purpose. There have been modifications of this extreme view among the critics which have grown out of the more careful study of the poem. Goethe, e.g., while he once held that it was a mere collection of separate songs, afterwards in the 'Kunst und Alterthum' admitted that there was dramatic unity to be recognized in it. The chief representative of Herder's view in later times is Mundt; but there are few writers of any distinction who would deny that at least one mind is traceable in the ordering and placing of the songs. Bleak, e.g., admits one editor who has put together a variety of erotic compositions referring to different persons and composed at different periods. And some Jewish critics have supposed that while the bulk of the poem refers to Solomon, other songs of a later date have . been interpolated. The chief authorities for the unity of the composition are Ewald, Umbreit, Delit.zsch, and Zockler. The following considerations must be acknowledged by every candid reader to be amply sufficient to support the view that the poem is not a mere collection of fragments or , isolated songs, but has a definite aim, and is the product, at least io arrangement, of some one superintending mind. T_he name of Solomon, and of "the king," who is plainly Solomon, is prominen~, .in the poem through- out~ The different parts seem to be strung together by the introduction of a chorus somewhat- after the manner of a Greek play; and the lover and his belove~ interchange the language of affection in a kind of dialogue. The references to the family of the bride are consistent throughout. The mother is introduced, never the father, but only the brothers, as though the father were deceased, which would point to a particular history (see oh. i. 6; iii. 4; and viii. 2). Again, the occurrence again and again of the same or similar words as a refrain, and the repetition of similar illustrations and figures, suggest one mind at work. The bride speaks in much the same language several times. In eh. ii. 16 and vi. 3 she says, "My beloved is mine, and I am his." In eh. ii. 5 and v. 8, "I am sick with love," and over and over again she uses the expression, "he whom my soul loves." She is addressed by the chorus in a similai· manner throughout. Delitzsch very rightly says, "He who has any perception whatever of the unity of a work of art in human discourse will receive an impression of external unity from the Song of Solomon which excludes all right to sunder any- thing from it as of a heterogeneous character or belonging to different periods, and whioh compels to the conclusion of an internal unity that may still remain an enigma to the Scripture exposition of the present, but must neverthelei;,s exist." But while unity of authorship, composition, and purpose may be substantiated, it is still a difficult question to decide what is the literary form and method of the poem. It is a mere abuse of literary language to call it a drama. There is, properly speaking, no dramatic action and progress in it. Ewald has gone so far as to maintain that it was designed for representation, and Bottcher and Renan that it actually was exhibited as a play, But all that can be said in favuur of such a view is that thore INTRODUCTION TO
nrc d,·ama.tic features in the poem, suoh as the dialogue between the lover and the beloved, the introduotion of the ohorus, and the scenio oharadter of some of the desoriptions. But, on the other hand, there is no evidenoe that any such representations took place among the Jews at any time, and the . generally idyllic character of the whole makes it extremely improbable that it was intended to be a drama. We can no more call the Song of Solomon a drama than we can give such a title to the Book of Job. Nor can we say, on the other hand, that it is a mere epithalamium,ior idyllic song prepared for some nuptial occasion and adapted to a mll8ical intention. The literary problems arising out of the mixed character, of the composition seem to be solved in the higher question of its aim and purpose. It is the adaptation of human affection' and sentiment to religious uses. We need not therefore wait for a satisfactory theory of its literary style, but rather be content to arrange its contents as they dispose themselves by the natural ·divisions of the .subject-matter. rlt has been observed by Dr. Henry Green, of Princeton (in a note' to his translation of Zockler's 'Commentary'), " The scenes portrayed and the displays of mutual fondness indulged seem to ·be grouped rather: than linked. They stand forth in their distinctness as exquisitely beautiful; and reflecting as much light on each other and'on: the subject which they illustrate and adorn as though they had been gathered up into the artifioial unity of a consecutive narration or a dramatic plot;, And this looser method of arrangement or aggregation, with its abrupt' translation and sudden changes of scene, is no less graceful and imp1·essive, while .it,is more in harmony with the Oriental mind and style • of composition generally than the vigorous, external, and formal concatenation which the more logical but less proud Indo-European is prone to demand." All that seems necessary to do as a help to the literary appreciation of the poem is to indicate the general principle and method of its -arrangement; which may be expressed thus: Love is first set forth simply in its.ecstatic fervour of emotion in the mutual delight of the lover and the beloved. ,.It is then celebrated as nuptial Wt/e in the rejoicing of .the bridegroom _and the bride. And in the second half of the poem, eh. v. L to the end1 love is set forth as tned, for a time in: danger of being·lost, ultimately recovered and expanding into the fulness of joy. There are thus three parts in.the poem. Part I. extends from the beginning to the fifth verse of the third chapter, and may be described as The rapture of first love. Part II"exte:Iids from eh. iii 6 to v. 1, and may be called Nuptial rejoicing. Part III. extends from eh. v. 2 to viii. 14, and may be named Separation and reunion. But while these main divisions are traceable in the composition, there are subdivisions which enable us to arrange the whole into a series of lyrical pieces, and to discern in the language some distinction of speakers a,,d some variety of scene and action which give a wonderful life and unity to the poem. The opening words prepare us for the general scope of the whole work, THE BONG OF SOLOMON. vii