Ecclesiastes 1:11

“[There] is no remembrance of former [things], etc.] Which is the reason why some things that are really old are thought to be new; because either the memories of men fail them, they do not remember the customs and usages which were in the former part of their own lives, now grown old; or they are ignorant of what were in ages past, through want of history, or defect in it; either they have no history at all, or what they have is false; or if true, as there is very little that is so, it is very deficient; and, among the many things that have been, very few are transmitted to posterity, so that the memory of things is lost; therefore who can say with certainty of anything, this is new, and was…”

“The reason why some things are thought "new," which are not really so, is the imperfect record that exists of preceding ages among their successors. those that . . . come after--that is, those that live still later than the "things, rather the persons or generations, Ecc 1:4, with which this verse is connected, the six intermediate verses being merely illustrations of Ecc 1:4 [WEISS], that are to come" (Ecc 2:16; Ecc 9:5).”

“Things - Rather, men. return to 'Top of Page'”

“No remembrance - This seems to be added to prevent the objection, There are many inventions and enjoyments unknown to former ages. To this he answers, This objection is grounded only upon our ignorance of ancient times which if we exactly knew or remembered, we should easily find parallels to all present occurrences. There are many thousands of remarkable speeches and actions done in this and the following ages which neither are, nor ever will be, put into the publick records or histories, and consequently must unavoidably be forgotten in succeeding ages; and therefore it is just and reasonable to believe the same concerning former ages. Ecclesiastes 1:12”

“1:11 no one will remember: We cannot count on anyone remembering anything that we think we have achieved.”

“There is: Ecc 2:16; Psa 9:6; Isa 41:22-26, Isa 42:9 Ecclesiastes 1:12”

“"There is no remembrance of ancestors; and also of the later ones who shall come into existence, there will be no remembrance for them with those who shall come into existence after them." With זכּרון (with Kametz) there is also זכרון, the more common form by our author, in accordance with the usage of his age; Gesen., Elst., and others regard it here and at Ecc 2:16 as constr., and thus לרא as virtually object-gen. (Jerome, non est priorum memoria); but such refinements of the old syntaxis ornata are not to be expected in our author: he changes (according to the traditional punctuation) here the initial sound, as at Ecc 1:17 the final sound, to oth and uth. אין ל is the contrast of היה ל:…”