“... Although parallels between the Psalms of Solomon have been drawn in various directions, the only sure dependence between them and another apocryphal writing is between Psalms of Solomon 11:2-5 and 1 Baruch 5:5-8. Some scholars extend this alignment to include a larger section (1Bar 4:36-5:9 with PssSol 11) or find other parallels (1Bar 4:26 and PssSol 8:17; 1Bar 4:20 and PssSol 2:21-23) or even expand the parallels to include all of 1 Baruch. [...] A few have detected a dependence of Psalms of Solomon upon 1 Baruch, usually from the observation that the Baruch parallels fit their context and that the themes described are those appropriate to the Babylonian exile. However, most scholars insist that 1 Baruch is dependent upon the Psalms of Solomon because stanza seven of Baruch's "Poem of Consolation and Hope" (1Bar 5:5-9) is longer, disjunctive, and somewhat diffused, while the psalm is a tightly arranged and wholly consistent composition. It seems clear that the Psalms of Solomon are not dependent upon 1 Baruch. It is not impossible, however, that they both are quoting some lost liturgical poem. But without the recovery of this hypothetical source, we may for the present assume that 1 Baruch is dependent upon the Psalms of Solomon. ...”

“... The almost unanimous conviction of scholars is that the original language of the Psalms of Solomon was Hebrew. Yet, the verbatim parallels between Baruch and the Psalms of Solomon are in Greek. This means that one can assume the possible interchange between the two authors when both texts existed in their actual, Greek form. As Baruch clearly does not depend on the Psalms of Solomon, just two solutions remain: either Psalms of Solomon 11 depends on Baruch, or both on a common source. Although there are differences between the two versions, the close verbal similarities [...] rule out the possibility that two completely independent authors would produce such consonant texts. ...”