Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

In the celebrated poems of OsSIAN, which, whether genuine or not, were certainly faithful copies of the manners of the age and country, we have the following images; one of which is the same as Solomon's:

'Thy breasts are like two smooth rocks seen 'from Banno of the streams.

'Lovely with her raven hair is the white-bo'som'd daughter of Songlan'.

'Her white-breast heaves like snow on the heath, when the gentle winds arise and slowly 'move, it in the night.

[ocr errors]

'Her breasts are like foam on the waves, and her eyes like the stars of light: her hair was as the raven's wing3

He must be a fastidious critic indeed, that condemns these beautiful images as licentious or immodest. Yet I know nothing in the Song of Solomon more licentious, and impassioned. The two descriptions of the bride and bridegroom will here perhaps rush into the reader's recollection, especially the former, and make it necessary for me to explain and remove some expressions, which, as they stand in our translation, I can by no means justify.

The translation of the Bible is indeed so important and valuable a work, and the translators were such good and learned men, that I feel pain in finding fault with either: yet as they were but 1 Finga', book I.

Battle of Lora.
Carthon. Compare Sol. Song, ch. v. 11.

[ocr errors]

men, and laid no claim to inspiration or infallibility, it conveys no censure to say that they sometimes erred. In the present instance I have shewn that part of their error must be laid to the state of our language and manners near two centuries ago; and another part to the state of learning at that period. Literature, it must be recollected, was then but just awakened from a slumber of a thousand years. The Hebrew language was very imperfectly understood, and less was known of the Hebrew poetry. The attention of our reformers and translators was drawn to objects of more immediate importance, and confined, in a great measure, to the subjects controverted between them and the church of Rome. Thus much at least must be admitted in their apology. Let us now advert to the very indelicate description they have given us of the spouse in the beginning of the seventh chap

ter.

If the reader will please to compare my translation of this passage with the common one (neither of which I think it necessary to transcribe here) he will at once perceive the grand difference to be, that what they refer to the naked features, I refer to the dress; which I hope takes off at once the grand objection of its indelicacy. For the import of the individual words and phrases, I must refer to my critical notes: in defence of the general idea, I must beg leave to argue from the following topics.

1. From the nature of the case. Waving the divine authority of the book, and supposing only

(which surely cannot be disputed) that the author was a man of sense and genius, would he represent the bride as describing her beloved naked to the virgins, that they might know him' ? Surely not much less would he represent the virgins as describing the naked charms of the bride; the supposition is against nature, reason, and probabili-, ty; to say nothing of decency and morals.

2. Let us compare this with other ancient poems, and particularly with the forty-fifth psalm which appears also to have been a nuptial poem, and, probably, written on the same occasion. Here the parties are deseribed in their royal or nuptial garments2; the queen especially, as clothed in wrought gold, and needle-work: nor is there any passage in the writings which compose our Bible analogous to this, supposing it to refer to the uncovered features.

3. Let us examine the internal evidence, and we shall find several circumstances which can be referred only to the dress, particularly in the description of the bride. The first article of the description, for instance, is the feet, which are de-. scribed, not naked, but clothed with sandals3,

The next is,

which strongly favours our idea. most literally and obviously, the covering of the thighs or loins. The head also is described in a manner which can be referred only to the dress : 'Thine head UPON THEE is like CARMEL.'

Now

Ch. v. 16.

Ver. 8, 9, 13, 14.

3 Ch. vii. 1.

L

Carmal was a mountain covered with trees and verdure, no doubt intermixed with flowers, which can refer to nothing but the head-dress, or rather the nuptial crown formed of flowers and evergreens. So again, in the description of the beloved his body like white ivory overlaid with sapphires,' I am much mistaken if this does not more naturally describe a white skin with a sapphire robe, or perhaps robes of blue and white, than it does the skin with blue veins.

4. If we recur.to authorities, those in favour of my hypothesis are, at least, equally respectable with those on the other side. Among the rabbins, Aben Ezra was an advocate for this method of interpretation, and among Christian writers I have noted Sanctius, Poole, Bishop Patrick, and Dr. Gill. Mr. Harmer hath pleaded on the same side, with much ingenuity, and he is followed by Mr. Parkhurst.

5. It may be thought extraordinary by some mere English readers, that there should be a doubt or a difficulty upon this subject, and they may wish to be informed whence the ambiguity arises. To gratify such I would reply, partly from the nature of the Hebrew language, which denominates the articles of dress from the members of the body which they cover and partly from the nature of poetry, which abounds in tropes and metonymies; and often becomes obscure by that conciseness which is essential to its elegance.

1 In Gill, ch. vii. 1.

If it be enquired, How are we to distinguish the parts clothed from the naked features? I an-) swer not only by the expressions used, but also by the nature of the case, and the customs of the country; but the application of this rule must be referred to the commentary.

The beauty of Solomon's imagery has been a subject of encomium with many writers, and particularly with the ingenious and elegant Bossuet: but if the reader have not taste to discern these, it would be in vain to point them out it would be like pointing a blind man to the rainbow. We hasten therefore to the next, and one of the most important subjects of enquiry.

SECTION V.

THE MYSTICAL SENSE OF THE POEM.

IT was a very early and general opinion among both Jews and Christians, who studied this book, that the author had something more in view than a literal reference to a beloved fair one, under the amatory expressions and figurative images employed; but they have differed very much in their methods of explication.

The learned Mr. Poole' mentions some writers who have conjectured the author's design to be

1 In Syn. Crit. vol. II. col. 1963.

« VorigeDoorgaan »