116 
Arr. Il. Song of Songs: or Sacred Idyls. Translated from the Original Hebrew, 
with Notes Critical and Explanatory. By Joux Mason Goon. 
IN his notes upon bishop Lowth’s 
prelections, the learned professor Mi- 
chaclis has observed, * that rio inter- 
preter of this exquisite poem has yet 
appeared, properly prepared for the 
_ task: all who have hitherto attempted it, 
having been more solicitous to explain the 
mystical sense, than to exhibit its first 
and obvious meaning as a song of love.” 
The task, indeed, he acknowledges to 
be by no means easy. “ He who un- 
dertakes it, must be deeply skilled in the 
Oriental languages; well versed in the 
knowledge of ancient manners; ac- 
quainted with natural history; accus- 
tomed to the frequent reading of Arabian 
poetry, especially of the amorous kind; 
and lastly, must be himself a votary and 
a favourite of the muses.” 
In none of these qualifications does 
Mr. Good appear deficient. His know- 
ledge of the Oriental languages, both 
ancient and modern, 1s extensive; with 
the love-songs of the Arabians he seems 
to be intimately acquainted ; and to a 
true taste for poetry, he unites the cha- 
racter of no mean poet. They who 
may differ from him in respect to the 
propriety of every part of the arrange- 
ment which he has adopted, or not ad- 
mit the justice of all his renderings, 
must still regard this as by far the most 
elegant, and, at the same time, the most 
faithful translation which has yet been 
given of this beautiful poem. 
«© The Song of Songs,” (he observes tn his 
preface) ‘has hitherto been generally re- 
garded as one continued and individual poem 
either as an epithalamium (expos nuptialis) 
accompanied, in its recitation, with appro- 
ptiate music; or a regular drama, divisible, 
and, at first, clearly divided into distinct 
acts or periods. Since the commentary of 
the learned and elegant Bossuet, bishop of 
Meaux, upon this admirable pastoral, and 
more especially since the confirmation of 
his ingenious conjecture by that excellent 
critic, the late bishop Lowth, the latter 
opinion has more generally prevailed ; and 
the poem has been arranged into seven parts, 
one being appropriated to every day of the 
bridal week, cr period of time allotted among 
the Hebrews for the celebration of the nup- 
tial solemnity. 
«Great as are the authorities for both 
these speculations, I have ventured to devi- 
ate from them in the version now offered to 
the public. ‘The Song of Songs cannot be 
one connected epithalamiam, since the tran- 
sitions are too avrupt for the wildest flights 
THEOLOGY AND ECCLESIASTICAL AFFAIRS, 
8vo. pp. 210. ? 
of the oriental muse, and evidently imply @ i 
variety of openings and conclusions; while, — 
as a regular drama, it is deficient in almost — 
every requisite that could give it such a — 
classification: it has neither dramatic fable — 
nor action; neither involution nor catastro- — 
phe; it ts without a beginning, a middle, 
or an end. To call it such, is to injure it — 
essentially; it is to raise expectations Which 
can never be gratified, and to force parts 
upon parts which have ne possible con-— 
nection. Bishop Lowth himself, indeed, 
while be contends that it is a drama, is 
compelled to contemplate it as an imperfect 
poem of this description. 
«Itis the object of the present version, 
therefore, to ofler a new arrangement, and 
to regard the entire song asa collection of 
distinct idyls upon one common subject, — 
and that, the loves of the Hebrew monarch — 
and his fair bride: and it has afforded me — 
peculiar pleasure to observe, from a passage 
I have accidentally met with in the writings — 
of Sir William Jones, long since the com~ — 
position of the present work, that some such 
opinion was entertained by this illustrious 
scholar. . 
‘© In forming this arrangement, I have 
followed no other guide than what has ap- 
peared to me the obvious intention of the — 
sacred bard himself: I have confined myself — 
to soliloquy, where the speaker gives no 
evident proofs of a companion; and I haye 
introduced dialogue where the responses are_ 
obvious: I have finished the idyl where the 
subject seems naturally to close; and I have 
recommenced it where a new subject is in-— 
troduced. ‘Thus divided into a multitude of — 
little detached poems, I trust that many of — 
fhe obscurities whish have hitherto over-— 
shadowed this unrivalled relique of the — 
Eastern pastoral, have vanished completely ; 
and that the ancient [lebrews will be found — 
to possess a poet who, independently of the 
sublimity of any soneeaiea and allegorical — 
ineaning, may rival the best productions of © 
Theocritus, Bion, or Virgil, as to the literal 
beauties with which every verse overflows.” | 
Prejace p. i.—vt. 
Agreeably to this system, the wholel 
poem is divided into twelve idyls ; the- 
new translation, metrically arranged,” 
occupies one page; and on the opposite 
page is a corresponding poetical version, - 
to which the notes, which are numerou 
and interesting, are adapted. We sha 
select as a specimen the fourth idyl, 
both because it is short, and is accom= 
panied by notes which will serve to she 
the general character of that part of th 
book, and introduce a. beautiful little 
poem from the Persian. 
