Sunday, 12 October 2014

What can't we deal with IV?

Noticed this clock in the house we were staying in at Halls Gap

I wonder why the Roman 4 is incorrect?  Nine is OK.  Strange.


You can find more close up style shots at Macro Monday2 and I Heart Monday.

29 comments:

Margaret Adamson said...

Good observation.

eileeninmd said...

That is odd! Have a great day!

Revrunner said...

Interesting to read the various arguments put forward for the variation. I think the strongest argument, though, is that it takes time for standards to become fixed.

Mari said...

I have 2 clocks with Roman Numerals and they are the same way. Strange!

Marcia said...

Very strange. I wonder if they did it to balance with the VIII on the other side - so for aesthetics? Beautiful clock face despite that.

Terri said...

How strange! There must be a reason.

TexWisGirl said...

that made me laugh! great observation!

John @ Sinbad and I on the Loose said...

That is a first run of the clock from the assembly line. The mistake was not noticed right away. This is a collector's item. Should fetch a high price on eBay.

Sylvia K said...

A great observation indeed, Stewart!! How strange is that!! Great shot for the day!!

Irma said...

Hi Stewart, the nine is indeed very strange.
Well noted.
Best regards, Irma

Fun60 said...

I feel it is the artistic license to blame so that it balances the eight.

Hilary said...

There are lots of theories as to why but no certain answer.

http://www.ubr.com/clocks/frequently-asked-questions-faq/faq-roman-iiii-vs-iv-on-clock-dials.aspx

Sallie (FullTime-Life) said...

Beautiful clock. I actually remember arguing with a teacher about the Roman Numeral for four. Because the clock on our mantelpiece at home said IIII. She wasn't buying it and of course nuns are always right. (Guess I passed fourth grade anyway, because 'I survived Catholic school.")

Bethany Carson said...

Beautiful clock...strange that the numeral for 4 is incorrect!

Felicia said...

hmmmm that is rather odd. pretty clock though and great image.

chai-and-chardonnay.blogspot.com said...

Maybe they wanted to balance it out? It is a very pretty clock though.

Optimistic Existentialist said...

Quite a beautiful and intriguing clock, the IIII error notwithstanding :)

retriever said...

Beautifull clock,greeting from Belgium.
http://louisette.eklablog.com/nuit-de-l-obscurite-mons-a112810380

ladyfi said...

Ha ha - wonderfully quirky clock.

bailey-road.com said...

Interesting bit of clock info. The clock face is really pretty.

bailey-road.com said...

Interesting bit of clock info. The clock face is really pretty.

Mama Zen said...

Nice catch!

Katrin Klink said...

Very funny, and beautiful.

Mike said...

Well, that is bizarre! Never seen that before.

Iowa Voice

Christian Weiß said...

Wonderful observation, the desinger forgot his latin lessons or it is a Monday morning product :-).

Gunilla Bäck said...

Strange. All the clocks I've seen have had IV for 4. Cool find.

Marie said...

That's very strange. Maybe a typo :-)...I bet it's a one of a kind!

Liz said...

That is odd! I've seen a few clocks like this and wondered how/why they can possibly get it wrong?

Laura said...

Great observation, still quite a lovely old clock Stewart. Thanks for sharing the love up-close with I Heart Macro:-)