clocks that use roman numerals?

Question

Two part question:
1.Have you every noticed that clocks that use roman numerals express the number 4 like IIII and not IV?

2.Why do you think that is?

Answer 1

"There is a story that a famous clockmaker had constructed a clock for Louis XIV, king of France. The clockmaker had naturally used IV for four. When the clock was shown to the king, he remarked that IIII should have been used instead of IV. When it was explained to him that IV was correct, he still insisted, so that there was nothing to do but change the clock dial. This introduced the custom of using IIII for four. This is probably only a story, however, as IIII occurs long before the time of Louis XIV. And this same story is also told in connection with other monarchs. There is one reason why IIII is preferable to IV, and it may have caused the change. On the other side of the clock dial the VIII is the heaviest number, consisting of four heavy strokes and one light one, as it is usually made. It would destroy the symmetry to have the IV with only two heavy strokes on the other side. Thus IIII with four heavy strokes is much to be preferred. The change may therefore have been made for reasons of symmetry."

Answer 2

i once took the eight foot clock off of the local high school being torn down, the roman numerals were constructed on a die caste material of steel but were configured to a four quarters to a whole and each of the four parts were backed with rods that had to go through the brick work of the school one hundred feet in the air on the clock tower, there are reasons that the foundry used was their own product and have evolved through each own school of though and teaching, this monster is all correct but was made to be supportive of the casting process as well as the aesthetic look of the finished product

Answer 3

I've wondered that one myself when it came up on a New York Times Sunday crossword. IIII or IV? The notation of Roman numerals has varied through the centuries. Originally, it was common to use IIII to represent "four", because IV represented the pagan god Jupiter. The subtractive notation (which uses IV instead of IIII) has become universally used only in modern times. For example, Forme of Cury, a manuscript from 1390, uses IX for "nine", but IIII for "four". Another document in the same manuscript, from 1381, uses IV and IX. A third document in the same manuscript uses both IIII and IV, and IX. Constructions such as IIIII for "five", IIX for "eight" or VV for "ten" have also been discovered. Subtractive notation arose from regular Latin usage: the number "18" was duodeviginti or “two from twenty”; the number "19" was undeviginti or “one from twenty”. The use of subtractive notation increased the complexity of performing Roman arithmetic, without conveying the benefits of a full positional notation system. Likewise, on some buildings it is possible to see MDCCCCX, for example, representing 1910 instead of MCMX - notably Admiralty Arch in London. Another notable example is on Harvard Medical School's Library which reads MDCCCCIIII for 1904. [edit] Calendars and clocks Clock faces that are labelled using Roman numerals conventionally show IIII for 4 o'clock and IX for 9 o'clock, using the subtractive principle in one case and not in the other. There are several suggested explanations for this, several of which may be true: The four-character form IIII creates a visual symmetry with the VIII on the other side, which IV would not. The number of symbols on the clock totals twenty 'I's, four 'V's, and four 'X's, so clock makers need only a single mold with five 'I's, a V, and an X in order to make the correct number of numerals for the clocks, cast four times for each clock: V IIII IX VI II IIX VII III X VIII I IX IIX and one of the IX's can be rearranged or inverted to form XI and XII. The alternative uses seventeen 'I's, five 'V's, and four 'X's, possibly requiring the clock maker to have several different molds. IIII was the preferred way for the ancient Romans to write 4, since they to a large extent avoided subtraction. It has been suggested that since IV is the first two letters of IVPITER, the main god of the Romans, it was not appropriate to use. The I symbol would be the only symbol in the first 4 hours of the clock, the V symbol would only appear in the next 4 hours, and the X symbol only in the last 4 hours. This would add to the clock's radial symmetry. IV is difficult to read upside down and on an angle, particularly at that location on the clock. Louis XIV, king of France, preferred IIII over IV, ordered his clockmakers to produce clocks with IIII and not IV, and thus it has remained. [citation needed]

Answer 4

It depends on the maker. For example Sun Dials use the Roman IV. Check this site...

http://pw1.netcom.com/~abraxas2/sun.htm

Answer 5

because people could not be able to distinguish between V and that small I in front of V specially in bracelets clocks!!! if it had it you must have to see the clock twice. just for practical and visual reason ...

Answer 6

I've got one right in front of me that has 'IV'.

Answer 7

They don't all do that some have iv.