[5]. I adjure you, &c. Having expressed her deep attachment to her beloved shepherd, she again adjures the court ladies not to persuade her to love any one else. Comp. ii. 7. The Sept. has again צְבָאוֹת, powers, and אֵילוֹת, virtues; vide supra, ii. 7.
[6]. What is that, &c. The situation changes. The state tents have been broken up in the neighbourhood of the Shulamite’s home, and the royal train travels towards Jerusalem. Some of the inhabitants, as they see at a distance the procession almost enveloped in the fragrant cloud of smoke arising from the incense profusely burned, exclaim, “What is that coming up from the country?” “The burning of perfumes in the East, in the preceding part of processions, is both very ancient and very general. Deities (images) were probably the first honoured with this ceremony, and afterwards their supposed vicegerents, human divinities. We have a relic of the same custom still existing among ourselves, in the flowers strewed or borne in public processions, at coronations, &c., and before our great officers of state: as the Lord Chancellor, the Speaker of the House of Commons; and in [[151]]some corporations, the mace, as an ensign of office, has the same origin, though now reduced to a gilded ornament only.” See Calmet, Dictionary, and Rosenmüller, Orient. iv. 948. מִי is properly used of persons, but also of things, especially when the notion of person or persons is in them, e.g. מִי לְךָ כָּל הַמַּחְנֶה הַזֶּה, “What is all this company with thee?” Gen. xxxiii. 8; Mich. i. 5. That this is here the meaning of מִי, is evident from the answer, הִנֵּה מִטָּתוֹ, Behold, it is the palanquin. מִדְבָּר (from דָבַר, to range in order, to guide, to drive flocks), here is not desert, but, as frequently, an uninhabited plain or country, where flocks are tended, in contradistinction to town, where people dwell. Comp. Isa. xlii. 11; Jer. xxiii. 10; Joel ii. 22. תִּימְרוֹת, the plur. of תִּמָרָה, like צִדְקוֹת, from צְדָקָה, columns or clouds, only occurs once more, Joel iii. 3, and is most probably derived from תָּמַר, to ascend, to rise up like a column or cloud. The י has merely been inserted to help the pronunciation (comp. Exod. xxv. 31; Ps. xix. 4.), and, indeed, nineteen MSS. and originally another omit the י, which is undoubtedly the correct reading. The כּ in כְּתִּימְרוֹת signifies as in. Comp. Isa. v. 17; xxix. 7; Gesen. Gram. § 118, 3, Rem. כֹּל is used for a plurality comprising, or consisting of, divers single things or objects, and is to be rendered all kinds. Comp. Lev. xix. 23; Neh. xiii. 16; Fürst, Lexicon, under כֹּל 5; Gesen. § 108, 4, § 111, 1. לְבֹנָה (λίβανος, λιβανωτὸς, arbor thuris, thus), frankincense, so called from its white colour, was early known and extensively used by the Jews (Exod. xxx. 34; Lev. ii. 1, 2; Isa. lxiii. 23) and other nations (Tibull. Lib. Eleg. ii.; Ovid. Trist. Lib. V. Eleg. v. 11) in sacrifices for fumigation. It is represented as a shrub, growing on mountains, and thorny, both in Arabia (Isa. lx. 6; Jer. vi. 20) and in Palestine, according to the passage here; reaches a height of about five feet, and resembles in its leaves and fruit the myrtle. The frankincense is obtained by incisions which are made twice a year; the first in the beginning of autumn, which is white and pure (לְבֹנָה זָכָּה, Exod. xxx. 34), and is regarded as superior; and the second incision is made in the winter, when the resin thus obtained is reddish, and considered much inferior. Comp. Winer, Bibl. Dict. p. 681, et seq.; Pliny, Hist. Nat. xxxii. 14.
[7], [8]. Lo! it is the palanquin, &c. Another bystander, recognizing it at a distance, exclaims that it is the cortége of Solomon, consisting of his palanquin and guard. מִטָּתוֹ שֶׁלִשְׁלמֹהֹ, i.q. מִטַּת שְׁלֹמֹה; comp. Gesen. § 121, 5, note; Ewald, § 309 c. This construction, however, has no real analogy in the Scriptures; it frequently occurs in latter Hebrew writings. Comp. תהתיתו של ההר, the bottom of the mountain, in Rashbam on the Song of Songs, iv. 1. The גִבּרִֹים here mentioned, were a separate class of the body-guard formed by David; and, as co-religionists (גִבֹּרֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל), seem to have been chosen to protect the monarch on his excursion against any attack of nocturnal marauders, so frequent and so much dreaded in the East. Comp. Job i. 15, with Gen. xvi. 12. The מ in מִגִּבֹּרֵי is used partitively, vide supra, i. 2. אֲחוּזֵי חֶרֶב, skilled in the sword. אָחַז, to take hold, also to handle artfully, like תָּפַשׂ, to take hold, to handle skilfully. The participle אָחוּז, though [[152]]of a passive form, has an active signification; this is not unfrequently the case, especially when it belongs to an intransitive verb. Comp. בּטוּחַ בַּיהוָֹה, he trusted in Jehovah, Ps. cxii. 7; Gesen. § 50, 3, Rem. 2; Ewald, § 149 d. This removes the apparent contradiction caused by the Authorized Version, “They all hold swords;” when in the next clause, as Hodgson and Good remarked, we are told that each had his sword on his thigh. אִישׁ, a man is used as a distributive for each, every. Comp. Gen. xv. 18; xlii. 25; Gesen. § 124, 2, Rem. 1; Ewald, § 278, b. We must supply חָגוּר after אִישׁ. Comp. Exod. xxii. 27; Ps. xlv. 4. פָּחַד, fear, metonymically for the object of fear (Gen. xxxi. 42, 53), here marauders. This is evident from Ps. xci. 5; Prov. iii. 24. בַּלֵילוֹת, in or during the nights, i.e. nocturnal marauders. Vide supra, iii. 1.
[9]. A palanquin, &c. As the train draws nearer, a third person recognizes it as the newly-made palanquin, of which he gives a circumstantial description. Palanquins were and are still used in the East by great personages. They are like a couch, sufficiently long for the rider to recline, covered with a canopy resting on pillars at the four corners, hung round with curtains to exclude the sun; they have a door, sometimes of lattice-work, on each side. They are borne by four or more men, by means of strong poles, like those of our sedan-chairs; and in travelling great distances, there are always several sets of men to relieve each other. The materials of which these palanquins are made, and the style of their construction, depend upon the rank and wealth of the owners. The word אַפִּרְיֹון is most probably derived from פָּרָה, to run, to be borne quickly. Comp. τρόχος, from τρέχειν, φορεῖον, from φέρω, currus from currendo, ferculum from fero. The form אַפִּרְיּוֹן is, according to the analogy of דִּמְיוֹן, likeness (Ps. xvii. 12), and פִּדְיֹון, ransom (Exod. xxi. 30); comp. Gesen. § 84, 15; Ewald, § 163 c. with a prosthetic א (Gesen. § 19, 4; Ewald, § 162 c,) followed by a Dagesh forte like אַפֶּדֶן, a palace, Dan. xi. 45; see Fürst, Lexicon. Ewald, however, derives it from פרה = ברה, to work out, to build, to form, hence אֲפִּרְיוֹן, ein Prachtstück. Kimchi derives it from פָּרָה, to be fruitful, and says it is called אַפִּרְיוֹן, because שפרין ורבין עליה, people increase and multiply therein. But this is contrary to the description here given of the procession. Besides, a bridal bed has no (מֶרְכָּבָה) seat. עָשַׂה, to make, means also to have made, to order to be made. A person is frequently described in Scripture idiom as doing that which he orders to be done. 2 Sam. xv. 1; Gal. ii. 5, 6. The מִן in מַעַצַי denotes the material of which the frame-work was made. Ps. xlv. 4. The wood of Lebanon, i.e. cedars and cypresses, Zech. xi. 1, 2; 1 Chron. ii. 8.
[10]. Its pillars he hath made, &c. The description here given of the costly construction of this magnificent palanquin is by no means a mere poetic embellishment. A similar litter was presented by the British government in 1766 to the Nabob of the Carnatic, of which the following account is given by Williams in loco, from the public prints of the time: “The beams are solid gold, the inside beautifully decorated with silver lining and fringe throughout; the panels are painted in the highest style of finishing, and represent various groups and heads of animals, after the manner of Asia, beaded with gold richly raised above the surface, and engraved. The stays and different other ornaments are of embossed silver.” Curtius (viii. 9, 23) [[153]]gives us a description of the procession of an Indian potentate, which strikingly resembles the one here depicted. “When the king shows himself in public, his servants go before him with silver censers, which fill the air, throughout the way along which he is borne in the palanquin, with delicious odour. He himself is reclining upon a golden couch, covered with pearls and veiled with purple curtains, embroidered with gold; the life-guard bring up the rear.” רְפִידָה (from רָפַד, to support, ii. 5), that which supports the back when sitting; so the Sept. ἀνάκλινον; Vulg. reclinatorium; Döpke, Rosenmüller, Hitzig, &c. מֶרְכָּב, a seat, comp. Lev. xv. 9. The words תּוֹכוֹ רָצוּף אַהֲבָה מִבְּנוֹת יְרוּשָּׁלַיִם, are either to be translated: its centre is tesselated most lovely, by the daughters of Jerusalem;—the noun אַהֲבָה may be used adverbially for lovely, charmingly, comp. אֹהֲבֵם נְדָבָה, “I will love them freely,” Hos. xiv. 4; Ewald, § 279 c, § 204; so Luther, Kleuker, Herder, De Wette, Rosenmüller, Philippson, &c.; and the מִּן in מִבְּנוֹת may denote the author or instrument, see Isa. xxii. 3; xxviii. 7; Eccl. xii. 11; Gesen. Gram. § 143, 2;—or they may be rendered, the middle thereof is wrought, as expressive of their love, by the daughters of Jerusalem; taking אַהֲבָה, love, for the effect, or proof of it; comp. דוֹדִים, i. 2, and ἀγάπη in Greek; so Le Clerc, Bp. Percy, Drs. Good and Clark. The interior of these couches is generally painted with baskets of flowers and nosegays, intermixed with short sentences or mottoes, expressing the power of love.
[11]. Come out, O ye daughters, &c. As the royal train begins to enter the city, a fourth bystander calls the daughters of Zion to come out and see the monarch in his joyful attire. Thus the inspired writer beautifully puts into the mouth of several spectators the description he desires to give. The crown here mentioned is not the symbol of royalty, but the emblem of happiness (Job xix. 9). Crowns or chaplets of flowers were worn in ancient times on occasions of festivity and rejoicing; comp. Apocryp. Wisdom, ii. 7, 8. Conjugal life being regarded as the most happy, it became a custom among the Jews, as well as among other nations, to put crowns on the heads of the newly-married people. Rosenmüller, Orient. iv. 196. “In the Greek Church in Egypt,” says Maillet, “the parties are placed before a reading-desk on which is the book of the Gospels, having two crowns upon it of flowers, cloth, or tinsel. The priest, after benedictions and prayers, places one on the bridegroom’s, the other on the bride’s head, covering both with a veil.” (See also Talmud, Sotha, ix. 14; Selden, Uxor. Hebr. II. xv. 139; I. F. Hirt, de Coronis apud Hebraeos nuptialibus sposi sposaeque). The Jews still call the bridegroom מֶלֶךְ, and the bride מַלְכָּה. The design of Solomon in putting on this crown is evidently to dazzle the rustic girl. The arrival and entrance of the royal train in the capital, recorded in verses 6–11, evidently show that the circumstances narrated in the preceding sections took place out of Jerusalem, and that the apartments into which the king brought the damsel, as stated in ch. i. 4, were not in the capital, but, [[154]]as we see from ch. vi. 11, 12, in the neighbourhood of the Shulamite’s home. The abnormal צְאֶינָה is here intentionally used instead of the normal צֵאנָה, to correspond in form with רְאֶינָה; just as מוֹבָא, entrance (Ezek. xliii. 11), is employed instead of מָבוֹא, to correspond with מוֹצָא, see also Jer. l. 20; Ezek. xvi. 50; infra, viii. 5; Gesen. § 59, Rem. 3; Ewald, § 118 d. The female inhabitants of the town are designedly called בְּנוֹת צִיוֹן, to distinguish them from the בְּנוֹת יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, which is the appellation of the court ladies.
[1]. Behold, thou art, &c. The shepherd, who had followed afar off the royal train in which his beloved was conveyed to the capital, obtains an interview with her, and is now addressing her. Thine eyes are doves; see supra, i. 15. Thy hair is like a flock of goats, i.e. the tresses, dangling from the crown of her head, are as beautiful as Mount Gilead covered with the shaggy herd. The hair of Oriental goats is exceedingly delicate, soft (Gen. xxvii. 16), long, and black (1 Sam. xix. 13); and when the sun shines upon it, reflects such a glare that the eye can hardly bear the lustre (see Boch. Hieroz. i. 2, 51. Rosenmüller, Orient. i. 85). הַר גִּלְעָד is the name of a chain of limestone mountains beyond Jordan, intersected by numerous valleys (Gen. xxxi. 21; Jer. l. 19). This ridge extends over the regions inhabited by the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the northern part of Manasseh (Numb. xxxii. 40; Deut. iii. 13; Josh. xvii. 1–6). It was famous for its luxuriant verdure, aromatic simples, and rich pastures; and hence attracted the flocks (Numb. xxxii. 1); and animals from this region were regarded as of a superior quality, like gold from Ophir. Nothing, therefore, could more beautifully express the curly hair of a woman, dangling down from the crown of her head, than the sight, at a distance, of a flock of goats running down from the summit of this verdant hill on a beautiful day. צַמָּה (from צָמַם, i.q. Chald. צַמְצַם, צָמַם, to bind, to twine, to veil), is well explained by Rashbam, ענין עילוף ומעטה היא, a kind of cover, or veil; so Sym., Sept., Isa. xlvii. 2, Michaelis, Döpke, Gesenius, De Wette, Lee, Percy, Williams, Hitzig, &c. The rendering of the Sept. here, ἐκτὸς τῆς σιωπήσεώς σου, behind thy silence, which is followed by the Syriac and Arabic, is both contrary to the etymology of the word, and meaningless. The other translations, viz. locks (Auth. Vers., Ewald), a plait of hair (Hengstenberg), cannot be substantiated. The word גָּלַשׁ, which occurs only here and vi. 5, is of difficult interpretation, and has produced a variety of renderings. The Sept. has here ἀπεκαλύφθησαν, and vi. 5, ἀνεφάνησαν, the Syriac ܣܠܰܩ, the Vulg. here ascenderunt, and vi. 5, apparuerunt. The Rabbins also differ in their interpretations. Rashi explains it שנקרחו, that make bare, i.e. quit or descend the mountain. Ibn Ezra, שנשקפו, which look down; Rashbam, שנראו, which are seen, i.e. while coming down from the mount. Modern commentators are not less at variance. Luther translates it shorn; Houbigant, which hang down; Kleuker, Ewald, which shows itself; Döpke, Gesenius, Hitzig, Philippson, which lie down; Magnus, which climb up; Percy, Hengstenberg, which come up, i.e. from Jerusalem. Amidst these conflicting opinions, it appears best to take גָּלַשׁ, like its kindred פָּלַשׁ, in the sense of rolling down, running down; see Fürst. Lexicon, s.v. This meaning [[155]]accords best with the comparison here used, and leaves to the preposition מִן its natural signification. The omission of הַר in the Sept., Arabic, and a few MSS., is evidently owing to the carelessness of a transcriber.
[2]. Thy teeth, &c. The compliment passed upon the black hair is followed by another on the white teeth: “Thy teeth resemble in whiteness woolly sheep just washed.” This comparison will appear more striking when we remember that the wool of Scripture is proverbial for its whiteness, and is placed in juxtaposition with the colour of snow, Isa. i. 18; Dan. vii. 9; Rev. i. 14; Book of Enoch xlvi. 1. The Sept., which is followed by many modern commentators, takes the comparison to be between the shorn skin of the sheep and the teeth; but this is untenable. For, 1. The skin of shorn sheep can never have the whiteness which the context here demands; 2. Shorn sheep would yield a very incongruous figure, if teeth were compared with them; 3. Sheep, as now, were generally washed before and not after they were shorn; 4. The passage in vi. 6, shows that קְצוּבוֹת is merely a poetical epithet for רְחֵלִים, not because they were then shorn, but because they are periodically shorn. The explanation of קְצוּבוֹת by well numbered (Rashi), or by יש להן מדה אחת כאילו נחצבת כל אחת כמו חברתה, same size (Kimchi, Ibn Ezra), are against vi. 6.
All of which are paired. That is, each upper tooth has its corresponding lower one; thus they, as it were, appear in pairs, like this flock of white sheep, each of which keeps to its mate, as they come up from the washing-pool. And no one of them is deprived of its fellow, i.e. no tooth is deprived of its corresponding one, just as none of the sheep is bereaved of its companion. The Hiphil of תָּאַם, to be double, to be pairs (Exod. xxvi. 24; xxxvi. 29), is to make double, to make pairs, to appear paired. שַׁכֻּלָּה is deprived, bereaved, Jer. xviii. 21. On the masculine suffixes in כֻּלָּם and בָּהֶם, referring to קְצוּבוֹת, fem., see supra, ii. 7. The words שֶׁכֻּלָּם and שַׁכֻּלָּה form a paranomasia; see i. 2. The rendering of מַתְאִימוֹת by כלם יולדות תאומים, all bearing twins (Kimchi, &c.), which some try to justify by submitting that sheep as well as goats in the East frequently bear twins (Arist. Hist. Anim. i. 6, 19; Theocret. i. 25; iii. 34), is incompatible with the figure. The teeth surely, which are here compared to the flock, cannot be said to bear twins like the sheep. Those who attempt to get over this difficulty by referring it to the rows of the teeth, are, to say the least, guilty of introducing a new subject.
[3]. Thy mouth is lovely. מִדְבָּר is translated by the Sept., Syriac, Vulg., Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Rashbam, speech, language; but this is incompatible with the description here given, which depicts the members of the body, and not their actions. It is therefore more consonant with the context to take מִדְבָּר as a poetical expression for the instrument of speech; not the tongue (Schultens, Kleuker, Döpke), which is kept within the mouth, and not when put out (נָאֲוָה) beautiful; but the mouth itself, (Ewald, Gesenius, De Wette, Umbreit, Rosenmüller, Meier, Philippson, &c.) The objection of Magnus (who translates it voice), and of Hitzig (who translates it palate), that the rendering of mouth would produce tautology, inasmuch as the mouth consists of the lips, and these have already been described, is [[156]]gratuitous: for an individual may have lips like scarlet, and yet not have a lovely mouth. The מ in מִדְבָּר, added to the root דָבַר, to speak, in order to form the noun, denotes the instrument with which one speaks: compare מַזְלֵג, an instrument with which to draw out = a fork, from זָלַג, to draw out; מַפְתֵּחַ, an instrument for opening = a key, from פָּתַח, to open, Gesen. § 84, 14; Ewald, § 160, 6. This corroborates the rendering we defended.