answersLogoWhite

0

🎒

Roman Numerals

Questions and answers related to the symbols used by the ancient Romans to represent numbers. These include the numerals: I, V, X, L, C, D and M.

14,167 Questions

What is this in Arabic numerals MCDXLIV?

1543

Improved Answer:-

MDXLIII represents 1543 in Roman numerals but MCDXLIV represents 1444 in Roman numerals

How would you add together 14 plus 1999 plus 19 using two different combinations of Roman numerals throughout both calculations?

Under today's rules governing the Roman numeral system 14, 1999 and 19 are officially XIV, MCMXCIX and XIX respectively thus restricting any form of mathematical operations with them.

But there is strong evidence to suggest that the Romans themselves in the past would have probably calculated the above numbers in either of the following formats:-

Abridged Version:

IXV+IMM = MMXIII (15-1)+(2000-1) = (2013)

MMXIII+IXX = MMXXXII (2013)+(20-1) = (2032)

Unabridged Version:

XIIII+MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII = MMXIII (14)+(1999) = (2013)

MMXIII+XVIIII = MMXXXII (2013)+(19) = (2032)

Remember that: 5*I=V, 2*V=X, 5*X=L, 2*L=C, 5*C=D and 2*D=M

Roman numerals: M=1000, D=500, C=100, L=50, X=10, V=5 and I=1

QED

What are twenty or more advantages of the now defunct ancient Roman numeral system?

These numbers have hardly any advantage. About the only one I can think of is that it makes some things look old-fashioned. It is only for this reason that they are sometimes used for chapter numbers or similar things.

What are two different ways of actually adding together 1999 64 and 99 entirely in Roman numerals knowing in advance that it must be MMCLXII giving reasons why?

Due to changes made to the real rules governing the Roman numeral system introduced during the Middle Ages, presumably to make it easier to convert Roman numerals into Hindu-Arabic numerals that were increasingly becoming the dominant numeral system in Western Europe at the time, today we would convert 1999, 64 and 99 into Roman numerals as MCMXCIX, LXIV and XCIX respectively which restricts collective mathematical interaction amongst them.

Furthermore the ancient Romans under no circumstances whatsoever wouldn't have converted the equivalent of 64 as LXIV because this could be construeded as an act of henious blasphemy against their most powerful of gods Jupiter which translates into Latin as IVPPITER and it is for the same reason that they always wrote out 4 as IIII instead of the abridged version of IV.

Nevertheless irrespective of todays modern notation of Roman numerals inasmuch that there is overwhelming evidence to suggest historically that the Romans would have probably calculated the aforementioned numbers in either of the following formats:-

IMM+ILXV = MMLXIII => (2000-1)+(65-1) = 2063

MMLXIII+IC = MMCLXII => 2063+(100-1) = 2162

Alternatively:-

MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII+LXIIII = MMLXIII => 1999+64 = 2063

MMLXIII+LXXXXVIIII = MMCLXII => 2063+99 = 2162

Note: 5*I=V, 2*V=X, 5*X=L, 2*L=C, 5*C=D and 2*D=M

Values: M=1000, D=500, C=100, L=50, X=10, V=5 and I=1

For more larger and complicated calculations the Romans would have made use of an abacus counting device.

QED by David Gambell

How do you write as a numeral 6057?

what kind of numeral if roman than VIVVII

Another contributor's answer:

6057 is already a numeral set out in Arabic numerals.

Do you mean Roman numerals? If so then the answer is:

VILVII but with an horizontal bar above each of the first two numerals to indicate multiplication by a thousand.

So: 6000+50+5+2 = 6057

How would you actually add together 1914 and 99 in two different ways entirely in Roman numerals with examples and explanations?

Nowadays, because of changes made to the real rules governing the original Roman numeral system introduced during the Middle Ages, we would now convert the equivalent of 1914 and 99 into Roman numerals as MCMXIV and XCIX respectively which doesn't seem to make sense because it inhibits their ability to mathematically interact with each other in some kind of logical order.

However, notwithstanding the aforementioned inasmuch that there still exist historical evidence to show that the ancient Romans would have worked out the equivalent of 1914 and 99 on an abacus counting device as MDCCCCXIIII and LXXXXVIIII respectively and then systematically abridged them to ICMMXV and IC in written format thus facilitating the speed and ease of addition as follows:-

ICMMXV+IC = MMXIII => (2015-101)+(100-1) = 2013

Alternatively:-

MDCCCCXIIII+LXXXXVIIII = MMXIII => 1914+99 = 2013

Values: M=1000 D=500 C=100 L=50 X=10 V=5 and I=1

Note: 5*I=V 2*V=X 5*X=L 2*L=C 5*C=D and 2*D=M

QED by David Gambell

How do you add together 1666 and 1999 in two different ways using Roman numerals?

The real rules governing the original Roman numeral were changed during the Middle Ages presumably to make the system more compatible with the Hindu-Arabic numeral system that was slowly being introduced into Western Europe at the time. So as a consequence of these changes nowadays we would convert 1999 into Roman numerals as MCMXCIX which inhibits their ability to interact sensibly with other numerals.

But there is historical evidence to suggest that the ancient Romans would have worked out the equivalent of 1999 on an abacus counting device as MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII and then systematically reduced them to IMM in written format thus facilitating the speed and ease of addition as follows:-

MDCLXVI+IMM = MMMDCLXV => 1666+(2000-1) = 3665

Alternatively:-

MDCLXVI+MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII = MMMDCLXV => 1666+1999 = 3665

Values: M=1000 D=500 C=100 L=50 X=10 V=5 and I=1

Note: 5*I=V 2*V=X 5*X=L 2*L=C 5*C=D and 2*D=M

QED by David Gambell

How would you precisely work out in two different ways the sum of 1499 plus 19 plus 99 using only Roman numerals throughout both calculations giving reasons why?

With great difficulty because in accordance with the rules and regulations governing todays Roman numeral system that were introduced during the Middle Ages nowadays we would convert 1499, 19 and 99 into Roman numerals as MCDXCIX, XIX and XCIX respectively which makes arithmetical operations with them quite difficult if not impossible at all.

But notwithstanding todays configuration of Roman numerals inasmuch that there is evidence to suggest that the ancient Romans would have probably calculated the equivalent of these numbers in either of the folllowing formats:-

IMD+IXX = MDXVIII => (1500-1)+(20-1) = 1518

MDXVIII+IC = MDCXVII => 1518+(100-1) = 1617

Alternatively:-

MCCCCLXXXXVIIII+XVIIII = MDXVIII => 1499+19 = 1518

MDXVIII+LXXXXVIIII = MDCXVII => 1518+99 = 1617

Remember: 5*I=V, 2*V=X, 5*X=L, 2*L=C, 5*C=D and 2*D=M

Roman numerals: M=1000, D=500, C=100, L=50, X=10, V=5 and I=1

Note that if we added I to MCCCCLXXXXVIIII it would then become MD so in order for it to retain its original value we must subtract I from MD therefore it follows that:-

MCCCCLXXXXVIIII = IMD = 1499

QED

What are the two ways of adding together 14 19 49 and 99 in step by step stages using Roman numerals?

Due to changes made to the Roman numeral system during the Middle Ages today we would write out the equivalent of 14, 19, 49 and 99 into Roman numerals as XIV, XIX, XLIX and XCIX respectively in which mathematical interaction amongst them is almost impossible.

But there is strong historical evidence to suggest that the ancient Romans would have probably calculated the equivalent of these numbers in either one of the following formats:-

IXV+IXX = XXXIII => (15-1)+(20-1) = 33

XXXIII+IL = LXXXII => 33+(50-1) = 82

LXXXII+IC = CLXXXI => 82+(100-1) = 181

Alternatively:-

XIIII+XVIIII = XXXIII => 14+19 = 33

XXXIII+XXXXVIIII = LXXXII => 33+49 = 82

LXXXII+LXXXXVIIII = CLXXXI => 82+99 = 181

Note: 5*I=V, 2*V=X, 5*X=L, 2*L=C, 5*C=D and 2*D=M

Values: M=1000, D=500, C=100, L-50, X=10, V=5 and I=1

QED by David Gambell

What are two ways of adding together 19 49 and 99 using Roman numerals throughout both calculations?

19 = XIX

49 = XLIX

99 = XCIX

Expected result is 167 = CLXVII

Method 1: Convert subtractive pairs so IV becomes IIII, XL becomes XXXX and XC becomes LXXXX. Then sort values in descending order of value, grouping C, X and I in groups of 5, and L and V in groups of 2, then reduce these groups so that IIIII becomes V, VV becomes X, XXXXX becomes L and LL becomes C.

XIX + XLIX + XCIX =

XVIIII + XXXXVIIII + LXXXXVIIII =

L + XXXXX + XXXX + VV + V + IIIII + IIIII + II =

L + XXXXX + XXXX + VV + VV + V + II =

L + XXXXX + XXXXX + X + V + II =

LL + L + X + V + II =

C + L + X + V + II =

CLXVII

Method 2: Expand all symbols into positive and negative symbols, sort by absolute value, cancel out any similar values with opposing signs. Convert higher values to lower values as required.

XIX + XLIX + XCIX =

X - I + X - X + L - I + X - X + C - I + X =

C + L + X + X - X + X - X + X - I - I - I =

C + L + X + X - I - I - I =

C + L + X + V + V - I - I - I =

C + L + X + V + I + I + I + I + I - I - I - I =

C + L + X + V + I + I =

CLXVII

What are two ways to add 1999 and 666 using Roman numerals throughout both calculations giving reasons why?

Under todays rules governing the Roman numeral system, which had nothing to do with the Romans themselves because they were introduced after the Dark Ages, 1999 is now officially considered to be MCMXCIX which is rather remarkable inasmuch that mathematical integration with other numerals is hardly possible.

But there is evidence to suggest that the Romans would have actually calculated the equivalent of 1999 on an abacus counting device as MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII and then probably abridged it to IMM (2000-1) in written format thus facilitating the speed and ease of addition as follows:-

IMM+DCLXVI = MMDCLXV (2000-1)+(666) = (2665)

Alternatively:-

MDCCCCLXXXXVIIII+DCLXVI = MMDCLXV (1999)+(666) = (2665)

Note that: 5*I=V, 2*V=X, 5*X=L, 2*L=C, 5*C=D and 2*D=M

Roman numerals: M=1000, D=500, C=100, L=50, X=10, V=5 and I=1

QED

How would you actually add together 99 plus 1776 plus 1900 in two different ways entirely in Roman numerals in both calculations?

Nowadays we would convert the equivalent of 99, 1776 and 1900 into Roman numerals as XCIX, MDCCLXXVI and MCM respectively which inhibits their ability to interact with each other:-

But the ancient Romans probably added the equivalent of 99, 1776 and 1900 in either of the following formats:-

IC+MDCCLXXVI = MDCCCLXXV => (100-1)+1776 = 1875

MDCCCLXXV+CMM = MMMDCCLXXV => 1875+(2000-100) = 3775

Alternatively:-

LXXXXVIIII+MDCCLXXVI = MDCCCLXXV => 99+1776 = 1875

MDCCCLXXV+MDCCCC = MMMDCCLXXV => 1875+1900 = 3775

Values: M=1000, D=500, C+100, L=50, X=10, V=5 and I=1

Note: 5*I=V, 2*V=X, 5*X=L, 2*L=C, 5*C=D and 2*D=M

QED

What are a score and five more interesting facts about the ancient Roman numeral system?

1 Its symbol for nought is N which is not needed

2 Its numerals have positional place values that are self evident

3 It once needed only 5 symbols which were I V X L and C

4 It used single or multiple brackets to increase the values of numerals

5 It once was I) for 500 and (I) for 1000 later changed to D and M

6 Its values are: M=1000 D=500 C=100 L=50 X=10 V=5 and I=1

7 It needs less numerals than todays Hindu-Arabic numeral system

8 It used superscripted numerals to increase the value of numerals

9 Its equivalent of 1,000,000,000,000 is (M)(M) or 1.0*1012 in scientific notation

10 It doesn't use decimals

11 It used fractions only to a limited extent

12 It's still used extensively today

13 It;s used by VIPs to nominate their names

14 It never used IV for 4 for fear of offending the Roman god Jupiter

15 It's quite capable of performing the 4 operations of arithmetic

16 Its numberals can sometimes be abridged yet retaining their original values

17 It was conceived by the Etruscans who once ruled the Romans

18 Its original rules governing it were changed in the Middle Ages

19 It's now MMXIV for 2014 but it once was MMXIIII or as IMMXV

20 It's the perfect prerequisite to learning algebra

21 It was superseded by the Hindu-Arabic numeral system in the Middle Ages

22 It once was calculated on a beaded abacus counting device

23 Its fractional equivalent of a 1/2 is S

24 Its equivalent of VIIIS is SIX which means 8.5 = 10-1.5

25 It was Julius Caesar who used Roman numerals in his calculations to extend the Roman year of 10 months to 12 months known as the Julian calendar which was modified in the year of MDLXXXII (1582) by Pope Gregory XIII (13) known today as the Gregorian calendar