This, to a large extent, Vollmer and Giarratano have accomplished. Vollmer, too, rejects the idea invented by the humanists, that Apicius had a collaborator, editor or commentator in the person of Cœlius or Cælius. This name, so Vollmer claims, has been added to the book by medieval scholars without any reason except conjecture for such action. They have been misled by the mutilated title: Api... Cæ...; Vollmer reconstructs this title as follows: API[cii artis magiri- (or) opsartyti-] CÆ[libri X] Remember, it is the title page only that is thus mutilated. The ten books or chapters bear the full name of Apicius, never at any time does the name of Cœlius appear in the text, or at the head of the chapters. The _Archetypus_, with the book and the chapters carefully indexed and numbered as they were, with each article neatly titled, the captions and capital letters rubricated--heightened by red color, and with its proper spacing of the articles and chapters must once have been a representative example of the art of book making as it flourished towards the end of the period that sealed the fate of the Roman empire, when books of a technical nature, law books, almanacs, army lists had been developed to a high point of perfection. Luxurious finish, elaborate illumination point to the fact that our book (the Vatican copy) was intended for the use in some aristocratic household. THE EXCERPTS OF VINIDARIUS And now, from a source totally different than the two important manuscripts so much discussed here, we receive additional proof of the authenticity of Apicius. In the _codex Salmasianus_ (cf. III, Apiciana) we find some thirty formulæ attributed to Apicius, entitled: _Apici excerpta a Vinidario vir. inl._ They have been accepted as genuine by Salmasius and other early scholars. Schuch incorporated the _excerpta_ with his Apicius, placing the formulæ in what he believed to be the proper order. This course, for obvious reasons, is not to be recommended. To be sure, the _excerpta_ are Apician enough in character, though only a few correspond to, or are actual duplicates of, the Apician precepts. They are additions to the stock of authentic Apician recipes. As such, they may not be included but be appended to the traditional text. The _excerpta_ encourage the belief that at the time of Vinidarius (got. Vinithaharjis) about the fifth century there must have been in circulation an Apicius (collection of recipes) much more complete than the one handed down to us through Fulda. It is furthermore interesting to note that the _excerpta_, too, are silent about Cœlius.