498 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, [July, 1907. 



<t 



o 



"according to Ben-al-Adami, the revolving ages . . • . No Sanscrit 

 term of similar sound occurs, bearing a signification reconcilable 

 to the Arabic interpretation. If a conjecture is to be hazarded, 

 the original word may have been Siddh'anta. Other guesses 

 might be proposed/* 



L* identite du vaoiSindhtndvivec sidd'dnta que Colebrooke a 

 ete le premier a soup9onner," writes Woepcke, *'n'est plus, je 

 pense, revoquee en doute par personne," and concludes that the 

 Indian astronomer who arrived at Bagdad in 773 a.d, had based 

 his work on that of Brahmagupta, and so Colebrooke's guess be- 

 comes a certainty. . In all probability Brahmagapta's work was 

 translated into Arabic at an early date, but that, for example^ 

 M. ibn Musa learnt his algebra from the Hindus does not follow 

 and neither is it true. The argument given by Cossali and fol- 

 lowed by Colebrooke for an Indian origin of M. ibn Musa's 

 mathematical work is curious enough to be quoted. It runs as 

 follows : — " There is nothing in history respecting Muhammad 

 ben Musa individually, which favours the opinion, that he took 

 from the Grreeks the Algebra which he taught the Muhammadans. 

 History presents in him no other than a mathematician of a 

 country most distant from Greece and contiguous to India , . . . 

 N'ot having taken Algebra from the Greeks, he must have either 

 invented it himself or taken it from the Indians. Of the two the 

 second appears to me most probable. " Is it surprising that 

 scholars who believed in, or even listened to, such arc:uments 

 came to unsound conclusions ? 



A comparison between the mathematical work of Brahma- 

 gnpta and M. ibn Musa proves without a shadow of a doubt that 

 the Muhammadan's work is not based upon that of the Hindu.' 

 Rosen, however, misled by Colebrooke, and his own inclination 

 possibly, seemed to think just the opposite. In this translation of 

 M. ibn Musa*s work he often refers to Brahmagupta and Bhaskara 

 in disparagement of the Muhammadan. Now M. ibn Musa, in 

 the preface to his work, writes : 



" The learned, in times which have passed away, and 

 among nations which have ceased to exist, were constantly 

 employed in writing books on the several departments of science 

 . . . . The fondness for science, by which God has distin- 

 guished the Imam al Mamum .... has encouraged me to com- 

 pose a short work on calculating . . . such as men constantly 

 require. " This does not point to India as the source of his 

 mathematical knowledge, but to a nation or nations that had 

 ceased to exist. Rosen, however, says, "I have drawn the con- 

 clusion that part of the information comprised in this volume 

 was derived from an Indian source," That he was not enti- 

 tled to draw any such conclusion is evident from an examina- 

 tion of the facts. It will even be seen that the evidence 

 selected by him in support of his arguments actually points 

 the other way. For example, he attempts to show that in 



^ Rodet also came to this conclnsion (Journal Asiatiqae, 1878). 



