Christian era. As it then existed the system was no better than many others, it was of late origin, it contained no zero, it was cumbersome and little used, {2} and it had no particular promise. Not until centuries later did the system have any standing in the world of business and science; and had the place value which now characterizes it, and which requires a zero, been worked out in Greece, we might have been using Greek numerals to-day instead of the ones with which we are familiar.
Of the first number forms that the world used this is not the place to speak. Many of them are interesting, but none had much scientific value. In Europe the invention of notation was generally assigned to the eastern shores of the Mediterranean until the critical period of about a century ago,--sometimes to the Hebrews, sometimes to the Egyptians, but more often to the early trading Phoenicians.[1]
The idea that our common numerals are Arabic in origin is not an old one. The medi?val and Renaissance writers generally recognized them as Indian, and many of them expressly stated that they were of Hindu origin.[2] {3} Others argued that they were probably invented by the Chaldeans or the Jews because they increased in value from right to left, an argument that would apply quite as well to the Roman and Greek systems, or to any other. It was, indeed, to the general idea of notation that many of these writers referred, as is evident from the words of England's earliest arithmetical textbook-maker, Robert Recorde (c. 1542): "In that thinge all men do agree, that the Chaldays, whiche fyrste inuented thys arte, did set these figures as thei set all their letters. for they wryte backwarde as you tearme it, and so doo they reade. And that may appeare in all Hebrewe, Chaldaye and Arabike bookes ... where as the Greekes, Latines, and all nations of Europe, do wryte and reade from the lefte hand towarde the ryghte."[3] Others, and {4} among them such influential writers as Tartaglia[4] in Italy and K?bel[5] in Germany, asserted the Arabic origin of the numerals, while still others left the matter undecided[6] or simply dismissed them as "barbaric."[7] Of course the Arabs themselves never laid claim to the invention, always recognizing their indebtedness to the Hindus both for the numeral forms and for the distinguishing feature of place value. Foremost among these writers was the great master of the golden age of Bagdad, one of the first of the Arab writers to collect the mathematical classics of both the East and the West, preserving them and finally passing them on to awakening Europe. This man was Mo[h.]ammed the Son of Moses, from Khow[=a]rezm, or, more after the manner of the Arab, Mo[h.]ammed ibn M[=u]s[=a] al-Khow[=a]razm[=i],[8] a man of great {5} learning and one to whom the world is much indebted for its present knowledge of algebra[9] and of arithmetic. Of him there will often be occasion to speak; and in the arithmetic which he wrote, and of which Adelhard of Bath[10] (c. 1130) may have made the translation or paraphrase,[11] he stated distinctly that the numerals were due to the Hindus.[12] This is as plainly asserted by later Arab {6} writers, even to the present day.[13] Indeed the phrase `ilm hind[=i], "Indian science," is used by them for arithmetic, as also the adjective hind[=i] alone.[14]
Probably the most striking testimony from Arabic sources is that given by the Arabic traveler and scholar Mohammed ibn A[h.]med, Ab[=u] 'l-R[=i][h.][=a]n al-B[=i]r[=u]n[=i] (973-1048), who spent many years in Hindustan. He wrote a large work on India,[15] one on ancient chronology,[16] the "Book of the Ciphers," unfortunately lost, which treated doubtless of the Hindu art of calculating, and was the author of numerous other works. Al-B[=i]r[=u]n[=i] was a man of unusual attainments, being versed in Arabic, Persian, Sanskrit, Hebrew, and Syriac, as well as in astronomy, chronology, and mathematics. In his work on India he gives detailed information concerning the language and {7} customs of the people of that country, and states explicitly[17] that the Hindus of his time did not use the letters of their alphabet for numerical notation, as the Arabs did. He also states that the numeral signs called a[.n]ka[18] had different shapes in various parts of India, as was the case with the letters. In his Chronology of Ancient Nations he gives the sum of a geometric progression and shows how, in order to avoid any possibility of error, the number may be expressed in three different systems: with Indian symbols, in sexagesimal notation, and by an alphabet system which will be touched upon later. He also speaks[19] of "179, 876, 755, expressed in Indian ciphers," thus again attributing these forms to Hindu sources.
Preceding Al-B[=i]r[=u]n[=i] there was another Arabic writer of
Continue reading on your phone by scaning this QR Code
Tip: The current page has been bookmarked automatically. If you wish to continue reading later, just open the
Dertz Homepage, and click on the 'continue reading' link at the bottom of the page.