https://www.facebook.com/AUGlycoBalance/
Food & Drink0 min ago
When did IV for 4 replace IIII
Just been looking at some numbered murals that were uncovered in a bathhouse in Pompeii and noticed that the 4th mural was numbered IIII and not as I expected as IV? Was there a time it changed or was using IIII/IV optional?
Answers
1 to 12 of 12
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by MarzipanQ. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
IIII and IV coexisted in ancient Rome, but IV came to be accepted as the educated man's way of writing it. However, IIII was preferred on monuments, perhaps for the simple reason that masons found it easier to carve IIII than IV without making a mistake . They had the same preference, and the same reason, for preferring I to J. (Latin allowed I as an alternative to J at the beginning of some words. The god Jupiter's name was written Juppiter but could be written Iuppiter. Either way it was pronounced like you-pitta, not joo-pitta ! )
On clocks, IIII is traditional. Written as IIII it balances VIII on the other side, which IV would not do. Clockmakers put the first stroke of the V in a bold thick line and the second very lightly, so that there are four obvious thick lines in the VIII and four obvious thick lines in the IIII, thereby achieving some symmetry.
On clocks, IIII is traditional. Written as IIII it balances VIII on the other side, which IV would not do. Clockmakers put the first stroke of the V in a bold thick line and the second very lightly, so that there are four obvious thick lines in the VIII and four obvious thick lines in the IIII, thereby achieving some symmetry.
Clock-faces with Roman numerals usually represent 4 by IIII rather than IV. This, as stated above, is generally taken to be so that the four elements of the number better balances the four elements of VIII for 8 on the same level at the other side. However, the clock-faces on the �Big Ben' tower at the Palace of Westminster - probably the best-known such clock-face in the entire world - actually uses IV for 4! Click here for a close-up picture of it. It shows clearly - though almost upside-down - that the 4 is IV and not IIII.
In Roman times either form was used, but legend has it that the IIII tradition for clocks began when a French clockmaker made a timepiece for the king. The latter decided that IV was wrong and - when the clockmaker insisted it was right - he was reminded that the king was never - ever - wrong! So the IIII version was preferred thereafter. Believe that or not, as you please!
In Roman times either form was used, but legend has it that the IIII tradition for clocks began when a French clockmaker made a timepiece for the king. The latter decided that IV was wrong and - when the clockmaker insisted it was right - he was reminded that the king was never - ever - wrong! So the IIII version was preferred thereafter. Believe that or not, as you please!
jno , no J ?. Lewis and Short, the standard Latin dictionary: has got 12 pages and some hundreds of words beginning J :-)
The idea that there was no J is a product of modern , simplified, teaching of Latin where I is substituted for J e.g iam for jam (losing the old schoolboy joke about Caesar having 'jam forte', jam for tea),iudex for judex. maior for major, eiectus for ejectus. [Interesting that we have kept the J in the English words derived from those, but changed the pronunciation] Lewis and Short says that originally I and J were the same character but the ancients distinguished between the sounds and effects of each (e.g.; J was said to lengthen the vowel preceding it); and started to write the 'J' ones as J and I ones as I [the dictionary has 40 lines of miniscule print explaining all this !]. So Classical Latin had lots of Js. The Romans themselves often used J and I interchangeably, to the relief of masons (who also carved U as V, that being easier!)
The idea that there was no J is a product of modern , simplified, teaching of Latin where I is substituted for J e.g iam for jam (losing the old schoolboy joke about Caesar having 'jam forte', jam for tea),iudex for judex. maior for major, eiectus for ejectus. [Interesting that we have kept the J in the English words derived from those, but changed the pronunciation] Lewis and Short says that originally I and J were the same character but the ancients distinguished between the sounds and effects of each (e.g.; J was said to lengthen the vowel preceding it); and started to write the 'J' ones as J and I ones as I [the dictionary has 40 lines of miniscule print explaining all this !]. So Classical Latin had lots of Js. The Romans themselves often used J and I interchangeably, to the relief of masons (who also carved U as V, that being easier!)
1 to 12 of 12
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.