XIII (13)
The Roman numeral for five is V and the numeral for one is I. Five is V, Six is five plus one or VI, and Seven is six plus another one or VII.
The Roman numeral for 50 is L, and the Roman numeral for 10 is X. So, 50 (L) plus 10 (X) plus 10 (X) plus 5 (V) plus 1 (I) equals 76 (LXXVI). There is no single Roman numeral for 79.
If you mean 33,500 then as a Roman numeral it is (XXXIII)D meaning 1,000*33 plus 500 = 33,500
xxxii or XXXII in Roman numerals is equivalent to 32 and 32+18 = 50 which is L as a roman numeral
The Roman numeral XXXII represents the number 32, while LV represents the number 55. When you add these together, you get 87, which would be represented in Roman numerals as LXXXVII.
The Roman numeral for five is V and the numeral for one is I. Five is V, Six is five plus one or VI, and Seven is six plus another one or VII.
The Roman numeral for 50 is L, and the Roman numeral for 10 is X. So, 50 (L) plus 10 (X) plus 10 (X) plus 5 (V) plus 1 (I) equals 76 (LXXVI). There is no single Roman numeral for 79.
If you mean 33,500 then as a Roman numeral it is (XXXIII)D meaning 1,000*33 plus 500 = 33,500
xxxii or XXXII in Roman numerals is equivalent to 32 and 32+18 = 50 which is L as a roman numeral
there is no roman numeral for itAnother answer: The Romans had no numeral to represent zero because there was no need for a zero in their system. We have 9 numbers plus the zero symbol. We add a zero on to the end of a number to convert it to tens and two zeros to convert it to hundreds and so on. The Romans simply had different symbols for tens and hundreds. For example we would write 1, 10, 20, 40, 50, 100 and 200 but the same numbers as Roman numerals would be I, X, XX, XL, L, C and CC, done quite simply with no need for a zero. In the middle ages monks, who still used Roman numerals and wrote in Latin, began to used the symbol N to represent zero (from the Latin Nullae meaning nothing).
The Roman numeral XXXII represents the number 32, while LV represents the number 55. When you add these together, you get 87, which would be represented in Roman numerals as LXXXVII.
ii plus xii equals xiv in Roman numerals.
Neither. It is 50 minus 10 plus 5 plus 1 plus1plus1.
C=100 X=10 I=1 So it is 10 before 100 (=90) plus 1 before 10 (=9) . Thus the answer in ARABIC numerals is "99", while of cause XCIX in ROMAN numerals is "XCIX"
The answer is 281.....but im Roman Numerals it is.......CCLXXXI
Eleven in Roman numerals is XI.Eleven in Roman numerals is XI.Eleven in Roman numerals is XI.Eleven in Roman numerals is XI.Eleven in Roman numerals is XI.Eleven in Roman numerals is XI.Eleven in Roman numerals is XI.Eleven in Roman numerals is XI.Eleven in Roman numerals is XI.
If you mean the equivalent of 190+128 in Roman numerals then it is CCCXVIII = 318 Note that the modern way of notating 190 in Roman numerals is now considered to be CXC but the ancient Romans would have notated the equivalent of 190 in Roman numerls entirely different..