The learned, after many contests, have at length agreed that the
numerical figures 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, usually called _Arabic_,
are of _Indian_ origin. The Arabians do not pretend to have been the
inventors of them, but borrowed them from the Indian nations. The
numeral characters of the Bramins, the Persians, the Arabians, and other
eastern nations, are similar. They appear afterwards to have been
introduced into several European nations by their respective travellers,
who returned from the East. They were admitted into calendars and
chronicles, but they were not introduced into charters, says Mr. Astle,
before the sixteenth century. The Spaniards, no doubt, derived their use
from the Moors who invaded them. In 1210, the Alphonsean astronomical
tables were made by the order of Alphonsus X. by a Jew, and an Arabian;
they used these numerals, from whence the Spaniards contend that they
were first introduced by them.
They were not generally used in Germany until the beginning of the
fourteenth century; but in general the forms of the ciphers were not
permanently fixed there till after the year 1531. The Russians were
strangers to them, before Peter the Great had finished his travels in
the beginning of the last century.
The origin of these useful characters with the Indians and Arabians is
attributed to their great skill in the arts of astronomy and of
arithmetic, which required more convenient characters than alphabetic
letters for the expressing of numbers.
Before the introduction into Europe of these Arabic numerals, they used
alphabetical characters, or _Roman numerals_. The learned authors of the
Nouveau Traité Diplomatique, the most valuable work on everything
concerning the arts and progress of writing, have given some curious
notices on the origin of the Roman numerals. Originally men counted by
their fingers; thus, to mark the first four numbers they used an I,
which naturally represents them. To mark the fifth, they chose a V,
which is made out by bending inwards the three middle fingers, and
stretching out only the thumb and the little finger; and for the tenth
they used an X, which is a double V, one placed topsy-turvy under the
other. From this the progression of these numbers is always from one to
five, and from five to ten. The hundred was signified by the capital
letter of that word in Latin, C--centum. The other letters, D for 500,
and M for a 1000, were afterwards added. They subsequently abbreviated
their characters, by placing one of these figures before another; and
the figure of less value before a higher number, denotes that so much
may be deducted from a greater number; for instance, IV signifies five
less one, that is four; IX ten less one, that is nine; but these
abbreviations are not found amongst the ancient monuments.[77] These
numerical letters are still continued by us in the accounts of our
Exchequer.
That men counted originally by their fingers, is no improbable
supposition; it is still naturally practised by the people. In
semi-civilized states small stones have been used, and the etymologists
derive the words _calculate_ and _calculations_ from _calculus_, the
Latin term for a pebble-stone, and by which they denominated their
counters used for arithmetical computations.
Professor Ward, in a learned dissertation on this subject in the
Philosophical Transactions, concludes that it is easier to falsify the
Arabic ciphers than the Roman alphabetical numerals; when 1375 is dated
in Arabic ciphers, if the 3 is only changed into an 0, three centuries
are taken away; if the 3 is made into a 9 and take away the 1, four
hundred years are lost. Such accidents have assuredly produced much
confusion among our ancient manuscripts, and still do in our printed
books; which is the reason that Dr. Robertson in his histories has also
preferred writing his dates in _words_, rather than confide them to the
care of a negligent printer. Gibbon observes, that some remarkable
mistakes have happened by the word _mil._ in MSS., which is an
abbreviation for _soldiers_, or for _thousands_; and to this blunder he
attributes the incredible numbers of martyrdoms, which cannot otherwise
be accounted for by historical records.