The Indian system (also known as the Indo-Arabic system) was intro- duced to Europeans by Gerbert of Aurillac in the tenth century. He traveled to Spain to learn about the system first-hand from Arab scholars, prior to being named Pope Sylvester II in 999 CE. However, the system subsequently encountered stiff resistance, in part from accountants who did not want their craft rendered obsolete, to clerics who were aghast to hear that the Pope had traveled to Islamic lands to study the method. It was widely rumored that he was a sorcerer, and that he had sold his soul to Lucifer during his travels. This accusation persisted until 1648, when papal authorities reopened Sylvester’s tomb to make sure that his body had not been infested by Satanic forces.posted by jessamyn at 8:34 PM on August 26, 2010 [10 favorites]
The Indo-Arabic system was reintroduced to Europe by Leonardo of Pisa, also known as Fibonacci, in his 1202 CE book Liber Abaci. However, usage of the system remained limited for many years, in part because the scheme continued to be considered “diabolical,” due in part to the mistaken impression that it originated in the Arab world (in spite (in spite of Fibonacci’s clear descrip- tions of the “nine Indian figures” plus zero). Indeed, our
modern English word “cipher” or “cypher,” which is derived from the Arabic zephirum for zero, and which alternately means “zero” or “secret code” in modern usage, is very likely a linguistic memory of the time when using decimal arithmetic was deemed evidence of dabbling in the occult, which was potentially punishable by death
1. A unit is that by virtue of which each of the things that exist is called one.This is a pithy statement of the perspective which hints at the theoretical undercurrents behind it. First, a unit; it's a thing that allows us to call each of the things that exist one. This is an essential and momentous thing; the unit is a mechanism which allows us even to conceive of things in the world. Oneness, the perception of a unified whole which is at the same time different from what surrounds it, is a fundamental moment in the human experience. I think it's essential, if we're going to be honest about how we experience the world, for us to come to the realization that seeing the oneness of a thing is categorically different from counting. There are even animals who are observably able to do one of those things and not the other; in fact, I don't know of any animals who can actually count, although I think there exist animals who can be aware of the multiplicity of objects and can even keep track of large numbers of them. Actually counting, though – enumeration – requires language. There is some way in which accepting the oneness of an object is actually prior to language.
2. A number is a multitude composed of units.
« Older The American Society of Magazine Editors and Amazo... | Investigative reporting contin... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
/obligatory
posted by vidur at 7:01 PM on August 26, 2010 [1 favorite]