Take the 2-minute tour ×
History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. It's 100% free, no registration required.

TL;DR: Is 1995 correctly written as MVM, or as something more like MCMLVL? MCMVC? MCMLXLV? MCMLXXXXV?

From what I recall from my Latin classes (European highschool...), you are not supposed to write more than 3 identical subsequent symbols. However, this rule hasn't been consistently followed in modern times from what I can tell by a little web research.

Perhaps it'd help if I knew how the Romans themselves wrote larger numerals... Would they write CLXL or CXC for 190? Something else still?

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 7 down vote accepted

1995 = MCMXCV.

The rules are:

first triad: I, V, and X:
I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X

Then all is repeated with:
second triad: X, L, and C
third triad: C, D, and M

You can't use letters outside of their "triad": So, IM for 999 is wrong. CXC for 190 is correct, and 195 is CXCV (not CVC).

You should write numbers in decreasing order: thousands first, then hundreds, then tens, and finally the ones.

There exists even more ancient (wiki) "Longer scheme" (Even now it is sometimes used for clocks):
I, II, III, IIII, V, VI, VII, VIII, VIIII, X... If you use it, you must use it for all three triads, of course.

share|improve this answer
    
was it really widespread in ancient times, or is it a modern mistake? –  Lohoris Feb 6 '12 at 15:17
    
It is the older form. Previously Romans used it and only it. Later changed to the other one. I don't remember when. But I have met this longer form sometimes in real life. I don't remember exactly, Maybe on cemetry. But now I think, there it could be an error... –  Gangnus Feb 6 '12 at 15:22
1  
Looks very strange to me, I'd ask for a authoritative source here... –  Lohoris Feb 6 '12 at 15:24
    
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals - look clocks there. –  Gangnus Feb 6 '12 at 15:29
1  
Oh! I was right - these VIII and even IIII forms ARE more ancient! The answer edited again. –  Gangnus Jun 20 '13 at 15:00
show 6 more comments

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.