The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Breitling Watch Information Forums, Navitimer, Chronomat
It is currently Fri May 02, 2025 1:48 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: IIII vs IV
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:24 am 
Offline
Breitling Enthusiast
Breitling Enthusiast

Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:45 am
Posts: 12
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Location: Cambridge, UK
Very random question.

I notice that Breitling and pretty much every other high-end watchmaker use IIII when depicting 4 in Roman numerals rather than IV as was taught at school. I would have thought that IV would have fitted slightly better on the face.

Anyone know the history of this tradition?

Ian


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:37 am 
Offline
All Roads lead to Breitling
All Roads lead to Breitling
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 8:23 am
Posts: 9766
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 1 post
Location: Republik of Mancunia, UK
The accepted reason is that "IV" was an abbreviation for "Jupiter" in Roman times so they decided to use "IIII" so that their clocks didn't have "1 2 3 GOD 5..." written on them. This is plausible but why only clocks? What about every other instance where 4 would be written?

One notable exception to this tradition is Big Ben in London which uses IV.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:12 am 
Offline
Contributing Moderator
Contributing Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 5:09 am
Posts: 36521
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 489 posts
Location: Ontario, Canada
Sharkmouth wrote:
The accepted reason is that "IV" was an abbreviation for "Jupiter" in Roman times so they decided to use "IIII" so that their clocks didn't have "1 2 3 GOD 5..." written on them. This is plausible but why only clocks? What about every other instance where 4 would be written?

One notable exception to this tradition is Big Ben in London which uses IV.


I've never heard that story - I always thought it was simply an aesthetic thing. That the IIII was considered to balance the dial better than IV.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:38 am 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:05 pm
Posts: 1202
Likes: 3 posts
Liked in: 2 posts
Location: Glasgow (home) & Reading (work)
I'm ashamed to admit that I had never noticed this anomally :oops:

In my defence I would say that I have never considered a watch with Roman Numeral markers although I have to admit that some of the Chronomats look superb with them.

Good stuff - very interesting. :thumbsup:

_________________
Aerospace Titanium & Gold - Grey Face
B-1 on Fighter/Blue Shark - Blue Face
Emergency on Pro - Yellow Face

To complete the collection:
Navi 01 46/Black leather - Black/white
Montbrillant Datora/Navi - White face
:lingsrock:

LEARNING.......EVERY DAY


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 8:54 am 
Offline
King of Ling
King of Ling
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 12:48 pm
Posts: 2092
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 2 posts
Location: Fort Smith, AR USA
Breitling Bloke wrote:
I'm ashamed to admit that I had never noticed this anomally :oops:

In my defence I would say that I have never considered a watch with Roman Numeral markers although I have to admit that some of the Chronomats look superb with them.

Good stuff - very interesting. :thumbsup:


+1

I never noticed this either.

Thanks for the history lesson Sharkmouth!!!

~Brian

_________________
Breitling Super Avenger
Fortis Flieger Chronograph
Rolex Submariner Date
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 8:04 pm 
Offline
Breitling Fanatic
Breitling Fanatic
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 9:55 am
Posts: 431
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 3 posts
Location: Napa Valley
interesting. I learn something every day.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 2:05 am 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member

Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:48 pm
Posts: 3806
Likes: 11 posts
Liked in: 19 posts
Location: Sweden
Sharkmouth wrote:
The accepted reason is that "IV" was an abbreviation for "Jupiter" in Roman times so they decided to use "IIII" so that their clocks didn't have "1 2 3 GOD 5..." written on them. This is plausible but why only clocks? What about every other instance where 4 would be written?

One notable exception to this tradition is Big Ben in London which uses IV.


It's not only on clocks. Older coins for example (as I have a collection starting at medeival time going onwards) using IIII as a 4 in the year was quite common, even up into the 16th and 17th century. Then someone probably decided enough respect had been paid to the Romans. The watch industry is just a little late on arriving to the same conclusion I guess... :) Or, they are still doing it due to history.

_________________
Collection: http://s540.photobucket.com/albums/gg32 ... mview=grid


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 3:58 am 
Offline
Contributing Moderator
Contributing Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:39 am
Posts: 12837
Likes: 148 posts
Liked in: 520 posts
Location: UK
Everyday's a school day. Interesting information. :thumbsup:

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 24 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
 




Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group