It is doubtful whether this verse was originally part of the book. Like the introductory verses to most Old Testament books, it is almost certainly an editorial addition to give the completed work greater authority, to identify it, and to commend it to others to read. Evidence that this verse was added comes from the form of the relative pronoun that appears as ʾasher in this verse alone but as she everywhere else. Although some scholars accept that parts of the Song may date back to the period of Solomon (3.6-11, for example), it is likely that this opening verse was added after the work was completed. We cannot determine when this may have taken place or who may have added it.

The opening words form the title of the book. In discussing the book’s title, we noted that the Hebrew phrase The Song of Songs is a superlative expression that describes the highest or greatest degree of something. These opening words, then, should be translated in the same way as we render the book title; for example, “The most beautiful of songs,” “The most sublime song,” “The most elegant of love poems,” or even “The greatest poem about love.” In some languages it may be necessary to use a demonstrative or introductory particle: “Here is the most beautiful of all songs” or “The most beautiful of all poems, here it is.”

We drew attention in the introduction, “Translating Song of Songs,” to the phrase which is Solomon’s. We pointed to the various attempts to translate a vague Hebrew expression, namely the preposition l- attached to the proper noun “Solomon.” This construction is similar to what we find in the titles of many Psalms. The preposition l- in the title phrase is generally understood to mean “belonging to [David]” or “presented to [Moses]” rather than “written by” them. In Psa. 81.1; 82.1, for instance, it is clear that the phrase leʾasap indicates that these psalms form part of the Asaph collection. Following this pattern we can translate which is Solomon’s as “from the Solomon collection.” However, there are other possible meanings for the preposition l- in this context, such as “for” in the sense of “dedicated to” or “in honor of.” In view of the probable late date for this work, we recommend a translation such as “dedicated to Solomon” or “in honor of Solomon.” In some languages it may be necessary to say “It was written to honor Solomon” or “These were written for Solomon.” As noted in the introduction, though many versions translate the phrase as “by Solomon” (Good News Translation, New American Bible [New American Bible], Revised English Bible [Revised English Bible]), we recommend that their example should not be followed.

Suggested translations of the verse:

• The most beautiful of love poems. Dedicated to Solomon.

• Here is the most beautiful song. It was written to honor Solomon.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Song of Songs. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1998. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

We see immediately that this verse contains a shift in person. The first line in Hebrew has a third person expression, “Let him kiss me with kisses of his mouth,” while in the second line the young woman addresses her lover directly (“your love…”). These changes between second and third person do not necessarily indicate that different persons are involved, as Hebrew poetry uses this feature often. Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation harmonize the lines by converting the third person in the first line to second person: O that you would kiss … and “Your lips cover me.” This is certainly one way to deal with this difficult problem of mixed second and third person forms. However, another approach is to retain the third person and use a verb form expressing the young woman’s wish or longing. This is the way Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, New Revised Standard Version, and others approach this matter. This gives a translation “Oh, that he would kiss me,” “Let him kiss me,” or “I wish he would kiss me.” It suggests that the woman is speaking to herself, expressing her great longing to be kissed by her lover. Not until the next part of the verse does she address her lover directly, telling him how much she adores him. Though both approaches are possible, we recommend the latter as reflecting more faithfully the content of the text.

O that you would kiss me with the kisses of your mouth: this is an emphatic form, where the noun kisses and the verb are from the same root. Though Revised Standard Version translates the phrase rather literally, translators are free to use an expression that is more natural to them. In many languages the verb kiss is sufficient, though some idioms may exist (“give kisses,” for example). The Hebrew preposition min is rendered in Revised Standard Version by with. If the noun kisses is retained, any appropriate preposition will do, “from” or “of,” for instance. The initial position of kiss in the Hebrew sentence, its plural form, and its repetition as noun and verb indicate intensity. Good News Translation renders this by the expression “cover me with kisses,” the New English Bible (New English Bible) by the even stronger “that he may smother me with kisses.” Bible en français courant uses repetitive phrases to convey this idea: “Kiss me, oh, kiss me!”

Your mouth: the Hebrew has “his” mouth, agreeing with the initial verb. If translators follow the recommendation of this Handbook and use a form like “let him kiss,” then we can retain the Hebrew third person pronoun form, “his mouth.”

Since most kisses are with the mouth, the expression may seem redundant; the verb may include the sense “with the mouth.” We note, however, that in the ancient world nose kissing was also known, so this call for kisses on the mouth may be intended. The young woman was asking for an expression of real intimacy. Some cultural groups, such as those in the South Pacific, have the custom of kissing with the nose, in which case “with his mouth” will be required for clarification. In other cultures kissing on the mouth may be unknown, so it may even be necessary to add a footnote: “In Bible times lovers kissed each other on the mouth.”

In some cultures public displays of affection, even between adults, may be frowned upon. Although on this occasion the young woman is not suggesting that the young man kiss her in public, the translator’s community may feel that even this expression of her feelings is offensive. We do not want to reduce the emotional content of the text; but if the translator faces a problem in speaking openly of displays of affection, we can say:

• Oh, that he would show how much he loves me.

• I wish he would show how much he loves me.

These examples will also serve where any form of kissing is unknown. If reference to kissing is not a problem, we can say:

• Oh, that he would smother me with kisses.

• Let him kiss me [with his mouth].

• How I long to be kissed by him!

For your love is better than wine: the initial particle in Hebrew, For, can have various functions. If we understand the comment to be a clause expressing reason, then “for” or “because” is correct. However, the particle can also be emphatic, in which case it emphasizes what has been said without reference to any motive. It is equivalent to “indeed” or “truly.” Some translations such as Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible, do not translate the particle but instead make this a new sentence.

Your love: the Hebrew dodim “love” is used frequently throughout Song of Songs. It is a plural form with singular meaning and describes all aspects of sexual love. Here your love refers to the love that the young man shows toward the young woman. It is not merely an emotional feeling but includes every demonstration of love and affection. The Septuagint (the ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament) and some other ancient versions have “breasts” for dodim, but this certainly does not make sense in this context. dodim is rendered by some as “caresses.” Alternatively we may wish to qualify “your love” in some way: “the love you show me,” “the love you give,” or even perhaps “the way you love me.”

Is better than uses the Hebrew adjective normally translated as “good.” Translators need to find an adjective that can apply to both love and wine equally well. “Sweet,” “good,” “pleasurable,” “pleasing,” or even “delightful” are possibilities. These adjectives seem more natural than saying that love is “fragrant” (New English Bible).

Wine is a common metaphor for love in Song of Songs. In light of 7.9, however, wine is also linked with pleasure. So the young woman describes the pleasure her lover gives as greater than that of wine.

If wine is an unknown drink, then it may be possible to substitute another drink that is pleasant and is used on special occasions. In some communities wine may be associated with many negative values such as drunkenness or problem behavior. In other contexts a local church may have taken a stand against drinking wine and so finds it difficult to deal with the mention of drinking wine in the Scriptures. In translating such references we need to determine whether wine is the primary focus of the verse or an historical reference (such as, for example, in the Last Supper), or whether, as here, it is merely an image for pleasure. In our present example we then have the possibility of understanding wine in a more general way as “that which gives great pleasure.” In this case love is more pleasurable than any other form of pleasure.

Considering the book as a whole, however, we are faced with a difficult decision. The word wine is a key term in this book, and so removing it or using a substitute throughout will pose a real problem. Further, our translation is not intended only for certain members of a language group (for example, Christians); it is for all speakers. In most cultures wine or some other form of alcoholic drink is known, and its tendency to make a person light-headed will be readily understood. The comparison between being in love and being drunk is easy to grasp. It certainly does not mean condoning heavy drinking. Indeed in many places wine may be associated with lovemaking, just as it was in biblical times. The French, of course, are well known for their love of wine, and Bible en français courant gives “your love makes me heady [literally ‘intoxicates me’] more than wine.”

A suggested translation for this part of the verse may be:

• Your love is more delightful than wine.

• The love you give is sweeter than wine.

• Being loved by you is more pleasurable than wine.

• Your love gives me more pleasure than anything else [in this world].

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Song of Songs. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1998. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The verse begins with the Hebrew preposition l-, a problem for some of the ancient versions. The Septuagint regarded it as the conjunction “and,” while the Syriac thought it meant “because.” In fact the preposition here seems to function as a particle that points to something and means “as for…” or “with reference to….” Many languages will have a similar way of introducing sentences to indicate that they are offering a comment, such as “As for your anointing oils, they are fragrant.” Alternatively the preposition can be left untranslated as Revised Standard Version has done.

Your anointing oils are fragrant: Revised Standard Version has rendered the word “good” in Hebrew as fragrant. This obscures the fact that the word “good” links this verse back to the previous verse, forming a chiastic structure.

We can translate “Your fragrance, how delightful it is” or “The scent of your perfume is so good.”

The close relationship between oil and love can be seen in a verse like 4.10. Throughout Song of Songs fragrant spices and oils are used as metaphors for the lover or loved one (see 1.2). Their use is not limited to the fragrant oils and perfumes used on the body. This is the reason Good News Translation has chosen to translate here with “there is a fragrance about you,” which can be speaking of either a fragrance applied to the body, or the “fragrance” or pleasantness of a person’s presence.

Your name is oil poured out: several comments can be made about this phrase. First, there is the continuing repetition of sh and m sounds in the Hebrew text: shemaneka “your oils”; shemen “oil”; shemek “your name.” Secondly, there is a wordplay between the two similar sounding words oil and name, as in Eccl 7.1.

In the culture and language of the Hebrews, a name is more than the sound by which we identify a person or object; it includes the nature of the person or thing so identified, together with their reputation. From this perspective the young woman praises her lover by referring to his reputation in the community. This means that Good News Translation “the sound of your name” is rather limited, as name has a much more profound meaning. If name has the same range of meaning as in Hebrew, a more literal translation may be acceptable. But where this is not the case, we need to make this idea clear. We can say “your renown,” “your fame,” or even “you.”

Oil poured out: the young man’s name is compared to oil. The meaning of the accompanying Hebrew word turaq is uncertain. As noted in the introduction, scholars may at times suggest a slight change in the Hebrew text to help make sense of an otherwise incomprehensible passage. Many translations follow the Septuagint and propose changing (or emending) the word turaq to a form meaning “poured out” (Revised Standard Version, New International Version, Jerusalem Bible, Revised English Bible). If this is the meaning, the expression probably means his fame is well known. His name or his fame spreads like poured-out oil. Contemporary English Version says “the very mention of your name is like spreading perfume.”

However, some scholars (Pope and Fox, among others) interpret turaq as referring to a special kind of oil, coming from a place called Turaq. One rendering of the Hebrew sentence is “ ‘Oil of Turaq’ is your name.” The meaning would be that the young man is as well known as this famous perfume, in which case we can say “You are as famous as the fragrant Turaq oil,” or “you are as well known as the famous oil from Turaq.” If necessary a footnote can be added.

Therefore the maidens love you: because of his wonderful “fragrance,” it is understandable that the young woman will think he is attractive to all women, so she flatters him (and thus indirectly flatters herself for being his lover). Therefore gives the reason for his wide appeal. We will almost certainly have to make this connection clear in translation. We can say “that is why,” or even “so it is not surprising that….”

The maidens may well be identical to the “daughters of Jerusalem” in 1.5, or the “they” referred to in verse 4. Maiden is a young woman who has reached the age when she can marry; it says nothing about her actual married state or her virginity. The plural form maidens may carry the sense of “all women” or “any woman,” including the young woman herself.

Love you is used with the general sense that every woman “would be attracted to” the young man.

For translation we suggest:

• The scent of your perfume is so fragrant,
You are as famous as the oil of Turaq.
No wonder all the young women are attracted to you.

• The fragrance of your perfume is so sweet,
Mention of your name is like spreading perfume.
No woman could resist you.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Song of Songs. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1998. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Because of changes in the personal pronouns used, this verse again causes problems for both interpreters and translators. Following on from verse 3, however, it is clear that the young woman is still speaking.

Draw me after you: the young woman speaks of her longing for her lover. The imperative Draw me shows how eager she is for him to take her away with him. Draw speaks of a power that can be for good (as in Hos 11.4) or for evil (Psa 10.9); it may also portray being in bondage to another person, being carried away forcibly. In this context we note the woman’s longing for her lover to carry her off to where they can be alone. We can say “Take me [away] with you” as in Revised English Bible and Good News Translation.

Let us make haste expresses the same feeling as the opening imperative. It is the first of four first person emphatic verb forms in this verse. There is urgency in the woman’s voice, which we can convey by “Let’s run [away],” or more generally, “Let’s hurry.” The plural “us” in this clause certainly must refer to the two young lovers. In languages that make a distinction between different first person plural pronouns, an inclusive “us” should be used. Or a dual form may be appropriate, meaning “you-and-I [we-two].”

The next lines again bring us to the problem of change of person. The first lines have an imperative sense, addressed to the lover: Draw me after you, let us make haste. But the rest of the verse includes several references that are difficult to deal with in translation. First, there is a third person comment, The king has brought me into his chambers. Next, there is another emphatic “we,” one that seems to exclude the lover, because he is in fact addressed: We will exult and rejoice in you; we will extol your love more than wine. Finally another group is introduced: rightly do they love you. These problems will be addressed as we examine each clause.

With the clause The king has brought me into his chambers, it is clear that the young woman is still speaking, but she no longer seems to be addressing her lover. Is this then a statement of fact, as Revised Standard Version suggests? Or is this something imagined by the young woman? Some have proposed a slight change in the Hebrew text and have translated an imperative “take me to your room.” Contemporary English Version says “Take me to your home” (compare Good News Translation). However, the verb form in the Hebrew describes a completed action. Therefore Revised Standard Version seems more correct. Another possibility is to translate the verb as a wish, “Oh, that he would take me to his room.” One French version (Pléiade) emphasizes her happy expectancy: “When he will bring me into his room…!”

In Egyptian love lyrics king or “prince” is a term of endearment for a lover. Following this tradition we understand king here not as a reference to Solomon or to a real king, nor as evidence for a royal wedding ritual; it is simply a term of endearment that the young woman uses when speaking of her lover. In some languages this metaphor will probably not have the same meaning, so we may need to render king as “my lover.” Good News Translation suggests “Be my king and…,” which actually means that the lover is “like a king” to her. Another possibility is to use “my ‘king’ ” within inverted commas to show that it was not a literal reference to a royal person. FRCL says “You are my king!” which clearly expresses the figurative meaning. Otherwise we can add a footnote to explain the meaning of the term, and retain the word “king” or an equivalent such as “chief” or “ruler” in the text.

His chambers is also a plural form in the Hebrew, though this is certainly not crucial to the translation. Perhaps because of the reference to a king, some English versions keep the word “chamber,” and some French versions use a term appropriate for a king’s palace. However, the real meaning is an inner, private room, thus referring to “his [bed]room.” In some cultures a direct reference like this may be inappropriate, so “his room” or “his home” may be more acceptable.

Translation of this clause can be:

• My lover took me to his room.

• My “king” took me to his room.

• My lover took me [to his] home.

We will exult and rejoice in you: this again leaves us with a problem about who is being spoken of. You is clearly the king, so who is we? There are at least three possibilities.
(1) We may be the couple. This is the meaning adopted by Bible en français courant and Good News Translation: “We will be happy together,” where we is the inclusive and dual pronoun form. This same understanding is reflected in New Jerusalem Bible “Let us delight and rejoice in your love,” and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible “Let’s be joyous and happy, thanks to you.”
(2) Others have seen the we as referring to the group of women who admire the young man. In this case the pronoun form will be an exclusive plural form.
(3) Another solution is to see the young woman as talking or referring to herself in the first person plural, a feature that is known to occur in Sumerian sacred marriage songs (Pope).

This last solution seems promising, so we can say “Let me rejoice and take pleasure in you.” Alternatively we can use New Jerusalem Bible and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible as models, where “we” refers to the couple.

Exult and rejoice: the two verbal phrases occur together and have the same meaning, “rejoice.” If necessary we can use one combined or intensive term in the translation, “greatly rejoice.” Otherwise two terms of similar meaning may be used: “Let us rejoice and take pleasure in your love.”

In you is a masculine singular form. It refers to the young man, or to his love. Good News Translation translates in more general terms, “We will … lose ourselves in love.”

We will extol your love more than wine: we have already noted the association between love and wine in verse 2. Wine is figurative for all that is pleasurable (see comments above in verse 2). The young woman remarks that the young man’s love makes her happier than any wine could. We will extol is another example of the plural with singular meaning; the young woman speaks of her strong feelings toward the young man. Revised Standard Version extol is one possible meaning of the Hebrew verb, whose root meaning is “remember.” In the particular verb form used here, it can mean “recall,” “mention,” or “celebrate.” Hence Jerusalem Bible and New English Bible suggest “praise.” Other possibilities are “boast” as in Psa 20.8 (“Some boast of…”), or “inhale” in the sense of savoring something. Gordis cites examples of the latter meaning in Lev 24.7; Isa 66.3; Hos 14.7.

Various possibilities for translation exist:

• Let me celebrate your love [for me].

• I will recall your love [for me].

• I will praise your love.

Revised Standard Version more than wine indicates the extent of her affection. However, as the phrase stands, it is unclear what it qualifies in the sentence, whether the verb “extol” or the noun phrase “your love.” Will she praise his love for her more than she will praise the pleasures of wine? Or will she celebrate his love, which itself is better than the pleasures of wine? This may seem a fine distinction to make, but the Hebrew text allows both possibilities. If it is necessary to choose one, then probably she intends to say that the pleasure he gives her is greater than the pleasure wine offers.

Two possibilities for rendering this line are:

• I will praise your love, which is more delightful than wine.

• Let me taste your love; it is more enjoyable than wine.

Good News Translation “drink deep and lose ourselves in love” seems to miss the thrust of the comparison. Where reference to wine is a problem (see comments on verse 2), we may say “Let me enjoy your love; it is more enjoyable than anything on earth.”

Rightly do they love you: the initial Hebrew term comes from the root meaning “upright, straight.” Early versions and modern commentators reflect a variety of interpretations. The majority, however, view it as an adverb, “rightly” or “correctly.” This suggests that it is natural to fall in love with a young man like this. Fox and Gordis both follow the ancient Jewish scholar Ibn Ezra and divide the sentence differently, bringing wine together with the word for “right” and explaining the meaning as “smooth,” “good,” or “strong wine.” This interpretation results in a translation, “more than smooth wine do they love you.” They will of course refer to the “maidens” or “other women” mentioned in verse 3. In many translations the pronoun they will have to be expressed as a noun, if it is not immediately clear who is being talked about. Another acceptable solution may be to use the general expression “every woman.” Following this statement the young woman confesses that her lover is irresistible, and even other women find him so.

In translating the last line of the verse, we may follow Good News Translation “No wonder all women love you,” which captures the spirit of the saying well. Other possibilities are “It is natural that any woman would love you”; “It is not surprising that every woman loves you.”

With the variety of possible interpretations, many translation models for the verse as a whole can be considered. Two possibilities are:

• “Take me away with you! Let’s hurry.”
My king took me to his room.
“Let me rejoice and be glad in your love!
I will praise your love more than wine!
No wonder all the women love you!”

• Take me away with you! Let’s hurry!
Oh, [or, I wish] that my king would take me to his room.
Let’s rejoice and enjoy our love!
Your caresses are smoother than wine.
It’s not surprising every woman adores you!

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Song of Songs. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1998. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

I am very dark, but comely: the adjective given in Revised Standard Version as very dark and in Good News Translation as “dark” is simply the word “black.” In 5.11 the same word describes the color of the raven, a large black bird. The translator will have to choose a term that refers to people and the color of their skin. Some, especially those who think the young woman was a foreign princess, see this term as indicating a person of African origin. In view of verse 6, however, others see it as describing skin darkened by the sun, and this is probably more correct. Our interpretation will affect the way we translate.

Most languages make a distinction between people with a darker complexion and those with fair skin. In many parts of Africa darker-skinned people are described as “black,” while fair-skinned people are described as “red.” In such cultures it is best to use the literal “black.”

The phrase but comely seems to make a contrast between black and comely. Even though she is black, she is nevertheless beautiful. Note, however, that the Hebrew conjunction can be rendered either by but or “and.” Which is intended here?

Those sensitive to and proud of their blackness will almost certainly wish to render the conjunction as “and”: “I am black and beautiful.” However, it is important to note that in many cultures in Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East, being light-skinned is a sign of beauty. Contrary to the Western ideal, being tan or darkened by the sun is viewed in a negative light. This description may mean, for example, that the young woman was forced to work in the sun—a sign of low social status. Indeed, in verse 6 this view in confirmed. She says she is dark “because the sun has scorched me.” In translating faithfully we need to choose terms that accurately reflect the culture of biblical times. In this context but seems to be a more faithful rendering. This is how Good News Translation, New American Bible, New English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and others understand it, though Contemporary English Version, New Revised Standard Version, and Revised English Bible use “and.”

The adjective comely appears often in descriptions of the young woman’s physical beauty (see 1.10; 2.14; 4.3; 6.4), mostly with reference to her facial features. Comely therefore means “lovely,” “beautiful.” In cultures that have one particular adjective to describe facial beauty, it will be appropriate here. Of course many languages use verbs in the place of adjectives, but this should pose no problem to the translator.

O daughters of Jerusalem is a phrase that appears in 2.7; 3.5, 10, 11; 5.8, 16; and 8.4. We understand the daughters to be the same group as is identified by the term “maidens” in verse 3 and by “they” in verse 4. As noted in the introduction, opinions vary greatly as to the role this group plays. Some see them as a group of privileged young women—“city girls”—who are light-skinned because they don’t have to work hard in the sun. Some detect a teasing attitude in their speech and so see them as possible rivals of the young woman. We have already noted that they are not actual actors or participants in the poem, but that they function more like a Greek chorus, whose role is to move the drama along. They may also be thought of as imaginary persons to whom the young woman addresses her inner thoughts. This may be rather unnatural in the translation, but we have little choice other than to render the text as it appears. As noted in our introductory remarks, if we explain the function of these “daughters” in the introduction, it will help the reader understand their role in the poem.

Revised Standard Version daughters of Jerusalem translates the Hebrew literally, but we need not use the term daughters if this is not appropriate. We can say “young women,” “girls,” or “women of Jerusalem.” Some languages have suffixes or markers to attach to the word Jerusalem to show they are feminine inhabitants. The call to these women is in the second line of this verse, but there is no reason that it must remain in this position. It may be preferable to place this vocative phrase at the beginning of the verse.

Like the tents of Kedar, like the curtains of Solomon: two questions arise about these parallel comparisons. One has to do with their relationship one with the other; the second is what they refer to and whether they both speak of the same object. We note that Kedar is one of the Ishmaelite tribes associated with Arabia (see Gen 25.13; Isa 21.16-17; Psa 120.5). This tribe typically lived in black tents. Kedar thus refers to the young woman’s black skin. In the case of the curtains of Solomon, this seems to be a reference to the curtains in Solomon’s Temple. The focus is on beauty. Thus each simile applies to one of the two claims the young woman makes about herself. She is as black as the nomads’ tents, and as beautiful as the elaborate curtains of Solomon’s Temple. Pope and Fox suggest we change the name Solomon to “Salmoh,” as there was an ancient tribe by this name in what came to be known later as Edom. Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, and New English Bible accept this suggestion and so have “Salmoh” or “shalmah” (Revised English Bible) as parallel to Kedar. This appears a neat arrangement, but there is no textual support for the change.

Good News Translation gives translators a good model here by repeating the point of the illustration in each case: “dark as the desert tents of Kedar, but beautiful as the curtains in Solomon’s palace.” To make the point clearer we can repeat the subject pronoun as well: “I am dark like the [black] tents of the tribes in Kedar, and as beautiful as the curtains of Solomon’s Temple.”

Again we note a defensive tone in the young woman’s speech. She may mean “Unlike you, young women of Jerusalem, I am dark,” but this may be overtranslating. If we want to push the point, we can use a contrastive “but”: “I am dark like the tents of the tribes of Kedar, but as beautiful as the curtains….”

The writer of the Song often uses proper nouns or geographical names in the text as a poetic feature. These names may represent exotic or faraway places. Each name carries many associated ideas with it, and certainly they were known and appreciated by the audience that first heard them. However, it may be especially difficult to render these in a poetic context in the translation. In a narrative, for example, we can easily explain, “the ethnic group called Kedar,” but such long explanatory clauses will make our text heavy and lose the beauty of the poetic form. Translators should reflect, then, on how best to render these proper nouns. One way is to transliterate “Kedar” without explanation in the text. A footnote can identify these people and state that their tents are black. Another possibility is to leave out the proper noun and use a noun substitute giving the same idea; for example, “desert-people.” Bible en français courant uses a known word “bedouin.” This may be a good solution, since many readers may have even seen pictures of people today living in black tents.

As noted above, the comparison to the curtains in Solomon’s palace is based on the common feature of beauty. Bible en français courant here translates “like luxurious tapestries [or, cloth].” This translation has the advantage of treating the two lines in the same way, rendering them by a meaningful modern equivalent. In the present case, however, this may not be the best solution—first, because most readers will know Solomon, and second, because the word “Solomon” is a keyword in this poem. It is recommended, then, that in this instance the name Solomon be preserved.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Song of Songs. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1998. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The young woman continues to address the “daughters of Jerusalem.” Opinions differ as to the meaning of Do not gaze at me. Does this mean she is so lovely that the “daughters” are amazed and “stare” at her (New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible)? Or do they look down on her, as Good News Translation and New English Bible suggest: “Do not look down on me”? From the context we learn she is trying to explain her dark color. So we favor the Good News Translation approach. New Jerusalem Bible “take no notice” is quite neutral and ambiguous enough to fit both possibilities.

In the phrase because I am swarthy, the Hebrew connector may be appropriately rendered as because or “that.” Swarthy is from the same root as “black” in the previous verse. It is an unusual reduplicated form, possibly with the sense “blackish.” Good News Translation treats the adjective in a way some may feel is inadequate, “because of my color.” As this can be easily misunderstood to mean any one of a number of skin colors, we advise against following the Good News Translation model here. It is correct to use the word “dark” or “black.” Here again we must use a term that refers to human skin color. It may be that the language only has one term that can serve here, in which case it is perfectly acceptable to repeat the same word as used in the previous verse.

Because the sun has scorched me is parallel to the previous relative clause because I am swarthy. It further states why the young woman is so dark. Scorched represents a Hebrew verb that may mean “see,” “look at” according to Job 20.9; 28.7, and this is how the King James Version (King James Version) translated it, the idea being that she was “looked [shone] on” by the sun. Dahood’s explanation is that the verb scorched comes from the noun meaning “pitch” or “tar” and so means “be black as pitch.” Whatever the background of the word, it is obvious that exposure to the sun has turned her skin dark. If the verb is really “see,” “look at,” then there is a play on the meanings: “don’t look at me” because “the sun looked at me.” But this kind of wordplay will be very difficult to incorporate into the translation. Some languages will readily follow the Hebrew pattern, with sun acting as the subject of the verb (the sun has scorched me), but in others “I” may be a more natural subject: “because I am burned by the sun,” “because I am darkened by the sun,” or “because I am so sunburned.”

In Hebrew this verse is quite poetic. There are two repetitive sounds: sh occurring in four of the first six words, and -i occurring at the end of a word three times in this line, and six more times before the end of the verse. Certainly it will be almost impossible to imitate this repetition of sound in our translation; and even if we could, it may not have the same effect in Hebrew. However, the translator can still try to give a poetic effect. Imitating the repetitive parallel structures may be one way to do this:

• Do not stare at me
because I am black,
because I am darkened by the sun.

In some languages the repetitive “because” will not be appreciated, so:

• Do not stare at me,
because I am black,
darkened by the sun.

• Do not stare at me just because I am black and burned by the sun.

My mother’s sons were angry with me describes her own brothers or half-brothers. Certain languages have special vocabulary for older and younger brothers. Here we have no way of establishing whether the brothers are younger or older, though they may be older if they have authority to give orders. They were angry with the young woman, though no explanation is given for that. It is idle to speculate. We should perhaps make it an independent statement. In Hebrew the word angry is related to the expression “be hot.” In this poetic passage it is again possible that there is a play on words: she was burned by the sun while she was the object of her brothers’ burning anger. Perhaps in some languages this play on words can be expressed and appreciated.

They made me keeper of the vineyards: this line and the next have a chiastic structure.

This structure highlights a contrast, and in some languages a similar patterning will be appreciated. In many African languages, for example, ending a line with one word and beginning the next line with the same one is a well-known poetic device.

Beyond this, the chiastic structure itself may have some special significance. In other writings in the Old Testament, this type of structure often points to key information, a high point in a story, or a central theme. Our task is to determine what is meant here. The first line explains why the young woman is dark; the meaning of the second line is rather uncertain. The emphasis in the Hebrew is on the phrase “My vineyard, which is mine.” The most obvious way of understanding this is that the vineyard refers to the young woman or her body: she was forced to take care of the vineyard, but as a result of her hard work she was not able to care for her own self (meaning her own beauty). This idea is expressed in the Good News Translation translation: “I had no time to care for myself.”

However, the reference to “vineyard” may mean more than it seems to mean at first. In the ancient world this word, along with other terms like “garden” and “field,” had definite sexual overtones. Some have gone so far as to suggest the young woman is no longer a virgin, but this view has not been widely accepted. Others think “not keeping her own vineyard” may mean she has given her heart to her lover; but again this means reading information into the text. Another approach is to see the brothers as over-protective, preventing her from having a lover. This may be behind the rather unusual translation of Bible en français courant: “… they forced me to keep watch over the vines. For my own vine, I don’t want any surveillance!” In other words, “Please don’t interfere with my love life!”

In light of the many possible interpretations that can be given to this line, perhaps the best solution is to translate rather literally. If desired a footnote can be added which points out that “vineyard” can refer to the young woman, with perhaps a deeper sexual meaning present also.

The word vineyard will certainly be a problem for translators in those areas where grapes are not known. As noted earlier “wine” and “vineyard” are key terms in this book, so if the word is not known, a substitute must be found and used consistently throughout. It may be possible to use a general word like “fruit tree” or “fruit-bearing vine,” though this may have none of the hidden meaning that vineyard has.

For translation we can suggest:

• My brothers were angry with me and put me in charge of the vineyards. My own vineyard I could not care for.

However, we may want to retain the wordplay on “keep” or “care for”:

• My brothers were angry at me,
and forced me to keep the vineyards,
but my own vineyard* I have not kept.

A possible footnote can be:
* Interpretations of “vineyard” vary: the woman herself, her love, or her beauty. This word often had sexual overtones.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Song of Songs. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1998. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Tell me …: with this inquiry the young woman again abruptly changes to second person; she speaks directly to her lover, and he responds in verse 8. We presume he is present with her.

You whom my soul loves: in terms of Hebrew grammar it appears as though this relative clause, “the one my soul loves,” may be the object of the imperative tell. However, that form makes little sense. For this reason many translations take this clause to be vocative, expressing direct address, you whom my soul loves or “the one my soul loves.” Good News Translation renders the clause with a term of endearment, “Tell me, my love.” Of course, if this is a direct address, many languages will prefer to move the vocative clause to the beginning, “My love, tell me…” or “You whom I love, tell me….”

My soul: the Hebrew word translated as soul includes the whole person, as in Gen 2.7, where it relates to the newly-created human as a living person; see also Psa 103.1. We can therefore render my soul with the pronoun “I.” Good News Translation “my love” in the sense of “my beloved” is briefer than “you whom I love” and is a good model.

There are two parallel questions here, each one beginning with the interrogative where…? The first contains only the verb “are shepherding,” but of course your flock is understood as its object and can be supplied, as in Revised Standard Version. The second question asks for more information: where he “gives rest” at midday. Again the Hebrew has no object, but it can be supplied. Revised Standard Version says where you make it lie down, and New International Version “tell me … where you rest your sheep.” Noon can be rendered by any natural equivalent, or we can say “midday,” or even perhaps, in some cultures, “siesta time.” What is in focus is not an exact time (twelve o’clock) but rather the time of day that is hottest.

The two clauses ask basically the same question. Though we wish to preserve the poetic flavor of this passage, the repetition may not be acceptable in some languages. It may even suggest two different items of information. If so, the two clauses can be combined into one: “Where do you pasture your sheep at midday?” Good News Translation retains the two questions but introduces variety by making the sheep the subject of the second clause, “Where will they rest from the noonday sun?” This is acceptable, though it may give the false impression that the young woman is more interested in the sheep than in the young man. It is not unusual for her to inquire where he will be; the semi-nomadic life of the Israelite shepherd meant that she needed directions as to where he might be at that time of the day.

For why should I be like one who wanders…?: for why should I can also be given as “lest” (Dan 1.10 and the Aramaic of Ezra 7.23 have a similar expression). Note that, while the two previous questions are true requests for information, this one is a rhetorical question. The meaning is “I don’t want to be like someone who….”

The meaning behind the participial phrase one who wanders is not immediately obvious. The Revised Standard Version translation is based on a slightly different text in some of the old versions like the Syriac. But the Hebrew participle is actually from a root “wear the veil” or “wrap oneself” so as to hide one’s identity. Prostitutes used to veil themselves for fear of being identified by others (see the story of Tamar in Gen 38.14). The young woman is asking where her lover might be because she does not want to have to hide her identity like a prostitute in order to spend time with him.

It will not be easy to find a good translation that will convey the various senses of the Hebrew. Good News Translation “Why should I need to look for you…” is rather weak. We may say “Why should I have to hide myself [put on a veil, or wrap myself up] to go out to look for you?” or “Otherwise I shall have to wear a veil and wander about looking for you.”

Beside the flocks of your companions suggests that there are many other shepherds in the same vicinity, and also that there is some link of friendship between the young man and them. The preposition beside translates Hebrew ʿal, which normally means “upon,” or “over.” Pope believes it means “among.” One other possible interpretation is that ʿal means “because,” “on account of.” If this were so here, it would give a translation in which the young woman wears the veil “because of” the other shepherds tending their flocks nearby. This seems a consistent and likely interpretation.

The flocks of your companions follows the Hebrew original. Companions simply means friends or comrades. However, the young woman’s object is to find her lover, and she will do that by first finding his flock. She is not looking for the other shepherds. We can simply say “your companions and their flocks.” Note that Good News Translation renders “flocks of the other shepherds,” thus eliminating the possessive your. However, the point is that the young man belongs to a group of shepherds, and she does not want them to know she is coming. Therefore it is better to retain “your companions,” or to put it another way, “your companions and their flocks.”

The young woman’s last question may have a slight teasing note: “Do you want me to have to hide myself from your friends when I come to see you?” On the other hand perhaps she is trying to make him jealous by mentioning his shepherd friends: “You don’t want your friends to see me, do you? (Otherwise, they might be attracted to me!)”

For translation, then, there is a range of possibilities:

• … otherwise I shall have to wear a veil because of your companions and their flocks.

• Why should I have to hide who I am from the other shepherds tending their flocks?

A rendering as a clear statement is:

• I don’t want [to be forced] to wear a veil to hide myself from your shepherd friends.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Song of Songs. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1998. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .