Roman Numerals---Three Different Answers

[birgit kellner]

Katharina Kupfer wrote:

> Certainly no, correct is:
> CMDCCCVI
>
> Kailash Srivastava wrote:
>
>> The following are three different replies to my question as to how
>> Romans
>> wrote 986!!!
>>
>> CMIICVI
>>
>> CMDCCCVI
>>
>> CMVCCCVI
>>
>> Was it possible to write the same number in three different ways?
>>
>

No, but here's a fourth, and unless I've left my mind at home, this
should now be the correct one - the number "986" is correctly written as
CMLXXXVI, to be resolved as "nine hundred" (CM) plus "fifty" (L) plus
"thirty" (XXX) plus "five" (V) plus "one" (I). There seems to be a
tendency to confuse fifty (L) with five hundred (D) or five (V).

... not that this would be in any way related to Indology ...

regards,
--
Birgit Kellner
Institut f. Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde / Institute for Tibetan and
Buddhist Studies
Universitaet Wien / Vienna University