This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.

As a contribution to further investigation, the Ethiopic, Arabic, and Saidic versions are now offered to students of this problem. The Ethiopic takes precedence, partly on account of the extended and peculiar character of the text, and partly from indications—shared with the Latin version—of a possibly earlier form of the canons. Meanwhile, the Arabic text separates the Ethiopic from the Saidic to show that the Arabic is derived from the Saidic and not from the Ethiopic. Professor Guidi strongly maintains that the Ethiopic was translated from the Arabic, though he admits that the Arabic manuscript from which the translation was made has not yet come to light. Lower Egypt furnishes another version of the canons, translated from the Saidic dialect in the nineteenth century, presenting no important difference except an arrangement into seven books. This Bohairic version was edited and rendered into English by Tattam from a manuscript formerly belonging to the Duke of Northumberland, now in the Royal Library of Berlin; but the text is so recent—and therefore corrupt—that many inaccuracies occur, and often, where the version appears to differ from the Saidic, no such variation actually exists.
Lagarde edited the Saidic version under the name of Canones Ecclesiastici Latin: "Ecclesiastical Canons." in his Ægyptiaca, and Professor Steindorff and Dr. Leipoldt have translated the greater part of the text into German.