The Timekeeper's Riddle: Why Do Many Clock Faces Use IIII for Four Instead of IV?

Take a moment to picture a classic clock face with Roman numerals. You see the stately V, the elegant X, and the familiar I, II, and III. But when your eyes land on the number four, you might notice something peculiar. Instead of the "IV" we all learned in school, many clocks proudly display "IIII." Is this a common mistake that has been repeated for centuries? Not at all. This horological quirk is a deliberate design choice steeped in history, aesthetics, and practicality. This post will wind back the hands of time to explore the fascinating reasons why "IIII" has remained the standard for four on so many of the world's timepieces.

A Tradition Older Than the "Rules"

One of the simplest reasons for the use of "IIII" is that it’s the older form. The system of Roman numerals we use today was not rigidly standardized in the ancient world. While the "subtractive principle"—where a smaller numeral placed before a larger one is subtracted from it (like IV for 4 and IX for 9)—became common, it wasn't the only method.

Early Romans often used an "additive" system, simply writing four as IIII and nine as VIIII. The earliest timekeeping devices, such as sundials, frequently used this additive method. When the first mechanical clocks began appearing in Europe in the 14th century, their makers simply carried over the established visual tradition from their predecessors. In a way, using "IIII" is less about breaking a rule and more about honoring an ancient convention that predates the rule itself.

The Art of Balance: Creating Visual Symmetry

Perhaps the most compelling argument for "IIII" is rooted in pure aesthetics and graphic design. A clock face is a complete composition, and visual harmony is paramount.

Consider the layout of a dial:

• The numeral VIII (8) sits directly opposite the IIII (4).
• The VIII is the visually "heaviest" numeral on the dial, with four characters.
• Using the equally heavy, four-character IIII creates a perfect symmetrical counterbalance. The slender, two-character IV would look visually slight and create an awkward imbalance against the dense VIII.

This sense of order extends across the entire dial. Many designers believe it divides the face into three visually pleasing sections:

• The "I" Section: I, II, III, IIII (four numerals using only the 'I' symbol).
• The "V" Section: V, VI, VII, VIII (four numerals built around the 'V' symbol).
• The "X" Section: IX, X, XI, XII (four numerals built around the 'X' symbol).

This creates a clean, organized, and balanced design that has appealed to clockmakers and their patrons for centuries.

Practicality, Legibility, and a Royal Legend

Beyond tradition and aesthetics, practical reasons also support the use of "IIII." From a distance or at an odd angle, the numeral IV can be easily mistaken for VI. The distinct shape of IIII, however, reduces this potential for confusion, making the time easier to read at a quick glance.

There is also a famous, though likely apocryphal, story involving King Charles V of France. According to legend, the king commissioned a clock for his palace. When the clockmaker presented it with "IV" for four, the king objected, demanding it be changed to "IIII." His reasoning was that IV represented the first two letters of the name of the Roman god Jupiter (IVPITER), and it was sacrilegious to place the deity’s name on a common clock. Whether true or not, the story has become a cherished part of horological lore.

Conclusion

So, why do many clock faces use IIII instead of IV? There is no single, definitive answer. Instead, it’s a fascinating convergence of factors. The practice is a holdover from ancient traditions that existed before Roman numerals were fully standardized. It is also a masterful stroke of design, creating a perfectly balanced and harmonious visual composition. Finally, it offers practical benefits in legibility that have stood the test of time. The next time you glance at a clock, take a closer look at the number four. You’re not just seeing the time; you’re looking at a small but significant piece of history, art, and engineering.