In today's modern way of expressing Roman numerals 199 and 114 are now considered to be CXCIX and CXIV respectively but there exist historical evidence to suggest that the ancient Romans would have probably worked out the above calculations in either of the following formats:
A: ICC+ICXV+ICC = DXII => (200-1)+(215-1)+(200-1) = 512
B: CLXXXXVIIII+CXIIII+CLXXXXVIIII = DXII +> 199+114+199 = 512
For more extensive and complicated calculations the Romans would have used an abacus calculating device.
See answer to question: ' How do you add together 1666 and 1999 in two different ways using Roman numerals'
The modern way of expressing 19 into Roman numerals is now XIX but the ancient Romans would have probably worked out the above calculations as follows: A: XXXI+IXX = L => 31+(20-1) = 50. B: XXXI+XVIIII = L => 31+19 = 50. C: XXXI-IXX = XII => 31-(20-1) = 12. D: XXXI-XVIIII = XII => 31-19 = 12.
I expect a Roman would notice that 1999 is only I less than MM, so he would used MM plus the others, take-away one I. Similarly for the others. So you have MM+XX+L less III = MMLXVII. In two different ways: take off the III before adding LXX or take it off afterwards instead.
Lower case numerals have the same values as upper case numerals but normally you don't mix them together.
Notwithstanding today's rules now governing the Roman numeral system that were introduced during the Middle Ages inasmuch that there exist credible evidence to suggest that the ancient Romans would have worked out the required calculations as follows:-MDCCLXXVI+CLXXXXVIIII+CXXXXV = MMCXX => 1776+199+145 = 2120VXXCCMMI+ICC+VCL = MMCXX => (2001-225)+(200-1)+(150-5) = 2120Note that the above calculations are fairly simple and straightforward but for more complicated calculations the Romans would have made use of an abacus calculating device.QED
See answer to question: ' How do you add together 1666 and 1999 in two different ways using Roman numerals'
Doing arithmetic with Roman numerals is exasperating, and imho a pointless waste of time, except to demonstrate the obvious superiority of our "normal numbers," which use base-10 radix / positional notation that includes a zero digit as a placeholder. I'd venture to say science & technology -- commerce, too -- could never have developed in recent centuries if we still used Roman numerals for calculations. However, this web site explains some methods: http://turner.faculty.swau.edu/mathematics/materialslibrary/roman/
In todays modern configuration of Roman numerals 49 is now considered to be XLIX but the ancient Romans would have probably added the given numbers in either of the following formats:-A: MDCCLXXVI+IL = MDCCCXXV => 1776+(50-1) = 1825.B: MDCCLXXVI+XXXXVIIII = MDCCCXXV => 1776+49 = 1825.For more complicated calculations the Romans would have used an abacus calculating device.QED
The modern way of expressing 19 into Roman numerals is now XIX but the ancient Romans would have probably worked out the above calculations as follows: A: XXXI+IXX = L => 31+(20-1) = 50. B: XXXI+XVIIII = L => 31+19 = 50. C: XXXI-IXX = XII => 31-(20-1) = 12. D: XXXI-XVIIII = XII => 31-19 = 12.
When in Rome do as the Roman do and the ancient Romans would have probably added together 1999 and 3001 in either of the following ways:- IMM+MMMI = (V) => (2000-1)+3001 = 1000*5 = 5000 MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII+MMMI = (V) => 1999+30001 = 5000 Note that in todays modern configuration of Roman numerals 1999 is now considered to be MCMXCIX
It is now generally accepted that the modern way of expressing 1999 into Roman numerals is now MCMXCIX but the ancient Romans would have probably worked out the above as follows:- A: MDCCLXXVI+IMM = MMMDCCLXXV => 1776+(2000-1) = 3775 B: MDCCLXXVI+MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII = MMMDCCLXXV => 1776+1999 = 3775 C: MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII-MDCCLXXVI = CCXXIII => 1999-1776 = 223 The above calculations are fairly easy and straightforward but for more complicated calculations the Romans would have used an abacus counting device.
I expect a Roman would notice that 1999 is only I less than MM, so he would used MM plus the others, take-away one I. Similarly for the others. So you have MM+XX+L less III = MMLXVII. In two different ways: take off the III before adding LXX or take it off afterwards instead.
The modern way of expressing the equivalent of 49 into Roman numerals is XLIX but the ancient Romans would have probably expressed it as IL or XXXXVIIII thus facilitating the speed and ease of the above calculations respectively as follows:- A: LI+IL = C => 51+(50-1) = 100. B: LI+XXXXVIIII = C => 51+49 = 100. C: LI-IL = II => 51-(50-1) = 2. D: LI-XXXXVIIII = II => 51-49 = 2.
Convert from Roman numerals to Arabic numerals, add, convert back to Roman numerals.
Lower case numerals have the same values as upper case numerals but normally you don't mix them together.
Notwithstanding today's rules now governing the Roman numeral system that were introduced during the Middle Ages inasmuch that there exist credible evidence to suggest that the ancient Romans would have worked out the required calculations as follows:-MDCCLXXVI+CLXXXXVIIII+CXXXXV = MMCXX => 1776+199+145 = 2120VXXCCMMI+ICC+VCL = MMCXX => (2001-225)+(200-1)+(150-5) = 2120Note that the above calculations are fairly simple and straightforward but for more complicated calculations the Romans would have made use of an abacus calculating device.QED
There are two major differences between Roman Numerals and Hindu-Arabic numerals, and together they make the Hindu-Arabic system superior for must applications. First, Hindu-Arabic numbers use placement within a number to indicate a higher value. For example, in the number 256, the "5" indicates five tens and the "2" indicates two hundred units. The same numerals in a different order represent a totally different number, as for example, 562, which represents five hundreds, six tens and two singles. Roman numbers make little use of the order in which numerals are presented. Second, Hindu-Arabic numerals include a symbol for zero, while the Roman system completely lacks that. The zero is used as a place holder in such numbers as 1028, indicating one thousand, no hundreds, two tens and eight singles. This place holder allows aligning of several numbers and makes addition and subtraction easier, and multiplication and division so much easier that calculations can be done with Hindu numerals that are simply impossible with Roman numerals.The Hindu Arabic system is different from Roman numerals cause Hindu Arabic has place value but Roman numerals do not