocinatores vocant. (“Whatever is one and which remains from the division of wholes, accountants call the unit.”) Under Roman law, a person might be heres ex asse, “heir to the whole estate.”

3 The Roman pound (libra, source of the modern sign £) contained 327.45 grams, .721 of an American pound.

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 4

Background on Roman Weights and Measures The values of Roman coins need to be considered together with the units for Roman weights, since the Romans often used the same term for a subdivision of many different measures. For example, the term uncia essentially means “1/12th of anything:” a pound, a iugerum (~ acre), a foot, or an as. On the Republican aes grave coinage we do in fact find some of the same sym-bols used for weights, which is not surprising since the as at this time was a pound of bronze. The following table gives an overview of all the Roman units; note that the subdivisions are based on a duodecimal system, where the main unit is divided into twelve parts.4 The notation ++ in the Unicode column indicates that the symbol can be constructed by combining two or more characters and so does not need to be encoded separately.

NAME AS UNCIAE UNICODE GLYPH VARS. As 1 12 proposed , |, Deunx 11/12 11 ++ S Dextans 5/6 10 ++ S Dodrans 3/4 9 ++ S Bes 2/3 8 ++ S Septunx 7/12 7 ++ S Semis 1/2 6 0053 S Quincunx 5/12 5 ++ Triens 1/3 4 ++ Quadrans 1/4 3 ++ Sextans 1/6 2 proposed , Z Sescuncia 1/8 1½ ++ Σ– Uncia 1/12 1 proposed •, , , Semuncia 1/24 1/2 , Σ, Binae sextulae / Duella 1/36 1/3 ++ Sicilicus 1/48 1/4 10140 Sextula 1/72 1/6 proposed , ϛ Dimidia Sextula 1/144 1/12 proposed Scripulum 1/288 1/24 2108 Siliqua 1/1728 1/144 proposed

4 The Romans preferred to divide almost everything into twelve parts rather than ten. Thus there were twelve

months in the year, twelve hours in the day, twelve inches to a foot, and twelve ounces in the Roman pound.

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 5

The table above was organized to show Unicode equivalents, where such exist, and to separate out the glyph variants. For an unedited table from an epigraphical handbook, see Figure 1. Figure 2 shows some of these units on an inscription. Discussion of Possible Unification The Roman sicilicus appears very similar to U+10140 GREEK ACROPHONIC ATTIC ONE QUARTER, as the examples in Figure 2 show. Furthermore, both characters have the meaning of one quarter, although it is doubtful that the Roman sign was directly borrowed from the Greek. U+03FD GREEK CAPITAL REVERSED LUNATE SIGMA SYMBOL and U+2183 ROMAN NUMERAL REVERSED ONE HUNDRED are less close to the sicilicus in appearance and in meaning. We have suggested the unification of the sicilicus with 10140 to avoid unnecessarily proposing a new character, but if this unification is not appropriate, epigraphers would have no objection to encoding a separate sicilicus character. New Characters Proposed The following characters are proposed for inclusion in the Universal Character Set. All other characters needed to represent the units in the table above, such as the letter S, are already encoded. Units of Weight , The uncia is shown by a horizontal line and the sextans by two lines, one on top of the

other. These shapes are similar to the Aegean numbers one and two, U+10110 and 10111 , except that the lines are longer. The uncia has glyph variants including a dot (common on aes grave coins; numismatists refer to it as a pellet; see Figure 3), , , and . The sextans has a glyph variant (probably the two lines formed without lifting the pen) or Z. Because of the range of glyph variants for the uncia and sextans, it is not appropriate to unify them with the Aegean numerals.

The semuncia is denoted by , with glyph variants Σ, , and (Figure 1). It is thought

that the character is a Sigma in origin; however, the variants and are not found in Greek texts, so a separate semuncia character should be encoded.

The sextula (1/72 of an as or 1/6 of an uncia) is represented by a reversed S glyph (Figures

1 and 4a) with the variant (Figure 4b). Binae sextulae or duella is shown by two of these reversed S glyphs or by the glyph variant (Figure 1).

Dimidia sextula (1/144 of an as or 1/12 of an uncia) is shown by the symbol (Figure 1). The siliqua (1/1728 of an as or 1/144 of an uncia) is represented by the shape (Figure 1). These should have the character property So.

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 6

Monetary Units The as was denoted by a slanted, crossed stroke (Figure 5). Glyph variants include a slanted

stroke with a tick at the left: (Figure 7), a plain vertical stroke | and the shape . The dupondius is shown by the sign , with glyph variants and (both in Figure 5). The sestertius was represented by the symbol , standing for 2 ½ asses (Figures 5, 8, and 9).

There are many glyph variants, including (Figure 10), (Figure 11), (Figure 5), and . There is one common character substitution: some printers have used the letters HS to

represent the sestertius sign which they did not have available in their fonts (Figure 12), but the letter H has nothing to do with the meaning of the symbol.

V The quinarius is represented by the symbol V, with a glyph variant S for semis, half a

denarius (both in Figure 5, V in Figure 6). X The denarius is consistently denoted by the symbol (Figures 5 and 8). Occasional glyph

variations are found, such as (Figure 7). These should have the character property Sc. Reference Glyphs and Suggested Names The symbols may be grouped under two subheads. Roman Weights and Measures

ROMAN SEXTANS SIGN ROMAN UNCIA SIGN ROMAN SEMUNCIA SIGN ROMAN SEXTULA SIGN ROMAN DIMIDIA SEXTULA SIGN ROMAN SILIQUA SIGN Roman Coin Symbols

ROMAN DENARIUS SIGN V ROMAN QUINARIUS SIGN ROMAN SESTERTIUS SIGN ROMAN DUPONDIUS SIGN ROMAN AS SIGN Codepoint Assignments It is suggested that these characters be placed in the Supplementary Multilingual Plane because they are used to represent ancient texts. The range 10100–1018F already contains ancient Aegean and Greek numbers. It would be logical to locate these proposed Roman characters further up in the 101XX area.

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 7

Bibliography

Cagnat, René. Cours d’épigraphie Latine. 3rd edition. Paris: Fontemoing, 1898. Capelli, Adriano. Dizionario di abbreviature latine ed italiane. Milano: Ulrico Hoepli, 1929,

reprinted 1979. Di Stefano Manzella, I. Mestiere di epigrafista. Guida alla schedatura del materiale epigrafico

lapideo. Roma: Quasar, 1987. Gildersleeve, B. L., and Lodge, Gonzalez. Latin Grammar. 3rd edition. London: Macmillan,

1895, many reprints. Gordon, Arthur E. Introduction to Latin Epigraphy. Berkeley: University of California Press,

1982. Hornblower, Simon, and Spawforth, Anthony, edd. The Oxford Classical Dictionary. 3rd

edition. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. Pauly, August, Georg Wissowa, Wilhelm Kroll, Kurt Witte, Karl Mittelhaus, Konrat Ziegler,

eds. Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft: neue Bearbeitun. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler, 1894–1980.

Ricci, Serafino. Epigrafia Latina. Milano: Ulrico Hoepli, 1898. Sandys, John Edwin. Latin Epigraphy: An Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions.

Second edition, revised by S. G. Campbell. London, 1927; reprinted 1974 by Ares Publishers, Chicago.

Vindolanda Tablets Online http://vindolanda.csad.ox.ac.uk/. This online edition now supercedes the earlier printed editions.

Acknowledgments

The following people and institutions were helpful in the preparation of this proposal: Deborah Anderson, Script Encoding Initiative; John Bodel, Brown University; Richard Peevers, Thesaurus Linguae Graecae; Vassar College Library.

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 8

Figures

Figure 1. From Cagnat 1898 page 33; table of Roman weights.

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 9

Figure 2. From Ricci 1898, plate LXI. An inscription of ca. 80 A.D. showing the

quadrans, semuncia, and sicilicus as well as the letter S = semis (line 6); deunx and sicilicus, deunx and semuncia (line 7); deunx and semuncia (line 8).

Figure 3. Roman coin of 217–216 B.C. (Sear, Roman Coins & their Values

[2000 Edition] #615). The single dot or pellet to the right of the head of Roma and below the prow of the ship indicates that the value is an uncia.

Figure 4a. From Pauly-Wissowa, showing sextula glyph.

David J. Perry

David J. Perry

David J. Perry

David J. Perry

David J. Perry

David J. Perry

David J. Perry

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 10

Figure 4b. From Pauly-Wissowa, showing variant of sextula.

Figure 5. Roman coin symbols from Cagnat, 1898, page 34. Footnote 2 (referenced next to the Sestertius variant) mentions that IS and SS with horizontal bars are also are used for sestertii; see Figures 10 and 11 below.

Figure 6. From the entry in Pauly-Wissowa “Quinarius.”

David J. Perry

David J. Perry

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 11

Figure 7. Vindolanda tablet 301 showing as and denarius signs plus the abbreviation S for semis

Candido suo

salutem souxtum saturnalicium iiii aut sexs rogo frater explices et radices ne mi nus s(emis)

Figure 8. From Gordon 1982, p. 151.

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 12

Figure 9. From Sandys 1927, p. 267.

Figure 10. From Gordon 1982, p. 143.

Figure 11. From Gordon 1982, p. 161.

Proposal for Roman Weights and Monetary Signs page 13

Figure 12. From Gildersleeve and Lodge, p. 493

David J. Perry