The _Confession_ is preserved in the _Codex Armachanus_ (ff. 22-24) along with other Patrician documents which will claim our attention. But the text is not complete. Considerable portions are missing, which are found in later MSS. There is nothing in these portions to excite suspicion of their genuineness; in fact we have positive evidence that one of these missing parts was read in the text of the _Confession_ in the seventh century, for Tírechán (310₅) refers to a passage (372₃₃) which is not found in the Armagh MS., and on the other hand there is not the slightest reason to suppose that the text of these later MSS. does not represent the full extent of the original work.[227] The question arises, How are the omissions in the oldest MS. to be accounted for? The theory that the scribe omitted passages which were illegible in his exemplar cannot be seriously entertained, as there are no proofs to support it. The statements made by Todd,[228] Haddan and Stubbs,[229] and Zimmer[230] as to the obscurity or defectiveness of the copy used by the Armagh scribe are not borne out by the alleged evidence.[231] The nature and subject of the omitted passages give us no clue, for, though it might be just conceivable that one passage was deliberately left out because it refers to a fault committed by Patrick in his boyhood, the omission of the other portions cannot be similarly explained; and an explanation which does not apply to them all will carry no conviction. It seems that the imperfect state of this text of the _Confession_ may be due to no more recondite cause than the haste and impatience of the scribe to finish his task. There may have been some external motive for such haste and carelessness; and as a matter of fact there is positive evidence that he stopped before his proposed task was finished. The heading of the _Confession_ is: _Incipiunt Libri Sancti Patricii Episcopi_. This shows, as has often been observed, that the scribe intended to copy both the _Confession_ and the _Letter_ against Coroticus. But he did not fulfil his purpose; he never copied the _Letter_. The _Confession_ ends on f. 24 vᵒ b; the second column is a blank; and therefore it is certain that the _Letter_ was never included in this MS. Further, the paragraph[232] which the scribe has attached to the end of the _Confession_ ought, possibly, to have followed the _Letter_, though of course the autograph volumen may have contained only the _Confession_. It seems then most simple to suppose that the scribe was hurried, and that in writing out the _Confession_ he “scamped” his work for the same reason which impelled him to omit copying the _Letter_.