Hi, as Gordon wrote, the sign III instead of IV isn't an error but only another way to write the same number: 4. Usually it is correct to say that Romans used the classical form of IV (subtractive) but in medieval times writers preferred the sign IIII that was additive form, the same happened with the numbers 9, 14,19 (VIIII, XIIII, XVIIII) etc. More or less like the American slang (i.e. I luv ya = I love you , it sounds the same). We may find some difference fron old Latin way of writing number already in the sixth century where we read G as 6 (so GI = 7). G is the graphycal contraction of VI, with V written as U. In calligraphy the two signs (V and I) got slowly attached together showing a sign that looks like a reversed N, then V became like a U, and U became similar to a C, so CI attached showed a sign like a G, and in ancient marbles often you may find a G for VI (6).
Mario --------------------------------------------------------- Mario Arnaldi Viale Leonardo, 82 48020 LIDO ADRIANO - Ravenna Italy E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2° E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web Site http://digilander.iol.it/McArdal/ ---------------------------------------------------------
