The Canticles was one of the books translated by Jerome from the Greek, or rather, corrected from the older Latin version, and published by that father ; but this work is now lost. We still possess in the present Latin Vulgate Jerome's translation of this book from the original Hebrew.
2. Subject. The subject of this book is con fessedly Love. But it has been a matter of much controversy, especially in modern times, what kind of love is here celebrated. It is equally a matter of dispute among Divines whether the interpretation of the poem is limited to its obvious and primary or whether it does not also include a latent mystical and allegorical sense. We shall speak of these subjects in order. And. first, as to the literal and primary meaning, the earliest information which we have is contained in the preface of Origen to his commentary on this book. This eminent scholar holds it to be an epithalamium, or marriage song in the form of a drama. This idea has been, in modern times, improved by Lowth, Bossuet. Michaelis and other commentators. 'The Song of Songs,' says Bishop Lowth, 'for so it is entitled, either on account of the excellence of the subject or of the composition, is an epithalamium, or nuptial dialogue, or rather, if we may he allowed to give it a title more agree able to the genius of the Hebrews, a Song of Loves. Such is the title of Psalm xlv. It is ex pressive of the utmost fervor as well as delicacy of passion ; it is instinct with all the spirit and sweetness of affection. The principal characters are Solomon himself and his bride, who are rep resented speaking both in dialogue and in solilo quy, when accidentally separated. Virgins, also, the companions of the bride, are introduced, who seem to be constantly on the stage, and bear a part of the dialogue. Mention is also made of young men, friends of the bridegroom, but they are mute persons. This is exactly conformable to the manners of the Hebrews, who had always a number of companions to the bridegroom, thirty of whom were present in honor of Samson at his nuptial feast (Judg. xiv :13). In the New Testa ment, according to the Hebrew idiom, they are called children, or sons of the bridechamber, and friends of the bridegroom. There, too, we find mention of ten virgins who went forth to meet the bridegroom and conduct him home; which circumstance indicates that this poem is founded on the nuptial rites of the Hebrews, and is ex pressive of the forms or ceremonial of their mar riage. In this opinion, indeed, the harmony of
commentators is not less remarkable than their disagreement concerning the general economy and conduct of the work, and the order and ar rangement of the several parts. The present ob ject of inquiry, however, is only whether any plot or fable be contained or represented in this poem; and upon this point the most probable opinion is that of the celebrated Bossuet, a critic whose profound learning will ever be acknowl edged and a scholar whose exquisite taste will ever be admired.' Bossuet'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 Sabbath, inasmuch as the bridegroom on this day does not, as usual, go forth to his rural em ployments, but proceeds from the marriage cham ber into public with his bride. The following are Bossuet's divisions of the plots: First day . . . Chap. i-ii:6.
Second day . . ii:7-i7.
Third day . . .
Fourth day . .
Fifth day . . . vi :io-vii:r 1.
Sixth day . . . vii:tz-viii:3.
Sabbath. . • viii:4-I4.
Lowth so far differs from Bossuet as to deny the existence of a regular drama, inasmuch as there is no termination to the plot. Michaelis, in his notes to his German translation of Lowth's Preleetions, endeavors to overturn the views of Bossuet and Lowth and to show that this poem can have no relation to the celebration of a mar riage, inasmuch as the bridegroom is compelled in his nuptial week to quit his spouse and friends for whole days in order to attend to his cattle in the pastures; and while he altogether repudiates the idea, which some have had the rashness to maintain, that the subject of the poem, in its literal signification, is a clandestine amour, inas much as the transaction is described as legal and i public, and the consent of parents plainly nti mated, he equally rejects the views of those who conceive that these songs relate to the state of parties betrothed before marriage. His opinion is that this poem had no reference to a future mar riage, but that the chaste loves of conjugal and domestic life are described. This state, he con ceives, in the East, admits of more of the per plexities, jealousies, plots and artifices of love than it does with us; the scene is more varied, and there is consequently greater scope for in vention.