Why Do Watches and Clocks have IIII Instead of IV?

Let’s start with my story from some years back!

I just got a new tank watch -worn it a couple of times. After a few wears, I noticed it has the Roman number IIII instead of IV.

It was surprising to see IIII instead of IV for the first time. Did some research and came to know almost all tank watches have IIII instead of IV.

Even more fascinating was many watches and clocks with Roman numbers use IIII instead of IV. For example Big Ben in London to Ayer Mill Clock Tower in Lawrence, Massachusetts.

There is a fascinating history and theories behind this. So, let’s explore the reasons behind using IIII instead of IV.

TL;DR

• IIII was an early form of IV so it makes sense to use it as such.
• A clockmaker messed up and used IIII instead of IV, and it became the new cool.
• An ancient Roman God’s name was “IVPPITER.” So, it was an offense to use it in watches (doubt-full theory).
• A clockmaker Henry Vick in 1300s designed a clock. But the French King at that time, Charles V was a nitpicker. He supposedly changed IIII from IV to satisfy his EGO.
• IIII is easier to read.
• IIII instead of IV, looks more symmetrical. Stop overthinking.
• IIII has vintage charm, therefore for more aesthetic.

I think that was enough for an average Joe. However, if you’re a history buff, I’ll cover this topic for you in the next sections.

The History of Roman Numerals and Timekeeping

Roman numerals have a history as old as Rome itself.

These time-honored numerical symbols, steeped in antiquity, echo a civilization famed for its military might, and architectural prowess.

Originating around 900 to 800 BC, Roman numerals served as a ubiquitous tool for the recording of trade transactions, the numbering of wars, and the marking of significant dates.

Despite its ancient roots, this system holds enduring relevance today. From Hollywood movie sequels to Super Bowl events, and, more pertinently, in the sphere of timekeeping.

In the context of timekeeping, the application of Roman numerals can be traced back to sundials of the ancient Roman empire.

Sundials, the earliest known devices to keep time, used shadows cast by the sun to mark the hours of the day.

The instrument employed the Roman numerals to denote each hour. However, it was the advent of mechanical clocks in the 14th century that solidified the bond between Roman numerals and timekeeping.

From towering clock faces adorning grand cathedrals to pocket-sized timepieces of the elite, Roman numerals lent a classical elegance to the art of horology.

The legacy is carried forward in today’s wristwatches, which often flaunt IIII instead of IV, offering a curious peek into a tradition that harks back centuries.

Here Are Some Reasons Watches have IIII Instead of IV

Most of us, when first coming across a Roman numeral watch face, can’t help but furrow our brows at the four o’clock marker.

It’s a little strange, don’t you think? Why do watchmakers use IIII instead of the universally recognized Roman numeral IV?

Here are some reasons.

IIII Was the Old IV

Scrutinizing the origin story of Roman numerals brings light to some interesting facts.

While today we know ‘four’ to be universally represented as ‘IV’, there was a time when it was not the case.

Take a trip down ancient Rome’s memory lane, and you’ll be greeted with the numeral ‘IIII’. The former was commonly used before the advent of the latter, making ‘IIII’ the elder brother, so to speak.

Now, imagine a scenario where you’d ask a Roman from before the 1st century to jot down ‘four’, you’d find the number ‘IIII’ staring back at you, and not ‘IV’.

It was quite common back then, and even clocks used to flaunt it. Yes, that’s correct!

The Roman numeral for four was originally written as ‘IIII’, which is why its presence can often be found on sundials and watches even today.

It’s evidence that Roman numerals were evolving, and ‘IIII’ was part of the conversation.

The Roman and the Jupiter Theory

Digging into the mythology of ancient Rome may shed some light on the number conundrum.

You see, Jupiter was considered the chief deity in Roman mythology, pretty much the Zeus of Rome.

Our guy Jupiter (or Jove) ran the show from his perch on Mount Olympus.

A prevalent theory suggests the Romans avoided having his name in numerals, so they steered clear of ‘IV’, which denoted ‘Iuppiter,’ Jupiter’s Latin naming convention.

Ancient Romans regarded their set of beliefs with intense reverence, just as many of us do today.

Another juicy bit of this theory is the influence of Roman religion on their numeral system. Jupiter, the head honcho of Roman gods, was also the god of sky and thunder.

His name, when abbreviated in Roman inscriptions, was often represented as ‘IV,’ mimicking the Roman numeral we are familiar with.

This representation, as per some experts, might have been seen as a slight. Using the symbolic name of a respected deity on sundials and later, watches, could be seen as irreverent, thus ‘IIII’ took precedence over ‘IV’.

King Charles and the Watch Maker Story

Every once in a while, a captivating tale winds its way through the annals of history and into our present narrative.

One such tale revolves around King Charles V of France and a clockmaker Henry Vick.

Legend has it that the clockmaker was once summoned to present a newly crafted timepiece to the king himself.

The King wanted to nitpick, so he said, “Change the IV to IIII.” And if this theory is correct, we’re witnessing this

Easier to Read

Readability is something clockmakers have understood from the very beginning.

With numbers whizzing around a watch face, even a slight misinterpretation can lead to mistaken timing. Perhaps, this is why IIII is preferred over IV.

The human brain looks for consistency and familiarity. Since all the other major numbers (V, X, L, etc.) on a watch face are notated in addition notation (i.e., ‘addition’ using I’s, such as VII for 7, and VIII for 8), it certainly makes more sense to continue this pattern, ensuring quick interpretation and understanding.

Many watchmakers also believe that the unbalanced, heavy ‘IV’ doesn’t register as quickly in the brain as the more even and visually lighter ‘IIII’.

So, the IIII design provides consistency within the watch design and ease of comprehension for its users.

The fact that this pattern enhances familiarity and ensures brisk understanding has led to its widespread use, even today, centuries past the fall of the Roman Empire.

It Looks Aesthetic

The aesthetics of Roman numerals can’t be overlooked when adorning the face of a timepiece.

The first thing you notice about a watch isn’t necessarily the time, but how the numbers and hands work in harmony to create a visually pleasing design.

In this case, IIII markedly contributes to the symmetry of a standard clock face, making the design more balanced and easier on the eyes.

Let’s face it, aesthetically speaking, there is a certain charm to seeing traditional Roman numerals on a wristwatch.

Using IIII instead of IV presents a classic appeal, suggesting an air of elegance and sophistication.

Even at a glance, the pleasing vertical linearity of four Is conveys a sense of balance that makes the watch face appear more visually satisfying.

So, while the mechanics of a watch may be all about timekeeping, the design has as much to do with the art of appeal and visual pleasure.

This aesthetic is the reason many elegant timepieces, especially from Cartier use IIII instead of IV.