Timaeus questions

[Constantinus Philo]

Tim., 17b: τὰ μὲν μεμνήμεθα, ὅσα δὲ μή, σὺ παρὼν ὑπομνήσεις: if I am not mistaken, this is a generic μη.

[Constantinus Philo]

μηχανωμένους ὅπως μηδείς ποτε τὸ γεγενημένον αὐτῶν ἰδίᾳ γνώσοιτο, νομιοῦσιν δὲ πάντες πάντας αὐτοὺς ὁμογενεῖς, ἀδελφὰς μὲν καὶ ἀδελφοὺς First, μηχανωμένους is probably wrong, or at least I cannot explain it (Archer-Hind's editions has mechanomenoi)
Second, these are two effort clauses with an opt in one and a F ind in the other. Any difference in meaning between them?

[Constantinus Philo]

ὡς ἐν κεφαλαίοις πάλιν ἐπανελθεῖν, is this an absolute infinitive?

[Constantinus Philo]

οὐδαμῶς, ἀλλὰ αὐτὰ ταῦτ᾽ ἦν τὰ λεχθέντα, ὦ Σώκρατες (Perseus). Cf this with Archer-Hind άλλὰ ταῦτὰ ταῦτ' ἦν, which is the correct version i think.

[Constantinus Philo]

εὖ λέγεις. ἀλλὰ δὴ ποῖον ἔργον τοῦτο Κριτίας οὐ λεγόμενον μέν, ὡς δὲ πραχθὲν ὄντως ὑπὸ τῆσδε τῆς πόλεως ἀρχαῖον διηγεῖτο κατὰ τὴν Σόλωνος ἀκοήν; Is this archaion an adj agreeing with ergon or is it an adv?

[Constantinus Philo]

ᾠκεῖτε δὴ οὖν νόμοις τε τοιούτοις χρώμενοι καὶ ἔτι μᾶλλον εὐνομούμενοι πάσῃ τε παρὰ πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὑπερβεβληκότες ἀρετῇ, καθάπερ εἰκὸς γεννήματα καὶ παιδεύματα θεῶν ὄντας. why is ontas in the acc? does it depend on eikos which usually takes Dat.?

[Constantinus Philo]

οὓς ἐμήνυσεν ἀφανεῖς ὄντας ἡ τῶν ἱερῶν γραμμάτων φήμη
this can be understood either as oration obliqua: those whom the sacred record revealed as extinct; or as an attribute, those who being extinct, the record revealed.

[Constantinus Philo]

κατὰ δὲ τὸν Σόλωνος λόγον τε καὶ νόμον εἰσαγαγόντα αὐτοὺς
Here A-Hind suggests δη instead of δε, saying that it reveals the true structure of the sentence. How?

[Constantinus Philo]

τῆς ἀμερίστου καὶ ἀεὶ κατὰ ταὐτὰ ἐχούσης οὐσίας καὶ τῆς αὖ περὶ τὰ σώματα γιγνομένης μεριστῆς τρίτον ἐξ ἀμφοῖν ἐν μέσῳ συνεκεράσατο οὐσίας εἶδος, How to understand this G at the beginning? or is it a kind of rhetoric figure? if it is replaced like τρίτον ἐξ ἀμφοῖν τῆς ἀμερίστου καὶ ἀεὶ κατὰ ταὐτὰ ἐχούσης οὐσίας καὶ τῆς αὖ περὶ τὰ σώματα γιγνομένης μεριστῆς ἐν μέσῳ συνεκεράσατο οὐσίας εἶδος, it becomes more clear.

[Constantinus Philo]

μίαν ἀφεῖλεν τὸ πρῶτον ἀπὸ παντὸς μοῖραν, μετὰ δὲ ταύτην ἀφῄρει διπλασίαν ταύτης, τὴν δ᾽ αὖ τρίτην ἡμιολίαν μὲν τῆς δευτέρας, τριπλασίαν δὲ τῆς πρώτης, τετάρτην δὲ τῆς δευτέρας διπλῆν, πέμπτην δὲ τριπλῆν τῆς τρίτης, τὴν δ᾽ ἕκτην τῆς πρώτης ὀκταπλασίαν, ἑβδόμην δ᾽ ἑπτακαιεικοσιπλασίαν τῆς πρώτης: μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα συνεπληροῦτο
Impf and ao used in the same context ἀφεῖλεν / ἀφῄρει
article used with some ordinal numbers and not used with some others

[Constantinus Philo]

ἵνα δ᾽ εἴη μέτρον ἐναργές τι πρὸς ἄλληλα βραδυτῆτι καὶ τάχει καὶ τὰ περὶ τὰς ὀκτὼ φορὰς πορεύοιτο, it makes no sense to me, A-H has ἵνα δ'εἴη μέτρον ἐναργές τι πρὸς ἄλληλα βραδυτῆτι καὶ τάχει καθ' ἃ περὶ τὰς ὀκτὼ φορὰς πορεύοιτο which looks like correct.

[Constantinus Philo]

τὴν περὶ τὸν διὰ παντὸς πόλον τεταμένον, this is from Burnet's edition on Perseus; I cannot see how to fix this ten here into the context; again, A-H does not have it.