Post #3874237
2026-07-12 14:58 UTC
@randulo
That's an interesting find. If it is 1892, what purpose would the L serve?
Wouldn't MDCCCXCII (without the L) be 1892?
MDCCCLXCII does not seem to be accepted as valid by online tools:
https://www.romannumerals.org/converter
https://www.calculator.net/roman-numeral-converter.html
https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/conversions/roman-numeral-calculator.php
Replies (0)
No replies.