2020/06/18 by S. G. Dani, Dani, S. G.
Mathematics · Physics and Astronomy · #01A32 #Advanced Mathematical Theories and Applications #FOS: Mathematics #History and Overview (math.HO) #History and Theory of Mathematics
paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2006.10285
openalex publication_date 2020/06/18 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
The Kātyāyana Śulvasutra has been much less studied or discussed from a modern perspective, even though the first English translation of two adhyāyas (chapters) from it, by Thibaut, appeared as far back as 1882. Part of the reason for this seems to be that the general approach to the Śulvasutra studies has been focussed on "the mathematical knowledge found in them"; as the other earlier Śulvasutras, especially Baudhāyana and Āpastamba substantially cover the ground in this respect the other two Śulvasutras, Mānava and Kātyāyana, received much less attention, the latter especially so. On the other hand the broader purpose of historical mathematical studies extends far beyond cataloguing what was known in various cultures, rather to understand the ethos of the respective times from a mathematical point of view, in their own setting, in order to evolve a more complete picture of the mathematical developments, ups as well as downs, over history. Viewed from this angle, a closer look at the Kātyāyana Śulvasutra assumes significance. Coming at the tail-end of the Śulvasutra period, after which the Śulvasutra tradition died down due to various historical reasons that are really only partly understood, makes it special in certain ways. What it omits to mention from the body of knowledge found in the earlier Śulvasutras would also be of relevance to analyse in this context, as much as what it chooses to record. Other aspects such as the difference in language, style, would also reflect on the context. It is the purpose here to explore this direction of inquiry.