book as a whole. Unlike the introduction, the epilogue has an overt evaluative force, and so its importance for addressing the issue at hand is apparent. The basic question is: Does the epilogue give a fundamentally negative or positive evaluation of the words of Qohelet? Is the purpose of the epilogue to correct the errant theology of Qohelet or to confirm his observations? I take the view that the epilogue fundamentally supports Qohelet’s observations while at the same time offering a mild “corrective”