The Commentary on the Psalms is a monumental work which for more than thirty years consumed the energies of Augustine as exegete. The extraordinary quantity of this work as well as the exceptional number of manuscript traditions which it has spawned has delayed until now the production of a critical edition carried out according to the exacting criteria of modern textual criticism. The part of the editorial project which the Vienna Academy entrusted to the Patristic Institute, the «Augustinianum» (en. Ps. 101-150) has now been completed in five volumes published in the CSEL series (voll. 95, 1-5). The editor’s intention was to incorporate the progress made in modern textual criticism to the specific case of Augustine’s treatment of the Psalms, giving due attention to the peculiar characteristics both of the text and of the manuscript tradition.

Severian of Gabala’s homilies and Pseudo-Theodoret’s Quaestiones et responsiones ad Orthodoxos (CPG 6285; = QRO) exhibit some notable parallels. Such links show that a marginal current of the Antiochene school was still thriving by the end of the 5th century, i.e. the most probable date of QRO.

Gregory of Nyssa’s Laudatio altera S. Stephani Protomartyris (CPG 3187) has been critically published by Lendle from the two extant copies of the long recension, mostly disregarding the unique Greek witness of a short form which is attributed to John Chrysostom. Following the unveiling of an Armenian translation of the short recension, also attributed to Chrysostom, the paper examines its critical role, its links with the short Greek form and proposes a revision of Lendle’s text.

Contrary to the position sustained in recent German- and English-language studies, the Author of this note rejects the suitability of using the modern and generic term “Homoianism” to describe the different subordinationist doctrinal positions circulating during the second half of the fourth century. In the case of Eudoxius, Valens, Urascius and Ulfila, among others, it is more appropriate to continue to speak in terms of “Arianism”, as their Nicene opponents had already realized, not without reason.