Mickey7@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 25 days agoKid gave a reasonable answer without all the math bullshitlemmy.worldimagemessage-square287fedilinkarrow-up11.02Karrow-down132
arrow-up1986arrow-down1imageKid gave a reasonable answer without all the math bullshitlemmy.worldMickey7@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 25 days agomessage-square287fedilink
minus-squareedwardbear@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·25 days agoHoly shit this is dope! But how did historians come up with the conclusion that, in the case of XIIX, the Romans substracted from the second X, and didn’t just write 12+10? Not arguing, just extremely curious
minus-squareTaTTe@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·25 days agoThe general rule is that the larger symbols come first in Roman numerals, so 12+10 (22) would be written as 10+10+1+1 or XXII. If you literally meant the arithmetic 12+10, I’d assume they used some symbol for addition, so it would be written as XII+X, but I can’t say for sure.
Holy shit this is dope!
But how did historians come up with the conclusion that, in the case of XIIX, the Romans substracted from the second X, and didn’t just write 12+10?
Not arguing, just extremely curious
The general rule is that the larger symbols come first in Roman numerals, so 12+10 (22) would be written as 10+10+1+1 or XXII.
If you literally meant the arithmetic 12+10, I’d assume they used some symbol for addition, so it would be written as XII+X, but I can’t say for sure.