# Mediaeval numeracy?



## Brian G Turner (Apr 14, 2013)

I'm currently trying to find how numerate people could be expected to be in mediaeval Europe, not least the difference between towns and villages.

It's proving to be a small but essential issue in my research, but I'm finding it hard to discover anything online, and I can't recall seeing it covered specifically in my books (though literacy is).

What I'm talking about is everyday counting, such as for money, stock, animals, etc. I've come across the old Northumbrian counting system some time ago, but never got an idea of how this compared relatively, not least in its flexibility.

I seem to recall that the ability to work with small numbers (up to 10 or 20) was relatively common, but I'm not sure how fluid and proficient people would be for counting. Hmm...

Anyone any suggestions, especially to online references?


----------



## AnyaKimlin (Apr 14, 2013)

This purely based on my home education and mixing with other parents that unschool (don't have a curriculum and work at the child's own pace).   I would say it would vary hugely from person to person.

My daughter just by listening to me count could go to one hundred before she was three whereas my son is six and still struggling with twenty and we had to put effort into that.  

The variation with unschooled kids I have met is huge - so it would depend on the person's background, how much they counted in every day life and natural ability.


----------



## Abernovo (Apr 14, 2013)

It would also depend upon what exactly you think of as numeracy.

Traders and bankers needed to be skilled. The numeracy of farmers might not be as obvious, but was still vital, just as it would have been with many occupations from publicans to sailors.

I've known old shepherds who said they were poor at maths and had no qualifications, but they knew the number of sheep they had, and how many lambs were produced each year. They could give a running commentary, leaving most people needing a graph to follow it, but they just knew the numbers and, from that, whether or not they'd turn a profit then and in the future (d.v.). In terms of mediaeval shepherds (presuming they're either serfs, or minor freemen dependent upon a landowner for employment), they would be responsible for the flock, with a 'natural wastage' allowance, so would need to _account_ to their masters.

Other occupations, such as stonemasons, served apprenticeships where they would have been schooled in basic numbers if they didn't have it before. You don't want to get stiffed on the stone delivered. Not to mention cutting angles. There would have, I suspect, been a lot of minor numeracy, applicable to their everyday life.


----------



## The Judge (Apr 14, 2013)

I'd have said the same -- a person with no need to count might not get far above yan tan tethera, but someone for whom numbers were important is going to know more, though multiplication and long division might be beyond anyone save the local clerks/tax collectors.  As in everything, townsfolk are likely to be more advanced than villagers if only because in the towns they'll be using money every day, so people will need to be able to count any change and ensure they're not being diddled, whereas the use of money in small villages is less important where they're growing their own and/or bartering.

I imagine you've seen this, but if not http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yan_tan_tethera


----------



## Nerds_feather (Apr 14, 2013)

This might be helpful.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Apr 14, 2013)

The Judge said:


> I imagine you've seen this, but if not http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yan_tan_tethera



Yep, that's the system I was referring to. I wasn't sure if the numbers were used for addition and subtraction, though, as much as tallying the sheep through the pens like striking through a line of five marks.



Nerds_feather said:


> This might be helpful.



I read that just before posting. 

What starts to get really confusing is when taxes are applied in percentiles. How does a cottager know what 5% of what they produce is? Unless they are counting off every twentieth. 

I guess where there was a need, there was a way.


----------



## Gordian Knot (Apr 14, 2013)

As to the latter, Brian, I expect the villagers were simply told how much 5% was. The average person would have to take the man's word for it, and have to pay it even if they might disagree!


----------



## Teresa Edgerton (Apr 14, 2013)

I said:


> I wasn't sure if the numbers were used for addition and subtraction, though, as much as tallying the sheep through the pens like striking through a line of five marks.



They often used tally sticks.  I assume the single ones were used for keeping track of things like sheep and goods sent to market.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tally_stick


----------



## sknox (May 27, 2013)

>How does a cottager know what 5% of what they produce is? Unless they are counting off every twentieth.

You have it exactly right, Brian. Taxes were almost never expressed as a percentile but a portion. The king (or bishop or town) would demand a twentieth or an eighth. That''s one reason why medieval taxes (not really the right word) were goofy numbers like ninths or twelfths. Every ninth or twelfth unit went to the taxman.

But you asked about numeracy. Arithmetic, of course, was part of the quadrivium, so it got taught at universities (1200AD and later). But a simpler and more practical form was taught in publicly-funded schools in at least north Italian towns by the 14th century. They were essentially teaching future merchants. With the multitude of currencies and laws, pretty much any long-distance merchant had to be educated in international relations (Pisa, Genoa, Venice, Augsburg, Rome, Cologne, Bruges or Antwerp, and on and on). Being numerate was absolutely essential for such folk.

I regard that as fundamentally different from being able to count sheep, an academic exercise that always puts me to sleep.


----------



## Brian G Turner (May 27, 2013)

Cheers for the replies, everyone.

It seems that ordinary "peasants" would have had a very basic, if limited, numeracy - the ability to count a few numbers at least. I guess the taxes accounted for that.


----------

