My clock doesn't have any numbers (roman numerals or normal arabic numerals), just a dot at each hour. I've seen them with both IV and IIII though, but I prefer IV cos it has a kind of symmetry to it.
My clock doesn't have any numbers (roman numerals or normal arabic numerals), just a dot at each hour. I've seen them with both IV and IIII though, but I prefer IV cos it has a kind of symmetry to it.
IV is more common because the Roman's dun liek nuhfen more dan 3 letrs. But IIII is acceptable.
I love Roman numeral clocks, I wanna get one for my room.
Using one or the other seems to be wholly arbitary anyway.
For example. 1999 = MIM right ?
Well it's actually MCMXCIX ! wtf
So just do whatever you want. As long as the person reading knows the numbers and can do arithmetic you are fine.
1666 - MDCLXVI. Rawk.
Romans hate subtraction.Originally Posted by Quin 'n' Tonic
Plus the whole IVPITER was bad mojo.
Never really noticed the difference between IIII and IV. Now I'm all freakin' out and checking all of my clocks (which are in actual numerals, not silly Roman numerals. [because I am not a Roman]).
Is that so? Well, I never!
Also, last I checked, IIII is also a considered option because it's easier to read when upside down.
VI V IV might confuse people when put in the proper place on a clock.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
