Trex202 to Showerthoughts · 5 months agoRoman numerals could be based on what your hand looks like when you count.message-squaremessage-square30linkfedilinkarrow-up172arrow-down113file-text
arrow-up159arrow-down1message-squareRoman numerals could be based on what your hand looks like when you count.Trex202 to Showerthoughts · 5 months agomessage-square30linkfedilinkfile-text
minus-squareRhaedas@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up23arrow-down1·5 months agoIV and IX don’t make sense when it could be done more intuitively by IIII and VIIII.
minus-squareGuyFawkes@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up15·5 months agoFewer axe marks. IIII = 4 IV = 3 IX = 3 VIIII = 6
minus-squareRhaedas@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up14·5 months agoSure, but OP is talking about fingers as representation, not markings. Your point is exactly why they did it in writing.
minus-squareTrex202OPlinkfedilinkarrow-up6arrow-down1·5 months agoIf thumb and index make V, then there’s only 3 fingers left.
minus-squareRhaedas@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up7·5 months agoI see what you’re saying, using one hand for the entire sequence. XI is still a pain. The real problem is that there is no mention of doing this in any Roman text. A bit of an omission, or was it a state secret?
minus-squaresomeguy3linkfedilinkarrow-up3·edit-25 months agoI read that’s how it was done for math, the exception being things like headlines.
IV and IX don’t make sense when it could be done more intuitively by IIII and VIIII.
Fewer axe marks.
IIII = 4 IV = 3
IX = 3 VIIII = 6
Sure, but OP is talking about fingers as representation, not markings. Your point is exactly why they did it in writing.
If thumb and index make V, then there’s only 3 fingers left.
I see what you’re saying, using one hand for the entire sequence. XI is still a pain. The real problem is that there is no mention of doing this in any Roman text. A bit of an omission, or was it a state secret?
I read that’s how it was done for math, the exception being things like headlines.