in ancient rome the IV in roman numerals is usually replaced by IIII

Actually, the common belief that in ancient Rome the number IV was replaced by IIII in Roman numerals is incorrect. Both IV and IIII were used in ancient Roman times, with IV being more common for representing the number 4. Here's why: 1. **Historical Evidence**: Numerous ancient Roman inscriptions, documents, and artifacts demonstrate the frequent use of IV for 4. Examples include the Column of Antoninus Pius from 161 CE, the Geminus astronomical tables from the 1st century BCE, and many others. 2. **Mathematical Notation**: In mathematical texts and calculations, Romans consistently used IV to represent 4. It was considered a more efficient and elegant way to write the number compared to IIII. 3. **Coinage**: Ancient Roman coins, which often featured Roman numerals, frequently used IV to denote the number 4. 4. **Practicality**: While IIII did appear occasionally, especially in contexts where individual units needed to be clearly visible (like counting markers), IV was generally preferred due to its simplicity and reduced chance of misreading. 5. **Cultural Influences**: The preference for IV over IIII aligns with broader trends in ancient Roman language and script, which aimed for brevity and clarity where possible. 6. **Contrary Popular Beliefs**: The misconception that IIII was the standard way to write 4 in ancient Rome likely stems from modern interpretations or misunderstandings of the Roman numeral system. In summary, contrary to popular belief, IV was not only used but was actually more common than IIII in ancient Roman times for representing the number 4. Both forms existed, but IV was widely accepted and preferred for its efficiency and elegance in various contexts, including inscriptions, artifacts, and mathematical texts.