Message text written by tony moss
I recall being
'smacked' by a BSS lady member for using a 'clock makers' IV' in my early
attempt at Roman numerals some years ago.
The Romans used both at different times during their Empire with
rather more frequently overall. There is no right or wrong
Tony:
Isn't the clockmaker's IV? Apparently introduced since it balances
VIII although that's not a theory that is without problems since other
numbers on the clock face are not balanced. While not necessarily
authoratative, see
http://www.wilkiecollins.demon.co.uk/roman/clockface.htm.
--
According to
http://www2.inetdirect.net/~charta/Roman_numerals.html#footnote4, the Romans
themselves rarely used the subtraction principle and so would have primarily
used rather than IV.
-- Richard
On Sat, 27 Mar 2004, tony moss wrote:
Richard Langley wrote:
Isn't the clockmaker's
Fellow Shadow Watchers,
I've just noticed that the BBC TV News credit
titles include the date as MMIV. Should this be MM? I recall being
'smacked' by a BSS lady member for using a 'clock makers' IV' in my early
attempt at Roman numerals some
Richard Langley wrote:
Isn't the clockmaker's IV? Apparently introduced since it balances
VIII although that's not a theory that is without problems since other
numbers on the clock face are not balanced. While not necessarily
authoratative, see
