8. The literal interpretation seems to have beei} con- nected with the general movement of Theodore Mop- suestia (860-429) and his followen, in opposition to tiie extravagances of the early Christian lilegorista. Its echeme was nuptial, with Pharaoh's daughter as the bride. That it was by many regarded as the only ad- missible interpretation appears firom Theodoret, who mentbns this opinion only to condemn it. Bome down and overwhelmed by the prolific genius of medi- SBval allegoiy, we have a glimpse of it in. Abulphara- gius (see above), and in the MS. commentary (BodL Oppenh. Coll. No. 626), cited by Mr. Ginsburg, and by him referred conjecturally to a French Jew of the 12th or 18th century. This commentaiy anticipates more recent criticism by interpreting the Song as ceUbraHmg tke humble love of a ehepherd and shepherdeee. The ex- treme literal view was propounded by Castellio (1M4), who rejected it from the Canon. Followhig out tlds idea, Whiston (1728) recognised the book as a compo- sition of Solomon, but denounced it BB/ooHtk, kua»- iout, and idokUrout, Nearly the same view is enter- tained by Dr. Clarke in his Commenktry. Meanwhile the mgtHal theory was adopted by Grotius as the literal basis of a seoondaiy and spiritual interpretation, and, after its dramatical development by Bossuet, long con- tinued to be the standard scheme of the mystical schooL Bossnet's idea of this poem was that it is a regular drama, or pastoral eclogue, consisting of seven acts, each act filling a day, concluding with the Sabbatii, inasmuch as the bridegroom on this day does not, as usual, go forth to his rural employments, but proceeds from t^ marriage chamber into public with his bride. The folbwing are Bossnet's divisions of the plots:
First day Cb»p. HI , 6.
Seoondday " il,T-17.
Thlrdday " UUv,l.
Foarthdii. ** v,S-rI,9.
.FlflhdayT. " vi, lO-vU, IL
SIxthday ♦* vlll9-Tlfl,a.
SabbiUh.... " vlil,4-14.
In 1808 this scheme was reconstructed by Good, with a Jewish instead of an Egyptian bride ; and his version is still the most elegant. For the most ingenious and completely elaborated form in which this theory has been developed, see the new translation in scenic form by Taylor in his edition of Calmet's Did. ; also more lately by Homer in the Meihodirt Quart, Review , July, 1862. See Theatrical Repbbsehtations.
The pur^g literal theory, opposed on the one hand to the allegorical interpretation, and on the other to Castellio and Whiston, owes its origin to Germany. Michaelis (1770) regarded the Song as an exponent of
CANTICLES
95
CANTICLES
miM hve, itmocaU amd happf. But, whOB Jiutify- ing its admissioB into the Caaon, he is betimjred into « hiity of ramark altogether inconsistent with' the sup- poiition that the book is inspired (Not ad Lowtk^ PmL), From this time the scholarship of Germany was mainly enlisted on the side of the literalists. 'Eke literal basis became thoronglily dissociated from flie mystical snperstractore, and idl that remained to be done was to elnddate the tme scheme of the former. The most generally received interpretation of the mod- emliteralists is that which was originally proposed by Jaoobi (1771), adopted by Herder, Ammon, Umbreit, Ewald, etc, and more recently by Prof. Meier of Tq- bbgen (1854), and in £ngland by Mr. Ginsburg, in his karned translation (1867). According to the de- tailed application of this view as given by Mr. Gins- berg, the Song is intended to display the victory of htwih and oondaaU love over the temptations of weaUh md TWfdtg, The tempter is Solomon ; the object of his eednctive endeavors is a Sholamite shepherdess, who, snrroonded by the glories of the ooort and the feermations of unwonted splend<^, pines for the shep- herd-lover from whom she has becm involnntarily sep- arated. In this nA^imn the drama is divided into five sections, indicatedoy the thrice-repeated formula of a^joration 0^ 7 ; iii, 5; viii, 4), and the use of another dosing sentence (v, 1).
Beetko 1 (cb. I-U, 7): scene, a ^oantry-eeat of Polomoo. The ■hfl^wrden is commiUed to the charge of the court ladles (^daaghten of Jerusalem**), who have been instrneted to pre- psre the way for the rmral approach. SolomoQ makes an on- neeesifol attempt to wm her affections.
Bee: S (li, 8-41L, 6) : the shepherdess ezplatais to the court Isdes the cruelty of her brothers, which had led to the sepa- rttion between henelf and her beloved.
8ee. 8 (Hi, <(-v, 1) : entry of the royal train into Jerusalem. The shepherd follows his betrothed into the city, and propo- MB to rescue her. Some of her court compankms are favora* bl7 impressed bv her constancy.
8ec. 4 (V, 2-viii, 4) : the shepherdess tells her dream, and atm &rther engages the sympathies of her companloos. The kJBg^ fla^erles and promises are unavailing.
8ec 5 (v9i, 5-14): the conflict is over ; virtue and truth bare woo the victory, and the shepherdess and her beloved ictuni to their happy home, visiting on the way the tree be- ■esth vhose shade they first plighted their troth (vill, 6). Her brothera repeat the promises which they had once made conditionally upon her vmuous and Irreproachable conduct
Even in Germany, however, a strong band of reac- tioDary allegorists have maintained their ground, in- cluding such names as Hog, E^aiser, Bosenmcdler, Hahn, and Hengstenberg. On the whole, their tend- ency is to return to the Chaldee paraphrase, a^end- ency which is specially marked in KosenmOUer. In England the bi^e of the literalists has been fooght by Dr. Pye Smith {Omgrtg, Mag, for 1887, 88); in America by Prof. Koyes, who adopts the extreme erotic theory, and is unwilling to recognise in Canticles any wuni or reBgiom design. It should be observed that tneh a sentiment as this of Dr. Noyes is utterly alien to the views of Jacobi and his followers, who conceive the recommendation ot virtooos love and constancy to he a portion of the very highest moral teaching, and in DO way unworthy of an inspired writer.