Tibet Libre, on Mar 29 2006, 03:06 PM, said:
Hello,
As part of a broader discussion of the development of Chinese numerals from the beginnings to now, I want to ask why the Chinese didn't adopt the countings rods symbols as their numerals. These countings rods were developed during the Han dynasty -probably by trading people for bookkeeping - and constituted the first place value decimal system, with the only deficit being a distinct lack of zero.
The amazing fact is that, although this counting rod system is superior to the current Chinese numerals for calculating, it later disappeared completely from the mainstream of Chinese culture (my GF doesnt even recognizes it). Why was this so and when did it happen?
PS: It was superior as it, unlike the current Chinese numerals, strictly applied to place value. For example, currently 11 = shi yi, but 10 = shi, making a two digit number to one digit number. Or 21 = er shi yi, creating falsely a three digit number out of what is actually a two digit one. With the counting rods though one had a two digit numeral for 10, 11 and 21.
Actually according to the source I have now the counting rod numerals
did not disappear from Chinese mathematics and continued to be used in China until the modern period. The precusor to the fully developed and stabilised counting rod numerals used from the Qin and Han dynasties onwards appeared during the middle and late Eastern Zhou period (6th to 3rd centuries BC) on coins.
As for place-value, the Chinese used it from as early as Shang dynasty times, however, I think the Shang dynasty system is not
completely based on place-value like the modern system: (You need to focus on the actual numerical logographs used instead of how they are pronunced)
"As far as place-value is concerned, the Chinese appear always to have used it. The Shang numeral system (thirteenth century B.C.) is the earliest of which we have evidence; its symbols are given in Table 20, and the significance of place-value is obvious. Clearly, it was more advanced than contemporary scripts in Babylonia and Egypt. Admittedly, all three systems started a new cycle of signs at 10 and multiples of 10, and each had a place-value component, but only the Shang Chinese were able to express any number, however large, using no more than 9 numerals and a counting-board."
Source: Colin A. Ronan,
The Shorter Science and Civilisation in China: Volume 2 (An abridgement of Joseph Needham's original text), page 5
According to currently available evidence, an
explicit symbol for zero (which is essentially the same as the modern symbol) was not used in China until 1247 AD. In earlier times blank spaces were left at where the zeros would be.
An interesting thing regarding the earliest written evidence for the explicit usage of the symbol zero is that the earliest written evidence is found in neither India nor China, but in
south-east Asia:
"However, while the first written evidence for the zero in India is of the late ninth century A.D., it has been discovered in use about
two hundred years earlier in Indo-China and other parts of south-east Asia. This fact may be of much significance. The literary and written evidence for place-value in India has been conflicting. A dating of the eighth century A.D. seems the earliest that can be determined with any certainty. But Indo-Chinese inscriptions use place-values much earlier - A.D. 609 in Champa in eastern India, and
A.D. 605 in Cambodia."
Source: Colin A. Ronan,
The Shorter Science and Civilisation in China: Volume 2 (An abridgement of Joseph Needham's original text), page 4
Sign In
Register
Help
MultiQuote
