Best Answer

In ancient Rome the numerals of VL would have been perfectly acceptable as being the equivalent of 45.

But the real rules governing the original Roman numeral system were changed during the Middle Ages and as a result the equivalent of 45 in Roman numerals today is considered to be XLV.

Q: Why VL in Roman numerals is incorrect?

Write your answer...

Submit

Still have questions?

Continue Learning about Math & Arithmetic

Vl

VL = 45 but in today's notation it is written out as XLV

45 but under today's notation of Roman numerals it is written out as XLV

Incorrect usage

June 26 = 06/26 = VI / XXVI

Related questions

VL = 45 but in today's notation it is written out as XLV

Vl

45 but under today's notation of Roman numerals it is written out as XLV

Incorrect usage

June 26 = 06/26 = VI / XXVI

The Romans themselves would have probably notated 45 as VL but the rules governing today's Roman numeral system, which were introduced during the Middle Ages, gives 45 as XLV in Roman numerals.

Incorrect Roman number. If you meant LVII then it would be 57.

VL is not a valid Roman numeral.

MIM is an incorrect way of writing 1999 in roman numerals. 1999 should be written MCMXCIX.

That is an incorrect number. MCMXLVI would 1946.

It appears to be an incorrect arrangement of Roman numerals. IIVIXI does not represent a valid Roman numeral.

IX = 9. 11 is XI in Roman Numerals.