Per the title, what are some of the oldest (non-analytic) geometry books out there with (unsolved) exercises? Maybe there are some hidden gems from before the 20th century out there.



Reference request: Oldest (non-analytic) geometry books with (unsolved) exercises?
These are the two oldest US geometry texts with unsolved exercises:


![](https://ilorentz.org/beenakker/MO/Greenleaf.png) ![](https://ilorentz.org/beenakker/MO/Chauvenet.png)


[Elements of geometry; with practical applications to mensuration](https://archive.org/details/elementsofgeomet00greerich/page/n6) Greenleaf, 1858.


[Treatise on elementary geometry](https://archive.org/details/chauvenetstreat04byergoog/page/n12) Chauvenet, 1887.


An older geometry text with solved exercises from France,


[Éléments de Géométrie](https://archive.org/details/elemensdegeometr00clai/page/n6) Clairaut, 1741 ([English translation](https://archive.org/details/elementsgeometr00claigoog/page/n9))


the practical approach of Clairaut received this contemporary critique:


Williamson, in his edition of Euclid, 1781, criticises Clairaut as follows: "Elements of geometry carefully weeded of every proposition tending to demonstrate another; all lying so handy that you may pick and choose with- out ceremony. 'This is useful in fortification;' 'you cannot play at billiards without this. ' 'You only look through a telescope like la Hottentot until this proposition is read,' with many such powerful strokes of rhetoric to the same purpose. And upon such terms, and with such inducements, who would not be a mathematician? Who would go to work with all that
apparatus which I have described as necessary for understanding Euclid, when he has only to take a pleasant walk with Clairaut upon the flowery banks of some delightful river, and there see, with his own eyes, that he must learn to draw a perpendicular before he can tell how broad it is?  

[source](https://www.jstor.org/stable/2973645)


