Page:The Song of Songs (1857).djvu/146

 3 Sweet is the odour of thy perfumes, Which perfume thou art, by thy name diffused abroad,

25; Ps. cxxxvii. 3), or plural (Gen. xxx. 14; Exod. xvii. 5; 2 Sam. xi. 17), is to be supplied from the plural noun [HE: min.^eS/iyqvOt], as indicated by the partitive [HE: min/]. (Compare Gesen. § 154, 3 c; Ewald, § 217, b, i. b.) The singular, however, is preferable, for the Shulamite does not wish so much for a number of kisses as for the presence of her beloved; one would be sufficient if he could only come. We thus obtain a phrase [HE: noS/oq n^eS/iyqoh], to kiss a kiss, i.e. to give a kiss; corresponding to [HE: yo`ax/ `Exoh], to counsel a counsel, i.e. to give counsel, 2 Sam. xvi. 23; [HE: Holoh Ho:liy], 2 Kings xiii. 14. This construction is of frequent occurrence in Hebrew, and is also found in Greek and Latin; (Compare [GR: nosei=n no/son], pugnam pugnare; Gesen. § 138 i., Rem. 1; Ewald, § 281 a.) The rendering, therefore, of [HE: min/] by with (Luther, English Version, Good, Williams, &c.) is incorrect. Ewald's and Herxheimer's translation, Let one of the kisses kiss me, is both incongruous and ungrammatical; for in the first place, it is not the kiss that kisses, but the individual; and secondly, [HE: n^eS/iyqoh] is feminine, which would require [HE: t.iS/.aqEniy], the third fem. [HE: dvOdiym/], prop. love, the abstract, which, as in Greek and Latin, is in Hebrew frequently expressed by the plural, (comp. [HE: Hayiym/], life, [HE: mam^et.aqiym/], sweetness, [HE: maHimadiym/], beauty; vide infra, v. 16; Gesen. § 108, 2 a; Ewald, § 179 a), here metonomically for the expressions of it—love-tokens, caresses. So Lee, Magnus, Noyes, Fürst, Philippson, &c. This rendering is demanded by the context, for this clause gives the cause of the statement in the preceding one. The change from the third person [HE: yiS/.aqEniy], to the second [HE: dOdoyk/o], or from the second to the third person, is an enallage of frequent occurrence in sacred poetry. (Deut. xxxii. 15; Isa. i. 29; Jer. xxii. 24; Gesen. § 137, 3, Rem. 3.) The Sept. and Vulg. have [HE: d.ad.eyk/o], thy breasts, instead of [HE: dOdeyk/o], thy caresses. That this is a gross error is evident from the fact that a man and not a woman is here addressed. To appeal to the catachresis in Isa. lx. 16, would be preposterous.

3. Sweet is the odour, &c. Ointments, like wines, were used by the ancients as cordials (Prov. xxvii. 9), and as restoratives in consequence of their supposed sanative properties. Hence the anointing of the sick. (Isa. i. 6, &c.; Jer. viii. 22.) The fainting Shulamite, therefore, mentions this second cordial. The [HE: l] in [HE: l^erEyHa] signifies in, as regards, quoad, and is frequently used for the sake of giving prominence to an idea. Thus "Solomon was greater than all the kings of the earth [HE: l^e`S/Er v.l^eHok^emoh], in or as regards riches and wisdom." (1 Kings x. 23.) Compare also Exod. xx. 5, 6; Ewald, § 217 a. Fürst, Lexicon, [HE: l] 5, f. The Sept. has [HE: v] instead of [HE: l]; or it may be, favours the view of Döpke, Heiligstedt, Meier, &c., that the [HE: l] introduces the nominative; but this requires another anomaly, viz., to refer [HE: TvObiym/], to the nomen rectum, instead of regens, and does not at all improve the sense. The Syriac, Ibn Ezra, Authorized Version, Percy, Williams, Noyes, &c., take the [HE: l] in the sense of [HE: l^ema`an/], because, and connect it with [HE: `al k.En/], therefore, of the last clause; but these words are never used together for cause and effect. Besides, this explanation, like the former, interrupts the sense; for the fainting damsel evidently refers here to the second restorative. Luther strangely renders this clause, ''dass man deine gute Salbe riche''. Kleuker, Rosenmüller, Ewald, Delitzsch, Philippson, &c., translate [HE: l^erEyHa] to the smell; but this is contrary to the usus loquendi, as [HE: rEyHa] is never used for the organ which inhales, but invariably means something exhaled or emitted. Hodgson renders [HE: l^erEyHa], like the scent; but [HE: l] never signifies like. The instance in Deut. xi. 18, adduced in support of his assertion, is gratuitous, for the [HE: l] in [HE: lTvOTopOt] has not that meaning.