This is an old thread, but I thought i'd offer an illustration of just how inconsistent Romans were in the use of numerals. During his final campaign (which ended at Actium), Marcus Antonius issued a huge mintage of denarii naming each of his 23 legions by number. They were probably a donative with each man being paid in coins of his own legion. The makers of the dies from which these coins were struck (dozens for each legion, as they wore out after a few hundred strikes) were clearly not given specific instructions as to how to write the legions' numbers, for we find the following variations:<br>
<br>
LEG PRI, LEG I, II, III, IIII, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, VIIII, IX, X, XI, IIX, XII, XIII, XIIII, XIV, XV, XVI, XVII. XVIII, XIIX, XVIIII, XIX, XX, XXI, XXII, XXIII, and XZ (_!_ possibly an error, but who knows?). Comparison of obverse dies show that IIX and XII both refer to the 12th legion. But whether XIIX is 18 or 22, I don't know.<br>
<br>
It was a huge issue, many millions of coins, which remained in circulation for well over a hundred years (they were common in the equivalent of cash registers at Pompeii). The reason they circulated so long is that their silver was so debased they just weren't worth melting down for the metal. The silver of the lower numbered legions' coins was somewhat better quality than those of the higher numbered.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
jjh<br>
<br>
(Hey! I just noticed I've been promoted! Where's my signum?)<br>
<p></p><i></i>
