to follow roman numerals is sereos in working
the roman numerals L,X,M,C,I,D ARE the roman numerals that can be used only 3 times
IVI has no meaning in Roman Numerals. IV is 4 V is 5 VI is 6 IVI does not follow the rules of how Roman Numerals work.
The Roman numeral "xxixiiimmxvi" is not a valid representation of any number in Roman numerals. Roman numerals use a combination of letters to represent numbers, with rules governing their order and repetitions. The given sequence of letters does not follow these rules.
For rules relating to the use of Roman numerals see related links.
This question has already been answered in detail under the heading: "What are the rules in changing hindu-arabic into roman numerals"
the roman numerals L,X,M,C,I,D ARE the roman numerals that can be used only 3 times
IVI has no meaning in Roman Numerals. IV is 4 V is 5 VI is 6 IVI does not follow the rules of how Roman Numerals work.
The Roman numeral "xxixiiimmxvi" is not a valid representation of any number in Roman numerals. Roman numerals use a combination of letters to represent numbers, with rules governing their order and repetitions. The given sequence of letters does not follow these rules.
For rules relating to the use of Roman numerals see related links.
This question has already been answered in detail under the heading: "What are the rules in changing hindu-arabic into roman numerals"
Under today's rules they represent 692 in Roman numerals.
As Roman numerals they are invalid because they do not conform with the rules governing the Roman numeral system.
Under today's rules the Roman numerals CMXLVII represent 947.
CXXXXV is not a correctly written Roman numeral. The individual numerals within it are real numerals but according to the rules of writing Roman numerals 'no numeral can be written more than three times in succession.' So, XXXX is not allowed. The numerals you have written add up to 145 and the correct Roman numeral for this is CXLV
Under today's rules we write out the equivalent of 29 into Roman numerals as XXIX But under the Roman rules 29 was XXVIIII *By roman rules I assume you mean Roman Numerals. Romans wrote out 29 as XXIX, the same way they work today.
The given Roman numerals under today's rules now governing the Roman numeral system represent the equivalent of 1697 in Hindu-Arabic numerals.
It is already in Roman numerals but if you meant its equivalent in Hindu-Arabic numerals then under the present rules now governing the Roman numeral system it is 1465.