Roman Numerals

CrowbarTK Hullo · 7th June 2002, 19:45

(numerals might be spelled wrong...)

I've noticed on many clocks with roman numerals that 4 is done wrong. 1-12 in roman numerals should be like this:

I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII

Four, IV, on clocks/watches is usually done IIII. There's no number like that! and i'm sure poeple know how roman numerals are supposed to be done! if not, they're a stupid idiot

kljs · 7th June 2002, 19:47

IV

tjb2004 · 7th June 2002, 19:48

Vie · 7th June 2002, 19:49

I write the date in RN's it pises off Kavnar

Bop · 7th June 2002, 19:50

I own quite a few watches and all the ones with roman numerals have the 4 written "incorrectly", I've always wondered why that was like that myself.

I assume that both methods are correct.... perhaps it is so that we do not confuse IV with VI.

I have no clue, really. I'm glad you brought it up though- I would like to know.

Xerxes · 7th June 2002, 19:56

Um, Shoddy Asian Reproductions? (What the Japanese call a "Rorex"

)

Bop · 7th June 2002, 19:56

Here's something I found, the 4 (IIII) phenomena is discussed briefly just after the table ---->

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RomanNumeral.html

[edit= here is another site] http://www.wilkiecollins.demon.co.uk/roman/intro.htm
(in the "Use of Roman Numerals" section it is explained a little)

fish · 7th June 2002, 20:57

It always been and always will be IV for me.

CrowbarTK Hullo · 7th June 2002, 21:10

yup

[edit]i didn't expect to gte this many replys so fast

eleet-2k2 · 7th June 2002, 21:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Boplicity
I own quite a few watches and all the ones with roman numerals have the 4 written "incorrectly", I've always wondered why that was like that myself.

I assume that both methods are correct.... perhaps it is so that we do not confuse IV with VI.

I have no clue, really. I'm glad you brought it up though- I would like to know.

I think it is done for 'class'. Beats me why though.

My watches and clocks display 4 = IV.

CrowbarTK Hullo · 7th June 2002, 21:38

they do? i've never seen a vlock/watch in roman numerals that displayed 4 as IV

apollos · 7th June 2002, 21:49

Only a few months ago did I master VI and IV

I is less than V so it must be 4
V is more than I so it must be 5.

before I got them confused

Roman numerals kick ass!

They make things look important!

Bop · 7th June 2002, 21:52

One of the site's mentioned that it balances
the dial better when it is written as IIII.

btw, Big Ben is written in the classic IV form...

QHOBBES · 7th June 2002, 22:41

IV is the correct because in RM you always use the least amount of
characters. I.E. IX is the correct form of 9 instead of VIIII

ujay · 7th June 2002, 23:29

Numerals are completely superfluous anyway. As long as the top of the dial is marked, there is no need for any numbers at all, a series of dots will do. Langlands & Bell have produced timepieces using the 3 letter codes for airports - 'Frozen Sky'

UJ

CrowbarTK Hullo · 8th June 2002, 00:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Inatlantis
Only a few months ago did I master VI and IV

I is less than V so it must be 4
V is more than I so it must be 5.

before I got them confused

Roman numerals kick ass!

They make things look important!

i mastered them a long time ago ^_~

i even use roman numerals in my schoolwork... @.@

patroclus22 · 8th June 2002, 00:45

My grandfather has a clock that uses IIII. I've actually wondered why they didn't use "IV" for many years now...

Quote:

i even use roman numerals in my schoolwork...

When I was in the 5th grade, I did an entire math assignment in Mayan numerals. That really pissed Sister Augustine off...

DJ Shredder · 8th June 2002, 00:50

One of the clocks in my house is in Roman Numerals, and it's IIII, I've always used IV, however.

Rocky Raccoon · 8th June 2002, 01:23

Roman numerals are I III III VII

c2R · 8th June 2002, 10:00

I think the IIII is also correct, and is to do with tallying (i.e. 5 being IIII with a line through to group it).

I've got clocks and watches with both methods used... but then again, does it really matter?

Bilbo Baggins · 8th June 2002, 11:24

I have never seen a clock face with 4 written as IIII.

Spiffed · 8th June 2002, 13:55

you got me curious, so i had to look, 3 clocks in my house are IV one other is IIII

personally i think they do it on watches so you can look at the thing upside down... and for us dyslexic people

ElChevelle · 8th June 2002, 14:11

I just read the reason why this occurs while searching for facts for my "Did you know" thread.

Look at the number four on a clock face that uses Roman numerals. If the clock is made correctly then the Roman numeral four is wrong. The standard and correct way to write the Roman numeral four is "IV," but the traditional way to show it on a clock face is "IIII." Legend has it that a clock was made for a British king. When he saw the clock he mis- informedly corrected the clock maker who re-did the clock face to show a "IIII" instead of an "IV" thus not risking offending the king. Other clock makers followed suit so as not to embarass the king. Now it is the traditional way to make clocks.

CrowbarTK Hullo · 8th June 2002, 17:03

-.-

sgtfuzzbubble011 · 9th June 2002, 05:44

Blargh... I've always written it the correct way. IV.

Print · 9th June 2002, 05:49

Well i'm pretty sure it's IV, ahem, absoluty sure, maybe it's just preferred with the creators. Vase, vahs. IIII, IV. Just a choice, didn't like IV.

pixiefied · 9th June 2002, 06:30

pollocks made the watches

liquidmotion · 9th June 2002, 06:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Boplicity
I own quite a few watches and all the ones with roman numerals have the 4 written "incorrectly", I've always wondered why that was like that myself.

I assume that both methods are correct.... perhaps it is so that we do not confuse IV with VI.

I have no clue, really. I'm glad you brought it up though- I would like to know.

i have all digital watches, makes for the much easier telling of time

(j/k).

i've never seen a watch with the IIII "spelling". strange.

CrowbarTK Hullo · 9th June 2002, 22:10

hrm...it seems that some watches/clocks do have the right way (IV), but i have never seen one like that....

7th June 2002, 19:45	#1
CrowbarTK Hullo Major Dude Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: The lush, tropical country of Canada Posts: 565	Roman Numerals (numerals might be spelled wrong...) I've noticed on many clocks with roman numerals that 4 is done wrong. 1-12 in roman numerals should be like this: I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Four, IV, on clocks/watches is usually done IIII. There's no number like that! and i'm sure poeple know how roman numerals are supposed to be done! if not, they're a stupid idiot

7th June 2002, 19:47	#2
kljs Major Dude Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Kulim,Kedah,Malaysia Posts: 645	IV I am just a normal person sitting on the bench and reading newspaper and having a cup of coffee. Why can't people see that?

7th June 2002, 19:48	#3
tjb2004 Major Dude Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Rocky River, Ohio. Posts: 1,881	Hype? tjb2004.deviantart.com

7th June 2002, 19:49	#4
Vie Forum King Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Thoron fields and Duranium shadows. Posts: Crap mostly Posts: 7,960	I write the date in RN's it pises off Kavnar Member most in need of SpellCheck Lifetime Achievement Award Vie's Scratching Post

7th June 2002, 19:50	#5
Bop Forum King Join Date: Dec 2000 Posts: 2,880	I own quite a few watches and all the ones with roman numerals have the 4 written "incorrectly", I've always wondered why that was like that myself. I assume that both methods are correct.... perhaps it is so that we do not confuse IV with VI. I have no clue, really. I'm glad you brought it up though- I would like to know. ßoþL¡©¡†¥

7th June 2002, 19:56	#6
Xerxes Capitalist Alumni Join Date: May 2000 Location: my 4 Houses on Park Place Posts: 8,687	Um, Shoddy Asian Reproductions? (What the Japanese call a "Rorex" )

7th June 2002, 20:57	#8
fish Pretty Cool Guy Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Cle, OH, USA Posts: 4,847	It always been and always will be IV for me.

7th June 2002, 21:10	#9
CrowbarTK Hullo Major Dude Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: The lush, tropical country of Canada Posts: 565	yup [edit]i didn't expect to gte this many replys so fast

7th June 2002, 21:38	#11
CrowbarTK Hullo Major Dude Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: The lush, tropical country of Canada Posts: 565	they do? i've never seen a vlock/watch in roman numerals that displayed 4 as IV

7th June 2002, 21:49	#12
apollos Forum King Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Canterbury & Plymouth Posts: 4,176	Only a few months ago did I master VI and IV I is less than V so it must be 4 V is more than I so it must be 5. before I got them confused Roman numerals kick ass! They make things look important!

7th June 2002, 21:52	#13
Bop Forum King Join Date: Dec 2000 Posts: 2,880	One of the site's mentioned that it balances the dial better when it is written as IIII. btw, Big Ben is written in the classic IV form... ßoþL¡©¡†¥

7th June 2002, 22:41	#14
QHOBBES Banned Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: I H8 Mods Posts: 1,405	IV is the correct because in RM you always use the least amount of characters. I.E. IX is the correct form of 9 instead of VIIII

7th June 2002, 23:29	#15
ujay Forum King Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: London Posts: 5,989	Numerals are completely superfluous anyway. As long as the top of the dial is marked, there is no need for any numbers at all, a series of dots will do. Langlands & Bell have produced timepieces using the 3 letter codes for airports - 'Frozen Sky' UJ

8th June 2002, 00:50	#18
DJ Shredder Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Langley, BC, Canada Posts: 255	One of the clocks in my house is in Roman Numerals, and it's IIII, I've always used IV, however.

8th June 2002, 01:23	#19
Rocky Raccoon Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Abbey Road Posts: 384	Roman numerals are I III III VII Salaam

8th June 2002, 10:00	#20
c2R Stereotype? (Forum King) Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Ware, England Posts: 3,511	I think the IIII is also correct, and is to do with tallying (i.e. 5 being IIII with a line through to group it). I've got clocks and watches with both methods used... but then again, does it really matter? lights out for darker skies # forums.winamp.com boinc team # tms

8th June 2002, 11:24	#21
Bilbo Baggins Wind Chime of the Apocalypse Join Date: May 2000 Location: The Forest Posts: 17,231	I have never seen a clock face with 4 written as IIII.

8th June 2002, 13:55	#22
Spiffed Major Dude Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Milliways Posts: 921	you got me curious, so i had to look, 3 clocks in my house are IV one other is IIII personally i think they do it on watches so you can look at the thing upside down... and for us dyslexic people the road to enlightenment is filled with much dark chat, stat, and be merry The best of IRC PM's

8th June 2002, 14:11	#23
ElChevelle Moderator Alumni Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: the MANCANNON! Posts: 22,431	I just read the reason why this occurs while searching for facts for my "Did you know" thread. Look at the number four on a clock face that uses Roman numerals. If the clock is made correctly then the Roman numeral four is wrong. The standard and correct way to write the Roman numeral four is "IV," but the traditional way to show it on a clock face is "IIII." Legend has it that a clock was made for a British king. When he saw the clock he mis- informedly corrected the clock maker who re-did the clock face to show a "IIII" instead of an "IV" thus not risking offending the king. Other clock makers followed suit so as not to embarass the king. Now it is the traditional way to make clocks.

8th June 2002, 17:03	#24
CrowbarTK Hullo Major Dude Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: The lush, tropical country of Canada Posts: 565	-.-

9th June 2002, 05:44	#25
sgtfuzzbubble011 Join Date: Jun 2000 Posts: 60,767	Blargh... I've always written it the correct way. IV.

9th June 2002, 05:49	#26
Print Forum King Join Date: May 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 3,206	Tomato, Tomahto... Well i'm pretty sure it's IV, ahem, absoluty sure, maybe it's just preferred with the creators. Vase, vahs. IIII, IV. Just a choice, didn't like IV.

9th June 2002, 06:30	#27
pixiefied Mother Trucker Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: in the forest Posts: 3,493	pollocks made the watches

9th June 2002, 22:10	#29
CrowbarTK Hullo Major Dude Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: The lush, tropical country of Canada Posts: 565	hrm...it seems that some watches/clocks do have the right way (IV), but i have never seen one like that....

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode