# Roman numerals **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [March 3, 2017, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296 "2017-03-03T14:43:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Lucas\_Jackson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lucas_jackson/32/303_2.png) [@Lucas\_Jackson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lucas_Jackson)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/1 "2017-03-03T14:43:03Z")
Why the distinction when talking about Roman _numerals_ and the _number_ 3 (for example)? Aren’t they both numerals? Also, is this a prostitue? > **[How did anyone do math in Roman numerals?](https://www.straightdope.com/21344421/how-did-anyone-do-math-in-roman-numerals)** ---
**Author:** ![TheChileanBlob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thechileanblob/32/435_2.png) [@TheChileanBlob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TheChileanBlob)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/2 "2017-03-03T14:54:27Z")
A number is a concept for a certain value or amount. A numeral is the squiggly thing you write down to stand for a number. Yes, it is a prostitute. ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/3 "2017-03-03T15:00:08Z")
I don’t see much of a difference for everyday usage, but I think it’s the distinction between the concept and the descriptor. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/4 "2017-03-03T15:32:43Z")
> [@White SIFL](#): > > Also, is this a prostitue? > [How did anyone do math in Roman numerals? - The Straight Dope](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/3330/how-did-anyone-do-math-in-roman-numerals) Mamma Mia! Whoot! ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/5 "2017-03-03T15:37:52Z")
That’s an almost recognizable human figure. Who killed Slug? ---
**Author:** ![Marvin\_the\_Martian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/marvin_the_martian/32/2898_2.png) [@Marvin\_the\_Martian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marvin_the_Martian)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/6 "2017-03-03T15:48:36Z")
> [@TheChileanBlob](#): > > Yes, it is a prostitute. A one-legged prostitute at that. I assume her name is Eileen. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/7 "2017-03-03T20:36:29Z")
Very annoyed that Uncle Cece has made the statement that the square root of 41786 is exactly equal to the number at the end. That’s a rounded value; the square root in question is irrational. Uncle Cece knows better. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Lucas\_Jackson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lucas_jackson/32/303_2.png) [@Lucas\_Jackson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lucas_Jackson)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2017, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/8 "2017-03-04T02:06:34Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > That’s an almost recognizable human figure. > > Who killed Slug? Umm, the prostitute? ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2017, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/9 "2017-03-04T10:26:43Z")
Despite the sign she’s carrying, the woman looks more like an X than a V. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2017, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/10 "2017-03-04T14:02:02Z")
And is this the first time that Slug has depicted a bare female breast, complete with nipple, for a column? Not that he hasn’t come awfully close before, of course. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2017, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/11 "2017-03-04T14:06:20Z")
> [@TheChileanBlob](#): > > A number is a concept for a certain value or amount. A numeral is the squiggly thing you write down to stand for a number. > > Yes, it is a prostitute. Number — concept Numeral — symbolic or written representation of that concept of value or quantity or however you are defining “number” Figure — specific typographical character or shape of written representation used in numeral system That’s why skaters make a “figure 8” rather than a “numeral 8”—they’re drawing a shape, not representing a value or quantity. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2017, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/12 "2017-03-04T16:22:29Z")
There are many ways to write “three” down. But there is only one number three (in the Natural Numbers, etc.). Humans knew all about three long before they learned to write. The numeral/number distinction was clearly explained to me in second grade. It took me a few minutes to get the idea. It’s not all that hard to understand. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2017, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/13 "2017-03-04T17:15:17Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > And is this the first time that Slug has depicted a bare female breast, complete with nipple, for a column? Are we sure it isn’t just covered by something filmy and diaphanous? ---
**Author:** ![glowacks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/glowacks/32/5548_2.png) [@glowacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glowacks)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/14 "2017-03-07T02:55:55Z")
The female should really be holding “VI”. That is in Latin, _[sex](http://www.latiumfigures.info/numbers-1-10/6-in-latin.htm)_. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/15 "2017-03-07T18:08:27Z")
Cecil says: > [@](#): > > Subtractive notation — expressing a value as the difference between a larger number and a smaller one set to its left — was rare in classical Rome and didn’t take off until the middle ages; the Romans greatly preferred the simpler IIII to IV, XXXX to XL, and so on. (The IIII-for-4 notation survives today on the faces of clocks.) Yes, I recall reading that and I’ve seen IIII on Roman monuments, etc. I can’t recall seeing IIIIIIIII (9) or IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII (19) though, for example. Wouldn’t they have had to use subtractive notation for larger numbers for the sake of space-saving on the stone if nothing else? ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/16 "2017-03-07T18:29:46Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > Yes, I recall reading that and I’ve seen IIII on Roman monuments, etc. I can’t recall seeing IIIIIIIII (9) or IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII (19) though, for example. Wouldn’t they have had to use subtractive notation for larger numbers for the sake of space-saving on the stone if nothing else? No, 9 would be VIIII, and 19 would be XVIIII. I don’t think there’d ever be a need for more than four of any one symbol. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-numerals/781296/17 "2017-03-07T21:39:32Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > No, 9 would be VIIII, and 19 would be XVIIII. I don’t think there’d ever be a need for more than four of any one symbol. Ah, I understand now. Only subtractive notation was not used, additive notation was fine.