{"version":"reconciled-tree-33","date":"2026-10-12","scope":"Roman accounts, first directional pass. Republican literary witnesses are added; no newly proved ancestry or adopted-basis edge is claimed.","rows":[{"id":"ROM33-EARLIER","route":"Earlier Roman bronze/as → denarius reckoning","decision":"Open predecessor boundary","finding":"An internal bronze-to-silver accounting history is plausible, but retrospective ratios are not a dated transition record.","next_evidence":"Collate early obligations and the bronze/silver reform chronology; decide whether continuity, rescaling or a distinct successor unit is supported.","claim_ids":["C1973","C1972"],"source_ids":["S1028","S1027"],"new_ancestry_edge":false,"new_adopted_basis_edge":false},{"id":"ROM33-GREEK","route":"Greek / South Italian systems → Rome","decision":"No ancestry or step-parent admitted","finding":"The inspected sources do not establish deliberate adoption of a named Greek account unit. A Greek-looking coin, shared weight or translated drachma label is insufficient.","next_evidence":"Find an explicit founding-unit adoption or conversion of obligations; identify the particular Greek account community rather than generic Greek coinage.","claim_ids":["C1972"],"source_ids":["S1027"],"new_ancestry_edge":false,"new_adopted_basis_edge":false},{"id":"ROM33-INTERNAL","route":"Republican → imperial denarius / sestertius accounts","decision":"Same profile, earlier witnesses added","finding":"The profile now has Republican literary evidence alongside the retained 57 CE debt and 301 price-ceiling witnesses. These observations do not certify an uninterrupted lifespan.","next_evidence":"Add contemporary Republican inscriptions or surviving accounts; investigate early boundaries without splitting denominations into currencies.","claim_ids":["C1970","C1971","C1976","C1844","C1283"],"source_ids":["S1023","S1024","S1025","S1026","S1027","S641","S966","S642","S643"],"new_ancestry_edge":false,"new_adopted_basis_edge":false},{"id":"ROM33-EGYPT","route":"Roman-Egyptian drachma/talent → denarius accounts","decision":"Existing qualified later absorption retained","relationship_ids":["R-V25-004"],"finding":"This local integration is already represented. Its 296–351 interval is a research envelope, not a founding date or instant extinction of Egyptian accounting. It does not make Egypt Rome's original parent.","next_evidence":"Trace local obligations across the reforms and distinguish the earlier Ptolemaic/bronze-drachma question from this later integration.","claim_ids":["C1323","C1325","C1849"],"source_ids":["S640","S641"],"new_ancestry_edge":false,"new_adopted_basis_edge":false},{"id":"ROM33-GOLD","route":"Denarius reckoning → solidus / nomisma accounts","decision":"Transition researched; ancestry edge held","finding":"The available evidence describes gold's growing role alongside older reckoning, not a demonstrated universal replacement. The existing solidus account profile remains separate.","next_evidence":"Inspect the primary 352 transaction and dated conversions or succession of account obligations; do not equate a mint reform with unit replacement.","claim_ids":["C1974","C1327","C1846"],"source_ids":["S641","S640","S968"],"new_ancestry_edge":false,"new_adopted_basis_edge":false},{"id":"ROM33-WEST","route":"Late Roman money → Frankish denier / livre","decision":"Western bridge remains open","finding":"Gallic solidus revenues and Merovingian obligations are real leads. Forty-denar legal reckoning cannot be equated automatically with Roman denarii or the later twelve-denier solidus.","next_evidence":"Collate the monetary clauses by manuscript/redaction and connect dated Gallic transactions to the later Frankish account system.","claim_ids":["C1975","C1832","C1833","C1834"],"source_ids":["S1029","S951","S949","S950","S947","S948"],"new_ancestry_edge":false,"new_adopted_basis_edge":false},{"id":"ROM33-EAST","route":"East Roman solidus / nomisma → later Byzantine accounts","decision":"Regional expansion not yet adjudicated","finding":"Egyptian solidus/nomisma accounting is already evidenced, but that scoped identity is not automatically a universal Byzantine unit extending through every later coin reform.","next_evidence":"Inspect dated imperial and regional account texts through later nomisma and hyperpyron usage; test continuity versus local differentiation. A requested Dumbarton Oaks coinage resource returned 403 and supplies no new admitted evidence.","claim_ids":["C1380","C1381","C1846"],"source_ids":["S694","S693","S640","S968"],"new_ancestry_edge":false,"new_adopted_basis_edge":false},{"id":"ROM33-ARAB","route":"East Roman accounts → early Arab administration / dinar usage","decision":"Existing local continuity retained; later dinar branch open","finding":"Inherited nomisma obligations survive the conquest in the existing Egyptian profile; the Palestinian bilingual dinar/solidus equation remains a qualified regional association. Neither conquest nor a new coin inscription alone creates a child.","next_evidence":"Connect the local obligations to later explicitly denominated dinar accounts and identify any genuine new unit boundary; do not jump to a modern dinar by name.","claim_ids":["C1838","C1839","C1840","C1841","C1842","C1852"],"source_ids":["S957","S960","S958","S959"],"new_ancestry_edge":false,"new_adopted_basis_edge":false}],"claim_map":{"denarius70":"C1970","sesterces70":"C1971","scales":"C1972","bronze":"C1973","gold_transition":"C1974","salic40":"C1975","identity":"C1976"},"source_map":{"cicero_grain":"S1023","cicero_grain_latin":"S1024","cicero_accounts":"S1025","cicero_accounts_latin":"S1026","pliny":"S1027","gaius":"S1028","salic":"S1029","constantian":"S641"},"new_claim_ids":["C1970","C1971","C1972","C1973","C1974","C1975","C1976"],"new_source_ids":["S1023","S1024","S1025","S1026","S1027","S1028","S1029"],"changed_currency_ids":["CUR-V25-ROMAN-DENARIUS"],"no_new_relationships":true}