Eurocentrism(or Greco-centrism) and Mathematics

[Guest guest]

Eurocentrism and Mathematics For

some their Eurocentrism (or Greco-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.

The following passages quoted from Gheverghese's The crest of the Peacock, "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 to use 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." While

Kaye is a particularly virulent example of the entrenched bias against

attributing anything to the Indics he might have expressed a modicum of

doubt in his statements considering the fact that the Indics predated

the Greeks by several centuries. But the British insisted in a dogged

manner that nothing worthwhile happened prior to the beginning of the

Christian era and concocted the strange history of India where even the

sequence of events was grossly wrong "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, David 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, Marcelin 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. " The

geographical location of India made her throughout history an important

meeting-place of nations and cultures. This enabled her from the very

beginning to play an important role in the transmission and diffusion

of ideas. The traffic was often two-way, with Indian ideas and

achievements traveling abroad as easily as those from outside entering

her own consciousness. Archaeological evidence shows both cultural and

commercial contacts between Mesopotamia and the Indus valley. Certain

astronomical calculations of the longest and shortest day included in

the Vedanga Jyotish, the oldest extant Indian astronomical text, have

close parallels with those used Mesopotamia. Some

sources even credit Pythagoras with having traveled as far as India in

search of knowledge, which may explain some of the close parallels

between Indian and Pythagorean philosophy and religion. These parallels

include: a belief in the transmigration of souls;the theory of four elements constituting matter;the

structure of the religio-philosophical character of the Pythagorean

fraternity, which resembled Buddhist monastic orders; andThe

contents of the mystical speculations of the Pythagorean schools, which

bear a striking resemblance of the Hindu Upanishads. According

to Greek tradition, Pythagoras, Thales, Empedocles, Anaxagoras,

Democritus and others undertook journey to the East to study philosophy

and science. By the time Ptolemaic Egypt and Rome's Eastern empire had

established themselves just before the beginning of the Common era,

Indian civilization was already well developed, having founded three

great religions – Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism – and expressed in

writing the massive literature (of the Veda, the Brahmanas, the Upanishads, the Purana,) as

well as fundamental theories in science and medicine. There are

scattered references to Indian science in the literary sources from

countries to the west of India after the time of Alexander. In a letter

Aristotle wrote to his pupil Alexander in India, he warns of the danger

posed by intimacy with a `poison-maiden', who had been fed on poison

from her infancy so that she could kill merely by her embrace! (Source: The crest of the peacock: Non-European roots of Mathematics - By George Gheverghese Joseph p. 1 - 18 and 215 - 216