{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_72761/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_72761","id":"gutenberg_72761","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/72761","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Ecclesiastes -- Commentaries","Category: Religion/Spirituality"],"text":"A COMMENTARY ON ECCLESIASTES\n\n\n\n\n \u250c\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2510\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Transcriber\u2019s Notes \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 The original text displayed the Authorized Version of \u2502\n \u2502 Scripture on the left page and the author\u2019s paraphrase on \u2502\n \u2502 the facing right page. For the electronic formats, these \u2502\n \u2502 two versions for each verse have been placed in two columns \u2502\n \u2502 followed immediately by the corresponding commentary. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Punctuation has been standardized. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Most of the non-common abbreviations used to save space in \u2502\n \u2502 printing have been expanded to the non-abbreviated form for \u2502\n \u2502 easier reading. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 The text may show quotations within quotations, all set \u2502\n \u2502 off by similar quote marks. The inner quotations have been \u2502\n \u2502 changed to alternate quote marks for improved readability. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Characters in small caps have been replaced by all caps. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Non-printable symbols have been presented in square brackets \u2502\n \u2502 with a description [Leo astrological sign] \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Non-printable characteristics have been given the following \u2502\n \u2502 Italic text: --> _text_ \u2502\n \u2502 emphasized text within \u2502\n \u2502 italics --> |text| \u2502\n \u2502 bold text: --> =text=. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 This book was written in a period when many words had \u2502\n \u2502 not become standardized in their spelling. Words may have \u2502\n \u2502 multiple spelling variations or inconsistent hyphenation in \u2502\n \u2502 the text. These have been left unchanged unless indicated \u2502\n \u2502 with a Transcriber\u2019s Note. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Index references have not been checked for accuracy. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 The symbol \u2018\u2021\u2019 indicates the description in parenthesis has \u2502\n \u2502 been added to an illustration. This may be needed if there \u2502\n \u2502 is no caption or if the caption does not describe the image \u2502\n \u2502 adequately. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Footnotes are identified in the text with a superscript \u2502\n \u2502 number and are shown immediately below the paragraph in which \u2502\n \u2502 they appear. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Transcriber\u2019s Notes are used when making corrections to the \u2502\n \u2502 text or to provide additional information for the modern \u2502\n \u2502 reader. These notes are identified by \u2666\u2660\u2665\u2663 symbols in the \u2502\n \u2502 text and are shown immediately below the paragraph in which \u2502\n \u2502 they appear. \u2502\n \u2514\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2518\n\n\n\n\n A COMMENTARY\n ON\n ECCLESIASTES\n\n\n\n\n RIVINGTONS\n\n London _Waterloo Place_\n Oxford _High Street_\n Cambridge _Trinity Street_\n\n\n\n\n A COMMENTARY\n ON\n ECCLESIASTES\n\n\n BY THE REV.\n\n THOMAS PELHAM DALE, M.A.\n\n LATE FELLOW OF SIDNEY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE,\n AND RECTOR OF ST. VEDAST WITH ST. MICHAEL LE QUERNE, LONDON.\n\n\n \u05d3\u05b4\u05bc\u05d1\u05b0\u05e8\u05b5\u05d9 \u05d7\u05b2\u05db\u05b8\u05de\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd \u05d5\u05b0\u05d7\u05b4\u05d9\u05d3\u05b9\u05ea\u05b8\u05dd\u05c3 \u05d9\u05b4\u05e8\u05b0\u05d0\u05b7\u05ea \u05d9\u05b0\u05d4\u05d5\u05b8\u05d4\u2666 \u05e8\u05b5\u05d0\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05ea \u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05ea\n\n \u2666 \u201c\u05d9\u05b0\u05d7\u05d5\u05b8\u05b9\u05d4\u201d replaced with \u201c\u05d9\u05b0\u05d4\u05d5\u05b8\u05d4\u201d\n\n RIVINGTONS\n London, Oxford, and Cambridge\n 1873\n\n\n\n\n TO\n\n JOHN HALL GLADSTONE, ESQ. PH.\u00a0D. F.R.S.\n\n THROUGH WHOSE LIBERALITY IT SEES THE LIGHT,\n\n IS THIS WORK AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED BY\n\n The Author.\n\n\n\n\n PREFACE.\n\n\nTHE following Commentary differs from many of its predecessors in the\ngreater weight given to the interpretation of the LXX., and the closer\ninvestigation of their peculiar renderings. In many cases these strange\nrenderings on the part of the LXX. are dismissed by commentators as\nsimply errors. But this is not consistent with what true criticism\nought to do. The LXX. is not only the oldest translation we have,\nbut also the only one made when Hebrew was yet a living language.\nIts peculiar renderings then deserve our most serious attention. The\ninvestigation of them will fully reward the inquirer. This, then,\nis the cause of the special line of interpretation adopted in this\nCommentary.\n\nWith regard to the Book of Ecclesiastes itself, the writer must confess\nhimself _homo unius libri_; for some years past all his Hebrew and\nGreek studies have been devoted to the investigation of the meaning\nof this one book in the Sacred Canon, and all his conclusions must\nbe taken with the reservation that they apply, directly, to this one\nbook alone. Such a concentration of effort may be expected to produce\nresults which might not be arrived at by a far wider and more extensive\nresearch, just as a few rays of sunlight concentrated by a small lens\nwill burn where the sun himself will only warm.\n\nNevertheless, this book does not profess to be anything in the nature\nof a new discovery. Sense is attempted to be made of difficult passages\nby what may be called a microscopic attention to the grammar of the\nwriter, and a minute and careful analysis of every form and expression\nhe uses. The test of the correctness of the meaning thus found is\ndisplayed in the way in which it falls into place in the context, and\nsquares with its tenor. But nothing novel in the way of Hebrew grammar\nis urged, or anything which may not be found in ordinary commentaries,\nexcept, perhaps, it be the fact of the difference of signification\nbetween the contracted and full relative pronoun\u2015\u2015a usage which is\npeculiar to the Book of Ecclesiastes. This has hitherto been dismissed\nby other commentators as evidence of late composition, without giving\nit the notice it merited.\n\nMany points of interest are started in these pages, which would well\nrepay a more careful investigation than I have either leisure or\nlearning to follow out. They are only presented so far as necessary\nto illustrate and clear up difficulties in the interpretation of that\nmarvellous book which is the subject of this Commentary. If I have\nsucceeded, the Church will be benefited; if I have altogether failed,\nmy book will only add a few pages more to the vast literature which\nthis, the scientific treatise of the Divine Word, has elicited.\n\nLONDON, _Oct. 1873_.\n\n\n\n\n INTRODUCTION.\n\n\n DATE AND AUTHORSHIP.\n\nTHE title or superscription of the book is, chapter i.\u00a01, \u2018The\nwords of Koheleth, the son of David, king of Jerusalem,\u2019 and this is\nfurther explained in verse 12, by \u2018I Koheleth was king over Israel in\nJerusalem.\u2019 The only person in Jewish history who answers exactly to\nthis description is Solomon, and accordingly the whole ancient Church,\nJewish as well as Christian, have regarded Solomon as the undoubted\nauthor of the book. With this conclusion even modern criticism is so\nfar agreed, that it is universally admitted that Solomon is the hero or\npersonated author, even though it is denied that he was the real writer.\nIt is alleged that internal evidence is against the supposition of so\nearly a date; for that the language and tone of thought in the book\npoint to a writer further on in Jewish history. The favourite opinion\namongst German scholars is, that Ecclesiastes was composed towards\nthe end of the Persian dominion. Ewald, indeed, considers that, so\nfar as language and style is concerned, the book might be the very\nlatest written in the whole Hebrew Scriptures.\n\nA detailed history of the exposition of the book will be found in the\n_Coheleth_ of Dr. Ginsburg, together with a complete discussion of the\nreasons for and against Solomonic authorship. It will be unnecessary,\ntherefore, to go into detail on this point. We shall only add what\nconcerns the immediate object of the present Commentary, remarking that\nseveral most competent English-speaking scholars remain unconvinced by\narguments which have apparently fully satisfied their German brethren.\nDr. Wordsworth, Professor Plumptre, Dr. Taylor Lewis of America, argue\nthat the book is really Solomon\u2019s, while even in Germany D.\u00a0H.\u00a0A. Hahn\n(_Commentar \u00fcber das Predigerbuch_, Leipzig, 1860) is strongly on the\nside of the Solomonic authorship.\n\nThe principal arguments in favour of later date derived from internal\nevidence, arise from (_first_) the state of violence and misery\ndepicted in the book with so much bitterness, and which, it is alleged,\ncannot be made to harmonize with what we know of the reign of Solomon;\nand (_secondly_) the strongly Aramaic character of the language,\nwhich assimilates itself to that of the books of Daniel and Esther.\nWith regard to the first point (if we have at all found the real\ninterpretation of the book), it seems improbable that any special\ndescription of a particular period could have been ever intended, or\neven any allusion to the special circumstances of any people. So far\nalso from supposing a time of trouble in the mind of the writer, on the\ncontrary the point and moral of the book will be enhanced if we suppose\nit to be written rather in a time of prosperity than of adversity\nor oppression. Thus, if we turn to the expressions of chapter iv.\u00a01\nwe shall see that to give any special reference to them, and suppose\nthem peculiar or out of the way, would weaken the force of Koheleth\u2019s\nargument. Human life generally, under the very best of external\ncircumstances, always exhibits the spectacle both of oppressions by\nthe wicked, and of oppressed without comforters. Now underneath this\nstatement lies the difficulty that He who permits this is the merciful\nAuthor of Nature Himself, and it is this difficulty which is especially\ndiscussed. There is no necessity to suppose the concluding years of\nPersian tyranny to be pointedly alluded to, because it is not under\nan Asiatic despotism alone that hypocrites come and go from the place\nof the holy (chapter viii.\u00a010), or servants are seen on horseback, and\nnobles, like serfs, walking afoot (chapter x.\u00a07), or that men continue\nin prosperous wickedness (chapter ix.\u00a03). Indeed, the same may be said\nof any other of the similar providential difficulties advanced in this\nbook, for the very same occurrences may be witnessed now in this age of\ncivilisation and progress. The reply then to the assertion that it is\n\u2018impossible to reconcile this state of things with the age of Solomon\u2019\nis simply this. There is no need even to make the attempt, because\nthere is no reason to believe that, considering the author\u2019s standpoint,\nhe intended that the instances of human suffering and disappointment\nhe cites should be taken otherwise than perfectly generally. What he\nadduces of this nature is in sufficient measure true always, at the\nbest of times. It would blunt the point of his reasoning if it could\nbe shown that the difficulties he starts were exceptional or temporary;\nbut this is not so. Koheleth\u2019s repeated declaration is that _all_\u2015\u2015that\nis, the whole of human life\u2015\u2015is vanity or evanescence.\n\nThe argument from Aramaic words is much more formidable, and would\nbe conclusive if our knowledge of the successive stages of the Hebrew\nlanguage were less fragmentary and uncertain than is really the case.\nIt is quite true that such words as \u05de\u05d3\u05d9\u05e0\u05d4 ,\u05e8\u05e2\u05d9\u05d5\u05df ,\u05e8\u05e2\u05d5\u05ea ,\u05db\u05d1\u05e8 ,\u05d6\u05de\u05df ,\u05e4\u05ea\u05d2\u05dd, have an\nAramaic colouring; but we must set against this the fact that, as Ewald\nremarks, we have in Ecclesiastes a new philosophical terminology, which\nhas modified the Hebrew of the book. And again, it will be seen by\nreferring to the places where these peculiar words occur, that they are\nintroduced either for the purposes of expressing new ideas or terms not\nfound in the language elsewhere. Sometimes the more usual word would be\nout of harmony with the context, _e.g._ the word \u05d6\u05de\u05d5\u05df replaces the more\nordinary \u05de\u05d9\u05e2\u05d3, because not only is the latter used to signify a _feast_,\nbut the root-meaning of the former is just what is required by the\nargument. Again, \u05db\u05d1\u05e8, as will be seen stated at length in the notes, is\nused in the purely technical sense, of \u2018this present,\u2019 and not in the\nordinary meaning of \u2018already.\u2019 The unusual \u2666\u05d0\u05dc\u05d5, chapter vi.\u00a06, also is\napparently introduced for the sake of the alliteration with \u05d4\u05dc\u05d0 in the\nnext clause, and the once occurring \u05e2\u05b2\u05d3\u05b6\u05df chapter iv.\u00a03, for the sake of\nthe equivoke to which its use gives rise. All these Aramaic words are\nnoticed as they occur in the body of the Commentary, and we think that\nthe conclusion which results from what there appears is to weaken very\nconsiderably any argument as to date which can be drawn from them one\nway or the other.\n\n \u2666 \u201c\u05d4\u05dc\u05d0\u201d replaced with \u201c\u05d0\u05dc\u05d5\u201d\n\nAgain, the object of the book is so peculiar, and so different from\nall the rest of Scripture, and especially from those which, supposing\nSolomon was the author, would stand related to it in point of time,\nthat we may well expect some difference of language and colouring.\nAgain, also, there is another reason. The books immediately subsequent\nto Solomon\u2019s era are all prophetic. Now it seems natural that prophets\nshould use an antique style, which would be tinged with that of the\nearlier religious books, while if, on the other hand, as the LXX. seem\nto imply by their translation of the word Koheleth, and appears also\nfrom the alliterations in the book itself, it were an address orally\ndelivered, it would no doubt contain colloquialisms. There are strong\nindications that it does so. Now these colloquialisms would certainly\nhave an Aramaic cast about them. Thus the difference of diction between\nthe Hebrew of Koheleth and a contemporary prophet would be exaggerated,\nand any estimate of date due to this difference proportionately\nuncertain.\n\nOn the whole, for myself, I have no theory to support either way. I\nam content to let the matter rest, as I believe the Scripture itself\nleaves it, which, after all, nowhere refers the authorship to Solomon.\nIn accordance with this, both to save space and to conduce to clearness,\nI have always referred to the author by the name Koheleth, and to the\nbook itself as Ecclesiastes, in the course of the subsequent Commentary.\n\n\n DESIGN AND METHOD OF THE WORK.\n\nThe design of the book is no other than argumentatively to work out the\nconcluding aphorism of the whole: \u2018Fear God, and keep His commandments,\nfor _this_ is the whole problem of Humanity.\u2019 This truth is never\nfor a moment lost sight of, not even in those passages which sound\nmost sceptical or Epicurean. We may compare this marvellous book to\nan overture, and say that this truth is its subject. This overture,\nhowever, is written in a minor key; it is almost always plaintive;\nsometimes it descends to what sounds like absolute discord; but this\nsubject floats through its wildest and strangest melodies, resolves its\nharshest discords, connects its most erratic wanderings. Koheleth is\na perfect master of sarcasm. A certain grim and bitter yet grave and\nholy satire runs through his book. He makes his readers think whether\nthey will or no. For this purpose he sometimes descends to plays upon\nwords, equivokes, alliterations, possibly also proverbs in ordinary\ncirculation. He certainly writes in the \u2018vulgar tongue.\u2019 But these\nequivokes always help the sense. If Koheleth appears in the guise of a\npopular preacher, he never loses sight of the moralist and philosopher.\nHis sermon, for such we believe it to be, will bear comparison with\nanother wonderful sermon found in Holy Scripture, with which it has\nsome striking points of resemblance, and yet how wonderfully different!\n\nThe book then opens with an exclamation which serves as a text or\ntopic\u2015\u2015\u2018Vanity of vanities,\u2019\u2015\u2015and forthwith proceeds to state the\nquestion, and work out the conclusion which this topic suggests. Has\nmankind any advantage (in the sense of a result in the future) by\nreason of his toil or anxiety (the technical word here used is \u05e2\u05de\u05dc, by\nwhich word is meant the same thing as the Greek expresses by \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1,\ncares of this life, Matthew xiii.\u00a022)? This he answers in the negative\nby eight aphorisms, four drawn from observation of nature and four from\nmoral considerations, which we have called the eight _un_beatitudes of\nthe sermon. This constitutes the first part of the proof. Koheleth then\ngoes on to discuss the question, Can any solution of this providential\ndifficulty be discovered? This, in the first place, is attempted to\nbe answered by an autobiography, in which Koheleth shows in succession\nthat wisdom, mirth, accumulation of wealth, etc., are alike evanescent\nand unsatisfactory, as his own experience (and no one was likely to\ndo better) abundantly displayed. These together form the first great\ndivision of the book\u2015\u2015Chapters I. and\u00a0II.\n\nIn the next five Chapters, III. to VII., the same question is discussed\nfrom another point of view. Koheleth remarks on the unalterable\ncharacter of Providence, and shows that even if it were possible that\nhuman wisdom could cause change (which it cannot), that the alteration\ncould only be for the worse. He begins by enumerating twenty-eight\ntimes or seasons\u2015\u2015that is, a fourfold seven\u2015\u2015of which the last is\n\u2018a time of peace.\u2019 This is especially worthy of remark, as it is an\ninstance of one of those hopes of better things which Koheleth allows\nto appear, as it were by stealth, amidst his most melancholy utterances.\nHe then argues this matter, and through a long and sustained course of\nreasoning, the conclusion of which is, that God must right the wronged.\n\nBut there naturally arises the objection, If this be so, why does\nimpiety and oppression exist so continually in the very places or\ncircumstances where we ought to expect the reverse? To this Koheleth\noffers two solutions, which, however, are neither satisfactory; the\nsecond indeed would lead to absolute scepticism. The true deduction is\nhowever stated in the last verse of chapter iii.\u00a0(22), which is, that\nif any result is to be accomplished by human toil, it can only consist\nin present gratification.\n\nKoheleth then turns to the consideration of oppressions or afflictions,\nthis turn of thought being that present enjoyment is marred by the\nexistence of so much irremediable unhappiness; that if this world be\nall, the dead are better off than the living; that the result even of\nsuccess is envy rather than pleasure; that it is useless labouring for\nposterity, and no avail in the present. Koheleth here sarcastically\npoints out that labour for others does give some advantage, the only\ninstance where he sees the possibility of any at all. He carefully\nlimits, however, all this to the present life, this formula \u2018under\nthe sun,\u2019 _i.e._ in this world of labour and toil, being introduced\nfrequently, showing that all he says is to be taken with this proviso.\n\nIn Chapter V. Koheleth begins to display the great remedy for human\nills\u2015\u2015that is, piety, patience, and submission to the Divine will,\ncautioning against foolish sacrifices, rash vows, rash speeches,\nselfishness and avarice. This display of the remedy, however, is as yet\nsubordinate, the main object being to show that all arguments conspire\nto prove the vanity or transitoriness of human existence. With this\nChapter VI. ends, and with it the more argumentative portion of the\ntreatise.\n\nChapter VII. opens with a paradoxical statement of seven good things,\nwhich look like evil ones, and on this Koheleth develops the thought\nthat man does not know a good thing when he sees it. He shows that even\nwisdom itself will not necessarily produce happiness in this world,\nthough this, he is sure, is a good thing; but he is very bitter and\nsarcastic on those who, because right does not always succeed, resort\nto impiety; this, he shows, is a great and fatal mistake. Though the\nproposition that piety is happiness is not formally stated or worked\nout argumentatively, nevertheless this is proved so completely that\nKoheleth is able at the end of the whole to cite this as the real\nresult of his argument.\n\nIf, however, piety be the remedy for human ills, early piety is\nessential to tolerable ease and quiet in this world. This is set forth\nin the same paradoxical and sarcastic way as before. We are advised to\navoid certain evils while we can. These are described with great pathos\nin Chapter XII. It is however, we believe, quite a mistake to imagine\nthat the close of the book contains an _allegorical_ description of\nold age. The weakness and other trials of age are, no doubt, brought\nbefore us in very poetic and picturesque language. There is an Oriental\nrichness and floridness about this language at first strange to Western\nears; but the images employed all admit of resolution by an appeal to\nthe usage of Scripture elsewhere, and can be shown to be quite in place.\nThe conclusion of the whole is significantly the same as the topic at\nthe beginning, \u2018Vanity of vanities, the whole is vanity.\u2019\n\nThe Epilogue, chapter xii.\u00a09, follows. This has been pronounced by some\nto be an interpolation, the work of a later hand; but we could no more\nimagine a book of the Old Testament ending with such an aphorism as\nvanity of vanities, without doing violence to our critical instinct,\nthan we could believe that the Gospel of St. Mark was ever intended to\nend with the words \u2018They were afraid\u2019 [\u1f10\u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1, Mark xvi.\u00a08]. It\nis rather the bold, open statement of the truth, which has in a more or\nless covered manner formed the subject of the whole book. The aphorism,\n\u2018Fear God and keep His commandments,\u2019 contains the only possible\nsolution of providential difficulties or remedy of human ills, and it\nis in vain to look for any other. The reasons for this mystery we must\nleave to God alone. He will bring into judgment\u2015\u2015_i.e._ into adjustment\nor declared consistency with justice\u2015\u2015every mystery, whether to our\nnotions good or evil. With this assurance the book appropriately ends.\n\n\n GRAMMATICAL PECULIARITIES.\n\nThe Book of Ecclesiastes being a didactic and argumentative treatise,\nand the only work of its kind in the Scriptures, its Hebrew is modified\nto meet the requirements of that which is a new philosophy, so that we\nmay fully indorse Ewald\u2019s expression, that \u2018Koheleth uses the Hebrew\nlanguage as a flexible instrument for the expression of novel ideas.\u2019\nThis naturally implies a usage of words and phrases peculiar to this\nbook, and accounts for the large number of unusual forms and once\noccurring words and the like which here meet us. It will be apparent\nto any who will diligently examine the text, that Koheleth confines\nhimself very strictly indeed to the rules of his own grammar, and uses\narticles, prepositions, and tenses with an accuracy not inferior to\nGreek itself. For example, there is a real distinction to be discovered\nbetween the usage of masculine and feminine forms, where a substantive\nis of both genders. It is not a matter of indifference whether the full\nrelative is used or the contracted form; on the contrary, it will be\nseen that the contracted relative gives an optative or subjunctive\nsense; or whether a verb governs directly or through the intervention\nof the particle \u05d0\u05ea; a distinction which the LXX. were quite aware of,\nand which gave rise to their adverbial \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd. What, for want of a better\nterm, we have called distributive plurals\u2015\u2015_i.e._ a singular noun and\nplural verb in agreement, or _vice vers\u00e2_\u2015\u2015are exceedingly significant.\nThey have a peculiar shade of meaning, according to circumstances\nand position in the sentence. It is too a matter of some consequence\nwhether the nominative precedes or follows the verb; hence in the\nrunning translation this order is never reversed, even where our idiom\nrequires it, but explanatory words are introduced. All these matters\nare, where necessary, pointed out in the notes\u2015\u2015perhaps some may\nimagine pressed too far, and repeated _ad nauseam_; but the excuse must\nbe that on these minuti\u00e6 depend the evidence of correct rendering. If\nthus a good sense is made out, as it were spontaneously, and which,\nmoreover, is found to fall into place as it occurs in the context, we\nhave strong evidence that we have hit the real meaning.\n\nConnected with this grammatical usage is a peculiar terminology, also\nto be expected in a scientific treatise. Thus \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8 is very commonly\nrendered in this Commentary by \u2018reasoning,\u2019 the exact idea implied\nbeing a matter or thing reasoned about, with the further notion or\nconclusion that this reason will become ground of action. No single\nEnglish or even Greek word will render it, but once let us master its\nreal significance, and the force and cogency of many passages will\nbecome manifest. Again, \u05d7\u05e4\u05e5, which has the sense of \u2018an agreeable\noccurrence,\u2019 \u2018a providence,\u2019 and then generally of \u2018any event,\u2019 in this\nbook denotes a \u2018_providential_ occurrence.\u2019 Again, \u05e2\u05de\u05dc is not exactly\ntoil, but the fatigue, distress, or anxiety that comes of it. It\ndiffers from \u05e2\u05e0\u05d9\u05df, which is also anxiety, but that kind of anxiety which\ncomes of uncertainty as to a future result. Two most important words\nare \u05e1\u05db\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea and \u05d4\u05dc\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea: the former is that kind of folly which has the\nappearance of wisdom, clever folly, or foolish wisdom; the latter is\nthat kind of folly which is begotten of a false expectation of the\nresult, as in our expression \u2018made a fool of.\u2019 So again \u05db\u05d1\u05e8 is not an\nadverb \u2018already,\u2019 but rather a substantive,\u2015\u2015this present considered\nas now existing. These technical words are all noticed as they occur,\nand a sense given, the proof of the correctness of which is that\nappropriate meaning is made in every place in which they occur. As\nseveral are found nowhere else in Scripture, this is the only true\nmethod of coming at their meaning. It is also worthy of notice that\nthese words occur usually seven or ten times, or some other round\nor mystic number. This happens so frequently that it can hardly be\naccidental, but I have seldom been able to trace any rule or law in\nthis circumstance. On the whole, however, it may be taken as an axiom\nthat when Koheleth uses a peculiar word, he intends to express a\npeculiar idea, and his meaning must be sought accordingly. Careful\nattention to this point clears up many difficulties.\n\nAlliteration and paronomasia occur with great and characteristic\nfrequency, a proof surely that the book was intended to be preached\nor delivered as an address. It is, of course, very difficult to give\nthese in the English version. Sometimes in the paraphrastic translation\nthis is attempted by means of rhymes and alliterations. I can hardly\npronounce these quite successful, and often have felt inclined to\nreturn to a more literal rendering, but then this most characteristic\nfeature of the book would have been lost to the English reader. Every\none who has ever addressed an assembly knows how very telling these\nhits are, and moreover they are of real importance to the commentator,\nas bringing the words on which the alliteration depends into artificial\nprominence. There is a danger, no doubt, that when once the mind is\naroused to this, that equivokes should be found where they were not\nintended; but of this the reader must judge.\n\nThis perhaps is the best point at which to discuss the meaning of the\nword Koheleth. In its present form and pointing \u05e7\u05b9\u05d4\u05b6\u05dc\u05b6\u05ea is the active\nfeminine participle of Kal of the verb \u05e7\u05d4\u05dc, occurring as a verb only\nin niphal and hiphil. The feminine noun occurs Deuteronomy xxxiii.\u00a04,\n\u200e\u200f\u05e7\u05b0\u05d4\u05b4\u05dc\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea\u2015\u2015_i.e._ this word differently pointed\u2015\u2015which the LXX. render\nby \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2. \u05e7\u05b0\u05d4\u05b4\u05dc\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea occurs Nehemiah v.\u00a07, rendered \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd. With\nthis before us it seems beside the mark to seek a meaning out of the\nroot \u05e7\u05d4\u05dc. According to the usage observable in this book, feminines\n(we should prefer to call them abstracts) in \u05ea differ from those in\n\u200e\u200f\u05d4\u2015\u2015compare \u05e2\u05de\u05d3\u05ea, chapter i.\u00a04; the abstract in this form again becomes\nas it were a concrete. Thus we should incline to indorse the view\nenunciated by Preston, who considers the word to be represented by\n\u2018collector\u2019 or \u2018concionator\u2019 in Latin. Both these meanings we believe\nare contained in the word, and it is quite consistent with what we know\nof the style of Ecclesiastes to admit that both these meanings were\nintended to be conveyed. The discourse is a collection of separate\nbut connected aphorisms on the transitoriness of human existence\u2015\u2015the\nauthor is thus a collector of them; and as the discourse was delivered\napparently when collected, he is a concionator or preacher also. The\nword used by the LXX., \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2, occurs nowhere else, either in\nthe Old or New Testaments, so that the _precise_ meaning they affixed\nto the word is unknown. In classical Greek it means preacher.\n\nThe repetition of a word, whether substantive or particle, in the\nsame sentence, of course gives emphasis to that word; to translate\naccurately, therefore, when this occurs, we have to add some English\nequivalent, such as \u2018this\u2019 or \u2018as well,\u2019 and so forth, see Commentary\n_passim_. A careful attention to this rule will often considerably help\nto clear up obscure passages.\n\n\n ON THE PECULIAR RENDERINGS OF THE VERSION OF THE LXX.\n\nThe remark of Delitzsch on the translation of the LXX., affixed to the\nBook of Psalms (Delitzsch on the Psalms, Clark\u2019s Library, Edinburgh)\nmay be introduced here:\u2015\u2015\u2018This translation, as being the oldest key\nto the understanding of the language of the Old Testament writings, as\nbeing the oldest mirror of the Old Testament text, and as an important\ncheck upon the interpretation of Scripture handed down in the Talmud\nand Midrash, and in that portion of the national literature not\noriginating in Egypt, is invaluable.\u2019 For this remark applies to the\nrendering of Ecclesiastes in an equal, if not greater degree, and may\nbe offered as an excuse, if one be needed, for the comparatively large\nspace assigned to the discussion of the Septuagint renderings.\n\nA peculiarity which meets us in this book is the occurrence of the\npreposition \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd followed by an accusative, and in one case a genitive,\nand which seldom if ever occurs in other books. This apparently\ntrifling circumstance, which is usually treated as a barbarism, will\ngive the clue which will lead to some curious and interesting facts\nconnected with the methods of translation adopted by the LXX.\n\nIf we examine carefully and in detail the wording of the LXX. we can\nhardly fail to be struck with the excessive care that is taken to\nrender in the exact order of the Hebrew\u2015\u2015a remark which may be extended\nto other portions of this version, the Book of Job being, however, a\nstriking exception, (and when there is any considerable departure, in\nalmost every instance hitherto examined a serious variation of text\nin the different recensions of the LXX. will be found to occur.) In\nEcclesiastes this order is so strict that, with hardly an exception,\nit would be possible to print the Greek text as it stands as an\ninterlinear translation. This most interesting point deserves further\ninvestigation than appears as yet to have been given to it. My own\nimpression from this circumstance, is that the version of the LXX. was\nmade with the idea that those who used it had the Hebrew before them,\nand this hypothesis, for in truth it is nothing more, will I think\ngroup together more facts than any other suppositions which have been\nadopted to explain these strange renderings met with in the LXX.,\u2015\u2015as,\nfor example, variation of original text, wilful corruption on the\npart of the translators, Hagadic influence (of which more presently),\nand the like. The LXX. have executed their work so well, that\nnotwithstanding this restriction which they thus laid upon themselves,\nwe have a very good translation, which for many centuries was used as\nthe sole representative of the ancient Scriptures, and on which the\nwhole fabric of ancient theology was erected.\n\nThis interlinear character, as we may call it, of the version of the\nLXX., will explain why they render the same Hebrew word by such very\ndifferent Greek equivalents. In an interlinear translation there is no\nspecial value in uniform rendering; rather the reverse. It is better\neven to study variety than uniformity, although we believe that the\nLXX. do neither the one nor the other, but simply endeavour to give\nthe best possible rendering of the passage before them. For example,\nthe word \u05d7\u05e4\u05e5 is rendered in chapter iii. 1,\u00a017, v.\u00a08 (7), viii.\u00a06, by\n\u03c0\u03c1\u1fb6\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1, and in the other three cases in which it occurs, viz., chapter\nv. 4\u00a0(3), xii. 1, 10, by \u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1. Now the real meaning of this word, as\nwe have shown, is an agreeable providential occurrence, or, since all\nprovidential occurrences imply the Divine will on their side, any such\nwhatever. The LXX. use the one rendering or the other as best suits\nthe context. This book containing so large a number of technical words,\nthe meaning of which is to be sought by a careful comparison of all\nthe passages in which they occur, the renderings of the LXX. become of\nspecial interest. The meaning compounded of the meanings of the LXX.\u2019s\nrenderings, to use a mathematical simile, will give us often the\nprecise shade of signification of the Hebrew of which we are in search,\nand this will then approve itself as correct by its suitableness in\nevery instance.\n\nThe same observation applies to the grammar of the Greek as\nrepresenting that of the Hebrew. There is no attempt whatever to\nrender Hebrew grammatical forms with any uniformity. Hebrew perfects\nare rendered by Greek presents, aorists, or perfects; Hebrew presents\nby aorists or perfects. Participles are rendered sometimes by\nparticiples, at others by principal verbs. The same Hebrew prepositions\nare sometimes rendered by different Greek prepositions, and sometimes\nsimply by case-endings. The relative is rendered by the relative, by\nthe pronoun, and by \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9. The Hebrew conjugations are not represented on\nany settled principle; Piels are sometimes indeed apparently marked by\na preposition compounded with the verb, sometimes not noticed at all.\nIn certain cases in which the root is doubtful, as for example in ain\nvaw, and ain ain verbs, the LXX. do not always follow the Masoretic\npointing and derivation. On the whole, however, the deviations of the\nLXX., from both pointing and accentuation, are more apparent than real,\nand may be explained, for the most part, on the principle that the\ntranslators felt themselves obliged to follow the order of the words\nin the original.\n\nWe must, however, bear in mind that the present text of the LXX. is\nof all texts the most time-worn, and often requires correction. Most\nprovidentially we do not depend on one recension; we have in existing\ncopies the remains of several, and we may make use of them to restore\nthe original readings. The problem in this case differs essentially\nfrom that which meets us in revising the Greek text of the New\nTestament. Here diplomatic evidence has not the same weight as there.\nEmendations may be detected, even when better readings of the Hebrew,\nby want of conformity to the Hebrew order (and the temptation to make\nsuch kind of alterations, when the version was used independently,\nwould clearly be very great), or again a comparison of the various\nreadings will enable us to guess with tolerable confidence what the\nHebrew originally was. In this way, when the Hebrew text is doubtful,\nwe can ascertain the correct reading by searching for that common\norigin from which the variants in the LXX. were derived, and we may\nthen turn round on the version with the help of the Hebrew, and show\nhow the changes successively arose. An instance of this will be found\nat chapter x.\u00a010; how far I have succeeded the reader must judge.\nWe must also bear in mind that what we should now denote by marginal\nrenderings are in the ancient versions inserted in the text. The\ninterlinear character of the version enables us to detect this: we\nfind two Greek words standing in place of a single Hebrew equivalent.\nThe result of all this, as applied in the Book of Ecclesiastes, is\nto vindicate the accuracy of the received Hebrew text, and, in a less\ndegree, of the pointing and accentuation also. Only in a very few\ninstances is it needful to propose an emendation of the Hebrew text,\nand that where the ancient versions are apparently unanimous in\nrequiring it.\n\nThere remains another point, however. Dr. Ginsburg (and from his\nextensive acquaintance with Jewish literature no one is better\nqualified to give an opinion) considers that Hagadic influence must\nbe taken largely into account in explaining difficult passages in\nEcclesiastes; amongst other points he notices the rendering of \u05d0\u05ea\nby \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd, which has been referred to already. \u2018Commentators,\u2019 he says,\n\u2018have been perplexed to account for this barbarism, and violation\nof grammatical propriety, but a reference to Hagadic exegesis will\nshow that this Hebrew particle was looked up to as having a mystical\nsignification, because the two letters, \u05d0 and \u05ea, of which it is\ncomposed, are the Alpha and Omega of the Hebrew alphabet. Hence the\nanxiety of the translator to indicate this particle in Greek, when a\npassage appeared to him to be fraught with special mysteries.\u2019 But,\nas he remarks, it is only in twenty-nine instances out of seventy-one\noccurrences of this particle that it is so rendered by the LXX.\nMoreover, Dr. Ginsburg has not shown that these passages are specially\nmysterious. They are in fact neither more nor less so than some others\nin which this particle is not so rendered. An examination of these\npassages will show, we think convincingly, that what the LXX. wished\nto do was to point out that \u05d0\u05ea was emphatic and with the meaning\nof \u2018respect to,\u2019 or the like, as will be seen by reference to the\nCommentary, especially chapters ii.\u00a017, iii.\u00a017, vii.\u00a026, viii. 8,\u00a015.\n\nThe Hagadic influence, according to Dr. Ginsburg, is still more evident\nin the peculiar rendering of chapter ii.\u00a012, as well as chapters ii.\u00a017,\niii.\u00a015, iv.\u00a017, v.\u00a01, all which are fully treated in the Commentary,\nand the renderings of the LXX. explained and elucidated, it is hoped\nsatisfactorily. So far from the true explanation of these renderings\nbeing found in the Chaldee paraphrase, as Dr. Ginsburg imagines, that\nversion gives distorted interpretations of passages but partially\nunderstood. Again, the gloss of the LXX. at chapter ii.\u00a015 is shared\nby the Syriac, and is a marginal reading; chapter ii.\u00a017 is a verbatim\nreading of the Hebrew in every particular; and the gloss at chapter\nii.\u00a09 is too evidently foisted in from the margin to make it of much\nvalue in any argument. See note there.\n\nHolding as I do the paramount authority of the LXX., I have not\nscrupled to follow them against the Masoretic interpretation when the\nsense of a passage seemed to require it, and I deem it a sufficient\nanswer to any objections on this head, that the rendering proposed is\nsupported by the LXX. On the whole, however, these differences are,\nas remarked above, not very great, and we have rather occasion for\nsurprise, not that there is here and there a divergence, but that on\nthe whole there is so substantial agreement. The pointing which we have\nin our Hebrew Bibles embodies a most valuable and venerable tradition,\nbut in its present form younger by centuries than that furnished by\nthe rendering of the LXX. While, therefore, we admit its great value,\nwe ought not to make its authority absolute, and this is done to all\nintents and purposes by those who reject without question the ancient\ninterpretation because it conflicts with the present pointing. No\nlanguage is too high to characterize our obligations to those Jewish\nfathers who have guarded so faithfully that special trust committed\nto them\u2015\u2015the oracles of God. But the Synagogue is no more infallible\nin matters of criticism than is the Church. Neither the Masorets nor\nthe LXX. are inspired, though inspiration has been by their respective\npartisans vehemently claimed for both. Each party, also, has unduly\ndepreciated the other, and the Hebrew scholars have been for centuries\ndivided into punctists and anti-punctists. But as there is no royal\nroad to learning, so there is no short-cut to certainty; the whole\nevidence, let it come from whence it may, must be diligently weighed\nand compared. So far as the version of the LXX. is concerned, this is\nnot done until their errors, or supposed errors, have been at least\nduly explained and accounted for, even when their renderings are\nrejected.\n\n\n OTHER VERSIONS OF ANTIQUITY.\n\nNext in order in point of antiquity to the version of the LXX. stands\nthe Syriac Peshito. This I have sometimes quoted in the present\nCommentary, having considered it my duty to make myself acquainted\nwith this version, so that if I am not in a position to offer anything\nof my own, I can follow other commentators, and test their accuracy.\nThe citations are made from the edition of Dr. Lee, published by the\nBible Society. As might be expected, the Syriac version stands midway\nbetween the LXX. and Masoretic text, agreeing sometimes with the one\nand sometimes with the other. It is often assumed that the peculiar\nrenderings of the Syriac which agree with the LXX. against the\nMasoretic rendering, arise from corrections of the former text by the\nlatter; this, however, is not proved. The existence of such an element\nof correction may well be admitted, but it is only one out of many, and\nin some cases we shall, I think, have reason to conclude that the sense,\nset aside as of no critical value by some commentators, does in fact\nembody the real meaning of the passage under discussion. See chapter\nx.\u00a010 for an instance of this.\n\nThe Vulgate is generally accessible; its value is subordinate as\ncompared with the above-mentioned versions, being only, as is well\nknown, corrected from the Hebrew by Jerome. Sometimes, however, the\nevidence it affords of an ancient reading is all the more valuable on\nthis account. See the note at chapter x.\u00a010.\n\nThe fragments of the ancient Greek versions of Aquila, Symmachus,\nand Theodotion are often of the very highest value, and diligent use\nhas been made of them. The edition used is that of Field, _Originis\nHexapla_, edition by Fridericus Field, Oxford, 1867, vol.\u00a0ii. The\n_Codex Syriaco Hexaplaris_, H.\u00a0Middedorpf, Berlin, 1835, has also been\nexamined.\n\n\n THE TRANSLATIONS OF THIS COMMENTARY.\n\nTwo translations of this book are here offered to the reader, the first,\ndispersed through the notes, denoted by bold-faced type, is absolutely\nliteral, even to utter baldness, and rigidly follows the exact order\nof the Hebrew. In the accompanying running commentary the construction\nof the sentences is carefully pointed out, the rendering of the LXX.\nnoted where peculiar, and the attempt made in all cases to account for\nthe peculiarity, either by showing that they have preserved the true\ninterpretation, or else explaining how the error arose. The sense thus\nobtained is embodied in the paraphrastic version printed at the head\nof the page. There has been no attempt made to adopt, in this latter\ntranslation, the phraseology of the Authorized Version; rather the\nreverse, as it is not intended to be independent, but is to be regarded\nas of the nature of an explanatory commentary or an English Targum upon\nthe text. It also seeks to render idea for idea rather than word for\nword, and gives in every case the meaning which on the whole seemed\nmost probable, and squared best with the context. It attempts also to\nrepresent equivokes and alliterations in the original, by corresponding\nequivokes and alliterations\u2015\u2015not necessarily in the equivalent words\nof the translation,\u2015\u2015and points out, by figures, italics, and other\ntypographical signs, instances of artificial arrangement of topics and\nthe like; see Chapters I. and II., etc. To the English reader a caution\nis here needed. The very nature of such a version requires that all be\nmade to run quite smoothly; thus, however obscure the passage, a sense\nis given, and difficulties are put out of sight. But after all this\nonly represents the meaning the commentator thinks most probable, and\nhe may be quite wrong, and altogether mistaken. Such a version is after\nall a Targum\u2015\u2015in other words, a well-meaning attempt at explanation,\nwith some amplification, of the sacred text. In dealing then with it\nlet the reader imitate the Jews of old, who, when they read the sacred\ntext itself, did so with every outward manifestation of respect and\ndeference; but when they came to read the Targum altered their manner,\nand showed by posture and gesture that they clearly regarded this as\nbut a mere exposition of the Divine Word, and of no authority.\n\nThe following works are assumed to be easily accessible to English\nreaders:\u2015\u2015_Ecclesiastes_, Theodore Preston, London, 1845; _Commentary\non Ecclesiastes_, Moses Stuart, New York, 1851; _Coheleth_, by\nChristian D. Ginsburg, London, 1861; _Ecclesiastes or Koheleth_, by\nDr. Otto Z\u00f6ckler, edited by Prof. Taylor Lewis, LL.D., Edinburgh, 1870;\n_Commentary on the Bible_, C. Wordsworth, Bishop of Lincoln, London,\n1868. The work of Dr. Ginsburg especially will be found indispensable.\nDr. Ginsburg has stated at length, and for the most part in the\nwriters\u2019 own words, the different opinions of critics, Jewish and\nChristian, who have written on this book. His vast reading and\nerudition are thus made available for future scholars. Once for all, I\nmust acknowledge the deep obligation I am under to his work. If in many\nof my renderings I am compelled to differ from him, I am not the less\nindebted to him on that account. If I have really seen further than he\nhas, it is only because he has, so to speak, allowed me to mount on his\nshoulders. Any one who takes the trouble to compare my work with his\nwill see that most of my renderings could have been supported by a name\nof weight. If, however, I have the authority of the LXX. in my favour,\nI am content, and cite no others. I have, however, not failed to resort\nto such of the commentators in Dr. Ginsburg\u2019s list, German and English,\nas well as some published since the appearance of his book, as would be\nlikely to give additional light.\n\nThe work of Dr. Graetz, _Kohelet oder der Salomonische Prediger_, von\nDr. H. Graetz, Leipzig, 1871, did not come to hand until the larger\nportion of this commentary was in type.\n\nThe texts made use of are those contained in the _Polyglotten Bibel,\nzum praktischen Handgebrauch bearbeitet_ von R. Stier, und R. G. W.\nTheile, Dritte Auflage, Bielfeld, 1864.\n\nThe following notation of MS. and Editions from the above work is\nadopted in the commentary:\u2015\u2015\n\n A Alexandrine text.\n A\u00b9\u00a0 Alexandrine Manuscript.\n A\u00b2\u00a0 Alexandrine Edition, Grabe, Breitinger, Reineccius.\n B \u00a0 Vatican text.\n B\u00b9\u00a0 Vatican Manuscript.\n B\u00b2\u00a0 Roman Edition, 1587.\n C \u00a0 Codex Frederico-Augustanus (of Tischendorf.)\n D \u00a0 Codex Ephraemi rescriptus (of Tischendorf.)\n E \u00a0 Editio Aldina, 1518.\n F \u00a0 Complutensium Polyglot.\n X \u00a0 Other MS. not especially named.\n\nIt may also be noticed that all citations are from chapter and verse\nas in the Authorized Version; where these differ from the Hebrew, the\nlatter is added in a bracket\u2015\u2015thus chapter v. 9\u00a0(8).\n\n\n\n\n ECCLESIASTES.\n\n\n CHAPTER I.\n\n\n THE words of the Preacher, \u2502 THE discourse of the Preacher,\n the son of David, king of \u2502 the son of David, king of\n Jerusalem. \u2502 Jerusalem.\n\nI. (1.) =The words of Koheleth, the son of David, king in Jerusalem.=\nThe meaning of the term Koheleth, and the question of authorship of\nthe book, is discussed in the introduction. We have only to remark here\non the use of the word \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8 as it occurs in this book in the technical\nsense not only of a \u2018word\u2019 or \u2018reason,\u2019 but also including the matter\nor thing which the word represents. Usually it refers to words,\nreasonings, and matters connected with the mysteries of Providence\u2015\u2015the\nwhole treatise itself being argumentative and didactic, discussing the\nvanity, that is, the transitoriness, of human existence, as its topic.\n\n \u2502 SECTION I.\u2015\u2015_The vanity or\n \u2502 evanescence of all things\n \u2502 human._\n \u2502\n 2 Vanity of vanities, \u2502 Utterly evanescent, utterly\n saith the Preacher, vanity of \u2502 evanescent, saith the Preacher;\n vanities; all _is_ vanity. \u2502 the whole is evanescent.\n\n(2.) =Vanity of vanities, said Koheleth; vanity of vanities= (very\nemphatic), =the whole= (\u05d4\u05db\u05dc, with the article giving a slightly\ndifferent notion to \u05db\u05dc, the \u2018whole collectively\u2019 therefore; the word is\nequivalent to the Greek \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd, with the limitation however to human\nlife in this world, as will become manifest in the course of the book)\nis =vanity=, (\u05d4\u05d1\u05dc, that which is \u2018evanescent\u2019 or \u2018transitory,\u2019 but\nnever used in the modern sense of being frivolous or empty.) There\nis nothing of scoffing epicureanism in this book; the life of man is\never spoken of in the most serious and solemn tones. There is, indeed,\nmuch sarcasm, but it never touches upon lightness or indifference; it\nis always grave and solemn, and even when to superficial observation\nappearing equivocal or sceptical, proves, on further examination, to\nhide promises and hopes beneath its bitterness. This first verse may\nbe looked upon as the text or topic of the discourse; Koheleth next\nproceeds to work out the argument suggested by it in detail.\n\n 3 What profit hath a man \u2502 Is there any profitable\n of all his labour which he \u2502 result to Humanity in all\n taketh under the sun? \u2502 his cares, over which he ever\n \u2502 moils, in this hot work-day\n \u2502 world? [No, for]\n\n(3.) =What is?= (expecting the answer no, and so nearly equivalent to a\ndenial) =the profit= (\u05d9\u05ea\u05e8\u05d5\u05df, a word peculiar to this book\u2015\u2015occurs chapter\ni.\u00a03; ii. 11, 13 twice; iii.\u00a09; v. 9 (8), 16 (15); vii.\u00a012; x. 10,\n11\u2015\u2015_i.e._ ten times in all; it is a technical word, and is used to\nsignify that which _remains_ over and above after the act is performed,\nand apart from its present results. Koheleth uses frequently these\nnouns ending in \u05d5\u05df\u2015\u2015thus \u05d9\u05ea\u05e8 \u2018to extend,\u2019 \u2018run over,\u2019 \u05d9\u05ea\u05e8\u05d5\u05df \u2018remainder,\u2019\n\u200e\u200f\u05d6\u05db\u05e8 \u2018remember,\u2019 \u05d6\u05db\u05e8\u05d5\u05df \u2018remembrance,\u2019 etc. These nouns are in their\nnature abstracts, but differ from the ordinary abstracts; see chapter\ni.\u00a014) =to man= (\u05dc\u05d0\u05d3\u05dd, this word occurs in its different combinations\nforty-eight times in this book, and always with the signification of\nman as a member of the human race. There is a tone of personification\nabout the word similar to that which occurs in the expression \u2018the\nold _Adam_;\u2019 when this generic character is not to be expressed, then\n\u200e\u200f\u05d0\u05d9\u05e9 or \u05d0\u05e0\u05d5\u05e9 is used instead; see chapters i.\u00a08; ix.\u00a014 and 15), =in all\nhis toil= (\u05e2\u05de\u05dc, a favourite word of Koheleth, and used as frequently\nin this book as in all the rest of Scripture put together. The exact\nmeaning to be affixed to it, and which, carefully kept in view, will\nbe found to explain more than one otherwise obscure passage, is that\ntoil, care, or anxiety which labour produces, and answers to the idea\ncontained in our metaphor \u2018takes _pains_;\u2019 see chapter ii.\u00a020), =which\nhe toils at= (this is the first instance which occurs of the contracted\nrelative \u05e9\u05be joined to the word. Koheleth uses also the full relative\n\u200e\u200f\u05d0\u05e9\u05e8, but with a slight difference of meaning. The contracted relative\nrefers to the word only which it joins, and in case of verbs often\ngives a subjunctive or optative meaning; the full relative refers\nback to the whole idea or clause. Hence the meaning of this passage\nis this, \u2018Is there any abiding advantage to humanity of the pains\nof his labouring in so far as he does take pains, or toils\u2019) =under\nthe sun= (or in this present state of existence). The phrase \u05ea\u05d7\u05ea \u05d4\u05e9\u05de\u05e9\noccurs twenty-five times in this book, and is always expressive of\na limitation. It shows that what is affirmed is to be understood as\nconfined to its relation to this sublunary existence only. The idea\nimplied is that of man toiling under the sun in the heat of the day\nin the sweat of his brow (Genesis iii.\u00a017), and earnestly desiring the\nshadow (Job vii.\u00a02), which shadow is yet the symbol of decaying life.\nIt is true that Ecclesiastes is never quoted in the New Testament,\nbut there are certainly several allusions to it, more or less direct;\none of these apparently occurs Revelation vii.\u00a016: \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03ac\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n\u1f14\u03c4\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03b9\u03c8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u2019 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u03ad\u03c3\u1fc3 \u1f10\u03c0\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f41 \u1f25\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1\u2015\u2015\u2018They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more, neither\nshall the sun light on them by day, nor any heat.\u2019 The Chaldee Targum\nexpresses this idea quaintly but forcibly: \u2018What advantage is there\nto a man after his death from all his labour which he laboured under\nthe sun in this world, except he studied the word of God, in order\nto receive a good reward in the world to come from before the Lord\nof the world?\u2019 In order to remind the reader of this meaning of the\nwords \u2018under the sun,\u2019 I have whenever they occur paraphrased them\nby \u2018in this hot work-day world\u2019\u2015\u2015not that this paraphrase is quite\nsatisfactory, but it is the best I could find.\n\nTo answer the above question, Koheleth cites _eight_ different\ninstances; four from natural, and four from moral experience. Those\nwe might call the eight _un_beatitudes of this sermon.\n\n 4 _One_ generation passeth \u2502 I. A generation comes, and\n away, and _another_ generation \u2502 that generation departs. But\n cometh: but the earth abideth \u2502 the earth the same abides.\n for ever. \u2502\n\n(4.) =A generation comes= (_i.e._ proceeds; the word occurs five times\nin the passage). =A generation sets= (using exactly the same word as\nfor the setting of the sun in the next verse), =but the earth to the\nage abideth= (_i.e._ remains the same as it was \u2018to the age\u2019 \u05dc\u05e2\u05dc\u05dd\u2015\u2015this\nword is used in a technical sense, and occurs chapters i. 4,\u00a010; ii.\u00a016;\niii. 11,\u00a014; ix.\u00a06; and xii.\u00a05 in this book. The LXX. render by \u03b1\u1f30\u03ce\u03bd,\nwhich Bengel says is \u2018s\u00e6culum pr\u00e6sens, mundus in sua indole cursu et\ncensu.\u2019 Hengstenberg observes that it is not an absolutely endless\neternity, but only a future of unlimited length. Bengel\u2019s definition,\n\u2018the present period in its quality, course, and account,\u2019 is exactly\nwhat the word signifies in this book. It is to be noticed that\neach instance of change is followed by a sentence which points out\nthat this change is resultless. In the first, the fluctuating and\nfleeting generations or life-periods of man contrast with the absolute\nendurance of an unchanged order of things). \u2018The great mill-wheel of\nexistence only revolves for the same cogs to come uppermost again and\nagain.\u2019\u2015\u2015[Hamilton, _Royal Preacher_.]\n\n 5 The sun also ariseth, \u2502 II. Bursts forth the sun,\n and the sun goeth down, and \u2502 and sets that sun again; and\n \u00b9hasteth to his place where \u2502 wearily advancing, bursts\n he arose. \u2502 forth as he did before.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ panteth. \u2502\n\n(5.) =And rises= (_i.e._ \u2018bursts out\u2019 or \u2018irradiates\u2019) =the sun, and\nsets the sun= (as \u2018sun\u2019 is repeated, the second is equivalent to that\nsame sun) =and towards his place panting= (this word \u2018pant,\u2019 \u05e9\u05d0\u05e3,\noccurs Job vii.\u00a02; Psalm lvii.\u00a03; Psalm cxix.\u00a0131, and denotes earnest\ndesire: the metaphor is a very beautiful one in this context)\u2015\u2015=rising=\n(irradiating) =is he there=.\n\n 6 The wind goeth toward the \u2502 III. Going southwards, and\n south, and turneth about unto \u2502 twisting northwards, twisting,\n the north; it whirleth about \u2502 twisting goes the blast; and\n continually, and the wind \u2502 so with all its twistings the\n returneth again according to \u2502 wind returns.\n his circuits. \u2502\n\n(6.) =Going= (_i.e._ \u2018walking,\u2019 \u2018proceeding,\u2019 as in verse\u00a04) =towards\nthe south= (the quarter of warm winds), and =turning round towards the\nnorth= (the place of cold), =turning turns, going the wind= (there is\nin the Hebrew a concourse of sibilant letters imitating the sound of\nthe wind, which is attempted to be rendered in the paraphrase), =and\nin its turnings returns the wind= (that is, ever goes round in the\nsame circuits, as the Authorized Version translates). Thus we have an\nallusion to the four cardinal points of the universe, North, South,\nEast, and West.\n\n 7 All the rivers run into \u2502 IV. All the torrents are\n the sea; yet the sea _is_ \u2502 running towards the sea, that\n not full; unto the place \u2502 sea which never overflows;\n from whence the rivers come, \u2502 to the place where these\n thither they \u00b9return again. \u2502 torrents are hastening,\n \u2502 thither they are only\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ return to go. \u2502 returning to go back.\n\n(7.) =All the torrents= (\u05e0\u05d7\u05dc, a mountain stream especially) =are going\nto the sea, and the sea it is not full= (equivalent to \u2018that sea which\nis never filled or any fuller\u2019), =to the place= to =which the rivers=\n(contract relative, meaning these _same_ rivers) =are going, thence are\nthey returning to go back.= (So the LXX.; others with the Authorized\nVersion translate, \u2018Thither they return again.\u2019) It is to be remarked\nthat this fact is scientifically accurate in statement. The Targum\nhas the gloss that the rivers flow into the ocean which _surrounds\nthe world like a ring_, and that they return again through the\n_subterranean channels_, but Koheleth knows nothing of such false\nphilosophy.\n\n 8 All things _are_ full of \u2502 V. All matters are fatiguing;\n labour; man cannot utter _it_: \u2502 impossible for any one to\n the eye is not satisfied with \u2502 reason out. Never is the eye\n seeing, nor the ear filled \u2502 satisfied by seeing, nor ever\n with hearing. \u2502 the ear filled with sound.\n\n(8.) =All the words= (with the article, and therefore generic;\n\u2018matters\u2019 or \u2018things,\u2019 in the technical sense of things reasoned about,\nsee verse\u00a01) =are fatiguing= (so the LXX. and Vulgate; Ginsburg has\n\u2018feeble;\u2019 Preston, \u2018in activity;\u2019 and Hengstenberg, \u2018all words become\nweary;\u2019 but the ancient verses make better sense with the context),\n=not possible is it for a man= (not \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd here, but \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9 = \u2018one,\u2019 or \u2018any\none\u2019) =to utter= them (\u05dc\u05d3\u05d1\u05e8, \u2018to speak rationally concerning them,\u2019\nand so to account for their existence or explain their nature. The\nimpossibility of exhausting a subject by talking or reasoning about\nit is here the point, as is evident from the order of the words); =not\nsatisfied= (answering to the \u2018not possible\u2019 above) =is the eye with\nseeing, and not is filled the ear by sound= (or by what it hears). So\nthen, while the consideration of any matter is pretty sure to produce\nweariness, it is quite certain not to produce satisfaction.\n\n 9 The thing that hath been, \u2502 VI. Whatever has been? \u2019tis\n it _is that_ which shall be; \u2502 just the same as will be; and\n and that which is done _is_ \u2502 whatever has been done? \u2019tis\n that which shall be done: \u2502 just the same as will be done.\n and _there is_ no new _thing_ \u2502 So there is nothing altogether\n under the sun. \u2502 new within this work-day world.\n\n(9.) =What is that which has been?= it =is the same which will be; and\nwhat is that which has been done?= it =is the same which will be done=\n(so the LXX., literally following the Heb. text), =and there is nothing\nall new under the sun.= The Authorized Version understands by this \u2018no\nnew thing;\u2019 but the peculiar position of this word \u2018all\u2019 seems to imply\nthat \u2018nothing\u2019 must be taken with some slight qualification,\u2015\u2015nothing\nmorally new. The next verse admits material novelty.\n\n 10 Is there _any_ thing \u2502 VII. [No doubt] there occurs\n whereof it may be said, See, \u2502 a matter such that people\n this _is_ new? it hath been \u2502 _say_, See, now this is really\n already of old time, which was \u2502 new. The present was it once\n before us. \u2502 in some age before our time.\n\n(10.) =There is= (\u05d9\u05e9, which is so far different from \u05d4\u05d9\u05d4 that it assumes\nthe existence as a fact, \u2018There really are matters which are called\nnew\u2019) =a matter which= one =says= (contracted relative joined to the\nverb, and giving an emphasis to it, equivalent therefore to our \u2018of\nwhich it may be _said_, indeed\u2019) =see this new it is= (emphatic) =the\npresent= (\u05db\u05d1\u05e8 occurs eight times, viz., i.\u00a010, ii. 12,\u00a016, iii.\u00a015\ntwice, iv.\u00a02, vi.\u00a010, and ix. 6, 7\u2015\u2015in Ecclesiastes only; it is a\ntechnical word used to denote the present state of things, that part\nof the \u05e2\u05dc\u05dd or \u2018age\u2019 which is now in existence. In the later Hebrew and\nSyriac it is used as an adverb, \u2018already,\u2019 but that is not its use here.\nThis remark is the more important because it is one of those so-called\nAramaic words, the occurrence of which is supposed to indicate the late\nperiod of this book\u2019s composition. A careful observance of its real\nimport will throw considerable light on several very obscure passages.\nGenerally, it may be taken for granted that if Koheleth uses a new\nword or form not known in other parts of the Scriptures, it is because\nhe desires to indicate a new idea.) =It was to the ages which= (full\nrelative, referring back, therefore, to the whole sentence) =were from\nbefore us= (as we have ages in the plural, followed by a singular verb,\n\u200e\u200f\u05d4\u05d9\u05d4, the meaning is some one of the ages). This thing which is said to\nbe new is really one of those forgotten matters which existed in one or\nother of the eras which were before our time.\n\n 11 _There is_ no remembrance \u2502 VIII. There is no remembrance\n of former _things_; neither \u2502 of former matters; and so also\n shall there be _any_ \u2502 with regard to subsequent ones\n remembrance of _things_ that \u2502 which will be, there will be no\n are to come with _those_ that \u2502 remembrance with those who will\n shall come after. \u2502 succeed them.\n\n(11.) =There is nothing= of =remembrance= (or memorial) =to former=\nevents (or persons) =and in addition to succeeding= events =which\nwill be. There will not be to them= (emphatic) =a remembrance= (the\nrepetition of this word shows it to be the prominent word of the\nsentence) =amongst those which shall be to= (_i.e._ belonging to)\nthe =last= of all (so the LXX.) We have here the feminine form, \u05d0\u05d7\u05e8\u05e0\u05d4.\nKoheleth usually expresses the abstracts by this form, and so here.\nThus, then, we find that history always repeats itself: not so, however,\nthat its events can be anticipated, but always so that its teachings\nmay be forgotten.\n\nThis then forms the first division of the book. By these eight\ninstances Koheleth proves the existence of unceasing toilsome care\nand resultless progression in all human things. He proceeds in the\nnext place to give his own personal experience, in the form of an\nautobiography to the same effect. All commentators, even those who deny\nthat Solomon himself was the author of this book, are agreed that he is\nthe hero, and that his life and experience form the groundwork of what\nis here set before us.\n\n \u2502 SECTION II.\u2015\u2015_Containing a\n \u2502 more formal discussion of the\n \u2502 problem of human existence,\n \u2502 drawn from the Preacher\u2019s own\n \u2502 observation and experience._\n \u2502\n 12 \u00b6 I the Preacher was king \u2502 Now, I myself, the Preacher,\n over Israel in Jerusalem. \u2502 was king over Israel in\n \u2502 Jerusalem,\n\n(12.) =I= (emphatic) =Koheleth was king over Israel in Jerusalem.=\nGinsburg supposes that by this declaration that he _was_ king, he\nintends to imply that he was so no longer; but not only does the LXX.\nrender by an imperfect, but the same word occurs in precisely the same\nform at Exodus ii.\u00a022, and clearly at the time there mentioned Moses\ncontinued to be a stranger in Midian. The object in stating this fact\nis rather to show that as a king he possessed peculiar facilities for\nmaking the investigation, an account of which follows.\n\n 13 And I gave my heart to \u2502 and I took the greatest pains\n seek and search out by wisdom \u2502 to seek out and to investigate\n concerning all _things_ that \u2502 by means of wisdom everything\n are done under heaven: this \u2502 that is done within the limits\n sore travail hath God given \u2502 of this world; how it is a\n to the sons of man \u00b9to be \u2502 painful uncertainty appointed\n exercised therewith. \u2502 of God to the human race that\n \u2502 they should be distracted with\n \u00b9 _Or_, to afflict them. \u2502 it.\n\n(13.) =And I set my heart= (gave great pains to, or thought much on,\nsee i.\u00a017, vii.\u00a021, viii. 9,\u00a010; Daniel x.\u00a012; 1 Chronicles xxii.\u00a019)\n=to inquiring= (\u05d3\u05e8\u05e9, being used of something lost or hidden, Genesis\nxxv.\u00a022, Deuteronomy xxii.\u00a02) =and to investigating= (\u05ea\u05d5\u05e8, refers to\nspying out or searching, Numbers xiii.\u00a015, chapter vii.\u00a025) =in wisdom=\n(the Authorized Version considers that wisdom was the means by which\ninquiry was made) =concerning= (\u05e2\u05dc, over) =all which= (equivalent to\n\u2018all that which\u2019) =is done= (but being niphal it has an objective sense,\nand includes what is suffered) =under the heavens= (this formula occurs\nchapter ii.\u00a03, and iii.\u00a01, and is of larger import than under the\nsun) =it is= (\u2018I mean that\u2019 is the equivalent expression in English)\n=uncertainty= (\u05e2\u05e0\u05d9\u05df, this is another technical word, it occurs eight\ntimes, chapter i.\u00a013, ii. 23,\u00a026, iii.\u00a010, iv.\u00a08, v. 3\u00a0(4), viii.\u00a016,\nand a careful comparison of places will show that the meaning is\n\u2018uncertainty,\u2019 accompanied with \u2018anxiety\u2019 as to what is to happen in\nthe future) =which is an evil= (for it is without the article) =given=\nof =God= (without the article; because God is here used personally, it\nis nominative to \u05e0\u05ea\u05df of course, but as the nominative follows the verb,\nthis is the best way of rendering in this case) =to the sons of the\nAdam= (the \u2018whole human race\u2019 is the meaning of this form), that they\nmay be =made anxious= (LXX. \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9) =therewith= (emphatic).\n\n 14 I have seen all the works \u2502 I perceived with respect to\n that are done under the sun; \u2502 all the actions whatsoever, in\n and, behold, all _is_ vanity \u2502 so far as they are performed\n and vexation of spirit. \u2502 within this work-day world,\n \u2502 that they are certainly all of\n \u2502 them (1.) evanescent, (2.) a\n \u2502 vexation of spirit,\n\n(14.) =I have seen= (I have observed, that is) =with respect to all\nactions= (\u05d0\u05ea is here emphatic as standing first) =which are performed=\n(niphal and contracted relative, hence having the meaning in so far as\nthey are or may be done) =under the sun= (for without this limitation\nthe above proposition would not be true), =and behold= (asserting a\nmatter of fact patent to all) =the whole= (with the article and in its\nusual sense, see chapter i.\u00a02) is =a vanity= (_i.e._ an instance of\nsomething evanescent) =and a vexation of spirit= (\u05e8\u05e2\u05d5\u05ea, occurs seven\ntimes in this book, viz., chapters i.\u00a014, ii. 11, 17,\u00a026, iv. 4,\u00a06,\nand vi.\u00a09; \u05e8\u05e2\u05d9\u05d5\u05df occurs three times, i.\u00a017, ii.\u00a022, iv.\u00a016. These words\nhave usually been regarded as absolutely synonymous, and hitherto\nthe difference of meaning has not been noticed; but there is a slight\ndifference, as a comparison of places will show. The exact sense to\nbe attached to them is a matter of dispute, and \u2018a windy notion,\u2019\n\u2018striving after the wind,\u2019 have been proposed, but the rendering of\nthe LXX., \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, \u2018distraction,\u2019 represents the meaning best. With\nregard to \u05e8\u05e2\u05d5\u05ea we may notice that it is formed quite regularly from \u05e8\u05e2\u05d4,\nwhich is \u2018evil,\u2019 in the sense of something that \u2018hurts\u2019 or \u2018offends,\u2019\nand is in the nature of a collective plural; so do we account at once\nfor the peculiar pointing and for the rendering of the LXX. On the\nother hand, \u05e8\u05e2\u05d9\u05d5\u05df has, as nouns with this termination usually have,\na more subjective meaning; the distinction between the two is that\nbetween \u2018vexations of\u2019 and \u2018vexing of\u2019 spirit; thus in verse\u00a017,\nwhere the trouble came from his own spirit, caused by his inability to\nexplain the difficulty which confronted him in his argument, Koheleth\nuses the subjective form).\n\n 15 _That which is_ crooked \u2502 (3.) a perplexity which it is\n cannot be made straight: and \u2502 impossible to set right, (4.)\n that which is \u00b9wanting cannot \u2502 a defect which it is equally\n be numbered. \u2502 impossible to account for.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ defect. \u2502\n\n(15.) =A crookedness= (occurs chapters vii.\u00a013, xii.\u00a03, and Amos\nviii.\u00a05, whence it appears that the precise meaning is moral obliquity)\n=not enabled to be set in order= (occurs chapter i.\u00a015, vii.\u00a018, xii.\u00a09,\nonly), =a defect= (occurs here only, but see Deuteronomy xxviii. 48,\u00a057,\nwhere the root is used of famine, and 1 Kings xvii.\u00a016, to denote the\nfailure of the oil) =not enabled= (repeated, hence we must render \u2018it\nis _equally_ impossible\u2019) =to be numbered= (infinitive plural niphal).\nThe meaning of this verse has been very much disputed, but if it be\nconsidered as the sequel to what went immediately before, the sense\nwill be quite plain. We may discern in it a fourfold description of\nhuman life, in respect of its cares and anxieties and uncertainties,\nthe first point being (i.)\u00a0that this care is for something evanescent;\n(ii.)\u00a0that it is vexatious; (iii.)\u00a0and then this anxiety is useless,\nbecause life is so perverted as to be beyond the possibility of being\nset in order by any care of ours; (iv.)\u00a0and so defective that no\naccount can be given which would set it right: \u2018which of you by taking\nthought can add one cubit to his stature?\u2019\n\n 16 I communed with mine own \u2502 I reasoned over the matter\n heart, saying, Lo, I am come \u2502 with my own heart to this\n to great estate, and have \u2502 effect. I who have, it appears,\n gotten more wisdom than all \u2502 become greater and more\n _they_ that have been before \u2502 advanced in wisdom than any who\n me in Jerusalem: yea, my \u2502 were before me in Jerusalem,\n heart \u00b9had great experience \u2502 and experienced over the widest\n of wisdom and knowledge. \u2502 extent of wisdom and knowledge,\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ had seen much. \u2502\n\n(16.) =Reasoned I myself together with my heart to say= (as reasoned\nstands first, this is the subject of the whole, and the words \u2018to say,\u2019\n\u200e\u200f\u05dc\u05d0\u05de\u05e8, are the usual formula of introduction of the thing said; they are\nequivalent to our \u2018to this effect.\u2019 This then is Koheleth\u2019s reasoning,\nthe result of which is to be given), =I behold= (stating it as an\nadmitted and patent fact) =I have been made great, and I have been\nadded= to in =wisdom above all which were before me in Jerusalem, and\nmy heart has seen the much= (with the article expressed; equivalent\ntherefore to very much, or as much as possible of) =wisdom and\nknowledge.=\n\n 17 And I gave my heart \u2502 and have set my heart earnestly\n to know wisdom, and to know \u2502 to know wisdom, and to know\n madness and folly: I perceived \u2502 false successes from real acts\n that this also is vexation of \u2502 of prudence, know but this: it\n spirit. \u2502 is simply vexing one\u2019s spirit;\n\n(17.) =And I have given my heart in order to know wisdom= (that is,\nhe made wisdom his special study and object) =and the knowledge of=\n(\u2018know\u2019 being repeated rises into special prominence, and hence the\nmeaning is to know wisdom, or to be wise enough to recognise) =false\nexpectations and prudences=. (This passage is one of great difficulty,\nbut the exact sense will become apparent on investigating the meaning\nof the two words \u05d4\u05d5\u05dc\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea and \u05e9\u05db\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea; now \u05d4\u05d5\u05dc\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea occurs chapter i.\u00a017, ii.\u00a012,\nvii.\u00a025, ix.\u00a03, and pointed with Shurek at x.\u00a013, and is peculiar to\nEcclesiastes. It is a technical word, and is correctly translated\n\u2018folly,\u2019 but it is that kind of folly which displays itself in false\njoy. The future poel from which this noun is derived occurs Job xii.\u00a017,\nchapter vii.\u00a07, Isaiah xliv.\u00a025; and the participle at chapter ii.\u00a02,\nPsalm cii.\u00a089. Thus we see the connexion between this sense and the\nmore ordinary one of \u2018praise;\u2019 it is the \u2018bepraised\u2019 used in a bad\nsense. The word \u05e9\u05db\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea occurs here only, but it is rendered by the LXX.\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7, and by the Syriac (\u2021 Syriac), compare also Genesis xli.\u00a033, \nwith the meaning \u2018prudence,\u2019 and with this agrees the later Hebrew. Now \nthese meanings make consistent sense. Koheleth wished to know wisdom \nand the knowledge of folly and prudence; in other words, to have a \nwisdom which could tell the one from the other. Thus the LXX. render \n\u200e\u200f\u05d4\u05dc\u05f4 by \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u1f70\u03c2, which A\u00b2 has altered into \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u1f70\u03bd; this apparently \nvery strange rendering is thus intelligible enough, especially to those \nwho had the Hebrew before them. To alter the text to \u05e1\u05db\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea, as some \nhave proposed, is not even to cut the Gordian knot, for with the true \nmeaning of this word, \u2018clever-folly,\u2019 \u2018false-wisdom,\u2019 no better sense \nwill be made, although it is quite possible that \u05e9\u05db\u05f4 may have been \nchosen for the equivoke it gives, not even differing in sound, if the \npointing can be trusted, from \u05e1\u05db\u05f4. The truth is that so much of our \nelaborate wisdom and best plans are but elaborate mistakes, that to \nattempt to judge the one from the other is a hopeless task. Hence then \nthe following) =I know= (this is the fourth time this word occurs in \nthe clause, thus it is brought out with the very strongest prominence, \nand gives the meaning \u2018what I do know is\u2019) =that even this= (\u05e9\u05d2\u05dd, \ncompare places chapter ii.\u00a015, viii.\u00a014, has a peculiar meaning, \nexpressive of surprise that this should be so) really =is vexing of \nspirit= (\u05e8\u05e2\u05d9\u05d5\u05df, not \u05e8\u05e2\u05d5\u05ea, as above; because in this case the vexation is \nsubjective,\u2015\u2015the idea conveyed by the whole passage being \u2018what I do \nknow as the result of my wisdom and knowledge being just even this, \nthat it is only a vexing of the spirit\u2019). It may be observed that \u05e8\u05e2\u05d9\u05d5\u05df \noccurs in the Chaldee of Daniel\u2015\u2015see Daniel ii. 29,\u00a030; iv. 19\u00a0(16); \nv.\u00a06, etc., always in the sense of a \u2018_painful_ reflection,\u2019 but in \nlater Chaldee and Syriac as \u2018a reflection\u2019 of any kind. As the sense \nin which Koheleth uses the word is the nearest to the root-meaning, is \nit not an evidence, so far, of earlier composition of his book?\n\n 18 For in much wisdom \u2502 because, in increasing wisdom,\n _is_ much grief: and he \u2502 there is an increase also of\n that increaseth knowledge \u2502 disappointment, and what adds\n increaseth sorrow. \u2502 to one\u2019s knowledge adds to\n \u2502 one\u2019s sorrow.\n\n(18.) =For= (introducing a reason for this conclusion as follows) =in\nmuch wisdom is much grief= (grief in the sense of \u2018vexation,\u2019 caused by\ndisappointment\u2015\u2015see chapter ii.\u00a023, vii. 3,\u00a09, xi.\u00a010, 1\u00a0Samuel i.\u00a06.\nThe LXX. translate by \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, \u2018knowledge\u2019! Is it possible that they\nintended to refer to Genesis ii.\u00a0\u266617, using \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 in a bad sense?)\n=and= he that =increases knowledge increases sorrow= (chapter ii.\u00a023;\nExodus iii.\u00a07, of the Israelitish sorrows at the hands of their\ntask-masters). \u2018In a world like this much science is much sorrow,\nfor it is the knowledge of penury, the statistics of starvation, the\nassurance that our case is desperate.\u2019\u2015\u2015[Hamilton.]\n\n \u2666 \u201cxvii.\u201d replaced with \u201c17\u201d\n\nEven the wisdom of Solomon having failed to find any solution of the\nproblem of human anxiety, he next tries mirth, but with no better\nsuccess. This experiment takes only two verses to record, for it was\nbut soon over.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER II.\n\n\n I SAID in mine heart, Go \u2502 SAID then I in my heart,\n to now, I will prove thee \u2502 Come now, I will try thee with\n with mirth, therefore enjoy \u2502 mirth, and so get a sight of a\n pleasure: and, behold, this \u2502 real-good; but see now, this is\n also _is_ vanity. \u2502 altogether an evanescent thing.\n \u2502 Of laughter, I said Delirium:\n\nII. (1.) =I said, even I= (the personal pronoun is not redundant, it\nindicates that Koheleth is recording his own experience), =in my heart=\n(this formula usually introduces in this book a thought more specious\nthan true), =Come now, I will try thee with mirth and see into good=\n(_i.e._ still addressing his heart, \u2018to see a real good;\u2019 \u05d8\u05d5\u05d1 is\nused in this book as a technical word, like _bonum_ in the _summum\nbonum_); =and behold= (stating a manifest fact) =also this= (emphatic,\nsignifying this same mirth) is a =vanity= (an evanescent thing; joy or\nmirth then is too short-lived to be considered a real good).\n\n 2 I said of laughter, _It \u2502 and of mirth, What will _that_\n is_ mad: and of mirth, What \u2502 do?\n doeth it? \u2502\n\n(2.) =To laughter I said, Madness= (that which is made mad, see note to\nchapter i.\u00a017), and =to pleasure= (or mirth), =What doth that do?= (as\nthis expects the answer No, it is very nearly equivalent to \u2018It _does_\nnothing.\u2019) (The Syriac reads here (\u2021 Syriac), \u2018What is the usefulness,\u2019 \n\u2018gratification,\u2019 or \u2018delight\u2019? It seems then as if the translators of \nthis version recognised a play upon the words \u200e\u200f\u05de\u05d4 \u05d4\u05d5\u05dc\u05dc, \u2018what a folly,\u2019 \nand \u05de\u05d4\u05d5\u05dc\u05dc, \u2018befooled,\u2019\u2015\u2015this being one of those equivokes in which \nKoheleth delights. The LXX. render verbatim, as is their custom, \n\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03bf\u1fd6\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2; \u2018why doest thou this?\u2019 but possibly with the same \nintention.)\n\nKoheleth next tries material enjoyment. The meaning of the following\npassage has been much disputed; we shall follow the rendering suggested\nby the LXX., which gives clear and intelligible sense.\n\n 3 I sought in mine heart \u2502 I tried with my heart to\n \u00b9to give myself unto wine, yet \u2502 allure as wine does one\u2019s flesh\n acquainting mine heart with \u2502 (that heart, however, being\n wisdom; and to lay hold on \u2502 conducted with wisdom), and so\n folly, till I might see what \u2502 get a hold over _false_ wisdom,\n _was_ that good for the sons \u2502 so that I might see thereby\n of men, which they should do \u2502 where lies the real good to\n under the heaven \u00b2all the days \u2502 the children of men, when they\n of their life. \u2502 are working in _this_ world, as\n \u2502 the tale of their daily lives.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ to draw my flesh \u2502 [Accordingly]\n with wine. \u2502\n \u2502\n \u00b2 _Hebrew_ the number of the \u2502\n days of their life. \u2502\n\n(3.) =I investigated with my heart= (or _in_ my heart; but the\nformer makes better sense. His heart was the medium through which the\ninvestigation was made. He wanted to see if material enjoyment would\nsatisfy his heart, _i.e._ the emotional part of his nature) =in order\nto a drawing with wine= (the LXX. render \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f36\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u2018_as_ wine,\u2019 but\nthey probably did not read otherwise than our present text, for this\n_as_ represents the \u05d0\u05ea which follows) =as to my flesh= (the meaning\nof the Hebrew is that he drew or enticed with wine with respect to his\nflesh, and that hence his object in using the wine was to entice the\nflesh. The rendering of the LXX. is _ad sensum_, preserving also a\nrendering of each word), =and my heart led= (_i.e._ as a man leads an\nanimal, Psalm lxxx.\u00a01, Isaiah xi.\u00a06. As \u2018heart\u2019 is repeated, we have\nthe meaning \u2018that same heart\u2019) =with wisdom= (because unless he enjoyed\nwisely he would not enjoy at all) =and= (repeated in the same clause,\nequal therefore to \u2018and so\u2019) =to lay hold of false wisdom= (\u05e1\u05db\u05dc\u05d5\u05bc\u05ea,\noccurs chapters ii. 3, 12,\u00a013, vii.\u00a025, x. 1,\u00a013, and is peculiar to\nthis book. The LXX. render \u03b5\u1f50\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u2018pleasure,\u2019 which, however A\u00b2\nalters to \u1f00\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7, \u2018folly,\u2019 the reason of which will appear presently.\nThe meaning of the root \u05e1\u05db\u05dc is to \u2018play,\u2019 or \u2018act the fool,\u2019 and in\nthis respect differs from \u05db\u05e1\u05dc, which has the idea of \u2018stupidity,\u2019\nand in the hiphil form, \u2018made stupid,\u2019 or \u2018befooled.\u2019 In all the\nten places in which the root \u05e1\u05db\u05dc occurs in other parts of Scripture,\nwe find the meaning of elaborateness and subtilty as well as folly;\ncompare 1 Samuel xiii.\u00a013, Saul\u2019s burnt-offering in the absence of\nSamuel; 2 Samuel xxiv.\u00a010; 1 Chronicles xxi.\u00a08, David\u2019s numbering the\npeople; 2 Chronicles xvi.\u00a09, Asa\u2019s reliance on Syria; 2 Samuel xv.\u00a031,\nAhithophel\u2019s counsel; similarly Isaiah xliv.\u00a025, where knowledge is\nsaid to be misused; so also \u05e1\u05b8\u05db\u05b8\u05dc, occurs Jeremiah iv.\u00a022, v.\u00a021, has\nevidently the same shade of meaning. It is hard to find a single word\nwhich will render it; \u2018foolish wisdom\u2019 or \u2018clever follies\u2019 are the best\ncombinations that occur. It will be seen also, in referring to the\nlexicon, that the LXX., who translate by \u03b5\u1f50\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7, apparently use\nthe word occasionally in a sinister aspect, see Proverbs xxx.\u00a032, Sira\nxiii.\u00a08. The Syriac here reads (\u2021 Syriac word) (see i.\u00a017), \u2018prudence,\u2019 \n\u2018intelligence,\u2019 contrary to its interpretation in other places. On \nthe whole, however, it is not difficult to see why the LXX. rendered \nas they did. That this pleasure was of a bad kind, or deceptive, the \nsequel shows, but it may be doubted whether their rendering preserved \nthe meaning of \u05e1\u05db\u05f4, even if, which is not impossible, they themselves \nunderstood it). =Until I= should =see where= (in the sense of \nwhereabouts, see 1 Samuel ix.\u00a08) is =this good to the sons of Adam, \nwhich= (full relative, referring back to the whole idea, equivalent \ntherefore to \u2018what _good_ it is which\u2019) =they do under the sun the \nnumber of the days of their lives= (this phrase occurs chapter ii.\u00a03, \nv. 18\u00a0(17), vi.\u00a012, as \u2018the tale,\u2019 or \u2018account of the days,\u2019 of their \nlives; an additional limitation to the words \u2018under the sun\u2019). In \nmaking this experiment he began to _work_ and _toil_ more than ever.\n\n 4 I made me great works; I \u2502 I increased my works.\n builded me houses; I planted \u2502\n me vineyards: \u2502 (1.) I built for _myself_\n \u2502 houses.\n \u2502\n \u2502 (2.) I planted for _myself_\n \u2502 vineyards.\n\n(4.) =I increased my work, I built for myself= (this emphatic \u2018myself\u2019\noccurs eight times in the passage, and is therefore its key-word)\n=houses, I planted for myself vineyards.=\n\n 5 I made me gardens and \u2502 (3.) I made for _myself_\n orchards, and I planted trees \u2502 gardens and parks, and planted\n in them of all _kind of_ \u2502 in them fruit-trees of every\n fruits: \u2502 kind.\n\n(5.) =I made for myself gardens and parks, and planted in them trees of\nevery kind of fruit.= It should have been mentioned that \u05e4\u05e8\u05d3\u05e1 is also\nconsidered to afford an indication of late composition. It is said to\nbe a Persian word; it occurs, however, Nehemiah ii.\u00a08; Canticles iv.\u00a010.\nThe word admits of Semitic derivation, from \u05e4\u05e8\u05d3, \u2018to divide,\u2019 \u2018cut\noff in portions,\u2019 \u2018lay out.\u2019 If it be really an exotic, no date of\nintroduction is more probable than that of Solomon. It is also to be\nnoted that in the context it _follows_ the word \u2018gardens,\u2019 which is\nquite natural if it were intended to denote a foreign luxury recently\nintroduced.\n\n 6 I made me pools of water, \u2502 (4.) I made for _myself_\n to water therewith the wood \u2502 reservoirs with which to\n that bringeth forth trees: \u2502 irrigate meadows and growing\n \u2502 copses.\n\n(6.) =I made for myself pools of water to irrigate from them the\nmeadows shooting forth trees.= (This, which contains \u2018for myself\u2019\n_four_ times, the first _half_ of the seven, consists of an enumeration\nof immoveable objects, or what the law calls real property, the others\nwhich follow are moveables or personal.)\n\n 7 I got _me_ servants and \u2502 (5.) I purchased slaves and\n maidens, and had \u00b9servants \u2502 maidens, and had for _myself_\n born in my house; also I had \u2502 home-born servants, besides\n great possessions of great and \u2502 herds of great and small\n small cattle above all that \u2502 cattle, more numerous than\n were in Jerusalem before me: \u2502 any of my predecessors in\n \u2502 Jerusalem.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ sons of my house. \u2502\n\n(7.) =I obtained slaves and maidens, and sons of my house= (home-born\nslaves, that is) =were= belonging to =myself, besides possessions of\nherd and flock; many= such were belonging =to myself; more than all who\nwere before me in Jerusalem.=\n\n 8 I gathered me also silver \u2502 (6.) I procured for _myself_\n and gold, and the peculiar \u2502 silver and gold and precious\n treasure of kings and of \u2502 objects of every kingdom and\n the provinces: I gat me \u2502 province.\n men-singers and women-singers, \u2502\n and the delights of the sons \u2502 (7.) I obtained for _myself_\n of men, _as_ \u00b9musical \u2502 men-singers and women-singers,\n instruments, and that of all \u2502 every delight that man can\n sorts. \u2502 enjoy, to the very ecstasy of\n \u2502 ravishment.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ musical \u2502\n instruments and \u2502\n instruments. \u2502\n\n(8.) =I gathered for myself, moreover, silver and gold, and the\npeculiar treasure of kings and the provinces. I made for myself= (_i.e.\n_ procured) =men-singers and women-singers, the delights of the sons of\nmen, outpouring and outpourers.= (The different meanings given to these\ntwo last words, \u05e9\u05d3\u05d4 \u05d5\u05e9\u05d3\u05d5\u05ea, which occur here only, are various, scarcely\na commentary or version agreeing. The LXX. translate a \u2018butler\u2019 and\n\u2018female cup-bearers,\u2019 the Vulgate \u2018pitchers and vases,\u2019 Ginsburg \u2018a\nconcubine and concubines\u2019; but the most probable etymology seems to\ngive the idea of \u2018overflowing\u2019 to the word in some sense or other. It\nis possible then to take the words generally, and interpret them as\nreferring to the overflow, not only of the generous wines, but of all\nthe delights of which wine is a type, as in the words \u2018The feast of\nreason and the flow of soul,\u2019 or like Milton\u2019s\u2015\u2015\n\n \u2018Did ever mortal mixture of earth\u2019s mould\n Breathe such divine enchanting ravishment?\u2019\n\nThe arrangement of these different objects of pleasure is somewhat\nartificial, as will be seen on examining the grouping.)\n\n 9 So I was great, and \u2502 So I was great and increased\n increased more than all that \u2502 more than all that were ever\n were before me in Jerusalem: \u2502 before me in Jerusalem, yet\n also my wisdom remained with \u2502 notwithstanding my wisdom\n me. \u2502 remained fast with _myself_,\n\n(9.) =And I was great= (rightly the Authorized Version, \u2018_so_,\u2019\nreferring back to verse\u00a04) =and increased more than all= (_all_ now\nbecomes the key-word, which occurs seven times) =which was= (singular,\ngiving the sense than \u2018any was\u2019) =before me in Jerusalem; also=\n(\u200e\u200f\u05d0\u05e3, affirms strongly, see Job iv.\u00a019, \u2018but beside,\u2019 for without this\nprovision of a wise enjoyment the experiment was necessarily a failure:)\n=my wisdom remained= (_i.e._ stood; it is usual to say that \u05e2\u05de\u05d3\u05d4 is\nfeminine to agree with \u05d7\u05db\u05de\u05d4; perhaps it would be equally correct to say\nthat it was an instance of two abstract ideas in apposition, giving the\nsense \u2018was still a thing standing\u2019) =with myself= (emphatic, and the\neighth repetition of this word).\n\n 10 And whatsoever mine eyes \u2502 and _all_ my eyes desired I\n desired I kept not from them, \u2502 kept not from them, nor did I\n I withheld not my heart from \u2502 deny my heart even one of _all_\n any joy; for my heart rejoiced \u2502 its joys: for this heart of\n in all my labour: and this was \u2502 mine did rejoice in my toils,\n my portion of all my labour. \u2502 and this was what I procured\n \u2502 for _all_ my toil.\n\n(10.) =And all which asked mine eyes I did not restrain= (or keep back;\nsee Genesis xxvii.\u00a036, Numbers xi.\u00a017, for the meaning, the only other\ninstances where it occurs in Kal.) =from them= (emphatic), =I did not\ndeny my heart from all rejoicing, for my heart rejoiced from all my\ntoil= (_i.e._ there was a certain kind of pleasure derived from doing\nall this), =and this was my portion= (\u2018lot\u2019 or \u2018inheritance\u2019 from all\nmy toil; equal to our \u2018this was all I obtained for my pains\u2019).\n\n 11 Then I looked on all \u2502 So I turned to look on _all_\n the works that my hands had \u2502 my work my hand had wrought,\n wrought, and on the labour \u2502 and _all_ my toil which I\n that I had laboured to do: \u2502 had moiled and done, and lo!\n and, behold, all _was_ vanity \u2502 that ALL was\u2015\u2015evanescent, and\n and vexation of spirit, and \u2502 vexation of spirit, and nothing\n _there was_ no profit under \u2502 of profit in this hot work-day\n the sun. \u2502 world.\n\n(11.) =I turned myself= (\u05e4\u05e0\u05d4 differs from \u05e1\u05d1\u05d1; the former is \u2018to turn\nround in order to look,\u2019 the latter is to \u2018go round in order to do.\u2019\nThe distinction is not without importance) =in all my works which\nworked my hands, and in my toil which I had toiled to work= (notice\nthe occurrence of these words\u2015\u2015work, work, toil, toil), =and behold=\n(a manifest and indisputable conclusion) =the whole was vanity and\nvexation of spirit, and there was nothing of profit= (_i.e._ over and\nabove the slight amount of present pleasure which he obtained) =under\nthe sun.= (It is especially worthy of remark that while Koheleth found\nsome small pleasure _in_ work, he found none _from_ it. Take, oh men,\nto your curse kindly, but a curse it is!)\n\n 12 \u00b6 And I turned myself to \u2502 Then I turned myself again\n behold wisdom, and madness, \u2502 to perceive wisdom in regard\n and folly: for what _can_ the \u2502 to [its power of detecting]\n man _do_ that cometh after the \u2502 _false_ hopes and _false_\n king? \u00b9_even_ that which hath \u2502 prudence, for how is any man\n been already done. \u2502 to enter upon the results of\n \u2502 that plan which he may have\n \u00b9 _Or_, in those things \u2502 made beforehand?\n which have been already \u2502\n done. \u2502\n\n(12.) =And I turned= (this coming immediately after a similar\nexpression, verse\u00a011, rises into emphasis; it equals our \u2018again\nI turned\u2019), =I myself= (emphatic, it was, as above, a personal\nexperience), =to see wisdom and self-deceptions and also false\nsuccesses= (the meaning of this passage most probably is, that Koheleth\ndesired to see wisdom in conjunction with those two kinds of folly\nwhich he denotes respectively by \u05d4\u05d5\u05dc\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea, false expectations or hopes,\nsee chapter i.\u00a017, and \u05e1\u05db\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea, false wisdom, that kind of folly which\nis so either through ignorance or sin, but has to all appearance\nthe semblance of wisdom, see chapter ii.\u00a03. If he could succeed in\naccomplishing this, he might by his wisdom avoid the mistakes into\nwhich men fall). =For= (this must introduce a reason) =what?= (Genesis\nxx.\u00a010, \u05de\u05b8\u05d4, Genesis iv.\u00a010, \u05de\u05b6\u05d4, both forms being similar in use) is\n=the man= (with the article; generic therefore, and equivalent to \u2018what\nis the man?\u2019) =who enters= (but as this is the contracted relative,\nit is equivalent to \u2018that he should enter\u2019) =after= (but the word is\nstrictly speaking a noun plural in regimen, and means \u2018that which comes\nafter,\u2019 \u2018the sequel of\u2019) =the king= (this the LXX. render by \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2,\nthe reasons of which we will discuss presently). =With respect to\nwhich= (for the \u05d0\u05ea is emphatic, hence some of the recensions of the LXX.\nread \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1) =the present= (the present state of things, \u05db\u05d1\u05e8 in its\nusual meaning, which it has everywhere in Ecclesiastes, see chapter\ni.\u00a010) =they make it= \u05e2\u05e9\u05d1\u05d4\u05d5, third person plural with the affix, which\nthe LXX. refer back to \u05d4\u05de\u05dc\u05da. The meaning of this passage has been much\ndisputed, and our difficulties are not diminished by the very strange\nrendering of the LXX., which is usually dismissed by commentators as\nerroneous; an explanation, however, of this rendering will probably\nclear up the difficulty. We must first notice the corrupt state of\nthe present text of the LXX. The Alexandrine reads \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f40\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd; E.\u00a0X. read \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\n\u1f45\u03c3\u03b1; F.\u00a0X. \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1; B.\u00a0X. \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd; and X. \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ae; Aquila reads\n\u1f43\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f40\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2; Symmachus, \u03c4\u03af \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f35\u03bd\u03b1\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b7 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u1fc7; Theodotion, \u1f43\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f40\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2; but,\nas Field remarks (Hexapla, p.\u00a0384), it is doubtful whether the Syriac\ntext reads (\u2021 Syriac word), \u2018king,\u2019 or (\u2021 Syriac word), \u2018counsel.\u2019 In \nthe same way, Theodotion reads \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd.\n\nWe must observe that all these versions, without exception, omit to\nnotice \u05db\u05d1\u05e8, which everywhere else is noted by \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7, being content with\n\u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 or \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1. The explanation of these difficulties seems to\nbe that \u05d4\u05de\u05dc\u05da was probably intended to be equivocal. It is, to say the\nleast, not impossible that it had, even in Solomon\u2019s time, the meaning\nof \u2018counsel,\u2019 which attaches to it as a usual signification in Aramaic;\nif so, \u05d4\u05de\u05dc\u05da means _the_ counsel, and of course has the idea of rule as\nwell. Castell gives as the meaning of (\u2021 Syriac word), \u2018Intellectum, \nConsilium dedit,\u2019 vel \u2018inivit,\u2019 \u2018Consultavit,\u2019 \u2018Promisit,\u2019 \u2018Pollicitus \nest;\u2019 thus we must understand it to mean, \u2018plans formed and intended \nto be carried out.\u2019 The question then which Koheleth asks is this, \u2018Who \nis the man who will enter upon\u2015\u2015as we say, _carry out_\u2015\u2015his plans with \nrespect to that which in the present moment he makes them or devises \nthem;\u2019 in other words, can he carry out what he now devises, and can \n_any_ man do this out of the number of human creatures who make these \nplans? This is the reason of the distributive plural which the best \nrecensions of the LXX. preserve. The equivoke involved in the meaning \n\u2018king\u2019 is obvious. Koheleth himself is, of course, _the_ king: could \nany one do better than he? It must be allowed that this meaning makes \nexcellent sense with the context, and violates no Hebrew grammar. If, \nhowever, I have failed in giving a real interpretation of this most \ndifficult passage, I may be excused a conjecture which is as plausible \nas many that have been advanced on this point. The corruptions of the \nold versions may be explained by the fact that the equivoke was lost \nso soon as readers ceased to have the Hebrew text before them, and \nhence the attempt to better their text. This most obscure passage may \nperhaps receive some light from a further discussion of the word \u05db\u05d1\u05e8 \nand other forms derived from the same root. The feminine or abstract \noccurs Genesis xxxv.\u00a016, xlviii.\u00a07, and 2\u00a0Kings v.\u00a019, joined \nwith \u05d0\u05e8\u05e5, rendered in the Authorized Version a \u2018little\u2019 way. The verb \noccurs in hiphil, Job xxxv.\u00a016, xxxvi.\u00a031, translated \u2018multiplied,\u2019 \n\u2018in abundance;\u2019 and in the hiphil form, with the characteristic _jud\u0304_ \ninserted\u2015\u2015Job viii.\u00a02, xv.\u00a010, etc.; Isaiah x.\u00a013, xvii.\u00a012, etc.\u2015\u2015in \nthe sense of \u2018full of years,\u2019 \u2018overflowing,\u2019 and the like. A diligent \ncomparison of these meanings shows that \u2018fulness,\u2019 in the sense of \n\u2018completeness,\u2019 must be the root-meaning; and hence, when applied to \ntime, the LXX. render \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7, \u2018already.\u2019 With this meaning agree also \nthe Arabic and Syriac, see Fuerst, Lexicon, _s. voc_. The meaning \nthen of the word is, the \u2018_complete_ present.\u2019 With regard to the \nuse of the root \u05de\u05dc\u05da in the sense of counsel, it occurs once in Hebrew, \nviz. Nehemiah v.\u00a07, and once in biblical Chaldee, Daniel iv. 27\u00a0(24). \nThis meaning is common, as remarked in the note, in Aramaic. The fair \ninference from this is, that the root-meaning of the Hebrew word is \n\u2018to counsel,\u2019 just as the root-meaning of the word Apostle is \u2018one \nsent.\u2019 These senses are just what the context requires. Koheleth turns \nround to see wisdom in comparison with, or contradistinction to, false \nhopes and false prudence, and asks how the man, that is, humanity, can \ntell the one from the other. His words are \u2018what is,\u2019 not \u2018_who_ is \nthe man,\u2019 etc., equivalent to\u2015\u2015\u2018in what way can humanity enter upon the \nresults of the counsel,\u2019 \u2018or the king,\u2019\u2015\u2015the equivoke being, we believe, \nintentional, and the contracted relative giving a conditional turn to \nthe sentence\u2015\u2015\u2018with respect to that which at present he performs it.\u2019 \nIt would have been better if the word =with= had been printed in the \nnotes with a small letter, as the division hardly amounts to a period, \nthough the connexion is not close. The suffix of the verb refers back \nthrough the relative pronoun to counsel, and might be well rendered \ninto English thus\u2015\u2015\u2018In respect of which he at present takes that \ncounsel.\u2019 The LXX., contrary to their custom, omit \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7, because it is \nperhaps sufficiently included in \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, or because \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \n\u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd would not have been intelligible. It is evident this all \nsquares with the context. Koheleth, as Solomon, discovered that with \nall his wisdom he could not practically discern the difference between \nthis true wisdom and that false prudence which led him to accumulate \nonly to be disappointed in his successor.\n\n 13 Then I saw \u00b9that wisdom \u2502 Now, I have myself perceived\n excelleth folly, as far as \u2502 that there must be a profit to\n light excelleth darkness. \u2502 wisdom over false prudence as\n \u2502 great as the profit of light\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ that there is an \u2502 over darkness.\n excellency in wisdom more \u2502\n than in folly, etc. \u2502\n\n(13.) =And I have seen, I= have (with the emphatic I again, as a\npersonal experience) =that there is= (_i.e._ that there really is),\n=a profit to wisdom above folly= (these same _elaborate_ mistakes which\nlook so like wisdom) =as the profit of the light above the darkness=.\n(Here profit is repeated, hence the meaning is \u2018as great as the profit\nof light above darkness.\u2019) =The wise, his eyes are in his head, but the\nfool= (_i.e._ the \u2018deceived fool\u2019\u2015\u2015notice the hiphil form\u2015\u2015equivalent\nto the befooled, but not necessarily by others\u2015\u2015by himself also) =in\ndarkness walks= (hence a wise man ought to be as much better off than\na fool as a sighted man is better than one blind, but experience does\nnot confirm this conclusion); =and I know also, I= (emphatic), =that\nthe hap= (_i.e._ the result or what occurs) =is one happening= (present\nhere as opposed to participial noun) =to all of them= (_i.e._ both wise\nand fools alike\u2015\u2015equivalent in our idiom, \u2018precisely the same result\noccurs to all\u2019).\n\n 14 The wise man\u2019s eyes _are_ \u2502 The wise has eyes in his head,\n in his head; but the fool \u2502 the befooled is wandering in\n walketh in darkness: and I \u2502 the dark; yet I know, as the\n myself perceived also that one \u2502 result of my own experience,\n event happeneth to them all. \u2502 that the event to which both\n \u2502 attain is just alike, so I\n 15 Then said I in my heart, \u2502 reasoned with myself thus:\n As it happeneth to the fool, \u2502 Exactly the same event as\n so it \u00b9happeneth even to me; \u2502 happens to one befooled has\n and why was I then more wise? \u2502 happened to me, and therefore\n Then I said in my heart, that \u2502 why should I make myself wise?\n this also _is_ vanity. \u2502 Then besides! Why, I said in my\n \u2502 heart, even this is an instance\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ happeneth to me, \u2502 of evanescence,\n even to me. \u2502\n\n(14, 15.) =And I said, I did, in my heart= (it was not a right thing\nto say, but, as we have already noticed, this formula introduces a\nsuggestion more specious than true), =Like the hap of the befooled, so\nhave I happened me= (_i.e._ made my own hap or result), =and why did I\nmake myself wise then in addition?= (The Masorets accent so as to make\nthis the main division of the verse, and consider these three last\nwords to belong to what precedes. The LXX., on the contrary\u2015\u2015which adds\na gloss after \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03af\u1fb3 \u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 (\u03b4\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f04\u03c6\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bb\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6), \u2018for the\nfool speaketh abundantly,\u2019 which is an ancient one, for the Syriac has\nit also, and varies much in its different recensions\u2015\u2015considers them\nto belong to the following verse. It is difficult on this account to\ncome to a conclusion which is correct, the LXX. or the Masorets; the\nmore that the Masorets themselves hesitate between \u05d9\u05ea\u05e8 and \u05d9\u05d5\u05ea\u05e8. On the\nwhole, one would incline to the following explanation:\u2015\u2015take \u05d9\u05b6\u05ea\u05b6\u05e8 in its\nordinary acceptation, \u2018the rest,\u2019 the meaning would thus be \u2018then the\nrest,\u2019 or \u2018what results is;\u2019 and suppose the pointing \u05d9\u05b9\u05ea\u05b5\u05e8, a conjecture\nsubsequently strengthened by writing \u05d9\u05d5\u05ea\u05e8); =and I said= (it was\npossibly this difficult \u05d5, \u2018and,\u2019 which gave rise to the Masoretic\nconjecture\u2015\u2015the LXX. take no notice of it; it is equivalent to \u2018_why_ I\nsaid\u2019) =that this= (the contracted relative with \u05d2\u05dd occurs only chapter\ni.\u00a017, ii.\u00a015, viii.\u00a014, and has a tone of surprise and disappointment,\ngiving the sense apparently that \u2018even _this_ wisdom itself! is\u2019)\n=a vanity= (or an instance of evanescence or transitoriness).\n\n 16 For _there is_ no \u2502 because there is no remembrance\n remembrance of the wise more \u2502 of the wise or the befooled\n than of the fool for ever; \u2502 either, in the future; because\n seeing that which now _is_ in \u2502 as time goes on the present\n the days to come shall all be \u2502 will be forgotten, and fool and\n forgotten. And how dieth the \u2502 wise will perish alike together.\n wise _man_? as the fool. \u2502\n\n(16.) =For= (an expansion of the above argument, and a corroboration of\nthe conclusion) =there is nothing= of =remembrance to a wise= (person\nor thing indefinitely) =with the fool= (but the hiphil form is to\nbe noted, as also the article, the befooled, generically, for a wise\naction perishes from remembrance amidst the class of fools) =to the\nage= (_i.e._ so far as the indefinite future is concerned) =by which\npresent= (_i.e._ in the present of that future age or \u00e6on it will so\nhappen that) during =the days, the going ones= (meaning, of course,\nthe days as they are passing, or, as we say, \u2018in the lapse of time\u2019)\n=the whole= (the whole of these wise lives and works) =is forgotten=\n(niphal, \u2018becomes a forgotten thing\u2019) =and how then dies the wise? with\nthe fool= (_i.e._ both perish together).\n\n 17 Therefore I hated life; \u2502 I was even disgusted with\n because the work that is \u2502 respect to life itself: for\n wrought under the sun _is_ \u2502 an evil to _me_ is the work\n grievous unto me: for all _is_ \u2502 at which I toil in this hot\n vanity and vexation of spirit. \u2502 work-day world, since the whole\n \u2502 is evanescent, and vexation of\n \u2502 spirit.\n\n(17.) =Then hated I, with respect to the lives= (an emphatic \u05d0\u05ea,\nwhich the LXX. note by the adverbial \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd, and meaning not exactly\nthat he hated his own life, as that he felt a disgust with respect\nto life generally), =because an evil to me= (emphatic with \u05e2\u05dc, giving\nthe notion of pressing upon) =the work which I worked under the sun,\nbecause= (\u05db\u05d9 following in a sentence with \u05db\u05d9 at the commencement; this\nparticle thus doubled I believe to be often nearly equivalent to our\n\u2018for,\u2019 \u2018as,\u2019) =the whole is vanity and vexation of spirit.=\n\n 18 \u00b6 Yea, I hated all my \u2502 I for my part was disgusted\n labour which I had taken under \u2502 with all my toil that I had\n the sun: because I should \u2502 moiled at it, in this work-day\n leave it unto the man that \u2502 world, because I shall leave it\n shall be after me. \u2502 to the man that succeeds me,\n\n(18.) =I hated then, I myself= (emphatic pronoun, because again we have\nKoheleth\u2019s personal experience, as we should say, \u2018I was disgusted\u2019),\n=with respect to all my toil which I= (again strongly personal, meaning\nso far as it was _my_ toil) =had toiled at under the sun that I should\nleave it= (close relative qualifying the verb, and giving the idea that\nthe grievance was that he would have to leave this work) =to a man=\n(_i.e._ some man as a human person) =which will be after me.=\n\n 19 And who knoweth whether \u2502 and no one knows whether he\n he shall be a wise _man_ or a \u2502 will be wise or foolishly\n fool? yet shall he have rule \u2502 clever, and yet he will have\n over all my labour wherein I \u2502 power over all my toil at which\n have laboured, and wherein I \u2502 I have moiled, and done so\n have shewed myself wise under \u2502 wisely in this hot work-day\n the sun. This _is_ also vanity.\u2502 world: another instance this\n \u2502 of evanescence.\n\n(19.) =And who knows= (equivalent to \u2018no-body does know\u2019) whether =the\nwise= (with the article, meaning one who belongs to this class, and who\nwill really act wisely) =or a fool?= (\u05e1\u05db\u05dc\u2015\u2015that is, a wisely-foolish\nperson, one whose wisdom will prove a mistake according to the meaning\nof this word, see chapter ii.\u00a03, references.; and will use this power\nprovided to his hand either amiss, or so as to defeat the end the\nwise man had in view) =and he has power= (\u05e9\u05dc\u05d8, a favourite word of\nKoheleth\u2019s; the exact meaning of this term may be found in Psalm\ncxix.\u00a0130) =in all my toil which I have toiled at, and which also I\nhave made myself wise in= (_i.e._ spent my pains wisely in) =under the\nsun: besides this is vanity= (or, as we should say, \u2018moreover this is\nanother instance of vanity or evanescence\u2019).\n\n 20 Therefore I went about to \u2502 So then I came round to the\n cause my heart to despair of \u2502 conclusion that I must bid\n all the labour which I took \u2502 farewell to any hope of\n under the sun. \u2502 satisfaction from anything I\n \u2502 had toiled at in this work-day\n \u2502 world;\n\n(20.) =I turned round then, I myself, to cause to despair with respect\nto my heart= (\u05d9\u05d0\u05e9, occurs 1\u00a0Samuel xxvii.\u00a01, where the word is used of\nSaul giving up the search for David in despair) =over the toil which I\ntoiled at under the sun.=\n\n 21 For there is a man whose \u2502 because it amounts to this:\n labour _is_ in wisdom, and \u2502 man, even when he toils wisely,\n in knowledge, and in equity; \u2502 prudently, and successfully,\n yet to a man that hath not \u2502 does so for some individual\n laboured therein shall he \u2502 who has not toiled at all, and\n leave it _for_ his portion. \u2502 gives it to him to possess: an\n This also _is_ vanity and a \u2502 instance of evanescence, and\n great evil. \u2502 very evil.\n\n(21.) =For it is= (this exists as the real state of the case) =man=\n(_i.e._ one specimen of humanity\u2015\u2015this is what humanity is really doing)\n=which he toils= (= who _is_, or may be, labouring) =with wisdom, and\nwith knowledge, and with success= (\u05db\u05e9\u05e8\u05d5\u05df, occurs chapter ii.\u00a021, iv.\u00a04,\nv.\u00a011, the root occurs Esther viii.\u00a05, chapter xi.\u00a06, x.\u00a010; it is\na technical word\u2015\u2015a \u2018successful issue\u2019 is the meaning; compare the\npassages. The LXX. render by \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3, \u2018bravery,\u2019 which is not a bad\nrendering, since it appears from the above that this success was but\ntemporary), =and to a man who= has =not= (emphatic; the contracted\nrelative joined with the negative shows that his _not_ doing this is\nthe point) =toiled= (_i.e._ taken any trouble) =in it= (emphatic, = \u2018in\nthat same\u2019) =he will give it= as =his portion; also this is= a =vanity=\nand =an evil= which is =great=. (There is a strange sarcastic tone\ngiven by the affix in the verb following the emphatic pronoun, \u2018to one\nwho has not toiled in _it_ at all will he give that same.\u2019)\n\n 22 For what hath man of \u2502 For what comes to a man through\n all his labour, and of the \u2502 all his toil and vexing his\n vexation of his heart, wherein \u2502 heart, which he himself toils\n he hath laboured under the \u2502 at within this work-day world?\n sun? \u2502\n\n(22.) =For what is there= (\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4, a peculiar form; but is it not possible\nthat this word has been chosen for the sake of the equivoke? \u05d4\u05b7\u05d5\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4,\n\u2018calamity,\u2019 \u2018perverseness,\u2019 Job vi.\u00a02, Micah vii.\u00a03, and which makes\nmost pungent and admirable sense) =to a man in all his toil, and in\nvexing= (\u05e8\u05e2\u05d9\u05d5\u05df, not \u05e8\u05e2\u05d5\u05ea; compare chapter i.\u00a018) =his heart which he=\nhimself =toils= at =under the sun?=\n\n 23 For all his days _are_ \u2502 Why, every day he spends is a\n sorrows, and his travail \u2502 trouble, and disappointment the\n grief; yea, his heart taketh \u2502 result of his anxiety, so that\n not rest in the night. This is \u2502 even at night his heart gets\n also vanity. \u2502 no rest. So then this is an\n \u2502 instance of evanescence itself.\n\n(23.) =For= (as \u05db\u05d9 is repeated, it becomes emphatic, \u2018for now\u2019) =all\nhis days are causing him pain= (or painful\u2015\u2015notice the force of the \u05de\u05be)\n=and disappointment his anxiety=, (a pregnant sentence, denoting more\nthan his anxiety disappoints, his anxiety is always painful and useless\ntoo) =also at night does not rest= (this clause is an additional proof\nthat we have correctly determined the meaning of \u2666\u05e2\u05e0\u05d9\u05df; it is anxiety\nwhich causes wakefulness) even =his heart. Moreover this a vanity it\nis= (emphatic; so the meaning is, \u2018this then _is indeed_ an instance of\nevanescence\u2019).\n\n \u2666 \u201c\u05e2\u05d2\u05d9\u05df\u201d replaced with \u201c\u05e2\u05e0\u05d9\u05df\u201d\n\n 24 \u00b6 _There is_ nothing \u2502 There is no real good then to\n better for a man, _than_ that \u2502 man in eating or drinking, or\n he should eat and drink, and \u2502 in supposing he will satisfy\n _that_ he should make his soul \u2502 himself with his toil. Moreover,\n enjoy good in his labour. This \u2502 I must make this observation,\n also I saw, that it _was_ from \u2502 that these things are all in\n the hand of God. \u2502 the hand of the Almighty,\n\n(24.) The conclusion of this argument now follows, viz.:\u2015\u2015This toil\nis useless, and the reasoning is set out at length. =There is nothing=\nof a =good= (not \u05dc\u05d0 here, but \u05d0\u05d9\u05df, the former would be required if the\nmeaning were \u2018it is not good that\u2019) =in a man= (_i.e._ as an instance\nof humanity, and the whole is equivalent to \u2018It is not to humanity real\ngood that\u2019) =that he should eat and drink, and show his soul= (_i.e._\nhimself) =good= (repeated, \u2018that good\u2019) =in his toil. Moreover this=\n(pointed \u05d6\u05d4\u05b9, feminine or _neuter_, which the LXX. confirm, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf) =have\nI seen,= even =I, now from= the =hand= (but \u2018the\u2019 is not emphatic at\nall, which would have required a different construction) of =the Deity=\n(on the contrary, \u2018the\u2019 is emphatic here, and, as will appear, the use\nof the article is significant) =it is= (emphatic).\n\n 25 For who can eat, or who \u2502 for who could eat or even drink\n else can hasten _hereunto_, \u2502 apart from Him?\n more than I? \u2502\n\n(25.) =For= (repeated) =who eats or who= even =drinks= (because\ndrinking is possible when eating is not) =apart from him?= (for we read\nwith the LXX. \u05d7\u05d5\u05e5 \u05de\u05de\u05e0\u05d5, for clearly this makes good sense, and preserves\nthe real meaning of \u05d7\u05d5\u05e5, which has the signification of \u2018without,\u2019\n\u2018on the outside,\u2019 Genesis vi.\u00a014, Deuteronomy xxv.\u00a05, references.)\nThe phrase \u05d5\u05de\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d7\u05d5\u05e9 \u05d7\u05d5\u05e5 \u05de\u05de\u05e0\u05d9 requires further elucidation. The reading \u05de\u05de\u05e0\u05d5,\nsupported by the LXX., is also confirmed by Hebrew MSS. The literal\nrendering is\u2015\u2015\u2018and who hastens outside him.\u2019 This the LXX. translate\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b9\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b5\u03be \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u2018who drinks,\u2019 etc. There is a reading of\nA\u00b2, \u03c6\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u2018spares.\u2019 The former is supported by Peshito, Arabic,\nand Theodotion\u2015\u2015the latter by Aquila, Symmachus, and Jerome. If the\nGreek text alone had to be considered, \u03c6\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 would, as the harder\nreading, be entitled to the preference. It is readily seen, however,\nthat it arose from a conjectural alteration of the Hebrew text into \u05d7\u05d5\u05e1,\nfor which there is no authority; neither will the meaning to \u2018spare\u2019\nmake any sense in the context. As the root occurs frequently, we are\ndriven to the conclusion that the rendering of the LXX. was by design.\nSchleusner\u2019s conjecture that \u03c0\u03af\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 is used in the signification of\n\u2018sensibus frui,\u2019 is no doubt correct\u2015\u2015compare Habakkuk i.\u00a08, as also\nIsaiah xxviii.\u00a016. Considered as _ad sensum_, this rendering gives the\nidea of the Hebrew text correctly.\n\n 26 For _God_ giveth to a man \u2502 and so to man just as is right\n that _is_ good in his sight \u2502 in His sight He gives wisdom\n wisdom, and knowledge, and \u2502 and knowledge and gladness, but\n joy: but to the sinner he \u2502 to the transgressor He gives\n giveth travail, to gather and \u2502 the anxiety of accumulating\n to heap up, that he may give \u2502 and collecting what is to be\n to _him that_ is good before \u2502 granted to any, as also is good\n God. This also _is_ vanity and \u2502 in the sight of God. So this is\n vexation of spirit. \u2502 another instance of evanescence\n \u2502 and vexation of spirit.\n\n(26.) =For= (repeated again, so that this word becomes emphatic and\nprominent. Accordingly _four_ reasons follow, comprising as it were the\nwhole cycle of the argument) =to a man= (still generic, as a specimen\nof the human race) =which is good before him= (not altogether with\nthe meaning \u2018a good man,\u2019 but as \u2018God thinks good\u2019) =He gives wisdom,=\nand =knowledge, and joy; but to the sinner= (_i.e._ the _erring_\nsinner) =he gives=, on the other hand, =anxious-travail to collect\nand to gather= (\u2666\u05db\u05e0\u05e1, occurs chapter ii. 8,\u00a026, iii.\u00a05; the meaning is\n\u2018to collect piece by piece;\u2019 see also Psalm xxxiii.\u00a07, 1\u00a0Chronicles\nxxii.\u00a02), =to give it to the good= in =the sight of God= (_i.e._ as God\nsees fit it should be given); =so this also is vanity and vexation of\nspirit.=\n\n \u2666 \u201c\u05db\u05e0\u05dd\u201d replaced with \u201c\u05db\u05e0\u05e1\u201d\n\nThus, then, the first part of the argument is completed. Man obtains\nnothing by his labour. It is the gift of a mysterious and inscrutable\nProvidence which alone confers any happiness or gratification.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER III.\n\n\nIII. At this point Koheleth commences another line of argument; he\nnotices that all things proceed according to a fixed and settled order\nof providence. This truth he brings into great prominence by instancing\neight-and-twenty\u2015\u2015a fourfold seven\u2015\u2015different times or seasons existing\nin human life. From this he deduces the conclusion, that as it is\nimpossible to alter the order of Providence, the toil of man is useless\nto effect any real good, so far as this world is concerned. The way\nin which this thought is worked out is peculiar. Koheleth is both\nsarcastic and paradoxical in his arguments; but his sarcasms are never\nill-natured and his paradoxes promote thought. He also enlivens his\nsubject with a considerable number of plays upon words, and striking\nand pregnant aphorisms.\n\n \u2502 SECTION III.\u2015\u2015_Further\n \u2502 demonstration of the vanity\n \u2502 of human labour from\n \u2502 considerations touching\n \u2502 Providence and Morals._\n \u2502\n TO every _thing there is_ \u2502 TO everything is there a\n a season, and a time to every \u2502 determined period, and a time\n purpose under the heaven: \u2502 for every providence under\n \u2502 heaven.\n\n(1.) =To all= (human life, that is) is a =season= (\u05d6\u05de\u05df, this word occurs\nhere and Nehemiah ii.\u00a06, Esther xi. 27,\u00a031, only, and the participle\npast of the verb Ezra x.\u00a014, Nehemiah x. 34\u00a0(35) 13,\u00a021; it will be\nseen by an examination of passages that this word differs from \u05de\u05d5\u05e2\u05d3,\nwhich both Ezra and Nehemiah also use, and which is the common word in\nthe older books for \u2018a _sacred_ season\u2019 or \u2018feast.\u2019 \u05d6\u05de\u05df is a \u2018settled\ntime,\u2019 \u2018a date.\u2019 Fuerst considers the primary idea of the root is \u2018to\ncount.\u2019 It is clear that \u05de\u05d5\u05e2\u05d3 would not have suited this context; this\nof course so far weakens any argument for the late date of this work as\nderived from the use of this word), =and a time= (general, the common\nword) =to all= (repeated, and therefore emphatic, equal \u2018that is to\nall\u2019) =providences= (\u05d7\u05e4\u05e5, which, however, has the signification desire\nas well, \u2018a satisfactory undertaking therefore;\u2019 Koheleth uses the word\ntechnically with a reference to the divine providences of God. The word\noccurs chapter iii. 1,\u00a017, v. 4\u00a0(3), 8\u00a0(7), viii.\u00a06, xii. 1,\u00a010. The\nLXX. here render \u03c0\u03c1\u1fb6\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1, but chapter xii. \u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1) =under the heavens=\n(this meaning of \u05d7\u05e4\u05e5 may account for one use of this phrase here\ninstead of the more usual \u2018under the sun,\u2019\u2015\u2015heaven being perhaps\nemployed as we sometimes use it, for God\u2019s providence under heaven).\n\n 2 A time \u00b9to be born, and a \u2502 (1.) A time to be born, and\n time to die; a time to plant, \u2502 a time to die;\n and a time to pluck up _that \u2502\n which_ is planted; \u2502 (2.) A time to plant, and a\n \u2502 time to root up that which is\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ to bear. \u2502 planted;\n\n(2.) =A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time\nto pluck up the planted.=\n\n 3 A time to kill, and a time \u2502 (3.) A time to slay, and a\n to heal; a time to break down, \u2502 time to heal;\n and a time to build up; \u2502\n \u2502 (4.) A time to break walls,\n \u2502 and a time to build them up;\n\n(3.) =A time for slaying, and a time for healing; a time for breaking\ndown, and a time for building up.=\n\n 4 A time to weep, and a time \u2502 (5.) A time to weep, and a\n to laugh; a time to mourn, and \u2502 time to laugh;\n a time to dance; \u2502\n \u2502 (6.) A time to cry, and a\n \u2502 time to play;\n\n(4.) =A time for weeping, and a time for laughing; a time of wailing,\nand a time of dancing= (there is an alliteration here, and a slight\nchange in construction to the hiphil in the next clause; possibly to\nmark the close of the first seven pairs).\n\n 5 A time to cast away \u2502 (7.) A time to scatter stones\n stones, and a time to gather \u2502 away, and a time to gather\n stones together; a time to \u2502 stones again;\n embrace, and a time to refrain \u2502\n from embracing; \u2502 (8.) A time to embrace, and a\n \u2502 time to refrain from embracing;\n\n(5.) =A time for scattering stones, and a time of collecting stones=\n(does our Lord allude to this, Mark xiii.\u00a02?); =a time for embracing,\nand a time to refrain from embracing.=\n\n 6 A time to \u00b9get, and a time \u2502 (9.) A time to seek, and a\n to lose; a time to keep, and a \u2502 time for loss;\n time to cast away; \u2502\n \u2502 (10.) A time to keep, and a\n \u00b9 _Or_, seek. \u2502 time to cast away;\n\n(6.) =A time to seek, and a time to lose= (the Masorets consider this\na Piel with the sense to destroy); =a time for keeping, and a time to\ncast away.=\n\n 7 A time to rend, and a \u2502 (11.) A time to rend, and a\n time to sew; a time to keep \u2502 time to sew;\n silence, and a time to speak; \u2502\n \u2502 (12.) A time to be silent,\n \u2502 and a time for speech;\n\n(7.) =A time for rending, and a time for sewing= (see Genesis xxxvii.\n29,\u00a034); =a time for being silent, and a time to speak.=\n\n 8 A time to love, and a time \u2502 (13.) A time of love, and a\n to hate; a time of war, and a \u2502 time of hate;\n time of peace. \u2502\n \u2502 (14.) A time of war, and a\n \u2502 time of peace.\n\n(8.) =A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time\nof peace.= (The slight changes in the rendering correspond to changes\nin construction in the Hebrew, giving a pleasing variety to the whole\npassage. There is also an observable difference in the second seven\npairs, which enumerate acts more emotional and subjective than the\nfirst.)\n\n 9 What profit hath he that \u2502 What advantage is there to\n worketh in that wherein he \u2502 the worker by reason of his\n laboureth? \u2502 own toil?\n\n(9.) =What profit= (something \u2018remaining over and above the present,\u2019\nin the technical meaning of this word, see chapter i.\u00a03, references.)\n=is the working= (an active participle with the article, and thus\ngeneric, working then as such) =in which= (full relative, and thus\nreferring to the whole idea; we must render therefore \u2018in respect of\nits _being_,\u2019 which will be emphatic, as it is followed by the pronoun)\n=it is toil= (but we must remember that the exact meaning of this word\nis\u2015\u2015see Genesis xli.\u00a051, Isaiah liii.\u00a011\u2015\u2015the \u2018anxiety,\u2019 or \u2018care,\u2019 the\nlabour produces. The question then is this, Is there any profit from\nworking in respect of its being care and pains? and the answer is, No.\nThe LXX. render somewhat _ad sensum_: \u03a4\u03af\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\n\u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c7\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6, \u2018What advantage of him that works in those things\nwhich _he_ toils?\u2019 The Syriac, (\u2021 Syriac phrase) \u2018What is the profit \nin the work in that he toils?\u2019 but both make the meaning clear. This \nquestion is answered in the negative, the argument being elaborated \nwith much care).\n\n 10 I have seen the travail, \u2502 I have observed with regard\n which God hath given to the \u2502 to the uncertainty which is\n sons of men to be exercised in \u2502 appointed of God to the human\n it. \u2502 race, to be made anxious\n \u2502 thereby,\n\n(10.) =I have seen= (or \u2018observed,\u2019 as we should write, this formula\nintroducing a matter which observation makes manifest), =with regard\nto the anxiety= (\u05e2\u05e0\u05d9\u05df, see chapter i.\u00a013, references, the meaning\npreviously assigned of \u2018_anxious care_,\u2019 or \u2018_uncertainty_\u2019 generally,\nthe word being used to signify that special form of human misery which\nconsists in the _uncertainty_ in which man lives; this emphatic \u05d0\u05ea the\nLXX. notice and render by their adverbial \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd, and to show us that the\nobservation was made, not _of_ the uncertainty, but _with respect to_\nit) =which has appointed= (because this is the principal idea) even\n=God= (the nominative follows, and is without the article, because it\nis God in his personal character who is here referred to. The article\nis used when the word occurs generically, as in the sense of \u2018the\nDeity\u2019 or \u2018the Almighty,\u2019\u2015\u2015\u2018which it is God\u2019s appointment\u2019 then is the\nmeaning) =to the sons of the man= (that is, the human race as children\nof Adam) =to be rendered uncertain therewith.=\n\n 11 He hath made every \u2502 that the whole is suitable at\n _thing_ beautiful in his time: \u2502 its proper time. Moreover, with\n also he hath set the world in \u2502 regard to the future, that too\n their heart, so that no man \u2502 is put into their desires, but\n can find out the work that God \u2502 so that Man cannot find out the\n maketh from the beginning to \u2502 working of the Almighty as _He_\n the end. \u2502 works it out from its beginning\n \u2502 even to its end.\n\n(11.) =With respect to the whole= (again the emphatic \u05d0\u05ea, and again\nnoted by \u03a3\u03cd\u03bc\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 in the LXX., some copies reading, \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f03, \u2018the\nwhole which;\u2019 as this preposition is repeated in the same clause, it\nis specially emphatic here) =he made it fair= (that is \u2018appropriate,\u2019\nwhich the LXX. render \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f70) =in its time= (one of these providential\ntimes or seasons above spoken of). =Moreover= (commencing another and\nadditional argument, confirming the above), =with respect to the age=\n(again \u05d0\u05ea repeated with the article, noticed as before by the LXX.,\nand again by them rendered \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd, meaning therefore generally, and also\nwith regard to the indefinite future generically it is, etc.) =is set=\n(placed by God indeed, but the nominative is so far off that the verb\nis almost impersonal, or in other words all emphasis on the nominative\nis lost) =in their hearts from the want of which= (\u05de\u05d1\u05dc\u05d9, occurs Job\niv.\u00a011; this word joined to the full relative must mean \u2018but as they\ndo not possess this knowledge of the future or this influence over the\nage, or course of things present and future, so as to control it,\u2019 for\nthis is the meaning of \u05e2\u05dc\u05dd, see chapter i.\u00a04, references.) =does not\nfind= (emphatic, as standing before its nominative) =the man= (_i.e._\n\u2018Humanity generally cannot find\u2019 or \u2018discover\u2019) =with respect to the\nworking= (the LXX. do not render here by \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd, probably because \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 is clear enough without it) =which works= (\u2018is the work of\u2019)\n=the Deity from the beginning even unto= (this preposition being\nseparated and joined with a conjunction is much more forcible than the\nmere affixed \u05de\u05be above, because, possibly, it is desired to render\nemphatic this final word which is reserved to the close of the sentence)\n=the end= (\u05e1\u05d5\u05e3, which occurs in this book in the sense of a final\nconclusion, see chapter xii.\u00a013, and which in the working of Divine\nProvidence is especially mysterious).\n\n 12 I know that _there is_ no \u2502 I am aware that there can be no\n good in them, but for _a man_ \u2502 real good to any, if it be not\n to rejoice, and to do good in \u2502 to rejoice and to see this good\n his life. \u2502 in their lives.\n\n(12.) =I know how there is nothing good= (\u2018nothing\u2019 and \u2018good\u2019 are two\nnouns in closest apposition, and hence having the meaning \u2018there is no\ngood thing\u2019) =in them= (emphatic and a distributive plural, referring\nto \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd singular) =except to rejoice and to do good= (but not in the\nsense of doing right, which, of course, is foreign to the train\nof thought, but to the obtaining of good; and as this last idea is\nrepeated from what went before, we have the meaning \u2018_that_ good\u2019)\n=in their lives= (which the LXX. render by the singular \u2018in his\nlife,\u2019 noticing the distributive plural. Hence then the sense of\nthe whole passage is plain: \u2018I know that there can be no real good\nthing belonging to them, except it be that they should rejoice and do\ngood each one in their lives,\u2019 and this is exactly true, as death so\ncompletely bounds the vision and terminates the earthly existence of\nevery human soul that what is not obtained in this life is clearly\nnot obtained at all. Of course the entire argument proceeds on the\nsupposition that we are regarding the whole matter as under the sun,\nthat is, limited to this earthly stage of existence).\n\n 13 And also that every man \u2502 And beside, if any way humanity\n should eat and drink, and \u2502 should eat or drink, and thus\n enjoy the good of all his \u2502 sees this good by any of his\n labour, it _is_ the gift of \u2502 toil, it is simply God\u2019s gift.\n God. \u2502\n\n(13.) =And moreover= (an additional consideration added to the above)\n=all the man= (_i.e._ all humanity generally, a proposition universally\ntrue of the whole of them) =when he eats= (contract relative with\npresent tense of the verb, \u2018as he eats then\u2019\u2015\u2015and eating is here put\nas the general type of use and enjoyment) =and drinks= (this is not\nsuperfluous; a man can drink when he can no longer eat; he can quench\nthe fever thirst when food is loathsome, hence drinking is the type of\nsolace) =and sees good= (as a past tense follows a present, we have the\nequivalent of our imperfect; and as also the conjunction is repeated\nbefore each verb, we may render them as dependent = \u2018if he should eat\nor even drink, and so should have a sight of a good\u2019) =in all his toil=\n(or by means of it). =A gift= (chapter v.\u00a019, see also 1 Kings xiii.\u00a017,\nwhere it appears that the meaning of the word is a \u2018present.\u2019 LXX. \u03b4\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1)\n=of God it is= (feminine, in close agreement with \u05de\u05ea\u05ea. Here again we\nthink that there may be noticed a more subjective, or active idea,\nwhen the feminine is used, than with corresponding masculines. In this\nway we may possibly find a grammatical explanation of the anomalous\ngenders so common in Hebrew. In the Pentateuch \u05d4\u05d5\u05d0 is used of females,\nand a possible reason may be that in the earlier stages of the language\nthere was less tendency to regard mere grammatical concords and more to\nfollow the logic of the passage. It is worth noticing that grammatical\nconcord as such becomes more and more developed as the language\nadvances, hence Syriac is as strict as Greek or Latin in this respect.\nWhatever be the reason, however, the fact of such closer connexion is\nmanifest by a careful collation of places).\n\n 14 I know that, whatsoever \u2502 I am aware also that all\n God doeth, it shall be for \u2502 which the Almighty effects\n ever: nothing can be put to \u2502 must be done with regard to all\n it, nor anything taken from \u2502 time, that to it nothing can be\n it: and God doeth _it_, that \u2502 added, and that from it nothing\n _men_ should fear before him. \u2502 either can be taken away, and\n \u2502 that the Almighty acts that men\n \u2502 may _fear_ in his presence;\n\n(14.) =I know how= (and as this is a repetition of the formula in\nverse\u00a012, we may add the word \u2018also\u2019 to show that the argument is\na continuation of the above) =all which does= (or is performed by)\n=the Deity= (with the article) =it is= (emphatic, followed by the verb\nsubstantive, and equivalent therefore to \u2018it really is\u2019) that which\n=will be= (and so the LXX. render) =to the age= (to the indefinite \u00e6on,\nor future that is, or rather, for both present and past are included\nin this word, to the whole course of present existing things\u2019), =to\nit= (in the meaning of \u2018over,\u2019 or \u2018above,\u2019 as something dominating\nover, which is the signification of \u05e2\u05dc) =there is nothing to be added=\n(niphal, which could be added) =and from it there is nothing to be\ndiminished= (Exodus v.\u00a08, Job xv. 4,\u00a08, or restrained. The relevancy of\nthis reasoning is now evident. Human labour and anxiety is vain, for\nthe course of providence cannot be altered by it, and if it could, the\nalteration would be for the worse; what follows makes this more clear),\n=and the Deity works that they may fear= (contract relative, with\nthe present as above. We have also the double jod; it occurs with the\nsingle jod at chapter viii.\u00a012, and again with double jod at chapter\nxii.\u00a05. There is no doubt a difference of meaning in these cases; see\na remarkable illustration of this in regard to the verb \u05d9\u05e7\u05e5 in Judges\nxvi.\u00a014 as compared with verse 20 in the same chapter) =from before\nhim= (\u05de\u05dc\u05e4\u05e0\u05d9\u05d5, with both \u05de and \u05dc, and hence emphatic, \u2018in _his_ presence\u2019).\n\n 15 That which hath been is \u2502 that what has been is just the\n now; and that which is to be \u2502 present, and whatever is to\n hath already been; and God \u2502 be is no other than the same\n requireth \u00b9that which is past. \u2502 present; and that the Almighty\n \u2502 will investigate with regard to\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ that which is \u2502 the wronged.\n driven away. \u2502\n\n(15.) =What= is that =which was?= (the contract relative with the verb\nsubstantive, _i.e._ what is _the past_?\u2019) =the present state of things=\n(\u200e\u200f\u05db\u05d1\u05e8, see chapter i.\u00a010, references; the word is a substantive with its\nordinary technical meaning as used in this book of the \u2018present as it\nnow is,\u2019 and of this he says) =it is= (emphatic) =and that which is to\nbe= (appointed so to be. The LXX. render \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b3\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, literally\n\u2018things of the being,\u2019 \u2018or to happen\u2019) =the present state of things\nit was= (that is, \u2018this _very_ same present it is;\u2019 each age being in\nthis respect an exact reproduction of what went before it. It never was\nsubject to human control, and never will be) =and the Deity= (as this\nword is repeated in the same clause, and stands as a nominative before\nthe verb, it is especially emphatic) =seeks= (\u2018asks after,\u2019 \u2018inquires\nfor,\u2019 with the object of not allowing it to pass notice, see 1 Samuel\nxx.\u00a016) =with respect to a persecuted= (person or thing. He does not\nallow any person or thing who is wronged to pass without notice).\n\nNo doubt St. Jerome has completely hit the point of the argument when\nhe writes, \u2018Since all things fade with time, and there is a time of\ndestroying and building, weeping and laughing, for silence and speaking,\nand those other things which are said concerning time, why do we strive\nand press forward in vain, and imagine the brief labours of life to be\nperpetual, nor are we content, according to the Gospel, with the evil\nof to-day, and so take no thought for the morrow?\u2019\n\n 16 \u00b6 And moreover I saw \u2502 Yet, however, I have observed\n under the sun the place of \u2502 in this work-day world, that in\n judgment, _that_ wickedness \u2502 place of justice there is\n _was_ there; and the place of \u2502 impiety, and in the place even\n righteousness, _that_ iniquity \u2502 of right there is impiety also.\n _was_ there. \u2502\n\n(16.) =And yet= (an objection to the foregoing) =I have seen under the\nsun= (the limitation here introduced requires special attention) =a\nplace of the justice= (we must not limit place to mean _locality_, but\ntake it generally of state or position, etc., and observe also that\n\u200e\u200f\u05d4\u05de\u05e9\u05e4\u05d8 has the article, and is therefore generic); =there= was =the\nwickedness= (again generic, and hence having the meaning that in place\nof justice, as one would expect from the proposition stated above,\nthat the Deity has regard to the wronged, just the reverse occurred;\nthis is again enlarged in the following), =and in the place of the\nright there was the wickedness= (the meaning is, that \u2018just in the\nvery circumstances under which you would expect right to prevail,\nthere you will find rampant and successful wickedness.\u2019 \u05e8\u05e9\u05e2 has the\nmeaning of that kind of \u2018wickedness\u2019 which goes out into bold and open\ntransgression, see 2\u00a0Samuel xxii.\u00a022; Psalm x. 2, 3, 4,\u00a013).\n\n 17 I said in mine heart, God \u2502 Then said I to myself:\n shall judge the righteous and \u2502 With respect to right and\n the wicked: for _there is_ a \u2502 wickedness, the Almighty does\n time there for every purpose \u2502 justice, because there is a\n and for every work. \u2502 time to every providence and\n \u2502 dominating over every action\n \u2502 which is done there.\n\n(17.) =I said, I myself, in my heart= (which we have noticed commonly\nintroduces a thought more specious than true), =with respect to= (\u05d0\u05ea,\nwhich the LXX. note with their customary \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd) =the righteous= (_i.e._\nwhat is _made_ right or _done_ right; notice the hiphil form as\ncompared with that in the above), =and with regard to the impious=\nalso =judges the Deity, for= there is =a time to every providence, and\nupon= (or \u2018over,\u2019 which the LXX. note by \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76) =all the working there=\n(some copies of the LXX. join this to the next verse, but it is more\nagreeable to the gist of the passage to refer it to the preceding, as\nthe Masoretic text does, and in this case \u2018there\u2019 refers back to the\nage or period).\n\n 18 I said in mine heart \u2502 Then said I to myself also:\n concerning the estate of the \u2502 By the reasonings of the\n sons of men, \u00b9that God might \u2502 human race in respect to any\n manifest them, and that they \u2502 discrimination of them by the\n might see that they themselves \u2502 Divine Creator, it seems that\n are beasts. \u2502 but brutes are they at best.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Or_, that they might \u2502\n clear God and see. \u2502\n\n(18.) =I said, I= did, =in my heart= (repeating the formula of the\npreceding verse, and so lending emphasis to it), =upon the speech=\n(this phrase occurs three times, and only in this book, viz. here, and\nchapters vii.\u00a014 and viii.\u00a02. Notwithstanding that a similar phrase\noccurs Psalm cx.\u00a04, with the meaning \u2018after the order,\u2019 LXX. \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03ac\u03be\u03b9\u03bd, which is apparently sanctioned by New Testament exegesis,\ncompare Hebrews v.\u00a06, etc.; this is really not to the point, for\nthat is \u05e2\u05dc \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8\u05ea\u05d9, the plural, while this is singular. According to\nstrict grammar \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8\u05ea is the construct of \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8\u05d4, and should therefore\nmean \u2018reasoning of,\u2019 just as the LXX. render by \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03b1\u03bb\u03b9\u1fb6\u03c2, and\nthis, moreover, will make good sense in every passage in which this\nphrase occurs) =of the sons of Adam= (_i.e._ the human race) =to the\ndiscriminating them= (hence the LXX. \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2, considering that\nthe root is \u05d1\u05e8\u05e8, which has the meaning \u2018to sift,\u2019 \u2018purify by sifting,\u2019\nthis is the only instance of the infinitive kal. Now we must take this\nmeaning, observing that the pronoun \u2018them,\u2019 which is involved in the\ntermination of the verb, is not emphatic; it is the discrimination\nof God which is the point, the persons on which this is exercised\nare subordinate. The Jewish commentators for the most part explain\n\u200e\u200f\u05dc\u05d1\u05e8\u05dd as the third person singular preterite of \u05d1\u05e8\u05d4 with the objective\npronominal affix \u05dd [the only instance, however, in which \u05d1\u05e8\u05d4 has the\nmeaning \u2018to choose\u2019 is 1 Samuel xvii.\u00a08]; as, however, some copies\nread \u05dc\u05d1\u05e8\u05e8\u05dd, we can have no difficulty in referring the word to the\nroot \u05d1\u05e8\u05e8, which makes good sense. It is also to be remarked that\nthough \u05d1\u05e8\u05dd does not exist as a root in Hebrew, it does so in Chaldee,\nSyriac, and Arabic, and the meaning is that which is \u2018twisted\u2019 or\n\u2018infolded\u2019\u2015\u2015compare Ezekiel xxvii.\u00a024\u2015\u2015a \u2018garment\u2019 worked in many\ncolours; this would make good sense also in this place, and may\npossibly have been an intentional equivoke, which is not surely\nimprobable in a sentence in which such manifest artificial alliteration\noccurs. The meaning then is, that) =the Deity= (discriminates men, or\nmakes a distinction between them and the lower creatures; but in what\nrespects? This is discussed at length) =and to see= (but rather might\nthis form of the infinitive be rendered, for which there is sufficient\nauthority, \u2018_to the appearance_\u2019) =that they= (contract relative, and\nhence the meaning is that this appearance belongs to them, and them\nonly. In this may be found the key to the whole passage. In appearance\nthere is no choice or discrimination, as subsequent argument proves,\nbecause they are) =a cattle= (singular, following a plural, and\nthus giving the meaning that each one is so) =they to them= (which\nMendelssohn explains, following the LXX., \u2018when left to themselves,\u2019\nor, as we should say, as \u2018far as they can tell.\u2019 With this Ewald\nand Ginsburg agree, who consider this latter clause an ironical\n\u2018_ipsissimi_,\u2019\u2015\u2015\u2018they themselves, indeed!\u2019 Thus, then, the meaning of\nthe whole passage is, \u2018I said, yes, I did in my heart again, so far\nas human reasonings extend concerning any discrimination the Divine\nProvidence has made of them, and as far as appearances go with them, a\nmere animal is each one of them, so far as they can tell.\u2019 The sentence\nis very sarcastic and equivocal, as the alliteration at the end shows.\nThen, again, if we take the root \u05d1\u05e8\u05dd in the sense of \u2018web,\u2019 as we use\nit for something intricate, in that case we should have the equivoke,\n\u2018concerning the web of Divine Providence so far as it appears to them.\u2019\nAgain, also, the Syriac renders as if \u05dc\u05d1\u05e8\u05dd were \u05dc\u05d1\u05e8\u05d0\u05dd, \u2018their Creator,\u2019\nwhich also makes excellent sense; but this, again, may simply be\na rendering of another equivoke. Then, again, there is a possible\nplay between \u05d1\u05d4\u05de\u05d4 and the same word considered as \u05d4\u05de\u05d4 with the\npreposition\u2015\u2015all these equivokes assist the sense). Consistent with\nthis is what follows:\u2015\u2015\n\n 19 For that which befalleth \u2502 For the event which happens\n the sons of men befalleth \u2502 to the human race, and the\n beasts; even one thing \u2502 event which happens to the\n befalleth them: as the one \u2502 brute-creation, is precisely\n dieth, so dieth the other; \u2502 the same event: the one dies\n yea, they have all one \u2502 just the same death as the\n breath; so that a man hath no \u2502 other; and the animal life\n pre-eminence above a beast: \u2502 is the same in both; and the\n for all _is_ vanity. \u2502 pre-eminence of man over the\n \u2502 brute is nothing at all; for\n \u2502 all alike are evanescent;\n\n(19.) =For a happening of the sons of man, and a happening of the brute\ncreation, and a happening= which is =one= (as we should say, \u2018precisely\nthe same\u2019) =to them= (the threefold repetition of \u05de\u05e7\u05e8\u05d4, \u2018hap,\u2019 brings\nthis word into strong prominence. It means, of coarse, that which\nabsolutely happens or results, or comes to them in the end. This is\nexactly the same in both cases, as the sequel shows). =As is the death\nof this, so= (\u2018exactly so\u2019) is =the death of this=, and =the spirit=\n(or \u2018breath\u2019) is =one to all, and the pre-eminence= (\u05d5\u05de\u05d5\u05ea\u05e8, this noun\noccurs in this form only at Proverbs xiv.\u00a023, and xxi.\u00a05, and evidently\nwith the meaning of advantage or increase of one thing over another.\nThe LXX. translate this as if it were \u05d5\u05de\u05d9 \u05d9\u05ea\u05e8, \u2018and what profit,\u2019 but\nthis is simply to give the sarcastic turn to the sentence) =of the man=\n(humanity generally) =over the beasts is nothing, for the whole= (in\nits technical sense of the whole of life, as usual) is =a vanity= (or\nevanescent).\n\n 20 All go unto one place; \u2502 all alike go to the same place;\n all are of the dust, and all \u2502 all alike come from the same\n turn to dust again. \u2502 dust; and all alike return to\n \u2502 the same dust again.\n\n(20.) And =the whole goes to one place, the whole= (repeating this\nword so as to bring it into strong prominence) =was from the dust, and\nthe whole= (again repeated, making the fourth time, and so implying\nuniversality) =returns to the dust=.\n\n 21 Who knoweth the spirit \u2502 For who can tell how that the\n \u00b9of man that \u00b2goeth upward, \u2502 spirit of man ascends up on\n and the spirit of the beast \u2502 high, and that the spirit of\n that goeth downward to the \u2502 the beast descends downwards\n earth? \u2502 to the earth?\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ of the sons of \u2502\n man. \u2502\n \u2502\n \u00b2 _Hebrew_ is ascending. \u2502\n\n(21.) =Who knows?= (participle, poel, \u2018who is knowing?\u2019 or \u2018who is\nthere that knows?\u2019 The question does not assert the fact that there\n_is_ no difference between man and beast; on the contrary, this clause\nis so ingeniously contrived as to assert the very reverse). =The spirit\nof the sons of men= (in its usual meaning, of the whole human race)\n=is the ascending= (with the article, \u2018the ascending thing\u2019), =it\nis= (emphatic) =to the ascent= (the repetition of the same root in a\ndifferent grammatical form gives prominence to this word. The human\nsoul is, it appears, especially an \u2018ASCENDING thing\u2019); =and the spirit=\nof the =beast= a =thing descending= (participle, poel with article),\n=it is= (emphatic, it really is this) =[to the] downwards to the earth=\n(the \u05dc, to, twice repeated, gives emphasis\u2015\u2015\u2018even to\u2019).\n\n 22 Wherefore I perceive that \u2502 Thus I perceived that there\n _there is_ nothing better, \u2502 can be no real good above that\n than that a man should rejoice \u2502 present-pleasure which man can\n in his own works; for that \u2502 obtain from his work; as that\n _is_ his portion: for who \u2502 is what belongs to him: for who\n shall bring him to see what \u2502 can bring him to see what may\n shall be after him? \u2502 be the subsequent results?\n\n(22.) =And I saw= (\u2018and thus I observed\u2019) =how there is nothing of\nreal-good= (in the technical sense in which this word occurs so often\nin this book) =from which= (full relative, \u2018more than that in which,\u2019\nor \u2018above that he should\u2019) =he rejoices=, even =the man= does (humanity\ngenerally), =in his workings= (or what he accomplishes, plural), =for=\n(or, as \u05db\u05d9 has occurred in the corresponding clause previously, \u2018as\u2019)\n=this is= (emphatic) =his portion= (\u2018lot\u2019 or \u2018inheritance,\u2019 singular):\n=for who= (\u05db\u05d9 again repeated, so we must render it \u2018and as none\u2019) =can\nmake him come to see= (this is not exactly equivalent to \u2018make him\nsee;\u2019 it is rather equivalent to \u2018who could enable him to see,\u2019 or\n\u2018who could show him some method how he might discover\u2019) =in what=\n(\u2018of what sort\u2019 is that work which) =which will be after him= (not\nin respect of time, but results,\u2015\u2015\u2018consequences,\u2019 therefore). Thus\nKoheleth\u2019s reasoning is quite clear, conclusive, and connected. In\n_ten_ particulars man and beast are alike. (1.)\u00a0The result is the\nsame to both; (2.)\u00a0their death is alike; (3.)\u00a0their spirit or animal\nlife is the same; (4.)\u00a0there is no pre-eminence of the one over the\nother; (5.)\u00a0they are alike evanescent; (6.)\u00a0they all go to the same\nplace; (7.)\u00a0they come from the same dust; (8.)\u00a0and they all go to the\nsame dust, and no one can tell (_i.e._ for certain, or by ordinary\nobservations) that they differ in this; (9.)\u00a0man\u2019s soul goes up,\n(10.)\u00a0and the beast\u2019s goes down. The arrangement of the whole, it will\nbe seen, is highly artificial.\n\nThe next stage in the argument opens with \u2018I turned and saw.\u2019 That\nis a further observation of a point in which, it may be remarked\nincidentally, man does differ from the beast: he is the only animal\nthat weeps. The object here is again to show that mere earthly labour,\nas such, produces no satisfaction. At this point the argument becomes\nsomewhat less sustained, dealing rather with a succession of instances.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n\n\n SO I returned, and \u2502 BUT to return: I am observing\n considered all the oppressions \u2502 this with regard to all those\n that are done under the sun: \u2502 afflictions which happen\n and behold the tears of _such \u2502 in this work-day world.\n as were_ oppressed, and they \u2502 For see now the tear of the\n had no comforter; and on the \u2502 afflicted for which there is\n \u00b9side of their oppressors \u2502 no comforter: and that in the\n _there was_ power; but they \u2502 hand of their afflictors there\n had no comforter. \u2502 is power, and yet there is no\n \u2502 comforter.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ hand. \u2502\n\nIV. (1.) _Turned I, and I see_ (the present tense following the perfect\nis equivalent to our imperfect, \u2018I was again regarding;\u2019 because this\npoint has been touched on before, though in another form, at ii. 22,\u00a023)\n=with respect to all= (\u05d0\u05ea \u05db\u05dc, LXX. \u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1) =the oppressions= (with the\narticle; we must not restrict this to the oppression of one man over\nanother, but take the word in its general sense, as from care, sickness,\nmisfortune, etc.) =which are done= (the niphal has an objective sense,\n\u2018submitted to,\u2019 or \u2018are done upon others\u2019) =under the sun, and behold=\n(calling attention to a manifest fact) =the tear= (singular. This turn\nof thought, which looks upon each tear as a sorrow, a type and sample\nof all other sorrows, is very beautiful. Compare Revelation vii.\u00a017,\nand xxi.\u00a04, Isaiah xxv.\u00a08, for the other side of this,\u2015\u2015\u2018God shall wipe\naway every tear,\u2019 etc.) =of the oppressings= (the same word as before,\n\u200e\u200f\u05d4\u05e2\u05e9\u05c1\u05e7\u05d9\u05dd, which the LXX., rendering _ad sensum_, express by a passive\nparticiple; but the meaning of the passage really requires the same\nword in both clauses: as far as Koheleth\u2019s argument here is concerned,\nthe existence of the oppressor and oppressed are equally mysterious),\n=and there is nothing to them of comfort= (the LXX. render by a\nparticiple, \u2018comforting,\u2019 \u2018no one comforts them\u2019), =and in the hand of\ntheir oppressors might= (this means, no doubt, \u2018_that the power of the\noppressors was so great_,\u2019 it was impossible to escape them; but hidden\nunderneath is the thought\u2015\u2015which again increases the mystery\u2015\u2015that\nthere is a mighty hand which could restrain these if it would), =and\nnothing to them of comfort= (repeated, and so emphatic).\n\n 2 Wherefore I praised the \u2502 Then I for my part pronounced\n dead which are already dead \u2502 happy the dead who are at this\n more than the living which are \u2502 time dead, above the living in\n yet alive. \u2502 their present [query?\n \u2502 _pleasant!_] lives;\n\n(2.) =Then I praised, I= did (it was a personal matter, a mere opinion\nof Koheleth\u2019s), =with respect to the dead= (with the emphatic \u05d0\u05ea)\n=which at present= (\u05db\u05d1\u05e8 see chapter i.\u00a010, references, which occurs in\nthe same technical sense as before, \u2018this present time or state\u2019) =are\ndead= (hence the whole is equivalent to \u2018which have finished their\nlives, and now are in the state of the departed\u2019), =above the living\nwhich they are living as yet= (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d3\u05b6\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4 occurs here only, and only differs\nin pointing from \u05e2\u05b6\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4, which occurs Genesis xviii.\u00a012 only, \u2018pleasure.\u2019\nIt will be seen that this unusual word leads to a strange equivoke,\nwhich yet helps the sense.)\n\n 3 Yea, better _is he_ than \u2502 and better off than both those\n both they, which hath not yet \u2502 who have not yet been: who have\n been, who hath not seen the \u2502 not yet had [_the pleasure!_]\n evil work that is done under \u2502 to see that work so evil which\n the sun. \u2502 will be done to them in this\n \u2502 hot work-day world.\n\n(3.) =And good above both= (equals our \u2018better off than either\u2019) =which\nas yet= (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d3\u05b6\u05df here only, differing again from \u05e2\u05b5\u05d3\u05b6\u05df, \u2018delight,\u2019 \u2018Eden,\u2019\nonly in the pointing) =have not been which= (this being repeated,\nis equivalent to \u2018even those who\u2019) =do not see= the =workings= so\n=evil which are worked= (niphal, \u2018suffered\u2019) =under the sun=. It is\nremarkable that in both cases the sentence may be rendered, without any\nviolence to its grammar, with each of these unusual words, translated\n\u2018pleasantness\u2019 and \u2018pleasure\u2019 respectively, as they ought to be thus,\n\u2018Then I praised the dead which are now in the state of the dead, above\nthe living, in so far as they are living pleasantly (Hebrew idiom,\npleasantness), and better off than both to whom the pleasure is not,\nwho is not seeing that evil work which is done under the sun.\u2019 No one\ncan, of course, for a moment doubt that the true meaning is given by\nthe former rendering, while this latter is only an equivoke, but it is\nan equivoke which helps the sense, and gives a peculiar sarcastic tone\nto the whole. I have endeavoured to represent this in the paraphrase\nby an equivoke between the words \u2018pleasant\u2019 and \u2018present,\u2019 which I am\nalmost inclined to withdraw, so feebly does it render the grave biting\nsarcasm of the original.\n\nKoheleth now touches on another instance of unsatisfactoriness which\nbesets successful toil.\n\n 4 \u00b6 Again, I considered \u2502 I have furthermore myself\n all travail, and \u00b9every right \u2502 observed of all toil, when it\n work, that \u00b2for this a man is \u2502 comes to any successful issue,\n envied of his neighbour. This \u2502 what envy [hence] arises of\n _is_ also vanity and vexation \u2502 a man from his fellows; and\n of spirit. \u2502 this is another instance of\n \u2502 evanescence and vexation of\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ all rightness of \u2502 spirit.\n work. \u2502\n \u2502\n \u00b2 _Hebrew_ this is the \u2502\n envy of a man from his \u2502\n neighbour. \u2502\n\n(4.) =And I have seen myself= (equivalent to \u2018I have also observed\u2019),\n=with respect to the whole toil= (in respect \u2018of all toil whatsoever.\u2019\nNotice the twice-repeated emphatic \u05d0\u05ea and \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd), =and with respect\nto all success whatever= (that is, toil or pains which come to a\nsuccessful issue\u2015\u2015\u05db\u05e9\u05e8\u05d5\u05df occurs ii.\u00a021, here, and v. 11\u00a0(10), with the\nmeaning \u2018success.\u2019 The verb occurs xi.\u00a06, x.\u00a010; and the only other\nplace in which the root occurs is Esther viii.\u00a05. It has been said\nin consequence to be a late word; but the force of any reasoning,\nderived from its occurrence, is much weakened by noticing that it is\na technical term, and is used to signify the \u2018successful issue\u2019 which\nresults. See chapter xi.\u00a06, which is decisive. The LXX. render by\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u2018bravery,\u2019 which is also the rendering at chapter v.\u00a011)\n=of the working= (\u05d4\u05de\u05e2\u05e9\u05d4, in the usual sense of the working, or what\nis accomplished), =for= (or \u2018how,\u2019 rather) =it is= (feminine pronoun\nemphatic, see chapter iii.\u00a013) =envy= (or jealousy) =of a man= (not \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd\nhere, but \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9, \u2018any one,\u2019 or \u2018one.\u2019 German, \u2018man.\u2019 The meaning then is,\n\u2018one\u2019s jealousy\u2019) =over his neighbour.= (Thus the whole sentiment is,\nthat Koheleth had observed that even when _toil_, the trouble attending\nlabour, seemed to have a successful result, it produced more envy than\npleasure, which Koheleth expresses by the pregnant words, \u2018It is just\nthe envy of a man over his neighbour.\u2019) =Also this= is =a vanity= and\n=vexation of spirit= (_i.e._ is another instance of it).\n\n 5 The fool foldeth his hands \u2502 The befooled wrings his hands\n together, and eateth his own \u2502 and eats his heart,\n flesh. \u2502\n\n(5.) =The fool= (_i.e._ the \u2018befooled,\u2019 \u05d4\u05db\u05e1\u05d9\u05dc, doubtless by envy)\n=folds= (occurs iii.\u00a05, 2\u00a0Kings iv.\u00a016; or perhaps \u2018wrings\u2019) =his\nhands and eats his flesh=. (It has been much disputed what we are to\nunderstand by this figure; but Proverbs vi.\u00a010, xxiv.\u00a023\u2015\u2015where the\nsame formula occurs to express the idleness of the sluggard\u2015\u2015seems\nconclusive as to the meaning of folding his hands, as also \u2018flesh\u2019 in\nthis book has a technical meaning, \u2018the sensuous nature\u2019\u2015\u2015see chapter\nii.\u00a03. We can best understand it of the self-mortification of envy:\nthus the connexion will be apparent both with what went before, and is\nto follow).\n\n 6 Better _is_ an handful \u2502 and yet a real good is but a\n _with_ quietness, than both \u2502 fistful of rest; better than\n the hands full _with_ travail \u2502 both palms full of toil and\n and vexation of spirit. \u2502 vexation of spirit.\n\n(6.) =Good= (_i.e._ a real good) =filling a hand= (\u05db\u05e3, \u2018the open palm\u2019)\n=with rest, than to fill= (which repeated twice is emphatic) the\n=double hand= (\u05d7\u05e4\u05e0\u05d9\u05dd occurs only Exodus ix.\u00a08, Leviticus xvi.\u00a012,\nProverbs xxx.\u00a04, Ezekiel x. 2, 7,\u2015\u2015the \u2018two hands\u2019 held together so\nas to hold the most they can) =of a toil= and =vexation of spirit=.\n\n 7 \u00b6 Then I returned, and I \u2502 Furthermore I have observed\n saw vanity under the sun. \u2502 also another instance of\n \u2502 evanescence within this hot\n \u2502 work-day world.\n\n(7.) =And I turned, I myself=, and I =see= (the same formula\nintroducing another instance of the same kind) =a vanity= (an instance\nof vanity) =under the sun=.\n\n 8 There is one _alone_, and \u2502 There exists a solitary who\n _there is_ not a second; yea, \u2502 has no fellow; neither son\n he hath neither child nor \u2502 nor brother has he, yet there\n brother: yet _is there_ no end \u2502 is no end to all his toils:\n of all his labour; neither is \u2502 and besides no satisfaction to\n his eye satisfied with riches; \u2502 himself in all his wealth: who\n neither _saith he_, For whom \u2502 never asks, \u2018For whom am I now\n do I labour, and bereave my \u2502 toiling and depriving myself\n soul of good? This _is_ also \u2502 of good?\u2019 This is an instance\n vanity, yea, it _is_ a sore \u2502 of evanescence and uncertainty,\n travail. \u2502 which is evil and nothing else.\n\n(8.) =There is one, and there is not a second= (evidently meaning\nthat there is one who is quite alone in the world). =Moreover, son\nand brother there is not to him= (_i.e._ he has emphatically neither\nposterity nor relationship to account for this desire of accumulating\nwhich Koheleth is subsequently about to bring forward: his love of\naccumulation is purely _selfish_), =and there is nothing of an end=\n(\u200e\u200f\u05d0\u05d9\u05df, \u2018nothing,\u2019 is repeated three times: \u2018_No_ end at all\u2019 is therefore\nthe meaning. This continual harping on the _nothingness_ of the miser\u2019s\nstate is an exceedingly effective piece of oratory) =to all his toil.\nMoreover, his eyes= (altered by the Masorets to the singular, but\nwithout much taste: \u2018both his eyes devour his wealth\u2019) =does not\nsatisfy= (feminine singular; hence, as the LXX. show, the word must\nrefer to eyes as its subject; they render \u2018is not filled with,\u2019 for\nit is a case of a distributive plural) =wealth. And for whom do I=\n(the oratio obliqua is dropped, and the directa used in its place; or\nperhaps with this meaning does this ego) =toil, and depriving my soul=\n(with the usual meaning, \u2018myself\u2019) =of good?= (abstract.) =Also this=\nis a =vanity and= an =anxiety= which =an evil is= (emphatic) \u2018indeed\u2019\n(equivalent to \u2018an evil and nothing else,\u2019 or \u2018is simply an evil\u2019;\nother anxieties may be beneficial, this cannot be. This is the reason\nwhy we have \u05e8\u05e2, and not \u05e8\u05e2\u05d4, the abstract, as we should have expected).\n\n 9 \u00b6 Two _are_ better than \u2502 Good things are companionships,\n one; because they have a good \u2502 and better than solitaries; for\n reward for their labour. \u2502 these indeed have some reward\n \u2502 for their labour.\n\n(9.) =Good= (things) are =the doubles= (_i.e._ union in the abstract),\n=better than the single= (again, for the same reason, with the article),\n=because= (literally \u2018which,\u2019 the full relative, and referring back to\nthe whole idea) =there is= (exists, \u2018because there exists,\u2019) =a reward,\na good= (_i.e._ a real good; for to love one\u2019s neighbour as one\u2019s self\nis one of the real good things of this world) =in the toil of them.=\n\n 10 For if they fall, the one \u2502 Because if one falls, then\n will lift up his fellow: but \u2502 his fellow sets him up again:\n woe to him _that is_ alone \u2502 but sad is it to the solitary\n when he falleth; for _he hath_ \u2502 when he slips, for there is no\n not another to help him up. \u2502 second to set him up.\n\n(10.) =For if they fall, the one= (singular, following plural, either\none or other fall, that is) then =is caused to stand his fellow=\n(Judges xx.\u00a011, Psalms xlv.\u00a07), =and woe to him= (in _this_ form at\nthis place only, perhaps because of the play upon the word \u05d0\u05b5\u05d9 \u05dc\u05d5\u05b9 \u2018where\nis he?\u2019 an equivoke which helps the sense) =the single one which falls=\n(contracted relative, \u2018when or as he falls,\u2019) =and there is no second\nto make him stand.=\n\n 11 Again, if two lie \u2502 Moreover, if two lie together\n together, then they have heat: \u2502 they keep each other warm: but\n but how can one be warm \u2502 how can one be warm alone?\n _alone_? \u2502\n\n(11.) =Moreover= (an additional instance of the advantage of\ncompanionship, taken from the passive side, as the other was from the\nactive side of this matter), =if they lie down, two of them, and heat\nto them= (_i.e._ \u2018there is certainly warmth for them\u2019), =but to the\nsingle one, how can he be warmed?=\n\n 12 And if one prevail \u2502 And where one would fail, two\n against him, two shall \u2502 will prevail; and a threefold\n withstand him; and a threefold \u2502 cord is not quickly broken.\n cord is not quickly broken. \u2502\n\n(12.) =And if they prevail over= (impersonal, _any_ prevail over) =the\nsingle, the doubles will stand before him= (plural, the idea is that\nthere are two to one), =and the cord= which is =the triplex is not in\nhaste broken= (Jeremiah viii.\u00a016; Judges xvi.\u00a09).\n\n 13 Better _is_ a poor and \u2502 A Poor and Prudent young man\n a wise child than an old and \u2502 is better than a Perverse old\n foolish king, \u00b9who will no \u2502 king, who cannot be prevailed\n more be admonished. \u2502 on to listen to a warning.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ who knoweth not \u2502\n to be admonished. \u2502\n\n(13.) =Good is a child, poor= (\u05de\u05e1\u05db\u05df, occurs chapter iv.\u00a013, ix. 15,\u00a016\nonly; the root occurs in the sense \u2018profitable,\u2019 see Job xxii.\u00a02; the\nidea seems to be, that kind of poverty which is economical and sparing)\n=and wise from= (\u2018above,\u2019 that is; the ordinary \u05de\u05be of comparison;) a\n=king old= (\u05d6\u05e7\u05df, the alliteration between _miscan_ and _zakan_ gives\npungency. We have rendered this in the paraphrase by a corresponding\nalliteration) =and befooled, who does not know= how =to= be =warned as\nyet.= (The allusion here to Solomon is palpable, and this may account\nfor the apparently redundant \u05e2\u05d5\u05d3, \u2018_as yet_,\u2019 at the end of the sentence.)\n\n 14 For out of prison he \u2502 For from a prison-house of\n cometh to reign; whereas \u2502 plotters he comes forth to\n also _he that is_ born in his \u2502 reign, and beside in his\n kingdom becometh poor. \u2502 kingdom is the birthplace of\n \u2502 meanness.\n\n(14.) =For from the house of rebels= (\u05d4\u05e1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd is considered a contraction\nfor \u05d4\u05d0\u05e1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd, \u2018prison;\u2019 but, to say the least, this is a violation of\nthe critical canon, which bids us prefer the harder reading. That the\nderivation from \u05e1\u05d5\u05e8, \u2018to turn aside,\u2019 hence \u2018revolters,\u2019 is contrary to\nthe pointing, is not a valid objection, because the Masorets pointed as\nthey did to explain a difficulty; so also the LXX., who read \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd\nand \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03af\u03c9\u03bd. If possible, we ought to preserve intact the unpointed\ntext. The exact and literal meaning is, as the text stands, \u2018from the\nhouse of the turners-aside,\u2019 _i.e._ those conspirators and wicked men,\nsycophants, who will be flattering him to promote their own interest,\nand this was exactly Solomon\u2019s case) =he goes out to reign, for= (the\nsecond \u05db\u05d9, with the meaning \u2018so\u2019) =also= (\u2018moreover;\u2019 this particle, as\nwe have seen, usually introduces an additional reason, confirming the\none which went before) =in his kingdom is begotten= (\u2666\u05e0\u05d5\u05dc\u05d3, _noled_, a\nplay upon \u05d9\u05dc\u05d3, _jeled_, above) =want= (\u05e8\u05e9 is poverty in the sense of\nindigence and meanness; compare 1\u00a0Samuel xviii.\u00a023, and Proverbs xix.\n1, 7,\u00a022; as, however, \u05e8\u05e9 has the form of a concrete, we must remember\nthat it involves the idea of a poor man, hence there is a sarcastic\nambiguity, heightened by alliteration. Take the LXX. and Masorets\u2019\nsense, which is merely to allow the obvious play between \u05d4\u05e1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd and\n\u200e\u200f\u05d4\u05d0\u05e1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd, and the sentiment is true, and, curiously enough, equally\ncorresponds with the history).\n\n \u2666 \u201c\u05e0\u05dc\u05d3\u201d replaced with \u201c\u05e0\u05d5\u05dc\u05d3\u201d\n\nThe following passage is one of great difficulty, but a very careful\nattention to its precise wording and the equivoke it contains, may\nperhaps afford a solution.\n\n 15 I considered all the \u2502 I have observed of all lives\n living which walk under the \u2502 whatsoever, as they are\n sun, with the second child \u2502 progressing in this work-day\n that shall stand up in his \u2502 world, in regard to any\n stead. \u2502 successors which may arise in\n \u2502 their places,\n\n(15.) =I have seen= (\u2018observed as matter of fact\u2019), =with respect to\nall the lives= (which the LXX. render \u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2), =the\nproceeding ones= (participle, piel plural with the article\u2015\u2015LXX. \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2\u2015\u2015occurs here and Psalms civ.\u00a03, Proverbs vi.\u00a011; \u2018as they\nare advancing\u2019 must be the meaning, and hence the observation was made\nwith regard to the _progress_ of these lives), =under the sun= (that is,\nin this stage of their existence; the limitation here is excessively\nimportant,) =together with the child= (with the article, generic,\nand giving the meaning of that which is \u2018begotten of them,\u2019 of course\nchildren primarily, but not exclusively; the \u2018heir\u2019 or \u2018successors\u2019\nwould represent the idea), =the second= (_i.e._ the _immediate_\nsuccessor) =who stands in their stead= (plural, which nevertheless the\nLXX. render \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, and rightly, because it is an instance of a\ndistributive plural, with regard to \u05d4\u05d9\u05dc\u05d3).\n\n 16 _There is_ no end of all \u2502 that no result was ever reached\n the people, _even_ of all that \u2502 by the [_moiling_] multitude\n have been before them: they \u2502 in the past: and as to what\n also that come after shall not \u2502 succeeds them, they will have\n rejoice in him. Surely this \u2502 no [_earthly_] pleasure in\n also _is_ vanity and vexation \u2502 that. Another instance of\n of spirit. \u2502 evanescence and vexing of\n \u2502 spirit.\n\n(16.) =There is nothing= of =an end= (_i.e._ \u2018result,\u2019 occurs chapter\niv. 8,\u00a016) =to all the people= (with the article, \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03bb\u03b1\u1ff7,\nLXX.\u2015\u2015and in this book it appears as a collective for the human\nrace\u2015\u2015see chapter xii.\u00a09), =to all= (repeated, hence with the meaning,\n\u2018that is to all those\u2019) =that= (full relative) =were before them=\n(but \u2018before\u2019 in the sense of in their \u2018presence,\u2019 not in the sense of\n\u2018before their time\u2019), =moreover= (introducing an additional reason),\n=the succeeding ones=\u2015\u2015(see 2\u00a0Chronicles ix.\u00a029, xii.\u00a015, which will\ngive the exact meaning) =not= (rather emphatic from its position, \u2018not\nat all\u2019) =will they= (_i.e._ the people before them) =rejoice in it=\n(\u2018it\u2019 is a singular following a plural, and hence a distributive, \u2018any\nsuccessor\u2019) =for also this= is =a vanity= (an instance of evanescence)\n=and vexing= (not \u2018vexation,\u2019 because this comes from within) =of\nspirit.= Thus the sense is clear; it is the conclusion of the argument.\nKoheleth\u2019s observation has regard to the progress of lives in relation\nto anything that may or is to be produced by them in the way of\nheritage\u2015\u2015or, in other words, he asks how far the present state\nof things can be explained on the theory that it is a working for\nposterity, and he shows that this is not an explanation, for there is\nno result obtained by the collective people in the present, because\neach age is the same morally as that which went before it; while,\nof course, with regard to what is to succeed, the present generation\ncannot rejoice in that, because they will be all dead, and as the\nargument is limited to what takes place under the sun, so all so-called\nprogress is but an instance of evanescence. The idea, if not that\ncontained in the observation of one who selfishly observed, when\nrequested to care for posterity, \u2018that as posterity had done nothing\nfor him, he did not see why he should do anything for posterity,\u2019 rests\non the same facts.\n\nThe sentence also, it appears, contains a remarkable equivoke.\n\u200e\u200f\u05dc\u05db\u05dc \u05d4\u05e2\u05dd \u05dc\u05db\u05dc sounds very like \u05dc\u05db\u05dc \u05d4\u05e2\u05de\u05dc \u05db\u05dc, and this division of the words will\nmake such good and pungent sense that we can hardly imagine that the\nequivoke was unintentional. The equivoke is sought to be rendered in\nthe paraphrase by the addition of the words enclosed in the brackets.\n\nAt this point we come to another division in the book. Certain\npractical exhortations follow, deduced from the previous arguments,\nconcerning human conduct, under the circumstances above set forth.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER V.\n\n\n \u2502 SECTION IV.\u2015\u2015_Practical\n \u2502 aphorisms grounded on the\n \u2502 foregoing._\n \u2502\n KEEP thy foot when thou \u2502 GUARD thou thy steps as one\n goest to the house of God, and \u2502 who art walking to the House of\n be more ready to hear, than to \u2502 the Divinity, and approach\n give the sacrifice of fools: \u2502 rather to hearken than to give,\n for they consider not that \u2502 as the fools do, a sacrifice;\n they do evil. \u2502 who do not know when evil is\n \u2502 being done.\n\nV. (1.) =Keep thy feet= (the Masorets have altered this to the singular,\nbut without sufficient reason; yet the LXX. support the Kri) =as when=\n(occurs chapter v. 3\u00a0(4), viii.\u00a07; \u2018as though\u2019 is the meaning here)\n=thou walkest= (taking up the word from the last clause above) =towards\nthe house of the Deity= (the LXX. render, of course correctly as to\nsense by the double article, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bf\u1f36\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6\u2015\u2015\u2018Thou art walking to\nthe temple of a Divine Providence\u2019 is the idea), =and drawing near to\nhear= (evidently \u2018in order to hear\u2019; hence the LXX. render \u1f10\u03b3\u03b3\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd; some, however, with the Authorized Version, take this as an\nimperative, but the sense is better preserved by rendering as the LXX.\ndo), =more than giving of the befooled ones= (for we must not lose\nsight of the hiphil form: they are deceived either by themselves or\nothers) =a sacrifice.= (The curious rendering of the LXX. by no means\nshows that they did not understand the meaning, or even would have\naltered the present pointing; \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u03b4\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 fulfils\ntheir conditions of rendering, which is, if possible, to preserve both\nthe sense and the order, \u2018above the gift of fools is thy sacrifice\u2019).\n=For= they are =not those instructed to the doing of= (so the LXX.,\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9) =evil.= The sentence is purposely ambiguous and equivocal;\nit is not clear at first sight whether the fools are those who do evil,\nor whether it be the doing of evil generally which is the point, but\nthe following will seem to give a fair explanation of this \u2666difficult\npassage. The advice given after the considerations above, is to walk\nreverently, and to listen to what God\u2019s oracle will say, rather than do\nas fools do,\u2015\u2015offer a sacrifice to avert evil, which they do not after\nall know to be such, and which, if it implies dissatisfaction with\nthese divine providential arrangements, is a foolish, if not sinful,\nsacrifice. This is further set forth in the following verses.\n\n \u2666 \u201cdifcult\u201d replaced with \u201cdifficult\u201d\n\n 2 Be not rash with thy \u2502 Do not be hasty with thy lips,\n mouth, and let not thine heart \u2502 nor in thought hurry forth a\n be hasty to utter _any_ \u00b9thing \u2502 word against the Almighty, for\n before God: for God _is_ in \u2502 that Almighty is in the\n heaven, and thou upon earth: \u2502 heavens, and thou art upon the\n therefore let thy words be \u2502 earth: on this account let thy\n few. \u2502 words be sparing. Because just\n \u2502 as there comes dreaming through\n 3 For a dream cometh through \u2502 a multitude of anxieties, so\n the multitude of business; and \u2502 there comes the voice of a\n a fool\u2019s voice _is known_ by \u2502 befooled through a multitude of\n multitude of words. \u2502 reasonings.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Or_, word. \u2502\n\n(2, 3.) =Do not hasten= (the hastiness of vexation, see Job iv.\u00a05,\nxxiii.\u00a015, Psalms vi.\u00a010) =upon thy mouth= (the preposition is by no\nmeans redundant), =and thy heart do not hurry= (the usual word denoting\nthe hurry of want of time. The meaning then is, do not speak, no, do\nnot even think, hastily) =to cause to send out a word= (with the usual\nmeaning of \u2018a reason to be acted on\u2019) =before the Deity, because the\nDeity= (as this is a repetition, the word becomes emphatic, \u2018that\nDeity\u2019) =in the heavens and thou= (emphatic) =on the earth, therefore\nbe thy words a few= (_i.e._ diminished rather than increased, hence\nthe following). =For comes the dream in the multitude of anxiety, and\na voice= of =a befooled= one (for it is without the article) =in the\nmultitude of words= (or \u2018reasons,\u2019 as above). The argument now passes\nover from rash speeches to rash vows. A vow is a favourite resource\nwith the foolish for obtaining the accomplishment of their wishes: they\nthink to bribe Providence with gifts and offerings.\n\n 4 When thou vowest a vow \u2502 (2.) Shouldst thou have vowed\n unto God, defer not to pay it; \u2502 specially to God, do not be\n for _he hath_ no pleasure in \u2502 slow to pay it; because there\n fools: pay that which thou \u2502 is no providence with the\n hast vowed. \u2502 befooled ones: just what thou\n \u2502 hast vowed pay.\n\n(4.) =When thou hast vowed a vow= (\u2018If by any means thou hast done\nthis,\u2019 for considerable emphasis is given by the repetition of \u2018vow,\u2019\naccording to the well-known Hebrew idiom) =to God, do not defer to pay\nit= (the alacrity with which men vow is commonly in strong contrast\nwith the tardiness with which they pay), =because there is nothing= of\n=providence= (\u05d7\u05e4\u05e5, with its usual technical meaning, and also equivocal,\nin the sense of \u2018pleasure\u2019) =in befooled= ones: =with respect to what\nthou hast vowed, pay= (the LXX. render \u03c3\u1f7a \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u2018thou then,\u2019 but the\nemphasis given by \u05d0\u05ea \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 may easily account for this).\n\n 5 Better _is it_ that thou \u2502 For it is better that thou\n shouldest not vow, than that \u2502 shouldst not vow, than that\n thou shouldest vow and not \u2502 thou shouldst be vowing and not\n pay. \u2502 pay.\n\n(5.) =A good is it that thou shouldst not vow= (the sentence is\nambiguous, but the equivoke is \u2018thou hadst better _not_ vow\u2019), =than\nthat thou shouldst vow and not pay.=\n\n 6 Suffer not thy mouth \u2502 Do not allow thy mouth to cause\n to cause thy flesh to sin; \u2502 thy body to sin; and say not in\n neither say thou before the \u2502 the presence of God\u2019s messenger,\n angel, that it _was_ an error: \u2502 \u2018It was but an inadvertence:\u2019\n wherefore should God be angry \u2502 why should the Almighty be\n at thy voice, and destroy the \u2502 angry with your prattle, and\n work of thine hands? \u2502 put an arrest on the work of\n \u2502 your hands?\n\n(6.) =Do not give with respect to thy mouth= (the \u05d0\u05ea is not redundant,\n\u2018do not appoint,\u2019 which is the meaning of \u05ea\u05ea\u05df), =to cause to make to\nsin with respect to thy flesh= (the meaning then must be, \u2018do not so\narrange matters as to cause thy mouth to make thy flesh sin,\u2019 by, that\nis, preferring the ease, pleasure, of the flesh or the like, to the\nsacrifice caused by a redemption of the vow), =and do not say in the\npresence of the angel= (with the article; had this been noticed as\nit ought, less difficulty would have been felt in the interpretation\nof this passage; the angel is the messenger of Providence who comes to\nrequire the vow, and whom, of course, with or without sufficient reason,\nthe person bound by the vow expects) =that= (\u05db\u05d9) =an error it is=: (see\nLeviticus iv. 2, 22,\u00a027, and Numbers xv. 24, 25,\u00a029; when too this\npassage is compared with Leviticus iv.\u00a02, we can have no doubt that\n\u200e\u200f\u05dc\u05e4\u05f3 \u05de\u05d0\u05f3 here is the equivalent of \u05dc\u05e4\u05f3 \u05d9\u05d9\u05f3 there) =why= (LXX. \u1f35\u03bd\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f74, \u2018so\nthat not\u2019), =should be angry= (Genesis xl.\u00a02, Deuteronomy i.\u00a024) =the\nDeity over thy voice= (Ginsburg, excellently, \u2018with thy prattle\u2019), =and\ndestroy= (as this word is used to signify the \u2018giving a pledge,\u2019 this\npeculiar signification conveys the idea, \u2018destroy by exacting a pledge,\u2019\n\u2018make thee bankrupt by insisting upon payment\u2019) =with respect to the\nwork of your hands?=\n\n 7 For in the multitude of \u2502 For in the multitude of dreams\n dreams and many words _there \u2502 and vanities even so reasons\n are_ also _divers_ vanities: \u2502 are multiplied that GOD is to\n but fear thou God. \u2502 be feared.\n\n(7.) =For in a multitude of dreams= (\u2018conjectures\u2019 probably) =and\nvanities and reasonings, the much= (_i.e._ these reasonings are\nincreased); =for= (\u05db\u05d9 is repeated, and this repetition makes it\nemphatic\u2015\u2015\u2018so indeed\u2019) =with respect to the Deity fear.= The probable\nmeaning is, \u2018fear God under all circumstances: vanity and conjectures\nonly increase the reasons for so doing,\u2019\u2015\u2015thus is revealed the real\nconclusion of the whole treatise.\n\nKoheleth now takes up a subject ineffectually discussed before, and\nsolves it with this principle just enunciated: Fear God.\n\n 8 \u00b6 If thou seest the \u2502 (3.) If violent oppression\n oppression of the poor, and \u2502 of the poor, and wresting\n violent perverting of judgment \u2502 of justice and right, should\n and justice in a province, \u2502 be observed by you in a\n marvel not \u00b9at the matter: for \u2502 jurisdiction, do not be\n _he that is_ higher than the \u2502 surprised at the providence;\n highest regardeth; and _there \u2502 for the lofty are watched by\n be_ higher than they. \u2502 one loftier still, and these\n \u2502 lofty ones are\u2015\u2015subjects.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ at the will, or \u2502\n purpose. \u2502\n\n(8.) =If oppression of the poor= (see chapter iv. 1,\u00a03, etc.), =and\nwresting= of =judgment and right, thou seest in a province= (\u05d1\u05de\u05d3\u05d9\u05e0\u05d4,\nthis has been considered a late word, and a sign, moreover, that the\nwriter lived in the country and not in the city, as he says, chapter\ni.\u00a012; but though it occurs in the later Hebrew [1\u00a0Kings xx.\u00a014 is the\nfirst instance] it is quite regularly formed, and is clearly in place\nhere), =do not marvel= (Psalms xlviii.\u00a06, Jeremiah iv.\u00a09, to \u2018be\nastonished,\u2019 \u2018struck with astonishment\u2019) =over the providence= (\u05d4\u05d7\u05e4\u05e5\nwith the article; the LXX. render \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 in this instance, the\nword, however, occurs in the technical meaning it has all through the\nbook, see chapter iii.\u00a01, v. 4\u00a0(3)); =for high from above the high=\n(which the LXX. render word for word, \u1f51\u03c8\u03b7\u03bb\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9 \u1f51\u03c8\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6) =keeps and\nhigh ones above them= (the sentence is enigmatic, perhaps proverbial,\nthough the meaning is clear. Is it possible that a play was intended\nbetween \u05de\u05b5\u05e2\u05b7\u05dc and \u05de\u05b7\u05e2\u05b7\u05dc, Leviticus v.\u00a015, a \u2018transgression,\u2019 \u05d2\u05d1\u05d4 being taken\nin the meaning of swelling up, thus\u2015\u2015\u2018Increasing transgression is\nincreasing regard?\u2019 In the same way the \u05de at the end of \u05d2\u05d1\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd would\nunite with the word following in utterance, and so help the equivoke).\n\n 9 \u00b6 Moreover the profit of \u2502 And besides,\n the earth is for all: the king \u2502\n _himself_ is served by the \u2502 (i.) The produce of the earth\n field. \u2502 is all in all: a king is a\n \u2502 subject to the field.\n\n(9.) =And the profit= (as this is joined by a conjunction with the\nformer, we must look upon it as a further argument in the same chain\nof reasoning; the meaning will then be \u2018and besides the produce\u2019) =of\nearth= (not _the_ earth, the article is wanting) =in all= (the LXX.\nrender this by \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 with a dative, hence they understood the preposition\nhere to mean \u2018for all,\u2019 which our version follows) =it is= (feminine,\nin close apposition therefore with the noun, but this noun must be \u05d9\u05ea\u05e8\u05d5\u05df,\nwhich is feminine, and the meaning is that it exists subjectively, or\nis always there playing its part) =a king= (again, not _the_ king: any\nking, therefore, however great,\u2015\u2015Solomon himself, or any other) =to\na field= (again, not _the_ field, equivalent to some field; the LXX.\nrender by the simple genitive) =is served= (niphal; this occurs only\ntwice in the past tense, here and at Ezekiel xxxvi.\u00a09, both in the\nsense of tilling; and the niphal future twice, at Deuteronomy xxi.\u00a04\nand Ezekiel xxxvi.\u00a034, again with the same meaning\u2015\u2015no doubt \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 is\nused with the signification \u2018to serve generally\u2019 in a vast number of\nplaces. It must be observed, however, that a niphal is not exactly the\nsame as a passive, but has an objective signification, so that it is\noften nearer in meaning to the Greek middle voice than our passive.\nBearing this in mind, we can have no further doubt over this passage\nas to its principal scope,\u2015\u2015\u2018the king is served of,\u2019 or \u2018a subject to\nthe field.\u2019 The idea is that the very highest are really in a state of\nabject dependence\u2015\u2015a single day\u2019s starvation would have been sufficient\nto have brought to the dust Solomon or Nebuchadnezzar. The other\npossible rendering, that \u2018_the king is served by the field_,\u2019 is only\nthe other side of the same truth, and the sentence is equivocal, being\ningeniously constructed so as to read either way).\n\n 10 He that loveth silver \u2502 (ii.) A lover of money no\n shall not be satisfied with \u2502 money ever satisfied; and\n silver; nor he that loveth \u2502 who that loved profusion\n abundance with increase: this \u2502 ever had sufficient income?\n _is_ also vanity. \u2502 Another instance of the\n \u2502 evanescent.\n\n(10.) =Loving silver= (the Masorets point as a participle, but\nhowever correct this may be, the participial notion is in Ecclesiastes\napparently not so prominent, as it is when the poel is used written\nfull) =not satisfies= (_i.e._ as the nominative follows, \u2018shall not\nbe satisfied with\u2019) =silver= (_silver_ is doubled here, and used of\ncourse in the sense of money\u2015\u2015the meaning being that \u2018a lover of money\nno _money_ ever satisfies\u2019), =and who loving in a multitude= (_i.e._\nsetting his desires in a multitude of goods, or anything else) =not=\n(but the LXX. in place of \u05dc\u05d0 possibly read \u05dc\u05d5\u05b9, \u2018to him,\u2019 and this makes\nfar better and more pungent sense\u2015\u2015\u2018_to him_\u2019 emphatic will then be\nthe meaning) =a revenue= (Numbers xviii.\u00a030, Deuteronomy xxxiii.\u00a014,\nProverbs iii.\u00a014, xviii.\u00a020; or, still better, for the word is derived\nfrom the root \u05d1\u05d5\u05d0, \u2018to come,\u2019 \u2018an income.\u2019 Thus it is seen that the two\nclauses are aimed respectively against niggardliness and extravagance.\nThe miser and the spendthrift both never have enough); =also this is\nvanity= (another instance of the transitory and evanescent, as indeed\nit is, because these riches look satisfactory and are not).\n\n 11 When goods increase, they \u2502 (iii.) As property increases,\n are increased that eat them: \u2502 so increases consumption\n and what good _is there_ to \u2502 too; and what success then\n the owners thereof, saving the \u2502 has ownership, but just the\n beholding _of them_ with their \u2502 right of beholding it?\n eyes? \u2502\n\n(11.) =In the multitudes of the good= (an abstract, with the article,\nand hence the meaning is \u2018In the very increase of the property itself,\nand as it increases,\u2019 this being the meaning of the plural, which\nis distributive) =multiply the eatings of it= (or, for the \u05d4 may be\nconsidered paragogic, and so making, as it were, an abstract of the\npoel participle, \u2018consumers\u2019), =and what is the success= (\u05db\u05e9\u05e8\u05d5\u05df, see\nii.\u00a021, references) =to the owners of it= (_i.e._ to ownership),\n=except seeing= (\u05e8\u05d0\u05d9\u05ea, this the Masorets alter to \u05e8\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea, but unnecessarily,\nfor there is a slight difference in the sense here, which will account\nfor the unusual grammatical form; a causative or hiphil notion is\nimplied by it; hence the LXX. \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f74 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f41\u03c1\u1fb6\u03bd, \u2018the priority to see,\u2019)\n=his eyes?= (_i.e._ each one with his eyes, singular following plural).\n\n 12 The sleep of a labouring \u2502 (iv.) How sweet is the sleep\n man _is_ sweet, whether he \u2502 of the slave, if a little,\n eat little or much: but the \u2502 or if much he eats: but a\n abundance of the rich will not \u2502 sufficiency to one who is\n suffer him to sleep. \u2502 enriched\u2015\u2015does not cause\n \u2502 rest to him so that he\n \u2502 sleeps.\n\n(12.) =Sweet= (but the participial form of the noun must not be\noverlooked, nor the feminine termination, equivalent to a \u2018sweetness,\u2019)\n=is the sleep of the slave= (\u2018of the toiler,\u2019 with the article),\n=if a little, or if the much he eats= (there is a peculiar force in\ncontrasting \u2018_the_ much,\u2019 \u05d4\u05e8\u05d1\u05d4, with the article, with \u05de\u05e2\u05d8 without it;\neven if he should eat to _the much_ [_i.e._ as large a quantity as\nhe can] it will do him no harm: no nightmare will trouble him who has\nearned his hearty meal by his hard work), =but the satisfaction= (as\ncontrasted with \u05d4\u05e8\u05d1\u05d4) =to the enriched it is not that which is causing\nrest= (hiphil participle) =to him= (emphatic) =to sleep= (an equivoke\nhere is to be found in \u05d4\u05e9\u05d1\u05e2 and \u05dc\u05e2\u05e9\u05d9\u05e8, remembering that \u05e9\u05d1\u05e2, \u2018seven,\u2019\nis used so commonly for \u2018completeness,\u2019 and \u05e2\u05e9\u05e8, \u2018ten,\u2019 as \u2018rich\u2019 and\n\u2018overflowing;\u2019 seven with ten has a peculiar meaning in the symbolism\nof numbers).\n\n 13 There is a sore evil \u2502 (v.) There is this evil\n _which_ I have seen under the \u2502 infirmity which I have\n sun, _namely_, riches kept for \u2502 observed in this work-day\n the owners thereof to their \u2502 world: Riches kept by an\n hurt. \u2502 owner to his own injury;\n\n(13.) =There is an evil= (abstract, a particular kind of evil), =a\nsickness= (another abstract) =I have seen under the sun\u2015\u2015wealth keeping\nto= (_i.e._ being kept by) =its possessors to their hurt.=\n\n 14 But those riches perish \u2502 for the wealth itself\n by evil travail: and he \u2502 perishes in an uncertainty\n begetteth a son, and _there \u2502 which is distressing: so\n is_ nothing in his hand. \u2502 that when he begets an\n \u2502 heir, he has in his hand\n \u2502 just nothing at all.\n\n(14.) =And perishes, that riches, that same= (as we should say, \u2018those\nvery same riches\u2019) =in an uncertainty= (\u05d1\u05e2\u05e0\u05d9\u05df, another instance of this\nword; we see that in this case also [see chapter i.\u00a013, references],\nthe meaning \u2018anxious uncertainty\u2019 exactly suits the context), which\nis =an evil= (this anxious care, instead of doing any good, is but a\nsimple mischief), =and he is caused to beget a son= (to whom, of course,\nhe would have wished to bequeath his wealth), and there is =nothing in\nhis hand at all= (which the LXX. render by a double negative, and hence\nwe must render \u2018and has in his hand even nothing at all\u2019).\n\n 15 As he came forth of his \u2502 For naked as when he came\n mother\u2019s womb, naked shall he \u2502 forth from the womb of\n return to go as he came, and \u2502 his mother does he go out\n shall take nothing of his \u2502 of the world again; and\n labour, which he may carry \u2502 nothing whatever does he\n away in his hand. \u2502 take from his care, which\n \u2502 he can hold in his hand.\n\n(15.) =And as he came out from the womb of his mother naked= (which is\nreserved to the end of the clause, making it emphatic; it is moreover\nwritten full, so that a slight additional emphasis is given by this to\nthe \u2018_state_ of nakedness\u2019 existing), =he returns to go back= (somewhat\nstronger than goes back\u2015\u2015he comes to this state through intermediate\nstages) just =as he came= (\u2018as he was at the first, so now is he at\nthe last\u2019), =and nothing at all does he not lift up= (Genesis vii.\u00a017,\n\u2018bear\u2019 as a burden) =in his toil= (as we say, \u2018_have_ for his _pains_,\u2019\nobserving the meaning of \u05e2\u05de\u05dc, not the labour but the anxiety which\ncauses, or results from, the labour) =which he takes in his hand.=\n\n 16 And this also _is_ a sore \u2502 Moreover, in this is\n evil, _that_ in all points as \u2502 discovered that evil\n he came, so shall he go: and \u2502 infirmity, that precisely\n what profit hath he that hath \u2502 as he began, so does\n laboured for the wind? \u2502 he leave off; and what\n \u2502 possible advantage can\n \u2502 there be, that he toiled\n \u2502 for the wind?\n\n(16.) =And, moreover, this same evil sickness, all over against= (\u05db\u05dc \u05e2\u05de\u05ea\noccurs as two words here only; \u05dc\u05e2\u05de\u05ea is the ordinary form, it has the\nmeaning of \u2018against,\u2019 \u2018over against,\u2019 see Exodus xxv.\u00a027, 2\u00a0Samuel\nxvi.\u00a013; it has been proposed to read \u05db\u05dc\u05e2\u05de\u05ea, in which case the meaning\nwill be as in the above\u2015\u2015\u2018precisely as,\u2019 LXX. \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1, but this is to\na certain extent to cut the knot rather than untie it. Now \u05e2\u05de\u05ea occurs\nseparately here only, and if \u05e2\u05de\u05ea really exists, it is a noun feminine\nin regimen; now the meaning of \u05e2\u05dd, which is presented both in \u2018people\u2019\nand in the preposition \u2018_with_,\u2019 gives evidently something \u2018collected\u2019\nor \u2018gathered,\u2019 hence \u05e2\u05de\u05d4 would mean a \u2018collection\u2019 or \u2018instance,\u2019\nand \u05e2\u05de\u05ea \u2018collection\u2019 or \u2018instance of,\u2019 and then the exact meaning\nof \u05db\u05dc \u05e2\u05f4 will be \u2018every instance of his going\u2019), =which he comes=\n(close relative, the reason of which is now sufficiently evident,\nmeaning, \u2018just as he comes;\u2019 he simply goes round in a circle without\naccomplishing anything, or returns back on his own track in every\ninstance) =so= (emphatic, standing apart from its noun, equal \u2018just\nso\u2019) =does he go, and what profit to him who has toiled= (close\nrelative again, \u2018in that he has toiled\u2019) =to the wind?= (which,\nsee chapter i.\u00a06, returns back again as it did before. \u2018To\u2019 is here\nnot exactly the same as \u2018like to,\u2019 but very near it; but perhaps\nalso because his toil or care is to his spirit, as it has no effect\notherwise.)\n\n 17 All his days also he \u2502 Moreover, all his days he\n eateth in darkness, and _he \u2502 consumes in darkness: his\n hath_ much sorrow and wrath \u2502 disappointment is very\n with his sickness. \u2502 great indeed: he has\n \u2502 sickness and is sorry.\n\n(17.) =Moreover, all his days in darkness= (for, of course, all this\ntime he has never any idea which way he was really going, or what he is\ndoing) =he eats= (or consumes), and =disappointment= is =the much= (or\nis multiplied), =and his sickness and wrath= (\u05e7\u05e6\u05e3 is that kind of wrath\nwhich arises from anger with a person on account of something wrong.\nThis miserable life is summed up, it appears, in four particulars\u2015\u2015(1.)\nAll his days he eats in darkness; (2.)\u00a0the vexation of disappointment\nconsumes him; (3.)\u00a0he is sick, or rather, in this general sense, he is\nafflicted; (4.)\u00a0he is angry, for those mistakes and disappointments.)\n\n 18 \u00b6 Behold _that_ which I \u2502 Manifest, then, is that real\n have seen: \u00b9_it is_ good and \u2502 good which I have observed,\n comely _for one_ to eat and to \u2502 viz., that it is proper to eat,\n drink, and to enjoy the good \u2502 and to drink, and so to see\n of all his labour that he \u2502 good in all one\u2019s toil which\n taketh under the sun \u00b2all the \u2502 one may toil in this hot\n days of his life, which God \u2502 work-day world, as the tale of\n giveth him: for it _is_ his \u2502 one\u2019s daily life. For this is\n portion. \u2502 what God gives, and this is\n \u2502 one\u2019s _own_ possession.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ there is a good \u2502\n which is comely, etc. \u2502\n \u2502\n \u00b2 _Hebrew_ the number of the \u2502\n days. \u2502\n\n(18.) =Behold= (for this introduces the manifest result of his\nobservation) =that which I have seen=, even =I myself= (the result\ntherefore of his own personal experience), a real =good; which also=\n(the full relative here has this meaning, because it is repeated) is\n=suitable to the eating= (_i.e._ active enjoyment), =to the drinking=\n(which is passive), =and to the seeing of goodness= (the _lamed_ is\nrepeated before each full infinitive, and the abstract \u05d8\u05d5\u05d1\u05d4 follows,\nwhich therefore gives the meaning that what he had observed was, \u2018that\nit was proper that one should eat, or one should drink, or should see\ngood in,\u2019 etc., _i.e._ any or all of these); =and= (repeated, meaning\n\u2018_and also_\u2019) =in all his toil which= (contracted relative) =he toils=\nover (toil is thus made very emphatic, the meaning is, \u2018for which one\nso earnestly or unceasingly toils,\u2019 for observe also, as no nominative\nis expressed, the verb is impersonal) =under the sun the number= (the\nroot \u05e1\u05e4\u05e8 has the meaning to count or enumerate, hence the idea \u2018as one\nis counting one\u2019s days\u2019) of =the days of his life which gives to him=\n(emphatic) =the Deity= (nominative following verb, with the usual shade\nof meaning), =because it is his portion= (_i.e._ what belongs to him,\nbut in the future he has no portion, _that_ no man has any right over).\n\n 19 Every man also to whom \u2502 And beside, should the Almighty\n God hath given riches and \u2502 appoint to any individuals\n wealth, and hath given him \u2502 of the human race, riches,\n power to eat thereof, and \u2502 possessions, and the power\n to take his portion, and to \u2502 to enjoy them, and so to make\n rejoice in his labour; this \u2502 use of their possessions, and\n _is_ the gift of God. \u2502 rejoice in their toil\u2015\u2015this is\n \u2502 simply a Divine appointment.\n\n(19.) =Moreover, all the man= (_i.e._ every one of the human race\nconsidered collectively and in the abstract) =which gives to him=\n(equivalent to one to whom) =God= (gives or appoints) =wealth and\nriches, and it is caused him to have power in order to eat= (which we\nhave seen is used as the highest type of enjoyment in the active sense)\n=of it, and to take his portion= (for a man may possess without being\nable to eat or enjoy at all, hence the necessity for this clause in\nthe course of the argument; \u05e0\u05e9\u05d0 has the meaning to \u2018lift up,\u2019 \u2018carry,\u2019\nor \u2018bear\u2019), =and to rejoice in his toil= (which\u2015\u2015considering the exact\nmeaning assigned in this book to \u05e2\u05de\u05dc, the \u2018care\u2019 one takes in one\u2019s\nlabour\u2015\u2015to rejoice in is to see it come to a successful end); =this\nsame= (the Masorets put here a strong disjunctive accent) =a gift= of\n=God it is.=\n\n 20 \u00b9For he shall not much \u2502 For the memory of the days of\n remember the days of his life; \u2502 the past life is not of much\n because God answereth _him_ in \u2502 importance; but the Almighty\n the joy of his heart. \u2502 rather exercises men in their\n \u2502 present emotions.\n \u00b9 _Or_, though _he give_ not \u2502\n much, _yet_ he remembereth,\u2502\n etc. \u2502\n\n(20.) =For not the much he remembers= (but as no nominative precedes\nor follows, the verb is impersonal) =the days of his life=, and =for=\n(the second \u05db\u05d9 introducing a reason in addition to and confirmatory\nof the first) =the Deity answers= (this is the only place in which\nthe participle hiphil occurs; in one other place the participle\npual\u2015\u2015Isaiah liii.\u00a04, which differs only from the hiphil in its\npointing, occurs evidently in the sense of \u2018afflicted,\u2019 which the\nLXX. render by \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, \u2018in affliction.\u2019 The future hiphil is used at\n1\u00a0Kings viii.\u00a035 and 2\u00a0Chronicles vi.\u00a026, parallels, and is translated\n\u2018thou dost afflict them.\u2019 On the whole, however, the meaning, as\npointed out by \u2666Z\u00f6ckler, and which the LXX. confirm, seems to be,\n\u2018hears them by vouchsafing;\u2019 and as this answer is painful or joyful,\nas the case may be, and more usually the former, \u2018exercises\u2019 would be\na suitable rendering) =in the joy of= (or by means of the joy, \u05d1\u05b0\u05be, of\nthe instrument; it is an abstract in regimen, \u2018in the joyousness\u2019 or\n\u2018rejoicings of\u2019) =his heart=. Thus, then, the two reasons given stand\nrelated thus: Present gratification is the lot of humanity, because\nthe past is not much remembered. The _chief_ remembrance\u2015\u2015for this is\nthe meaning of \u05d4\u05e8\u05d1\u05d4\u2015\u2015is not in the past. The deepest sorrows fade away\nquickly into forgetfulness; and so also the brightest joys. They have,\nno doubt, some influence by recollection, but not _much_. And thus the\nDeity, or God regarded as the supreme providential ruler, exercises us.\nHe responds to our anxieties, afflicts us, or chastens us, or causes\nus pleasure by means of joys given or taken away, as the case may be.\nAgain, these are spoken of as joys of our _hearts_, or of our inward\ndesires and consciousness, which is the meaning of \u2018heart\u2019 in this\nbook; our _emotional nature_, as the idea would stand expressed in the\nnomenclature of modern philosophy.\n\n \u2666 \u201cZ\u00f6kler\u201d replaced with \u201cZ\u00f6ckler\u201d for consistency\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VI.\n\n\n THERE is an evil which I \u2502 THERE is another evil which I\n have seen under the sun, and \u2502 have observed in this work-day\n it _is_ common among men: \u2502 world, and a common one is it\n \u2502 upon mankind:\n\nVI. (1.) =There is= (exists) an =evil which I have seen under the sun,\nand common= (literally \u2018much\u2019) =it is= (feminine emphatic) =over the\nman= (_i.e._ mankind in general).\n\n 2 A man to whom God hath \u2502 one who has appointed to\n given riches, wealth, and \u2502 him by the Almighty riches,\n honour, so that he wanteth \u2502 possessions, and honour, and\n nothing for his soul of all \u2502 there is nothing lacking to him\n that he desireth, yet God \u2502 which he could possibly desire;\n giveth him not power to eat \u2502 and yet the Almighty Himself\n thereof, but a stranger eateth \u2502 does not allow him to have\n it: this _is_ vanity, and it \u2502 any enjoyment of it; but\n _is_ an evil disease. \u2502 some stranger or other enjoys\n \u2502 it. This is an instance of\n \u2502 evanescence, and an infirmity\n \u2502 which is indeed an evil.\n\n(2) =A man= (\u05d0\u05d9\u05e9, not \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd, for it is equivalent to our \u2018one\u2019\nindefinitely), =which gives to him= (emphatic) =the Deity= (one to whom\nthe Deity gives, that is) =riches, and possessions= (chapter v.\u00a019),\n=and honour, and he is not lacking to his soul of all which he desires=\n(the expression is peculiar, and is designed to bring into prominence\nthe fact that to this person nothing at all is lacking; as we say,\n\u2018he wants for nothing\u2019) =and not causes to him power=, does =the Deity\nto eat= (in the usual sense of \u2018enjoy\u2019 or \u2018use\u2019) =from it, for a man=\n(again \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9, \u2018one\u2019), =a stranger, eats it= (equivalent to \u2018some stranger\nor another really enjoys it\u2019). =This= is =vanity= and =sickness=, which\n=is an evil=, (indeed) =it is.=\n\n 3 \u00b6 If a man beget an \u2502 Suppose one were to beget a\n hundred _children_, and live \u2502 hundred children, and he should\n many years, so that the days \u2502 have many years, yes, many\n of his years be many, and his \u2502 indeed may be the days of his\n soul be not filled with good, \u2502 years, and his soul not\n and also _that_ he have no \u2502 satisfied with good, and he\n burial; I say, _that_ an \u2502 have no burial,\u2015\u2015I should say,\n untimely birth _is_ better \u2502 that better off than such an\n than he. \u2502 one is an abortion.\n\n(3.) =If is caused to beget a man= (again \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9, \u2018should one beget\u2019) =a\nhundred= (children is to be supplied, but not prominently; begetting\nis used in its widest sense), =and years many= (plural, equivalent to\n\u2018years, and many of them\u2019) =should live, and many= (singular) =which\nthey are the days of his years= (\u2018and the days of his years should\nbe ever so many,\u2019 his life being expressed both in days and years to\ngive strong prominence to the fact of its duration), =and his soul not\nsatisfied from out of the good= (the abstract with the article, hence\nequivalent to our \u2018good,\u2019 standing alone), =and moreover burial= (the\nabstract of the past participle, used, of course, as the place of\nburial\u2015\u2015see Genesis xxxv.\u00a020, xlvii.\u00a030, but with a shade of difference\nfrom \u05e7\u05d1\u05e8\u2015\u2015compare Genesis xlvii.\u00a030 with Genesis l.\u00a05, for here, too,\nwe notice that \u05e7\u05d1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d4 is written full), =is not to be to him= (emphatic.\nTo have no burial, no one to lament him or erect a tomb over him\u2015\u2015to be\nworse off than Jehoiakim, Jeremiah xxii.\u00a019, who had the burial of an\nass\u2015\u2015is such a terrible failure to a man who had possessed a hundred\nchildren, of whom some at least might have shown him this last honour,\nthat it may well be cited as an instance of failure of human felicity),\n=I say a good better than his= (emphatic) =is the abortion= (_i.e._\nthat abortion is a better lot).\n\n 4 For he cometh in with \u2502 For in evanescence it begins,\n vanity, and departeth in \u2502 and in darkness departs, and\n darkness, and his name shall \u2502 its name in that darkness is\n be covered with darkness. \u2502 concealed; IT has not seen\n \u2502 light; HE has not known rest;\n 5 Moreover he hath not seen \u2502 the one is no better than the\n the sun, nor known _any thing_:\u2502 other.\n this hath more rest than the \u2502\n other. \u2502\n\n(4, 5.) =For in vanity he comes, and in darkness he goes, and in\ndarkness= (repeated, equivalent, therefore, to \u2018in that darkness\u2019) =his\nname is covered; moreover the sun not seen= (which is the lot of the\nabortion), and =not knowing rest= (the lot of the person here spoken\nof), =to this= there is no =more= than =that=. The Masorets, however,\nby their accentuation, show that they understood the verse somewhat\ndifferently. They render, \u2018a sun he does not see and does not know;\nthe rest of this is more than that;\u2019 but this rendering is obscure\nand clumsy, and makes the words \u2018does not know\u2019 superfluous, besides\ninterrupting the argument. The LXX. render verbatim: \u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b3\u03b5 \u1f25\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u1ff3 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, which is clear enough\nwith the Hebrew before us, but is quite unintelligible without it,\nhence the text has been attempted to be amended in various ways (see\nStier and Theile\u2019s _Polyglot_).\n\n 6 \u00b6 Yea, though he live a \u2502 Suppose he had even lived a\n thousand years twice _told_, \u2502 thousand years twice over, and\n yet hath he seen no good: do \u2502 seen no good in them, does he\n not all go to one place? \u2502 not arrive at altogether the\n \u2502 same result as abortion?\n\n(6.) =And if= (this particle occurs Esther vii.\u00a04 only, equivalent to\n\u200e\u200f\u05d5\u05b0\u05d0\u05b4\u05dd \u05dc\u05d5\u05b9, but common in later Hebrew and Chaldee. It is one of those words\nfrom which many critics infer a late date to this book; but is it not\nused for the sake of the alliteration with \u05d4\u05dc\u05d0 below?) =he lived a\nthousand years twice= told, =and goodness not seen= (as there is no\nnominative expressed, these verbs are in the nature of impersonals, and\nexpress the fact generally), =is it not to a place= which =is the same=\n(literally \u2018one\u2019) =the whole= (_i.e._ the totality of such persons) =is\ngoing?=\n\n 7 All the labour of man _is_ \u2502 All the toil of humanity is\n for his mouth, and yet the \u2502 for the gratification of\n \u00b9appetite is not filled. \u2502 appetite, and yet the desires\n \u2502 are never satisfied.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ soul. \u2502\n\n(7.) =Every toil= of =the man= (_i.e._ humanity) is =to his mouth=\n(remembering the meaning of \u05e2\u05de\u05dc, the sense is clear; the anxiety of men\nis directed to their mouths, to satisfy physical or moral hunger), =and\nbesides the soul= (_i.e._ the self, the ego, as metaphysicians write)\n=is not filled= (_i.e._ satisfied, or fills itself).\n\n 8 For what hath the wise \u2502 What profit then is there to\n more than the fool? what hath \u2502 the wise above the befooled?\n the poor, that knoweth to walk \u2502 simply that which it is to a\n before the living? \u2502 man in distress to maintain\n \u2502 himself in the presence of the\n \u2502 living.\n\n(8.) =For what is profiting to the wise beyond the befooled? what=\n(repeated, \u2018even what\u2019) =to the poor= (but \u2018poor\u2019 in the sense of\noppressed or unfortunate) =made to know to walk in the presence of the\nliving ones?= We must notice, in explaining this very obscure passage,\nthat \u05d4\u05d7\u05d9\u05d9\u05dd, being with the article, must be looked upon as denoting\nlives generally; moreover \u05e0\u05d2\u05d3 has the meaning of \u2018in the presence of,\u2019\n\u2018amongst,\u2019 \u2018in the midst of.\u2019 Thus the advantage, or that which is\nreally profitable to the wise, is to know how to walk, proceed, or act;\nto know which way to go in the presence of the living; in what way,\ntherefore, to direct himself through life and amongst its pleasures\nand difficulties, so as to make no mistakes as the befooled does.\nThus we obtain a connected sense. The anxiety is for enjoyment, but\nsatisfaction is impossible. What, then, is the advantage or profit\nof wisdom, in the sense of knowing what is best to do under a given\nset of circumstances? and what advantage gives it over the man who is\ndissatisfied equally, but does _not_ know this? The answer is, Just the\nsame as to a man in distress, who can manage to live. Existence itself\nis the struggle for life; but the wise rise to the top, and the fools\nsink.\n\n 9 Better _is_ the sight of \u2502 Good is a sight with one\u2019s eyes\n the eyes \u00b9than the wandering \u2502 above a longing for one knows\n of the desire: this _is_ also \u2502 not what: another instance this\n vanity and vexation of spirit. \u2502 of evanescence and vexation of\n \u2502 spirit.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ walking of the \u2502\n soul. \u2502\n\n(9.) =Good= is =the seeing= of =the eyes above the walking the soul=\n(but the participle \u05de\u05e8\u05d0\u05d4 is singular, and eyes are plural, hence\n\u2018better is a sight with the eye than,\u2019 etc. But may not there be\nthis equivoke? \u05de\u05d4\u05dc\u05da might be a participle also, and then the whole\nwould read thus, \u2018A real good, the seeing of the eye, the wandering\nof the soul\u2019). =Moreover, this= is =vanity and vexation of spirit=\n(this clause being in this case the answer to the above. So curt\nand enigmatical a sentence was no doubt in some way intended to be\nequivocal).\n\n 10 That which hath been is \u2502 What then is that which\n named already, and it is known \u2502 will be? The present state\n that it _is_ man: neither may \u2502 of things, called by its true\n he contend with him that is \u2502 name, and known what it really\n mightier than he. \u2502 is\u2015\u2015Old Adam, unable to obtain\n \u2502 a decision in a cause with a\n \u2502 Power superior to himself.\n\n(10.) =What is that which will be? The present= (compare chapter\ni.\u00a010, references) =is called its name= (to be called by its name is\nof course equivalent to our \u2018accurately described\u2019), =and it is known=\n(subjectively) =what it is= (emphatic), =even man= (but here without\nthe article, an \u2018instance\u2019 then of \u2018an Adam\u2019 or human person), =and not\nable to decide with the mightier than he= (emphatic, \u05dc\u05d3\u05d9\u05df, Psalms l.\u00a04,\nIsaiah iii.\u00a013; this the Authorized Version renders rightly \u2018to contend\nwith,\u2019 because \u05d3\u05d5\u05df has the meaning of \u2018judge\u2019 in the sense of \u2018decide\nin a court of justice.\u2019 \u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05d4\u05af\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05e7\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05e3 occurs Job xiv.\u00a020, \u2666xv.\u00a024, and chapter\niv.\u00a012, and as an adjective in the hiphil form here only. The Masorets\nnotice that the \u05d4 is superfluous; but this could only have been because\nthey did not see, as the LXX. did [who add the article \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6,\n\u2018the strong\u2019], that it means \u2018the strong one\u2019 generically; \u2018what is\nstronger,\u2019 as we say, or, noticing the hiphil form, \u2018what is _made_\nstronger,\u2019 and which is clearly man\u2019s destiny, decided by an overruling\nprovidence which he cannot escape).\n\n \u2666 \u201cxvi\u201d replaced with \u201cxv\u201d\n\n 11 \u00b6 Seeing there be many \u2502 For there are numberless\n things that increase vanity, \u2502 reasons, and they only\n what _is_ man the better? \u2502 increase the demonstration of\n \u2502 evanescence, and that there\n \u2502 could be no profit to humanity.\n\n(11.) =For there exist words= (reasonings, in the technical use of the\nword in this book) =the much= (_i.e._ to the full) =multiplying vanity,\nwhat is the profiting to humanity?= The meaning seems to be that there\ncould be adduced a still greater number of reasons, all of which would\nshow that human life was evanescent; but what is the profit, or use,\nof stating them to humanity, or bringing them forward? and as \u05d9\u05d5\u05ea\u05e8\nnaturally refers to \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd, the nearest nominative, it must be taken as a\ndistributive singular; so that this interpretation is the simplest the\ngrammar of the passage admits.\n\n 12 For who knoweth what _is_ \u2502 For no one can tell what _is_\n good for man in _this_ life, \u2502 a real good to mankind in any\n \u00b9all the days of his vain life \u2502 life: that life being a number\n which he spendeth as a shadow? \u2502 of evanescent days, which\n for who can tell a man what \u2502 he spends as a shadow, and\n shall be after him under the \u2502 of which no one can tell to\n sun? \u2502 any man what shall result\n \u2502 to him\u2015\u2015in this hot work-day\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ the number of the \u2502 world.\n days of the life of his \u2502\n vanity. \u2502\n\n(12.) =For= (another additional reason) =who knows what= is a =good to\nman= in =his lives= (\u05d0\u05d3\u05dd, followed by plural, \u2018lives,\u2019 in _any_ life,\ntherefore), =the number of the days of his life= (_i.e._ as he passes\nthe days of that life), =his vanity= (that evanescent life of his),\n=and he makes them= as a =shadow= (the LXX. render \u1f10\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03b9\u1fb7, but this\nmay be _ad sensum_ only, not because they read differently) =which=\n(full relative, because the whole idea is referred to, it may be best\nrendered \u2018because\u2019) =who= (repeated, and so giving emphasis) =tells to\nman what shall be after him= (_i.e._ what shall succeed him) =under the\nsun.= The limitation is necessary, and especially here, as this passage\ncloses the argument thus far. What is to follow is in the nature of\ndetached and paradoxical aphorisms, illustrating these truths: they\nare some of these many arguments demonstrating human evanescence and\ntransitoriness, but stated less formally than heretofore.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VII.\n\n\n \u2502 SECTION IV. _continued.\u2015\u2015\n \u2502 Providential Paradoxes leading\n \u2502 up to the conclusion, Fear God._\n \u2502\n A GOOD name _is_ better than \u2502 (1.) GOOD is a name, (2.) good\n precious ointment; and the day \u2502 more than spikenard\u2019s fame; and\n of death than the day of one\u2019s \u2502 a deathday is better than one\u2019s\n birth. \u2502 birthday.\n\nVII. (1.) =Good= is =a name, above ointment good= (there is an\nalliteration here which gives great pungency to the sentence. The\nMasorets commence this paragraph with a large letter. The Jews have\ndiscovered many mysteries in these letters, but here, perhaps, it is\nsufficient reason to allege that a new division of the subject begins);\n=and= the =day= (but without the article) of =the death above= the =day\nof his birth= (equivalent to one\u2019s birth, for there is no nominative\nexpressed. Some have remarked that the second clause being connected\nby a conjunction with the first, is to be looked upon as containing a\nconsequence of the fact stated in the first; which is quite true if not\npressed too far. Possibly the idea might be presented thus\u2015\u2015\n\n All the ointment\u2019s costly fame\n Is not so good as a good name,\n And thus it comes that dead saints die\n In odour of sweet sanctity).\n\n 2 \u00b6 _It is_ better to go to \u2502 (3.) Good is it to go to the\n the house of mourning, than to \u2502 house of mourning, rather than\n go to the house of feasting: \u2502 to go to the house of feasting;\n for that _is_ the end of all \u2502 because therein is the end\n men; and the living will lay \u2502 of every human thing, and the\n _it_ to his heart. \u2502 living should lay it to his\n \u2502 heart.\n\n(2.) =Good= is it =to go to the house of mourning, more than to go to\nthe house of feasting, in which= (full relative) =is= (emphatic) =the\nend of all the man= (the end of all humanity generally: every real\nbiography is a tragedy and ends with a death), =and the living= one\n=will give it to his heart.=\n\n 3 \u00b9Sorrow _is_ better than \u2502 (4.) Good is disappointment\n laughter: for by the sadness \u2502 above laughter; for by spoiling\n of the countenance the heart \u2502 the features the heart is\n is made better. \u2502 improved.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Or_, anger. \u2502\n\n(3.) =Good= is =vexation= (the vexation of disappointment\u2015\u2015see chapter\ni.\u00a018, references) =above laughter; for in= the =evil= (concrete, and\ntherefore an evil or distortion) of =the faces= (plural, but \u05e4\u05e0\u05d9\u05dd is so\ngenerally, as the face is double) =is bettered= (a _pe. jud_ verb, with\ndouble _jud_) the =heart=. I think the equivoke here is, \u2018the worse one\nlooks, the better one gets.\u2019\n\n 4 The heart of the wise _is_ \u2502 That heart of the wise which is\n in the house of mourning; but \u2502 in the house of the mourning,\n the heart of fools _is_ in the \u2502 when the heart of the befooled\n house of mirth. \u2502 is in the house of mirth.\n\n(4.) =The heart= of =wise ones= (as \u2018heart\u2019 is repeated again, it gives\nthe idea of \u2018that heart\u2019 spoken of before. This, however, as occurring\nin a new clause containing a fresh sentiment, must not be pressed too\nfar) is =in= the =house of mourning, and= the =heart of befooled ones\nin= the =house of rejoicing.= This aphorism is very suggestive: the\nheart of the wise is improved in the house of sadness; fools, or rather\nbefooled ones, who are mistaken with their own joy, are improved in the\nhouse of feasting, but it is an improvement in evil. This equivoke the\nrendering of the LXX. preserves.\n\n 5 _It is_ better to hear the \u2502 (5.) Good is it to hear the\n rebuke of the wise, than for a \u2502 rebuke of the wise, more than\n man to hear the song of fools. \u2502 that any should hear the song\n \u2502 of the befooled.\n\n(5.) =Good= is it =to hear= the =rebuke= of a =wise one= (\u05d2\u05e2\u05e8\u05ea occurs\nin this book here only, but at Proverbs xiii. 1,\u00a08, xvii.\u00a010), =above=\na =man= (_i.e._ any one) =hearing a song= of =befooled ones= (the\nhiphil form is here especially to be noticed, \u2018many befooled ones\nsing;\u2019 as Jeremy Taylor says, \u2018We commonly enter singing into the\nsnare.\u2019 Ginsburg would amend this passage by relegating the \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9 to the\nfirst clause; but this is to miss the point, which is, that \u2018it is\nbetter to listen to a wise rebuking, than for _any one_ to hear the\nsong of the befooled\u2019).\n\n 6 For as the \u00b9crackling of \u2502 For as the crackling of\n thorns under a pot, so _is_ \u2502 thorns under a pot, so is the\n the laughter of the fool: \u2502 cackling of the befooled\u2015\u2015and\n this also _is_ vanity. \u2502 besides, it is evanescent.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ sound. \u2502\n\n(6.) =For as= the =voice of the thorns under the pot= (there is both\nalliteration and equivoke here, the root \u05e1\u05d5\u05e8 having the meaning, \u2018to\nturn aside,\u2019 \u2018be crooked,\u2019 etc., and \u05e1\u05e8, \u2018displeased,\u2019 1\u00a0Kings xx.\u00a043,\nxxi.\u00a04) =so= (the word \u2018so\u2019 is somewhat emphatic, as standing alone)\n=a laugh= of =the befooled= (generic), =also this is vanity= (_i.e._\nan instance of evanescence).\n\n 7 \u00b6 Surely oppression maketh \u2502 Yet affliction makes false a\n a wise man mad; and a gift \u2502 wise man\u2019s hope, and destroys\n destroyeth the heart. \u2502 the heart of his purpose.\n\n(7.) =For the oppression= (generic, \u2018the affliction of life\u2019) =makes\nmad= (poel future, occurs Job xii.\u00a07, Isaiah xlii.\u00a05; compare also\nchapter ii.\u00a02, which we have seen is the madness of false expectation)\n=a wise man= (hence the meaning must be, that the oppressions or\nafflictions of life put out the calculations of the wise, and make\ntheir expectation false) =and destroys with respect to the heart=\n(\u200e\u200f\u05d0\u05ea \u05dc\u05d1, therefore emphatic; hence the LXX. render \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, and the\nmeaning is, that affliction [compare chapter iv.\u00a01] not only makes his\nexpectations false, but disappoints his desires; which clearly, with\nthe advantages of sorrow stated above, it ought not to do to a _wise_\nman) =of his purpose.= (Following the LXX., who derive the word from\nthe root \u05de\u05ea\u05df, which exists in the Arabic, and also in the Syriac\u2015\u2015see\nBernstein, s.\u00a0v., (\u2021 Syriac word) \u2018moratus est,\u2019 \u2018tardus fuit;\u2019 \u2018that \nwhich is purposed or appointed\u2019 would be quite a natural meaning, for \n\u200e\u200f\u05e0\u05ea\u05df not only has the meaning \u2018to give,\u2019 but also \u2018to settle or appoint.\u2019 \nIf we render with the Authorized Version \u2018gift,\u2019 we introduce an idea \naltogether new and strange, while with the rendering supported by the \nLXX. and unpointed text, the aphorism connects itself with what went \nbefore and follows after.)\n\n 8 Better _is_ the end of \u2502 (6.) [Yet] good is the end\n a thing than the beginning \u2502 of a matter, and more than its\n thereof: _and_ the patient in \u2502 beginning.\n spirit _is_ better than the \u2502\n proud in spirit. \u2502 (7.) [And] good is the\n \u2502 long-suffering soul above the\n \u2502 high swelling spirit.\n\n(8.) =Good= is =the end of a matter= (in its technical sense of a\nreasoning) =above its beginning; good is a long spirit above a high\nspirit= (this is equivocal; \u2018_long_-suffering is better than _high_\nmindedness\u2019 will render the equivoke. Thus, then, it appears that these\naphorisms are all closely related to one another, or, at any rate, hang\non the same thread of argument. The existence of oppression makes the\nwise man mad by reason of disappointed hopes, and destroys his purpose;\nbut he must wait to see the end, and be patient. \u2018Good\u2019 has occurred\nin seven paradoxical relations, having the appearance of evil. The\nsame strain is continued in the following, but the argument is somewhat\ndifferent).\n\n 9 Be not hasty in thy spirit \u2502 Do not be in haste to be\n to be angry: for anger resteth \u2502 disappointed; for disappointment\n in the bosom of fools. \u2502 nestles in the bosom of the\n \u2502 befooled.\n\n(9.) =Do not hasten in thy spirit to be angered= (by disappointment),\n=for anger in the bosom of befooled ones rests.=\n\n 10 Say not thou, What is \u2502 Do not say either, How was it\n _the cause_ that the former \u2502 that former days were so good\n days were better than these? \u2502 as compared with these? because\n for thou dost not inquire \u2502 it is not wisdom which prompts\n \u00b9wisely concerning this. \u2502 you to inquire in this way.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ out of wisdom. \u2502\n\n(10.) =Do not say= (\u05d0\u05dc, the particle of prohibition being repeated,\nthis second is equivalent to \u2018neither say\u2019) =what was= (how was it)\n=that the days= (with the article, and therefore generic), =the former\nones= (again generic, in strict apposition) =were good ones beyond\nthese= (the whole construction of the sentence shows that the _Laudator\ntemporis acti_ is here specially reprehended), =because not from\nwisdom= (_i.e._ the _wisdom_ of such an inquiry is here negatived)\n=thou askest= (\u05e9\u05d0\u05dc is to ask in the sense of wishing to have\u2015\u2015Exodus\niii.\u00a022) =upon= (or about) =this.=\n\n 11 \u00b6 Wisdom \u00b9_is_ good with \u2502 As good is wisdom as an\n an inheritance: and _by it \u2502 inheritance, and something\n there is_ profit to them that \u2502 more, to those who see the\n see the sun. \u2502 sunshine;\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Or_, as good as an \u2502\n inheritance, yea, better \u2502\n too. \u2502\n\n(11.) =A good= is =wisdom= (the two nouns both abstracts or in strict\nagreement) =together with an inheritance, and a profitable thing= (\u05d5\u05b0\u05d9\u05b9\u05ea\u05b5\u05e8,\nwhich the Masorets point as a participle, not \u05d9\u05ea\u05e8\u05d5\u05df, which would give\na different idea, _i.e._ a \u2018profit generally,\u2019 which, in the sense\nof this book, wisdom is not always, for it fails, through unforeseen\naccidents, of always attaining its end, and sometimes perishes like\nfolly; but with an inheritance, wisdom to know how to use it is\nalways a real advantage in some way even in this life, and hence the\nqualification) =to= those =that see the sun= (generic, as a sun which\nis light and warmth indeed, but also glare and heat).\n\n 12 For wisdom _is_ a \u2502 for the shelter of wisdom is\n \u00b9defence, _and_ money _is_ a \u2502 just as the shelter of money:\n defence: but the excellency of \u2502 but the profit of knowledge\n knowledge _is_, _that_ wisdom \u2502 is, the wisdom that enables its\n giveth life to them that have \u2502 possessor to live.\n it. \u2502\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ shadow. \u2502\n\n(12.) =For in shadow= of =the wisdom= is =in shadow= of =the silver.=\n(The sentence, whichever way we take it, is enigmatical, as indeed the\nform shows. The LXX. render _ad sensum_, \u2018Because in her shadow, wisdom\nis as the shadow of silver,\u2019 but very probably not because they read\ndifferently, this rendering merely gives the equivoke; for the literal\nmeaning of the sentence, as it stands in the text, is, \u2018_Because in the\nshadow of wisdom_ generically, _is the same as to be in the shadow of\nmoney._\u2019 The idea of shadow arises naturally from that of _sunshine_,\nspoken of above; for we must remember that in the East, shadow is\nalways desired, and it is to the natives of southern Europe and Asia\nthe symbol of pleasant refreshment. Shadow and sun are cognate\nideas\u2015\u2015see Psalms xci.\u00a01, Isaiah xxxii.\u00a02. Again, the root \u05db\u05e1\u05e3 has the\nmeaning to desire earnestly\u2015\u2015see Job xiv.\u00a015, Psalms xvii.\u00a012; hence\nthe further play upon the words.) =And a profit of a knowledge of the\nwisdom?= (generic, this special wisdom, but the passage might also be\nrendered, and a \u2018profit of knowledge, it is wisdom which,\u2019 etc.) it\n=enlivens its possessor.= (The Masorets, by accenting \u05d3\u05b7\u05bc\u0594\u05e2\u05b7\u05ea with zakeph,\nseparate it from what follows, and so render as above. Thus the meaning\nis\u2015\u2015\u2018and there is this advantage in the knowledge of wisdom, it makes\nits possessor live,\u2019 or gives him life: but not absolutely so; this\nappears from what follows.)\n\n 13 Consider the work of \u2502 Consider then, with regard\n God: for who can make _that_ \u2502 to the working of the Almighty,\n straight, which he hath made \u2502 that none is able to explain\n crooked? \u2502 with regard to what He has made\n \u2502 complex.\n\n(13.) =See= (as the verb stands first, this is the emphatic word in\nthe sentence, equivalent, therefore, to \u2018observe, however\u2019) =with\nrespect to the working of the Deity, for who is enabled to set in\norder= (occurs chapters i.\u00a015, xii.\u00a09 only, and is a word peculiar\nto Ecclesiastes; it is used in the technical sense of \u2018resolve,\u2019 or\n\u2018account for,\u2019 a providential mystery) =with respect to that which=\n(the LXX. give the force of this \u05d0\u05ea here by the rendering \u1f43\u03bd \u1f02\u03bd \u1f41 \u0398\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2)\n=He hath involved it?= (\u05e2\u05d5\u05ea, in hithpael, occurs Job xix.\u00a06, chapters\ni.\u00a015, and xii.\u00a03. The cognate \u05e2\u05d5\u05d4 occurs nearly as often, and with the\nsame signification, which is the exact opposite of \u05ea\u05e7\u05df, \u2018to involve,\u2019\n\u2018make complex.\u2019 \u2018Who can resolve that with respect to which He has\ndetermined that it shall be involved?\u2019 is the precise meaning given by\nthe suffix to the verb.)\n\n 14 In the day of prosperity \u2502 In the day then of good,\n be joyful, but in the day of \u2502 accept the good; in the day\n adversity consider: God also \u2502 of distress, discern: for the\n hath \u00b9set the one over against \u2502 one indeed hath the Almighty\n the other, to the end that man \u2502 appointed as the counterpart\n should find nothing after him. \u2502 of the other, for the very\n \u2502 purpose that Humanity should\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ made. \u2502 by no means be able to discover\n \u2502 anything of what is to result.\n\n(14.) =In a day of good= (\u05d8\u05d5\u05d1\u05d4, the abstract here having the meaning\nof \u2018prosperity\u2019) =be in good= (which the LXX. render, \u2018live in good,\u2019\nand as the root is repeated, we must render, _that_ good), =and in a\nday of= (with the meaning, \u2018and in a time also of\u2019) =evil= (abstract\nas above) =see= (emphatic, not only from the alliteration of \u05e8\u05e2\u05d4 and\n\u200e\u200f\u05e8\u05d0\u05d4, but from its being the same word at the end as at the beginning,\nverse\u00a013). =Moreover, with respect to this, to the counterpart= (\u05dc\u05e2\u05de\u05ea,\nsee chapter v. 16\u2003(15), where this word is discussed) =of that makes=\n(_i.e._ so works) =the Deity, for the reason= (\u05e2\u05dc \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8\u05ea occurs chapters\niii.\u00a018, vii.\u00a014, viii.\u00a02, and in the same sense \u2018to the intent that\u2019)\n=he might not= (contract relative, with the negative, and involving its\nusual subjunctive meaning) =find= even =humanity, his future= (_i.e._\nthat which comes after him or succeeds, whether this be due to his\nown labour or otherwise) =anything= (which is reserved to the end of\nthe sentence, and is equivalent to \u2018anything at all.\u2019 Thus, then, the\ntransition to the next clause is quite manifest. It follows of course\nthat this uncertainty as to the result applies even in the case of\nvirtue and vice: this, therefore, is the topic next discussed).\n\n 15 All _things_ have I seen \u2502 With regard to the whole of\n in the days of my vanity: \u2502 life, then, I have observed\n there is a just _man_ that \u2502 during the days of my\n perisheth in his righteousness,\u2502 evanescent existence that\n and there is a wicked _man_ \u2502 there may be a just man who\n that prolongeth _his life_ in \u2502 perishes by reason of his\n his wickedness. \u2502 justice, and there may be an\n \u2502 impious man who prolongs his\n \u2502 existence by his wrong.\n\n(15.) =With regard to the whole= (with \u05d0\u05ea and the article, \u2018with regard\nto the whole of life\u2019 is therefore the meaning, as so often in this\nbook\u2015\u2015see chapter i.\u00a02) =I have observed in the days of my vanity=\n(with the idea, therefore, \u2018so far as my short experience goes\u2019)\nthat =there is= (a person or thing) =made right=, yet =perishing in\nhis righteousness, and= that =there is= (as \u05d9\u05e9 is repeated it becomes\nemphatic, and thus we must render \u2018there also is\u2019) =an impious caused\nto be prolonging= (himself) =in his mischief= (_i.e._ the hiphil\nparticiple gives the idea that this prolongation of life by evil means,\nor the like, is due to the wickedness itself: it is again the problem\nof successful impiety; for the word \u05de\u05d0\u05e8\u05d9\u05da compare Exodus xx.\u00a012).\n\n 16 Be not righteous over \u2502 Do not be then righteous to\n much; neither make thyself \u2502 excess, or make thyself wise\n over wise: why shouldest thou \u2502 too confidently: why shouldest\n \u00b9destroy thyself? \u2502 thou be grievously disappointed?\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ be desolate. \u2502\n\n(16.) =Do not be made right too much, and do not= (repeated, \u2018do not\nalso\u2019) =make thyself wise= (the hithpael occurs only Exodus i.\u00a010, and\nhas a sinister meaning. Pharaoh\u2019s policy with the children of Israel\nwas for the time dealing wisely, but also a \u2018prolonging in wickedness\u2019)\n=to excess= (\u2018or over and above what is reasonable,\u2019 expecting a\n\u2018_profit_,\u2019 \u05d9\u05d5\u05ea\u05e8, from it, in that sense in which this word is used in\nthis book). =Wherefore shouldest thou be desolated?= (but the hithpolel\noccurs Psalms cxliii.\u00a04, Isaiah lix.\u00a016, lxii.\u00a05, Daniel viii.\u00a027,\nand in all cases with the idea of \u2018consternation\u2019 at an unexpected\nand afflictive occurrence. Thus the meaning must be, \u2018that this\nrighteousness overmuch, and wisdom beyond what is reasonable, will\ndisappoint.\u2019 We must not then, in the days of our vanity, expect\ntoo much from right actions; they may to all appearance prove as\ndisastrous as the most impious could be. In the same way impiety, that\nis, high-handed and presumptuous rebellion against right, may succeed\nso well that it may cause a prolongation of itself; the very word\nis sarcastic, as pointing to an end of wrong at last. The inference\nnaturally seems to be\u2015\u2015If this be so, what is the use of doing right\nat all? but a deeply sarcastic refutation is given to this thought in\nthe succeeding clause).\n\n 17 Be not over much wicked, \u2502 but then, do not be wicked to\n neither be thou foolish: why \u2502 excess either, and by no means\n shouldest thou die \u00b9before thy \u2502 become a clever fool: why\n time? \u2502 shouldest thou die when it is\n \u2502 not thy time?\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ not in thy time. \u2502\n\n(17.) =Do not be impious to excess, and do not be= (the quadruple\nrepetition of the particle of prohibition gives emphasis to it,\nespecially at the close of the sentence\u2015\u2015(1.) Do not be over right,\nand (2.)\u00a0do not be over wise either, (3.)\u00a0nor impious either, nor\n(4.)\u00a0still less either a clever fool, are the four stages of the\nargument; the emphatic \u05ea\u05d4\u05d9 is reserved to the last clause here in this\nmember; in the former clause it stands first, giving it thus a still\nfurther sarcastic emphasis, something like our \u2018whatever you are do\nnot be\u2019) =an elaborate fool= (\u05e1\u05db\u05dc, compare chapters ii.\u00a019, x. 3,\u00a014;\nand see the meaning of this term discussed there. This wickedness then,\nit seems, is wise folly, or false prudence). =Wherefore shouldest thou\ndie in= what is =not your time?= The sarcasm is surely deep and cutting\nwhich, covertly reminding the impious that he has yet to die, advises\nhim not to die before his time.\n\n 18 _It is_ good that thou \u2502 It is good that thou shouldest\n shouldest take hold of this; \u2502 lay hold of the former;\n yea, also from this withdraw \u2502 moreover, of the latter, by no\n not thine hand: for he that \u2502 means let your hand touch it,\n feareth God shall come forth \u2502 for he that fears God comes out\n of them all. \u2502 safely with regard to all of\n \u2502 these.\n\n(18.) =Good= it is =that= (full relative, referring to both the\nfollowing clauses) =thou layest hold of this, and, moreover, from\nthat do not withhold with respect to thine hand= (the root \u05d9\u05e0\u05d7 occurs\nchapters ii.\u00a018, x.\u00a04, xi.\u00a06; see also Genesis ii.\u00a015, xix.\u00a016,\netc.\u2015\u2015the precise meaning being, in all these cases, \u2018to lay up.\u2019 The\nLXX. translate this word by \u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u1fc3\u03c2, \u2018defile;\u2019 and hence consider the\nword to refer to the second clause of the verse above; but it may be\ndoubted, as Schleusner points out, whether the rendering of the LXX. is\nnot a misreading of Symmachus\u2019 \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f00\u03bd\u1fc7\u03c2, which was successively altered\nto \u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\u1fc3\u03c2 and \u03bc\u1f74 \u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\u1fc3\u03c2, so that with this before us we may well reject\ntheir reading as not entitled to disturb our confidence in the Hebrew\ntext; observing also that it is \u05d0\u05ea \u05d9\u05d3\u05da, _i.e._ do not rest, or do not\nlay it up, _with respect to_ thy hand; the conclusion is, do not touch\neither the wickedness or the false prudence. The rendering of the\nAuthorized Version is ambiguous; it is not clear what the second \u2018this\u2019\nrefers to, but evidently admits of the meaning above. The whole drift\nthen of the aphorism is, \u2018lay hold of right notwithstanding, and have\nnothing to do with wickedness\u2019). =For= he who =fears God goes out of=\n(or \u2018gets free from,\u2019 as \u05d0\u05ea follows) =with respect to all of them=\n(_i.e._ the whole four difficulties here mentioned; he will neither be\nover-expectant of an immediate result from his righteousness, nor of\nhis prudence; on the other hand, he will not be either impious, or an\nelaborate fool).\n\n 19 Wisdom strengtheneth \u2502 This wisdom is a better\n the wise more than ten mighty \u2502 defence to the wise than ten\n _men_ which are in the city. \u2502 powerful men within a fortress.\n\n(19.) =The wisdom= (wisdom generically) =strengthens= (a play between\n\u200e\u200f\u05ea\u05d0\u05d7\u05d6 above and \u05ea\u05e2\u05d6 here) =to the wise more than ten= persons who =have\nbeen invested with power who are= (emphatic) =in a city.= Powerful men\nin a city are hard to overcome, or get at; ten, the indefinite number,\ngives the idea of \u2018ever so many.\u2019\n\n 20 For _there is_ not a just \u2502 However, there is no single\n man upon earth, that doeth \u2502 man on earth so right that he\n good, and sinneth not. \u2502 always does good, and never\n \u2502 makes a wicked mistake.\n\n(20.) =For a man= (a man, as a specimen of the race, which we have\nalready seen is the meaning of this word standing alone without the\narticle) =there is not= (for we have in this case \u05d0\u05d9\u05df, and not \u05dc\u05d0; thus\nthe meaning is, \u2018there is not a single man\u2019) =made right in the earth\nwho does good and does not sin= (_i.e._ \u2018make wicked mistakes:\u2019 hence,\nas no man is perfectly right, it would be unreasonable to expect a\nperfect result; thus the relevancy of verse\u00a017 is apparent. If our\nright acts do not always succeed, it is but just, considering the many\nsins we all commit).\n\n 21 Also \u00b9take no heed unto \u2502 Besides, to all those arguments\n all words that are spoken; \u2502 by which men direct themselves,\n lest thou hear thy servant \u2502 do not give much heed, just as\n curse thee: \u2502 thou hadst better not listen to\n \u2502 thy servant when he curses thee;\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ give not thy \u2502\n heart. \u2502\n\n(21.) =Moreover= (an additional reason), to =all the words= (\u05d4\u05d3\u05d1\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd, in\nthe usual sense, and very emphatic as followed by the corresponding\nverb) =which they speak= (reason about) =do not give thine heart=\n(because they are not worth thinking about: the reason follows),\n=which= (repeated, equivalent to \u2018they are such that\u2019) =not dost\nthou hear= (\u2018as thou wouldest not listen to if\u2019) =with respect to thy\nservant= he was =cursing thee.=\n\n 22 For oftentimes also thine \u2502 because thou knowest that\n own heart knoweth that thou \u2502 besides, times out of mind\n thyself likewise hast cursed \u2502 thyself also hast cursed\u2015\u2015some\n others. \u2502 one else.\n\n(22.) =For moreover, times many knows= (but the LXX. read \u05d9\u05e8\u05e2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9,\n\u2018afflicts,\u2019 that is, the servant does so. Symmachus also reads \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9\n\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03af\u03b1 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5, supporting the LXX.;\nthe Syriac, on the other hand, reads as the Hebrew. If, therefore, \u05d9\u05e8\u05e2\nwas the real reading, the change took place in ancient times) =thy\nheart= (which is nominative to \u05d9\u05d3\u05e2) =which= (the third repetition of the\nrelative; it ought therefore to be taken in the meaning of \u2018and this,\u2019)\n=also thou= (which is emphatic if we follow the Masorets, who point \u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\nin which apparently they are supported by both the LXX. and Symmachus)\n=hast cursed others.=\n\nWere it not for this suspicious \u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc there would be no reason at all to\ndisturb the present Hebrew text. Nor, probably, is the evidence strong\nagainst it, unless indeed it should turn out, on further investigation\nand discovery, that when the version of the LXX. was made, there was\na greater difference between the letters \u05e8 and \u05d3 than there is now. If\nthe reading of the LXX. were right, the following was the meaning of\nthe passage:\u2015\u2015\u2018Moreover, to all the words which they speak [they being\nsupposed to refer to the wicked, hence the explanatory gloss of B,\n\u1f00\u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2], do not give thine heart,\u2019\u2015\u2015which [amounts to this]\u2015\u2015\u2018thou\nwouldest not hear (or listen to) with respect to thy servant cursing\nthee, because many times he vexes thy heart, which [amounts to this\nalso] in regard that thou hast _cursed_ others.\u2019 The innuendo being\nthat our reasonings with regard to God\u2019s dealings with ourselves are\nlike the rash improper speeches of a grumbling servant. It must be\nconfessed that the expression, \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05d2\u05dd \u05d0\u05ea \u05e7\u05dc\u05dc\u05ea, literally, \u2018which also with\nrespect to thou hast cursed,\u2019 is unprecedentedly harsh and elliptical,\neven for Koheleth. But to alter the text\u2015\u2015and the Masoretic punctuation\nis here a virtual alteration of the text\u2015\u2015is to interpret an imaginary\ndocument, and not the one which exists before our eyes. The Masorets,\nhowever, with their customary caution\u2015\u2015and in this respect they are a\nbrilliant example to some modern critics\u2015\u2015would not add a single letter,\non mere conjecture only, however plausible.\n\n 23 \u00b6 All this have I proved \u2502 All this have I explored by\n by wisdom: I said, I will be \u2502 means of wisdom. I said, I\n wise; but it _was_ far from me.\u2502 shall be wise enough, but what\n \u2502 may be is altogether beyond\n 24 That which is far off, \u2502 me! beyond me how far? a double\n and exceeding deep, who can \u2502 depth! how could any find it?\n find it out? \u2502\n\n(23, 24.) =All this= (the Masorets point \u05d6\u05b9\u05d4 feminine, equivalent to\nneuter) =have I tried with wisdom; I said I will be wise= (with \u05d4\nparagogic, and Taylor in his note observes that this form is optative,\nand expresses a strong desire [Lange, _Commmentary on Old Testament_,\nAmerican edition]; might it not with truth be said that it is\nthe abstract idea of which the verb is the concrete, \u2018I shall be\nwisdomed\u2019?), =but that was far from me= (but notice again \u05e8\u05d7\u05d5\u05e7\u05d4,\nagreeing no doubt with \u05d7\u05db\u05de\u05d4 understood, but not the less an abstract on\nthat account: it was _farness_ or _distance itself_ from me\u2015\u2015\u2018beyond my\nreach\u2019 is the meaning), =a distant= thing, =what= is it =which it will\nbe= (that is, that he could not reach by wisdom to discern what the\nfuture might be), =and deep, deep= (\u2018doubly deep,\u2019 very emphatic), =who\nwill find it out?= (as these questions expect the answer, No, they are\nequivalent to \u2018a distant _thing_! is not it, the future, indeed? and a\nvast depth which none can discover.\u2019)\n\nThis concludes this part of the discourse, as is evident from the\nformula, \u2018I turned round, I and my heart,\u2019 with which the following\npassage begins; that which is to succeed is a personal experience of\nanother kind.\n\n 25 \u00b9I applied mine heart \u2502 To come to another point then,\n to know, and to search, and \u2502 in my own experience of\n to seek out wisdom, and the \u2502 knowledge and investigation: I\n reason _of things_, and to \u2502 mean the discovery of wise and\n know the wickedness of folly, \u2502 prudent experiments by which\n even of foolishness _and_ \u2502 one may recognise wickedness\n madness: \u2502 as folly, and false-prudence\n \u2502 as mad disappointment.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ I and my heart \u2502\n compassed. \u2502\n\n(25.) =I turned round= (to do something, as this formula always\nimplies), =I and my heart= (for we have here a _confession_) =to know=\nand =to investigate= (that is in order to know, etc., the prepositions\nbeing repeated) =and seek= (without a preposition; the distinction\nseems to be that the seeking is to be the consequence of the above\ninvestigation) =wisdom and device= (\u05d7\u05e9\u05d1\u05d5\u05df is exclusively a Koheleth word,\nand occurs verse\u00a027, ix.\u00a010, only, it is thus not easy to determine its\nprecise meaning, but it is probably, as Moses Stuart points out, the\nopposite of \u05d4\u05dc\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea; and if so, it will be something reasonable, in the\nsense of wise or well-formed and successful plan, as its opposite is\nan ill-formed and disappointing one; thus \u05d4\u05e9\u05d1\u05d5\u05e0\u05d5\u05ea\u2015\u2015occurs only here,\nverse\u00a029, and 2\u00a0Chronicles xxvi.\u00a015, where it is used to denote Asa\u2019s\nengines of war\u2015\u2015is evidently \u2018efficient contrivances.\u2019 To know wisdom\nand _a device_, then, in this sense, is \u2018wisdom how to obtain a\nreasonable or proper result; and, on the other hand, to discover the\nopposite.\u2019 With this accords what follows), =and to know= (as this\nis repeated it is equivalent to, and so to know) =wickedness= (as)\n=folly= (\u05db\u05b6\u05e1\u05b6\u05dc\u2015\u2015the only instance of the occurrence of this form in\nEcclesiastes\u2015\u2015compare Job viii.\u00a014, xxxi.\u00a024, where we find that\n\u2018expectation\u2019 is the meaning, though not necessarily in a bad sense,\nyet clearly so here. The LXX. render \u1f00\u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd [which E.\u00a0X.\nalter to \u03b5\u1f50\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd], \u2018the folly of a wicked person\u2019) =and the false\nwisdom= (plural form in \u05d5\u05ea\u2015\u2015with the article) =follies= (\u05d4\u05d5\u05dc\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea, as\nwe have seen, compare chapter i.\u00a017, of the disappointing kind. The\nLXX. render here \u1f40\u03c7\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u2018trouble,\u2019 and \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd, \u2018madness,\u2019 with\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u2018and,\u2019 which is so far wrong, as there is no conjunction in the\noriginal. The meaning of this passage it is no doubt difficult to\ndiscover, but if we are right in the above analysis the interpretation\nmust be as follows: \u2018I turned myself round, I and my heart\u2015\u2015(or, my own\npersonal experience) to know and to investigate, and so seek, wisdom\nand well-formed plans: and so to recognise a wicked folly; and [a\nseries of] falsely-wise acts, [which were] disappointing follies.\u2019\nThe punctuation represents the accents, the larger distinctive accents\nbeing represented by the longer pauses. The Syriac reads (\u2021 Syriac \nphrase), \u2018to know the wickedness of the fool, and folly and _adultery_,\u2019 \nwhich coincides with the above; a reason for the peculiar rendering \n\u2018adultery\u2019 will appear presently).\n\n 26 And I find more bitter \u2502 Now, I have made a discovery,\n than death the woman, whose \u2502 and that more bitter than\n heart _is_ snares and nets, \u2502 death; it is with respect\n _and_ her hands _as_ bands: \u2502 to woman, when she is in the\n \u00b9whoso pleaseth God shall \u2502 nature of an ensnarer, her\n escape from her; but the \u2502 affection seductions, and her\n sinner shall be taken by her. \u2502 hands bondage. A real good in\n \u2502 the sight of the Almighty is it\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ _He that is_ good \u2502 to be delivered from her, but\n before God. \u2502 the erring sinner is taken by\n \u2502 such as she.\n\n(26.) =And finding= (a participle written full, giving a peculiar\nemphasis to this word) =am I a bitterness above death with respect to\nthe woman= (\u05d0\u05ea with the article, which the LXX. note by \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd, as usual;\nthus \u2018woman\u2019 is generic, hence the precise idea seems to be \u2018and a\ndiscovery of mine more bitter than death\u2015\u2015is with respect to woman;\u2019\nand, again, this follows the accentuation, which makes a pause at\n\u2018death,\u2019) =who= (but the relative is full, and so refers back to the\nwhole clause, \u2018when she\u2019) =is snares= (masculine plural, and hence\ndistributive, \u2018in the nature of an ensnarer\u2019 then, see Proverbs xii.\u00a012,\nchapter ix.\u00a014, where this form alone \u05de\u05e6\u05d5\u05d3\u05d4 in the feminine occurs,\nchapter ix.\u00a012, Isaiah xxix.\u00a07, Ezekiel xix.\u00a09, and with shurek at Job\nxix.\u00a06; there is a slight difference in meaning in these forms) =and\nallurements= (the root \u05d7\u05e8\u05dd is to destroy, and the noun signifies \u2018a\ncursed thing\u2019 as often as a \u2018net;\u2019 see Deuteronomy vii.\u00a026, Joshua\nvi.\u00a017) =her heart= (singular following plural; her heart then is in\nthe nature of things which allure to destruction, a whole armoury of\nthem, as it were, in her love) =and bonds= her =hands= (or \u2018powers\u2019);\n=good in the sight of Divine providence= (\u2018a real good is it in the\nsight of Divine providence\u2019 is the meaning) =is deliverance from her=\n(emphatic), =but the erring one= (a full participle, which the LXX.\nnote) =is taken by her= (emphatic).\n\n 27 Behold, this have I \u2502 _Observe_, this have I\n found, saith the Preacher, \u2502 discovered, and this is\n \u00b9_counting_ one by one, to \u2502 what the Preacher announces,\n find out the account: \u2502 one after another, so as to\n \u2502 find out a wise experiment;\n 28 Which yet my soul \u2502 but which I have longed for\n seeketh, but I find not: one \u2502 without discovering: one\n man among a thousand have I \u2502 single specimen of Humanity in\n found; but a woman among all \u2502 a thousand I discovered; but\n those have I not found. \u2502 a woman in all these I did not\n \u2502 discover.\n \u00b9 _Or_, _weighing_ one thing \u2502\n after another to find out \u2502\n the reason. \u2502\n\n(27, 28.) =Observe this, have I found the speech of Koheleth= (it is\nusually said that \u05d0\u05de\u05e8\u05d4 is a feminine agreeing with \u05e7\u05d4\u05dc\u05ea, but \u05e7\u05d4\u05dc\u05ea was\na king, and so certainly masculine. It has been proposed to write \u05d0\u05de\u05e8\n\u200e\u200f\u05d4\u05e7\u05d4\u05dc\u05ea, but this is another instance of the attempt to cut the knot by\naltering the text, besides in that case Koheleth would be generic.\nWe must therefore fall back upon the usual meaning of feminines as\nthe abstract of the masculines. Now, \u05d0\u05de\u05e8 is \u2018to say,\u2019 to \u2018announce,\u2019\nand therefore the abstract will be \u2018the announcement;\u2019 this abstract,\nhowever, stands by itself, and is not joined closely to \u05e7\u05d4\u05dc\u05ea, as in\nthat case it would have been \u05d0\u05de\u05e8\u05ea. Attending then to these principles\nof grammar, the meaning will be, \u2018observe this, I have found it, and\nannounce it as Koheleth,\u2019 an additional proof that here we have a\npersonal experience of Koheleth\u2019s) =one to one to find a wise result=,\n(that is collecting instance after instance, or trying one method after\nanother so as to find the wise result, in contrast to the disappointing\nfolly mentioned above) =which yet seeks my soul=, and =has not\nfound= (the \u2018not\u2019 is emphatic, and denies that he has discovered it:\nexperimental science did no more for him than moral); =a man= (\u05d0\u05d3\u05dd;\nwe should have anticipated \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9 from the context, but \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd includes both\nsexes, so that we have a sarcastic equivoke) =a single one from a\nthousand have I found, but a woman in all these have I not found= (that\nis, that he could come to no general conclusion; only in his experience\nhe had met with one man but not with one woman, the allusion being\nevidently to his thousand wives and concubines. From this individual\nhistory we are allowed to make our own conclusions. In the case of\nSolomon, it was his numerous wives which turned away his heart. He had\napparently one or two male friends, such as Zadoc and Nathan, that he\ncould trust. The word \u2018found\u2019 occurs seven times in its different\nforms\u2015\u2015it is _all_ he could discover).\n\n 29 Lo, this only have I \u2502 Only observe, this I have\n found, that God hath made man \u2502 discovered, namely, that the\n upright; but they have sought \u2502 Almighty has with respect to\n out many inventions. \u2502 humanity done what is correct,\n \u2502 but _they_ have sought out\n \u2502 machinations without number.\n\n(29.) =Only= (which standing first is emphatic: \u2018This _alone_ is a\nreal discovery, or a safe induction from my numerous trials\u2019) =observe,\nthis have I discovered, which= is that he has =made= even =the Deity\nwith respect to the man= (_i.e._ \u2018has done in regard to man,\u2019 the LXX.\nnotice this by \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd) =right= (or \u2018correct,\u2019 see 1\u00a0Samuel\nvi.\u00a012, Proverbs xi.\u00a03), =but they= (plural following singular\u2015\u2015\u2018every\none of them\u2019) =seek devices= (plural abstract, and as it is used\nevidently in a sinister sense, we may translate \u2018machinations\u2019) =many=\n(masculine, notwithstanding the feminine plural, _i.e._ not many in the\nabstract, \u2018but many a one\u2019\u2015\u2015all kinds of sinister plans to evade God\u2019s\nright order, of which Solomon\u2019s harem was a signal instance. He would\nhave had more real enjoyment had he obeyed the rule at Genesis ii.\u00a024,\nwhich assigns one man to one woman, and the spirit of that at Leviticus\nxxi.\u00a01, which enjoins a Hebrew woman. This harem of strange women was\nat once Solomon\u2019s most elaborate folly, bitterest disappointment, and\nsaddest fall: it was an experiment in search of happiness, running\ncounter to God\u2019s just and right commands, and proved a most miserable\nfailure; and the only conclusion which could be drawn from it was, that\nGod\u2019s way is invariably the best. The connexion with the following will\nbe best understood if we consider it a reflection on his own failure).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VIII.\n\n\n WHO _is_ as the wise _man_? \u2502 AH, then, who is really wise,\n and who knoweth the \u2502 and who knows how to solve the\n interpretation of a thing? a \u2502 enigma of this matter? that\n man\u2019s wisdom maketh his face \u2502 wisdom of humanity which\n to shine, and \u00b9the boldness of \u2502 enlightens his face, for the\n his face shall be changed. \u2502 haughty face is detestable.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ the strength. \u2502\n\n\u2666VIII. (1.) =Who is as the wise=? (the LXX., rendering _ad sensum_,\ntranslate \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2, \u2018who knows wise men or things?\u2019 which\nE. and X. alter to \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u2018wisdom.\u2019 \u2018Who is as _the_ wise?\u2019 or, as\n\u200e\u200f\u05de\u05d9 stands first, \u2018ah, who is really wise?\u2019 There is a double meaning\nhere\u2015\u2015a lamentation over his own failure, and a natural reflection\non the superior wisdom of _the_ Wise One, or, as we should write, the\nOmniscient) =and who= (\u2018and who too\u2019) =knows a solution= (\u05e4\u05e9\u05e8 occurs\nDaniel ii. 4, 5,\u00a06, etc., but in that prophet only, and is used to\nsignify the interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s dream, hence LXX. \u03bb\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2)\n=of a reason=: (who then is so wise that he knows how to solve the\nmatter, or give it its true interpretation? The answer follows) =that\nwisdom of a man enlightens= (but as \u05d7\u05db\u05de\u05d4 follows \u05d7\u05db\u05dd, it rises into\nimportance, \u2018that wisdom of a man which enlightens\u2019) =his countenance=\n(there is a manifest allusion here to Proverbs xvi.\u00a015, and the meaning\nof \u2018enlightens his face\u2019 is, \u2018gives him favour or satisfaction\u2019),\n=but= the =strength of his face= (which has the meaning of sternness\nor wilfulness, see Deuteronomy xxvii.\u00a050) =is hated= (the Masorets\npropose the alteration from \u05d9\u05b0\u05e9\u05bb\u05c1\u05e0\u05b6\u05d0 to \u05d9\u05b0\u05e9\u05bb\u05c1\u05e0\u05b6\u05bc\u05d4; but this was because they did\nnot understand the context; the LXX. render \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u1f74\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ce\u03c0\u1ff3 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b7\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u2018but a man of shameless countenance will be hated,\u2019 and\nalso the Syriac, but strictly \u05d9\u05e9\u05e0\u05d0 is impersonal, \u2018one hates.\u2019 The\nmeaning then, read in the light of Proverbs xvi.\u00a015, evidently is, that\nobstinacy is that which a king hates, and of course _a fortiori_ the\nDivine King).\n\n \u2666 \u201cVII.\u201d replaced with \u201cVIII.\u201d\n\n \u2660 \u201c\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u201d replaced with \u201c\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ce\u03c0\u1ff3\u201d\n\n 2 I _counsel thee_ to keep \u2502 As for me, a royal word observe,\n the king\u2019s commandment, and \u2502 and upon reasoning about the\n _that_ in regard of the oath \u2502 Divine decree, do not hasten.\n of God. \u2502\n\n(2.) =I= (emphatic, none of the ancient versions take any notice\nof this emphatic pronoun, a reason for which will appear presently)\n=the mouth of a king= (not the king, thus the literal meaning is,\n\u2018I, a king\u2019s word\u2019) =keep= it (the explanation is to be found in the\nequivocal use of the word \u2018king,\u2019 which has an undertone of reference\nto the Great King: compare also chapter ii.\u00a012, and observe how\nexcellently a word of counsel suits the passage. The meaning therefore\nis, I will give you a royal word to keep, or guard), and =upon\nreasoning= (\u05e2\u05dc \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8\u05ea, see chapter iii.\u00a018, and with the same meaning\n\u2018upon the reasonings about,\u2019 the Masorets put a strong distinctive\naccent on \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u0595\u05dc, thus separating it from the following words, but this\nwas because they did not see the exact meaning) =the oath of God= (see\nDeuteronomy vii.\u00a08, Jeremiah xi.\u00a05; the oath of God then is that which\nGod has determined on, and we are especially to regard this, and take\ncare that we use no hasty words or expressions about it).\n\n 3 Be not hasty to go out \u2502 From His presence canst thou go?\n of his sight: stand not in \u2502 Do not rest on any evil word,\n an evil thing; for he doeth \u2502 for all that His providence\n whatsoever pleaseth him. \u2502 ordains He does;\n\n(3.) =Do not hasten= (this the LXX. and Syriac join on to the preceding\nverse, against the accentuation of the Masorets, and this makes better\nsense) =from his face thou shalt go= (but as \u2018face\u2019 is the emphatic\nword, it is clear that the clause is in the nature of a question,\nor rather with a note of admiration, _i.e._ \u2018From his face are you\ngoing!\u2019), =do not stand= (\u2018abide,\u2019 or \u2018stay\u2019) =in a reason which is an\nevil one for all he provides= (\u05d9\u05d7\u05e4\u05e5, the verb, of which \u05d7\u05e4\u05e5 is the root,\nand which invariably means \u2018Divine providence\u2019 in this book) =he does=\n(he always acts, therefore, according to the pleasure of his Divine\nprovidence).\n\n 4 Where the word of a king \u2502 in Whose royal word is\n _is_, _there is_ power: and \u2502 authority, and who dare say to\n who may say unto him, What \u2502 Him, What doest Thou?\n doest thou? \u2502\n\n(4.) =In whom= (or \u2018in which,\u2019 for it refers back to the whole idea of\nGod\u2019s providence) =the matter of a king= is =powerful= (_i.e._ a power,\n\u2018matter,\u2019 \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8 as usual being taken in its technical sense of the matter\nreasoned about and the matter itself. The LXX. invert the order of\nthe words\u2015\u2015a very unusual proceeding with them: it is, however, to be\nobserved that B. omits \u03bb\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6, the word out of place), =and who shall\nsay to him, What doest thou?=\n\n 5 Whoso keepeth the \u2502 Whoso keeps the commandment\n commandment \u00b9shall feel no \u2502 will not know a reason which\n evil thing: and a wise man\u2019s \u2502 leads to wrong. For a wise\n heart discerneth both time and \u2502 heart does know that there is\n judgment. \u2502 a time and a judgment;\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ shall know. \u2502\n\n(5.) =One keeping the command= (a participle, that which is commanded)\n=does not know a matter= (as above) which is =evil, and time and\njudgment knows= (repeated; thus the exact meaning is, \u2018but time and\njudgment\u2019) =the heart of a wise man= (\u2018does know\u2019).\n\n 6 \u00b6 Because to every purpose \u2502 because to every providence\n there is time and judgment, \u2502 there is a time and a judgment;\n therefore the misery of man \u2502 because also, the wrong of\n _is_ great upon him. \u2502 Humanity is great upon him;\n\n(6.) =For to every providence there is a time and a judgment= (that\nis, a proper season for its occurrence, and a time when it will be\nshown to be in the economy of providence), =for the wrong of man=\n(generic, with the article) =is much upon him= (the LXX. here read \u05d3\u05e2\u05ea,\n\u2018knowledge,\u2019 \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2; Symmachus and the Syriac read as the Hebrew. On\nthe whole, however, it appears that the text is fully entitled to stand\nundisturbed, as it makes better sense, and, supposing an error in the\nLXX., it might so readily occur from a misreading of letters so much\nalike as \u05d3 and \u05e8. The older forms, however, of these two letters were\nnot so much alike, as is shown by the Moabite stone, and hence caution\nis required in coming to a judgment; but further, \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 has already\nbeen used in a bad sense, see chapter i.\u00a018).\n\n 7 For he knoweth not that \u2502 and because, he is not one who\n which shall be: for who can \u2502 knows what may be; and because,\n tell him when it shall be? \u2502 _how_ it will be, none can tell\n \u2502 him.\n\n(7.) =For he is not knowing= (that is, man is not a creature that knows)\n=what will be= (contract relative with the verb): =for how it will be,\nwho can tell him?= (the particle \u05db\u05d9 is introduced four times, and each\nintroduces an additional reason strengthening what went before. Thus\nthe wise heart will not know a matter which is bad\u2015\u2015will not allow,\nthat is, that in its nature it is so, and he does know that there is an\nappointed time and judgment which will set all right. First, because to\nevery providence whatever there is such a time and judgment; secondly,\nbecause there is so much evil amongst mankind, which of course needs\nrectification, and will have it, see chapter iii.\u00a015; and because he\ncannot tell what will be, and so right may be discovered and providence\nvindicated in the future; and lastly, because as none can predict the\nresult of any event, so he is an imperfect judge concerning it. This\nimpotence of man is further set forth in what follows).\n\n 8 _There is_ no man that \u2502 No man has power over the\n hath power over the spirit \u2502 spirit to restrain the spirit;\n to retain the spirit; neither \u2502 and there is no powerfulness in\n _hath he_ power in the day \u2502 the day of death; and there is\n of death: and _there is_ no \u2502 no putting off the weapons in\n \u00b9discharge in _that_ war; \u2502 that warfare: but by no means\n neither shall wickedness \u2502 will _Impiety_ deliver those\n deliver those that are given \u2502 that resort to _it_.\n to it. \u2502\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Or_, casting off \u2502\n _weapons_. \u2502\n\n(8.) =There is nothing= in (that is, There is not a single) =man caused\nto have power= (LXX. \u1f10\u03be\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ac\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd) =with the spirit= (the LXX. render\nwith \u1f10\u03bd, \u2018in\u2019) =to the restraint of= (\u05db\u05dc\u05d0\u200e\u2015\u20151 Samuel vi.\u00a010; Jeremiah\nxxxii.\u00a03\u2015\u2015is used of restraint in prison) =with respect to the spirit=\n(\u200e\u200f\u05d0\u05ea with the article, and the noun repeated, making it exceedingly\nemphatic, which the LXX. note by their customary \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd: \u2018to have any\nrestraint with respect to that same spirit\u2019 is the meaning) =and there\nis no power= (that is, \u2018power to rule or direct\u2019) =in the day of death,\nand there is no discharge= (occurs Psalms lxxviii.\u00a049) =in the warfare,\nand not delivers= (this standing first is emphatic; it is equivalent\nto \u2018but _this_ does not deliver\u2019) even =impiety in respect of its lord=\n(or, as our idiom would put it, \u2018but impiety will not deliver those who\nresort to it\u2019).\n\n 9 All this have I seen, and \u2502 With respect to all this I\n applied my heart unto every \u2502 have observed, with regard to\n work that is done under the \u2502 all the works which are done\n sun: _there is_ a time wherein \u2502 in this work-day world\u2015\u2015and\n one man ruleth over another to \u2502 greatly am I impressed by it\u2015\u2015a\n his own hurt. \u2502 time when humanity has a power\n \u2502 over itself to injure itself.\n\n(9.) =With respect to all this I have seen,= (_i.e._ \u2018observed\u2019),\n=and setting= myself (infinitive absolute. Z\u00f6ckler says the infinitive\nabsolute with copula prefixed indicates an action contemporaneous with\nthe main verb; hence the LXX. render \u1f14\u03b4\u03c9\u03ba\u03b1 ... \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2), =with respect to\nmy heart, to all the working which= (full relative) =is done= (niphal)\n=under the sun, the time which= (the LXX. apparently take no notice\nof \u05e2\u05ea, but render as if they had read \u05d0\u05ea \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8; but if we take \u05e2\u05ea as in\napposition to \u05ea\u05d4\u05ea \u05d4\u05f4, and notice that \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 is repeated, we shall see that\nthe sense is \u2018I mean with regard to that time when,\u2019 etc.) =rules= (or\nhas power) =the man= (mankind generally) =by a man to an injury to him=\n(not exactly with the meaning of one man injuring another, but rather,\nthat when humanity has any power over itself in the person of other men,\nit uses this power to injury for the most part, an instance of which\nfollows).\n\n 10 And so I saw the wicked \u2502 And on this wise: I have seen\n buried, who had come and gone \u2502 the wicked honourably buried,\n from the place of the holy, \u2502 who used to come and go from\n and they were forgotten in the \u2502 the place of the holy, and were\n city where they had so done: \u2502 praised in the city where they\n this _is_ also vanity. \u2502 had done this: an instance this\n \u2502 of the evanescent.\n\n(10.) =And in this wise= (\u05d5\u05d1\u05db\u05df, occurs only Esther iv.\u00a016, in the sense\nof \u2018in this way\u2019) =I have observed wicked ones= (not _the_ wicked,\nbut continually instances of the impiously wicked) =sepulchres= (the\nMasorets point with \u2663kubbutz, the \u2666pual participle, the only other\ninstance of which occurs 1\u00a0Kings xiii.\u00a031; but there the participle\nis full: we cannot therefore accept the Masoretic pointing as\nauthoritative; it really amounts to an alteration of the unpointed\ntext. The LXX. considered \u05e7\u05d1\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd a noun plural, accusative to \u05d5\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5, and\ntranslate \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u2660\u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b1\u03c7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u2018carried into the tombs\u2019) =and they\nentered= (I would seek an explanation of the difficulty here in the\noccurrence of this conjunction \u2018and,\u2019 of which a similar instance is\nfound at chapter ii.\u00a015, \u2018so they entered a place ... and they are\ngoing,\u2019 etc.; _i.e._ \u2018did this as a habit\u2019) =and from a place of\nthe hallowed one= (participle) =they go.= (The rendering of the LXX.\nis easily explained; they translate as they do, because we have a\npast tense joined with a present\u2015\u2015\u05d9\u05d4\u05dc\u05e7\u05d5, thus giving the meaning of\nimperfects. As the wicked could not be said to go after death into\nthe sepulchre, they rendered by a passive, \u2018were taken,\u2019 or because\nthey wished it to be made plain that it was not a mere entering and\ndeparting, but that the wicked were buried, _i.e._ honoured, in their\ngraves). =And they were forgotten in the city in which= (full relative,\nbecause it does not refer closely to the city only; they were forgotten,\nnot as regards that particular city, but as a general proposition)\n=thus they did= (but twenty MSS. and all the ancient versions, except\nthe Syriac, in place of \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05ea\u05db\u05d7\u05d5, \u2018were forgotten,\u2019 read \u05d9\u05e9\u05ea\u05d1\u05d7\u05d5, \u2018praised,\u2019\nwhich not only makes better sense, but accounts for the hithpael with\nits reflexive signification. Symmachus reads, \u2018And when they had gone\nround in the holy place, they returned, being praised in the city\nwhere they had so done\u2019\u2015\u2015\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f45\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u1ff3 \u1f01\u03b3\u03af\u1ff3 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c6\u03bf\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9.\u2015\u2015See Field\u2019s _Hexapla_, p.\u00a0396. He also gives\nthe explanatory gloss, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u2018as those who had done\nwell.\u2019 Hence, then, on the whole, we should prefer to take in substance\nthe LXX.\u2019s rendering, and look upon this as setting forth a salient\nexample of successful hypocrisy. After all, the forced renderings of\ncertain critics are in effect alterations of the text, or yield no\nsense at all. The remark) =This also= is =vanity= (equivalent to \u2018this\nthen is besides, an instance of evanescence or transitoriness,\u2019 is very\nstriking and appropriate at this point, as also what succeeds).\n\n \u2663 \u201ckibbutz\u201d replaced with \u201ckubbutz\u201d\n\n \u2666 \u201cpaul\u201d replaced with \u201cpual\u201d\n\n \u2660 \u201c\u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b1\u03c7\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\u201d replaced with \u201c\u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b1\u03c7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2\u201d\n\n 11 Because sentence against \u2502 It amounts to this, however:\n an evil work is not executed \u2502 there is no speedy execution of\n speedily, therefore the heart \u2502 sentence for doing evil, and so\n of the sons of men is fully \u2502 the heart of the human race is\n set in them to do evil. \u2502 thus encouraged in them to do\n \u2502 that evil;\n\n(11.) =Which= (standing at the beginning of a period is emphatic, and\nthus the subject of the whole. \u2018It amounts to this\u2019 would render it\nwell) =there is nothing done as a sentence= (occurs Esther i.\u00a020) =of\ndoing the evil speedily, therefore full= is the =heart of the sons of\nman in them to the doing of an evil= (that is, \u2018It amounts to this,\nthere is nothing inflicted as a penalty of doing the evil [_i.e._ evil\ngenerally] speedily; on that account filled is the heart of men within\nthem in order to do that evil, the word evil being repeated\u2019).\n\n 12 \u00b6 Though a sinner do \u2502 which, however, is a wicked\n evil an hundred times, and \u2502 mistake merely because there\n his _days_ be prolonged, yet \u2502 is time and a prolongation of\n surely I know that it shall \u2502 impunity; for I am perfectly\n be well with them that fear \u2502 assured that it must be\n God, which fear before him: \u2502 well with those who fear the\n \u2502 Almighty,\n\n(12.) =Which= (repeated at the beginning of a clause, equivalent\ntherefore to \u2018And it also amounts to this\u2019) =a sinning= (\u05d7\u05d8\u05d0, which the\nMasorets point as a participle, and the LXX. confirm, rendering by a\nverb) =doing an evil a hundred= (so stands the text at present, but it\nclearly was not so in the text which the ancient versions used, all of\nwhich read differently, except the Syriac, which follows the Hebrew.\nThe LXX. read either \u05de\u05d0\u05df or \u05de\u05e2\u05ea. Symmachus, Aquila, and Theodotion read\n\u200e\u200f\u05de\u05d5\u05ea. Jerome remarks the difficulty; and the Syriac Hexapla shows that\nthe text needed emendation at an early time. We believe the LXX. have\npreserved the right reading; moreover, that they took \u05d0\u05e8\u05d9\u05da as a noun\nin the sense of \u2018prolongation,\u2019 like \u05d0\u05e1\u05d9\u05e8, \u2018a prisoner,\u2019 Genesis xxxix.\n20,\u00a022; \u05d6\u05e2\u05d9\u05e8, \u2018a little,\u2019 Job xxxvi.\u00a02, Isaiah xxviii.\u00a010 and 13; for\n\u200e\u200f\u05d5\u05de\u05d0\u05e8\u05d9\u05da is not a participle hiphil, but is really the substantive \u05d0\u05e8\u05d9\u05da\nwith \u05de. When, however, this word was taken as a hiphil, \u05de\u05e2\u05ea became\nunintelligible, and was altered by conjecture to \u05de\u05d0\u05ea, or \u05de\u05d5\u05ea; hence the\nmeaning is not) =caused to be prolonged= (as it stands in the text,\nbut rather \u2018and from the prolongation\u2019) =to him=: (emphatic, hence the\nsense of the passage is, noticing the repetition of the \u05de, and the fact\nthat \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 also stands at the head of the verse, \u2018And it amounts to this\nas well: a wickedly mistaking one does evil from the time and from\nthe prolongation of it to HIM,\u2019 _i.e._ \u2018to the other above cited;\u2019 and\nhence the LXX. render \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, also referring us back to the hypocritical\nsinners spoken of above. Then follows a reason introduced with) =for in\naddition= (besides its being a wicked mistake, a sin which it is always\nfolly to commit) =knowing am I= (_i.e._ \u2018I do know, notwithstanding\nappearances\u2019) =this= also, =it will be a good to the fearers of God\nwho= (but full relative repeated, and so with the meaning \u2018because they\nare those who\u2019) =fear= (emphatic, with double _jud_) =before him.=\n\n 13 But it shall not be well \u2502 just because they do fear\n with the wicked, neither shall \u2502 before Him; and that it cannot\n he prolong _his_ days, _which \u2502 be good to the impious man, and\n are_ as a shadow; because he \u2502 he will not prolong his days,\n feareth not before God. \u2502 even like a shadow, because he\n \u2502 is _not_ one who fears before\n \u2502 God.\n\n(13.) =And good= (repeated, \u2018but good\u2019) =it will not be to an impious=\nperson (or act) =and he will not cause to prolong days as a shadow=\n(he does not prolong his days; they are prolonged indeed sometimes\nby Divine providence in His inscrutable decrees, and they are as a\nshadow,\u2015\u2015a very impressive figure: the lengthened shadow of the old\nsinner\u2019s years so soon to end in darkness absolute) =which= (full\nrelative, in this equivalent to \u2018because that\u2019) =he is not a fearer\nbefore God.=\n\n 14 There is a vanity which \u2502 There is an instance of\n is done upon the earth; that \u2502 evanescence which occurs upon\n there be just _men_, unto whom \u2502 earth, and it is this: that\n it happeneth according to the \u2502 there are righteous persons to\n work of the wicked; again, \u2502 whom it results as if they had\n there be wicked _men_, to whom \u2502 acted like the impious; and,\n it happeneth according to the \u2502 on the other hand, there are\n work of the righteous: I said \u2502 impious persons to whom it may\n that this also _is_ vanity. \u2502 happen as though they had acted\n \u2502 like the righteous. So this,\n \u2502 said I, is another instance of\n \u2502 the transitory!\n\n(14.) =There exists a vanity done= (_i.e._ which occurs or happens to\nmen) =under the sun= (the LXX. render by a perfect, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9), =which\nis, that there exists righteous= (full relative) =which= (persons or\nacts) =it reaches= (hiphil participle, Genesis xxviii.\u00a012) =to them=\n(emphatic) =according to the doing of the wicked ones=, (generic; they\nattain the same ends as the wicked ones do, in this world at least,\nfor \u2018under the sun\u2019 is put in as a qualifying clause), =and there are\nwicked ones which= it =reaches= (here we have the contract relative\ninstead of the full one above. So accurate a writer as Koheleth\ncould hardly have done this without reason. We have already noticed\nthe subjunctive sense the contract relative gives to the verb it\njoins\u2015\u2015possibly he intends a limitation; it is an occurrence which\n_sometimes_ happens, the _rule_ however is after all the other way)\n=to them according to the working= of the =righteous ones, I said which\nalso= (\u05e9\u05d2\u05dd\u2015\u2015see chapter i.\u00a017, ii.\u00a015, the only other two instances in\nwhich this combination occurs; it clearly gives an interrogatory force,\nwith a tone of surprise) is =vanity?=\n\n 15 Then I commended mirth, \u2502 Then I, for my part, expressed\n because a man hath no better \u2502 a preference with regard to\n thing under the sun, than to \u2502 enjoyment, because there is\n eat, and to drink, and to be \u2502 no real good to a man in this\n merry: for that shall abide \u2502 work-day world, except to eat,\n with him of his labour the \u2502 and drink, and be delighted,\n days of his life, which God \u2502 and that same conjoined with\n giveth him under the sun. \u2502 his toil during the days of\n \u2502 his life; and because also\n \u2502 it is appointed to him of the\n \u2502 Almighty in this work-day world.\n\n(15.) =And I praised, I myself, with respect to= (which the LXX. note\nby \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd adverbial) =the gladness= (which is both generic and abstract,\n\u2018I came, that is, to a strong conclusion as to the value of present\nhappiness\u2019), =because there is no good to a man under the sun, except\nto eat, and to drink, and to rejoice, and that= (emphatic) =to abide\nwith him in= (or by means of) =his toil during the days of his life=\n(_i.e._ no other real good except this gratification immediately\narising from the toil) =which= is =a gift to him= (emphatic) =of Divine\nProvidence= (and so not the result of his labour, but a mercy for which\nhe ought to thank God) =under the sun= (which is in this case reserved\nto the end of the sentence, and indeed the period, for the next clause\nis a summing up).\n\n 16 \u00b6 When I applied mine \u2502 Whence it results, that having\n heart to know wisdom, and to \u2502 set my heart to know wisdom,\n see the business that is done \u2502 and to observe with regard to\n upon the earth: (for also \u2502 the uncertainty which is\n _there is that_ neither day \u2502 suffered upon earth (for indeed,\n nor night seeth sleep with his \u2502 by day and by night also, _rest_\n eyes:) \u2502 does no human eye behold)\u2015\u2015\n\n(16.) =As then I have given with respect to my heart= (with \u05d0\u05ea) =to\nthe knowledge of wisdom, and to the appearances= (\u05d5\u05b0\u05dc\u05b4\u05e8\u05b0\u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea; this infinitive\nwith \u05d5\u05b0 is peculiar to Ecclesiastes\u2015\u2015occurs chapters iii.\u00a018, v.\u00a017, and\nhere; see the peculiar shade of meaning given by the conjunction) =with\nrespect to the anxiety= (see chapter i.\u00a013; generic with \u05d0\u05ea, of which,\nhowever, the LXX. take no special notice) =which is done on earth=\n(but we must write \u2018endured upon earth\u2019 to express the meaning, which\namounts to this, \u2018As, then, I have given my heart to the knowledge of\nwisdom, _i.e._ a scientific knowledge, with regard to the spectacle of\nthat anxious uncertainty which is suffered on the earth\u2019), for =also\nby day and by night sleep= (the Masorets with great taste put \u2018sleep\u2019\nin a clausule by itself) =with his eyes he is not seeing= (_i.e._ this\nuncertainty is incessant).\n\n 17 Then I beheld all the \u2502 so I perceive, with respect to\n work of God, that a man cannot \u2502 the whole working of the\n find out the work that is done \u2502 Almighty, how impossible is it\n under the sun: because though \u2502 for humanity to discover the\n a man labour to seek _it_ out, \u2502 working out of anything with\n yet he shall not find _it_; \u2502 respect to what is done within\n yea farther, though a wise \u2502 this work-day world. Yet it is\n _man_ think to know _it_, yet \u2502 on account of this that man\n shall he not be able to find \u2502 toils, that he may seek it\n _it_. \u2502 out, but he does not discover\n \u2502 it: and if he thinks wisdom\n \u2502 will enable him to know it,\n \u2502 it is not sufficient for the\n \u2502 discovery either.\n\n(17.) =And I saw= (so I saw, the apodosis of the above) =with respect\nto all the working of Divine providence, how that is not able= (_not_\nis emphatic) =humanity to the finding out of= (\u2018or a discovery\u2019 of)\n=with regard to= (the LXX. again write \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd) =the work= (generic) =which\nis done= (or suffered, or endured, as being a niphal) =under the sun,\nbecause of= (\u05d1\u05e9\u05dc occurs Jonah i.\u00a07 only) =which toils humanity in order\nto seek it, and does not find it; and also if he says the wisdom=\n(_i.e._ wisdom generically) =to know it= (\u2018that wisdom is given him to\nknow it\u2019) =he is not able= (or rather not enabled) =to find it.= \u05d1\u05e9\u05dc\nin this place is no doubt used to express a new idea, \u2018for this,\u2019 or\n\u2018which cause.\u2019 The object of man\u2019s toil, _i.e._ the object he has in\nhis labour, is to find out some method by which he may rectify what\nappears wrong in the course of God\u2019s providence: in the strict sense\nof the term this is impossible. The principle which pervades Koheleth\u2019s\nreasoning is, that enjoyment, as such, is God\u2019s gift, and that toil is\nuseless. Labour, however, which is distinguished from toil, is to be\ndone in the fear of God, and the result left to his providence. The\nargument which is to follow further enforces this.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER IX.\n\n\n FOR all this \u00b9I considered \u2502 FOR with respect to all this,\n in my heart even to declare \u2502 I have laid to my heart that\n all this, that the righteous, \u2502 which is to be deduced from it\n and the wise, and their works, \u2502 all, which is, that right and\n _are_ in the hand of God: no \u2502 wisdom, and any service they\n man knoweth either love or \u2502 can render, are in the hand of\n hatred _by_ all _that is_ \u2502 the Almighty, and whether [an\n before them. \u2502 event be an indication of His]\n \u2502 love or displeasure either, no\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ I gave _or_ set \u2502 man knows from anything he sees\n to my heart. \u2502 before him,\n\nIX. (1.) =For with respect to all this, I have given it to= (\u05d0\u05dc, not\n\u200e\u200f\u05d0\u05ea, which the LXX. render by \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2) =my heart, and to sift out= (occurs\nhere only, but compare chapter iii.\u00a018) =with respect to all this= (but\nthe LXX., dividing the words differently, evidently read \u05d5\u05dc\u05d1\u05d9 \u05e8\u05d0\u05ea \u05db\u05dc \u05d6\u05d4,\nwhich would mean, \u2018when that heart was seeing all this.\u2019 The number\nof various readings\u2015\u2015see Stier and Theile, _Polyglot_\u2015\u2015show that\nthis passage was early one of difficulty. The rendering of Symmachus,\npreserved by Jerome, \u2018omnia ita statui [fort. \u1f14\u03c4\u03b1\u03be\u03b1] in corde meo ut\nventilarem universa,\u2019 conveys the meaning; which is, that Koheleth\nset to his heart that which is the result when the matter is entirely\nsifted) =which is the righteous and the wise= (generic and plural, all\nthose things which are right or wise generally; \u2018right and wisdom,\u2019 as\nwe speak, is the meaning) =and their works= (_i.e._ what they produce,\nor, better still, their \u2018services\u2019) are =in the hand of the Deity,\nalso love= (in the abstract), =also hatred= (also abstract, and \u05d2\u05dd\nbeing repeated gives the idea of both love and hatred too) =is nothing,\nknowing the man= (the negative belongs to the noun, not to the verb,\nand so the meaning must be \u2018there is _no man_ who does know.\u2019 Moreover,\nthe two nominatives absolute, \u2018love\u2019 and \u2018hatred,\u2019 are the subjects of\nthe whole sentence, \u2018as to love or hatred either, there is no man who\nknows,\u2019 or, better still, \u2018to whom is made known,\u2019 giving the import\nto the participle) =the whole= (generic) =before them= (distributive\nplural, any of them, equivalent then \u2018to anything which is before\nthem\u2019).\n\n 2 All _things come_ alike \u2502 evanescence being that which\n to all: _there is_ one event \u2502 belongs to all. That which\n to the righteous, and to the \u2502 happens is just the same to\n wicked; to the good, and to \u2502 the right and to the wrong, to\n the clean, and to the unclean; \u2502 good [_and to bad_, LXX.], and\n to him that sacrificeth, and \u2502 to clean and to unclean, and\n to him that sacrificeth not: \u2502 to the sacrificer as to one\n as _is_ the good, so _is_ \u2502 who never sacrifices; as the\n the sinner; _and_ he that \u2502 good, so the erring sinner,\n sweareth, as _he_ that feareth \u2502 the forsworn as though he had\n an oath. \u2502 feared the oath.\n\n(2.) =The whole= (but all the ancient versions read here \u05d4\u05d1\u05dc,\n\u2018_vanity_,\u2019 and this makes better sense; the error, for such we believe\nit to be, in the Masoretic text, was one so likely to occur, that,\nconsidering the strong weight of testimony in favour of the LXX., and\nthe far better sense it makes with the context, we may well adopt it.\nAs an additional reason for following the LXX., we notice that the\nSyriac reads (\u2021 Syriac phrase) \u2018all that is before him is vanity, all \njust as that which is to all,\u2019 combining, therefore, both readings \ntogether. Thus it appears that the variation in the texts was a very \nancient one. If this reading be adopted, then combining it with the \nwords which follow) =as= (or like this same) =to all= (the meaning \nwill be \u2018transitoriness is exactly the same to all,\u2019 or \u2018all alike \nare equally transitory.\u2019 If, however, we retain the Masoretic text \nand pointing, a good sense is made. \u2018_The whole_ is as it were to \nall,\u2019 namely) =a happening= which is =one to the righteous, and to \nthe impious, to the good= (the LXX. add here _to the bad_), =to the \nclean, and to the unclean, to the sacrificer, and to one who has not \nsacrificed; as is the good so the sinner= (but general, including \nthings as well as persons), =the forsworn as one who an oath fears.=\n\n 3 This _is_ an evil among \u2502 This evil is in all which is\n all _things_ that are done \u2502 performed in this work-day\n under the sun, that _there is_ \u2502 world: that there is but one\n one event unto all: yea, also \u2502 event to all, and so the heart\n the heart of the sons of men \u2502 of the human race overflows\n is full of evil, and madness \u2502 with wrong, and foolish\n _is_ in their heart while they \u2502 anticipations are in their\n live, and after that _they go_ \u2502 inmost hearts while they live,\n to the dead. \u2502 and what succeeds\u2015\u2015it belongs\n \u2502 to the _dead_.\n\n(3.) =This wrong= is _in all which is done_ (niphal, and therefore\nobjective; men both do and suffer as though this were so) = under the\nsun, how a happening= which is =one= (_i.e._ the same) =to all= (the\nforce of this reasoning is made apparent by what follows, as there\nis no visible reward to these righteous persons as compared with the\nwicked, wicked men presume); =and moreover, the heart of the sons of\nAdam is full of= (\u2018overflows with\u2019 would represent the idea) =evil,\nand false expectations= (\u05d4\u05d5\u05dc\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea occurs chapter i.\u00a017\u2015\u2015see references;\nthe meaning deduced exactly suits this passage; it is the false hope\nbegotten of an evil action, a crime worse than a blunder, to invert a\ncelebrated aphorism) =in their hearts= (\u05dc\u05d1\u05d1 is \u2018the inmost heart\u2019\u2015\u2015see\nConcordance, _sub voce_, for the shade of difference between \u05dc\u05d1 and\n\u200e\u200f\u05dc\u05d1\u05d1), =in their lives, and their future= (_i.e._ what comes afterwards)\n=belongs to= (the preposition is \u05d0\u05dc, which the LXX. note, and render by\n\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2) =the dead= (generic, with the article).\n\n 4 \u00b6 For to him that is \u2502 For whoever he may be,\n joined to all the living there \u2502 he chooses altogether as\n is hope: for a living dog is \u2502 regarding the _living_, this\n better than a dead lion. \u2502 being his anticipation: for to\n \u2502 a dog alive it is indeed better\n \u2502 than the lion when he is dead.\n\n(4.) =For whoever= (interrogative pronoun followed by \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8, compare\nExodus xxxii.\u00a033; it has here the sense, \u2018For whoever he be\u2019) =chooses=\n(the Kri reads \u2018is joined to,\u2019 which the LXX., Syriac, Targum, and\nSymmachus all have; but this and the pointing as a pual is merely a\nMasoretic conjecture: it would be better with the LXX. to take it in\nan active sense, \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6, \u2018participates.\u2019 The Chetib is perfectly\nintelligible, however, and is to be preferred) =towards= (\u05d0\u05dc, as in\nverse\u00a03) =all= (but \u05db\u05dc is without the article; hence it has the meaning,\nthe \u2018whole of\u2019) =the lives= (with the article, and hence generic,\n\u2018lives generally.\u2019 Thus the meaning is, \u2018For whoever he be, he is one\nwho chooses entirely with relation to the living\u2019), =it is= (\u05d9\u05e9, it\nexists as such) =an expectation= (\u05d1\u05d8\u05d7\u05d5\u05df, occurs 2\u00a0Kings xviii.\u00a019, and\nits parallel Isaiah xxxvi.\u00a04 besides this place only, in the meaning\nof a \u2018confidence\u2019 or \u2018expectation,\u2019 and this meaning gives excellent\nsense here: \u2018is his expectation that he will _live:_\u2019 no man makes\nplans on the supposition that he is going to _die_; he may indeed\nprovide for others after he is dead, but the horizon of his own hopes\nis necessarily bounded by his life). =For= (an additional reason\nconfirming the above) =to a dog alive it is= (emphatic) =good above the\nlion= (with the article, because this is generic; it is not _a_ lion,\nbut lion qualities generally), =the dead= (again generic, for the same\nreason\u2015\u2015\u2018a live dog is better than the lion when he is dead,\u2019 is the\nexact turn of thought).\n\n 5 For the living know that \u2502 Yet the living are quite aware\n they shall die: but the dead \u2502 that they shall die; but the\n know not any thing, neither \u2502 dead are not aware of anything;\n have they any more a reward; \u2502 and they can have no further\n for the memory of them is \u2502 recompense, because a forgotten\n forgotten. \u2502 thing is their memorial:\n\n(5.) =For the living= ones =are knowing that they will die= (this is an\nadditional reason to the above, and so may be rendered, \u2018but the living\nare certain that they will _die_\u2018), =but the dead= (plural, with the\narticle, \u2018the dead persons generally\u2019) =are not those who are knowing\nanything= (it is not here, be it observed, the existence of knowledge\non the part of the dead which is denied, but that, from the author\u2019s\npoint of view, the dead are persons who do not know anything: an\nunevangelic sense has been given to this passage by not attending to\nthis distinction), =and there is nothing further to them= (emphatic)\nwhich is a =hire= (or a reward in this life accruing to them as a\nrecompense for their toil), =because forgotten= (niphal in its usual\nobjective sense) is =their remembrance.=\n\n 6 Also their love, and their \u2502 and then their love and their\n hatred, and their envy, is now \u2502 hatred also, and their envy as\n perished; neither have they \u2502 well, as far as this Present\n any more a portion for ever in \u2502 is concerned, are perished;\n any _thing_ that is done under \u2502 and there is no further\n the sun. \u2502 participation for them in the\n \u2502 age, in anything that may be\n \u2502 done within this work-day world.\n\n(6.) =Moreover their love, moreover their hatred, moreover their\nenvy= (the triple repetition of \u05d2\u05dd brings this word into prominence,\nequivalent to \u2018their love also; yes, their hatred and envy too\u2019) =in\nthis present= (\u05db\u05d1\u05e8, see chapter i.\u00a010, references; the word occurs\nagain in its technical sense of the \u2018present state of things,\u2019 and\nmakes excellent sense here), =perish= (abstract \u2018is a thing perished\u2019)\n=in all which= (full relative) =is done under the sun.= On this follows\nthe most touching piece of sarcasm in the whole work. There is a force\nand pungency about it which is very striking.\n\n 7 \u00b6 Go thy way, eat thy \u2502 Go then, eat thy bread with\n bread with joy, and drink thy \u2502 gladness, and drink in good\n wine with a merry heart; for \u2502 heart thy wine, if in the\n God now accepteth thy works. \u2502 present the Almighty prospers\n \u2502 thy works.\n\n(7.) =Go, eat= (_i.e._ enjoy) in =pleasure thy bread, and drink in\nheart= of =good thy wine; for so in the present hath prospered the\nDeity thy workings.=\n\n 8 Let thy garments be always \u2502 At every opportunity let thy\n white; and let thy head lack \u2502 garments be white, and the oil\n no ointment. \u2502 to thy head do not spare.\n\n(8.) =In all season= (\u05e2\u05ea, a providential season\u2015\u2015see chapter iii. 1,\u00a019)\n=let them be= (even) =thy garments white= (it is hardly possible here,\nwhen we remember the constant use in Scripture of _white_ garments, not\nto discover one of those hidden allusions with which this book abounds\nto a pure as alone a happy life; the garments of the sensualist and\ndrunkard are, in the emphatic language of the apostle, \u2018spotted with\n_the flesh_\u2019), =and oil= (see chapter vii.\u00a01, as the symbol of luxury\nand wealth) =on thy head do not spare= (chapter iv.\u00a08; \u2018do not stint\u2019\nor \u2018save it as for another time,\u2019 is the meaning: \u2018use it when you have\nthe occasion\u2019).\n\n 9 \u00b9Live joyfully with the \u2502 Enjoy life with that woman\n wife whom thou lovest all the \u2502 whom thou lovest, all the days\n days of the life of thy vanity,\u2502 of thy evanescent life, which\n which he hath given thee under \u2502 He grants thee in this hot\n the sun, all the days of thy \u2502 work-day world,\u2015\u2015all these\n vanity: for that _is_ thy \u2502 evanescent days, I say, for\n portion in _this_ life, and in \u2502 _that_ is all thou canst\n thy labour which thou takest \u2502 possess in thy life, and from\n under the sun. \u2502 that toil thyself art toiling\n \u2502 ever in this same work-day\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ See _or_ enjoy \u2502 world.\n life. \u2502\n\n(9.) =See lives together with the woman which thou lovest= (it is to\nbe remarked here that Koheleth speaks of a woman in the singular; the\nidea thus implied is cognate with that of the white garments, it is\npure domestic love) =all the days of the lives of thy vanity= (_i.e._\nthy evanescent life) =which= He =gives to thee= (the nominative is no\ndoubt the Deity; but as this nominative is so far off, the verb becomes\nalmost an impersonal) =under the sun all the days of thy vanity=\n(repeated); =for that same is thy portion in lives in thy toil which\nthou= (emphatic) =toilest at under the sun= (repeated, and therefore\nhaving the meaning, \u2018under that same sun,\u2019 the whole being thus\nstrictly limited to the horizon of this world).\n\n 10 Whatsoever thy hand \u2502 All that thy hand finds to do,\n findeth to do, do _it_ with \u2502 to the utmost do it, because\n thy might; for _there is_ \u2502 there is no work, nor device,\n no work, nor device, nor \u2502 nor wisdom, nor knowledge in\n knowledge, nor wisdom, in the \u2502 the grave, and that is whither\n grave, whither thou goest. \u2502 thou art hastening.\n\n(10.) =All which shall find thy hand in order to do= (that is,\neverything which it is in thy power to perform in regard of the above),\n=in thy might do it, because= there is =nothing= of =a work, or a\ncontrivance, or a knowledge, or a wisdom= (all these being without the\narticle, and singular) =in Sheol, which= (is the \u2018place,\u2019 or \u2018end,\u2019\netc.; for we have in English to supply some general word here) =thou=\n(emphatic) =art going unto= (the meaning is, \u2018and _that_ is whither\n_thou_ art going unto\u2019).\n\n 11 \u00b6 I returned, and saw \u2502 But to return, I perceived\n under the sun, that the race \u2502 how in this work-day world that\n _is_ not to the swift, nor the \u2502 not to the swift ones is the\n battle to the strong, neither \u2502 race, nor to the strong ones\n yet bread to the wise, nor yet \u2502 the battle, nor even to wise\n riches to men of understanding,\u2502 ones bread, nor yet to prudent\n nor yet favour to men of skill;\u2502 ones wealth, nor yet to the\n but time and chance happeneth \u2502 instructed ones favour. For\n to them all. \u2502 time and chance happens with\n \u2502 regard to them all.\n\n(11.) =I turned=, and =see under the sun= (\u2018see\u2019 is rightly joined by\nthe accents to the word which follows it; it is, as this formula of\nintroduction shows, another aspect of the same truth as that set forth\nabove) =how not to swift= is =the race= (\u05de\u05e8\u05d5\u05e5, occurs here only), =and\nnot= to =mighty ones the war, and also not to wise ones bread, and also\nnot to prudent ones= (occurs Genesis xli.\u00a033 of Joseph, and 1\u00a0Kings\niii.\u00a012 of Solomon) =an increase, and not to knowing ones a favour=:\n(these three nouns, \u2018bread,\u2019 etc., are singular and without the article,\nthe other two are with it), =for time= (the providential season, that\nis) and =chance= (occurs 1\u00a0Kings v.\u00a04 as a noun only; the meaning\nof the verb, which occurs frequently, is, \u2018to meet,\u2019 \u2018to approach\u2019)\n=happens with respect to= (\u05d0\u05ea, which the LXX. notice by making the verb\ncompound, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9) =all.=\n\n 12 For man also knoweth not \u2502 For so also Humanity knows not\n his time: as the fishes that \u2502 its time, but just like fishes\n are taken in an evil net, and \u2502 which have been caught in a\n as the birds that are caught \u2502 net, or birds held fast in a\n in the snare; so _are_ the \u2502 snare, just like them the sons\n sons of men snared in an evil \u2502 of men are ensnared in some\n time, when it falleth suddenly \u2502 evil time, as it falls upon\n upon them. \u2502 them\u2015\u2015suddenly.\n\n(12.) =For also not knows= (it is the verb which is here negatived)\n=the man= (humanity) =his time= (with \u05d0\u05ea, which the LXX. note by the\narticle), =as fishes which may be caught= (contract relative and plural\nniphal) =in a net, the evil one= (an evil net), =and like also birds=\nwhen =caught in a snare= (notice the difference between \u05e9\u05e0\u05d0\u05d7\u05d6\u05d9\u05dd, which\nis niphal participle plural, occurs Genesis xxii.\u00a013, and \u05d4\u05d0\u05d7\u05d6\u05d5\u05ea, pual\nparticiple, \u2018the fishes are _caught_, the birds are _held_\u2019); =like\nthem= _are_ =ensnared= (\u05d9\u05d5\u05e7\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd, see Deuteronomy vii.\u00a025) =the sons\nof the Adam to a time= (which is) =evil, as when it falls upon them\nsuddenly.= (It would result from this reasoning that wisdom is of no\nuse at all; but in order to meet this objection, Koheleth cites an\ninstance where it was of great value.)\n\n 13 \u00b6 This wisdom have I seen \u2502 Nevertheless, I have observed\n also under the sun, and it \u2502 the following instance of\n _seemed_ great unto me: \u2502 wisdom in this work-day world,\n \u2502 and which appeared to me of\n \u2502 great moment.\n\n(13.) =Moreover, this I have seen= (_i.e._ an instance of) =a wisdom\nunder the sun= (_i.e._ in this world, where wisdom avails so little),\n=and great= (but the noun is an abstract, \u2018of great value\u2019 or\nimportance, \u2018a really great thing\u2019) =is it with regard to me= (LXX.,\n\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2, _i.e._ he considered that, notwithstanding the observation above,\nhe ought to take it as of considerable account; here was an unexpected\ndeliverance, by means of wisdom, from one of those snares, \u05de\u05e6\u05d5\u05d3\u05d9\u05dd,\nspoken of above).\n\n 14 _There was_ a little \u2502 There was a little city, and\n city, and few men within it; \u2502 the men therein were a few; and\n and there came a great king \u2502 there came a great king against\n against it, and besieged it, \u2502 it, and invested it, and built\n and built great bulwarks \u2502 a net-work [of fortifications]\n against it: \u2502 around it.\n\n(14.) =A city small, and the men= (\u05d0\u05e0\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd, \u2018weak men\u2019) =in it= (emphatic,\n\u2018in that same\u2019) =a few, and there came against it a king= (who was)\n=great, and he surrounded it, and built over against it networks very\ngreat ones;=\n\n 15 Now there was found in it \u2502 Now there was found therein\n a poor wise man, and he by his \u2502 a poor wise working man, and\n wisdom delivered the city; yet \u2502 _he_ it was who saved the city\n no man remembered that same \u2502 by his wisdom; yet men did\n poor man. \u2502 not remember that same person\n \u2502 because he was a poor working\n \u2502 man.\n\n(15.) =and was found in it= (again emphatic) =a man= (\u05d0\u05d9\u05e9, the rest\nare \u05d0\u05e0\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd) =poor= (chapter iv.\u00a013, and here only, \u05de\u05e1\u05db\u05df, LXX. \u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1. The\nmeaning of \u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 is that kind of poverty which seeks its food by labour,\nand differs from \u03c0\u03c4\u03c9\u03c7\u1f78\u03c2, which signifies a mendicant. Fuerst gives the\nderivation, \u05e1\u05be\u05db\u05df, of the root, which would imply such a meaning as the\nLXX. have), =wise= (there is no copula between these two qualifying\nwords. It is not a poor _and_ wise man, but a man economically\nwise\u2015\u2015who could make his wisdom go a long way), =and saved= (even)\n=he= (the turn of meaning is, that the safety of the city was found\nin himself, as the embodiment of wisdom) =the city= (with \u05d0\u05ea emphatic,\nwhich the LXX. notice by the rendering, \u03b4\u2009\u03b9\u2009\u03b1\u2009\u03c3\u03ce\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u2009\u1f74\u2009\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd)\n=in his wisdom; and a man= (not exactly \u2018humanity,\u2019 which we have seen\nwould require the article, but \u2018man\u2019 as representing the individuals\ngenerally) =did not remember= (the verb follows the nominative), =with\nrespect to that man= (\u05d0\u05ea, with the article, which the LXX. notice by\n\u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd, with a _genitive_! but in reality the genitive is governed by the\nverb, \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd being adverbial), =the poor one, even that same=. (The shade\nof meaning given by the article is, that mankind, as a rule, do not\nadequately remember, and so neither reward, wisdom when associated\nwith poverty. \u2018The poor inventor and his sorrows,\u2019 have passed into a\nproverb.)\n\n 16 Then said I, Wisdom \u2502 Yet _I_ should say myself that\n _is_ better than strength: \u2502 wisdom was a real good, and\n nevertheless the poor man\u2019s \u2502 better than strength, yet the\n wisdom _is_ despised, and his \u2502 wisdom of the poor working man\n words are not heard. \u2502 is despised, and his words just\n \u2502 those which are not listened to.\n\n(16.) =Then said I= (in opposition to \u2018man,\u2019 above), =good= is =wisdom\nabove might; and the wisdom of the poor= (with the article) =is\ndespised, and his words= (or reasonings, used still in the technical\nsense common to this book) are those =which are not listened to.=\n\n 17 The words of wise _men \u2502 These words of the wise in\n are_ heard in quiet more than \u2502 a silence are heard:\n the cry of him that ruleth \u2502\n among fools. \u2502 More than the shriek of a\n \u2502 ruler with fools.\n\n(17.) =Those words= (repeated) of =wise men in rest are heard= (but\nnotice \u05d1\u05e0\u05d7\u05ea is an ambiguous word,\u2015\u2015see Job xxxvi.\u00a016; the root \u05e0\u05d7\u05ea is to\npress down, and hence the equivoke. These words of the wise man in \u2018a\ngoing down\u2019 are those which are heard, _i.e._ in a \u2018time of pressure,\u2019\nor in distress; \u2018in quiet,\u2019 is also a meaning, and a very good one,\nbeing that which expresses, without doubt, the main intent in the\npassage) =above the cry= (Genesis xviii.\u00a020. Fuerst considers that \u05e6\u05e2\u05e7\nis an older form and \u05d6\u05e2\u05e7 modern, yet both are used in Genesis xviii.\n20,\u00a021, but the references will be seen to support the idea that \u05d6\u05e2\u05e7\u05d4\nis the \u2018cry of emotion,\u2019 while \u05e6\u05e2\u05e7\u05d4 is any \u2018loud cry;\u2019 if so, there is\na special reason why it should be used in this place. Again, \u05de\u05d6\u05e2\u05e7\u05d4 might\nbe a participle meaning a \u2018cry of distress,\u2019 thus giving force to the\nequivoke), =of a ruler with the befooled.=\n\n 18 Wisdom _is_ better than \u2502 A real good is wisdom above\n weapons of war: but one sinner \u2502 weapons of fight: but a single\n destroyeth much good. \u2502 erring sinner destroys this\n \u2502 good very much.\n\n(18.) =A good= (repeated, so that it corroborates what is found in\nverse\u00a016) is =wisdom above weapons= of =an encounter, and sinning once=\n(in the sense of making a wicked mistake, or \u2018one wicked mistaker,\u2019\neither person or thing) =destroys good the much.=\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER X.\n\n\n DEAD \u00b9flies cause the \u2502 ONE of a swarm of blow-flies\n ointment of the apothecary to \u2502 tainting corrupts the\n send forth a stinking savour: \u2502 confectioner\u2019s conserve, and\n _so doth_ a little folly him \u2502 esteemed above reason and above\n that is in reputation for \u2502 reputation too is of false\n wisdom _and_ honour. \u2502 prudence\u2015\u2015just a little.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ Flies of death. \u2502\n\nX. (1.) =Flies of death= (\u05d6\u05d1\u05d5\u05d1, occurs Isaiah vii.\u00a018 only, as an emblem\nof the Egyptian plague) =cause to stink= (singular, _i.e._ a single\nblow-fly out of many will do this, see Proverbs xiii.\u00a05 for the only\nother instance of future hiphil), and =cause to belch out= (Psalms\nlix.\u00a07, Proverbs xv.\u00a02, _i.e._ with putrefaction) =the oil= (see\nchapter vii.\u00a01) =of the apothecary. Precious more than wisdom more than\nhonour= (_i.e._ and _more_ than honour also), =follies= (but observe\n\u200e\u200f\u05e1\u05db\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea, elaborate follies or false prudence, chapter ii.\u00a03), =a little=\n(distributive singular, one out of many such. The LXX. render \u03c4\u03af\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\n\u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd, \u2018and a little wisdom\nis more precious than great glory of folly.\u2019 The objection to this\nrendering of the LXX. is that they displace, quite contrary to their\nusual custom, \u2018_a little_,\u2019 which comes at the end of the sentence, a\ndifficulty which D.\u00a0F.\u00a0X. palliate by reading \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2\u2015\u2015\u2018than the glory\nof _great_ folly.\u2019 The Syriac reads, \u2018so a little folly is more weighty\nthan wisdom and great glory.\u2019 Symmachus reads, \u03ba\u1f02\u03bd \u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac, \u2018even if\na little.\u2019 On the whole, however, and remembering the meaning of\n\u200e\u200f\u05e1\u05db\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea, which is a perverse or false wisdom, the text as it stands makes\nvery good sense: \u2018A single blow-fly will corrupt and make ferment\nthe [carefully prepared] oil of the apothecary; so more precious\nthan wisdom or honour, even is a little one out of the many perverse\nfollies,\u2019 _i.e._ this perverse kind of wisdom will destroy a reputation\nfor intellect and probity, and that also even when the gain proposed\nis but a small matter, and will cause the subject of it to sacrifice\nprudence and reputation for the sake of some whim which he knows is not\nworth having).\n\n 2 A wise man\u2019s heart _is_ at \u2502 The heart of the wise man is at\n his right hand; but a fool\u2019s \u2502 his right hand, but the heart\n heart at his left. \u2502 of a foolish one is at his left\n \u2502 hand.\n\n(2.) =The heart of a wise man is at his right, but the heart of a\nfoolish one is at his left= (the heart is really at the left side,\nbut this is the natural heart. Heart is however to be understood\nnot as meaning the understanding, but moral sentiments, which is its\nmetaphorical signification in this book).\n\n 3 Yea also, when he that is \u2502 And also in the way, like the\n a fool walketh by the way, his \u2502 wise fool he is, out of heart\n \u00b9wisdom faileth _him_, and he \u2502 he walks, and says to all, What\n saith to every one _that_ he \u2502 elaborate folly _this_ is!\n _is_ a fool. \u2502\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ his heart. \u2502\n\n(3.) =And moreover in the way= (which word \u2018way\u2019 is so constantly used\nin an ethical sense\u2015\u2015Psalms cxix.\u00a01\u2015\u2015that we cannot overlook it here)\n=like that which is the wise fool\u2019s= (the Masorets notice the article\nhere, and pronounce it superfluous, but it is not so; for the meaning\nis, that it is like the perversely wise fool\u2019s way generically, in this)\nthat as _he walks, his heart_ (the third time \u2018heart\u2019 has occurred in\nthis passage, raising the word into great emphasis and importance),\n=fails= (the Authorized Version considers this to mean a failure in\nwisdom, but it is rather a failure of confidence, which is the ethical\nmeaning of the term \u2018heart\u2019) =and says= (the nearest nominative is \u05dc\u05d1,\nheart, and so the LXX. understood, for they render \u1f03 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb.\n\u2018that which he thinks of\u2019 _is_ folly; this makes good sense) =to all,\nperverse folly it is= (emphatic, hence the meaning is, \u2018he is out of\nheart altogether,\u2019 or \u2018his heart misgives him;\u2019 and it says, \u2018what\nperverse folly it all really is.\u2019 Conscience convicts those clever\nwicked plans, and they who devise them know that they are only\nelaborate mistakes).\n\n 4 If the spirit of the ruler \u2502 If the spirit of the ruling\n rise up against thee, leave \u2502 one should go forth against\n not thy place; for yielding \u2502 thee, thy station do not quit,\n pacifieth great offences. \u2502 because a remedy may cure\n \u2502 wicked errors which are great.\n\n(4.) =If a spirit= of =the ruling one= (not, as usually rendered, the\nruler, which does not exactly convey the idea) =goes up against thee=\n(the LXX. show that they so understood it by rendering \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u1f10\u03be\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2) =thy place do not yield= (the sense of the passage is,\n\u2018If there be too strong a spirit against you, if you are sailing, as\nit were, in the teeth of the wind, do not yield when you have good\ngrounds for remaining:\u2019 this makes excellent sense, is cognate to the\naccompanying passages, and follows the LXX.) =for a healing= (\u05de\u05e8\u05e4\u05d0,\noccurs Proverbs xiv.\u00a030 and xv.\u00a04 only, the LXX. read \u1f34\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1, \u2018a remedy\u2019)\n=pacifies mistakes= (with the usual idea of culpability attaching to\nthis word) =great ones= (the idea is \u2018do not yield to mere adverse\n_circumstances_ when even culpable _mistakes_ admit of a remedy.\u2019)\n\n 5 There is an evil _which_ I \u2502 There exists an evil which I\n have seen under the sun, as an \u2502 have observed in this work-day\n error _which_ proceedeth \u00b9from \u2502 world, like an error which goes\n the ruler: \u2502 forth from before the face of\n \u2502 the Powerful,\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ from before. \u2502\n\n(5.) =There exists an evil= (notice abstract with its shade of meaning,\nwhich) =I have seen under the sun, like that which is erroneous= (\u05e9\u05d2\u05d2\u05d4,\nsee chapter v. 5\u00a0(6), \u2018an inadvertence\u2019), =which goes out= (the verb\nhas the contract-relative joined with it; the exact idea is that it is\nlike an inadvertence, such as might go out on the part of the ruler\u2019s\ncommand, the great Ruler being in the mind of the writer, but the\nproposition is general) =from the face of the caused to have power=\n(a \u2018providential mistake,\u2019 then).\n\n 6 Folly is set \u00b9in great \u2502 viz., the setting of false\n dignity, and the rich sit in \u2502 wisdom in high places, and the\n low place. \u2502 rich sit in low estate.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ in great heights. \u2502\n\n(6.) =Set= (that is, the ruler does this, but, as usual, this is not\nexpressed when the proposition is intended to have a general bearing)\n=the perverse fool= (generic\u2015\u2015\u2018perverse folly\u2019 then will be a good\nrendering) =in high places many a one, and the rich= (but the hiphil\nform is worthy of remark, \u2018persons that make rich\u2019) =in a low place=\n(\u200e\u200f\u05e9\u05b5\u05e4\u05b6\u05dc occurs so punctuated at Psalms cxxxvi.\u00a023 only, rendered \u2018low\nestate\u2019) =sit.=\n\n 7 I have seen servants upon \u2502 I have seen serfs on horseback,\n horses, and princes walking as \u2502 and princes walking like serfs\n servants upon the earth. \u2502 afoot.\n\n(7.) =I have observed servants= (slaves, that is, who ought to serve)\n=upon horseback, and princes walking as servants= (\u2018ought to do\u2019 is no\ndoubt involved in this expression\u2015\u2015\u2018servants\u2019 repeated being emphatic)\n=upon the earth= (_i.e._ afoot).\n\n 8 He that diggeth a pit \u2502 One digs a pit, into _that_ he\n shall fall into it; and whoso \u2502 falls: or breaks a hedge, gets\n breaketh an hedge, a serpent \u2502 bitten by a serpent.\n shall bite him. \u2502\n\n(8.) =Dig= (not necessarily either a participle or an imperative)\n=a pitfall= (\u05d2\u05d5\u05de\u05e5 occurs here only, and is said to be a late word; it\noccurs in Arabic and Syriac. That a \u2018pitfall\u2019 is meant is evident\nfrom the context), =in it= (emphatic) =he falls= (a sinister intent in\ndigging this pit is not necessarily implied, but the context shows that\nsuch is primarily aimed at: this is the more evident when we recollect\nthat \u05d7\u05b8\u05e4\u05b7\u05e8 is to \u2018dig,\u2019 and \u2666\u05d7\u05b8\u05e4\u05b5\u05e8 \u2018to bring to confusion\u2019); =and break a\nwall= (_i.e._ an enclosure, see Job xix.\u00a08 for the precise meaning of\nthe root, hence also Numbers xxii.\u00a024), =bites him a serpent= (as we\nsay, \u2018gets bitten by a serpent,\u2019 which would naturally lurk in loose\nstone walls).\n\n \u2666 \u201c\u05d7\u05b8\u05e4\u05b5\u05d3\u201d replaced with \u201c\u05d7\u05b8\u05e4\u05b5\u05e8\u201d\n\n 9 Whoso removeth stones \u2502 Moves stones, and finds them\n shall be hurt therewith; _and_ \u2502 in his way: chops wood, must\n he that cleaveth wood shall be \u2502 be careful with it.\n endangered thereby. \u2502\n\n(9.) =Cause to move= (\u2666hiphil participle of \u05e0\u05e1\u05e2, \u2018bring up\u2019\u2015\u2015see\nExodus xv.\u00a022) =stones, be troubled= (see Genesis xlv.\u00a05) =with them=\n(emphatic); =cleaving= (poel participle, occurs Psalms cxli.\u00a07; Isaiah\nlxiii.\u00a012 only) =wood= (plural \u2018logs of wood\u2019) =be endangered= (this\nis called a future niphal by the Masorets, who so point, but the real\nmeaning of \u05e1\u05db\u05df is evidently to \u2018take care,\u2019 so that the reading of the\nLXX. by \u2660\u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, \u2018he shall be endangered,\u2019 is _ad sensum_\u2015\u2015it is\nliterally \u2018he shall take care,\u2019) =with them= (emphatic, all these are\ninstances of either unexpected or unintentional results).\n\n \u2666 \u201chiphal\u201d replaced with \u201chiphil\u201d for consistency\n\n \u2660 \u201c\u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u201d replaced with \u201c\u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u201d\n\n 10 If the iron be blunt, and \u2502 If the axe be blunt, then\n he do not whet the edge, then \u2502 its edge had best be set: and\n must he put to more strength: \u2502 then if one of the strong hits\n but wisdom _is_ profitable to \u2502 prevail, the skilful hit was\n direct. \u2502 it.\n\n(10.) =If blunt= (\u05e7\u05d4\u05d4\u2015\u2015occurs Jeremiah xxxi. 29,\u00a030, and Ezekiel\nxviii.\u00a02\u2015\u2015in the sense of \u2018teeth set on edge:\u2019 there the Masorets\npoint as Kal, here as piel) =the iron, and he= (emphatic, but there\nis no nominative expressed to which this can refer) =not the faces=\n(usually considered to refer to the edges of the axe-head) =sharpen=\n(occurs Ezekiel xxi. 21\u00a0(26), as pilpel of \u05e7\u05dc\u05dc, which has the meaning\nof \u2018lightness,\u2019 \u2018swiftness;\u2019 the word occurs as an adjective, Numbers\nxxi.\u00a05, in the sense of \u2018light,\u2019\u2015\u2015our soul loatheth this _light_ food)\n=and strong ones will prevail= (singular, If \u2018strong ones\u2019 be the\nnominative, this is an instance of a distributive plural\u2015\u2015one or more\nof these will; the future piel has the meaning \u2018_strengthen_,\u2019 the\nKal \u2018_to prevail_,\u2019 but we can only consider this as a Masoretic\nconjecture) =and profit causing success= (but the LXX. render by\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03af\u03b1, \u2018advantage\u2019\u2015\u2015see below; but \u05db\u05e9\u05e8 occurs only Esther viii.\u00a05,\nand chapter xi.\u00a06; see however \u05db\u05e9\u05e8\u05d5\u05df, which occurs chapter ii.\u00a021, iv.\u00a04,\nv. 10\u00a0(11), which we have seen occasion to render \u2018success;\u2019 hence\nthe meaning, \u2018the made successful is\u2019) =wisdom= (not generic, _i.e._\na single instance of it). The general scope is quite clear; it is\nthe superiority of wisdom to brute force, and so all commentators and\nversions understand it; but the exact rendering is very difficult;\u2015\u2015all\nthe versions are perplexed and discordant, and the copies of the LXX.\nhave an important textual variation. We will give these at length,\nbeginning with the LXX. as the most ancient. This reads\u2015\u2015\u1f18\u1f70\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03c0\u03ad\u03c3\u1fc3\n\u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03b9\u03b4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1\u03be\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 (which B. reads \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50, and E. X. \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2) \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u2015\u2015\u2018If the axe-head should fall off, then the man troubles\nhis countenance, and he must put forth more strength; and wisdom is the\nadvantage of an energetic man.\u2019 The Syriac version, (\u2021 Syriac phrase)\n\u2015\u2015\u2018If the axe be blunt, and it troubles the face and increases the\nslain; and the advantage of the diligent is wisdom.\u2019 The Vulgate\nreads\u2015\u2015\u2018Si retusam fuerit ferrum _et hoc non ut prius_ sed hebetatum\nfuerit, multo labore \u2666exacuetur et post industriam \u2660sequetur\nsapientia\u2019\u2015\u2015\u2018If the iron should be blunt, and this _not as before_,\nbut should have lost its edge, it is sharpened with much labour; and\nafter industry will follow wisdom.\u2019 Jerome renders the former part in\nconformity with the Vulgate; but after \u2018_non ut prius_,\u2019 which he also\nhas, runs on with\u2015\u2015\u2018sed conturbatum fuerit, virtutibus corroborabitur,\net reliquum fortitudinis sapientia est ...\u2019\u2015\u2015\u2018but is troubled; it shall\nbe strengthened by virtues, and the remainder of strength is wisdom.\u2019\nIt will be seen then that we have reason to suspect a corruption of the\ntext; and we think that the suspicious \u2018non ut prius\u2019 of the Vulgate\nand Jerome shows what this corruption was. We notice also that neither\nthe LXX. nor the Syriac take any notice of the negative. Guided by\nthe clue thus given, we will venture on the following conjectural\nemendation of the text. We imagine that it was originally written thus,\n\u200e\u200f\u05d5\u05d4\u05d5\u05d0 \u05dc\u05d4\u05e4\u05e0\u05d9\u05dd \u05e7\u05dc\u05e7\u05dc, the \u05d4 being written full\u2015\u2015like \u2663\u05e9\u05ea\u05e7\u05d9\u05e3 in chapter vi.\u00a010,\ncompare also chapter viii.\u00a01, Nehemiah ix.\u00a019\u2015\u2015and having the meaning,\n\u2018to _the_ faces\u2019 or \u2018edges.\u2019 Such an insertion of \u05d4 being unusual,\nwould cause suspicion to rest on the passage, and the transition to\n\u200e\u200f\u05dc\u05d0 \u05e4\u05e0\u05d9\u05dd would be easy. This, however, was but one out of many possible\nconjectures, and the Vulgate has preserved another, namely, that\nthe reading was \u05dc\u05e4\u05e0\u05d9, \u2018as before,\u2019 and, as was common with the ancient\nversions, inserts both the reading and its variant into the text. This\nconjectural change in the text will make all quite clear; the passage\nwill then read thus\u2015\u2015\u2018If the iron be blunt, and so it is as to its\nedges whetted, and so too blows prevail, and so too an advantage is\nthe success [due to an instance] of wisdom,\u2019 _i.e._ in this case a\nskilful hit. That is, if the axe be blunt, grinding, force, and skill\ntogether, will produce the required result. No doubt this can only be\nput forth as mere conjecture, but, in the absence of any satisfactory\ninterpretation, may be admitted; for, in fact, arbitrary senses given\nto words, and the insertions of explanatory glosses not immediately\ndeducible from the original, do amount to alterations of the text. None\nof the other ancient Greek versions have been preserved in this place,\nexcept a reading of Symmachus, which is very curious, showing still\nmore forcibly how early the difficulty must have arisen, since it is at\nbest a reading _ad sensum_ only, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd,\n\u2018and the nimble advances into wisdom.\u2019\n\n \u2666 \u201cexacueter\u201d replaced with \u201cexacuetur\u201d\n\n \u2660 \u201csequeter\u201d replaced with \u201csequetur\u201d\n\n \u2663 \u201c\u05e9\u05d4\u05ea\u05e7\u05d9\u05e3\u201d replaced with \u201c\u05e9\u05ea\u05e7\u05d9\u05e3\u201d\n\n 11 Surely the serpent will \u2502 If bites the snake before the\n bite without enchantment; and \u2502 charm is sung, then what is the\n \u00b9a babbler is no better. \u2502 profit of the skilful tongue?\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ the master of \u2502\n the tongue. \u2502\n\n(11.) =If bites the serpent= (with the article, and therefore\ngeneric\u2015\u2015serpents generally) =without= (\u05d1\u05dc\u05d5\u05d0; we may well suppose that\nthe full form is used not without meaning; it occurs Isaiah lv. 1,\u00a02,\nin the sense of \u2018the absence of,\u2019 which well suits the context here,)\n=whispering= (occurs Isaiah ii. 3,\u00a020, and xxvi.\u00a06; Jeremiah viii.\u00a017,\netc.), =and= there is =nothing= of =profit to the master of the tongue=\n(with article, hence generic. The rendering of the Authorized Version\nis derived from the Vulgate. The alliteration shows that the aphorism\nis equivocal, it is the converse of the former: skill will help force,\nbut after the mischief is done skill is of no use. There is also here\nan ironical depreciation of serpent-charming).\n\n 12 The words of a wise man\u2019s \u2502 Each word of a wise man\u2019s\n mouth _are_ \u00b9gracious; but the \u2502 mouth is grace, but the lips of\n lips of a fool will swallow up \u2502 a fool will swallow him apace.\n himself. \u2502\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ grace. \u2502\n\n(12.) =The words of= (in the usual sense of reasonings) =the mouth of\na wise man, a favour= (_i.e._ are each one so), =but the lips of= the\n=foolish swallow him= (future piel, occurs 2\u00a0Samuel xx. 19,\u00a020; Job\nviii.\u00a018, in the sense of \u2018destroy;\u2019 hence the LXX. render \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd;\ncompare Matthew xiv.\u00a030, xviii.\u00a06. Here too we have a singular verb\nwith a plural noun\u2015\u2015\u2018any one of a fool\u2019s words may be his destruction.\u2019\nNotice also the implied difference\u2015\u2015\u2018a fool talks with his _lips_, a\nwise man _reasons_\u2019).\n\n 13 The beginning of the \u2502 The beginnings of _his_\n words of his mouth _is_ \u2502 reasonings are each a wise\n foolishness: and the end of \u2502 error, and the result of what\n his \u00b9talk _is_ mischievous \u2502 he says are disappointed\n madness. \u2502 expectations, every one of\n \u2502 which is mischievous.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ his mouth. \u2502\n\n(13.) =The beginning= of =words= (or reasonings) =of his mouth,\nelaborate follies= (\u05e1\u05db\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea in its usual sense; and the whole being\nwithout the article gives the meaning\u2015\u2015\u2018Each beginning of the\nreasonings of his mouth is one out of a number of elaborate follies;\nhis reasonings are themselves elaborate mistakes\u2019), =and an end= (\u05d0\u05d7\u05e8\u05d9\u05ea\nis used to signify the last end, Numbers xxiii.\u00a010; see chapter vii.\u00a08)\n=of his mouth= (repeated, \u2018that same mouth\u2019) =disappointed expectations=\n(\u200e\u200f\u05d4\u05d5\u05dc\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea, in its usual sense in this book) =mischievous= (singular, each\none of which is so).\n\n 14 A fool also \u00b9is full of \u2502 And the wise fool multiplies\n words: a man cannot tell what \u2502 his reasons, though no man\n shall be; and what shall be \u2502 understands the present, and\n after him, who can tell him? \u2502 the future results no one can\n \u2502 declare.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ multiplieth words.\u2502\n\n(14.) =And the elaborate fool multiplies words, not knowing= (_i.e._\nwhen there is _no_ knowing by) =the man= (humanity generally) =what\nit is which will be= (but the Alexandrine and Vatican read apparently\n\u200e\u200f\u05e9\u05d4\u05d9\u05d4, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, which A\u00b2. E.\u00a0X. alter to \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u2018which shall be.\u2019\nThe Syriac supports the LXX., but Symmachus reads \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f10\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u2015\u2015\u2018the things which were before, but not those which\ncome after\u2019\u2015\u2015which the Vulgate follows. Jerome, however, follows the\nLXX. against the Vulgate; nevertheless we should not be inclined to\nalter the text, but would rather regard the reading of the LXX. as _ad\nsensum_\u2015\u2015the object being to give the difference between the contracted\nand full relative and the subjunctive meaning attaching to this form.\nThus \u05e9\u05d9\u05d4\u05d9\u05d4 is that which _is_ or exists, the \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f44\u03bd\u2015\u2015\u2018he does not know\nthen the real state of things\u2019\u2015\u2015is the meaning; for with this agrees\nwhat follows), =and which= (full relative) =is= (or will be) =from\nafter him= (but there is no reason why \u05de\u05d0\u05d7\u05e8\u05d9\u05d5 should not be considered\nas a participial noun, as the LXX. make it, and then we must render the\n\u2018future\u2019 in the sense of what occurs in the future) =who tells to him=\n(emphatic). The meaning of the passage is\u2015\u2015\u2018That the elaborate fool\nmultiplies reasonings, which are sure to have an evil tendency, as they\nare intended to promote his elaborate folly, although man generally\nneither understands the meaning of the present, nor can divine the\nfuture.\u2019 The difficulty of the sentence arises from the play between\n\u200e\u200f\u05de\u05d4\u05be\u05e9\u05d9\u05d4\u05d9\u05d4 and \u05de\u05d0\u05d7\u05e8\u05d9\u05d5.\n\n 15 The labour of the foolish \u2502 A toil of fools will\n wearieth every one of them, \u2502 weary them each one, who has\n because he knoweth not how to \u2502 altogether lost his way.\n go to the city. \u2502\n\n(15.) =The toil= (_i.e._ \u2018anxious care,\u2019 which is the meaning of this\nword) =of the foolish ones wearies him= (another distributive plural;\nthe result of these various fools\u2019 labour is weariness to each of\nthem. It is also to be noticed that the verb is feminine, and yet \u05e2\u05de\u05dc\nis usually masculine. Several nouns are, Stuart observes, masculine\nor feminine _ad libitum scriptoris_. There is however, we suspect,\na perceptible difference in the meaning in these cases. The stricter\nagreement denotes closer union between the verb and its nominative;\nand if this be so, the idea of the passage may be rendered by \u2018the toil\nof the fools is self-weariness\u2019), =which= (full relative, equivalent\ntherefore to \u2018because\u2019 he does) =not know= (or is instructed) =to= (in\norder to) =go towards= (\u05d0\u05dc, LXX. \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2) =a city= (not _the_ city, as is\nusually rendered.) The obvious meaning would surely be, that the fool\nhad lost his way, and hence as he is going wrong he has simply his\ntrouble for his pains.\n\n 16 \u00b6 Woe to thee, O land, \u2502 Ah! woe to thee, O country,\n when thy king _is_ a child, \u2502 whose king is a child, and thy\n and thy princes eat in the \u2502 princes eat in the morning.\n morning! \u2502\n\n(16.) =Woe to thee, land, whose king= is =a lad, and thy princes in\nthe morning eat= (_i.e._ \u2018feast,\u2019 the morning being the proper time for\nwork, and not for feasting. Compare Isaiah v.\u00a011).\n\n 17 \u00b6 Blessed =art= thou, \u2502 Blessed art thou, O country,\n O land, when thy king _is_ \u2502 whose king is the son of\n the son of nobles, and thy \u2502 nobles, and thy princes eat in\n princes eat in due season, \u2502 due season, for strength and\n for strength, and not for \u2502 not for drunkenness.\n drunkenness! \u2502\n\n(17.) =Blessings on thee, land, whose king= is =a son of nobles=\n(\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5, LXX.), =and thy princes in season eat, and not in\ndrunkenness= (but the LXX. render \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u2015\u2015\u2018and shall\nnot be ashamed\u2019\u2015\u2015reading the \u05d1\u05e9\u05ea\u05d9 as though the \u05d1 were radical, and\nderiving the word from \u05d1\u05d5\u05e9, \u2018to be ashamed.\u2019 Thus is probably preserved\nan intentional equivoke.)\n\n 18 \u00b6 By much slothfulness \u2502 When they are idle, there\n the building decayeth; and \u2502 is a slender support, and\n through idleness of the hands \u2502 when both hands hang down,\n the house droppeth through. \u2502 the roof-tree will weep.\n\n(18.) =By idlenesses= (Proverbs xix.\u00a015 only; but \u05e2\u05e6\u05dc, \u2018the sluggard,\u2019\noccurs continually in Proverbs, and once as a verb, Judges xviii.\u00a09.\nThe word is pointed as a dual, but the meaning \u2018idlenesses\u2019 suits the\ncontext) =decayeth= (\u05de\u05db\u05da, occurs Kal, Psalms cvi.\u00a043, niphal here, and\nhiphil Job xxiv.\u00a024, _all_) =the beam= (\u05d4\u05b7\u05de\u05b0\u05bc\u05e7\u05b8\u05e8\u05b6\u05d4 here only, but the word\ndiffers only in pointing from \u05d4\u05b7\u05de\u05b4\u05e7\u05b0\u05e8\u05b6\u05d4\u2015\u2015the hap, and the equivoke could\nhardly be unintentional), =and in lowness of hands drops= (occurs Job\nxvi.\u00a020, Psalms cxix.\u00a028; but notice the readings of the LXX., which\nare peculiar) =the house.=\n\n 19 \u00b6 A feast is made for \u2502 For pleasure they make bread,\n laughter, and wine \u00b9maketh \u2502 and wine rejoices life, but\n merry: but money answereth all \u2502 silver subserves with respect\n _things_. \u2502 to everything.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ maketh glad the \u2502\n life. \u2502\n\n(19.) =To laughter= are =makings= (which the LXX. renders by \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd,\n\u2018they make\u2019) =bread and wine rejoices= (the Masorets consider this a\npiel and transitive) =lives, and the silver= (with the article, and\ntherefore generic\u2015\u2015money) =answereth with respect to all things=\n(both senses of \u05d9\u05e2\u05e0\u05d4 are given in the versions of the LXX. \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9,\nAlexandrine, \u2018humbly obeys,\u2019 and \u03c4\u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, Vatican, \u2018will humble.\u2019\nThe Alexandrine also reads \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1. The Syriac reads also double,\nas do some copies of the LXX.\u2015\u2015(\u2021 Syriac phrase)\u2015\u2015\u2018and money oppresses \nand leads them astray in all.\u2019 The Alexandrine reading, however, makes \nquite consistent sense, and squares entirely with the rest of the \npassage. Bread is prepared for pleasure rather than support, wine \nrejoices hearts already merry\u2015\u2015its real use is to cheer those who are \nfaint with toil or sorrow; and silver, which one can neither eat nor \ndrink, is preferred to bread and wine and everything else).\n\n 20 \u00b6 Curse not the king, \u2502 Also, even in thy conscience\n no not in thy \u00b9thought; and \u2502 a king do not revile, and in\n curse not the rich in thy \u2502 secret places of the bed-chamber\n bed-chamber: for a bird of the \u2502 neither do thou revile the rich:\n air shall carry the voice, and \u2502 for a bird of the heavens will\n that which hath wings shall \u2502 carry out the rumour, and the\n tell the matter. \u2502 swift one on wings shall tell\n \u2502 the matter.\n \u00b9 _Or_, conscience. \u2502\n\n(20.) =Also in thy understanding= (occurs Daniel i. 4,\u00a017; 2\u00a0Chronicles\ni. 10, 11,\u00a012 only, and always with this meaning: all the ancient\nversions follow the idea contained in the LXX.\u2019s \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, which\nwould seem to give the notion that this curse was a reasonable, not a\nhasty one) =a king= (not the king, any king) =do not curse; and in the\ninnermost= of =thy bed-chambers do not= either =curse the rich= person\n(the idea of cursing or reviling is of course here prominent), =for a\nbird of the heavens shall cause to convey the voice= (with \u05d0\u05ea and the\narticle, with \u2018respect to that voice\u2019 is the meaning\u2015\u2015the rumour will\nget abroad in a mysterious way) =and a lord of the winged ones= (the\nMasorets wish to omit the article in \u05d4\u05af\u05db\u05e0\u05e4\u05d9\u05dd) =shall tell the matter=\n(the LXX. note the emphasis given by \u05d4 and the articles by adding the\npronoun \u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6, which is simply a rendering _ad sensum_\u2015\u2015\u2019Treason, like\nmurder, will out\u2019).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XI.\n\n\n CAST thy bread \u00b9upon the \u2502 CAST thy bread on the face\n waters: for thou shalt find it \u2502 of the waters: for in the\n after many days. \u2502 multitude of the days\u2015\u2015thou\n \u2502 wilt find it.\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ upon the face of \u2502\n the waters. \u2502\n\nXI. (1.) =Cast thy bread upon the face of the waters, for in the\nmultitude of the days thou shalt find it.= (This passage is usually\ntaken as an exhortation to liberality. Hengstenberg however understands\nit to refer to ships and their cargo of grain. \u2666Z\u00f6ckler refers to\nProverbs xi.\u00a024 for a similar sentiment, and Luke xvi.\u00a09; the idea is\nclearly that of an unexpected return).\n\n \u2666 \u201cZ\u00f6kler\u201d replaced with \u201cZ\u00f6ckler\u201d for consistency\n\n 2 Give a portion to seven, \u2502 Give a share all round, and\n and also to eight; for thou \u2502 to some one else beside, for\n knowest not what evil shall be \u2502 thou dost not know what sort of\n upon the earth. \u2502 mischief shall be in the earth.\n\n(2.) =Give a portion to seven, and also to eight= (see Job v.\u00a019, Micah\nv. 4\u00a0(5), for similar idioms; it is equivalent to our \u2018everybody, and\nsome one else\u2019), =for not dost thou know what shall be mischief upon\nthe earth.=\n\n 3 If the clouds be full of \u2502 IF the clouds are FULL of\n rain, they empty _themselves_ \u2502 rain, they empty themselves\n upon the earth: and if the \u2502 upon the earth; and if falls\n tree fall toward the south, or \u2502 the tree by the south [wind] or\n toward the north, in the place \u2502 by the north\u2015\u2015the place where\n where the tree falleth, there \u2502 the tree _falls_ is just where\n it shall be. \u2502 it will be.\n\n(3.) =If they are full the clouds= (\u05e2\u05d1 is the thick vapour that appears\nand disappears) =rain= (\u05d2\u05e9\u05dd is the storm rain which does mischief or\ngood according to circumstances, see chapter xii.\u00a02) =they cause to\nempty= (clouds do not always prognosticate rain; and even if they\nshould, a storm may do mischief rather than good); =and if is falling\na tree in the south=, or =if= either =in the north= (\u2018_if_\u2019 is hence\nemphatic) =the place where= may =fall= (contracted relative) =the tree=\n(now with the article, for it is the falling tree spoken of above)\n=there it will be= (the unusual form \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d0 has troubled the commentators\nmuch: Moses Stuart pronounces the \u05d0 to be otiose, which is not\nexplaining the form at all. But may not the following be a sufficient\nexplanation?\u2015\u2015\u05d4\u05d5\u05d0 in this book is used in the sense of the existence of\nan object: might not Koheleth coin a verb by adding the \u05d9 of the\npresent tense, with the idea, \u2018makes itself be\u2019?\u2015\u2015compare also Joshua\nx.\u00a024, Isaiah xxiii.\u00a012, where this otiose \u05d0 occurs; the rendering of\nthe LXX. by \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 shows how they understood it, and so also the Syriac\nand Vulgate. The whole sentence is ironical, when the tree has really\nfallen, then we know which way it fell. The Masoretic accentuation of\nthis passage is peculiar\u2015\u2015we should naturally have expected them to\nhave divided the verse into two clauses, at \u05d9\u05e8\u05d9\u05e7\u05d5, \u2018they empty,\u2019 instead\nof which the greatest pause occurs at \u2018north\u2019 \u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05e6\u05b8\u05bc\u05e4\u0591\u05d5\u05b9\u05df, but this method of\nreading renders the irony of the passage; the verse will then stand\nthus:\u2015\u2015\u2018If the clouds are full of rain they will empty themselves\nupon the earth, and so if the tree should incline to the south, or if\nit should incline to the north\u2015\u2015the place where it falls is where it\nreally will _be_.\u2019 The accentuation is rhetorical rather than logical,\nand the Masorets have shown great taste in their pointing).\n\n 4 He that observeth the wind \u2502 Looking at the wind one does\n shall not sow; and he that \u2502 not sow, and gazing into the\n regardeth the clouds shall not \u2502 clouds one does not reap.\n reap. \u2502\n\n(4.) =Regarding wind! not does= one =sow= (impersonal), =and looking\ninto clouds neither is one reaping= (we must attend to the precise form\nof the words in this sentence in order to gather the true nature of the\nsarcasm hidden in it; the LXX. have clearly marked these forms in their\nrendering).\n\n 5 As thou knowest not what \u2502 Just as thou art not one who\n _is_ the way of the spirit, \u2502 knows the way of the spirit,\n _nor_ how the bones _do grow_ \u2502 how the bones are in the womb\n in the womb of her that is \u2502 of the pregnant: just so thou\n with child: even so thou \u2502 knowest nothing with respect\n knowest not the works of God \u2502 to the working of the Almighty,\n who maketh all. \u2502 who is working out the whole.\n\n(5.) =As thou art not one who knows what is the way of the spirit,\nlike the bones in the womb of the pregnant, just so, thou dost not\nknow, with respect to the working of the Deity, Who is He that= (full\nrelative) =performs with regard to the whole.= (The LXX. render the\nfirst part \u1f10\u03bd \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9\u03bd, \u2018among whom none knows,\u2019 taking\nno notice of the pronoun _thou_. Did they read the \u05db at the end of \u05d0\u05d9\u05e0\u05da\nas beginning the following word? That the sentence is equivocal, and\nthat this equivoke helps the general drift of the passage is not to be\ndoubted.) The subject now returns to the previous train of argument,\nwhich directs man to do his duty in submission to the inscrutable ways\nof Providence.\n\n 6 In the morning sow thy \u2502 In the morning sow the seed\n seed, and in the evening \u2502 thou oughtest, and to the\n withhold not thine hand: \u2502 evening do not withhold thy\n for thou knowest not whether \u2502 hand, for THOU canst not tell\n \u00b9shall prosper, either this \u2502 if it shall succeed, whether\n or that, or whether they both \u2502 this or another, or if all of\n _shall be_ alike good. \u2502 it shall be alike good.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ shall be right. \u2502\n\n(6.) =In the morning sow thy seed= (with \u05d0\u05ea, \u2018sow that seed which you\nought to sow,\u2019) =and to the evening= (note the change of preposition,\nit renders this passage a better introduction to what is to follow:\nthere is a reference to the evening of life) =do not withhold thy\nhand= (compare chapter vii.\u00a018, where \u05d0\u05ea is used with this verb, and\nobserve the difference in meaning), =for it is not thou who knowest=\n(a repetition of this clause from the preceding verse) =whether= (but\ncompare 1\u00a0Kings xxii.\u00a024, and 1\u00a0Samuel ix.\u00a018, showing that the meaning\nwith \u05d6\u05d4 is \u2018what way\u2019 or \u2018how,\u2019) =succeeds= (see chapter x.\u00a010 and\nreferences) =the this or this, or if both of them as one= (\u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc \u2018to the same,\u2019 LXX.) =good= (plural; sowing is no doubt taken\ngenerically as a type of human labour, performed in expectation of a\nfuture harvest, and the Preacher directs us to do our appointed work in\npatience, and from morning till evening, _i.e._ the whole day through,\nsure of a good result. The morning or the evening sowing will, one or\nother, perhaps both, succeed; the transition to what follows is quite\nnatural).\n\n 7 \u00b6 Truly the light _is_ \u2502 Yes, sweet is the light, and\n sweet, and a pleasant _thing \u2502 a good to the eyes the sight of\n it is_ for the eyes to behold \u2502 the sun;\n the sun: \u2502\n\n(7.) =And sweet= (but the participial form \u2018sweetened\u2019 is not to be\naltogether overlooked; thus, \u2018is sweetened\u2019) =the light, and a good to\nthe eyes to behold= (_i.e._ to have sight of) =the sun=, (for life _is_\na blessing, and this is a reply to the equivocal \u2018I said in my heart\u2019\nof chapter iii.\u00a018 and iv.\u00a03).\n\n 8 But if a man live many \u2502 yet if man lives to the very\n years, _and_ rejoice in them \u2502 longest limit of his days, in\n all; yet let him remember the \u2502 all of them he may rejoice, and\n days of darkness; for they \u2502 remember with respect to the\n shall be many. All that cometh \u2502 days of darkness that they\n _is_ vanity. \u2502 shall be many too: all that is\n \u2502 coming is evanescent.\n\n(8.) =For if the years are many= (that is, if his years are as long as\nthey can be) =the man= (humanity generally) =in all of them rejoices=\n(but as the noun stands before the verb, it is emphatic, and in this\ncase, as the verb is preceded by \u05d1\u05db\u05dc\u05dd, is potential\u2015\u2015\u2018may rejoice\u2019),\n=and remembers with regard to days of darkness= (that is, forgetfulness,\nthe days when he is forgotten, and also of sorrow or sadness, for both\nmeanings are combined) =for the many= (repeating the above, with the\nsense, then, \u2018for very many also,\u2019) =will they be, all which may come=\n(\u2018every coming event\u2019 that is, as the contracted relative shows) =is\nvanity= (evanescent).\n\n 9 \u00b6 Rejoice, O young man, in \u2502 Rejoice, O choice young man,\n thy youth; and let thy heart \u2502 in the days of thy youth, and\n cheer thee in the days of thy \u2502 let thy heart do thee good in\n youth, and walk in the ways of \u2502 the choice days of thy youth,\n thine heart, and in the sight \u2502 and walk in ways of thy heart\n of thine eyes: but know thou, \u2502 and sights of thine eyes, and\n that for all these _things_ \u2502 know how, on account of all\n God will bring thee into \u2502 these things thou shalt be\n judgment. \u2502 summoned of the Almighty to\n \u2502 judgment.\n\n(9.) =Rejoice, young man= (but \u05d1\u05d7\u05e8 has the sense of \u2018_choice_,\u2019 and\nthis is to be remembered here) =in thy youth= (but \u05d9\u05dc\u05d3\u05d5\u05ea occurs here\nonly; see however Psalms cx.\u00a03, which the Masorets point \u05d9\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05d3\u05bb\u05ea\u05b6\u05da\u05b8; this\nword is the abstract of the word \u05d9\u05dc\u05d3, which means \u2018to beget;\u2019 hence the\nexact meaning of \u05d9\u05dc\u05d3\u05d5\u05ea would be \u2018productions\u2019), =and cause good to thee=\nlet =thy heart in days of thy choosings= (for \u05d1\u05d7\u05d5\u05e8\u05d5\u05ea also occurs only\nhere and chapter xii.\u00a01, and youth therefore is so designated, because\nit is a time of choice), =and walk in ways of thy heart, and seeings\nof thine eyes; and know how, upon all these, thou art caused to come=\nof =the Deity into judgment.= (The LXX. have here the gloss \u1f04\u03bc\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2\u2015\u2015\u2018in\nthe ways of thine heart _blameless_;\u2019 but the Syriac Hexaplar notes\nthis gloss with an asterisk, so that it is clearly not entitled to any\nweight; it was no doubt a subsequent addition to the text, because the\nmeaning was not seen, as indeed it cannot be, without a reference to\nthe double meanings of the Hebrew words.)\n\n 10 Therefore remove \u00b9sorrow \u2502 Put away disappointment from\n from thy heart, and put away \u2502 thine heart, and purge away\n evil from thy flesh: for \u2502 mischief from thy flesh, for\n childhood and youth _are_ \u2502 childhood and early\n vanity. \u2502 expectations are evanescent.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Or_, anger. \u2502\n\n(10.) =And put away disappointment= (\u05db\u05e2\u05e1, chapter i.\u00a018, references)\n=from thy heart, and pass away evil from thy flesh; because the\nproducings and the dawnings= (\u05e9\u05d7\u05e8\u05d5\u05ea occurs here only; for the meaning\nof the root see Job vii.\u00a021, Psalms lxxviii.\u00a034, Proverbs xiii.\u00a024. So\nthe meaning of the word here is \u2018early seekings,\u2019 which the LXX. render\n_ad sensum_ by \u1f21 \u1f04\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1, \u2018the ignorance;\u2019 and the Syriac by (\u2021 Syriac \nphrase) \u2018because childhood and not to know\u2019) =is vanity= (singular; \n\u2018each one is so,\u2019 as a plural precedes). That the passage is ironical \nwe cannot doubt, but it is good advice, even the very best, as it \nstands. Youth is the time of choice, the time of productions, or, if \none will\u2015\u2015and the expression will preserve an equivoke similar to that \nin the text\u2015\u2015_conception_; but this time is evanescent. We choose our \npath in life when young, but then we cannot go back. He who changes his \ncalling once rarely succeeds in it, and never if he chooses twice.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XII.\n\n\n REMEMBER now thy Creator in \u2502 But remember thy Creator in\n the days of thy youth, while \u2502 the days of thy choice youth,\n the evil days come not, nor \u2502 while these evil days come not,\n the years draw nigh, when thou \u2502 and these years approach, of\n shalt say, I have no pleasure \u2502 which thou shalt say there is\n in them; \u2502 nothing for me in THEM of happy\n \u2502 providence;\n\nXII. (1.) =And remember with respect to thy Creators= (but \u05d1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d0 is\n\u2018creating\u2019\u2015\u2015see Isaiah xl.\u00a028, xli.\u00a05, xlv. 7,\u00a018, where the participle\npoel occurs; hence, according to the strict meaning, it ought to be\n_thy creatings_) =in days of thy choosings= (with the same meaning as\nbefore; the sentence is doubtless intentionally equivocal) =until not\ncome days of the evil= (\u2018the evil days\u2019 is quite correct, but then\nwe must remember the emphasis falls on \u2018evil,\u2019 not \u2018days\u2019), =and are\ncaused to draw near years= (not \u2018the years,\u2019 which spoils the pathos of\nthe passage\u2015\u2015years are opposed to days above) =which thou sayest there\nis nothing to me= (emphatic) =in them of delight= (but not without a\nshade of the technical meaning, \u2018providence\u2019\u2015\u2015as man grows older he\n_expects_ no delight; no great good fortune can come to him).\n\n 2 While the sun, or the \u2502 before, too, is darkened the\n light, or the moon, or the \u2502 sun, and the light, and the\n stars, be not darkened, nor \u2502 moon, and the stars; and the\n the clouds return after the \u2502 storm-cloud returns after the\n rain: \u2502 tempest.\n\n(2.) =Until not darkened= (_i.e._ before this happens) is =the sun,=\nand =the light= (referring back to chapter xi.\u00a07), =and the moon, and\nthe stars, and return the clouds= (_storm_-clouds) =after the rain=\n(the tempestuous rain, _i.e._ storm succeeds storm).\n\n 3 In the day when the \u2502 In a day when sore moved are\n keepers of the house shall \u2502 the keepers of the house,\n tremble, and the strong men \u2502 and the mighty mortals sadly\n shall bow themselves, and the \u2502 perplex themselves, and the\n grinders \u00b9cease because they \u2502 grinding maids are idle because\n are few, and those that look \u2502 there is little to grind, and\n out of the windows be darkened,\u2502 the ladies look into gloom\n \u2502 through the windows;\n \u00b9 _Or_, fail because they \u2502\n _grind_ little. \u2502\n\n(3.) =In a day= (not _the_ day, which again spoils the pathos. Koheleth\nis now going to give specimens of evil days) =when disturbed are,=\n(occurs only Esther iii.\u00a09, and Habakkuk ii.\u00a07, pilpel. This word, \u05e9\u05d9\u05d6\u05e2\u05d5,\nhas been said to be a late one, but \u05d6\u05e2\u05d5\u05d4 occurs Deuteronomy xxviii.\u00a0\u266625;\nthe idea is \u2018commotion,\u2019 when they are or may be in commotion) =the\nkeepers of the house, and perplex themselves= (see chapter i.\u00a015,\nvii.\u00a013), =the men= (\u05d0\u05e0\u05d5\u05e9\u05d9, \u2018weak men\u2019) of =the strength= (it is quite\nconsistent with the character of the writer to join such terms as these\ntogether, with an oblique sarcasm hidden beneath them), =and cease=\n(here only, a so-called late word) =the grinding maids, because they\nare diminished, and are dark the gazers= (feminine) =in the windows=\n((1.)\u00a0the keepers are the slaves; (2.)\u00a0the strong men the masters;\n(3.)\u00a0the grinding maids the women servants; (4)\u00a0the gazers are the\nladies\u2015\u2015compare Judges v.\u00a028; thus is comprised the whole family.)\n\n \u2666 \u201c5\u201d replaced with \u201c25\u201d\n\n 4 And the doors shall be \u2502 and closed are the doors in the\n shut in the streets, when the \u2502 street in the failing sound of\n sound of the grinding is low, \u2502 the mill, and one starts at the\n and he shall rise up at the \u2502 note of a sparrow, and hushed\n voice of the bird, and all the \u2502 are all the daughters of song.\n daughters of musick shall be \u2502\n brought low; \u2502\n\n(4.) =And shut are the doors in the street, in the failing voice of\nthe grinding,= (or \u2018grinding maid\u2019), =and rises up= (as there is no\nnominative we must take it as impersonal, \u2018one rises up\u2019) =to a voice\nof the sparrow, and brought low= (see Isaiah ii.\u00a09, and also xxix.\u00a04,\nwhere the word is used of a muttering voice) =all daughters of the\nsong.=\n\n 5 Also _when_ they shall \u2502 Moreover, the height is\n be afraid of _that which is_ \u2502 dreaded, and great fears are\n high, and fears _shall be_ \u2502 in the way, and the almond\n in the way, and the almond \u2502 tree [the harbinger of spring]\n tree shall flourish, and the \u2502 is despised, and the little\n grasshopper shall be a burden, \u2502 grasshopper [of summer] is as\n and desire shall fail: because \u2502 a burden, and desire itself has\n man goeth to his long home, \u2502 fled, for man has departed to\n and the mourners go about the \u2502 his long home, and mourners go\n streets: \u2502 round the market:\n\n(5.) =Moreover= (this marks a transition in the catalogue of ills,\nthe former were external evils\u2015\u2015these come from within) =also from the\nheight they fear; and terrors in the way; and the almond is despised;\nand burdens itself the grasshopper; and scattered the desire.= (This\npassage has exercised translators and commentators from the earliest\ntimes. The LXX. read\u2015\u2015\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b3\u03b5 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f55\u03c8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f44\u03c8\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03ac\u03bc\u03b2\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f41\u03b4\u1ff7,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f00\u03bc\u03cd\u03b3\u03b4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u2666\u03c0\u03b1\u03c7\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u1fc7 \u1f21 \u1f00\u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u1fc7 \u1f21\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c0\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2\u2015\u2015\u2018and they shall look from the height, and fears shall be\nin the way, and the almond-tree shall blossom, and the locust shall\nincrease, and the caper berry shall be scattered.\u2019 Here B. read \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u1f55\u03c8\u03bf\u03c2, \u2018into the height.\u2019 Aquila, \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u1ff3 \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u2018they shall tremble\na trembling;\u2019 and \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03c0\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f21 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c0\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2, \u2018the caper-berry shall\nfructify.\u2019 Now Symmachus, quoted by Jerome, read\u2015\u2015\u2018Super h\u00e6c etiam\nde eccelso videbunt, et error erit in via, et obdormiet vigilans, et\ndissolvetur spiritus fortitudo.\u2019 The last words are, however, preserved\nin Greek\u2015\u2015\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u1fc7 \u1f21 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2. \u2018On these they look from the height,\nand error will be in the way, and the watchful will fall asleep, and\nthe courage of the spirit will be dissolved.\u2019 The Syriac reads\u2015\u2015(\u2021 \nSyriac phrase)\u2015\u2015\u2018and also from the height they fear, and shall be \nterrified in the way, and the watch shall rush upon him, and the almond \nflourish, and the grasshopper be increased, and the caper shall burst, \nand desire shall cease.\u2019 We think that, with these different versions \nbefore us, all of which have preserved portions of the original, \nwe shall be able to conjecture the meaning of the text. It is just \npossible that originally the text read \u05de\u05d2\u05d1\u05d9\u05d4, and which might have been \naltered by displacing the \u05d9, and putting it on to the beginning of the \nnext word; for otherwise it is hard to suppose that the LXX. would go \nout of their way to alter a reading the meaning of which, as it stands, \nis so obvious. B. seems to have preserved this original reading. The \ndifference to the sense, however, is not great, as this looking upwards \nis evidently the effect of fear, as is shown by the next clause. This \nbegins with the word \u05d5\u05d7\u05ea\u05d7\u05ea\u05d9\u05dd\u2015\u2015a reduplicated and therefore emphasized \nform of \u05d7\u05ea\u05ea, to \u2018be dismayed,\u2019 or \u2018distracted,\u2019 as in the sense of \n\u2018broken in pieces;\u2019 hence the rendering of Aquila: \u2018These intense \ntremblings in the way\u2019\u2015\u2015which word \u2018way\u2019 surely we may interpret in the \nethical sense so common in this book of \u2018way of life\u2019\u2015\u2015are the natural \nresult of \u2018looking with fearfulness into the height.\u2019 Compare chapter \niii.\u00a021.\n\n \u2666 \u201c\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c7\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u1fc6\u201d replaced with \u201c\u03c0\u03b1\u03c7\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u1fc7\u201d\n\nThe next clause is still more obscure. The word \u05d9\u05e0\u05d0\u05e5 has, in all other\nplaces, the meaning \u2018to be despised,\u2019 or, in piel, to \u2018provoke.\u2019 The\nhiphil occurs here only, and is rendered, contrary to all analogy,\n\u2018flourish.\u2019 This is virtually to alter the text; and though the LXX.\nsupport this rendering, it is clear, from its various readings, that\nthe Greek text has also been tampered with. The original meaning\nhas apparently been preserved by Symmachus, and by the alternative\nrendering of the Syriac. Then as to \u2018the almond tree,\u2019 \u05d4\u05e9\u05e7\u05d3: the word\noccurs Genesis xliii.\u00a011, Numbers xvii. 8\u00a0(23), Jeremiah i.\u00a011, _all_.\nThis last passage gives probably the clue. The almond is the first\ntree to blossom in the coming spring, and is its harbinger; it is,\nas it were, in a hurry to welcome it; but this harbinger of spring\nis despised. As to the interpretation that the almond blossom is an\nallegorical description of the white hairs of an old man, it may be\nanswered that the almond blossom is pink, not white.\n\nThe next clause\u2015\u2015\u2018The grasshopper shall be a burden\u2019\u2015\u2015may be explained\nby noticing that the word \u05d7\u05d2\u05d1 occurs Numbers xiii.\u00a033, Isaiah xl.\u00a022,\nas the type of something small or insignificant. The only other two\nplaces, viz. Leviticus xi.\u00a022, 2\u00a0Chronicles vii.\u00a013, where the word\noccurs, show that this creature was edible, but might become a plague.\n\u200e\u200f\u05d9\u05e1\u05ea\u05d1\u05dc, the hithpael of \u05e1\u05d1\u05dc, occurs here only; \u2018burdens itself\u2019 is the\nexact meaning. The English Version no doubt gives here the true sense.\n\nThe next clause\u2015\u2015\u2018Desire shall fail\u2019\u2015\u2015may be explained in the same\nway. The word \u05ea\u05e4\u05e8, the hiphil of \u05e4\u05e8\u05e8, has always the meaning to \u2018break,\u2019\n\u2018disannul\u2019\u2015\u2015see Numbers xxx.\u00a013, Job xv.\u00a04, and hophal, Zechariah\nxi.\u00a011. Evidently Symmachus, with the reading \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u1fc7 \u1f21 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, has\npreserved the true meaning; for by \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 he has rendered the word\n\u200e\u200f\u05d0\u05d1\u05d9\u05d5\u05e0\u05d4, which occurs here only. Now we have no right to seek a strange\nsignification for this word when fair sense can be made according to\nthe ordinary derivations. \u05d0\u05d1\u05d9\u05d5\u05df occurs frequently in the sense of \u2018a poor\nperson\u2019\u2015\u2015the root being \u05d0\u05d1\u05d4, \u2018to wish,\u2019 or \u2018desire.\u2019 Jerome translates,\nas we see\u2015\u2015\u2018Et dissolvetur spiritus fortitudinis\u2019\u2015\u2015\u2018the spirit or\nbreath of the brave is dissolved,\u2019 which is _ad sensum_; so that\nwe may take \u05d0\u05d1\u05d9\u05d5\u05e0\u05d4 as simply an abstract of \u05d0\u05d1\u05d9\u05d5\u05df, with the meaning of\n\u2018wishfulness,\u2019 or \u2018longing.\u2019 Thus the reading of the LXX. is explained:\nCapers are provocatives of desire or appetite, and hence their Hebrew\nname. The \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 of Symmachus occurs only once again, at Isaiah\nliii.\u00a03, where it represents the Hebrew \u05de\u05db\u05d0\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea, \u2018griefs\u2019 (see Field\u2019s\nmost instructive note, Hexaplar _in loc._). Thus we venture to offer\nthe following as a probable explanation of this passage:\u2015\u2015\u2018Besides,\nthey look with dread on high, and great dismay is in the way, and\nthe almond tree (as a symbol of anticipation) is despised, and the\ngrasshopper (as a symbol of what is small and light) is burdensome,\nand the caper-berries (as the symbol of desires or longings) are\nscattered.\u2019 In the last clause the metaphorical out-tops the literal\nmeaning, as the Authorized Version renders, rightly abandoning the LXX.\nat this point.) =For= (or \u2018so\u2019) =advances= (\u05d4\u05dc\u05da, recalling chapter i.)\n=the man= (in the ordinary technical meaning of humanity) =to=\n(\u2018towards,\u2019 LXX. \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2, in its primary sense of motion to a place) =a\nhouse of his age= (\u05e2\u05dc\u05de\u05d5, having its ordinary sense of \u2018the age,\u2019 or\n\u03b1\u1f30\u1f7c\u03bd, as the LXX. render. The Authorized Version\u2019s \u2018long home\u2019 is a\nbeautiful paraphrase: his \u2018brief home\u2019 is his _house_; his \u2018long home\u2019\nhis _tomb_), =and go round in the street= (which the LXX. render \u1f10\u03bd\n\u1f00\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u1fb7, \u2018in the market\u2019) =the mourners= (those who mourn for the dead).\n\n 6 Or ever the silver cord \u2502 or ever the silver line runs\n be loosed, or the golden bowl \u2502 out, or the golden oil bowl is\n be broken, or the pitcher be \u2502 removed, or the pitcher is\n broken at the fountain, or the \u2502 shattered at the fountain, or\n wheel broken at the cistern. \u2502 wheel runs down at the well, or\n \u2502 the dust returns to the earth\n 7 Then shall the dust return \u2502 where it was, or the spirit is\n to the earth as it was: and \u2502 returning to the Almighty, its\n the spirit shall return unto \u2502 giver;\n God who gave it. \u2502\n\n(6. 7.) =Until not= (marking another break in the comparison) =is\nloosed= (according to the Kri, but this is only a conjecture of the\nMasorets; if correct, the niphal occurs here only, but the chetib, \u05d9\u05e8\u05d7\u05e7,\nmeans \u2018to be far from;\u2019 and thus the LXX. render by \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u1fc7, \u2018turned\nback,\u2019 and this appears to be correct) =a cord of the silver= (the\nHebrew idiom for our \u2018the _silver_ cord.\u2019 If we understand this to mean\nthe silver cord from which the lamp is suspended, we shall perceive\nthe allusion), =and is broken= (\u05ea\u05e8\u05e5, so far as the unpointed text is\nconcerned, might be feminine third future Kal of \u05e8\u05d5\u05e5, \u2018to run\u2019\u2015\u2015see\nGenesis xxix.\u00a012. The LXX. render by \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03bb\u03b9\u03b2\u1fc7, which occurs Sira\nxxxi.\u00a014 only; but it also may be from \u05e8\u05e6\u05e5\u2015\u2015see Judges ix.\u00a053. B. reads\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u1fc7; but this is an error, the origin of which is the similarity\nof the two words and the occurrence of them both in the same sentence),\n=a bowl= (\u05d2\u05dc\u05ea, used by Zechariah to denote the reservoir which\ncontained the oil for the golden candlestick of the temple, Zechariah\niv. 2,\u00a03. The LXX. render \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03ad\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, which also occurs Exodus xxxviii.\n16, \u2018for the round ornaments;\u2019 compare also Joshua xv.\u00a019, Judges i.\u00a015,\nwhere the word evidently signifies a reservoir for irrigation; \u05d2\u05dc\u05d4 also\noccurs 1\u00a0Kings vii.\u00a041, etc. If the \u2018golden bowl of the lamp\u2019 be taken\nas the most probable meaning, it will admirably suit the context),\n=of the gold= (the idea then is apparently that of a golden lamp\nbowl suspended by a silver cord; the lamp would be let down daily at\nleast; the golden bowl would then run down and be taken away to be\nreplenished); =and is shivered= (see Leviticus vi. 28\u00a0(21)) =a pitcher\nupon= (or over) =the spring= (occurs Isaiah xxxv.\u00a07, xlix.\u00a010, and is\nevidently a spring gushing out of the ground, as opposed to \u05d1\u05d5\u05e8, which\nis a sunken well or cistern), =and= is =run= (but the word is niphal,\nand the LXX. render \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c7\u03ac\u03c3\u1fc3, \u2018run down to\u2019) =the wheel= (with the\narticle, because the special wheel is meant which stands over the\ncistern) =towards= (\u05d0\u05dc, the preposition is different) =the well; and\nreturns the dust upon the earth as it was, and the spirit is returning=\n(both futures, but one written full, the other contracted; there is\nperhaps a slight distinction\u2015\u2015one also follows, the other goes before,\nits verb) =to= (\u05d0\u05dc; LXX. \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2) =the Deity who= (but full relative, as\ncompared with the contracted form above) =gave it= (feminine, to agree\nwith \u05e8\u05d5\u05d7; but, as we have so often seen, this close agreement gives a\npeculiar meaning; it is especially the divine _gift_).\n\n 8 \u00b6 Vanity of vanities, \u2502 so\u2015\u2015evanescence of evanescence,\n saith the Preacher; all _is_ \u2502 says the Preacher, the whole is\n vanity. \u2502 evanescent.\n\n(8.) =Vanity of vanities, said the Preacher= (with the article, the\nPreacher as such, generic), =the whole is vanity=.\n\nWe must notice, in interpreting these last verses that the acts\ndescribed are all such as take time, indeed but a short time, to\naccomplish, and occur frequently. The string of the lamp will be loosed\nalmost daily, and the lamp taken away; and surely no more poetical\nor impressive metaphor of death can be discovered than a lamp with\noil-bowl gone. Next we have the shattered pitcher\u2015\u2015an accident which\nmay happen at any time; and then the bucket running down into the\nwell, which is a comparatively frequent occurrence, and may well bring\nvividly before our minds the disappearance of one who was just before\nfamiliarly among us. That the bucket might be drawn up again full of\nliving water is necessarily not mentioned, but is one of those hidden\nsarcastic promises in which the book delights. The last two clauses are\njoined together by the simple \u2018and;\u2019 but there is clearly at this point\na transition from simile to metaphor, which the Authorized Version\nnotices. If indeed one likes to take it so, the simile is true enough\nof dust and wind, but the last clause discloses a deeper meaning. After\nall, the promises of a resurrection are but scarcely hidden behind the\napparent hopelessness of the conclusion arrived at.\n\nThe interpretation which makes the whole of this passage a metaphorical\ndescription of old age, comes from no more authoritative source than\nHagadic interpretation, as embodied in the Chaldee Targum. There is\nno proof that any allegory was intended, and the literal meaning is\nnot only to the purpose, but exceedingly touching and beautiful. The\narrangement of clauses, also, is highly artificial, which may be seen\nby counting them as marked off by the recurring forms \u2018or ever,\u2019\n\u2018also,\u2019 and the like.\n\n \u2502 SECTION V.\u2015\u2015_Epilogue._\n \u2502\n 9 And \u00b9moreover, because the \u2502 But there is something yet to\n Preacher was wise, he still \u2502 come: for the Preacher _was_\n taught the people knowledge; \u2502 wise; he yet taught knowledge\n yea, he gave good heed, and \u2502 with respect to men generally;\n sought out, _and_ set in order \u2502 and, pondering, he tracked out\n many proverbs. \u2502 the solution of [these] enigmas\n \u2502 to the utmost.\n \u00b9 _Or_, the more wise the \u2502\n Preacher was. \u2502\n\n(9.) =And for the rest= (for now is to be added something over and\nabove, to form a supplement to what went before; compare 1\u00a0Kings\nxiv.\u00a019 both for the Hebrew and Greek. As the word \u05d5\u05b0\u05d9\u05b9\u05ea\u05b5\u0595\u05e8 stands first, it\nis the subject: whether we point it as noun or participle will not make\nmuch difference to the sense, but the Masoretic pointing is best; they\nalso, with great taste, put a large distinctive accent on the word.\nThe meaning is, \u2018there is something yet to be added;\u2019) =that he was=\n(the contract-relative with subject verb) even a =Koheleth= (_i.e._\na preacher or gatherer) who was =wise, yet= (the LXX. render \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9,\n\u2018nevertheless,\u2019 but their rendering is very remarkable and we will\ndiscuss it at length presently) =taught knowledge= (and in the sense so\ncommon in this book, of the knowledge how to act under a given set of\ncircumstances) =with respect to the people= (not as usually understood\nthat he taught the people knowledge, but taught knowledge with regard\nto the people, the _collected_ body of humanity; compare chapter\niv.\u00a016) =and he gave heed, and he sought out= (Deuteronomy xiii.\u00a04;\nPsalms cxxxix.\u00a01) =an order= (chapter i.\u00a015, viii.\u00a018; this is the\nthird time of occurrence of this root, which is peculiar to this book.\nThe Masorets point as piel pret., it might however be a noun, as the\nLXX. render it, and we shall see reason presently for adopting this\ninterpretation) =of parables the many.=\n\n 10 The Preacher sought to \u2502 The Preacher, indeed, sought\n find out \u00b9acceptable words: \u2502 to discover the reasons for a\n and _that which was_ written \u2502 providence, but what he _has_\n _was_ upright, _even_ words of \u2502 written is the real matter of\n truth. \u2502 truth.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Hebrew_ words of delight. \u2502\n\n(10.) =Sought Koheleth to find words of providence= (\u05d3\u05d1\u05e8 and \u05d7\u05e4\u05e5, both\nin their usual technical senses) =and written= (full participial form)\n=uprightness, words of truth.= (The passage is very obscure; the LXX.\nrender \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u1f78\u03bd \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u1f41 \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u1f78\u03c2 [\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76] \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b5\u03bd\n\u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f56\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be\u03b9\u03c7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd. \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70,\n\u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb. \u2018and for the rest, because the Preacher was wise, and because\nhe taught knowledge with respect to the man, and his ear will trace\nout the orderly arrangement of parables.\u2019 Now, some curious features in\nthis rendering deserve notice\u2015\u2015the word \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd occurs 1\u00a0Timothy ii.\u00a09,\nand iii.\u00a02; it is used as a neuter, \u2018orderliness.\u2019 Again, \u05d0\u05ea \u05d4\u05e2\u05dd is\nrendered \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd. B. omits and A\u00b2 includes in brackets the\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76, so marked, in the text; A\u00b2 reads \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9; F.X. omit \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd; F. reads [for\n\u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd] \u03bb\u03b1\u1f78\u03bd; E. \u1f10\u03be\u03b9\u03c7\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c3\u03b5; and D. \u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd. Thus it appears probable\nthat the LXX. read \u05d9\u05d7\u05e7\u05e8 and as this future follows the past, we have the\nsense of the imperfect: they also translated \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, because\nthey considered \u05d4\u05e2\u05dd as used generically\u2015\u2015see chapter iv.\u00a016, and in the\nsame sense. If, however, the Hebrew text were altered, which would be\ndone simply by lengthening the jud \u05d9 into van \u05d5, the rendering of the\nLXX. would become unintelligible, and hence the variations, especially\nthat of E. Then \u05d0\u05d6\u05df, which is really nominative to \u05d9\u05d7\u05e7\u05e8, and emphatic as\nstanding before it, came to be regarded as a verb and pointed piel, the\nonly instance of such pointing that occurs, and then accenting \u05d5\u05b0\u05d7\u05b4\u05e7\u05b5\u05bc\u0594\u05e8 with\nzakeph, the Masorets made these two words a parenthesis, and pointed\n\u200e\u200f\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05e7\u05b5\u05bc\u05df as a piel pret., instead of a noun as do the LXX.; they then make\n\u200e\u200f\u05d4\u05e8\u05d1\u05d4 singular agree with the plural \u05de\u05e9\u05dc\u05d9\u05dd, which would, according to the\nusage of this book, be distributive. On the whole, however, it seems\nvery probable that the LXX. have preserved the right reading, or at\nleast the meaning of the passage; this meaning is, \u2018and for the rest,\nbecause Koheleth _was_ a wise man, still he taught knowledge with\nrespect to the people, and his ear [_i.e._ judgment, for the word\ncontains the idea of weighing as in a balance] was seeking out an\norderly meaning [or solution] of parables;\u2019 by parables he means\ndoubtless the mysterious facts cited. The next verse takes this\nthought up thus: \u2018Very much sought Koheleth in order to find words of\nprovidence\u2015\u2015and written correctly words of truth.\u2019 If the reading were\nreally \u05d5\u05db\u05ea\u05d5\u05d1, and not, as we may conjecture, \u05d9\u05db\u05ea\u05d5\u05d1, we should then read\n\u2018he was writing,\u2019 which it must be confessed makes excellent sense. \nThe LXX. render here [\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76] \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, in \nthe accusative, governed by \u1f10\u03b6\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, and the meaning is therefore, \n\u2018sought ... a thing written of right [even] words of truth.\u2019 This \nagrees altogether with the context, and also is cognate with what \nfollows).\n\n 11 The words of the wise \u2502 These reasons of the wise are\n _are_ as goads, and as nails \u2502 like goads, but they are like\n fastened _by_ the masters of \u2502 stakes as well, deeply fixed,\n assemblies, _which_ are given \u2502 dominating over the herd,\n from one shepherd. \u2502 appointed so by a shepherd,\n \u2502 who is the only one.\n\n(11.) =The words of= (but as \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8\u05d9 is repeated, we have \u2018those words of\u2019)\n=wise men as goads= (\u05d3\u05d1\u05e8\u05d9 \u05d7\u05db\u05de\u05d9\u05dd \u05db\u05d3\u05e8\u05d1\u05e0\u05d5\u05ea; the play is manifest between \u05d3\u05d1\u05e8 and\n\u200e\u200f\u05d3\u05e8\u05d1, but \u05d3\u05e8\u05d1\u05e0\u05d5\u05ea occurs here only, note also its two accents, and the noun\nin a concrete form at 1\u00a0Samuel xiii.\u00a021) =and as nails= (the particle\nof comparison being repeated, gives the idea \u2018but as nails as well,\u2019\nbut \u05de\u05b7\u05e9\u05b0\u05b9\u05de\u05b0\u05e8\u05b9\u05d5\u05ea, spelt with the letter sin, occurs here only; only one\ninstance of a piel participle of the very common verb \u05e9\u05de\u05e8 occurs,\nviz. Jonah ii. 8\u00a0(9), but the noun \u05de\u05e9\u05de\u05e8 is also quite common; see\n1\u00a0Chronicles ix.\u00a023, where \u05dc\u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05c1\u05de\u05b8\u05e8\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea occurs in the sense of \u2018by wards\u2019)\n=planted masters of assemblies= (\u05d0\u05e1\u05e4\u05d4, occurs as a feminine noun\nIsaiah xxiv.\u00a022; LXX. \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1f74\u03bd. This word has a curious history, which\nwill further illustrate its meaning at this place. The reading of the\nHexapla at Isaiah xxiv.\u00a022 is: \u039f\u02b9. \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03be\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u203b \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u203b\n\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03c9\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f40\u03c7\u03cd\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1. \u03a3. \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n\u1f00\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd, showing a\ndifficulty about the word which in the Hexapla is included between\n\u2666asterisks. Here the Peshito renders Koheleth by (\u2021 Syriac word) \n\u2018masters of thresholds,\u2019 and uses this same word at Exodus xii. 22,\u00a023, \nand Deuteronomy vi.\u00a09; hence they understood the allusion to be to the \nstake set across the entrance of the fold to prevent the cattle from \nstraying out. That this reading will explain Isaiah xxiv.\u00a022 is evident \nenough, and that it will explain this passage also will be seen if we \nlook upon these goads as both compelling the oxen to labour, and, as \nthe Syriac renders, forming the stakes which close the entrance to the \nlair); =are given from a shepherd, one only= (notice that \u05d0\u05d7\u05d3 stands \nemphatically at the end of the sentence, and must mean, therefore, \n\u2018the shepherd, who is the only one.\u2019 This verse has greatly perplexed \ncommentators: a diligent perusal of the ancient versions, and following \nthe hint given by the Syriac above, will show us what is the real \nmeaning. The LXX. read \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 A\u00b9. D. E. X., which A\u00b2, B alter \nto \u03c0\u03b5\u03c6\u03c5\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, and which Aquila follows; probably \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 was \na misreading of \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, from \u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c9, \u2018to infix;\u2019 Symmachus reads \n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03b7\u03b3\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u2018constructed on,\u2019 see Hebrews viii.\u00a02. All the ancient \nGreek versions consider \u05d1\u05e2\u05dc\u05d9 as a preposition, and render by \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd; \nthe LXX. render \u05d0\u05e1\u05e4\u05d5\u05ea by \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd; B. \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd; Aquila \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd; \nSyriac Hexapla (\u2021 Syriac phrase); Symmachus \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, otherwise \n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd; Syriac (\u2021 Syriac phrase), all which words have nearly \nthe same meaning. The Syriac also gives here, from Theodotion, what is \npossibly a rendering of this place, but may be intended for \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1ff3, \nin verse\u00a014, (\u2021 Syriac phrase), _i.e._ \u1f00\u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9, \u2018unseen things.\u2019 The \nPeshito rendering, perhaps, may give us the clue\u2015\u2015these \u2018collections\u2019 \nor \u2018collectanea\u2019 are the instances of human life adduced by Koheleth, \nand it is men [like a herd of oxen driven by goads, and confined by \nstakes] over which these wise words are masters; and this we think will \nmake all clear. The meaning of the passage will be: \u2018These words of \nwise men are like goads, by which the ox is incited to labour, but \nthen they are like stakes [_i.e._ to which the ox may be tied, or, of \nwhich a fence might be made to confine him] as well, planted around the \npersons brought together, [or the herd, and so infixed as masters of \nthe assembly]; they are given from the shepherd [or herdsman\u2019\u2015\u2015for \nthe word has both senses] \u2015\u2015\u2018who is the only one;\u2019 or, since \u05de\u05b5\u05e8\u05b6\u05b9\u05e2\u05b6\u05d4 is \nambiguous, and pointed \u05de\u05b4\u05e8\u05b0\u05e2\u05b6\u05d4 means \u2018pasture,\u2019 they give pasture only. \nThus the metaphor is kept up and the equivoke maintained).\n\n \u2666 referencing the \u201c\u203b\u201d symbol\n\n 12 And further, by these, \u2502 But as to anything else from\n my son, be admonished: of \u2502 these, my son, be warned:\n making many books _there is_ \u2502 making of many treatises would\n no end; and much \u00b9study _is_ \u2502 lead to no result, and much\n a weariness of the flesh. \u2502 study would but weary the body.\n \u2502\n \u00b9 _Or_, reading. \u2502\n\n(12.) =But for the rest= (repeating the formula of verse\u20039, and hence\na further extension of the same idea), =from them= (emphatic, \u2018but for\nanything else that these wise words can do\u2019 is the meaning) =my son,\nbe admonished: makings= of =books= (\u05e1\u05e4\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd used for the sake of the\nalliteration with \u05d0\u05e1\u05e4\u05d5\u05ea above) =the many= (_i.e._ too many) =is nothing\nof an end= (_i.e._ gives no result) =and study= (\u05dc\u05d4\u05d2 occurs here only,\nLXX. \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c4\u03b7) =the much= (too much) =wearies= (compare chapter i.\u00a08)\n=the flesh=. (Thus even wisdom itself is no cure for the ills of\nhumanity. The catalogue of human ills and the instances of human\nevanescence would form too large a volume for humanity to master, so\nthat in this case also the world itself would not contain the books\nwhich should be written. The grand result of all however is easily\nobtained, and follows.)\n\n 13 \u00b6 \u00b9Let us hear the \u2502 The end of the matter, even\n conclusion of the whole \u2502 all that hath been heard,\n matter: Fear God, and keep his \u2502 is this: WITH REGARD TO THE\n commandments: for this _is_ \u2502 ALMIGHTY, FEAR HIM; AND WITH\n the whole _duty_ of man. \u2502 REGARD ALSO TO HIS COMMANDMENTS,\n \u2502 KEEP THEM, FOR THIS IS\n \u00b9 _Or_, The end of the \u2502 EVERYTHING TO HUMANITY.\n matter, _even_ all that \u2502\n hath been heard, _is_. \u2502\n\n(13.) =The conclusion= (compare chapter iii.\u00a011, vii.\u00a02) of the =word=\n(_i.e._ the final reason), =the whole= (with article in its usual\nsense), =is heard= (niphal), =with respect to the Deity, fear; and\nwith respect to his commandments, keep= (notice the emphatic \u05d0\u05ea,\nwhich, however, the LXX. do not render by \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd, because the article\nand position give the emphasis required) =for this= is =all the man=\n(_i.e._ the whole duty, happiness, etc., of humanity).\n\n 14 For God shall bring every \u2502 For with respect to every\n work into judgment, with every \u2502 act, the Almighty will bring\n secret thing, whether _it be_ \u2502 to adjustment all that is\n good, or whether _it be_ evil. \u2502 mysterious, whether it be a\n \u2502 good or an evil.\n\n(14.) =For with respect to all working= (or doings, notice the prefixed\n\u200e\u200f\u05de) =the Deity= (noun before the verb) =is bringing into judgment\nupon all the hidden= (niphal participle, but \u05e2\u05dc\u05dd has not lost its\nmeaning, it is the hidden past and future, hence the LXX. \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1ff3,\n\u2018overlooked,\u2019 compare 1\u00a0Kings x.\u00a03), =if it be good or if evil= (if it\nbe a good act or an evil one either. That is, God will bring all these\nmysteries into orderly adjustment, and in the sequel vindicate his\nholiness and justice).\n\n\n \u0394\u03cc\u03be\u03b1 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f51\u03c8\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c1\u03ae\u03bd\u03b7 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2\n \u03b5\u2009\u1f50\u2009\u03b4\u2009\u03bf\u2009\u03ba\u2009\u03af\u2009\u03b1\u2015\u2015LUKE ii.\u00a014.\n\n\n\n\n \u2666ERRATA.\n\n \u2666 All Errata and Addenda items have been corrected in the text.\n\n\nPage 7, \u00a0NOTES, column 2 line 14, _for_ \u2018hiphil\u2019 _read_ \u2018niphal.\u2019\n\nPage 19, TEXT, line 10, _for_ \u2018he\u2019 _read_ \u2018He.\u2019\n\nPage 31, NOTES, column 2, line 6, _for_ \u2018ratio\u2019 _read_ \u2018oratio.\u2019\n\n\n\n\n ADDENDA.\n\n\nPage 9, NOTES. _At end of Note on verse\u00a017, after_ \u2018spirit,\u2019 _add_: It\nmay be observed that \u05e8\u05e2\u05d9\u05d5\u05df occurs in the Chaldee of Daniel\u2015\u2015see Daniel ii.\n29,\u00a030; iv. 19\u00a0(16); v.\u00a06, etc., always in the sense of a \u2018_painful_\nreflection,\u2019 but in later Chaldee and Syriac as \u2018a reflection\u2019 of any\nkind. As the sense in which Koheleth uses the word is the nearest to\nthe root-meaning, is it not an evidence, so far, of earlier composition\nof his book?\n\nPage 12, NOTES. _At end of Note on verse 5 add_: It should have been\nmentioned that \u05e4\u05e8\u05d3\u05e1 is also considered to afford an indication of\nlate composition. It is said to be a Persian word; it occurs, however,\nNehemiah ii.\u00a08; Canticles iv.\u00a010. The word admits of Semitic derivation,\nfrom \u05e4\u05e8\u05d3, \u2018to divide,\u2019 \u2018cut off in portions,\u2019 \u2018lay out.\u2019 If it be\nreally an exotic, no date of introduction is more probable than that\nof Solomon. It is also to be noted that in the context it _follows_ the\nword \u2018gardens,\u2019 which is quite natural if it were intended to denote a\nforeign luxury recently introduced.\n\nPage 15, NOTES. _At end of Note on verse 12 add_: This most obscure\npassage may perhaps receive some light from a further discussion of\nthe word \u05db\u05d1\u05e8 and other forms derived from the same root. The feminine or\nabstract occurs Genesis xxxv.\u00a016, xlviii.\u00a07, and 2\u00a0Kings v.\u00a019, joined\nwith \u05d0\u05e8\u05e5, rendered in the Authorized Version a \u2018little\u2019 way. The verb\noccurs in hiphil, Job xxxv.\u00a016, xxxvi.\u00a031, translated \u2018multiplied,\u2019\n\u2018in abundance;\u2019 and in the hiphil form, with the characteristic _jud\u0304_\ninserted\u2015\u2015Job viii.\u00a02, xv.\u00a010, etc.; Isaiah x.\u00a013, xvii.\u00a012, etc.\u2015\u2015in\nthe sense of \u2018full of years,\u2019 \u2018overflowing,\u2019 and the like. A diligent\ncomparison of these meanings shows that \u2018fulness,\u2019 in the sense of\n\u2018completeness,\u2019 must be the root-meaning; and hence, when applied to\ntime, the LXX. render \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7, \u2018already.\u2019 With this meaning agree also\nthe Arabic and Syriac, see Fuerst, Lexicon, _s. voc_. The meaning\nthen of the word is, the \u2018_complete_ present.\u2019 With regard to the\nuse of the root \u05de\u05dc\u05da in the sense of counsel, it occurs once in Hebrew,\nviz. Nehemiah v.\u00a07, and once in biblical Chaldee, Daniel iv. 27\u00a0(24).\nThis meaning is common, as remarked in the note, in Aramaic. The fair\ninference from this is, that the root-meaning of the Hebrew word is \u2018to\ncounsel,\u2019 just as the root-meaning of the word Apostle is \u2018one sent.\u2019\nThese senses are just what the context requires. Koheleth turns round\nto see wisdom in comparison with, or contradistinction to, false hopes\nand false prudence, and asks how the man, that is, humanity, can tell\nthe one from the other. His words are \u2018what is,\u2019 not \u2018_who_ is the\nman,\u2019 etc., equivalent to\u2015\u2015\u2018in what way can humanity enter upon the\nresults of the counsel,\u2019 \u2018or the king,\u2019\u2015\u2015the equivoke being, we believe,\nintentional, and the contracted relative giving a conditional turn to\nthe sentence\u2015\u2015\u2018with respect to that which at present he performs it.\u2019\nIt would have been better if the word =with= had been printed in the\nnotes with a small letter, as the division hardly amounts to a period,\nthough the connexion is not close. The suffix of the verb refers back\nthrough the relative pronoun to counsel, and might be well rendered\ninto English thus\u2015\u2015\u2018In respect of which he at present takes that\ncounsel.\u2019 The LXX., contrary to their custom, omit \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7, because it\nis perhaps sufficiently included in \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, or because \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd would not have been intelligible. It is evident this all\nsquares with the context. Koheleth, as Solomon, discovered that with\nall his wisdom he could not practically discern the difference between\nthis true wisdom and that false prudence which led him to accumulate\nonly to be disappointed in his successor.\n\nPage 19, NOTES. _At end of Note on verse 25 add_: The phrase \u05d5\u05de\u05d9 \u05d9\u05d7\u05d5\u05e9 \u05d7\u05d5\u05e5\n\u200e\u200f\u05de\u05de\u05e0\u05d9 requires further elucidation. The reading \u05de\u05de\u05e0\u05d5, supported by the\nLXX., is also confirmed by Hebrew MSS. The literal rendering is\u2015\u2015\u2018and\nwho hastens outside him.\u2019 This the LXX. translate \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b9\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b5\u03be\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u2018who drinks,\u2019 etc. There is a reading of A\u00b2, \u03c6\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u2018spares.\u2019\nThe former is supported by Peshito, Arabic, and Theodotion\u2015\u2015the latter\nby Aquila, Symmachus, and Jerome. If the Greek text alone had to be\nconsidered, \u03c6\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 would, as the harder reading, be entitled to\nthe preference. It is readily seen, however, that it arose from a\nconjectural alteration of the Hebrew text into \u05d7\u05d5\u05e1, for which there is\nno authority; neither will the meaning to \u2018spare\u2019 make any sense in the\ncontext. As the root occurs frequently, we are driven to the conclusion\nthat the rendering of the LXX. was by design. Schleusner\u2019s conjecture\nthat \u03c0\u03af\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 is used in the signification of \u2018sensibus frui,\u2019 is no\ndoubt correct\u2015\u2015compare Habakkuk i.\u00a08, as also Isaiah xxviii.\u00a016.\nConsidered as _ad sensum_, this rendering gives the idea of the Hebrew\ntext correctly.\n\n\n PRINTED BY T. AND A. CONSTABLE, PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTY,\n AT THE EDINBURGH UNIVERSITY PRESS.\n\n\n\n\n Catalogue.\n\n\n A SELECTION FROM THE\n BOOKS\n PUBLISHED DURING 1869, 1870, 1871, AND 1872, BY\n\n MESSRS. RIVINGTON,\n\n HIGH STREET, OXFORD; TRINITY STREET, CAMBRIDGE;\n WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON.\n\n =THE BOOK OF CHURCH LAW.= Being an exposition of the Legal Rights\n and Duties of the Clergy and Laity of the Church of England.\n By the Rev. JOHN HENRY BLUNT, M.A., F.S.A. Revised by WALTER\n G.\u00a0F. PHILLIMORE, B.C.L., Barrister-at-Law, and Chancellor of\n the Diocese of Lincoln. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_We have tested this work on various points of a crucial character,\nand have found it very accurate and full in its information. It\nembodies the results of the most recent acts of the Legislature on\nthe clerical profession and the rights of the laity._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\u201c_Already in our leading columns we have directed attention to Messrs.\nBlunt and Phillimore\u2019s \u2018Book of Church Law,\u2019 as an excellent manual\nfor ordinary use. It is a book which should stand on every clergyman\u2019s\nshelves ready for use when any legal matter arises about which its\npossessor is in doubt.... It is to be hoped that the authorities at\nour Theological Colleges sufficiently recognize the value of a little\nlegal knowledge on the part of the clergy to recommend this book to\ntheir students. It would serve admirably as the text-book for a set\nof lectures, and we trust we shall hear that its publication has done\nsomething to encourage the younger clergy to make themselves masters of\nat least the general outlines of Ecclesiastical Law, as it relates to\nthe Church of England._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_There is a copious index, and the whole volume forms a Handy-book\nof Church Law down to the present time, which, if found on the\nlibrary shelves of most of the clergy, would often save them from\nmuch unnecessary trouble, vexation, and expense._\u201d\u2015\u2015NATIONAL CHURCH.\n\n\n =THOUGHTS ON PERSONAL RELIGION=; being a Treatise on the\n Christian Life in its Two Chief Elements, Devotion and\n Practice. By EDWARD MEYRICK GOULBURN, D.D., Dean of Norwich.\n New Edition. Small 8vo. 6s. 6d.\n\n An Edition for Presentation, Two Volumes, small 8vo.\n 10s. 6d. Also, a cheap Edition. Small 8vo. 3s. 6d.\n\n\n =THE PURSUIT OF HOLINESS=: a Sequel to \u201cThoughts on Personal\n Religion,\u201d intended to carry the Reader somewhat farther\n onward in the Spiritual Life. By EDWARD MEYRICK GOULBURN, D.D.,\n Dean of Norwich, and formerly one of Her Majesty\u2019s Chaplains\n in Ordinary. Fourth Edition. Small 8vo. 5s.\n\n\n =THE STAR OF CHILDHOOD.= A First Book of Prayers and Instruction\n for Children. Compiled by a Priest. Edited by the Rev. T.\u00a0T.\n CARTER, M.A., Rector of Clewer, Berks. With Six Illustrations,\n reduced from Engravings by FRA ANGELICO. Royal 16mo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_All the Instructions, all of the Hymns, and most of the Prayers here\nare excellent. And when we use the cautionary expression \u2018most of the,\u2019\n&c., we do not mean to imply that all the prayers are not excellent in\nthemselves, but only to express a doubt whether in some cases they may\nnot be a little too elaborate for children. Of course it by no means\nfollows that when you use a book you are to use equally every portion\nof it: what does not suit one may suit a score of others, and this book\nis clearly compiled on the |comprehensive| principle. But to give a\nveracious verdict on the book it is needful to mention this. We need\nhardly say that it is well worth buying, and of a very high order of\nmerit._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_Messrs. Rivington have sent us a manual of prayers for children,\ncalled \u2018The Star of Childhood,\u2019 edited by the Rev. T.\u00a0T. Carter, a\nvery full collection, including instruction as well as devotion, and\na judicious selection of hymns._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_The Rev. T.\u00a0T. Carter, of Clewer, has put forth a much needed and\nexcellent book of devotions for little children, called \u2018The Star\nof Childhood.\u2019 We think it fair to tell our readers, that in it they\nwill find that for children who have lost a near relative a short\ncommemorative prayer is provided; but we most earnestly hope that even\nby those who are not willing to accept this usage, the book will not be\nrejected, for it is a most valuable one._\u201d\u2015\u2015MONTHLY PACKET.\n\n\u201c_One amongst the books before us deserves especial notice, entitled\n\u2018The Star of Childhood,\u2019 and edited by the Rev. T.\u00a0T. Carter: it is\neminently adapted for a New Year\u2019s Gift. It is a manual of prayer for\nchildren, with hymns, litanies, and instructions. Some of the hymns are\nillustrative of our Lord\u2019s life; and to these are added reduced copies\nfrom engravings of Fra Angelico._\u201d\u2015\u2015PENNY POST.\n\n\u201c_Supposing a child to be capable of using a devotional manual, the\nbook before us is, in its general structure, as good an attempt to meet\nthe want as could have been put forth. In the first place it succeeds,\nwhere so many like efforts fail, in the matter of simplicity. The\nlanguage is quite within the compass of a young child; that is to say,\nit is such as a young child can be made to understand; for we do not\nsuppose that the book is intended to be put directly into his hands,\nbut through the hands of an instructor._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH BELLS.\n\n\u201c_To the same hand which gave us the \u2018Treasury of Devotion\u2019 we are\nindebted for this beautiful little manual for children. Beginning\nwith prayers suited to the comprehension of the youngest, it contains\ndevotions, litanies, hymns, and instructions, carefully proportioned\nto the gradually increasing powers of a child\u2019s mind from the earliest\nyears, until confirmation. This little book cannot fail to influence\nfor good the impressible hearts of children, and we hope that ere\nlong it will be in the hands of all those who are blessed with\nCatholic-minded parents. It is beautifully got up, and is rendered\nmore attractive by the capital engravings of Fra Angelico\u2019s pictures\nof scenes of our Lord\u2019s childhood. God-parents could scarcely find a\nmore appropriate gift for their God-children than this, or one that is\nmore likely to lead them to a knowledge of the truth._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH UNION\nGAZETTE.\n\n\u201c_\u2018The Star of Childhood\u2019 is a first book of Prayers and instruction\nfor children, compiled by a Priest, and edited by the Rev. T.\u00a0T. Carter,\nrector of Clever. It is a very careful compilation, and the name of its\neditor is a warrant for its devotional tone._\u201d\u2015\u2015GUARDIAN.\n\n\u201c_A handsomely got up and attractive volume, with several good\nillustrations from Fra Angelico\u2019s most famous paintings._\u201d\u2015\u2015UNION\nREVIEW.\n\n\n _BY THE SAME COMPILER AND EDITOR._\n\n =THE TREASURY OF DEVOTION=: A Manual pf Prayers for General and\n Daily Use. Sixth Edition. Imperial 32mo, 2s. 6d.; limp cloth,\n 2s. Bound with the Book of Common Prayer, 3s. 6d.\n\n\n =THE WAY OF LIFE=: A Book of Prayers and Instruction for the\n Young (at School). Imperial 32mo, 1s. 6d.\n\n\n =THE GUIDE TO HEAVEN=: A Book of Prayers for every Want. For the\n Working Classes. New Edition. Imperial 32mo, 1s. 6d.; limp\n cloth, 1s.\n\n _The Edition in large type may still be had._\n Crown 8vo, 1s. 6d.; limp cloth, 1s.\n\n\n =THE PATH OF HOLINESS=: A First Book of Prayers, with the Service\n of the Holy Communion, for the Young. With Illustrations.\n Crown 16mo, 1s. 6d.; limp cloth, 1s.\n\n\n =LECTURES ON THE REUNION OF THE CHURCHES.= By JOHN J. IGN. VON\n D\u00d6LLINGER, D.D., D.C.L., Professor of Ecclesiastical History\n in the University of Munich, Provost of the Chapel-Royal,\n &c. &c. Authorized Translation, with Preface by HENRY NUTCOMBE\n OXENHAM, M.A., late Scholar of Balliol College, Oxford. Crown\n 8vo. 5s.\n\n\u201c_... Marked by all the author\u2019s well-known, varied learning, breadth\nof view, and outspoken spirit. The momentous question which the Doctor\ndiscusses has long occupied the thoughts of some of the most earnest\nand enlightened divines in all branches of the Christian communion,\nthough wide apart in other points of belief and practice. On the\ninfinite importance of reunion among Christian Churches in their\nendeavour to evangelize the yet remaining two-thirds of the human\nrace\u2015\u2015strangers to any form of Christianity\u2015\u2015the author enlarges with\npower and eloquence; and this topic is one of unusual and lasting\ninterest, though, of course, only one among \u2666a host of others equally\nimportant and equally well discussed._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n \u2666 duplicated word removed \u201ca\u201d\n\n\u201c_In the present state of thought respecting the union of the Churches,\nthese Lectures will be welcomed by very many persons of different\nschools of religious thought. They are not the hasty words of an\nenthusiast, but the calm, well-considered, and carefully prepared\nwritings of one whose soul is profoundly moved by his great subject.\nThey form a contribution to the literature of this grave question,\nvaluable alike for its breadth of historical survey, its fairness, the\ndue regard paid to existing obstacles, and the practical character of\nits suggestions._\u201d\u2015\u2015LONDON QUARTERLY REVIEW.\n\n\n =BRIGHSTONE SERMONS.= By GEORGE MOBERLY, D.C.L., Bishop of\n Salisbury. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\n =THE SAYINGS OF THE GREAT FORTY DAYS=, Between the Resurrection\n and Ascension, regarded as the Outlines of the Kingdom of God.\n In Five Discourses. With an Examination of Dr. Newman\u2019s Theory\n of Development. By GEORGE MOBERLY, D.C.L., Bishop of Salisbury.\n Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\n =WARNINGS OF THE HOLY WEEK, &c.= Being a Course of Parochial\n Lectures for the Week before Easter and the Easter\n Festivals. By the Rev. W.\u00a0ADAMS, M.A., late Vicar of St.\n Peter\u2019s-in-the-East, Oxford, and Fellow of Merton College.\n Seventh Edition. Small 8vo. 4s. 6d.\n\n\n =SELF-RENUNCIATION.= From the French. With Introduction by the\n Rev. T.\u00a0T. CARTER, M.A., Rector of Clewer. Crown 8vo. 6s.\n\n\u201c_It is excessively difficult to review or criticise, in detail, a\nbook of this kind, and yet its abounding merits, its practicalness,\nits searching good sense and thoroughness, and its frequent\nbeauty, too, make us wish to do something more than announce its\npublication.... The style is eminently clear, free from redundance\nand prolixity._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_Few save Religious and those brought into immediate contact with\nthem are, in all probability, acquainted with the French treatise of\nGuillor\u00e9, a portion of which is now, for the first time we believe,\ndone into English.... Hence the suitableness of such a book as this\nfor those who, in the midst of their families, are endeavouring to\nadvance in the spiritual life. Hundreds of devout souls living in the\nworld have been encouraged and helped by such books as Dr. Neale\u2019s\n\u2018Sermons preached in a Religious House.\u2019 For such the present work\nwill be found appropriate, while for Religious themselves it will be\ninvaluable._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\n =THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF.= By S.\n BARING-GOULD, M.A., Author of \u201cCurious Myths of the Middle\n Ages.\u201d\n\n Volume I. MONOTHEISM and POLYTHEISM. Second Edition. 8vo. 15s.\n\n Volume II. CHRISTIANITY. 8vo. 15s.\n\n\n =THE HIDDEN LIFE OF THE SOUL.= From the French. By the Author of\n \u201cA Dominican Artist,\u201d \u201cLife of Madame Louise de France,\u201d &c.\n Crown 8vo. 5s.\n\n\u201c_\u2018The Hidden Life of the Soul,\u2019 by the author of \u2018A Dominican Artist,\u2019\nis from the writings of Father Grou, a French refugee priest of 1792,\nwho died at Lulworth. It well deserves the character given it of being\n\u2018earnest and sober,\u2019 and not \u2018sensational.\u2019_\u201d\u2015\u2015GUARDIAN.\n\n\u201c_There is a wonderful charm about these readings\u2015\u2015so calm, so true,\nso thoroughly Christian. We do not know where they would come amiss. As\nmaterials for a consecutive series of meditations for the faithful at\na series of early celebrations they would be excellent, or for private\nreading during Advent or Lent._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_From the French of Jean Nicolas Grou, a pious Priest, whose works\nteach resignation to the Divine will. He loved, we are told, to\ninculcate simplicity, freedom from all affectation and unreality, the\npatience and humility which are too surely grounded in self-knowledge\nto be surprised at a fall, but withal so allied to confidence in God as\nto make recovery easy and sure. This is the spirit of the volume which\nis intended to furnish advice to those who would cultivate a quiet,\nmeek, and childlike spirit._\u201d\u2015\u2015PUBLIC OPINION.\n\n\n =A DOMINICAN ARTIST=; a Sketch of the Life of the Rev. P\u00e8re\n Besson, of the Order of St. Dominic. By the Author of the \u201cThe\n Tales of Kirkbeck,\u201d \u201cThe Life of Madame Louise de France,\u201d &c.\n New Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.\n\n\u201c_The author of the Life of P\u00e8re Besson writes with a grace and\nrefinement of devotional feeling peculiarly suited to a subject-matter\nwhich suffers beyond most others from any coarseness of touch. It\nwould be difficult to find \u2018the simplicity and purity of a holy life\u2019\nmore exquisitely illustrated than in Father Besson\u2019s career, both\nbefore and after his joining the Dominican Order under the auspices\nof Lacordaire.... Certainly we have never come across what could\nmore strictly be termed in the truest sense \u2018the life of a beautiful\nsoul.\u2019 The author has done well in presenting to English readers this\nsingularly graceful biography, in which all who can appreciate genuine\nsimplicity and nobleness of Christian character will find to admire and\nlittle or nothing to condemn._\u201d\u2015\u2015SATURDAY REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_It would indeed have been a deplorable omission had so exquisite\na biography been by any neglect lost to English readers, and had\ncharacter so perfect in its simple and complete devotion been withheld\nfrom our admiration.... But we have dwelt too long already on this\nfascinating book, and must now leave it to our readers._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY\nCHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_A beautiful and most interesting sketch of the late P\u00e8re Besson, an\nartist who forsook the easel for the altar._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_A book which is as pleasant for reading as it is profitable for\nmeditation._\u201d\u2015\u2015UNION REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_Whatever a reader may think of P\u00e8re Besson\u2019s profession as a monk,\nno one will doubt his goodness; no one can fail to profit who will\npatiently read his life, as here written by a friend, whose sole defect\nis in being slightly unctuous._\u201d\u2015\u2015ATHEN\u00c6UM.\n\n\u201c_The life of the Rev. P\u00e8re Besson, who gave up an artist\u2019s career, to\nwhich he was devotedly attached, and a mother whose affection for him\nis not inaptly likened to that of Monica for St. Augustine, must be\nread in its entirety to be rightly appreciated. And the whole tenour\nof the book is too devotional, too full of expressions of the most\ntouching dependence on God, to make criticism possible, even if it was\ncalled for, which it is not._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_The story of P\u00e8re Besson\u2019s life is one of much interest, and told\nwith simplicity, candour, and good feeling._\u201d\u2015\u2015SPECTATOR.\n\n\u201c_A beautiful book, describing the most saintly and very individual\nlife of one of the companions of Lacordaire._\u201d\u2015\u2015MONTHLY PACKET.\n\n\u201c_We strongly recommend it to our readers. It is a charming biography,\nthat will delight and edify both old and young._\u201d\u2015\u2015WESTMINSTER GAZETTE.\n\n\n =THE LIFE OF MADAME LOUISE DE FRANCE=, daughter of Louis\u00a0XV.\n Known also as the Mother T\u00e9r\u00e8se de St. Augustine. By the\n Author of \u201cTales of Kirkbeck.\u201d Crown 8vo. 6s.\n\n\u201c_On the 15th of July 1737, Marie Leczinska, the wife of Louis\u00a0XV.,\nand daughter of the dethroned King of Poland, which Prussia helped\nto despoil and plunder, gave birth to her eighth female child, Louise\nMarie, known also as the Mother T\u00e9r\u00e8se de St. Augustin. On the death of\nthe Queen, the princess, who had long felt a vocation for a religious\nlife, obtained the consent of her royal father to withdraw from the\nworld. The Carmelite convent of St. Denis was the chosen place of\nretreat. Here the novitiate was passed, here the final vows were\ntaken, and here, on the death of the M\u00e8re Julie, Madame Louise began\nand terminated her experiences as prioress. The little volume which\nrecords the simple incidents of her pious seclusion is designed to\nedify those members of the Church of England in whom the spirit of\nreligious self-devotion is reviving._\u201d\u2015\u2015WESTMINSTER REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_The annals of a cloistered life, under ordinary circumstances, would\nnot probably be considered very edifying by the reading public of the\npresent generation. When, however, such a history presents the novel\nspectacle of a royal princess of modern times voluntarily renouncing\nher high position and the splendours of a court existence, for the\npurpose of enduring the asceticism, poverty, and austerities of a\nsevere monastic rule, the case may well be different._\u201d\u2015\u2015MORNING POST.\n\n\n =HENRI PERREYVE.= By A.\u00a0GRATRY, Pr\u00eatre de l\u2019Oratoire, Professeur\n de Morale Evang\u00e9lique \u00e0 la Sorbonne, et Membre de l\u2019Acad\u00e9mie\n Fran\u00e7aise. Translated, by special permission, by the Author of\n \u201cA Dominican Artist,\u201d \u201cLife of S. Francis de Sales,\u201d &c., &c.\n With Portrait. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_... A most touching and powerful piece of biography, interspersed\nwith profound reflections on personal religion, and on the prospects\nof Christianity.... For priests this book is a treasure. The moral of\nit is the absolute necessity of \u2018recollectedness\u2019 to the higher, and\nespecially the true priestly life._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_The works of the translator of Henri Perreyve \u2666from, for the most\npart, a series of saintly biographies which have obtained a larger\nshare of popularity than is generally accorded to books of this\ndescription.... The description of his last days will probably be read\nwith greater interest than any other part of the book; presenting as\nit does an example of fortitude under suffering, and resignation, when\ncutoff so soon after entering upon a much-coveted and useful career,\nof rare occurrence in this age of self-assertion. This is, in fact, the\nessential teaching of the entire volume.... The translator of the Abb\u00e9\nGratry\u2019s work has done well in giving English readers an opportunity of\nprofiting by its lessons._\u201d\u2015\u2015MORNING POST.\n\n \u2666 \u201cform\u201d replaced with \u201cfrom\u201d\n\n\u201c_Those who take a pleasure in reading a beautiful account of a\nbeautiful character would do well to procure the Life of \u2018Henri\nPerreyve.\u2019... We would especially recommend the book for the perusal\nof English priests, who may learn many a holy lesson from the devoted\nspirit in which the subject of the memoir gave himself up to the duties\nof his sacred office, and to this cultivation of the graces with which\nhe was endowed._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_It is easy to see that Henri Perreyve, Professor of Moral Theology\nat the Sorbonne, was a Roman Catholic priest of no ordinary type.\nWith comparatively little of what Protestants call superstition, with\ngreat courage and sincerity, with a nature singularly guileless and\nnoble, his priestly vocation, although pursued, according to his\nbiographer, with unbridled zeal, did not stifle his human sympathies\nand aspirations. He could not believe that his faith compelled him\n\u2018to renounce sense and reason,\u2019 or that a priest was not free to speak,\nact, and think like other men. Indeed, the Abb\u00e9 Gratry makes a kind of\napology for his friend\u2019s free-speaking in this respect, and endeavours\nto explain it. Perreyve was the beloved disciple of Lacordaire,\nwho left him all his manuscripts, notes, and papers, and he himself\nattained the position of a great pulpit orator._\u201d\u2015\u2015PALL MALL GAZETTE.\n\n\n =THE LAST DAYS OF P\u00c8RE GRATRY.= By PERE ADOLPHE PERRAUD, of the\n Oratory, and Professor of La Sorbonne. Translated by special\n permission. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.\n\n\n =S. FRANCIS DE SALES, BISHOP AND PRINCE OF GENEVA.= By the Author\n of \u201cA Dominican Artist,\u201d \u201cLife of Madame Louise de France,\u201d\n &c., &c. Crown 8vo. 9s.\n\n\u201c_It is written with the delicacy, freshness, and absence of all\naffectation which characterised the former works by the same hand,\nand which render these books so very much more pleasant reading than\nare religious biographies in general. The character of S. Francis de\nSales, Bishop of Geneva, is a charming one; a more simple, pure, and\npious life it would be difficult to conceive. His unaffected humility,\nhis freedom from dogmatism in an age when dogma was placed above\nreligion, his freedom from bigotry in an age of persecution, were\nalike admirable._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\u201c_The author of \u2018A Dominican Artist,\u2019 in writing this new life of\nthe wise and loving Bishop and Prince of Geneva, has aimed less at\nhistorical or ecclesiastical investigation than at a vivid and natural\nrepresentation of the inner mind and life of the subject of his\nbiography, as it can be traced in his own writings and in those of his\nmost intimate and affectionate friends. The book is written with the\ngrave and quiet grace which characterises the productions of its author,\nand cannot fail to please those readers who can sympathise with all\nforms of goodness and devotion to noble purpose._\u201d\u2015\u2015WESTMINSTER REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_A book which contains the record of a life as sweet, pure, and\nnoble as any man by divine help, granted to devout sincerity of soul,\nhas been permitted to live upon earth. The example of this gentle\nbut resolute and energetic spirit, wholly dedicated to the highest\nconceivable good, offering itself, with all the temporal uses of mental\nexistence, to the service of infinite and eternal beneficence, is\nextremely touching.... It is a book worthy of acceptance._\u201d\u2015\u2015DAILY NEWS.\n\n\u201c_It is not a translation or adaptation, but an original work, and a\nvery charming portrait of one of the most winning characters in the\nlong gallery of Saints. And it is a matter of thankfulness to us to\nfind a distinctively Anglican writer setting forward the good Bishop\u2019s\nwork among Protestants, as a true missionary task to reclaim souls from\ndeadly error, and bring them back to the truth._\u201d\u2015\u2015UNION REVIEW.\n\n\n =THE SPIRIT OF S. FRANCIS DE SALES, BISHOP AND PRINCE OF GENEVA.=\n Translated from the French by the Author of \u201cThe Life of S.\n Francis de Sales,\u201d \u201cA Dominican Artist,\u201d &c., &c. Crown 8vo.\n 6s.\n\n\n =A SELECTION FROM THE SPIRITUAL LETTERS OF S. FRANCIS DE SALES,\n BISHOP AND PRINCE OF GENEVA.= Translated by the Author of\n \u201cLife of S. Francis de Sales,\u201d \u201cA Dominican Artist,\u201d &c. &c.\n Crown 8vo. 6s.\n\n\u201c_It is a collection of epistolary correspondence of rare interest and\nexcellence. With those who have read the Life, there cannot but have\nbeen a strong desire to know more of so beautiful a character as S.\nFrancis de Sales. He was a model of Christian saintliness and religious\nvirtue for all time, and one everything relating to whom, so great were\nthe accomplishments of his mind as well as the devotion of his heart,\nhas a charm which delights, instructs, and elevates._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH HERALD.\n\n\u201c_A few months back we had the pleasure of welcoming the Life of S.\nFrancis de Sales. Here is the promised sequel:\u2015\u2015the \u2018Selection from\nhis Spiritual Letters\u2019 then announced:\u2015\u2015and a great boon it will be to\nmany. The Letters are addressed to people of all sorts:\u2015\u2015to men and to\nwomen:\u2015\u2015to laity and to ecclesiastics, to people living in the world,\nor at court, and to the inmates of Religious Houses. And what an idea\nit gives one of the widely ramifying influence of one good man and\nof the untiring diligence of a man, who in spite of all his external\nduties, could find or make the time for all these letters. We hope that\nwith our readers it may be totally needless to urge such a volume on\ntheir notice._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\n =CONSOLATIO=; or, Comfort for the Afflicted. Edited by the Rev.\n C.\u00a0E. KENNAWAY. With a Preface by SAMUEL WILBERFORCE, D.D.,\n Lord Bishop of Winchester. New Edition. Small 8vo. 3s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_A charming collection from the best writers of passages suitable in\nseasons of sickness and afflictions._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_A very valuable collection of extracts from writers of every school.\nThe volume is an elegant one._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_A very useful collection of devotional extracts from the histories of\ngood men of very various schools of thought._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_We are bound to admire the extreme beauty and the warm devotion\nof the majority of passages here collected to smooth the soul that\nsorrows, even though penned by men from whom we differ so much in\ndoctrine._\u201d\u2015\u2015ROCK.\n\n\u201c_A work which we feel sure will find a welcome and also prove a\nsoothing guest in the chamber of many an invalid._\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n\n =A BOOK OF FAMILY PRAYER.= Compiled by WALTER FARQUHAR HOOK,\n D.D., Dean of Chichester. Eighth Edition. 18mo. 2s.\n\n\n =FAMILY PRAYERS.= Compiled from various Sources (chiefly from\n Bishop Hamilton\u2019s Manual), and arranged on the Liturgical\n Principle. By EDWARD MEYRICK GOULBURN, D.D., Dean of Norwich.\n New Edition. Large type. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. Cheap Edition,\n 16mo. 1s.\n\n\n =A MANUAL OF CONFIRMATION=, Comprising\u2015\u20151. A General Account\n of the Ordinance. 2.\u00a0The Baptismal Vow, and the English Order\n of Confirmation, with Short Notes, Critical and Devotional.\n 3.\u00a0Meditations and Prayers on Passages of Holy Scripture,\n in connexion with the Ordinance. With a Pastoral Letter\n instructing Catechumens how to prepare themselves for their\n first Communion. By EDWARD MEYRICK GOULBURN, D.D., Dean of\n Norwich. Ninth Edition. Small 8vo. 1s. 6d.\n\n\n =DIRECTORIUM PASTORALE.= The Principles and Practice of Pastoral\n Work in the Church of England. By the Rev. JOHN HENRY BLUNT,\n M.A., F.S.A., Editor of \u201cThe Annotated Book of Common Prayer,\u201d\n &c. &c. Third Edition, revised. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_This is the third edition of a work which has become deservedly\npopular as the best extant exposition of the principles and practice of\nthe pastoral work in the Church of England. Its hints and suggestions\nare based on practical experience, and it is further recommended\nby the majority of our Bishops at the ordination of priests and\ndeacons._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\u201c_Its practical usefulness to the parochial clergy is proved by the\nacceptance it has already received at their hands, and no faithful\nparish priest, who is working in real earnest for the extension of\nspiritual instruction amongst all classes of his flock will rise from\nthe perusal of its pages without having obtained some valuable hints as\nto the best mode of bringing home our Church\u2019s system to the hearts of\nhis people._\u201d\u2015\u2015NATIONAL CHURCH.\n\n\n =THE SHEPHERD OF HERMAS.= Translated into English, with an\n Introduction and Notes. By CHARLES H. HOOLE, M.A., Senior\n Student of Christ Church, Oxford. Small 8vo. 4s. 6d.\n\n\n =HYMNS AND POEMS FOR THE SICK AND SUFFERING.= In connexion with\n the Service for the Visitation of the Sick. Selected from\n various Authors. Edited by T.\u00a0V. FOSBERY, M.A., Vicar of St.\n Giles\u2019s, Reading. New Edition. Small 8vo. 3s. 6d.\n\n\n =THE \u201cDAMNATORY CLAUSES\u201d OF THE ATHANASIAN CREED RATIONALLY\n EXPLAINED, IN A LETTER TO THE RIGHT HON. W.\u00a0E. GLADSTONE, M.P.=\n By the Rev. MALCOLM MACCOLL, M.A., Rector of St. George,\n Botolph Lane. Crown 8vo. 6s.\n\n\n =A GLOSSARY OF ECCLESIASTICAL TERMS.= Containing Brief\n Explanations of Words used in Theology, Liturgiology,\n Chronology, Law, Architecture, Antiquities, Symbolism, Greek\n Hierology and Medi\u00e6val Latin; together with some account\n of Titles of our Lord, Emblems of Saints, Hymns, Orders,\n Heresies, Ornaments, Offices, Vestments and Ceremonial, and\n Miscellaneous Subjects. By Various Writers. Edited by the Rev.\n ORBY SHIPLEY, M.A. Crown 8vo. 18s.\n\n\n =ANCIENT HYMNS.= From the Roman Breviary. For Domestic Use every\n Morning and Evening of the Week, and on the Holy Days of the\n Church. To which are added, Original Hymns, principally of\n Commemoration and Thanksgiving for Christ\u2019s Holy Ordinances.\n By RICHARD MANT, D.D., sometime Lord Bishop of Down and Connor.\n New Edition. Small 8vo. 5s.\n\n\u201c_Real poetry wedded to words that breathe the purest and the sweetest\nspirit of Christian devotion. The translation from the old Latin Hymnal\nare close and faithful renderings._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\u201c_As a Hymn writer Bishop Mant deservedly occupies a prominent place in\nthe esteem of Churchmen, and we doubt not that many will be the readers\nwho will welcome this new edition of his translations and original\ncompositions._\u201d\u2015\u2015ENGLISH CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_A new edition of Bishop Mant\u2019s \u2018Ancient Hymns from the Roman\nBreviary\u2019 forms a handsome little volume, and it is interesting to\ncompare some of these translations with the more modern ones of our own\nday. While we have no hesitation in awarding the palm to the latter,\nthe former are an evidence of the earliest germs of that yearning of\nthe devout mind for something better than Tate and Brady, and which\nknow so richly supplied._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_This valuable manual will be of great assistance to all compilers\nof Hymn-Books. The translations are graceful, clear, and forcible,\nand the original hymns deserve the highest praise. Bishop Mant has\ncaught the very spirit of true psalmody, his metre flows musically,\nand there is a tuneful ring in his verses which especially adapts them\nfor congregational singing._\u201d\u2015\u2015ROCK.\n\n\n =YESTERDAY, TO-DAY, AND FOR EVER=: A Poem in Twelve Books. By\n E.\u00a0H. BICKERSTETH, M.A., Vicar of Christ Church, Hampstead.\n Seventh Edition. Small 8vo. 6s.\n\n\u201c_The most simple, the richest, and the most perfect sacred poem which\nrecent days have produced._\u201d\u2015\u2015MORNING ADVERTISER.\n\n\u201c_A poem worth reading, worthy of attentive study; full of noble\nthoughts, beautiful diction, and high imagination._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\u201c_Mr. Bickersteth writes like a man who cultivates at once reverence\nand earnestness of thought._\u201d\u2015\u2015GUARDIAN.\n\n\u201c_In these light miscellany days there is a spiritual refreshment\nin the spectacle of man girding up the loins of his mind to the\ntask of producing a genuine epic. And it is true poetry. There is a\ndefiniteness, a crispness about it, which in these moist, viewy, hazy\ndays \u2666is no less invigorating than novel._\u201d\u2015\u2015EDINBURGH DAILY REVIEW.\n\n \u2666 \u201cin\u201d replaced with \u201cis\u201d\n\n\n =THE TWO BROTHERS=, and other Poems. By EDWARD HENRY BICKERSTETH,\n M.A., Vicar of Christ Church, Hampstead, and Chaplain to the\n Bishop of Ripon, Author of \u201cYesterday, To-day, and for Ever.\u201d\n Second Edition. Small 8vo. 6s.\n\n\n =A HANDY BOOK OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL DILAPIDATIONS ACT, 1871.=\n With the Amendment Act, 1872. With Remarks on the\n Qualification and Practice of Diocesan Surveyors. By EDWARD G.\n BRUTON, F.R.I.B.A., and Diocesan Surveyor, Oxford. Crown 8vo.\n 5s.\n\n\n =STONES OF THE TEMPLE; OR, LESSONS FROM THE FABRIC AND FURNITURE\n OF THE CHURCH.= By WALTER FIELD, M.A., F.S.A., Vicar of\n Godmersham. With numerous Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_Anyone who wishes for simple information on the subjects of\nChurch-architecture and furniture, cannot do better than consult\n\u2018Stones of the Temple.\u2019 Mr. Field modestly disclaims any intention\nof supplanting the existing regular treatises, but his book shows an\namount of research, and a knowledge of what he is talking about, which\nmake it practically useful as well as pleasant. The wood-cuts are\nnumerous and some of them very pretty._\u201d\u2015\u2015GRAPHIC.\n\n\u201c_A very charming book, by the Rev. Walter Field, who was for years\nSecretary of one of the leading Church Societies. Mr. Field has a\nloving reverence for the beauty of the domus mansionalis Dei, as the\nold law books called the Parish Church.... Thoroughly sound in Church\nfeeling, Mr. Field has chosen the medium of a tale to embody real\nincidents illustrative of the various portions of his subject. There is\nno attempt at elaboration of the narrative, which, indeed, is rather a\nstring of anecdotes than a story, but each chapter brings home to the\nmind its own lesson, and each is illustrated with some very interesting\nengravings.... The work will properly command a hearty reception from\nChurchmen. The footnotes are occasionally most valuable, and are always\npertinent, and the text is sure to be popular with young folks for\nSunday reading._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\u201c_Mr. Field\u2019s chapters on brasses, chancel screens, crosses, encaustic\ntiles, mural paintings, porches and pavements, are agreeably written,\nand people with a turn for Ritualism will no doubt find them edifying.\nThe volume, as we have said, is not without significance for readers\nwho are unable to sympathize with the object of the writer. The\nillustrations of Church-architecture and Church ornaments are very\nattractive._\u201d\u2015\u2015PALL MALL GAZETTE.\n\n\n =A SHADOW OF DANTE.= Being an Essay towards Studying Himself, his\n World, and his Pilgrimage. By MARIA FRANCESCA ROSSETTI. With\n Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.\n\n \u201c_The \u2018Shadow of Dante\u2019 is a well-conceived\nand inviting volume, designed to recommend the \u2018Divina Commedia\u2019 to\nEnglish readers, and to facilitate the study and comprehension of its\ncontents._\u201d\u2015\u2015ATHRN\u00c6UM.\n\n\u201c_And it is in itself a true work of art, a whole finely conceived,\nand carried out with sustained power,\u2015\u2015one of those reproductions and\nadumbrations of great works, in which mere servile copying disappears,\nand which are only possible to a mind which, however inferior to its\noriginal, is yet of the same order and temperament, with an unusual\nfaculty for taking the impressions of that original and reflecting them\nundimmed. It is much to say of a volume like this. But it is not too\nmuch to say, when, after going through it, we consider the thorough\nknowledge of the subject shown in it, the patient skill with which the\nintricate and puzzling arrangements of the poem, full of what we call\nthe conceits and puzzles of the contemporary philosophy, are unravelled\nand made intelligible; the discrimination and high principle with which\nso ardent a lover of the great poet blames his excesses; the high and\nnoble Christian faith which responds to his; and, lastly, the gift of\neloquent speech, keen, rich, condensed, expressive, which seems to have\npassed into the writer from the loving study of the greatest master\nin his own tongue of all the inimitable harmonies of language\u2015\u2015the\ntenderest, the deepest, the most awful._\u201d\u2015\u2015GUARDIAN.\n\n\u201c_The work introduces us not merely to the author\u2019s life and the\npolitical and ecclesiastical conjunctures under which he lived, but\nto the outlines of the Catholicised systems of ethics, astronomy, and\ngeography which he interpreted in classifying his spirits and assigning\nthem their dwellings; as also to the drift of his leading allegories;\nand finally, to the general conduct of his poem\u2015\u2015which is amply\nillustrated by citations from the most literal verse translations.\nWe find the volume furnished with useful diagrams of the Dantesque\nuniverse, of Hell, Purgatory, and the \u2018Rose of the Blessed,\u2019 and\nadorned with a beautiful group of the likenesses of the poet, and with\nsymbolic figures (on the binding) in which the taste and execution of\nMr. D.\u00a0G. Rossetti will be recognised. The exposition appears to us\nremarkably well arranged and digested; the author\u2019s appreciation of\nDante\u2019s religious sentiments and opinions is peculiarly hearty, and her\nstyle refreshingly independent and original._\u201d\u2015\u2015PALL MALL GAZETTE.\n\n\u201c_It bears traces throughout of having been due to a patient, loving\nand appreciative study of the great poet, as he is exhibited, not\nmerely in the \u2018Divina Commedia,\u2019 but in his other writings. The result\nhas been a book which is not only delightful in itself to read, but\nis admirably adapted as an encouragement to those students who wish to\nobtain a preliminary survey of the land before they attempt to follow\nDante through his long and arduous pilgrimage. Of all poets Dante\nstands most in need of such assistance as this book offers._\u201d\u2015\u2015SATURDAY\nREVIEW.\n\n\n =PARISH MUSINGS; OR, DEVOTIONAL POEMS.= By JOHN S.\u00a0B. MONSELL,\n LL.D., Rural Dean, and Rector of St. Nicholas, Guildford. Fine\n Edition. Small 8vo. 5s. Cheap Edition, 18mo, limp cloth, 1s.\n 6d.; or in Cover, 1s.\n\n\n =THE LIFE OF JUSTIFICATION.= A Series of Lectures delivered in\n Substance at All Saints\u2019, Margaret Street, in Lent, 1870. By\n the Rev. GEORGE BODY, B.A., Rector of Kirkby Misperton. Second\n Edition. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_On the whole we have rarely met with a more clear, intelligible and\npersuasive statement of the truth as regards the important topics on\nwhich the volume treats. Sermon\u00a0II. in particular, will strike every\none by its eloquence and beauty, but we scarcely like to specify it,\nlest in praising it we should seem to disparage the other portions of\nthis admirable little work._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_These discourses show that their author\u2019s position is due to\nsomething more and higher than mere fluency, gesticulation, and\nflexibility of voice. He appears as having drunk deeply at the\nfountain of St. Augustine, and as understanding how to translate\nthe burning words of that mighty genius into the current language\nof to-day._\u201d\u2015\u2015UNION REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_There is real power in these sermons:\u2015\u2015power, real power, and\nplenty of it.... There is such a moral veraciousness about him, such a\nprofound and over-mastering belief that Christ has proved a bona-fide\ncure for unholiness, and such an intensity of eagerness to lead others\nto seek and profit by that means of attaining the true sanctity which\nalone can enter Heaven\u2015\u2015that we wonder not at the crowds which hang\nupon his preaching, nor at the success of his fervid appeals to the\nhuman conscience. If any one doubts our verdict, let him buy this\nvolume. No one will regret its perusal._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\n =SERMONS ON SPECIAL OCCASIONS.= By DANIEL MOORE, M.A.,\n Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen, and Vicar of Holy Trinity,\n Paddington; Author of Hulsean Lectures on \u201cThe Age and the\n Gospel,\u201d \u201cAids to Prayer,\u201d &c. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_We do not wonder at Mr. Moore\u2019s long continued popularity with so\nmany hearers; there is so much painstaking and so much genuine desire\nto discharge his duty as a preacher visible through all the volume.\nWhat we miss is the deeper theology, and the spontaneous flow of\nteaching as from a spring which cannot help flowing, which some of our\npreachers happily exhibit. But the Sermons may be recommended, or we\nwould not notice them._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_Rarely have we met with a better volume of Sermons.... Orthodox,\naffectionate, and earnest, these Sermons exhibit at the same time\nmuch research, and are distinguished by an elegance and finish of\nstyle often wanting in these days of rapid writing and continual\npreaching._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_Sermons like those of Mr. Moore are, however, still of comparative\nrarity\u2015\u2015sermons in which we meet with doctrine which cannot be gainsaid;\nwith a knowledge of the peculiar circumstances of his hearers, which\nnothing but accurate observation and long experience can secure, and a\npeculiar felicity of style which many will envy, but to which it is the\nlot of few to attain._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHRISTIAN OBSERVER.\n\n\u201c_We have had real pleasure, however, in reading these sermons. Here\nare most of the elements of a preacher\u2019s power and usefulness: skilful\narrangement of the subject, admirable clearness of style, earnestness,\nboth of thought and language, and the prime qualification of all, \u2018in\ndoctrine, uncorruptness.\u2019_\u201d\u2015\u2015LONDON QUARTERLY REVIEW.\n\n\n =THE KNIGHT OF INTERCESSION, AND OTHER POEMS.= By the Rev.\n S.\u00a0J. STONE, M.A., Pembroke College, Oxford. Second Edition.\n Small 8vo. 6s.\n\n\u201c_Mr. Stone has now given to the public a collection of poems, widely\ndifferent in form, which enable us to measure more accurately his\npowers, not merely as a hymnist, but as a poet; and though we would\nnot injure a growing reputation by overstating his merits, yet we can\nsafely say that his volume contains much genuine poetry which will be\nread with unqualified pleasure.... It would be ungrateful of us to put\ndown this volume without expressing the great pleasure it has afforded\nus, and our high appreciation of the valuable services which its author\nis rendering to the Church._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH BELLS.\n\n\u201c_... We all know him so well as the author of the beautiful\nprocessional hymn \u2018The Church\u2019s One Foundation,\u2019 the Lenten hymn \u2018Weary\nof Earth,\u2019 and other favourites, that we were fully prepared for the\npleasure that awaited us in perusing this volume._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH OPINION.\n\n \u201c_The extracts we have thus given, differing as they\ndo alike in subject and in style, present fair specimens of the varied\ninterest of the volume, and of the poetic powers of its author. Most of\nour readers, we think, will agree with us that the publication is\nwell-timed, and that it has much in it that is both pleasant and profitable\nreading._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH HERALD.\n\n\u201c_In the \u2018Knight of Intercession\u2019 and other poems we have the\noutpourings of a pure and devotional spirit, in language of unassuming\nand yet genuine poetry, rising at times, naturally and without effort,\nto a quiet but real beauty._\u201d\u2015\u2015SCOTSMAN.\n\n\u201c_Mr. Stone, it is clear, has studied all the best models, and has\nbeen influenced by them; but he maintains through all a distinctly\nindividual note, and gives us real music.... There are true touches in\nthe Idylls, and some of the poems on pictures are remarkably expressive\nand skilful, though nothing is more difficult than the proper working\nout of such themes. We like some of the sonnets\u2015\u2015some of them are\nexceptionally sweet and finished._\u201d\u2015\u2015NONCONFORMIST.\n\n\n =THE ANNUAL REGISTER=: A Review of Public Events at Home and\n Abroad, for the Year 1872. 8vo. 18s.\n\n \u2042 _All the Volumes of the New Series from 1863 to 1872\n may be had, 18s. each._\n\n\u201c_Well edited, excellent type, good paper, and in all respects\nadmirably got up. Its review of affairs, Home, Colonial, and Foreign,\nit fair, concise, and complete._\u201d\u2015\u2015MINING QUARTERLY.\n\n\u201c_Solidly valuable, as well as interesting._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\u201c_Comprehensive and well executed._\u201d\u2015\u2015SPECTATOR.\n\n\u201c_The whole work being well-written, and compiled with care and\njudgment, it is interesting reading for the present day, will be\nmore useful as a work of reference in future years, and will be\nmost valuable of all to readers of another generation. Every student\nof history knows the worth, for the time that it covers, of the\nold \u2018Annual Register,\u2019 and this new series is better done and more\ncomprehensive than its predecessor._\u201d\u2015\u2015EXAMINER.\n\n\u201c_This volume of the new series of the \u2018Annual Register\u2019 seems well and\ncarefully compiled. The narrative is accurate, and it is obvious that\nthe writers have striven to be impartial._\u201d\u2015\u2015ATHEN\u00c6UM.\n\n\u201c_The whole of the compilation, however, is readable, and some of\nits more important parts are very well done. Such is, among other\nhistorical portions, the account of the situation in France before and\nat the beginning of the war. The narrative of the military events is\nclear, comprehensive, and attractive._\u201d\u2015\u2015NATION (NEW YORK).\n\n\n =HISTORICAL NARRATIVES.= From the Russian. By H.\u00a0C. ROMANOFF,\n Author of \u201cSketches of the Rites and Customs of the\n Greco-Russian Church,\u201d &c. Crown 8vo. 6s.\n\n\n =PRAYERS AND MEDITATIONS FOR THE HOLY COMMUNION.= With a Preface\n by C.\u00a0J. ELLICOTT, D.D., Lord Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol.\n With rubrics and borders in red. Royal 32mo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_Devout beauty is the special character of this new manual, and it\nought to be a favourite. Rarely has it happened to us to meet with so\nremarkable a combination of thorough practicalness with that almost\npoetic warmth which is the highest flower of genuine devotion. It\ndeserves to be placed along with the manual edited by Mr. Keble so\nshortly before his decease, not as superseding it, for the scope of\nthe two is different, but to be taken along with it. Nothing can exceed\nthe beauty and fulness of the devotions before communion in Mr. Keble\u2019s\nbook, but we think that in some points the devotions here given after\nHoly Communion are even superior to it._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_Bishop Ellicott has edited a book of \u2018Prayers and Meditations for the\nHoly Communion,\u2019 which, among Eucharistic manuals, has its own special\ncharacteristic. The Bishop recommends it to the newly confirmed, to the\ntender-hearted and the devout, as having been compiled by a youthful\nperson, and as being marked by a peculiar \u2018freshness.\u2019 Having looked\nthrough the volume, we have pleasure in seconding the recommendations\nof the good Bishop. We know of no more suitable manual for the newly\nconfirmed, and nothing more likely to engage the sympathies of youthful\nhearts. There is a union of the deepest spirit of devotion, a rich\nexpression of experimental life, with a due recognition of the objects\nof faith, such as is not always to be found, but which characterises\nthis manual in an eminent degree._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_The Bishop of Gloucester\u2019s imprimatur is attached to \u2018Prayers and\nMeditations for the Holy Communion,\u2019 intended as a manual for the\nrecently confirmed, nicely printed, and theologically sound._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH\nTIMES.\n\n\u201c_Among the supply of Eucharistic Manuals, one deserves special\nattention and commendation. \u2018Prayers and Meditations\u2019 merits the Bishop\nof Gloucester\u2019s epithets of \u2018warm, devout, and fresh.\u2019 And it is\nthoroughly English Church besides._\u201d\u2015\u2015GUARDIAN.\n\n\u201c_We are by no means surprised that Bishop Ellicott should have been\nso much struck with this little work, on accidentally seeing it in\nmanuscript, as to urge its publication, and to preface it with his\ncommendation. The devotion which it breathes is truly fervent, and the\nlanguage attractive, and as proceeding from a young person the work is\naltogether not a little striking._\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n\n =THE PRAYER BOOK INTERLEAVED=; With Historical Illustrations and\n Explanatory Notes arranged parallel to the Text. By the Rev.\n W.\u00a0M. CAMPION, D.D., Fellow and Tutor of Queen\u2019s College, and\n Rector of St. Botolph\u2019s, and the Rev. W.\u00a0J. BEAMONT, M.A.,\n late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. With a Preface by\n the LORD BISHOP OF ELY. Sixth Edition. Small 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\n =EIGHT LECTURES ON THE MIRACLES.= Being the Bampton Lectures for\n 1865. By J.\u00a0B. MOZLEY, D.D., Regius Professor of Divinity, and\n Canon of Christ Church, Oxford. Third Edition, Revised. Crown\n 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\n =CATECHESIS; OR, CHRISTIAN INSTRUCTION PREPARATORY TO\n CONFIRMATION AND FIRST COMMUNION.= By CHARLES WORDSWORTH,\n D.C.L., Bishop of St. Andrew\u2019s. New Edition. Small 8vo. 2s.\n\n\n =A THEORY OF HARMONY.= Founded on the Tempered Scale. With\n Questions and Exercises for the Use of Students. By JOHN\n STAINER, Mus. Doc., M.A., Magdalene College, Oxford, Organist\n to St. Paul\u2019s Cathedral. Royal 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_It is the first work of its class that needs no apology for its\nintroduction, as it is really much needed especially by teachers, who\nwould fail without the aid of its principles to account for many of\nthe effects in modern music, used in direct opposition to the teaching\nof the schools. It is difficult, if not impossible, to give a more\nelaborate description of a book destined to effect an entire change\nin musical teaching without entering into details that could not but\nprove uninteresting to the general readers, while to the musician and\namateur, the possession of the book itself is recommended as a valuable\nconfirmation of ideas that exist to a large extent in the minds of\nevery one who has ever thought about music, and who desires to see\nestablished a more uniform basis of study. The great and leading\ncharacteristic of the work is its logical reasoning and definitions,\na character not possessed by any previous book on the subject, and for\nthis Dr. Stainer\u2019s theory is certain to gain ground, and be the means\nof opening an easy and pleasant path in a road hitherto beset with the\nthorns and briars of perplexing technicalities._\u201d\u2015\u2015MORNING POST.\n\n\u201c_Dr. Stainer is a learned musician, and his book supplies a manual of\ninformation as well as a rich repository of musical erudition in the\nform of classical quotations from the great masters._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_Dr. Stainer, in his thoughtful book, sees clearly of amalgamating\nopposing systems in order to found a theory of harmony. He bases\nhis work on the tempered scale, and he developes and illustrates his\ntheory by questions and exercises for the use of students. His opening\nexposition of the rudiments of music is clear: when he reaches the\nregions of harmony he comes on debateable ground._\u201d\u2015\u2015ATHEN\u00c6UM.\n\n\u201c_To the student perplexed and chained down by the multitudinous rules\nof the old theorists, we cannot give better comfort than to advise him\nto read forthwith Dr. Stainer\u2019s ingenious and thoughtful book. It is\nexceedingly well got up, and from the clearness of the type used, very\neasy and pleasant to read._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHOIR.\n\n\n =CHURCH ORGANS=: their Position and Construction. With an\n Appendix containing some Account of the Medi\u00e6val Organ Case\n still existing at Old Radnor, South Wales. By FREDERICK\n HEATHCOTE SUTTON, M.A., Vicar of Theddingworth. With\n Illustrations. Imperial folio. 6s. 6d.\n\n\n =MISCELLANEOUS POEMS.= By HENRY FRANCIS LYTE, M.A. New Edition.\n Small 8vo. 5s.\n\n\n =BIBLE READINGS FOR FAMILY PRAYER.= By the Rev. W.\u00a0H. RIDLEY,\n M.A., Rector of Hambleden. Crown 8vo.\n\n Old Testament\u2015\u2015Genesis and Exodus. 2s.\n\n New Testament, { St. Luke and St. John. 2s.\n { St. Matthew and St. Mark. 2s.\n\n The Four Gospels, in one volume. 3s. 6d.\n\n\n =ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM\u2019S LITURGY.= Translated by H.\u00a0C. ROMANOFF,\n Author of \u201cSketches of the Rites and Customs of the\n Greco-Russian Church,\u201d &c. With Illustrations. Square crown\n 8vo. 4s. 6d.\n\n\n =NOTITIA EUCHARISTICA.= A Commentary, Explanatory, Doctrinal, and\n Historical, on the Order of the Administration of the Lord\u2019s\n Supper, or Holy Communion, according to the Use of the Church\n of England. By W.\u00a0E. SCUDAMORE, M.A., Rector of Ditchingham,\n and formerly Fellow of S. John\u2019s College, Cambridge. 8vo. 28s.\n\n\n =WORDS TO TAKE WITH US.= A Manual of Daily and Occasional\n Prayers, for Private and Common Use. With Plain Instructions\n and Counsels on Prayer. By W.\u00a0E. SCUDAMORE, M.A., Rector\n of Ditchingham, and formerly Fellow of S. John\u2019s College,\n Cambridge. New Edition. Revised. Small 8vo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_\u2018Words to Take with Us,\u2019 by W.\u00a0E. Scudamore, is one of the best\nmanuals of daily and occasional prayers we have seen. At once orthodox\nand practical, sufficiently personal, and yet not perplexingly minute\nin its details, it is calculated to be of inestimable value in many a\nhousehold._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_We are again pleased to see an old friend on the editorial table, in\na third edition of Mr. Scudamore\u2019s well-known Manual of Prayers. The\nspecial proper collects for each day of the week, as well as those for\nthe several seasons of the Christian year, have been most judiciously\nselected. The compiler moreover, while recognising the full benefits\nto be derived from the Book of Common Prayer, has not feared to draw\nlargely from the equally invaluable writings of ancient Catholicity.\nThe preface is a systematic arrangement of instructions in prayer and\nmeditation._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\n =THE HOME LIFE OF JESUS OF NAZARETH AND OTHER SERMONS.=\n By the Rev. AUGUSTUS GURNEY, M.A., Vicar of Wribbenhall,\n Kidderminster. Crown 8vo. 5s.\n\n\n =A CHURCH HISTORY OF THE FIRST SEVEN CENTURIES=, to the Close\n of the Sixth General Council. By MILO MAHAN, D.D., sometime\n S. Mark\u2019s-in-the-Bowery Professor of Ecclesiastical History\n in the General Theological Seminary, New York. 8vo. 15s.\n\n\n =OUR MOTHER CHURCH=: being Simple Talk on High Topics. By\n ANNE MERCIER. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_We have rarely come across a book dealing with an old subject\nin a healthier and, as far as may be, more original manner, while\nyet thoroughly practical, than \u2018Our Mother Church,\u2019 by Mrs. Jerome\nMercier. It is intended for and admirably adapted to the use of girls.\nThoroughly reverent in its tone, and bearing in every page marks\nof learned research, it is yet easy of comprehension, and explains\necclesiastical terms with the accuracy of a lexicon without the\naccompanying dulness. It is to be hoped that the book will attain to\nthe large circulation it justly merits._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_We have never seen a book for girls of its class which commends\nitself to us more particularly than \u2018Our Mother Church\u2019 by Mrs. Jerome\nMercier. The author, who is the wife of an earnest parish priest\nof the Anglican school, near London, calls her work \u2018simple talk on\ngreat subjects,\u2019 and calls it by a name that describes it almost as\ncompletely as we could do in a longer notice than we can spare the\nvolume. Here are the headings of the chapters:\u2015\u2015\u2018The Primitive Church,\u2019\n\u2018Primitive Places and Modes of Worship,\u2019 \u2018The Early English Church,\u2019\n\u2018The Monastic Orders,\u2019 \u2018The Friars,\u2019 \u2018A Review of Church History,\u2019\n\u2018The Prayer Book,\u2019 (four chapters), \u2018Symbolism,\u2019 \u2018Church Architecture,\u2019\n\u2018Windows and Bells,\u2019 \u2018Church Music,\u2019 \u2018Church Work.\u2019 No one can fail\nto comprehend the beautifully simple, devout, and appropriate language\nin which Mrs. Mercier embodies what she has to say; and for the facts\nwith which she deals she has taken good care to have their accuracy\nassured._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\u201c_The plan of this pleasant-looking book is excellent. It is a kind\nof Mrs. Markham on the Church of England, written especially for\ngirls, and we shall not be surprised to find it become a favourite\nin schools.... It is really a conversational hand-book to the English\nChurch\u2019s history, doctrine, and ritual, complied by a very diligent\nreader from some of the best modern Anglican sources._\u201d\u2015\u2015ENGLISH\nCHURCHMAN.\n\n\n =THE DIVINITY OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST=; being the\n Bampton Lectures for 1866. By HENRY PARRY LIDDON, D.D., D.C.L.,\n Canon of St. Paul\u2019s, and Ireland Professor of Exegesis in the\n University of Oxford. Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo. 5s.\n\n\n =SERMONS PREACHED BEFORE THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD.= By HENRY\n PARRY LIDDON, D.D., D.C.L., Canon of St. Paul\u2019s, and Ireland\n Professor of Exegesis in the University of Oxford. Fifth\n Edition, revised. Crown 8vo. 5s.\n\n\n =SOME ELEMENTS OF RELIGION.= Lent Lectures. By HENRY PARRY LIDDON,\n D.D., D.C.L., Canon of St. Paul\u2019s, and Ireland Professor of\n Exegesis in the University of Oxford. Crown 8vo. 5s.\n\n\n =HOUSEHOLD THEOLOGY=: A Handbook of Religious Information\n respecting the Holy Bible, the Prayer Book, the Church, the\n Ministry, Divine Worship, the Creeds, &c., &c. By JOHN HENRY\n BLUNT, M.A. New Edition. Small 8vo. 3s. 6d.\n\n\n =LIBER PRECUM PUBLICARUM ECCLESI\u00c6 ANGLICAN\u00c6.= A GULIELMO BRIGHT,\n A.M., et PETRO GOLDSMITH MEDD, A.M., Presbyteris, Collegii\n Universitatis in Acad. Oxon. Sociis, Latine redditus. New\n Edition, with all the Rubrics in red. Small 8vo. 6s.\n\n\n =THE PSALMS.= Translated from the Hebrew. With Notes, chiefly\n Exegetical. By WILLIAM KAY, D.D., Rector of Great Leighs; late\n Principal of Bishop\u2019s College, Calcutta. 8vo. 12s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_Like a sound Churchman, he reverences Scripture, upholding\nits authority against sceptics; and he does not denounce such as\ndiffer from him in opinion with a dogmatism unhappily too common\nat the present day. Hence, readers will be disposed to consider his\nconclusions worthy of attention; or perhaps to adopt them without\ninquiry. It is superfluous to say that the translation is better and\nmore accurate on the whole than our received one, or that it often\nreproduces the sense of the original happily._\u201d\u2015\u2015ATHEN\u00c6UM.\n\n\u201c_Dr. Kay has profound reverence for Divine truth, and exhibits\nconsiderable reading, with the power to make use of it._\u201d\u2015\u2015BRITISH\nQUARTERLY REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_The execution of the work is careful and scholarly._\u201d\u2015\u2015UNION REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_To mention the name of Dr. Kay is enough to secure respectful\nattention to his new translation of the Psalms. It is enriched with\nexegetical notes containing a wealth of sound learning, closely\noccasionally, perhaps too closely condensed. Good care is taken\nof the student not learned in Hebrew; we hope the Doctor\u2019s example\nwill prevent any abuse of this consideration, and stimulate those\nwho profit by it to follow him into the very text of the ancient\nRevelation._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\n =THE ANNOTATED BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER=; being an Historical,\n Ritual, and Theological Commentary on the Devotional System\n of the Church of England. Edited by the Rev. JOHN HENRY BLUNT,\n M.A., F.S.A., Author of \u201cThe History of the Reformation,\u201d\n \u201cDirectorium Pastorale,\u201d Editor of \u201cThe Dictionary of\n Theology,\u201d &c. Sixth edition, revised. Imperial 8vo. 36s., or\n half-bound in morocco, 48s.\n\n\n =A COMPANION TO THE OLD TESTAMENT.= Being a Plain Commentary on\n Scripture History, down to the Birth of our Lord. Small 8vo.\n 3s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_A most admirable Companion to the Old Testament, being far the most\nconcise yet complete commentary on Old Testament history with which\nwe have met. Here are combined orthodoxy and learning, an intelligent\nand at the same time interesting summary of the leading facts of the\nsacred story. It should be a text-book in every school, and its value\nis immensely enhanced by the copious and complete index._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_This will be found a very valuable aid to the right understanding of\nthe Bible. It throws the whole Scripture narrative into one from the\ncreation downwards, the author thus condensing Prideaux, Shuckford,\nand Russell, and in the most reverential manner bringing to his aid\nthe writings of all modern annotators and chronologists. There are no\nlengthy comments, no visionary theories, nothing speculative; all is\nplain matter of fact, intelligibly stated. The book is one that should\nhave a wide circulation amongst teachers and students of all\ndenominations._\u201d\u2015\u2015BOOKSELLER.\n\n\u201c_Is a very compact summary of the Old Testament narrative, put\ntogether so as to explain the connection and bearing of its contents,\nand written in a very good tone; with a final chapter on the history\nof the Jews between the Old and New Testaments. It will be found\nvery useful for its purpose. It does not confine itself to merely\nchronological difficulties, but comments briefly upon the religious\nbearing of the text also._\u201d\u2015\u2015GUARDIAN.\n\n\u201c_The handbook before us is so full and satisfactory, considering\nits compass, and sets forth the history of the old covenant with such\nconscientious minuteness, that it cannot fail to prove a godsend to\ncandidates for examination in the Rudimenta Religionis as well as\nin the corresponding school at Cambridge.... In one of our dioceses\nthe Scripture subjects for diocesan inspection this year included\n\u2018the lives of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the twelve Patriarchs,\u2019 and\nteachers were warned that the higher classes in the schools would be\nexpected to evince a knowledge gathered from the source and not any\nsecondary channels. But really we have tested the second book of this\nwork with an eye to ascertaining whether a mastery of it would have\nserved the teacher or pupil\u2019s purpose; and our deliberate opinion is\nthat it would, so careful is the survey, and so very rare the omission\nof a single point that is of any historical or doctrinal importance....\nThroughout his work the writer of this \u2018companion,\u2019 \u2018commentary,\u2019 or\n\u2018handbook,\u2019 exhibits at the same time extensive research into the best\nsources of information and enlightenment as to the sacred history,\nand an independent, though cautious, judgment in his choice between\nconflicting theories and explanations._\u201d\u2015\u2015ENGLISH CHURCHMAN.\n\n\n =FABLES RESPECTING THE POPES OF THE MIDDLE AGES.= A Contribution\n to Ecclesiastical History. By JOHN J. IGN. VON D\u00d6LLINGER.\n Translated, with Introduction and Appendices, by ALFRED\n PLUMMER, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Trinity College, Oxford.\n 8vo. 14s.\n\n\n =SKETCHES OF THE RITES AND CUSTOMS OF THE GRECO-RUSSIAN CHURCH.=\n By H.\u00a0C. ROMANOFF. With an Introductory Notice by the Author\n of \u201cThe Heir of Redclyffe.\u201d Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_The twofold object of this work is \u2018to present the English with\ncorrect descriptions of the ceremonies of the Greco-Russian Church,\nand at the same time with pictures of domestic life in Russian homes,\nespecially those of the clergy and the middle class of nobles;\u2019 and,\nbeyond question, the author\u2019s labour has been so far successful that,\nwhilst her Church scenes may be commended as a series of most dramatic\nand picturesque tableaux, her social sketches enable us to look at\ncertain points beneath the surface of Russian life, and materially\nenlarge our knowledge of a country concerning which we have still a\nvery great deal to learn._\u201d\u2015\u2015ATHEN\u00c6UM.\n\n\u201c_The volume before us is anything but a formal liturgical treatise.\nIt might be more valuable to a few scholars if it were, but it would\ncertainly fail to obtain perusal at the hands of the great majority\nof those whom the writer, not unreasonably, hopes to attract by the\nnarrative style she has adopted. What she has set before us is a\nseries of brief outlines, which, by their simple effort to clothe the\ninformation given us in a living garb, reminds us of a once popular\nchilds\u2019 book which we remember a generation ago, called \u2018Sketches of\nHuman Manners.\u2019_\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\n =THE ARGUMENT DELIVERED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE\n PRIVY COUNCIL.= By ARCHIBALD JOHN STEPHENS, LL.D., one of Her\n Majesty\u2019s Counsel in the case of THOMAS BYARD SHEPPARD against\n WILLIAM EARLY BENNETT, Clerk. With an Appendix containing\n their Lordships\u2019 Judgment. 8vo. 9s.\n\n\n =SERMONS ON CERTAIN OF THE LESS PROMINENT FACTS AND REFERENCES\n IN SACRED STORY.= By HENRY MELVILL, B.D., late Canon of St.\n Paul\u2019s, and Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen. New Edition.\n Two vols. Crown 8vo. 5s. each.\n\n\u201c_We are glad to see this new edition of what we have always considered\nto be Melvill\u2019s best sermons, because in them we have his best\nthoughts.... Many of these sermons are the strongest arguments yet\nadduced for internal evidence of the veracity of the Scriptural\nnarratives._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\u201c_Many who admire elegant phraseology, and the other now rarely\nexhibited constituents of pulpit eloquence, will be glad to have in\na convenient shape a judicious selection of Canon Melvill\u2019s sermons.\nMr. Melvill was one of the few really successful preachers of our\nday._\u201d\u2015\u2015EXAMINER.\n\n\u201c_The sermons of the lamented Melvill are too well known to require any\ncommendation from us. We have here all the power of rhetoric, and the\ngrace and beauty of style, for which the author has been distinguished,\nand which have contributed to render him a model to preachers, and\ngiven him a representative position in the history of the English\npulpit._\u201d\u2015\u2015WEEKLY REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_Polished, classical, and winning, these sermons bear the marks\nof literary labour. A study of them will aid the modern preacher\nto refine and polish his discourses, and to add to the vigour which\nis now the fashion the graces of chastened eloquence and winning\nrhetoric._\u201d\u2015\u2015ENGLISH CHURCHMAN.\n\n\n =SELECTION FROM THE SERMONS PREACHED DURING THE LATTER YEARS OF\n HIS LIFE, IN THE PARISH CHURCH OF BARNES, AND IN THE CATHEDRAL\n OF ST. PAUL\u2019S.= By HENRY MELVILL, B.D., late Canon of St.\n Paul\u2019s, and Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen. Two vols. Crown\n 8vo. 5s. each.\n\n\u201c_Melvill\u2019s chief characteristic was humility, that truest mark of\nreal nobility of soul and of genuine genius; and his sole actuating\nprinciple in life was devotion to duty\u2015\u2015duty to God and duty to man,\nand never were the two more beautifully blended together than in him.\n\u2018While the pure truths of the Gospel,\u2019 observes his biographer in the\nmemoir prefixed to these sermons, \u2018flowed so persuasively from his lips,\nthe pure spirit of Christianity ever reigned in his heart, and the\npurest charity influenced his every thought and every action.\u2019... The\nstyle of Canon Melvill\u2019s sermons is rather Ciceronian than Demosthenic,\nrather splendid and measured than impetuous and fervid._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\u201c_Two other volumes of the late Canon Melvill\u2019s sermons contain forty\ndiscourses preached by him in his later years, and they are prefaced by\na short memoir of one of the worthiest and most impressive preachers of\nrecent times._\u201d\u2015\u2015EXAMINER.\n\n\u201c_These outlines contain probably the last specimens of the work of\na great master in the art of preaching the Gospel. In the sermons of\nHenry Melvill there are a certain dignity and elevation of style and\nhandling which belong rather to the past than to the present.... There\nare in the sermons before us all Melvill\u2019s wonted grace of diction,\nstrength of reasoning, and aptness of illustration._\u201d\u2015\u2015WEEKLY REVIEW.\n\n\n =SERMONS.= By HENRY MELVILL, B.D., late Canon of St. Paul\u2019s,\n and Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen. New Edition. Two vols.\n Crown 8vo. 5s. each. Sold separately.\n\n\u201c_Messrs. Rivington have published very opportunely, at a time when\nChurchmen are thinking with satisfaction of the new blood infused into\nthe Chapter of St. Paul\u2019s, sermons by Henry Melvill, who in his day was\nas celebrated as a preacher as is Canon Liddon now. The sermons are not\nonly couched in elegant language, but are replete with matter which the\nyounger clergy would do well to study._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_Henry Melvill\u2019s intellect was large, his imagination brilliant, his\nardour intense, and his style strong, fervid, and picturesque. Often he\nseemed to glow with the inspiration of a prophet._\u201d\u2015\u2015AMERICAN QUARTERLY\nCHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_It would be easy to quote portions of exceeding beauty and power. It\nwas not, however, the charm of style, nor wealth of words, both which\nCanon Melvill possessed in so great abundance, that he relied on to win\nsouls; but the power and spirit of Him who said, \u2018I, if I be lifted up,\nwill draw all men to Me.\u2019_\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n\u201c_Every one who can remember the days when Canon Melvill was the\npreacher of the day, will be glad to see these four-and-twenty of his\nsermons so nicely reproduced. His Sermons were all the result of real\nstudy and genuine reading, with far more theology in them than those\nof many who make much more profession of theology. There are sermons\nhere which we can personally remember; it has been a pleasure to us\nto be reminded of them, and we are glad to see them brought before the\npresent generation. We hope that they may be studied, for they deserve\nit thoroughly._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_Few preachers have had more admirers than the Rev. Henry Melvill,\nand the new edition of his Sermons, in two volumes, will doubtless find\nplenty of purchasers. The Sermons abound in thought, and the thoughts\nare couched in English which is at once elegant in construction and\neasy to read._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_The Sermons of Canon Melvill, now republished in two handy\nvolumes, need only to be mentioned to be sure of a hearty welcome.\nSound learning, well-weighed words, calm and keen logic, and solemn\ndevoutness, mark the whole series of masterly discourses, which embrace\nsome of the chief doctrines of the Church, and set them forth in clear\nand Scriptural strength._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\n =VITA ET DOCTRINA JESU CHRISTI=; Or, Meditations on the Life of\n our Lord. By AVANCINI. In the Original Latin. Adapted to the\n use of the Church of England by a CLERGYMAN. Imperial 32mo. 2s.\n 6d.\n\n\n =THE FIRST BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER OF EDWARD\u00a0VI.=, and the Ordinal\n of 1549, together with the Order of the Communion, 1548.\n Reprinted entire, and Edited by the Rev. HENRY BASKERVILLE\n WALTON, M.A., late Fellow and Tutor of Merton College. With\n an Introduction by the Rev. PETER GOLDSMITH MEDD, M.A., Senior\n Fellow and Tutor of University College, Oxford. Small 8vo. 6s.\n\n\u201c_A volume like this is worth two of Church History. In many respects,\nindeed, it is the subject of history itself; and with Mr. Medd\u2019s\nintroduction and Mr. Walton\u2019s editorial work we may be said to have\nboth subject and history thereof. The volume should be in the hands\nof every member of the Church of England: we may say, it should be in\nthose of every student of Church History._\u201d\u2015\u2015ATHEN\u00c6UM.\n\n\u201c_We welcome the seasonable appearance of this work, which indeed\nsupplies a long-felt want, for \u2018the First Book\u2019 has been hitherto\naccessible to very few.... It is especially important at the present\ntime that the principles of the first Reformers should be understood;\nand no one can look through this edition without gaining some definite\ninformation on that point. We commend this new edition of the First\nPrayer Book, with its introduction to the study of all that are\ndesirous of understanding the principles of those who originated the\nreform of our public Services._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH NEWS.\n\n\u201c_The more that English Churchmen become acquainted with the Reformed\nPrayer Book, as our English Divines reformed it, apart from the\nmeddling of foreigners\u2015\u2015i.e., the better people become acquainted with\n\u2018Edward\u00a0VI.\u2019s first book,\u2019 the better both for themselves, and for the\nEnglish Church at large. We are therefore delighted to welcome this\nhandy and handsome reprint, with which every pains has been taken to\nmake it as accurate as possible._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_Mr. Walton deserves the very best thanks of Anglican Churchmen, for\nputting this most important volume within their reach in so convenient\nand handsome a form._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\n =INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE USE OF CANDIDATES FOR HOLY ORDERS=, And of\n the Parochial Clergy; with Acts of Parliament relating to the\n same, and Forms proposed to be used. By CHRISTOPHER HODGSON,\n M.A., Secretary to the Governors of Queen Anne\u2019s Bounty. Ninth\n Edition. 8vo. 16s.\n\n\n =THE GREEK TESTAMENT.= With a Critically Revised Text; a\n Digest of Various Readings; Marginal References to Verbal and\n Idiomatic Usage; Prolegomena; and a Critical and Exegetical\n Commentary. For the use of Theological Students and Ministers.\n By HENRY ALFORD, D.D., late Dean of Canterbury. New Edition.\n Four Volumes. 8vo. 102s.\n\n The Volumes are sold separately as follows:\u2015\u2015\n\n Vol. \u00a0 I.\u2015\u2015The Four Gospels. 28s.\n Vol.\u00a0 II.\u2015\u2015Acts to II. Corinthians. 24s.\n Vol.\u00a0III.\u2015\u2015Galatians to Philemon. 18s.\n Vol. IV.\u2015\u2015Hebrews to Revelation. 32s.\n\n\n =THE NEW TESTAMENT FOR ENGLISH READERS=: containing the\n Authorized Version, with a revised English Text; Marginal\n References; and a Critical and Explanatory Commentary. By\n HENRY ALFORD, D.D., late Dean of Canterbury. New Edition.\n Two volumes, or four parts. 8vo. 54s. 6d.\n\n The Volumes are sold separately, as follows:\u2015\u2015\n\n Vol. 1, Part \u00a0I.\u2015\u2015The Three first Gospels. 12s.\n Vol. 1, Part II.\u2015\u2015St. John and the Acts. 10s. 6d.\n Vol. 2, Part \u00a0I.\u2015\u2015The Epistles of St. Paul. 16s.\n Vol. 2, Part II.\u2015\u2015Hebrews to Revelation. 8vo. 16s.\n\n\n =CURIOUS MYTHS OF THE MIDDLE AGES.= By S. BARING-GOULD, M.A.,\n Author of \u201cPost-Medi\u00e6val Preachers,\u201d &c. With Illustrations.\n New Edition. Complete in One Volume. Crown 8vo. 6s.\n\n\u201c_These Essays will be found to have something to satisfy most classes\nof readers; the lovers of legends proper, the curious in popular\ndelusions, the initiated in Darwinian and Monboddoan theories; and if,\nin the chapters on Tell and Gellert, we are a little struck with the\nclose following of Dasent\u2019s track, in his preface to the Norse tales,\nit must be owned that there are chapters\u2015\u2015e.g., those on the Divining\nRod, the Man in the Moon, and the Seven Sleepers\u2015\u2015which present new\nmatter and deserve the praise of independent research._\u201d\u2015\u2015QUARTERLY\nREVIEW.\n\n\u201c_The author, indeed, is sometimes fanciful and overbold in his\nconclusions; but he conducts us through marvellous ways\u2015\u2015ways which he\nhas studied well before he undertook to guide others; and if we do not\nalways acquiesce in his descriptions or arguments, we seldom differ\nfrom him without hesitation._\u201d\u2015\u2015ATHEN\u00c6UM.\n\n\u201c_We have no space to linger longer about a book which, apart from\nits didactic pretensions, is an exceedingly amusing and interesting\ncollection of old stories and legends of the middle ages._\u201d\u2015\u2015PALL MALL\nGAZETTE.\n\n\u201c_That, on his first visit to the varied field of medi\u00e6val mythology,\nMr. Baring-Gould should have culled as samples of its richness the most\nbrilliant of the flowers that bloomed in it, is scarcely to be wondered\nat. But it shows how fertile is the soil when he is enabled to cull\nfrom it so goodly a second crop as that which he here presents to us.\nThe myths treated of in the present volume vary in interest\u2015\u2015they are\nall curious and well worth reading._\u201d\u2015\u2015NOTES AND QUERIES.\n\n\n =THE POPE AND THE COUNCIL.= By JANUS. Authorized translation\n from the German. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_A profound and learned treatise, evidently the work of one of the\nfirst theologians of the day, discussing with the scientific fulness\nand precision proper to German investigation, the great doctrinal\nquestions expected to come before the Council, and especially the\nproposed dogma of Papal Infallibility. There is probably no work in\nexistence that contains at all, still less within so narrow a compass,\nso complete a record of the origin and growth of the infallibilist\ntheory, and of all the facts of Church history bearing upon it, and\nthat too in a form so clear and concise as to put the argument within\nthe reach of any reader of ordinary intelligence, while the scrupulous\naccuracy of the writer, and his constant reference to the original\nauthorities for every statement liable to be disputed, makes the\nmonograph as a whole a perfect storehouse of valuable information for\nthe historical or theological student._\u201d\u2015\u2015SATURDAY REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_Beginning with a sketch of the errors and contradictions of the\nPopes, and of the position which, as a matter of history, they held\nin the early Church, the book proceeds to describe the three great\nforgeries by which the Papal claims were upheld\u2015\u2015the Isidorian\ndecretals, the donation of Constantine, and the decretum of Gratian.\nThe last subject ought to be carefully studied by all who wish to\nunderstand the frightful tyranny of a complicated system of laws,\ndevised not for the protection of a people, but as instruments for\ngrinding them to subjection. Then, after an historical outline of\nthe general growth of the Papal power in the twelfth and thirteenth\ncenturies, the writers enter upon the peculiarly episcopal and clerical\nquestion, pointing out how marvellously every little change worked in\none direction, invariably tending to throw the rule of the Church into\nthe power of Rome; and how the growth of new institutions, like the\nmonastic orders and the Inquisition, gradually withdrew the conduct\nof affairs from the Bishops of the Church in general, and consolidated\nthe Papal influence. For all this, however, unless we could satisfy\nourselves with a mere magnified table of contents the reader must\nbe referred to the book itself, in which he will find the interest\nsustained without flagging to the end._\u201d\u2015\u2015PALL MALL GAZETTE.\n\n\u201c_In France, in Holland, and in Germany, there has already appeared a\nmultitude of disquisitions on this subject. Among these several are the\nacknowledged compositions of men of high standing in the Roman Catholic\nworld,\u2015\u2015men admittedly entitled to speak with the authority that must\nattach to established reputation: but not one of them has hitherto\nproduced a work more likely to create a deep impression than the\nanonymous German publication at the head of this notice. It is not\na piece of merely polemical writing, it is a treatise dealing with\na large subject in an impressive though partisan manner, a treatise\ngrave in tone, solid in matter, and bristling with forcible and novel\nillustrations._\u201d\u2015\u2015SPECTATOR.\n\n\u201c_Rumour will, no doubt, be busy with its conjectures as to the name\nwhich lurks beneath the nom de plume of \u2018Janus.\u2019 We do not intend to\noffer any contribution towards the elucidation of the mystery unless\nit be a contribution to say that the book bears internal evidence of\nbeing the work of a Catholic, and that there are not many Catholics\nin Europe who could have written it. Taking it all in all, it is no\nexaggerated praise to characterise it as the most damaging assault\non Ultra-montanism that has appeared in modern times. Its learning\nis copious and complete, yet so admirably arranged that it invariably\nillustrates without overlaying the argument. The style is clear and\nsimple, and there is no attempt at rhetoric. It is a piece of cool and\nmasterly dissection, all the more terrible for the passionless manner\nin which the author conducts the operation._\u201d\u2015\u2015TIMES.\n\n\n =LETTERS FROM ROME ON THE COUNCIL.= By QUIRINUS. Reprinted from\n the \u201cAllgemeine Zeitung.\u201d Authorized Translation. Crown 8vo.\n 12s.\n\n\n =FEMALE CHARACTERS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE.= In a Series of Sermons.\n By the Rev. ISAAC WILLIAMS, B.D., formerly Fellow of Trinity\n College, Oxford. New Edition. Crown 8vo. 5s.\n\n\n =THE CHARACTERS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.= In a Series of Sermons.\n By the Rev. ISAAC WILLIAMS, B.D., formerly Fellow of Trinity\n College, Oxford. New Edition. Crown 8vo., 5s.\n\n\u201c_This is one of the few volumes of published sermons that we\nhave been able to read with real pleasure. They are written with a\nchastened elegance of language, and pervaded by a spirit of earnest\nand simple piety. Mr. Williams is evidently what would be called\na very High Churchman. Occasionally his peculiar Church views are\napparent; but bating a few passages here and there, these sermons\nwill be read with profit by all \u2018who profess and call themselves\nChristians.\u2019_\u201d\u2015\u2015CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_This is a new edition of a very popular\u2015\u2015and deservedly popular\u2015\u2015work\non the biography of the Old Testament history. The characters are ably\nand profitably analysed, and that by the hand of a master of style and\nthought.... The principle of selection has been that of prominence; and\npartly, too, that of significance in the characters so ably delineated.\nA more masterly analysis of Scriptural characters we never read,\nnor any which are more calculated to impress the mind of the reader\nwith feelings of love for what is good, and abhorrence for what is\nevil._\u201d\u2015\u2015ROCK.\n\n\n =THE HILLFORD CONFIRMATION: A TALE.= By M.\u00a0C. PHILLPOTTS. 18mo.\n 1s.\n\n\n =APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.= By the Rev.\n ARTHUR W. HADDAN, B.D., Rector of Barton-on-the-Heath, and\n late Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford. 8vo. 12s.\n\n\u201c_Mr. Haddan\u2019s estimate of the bearing of his subject, and of its\nspecial importance at the present juncture is characteristic, and\nwill well repay attention.... Mr. Haddan is strictly argumentative\nthroughout. He abstains with some strictness from everything which\nwould divert either his reader or himself from accurate investigation\nof his reasoning. But his volume is thoroughly well written, clear\nand forcible in style, and fair in tone. It cannot but render valuable\nservice in placing the claims of the Church in their true light before\nthe English public._\u201d\u2015\u2015GUARDIAN.\n\n\u201c_Among the many standard theological works devoted to this important\nsubject Mr. Haddan\u2019s will hold a high place._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\u201c_We should be glad to see the volume widely circulated and generally\nread._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_A weighty and valuable treatise, and we hope that the study of its\nsound and well-reasoned pages will do much to fix the importance, and\nthe full meaning of the doctrine in question, in the minds of Church\npeople.... We hope that our extracts will lead our readers to study\nMr. Haddan for themselves._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_This is not only a very able and carefully written treatise upon the\ndoctrine of Apostolical Succession, but it is also a calm yet noble\nvindication of the validity of the Anglican Orders: it well sustains\nthe brilliant reputation which Mr. Haddan left behind him at Oxford,\nand it supplements his other profound historical researches in\necclesiastical matters. This book will remain for a long time the\nclassic work upon English Orders._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_A very temperate, but a very well reasoned book._\u201d\u2015\u2015WESTMINSTER\nREVIEW.\n\n\u201c_Mr. Haddan ably sustains his reputation throughout the work. His\nstyle is clear, his inferences are reasonable, and the publication\nis especially well-timed in prospect of the coming \u0152cumenical\nCouncil._\u201d\u2015\u2015CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY GAZETTE.\n\n\n =A MANUAL FOR THE SICK=; with other Devotions. By LANCELOT\n ANDREWES, D.D., sometime Lord Bishop of Winchester. Edited\n with a Preface by H.\u00a0P. LIDDON, M.A. Large type. With Portrait.\n 24mo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\n =HELP AND COMFORT FOR THE SICK POOR.= By the Author of \u201cSickness;\n its Trials and Blessings.\u201d New Edition. Small 8vo. 1s.\n\n\n =A DEVOTIONAL COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL NARRATIVE.= By the Rev.\n ISAAC WILLIAMS, B.D., formerly Fellow of Trinity College,\n Oxford. A New and uniform Edition. In Eight volumes. Crown\n 8vo. 5s. each.\n\n _THOUGHTS ON THE STUDY OF THE HOLY GOSPELS._\n\n Characteristic Differences in the Four Gospels.\n Our Lord\u2019s Manifestations of Himself.\n The Rule of Scriptural Interpretation furnished by our Lord.\n Analogies of the Gospel.\n Mention of Angels in the Gospels.\n Places of our Lord\u2019s Abode and Ministry.\n Our Lord\u2019s Mode of Dealing with His Apostles.\n Conclusion.\n\n _A HARMONY OF THE FOUR EVANGELISTS._\n\n Our Lord\u2019s Nativity.\n Our Lord\u2019s Ministry\u2015\u2015Second Year.\n Our Lord\u2019s Ministry\u2015\u2015Third Year.\n The Holy Week.\n Our Lord\u2019s Passion.\n Our Lord\u2019s Resurrection.\n\n _OUR LORD\u2019S NATIVITY._\n\n The Birth at Bethlehem.\n The Baptism in Jordan.\n The First Passover.\n\n _OUR LORD\u2019S MINISTRY._\n SECOND YEAR.\n\n The Second Passover.\n Christ with the Twelve.\n The Twelve sent forth.\n\n _OUR LORD\u2019S MINISTRY._\n THIRD YEAR.\n\n Teaching in Galilee.\n Teaching at Jerusalem.\n Last Journey from Galilee to Jerusalem.\n\n _THE HOLY WEEK._\n\n The Approach to Jerusalem.\n The Teaching in the Temple.\n The Discourse on the Mount of Olives.\n The Last Supper.\n\n _OUR LORD\u2019S PASSION._\n\n The Hour of Darkness.\n The Agony.\n The Apprehension.\n The Condemnation.\n The Day of Sorrows.\n The Hall of Judgment.\n The Crucifixion.\n The Sepulture.\n\n _OUR LORD\u2019S RESURRECTION._\n\n The Day of Days.\n The Grave Visited.\n Christ Appearing.\n The Going to Emmaus.\n The Forty Days.\n The Apostles Assembled.\n The Lake in Galilee.\n The Mountain in Galilee.\n The Return from Galilee.\n\n\u201c_There is not a better companion to be found for the season than\nthe beautiful \u2018Devotional Commentary on the Gospel Narrative,\u2019 by the\nRev. Isaac Williams.... A rich mine for devotional and theological\nstudy._\u201d\u2015\u2015GUARDIAN.\n\n\u201c_So infinite are the depths and so innumerable the beauties of\nScripture, and more particularly of the Gospels, that there is\nsome difficulty in describing the manifold excellences of Williams\u2019\nexquisite Commentary. Deriving its profound appreciation of Scripture\nfrom the writings of the early Fathers, it is only what every student\nknows must be true to say that it extracts a whole wealth of meaning\nfrom each sentence, each apparently faint allusion, each word in the\ntext._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_Stands absolutely alone to our English literature; there is, we\nshould say, no chance of being superseded by any better book of\nits kind; and its merits are of the very highest order._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY\nCHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_It would be difficult to select a more useful present, at a small\ncost, than this series would be to a young man on his first entering\ninto Holy Orders, and many, no doubt, will avail themselves of\nthe republication of these useful volumes for this purpose. There\nis an abundance of sermon material to be drawn from any one of\nthem._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_This is, in the truest sense of the word, a \u2018Devotional Commentary\u2019\non the Gospel narrative, opening out everywhere, as it does, the\nspiritual beauties and blessedness of the Divine message; but it is\nsomething more than this, it meets difficulties almost by anticipation,\nand throws the light of learning over some of the very darkest passages\nin the New Testament._\u201d\u2015\u2015ROCK.\n\n\u201c_The author has skilfully compared and blended the narratives of the\ndifferent Gospels, so as to give a synoptical view of the history;\nand though the commentary is called \u2018devotional,\u2019 it is scholarly\nand suggestive in other respects. The size of the work, extending,\nas it does, over eight volumes, may deter purchasers and readers;\nbut each volume is complete in itself, and we recommend students to\ntaste a sample of the author\u2019s quality. Some things they may question;\nbut the volumes are really a helpful and valuable addition to our\nstores._\u201d\u2015\u2015FREEMAN.\n\n\u201c_The high and solemn verities of the Saviour\u2019s sufferings and death\nare treated with great reverence and ability. The thorough devoutness\nwhich pervades the book commends it to our heart. There is much to\ninstruct and help the believer in the Christian life, no matter to what\nsection of the Church he may belong._\u201d\u2015\u2015WATCHMAN.\n\n\n KEYS TO CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE.\n\n =A KEY TO THE KNOWLEDGE AND USE OF THE HOLY BIBLE.= By the Rev.\n J.\u00a0H. BLUNT, M.A. Small 8vo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_Another of Mr. Blunt\u2019s useful and workmanlike compilations,\nwhich will be most acceptable as a household book, or in schools\nand colleges. It is a capital book too for schoolmasters and pupil\nteachers._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_As a popular handbook, setting forth a selection of facts of which\neverybody ought to be cognizant, and as an exposition of the claims\nof the Bible to be received as of superhuman origin, Mr. Blunt\u2019s \u2018Key\u2019\nwill be useful._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_A great deal of useful information is comprised in these pages,\nand the book will no doubt be extensively circulated in Church\nfamilies._\u201d\u2015\u2015CLERICAL JOURNAL.\n\n\u201c_We have much pleasure in recommending a capital handbook by the\nlearned editor of \u2018The Annotated Book of Common Prayer.\u2019_\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH\nTIMES.\n\n \u201c_Merits commendation for the lucid and orderly arrangement in\nwhich it presents a considerable amount of valuable and interesting\nmatter._\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n\n =A KEY TO THE KNOWLEDGE AND USE OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER.=\n By the Rev. J.\u00a0H. BLUNT, M.A. Small 8vo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_A very valuable and practical manual, full of information, which is\nadmirably calculated to instruct and interest those for whom it was\nevidently specially intended\u2015\u2015the laity of the Church of England. It\ndeserves high commendation._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_A thoroughly sound and valuable manual._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_To us it appears that Mr. Blunt has succeeded very well. All\nnecessary information seems to be included, and the arrangement is\nexcellent._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_It is the best short explanation of our offices that we know of, and\nwould be invaluable for the use of candidates for confirmation in the\nhigher classes._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\n =A KEY TO CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE AND PRACTICE FOUNDED ON THE CHURCH\n CATECHISM.= By the Rev. JOHN HENRY BLUNT, M.A. Small 8vo. 2s.\n 6d.\n\n\u201c_Of cheap and reliable text-books of this nature there has hitherto\nbeen a great want. We are often asked to recommend books for use in\nChurch Sunday-schools, and we therefore take this opportunity of saying\nthat we know of none more likely to be of service both to teachers and\nscholars than these \u2018Keys.\u2019_\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCHMAN\u2019S SHILLING MAGAZINE.\n\n\u201c_This is another of Mr. Blunt\u2019s most useful manuals, with all the\nprecision of a school book, yet diverging into matters of practical\napplication so freely as to make it most serviceable, either as\na teacher\u2019s suggestion book, or as an intelligent pupil\u2019s reading\nbook._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_Will be very useful for the higher classes in Sunday-schools,\nor rather for the fuller instruction of the Sunday-school teachers\nthemselves, where the parish priest is wise enough to devote a certain\ntime regularly to their preparation for their voluntary task._\u201d\u2015\u2015UNION\nREVIEW.\n\n\u201c_Another of the many useful books on theological and Scriptural\nsubjects which have been written by the Rev. John Henry Blunt. The\npresent is entitled \u2018A Key to Christian Doctrine and Practice, founded\non the Church Catechism,\u2019 and will take its place as an elementary\ntext-book upon the Creed in our schools and colleges. The Church\nCatechism is clearly and fully explained by the author in this \u2018Key\u2019.\nNumerous references, Scriptural and otherwise, are scattered about the\nbook._\u201d\u2015\u2015PUBLIC OPINION.\n\n\n =A KEY TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF CHURCH HISTORY.= (Ancient.) Edited by\n JOHN HENRY BLUNT, M.A. Small 8vo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_It offers a short and condensed account of the origin, growth, and\ncondition of the Church in all parts of the world, from A.D.\u00a01 down\nto the end of the fifteenth century. Mr. Blunt\u2019s first object has been\nconciseness, and this has been admirably carried out, and to students\nof Church history this feature will readily recommend itself. As an\nelementary work \u2018A Key\u2019 will be specially valuable, inasmuch as it\npoints out certain definite lines of thought, by which those who\nenjoy the opportunity may be guided in reading the statements of more\nelaborate histories. At the same time it is but fair to Mr. Blunt to\nremark that, for general readers, the little volume contains everything\nthat could be consistently expected in a volume of its character.\nThere are many notes, theological, scriptural, and historical, and\nthe \u2018get up\u2019 of the book is specially commendable. As a text-book for\nthe higher forms of schools the work will be acceptable to numerous\nteachers._\u201d\u2015\u2015PUBLIC OPINION.\n\n\u201c_It contains some concise notes on Church History, compressed into\na small compass, and we think it is likely to be useful as a book of\nreference._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_A very terse and reliable collection of the main facts and incidents\nconnected with Church History._\u201d\u2015\u2015ROCK.\n\n\u201c_It will be excellent, either for school or home use, either as a\nreading or as a reference book, on all the main facts and names and\ncontroversies of the first fifteen centuries. It is both well arranged\nand well written._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\n =A KEY TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF CHURCH HISTORY= (Modern). Edited by\n the Rev. JOHN HENRY BLUNT, M.A. Small 8vo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\n =A KEY TO THE NARRATIVE OF THE FOUR GOSPELS.= By JOHN PILKINGTON\n NORRIS, M.A., Canon of Bristol, formerly one of Her Majesty\u2019s\n Inspectors of Schools. Small 8vo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_This is very much the best book of its kind we have seen. The only\nfault is its shortness, which prevents its going into the details which\nwould support and illustrate its statements, and which in the process\nof illustrating them would fix them upon the minds and memories of its\nreaders. It is, however, a great improvement upon any book of its kind\nwe know. It bears all the marks of being the condensed work of a real\nscholar, and of a divine too. The bulk of the book is taken up with a\n\u2018Life of Christ\u2019 compiled from the Four Gospels so as to exhibit its\nsteps and stages and salient points. The rest of the book consists of\nindependent chapters on special points._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_This book is no ordinary compendium, no mere \u2018cram-book\u2019; still less\nis it an ordinary reading book for schools; but the schoolmaster, the\nSunday-school teacher and the seeker after a comprehensive knowledge\nof Divine truth will find it worthy of its name. Canon Norris writes\nsimply, reverently, without great display of learning, giving the\nresult of much careful study in a short compass, and adorning the\nsubject by the tenderness and honesty with which he treats it.... We\nhope that this little book will have a very wide circulation and that\nit will be studied; and we can promise that those who take it up will\nnot readily put it down again._\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n\u201c_This is a golden little volume. Having often to criticise unsparingly\nvolumes published by Messrs. Rivington, and bearing the deep High\nChurch brand, it is the greater satisfaction to be able to commend this\nbook so emphatically. Its design is exceedingly modest. Canon Norris\nwrites primarily to help \u2018younger students\u2019 in studying the Gospels.\nBut this unpretending volume is one which all students may study with\nadvantage. It is an admirable manual for those who take Bible Classes\nthrough the Gospels. Closely sifted in style, so that all is clear and\nweighty; full of unostentatious learning, and pregnant with suggestion;\ndeeply reverent in spirit, and altogether Evangelical in spirit; Canon\nNorris\u2019 book supplies a real want, and ought to be welcomed by all\nearnest and devout students of the Holy Gospels._\u201d\u2015\u2015LONDON QUARTERLY\nREVIEW.\n\n\n =A KEY TO THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.= By JOHN PILKINGTON NORRIS,\n M.A. Small 8vo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_It is a remarkably well-written and interesting account of its\nsubject, \u2018The Book of the Acts,\u2019 giving us the narrative of St.\nLuke with exactly what we want in the way of connecting links and\nillustrations. One most notable and praiseworthy characteristic of\nthe book is its candour.... The book is one which we can heartily\nrecommend._\u201d\u2015\u2015SPECTATOR.\n\n\u201c_Of Canon Norris\u2019s \u2018Key to the Narrative of the Four Gospels,\u2019 we\nwrote in high approval not many months ago. The present is not less\ncarefully prepared, and is full of the unostentatious results of sound\nlearning and patient thought._\u201d\u2015\u2015LONDON QUARTERLY REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_This little volume is one of a series of \u2018Keys\u2019 of a more or less\neducational character, which are in the course of publication by Messrs.\nRivington. It gives apparently a very fair and tolerably exhaustive\nr\u00e9sum\u00e9 of the contexts of the Acts, with which it deals, not chapter\nby chapter, but consecutively in the order of thought._\u201d\u2015\u2015SCHOOL BOARD\nCHRONICLE.\n\n\u201c_Few books have ever given us more unmixed pleasure than this. It is\nfaultlessly written, so that it reads as pleasantly and enticingly as\nif it had not the least intention of being an \u2018educational\u2019 book. It is\ncomplete and exhaustive, so far as the narrative and all its bearings\ngo, so that students may feel that they need not be hunting up other\nbooks to supply the |lacun\u00e6|. It is the work of a classical scholar,\nand it leaves nothing wanting in the way of classical illustrations,\nwhich in the case of the Acts are of special importance. And, lastly,\nit is theologically sound._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_This is a sequel to Canon Norris\u2019s \u2018Key to the Gospels,\u2019 which was\npublished two years ago, and which has become a general favourite with\nthose who wish to grasp the leading features of the life and word of\nChrist. The sketch of the Acts of the Apostles is done in the same\nstyle; there is the same reverent spirit and quiet enthusiasm running\nthrough it, and the same instinct for seizing the leading points in the\nnarrative._\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n \u2042 _Other Volumes are in preparation._\n\n\n RIVINGTON\u2019S DEVOTIONAL SERIES.\n\n Elegantly printed with red borders. 16mo. 2s. 6d. each.\n\n\n =THOMAS \u00c0 KEMPIS, OF THE IMITATION OF CHRIST.=\n\n Also a Cheap Edition, without the red borders, 1s.,\n or in Cover, 6d.\n\n\u201c_A very beautiful edition. We commend it to the Clergy as an excellent\ngift-book for teachers and other workers._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_This work is a precious relic of medi\u00e6val times, and will continue to\nbe valued by every section of the Christian Church._\u201d\u2015\u2015WEEKLY REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_A beautifully printed pocket edition of this marvellous production\nof a man, who, out of the dark mists of popery, saw so much of\nexperimental religion. Those who are well grounded in evangelical\ntruth may use it with profit._\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n\u201c_A very cheap and handsome edition._\u201d\u2015\u2015ROCK.\n\n_This new edition is a marvel of cheapness._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_Beautifully printed, and very cheap editions of this long-used\nhand-book of devotion._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY WORLD.\n\n\n =THE RULE AND EXERCISES OF HOLY LIVING.= By JEREMY TAYLOR, D.D.,\n Bishop of Down and Connor, and Dromore.\n\n Also a Cheap Edition, without the red borders, 1s.\n\n\n =THE RULE AND EXERCISES OF HOLY DYING.= By JEREMY TAYLOR, D.D.,\n Bishop of Down and Connor, and Dromore.\n\n Also a Cheap Edition, without the red borders, 1s.\n\n The \u2018HOLY LIVING\u2019 and the \u2018HOLY DYING\u2019 may be had bound together\n in One Volume, 5s.; or without the red borders, 2s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_An extremely well-printed and well got up edition, as pretty and\ngraceful as possible, and yet not too fine for real use. We wish the\ndevotions of this beautiful book were more commonly used._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY\nCHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_We must admit that there is a want of helps to spiritual life amongst\nus. Our age is so secular, and in religious movements so bustling, that\nit is to be feared the inner life is too often forgotten. Our public\nteachers may, we are sure, gain by consulting books which show how\ncontentedness and self-renunciation may be increased; and in which the\npathology of all human affections is treated with a fulness not common\nin our theological class rooms._\u201d\u2015\u2015FREEMAN.\n\n\u201c_The publishers have done good service by the production of these\nbeautiful editions of works, which will never lose their preciousness\nto devout Christian spirits. It is not necessary for us to say a word\nas to their intrinsic merits; we have only to testify to the good\ntaste, judgment, and care shown in these editions. They are extremely\nbeautiful in typography and in the general getting up._\u201d\u2015\u2015ENGLISH\nINDEPENDENT.\n\n\u201c_We ought not to conclude our notice of recent devotional books,\nwithout mentioning to our readers the above new, elegant, and cheap\nreprint, which we trust will never be out of date or out of favour in\nthe English branch of the Catholic Church._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_These manuals of piety written by the pen of the most beautiful\nwriter and the most impressive divine of the English Church, need no\ncommendation from us. They are known to the world, read in all lands,\nand translated, we have heard, into fifty different languages. For two\ncenturies they have fed the faith of thousands upon thousands of souls,\nnow we trust happy with their God, and perhaps meditating in Heaven\nwith gratitude on their celestial truths, kindled in their souls by a\nwriter who was little short of being inspired._\u201d\u2015\u2015ROCK.\n\n\u201c_These little volumes will be appreciated as presents of inestimable\nvalue._\u201d\u2015\u2015PUBLIC OPINION.\n\n\u201c_Either separate or bound together, may be had these two standard\nworks of the great divine. A good edition very tastefully printed and\nbound._\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n\n =A SHORT AND PLAIN INSTRUCTION FOR THE BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF\n THE LORD\u2019S SUPPER=; to which is annexed the Office of the Holy\n Communion, with proper Helps and Directions. By THOMAS WILSON,\n D.D., late Lord Bishop of Sodor and Man. Complete Edition, in\n large type.\n\n Also a Cheap Edition, without the red borders,\n 1s., or in Cover, 6d.\n\n\u201c_The Messrs. Rivington have published a new and unabridged edition of\nthat deservedly popular work, Bishop Wilson on the Lord\u2019s Supper. The\nedition is here presented in three forms, suited to the various members\nof the household._\u201d\u2015\u2015PUBLIC OPINION.\n\n\u201c_We cannot withhold the expression of our admiration of the style\nand elegance in which this work is got up._\u201d\u2015\u2015PRESS AND ST. JAMES\u2019\nCHRONICLE.\n\n\u201c_A departed author being dead yet speaketh in a way which will never\nbe out of date; Bishop Wilson on the Lord\u2019s Supper, published by Messrs.\nRivington, in bindings to suit all tastes and pockets._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_We may here fitly record that Bishop Wilson on the Lord\u2019s Supper has\nbeen issued in a new but unabridged form._\u201d\u2015\u2015DAILY TELEGRAPH.\n\n\n =INTRODUCTION TO THE DEVOUT LIFE.= From the French of SAINT\n FRANCIS of Sales, Bishop and Prince of Geneva. A New\n Translation.\n\n\u201c_A very beautiful edition of S. Francis de Sales\u2019 \u2018Devout Life:\u2019 a\nprettier little edition for binding, type, and paper, of a very great\nbook is not often seen._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_The translation is a good one, and the volume is beautifully got\nup. It would serve admirably as a gift book to those who are able to\nappreciate so spiritual a writer as St. Francis._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_It has been the food and hope of countless souls ever since its\nfirst appearance two centuries and a half ago, and it still ranks\nwith Scupoli\u2019s \u2018Combattimento Spirituale,\u2019 and Arvisenet\u2019s \u2018Memoriale\nVit\u00e6 Sacerdotalis,\u2019 as among the very best works of ascetic theology.\nWe are glad to commend this careful and convenient version to our\nreaders._\u201d\u2015\u2015UNION REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_We should be curious to know by how many different hands \u2018The Devout\nLife\u2019 of S. Francis de Sales had been translated into English. At\nany rate, its popularity is so great that Messrs. Rivington have just\nissued another translation of it. The style is good, and the volume is\nof a most convenient size._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_To readers of religious treatises, this volume will be highly valued.\nThe \u2018Introduction to the Devout Life\u2019 is preceded by a sketch of the\nlife of the author, and a dedicatory prayer of the author is also\ngiven._\u201d\u2015\u2015PUBLIC OPINION.\n\n\n =A PRACTICAL TREATISE CONCERNING EVIL THOUGHTS=: wherein\n their Nature, Origin, and Effect are distinctly considered\n and explained, with many Useful Rules for restraining and\n suppressing such Thoughts; suited to the various conditions\n of Life, and the several tempers of Mankind, more especially\n of melancholy Persons. By WILLIAM CHILCOT, M.A.\n\n\u201c_An elegant edition of an old devotional manual by a clergyman who\nwas a rector in Exeter at the beginning of the last century. It seems\nto contain a great deal of valuable truth as to the sources of evil\nthoughts and the mode in which they may be expressed._\u201d\u2015\u2015ENGLISH\nINDEPENDENT.\n\n\u201c_The book is worthy of a careful perusal, and is one which once known\nis likely to be recurred to again and again, a characteristic not\nalways to be met within works of our own day._\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n\u201c_Messrs. Rivington have done all that publishers could do to give\nstrengthening matter a cheerful form._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\n =THE ENGLISH POEMS OF GEORGE HERBERT=, together with his\n Collection of Proverbs, entitled JACULA PRUDENTUM.\n\n\u201c_This beautiful little volume will be found specially convenient\nas a pocket manual. The \u2018Jacula Prudentum\u2019 or proverbs, deserve to\nbe more widely known than they are at present. In many copies of\nGeorge Herbert\u2019s writings these quaint sayings have been unfortunately\nomitted._\u201d\u2015\u2015ROCK.\n\n\u201c_George Herbert is too much a household name to require any\nintroduction. It will be sufficient to say that Messrs. Rivington\nhave published a most compact and convenient edition of the poems and\nproverbs of this illustrious English divine._\u201d\u2015\u2015ENGLISH CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_An exceedingly pretty edition, the most attractive form we have yet\nseen from this delightful author, as a gift-book._\u201d\u2015\u2015UNION REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_A very beautiful edition of the quaint old English bard. All lovers\nof the \u2018Holy\u2019 Herbert will be grateful to Messrs. Rivington for the\ncare and pains they have bestowed in supplying them with this and\nwithal convenient copy of poems so well known and so deservedly\nprized._\u201d\u2015\u2015LONDON QUARTERLY REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_A very tasteful little book, and will doubtless be acceptable to\nmany._\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n\u201c_We commend this little book heartily to our readers. It contains\nHerbert\u2019s English poems and the \u2018Jacula Prudentum,\u2019 in a very neat\nvolume which does much credit to the publishers; it will, we hope,\nmeet with extensive circulation as a choice gift-book at a moderate\nprice._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHRISTIAN OBSERVER.\n\n\n _NEW THEOLOGICAL DICTIONARY._\n\n =DICTIONARY OF DOCTRINAL AND HISTORICAL THEOLOGY.= By various\n writers. Edited by the Rev. JOHN HENRY BLUNT, M.A., F.S.A.\n Editor of the Annotated Book of Common Prayer. Second Edition.\n\n _Complete in one volume of 833 pages, imperial 8vo (equal to\n six 8vo volumes of 400 pages each), and printed in large\n readable type, 42s. or half-bound in morocco, 52s. 6d._\n\n1. NATURE OF THE WORK. This Dictionary consists of a series of\noriginal Essays (alphabetically arranged, and 575 in number) on all the\nprincipal subjects connected with the Doctrines of the Christian Church.\nSome idea of the subjects, and of the length of the articles, may be\nformed from the following titles of those which occupy the work from\npage 700 to page 720.\n\n SIGN. SPINOZISM. SUFFRAGAN.\n SIMONY. SPIRIT. SUNDAY.\n SIN. SPIRIT, THE HOLY. SUPEREROGATION.\n SINAITIC CODEX. SPONSORS. SUPERNATURAL.\n SOCINIANISM. SUBDEACONS. SUPERSTITION.\n SOLIFIDIANISM. SUBLAPSARIANISM. SUPRALAPSARIANISM.\n SOUL. SUBSTANCE. SUPREMACY, PAPAL.\n\n2. OBJECT OF THE WORK. The writers of all the Essays have endeavoured\nto make them sufficiently exhaustive to render it unnecessary for the\nmajority of readers to go further for information, and, at the same\ntime, sufficiently suggestive of more recondite sources of Theological\nstudy, to help the student in following up his subjects. By means of a\nTable prefixed to the Dictionary, a regular course of such study may be\ncarried out in its pages.\n\n3. PRINCIPLES OF THE WORK. The Editor and his coadjutors have carefully\navoided any party bias, and consequently the work cannot be said to be\neither \u201cHigh Church,\u201d \u201cLow Church,\u201d or \u201cBroad Church.\u201d The only bias\nof the Dictionary is that given by Revelation, History, Logic, and the\nliterary idiosyncrasy of each particular contributor. But the Editor\nhas not attempted to assist the circulation of the book by making\nit colourless on the pretence of impartiality. Errors are freely\ncondemned, and truths are expressed as if they were worth expressing;\nbut he believes that no terms of condemnation which may be used ever\ntransgress the bounds of Christian courtesy.\n\n4. PART OF A SERIES. The Dictionary of Theology is complete in itself,\nbut it is also intended to form part of a Series, entitled, \u201cA Summary\nof Theology,\u201d of which the second volume, \u201cA Dictionary of Sects,\nHeresies, and Schools of Thought,\u201d is in the press.\n\n\u201c_Taken as a whole the articles are the work of practised writers, and\nwell informed and solid theologians.... We know no book of its size\nand bulk which supplies the information here given at all; far less\nwhich supplies it in an arrangement so accessible, with a completeness\nof information so thorough, and with an ability in the treatment of\nprofound subjects so great. Dr. Hook\u2019s most useful volume is a work of\nhigh calibre, but it is the work of a single mind. We have here a wider\nrange of thought from a greater variety of sides. We have here also the\nwork of men who evidently know what they write about and are somewhat\nmore profound (to say the least), than the writers of the current\nDictionaries of Sects and Heresies._\u201d\u2015\u2015GUARDIAN.\n\n\u201c_Mere antiquarianism, however interesting, has little place in it.\nBut for all practical purposes its historical articles are excellent.\nThey are of course, and of necessity, a good deal condensed, yet they\nare wonderfully complete; see for example such articles as \u2018Atheism,\u2019\n\u2018Cabbala,\u2019 \u2018Calvinism,\u2019 \u2018Canonization,\u2019 \u2018Convocations,\u2019 \u2018Evangelical,\u2019\n\u2018Fathers,\u2019 \u2018Infant Baptism,\u2019 &c., &c. But the strength of the book\nlies in the theology proper, and herein more particularly in what\none may call the metaphysical side of doctrine:\u2015\u2015see the articles\non \u2018Conceptualism,\u2019 \u2018Doubt,\u2019 \u2018Dualism,\u2019 \u2018Election,\u2019 \u2018Eternity,\u2019\n\u2018Everlasting Punishment,\u2019 \u2018Fatalism,\u2019 and the like. We mention these\nas characteristic of the book. At the same time other more practical\nmatters are fully dealt with. There are excellent and elaborate\npapers on such words as \u2018Eucharist,\u2019 \u2018Confession,\u2019 \u2018Blood,\u2019 \u2018Cross,\u2019\n\u2018Antichrist,\u2019 to say nothing of the host of minor matters on which it\nis most convenient to be able to turn to a book which gives you at a\nglance the pith of a whole library in a column or a page. Thus it will\nbe obvious that it takes a very much wider range than any undertaking\nof the same kind in our language; and that to those of our clergy who\nhave not the fortune to spend in books, and would not have the leisure\nto use them if they possessed them, it will be the most serviceable and\nreliable substitute for a large library we can think of. And in many\ncases, while keeping strictly within its province as a Dictionary, it\ncontrives to be marvellously suggestive of thought and reflections,\nwhich a serious minded man will take with him and ponder over for his\nown elaboration and future use. As an example of this we may refer to\nthe whole article on Doubt. It is treated of under the successive heads\nof,\u2015\u2015(1)\u00a0its nature; (2)\u00a0its origin; (3)\u00a0the history of the principal\nperiods of Doubt; (4)\u00a0the consciousness\u2015\u2015or actual experience of\nDoubt, and how to deal with its different phases and kinds; (5)\u00a0the\nrelations of Doubt to action and to belief. To explain a little we\nwill here quote a paragraph or two, which may not be unacceptable to\nour readers.... The variety of the references given in the course of\nthis article, and at its conclusion, show how carefully the writer\nhas thought out and studied his subject in its various manifestations\nin many various minds, and illustrate very forcibly how much reading\ngoes to a very small amount of space in anything worth the name of\n\u2018Dictionary of Theology.\u2019 We trust most sincerely that the book may be\nlargely used. For a present to a clergyman on his ordination, or from a\nparishioner to his pastor, it would be most appropriate. It may indeed\nbe called \u2018a box of tools for a working clergyman.\u2019_\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY\nCHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_Seldom has an English work of equal magnitude been so permeated with\nCatholic instincts, and at the same time seldom has a work on theology\nbeen kept so free from the drift of rhetorical incrustation. Of course\nit is not meant that all these remarks apply in their full extent to\nevery article. In a great Dictionary there are compositions, as in a\ngreat house there are vessels, of various kinds. Some of these at a\nfuture day may be replaced by others more substantial in their build,\nmore proportionate in their outline, and more elaborate in their detail.\nBut admitting all this, the whole remains a home to which the student\nwill constantly recur, sure to find spacious chambers, substantial\nfurniture, and (which is most important) no stinted light._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH\nREVIEW.\n\n\u201c_The second and final instalment of Mr. Blunt\u2019s useful Dictionary,\nitself but a part of a more comprehensive plan, is now before the\npublic, and fully sustains the mainly favourable impression created\nby the appearance of the first part. Within the sphere it has marked\nout for itself, no equally useful book of reference exists in English\nfor the elucidation of theological problems.... Entries which display\nmuch care, research, and judgment in compilation, and which will make\nthe task of the parish priest who is brought face to face with any of\nthe practical questions which they involve far easier than has been\nhitherto. The very fact that the utterances are here and there somewhat\nmore guarded and hesitating than quite accords with our judgment, is a\ngain in so far as it protects the work from the charge of inculcating\nextreme views, and will thus secure its admission in many places where\nmoderation is accounted the crowning grace._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_The writers who are at work on it are scholars and theologians, and\nearnest defenders of the Christian faith. They evidently hold fast\nthe fundamental doctrines of Christianity, and have the religious\ninstruction of the rising ministry at heart. Moreover, their scheme is\na noble one; it does credit not only to their learning and zeal, but\nalso to their tact and discretion._\u201d\u2015\u2015LONDON QUARTERLY REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_Infinitely the best book of the kind in the language; and, if not\nthe best conceivable, it is perhaps the best we are ever likely to\nsee within its compass as to size and scope. Accurate and succinct\nin statement, it may safely be trusted as a handbook as regards facts,\nwhile in our judgment, this second part still maintains the character\nwe gave the first, namely, of showing most ability in its way of\ntreating the more abstract and metaphysical side of theological\nquestions. The liturgical articles also in this part deserve especial\nmention. The book is sure to make its own way by sheer force of\nusefulness._\u201d\u2015\u2015LITERARY CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_It is not open to doubt that this work, of which the second and\nconcluding part has just been issued, is in every sense a valuable and\nimportant one. Mr. Blunt\u2019s Dictionary is a most acceptable addition to\nEnglish theological literature. Its general style is terse and vigorous.\nWhilst its pages are free from wordiness, there is none of that undue\ncondensation which, under the plea of judicious brevity, veils a mere\nempty jotting down of familiar statements (and mis-statements), at\nsecond or, it may be, third hand from existing works. Dean Hook\u2019s\nwell-known Dictionary makes the nearest approach to the one now before\nus, but Mr. Blunt\u2019s is decidedly the better of the two._\u201d\u2015\u2015ENGLISH\nCHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_It will be found of admirable service to all students of theology,\nas advancing and maintaining the Church\u2019s views of all subjects as fall\nwithin the range of fair argument and inquiry. It is not often that a\nwork of so comprehensive and so profound a nature is marked to the very\nend by so many signs of wide and careful research, sound criticism, and\nwell-founded and well-expressed belief._\u201d\u2015\u2015STANDARD.\n\n\n =THE HAPPINESS OF THE BLESSED CONSIDERED= as to the Particulars\n of their State: their Recognition of each other in that State:\n and its Differences of Degrees. To which are added Musings on\n the Church and her Services. By RICHARD MANT, D.D., sometime\n Lord Bishop of Down and Connor. New Edition. Small 8vo. 3s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_A welcome republication of a treatise once highly valued, and which\ncan never lose its value. Many of our readers already know the fulness\nand discrimination with which the author treats his subject, which must\nbe one of the most delightful topics of meditation to all whose heart\nis where the only true treasure is, and particularly to those who are\nentering upon the evening of life._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_The value of this book needs not to be referred to, its standard\ncharacter having been for many years past established. The edition in\nwhich it reappears has evidently been carefully prepared, and will be\nthe means of making it more generally known._\u201d\u2015\u2015BELL\u2019S MESSENGER.\n\n\u201c_All recognise the authority of the command to set the affections on\nthings above, and such works as the one now before us will be found\nhelpful towards this good end. We are, therefore, sincerely glad that\nMessrs. Rivington have brought out a new edition of Bishop Mant\u2019s\nvaluable treatise._\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n\u201c_This beautiful and devotional treatise, which it is impossible\nto read without feeling a more deepened interest in the eternal\nblessedness which awaits the true servants of our God, concludes very\nappropriately with \u2018Musings on the Church and her Services,\u2019 which we\ncordially recommend to our readers._\u201d\u2015\u2015ROCK.\n\n\n =THE SERVICES OF THE CHURCH.= Containing the Book of Common\n Prayer, the Proper Lessons and Psalms for Sundays and Holy\n Days, and the Daily Lessons, according to the Use of the\n Church of England. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.\n\n\n =THE BOOK OF LESSONS.= Containing the Proper Lessons and Psalms\n for Sundays and Holy Days, together with the Daily Lessons\n from the Calendar. Crown 8vo. 9s.\n\n\n =AIDS TO PRAYER; OR, THOUGHTS ON THE PRACTICE OF DEVOTION.=\n With Forms of Prayer for Private Use. By DANIEL MOORE, M.A.,\n Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen, and Vicar of Holy Trinity,\n Paddington, Author of \u201cSermons on Special Occasions,\u201d Hulsean\n Lectures on \u201cThe Age and the Gospel,\u201d &c. Second Edition.\n Square 32mo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_The valuable characteristic of this work will be recognised by every\nserious, thoughtful Christian, in a word, by all who perceive and\nlament the growing tendency to prefer the claims of external service,\necclesiastical controversy, or multiplied activities to the practice of\nprivate devotion. \u2018Aids to Prayer\u2019 offers both encouragement and help\nto those who aspire to higher attainments in the Divine Life. Every\npage bears the impress of a matured judgment, and of an experimental\nacquaintance with a subject confessedly difficult, and of supreme\nimportance._\u201d\u2015\u2015RECORD.\n\n\u201c_Eloquently, ably, and practically written._\u201d\u2015\u2015ENGLISH CHURCHMAN.\n\n\u201c_\u2018Aids to Prayer\u2019 has deservedly reached a second edition. The sermon\nmethod of treatment has been wisely discontinued._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\n =THE ATHANASIAN ORIGIN OF THE ATHANASIAN CREED.= By J.\u00a0S. BREWER,\n M.A., Preacher at the Rolls, and Honorary Fellow of Queen\u2019s\n College, Oxford. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.\n\n\n =THE REFORMATION OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND=: its History,\n Principles, and Results, A.D. 1514\u20121547. By JOHN HENRY BLUNT,\n M.A., Vicar of Kennington, Oxford. Second Edition. 8vo. 16s.\n\n\n =THE CHURCH BUILDER.= A Quarterly Journal of Church Extension\n in England and Wales. Published in connection with The\n Incorporated Church Building Society. With Illustrations.\n Annual Volumes. Crown 8vo. 1s. 6d. each.\n\n\n =PAROCHIAL AND PLAIN SERMONS.= By JOHN HENRY NEWMAN, B.D.,\n formerly Vicar of St. Mary\u2019s, Oxford. Edited by the Rev.\n W.\u00a0J. COPELAND, Rector of Farnham, Essex. From the Text of\n the last Editions published by Messrs. Rivington. 8 Volumes.\n Sold separately. Crown 8vo. 5s. each.\n\n\n =SERMONS BEARING UPON SUBJECTS OF THE DAY.= By JOHN HENRY NEWMAN,\n B.D. Edited by the Rev. W. J. COPELAND, Rector of Farnham,\n Essex. With an Index of Dates of all the Sermons. Crown 8vo.\n 5s.\n\n\n =FIFTEEN SERMONS PREACHED BEFORE THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD=,\n BETWEEN A.D. 1826 AND 1843. By JOHN HENRY NEWMAN, B.D.,\n sometime Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. New Edition. Crown\n 8vo. 5s.\n\n\n =HERBERT TRESHAM.= A Tale of the Great Rebellion. By the late\n Rev. J.\u00a0M. NEALE, D.D. New Edition. Small 8vo. 3s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_We cordially welcome a new edition of Dr. Neale\u2019s \u2018Herbert Tresham.\u2019\nThe scene is laid in the time of the great civil war, and vivid\npictures are drawn of some of the startling events that then disgraced\nthe history of this country. The martyrdom of Archbishop Laud is\ndescribed in a manner few besides its author could equal, while the\nnarration of the disastrous battle of Naseby, and the disgraceful\nsurrender of Bristol by Prince Rupert, afford proof of the versatility\nof his genius._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH TIMES.\n\n\u201c_A pleasant Christmas present is Dr. Neale\u2019s \u2018Herbert Tresham.\u2019 Such\na book is well calculated to correct current views of 17th century\nhistory._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH REVIEW.\n\n\u201c_Nothing could be more admirable as a Christmas present._\u201d\u2015\u2015CHURCH\nNEWS.\n\n\n =THE MANOR FARM: A TALE.= By M.\u00a0C. PHILLPOTTS, Author of \u201cThe\n Hillford Confirmation.\u201d With Illustrations. Small 8vo. 3s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_The Manor Farm, by Miss Phillpotts, author of the \u2018Hillford\nConfirmation,\u2019 is a pious story, which amongst other things shows the\ndawning of light in superstitious minds._\u201d\u2015\u2015MORNING POST.\n\n\u201c_\u2018The Manor Farm\u2019 relates how, under good influence, a selfish\ngirl became a useful and gentle daughter. The story is a capital\nillustration of the value of perseverance, and it is a book that will\nbe very useful in parochial reading libraries._\u201d\u2015\u2015JOHN BULL.\n\n\u201c_A prettily got-up and prettily written little book above the average\nof the class it belongs to._\u201d\u2015\u2015EDINBURGH COURANT.\n\n\n =PERRANZABULOE, THE LOST CHURCH FOUND=; Or the Church of England\n not a New Church, but Ancient, Apostolical, and Independent,\n and a Protesting Church Nine Hundred Years before the\n Reformation. By the Rev. C.\u00a0T. COLLINS TRELAWNY. Seventh\n Edition. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.\n\n\n =SACRED ALLEGORIES.= Illustrated Edition. By the Rev. W. ADAMS,\n M.A., late Fellow of Merton College, Oxford.\n\n The SHADOW of the CROSS. The DISTANT HILLS. The OLD MAN\u2019S\n HOME. The KING\u2019S MESSENGERS. New Edition in one Volume.\n Square 16mo. 5s.\n\n The Cheap Editions may still be had, 18mo., 1s. each, or 6d.\n in Paper Covers.\n\n\n =ENGLISH NURSERY RHYMES.= Translated into French. By JOHN\n ROBERTS, M.A., Fellow of Magdalene College, Cambridge. Square\n 16mo. 2s. 6d.\n\n =SICKNESS; ITS TRIALS AND BLESSINGS.= New Edition. Small 8vo.\n 3s. 6d.\n\n Also a Cheap Edition, 1s. 6d.; or in paper cover, 1s.\n\n\n =CATENA CLASSICORUM=\n\n _A Series of Classical Authors. Edited by Members of both\n Universities, under the Direction of the Rev. =Arthur Holmes=,\n M.A., Senior Fellow and Dean of Clare College, Cambridge, and\n late Preacher at the Chapel Royal, Whitehall; and the Rev.\n =Charles Bigg=, M.A., late Senior Student and Tutor of Christ\n Church, Oxford; Principal of Brighton College._\n\n _Sophoclis Tragoediae._\n\n =THE ELECTRA=, 3s. 6d. =THE AJAX=, 3s. 6d.\n Edited by R.\u00a0C. JEBB, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Trinity\n College, Cambridge, and Public Orator of the University.\n\n _Juvenalis Satirae._\n\n Edited by G.\u00a0A. SIMCOX, M.A., Fellow and Classical Lecturer of\n Queen\u2019s College, Oxford. New Edition, revised. 5s.\n\n _Thucydidis Historia._\n\n Edited by CHARLES BIGG, M.A., late Senior Student and Tutor of\n Christ Church, Oxford; Principal of Brighton College.\n Books I. and II., with Introductions. 6s.\n\n _Demosthenis Orationes Publicae._\n\n =THE OLYNTHIACS=, 2s. 6d. =THE PHILIPPICS=, 3s. =DE FALSA\n LEGATIONE=, 6s.\n Edited by G.\u00a0H. HESLOP, M.A., late Fellow and Assistant Tutor\n of Queen\u2019s College, Oxford; Head Master of St. Bees.\n\n _Aristophanis Comoediae._\n\n =THE ACHARNIANS and THE KNIGHTS=, 4s. =THE CLOUDS=, 3s. 6d.\n =THE WASPS=, 3s. 6d.\n Edited by W.\u00a0C. GREEN, M.A., late Fellow of King\u2019s College,\n Cambridge; Assistant Master at Rugby School.\n An Edition of =THE ACHARNIANS and THE KNIGHTS=, Revised and\n especially adapted for Use in Schools. 4s.\n\n _Isocratis Orationes._\n\n =AD DEMONICUM ET PANEGYRICUS=, 4s. 6d.\n Edited by JOHN EDWIN SANDYS, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of St.\n John\u2019s College, Classical Lecturer at Jesus College, Cambridge.\n\n _Persii Satirae._\n\n Edited by A. PRETOR, M.A., Fellow of St. Catherine\u2019s College,\n Cambridge, Classical Lecturer of Trinity Hall. 3s. 6d.\n\n _Homeri Ilias._\n\n Edited by S.\u00a0H. REYNOLDS, M.A., late Fellow and Tutor of\n Brasenose College, Oxford. Books I. to XII. 6s.\n\n _Terenti Comoediae._\n\n =ANDRIA ET EUNUCHUS=, 4s. 6d.\n Edited by T.\u00a0L. PAPILLON, M.A., Fellow of New College, Oxford,\n late Fellow of Merton.\n\n _Demosthenis Orationes._\n\n =DE CORONA=, 5s.\n Edited by the Rev. ARTHUR HOLMES, M.A., Senior Fellow and Dean\n of Clare College, Cambridge, and late Preacher at the Chapel\n Royal, Whitehall.\n\n _Herodoti Historia._\n\n Edited by H.\u00a0G. WOODS, Fellow and Tutor of Trinity College,\n Oxford.\n Book I. 6s. Book II. 5s.\n\n\n =RIVINGTON\u2019S MATHEMATICAL SERIES=\n\n =ALGEBRA.= Part I. By J. HAMBLIN SMITH, M.A., of Gonville and\n Caius College, and late Lecturer at St. Peter\u2019s College,\n Cambridge. Part\u00a0I. 12mo. 3s.; without Answers, 2s. 6d.\n\n\u201c_The design of this treatise is to explain all that is commonly\nincluded in a First Part of Algebra. In the arrangement of the chapters,\nI have followed the advice of experienced teachers. I have carefully\nabstained from making extracts from books in common use. The only work\nto which I am indebted for any material assistance is the Algebra of\nthe late Dean Peacock, which I took as the model for the commencement\nof my treatise. The examples, progressive and easy, have been selected\nfrom university and college examination papers, and from Old English,\nFrench, and German works._\u201d\u2015\u2015FROM THE PREFACE.\n\n\u201c_It is evident that Mr. Hamblin Smith is a teacher, and has written to\nmeet the special wants of students. He does not carry the student out\nof his depth by sudden plunges, but leads him gradually onward, never\nbeyond his depth from any desire to hurry forward. The examples appear\nto be particularly well arranged, so as to afford a means of steady\nprogress. With such books the judicious teacher will have abundant\nsupply of examples and problems for those who need to have each step\nensured by familiarity, and he will be able to allow the more rapid\nlearner to travel onward with ease and swiftness. We can confidently\nrecommend Mr. Hamblin Smith\u2019s books. Candidates preparing for Civil\nService examinations under the new system of open competition will find\nthese works to be of great value._\u201d\u2015\u2015CIVIL SERVICE GAZETTE.\n\n\n =EXERCISES ON ALGEBRA.= By J. HAMBLIN SMITH, M.A. Part\u00a0I. 12mo.\n 2s. 6d.\n\n\n =ELEMENTARY TRIGONOMETRY.= By J. HAMBLIN SMITH, M.A. Part\u00a0I.\n 12mo. 4s. 6d.\n\n\n =ELEMENTARY HYDROSTATICS.= By J. HAMBLIN SMITH, M.A. Part\u00a0I.\n 12mo. 3s.\n\n\n =ELEMENTS OF GEOMETRY.= By J. HAMBLIN SMITH, M.A. Containing\n the First Six and portions of the Eleventh and Twelfth\n Books of Euclid, with Exercises and Notes, arranged with the\n Abbreviations admitted in the Cambridge Examinations. 12mo,\n 3s. 6d.\n\n Part I., containing the First Two Books of Euclid, with\n Exercises and Notes. 12mo, 2s.; limp cloth, 1s. 6d.\n\n Part II., containing the Third and Fourth Books of Euclid,\n with Exercises and Notes. 12mo, 2s.; limp cloth, 1s. 6d.\n\n Part III., containing the Fifth and Sixth and portions of the\n Eleventh and Twelfth Books of Euclid, with Exercises and\n Notes. 12mo, 2s.; limp cloth, 1s. 6d.\n\n\n =ELEMENTARY STATICS.= By J. HAMBLIN SMITH, M.A. 12mo. 3s.\n\n \u2042 _Other Volumes are in preparation._\n\n\n =SELECT PLAYS OF SHAKSPERE=\n\n _RUGBY EDITION. With an Introduction and Notes to each Play.\n Small 8vo._\n\n =AS YOU LIKE IT.= Edited by the Rev. CHARLES E. MOBERLY, M.A.,\n Assistant Master in Rugby School, formerly Scholar of Balliol\n College, Oxford 2s.; paper cover, 1s. 6d.\n\n\n =MACBETH.= Edited by the same. 2s.; paper cover, 1s. 6d.\n\n\n =CORIOLANUS.= Edited by ROBERT WHITELAW, M.A., Assistant Master\n in Rugby School, formerly Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.\n 2s. 6d.; paper cover, 2s.\n\n\n =HAMLET.= Edited by the Rev. CHARLES E. MOBERLY, M.A. 2s. 6d.;\n in paper cover, 2s.\n\n\n =THE TEMPEST.= Edited by J. SURTEES PHILLPOTTS, M.A., Assistant\n Master in Rugby School, formerly Fellow of New College, Oxford.\n [_In preparation._\n\n =MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING.= Edited by the same. [_In preparation._\n\n \u2042 _Other Plays are in preparation._\n\n\n =LATIN PROSE EXERCISES.= Being Easy Graduated English Sentences\n for Translation into Latin, with Rules, Explanations, a\n Vocabulary, and Index. Intended for the Use of Beginners and\n Junior Forms of Schools. By R. PROWDE SMITH, B.A., Assistant\n Master at the Grammar School, Henley-on-Thames. Crown 8vo.\n 2s. 6d.\n\n\n =SELECTIONS FROM LUCIAN.= With English Notes. By EVELYN ABBOTT,\n Assistant Master in Clifton College. Small 8vo. 3s. 6d.\n\n\n =SCENES FROM GREEK PLAYS.= Rugby Edition. Abridged and adapted\n for the Use of Schools, by ARTHUR SIDGWICK, M.A., Assistant\n Master at Rugby School, and formerly Fellow of Trinity College,\n Cambridge.\n\n ARISTOPHANES. The Clouds. The Frogs. The Knights. Plutus.\n\n EURIPIDES. Iphigenia in Taurus. The Cyclops. Ion.\n\n Small 8vo. 1s. 6d. each, or 1s. in paper cover.\n\n\n =MESSRS. RIVINGTON\u2019S COMPLETE SCHOOL CATALOGUE=, with Press\n Notices and Specimen Pages, may be had on application.\n\n\n\n\n INDEX\n (to the Catalog)\n\n\n PAGE\n ABBOTT (Evelyn), Selections from Lucian, 30\n\n Adams (W.), Holy Week, 3\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Sacred Allegories, 27\n\n \u00c0 Kempis, Imitation of Christ, 22\n\n Alford (Henry), Greek Testament, 16\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, New Testament for English Readers, 16\n\n Andrewes (Bishop Lancelot), Manual for the Sick, 18\n\n Annotated Prayer Book, By J. H. Blunt, 13\n\n Annual Register, 10\n\n Aristophanis Comoediae, by W.\u00a0C. Green, 28\n\n Aristophanes (Scenes from), by Sidgwick, 30\n\n Avancini, Vita et Doctrina Jesu Christi, 16\n\n\n BICKERSTETH (E.\u00a0H.), Two Brothers, 7\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Yesterday, To-Day, etc., 7\n\n Bigg (Chas), Thucydidis Historia, 28\n\n Blunt (J.\u00a0H.) Directorium Pastorale, 6\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Household Theology, 13\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Key to Bible, 20\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Key to Church Catechism, 20\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Key to Church History (Ancient), 20\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Key to Church History (Modern), 21\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Key to Common Prayer, 20\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Reformation, 26\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, and Norris (J.\u00a0P.), Keys to Christian\n Knowledge, 20\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, and Phillimore (G.\u00a0F.), Book of Church Law, 1\n\n Body (George), Life of Justification, 9\n\n Book of Lessons, 26\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, The, Church Law, 1\n\n Brewer (J.\u00a0S.), Athanasian Creed, 26\n\n Bright (A.\u00a0W.), and Medd (P.\u00a0G.), Liber Precum\n Publicarum, 13\n\n Bruton (E.\u00a0G.), Ecclesiastical Dilapidations, 7\n\n\n CAMPION (W.\u00a0M.) and Beamont (W.\u00a0J.), Prayer Book\n Interleaved, 10\n\n Catena Classicorum, 28\n\n Chilcot (William), Evil Thoughts, 23\n\n Church Builder, 26\n\n Common Prayer and Ordinal, 1549, 16\n\n Companion to Old Testament, 14\n\n Consolatio, by C.\u00a0E. Kennaway, 6\n\n\n DEMOSTHENIS ORATIONES, by Arthur Holmes, 28\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Publicae, by G.\u00a0H. Heslop, 28\n\n Dictionary of Theology, 24\n\n D\u00f6llinger (John J. Ign. Von.), Fables respecting\n the Popes, &c., 14\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Lectures on Reunion, 3\n\n Dominican Artist (A), 4\n\n\n EDWARD VI., First Book of Common Prayer of, 16\n\n Euripides, Scenes from, by Sidgwick, 30\n\n\n FIELD (Walter), Stones of the Temple, 8\n\n Fosbery (T.\u00a0V.), Hymns and Poems, &c., 7\n\n\n GLOSSARY of Ecclesiastical Terms, by Orby Shipley, 7\n\n Goulburn (Dean), Manual of Confirmation, 6\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Family Prayers, 6\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Pursuit of Holiness, 6\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Thoughts on Personal Religion, 1\n\n Gould (S.\u00a0B.) Curious Myths, &c., 17\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Religious Belief, 3\n\n Gratry (P\u00e8re), Henri Perreyve, 5\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Last Days of, 5\n\n Greek Testament, by Dean Alford, 16\n\n Green (W.\u00a0C.), Aristophanis Comoediae, 28\n\n Guide to Heaven, 2\n\n Gurney (Augustus), Home Life of Jesus of\n Nazareth, 12\n\n\n HADDAN (A.\u00a0W.), Apostolic Succession, 18\n\n Help and Comfort for the Sick Poor, 18\n\n Herbert (George), Poems and Proverbs, 23\n\n Herodoti Historia, by H. G. Woods, 28\n\n Hidden Life of the Soul, 4\n\n Hodgson (Chris.), Instructions for the Clergy, 16\n\n Holmes (Arthur), Demosthenis Orationes, 28\n\n Homeri Ilias, by. S.\u00a0H. Reynolds, 28\n\n Hook (W.\u00a0F.), Family Prayers, 6\n\n Hoole (Chas. H.), Shepherd of Hermas, 6\n\n Hymns and Poems, by T. V. Fosbery, 7\n\n\n IMITATION of Christ, 22\n\n Isocratis Orationes, by John Edwin Sandys, 28\n\n\n JANUS, Pope and Council, 17\n\n Jebb (R.\u00a0C.), Sophoclis Tragoediae, 28\n\n Juvenalis Satirae, by G.\u00a0A. Simcox, 28\n\n\n KAY (W.) on the Psalms, 13\n\n Keys to Christian Knowledge, 19, 20\n\n Kennaway (C.\u00a0E.), Consolatio, 6\n\n\n LETTERS from Rome on the Council, by Quirinus, 17\n\n Liber Precum Publicarum, 13\n\n Liddon (H.\u00a0P.), Bampton Lectures, 13\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Elements of Religion, 13\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, University Sermons, 13\n\n Louise, Life of Madame, de France, 4\n\n Lyte (Henry F.), Poems, 11\n\n\n MACCOLL (M.), Damnatory Clauses, etc., 7\n\n Mahan (Milo), Church History, 12\n\n Mant (Richard), Ancient Hymns, 7\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Happiness of the Blessed, 26\n\n Melvill (Henry), Sermons, 15\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Latter Sermons, 15\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Sermons on Less Prominent Facts, 15\n\n Mercier (Anne), Our Mother Church, 15\n\n Moberly (George), Brighstone Sermons, 3\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Great Forty Days, 3\n\n Monsell (John S.\u00a0B.), Parish Musings, 8\n\n Moore (Daniel), Aids to Prayer, 26\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Sermons, 9\n\n Mozley\u2019s (J.\u00a0B.) Lectures on the Miracles, 11\n\n\n NEALE (J.\u00a0M.), Herbert Tresham, 27\n\n Newman (J.\u00a0H.), Sermons, 27\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Sermons, Oxford University, 27\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Sermons, Subjects of the Day, 27\n\n New Testament by Henry Alford, 16\n\n Norris (J.\u00a0B.), Key to the Acts, 21\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Key to the Four Gospels, 21\n\n\n PAPILLON (T.\u00a0L.), Terenti Comoediae, 28\n\n Path of Holiness, 2\n\n Perraud (P\u00e8re A.), Last Days of P\u00e8re Gratry, 5\n\n Perreyve (Henri), Life of, 5\n\n Persii Satirae, by A. Pretor, 28\n\n Phillpotts (M.\u00a0C.), Hillford Confirmation, 18\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Manor Farm, 27\n\n Pope, The, and the Council, by Janus, 17\n\n Prayer Book Interleaved, 10\n\n Prayers and Meditations for Holy Communion, 10\n\n\n QUIRINUS, Letters from Rome, 17\n\n\n REYNOLDS (S.\u00a0H.), Homeri Ilias, 28\n\n Ridley (W.\u00a0H.), Bible Readings, 11\n\n Rivington\u2019s Devotional Series, 22\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015 Mathematical Series, 29\n\n Roberts (John), English Nursery Rhymes, 27\n\n Romanoff (H.\u00a0C.), Historical Narratives, 10\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Rites and Customs of the Greco-Russian\n Church, 14\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, S. John Chrysostom\u2019s Liturgy, 11\n\n Rossetti (Maria F.), Shadow of Dante, 8\n\n\n SALES (S. Francis de), Devout Life, 23\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Letters, 6\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Life, 5\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Spirit, 5\n\n Sandys (J.\u00a0E.), Isocratis Orationes, 28\n\n Scudamore (W.\u00a0E.), Manual of Prayers, 12\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Notitia Eucharistica, 12\n\n Self-Renunciation, 3\n\n Services of the Church, 26\n\n Shakspere\u2019s As You Like It, 30\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015 Coriolanus, 30\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015 Hamlet, 30\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015 Macbeth, 30\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015 Much Ado about Nothing, 30\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015 Tempest, 30\n\n Shepherd of Hermas, 6\n\n Shipley (Orby), Glossary of Ecclesiastical Terms, 7\n\n Sickness; Its Trials, &c., 27\n\n Sidgwick\u2019s Scenes from Greek Plays, 30\n\n Simcox (G.\u00a0A.), Juvenalis Satirae, 28\n\n Smith (J.\u00a0H.), Algebra, Part\u00a0I., 29\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Algebra, Exercises on, 29\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Geometry, 29\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Hydrostatics, 29\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Statics, 29\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Trigonometry, 29\n\n Smith (R. Prowde), Latin Prose Exercises, 30\n\n Sophoclis Tragoediae, by R.\u00a0C. Jebb, 28\n\n Stainer (John), Theory of Harmony, 11\n\n Star of Childhood, 2\n\n Stephens (A.\u00a0J.), Argument: Sheppard v. Bennett, 14\n\n Stone (S.\u00a0J.), Poems, 9\n\n Sutton (Fred.\u00a0H.), Church Organs, 11\n\n\n TAYLOR (Jeremy), Holy Dying, 22\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Holy Living, 22\n\n Terenti Comoediae, by T. L. Papillon, 28\n\n Thucydidis Historia, by Chas. Bigg, 28\n\n Treasury of Devotion, 2\n\n Trelawny, (C.\u00a0T.\u00a0C.), Perranzabuloe, 27\n\n\n WALTON (H.\u00a0B.), and Medd (P.\u00a0G.), Common Prayer\n and Ordinal, 1549, 16\n\n Way of Life, 2\n\n Williams (Isaac), Devotional Commentary, 19\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Female Scripture Characters, 18\n\n \u2015\u2015\u2015\u2015, Old Testament Characters, 18\n\n Wilson (Bishop), Lord\u2019s Supper, 22\n\n Woods (H.\u00a0G.), Herodoti Historia, 28\n\n Wordsworth (Charles), Catechesis, 11","title":"A commentary on Ecclesiastes","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":82908}