[413]. ‘Cairo, the Old in the New,’ Contemp. Rev., xliii. 852.

[414]. Records of the Past, vi. 127.

[415]. Geiger, Urschrift, pp. 60, 61; Nöldeke, Die alttestamentliche Literatur., p. 175; Kuenen, Hist.-krit. Onderzoek., iii. 188. Theologisch. Tijdschrift, 1883, p. 143.

[416]. See reference, p. [280].

[417]. In the Theologisches Literaturblatt, Sept. 19, 1884.

[418]. Van der Palm first conjectured that passages had been misplaced, and Grätz has adopted the idea (Kohélet, pp. 40-43).

[419]. Comp. Rashbam’s interpolation theory (Ginsburg, Coheleth, p. 42).

[420]. See Budde’s review of Bickell’s work in the Theologische Literaturzeitung, Feb. 7, 1885.

[421]. On Aquila and his theory of interpretation, comp. Renan, L’Ecclésiaste, p. 54; and on his artificial vocabulary, Field’s remarks, Hexapla, Prolegomena, p. xxii.

[422]. Kohélet, Anhang. Before Grätz, Frankel was already inclined to think that the Septuagint version might be really Aquila’s (Vorstudien, p. 238, note w). So more positively Freudenthal. Renan inclines to agree with Grätz.