<p>This paper presents a new solution to the preface paradox (Makinson, 1965). It makes use of a fragmented account of justification, and thus, unlike existing solutions, employs the central concept involved in the paradox—justification. First, I present the original paradox, and recall a prominent family of solutions to it—solutions that make use of fragmentation accounts of belief. I argue that, while fragmented belief solutions go in the right direction, what does the work in this paradox is not belief but justification. I then present my account of fragmented justification. I show how it solves the preface paradox in a novel way and I provide reasons for why it is a good solution. The upshot of my account of fragmented justification is that the justification relations that hold between pieces of evidence and the propositions they justify are fragment-relative.</p>