I never said Nabateans under Aretas IV ruled Damascus. You are confusing me with TedM.1. Is there any evidence that the Nabateans ruled Damascus. No. You originally said 'why not?'
I have evidence that Agrippa II named high priests while Romans ruled Jerusalem. I know, that's not it, but similar situation.2. Is there any evidence that ethnarchs were associated with or appointed by a foreign king while the Romans ruled a city? No. You say 'why not?'
No evidence here. But the Jewish ethnarchs and the Nabatean ethnarch might not be subject to the same process for nomination.3. Is there any evidence that the ethnarch of the Jewish community at Alexandria appointed by King Agrippa? No. You say 'why not?'
Cordially, Bernard