When Roman numerals are used on a clock face, why is the number 4 usually written as IIII rather than IV? Are there any other instances where IIII is used in favour of IV?
In: Other
Ok, IIII is sometimes used on a variety clock or watches – it has nothing to do with quality, it is more of a “watchmaking tradition/quirk”. Correct way is to write IV as 4, but it was not always so – the oldest version of roman numbers used IIII as 4 and VIIII as 9. So it can be found in some historical instances. Now why only watchmakers decided to keep 4 as IIII instead of newer, more common IV is a point of many discussions and theories, but simply put – we don’t know for sure! There are theories, that it was because ancient roman pocket sundials (yes, they were a thing) did not want to feature IV, since it would seem as a reference to IVPPITER (god Jupiter) and it would be blasphemous, so they used the “older” writing IIII. Some theories are also about “it is easier to read upside down”, but hey you have IX as 9 and XI as 11, so that is wonky theory. Then there is a theory that it was to save up money, because you could use mold for “I” 4 times instead of 3, which also seems shady. And of course theory “it is easier to understand for uneducated masses in 18-19th century” (why then you don’t write 9 as VIIII?!). So it remains a mystery and bit of an unusual trivia in the history of clock making.
TL;DR: It was an older way to write 4 for romans. We don’t really know why is it traditional on clocks.
Latest Answers