Tuning the Song of Songs

While King Solomon spoke 3,000 proverbs and wrote 1,005 songs (1 Ki. 4:32), only 800 of his proverbs (book of Proverbs) and one of his songs (Song of Songs, or Song of Solomon) are recorded in Scripture’s canon. The Jewish Talmud, the church fathers, and other early Christian writers affirmed Solomon’s authorship of the Song of Songs (Song 1:1).

However, skeptics long have cast doubt on it. Julius Wellhausen, the father of modern biblical criticism, assigned it to the second half of the Persian period; and critics after him have assumed a post-exilic date, long after Solomon’s time. They believe its poetic structure lacks references to historical or political events that might support the work’s 10th-century BC composition; and they point to the use of Persian loan words and late Hebrew word spellings in the song, although they admit to early spellings.¹ Aside from comparative ancient Near Eastern love poems, archaeology long supplied little defense for Solomon’s greatest song (Hebrew, Shir Ha-shirim, “the Song of Songs”).

This changed with the 2024 publication of prominent Israeli archaeologist Gabriel Barkay’s book “For Your Eyes Only”: Song of Songs Through Archaeological-Historical Eyes, which addresses the critics’ most pertinent issues.

1. Language. The book contains 50 terms classified as hapax legomena (words that appear only once in the Bible), a striking feature for such a brief composition. Barkay researched Iron Age inscriptions that parallel and illumine these terms and conceptions that center them in Solomon’s time. These came from sources as diverse as the 10th-century BC Gezer Calendar, an 8th-century BC vessel inscription from Hazor, the 7th-century BC Arad ostracon, and the 9th-century BC Phoenician stone from Sardinia called the Nora Inscription.

2. Geography. Because earlier researchers considered the book allegorical, they regarded geographic or historical elements as insignificant. Barkay studied 20 locations mentioned in the Song of Songs and discovered that all existed in Solomon’s time; and none were inhabited later in the monarchical period, with some even becoming largely lost to history soon after. Additionally, the song omits key Solomonic cities like Gezer, Hazor, and Megiddo, refuting the notion that a later writer was trying to link the work to the king’s authorship.

The most frequently mentioned locations are Jerusalem and Lebanon, which shared a special relationship in Solomon’s time, evidenced by Lebanon’s aid in building the Temple. Jerusalem’s size is never described, a detail mentioned by later writers (cf. Jer. 22:8; Lam. 1:1). This exclusion fits archaeological evidence that 10th-century BC Jerusalem was relatively small compared to its dimensions in the following two centuries, when it tripled in size. Thus, the book would have been composed before the urban expansion that followed Solomon’s reign. These factors anchor the text to Solomon’s time, suggesting that he composed the song, as Scripture says.

Barkay tackled many more issues, including military references in the song (pharaonic chariots and shields atop towers), fitting evidence of Solomon’s trade with Egypt and the Iron Age practice of shield fortification, as well as archaeological examples of horticulture, jewelry, spices currency, and beekeeping, which fit the king’s time and culture. He also traced the text references to Canaanite culture and the love-poetry genre that fits the Egyptian-Mesopotamian culture of Solomon’s time but later became lost.

The essential integrity of God’s Word requires Solomon to be the author of the Song of Songs (Song 1:1). Thanks to this careful research, archaeology has tuned this ancient song to harmonize with Scripture’s assertion.

ENDNOTE

1. 1. This fact could simply indicate that the book was later edited, as were some of Solomon’s proverbs by King Hezekiah (Prov. 25:1) and “his colleagues” (Talmud, Baba Batra 15a). In this case, the book was written by Solomon but revised in the post-exilic period. Conservative scholars recognize such inspired editorial updating as a part of the divine process of preserving Scripture. See Michael A. Grisanti, “Inspiration, Inerrancy, and the Old Testament Canon: The Place of Textual Updating in an Inerrant View of Scripture,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44/4 (December 2001).