The Book of Enoch

Chap. 14, 13 tryphe zoes delight of life = feg'a ḥejwat GMQU — feg'â wa-ḥejwat
,, 14, 21 idein to prosopon to see the face = re’ejja gaṣṣû GQTU — râ'ja gaṣṣû
,, 15, 5 hina me ekleipe that it may not fail = kama î-jenteg GTU (< MQ) — kama jetgabar
,, 17, 3 topon ton phosteron place of the luminaries = makânâta berûhânât GMQ, O — makânâta berûhâna
,, 18, 11 stylous tou pyros pillars of fire = a'mâda esât G and T (after corr.) — a'mâda samâj za-esât
,, 19, 1 mechri until = eska MT, BCHNO — esma
,, 21, 2 oute ouranon epano neither heaven above = î-samâja lâ'la GMQU — î-samâja le'ûla
,, 21, 7 ho topos the place = makânû I — wasanû
,, 22, 3 eis auto touto into this very thing = lôtû zentû I — lômû ellôntû
,, 22, 9 ou . . . en auto not . . . in it = za . . . balâ'lêhû GQ — ze . . . balâ'lêhû
,, 26, 3 hypseloteron toutou higher than this = za-jenaweḥ em-ze Q — za-j. kama-ze
,, 89, 43 egeiren he raised up = anṣe'a G — tanṣe'a
,, 99, 7 non secundum scientiam not according to knowledge = wa-î-ba-temhert GGᵃQTU — wa-ba-meḥrâmât

There repeats itself here, therefore, the same phenomenon that was also observed with the other books of the Abyssinian Old Testament canon 1) Cf. Dillmann, Biblia V. T. aeth. Ethiopic Old Testament Vol. I, Critical Appar. p. 4 ff.; Vol. II, fasc. 1, Critical Appar. p. 3 ff. Cornill, Ezechiel, Leipzig 1886, p. 36 ff. Prätorius, Art. aethiop. Bibelübersetzungen Ethiopic Bible Translations in Realencycl. f. protest. Theol. Real Encyclopedia for Protestant Theology III, 87 ff., namely that there is a double text recension: an older one, which adheres faithfully to the Greek text and may be considered a generally successful and happy reproduction of the same, with many forms and constructions belonging to an older language period, but also of great negligence and incorrectness in grammatical matters, especially in the use of gender and number, and almost without any division of the text; and a younger one, whose endeavor is to improve the many real or supposed errors of the older one, more pleasing and flowing in language, more correct in expression, and more practical for use through chapter division. A third recension, in which the older text form has been changed according to the Hebrew, does not come into consideration here. This younger recension is the work of the Abyssinian Mamherân teachers/scholars, who probably undertook the revision of the Bible text from the 16th century on and produced a Vulgata common version, which then passed into general use. It is possible, indeed even probable 2) Dillmann, Bibl. Vol. II, 1, Critical Appar. p. 4., that they occasionally drew on Greek [manuscripts] in doing so.