SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.

id)

SOLVING THE MYSTERY OF DOUBLE ENTRY BOOKKEEPING

1

Sony Warsono-bin-Hardono
Department of Accounting Faculty of Economics and Business
Universitas Gadjah Mada Indonesia

ABSTRACT
Double-entry bookkeeping (DEB) has been shown to be reliable. The first documentation of
its usage dates to 1494 and it has been used since then without any significant changes,
despite more than half a millennium having passed. From time to time, scholars have
marvelled at the utility of DEB and have tried to elucidate the reasoning behind its
application, particularly the debit-credit mechanism. Yet despite these efforts, the efficacy
of DEB remains an unsolved mystery. Using a mathematical approach, this paper presents
evidence that DEB is an application of arithmetic. This mathematical approach is motivated
by the mathematical content of Summa de Arithmetica, Geometrica, Proportioni et
Proportionalita, in which DEB was included. Revealing the internal workings of DEB is an
important first step towards developing transparent, accurate and comprehensive
accounting practices that can meet the increasing demands of stakeholders.
Key words: Double-entry bookkeeping (DEB); Summa; Debit-credit mechanism; Mathematics

1 INTRODUCTION

The rise and metamorphosis of double-entry bookkeeping is one of historys best-kept

secrets and most important untold tales. (Gleeson-White, 2012, p. 8)

Nowadays, the field of accounting is growing rapidly, in terms of both its practice and academic
study. Double-entry bookkeeping (DEB hereinafter) has been practised for more than 500 years
and forms the foundation of modern accounting (Littleton, 1928; Edwards, 1960). DEB was
presented in the book Summa de Arithmetica, Geometrica, Proportioni et Proportionalita
(hereinafter "the Summa"), published in 1494 in Italy. Since its inception, many scholars have
marvelled at its efficacy and efficiency. Among them are the following. Von Goethe (1795 [Ch.
X, par. 13]) states that DEB is among the finest inventions of the human mind; every prudent

GraduatefromDoctoralprograminUniversityofKentucky(2003),MasterprograminClevelandStateUniversity
(1994),andBachelorprograminFakultasEkonomiUniversitasGadjahMada(1991).

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2339864

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

master of a house should introduce it into his economy. Cayley (1894, p. 5) holds DEB is in
fact like Euclid theory of ratios an absolutely perfect one. Hatfield (1924) suggests that the
excellence of DEB is the main reason for viewing accounting as an academic discipline. Littleton
(1928) notes that accounting owes its modern status to the Middle Ages, because modern
accountants have not been able to improve upon the original formulation of DEB. Weber,
Schumpeter, and Sombart (in Carruthers and Espeland, 1991) argue that DEB is an important
tool in the service of rationality and has played an important role in the development capitalism.
Chambers states that DEB could accommodate anything' (1987, p.99), and is 'the source of
modern accounting' (2000, p.328). Yamey (1994) states that the basic framework of double entry
is the only accounting practice to adapt and survive for more than 500 years.
Yet despite its success, DEB is considered to be a mystery (Littleton, 1928; Yamey, 1947 and
1994). Recently, Gleeson-White (2012, p. 8) states '... the double-entry bookkeeping is one of
history's best-kept secrets and most important untold tales'. Waymire (2011) and Basu (2012)
assert that DEB is a practice, the efficacy of which has not been satisfactorily explained. Basu
(2012) specifically asked accountants to answer the question Why is the double-entry
bookkeeping beautiful? (p. 865).
This paper uses a mathematical approach to highlight the rationality of DEB. This approach
is motivated by the fact that Summa discusses various topics related to mathematics and was
written by Luca Pacioli, a professor of mathematics at universities in Italy.
The remainder of the paper is organised as follows. In section 2, the early development of
DEB is described and accompanying issues presented. In section 3, the current state of
accounting is described. In section 4, the rationality of the debit-credit mechanism as an
application of algebra is considered. Section 5 concludes.

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2339864

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

2 THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF DEB AND ACCOMPANYING ISSUES

The formal procedures of modern accounting were devised somewhere in the twelfth to the
fourteenth centuries of the present era, probably by some mathematician of acute insight
and inventiveness. (Chambers, 1999, p. 242; 2005, p. 242)

Luca Pacioli was awarded the title of Father of Accounting for his services to the field in
documenting DEB. Pacioli was a mathematics professor who taught at several universities
(Hatfield, 1924), publishing a number of books, mostly in the fields of pure mathematics
(Sangster et al., 2007), and applied mathematics in various fields, including the military (Weis
and Tinius, 1991).
DEB was documented in the Summa, which was published in 1494. As described by
Hernandez-Esteve (1994) and Sangster et al. (2007), the Summa consists of two volumes with
the following details. The first volume contains nine chapters. Chapters 1 to 7, inclusive, discuss
arithmetic, Chapter 8 discusses algebra, and Chapter 9 discusses a variety of topics about the
application of mathematics in business. Chapter 9 itself consists of 12 treatises. DEB is in the
eleventh treatise, entitled Particularis De Computis et Scripturis.The second volume consists of
one chapter, chapter 10, which deals with geometry. Given the table of contents, it is very likely
that there is a close relationship between mathematics and the other topics discussed in the
Summa, including DEB.
The majority of scholars believe that Pacioli contributes greatly to documenting the state of
DEB at that time, for the following reasons. First, Pacioli presents practical business rules
without discussing the philosophy of DEB (Littleton, 1928). This would indicate that DEB was
already an established discipline and that its use did not need to be justified. Second, the title of
the Summa indicates that the book is a collection of pre-existing knowledge. Third, DEB is
thought to have been used by the merchants of Venice several centuries before the publication of
the Summa (eg Kats, 1930; Yamey, 1994, de Roover, 1955; Edwards, 1960; Lee, 1973; Mann,
1994). These suggested reasons motivated some researchers to propose the origin of DEB (eg
Martinelli, 1977; Mattessich, 1989; Aiken and Lu, 1998; Zaid, 2000) which sometimes led to
debates that are not easily resolved. For example, Jacobsen (1964) argues that DEB derived from
the accounting practices of the Inca in Peru. In response, Forrester (1968) reports that the Inca
3

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

had a moneyless economy. Lall Nigam (1986) claims that Bahi-khata was an early forerunner of
DEB development and that it was used in India hundreds of years before DEB was used in Italy.
As a response, Nobes (1987) concluded that Lall Nigams' claim is supported only by anecdotal
evidence.

3 CURRENT STATE OF ACCOUNTING

If accountants know not the instruments of thought and action of other fields of
inquiry or practice, they bind themselves to the dogma of their kind; for they are
unable to discriminate between dogma and reliable knowledge. In the last sixty
years, instead of the richness and rigour of thought that arises from the crossfertilization of ideas, accountants have insulated themselves from the world of
affairs by a cocoon of their own making. It is called generally accepted
accounting principles. (Chambers, 1999, p.249)

Edwards (1960) divides the development of accounting into three sequential phases: record
keeping, bookkeeping, and modern accounting. In the present day, there is a tendency for the
practice of accounting to be governed more and more by regulations, in the form of conceptual
frameworks, principles, and standards. Boards of standards, for example, the International
Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and the Financial Accounting standards Board (FASB),
play a major role in the formulation of accounting best practices via the issuance of what are
referred to as Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAPs hereinafter). Regulationsbased accounting practices have a broad impact on both education and research. For example, in
education, Cluskey et al. (2007) concludes that the majority of courses on accounting theory
discuss a variety of topics that essentially cover the practices prescribed by the standards boards.
In research, Ball (2008) implied that accounting research is generally too focused on tapered and
answerable questions.
Prof. R.J. Chambers, a prominent accounting scholar, has leveled repeated criticisms against
the existing regulations governing accounting practice. Chambers (1966) shows that existing
GAAPs contain ambiguous terminology and that the principles set out are not always in
4

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

accordance with the statutory principles. Chambers (1967) implies that GAAPs extrapolate from
real data and actual accounting practices to prescriptions that achieve the status of myth.
Chambers (1979) indicates the usefulness characteristic as "the vanishing premise" because the
resulting standards are rarely based on the premise that made it. Chambers (1987) states that
following existing GAAPs will not result in reliable accounting practice. Chambers (1996) notes
that the accounting framework is merely a product of agreement among several parties and is in
danger of losing touch with business reality. Chambers (1999; 2005) argues GAAPs cause
accountants to isolate themselves from the real world. In summary, Chambers' criticisms
question the idea that current GAAPs are based on empirical observation of actual business
practices.
On the one hand, the formulation of new regulations for accounting is ongoing. There are at
least two phenomena that support this claim. First, the IASB and FASB are working intensively
on a Joint Project to achieve a global convergence in accounting standards. One outcome of the
Joint Project is the promulgation of the Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting in 2010
(FASB, 2010; IASB, 2010). Secondly, recently, the International Integrated Reporting
Committee (IIRC) was formed with the aim of providing both financial and non-financial
information (Accounting Today, 2010; White, 2012). On the other hand, more than a few
accounting scholars are currently dissatisfied with the direction that accounting is taking (eg
Hopwood, 2007; Demski, 2007 & 2008; Fellingham, 2007; Basu, 2008, 2012; Sunder, 2006;
Ball, 2008; Arnold , 2009; Young, 2009; Kaplan, 2011; McCarthy, 2012). Interestingly, some of
them remind accountants to study DEB thoroughly (Waymire, 2011; Basu, 2012), and to return
to DEB (Fellingham, 2007).

4 THE DEBIT-CREDIT MECHANISM AS AN APPLICATION OF MATHEMATICS

The task of accounting is to provide reliable knowledge. . What was regarded as reliable
knowledge was not a body of 'generally accepted principles' of the kind that so strongly
influence accounting practice. It was knowledge of the underlying nature of the physical
and biological and social context of practice. (Chambers, 1987, p. 97)

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

In addition to Pacioli, others have concluded that DEB is an application of mathematics. Cayley
(1894, p. 5) states 'The Principles of Book-keeping by Double Entry constitute a theory which is
mathematically by no means uninteresting ....' Childs (1895, p. 77) states that DEB 'is a beautiful
system - a science in fact, based upon true mathematical principles, ....' Littleton (1927, p. 140)
notes that arithmetic is an antecedent of double-entry bookkeeping 'since bookkeeping is a
sequence of simple computations, .... Williams (1978, p. 38) concludes that the power of
mathematic is 'an essential ingredient for a complete system of double-entry book-keeping.' Weis
and Tinius (1991, p. 95) go further, holding that 'the Venetian method - you call it a double-entry
- was an application of Arabic algebra.'
DEB is presented technically in the use of the debit-credit mechanism. There is continuing
debate about the importance of the debit-credit mechanism. Most modern accounting textbooks
state that the rules of debit-credit are arbitrary (Anthony et al., 2007), rules of thumb (Williams
et al., 2007), or mere customs (Weygandt et al., 2011; Kieso, et al, 2011). Moreover, some
researchers treated the debit-credit mechanism as simply 'a part of the vocabulary of accounting'
(Wallace, 1997, p. 230), mere language' (Pincus, 1997, p. 579), or 'nothing more than pluses and
minuses' (Ingram , 1998 p. 411). In turn, the study of debit and credit is considered too narrow
and procedural (Patten and Williams, 1990; Nelson, 1995), requires students to memorize
(Pincus, 1997; Ingram, 1998), poses a risk of misrepresentation to students about accounting
(Pincus , 1997; Diller-Hass, 2004) and meets instructors on unfamiliar turf, likely in a land'' the
students hope to visit never again.' (Warren and Young, 2012, p. 248). In contrast to the
foregoing views, Vangermeersch (1997, p. 582) believes that the mechanism of debit and credit
"has survived technological momentous changes .... this approach has proven its adaptability.'
Several scholars have studied the debit-credit mechanism from a mathematical perspective.
Peters and Emery (1978) believe that at the time DEB was developed, mathematicians did not
accept the concept of negative numbers, which led to the idea of implementing the debit-credit
mechanism. However, Scorgie (1989) argues that Peters and Emerys claim is not supported by
the evidence. By assuming there was a Pacioli Group that operated with only non-negative
numbers, Ellerman (1985; 1986; 2009) uses modern mathematical models to rationalize, at least
in part, the debit-credit mechanism. However, there is no elucidation of the rational basis for the
debit-credit mechanism that is accepted by accountants.

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

Most of the accounting literature presents the arithmetic equation "Assets = Liabilities +
Equity" as the basic accounting equation. Furthermore, the literature states that 'debit' means left
and that 'credit' means right, in that bookkeeping entries are made in two columns and debits are
entered in the left column, with credits being entered in the right column. The debit-credit
mechanism is basically used to represent the increase (addition) and decrease (subtraction) of the
elements assets, liabilities and equity that are used in the basic accounting equation. However, it
would be incorrect to conclude that the terminology of debit always means an increase
(additions), or that the terminology of credit always means a decrease (subtraction). The rules for
debits and credits depend on the position of the elements in the accounting equation. For
example, assets, which are positioned on the left side of the equation, are recorded (in each case
by a positive number) in the debit (left) column when the assets increase, but in the credit (right)
column when they decrease. By the same token, liabilities and equity, which are positioned on
the right side of the equation, are recorded (in each case by a positive number) in the credit
(right) column when the liabilities and equity increase, but in the debit (left) column when they
decrease.
It will be evident that an accurate balance sheet could be constructed by making entries in
one column using only the symbols of addition and subtraction. So why do accountants make
entries in two columns, using the terminology of debit and credit? The answer is simple:
accounting provides financial information, and financial value is always positive to someone and
can never be negative; this is in accordance with past and present reality. As a consequence, the
use of negative numbers to reflect the financial information is prohibited. Therefore, to record
the decrease in monetary value, the early initiator of DEB came up with the idea of using two
columns and moving what would be a negative number in one column to the other column,
where it is positive. Using this technique, a decrease of monetary value can be represented by a
positive number that, due to the meaning of the column in which it is placed, carries with it with
the meaning of a decrease.
In essence, the debit and credit mechanism represents a consequence of the arithmetic
equation whose recording is reflected in the double entry system. By way of illustration, here are
some examples of how approaching DEB from an arithmetical perspective underlies and
establishes the rationality of the debit-credit mechanism in the basic accounting equation.

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

Case A. Assume that Assets = 10, Liabilities = 4, and Equity = 6. Applying the basic accounting
equation, we get 10 = 4 + 6. Suppose that the net amount/balance of assets (10) is the difference
between transactions valued at 25 and 15 (25 15). Now, accounting does not recognize the
negative number (here, -15). So, to eliminate the negative number yet at the same time account
for it, the value of 15 must be recorded on the credit (right) side with a positive number. In this
way, the increase in assets is recorded on the debit, whereas the decrease is recorded on the
credit (see Figure 1).

FIGURE 1
The Mathematics of Numbers Debit/Left Side
Debit/Left Side
=

10
25

Credit/Right Side
4

15

The Rules of Debit Credit for Assets

Debit/Left Side
=

10
+

Credit/Right Side
4

Case B. Assume that Assets = 10, Liabilities = 4, and Equity = 6. Applying the basic accounting
equation, we get 10 = 4 + 6. Suppose that the net amount/balance of liabilities (4) is the
difference between transactions valued at 18 and 14 (18 14). Now, accounting does not
recognize the negative number (here, -14). So, to eliminate the negative number yet at the same
time account for it, the value of 14 must be recorded on debit (left) side with a positive number.
In this way, the increase in liabilities is recorded on the credit, whereas the decrease is recorded
on the debit (see Figure 2).

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

FIGURE 2
The Mathematics of Number Credit/Right Side
Debit/Left Side
10

Credit/Right Side
=

4
14

18

The Rules of Debit Credit for Liabilities

Debit/Left Side
10

Credit/Right Side
=

4
-

Case C. Assume that Assets = 10, Liabilities = 4, and Equity = 6. Applying the basic accounting
equation, we get 10 = 4 + 6. Suppose that the net amount/balance of equity (6) is the difference
between transactions valued at 36 and 30 (36 30). Now, accounting does not recognize the
negative number (here, -30). So, to eliminate the negative number yet at the same time account
for it, the value of 30 must be recorded on debit (left) side with a positive number. In this way,
the increase in equity is recorded on the credit, whereas while the decrease in equity is recorded
on the debit (see Figure 3).
FIGURE 3
The Mathematics of Number Credit/Right Side
Debit/Left Side
10

Credit/Right Side
=

6
30

36

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

The Rules of Debit Credit for Equity

Debit/Left Side
10

Credit/Right Side
=

6
-

In summary, the existing rules for debit and credit are based on a mechanism that follows in
its entirety the logic of the operations of addition and subtraction, negative numbers having been
barred by fiat. Thus, any grounds for debate about the debit-credit mechanism are swept away.

5 CONCLUDING REMARKS
Prominent accounting scholar Prof. R.J. Chambers (2000) argues that reliable knowledge
(1999, p. 249; 2000, p. 327) is mostly gained by careful observation and genuine imagination,
and its established in the accepted body of knowledge requires the passing of at least three
generations. Eventually, this knowledge comes to be regarded as common sense. As the
embodiment of DEB, the mechanism of debit and credit is established in the accepted body of
knowledge. Debit-credit mechanisms reflect the results of accurate observations of reality, in that
no monetary value has a negative number. In addition, these mechanisms have been used for
more than 500 years without significant change. Finally, accounting scholars and practitioners
consider DEB, especially the rules of debit and credit, to be common sense. Interestingly, the
discovery of the mechanism follows the customary path for scientific discoveries, in that it was
originally formulated as the result of a creative leap of imagination, which envisaged the
elimination of negative numbers while still accounting for reality by moving numbers from one
side of the equation to the other, and this in turn was based on the (admittedly embryonic at the
time, with its ban on negative numbers) science of arithmetic.
In parallel with Chambers concern for and recommendations on the development of
accounting, two things need to be done urgently. First, it must be realised that accounting is a
form of technology, because at its foundation, it cannot be separated from science (as
10

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

knowledge) and technology (Chambers, 2000). In this case, accounting at least should be able to
learn from information and communication technology (ICT), which has been developed
successfully and comprises a form of advanced knowledge. Based mainly on binary arithmetic,
ICT has had a strong influence on many aspects of life. Second, the way in which GAAPs are
formulated needs to be scrutinized in detail because there are indications that the standards
boards are less aware than they might be of the importance of mathematics for accounting. For
example, the IASB and FASB have determined that the purpose of a statement of financial
position (balance sheet) is to present information about 'the entity's economic resources and the
claims against the reporting entity' (IASB, 2010, OB. 12; FASB, 2010, OB. 12). Furthermore,
the standards boards state that '..., in many cases, claims against an entity are not claims on
specific resources.' (FASB, 2010, BC1.33). Yet if these recommendations are followed and
nothing further is specified, the accounting equation may not be balanced.
The development of mathematics-based accounting along the lines proposed above is
expected to meet the rising demands and expectations of stakeholders, which are reaching levels
that border on the fantastical:
Finally, and most significantly, bookkeeping now has the potential to make or break the
planet (Gleeson-White, 2012, p. 8).

REFERENCES
Accounting Today, Group Formed to Set Sustanability Rules, Accounting Today, Vol. 24, No. 11, 2010.
Aiken, M., and W. Lu, The Evolution of Bookkeeping in China: Integrating Historical Trends with
Western Influences, Abacus, Vol. 34, No. 2, 1998.
Anthony, R.N., D.F, Hawkins, and K.A. Merchant, Accounting: Text and Cases, McGraw-Hill/Irwin
(Singapore - International edition), 2007.
Arnold, P.J., Global Financial Crisis: The Challenge to Accounting Research, Accounting,
Organizations and Society, Vol. 34, 2009.
Ball, R., What is the Actual Economic Role of Financial Reporting?, Accounting Horizons, Vol. 22, No.
4, 2008.
Basu, S., Panel on Big Unanswered Questions in AccountingGenesis, Accounting Horizons, Vol. 22,
No. 4, 2008.
11

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

_____, How Can Accounting Researchers Become More Innovative?, Accounting Horizons, Vol. 26,
No. 4, 2012.
Carruthers, B.G. and W. N. Espeland, Accounting for Rationality: Double-Entry Bookkeeping and the
Rhetoric of Economic Rationality, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 97. No. 1, 1991.
Cayley, A., The Principles of Book-keeping by Double Entry, Cambridge: University Press, Available
at: http://ia700402.us.archive.org/9/items/principlesofbook00caylrich/principlesofbook00caylrich.pdf,
1894.
Chambers, R.J., A Matter of Principle, The Accounting Review, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1966.
_____, Prospective Adventures in Accounting Ideas, The Accounting Review, Vol. 42, No. 2, 1967.
_____, Usefulness The Vanishing Premise in Accounting Standard Setting, Abacus, Vol. 15, No. 2,
1979.
_____, Accounting Education for the Twenty-first Century, Abacus, Vol. 23, No. 2, 1987.
_____, Ends, Ways, Means and Conceptual Frameworks, Abacus, Vol. 32, No. 2, 1996.
_____, The Poverty of Accounting Discourse, Abacus, Vol. 35, No. 3, 1999.
_____, R.J., Common Sense, Technology and Science, Abacus, Vol. 36, No. 3, 2000.
_____, The Poverty of Accounting Discourse, Accounting Education: an International Journal, Vol. 14,
No. 1, 2005.
Childs, C.W., New Essentials of Bookkeeping for Public Schools Single and Double Entry: Including
Forms and Explanations of Business Papers, The Whitaker & Ray Co., Available at:
http://archive.org/details/newessentialsbo00chilgoog, 1895.
Cluskey Jr., G.R., Ehlen, C.R., and Rivers, R., Accounting Theory: Missing in Action?, Management
Accounting Theory Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2007.
Demski, J.S., Is Accounting an Academic Discipline?, Accounting Horizons, Vol. 21, No. 2, 2007.
de Roover, R., New Perspectives on the History of Accounting, The Accounting Review, Vol. 30, No. 3,
1955.
Diller-Haas, A., Time to Change Introductory Accounting, The CPA Journal, Vol. 74, No. 4, 2004.
Edwards, J.D., Early Bookkeeping and Its Development into Accounting Author, The Business History
Review, Vol. 34, No. 4, 1960.
Ellerman, D.P., The Mathematics of Double Entry Bookkeeping, Mathematics Magazine, Vol. 58, No.
4, 1985.
_____, Double Entry Multidimensional Accounting, OMEGA International Journal of Management
Science, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1986.
12

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

_____, Double-Entry Accounting: The Mathematical Formulation and Generalization, SSRN, Available
at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1340619, 2009.
FASB, Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 8 Conceptual Framework for Financial
Reporting, Financial Accounting Standards Board of the Financial Accounting Foundation, 2010.
Fellingham, J.C., Is Accounting an Academic Discipline?, Accounting Horizons, Vol. 21, No. 2, 2007.
Forrester, D.A.R., The Incan Contribution to Double-Entry Accounting, Journal of Accounting
Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1968.
Gleeson-White, J., Double Entry: How Merchants of Venice Created Modern Finance, W.W. Norton &
Company, 2012.
Hatfield, H.R., An Historical Defense of Bookkeeping, The Journal of Accountancy, Vol. 37, No. 4,
1924.
Hernandez-Esteve, E., Luca Pacioli's Treatise De Computis et Scripturis: A composite or a Unified
work?, Accounting, Business and Financial History, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1994.
Hopwood, A.G., Whither Accounting Research?, The Accounting Review, Vol. 82, No. 5, 2007.
IASB, The Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting, IFRS Foundation, 2010.
Ingram, R.W., A Note on Teaching Debits and Credits in Elementary Accounting, Issues in Accounting
Education, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1998.
Jacobsen, L.E., The Ancient Inca Empire of Peru and the Double Entry Accounting Concept, Journal of
Accounting Research, Vol 21, No. 2, 1964.
Kaplan, R.S., Accounting Scholarship that Advances Professional Knowledge and Practice, The
Accounting Review, Vol. 86, No. 2, 2011.
Kats, P., A Surmise Regarding the Origin of Bookkeeping by Double Entry, The Accounting Review,
Vol. 5, No. 4, 1930.
Kieso, D.E., J.J. Weygandt, and T.D. Warfield, Intermediate Accounting IFRS Edition, John Wiley &
Sons, 2011.
Lall Nigam, B.M., Bahi-Khata: The Pre-Pacioli Indian Double-entry System of Bookkeeping, Abacus,
Vol. 22, No. 2, 1986.
Lee, G.A., The Development of Italian Bookkeeping 1211-1300, Abacus, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1973.
Littleton, A.C., The Antecedents of Double-Entry, The Accounting Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1927.
Littleton, A.C., Paciolo and Modern Accounting, The Accounting Review, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1928.
Mann, G., The Origins of Double-Entry, Australian Accountant, Vol. 64, No. 6, 1994.

13

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

Martinelli, A., Notes on the Origin of Double Entry Bookkeeping, Abacus, Vol. 13, No. 1, 1977.
Mattessich, R., Accounting and the Input-Output in the Prehistoric and Ancient World, Abacus, Vol. 25.
No. 2, 1989.
McCarthy, W.E., Accounting Craftspeople versus Accounting Seers: Exploring the Relevance and
Innovation Gaps in Academic Accounting Research, Accounting Horizons, Vol. 26, No. 4, 2012.
Nelson, I.T., Whats New about Accounting Education Change? An Historical Perspective on the
Change Movement Accounting Horizons, Vol. 9, No. 4, 1995.
Nobes, C.W., The Pre-Pacioli Indian Double-entry System of Bookkeeping: A Comment, Abacus, Vol.
23, No. 2, 1987.
Patten, R.J., and D.Z. Williams, Theres Trouble Right Here in Our Accounting Programs: The
Challenge to Accounting Educators, Issues in Accounting Education, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1990.
Peters, R.M. and D.R. Emery, The Role of Negative Numbers in the Development of Double Entry
Bookkeeping, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 16, No. 2, 1978.
Pincus, K.V., Is Teaching Debits and Credits Essential in Elementary Accounting?, Issues in
Accounting Education, Vol. 12, No. 2, 1997.
Sangster, A., G. N. Stoner, and P. A. McCarthy, Lessons for the Classroom from Luca Pacioli, Issues in
Accounting Education, Vol. 22, No. 3, 2007.
Scorgie, M.E., "The Role of Negative Numbers in the Development of Double Entry Bookkeeping": A
Comment, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 27, No. 2, 1989.
Sunder, S., Presidents Message: Imagined Worlds of Accounting, Accounting Education News, Vol.
34, No. 4, 2006.
Sy, A., and T. Tinker, Bury Pacioli in Africa: A Bookkeepers Reification of Accountancy, Abacus,
Vol. 42, No. 1, 2006.
Vangermeersch, R.G., Dropping Debits and Credits in Elementary Accounting: A Huge Disservice to
Students, Issues in Accounting Education, Vol. 12, No. 2, 1997.
von

Goethe,
J.W.
Wilhelm
Meisters
http://www.bartleby.com/314/110.html, 1795.

Apprenticeship,

Available

at:

Wallace, W.A., Where Are the Debits and Credits? Editors Perspective, Issues in Accounting
Education, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1997.
Warren, D.L. and M.N. Young, Integrated Accounting Principles: A Best Practices Course for
Introductory Accounting, Issues in Accounting Education, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2012.

14

SolvingtheMysteryofDoubleEntryBookkeepingWarsonobinHardono(swarsono@feb.ugm.ac.id)

Waymire, G., Seeds of Innovation in Accounting Scholarship,

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1962850, 2011.

SSRN,

Available

at:

Weis, W.L. and D.E. Tinius, Luca Pacioli Reinassance Accountant, Journal of Accountancy, Vol. 172,
No. 5, 1991.
Weygandt, J.J., P.D. Kimmel, and D.E. Kieso, Financial Accounting: IFRS Edition, John Wiley & Son,
2011.
White, L., The Big Idea: Beyond the Bottom Line, Charter, Vol. 83, No. 6, 2012.
Williams, J.J., A New Perspective On The Evolution Of Double-Entry Bookkeeping, The Accounting
Historians Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1, 1978.
Williams, J.R., S.F. Haka, and M.S. Bettner, Financial & managerial accounting: The basis for business
decisions, McGraw-Hill/Irwin (Singapore - International edition), 2007.
Yamey, B.S., Notes on The Origin of Double-Entry Bookkeeping, The Accounting Review, Vol. 22, No.
3, 1947.
Yamey, B.S., Accounting in History, The European Accounting Review, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1994.
Young, J.J., The Absent of Dissent, Accounting and the Public Interest, Vol. 9, p. 1 9, 2009.
Zaid, O. A., Were Islamic Records Precursors to Accounting Books Based on The Italian Method?, The
Accounting Historians Journal, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2000.

15