Re: Query: Roman numeral dating

[Boris <plazabks@SONIC.NET>]

I figured Fred would come up with the definitive answer, which he  
has. Thanks.

Boris


On Oct 30, 2006, at 9:41 AM, Fred Schreiber wrote:

> The system of Roman numerals, including the answer to Boris's  
> question (see below), was previously discussed on this List:
>
> http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/byform/mailing-lists/exlibris/ 
> 1996/02/msg00222.html
>
>
> Fred Schreiber
> email: ekslibris@mac.com
> http://www.ekslibris.com
>
>
> On Oct 30, 2006, at 12:19 PM, Boris wrote:
>
> > Carol,
> >
> > 	I don't know the background and will look into it, but cl(reverse  
> > c) = 1000, l(reverse c) = 500. c of course = 100, etc. Note the  
> > value for 1000 looks like the letter m, as in the Latin mille or a  
> > thousand.  l(reverse c) looks like the letter d, as in the latin  
> > dimidium mille or a half thousand. I have never read anything  
> > clarifying this, but this is my own supposition. Why the letters,  
> > in roman dating during the early days or printing, should be  
> > written in that way, I don't know.
> >
> > Boris

Boris Bruton
Plaza Books  ABAA/ ILAB
215 Orange St.
Santa Rosa, CA 95401  USA
707-546-3544
www.plazabooks.com