Q1.
In the above series of numerals, which ones look somewhat like our modern numerals? Which ones don’t?
Answer
The page prints seven Brahmi signs, labelled 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9 and 10. Here is what each looks like, read straight off the printed page.
| Value | The Brahmi sign as printed | Like our numeral? |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | A single short horizontal stroke — | No — our 1 is a vertical stroke |
| 2 | Two horizontal strokes, one above the other = | No — but the idea is easy: count the strokes |
| 4 | A vertical stem with a cross-bar and a cup-shaped top — like a ‘Ŧ' with a bowl | Somewhat — it has the crossed look of our 4, but not its shape |
| 6 | A curve that comes down and closes into a small loop at the bottom | Yes — very close. Write our 6 quickly and you get this |
| 7 | A short top stroke turning sharply down to the left, with a small hook | Yes — almost identical to our 7 |
| 9 | An open S-like curl, hooked at the top | No — nothing like our 9 |
| 10 | A shape like the Greek letter α | No — and note it is a single sign, not ‘1' plus ‘0' |
Look like ours: 6 and 7 (and, at a stretch, 4)
Do not look like ours: 1, 2, 9 and 10
Do not look like ours: 1, 2, 9 and 10
Why it happens: shapes drift over centuries as scribes write faster. Some Brahmi signs kept their form and travelled — from India to West Asia, then to Europe, where they are still called ‘Arabic numerals' although the Arabs themselves called them hindsā, ‘from India'. This inscription is “one of the many evidences showing that modern numerals ultimately originated in India.”
Tip: notice what is missing from the series — a sign for zero, and a place-value system. Brahmi had a separate sign for 10. Zero and place value came later, and that is what turned Indian numerals into the world's arithmetic.