No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Song of Songs: an Examination of Recent Theory
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
Extract
The history of the interpretation of the Song of Songs is a fascinating, if inconclusive, study in the ingenuity of the interpreters. Bach has but to bring to the Song what he desires to find in it, and behold! it lies plain before him. And hence the pages of the commentaries are strewn with the strange extravagances that have been imported to becloud its apparent meaning. The older allegorical theory has fallen into disrepute because it is recognized that it built on subjective fancies; the dramatic theories have also lost the favour they enjoyed in the nineteenth century because it is recognized that the edifying plots they displayed were merely the creations of their discoverers; the wedding-cycle theory has lost something of the impetus Budde gave it because, while its point of departure was not an editor's fancy but an actual modern practice, it has to be forced upon the Song across a great gulf of centuries rather than found there.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1938
References
page 251 note 1 Cf. Assembly's, WestminsterAnnotations upon all the Books of the Old and New Testament, 2nd ed., 1651, iGoogle Scholar, Introduction to the annotations on the Song of Solomon (the pages are not numbered): “It is not unknown to the learned, what the obscurity and darkiiesse of this Book hath ever been accounted, and what great variety of Interpreters, and Interpretations have indeavoured to clear it, but with so ill successe many times, that they have rather increased, then removed the cloud.”
page 251 note 2 Published in AJSL., xxxix, 1922–1923, pp. 1–14Google Scholar, under the title “Canticles and the Tammuz Cult”.
page 251 note 3 “The Song of Songs and the Fertility Cult,” in The Song of Songs: a symposium (ed. Schoff, Wt. H.), 1924, pp. 48–79Google Scholar; and “Babylonian Parallels to the Song of Songs,” in JBL., xliii, 1924, pp. 245–252Google Scholar.
page 252 note 1 “The Offering Lists in the Song of Songs,” in The Song of Songs: a symposium, pp. 80–120.
page 252 note 2 Die Hebräer: Kanaan im Zeitalter der hebräischen Wanderung und hebräischer Staatengründungen, 1906, pp. 196–202. Erbt's view was criticized by Zapletal, V., Das Hohelied, 1907, pp. 52–6Google Scholar.
page 252 note 3 Le Cantique des Cantiques et le Mythe d'Osiris-Hetep.
page 252 note 4 The Solomon of history is dissolved by this author into mere myth and legend (pp. 21 ff.).
page 252 note 5 pp. 16 f.
page 252 note 6 pp. 17 f.
page 252 note 7 p. 21.
page 252 note 8 p. 32. Similarly he argues that the kiss of Judas was not the kiss of betrayal, but the kiss of resurrection, which has been wrongly changed by tradition, and claims that the fact that the kiss was given in the garden of Gethsemane = 
(cf. the part played by spices in the Song of Songs) supports this view (p. 34).
page 253 note 1 Halévy, J. devoted a few scornful pages (Revue Sémitique, xxii, 1914, pp. 248–255)Google Scholar to it, and concluded “Je renonce à répondre aux grossièretés gratuites de I'auteur et lui souhaite une plus grande dose de bons sens et de modestie”.
page 253 note 2 Keilschrifttexte aus Assur religiösen Inhalts, vol. i, Heft 4, 1919, No. 158 (pp. 267–276)Google Scholar. Cf. p. 352, where the text is described as a “Katalog von Hymnen Anfängen an verschiedene Götter”.
page 253 note 3 See Langdon, S., Babylonian Liturgies, 1913Google Scholar, and now, more recently, Witzel, M., Tammuz-Liturgien und Verwandtes (Analecta Orientalia, x), 1935Google Scholar.
page 253 note 4 Cf. MDOG., 58, 1917, pp. 49 f.
page 253 note 5 “Babylonian and Hebrew Musical Terms,” in JRAS., 1921, pp. 171–191Google Scholar. See especially pp. 183–190.
page 253 note 6 Cf. JBL., xliii, 1924, pp. 245–252Google Scholar.
page 253 note 7 Cf. Archæology and the Bible, 6th ed., 1933, pp. 518–520. It may be noted here that Barton's view of the Song of Songs is not quite clear. He quotes (pp. 515 ff.) some Egyptian parallels to the Song, and comments that they “make it clear that in Egypt love …was as warmly felt as in Israel, and was likewise poetically and passionately expressed”. Since the parallels adduced are not presented as liturgies, it would seem that Barton regarded the Song merely as amorous poetry. The Babylonian parallel he quotes, however, he presents as a cult poem of the Tammuz. worship. But since he then defines the theme simply as two lovers' praises for one another's charms, and the delight in love, it is not certain that he attaches himself to the theory of Meek.
page 253 note 8 Cf. von Baudissin, , Adonis und Esmun, 1911Google Scholar; Langdon, S., Tammuz and Ishtar 1914Google Scholar; Frazer, J. G., Adonis, Attis, Osiris, 3rd ed., 2 vols., 1914Google Scholar; Gressmann, H., “Tod und Auferstehung des Osiris,” Der Alte Orient, xxiii, 3, 1923Google Scholar.
page 254 note 1 Cf. Virolleaud, Ch., “Un poeme phenicien de Ras Shamra: la lutte de Mot, fils des dieux, et d'Aleīn, fils de Baal,” in Syria, xii, 1931, pp. 193–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar; id., “The Gods of Phœnicia, as revealed by the Poem of Ras Shamra,” in Antiquity, v, 1931, pp. 405–414; Dussaud, R., “La mythologie Phénieienne d'après les tablettes de Ras Shamra,” in RHR., civ, 1931, pp. 353–408Google Scholar; id., “Le mythe de Ba'al et d'Aliyan d'après des documents nouveaux,” ibid., cxi, 1935, pp. 5–65; Graham, W. C., “Recent Light on the Cultural Origins of the Hebrews,” in Journal of Beligion, xiv, 1934, pp. 306–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nielsen, D., Ras Šamra Mythologie und Biblische Theologie, 1936Google Scholar; Dussaud, R., Les Découvertes de Bas Shamra et l'Ancien Testament, 1937Google Scholar. Cf. also Myth and Ritual (ed. by Hooke, S. H.), 1933Google Scholar, for the wide range of the influence of the associated cults.
page 254 note 2 Cf. ZDMG., lxxviii, 1924, p. lxviii fGoogle Scholar. (brief report of a paper read to the German Orientalists at Munich).
page 254 note 3 Le Perle della Bibbia: Il Cantico dei Cantid e l'Ecclesiaste, 1924. Cf. pp. 22 f.: “In questo senso il Cantico è tutto quanto poesia mistica. È un inno simbolico in cui si rappresenta una viva realtà naturale ed umana: la fecondata bellezza della terra e del cielo, al rinascere dell'anno, che è poi primavera della vita per la virtù dell'amore nel rinnovarsi delle anime. E i due amanti sono i simboli vivi della universale rinascita, non oscuramente indicati come tali dal poeta medesimo. Peró tutto il Cantico è un inno alia primavera, l'esaltazione lirica della nuova creazione attuata dalla potenza divina immanente nelle cose; ed è in pari tempo anehe un dramma, l'espressione rituale, in forme umane, delle profonde potenze spirituali che operano, palesi insieme e occulte, nella natura visibile…. Il Cantico è una poetica celebrazione della primavera e dell'amore, per via di simboli mitici, aventi valore ad un tempo naturale e umano; i due amanti figurano o sostituiscono originariamente due divinità, rappresentano un mito, o, per essere esatti, i residui letterarii di un mito.”
page 254 note 4 “The Rôle of Solomon in the Song of Songs,” in JBL., xliv, 1925, pp. 171–187Google Scholar.
page 255 note 5 Das Hohe Lied und seine Beziehungen turn Istarkult, 1926. Cf. especially pp. 179–217.
page 255 note 6 “The Song of Songs: the dances of the virgins,” in AJSL., 1, 1933–1934, pp. 129–142Google Scholar.
page 255 note 7 Culture and Conscience, 1936, pp. 122 f.
page 255 note 1 The Song of Songs, 1936.
page 255 note 2 Review of The Song of Songs: a symposium, in GSAI., N.S., i, 1925–1928, pp. 166–173Google Scholar (in fasc. 2, dated Jan.–Mar., 1926).
page 255 note 3 “Is Canticles an Adonis Litany ?” in JAOS., xlvi, 1926, pp. 154–164Google Scholar.
page 255 note 4 Il Cantico del Cantici, 1928, pp. 117–120, 289 f.
page 255 note 5 OLZ., xxxi, 1928Google Scholar, cols. 113–5.
page 256 note 1 Psalmenstudien, i, 1921Google Scholar. In Psalmenstudien, iii, 1923, pp. 96–101Google Scholar, Mowinckel argues that Ps. xlv, whose similarity to the Song of Songs has long been recognized, is a ritual Psalm of prophetic import.
page 256 note 2 “Essai d'analyse de Nahoum, i, 2–ii, 3,” in ZAW., xliv, 1926, pp. 266–280Google Scholar; “La Vision de Nahoum, ii, 4–11,” in Archiv für Orientforschung, v, 1928–1929, pp. 14–19Google Scholar; and “Le problème du livre de Nahoum,” in RHPR., xii, 1932, pp. 1–15Google Scholar.
page 256 note 3 RGG., 2nd ed., ii, 1928Google Scholar, cols. 1556 f. So also Sellin, , Einleitung in das Alte Testament, 7th ed., 1935, p. 119Google Scholar.
page 256 note 4 AJSL., xxxix, 1922–1923, p. 3Google Scholar.
page 256 note 5 With AV., following Kimhi and Ibn Ezra; so also Duhm, Marti, and Gray. Procksch objects that Pilpel from a 
root is improbable.
page 257 note 1 Symposium, p. 48 n.
page 257 note 2 Journal of Religion, xiv, 1934, p. 315Google Scholar.
page 257 note 3 Symposium, p. 67.
page 257 note 4 JAOS., xlvi, 1926, p. 157Google Scholar. But cf. Baudissin, , Adonis und Esmun, 1911, p. 91Google Scholar, and Bertholet, , “Baudissin Festschrift” (BZAW., xxiii), 1918, p. 52Google Scholar.
page 257 note 5 Cf., e.g., May, H. G., “The Fertility Cult in Hosea,” in AJSL., xlviii, 1932, pp. 73–98Google Scholar; also Gressmann's, H. important article, “The Mysteries of Adonis and the Feast of Tabernacles,” in The Expositor, 9th series, iii, 1925, pp. 416–432Google Scholar; and Baudissin, op. cit., pp. 385–510.
page 258 note 1 Cf. Graham, and May, , Culture and Conscience, 1936, p. 122Google Scholar: “By the enactment of the accompanying drama the worshipers felt themselves to be reinforcing the power of the spoken word to influence the forces of nature so that the normal seasonal cycle might be maintained for the preservation and enrichment of human life. The psychology underlying this technique was one of coercion and manipulation.”
page 258 note 2 “A Babylonian Fertility Cult,” in JSAS., 1928, pp. 849–875. See p. 867.
page 258 note 3 Cf. also Myth and Ritual (ed. by Hooke, ), pp. 80, 82–4Google Scholar.
page 258 note 4 Cf. Meek, , Symposium, pp. 60–63Google Scholar.
page 259 note 1 Zeitlin, (An Historical Study of the Canonization of the Hebrew Scriptures, 1933, pp. 10 f.)Google Scholar denies that there was any dispute as to the canonicity of the Song of Songs.
page 259 note 2 Mishnah, , Yadaim, iii, 5Google Scholar: 
page 259 note 3 Cf. Origen, (Migne, PG., xiii, 1862, col. 37)Google Scholar: “Quomodo didicimus per Mosen quaedam esse non solum sancta, sed et Sancta sanctorum, et alia non tantum Sabbata, sed et Sabbata sabbatorum; sio nunc docemur scribente Salomone esse quaedam non solum cantica, sed et Cantica canticorum. Beatus quidem is qui ingreditur sancta, sed beatior qui ingreditur Sancta sanctorum. Beatus qui sabbata sabbatizat, sed beatior qui sabbatizat sabbatorum Sabbata. Beatus similiter et is qui intellegit cantica et eanit ea: nemo quippe nisi in solemnitatibus canit: sed multo beatior ille qui canit Cantica canticorum.”
page 259 note 4 AJSL., loc. cit., p. 3; cf. Sohoff, , Symposium, p. 106Google Scholar.
page 259 note 5 Op. cit., p. 71.
page 260 note 1 Op. cit., p. 90: “Le Cantique des Cantiques esfc resté ce qu'il a été dès le début, le chant funéraire d'Isis-Sulamith ou hetepith, cherchant son frère et époux Osiris-Salom ou hetep, disparu dans les ombres de l'Amenti.”
page 260 note 2 JBL., loc. cit.
page 260 note 3 Ibid., p. 183.
page 260 note 4 Ibid., pp. 179 f., 187.
page 260 note 5 Ibid., p. 182. Cf. p. 187: “A fertility cult liturgy reduced to folk poetry and reinterpreted by a political motif, that was later partly obscured by a divergent national ideal, would seem to satisfy and explain Solomon's connection with the poem.”
page 261 note 1 Symposium, p. 56.
page 261 note 2 Cf. Sayce, , Hibbert Lectures, 1887, pp. 56 f.Google Scholar; Winckler, , in KAT., 3rd ed., 1903, p. 225Google Scholar.
page 261 note 3 AJSL., loc. cit., pp. 4 ff.; Symposium, pp. 54 f.
page 261 note 4 Symposium, pp. 88 f.
page 261 note 5 Ibid., pp. 94 f.
page 261 note 6 Cf. Graham, and May, , Culture and Conscience, 1936, p. 239Google Scholar: “While it is too daring to affirm that Solomon's temple was oriented as it was with reference to the enactment of some such cycle of nature myths as was in use in the cultus at Ras Shamra, the well-attested place of solar features in the Jerusalem cultus makes such a possibility not unreasonable.”
page 262 note 1 Schoff, says (Symposium, p. 98)Google Scholar: “It began as an early Canaanite ritual. It received additions as that ritual was adapted, under protest by the prophetic party, to the temple services at Jerusalem.”
page 263 note 1 Ibid., p. 85.
page 263 note 2 Ibid., p. 82.
page 262 note 3 Reference has been made above to Gressmann's view that the Feast of Tabernacles goes back in its origin to Adonis rites (Expositor, 9th series, iii, 1925, pp. 416–432.) Its assimilation to Yahwism has, however, been altogether more thoroughgoing than this mere pretence of a revision which is assumed for the Song.
page 263 note 4 Num. xxiv, 6. The word is also found in Prov. vii, 17, and in Ps. xlv, 9. In the two former passages it is masculine in form, but in Ps. xlv, 9, it is feminine, as in Ct. iv, 14. Since Meek and Schoff regard Ps. xlv as another surviving fragment of fertility cult liturgy (cf. Symposium, pp. 49 n., 108), it is surprising that this word is not emphasized as a further link between them, associated with the cult.
page 264 note 1 Symposium, p. 58.
page 264 note 2 Op. cit., p. 99.
page 264 note 3 Symposium, p. 58; and cf. AJSL., loc. cit., p. 9.
page 264 note 4 Op. cit., p. 99. Cf. also Frazer, , Adonis, Attis, Osiris, 3rd ed., 1914, i, pp. 227 fGoogle Scholar.
page 264 note 5 Ibid., p. 98.
page 264 note 6 Ibid., p. 29; and cf. Meek, AJSL., loc. cit., p. 11.
page 264 note 7 Op. cit., p. 30.
page 264 note 8 Ibid., p. 68.
page 264 note 9 Ibid.
page 264 note 10 AJSL., loc. cit., p. 14.
page 265 note 1 Symposium, p. 62.
page 265 note 2 Ibid., p. 120.
page 265 note 3 Cf. also Wittekindt, op. cit., p. 57, who again interprets in sensu obscaeno.
page 266 note 1 The process has, indeed, already begun, for W. E. Staples now resolves the book of Ruth into a Tammuz liturgy (AJSL., liii, 1936–1937, pp. 145–157)Google Scholar.
page 267 note 1 So Meek, AJSL., loo. cit., p. 6, and Symposium, p. 58.
page 267 note 2 So Schoff, , Symposium, pp. 117, 120Google Scholar.
page 267 note 3 Cf. Oesterley, and Robinson, , Hebrew Religion, 2nd ed., 1937, p. 177Google Scholar.
page 267 note 4 So Winckler, , KAT., 3rd ed., 1903, p. 224Google Scholar.
page 267 note 5 So Meek, , Symposium, p. 53Google Scholar.
page 267 note 6 Graham, W. C. has indeed already given this explanation (Journal of Religion, xiv, 1934, p. 328)Google Scholar. He renders the verse, “Yea, though I walk through the valley of Mot's shadow, I will fear no evil for thou art with me,” and equates Mot with the Mot of the Ras Shainra texts.
page 267 note 7 So Wittekindt, op. cit., p. 98.
page 267 note 8 The same word for oil is found in Ct. i, 3, and Meek, (Symposium, p. 73 n.)Google Scholar gives it fertility connotation, and connects it with the cult. For the connection of the table and the oil with the cult, cf. Neuschotz's argument (op. cit., pp. 34 f.) that the Passion narratives of the New Testament are merely a reflection of the cult, and that it was necessary to make Jesus die three times, each in a different way. Of these one was in Gethsemane, the garden of aromatic oils, and the second was at the table of the Last Supper. Neuschotz finds special significance in the name Gethsemane, or 
, which contains the same word for oil as we find in Ps. xxiii, 6, and Ct. i, 3.
page 268 note 1 Symposium, p. 49 f.
page 268 note 2 JAOS., loc. cit., p. 159. Cf. Cassuto, , GSAL, N.S., i, 1925–1928, pp. 169 fGoogle Scholar.
page 268 note 3 Tosephta, , Sanhedrin, xiiGoogle Scholar: 
which may be rendered “Rabbi Akiba says he who sings the Song of Songs with a trill at a banquet, and treats it as a common ditty, has no portion in the world to come”. With this cf. T.B. Sanhedrin, 101a: 
. Lods, A. (RHR., Ixxxii, 1920, pp. 221 f.)Google Scholar objects to the rendering “banquet” in these passages, and thinks the meaning is “the house in which a wedding was being celebrated”, and so seeks to find here some additional support for the Wetzstein-Budde view of the Song. Similarly Cassuto, U. (GSAI., N.S., i, 1925–1928, p. 37)Google Scholar.
page 268 note 4 R.V. “singing of birds” can claim little justification, for, as Bloch says (AJSL., xxxviii, 1921–1922, p. 115)Google Scholar, wherever this word is used of singing, it refers to human singing.
page 268 note 5 Symposium, p. 50.
page 268 note 6 The view is, of course, very much older than Ehrlich, for it is represented in the LXX καιρός τς τομς ἓϕθακεѵ in the Peshitta 
; in the Vulgate, tempus putationis advenil: and in the Arabic 
. Cf. also the comment of Ibn Ezra quoted in the following note.
page 269 note 1 AJSL., loc. cit., p. 131 n. Cf. also Ibn Ezra: 
, i.e. “There are some who say that it is to be explained by ‘nor prune thy vineyard’ (Lev. xxv, 4), but it was not the time for it”.
page 269 note 2 AJSL., loc. cit., p. 138.
page 269 note 3 Ibid., p. 136. It is interesting to set this against the view of Meek, Sehoff, and Wittekindt, discussed below, that the Passover reading of the Song is evidence that it was a spring ritual. For the connection with a later season in the year, in relation to Budde's wedding song theory of the origin of the book, cf. Dalman, , Palästinischer Diwan, 1901, p. xiiGoogle Scholar: “Nebenbei sei auch erwähnt, dass nicht der Frühling, sondern der Herbst in ganz Palästina die beliebteste Zeit zu Hochzeiten ist, weil mann dann aus dem Ernteertrag das zur Brautzahlung nötige Geld gelost hat und ausserdem nach Vollendung des Dreschens mussige Zeit besitzt.” Cf., too, Granqvist, H., Marriage Conditions in a Palestinian Village, ii, 1935, p. 32Google Scholar: “There is always a certain air of foolishness attached to those who donot know that summer is the time for weddings…. It is a striking fact that although the summer is so long, a wedding is often postponed till the autumn.”
page 269 note 4 PMFQS., 1909, p. 29, and Ephemeris für semitische Epigraphik, iii, 1909–1915, p. 41Google Scholar.
page 269 note 5 PEFQS., 1909, p. 31.
page 269 note 6 Ibid., p. 110.
page 269 note 7 Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel, 2nd ed., 1913, p. vii.
page 269 note 8 Altorientalische Texte zum Alien Testament, 2nd ed., 1927, p. 444.
page 269 note 9 Le iscrizione antico-ebraiche palestinesi, 1934, p. 5.
page 269 note 10 So Dalman, , PEFQS., 1909, p. 119Google Scholar: “Zāmīr can, neither here nor in Cant, ii, 12, mean the first pruning of vine, which is done in March, but the second pruning in June or July.” It should perhaps be noted that Vulliaud, , Le Cantique des Cantiques d'après la tradition juive, 1925, pp.38 ff.Google Scholar, defends the meaning cutting for 
, but explains it in connection with the law of Lev. xix, 23 ff. (cf. Mishnah, Orlah). In this he follows the interpretation of the Cabbalists. The Targum also found the meaning cutting in the word, but interpreted it of the cutting off of the Egyptian first-born—
.
page 270 note 1 AJSL., loc. cit., p. 4, and Symposium, p. 49.,
page 270 note 2 Ibid., p. 86.
page 270 note 3 It should, however, be observed that Lagrange (Études sur Us Religions sémitiques, 1905, pp. 305 f.) and Baudissin, (Adonis und Esmun, 1911, pp. 121—133)Google Scholar maintain that the Adonis rites were celebrated in the summer and not in the spring. Cf. Jastrow, (Religion of Babylonia and Assryia, 1898, p. 547)Google Scholar: “The Tammuz festival was celebrated just before the summer solstice set in.”
page 270 note 4 AJSL., loc. cit., p. 4 n. Cf. Cassuto, , GSAI, N.S., i, 1925–1928, p. 169Google Scholar: “Ma occorrerebbe prima dimostrare che quaest'uso risale a un'alta antichita, il che non sembra probabile, non trovandosi esso ricordato prima del Masseketh Sôpherīm, che appartiene, come è noto, all'epoca gaonaica.”
page 270 note 5 “Unde nee Judaeis, nee nobis publica lectio unquam cantici canticorum facta est” (Mansi, , Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, ix, 1763Google Scholar, col. 227; cf. Migne, , PG., lxvi, 1864Google Scholar, col. 700).
page 270 note 6 JAOS., loc. cit., p. 156.
page 271 note 1 Op. cit., p. 199 f.
page 271 note 2 Cf. Cyril of Alexandria's view that iii, l, refers to the women who sought Jesus on the Resurrection morning (cf. Migne, , PG., lxix, 1864Google Scholar, col. 1285).
page 271 note 3 OLZ., xxxi, 1928, col. 115Google Scholar.
page 271 note 4 Op. cit., pp. 187 f., 191 f.
page 272 note 1 Cf. Jeremias, , ATLOE., 4th ed., 1930, p. 670Google Scholar, where Ct. iv, 8, is held to be an allusion to the Tammuz legend. Cf. Bertholet, , “Zur Stelle Hohes Lied, iv, 8,” in Baudissin Festschrift (BZA W., xxxiii), 1918, pp. 47–53Google Scholar.
page 272 note 2 Cf. Eissfeldt, , Einleitung in das AUe Testament, 1934, pp. 533 f.Google Scholar: “Indes bleibt bei genauerer Nachprüfung dieser Theorie (i.e. Wittekindt's) nichts weiter übrig als die freilich sehr beachtenswerte und auch sonst bedeutsame Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass in Israel, wie anderswo in der Welt, die Sprache der Liebenden durch die mythisch-kultische Diktion, insofern sie das Verhaltnis von Gott und Göttin zum Gegenstand hat, beeinflusst worden ist, wie auch umgekehrt der Mythus bei der erotischen Poesie Anleihen gemacht hat.” Cf. also Dürr, , OLZ., xxxi, 1928Google Scholar, col. 115: “Es dürfte sicher sein, dass manche Zlige der Ischtar auch auf die orientalische Liebespoesie eingewirkt haben.”
page 272 note 3 Jewish En-cyclopædia, xi, p. 467a.
page 272 note 4 It connects with the view advanced by Herder, , Lieder der Liebe, 1778, pp. 89–106Google Scholar; Reuss, , Die Geschichte der Heiligen Schrifte Alten Testaments, 1881, p. 223Google Scholar, and many other writers. Cf. the quite recent work of Robinson, H. Wheeler, The Old Testament: its Making and Meaning 1937, pp. 161 fGoogle Scholar.
page 273 note 1 Already, in 1919, before Meek propounded his theory, Dussaud, had recognized this. He wrote (Le Cantique des Cantiqnes, 1919, p. 29)Google Scholar: “L'identification de l'amante avec la nature nous place sur un terrain familier au mythe, en partioulier au mythe d'Eschmoun-Adonis. En eflet, les deux poèmes du bien-aimé comportent non seulement l'identification du jeune homme au printemps et de la jeune fille à la nature, mais encore la fuite de l'amant vers la montagne et sa poursuite par l'amante. Le rapprochement marque à quel point la société israélite était encore impregnee par les cultes naturistes; mais il n'y a pas lieu de pousser la comparaison plus avant. Après avoir écarté ces poèmes des rites nuptiaux, nous ne songeons nullement à y reconnaître l'écho de la liturgie des Adonies.” Lods, A. (RHR., lxxxii, 1920, p. 223)Google Scholar says that in this view Dussaud “obéit très certainement a un sentiment juste”.
page 273 note 2 See the Preface to his commentary on the Song, 
, which may be rendered “Abhorred, abhorred be the idea that the Song of Songs is in the category of love songs, but rather has it the character of a parable; and were it not for the greatness of its excellence it would not have been incorporated in the corpus of sacred writings.” Cf. first recension (Mathews, H. J., Abraham ibn Ezra's Commentary on the Canticles after the first recension, 1874, Hebrew part, p. 9)Google Scholar: 
. Cf. also Ali, Jephet ibn (in Canticum Canticorum commentarium arabicum, ed. by Bargès, J. J. L., 1884, on i, 1)Google Scholar: 
which Bargès (p. 6) renders “Ne cadat in mentem eorum qui illius sensum non capiunt, sermonem hie haberi alicujus viri meretricem aruantis; nullatenus enim computandus est Salomon (cui salus!) inter eos, qui talem januam ingrediuntur; verumenimvero Spiritu Sancto afflatus istud dixit Canticum, verba nimirum dans congregationi Israel, et loquentes inducens Immaculatos viae, Fortes Israel et germen Davidicum.”
page 274 note 1 Introdtiction à l'Ancien Testament, 1934, p. 140: “Cette conception (i.e. that the Song is a collection of love songs) est exclue par le seul fait que le Cantique se trouve dans le canon biblique.” Yet on the following page he says “L'amour naturel, denue de toute sensualite coupable, est le type le plus parfait de l'amour surnaturel.” Why, then, should it be regarded as a thing evil in itself, and patently unworthy of a place in the Canon ?
page 274 note 2 JTS., xxxviii, 1937, p. 363.
page 274 note 3 Part i, Book vii, Ode 13.
page 274 note 4 The Chinese Classics, with a Translation, etc., iv, part i, 1871, p. 140Google Scholar. Giles, H. A. (History of Chinese Literatute, 1923, p. 14Google Scholar gives a spirited abridgment:—
“If you will love me dear, my lord,
I'll pick up my skirts and cross the ford,
But if from your heart you turn me out—
Well, you're not the only man about,
You silly, silly, silliest lout.”
He comments “Native scholars are, of course, hidebound in the traditions of commentators, but European students will do well to seek the meaning of the Odes within the compass of the Odes themselves”—a comment that can equally be applied to the Song of Songs.
page 275 note 1 Book iii, chap. viii.
page 275 note 2 The Chinese Classics, with a Translation, etc., 2nd ed., i, 1893, p. 157Google Scholar. Cf.Soothill's, W. E. rendering of the Ode (The Analects of Confucius, 1910, p. 191)Google Scholar:—
“As she artfully smiles
What dimples appear!
Her bewitching eyes
Show their colours so clear.
Ground spotless and candid
For tracery splendid!”