perhaps is that T is the earliest form in which the Gospel came to Syria, that in Syr^{cu} and Syr^{sin} we have two attempts to exhibit T in the form of a version of the separate Gospels which were not generally accepted, while Syr^{sch} actually succeeded and passed into general use. The interest attaching to this question may be learned from the form in which the text of Matthew i. 16 is given in these witnesses. Syr^{sch} agrees exactly with our present Greek text, but Syr^{cu} presents a form which, when translated into Latin, reads, _Joseph cui desponsata virgo Maria genuit Jesum Christum_. Now, the only Greek manuscripts that present a form corresponding to this are four minuscules, 346, 556, 624 and 626, which differ in this respect even from the other members of the Ferrar Group to which they belong. In these four manuscripts the verse reads, Ἰωσὴφ ᾧ μνηστευθῆσα (_sic_) παρθένος Μαριὰμ ἐγέννησεν Ἰησοῦν τὸν λεγόμενον Χριστόν. In the Latin, however, this text is represented by a number of the oldest manuscripts, seven at least, one of which omits the word _virgo_, while two have _peperit_ instead of _genuit_, and τὸν λεγόμενον is omitted. But in Syr^{sin} we find: _Joseph: Joseph autem cui desponsata (erat) virgo Maria genuit Jesum Christum_. The passage is similarly cited in the recently published _Dialogue of Timotheus and Aquila_,[85] along with two other forms, thus:—Ἰακὼβ ἐγέννησεν τὸν Ἰωσὴφ τὸν ἄνδρα Μαρίας, ἐξ ἧς ἐγεννήθη Ἰησοῦς ὁ λεγόμενος Χριστὸς, καὶ Ἰωσὴφ ἐγέννησεν τὸν Ἰησοῦν τὸν λεγόμενον Χριστόν. The exact wording of Tatian can no longer be determined, but it is evident that of these three forms in which the verse is found, only one or none can be the original. If we had no more than our oldest uncials or the great body of our minuscules to go by, no one could have the slightest suspicion that in our Greek text all is not in perfect order. But here, in an old Syriac fragment from the far East, there suddenly appears a reading which is also found in Latin witnesses from the far West, and which is confirmed by four solitary Greek manuscripts, written probably in Calabria at the close of the Middle Ages. How are these facts connected, and how do they stand to the other two readings, that of the common Greek text, and that of the Lewis-Syriac? The history of the text of the New Testament presents many such problems. [Sidenote: Philoxenus-Polycarp.]