Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz's Explication de l'arithmetique binaire is the primary source for Leibniz's own development of binary numeral notation, and it is relevant to the atlas specifically because Leibniz explicitly connected his binary system to Chinese Yijing hexagram symbolism, seeing in the sixty-four hexagrams' pattern of broken and unbroken lines a confirmation of his own mathematical system that he believed carried theological significance. As Leibniz's own paper, it is direct primary evidence of how he understood that connection. It is Leibniz's own interpretive reading of the Yijing through a seventeenth century European mathematical and theological lens, not itself an account of how Chinese tradition understood the hexagrams, a distinction worth keeping clear when the source is cited for the Yijing side of the comparison.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz's Explication de l'arithmetique binaire, published in the Memoires de l'Academie Royale des Sciences, is Leibniz's own primary paper developing binary notation and connecting it to Yijing hexagram symbolism, treated at the top tier as the actual primary text for how Leibniz himself understood that connection, notwithstanding that it is his own seventeenth century theological reading rather than an account of the Chinese tradition's own understanding of the hexagrams. NotesThe first European commentary connecting the hexagram arrangement to binary arithmetic, written after correspondence with the Jesuit Joachim Bouvet in Beijing. Tier corrected from 5 to 1: the site uses a three-tier scale (1 scholarly or peer-reviewed, 2 reputable secondary, 3 the tradition's own account). Scholarly translations and primary manuscripts are tier 1; 4 and 5 were outside the scale.
Citation
AuthorGottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
PublisherMemoires de l'Academie Royale des Sciences
Publication Year1703
Source TypeArticle
Cross-Tradition Connections
Associated With
This source names Yijing directly: "connected his binary system to Chinese Yijing hexagram symbolism, seeing in the sixty-four hexagrams' pattern of broken and unbroken lines a confirmation of his own mathematical system that he..."
Claims Backed By This Source (16 claims)
This source backs 16 claims across the atlas. As facts: 11 well-attested. As cited relationships: 2 holds. Plus 3 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Sources, 8 claims: 7 well-attested, 1 holds.
- Historical Figures, 5 claims: 4 well-attested, 1 general references.
- Scriptures & Texts, 2 claims: 1 holds, 1 general references.
- I Ching Hexagrams, 1 claims: 1 general references.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.