| |
| Author | Message | | | Posted on Fri Nov 03, 2006 05:01:11 | |
| | | I think there is a typo in the latin where you kept a "u" in aeuum rather than aevum. | |
| | | Posted at Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:08:39 | Quote |
| | | Quote: | | | | | I think there is a typo in the latin where you kept a "u" in aeuum rather than aevum. |
I see aevum. But either way, aeuum and aevum are the same thing. Romans only had one letter for it - V, also written sometimes closer to the U, but consistent nonetheless. That is, it either would have been AEVVM or AEUUM depending on the the medium of the writing. It's only a modern typography that allows us to write the u for the vowels and the v for the consonants of what was the same letter in Roman times.
Chris | |
| | | Posted at Sat Nov 04, 2006 16:50:08 | Quote |
| | | I think you are referring to the scanned version, where indeed it says aeuum. Although, Chris, you are right, I will replace aeuum in the scanned version by aevum to get it consistent. Thanks! | |  | Site manager  |
|
|
|
|
