The Egyptian Language Restored

PREFACE.

The critical apparatus of Kulenkamp to Cleomedes, containing the readings of eight codices and the editio princeps first printed edition, which the Göttingen library twice entrusted to me with singular generosity for my domestic studies, was not of great assistance, since the learned man refrains from speaking about the age of the codices he used.

And as I hesitated at times and considered with myself whether perhaps that burden was beyond our strength, I did not lack the support—which I publicly acknowledge with a grateful heart—of my colleague Carolus Manitius, who, with the learning and sagacity he possesses in astronomical matters, acted as a most rigorous overseer of the work I had undertaken. We have noted in their proper places all the conjectures he most liberally granted to me. Also, the emendations of Hultsch, Konti, Letronne, and Meineke, which removed inveterate errors, have been accepted into the text.

The Latin translation of Balfour, which Bake added to his edition, has been so changed and corrected in so many places that we do not fear to claim it as our own. The index to Pappus, elaborated with marvelous diligence and care by Hultsch, often showed us the way as we worked and rendered this difficult and sometimes thankless task easier. However, we chose not to consult the Latin translation made by Georgius Valla Placentinus, with which Marcus Hopperus augmented his edition of Cleomedes in 1561, even though that very rare book was available to us, because it is faulty and lacks elegance.

So that individual words and matters treated by Cleomedes may be more easily found and his Greek in some way [might be understood]...