IIII isn't a roman numeral. It would represent 4 but the Roman numeral for four is IV.
No, the Roman numeral for 4 is IV, not llll. The use of llll is a common mistake, but traditional Roman numeral representations on clocks and other time-related devices use IV instead of llll for the numeral 4.
That is not a roman numeral.I = 1II = 2III = 3IV = 4V = 5VI = 6VII = 7VIII = 8IX = 9X= 10Another response:Actually, it was a Roman numeral. The Romans were superstitious, and since "IV" were the first two letters of Jupiter's name, they used IIII for four. That's why old fashioned clocks show IIII instead of IV.Another response:But now IV is used.Another response:I'm sorry, but I'd disagree. IV may well be used, but if one is using Roman numerals, one should use them as the Roman's did. Fancy clocks made today still do it the Roman way, with the IIII. If one wishes to be modern, or logically consistent, then one still doesn't use "IV", but rather "4".
The Romans generally used the numeral IIII to represent the number 4. Later however, to bring this in line with the rule that states that no numeral should appear more than three times in succession, IV was adopted in preference to IIII. Some older watches, clocks and sundials still have the old version.
Roman numerals can be more difficult to work with compared to Arabic numerals. Arabic numerals are easier to understand and manipulate in calculations, and are used more commonly in everyday life. Roman numerals are mainly used for formal or decorative purposes, such as on clocks or in movie credits.
We still use the Roman numeral system today because it is the numerical aspect of the Latin language which is still spoken today
there is no roman numeral for itAnother answer: The Romans had no numeral to represent zero because there was no need for a zero in their system. We have 9 numbers plus the zero symbol. We add a zero on to the end of a number to convert it to tens and two zeros to convert it to hundreds and so on. The Romans simply had different symbols for tens and hundreds. For example we would write 1, 10, 20, 40, 50, 100 and 200 but the same numbers as Roman numerals would be I, X, XX, XL, L, C and CC, done quite simply with no need for a zero. In the middle ages monks, who still used Roman numerals and wrote in Latin, began to used the symbol N to represent zero (from the Latin Nullae meaning nothing).
It still is, on clocks and for dates.
That is not a roman numeral.I = 1II = 2III = 3IV = 4V = 5VI = 6VII = 7VIII = 8IX = 9X= 10Another response:Actually, it was a Roman numeral. The Romans were superstitious, and since "IV" were the first two letters of Jupiter's name, they used IIII for four. That's why old fashioned clocks show IIII instead of IV.Another response:But now IV is used.Another response:I'm sorry, but I'd disagree. IV may well be used, but if one is using Roman numerals, one should use them as the Roman's did. Fancy clocks made today still do it the Roman way, with the IIII. If one wishes to be modern, or logically consistent, then one still doesn't use "IV", but rather "4".
The Romans generally used the numeral IIII to represent the number 4. Later however, to bring this in line with the rule that states that no numeral should appear more than three times in succession, IV was adopted in preference to IIII. Some older watches, clocks and sundials still have the old version.
Roman numerals can be more difficult to work with compared to Arabic numerals. Arabic numerals are easier to understand and manipulate in calculations, and are used more commonly in everyday life. Roman numerals are mainly used for formal or decorative purposes, such as on clocks or in movie credits.
We still use Roman numerals to a certain extent today but the Roman numeral system was replaced by the Hindu-Arabic numeral system because it contained a zero symbol thus making arithmetical operations a lot easier whereas the Roman numeral system has no zero symbol and mathematical operations were much more difficult.
We still use the Roman numeral system today because it is the numerical aspect of the Latin language which is still spoken today
We still use the ancient Roman numeral system today because it forms the numerical aspect of the ancient Latin language which is still spoken today.
there is no roman numeral for itAnother answer: The Romans had no numeral to represent zero because there was no need for a zero in their system. We have 9 numbers plus the zero symbol. We add a zero on to the end of a number to convert it to tens and two zeros to convert it to hundreds and so on. The Romans simply had different symbols for tens and hundreds. For example we would write 1, 10, 20, 40, 50, 100 and 200 but the same numbers as Roman numerals would be I, X, XX, XL, L, C and CC, done quite simply with no need for a zero. In the middle ages monks, who still used Roman numerals and wrote in Latin, began to used the symbol N to represent zero (from the Latin Nullae meaning nothing).
The numbers 1221 in Roman numerals is MCCXXI. Roman numerals is the numeric system that was used in ancient Rome and is still used on some clocks and watches.
The Roman numeral system is used in the Latin language which is still spoken today in the Vatican
The Roman numeral system is still being used today because it is the numerical aspect of the Latin language which is still being used today.
The Roman numeral system was actually created by the Etruscans who once ruled the Romans. The real rules governing the original Roman numeral system were changed during the Middle Ages and are still used as we know today.