# Were people aware of the “mistakes” in Euclid's Elements before the start of the formalization of Mathematics?

For example, in proposition 1, Euclid assumes that the instersection of the two circles exist, when he shouldn't have. This, among many other things, was corrected quite recently (by Hilbert and others, I believe). Were these mistakes only found out then? Did no one mention them for over 2000 years?

• It is true that Euclid's Elements do not meet 20th-century standards of rigor. But then, hardly any19th-century (or earlier) mathematics does. And why should it? E. H. Moore put it this way: "Sufficient unto the day is the rigor thereof." – Gerald Edgar Jul 10 '19 at 22:10