PREFACE.

...I will discuss this matter more fully at the end of this edition. Here, only a few things need to be said about the method I have followed in preparing this edition.

In general, I have proposed to imitate the edition of Pappus prepared by the most learned Fr. Hultsch, as a model approved by the consensus of all. Therefore, I have not only appended critical notes to the Greek words but have also added a Latin translation, to which are added notes mostly explaining mathematical matters.

First, regarding the so-called critical apparatus: I have prepared it so that it is most apparent what the Florentine codex provides in each place, and if its reading had to be emended, who the author of the emendation was. Therefore, wherever I have departed from the Florentine codex, I have placed its reading first in the notes, and then added the author of the emended reading. Thus, where nothing else is added, it should be understood that all intermediate authors agree, and where the differing reading of some is noted, the others agree with the Florentine codex. In this matter, however, it must be noted that the manifest errors of the Parisian codices have been omitted entirely. Where only the reading of the Florentine codex is indicated, its errors have already been corrected in the other codices, if the collations of Torelli are to be trusted; but I do not doubt that in many such places the reading of the Parisian codices was noted down with insufficient care (Questions on Archimedes, p. 111 ff.). In more serious places*) Henry Lebègue inspected the Parisian codices for me at the request of the most learned Charles Graux, a man very dear to me.

*) I have affixed an asterisk to the readings of the Parisian codices, about which H. Lebègue informed me.