National Council of Teachers of Mathematics

Problems 1 to 6 of the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus

Author(s): R. J. Gillings
Source: The Mathematics Teacher, Vol. 55, No. 1 (JANUARY 1962), pp. 61-69
Published by: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27956523
Accessed: 22-10-2015 06:03 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Mathematics Teacher.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:03:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 HISTORICALLY SPEAKING,?

Edited byHoward Eves, University ofMaine, Orono, Maine

Problems 1 to 6 of theRhind
Mathematical Papyrus
by R. J. Gillings, Sydney University, Australia

When the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus given in his table of reference, and then
was received by the British Museum in proves arithmetically that they are cor
1864, it was broken in some places, and rect. (This table and an explanatory ver
portions of the brittle fragments were miss sion are shown on page 62.)
ing. Subsequently the papyrus roll was un One observes that as soon as it is possi
rolled and mounted in two glass frames, ble to introduce the fraction 2/3 into his
the first portion, called the Recto (reading table, the scribe does so, even though for 7
from right to left), having a jagged break divided by 10 he could have used the sim
because of these missing fragments. The pler value 1/2+ 1/5,and for8 divided by
whole papyrus was originally 18 ft. long 10, 1/2+1/5+ 1/10,and for9 divided by
and a little over a foot inwidth, the second 10, 1/2+1/3+ 1/15 [3].
half, called the Verso, having a blank space The problems on the division of loaves
about 10 ft. long towards the left-hand are available to us for examination and
end, upon which nothing is written. discussion as a result of the restoration of
Section I of the papyrus [1]* consists of the missing fragments of the papyrus,
an introduction, followed by the division which, while in the possession of the New
of the number 2 by all the odd numbers York Historical Society, were recognized
from 3 to 101, 50 separate divisions in all, as such by the English archeologist Pro
with the answers expressed as unit frac fessorNewberry in 1922, and were brought
tions except for the quite common use of to theBritishMuseum byEdwin Smith to
the special fraction 2/3 [2], for which the allow them to be put in their appropriate
scribe had a particular liking, so that he places on the Recto.
used it whenever it was possible. This In the text of the R. M. P. itself, no
takes up about one-third of the Recto. statement occurs giving the title, or de
Section II, which is relatively much scribing the purpose, of the table. The
smaller?occupying only about nine inches scribe clearly regarded these as self
of the papyrus?consists of a short table evident. The table occurs as if (for ex
giving the answers in unit fractions of the ample) a student about to solve a group of
divisions of the numbers 1 to 9 by 10, fol problems which would require multiplica
lowedby Problems 1 to 6 [1]on the divi tions and divisions of numbers by 7 (let
sion of certain numbers of loaves of bread us say) were to write down first of all the

equally among ten men, inwhich problems 7 times table, for ready reference in the
the scribe uses, for his answers, the values operations which were to follow.
* Numbers
The scribe now sets down the divisions
in brackets refer to the notes at the
end of the article. of 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, and 9 loaves among 10men,

Historically speaking,? 61

This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:03:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 1 divided by 10 is 1/10 For proofmultiply 1/10 by 10.
" "
2 10 " 1/5 Do it thus:
" 1 [partis]
3 "10 1/10
4
" " " 1/5 1/10 [If]
10
" 1/3 1/15 [then] y/2 [parts
" are] 1/5
5 "10 1/2 4 1/34-1/15
" ?
6 10e 1/2 1/10 (From the Recto, 2-5-5-1/3 + 1/15.)
" " " "
7 10 2/3 1/30 V8 2/3+1/10+1/30
" =
8 "10 (From theRecto, 2 15 1/10+30.)
" " " 2/3 1/10 1/30
9 10 2/3 1/5 1/30 [Add the fractionson the lineswith checkmarks
=
(since 2+8 = 10): 1/5+2/3+1/10+1/30 1.]
Total 1 loaf which is correct.

Those portions enclosed within square

brackets are not given by the scribe, but
are included here to explain his methods.
He does not prove that 1 divided by 10 is
1/10. His readers are supposed to know
this by referring to his table which pre
cedes his problems. Further, the steps in
his proof that 1/10multiplied by 10 is in
fact one loaf may be verified by referring
to his more elaborate table of "2 divided
by all the odd numbers from 3 to 101,"
with which the R.M.P. begins [4]. Thus,
when it is required to multiply the frac
tion 1/5 by 2, it is only necessary to look
inhis table, for2 divided by 5, to findthe
answer 1/3+ 1/15.And similarlyfor 1/15
k multiplied by 2, he finds fromhis table
that2 divided by 15 is 1/10+1/30.
For the addition of the fractions, the
standard method, used elsewhere in the
R. M. P., was analogous to our modern
concept of Least Common Multiple.
k Taken as parts of (say) the abundant num
ber 30, 1/5 is 6, 2/3 is 20, 1/10 is 3, and
=
1/30 is 1, so that 6+20+3+1 30, and
thus the whole.
Table of division of Ito 9 by 10 We may fairly assume that the Egyptian
loaves were long and regular in cross-sec
tion, either cylindrical or rectangular, so
that the actual cutting up of a loaf into
using the values he has already given in
his table. These constitute Problems 1 to 6. unit fractions (and of course 2/3) did not
He omits the division of 3, 4, and 5 loaves present real difficulties. The sign in
for a loaf is
among 10men, but in this discussion of the hieroglyphics
Egyptian division of loaves we shall in
clude them, following exactly the methods
<k==3i
he uses for the others. I ? ? Q
Problem 1
which permits us to make this assump
tion. The division of one loaf among ten
Division of 1 loaf among 10 men.
man
men would be done, therefore, as in Fig
[Each receives 1/10.] (From his reference
table.) ure 1.

62 The Mathematics Teacher | January, 1962

This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:03:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 2 Loaves

mon

Figure 1
Back man^ 1/
Problem 2
Figure 2
Division of 2 loaves among 10 men.
man
loaves among ten men would therefore be
[Each receives 1/5.] (From his reference
table.) as shown in Figure 3.
For proofmultiply 1/5 by 10. It now becomes clear to us why the
Do it thus:
1 [part is] scribe omitted this division. It ismerely a
[If] 1/5
[then]V 2 [parta are] 1/3+ 1/15 repetition of his first two examples, whose
=
(From the Recto, 2a+ 5 1/3+1/15.) answers were 1/10 and 1/5, giving his
4 2/3+1/10+1/30
= answer 1/10+1/5. A glance at Figures 1,
(From theRecto, 2-^15
? 1/10+1/30.)
V8 11/3+ 1/5+1/15 2, and 3 also shows this. Now in the case
[Add the fractionson the lineswith checkmarks of the division of one and two loaves
(since 2+8 = 10):
1/3+ 1/15+1 1/3+1/5 + 1/15= 2.] equally among ten men, there is no differ
Total 2 loaves which is correct. ence whatever between what an Egyptian
would have done following the R. M. P.
The steps in Problem 2 are practically and what would be done in the present
the same as those for Problem 1, and the
day. But in the case of the division of
division of two loaves among ten men three loaves, a modern division would re
would be done therefore as in Figure 2. sult in nine men getting 3/10 of a loaf each
If the scribehad includedthedivisionof in one whole piece, and the tenth man
three loaves among ten men as his next
getting three smaller pieces each 1/10 of a
problem, he would have set it down as loaf, as in Figure 4.
follows (if we adopt the same procedure The Egyptian foreman charged with the
shown in the other problems).
duty of sharing the food fairly and equally
Division of 3 loaves among 10 men. among his gang of ten men, would give
Each man receives 1/5+1/10. (From his each man exactly the same share both in
reference table.)
For proofmultiply 1/5+1/10 by 10. quantity (i.e., size) and number of pieces,
Do it thus: and thus to the uneducated and ignorant
If lpart is 1/5+ 1/10
thenV 2 parts are 1/3+1/15 + 1/5
(From the Recto, 2^-5 =
1/3+ 1/15.)
then 4 parts are
2/3+ 1/10
+ 1/30
+ 1/3
+ 1/15
(From the Recto, 2 -M5= 1/10+1/30.)
then V 8 parts are
1 1/3
+ 1/5
+ 1/15+2/3
+ 1/10
+ 1/30
[Add the fractions on the lines with the check
marks (since 2+ 8 = 10) :
1/3+1/15 + 1 1/3
+ 1/5 + 1/5
+ 1/15+2/3 + 1/10+1/30 = 3.]
Total 3 loaves which is correct.

The of the row of fractions is

addition
merely (1+2), from the additions in Each
Problems 1 and 2. The division of three Figure 3

Historically speaking,? 63

This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:03:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The addition of the long row of fractions
3/?O 3/?O to give 4 ismuch simpler than it appears
at first glance. The scribe would observe
that, fraction by fraction, the array is ex
actly twice the summation he has already
made in Problem 2. Thus,

=
3/IO 3/tO m 2X1/3 2/3
=
Figure 4 2X1/15 1/10+1/30

laborers, not only is justice done, but

2X1 1/3= 2 2/3
justice also appears to have been done. In =
2X1/5 1/3+1/15
our modern division it could be supposed
=
that one man had received more than his 2X1/15 1/10+1/30.
share, because he had three pieces, to the The division of four loaves among ten men
others' one piece.
is therefore as shown in Figure 5.
We proceed now to the next case, the
One again notices that not only is justice
division of 4 loaves among 10 men. It
done in the Egyptian system, but justice
might have appeared as follows.
also appears to be done. A modern divi
Division of 4 loaves among 10 men. sion would result in eight men getting each
Each man receives 1/3+ 1/15. (From his
reference
one portion, namely 2/5 of a loaf, and two
table.)
For proofmultiply 1/3+1/15 by 10. men getting each two smaller pieces of 1/5
Do it thus: of a loaf, an apparent inequity perhaps to
If lpart is 1/3+ 1/5
thenV 2 parts are 2/3+ 1/10+ 1/30 the ignorant members of the working gang.
=
(From the Recto, 2-?-15 l/10+ l/30.) This is shown in Figure 6.
then 4 parts are 1 1/3+ 1/5+ 1/15
thenV 8 parts are 2 2/3+ 1/3+ 1/15+ 1/10 Continuing we have:
+ 1/30
(From theRecto, 2-5-5= 1/3+ 1/15.) Division of 5 loaves among 10 men.
[Add the fractions on the lines with the check Each man receives 1/2. (From his reference
marks (since 2+8 = 10): table.)
2/3+1/10+ 1/30+22/3+ 1/3 For proofmultiply 1/2 by 10.
+ 1/5+ 1/10+1/30 = 4.] Do it thus.
Total 4 loaves which is correct. If 1 part is 1/2
then y/ 2 parts are 1
then 4 parts are 2
then y/ 8 parts are 4

mmm [Add the numbers on the lines with check

marks (since 2+8 = 10): 1+4 = 5.]
Total 5 loaves which is correct.

I 2/5 2/S

2/5

2/S

Each man

Figure 5 Figure 6

64 The Mathematics Teacher 1962

| January,

This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:03:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 This is the simplestof all the divisions, m'
' :

and it was omitted by the scribe as were

mmmm
the divisions of three and four loaves. The
actual cutting up of the five loaves is
shown in Figure 7 and, of course, is the
same as itwould be done today.

Problem S
Division of 6 loaves among 10 men.
[Each man receives 1/2+1/10.] (From his
reference table.)
For proofmultiply 1/2+1/10 by 10.
Do it thus:
[If] 1 [part is] 1/2+1/10
[then] y/2 [parts a are] 1+1/5
4 2+1/3+1/15
=
(From" the Recto, 2^-5 u 1/3+1/15.)
v/8 4+2/3+1/10+1/30
=
(From the Recto, 2 -M5 1/10+1/30.)
[Add the fractionson the lineswith checkmarks
=
(since 2+8 10) : 1+1/5 +4 +2/3+1/10
= 6.]
1+1/30
Total 6 loaves which is correct.

One notes, en passant, that the addition

of the row of fractions in this problem is,
except for the integers, exactly the same m& mm gets 1/2 1/10
as that for Problem 1. The actual cutting
Figure 8
up is shown in Figure 8.
This is perhaps the best example to show pieces of bread, whereas a modern division
the efficiency of the Egyptian unit fraction would very likely be as shown in Figure 9.
system in the cutting up of loaves, for here In this case an apparent inequity is even
again each man gets exactly the same por more apparent, since six men each receive
tions, both in quantity and numbers of a single piece which is 3/5 of a loaf, and
Laave* fourmen receive two unequal pieces each,

2A

9/8

* Ms

Figure 7 Figure 9

Historically speaking,? 65

This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:03:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
one 1/5 of a loaf and the other 2/5 of a 7 Loaves
loaf.

Problem 4
Division of 7 loaves among 10 men.
[Each man receives 2/3+ 1/30.] (From his
reference table.)
For proofmultiply 2/3+ 1/30 by 10.
Do it thus:
[If] 1 [partis] 2/3+ 1/30
[then] v/ 2 [parts 1 +
" are] 2 1/3 1/15
4 2/3+1/10+1/30
(From*theRecto, 2 -?-15
" -1/10+1/30.)
v/8 5 1/3+1/5+1/15
[Add the fractions on the lineswith check
marks.]
Total 7 loaves which is correct.

On the last line, in the R. M. P., the

scribe has written instead of the simple
5 1/3+1/5+1/15 (which togetherwith
the fractions1 1/3+1/15 is exactly the
same as the fractions he has already added 1m?ri get2/3 1/30
inProblem 2) the values 5 1/2+1/10. It
is not clear at this stage why he should
have done this, forwhile 1/2+1/10 is equiv
alent to 1/3+1/5+1/15, the substitution
does not make the summation to a total of
Figure 10
7 any easier, nor in fact does itmake it any
more difficult [5].We shall see later why men each one portion of 7/10 of a loaf,
the scribe preferred to use this alternative and the remaining three men would each
not
form, but the change here made does receive three pieces, 3/10 of a loaf twice,
in any way alter the general thread of the and a smaller piece, 1/10 of a loaf. This is
working of the problem. In the division of as the scribe's
just about as complicated
seven loaves among ten men, the scribe division, but would require only nine cuts.
comes to his first chance to use the frac
Problem 5
tion 2/3 for which he has such a great
Division of 8 loaves among 10 men.
him into
propensity [2]. And here it gets [Each man receives 2/3+1/10+1/30.] (From
trouble, ifwe may use the phrase. His divi his reference table.)
sion results in seven men getting two For proofmultiply 2/3+ 1/10+ 1/30 by 10.
men get Do it thus:
pieces, 2/3 and 1/30, while three [If] 1 [partis] 2/3+ 1/10
+ 1/30
three pieces, two equal pieces 1/3 each and V 2 [parts are] 1+1/2 + 1/10 (As
[then]
one piece 1/30. This is shown in Figure 10. in Problem 4 [6].)
" 3+ 1/5
4
The scribe had at his disposal the simple * "
n/8 6+1/3 + 1/15
division of each man getting 1/2+1/5, =
(From the Recto, 2-5-5 1/3+ 1/15.)
and the seven loaves could have been [Add the fractions on the lines with check
cuts in marks.]
equally distributed with only 13 Total 8 loaves which is correct.
stead of the 16 cuts required for the divi
notes that the summation of the
sion which he recommends. It is just an One
other illustration of the Egyptian's desire here 1/2+1/10+1/3 + 1/15= 1,
fractions,
is exactly the same as the summation of
to use the nonunit fraction 2/3 wherever
he possibly could. A modern division, the the fractions1/3+1/15+1/2+1/10 = 1 in
now
simplest I can think of, would give
seven Problem 4, as the scribe wrote it.And

The Mathematics Teacher 1962

66 | January,

This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:03:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
the efficacy of using this alternative form Problem 6
1/2+1/10 instead of the conventional Division of 9 loaves among 10 men.

1/3+ 1/5+1/15 becomesquite clear to us, [Each man receives 2/3+ 1/5+ 1/30.] (From
his reference table.)
and in the subsequent doubling, 3+1/5 is For proofmultiply 2/3+1/5+1/30 by 10.
somuch simplerthan 2+2/3 + 1/3+1/15 Do it thus:
1 [part is] 2/3+ 1/5+1/30
+ 1/10+1/30, and the next doubling is [If]
[then] v/2 [parts are] 1 2/3+1/10+1/30
simplified as well. (i.e., 1 1/3+1/3 + 1/15+ 1/15 as before,
The division of eight loaves among ten = 1 from2 4-5
2/3+1/10+1/30
men as the scribe directs is shown in Fig in the Recto.)
4 u
ure 11. ? * 3+1/2+1/10 [6]
y/8 7 1/5
Here seven men get three distinct por [Add the fractions on the lineswith check
tions,2/3, 1/10, 1/30,and threemen get marks.]
Total 9 loaves which is correct.
fourdistinctportions, 1/3 and 1/3, 1/10,
1/30, which appear to be more or less iden Again the use of the equivalent
tical if the two separate 1/3 pieces are kept 1/2+1/10 instead of 1/3+ 1/5+1/15
together, and so again justice appears to leads to simpler answers, for 2/3+1/10
=
have been done. A modern cutting up of +1/30+1/5 1, exactly as in Problem 1,
loaves would result in eight men getting and the scribe is to be commended on an
each 4/5 of a loaf in one piece, while the elegant arithmetical solution.
remaining two men get each foin* pieces,
each 1/5 of a loaf, which might be con
strued as being inequitable.
8 Loaves

7menget2/3 1/10 ?/30

Figure 11 Figure 12

Historically speaking,? 67

This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:03:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The division would be performed as in But of course we know how he would
Figure 12, and the apparent equity of the have obtained the values he gives in his
shares is observable if the two separate 1/3 table! The first part of the Recto of the
pieces are placed together to make 2/3. R. M. P. is filled with examples of how he
A modern distribution of nine loaves would do it. Chace (R. M. P., Vol. 1, p.
among ten men would result either in nine 23), for example, gives his methods for 3
men receiving 9/10 of a loaf and the tenth and 7 divided by 10, but they are so simple
man getting nine small pieces each 1/10 from the scribe's point of view that he
of a loaf, which would be clearly inequi merely sets the answers down in order,
table to the uneducated laborer, or in the without even a heading let alone any ex
ten men getting each 1/2 a loaf, and then planations. A'h-mos? neither here nor else
eight of them receiving in addition 2/5 where indulged in unnecessary detail or
of a loaf while the remaining two men verbosity. He was writing a mathematical
would get four small pieces each 1/10 of a text! Having "no idea how the figure for

loaf, which is even worse. each share was arrived at," as Newman
As in Problem 4, the scribe had at his puts it, is so farfromthe truththat I will
disposal simpler divisions in terms of unit set down here how the scribe could have
fractions, as for example 1/2+1/5 + 1/10 performed the divisions of the numbers 1
for 8-5-10, and 1/2+1/3 + 1/15 for 9-f-10, to 9 by 10. All that is necessary is to note
but speculations on these dissections would that he performed division by continually
not serve us. The simple fact is that the multiplyingthe divisoruntil the dividend
Egyptian scribe always preferred to use was reached, usually by doubling and

2/3 ifhe could, and then by halving his halving, and of course taking 2/3 wherever
answer to get 1/3 of a quantity, "an ar possible [2].
rangement," as Neugebauer remarks,
10 10
which is "standard even if it seems per Vi/ Vl/2 5
Ans. 1/10 1 Vi/io 1
fectly absurd to us [7]." Ans. 1/2 1/10 6
Problems 1 to 6 of the R. M. P. have had 1 10 1 10
1/10 1 V2/3 6 2/3
considerable interest for students of
Vl/5 2 Vl/30 1/3
Ans. 1/5 2 Ans. 2/3 1/30 7
Egyptian mathematics, although I know
1 10 1 10
of none who has looked at the practical Vi/io 1 V2/3 6 2/3
1/5 2 Vi/io
aspect of the actual cutting up of the Ans. 1/10 1/5 3 Vl/30 1/3
Ans: 2/3 1/10 1/30 8
loaves, at least in publication. I quote from
of 1952, "The 1 10 1 10
The Scientific American 6 2/3 V2/3 6 2/3
2/3
3 1/3 Vl/5 2
Rhind Papyrus," by James R. Newman, Vl/3
si1/15 2/3** Vl/30 1/3
Ans. 1/3 1/15 4 Ans. 2/3 1/5 1/30 9
reprinted in The World of Mathematics
1 10
(New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc., Vl/2 5
Ans. 1/2 5
1956), I, 173. Discussing the division of
nine loaves among ten men, that is, ** Written probably as 3 30 1/3, meaning that,
since = 30, then and hence
6, Newman
Problem 3X10 1/30X10=1/3,
says: =
1/15X10 2/3.
The actual working of the problem is not I follow these by his abbreviated proofs
given. If 10 men are to share 9 loaves, each man,
as given in the R. M. P. (except, of course,
says A'h-mos?, is to get 2/3+ 1/5+ 1/30 (i.e.,
27/30) times 10 loaves (sic. [8]); but we have no those for 3, 4, and 5, which I reconstruct)
share was
idea how the figure for each arrived at. so that one can see the order and regular
The answer to the problem (27/30, or 9/10) is
given first and then verified, not explained. It itywith which the Egyptian scribe sets
may be, in truth, that the author had nothing down his work. It is a matter of wonder
was
to explain, that the problem solved by trial ment to me that an Egyptian scribe could
and error?as, it has been suggested, the
with
Egyptians solved all their mathematical prob perform such arithmetical operations
lems. the limited tools at his disposal.

68 The Mathematics Teacher | January,1962

This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:03:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 1 1 1/5
1/2 1/10
Problem
8- 5-10= (6 1) 1/2 (1/3 1/10 1/15)

1fr.? V8 2 1/8 1/15 = 7 =

1/2 1/2 8

-
Problem 6
1/5 1 2/8 1/30
1/3 1/15 11/8 1/15 9- 5-10= 7 1 (2/3 1/5 1/10 1/30) =9
2/3 1/101/80
1 1/2 1/? 1A5 V8
Total 2 A dispassionate view of this array of unit
1 1/61/10 1 2/8 1/101/80 fractions, with its order and symmetry,
1/2 1/10 11/2 1/10
1 1/5 8 1/5 and indeed its elegance and simplicity (if
V2 2 1/81/15 V8 ? i/s i/ta
Tot?13 Totals one considers the mathematical issues in
1/8 1/15 1 2/8 1/5 1/80 volved), leaves one with a feeling of hope
2/3 1/101/90
less admiration and wonderment at what
ve
Total? T&1* was achieved by the Egyptian scribe with
the rudimentary arithmetical tools at his
disposal.
Notes
1 Following the nomenclature of Chace,
Summary op the scribe's addition Bull, Manning, The Rhind Mathematical Papy
rus (Oberlin, Ohio: Mathematical Association of
op unit fractions
America, 1929).
From theRecto of theRM.P. 2 See Gillings, "The Egyptian 2/3 table for
fractions," Australian Journal of Science, XXII

2+ 5= 1/3 1/15 (December, 1959), 247.

3 It is convenient to use the plus sign at this
2+15 = 1/10 1/30 stage. The Egyptian scribe had no such nota
tion; mere juxtaposition indicated addition. I
2/3 1/5 1/10 1/30=1 also use the signs = and -5-which also do not
have equivalents in the R. M. P., although in
Problem 1 the Egyptian Leather Roll
1+10 = (2/3 1/5 1/10 1/30) = 1
Problem 2 HI

2 + 10= 1 1/3 1/3 1/5 1/15 1/15 "this is repeatedly used.

= 1 2/3 meaning is,"
1/5 (2-5-15) 4 See Gillings, "The division of 2 by the odd
= 1 (2/3 1/5 1/10
1/30) =2 numbers 3 to 101 fromtheRecto of theR. M. P.
=
3 + 10 1 1/3 2/3 1/3 1/5 1/5 1/10 1/15 1/15
(B.M. 10058)," Australian Journal of Science,
1/30 XVIII (October, 1955), 43-49.
= 2
1/3 (2+5) 1/10 1/15 1/15 1/30
= 2 1/3 (1/31/15)1/101/151/151/30 5 The scribe is familiar with many alterna
tives evident the R. M. P., and he
=
2 2/3 (1/15 1/15 1/15) 1/10 1/30 throughout
uses the values 7-5-10= 1/2+1/5 in Problem
-2 (2/3 1/5 1/10 1/30) =3
4 + 10= 2 2/3 2/3 1/3 (1/10 1/10) 1/15 (1/30 54, while in his table, and inProblem 4, he uses
7-5-10=2/3+1/30.
= 1/30)
(2 2/3 1/3)2/3 1/51/151/15
6. Here again the scribe writes 1/2+1/10
= as equivalent to 1/3+1/5+1/15, both arising
3 2/3 1/5(2 + 15) from the multiplication of 2/3+1/10+1/30
= 3 by
(2/3 1/5 1/10 1/30) =4 2. In Problem 4, the scribe does not have
5 + 10= 14 = 5 furtherdoubling, so that there is little advan
any

in the shorter form there. Thus

Problem 8 tage using
+ 1/30)=2 + 1 1/3+1/5+ 1/15
2(12/3+ 1/10
6 + 10= 4 1 (2/3 1/5 1/10 1/30) =6 -3 + 0/3+1/5 + 1/15) =3 + 1/2+1/10.
7 O. Neugebauer, The Exact Sciences in An
Problem 4
tiquity (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University
7 + 10= 5 1 (1/3 1/3) 1/5 (1/15 1/15) Press, 1952), p. 76.
= 6
2/3 1/5 (2+ 15) 8 An error. "Times 10 loaves," should read
= 6
(2/3 1/5 1/10 1/30) =7 "of one loaf."

Historically speaking,? 69

This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:03:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions