During recent years the trend of New Testament textual studies has been toward the identification and establishment of local texts. If these be old, they serve as witnesses to the original text, if late, they are helpful in showing the trends of textual development and add to our knowledge of the history of the Church. We are far removed from the New Testament studies and problems of 1898, when Grenfell and Hunt published the first papyrus fragment of the New Testament, Oxyrhynchus 2 containing Matthew 1, 1–20.

The fragments published in the present article were obtained during a visit to the Coptic monasteries in the Wâdi Naṭrûn, which was made in February, 1923. They are all of paper, and they are all in the Bohairic dialect. One of them (Fragment IV) was written in the thirteenth century, and the rest are of the fourteenth. Fragments I, II, III, V, and VI were once parts of lectionaries; and Fragment IV may also have belonged originally to a book of lessons, but in this case it is impossible to speak with certainty.

The problem of Philo's Exposition of the Law and of its relation to the treatise De vita Mosis has, it seems to me, not yet been solved.

The Exposition is one of Philo's three great series of commentaries on the Pentateuch. It comprised originally De opificio mundi, De Abrahamo, De Isaaco, De Iacobo, De Josepho, De decalogo, De specialibus legibus, De virtutibus, and De praemiis et poenis, of which all are preserved but De Isaaco and De Iacobo.

The following Armenian text of Athanasius's Letter to Epictetus is found in two manuscripts of the Mechitarists at Vienna:

A. Cod. 629, ff. 66a–73b, 19th century, notragir, copied from an 18th century archetype at Ispahan.

B. Cod. 648, ff. 102b–105b, paper, 14th century, bolorgir, without word division and badly worm-eaten.

The version is different from that published by Tajezi, and belongs to an Armenian corpus of Athanasian writings compiled early in the eighth century. I have added a collation with Ludwig's edition of the Greek, but have deliberately refrained from discussing at length its relation to other textual authorities.