Helpful Saints Corpus Reader
Kebra Nagast
Budge 1922 — retained OCR sections
Unverified edition · Chapter 22
Reading language: eng · Original language (catalog): Ancient source language(s)
Reading display
Display preferences stay on this browser when storage is available.
Resume in the Library keeps only your last public work, edition and passage on this browser.
Saved Places
Saved only on this browser. Places do not synchronize between devices. Only work, edition and passage identifiers are kept; passage text is not stored.
Remove all Saved Places from this browser? Resume reading and display preferences will stay.
Chapter 22 · All reading sections
Choose an edition
Kebra Nagast — Budge — Section 22
which it was compiled. Dillmann, the first European scholar who had read the whole book in the original Ethiopic, contented himself with saying in 1848, “ de vero compositionis tempore nihil liquet ” ( Catalogus , p. 72), but later he thought it might be as old as the fourteenth century. Zotenberg ( Catalogue , p. 222) was inclined to think that “ it was composed soon after the restoration of the so-called Solomonic line of kings,” that is to say, soon after the throne of Ethiopia was oc¬ cupied by Tasfa ’tyasus,or Yekuno ’Amlak, who reigned from a.m. 6762-77, i.e. a.d. 1270-1285. A Colophon (see pp. 228, 229), which is found in several of the Codices of the Kebra Nagast in Oxford, London and Paris, states that the Ethiopic text was translated from the Arabic version, which, in turn, was translated from the Coptic. The Arabic translation was, it continues, made by ’Abu ’l-£Izz and ’Abu ’1-Faraj, in the “ year of mercy ” 409, during the reign of Gabra Maskal (£Amda Seyon I), i.e. between a.d. 1314 and 1344, when George was Patriarch of Alexandria. These statements are clear enough and definite enough, yet Dillmann did not believe them, but thought that the whole Colophon was the result of the imagination of some idle scribe (ab otioso quodam librario inventa). The statements about the Ethiopic version being made from the Coptic through the Arabic, he treated as obvious fictions (plane fictitia esse), and he condemned the phrasing of the Colophon because he considered its literary style in¬ ferior to that used in the narrative of the Kebra Nagast itself (dictio hujus subscriptionis pessima est, et ab oratione eleganti libri ipsius quam maxime differt). Zotenberg ( Catalogue , p. 223, col. 1) a very competent scholar, saw no reason for doubting the truth of the statements in the Colophon generally, but thought it possible that an Arab author might have supplied the fundamental facts of the narrative, and that the author xxx Introduction
Study this passage
Compare this section in another edition
Read the editions separately. Matching section labels do not establish word or phrase alignment.
Only publicly readable editions are offered. An original-language parallel requires an admitted source edition; a retained private witness is not displayed here.
About this edition
Recorded completeness: Existing approved legacy passages only; completeness against full historical work UNVERIFIED. Available reading sections are listed below.
Available body coverage · eng
28 chapter/reading unit(s) · 28 nonempty passage record(s).
Supported chapters & passages
- Chapter 1 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 2 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 3 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 4 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 5 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 6 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 7 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 8 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 9 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 10 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 11 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 12 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 13 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 14 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 15 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 16 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 17 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 18 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 19 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 20 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 21 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 22 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 23 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 24 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 25 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 26 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 27 · 1 passage record(s)
- Chapter 28 · 1 passage record(s)
Body coverage is separate from textual verification. Counts do not establish complete chapters or textual completeness.
Evidence Intelligence
Know what kind of evidence you are looking at.
Helpful Saints keeps direct biblical text, language evidence, ancient witnesses, historical context, research models, and open questions visibly distinct.Direct Biblical Text
The explicit wording and literary context of canonical Scripture.
Original-Language Evidence
Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, morphology, lemmas, semantic range, and textual comparison.
Ancient Witness
Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, ancient Jewish literature, and early Christian writings—clearly classified.
Historical Context
Geography, material culture, chronology ranges, institutions, customs, and reception history.
Research Model
A configured chronology, theological synthesis, typological pattern, or proposed relationship.
Open Question
Evidence is incomplete, debated, or insufficient for a settled conclusion.