Response to "The Crest of the Peacock - Chapter1: The History of Mathematics: Alternative Perspectives"

Upon reading George Gheverghese Joseph's justification of this book, I was immediately attracted to his view on the Eurocentric approach to history. While the development of the world is viewed holistically in generally with more focus on European contribution, I never realized that the field of modern mathematics is regarded as entirely European-origin. Joseph points out that "the contributions of the colonized peoples were ignored or devalued as part of the rationale for subjugation and dominance", and "the development of mathematics before the Greeks suffered a similar fate". 

What's surprising is that the ancient Greek did acknowledged their learning from the Egyptians, and yet this affirmation was devalued by the descendants of the Greek. The same thing also happened to the naming of "Arabic numerals", where the original Indian inventors were credited but not translated (page 11). These biased events really made me think how deep the Eurocentric ideas are embedded in modern documentation of the history of mathematics. 

Another interesting point raised by Joseph is how all the mathematical knowledges are transmitted among cultures without much barriers (page 13). While this chapter talks a lot about mapping the transmission, not much emphasis is put on how our ancestors overcame the cultural and language barriers. Investigating this could also provide insights to the development of mathematics history as a whole.