Complete Works of Euclid, Vol. 7 (Optics and Catoptrics)

they can be attributed to the scribe (p. 148, 3; 150, 9, 14, 19; 152, 4, 27; 162, 2; 164, 6, 11, 15, 21, 22; 166, 10; 170, 8, 9; 178, 14; 182, 13, 17, 22; 184, 20; 190, 5; 192, 24; 200, 3, 5; 202, 15; 206, 9; 208, 7, 10; 210, 3, 18, 23; 212, 25; 214, 15; 218, 6; 220, 12; 224, 3 Θ N; 226, 21; 228, 11; 230, 15; 236, 8; 238, 23; 240, 2, 6; 242, 12, 18; 244, 3, 23; 246, 4; in the Catoptrica p. 286, 6; 294, 11; 308, 4; 314, 17, 22; I have omitted the passages where V was corrected by m. 1 or 2, as was proper); slightly larger ones, but not so as to exceed the scribe’s grasp, p. 148, 15, 21; 152, 1; 198, 23; 200, 3, 5; 232, 13; 298, 5. Nor was any other result to be expected, since the ratio of codices V v (v there is w) is the same in Eutocius also, see Apollon. II p. V. The interpolations at p. 162, 14; 166, 7, 16; 168, 10; 180, 23 common to codices vp were sought from the ancient recension.

Furthermore, cod. 26 seems to depend on V; for at p. 194, 19 it has the compendium $\smile$, at p. 174, 15 Θ N, at p. 148, 3 ἐξεριμμένον, at p. 172, 7 correctly ὥστε καί. The common interpolations and false conjectures at p. 146, 16; 148, 9, 17; 188, 28 reveal a common archetype, as well as p. 166, 20 ff. and p. 168, 14 ff., which were sought from the ancient recension, just as p. 162, 14 also. It conspires with v at p. 182, 14 ὁρώμενον, at p. 184, 9 τὸν ZΛ, at p. 186, 11 σημεῖον, against v with Vp at p. 152, 20 περιφέρεια. The origin of the interpolation in v is shown at p. 192, 8, where ὡς ἡμικύκλου were written above, but at p. 146, 12 πυκτίον, p. 164, 2 καὶ παράλληλα, p. 168, 14 ὧν — 16 θεώρημα it has interpolations in the text which the others either omit or leave in the margin; at p. 190, 12—14 it has it in the margin like V, but by the first hand (ἢ τὸ ἥμισυ line 14 it omitted with a lacuna left); at p. 176, 16 it has the interpolation sought from p. 28, 24, which V has only by a recent hand, in the margin by the first hand (γρ.), with which can be compared scholium 54 sought from p. 58, 15—18.

Without doubt, codices 27, 28, 32 hang from cod. 26 by the intervention of a common archetype, and cod. 30 was copied from cod. 32, as is evident when these passages are compared: p. 144, 5 θυρίδων] 27, 28; θηρίων 32, θηρίων 30 supra scr. δ m. 2; p. 144, 11 ἀπορρίπτειν] 28, 30, 32; ἀπορρίπτει 27; p. 146, 5 αἱ] 27, 28; om. 30, 32; p. 146, 23 ὅλα] om. 26, 27, 28, 30, 32; p. 146, 25 προσεκάθησαν 28; p. 148, 7 ἑωρᾶτο] ἑωρᾶτο 26, ὁρᾶται 27, 28, 30, 32; p. 148, 14 οὐδέ] μηδέ 26, 27, 28, 30, 32; p. 148, 17 ἅμα ὅλα] ὅλα ἅμα 26, 27, 28, 30, 32; p. 150, 7 τά] om. 28; p. 150, 8 ἀποκλησοῦσθαι 28; p. 150, 10 κατεσκευακέναι] κατεσκευασμ[αι] 26, κατεσκευασμένα 27, 28, 30, 32; p. 150, 11 ὄφρησιν 28; p. 150, 13 φωνή] φηνῆ 27;