An Overview of the Book of Song of Solomon

The title “Song of Solomon” is from the opening words in the Hebrew text, Shir hashirim asher l’sholomo (lit., “Song of Songs which belongs to/concerns Solomon”). Many English versions identify the book as Song of Solomon (NASB, AV, RSV, NKJV, KJV), while other versions title the book Song of Songs (NIV, TNIV). The Latin Vulgate translates the Hebrew as Canticum Canticorum, or in English, Canticles (Catholic Bibles).

Who Wrote the Book of Song of Solomon and When Was It Written?

Solomon is identified as the author in the opening verse, “The Song of Songs, which is Solomon’s” (l’sholomo = “of/concerning Solomon”). Solomon, King David’s son (1Kg 2:2-4), ruled Israel during the high point of the united kingdom (970–930 BC) and is a central figure in the book (Sg 1:1, 5; 3:7, 9, 11; 8:11-12). God gave Solomon great wisdom and he spoke 3,000 proverbs, many recorded in the book of Proverbs, plus 1,005 songs (1Kg 4:29-34). This superlative form (Song of Songs) is common in biblical Hebrew, as seen in the phrases “King of kings,” “Lord of lords,” and “holy of holies.” It indicates that of all of Solomon’s many songs, these are his best.

Although a great king, Solomon is infamous for his 700 wives and 300 concubines (1Kg 11:3), so it is puzzling that he would write a book extolling faithfulness in marriage. Sadly, many people do not practice the wisdom they know, and this may account for the contradiction between Solomon’s wise words and his foolish behavior.

However, though Solomon is a central figure, he may not have written the Song in its final form. As Pr 25:1 describes Hezekiah’s men recording Solomon’s proverbs well after his time, so too the Song may be a later recollection of Solomon’s love poems. That Solomon wrote numerous such songs is clear from 1Kg 4:29-34.

Regardless, Solomon’s songs of love were not based on his own experience but rather intended to depict an “ideal” marriage.

The book was probably composed while Solomon was king (970–930 BC) or some time shortly thereafter. Although it lacks the historical reference points found in the Pentateuch, Prophetic Books, and many of the Psalms, the interpretation of the Song does not depend upon chronology.

What Are the Theme and Purpose of the Book of Song of Solomon?

Like Ps 45, which is titled “A Song of Love” and celebrates a royal wedding, the Song is a celebration of marital love. Its association with Solomon allows it to be read in light of other wisdom books as both a song of celebration and caution—celebrating divinely created and encouraged marital love as well as cautioning against its misuse or exploitation. Just as Solomon repeatedly pleaded with future Davidic rulers, employing the phrase “my son” throughout Pr 1–7, the Song cautions the “daughters of Jerusalem” to be wise about sexuality (Sg 2:7; 3:5; 8:4). Thus the Song may be read as a female counterpart to Proverbs. Sadly, though Solomon did not always follow the wisdom of Proverbs or the Song, God did use him to write of both wisdom and love despite his failures.

The Song borrows imagery from plant and animal life, food and beverage, geography, colors, fragrances, and many other aspects of the natural order that idealize a paradise-like landscape, reminiscent of the garden of Eden. Marital love, though tainted and troubled by the fall, is still a part of God’s creation and a good gift intended for husband and wife to fully enjoy.

Despite the Song’s obviously sensual content, it should not be reduced to a manual on romantic love. The Song warns those who would approach sexuality carelessly that “love is as strong as death, jealousy is as severe as Sheol” (8:6). These very cautions found throughout the Song demonstrate that it is overwhelmingly a celebration of marital love.

Therefore, the major purpose of the Song is to exalt the love and marriage between a husband and wife. Like Hosea and Proverbs, this book teaches the importance of faithful, pure love in marriage, which is also reflected in the NT: “Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled” (Heb 13:4).

In addition to the depiction of the celebration of ideal marital love, as Hamilton maintains, its secondary purpose could also be to symbolize the messianic hope of recovery of spiritual intimacy after the alienation of sin (J. M. Hamilton, Jr., “The Messianic Music of the Song of Songs: A Non-Allegorical Interpretation,” WTJ 68 [2006]: 331).

What Is the Genre of the Book of Song of Solomon?

The Song is written in Hebrew poetry. Although called “Song,” the Hebrew word refers to a poem, much more like a sonnet than a musical composition. This literary style, found throughout the OT, is rich in repeated words, linguistic patterns, and parallelism. As poetry, the Song is built on imagery and symbolism, intended to portray themes and ideas outside the scope of the literal descriptive words (e.g., “Your teeth are like a flock of newly shorn ewes . . .”, 4:2). Robert Gordis notes the significance of the use of poetry: “The essence of poetry employs symbolism, not allegory, to express nuances beyond the power of exact definition. . . . The language of symbolism, on the other hand, is superior to literal speech as well, because its elements possess both existential reality and a representational character” (The Song of Songs and Lamentations, revised edition [New York: Ktav, 1974], 36–38).

How Should the Book of Song of Solomon Be Interpreted?

Scholars and theologians have offered numerous suggestions to understand the challenging poetic message of the Song. Their presuppositions determine how the book is understood.

First, allegory has historically been the most common approach to the Song. Jewish tradition sees it as a story of God’s love for Israel. Christian tradition has seen it as Christ’s love for the Church. Although love is a key element in the Song, forcing an allegory strains the message of the text and imposes arbitrary meanings. Therefore, allegory has generally been rejected by modern scholarship as a valid approach to the Song.

Second, it is common to interpret the Song as a drama. As a drama, Solomon and the Shulammite (see comments at 6:13 for this name) have the main roles with a chorus as minor speakers. The lack of plotline in the Song and the subjective imposition of scenes make a dramatic reading forced. Most importantly, full-fledged dramatic literature of this type was not known among the ancient Israelites.

Third, some critical scholars see the Song as a sacred marriage story drawn from ancient pagan Near Eastern fertility cults. However, annual fertility rituals are absent from the Song. Furthermore, it is doubtful that the sacred monotheistic Scriptures would borrow from pagan fertility rituals.

Fourth, a common current interpretation of the genre of the Song is that it is an anthology of love poems. The Hebrew title of the book provides readers with a literary clue to the book’s genre—and therefore its interpretation. Shir Hashirim (the Song of Songs) is a collection of love poems or a song composed of many songs—thus a “song of songs.” Those who differ with this interpretation argue it fails to see the intrinsic unity in the Song as well as the intertextual links within it.

Fifth, recently it has been again suggested that the Song should be read as a messianic document. John Sailhamer and James Hamilton have both argued that the Song was written from a messianic perspective in order to nourish a messianic hope.

Sailhamer views the Song as an allegory not of Messiah’s love for the Church, but for His love for divine wisdom. He cites “Beneath the apple tree I awakened you . . .”(8:5b) as an intertextual reference to the prologue of the book of Proverbs and the fall in Gn 3 (J. H. Sailhamer, NIV Compact Bible Commentary [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994], 359–60). In his view the beloved is understood as “wisdom” and Solomon represents the promised seed of Gn 3:15.

Hamilton proposes a more likely messianic view. He posits a nonallegorical but symbolic interpretation, with King Solomon, as the son of David, representing “the ultimate expression of David’s royal seed . . . the Davidic king, with all the messianic connotations that status carries” (Hamilton Jr., “The Messianic Music of the Song of Songs,” 331). Hamilton sees the theme of the Song as the “recovery of intimacy after alienation, which appears to match the hope engendered by Gn 3:15 for a seed for the woman who would come as the royal Messiah to restore the gladness of Eden” (339-40).

After demonstrating the development of this theme of recovered intimacy through the Song, Hamilton points out that “I am my beloved’s, And his desire is for me” (Sg 7:10) functions as the climax to the Song, using the same word for “desire” as in Gn 3:16. This word (Hb. tesuqah) is used only three times in the Hebrew Bible (Gn 3:16; 4:7; Sg 7:10). The first two uses refer to the alienation of the fall. Thus the Song appears to be making a direct allusion to the alienation found in the curse of Gn 3:16, suggesting that the messianic king will ultimately reverse the curse on the woman.

These views notwithstanding, it remains best to understand the Song as primarily a poetic presentation of a biblical view of ideal love and marriage. This is not to treat the book as a sex manual, but rather as divine guidance for the most sacred earthly relationship created by God. It treats marital love as a spiritual creation. Roland Murphy correctly concludes that “the eventual canonization of the work . . . can best be explained if the poetry originated as religious rather than secular literature” (Roland E. Murphy, A Commentary on the Book of Canticles or the Song of Songs, Hermenia—A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible [Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press, 1990], 94–95). Love and marriage are divinely ordained and not mere cultural mores.

How Is the Book of Song of Solomon Structured?

Scholars approach the structure of the Song in two ways. The first holds that the Song is a loose collection of songs/poems without a chronological or narrative flow. The second maintains that there is a logical flow of thought, based on a chiastic structure, suggesting a subtle, almost dramatic, progression.

Regarding the first approach, while the Song is often seen as a loose collection of songs/poems, the scholars who hold this view do not see it as completely devoid of order. The repeated refrains (2:7; 3:5; 8:4) and parallel structures (2:10-13 with 7:12-13; 2:14 and 17 with 8:1314; 3:1-5 with 5:2-8; 3:6-11 with 5:9-16; and 4:1-7 with 6:4-10) indicate an internal coherence and structural unity in relation to its themes. Those who interpret the Song as an anthology of love poems identify the various poems as follows:

1. Title / Superscription (1:1)
2. Rejoicing in You (1:2-4)
3. The Black Beauty and Her Brothers (1:5-7)
4. A Lovely Mare (1:8-11)
5. Sensual Scents (1:12-14)
6. Beautiful Darling, Handsome Beloved (1:15-17)
7. Flowers, Fruit, and Trees (2:1-7)
8. A Gazelle in Springtime (2:8-17)
9. Searching for Her Love (3:1-5)
10. Solomon’s Wedding (3:6-11)
11. His Descriptive Song of Beauty (4:1-7)
12. The Garden of Love (4:8–5:1)
13. Searching for Her Love Once More (5:2–6:3)
14. Comparable but Ultimately Unique (6:4-10)
15. In the Orchard (6:11-12)
16. The Dancing Shulammite (6:13–7:10)
17. Her Invitation to the Countryside (7:11-13)
18. A Song of Yearning (8:1-4)
19. More Powerful than Death (8:5-7)
20. Brothers (8:8-10)
21. My Vineyard Is Mine Alone (8:11-12)
22. Be Like a Gazelle! (8:13-14)

Nevertheless, the book’s multiple intertextual links argue against this anthological interpretation (a loose collection of poems) but rather reflect an internal unity. First, the same characters appear and speak throughout the book: the maiden, the lover, and the daughters of Jerusalem. Second, similar figures of speech are used throughout: e.g., love is better than wine (1:2; 4:10); fragrant perfume (1:3, 12; 3:6; 4:10); lovely cheeks (1:10; 5:13); eyes like doves (1:15; 4:1); teeth like sheep (4:2; 6:6); admonitions for purity (2:7; 3:5; 8:4); gazelles (2:9, 17; 8:14); Lebanon (3:9; 4:8, 11, 15; 7:4). Third, the book is united by the rich, consistent poetic imagery of flora, fauna, fragrance, and color, suggesting the beauty of Eden.

David A. Dorsey correctly maintains, “The sophistication and homogeneity of the Song’s surface-structure design strongly suggests a unified poem that was composed by a single author” (The Literary Structure of the Old Testament [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1999], 213). Dorsey’s chiastic outline demonstrates the symmetry that many interpreters have observed in the Song.

A) Opening words of mutual love and desire (1:2–2:7)

B) Young man’s invitation to the young woman to join him in the countryside (2:8-17)

C) Young woman’s nighttime search for the young man (3:1-5)

D The crest: their wedding day (3:6–5:1)

C’ Young woman’s nighttime search for the young man, and their speeches of
admiration and longing (5:2–7:10)

B’ Young woman’s invitation to the young man to join her in the countryside (7:11–8:4
[7:12–8:4])

A’ Closing words of mutual love and desire (8:5-14)

The A, B, and C sections reflect the courtship phase of this ideal marriage; D is the focal point of the poetic book and focuses on the actual wedding, while C’, B’, and A’ describe the maturation of marital love in an ideal marriage. The interpretation that will undergird this commentary is that the book is a collection of love poems arranged or structured to depict these three phases of marriage: courtship (1:1–3:5), wedding (3:6–5:1), and maturation of marital love (5:2–8:4).

What Is the Background of the Book of Song of Solomon?

As part of the Hebrew Bible, the Song is one of the megillot (scrolls) in the Writings section. The book had early acceptance and was included in the LXX translation. The Mishnah indicates certain portions of the Song were used during the Passover festival celebrated in the temple before AD 70 (Ta’anit 4:8).

In AD 90, the rabbinic scholars of Yavneh debated the Song, not regarding its inclusion, because it was already included, but rather re-examining it to verify its canonical status.

There, Rabbi Akiba upheld the Song’s divine inspiration using allegorical interpretation as a means to justify its spiritual value (cf. Gleason L. Archer, Jr., A Survey of Old Testament Introduction [Chicago: Moody, 2007], 541).

Although not quoted in the NT, the early Church recognized the Song as Scripture. The Church fathers attested to its canonicity and interpreted it primarily as an allegory. Throughout Church history, the Song has stimulated debate.

A longstanding objection to the Song’s canonicity is that the name of God is used only once (8:6). Yet the name of God does indeed appear in the book. Moreover, having the name of God in the text is not a criterion for inclusion in the canon—the canonical book of Esther lacks the name of God in its text.

Critical scholars also object that the language of the Song is too descriptive of physical characteristics and sexual intimacy. In response, the Song does indeed include references to sexual intimacy and romantic love in poetic form; but these images have been given exaggerated sexual meaning by some recent interpreters. Despite the Song’s obviously romantic content, it should not be reduced to a sex manual. The Song warns against approaching sexuality irresponsibly (cf. 2:7; 8:4, 6). Instead, the book is overwhelmingly a celebration of marital love.

Despite these objections to the Song’s place in the canon, it can confidently be recognized as a canonical book. The Song should be read as God’s Word on wisdom applied to marriage.