PREFACE

The same Wassius, to add this in passing, had compared Palladius with three written books. See the note on I, title 28, section 2. It happens well and fortunately that the exemplars of most of the writers still exist today, by whose faith the reading of Palladius had to be tested. For having borrowed little from Cato and Varro, he owes the most to Columella, whom he seems to have wanted to slander at the beginning of the work. However, as much as one must attribute to the authority of Columella in interpreting and correcting Palladius, so much did Palladius himself provide help in return for correcting the books of Columella. Pontedera first performed this critical work of comparing and correcting both writers in an excellent manner, an example which Gesner did not imitate everywhere. Indeed, less diligence of the latter is seen in Palladius than in the remaining writers. Thus, he omitted a notable supplement derived from the editiones principes first editions at I, title 6, section 17, which I taught was translated from Columella and restored to Palladius, although with no support from the more recent codices or from Crescentius or Vincent. For this reason, many passages remained to be interpreted and corrected from a comparison with Columella. If there was no defect or obscurity in Palladius’s speech, I briefly and simply indicated the source to which readers should go. There are still, however, some passages in Palladius, indeed translated from Columella, but faulty and lacunose, for the restoration of which none of the written books sufficed.