0
The Roman had no zero because they didn't need one. We have numbers from 1 to 9 and then add a zero to represent tens, a second zero to represent 100s and so on. The Romans simply had additional symbols for 10s, 100s, 100s etc. So we would write a series of numbers such as 3, 4, 8, 13, 17, 40, 106, 789, 1005 and 2346 and the Roman numerals for each of these would be...
3 = III
4 = IV
8 = VIII
13 = XIII
17 = XVII
40 = XL
106 = CVI
789 = DCCLXXXIX
1005 = MV
2346 = MMCCCXLVI
Still curious? Ask our experts.
Chat with our AI personalities
Beau
Steve
DevinAdd your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Which Roman Numeral does not exist?
The Roman Numeral system did not have a way to represent zero.
What is the Roman numerals for zero?
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).
What system of numerals do not have zero?
the roman numeral system
Which numbering system should not used zero?
The Roman numeral system
In which numbering system zero doesn't exist?
Roman numeral system.
