Re: Roman (and other) numismatic marks

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Wed Jun 09 2004 - 11:08:59 CDT

  • Next message: Mark E. Shoulson: "Re: [hebrew] Response to a Proposal to Encode Phoenician in Unicode"

    At 08:49 -0700 2004-06-09, Doug Ewell wrote:

    >Then I suppose one could use combining sequences. But I remember from
    >the discussion of the austral and guarani signs that precomposed
    >characters were preferred over combining sequences for currency signs.
    >I don't see why that wouldn't be the case for mint marks as well. They
    >are the same type of symbol.

    None of the currency signs have a floating diacritic. We tend to
    avoid the diacritics that go through letters. M with ring above would
    not fall into that category.

    >"Not open-ended" in the sense that, as James said, new mint marks are
    >not being created as we speak. The modern trend is to use ordinary
    >letters, or to do away with mint marks altogether.


    >As to whether the collection is open-ended going back in time, it is
    >possible -- despite centuries of study -- that a previously unknown mint
    >mark could be discovered. This is about as likely as a new Greek
    >letter, say SHO, being discovered and encoded. It is certainly not
    >"open-ended" in the sense of new Han characters being created on the
    >spur of the moment, say for race horses.


    >Like James, I'm not a collector of ancients (I have exactly one coin
    >minted before 1300) so I don't have the relevant books. I know they are
    >out there. For British coins going back to the 800's or so, Seaby would
    >probably be the best reference. I have another book on British issues
    >(somewhere) that may help.

    Without bibliography nothing can be done. My library is impressive,
    but has limitations. ;-)

    How many of them are there?

    Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 09 2004 - 11:09:47 CDT