Natural History

on parchment, assigned to the XIIIth century, bought at Bologna in 1459; the other (k¹), on paper, of unknown origin, is thought to have been written in the XIVth century. I have noted their readings for the preface.
Finally, in one place—I ind. IX (35—42)—I have cited
pal. Chat.: a few leaves of a palimpsest codex of the IVth or Vth century, which, having been discovered in the Cassian codex of the Institutes, 24, of the library of the Major Seminary of Autun, Aemilius Chatelain described in the Journal des savants of the year 1900, pp. 44—48.

It remains for me to add a few things about Book I, in which the indices (tables of contents) are contained; for the critical condition of these is singular and different from the other books, and for those who wish to know it thoroughly, I am content to have recommended what Detlefsen discussed very subtly, as is his wont, in Philol. XXVIII, pp. 701—716.
And indeed, the indices were included by Pliny himself in the first book and appended to the preface (cf. § 33): a method that is preserved today in the codices d T. In the most ancient codices, however, in order to provide for the convenience of the readers, the indices were doubled in such a way that they existed both written collectively in Book I and separately, each one prefixed to its own book. Examples of this are the codices F R E, in which they are repeated before the individual books (F^a R^a E^a). In the others, however, Book I is either lost, as in M O B D (V), or omitted, as in a, and there remain—insofar as they are intact—only M^a O^a B^a D^a (V^a) a^a: thus, therefore, it was more correct that they should be noted to avoid errors, unless it had seemed better, for the sake of brevity, to use simple sigla. The indices are entirely missing in codex p. But not even in F R E does the double record of all of them survive intact: for the latter part of the index of XXXIII and the former of XXXIV have perished in them; furthermore, indices are missing in F II—XI (77), in R XXXV—XXXVII, but in E many things can no longer be read; they are missing in F^a II and III, in R^a II(?). XIV—XIX. XXI (in whose place is XX). XXIII. XXIV. XXXVII, in E^a II. III. V. VI. VIII—XIII. XV—XIX. XXI (in whose place is XX). XXII. XXIV and the last ones from XXXIII onwards. (Concerning M cf. Vol. II p. XXXIII, concerning O and B Vol. V p. VIII and IV). I was permitted to use the full collations of the codices whose sigla I indicated in the upper margin of the pages (a up to XXI); I took the readings of the others from the edition of Detlefsen, who, by design—which is greatly to be regretted—offers a very sparse selection.
Given such a condition of resources, and because of the great multitude of names and numbers, often corrupted in an incredible manner, and with the order of the headings also sometimes disturbed or changed—which was done in d T intentionally and with a certain consistency, so that the indices might be reconciled more with the text of the books—it is not surprising that Book I is the most laborious and