¶ The 19. Theoreme. The 22. Proposition. If vpon a rationall line be applied the square of a mediall line: the other side that maketh the breadth thereof shalbe rationall, and incommensura∣ble in length to the line wherupon the parallelograme is applied.
SVppose that A be a mediall line, and let BC be a line rationall, and vpon the line BC describe a rectangle parallelograme equall vnto the square of the line A, and let the same be BD making in breadth the line CD. Then I say that the line CD is rationall and incōmensurable in length vnto the line CB. For forasmuch as A is a mediall line, it containeth in power (by the 21. of the tenth) a rectangle parallelograme comprehen∣ded vnder rationall right lines commensurable in power onely. Suppose that is containe in power the parallelograme GF: and by supposition it also containeth in power the parallelo∣grame BD. Wherefore the parallelo∣grame
BD is equall vnto the parallelo∣grame GF: and it is also equiangle vn∣to it, for that they are ech rectāgle. But in parallelogrames equall and equiangle the sides which containe the equall an∣gles, are reciprocall (by the 14. of the sixt): Wherfore what proportiō the line BC hath to the line EG, the same hath the line EF to the line CD. Therefore (by the
22. of the sixt) as the square of the line BC is to the square of the line EG, so is the square of the line EF to the square of the line CD. But the square of the line BC is commensurable vnto the square of the line EG (by supposition). For either of them is rationall. Wherefore (by the the 10. of the tenth) the square of the line EF is commensurable vnto the square of the lin
•• CD. But the square of the line EF is rationall. Wherefore the square of the line CD is likewise ratio∣nall. Wherefore the line CD is rational. And forasmuch as the line EF is inco
••mensurable in length vnto the line EG (for they are supposed to be commensurable in power onely). But as the line EF is to the line EG, so (by the assumpt going before) is the square of the line EF to the parallelograme which is contained vnder the lines EF and EG. Wherefore (by the
10. of the tenth) the square of the line EF is incommensurable vnto the parallelograme which is contained vnder the lines FE and EG. But vnto the square of the line EF the square of the line CD is commensurable, for it is proued that
••ither of them is