Nicholas Bodley wrote:

> Also, as you know, numerals have a range of complexities; the
> Asian traditional numerals (especially (disused?) traditional
> Chinese!) are elaborate, and must come from a different kind
> of life, when people had the time and peace of mind to write
> such elaborate forms.

If I understand what you are talking about, those logograms are by no means
disused: I have implemented printing in those numerals on electronic cash
registers not more than four years ago.

But they have to do with peace of mind, in a sense: they are anti-fraud
numerals, which are mandatory for monetary amounts on cheques, contracts,
and other commercial documents.

They are so complex in order to make it difficult to counterfeit them after
the document has been signed. The ordinary Chinese numeral logograms would
be too much exposed to forging, especially 1 and 2, which can very easily be
changed into 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 100, 1000, etc.

_ Marco