تحلیل مقایسه‌ای ساختار عددنویسی خط سیاق در ایران و هند (مطالعه موردی: ایران دوره قاجار و هند اواخر دوره گورکانی)

Introduction: In pre-modern societies, specialized writing systems served not only as instruments for recording information but also as essential tools for organizing administrative, financial, and commercial affairs. Among these systems, the Siyāq script occupied a prominent position in the bureaucratic and fiscal administration of Iran and several other Islamic regions. Owing to its concise notation, rapid execution, and distinctive method of representing numerical values, Siyāq was extensively employed in administrative records, financial accounts, and commercial documents. In the present study, the structure of Siyāq numeral notation refers to the formal principles governing the formation, combination, and visual organization of numerical signs. These principles reflect not only computational requirements but also the scribal traditions and administrative practices within which the script evolved.
Iran and India represent two of the principal centres in the historical dissemination of the Siyāq script owing to their long-standing cultural interactions and the transmission of Persian bureaucratic traditions. Although the script fulfilled comparable administrative and accounting functions in both regions, its system of numeral notation evolved differently under the influence of local scribal practices, administrative requirements, and cultural traditions. Despite the significance of the Siyāq script for the study of documentary culture and administrative history, comparative research on its numeral structure in Iran and India remains limited. Existing studies have primarily focused on the introduction of documentary sources, the reading of archival texts, or the technical aspects of Siyāq notation, while its structural and visual characteristics have received comparatively little scholarly attention.
Accordingly, the present study comparatively examines the structure of Siyāq numeral notation in Iran and India through selected documentary examples from Qajar Iran and Late Mughal India. The principal research question is: What are the shared and distinctive structural characteristics of Siyāq numeral notation in Iran and India, and to what extent can the observed differences be explained by the cultural, administrative, and scribal traditions of the two regions?
The scope of this study is limited to the analysis of numeral forms representing units, tens, hundreds, and selected higher numerical orders, together with the structural principles governing their composition in both connected and disconnected forms of writing. The documentary corpus is drawn primarily from authentic sources dating to the Qajar period in Iran and the Late Mughal period in India, with particular emphasis on documents produced during the early nineteenth century (c. 1800-1820 CE).
Research Methodology: This study adopts a qualitative research design with a descriptive-comparative approach and focuses on the comparative analysis of the structural and visual characteristics of Siyāq numeral notation in Iran and India. Research data were collected from official administrative documents, historical manuscripts, instructional treatises on the Siyāq script, and archival images. The documentary samples were selected purposively according to four criteria: the authenticity and reliability of the sources, their confirmed attribution to the Iranian and Indian Siyāq traditions, the presence of representative numeral forms, and their suitability for structural and visual comparison.
The scope of the study is primarily confined to documents from Qajar Iran and Late Mughal India, as these periods provide the most appropriate basis for comparison owing to the widespread use of the Siyāq script, the availability of authentic documentary materials, and the preservation of well-established numeral conventions. The unit of analysis consists of Siyāq numeral signs representing units, tens, and hundreds, together with the structural principles governing their composition and visual organization in selected documents from the two regions.
The data were analyzed through documentary research, comparative observation, and structural as well as visual analysis of the selected samples. Particular attention was paid to the methods of numeral composition, the continuity or separation of graphic components, the density and extension of strokes, the visual organization of numeral forms, and the arrangement of numerical elements in both connected and disconnected writing styles. Although the primary analysis focuses on units, tens, and hundreds, selected examples of higher numerical orders were included as supplementary evidence where they contributed to a clearer understanding of the structural characteristics of the notation system.
Artificial intelligence–assisted tools were employed solely for linguistic editing, stylistic refinement, and the improvement of textual coherence. The research design, source selection, data analysis, interpretation of the findings, and final conclusions were conducted independently by the authors on the basis of primary sources and established scholarly references.
Conclusion: The findings of this study demonstrate that the structure of Siyāq numeral notation in Iran and India, while sharing a common foundation in numerical logic, hierarchical composition, and administrative function, developed distinctive visual and structural characteristics. The principal differences lie in the visual organization of numeral forms, the execution of graphic signs, pen movement, and formal composition. These variations are better understood as reflections of regional scribal traditions, visual culture, and bureaucratic practices rather than as evidence of fundamental differences in the underlying numerical system. Accordingly, the similarities between the Iranian and Indian traditions derive from their common historical origin and administrative function, whereas their structural and visual distinctions resulted from the adaptation of the system to different cultural and scribal environments.
In the Iranian tradition, Siyāq numeral forms are characterized by balanced linear extension, continuous pen movement, horizontal organization, and comparatively greater legibility. These features correspond closely to the conventions of Persian calligraphy, particularly Taʿlīq and Nastaʿlīq, as well as to the practical requirements of the Iranian bureaucratic system during the Safavid and Qajar periods. By contrast, the Indian examples, while preserving the same structural principles of numeral notation, exhibit denser compositions, more compact and enclosed forms, sharper directional changes, and stronger geometric organization. These characteristics reflect the influence of local scribal traditions and the visual culture of the Indian subcontinent. The findings therefore indicate that the transmission of Siyāq from Iran to India did not involve the simple adoption of a numerical notation system; rather, the script underwent a process of formal adaptation and visual transformation within a new cultural context.
The historical evidence further indicates that the dissemination of Siyāq in India was closely associated with the expansion of Persian as the language of administration under the Mughal Empire, particularly from the reign of Akbar onward. The system remained in use as long as Persian retained its official administrative status. Conversely, the replacement of Persian by English in nineteenth-century India, together with the administrative reforms and the enactment of the Accounting Law of 1306 Sh. (1927 CE) in Iran, gradually brought about the decline of Siyāq in both regions. This parallel historical development suggests that the continuity or disappearance of Siyāq depended primarily on the institutional role of Persian and the bureaucratic framework within which it functioned rather than on the intrinsic capabilities of the notation system itself.
The study also calls for a reconsideration of the widespread assumption that Siyāq was essentially a cryptic or secret script. The available evidence suggests that Siyāq was not designed as a cipher but rather as a specialized and widely recognized method of recording financial and administrative calculations. Its apparent complexity is attributable not to intentional concealment but to the abbreviated nature of its notation, the rapid execution of writing, the density of bureaucratic calculations, and the gradual disappearance of the knowledge required to read it. The perception of Siyāq as an obscure script is therefore better understood as the consequence of historical discontinuity than of deliberate secrecy.
Another important finding is that the structure of Siyāq numeral notation cannot be examined independently of writing implements, pen movement, and scribal practice. Differences in line extension, the balance between positive and negative space, writing rhythm, and the visual organization of numeral forms demonstrate that the appearance of the numerals was shaped not only by the conventions of numerical notation but also by the material conditions of writing, the skill of individual scribes, and regional calligraphic traditions. From this perspective, Siyāq numerals should be regarded not merely as quantitative signs but also as visual forms produced through the interaction of writing technology, scribal practice, and cultural context.
Accordingly, the Siyāq script should be understood not simply as a computational notation but as a specialized visual sign system in which numerical structure, graphic organization, and administrative function are closely integrated. This perspective extends the study of Siyāq beyond the history of accounting and administrative documentation into the broader fields of manuscript studies, visual culture, historical palaeography, and semiotics. The comparative analysis presented here demonstrates that systems of numeral notation, like writing systems themselves, evolve through cultural interaction and institutional adaptation. Consequently, the study of Siyāq numeral notation provides valuable evidence for understanding the transmission of administrative knowledge, the development of visual culture, and the historical connections between Iran and India.