no English translation located. No published English translation of this text was located in the catalogues and series checked. Where only a non-English rendering or a translation of a daughter version exists, it is recorded below and does not close the gap. Treat this as a gap candidate, not as proof that no translation exists; the evidence names every source checked.
Why this is in the register
The Beta Masaheft record has no edition, no translation and no abstract (https://raw.githubusercontent.com/BetaMasaheft/Works/master/5001-6000/LIT5946CommAnAp.xml). It is one of a series of fourteen such commentaries, LIT5946-LIT5959, one for each anaphora of the Missal (e.g. LIT5949 on the Anaphora of Mary, LIT5950 on the 318, LIT5958 on Dioscorus), none of which carries an edition or translation in its record. No English translation located in HOLLIS Primo ('Ethiopian liturgical commentary Amharic', https://hollis.harvard.edu/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Ethiopian%20liturgical%20commentary%20Amharic&tab=Everything&search_scope=MyInst_and_CI&vid=01HVD_INST:HVD2&offset=0 and a Crossref query for an Ethiopian commentary on the anaphora returned only the Daoud chapter records.
No translation of any of the fourteen records was located, so this record stands for an untranslated group. Because the commentaries are in Amharic rather than Ge'ez, they fall outside what the existing English Missals render, which is the Ge'ez text. Whether the fourteen records describe one continuous commentary or independent compositions was not established.
Existing translations recorded
None recorded in English. Non-English versions, where they exist, are named in the evidence above.
Cite: Tergwame, “Amharic Commentary on the Anaphora of the Apostles”
(ethiopic gap dossier), 2026.
https://naxiai.com/christian/gaps/ethiopic-anon-commentary-anaphora-apostles