3 ms·
The Roman army must have had good deductibles.
by FirmwareBurner 2y ago
The Roman army must have had good deductibles.
- remoquete 2y agoAnd CDI plans better than those in year MMXXV.
- credit_guy 2y agoMMDCCLXXVIII AVC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ab_urbe_condita https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ab_urbe_condita
- ToValueFunfetti 2y agoMMXXV is a legitimate usage of Roman numerals, but CDI is unauthorized
- gerdesj 2y ago-49? Mind you, 0 needs inventing or what happens between 1 and -1 ... oh and -1 needs defining too, whatever that nonsense is! People haven't somehow magically become cleverer over the recent millennia. We just have some fancier tools these days. I'm sure if you gave a few Romans enough wine and the starting point of "Quid CDI significat?" then you would probably get a decent discussion.
- Someone 2y agoCertainly in modern use CDI is “a hundred less than five hundred, plus one”, or 401 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals#Standard_form https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals#Standard_form: “The numerals for 4 (IV) and 9 (IX) are written using subtractive notation, where the smaller symbol (I) is subtracted from the larger one (V, or X), thus avoiding the clumsier IIII and VIIII. Subtractive notation is also used for 40 (XL), 90 (XC), 400 (CD) and 900 (CM). These are the only subtractive forms in standard use. […] While subtractive notation for 4, 40, and 400 (IV, XL, and CD) has been the usual form since Roman times [citation needed], additive notation to represent these numbers (IIII, XXXX, and CCCC) very frequently continued to be used, including in compound numbers like 24 (XXIIII), 74 (LXXIIII), and 490 (CCCCLXXXX).[12] The additive forms for 9, 90, and 900 (VIIII,[9] LXXXX, and DCCCC) have also been used, although less often“
- beacon294 2y ago401 - unauthorized
- skirge 2y agogood selection of conscripts