[Footnote 15: Found only at the end of words in our fragment. Its use in the body of a word is, however, very ancient.]
[Footnote 16: The _C_ invariably has the two dots as well as the superior horizontal stroke.]
2. Technical or recurrent terms which occur in the colophons at the end of each book and at the end of letters, as:
·EXP· = EXPLICIT ·INC· = INCIPIT LIB· = LIBER VAL· = VALE[17]
[Footnote 17: The abbreviation is indicated by a stroke above the letters as well as by a dot after them.]
3. Purely arbitrary suspensions which occur only in the index of addresses preceding each book, suspensions which would never occur in the body of the text, as: SUETON TRANQUE,[18] UESTRIC SPURINN·
[Footnote 18: An ancestor of our manuscript must have had TRANQ·, which was wrongly expanded to TRANQUE.]
4. Omitted _M_ at the end of a line, omitted _N_ at the end of a line, the omission being indicated by means of a horizontal stroke, thickened at either end, which is placed over the space immediately following the final vowel.[19] This omission may occur in the middle of a word but only at the end of a line.
[Footnote 19: This is a sign of antiquity. After the sixth century the _M_ or _N_stroke is usually placed above the vowel. The practice of confining the omission of _M_ or _N_ to the end of a line is a characteristic of our very oldest manuscripts. Later manuscripts omit _M_ or _N_ in the middle of a line and in the middle of a word. No distinction is made in our manuscript between omitted _M_ and omitted _N_. Some ancient manuscripts make a distinction. Cf. Traube, _Nomina Sacra_, pp. 179, 181, 183, 185, final column of each page; and W.M. Lindsay, _Notae Latinae_, pp. 342 and 345.]
[Sidenote: _Authenticity of the six leaves_]
The sudden appearance in America of a portion of a very ancient classical manuscript unknown to modern editors may easily arouse suspicion in the minds of some scholars. Our experience with the "Anonymus Cortesianus" has taught us to be wary,[20] and it is natural to demand proof establishing the genuineness of the new fragment.[21] As to the six leaves of the Morgan Pliny, it may be said unhesitatingly that no one with experience of ancient Latin manuscripts could entertain any doubt as to their genuineness. The look and feel of the parchment, the ink, the script, the titles, colophons, ornamentation, corrections, and later additions, all bear the indisputable marks of genuine antiquity.