Page:The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus, Volume I.pdf/184

168 that it would be obtained by the revolution of a parabola of the fourth degree about the y-axis, x$4$ = By, y representing the height of the water. This curve called a "Flachparabel" (A. Haas, Lehrbuch dei Differentialrechnung, Teil 3, 1894, p. 113 and 271) was first discussed by Fagnano, Giornale de'Letlerati d'Italia, Venice, vol. 22, 1715, p. 256, etc.

Another example of the calculation of the frustum of a cone, in connection with the seating of a theatre, may be found in the fourth (?) century Oxyrhynchus papyrus no. 186 (size 7 x 14 cm.) at Florence, published in Papiri Greci e Latini, (Publicazioni della Società Italiana per le Ricerca dei Papiri Greci e Latini in Egitto), Florence. vol. 3, 1914, pp. 44-45.

In his discussion of the diﬁicult no. 43 of the Rhind papyrus Eisenlohr (1877) suggested (p. 94) that the problem was to ﬁnd the volume of a frustum of a certain cone. But his interpretation was incorrect as Peet (1923, 2) summing up, see Griﬁith (1897), made clear.

See also Schubart (1916).

, "Beitrage zur agyptischen Metrologie," Archiv für Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete, Leipzig, vol. 2, 1903, pp. 87-93, 273-293, 521-528; see especially pp. 88-89.

"La quadrature du cercle dans l'ancienne Égypte," Revue Scientifique, Paris, series 4, vol. 20, July 18, 1903, p. 91.

Anonymous note of no importance.

1904, Aegyptische Chrestomathie zum Gebrauch auf Universitäten und zum Selbstunterricht, Berlin, I904, pp. 92-93 (numbers 26, 35, 41 of the Rhind papyrus), 46*—47* (notes).

Not important in this connection.

, "Az Egyiptomiak mathematikai és astronomiai ismeretei," [Mathematical and astronomical knowledge of the Egyptians], Mathematikai és Physikai Lapok, Budapest, vol. 13, 1904, pp. 30-53 (mathematics), 128-142 (astronomy).

, "Nr. 60 des mathematischen Handbuchs," Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache. . . ,vol. 41, 1904, pp. 77-78.

Discussion suggested by Borchardt (1893) and Calice (1903), correcting the latter. With references to one of the Kahun papyri, to the Berlin papyrus 6619, and to the Rhind papyrus, Schack-Schackenburg suggests the omission of a certain word introduced into the text through an error, as he believed: Peet (1923, 2) approves of this. But see the important correction of this in Gunn 1926 [1923], p. 132.