Response to "Crest of the Peacock"

Reading the introduction section of Crest of the Peacock, my first surprise was when the idea of Eurocentrism in mathematics history was brought up. I didn't think too much of it going into this course, but after giving it a few seconds of thought, I came to the realization that this is very much true! In my past math classes, almost every historical figure was from some part of Europe, whether it be Euler or Pythagoras. This made me think about it further on why this might be the case. I feel that many European records were passed down more prominently due to their undoubtable influence in the past in the field of mathematics, but also due to their general historical record in the world (with European states going on their whole empire phase and all, spreading their ideas and curricula). It is known that many other cultures preserved their information well, so this may have been the key difference maker. Other factors may have helped the Europeans, like the printing press that could copy ideas much more efficiently than the painstaking hand-by-hand copying processes that came before, allowing even more efficient distribution.

The second surprise to note was how the contributions of colonized peoples were ignored for purposes of subjugation and dominance. My first thought was, "That's really unfortunate!" Why? The one thing that stood out to me later in the reading was that cultural barriers didn't stop any of these mathematicians from crossing over their knowledge, to collaborate! I remember in class summarizing one of my discussion points with "the students yearn to do group work", and it seems that this was the case for millennia of mathematics. If the Mesopotamians were still around as they were, their understanding of quadratic equation solving would've proved helpful for the other civilizations that had to prove and improve upon it. One reason I like the idea of teaching so much is because we are able to give learners the blueprints that have been perfected instead of making them work hard to reinvent them, so that they may have the time to work hard to take these blueprints and make something even greater. If the colonizers of the past weren't so focused on petty ideals of supremacy, who knows how far humanity could have gone with mathematics today?

Finally, I found myself particularly surprised when looking at the three figures: 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4. These figures showed the influences that different areas and cultures of mathematics had on each other. Looking at Figure 1.2, it resembled something more along the lines of the compulsory BC Social Studies curriculum, as it started with the Greeks, went into the Dark Ages and Renaissance, and eventually led to Europe and all its glory. Not particularly mindful of the rest of the world. Where's China? India? Any part of southern Africa, the cradle of humanity? I agreed with the reading that it was a flawed figure, and Figures 1.3 and 1.4 were far more eye-opening to the wide web of collaboration across time and space (except for the Maya, who sort of figured out things on their own without the distractions of the Old World). The study of mathematics history becoming more enlightened to the rest of the world is certainly one of appreciation and acknowledgement, and I look forward to seeing what the people across the times and spaces have to say about this.