Until, liowever, we have a complete and critical edition of the Eth. version, it will not be possible to settle finally the above questions. Even iJill- maiin's edition (vols. i. ii. v.) is inadequate for this purpose, as vols. i. and ii. were completed before the best MSS were accessible.*
(B) New Testament. — Zotenberg (Cat. des MSS tth. de la bibliot. Nat. pp. 24, 25, 30, 1877) showed that there were two forms of text present in the MSS, — the first, that which was made from the Greek original ; the second, a corrected text. In the same year Dillmann (Herzog's RE i. pp. 203- 206) suggested that the numerous variations in the more widely read books of the NT, such as the Gospels, were due to tlie influence of the Copt, and Arab, versions. That such versions were known in Abyssinia he infers on the following grounds ; Prolegomena translated from the Arab, were prefixed to the NT writings ; names of NT books derivedfrom the Arab, displaced occasionally in later times the native nomenclature of the NT books; e.^. the Acts were called ^6raxw( = n/)d|eis), ^eveXaXioxi Abukalamis ('AiroitciXi/i/'is). The Arabic- Coptic SinOdus became early naturalized in the Eth. Church.
These hints of Dillmann's are further developed by Guidi, who pointed out that such corrections are deri\ ed from an Arab. tr. circulating in Egypt (Guidi, Le Traduzioni degli Evangelii in Arabo e in Ethiopieo, Accad. Lincei, 1888, p. 33 ff.). The MSS are affected in various degrees by these cor- rections. In some they appear side by side mth the original text.
V. Critical Value.— The Eth. version of the OT is generally a very faithful and verbal tr. of the Greek. It freqiiently reproduces the very order of the words. On the other hand, it is not possible to explain many of its readings by any extant Gr. text, and over-against the LXX it frequently attests a purer text. But its critical value cannot be determined until the questions discussed in the preceding section have been treated exhaustively.
As regards the NT, this version is related to the older type of text attested by the great Greek Vatican and Sinaitic MSS. It has also Western and Alexandrian and Syrian elements. But no critical text has yet been published.
vi. Date.— Dillmann (Herzog's RE i. 203, 204) confidently ascribes the Eth. version to the 4th and 5th centuries of our era, and regards it as constituting not only the oldest memorial but also the foundation of Eth. literature. This con- clusion he draws from the following facts : i. Christianity was already firmly established in the 5tli cent. ii. The poet and musician Jared had already produced a church hymnal in the 6th cent. iii. Chrysostomf (Horn, in Jolian., Opera
• For many interesting details see Reckendorf, * Ueber den Werth der altathiopischen Pentateuch-ubergetziing fiir die Reconstruction der SeptuafinU," in ZATW (1S.S7) pp. 61-90. Among other points he conlroverta Comill's view in his Cora- nientarv on Ezeljiel (p. 67 ff.), that the Ethiopic veraion il derived from the Heaychian recension of the LXX.
t i-X^k «<ti 1\,pin Keti A^yi^Tiu xaii 'Uioi *»* Ulprm mmi KldicrH . . . lit rrt ai'Tait /Mrgt^aXotTtt yX^rrxr r» wttpa rourm iey/xarm
ETH-KAZIN
EUNUCH
793
[Montfaucon], viii. p. 10) appears to have kno^vn of an Ktli. version of the Bilile. iv. The version is made directly from the Greek. Now, it vvjia only in the first period of Eth. literature that transla- tions were made from the Greek ; for after the appearance of the Arab, language in Kgypt, Eth. literature came under the sway of the Arabic.
The above views of Uillmann have recently been conlirmed by the peculiar title used for God in Sir .'Jl' 37-', i.e. Asldr. This shows that heathenism still prevailed when this book was translated (Dilliiiann, V.T. ^tliiopici, Tom. v. p. 117). Guidi assigns the version to the end of the 5th and the beginning of the 6th cent. Lagarde's view (Ankiindigung einer neuen Ausgabe der griech. Uebersetzung dcs A T.s, 18S2, p. 28), that the version was made in the 14th cent., not from a Gr. but from an Arab, or an Egyp. trans- lation of the original, is wholly contradicted by the evidence. We may safely assume that the version was completed before the 7th cent.
R. H. Charles.
ETH-KAZIN (pvij npp, where AV, misunderstand- ing the n locale, writes Ittahkazin, as in same verse Gittah hepher for Gath-heplier). — A town on the E. frontier of Zebulun, whose site has not been identified, Jos 19". J. A. Selbie.
ETHNAN (Wf).— A Judahite (1 Ch 4'). See Genealogy.
ETHNARCH (i0yipxv^).—ln 2 Co 11« it is stated that ' in Damascus the ethnarch under Aretas the king guarded the city of the Damascenes,' the word etnnarch being tr. in both AV and RV by Governor. Its exact meaning seems doubtful : it is used of Simon the high priest (1 Mac 14" 16'-'), of Hyrcanus (Jos. Anl. xiv. x. 2), and of Archelaus (Anl. xvn. xi. 4 ; JSJ u. vi. 3). It was also used for the governor of the Jews in Alex- andria (Strabo, an. Jos. Ant. XIV. vii. 2), and the head of the Jewish community in F'al. in the time of Origen (Origenes, Ep. ad A/ricanum, § 14). The last two instances suggest that the normal use of the word was for the ruler of a nation or f6i>os living with separate laws and customs amongst those of a diti'erent race. But the sense of the term seems to have widened, and it be- came a little superior to that of tetrarch, but inferior to that of king (Schiirer, ffJP n. ii. 244, etc.). A. C. Headlam.