03-22-2005, 04:31 AM
Mathematics and Eurocentrism
For some their Eurocentrism (or Graeco-centrism) is so deeply entrenched that they cannot bring themselves to face the idea of independent developments in early Indian mathematics, even as a remote possibility.
A good illustration of this blinkered vision is provided by a widely respected historian of mathematics at the turn of this century, Paul Tannery. Confronted with the evidence from Arab sources that the Indians were the first touse the sine function as we know it today, Tannery devoted himself to seeking ways in which the Indians could have acquired the concept from the Greeks. For Tannery, the very fact that the Indians knew and used sines in their astronomical calculations was sufficient evidence that they must have had it from the Greeks. But why this tunnel vision? The following quotation from G.R. Kaye (1915) is illuminating:
The achievements of the Greeks in mathematics and art form the most wonderful chapters in the history of civilization, and these achievements are the admiration of western scholars. It is therefore natural that western investigators in the history of knowledge should seek for traces of Greek influence in later manifestations of art, and mathematics in particular.
It is particularly unfortunate that Kaye is still quoted as an authority on Indian mathematics. Not only did he devote much attention to showing the derivative nature of Indian mathematics, (Attempts to show the derivative nature of Indian sciences, and especially its supposed Greek roots, continue even today. For example, Pingree has prepared a chronology of Indian astronomy which is notable for the absence of any Indian presence!) usually on dubious linguistic grounds (his knowledge of Sanskrit was such that he depended largely on indigenous `pandits' for translations of primary sources), but he was prepared to neglect the weight of contemporary evidence and scholarship to promote his own viewpoint. So while everyone else claimed that the Bakhshali Manuscript was written or copied from an earlier text dating to the first few centuries of the Common era, Kaye insisted that it was no older than the 12th century A.D. Again, while the Arab sources unanimously attributed the origin of our present-day numerals to the Indians, Kaye was of a different opinion. And the distortions that resulted from Kaye's work have to be taken seriously because of his influence on Western historians of mathematics, many of whom remained immune to findings which refuted Kaye's inferences and which established the strength of the alternative position much more effectively than is generally recognized.
This tunnel vision is not confined to mathematics alone. Surprised at the accuracy of information on the preparation of alkalis contained in an early Indian textbook on medicine (Susruta Samhita) dating to few centuries BCE, the eminent chemist and historian of the subject, M. Berthelot (1827-1909) suggested that this was a later insertion, after the Indians had come into contact with European chemistry!
This Eurocentric tendency has done more harm, because it rode upon the political domination imposed by the West, which imprinted its own version of knowledge on the rest of the world.
(source: The Crest of the Peacock - By George Gheverghese Joseph p. 215 - 216
For some their Eurocentrism (or Graeco-centrism) is so deeply entrenched that they cannot bring themselves to face the idea of independent developments in early Indian mathematics, even as a remote possibility.
A good illustration of this blinkered vision is provided by a widely respected historian of mathematics at the turn of this century, Paul Tannery. Confronted with the evidence from Arab sources that the Indians were the first touse the sine function as we know it today, Tannery devoted himself to seeking ways in which the Indians could have acquired the concept from the Greeks. For Tannery, the very fact that the Indians knew and used sines in their astronomical calculations was sufficient evidence that they must have had it from the Greeks. But why this tunnel vision? The following quotation from G.R. Kaye (1915) is illuminating:
The achievements of the Greeks in mathematics and art form the most wonderful chapters in the history of civilization, and these achievements are the admiration of western scholars. It is therefore natural that western investigators in the history of knowledge should seek for traces of Greek influence in later manifestations of art, and mathematics in particular.
It is particularly unfortunate that Kaye is still quoted as an authority on Indian mathematics. Not only did he devote much attention to showing the derivative nature of Indian mathematics, (Attempts to show the derivative nature of Indian sciences, and especially its supposed Greek roots, continue even today. For example, Pingree has prepared a chronology of Indian astronomy which is notable for the absence of any Indian presence!) usually on dubious linguistic grounds (his knowledge of Sanskrit was such that he depended largely on indigenous `pandits' for translations of primary sources), but he was prepared to neglect the weight of contemporary evidence and scholarship to promote his own viewpoint. So while everyone else claimed that the Bakhshali Manuscript was written or copied from an earlier text dating to the first few centuries of the Common era, Kaye insisted that it was no older than the 12th century A.D. Again, while the Arab sources unanimously attributed the origin of our present-day numerals to the Indians, Kaye was of a different opinion. And the distortions that resulted from Kaye's work have to be taken seriously because of his influence on Western historians of mathematics, many of whom remained immune to findings which refuted Kaye's inferences and which established the strength of the alternative position much more effectively than is generally recognized.
This tunnel vision is not confined to mathematics alone. Surprised at the accuracy of information on the preparation of alkalis contained in an early Indian textbook on medicine (Susruta Samhita) dating to few centuries BCE, the eminent chemist and historian of the subject, M. Berthelot (1827-1909) suggested that this was a later insertion, after the Indians had come into contact with European chemistry!
This Eurocentric tendency has done more harm, because it rode upon the political domination imposed by the West, which imprinted its own version of knowledge on the rest of the world.
(source: The Crest of the Peacock - By George Gheverghese Joseph p. 215 - 216