. At the end, Harriot makes the same observation as on Add MS 6785
<ref target="http://echo.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/ECHOdocuView?url=/permanent/library/KN1CRTZ2/&start=180&viewMode=image&pn=187">
f. </ref>
, that the method of solving the equation is essentially the same as the 'ancient' method, that is, the traditional method taught in every algebra text. </s>
<s xml:space="preserve">]</s>
</p>
</div>
<head xml:space="preserve" xml:lang="lat">
Alia operatio per
<emph style="st">[???]</emph>
<emph style="super">solam</emph>
proportionem [???] ad illam [???] quod
<lb/>
prop. 12. effectionum geometricarum
<lb/>
[
<emph style="bf">Translation: </emph>
Another method using a single proportion [???] to that [???] done in Proposition 12 of the
<emph style="it">Effectionum geomtericarum</emph>
. </head>
<p xml:lang="">
<s xml:space="preserve">
Dico quod:
<lb/>
Nam:
<lb/>
per const:
<lb/>
et per invers:
<lb/>
<lb/>
[
<emph style="bf">Translation: </emph>
I say that:
<lb/>
For:
<lb/>
By constrcution
<lb/>
And by ]</s>
</p>
<p xml:lang="">
<s xml:space="preserve">
A lemma.
<lb/>
Ergo.
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
, vel maior,
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
<lb/>
mminor,
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
<lb/>
æqualis,
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
<lb/>
sit
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
maior
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
:
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
maior
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
; et
<lb/>
<math>
<mstyle>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
maior
<math>
<mstyle>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
et
<lb/>
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
<mo>+</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
maior,
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
<mo>+</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
.
<lb/>
quod contra hypothesin
<lb/>
Ergo
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
non maior
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
.
<lb/>
sit
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
minor
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
:
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
minor
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
; et
<lb/>
<math>
<mstyle>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
minor
<math>
<mstyle>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
, et
<lb/>
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
<mo>+</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
, minor,
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
<mo>+</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
.
<lb/>
quod contra hypothesin
<lb/>
Ergo
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
non minor
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
.
<lb/>
Ergo:
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
<lb/>
[
<emph style="bf">Translation: </emph>
A. Lemma.
<lb/>
Therefore,
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
is either greater than, less than, or equal to
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
.
<lb/>
Suppose
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
is greater than
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
; then
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
is greater than
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
, and
<math>
<mstyle>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
is greater than
<math>
<mstyle>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
, and
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
<mo>+</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
is greater than
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
<mo>+</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
, which is against the hypothesis.
<lb/>
Therefore
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
is not greater than
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
.
<lb/>
Suppose
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
is less than
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
; then
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
is less than
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
, and
<math>
<mstyle>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
is less than
<math>
<mstyle>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
, and
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
<mo>+</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
is less than
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
<mo>+</mo>
<mn>2</mn>
<mi>c</mi>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
, which is against the hypothesis.
<lb/>
Therefore
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
is not less than
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
.
<lb/>
Therefore
<math>
<mstyle>
<mi>h</mi>
<mo>=</mo>
<mi>a</mi>
</mstyle>
</math>
. </s>
</p>
<p xml:lang="">
<s xml:space="preserve">
praxis ista per compendium
<lb/>
eadem omnino est cum
<lb/>
[
<emph style="bf">Translation: </emph>
The practice of this more briefly is exactly the same as the ancient ]</s>