Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Showing 1 of 20 conversations about:
Waygooksaram
13
Dec 11, 2019
bookmark_border
Sorry, if I pay $5,000 for a watch, the Roman numeral IV (4) should be correct. IIII doesn't exist.
(Edited)
Watchyoutalkingabout
Dec 11, 2019
bookmark_border
WaygooksaramSo you don’t like Rolex, Cartier, Glashutte, Lange, Blancpain or Seiko? You’ll find all of them feature Roman numeral dials with the IIII, as it’s been an odd quirk of watchmaking for a few centuries now.
Also, technically, Romans first wrote IIII and later changed to IV.
solaufein_g
3
Dec 14, 2019
bookmark_border
WatchyoutalkingaboutBoth are correct, Romans change it at some-point. The "subtract" form was widely, but never universally, followed. Seems Swiss guards liked the "additive" form. :D
Cfrank17
6
Dec 21, 2019
bookmark_border
WaygooksaramOriginally, it was common to use IIII to represent four, because IV represented the Roman god Jupiter, whose Latin name, IVPPITER, begins with IV. The subtractive notation (which uses IV instead of IIII) has become the standard notation only in modern times.
Drop Refurbished
Like-new products you can trustDrop Rewards
Get $5 for every 500 points you earn! Learn more
Drop Keyboard Club
Become a member and expand your keycap collectionCollaborate With Us
For Brands & DesignersFollow Drop