Here's something you might be interested in.
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
The only way of writing the Roman numeral four
Why IIII, not IV, when it comes to clocks
IIII o'clock
Dear Matthew Alice:
Have you ever noticed the Roman numeral four on watches and clocks? It's WRONG! Instead of the usual IV, like we all learned in grade school, it says IIII! What's the story? Is there a story?
Ellen, La Mesa
Of course there's a story. There's always a story.
You can stroll around any city and look at public clocks (the nonelectronic ones, at any rate), check out watches on practically any wrist, and leaf through any book on the history of clocks, and you'll see exactly the same Roman numeral for the hour of four o'clock: IIII, not IV, It's been that way for as long as people have been numbering dials, including sundials. And I'm afraid to say, pan of the explanation is just that — it's tradition — it's the way we've always done it.
In following tradition, clock and watch makers are copying a very old form of the Roman system of numerals. At one time, 1/11 was the only way of writing four in that system. This numbering method was picked up from sundials when mechanical clocks were invented in the Middle Ages, and it's continued on like that to the present day on virtually all timepieces that use Roman instead of Arabic numerals.
A bigger mystery is why clock makers substituted IX for the earlier VIIII for the number nine. There appears to be no easy explanation for this, unless, perhaps, as clocks became smaller and more portable, the shorter IX was substituted to save space on the dial.
Here's something you might be interested in.
The only way of writing the Roman numeral four
Why IIII, not IV, when it comes to clocks
The only way of writing the Roman numeral four
Why IIII, not IV, when it comes to clocks
IIII o'clock
Dear Matthew Alice:
Have you ever noticed the Roman numeral four on watches and clocks? It's WRONG! Instead of the usual IV, like we all learned in grade school, it says IIII! What's the story? Is there a story?
Ellen, La Mesa
Of course there's a story. There's always a story.
You can stroll around any city and look at public clocks (the nonelectronic ones, at any rate), check out watches on practically any wrist, and leaf through any book on the history of clocks, and you'll see exactly the same Roman numeral for the hour of four o'clock: IIII, not IV, It's been that way for as long as people have been numbering dials, including sundials. And I'm afraid to say, pan of the explanation is just that — it's tradition — it's the way we've always done it.
In following tradition, clock and watch makers are copying a very old form of the Roman system of numerals. At one time, 1/11 was the only way of writing four in that system. This numbering method was picked up from sundials when mechanical clocks were invented in the Middle Ages, and it's continued on like that to the present day on virtually all timepieces that use Roman instead of Arabic numerals.
A bigger mystery is why clock makers substituted IX for the earlier VIIII for the number nine. There appears to be no easy explanation for this, unless, perhaps, as clocks became smaller and more portable, the shorter IX was substituted to save space on the dial.
Comments