f., which still forms part of the
Syrian ceremonies. But his reconstruction is open to the same objection
as all similar attempts, in that the vital moments of the dramatic
action have to be supplied from without. Thus between v. 1 and v. 2, the
baffled king is supposed to have disappeared, and to have been replaced
by the happy lover; between viii. 7 and viii. 8, we are required to
imagine "the bridal night and its mysteries"; whilst between viii. 9 and
viii. 10, we must suppose the evidence that the bride has been found a
virgin is exhibited. He also attempts, with considerable ingenuity, to
trace the legend involved in the supposed drama to the fact that Abishag
remained a virgin in regard to David (1 Kings i. 4) whilst nothing is
said of her marriage to Solomon.[10]

On the view accepted above, Canticles describes in a number of separate
poems the central passion of human life, and is wholly without didactic
tendencies. Of its earliest history as a book we have no information. It
is already included in the Hebrew canon (though its right to be there is
disputed) when the first explicit mention of the book occurs. We have no
evidence, therefore, of the theory of interpretation prevalent at the
time of its incorporation with the other books of the canon. It seems,
however, fair to infer that it would hardly have found acceptance but
for a Solomonic theory of authorship and a "religious" theory of
meaning. The problem raised by its present place in the canon occurs in
relation to mistaken Jewish theories about other books also; it
suggests, at least, that divine inspiration may belong to the life of a
people rather than to the letter of their literature. Of that life
Canticles portrays a central element--the passion of love--in striking
imagery and graceful language, however far its oriental standard of
taste differs from that of the modern West.

From the nature of the book, it is impossible to assign a precise date
for its origin; the wedding-songs of which it chiefly consists must
belong to the folklore of more than one century. The only evidence we
possess as to date is drawn from the character of the Hebrew in which
the book is written, which shows frequent points of contact with new
Hebrew.[11] On this ground, we may suppose the present form of the work
to date from the Greek period, i.e. after 332 B.C. This is the date
accepted by most recent writers, e.g. Kautzsch, Cheyne, Budde,
Rothstein, Jacob, Haupt. This l