Cohdeth is the fourth of the five A•egriloth or books 0-164in tynn) which are annually read in the synagogue at five appointed seasons. Its occupy ing the fourth position in the present arrangement of the Hebrew canon, is owing to the fact that the Feast of Tabernacles, on which it is read, is theJhurth of these occasions.
6. Literature On the Book.—Of primary import ance to the literary history of this book are the ancient versions—viz., the Sept., the fragments of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus, the Vul gate, St. Jerome's translation and commentary (Opp. torn. ii.) The long neglected Syriac version in Walton's Polyglot, and separately published by the Bible Society, is the best of all, and is of ines timable value for the interpretation of this book ; the translator often reproducing in his version the very roots, and following the order of the original Hebrew. The Chaldee Paraphrase, too, is very valuable, inasmuch as it embodies the IIagadic mode in which this book was interpreted, and thus furnishes us with the sources whence the ancient versions derived their deviations from the text. From St. Jerome down to the time of the Refor mation, nothing is to be found in the Christian Church of any value to the elucidation of this book. The Jews, however, both in the East and in Europe, were busily engaged during this time in explaining the word of God ; and as results of these labours we have the Commentary of the im mortal Rashi (1040-1 ro5 A.D.), the founder of the Germano-French school of interpreters (in the Rabbinic Bibles) ; the elegant exposition of this book by the cultivated and far-seeing Rashbam (1085-1155), edited by Dr. Adolph Jellinek, Leip zig, 1833 ; the thoroughly grammatical commen tary by the erudite Ibn Ezra (1092-1167 A.D.), given in the Rabbinic Bibles; and a host of others, some still unpublished, and dispersed through the public libraries of Europe, and some published, but not of sufficient importance to be enumerated. With the Reformation, we have the revival of biblical literature, and as its result Luther's excel lent Latin commentary on this book (Wurtenberg, 1532), which was so highly regarded that it was translated the following year into German by the reformer's friend Justus Jonas (Wurtenberg, 1533). This was followed by Melanchthon's valuable com mentary (Wurtenberg, 1556). In our own country the reformers were more dependent upon the Ger mans for their biblical knowledge, and the first commentary on Ecclesiastes in the English language is a translation of Luther's work (printed by Sohn Daye, dwellyng ones- Aldersgate, 1573); we then have the more independent but less valuable trans lation of Ecclesiastes, with an introduction by ` the far-famed Hebraist' Hugh Broughton, for the instruction of Prince Henry, our hope' (1605).
And now the Roman Catholics were fairly roused by the Protestant zeal for elucidating the Bible, and the result of it was the unparalleled commentary of the Jesuit Pineda (AntwerpiT, 1620). In this most elaborate work, Pincda gives a thorough digest of all that the Fathers and others have said upon each verse, nine different versions in nine parallel columns at the end of each chapter—viz., the Vulg., the Venice version, that of our countryman Robert Shirwode 0523), translations of the Sept., Syriac, Arabic, the Brylinger version (15S2), and two versions of the Chaldee Paraphrase, the one by Zomara from the Complutensian Bible, and the other by Peter Costus, published in 1354 ; and a catena of the Greek Fathers. This work is indis pensable to the historico-critical expositor. Pass ing over a number of minor works, we come to the commentary of Grotiu which gave a new tone to the interpretation of Ecclesiastes. This was followed by the excellent commentary on Ecclesiastes by Bishop Reynolds, in what is called ' the Assembly's Annotations,' and afterwards re printed separately (London, 1669). It is impos sible to enumerate in our brief space the corn. mentaries on this book which now began to issue from the press. The most important for the biblical student are the commentaries of Desvoeux (London, 1760) ; Mendelssohn, translated by Pres ton (Cambridge, 1853) ; Rosenmiiller (Scholia in Vet. Test., p. 9, vol. ii.) ; Knobel (Leipzig, 1S36); Herzfeld (Brunswick, IS3S) ; Ewald (Got tingen, 1837) ; Noyes (Boston and London, 1846); Cahen (La Bible, torn. xvi., Paris, 1848) ; Hitzig (Exeget. Handb. vii., Leipzig, 1847); Heiligstedt's continuation of Maurer (Leipzig, tS48) ; Stuart (New York, 1851) ; Philippson (Die Israelitische Ethel, vol. iii., Leipzig, 183.1) ; Elster (Gottingen, 1855) ; Vaihinger (Stuttgart, I83S) ; and Heng stenberg, translated into English in Clark's Foreign Theological Lib. (Edinburgh, IS6o). For a further analysis of these commentaries, as well as for a more extensive treatment upon the points handled in this article, we must refer to our His torical and Critical Commentary on Ecclesiastes (Longman, IS6r).—C. D. G.