From this time on, until the decimal system finally adopted the first nine characters and replaced the rest of the Brāhmī notation by adding the zero, the progress of these forms is well marked. It is therefore well to present synoptically the best-known specimens that have come down to us, and this is done in the table on page 25.[[79]]
Table showing the Progress of Number Forms in India
| Numerals | |
| Aśoka[[80]] | |
| Śaka[[81]] | |
| Aśoka[[82]] | |
| Nāgarī[[83]] | |
| Nasik[[84]] | |
| Kṣatrapa[[85]] | |
| Kuṣana[[86]] | |
| Gupta[[87]] | |
| Valhabī[[88]] | |
| Nepal[[89]] | |
| Kaliṅga[[90]] | |
| Vākāṭaka[[91]] |
[Most of these numerals are given by Bühler, loc. cit., Tafel IX.]
With respect to these numerals it should first be noted that no zero appears in the table, and as a matter of fact none existed in any of the cases cited. It was therefore impossible to have any place value, and the numbers like twenty, thirty, and other multiples of ten, one hundred, and so on, required separate symbols except where they were written out in words. The ancient Hindus had no less than twenty of these symbols,[[92]] a number that was afterward greatly increased. The following are examples of their method of indicating certain numbers between one hundred and one thousand:
