Song of Songs

(or Song of Solomon)

Lecture Notes, Summer 2000 (Chuck Pitts)

è Introduction

--Title

--“Song of Songs” is a superlative form, referring to the greatness of the song.

--“Canticles” is the Latin form of “songs.”

--“Song of Solomon” is a reference to authorship by Solomon. This is based upon the mention of Solomon in 1:5; 3:9, 11; 8:11, 12. Outside of the superscription, Solomon is not mentioned as the author, rather as a subject of discussion. In fact, the truth is that the mention of Solomon somewhat peripherally would seem to argue against Solomonic authorship.

--Composition

--Authorship

--Tradition, as the superscription reads, says that Solomon wrote Song of Songs. Scholars through the centuries have argued that it is a drama, love song, marriage song, or allegory of God & His people by Solomon.

--If the superscription is a later addition, then the book is an anonymous poem, or collection of songs. (For discussion of form, see below.)

--Compilation

--If the book is a compilation then the date is unknown, and like most wisdom literature is given a wide range of dates for composition.

--Structure

--Song of Songs is written as a poetic drama, or something like that. Several characters are present:

--The Woman—Sometimes “the beloved,” she sings of her love & desire for her lover. She is often referred to as the “bride.” Of course, the identification of her as a “bride,” & her lover as a “groom,” depends upon the understanding of the genre. (As a drama, the “bride” & “groom” are characters. As a collection of love poems, they are lovers. As an allegory, they are representative of other entities.)

--The Man=Groom (Bridegroom)—Literally “the lover,” he sings the love & beauty of his love, the bride.

--Friends/“Daughters of Jerusalem”—These are witnesses to the events who also interact with the main characters. (As a drama, they are the chorus. As a wedding song, they are witnesses.)

--Form

--Drama

--Some have seen the Song of Songs as a drama, perhaps a ritual drama performed as part of a worship ritual. As such, the book would have been the celebration of the “marriage” between god and goddess, or possibly between God and people or God and king or high priest as representative of the people. The problem is that drama as we know it is not really known until the Greek period.

--The book has been explained as Solomon’s love for a woman who is in love with a shepherd or as Solomon’s description of his love for the “dark” Egyptian wife (i.e. daughter of pharaoh). All of these are, of course, speculative & conjectural.

--Allegory

--Early Jewish Interpretations

--Early Jewish interpretation focused upon allegorical interpretations, seeing the groom as God & the bride as Israel or individual people of God. In some interpretations, “breasts” refers to oral & written Torah or Aaron & Moses as the greatest ornaments of Israel’s traditions. “Kisses” refers to the giving of the Torah to Moses &/or the people at Mt. Sinai.

--Early Christian Interpretations

--Early Christian interpretation also focused upon allegorical interpretations, seeing the groom as Jesus and the bride as the church or the individual believer. The “breasts” may refer to the old & new covenants, the old & new testaments of scripture. “Kisses” refers to God’s communication to His people.

--Why allegory?

--The desire to tone down the obvious erotic nature of the book drove some to find allegorical meanings. The erotic nature offended the attitude of sexual restraint, especially when monastic, ascetic lifestyles became the norm for Christian leadership, ministry, and teaching. Origen argued that a literal reading of Song of Songs would be dangerous for the immature because it might encourage him to sexual lasciviousness.

--The desire to find a greater meaning for the existence of love poetry in the canon of scripture. Even those who accepted the literal meaning of the text questioned the erotic nature of the poetry and sought a deeper meaning.

--Love Poems

--Most modern scholars argue that Song of Songs is a collection of love poetry, which includes a variety of literary genres. As such, they celebrate the beauty of human sexuality & love.

--ANE Parallels

--Egyptian love songs from 18^th-20^th dynasties (1300-1100 BC) are personal & similar to Song of Songs. The lovers call each other brother & sister & tell of their desire & love for one another.

--Sumerian/Babylonian love songs are primarily related to the god/goddesses, esp. the goddesses Inanna & Ishtar. The love songs may include gods (i.e. Dumuzi) or kings as the objects of the goddess’ love.

è Selected Texts

--2:1-4—

--Note the beautiful descriptions of one another by the lovers, all taken from nature & agricultural images, i.e. “rose,” “lily,” “apple tree,” & “fruit.”

--Also note that many of these are images used in later Christian literature, hymns, and songs to refer to Jesus, i.e. “rose of Sharon,” “lily of the valleys,” & “His banner over me is love.” This points out the pervasiveness of allegorical understandings of the Song.

--4:1-7—This is a picturesque, poetic description of the woman’s beauty, in which “there is no flaw” (v. 7). Note descriptions of her eyes, hair, teeth, lips, mouth, temples, neck, & breasts.

--5:10-16—This is the description of the man’s beauty by the woman, as a counterpart to 4:1-7. Note her descriptions of his head, hair, eyes, cheeks, lips, arms, body, and legs.

--7:6-9—This type of eroticism was certainly offensive to early Christian monastics & many Jewish rabbis. In fact, it still presses our sensitivities today. It is a erotic depiction of the sexual act.

--8:6-7—Here is the key to the literal reading of the book: love. Love is a fire that oceans cannot quench & that money cannot buy. Song of Songs is the story of lovers, not just sexual animals. They are committed to each other.

è Teaching/Theology

--The Song of Songs is not necessarily a book of erotic poems describing lascivious, promiscuous sexual behavior.

--The book actually supports basic traditional restraint with regard to sexual activity, at least in 8:1-2, where sexual propriety is mentioned. The issue of forbidden love or promiscuity is not the subject of the book.

--Also, note the use of “friend,” “brother,” & “sister” to describe the lovers. They saw sexual love as an expression of their intimate care for one another, & presumably their desire to spend a life together. This was a relationship, not a fling!

--The Song of Songs celebrates sexual love, pure & simple, at least on a literal level. Is this acceptable for canonical scripture?

--Many believe that it is. The celebration of human sexuality is present in various ancient cultures. Furthermore, human sexuality is one of the strongest forces we encounter & can be a very beautiful thing (although it can also be an ugly, degrading, and abusive thing).

--Many, however, believe that pure sexual celebration is below scripture. Thus, they find alternative meanings. This does recognize the deeper applications of poetry. Love poetry can be applied to many relationships, including the relationship between God/Jesus & the church or individual Christians.