Is there any thing, etc. - The original is beautiful. "Is there any thing which will say, See this! it is new?" Men may say this of their discoveries, etc.; but universal nature says, It is not new. It has been, and it will be.

Is there any thing whereof it may be said, see, this is new?.... This is an appeal to all men for the truth of the above observation, and carries in it a strong denial that there is anything new under the sun; and is an address to men to inquire into the truth of it, and thoroughly examine it, and see if they can produce any material objection to it; look into the natural world, and the same natural causes will be seen producing the same effects; or into the moral world, and there are the same virtues, and their contrary; or into the political world, and the same schemes are forming and pursuing, and which issue in the same things, peace or war; or into the learned world, and the same languages, arts, and sciences, are taught and learned; and the same things said over again (i): or into the mechanic world, and the same trades and businesses are carrying on: or the words may be considered as a concession, and carry in them the form of an objection, "there is a thing (k) whereof it may be said", or a man may say, "see, this is new"; so the Targum; there were some things in Solomon's time it is allowed that might be objected, as there are in ours, to which the answer is,

it hath been already of old time which was before us; what things are reckoned new are not so; they were known and in use in ages past, long before we had a being. R. Alshech takes the words to be an assertion, and not an interrogation, and interprets it of a spiritual temple in time to come, which yet was created before the world was.

(i) "Nullum est jam dictum, quod non dictum sit prius", Terent Prolog. Eunuch. v. 41. (k) "est quidpiam", Pagninus, Mercerus, Gejerus; "est res", Drusius, Cocceius, Rambachius.

"Is there anything whereof it may be said: See, this is new? - it was long ago through the ages (aeons) which have been before us." The Semit. substantive verb ישׁ (Assyr. isu) has here the force of a hypothetical antecedent: supposing that there is a thing of which one might say, etc. The זה, with Makkeph, belongs as subject, as at Ecclesiastes 7:27, Ecclesiastes 7:29 as object, to that which follows. כּבר (vid., List, p. 193) properly denotes length or greatness of time (as כּברה, length of way). The ל of לע is that of measure: this "long ago" measured (Hitz.) after infinitely long periods of time. מלּ, ante nos, follows the usage of מלּף, Isaiah 41:26, and lpaa', Judges 1:10, etc.; the past time is spoken of as that which was before, for it is thought of as the beginning of the succession of time (vid., Orelli, Synon. der Zeit u. Ewigkeit, p. 14f.). The singular היה may also be viewed as pred. of a plur. inhumanus in order; but in connection, Ecclesiastes 2:7, Ecclesiastes 2:9 (Gesen. 147, An. 2), it is more probable that it is taken as a neut. verb. That which newly appears has already been, but had been forgotten; for generations come and generations go, and the one forgets the other.

Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.

10. old time-Hebrew, "ages."

which was-The Hebrew plural cannot be joined to the verb singular. Therefore translate: "It hath been in the ages before; certainly it hath been before us" [Holden]. Or, as Maurer: "That which has been (done) before us (in our presence, 1Ch 16:33), has been (done) already in the old times."

1:9-11 Men's hearts and their corruptions are the same now as in former times; their desires, and pursuits, and complaints, still the same. This should take us from expecting happiness in the creature, and quicken us to seek eternal blessings. How many things and persons in Solomon's day were thought very great, yet there is no remembrance of them now!