Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Song of Solomon 8:11 - 8:11
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
It now lies near, at least rather so than remote, that Shulamith, thinking of her brothers, presents her request before her royal husband:
11 Solomon had a vineyard in Baal-hamon;
He committed the vineyard to the keepers,
That each should bring for its fruit
A thousand in silv.
12 I myself disposed of my own vineyard:
The thousand is thine, Solomon,
And two hundred for the keepers of its fruit!
The words לִשְׁ הָיָה כֶּרֶם are to be translated after כרמוגו, 1Ki 21:1, and לִידִידִי ... , Isa 5:1, “Solomon had a vineyard” (cf. 1Sa 9:2; 2Sa 6:23; 2Sa 12:2; 2Ki 1:17; 1Ch 23:17; 1Ch 26:10), not “Solomon has a vineyard,” which would have required the words לִשְׁ כרם, with the omission of היה. I formerly explained, as also Böttcher: a vineyard became his, thus at present is his possession; and thus explaining, one could suppose that it fell to him, on his taking possession of his government, as a component part of his domain; but although in itself לו היה can mean, “this or that has become one's own” (e.g., Lev 21:3), as well as “it became his own,” yet here the historical sense is necessarily connected by היה with the נתן foll.: Solomon has had ... , he has given; and since Solomon, after possession the vineyard, would probably also preserve it, Hitzig draws from this the conclusion, that the poet thereby betrays the fact that he lived after the time of Solomon. But these are certainly words which he puts into Shulamith's mouth, and he cannot at least have forgotten that the heroine of his drama is a contemporary of Solomon; and supposing that he had forgotten this for a moment, he must have at least once read over what he had written, and could not have been so blind as to have allowed this היה which had escaped him to stand. We must thus assume that he did not in reality retain the vineyard, which, as Hitzig supposes, if he possessed it, he also “probably” retained, whether he gave it away or exchanged it, or sold it, we know not; but the poet might suppose that Shulamith knew it, since it refers to a piece of land lying not far from her home. For הָמוֹן בַּעַל, lxx Βεελαμών, is certainly the same as that mentioned in Judith 8:3, according to which Judith's husband died from sunstroke in Bethulia, and was buried beside his fathers “between Dothaim and Balamoon”
(Note: This is certainly not the Baal-meon (now Maïn) lying half an hour to the south of Heshbon; there is also, however, a Meon (now Maïn) on this the west side of Jordan, Nabal's Maon, near to Carmel. Vid., art. “Maon,” by Kleuker in Schenkel's Bibl. Lex.)
(probably, as the sound of the word denotes, Belmen, or, more accurately, Belmaïn, as it is also called in Judith 4:4, with which Kleuker in Schenkel's Bibl. Lex., de Bruyn in his Karte, and others, interchange it; and חַמּוֹן, Jos 19:28, lying in the tribe of Asher). This Balamoon lay not far from Dothan, and thus not far from Esdräelon; for Dothan lay (cf. Judith 3:10) south of the plain of Jezreel, where it has been discovered, under the name of Tell Dotan, in the midst of a smaller plain which lies embosomed in the hills of the south.
(Note: Vid., Robinson's Physical Geogr. of the Holy Land, p. 113; Morrison's Recovery of Jerusalem (1871), p. 463, etc.)
The ancients, since Aquila, Symm., Targ., Syr., and Jerome, make the name of the place Baal-hamon subservient to their allegorizing interpretation, but only by the aid of soap-bubble-like fancies; e.g., Hengst. makes Baal-hamon designate the world; nothrim [keepers], the nations; the 1000 pieces in silver, the duties comprehended in the ten commandments. Hamon is there understood of a large, noisy crowd. The place may, indeed, have its name from the multitude of its inhabitants, or from an annual market held there, or otherwise from revelry and riot; for, according to Hitzig,
(Note: Cf. also Schwarz' Das heilige Land, p. 37.)
there is no ground for co-ordinating it with names such as Baal-gad and Baal-zephon, in which Baal is the general, and what follows the special name of God. Amon, the Sun-God, specially worshipped in Egyptian Thebes, has the bibl. name אָמוֹן, with which, after the sound of the word, accords the name of a place lying, according to Jer. Demaï ii. 1, in the region of Tyrus, but no אָמוֹן. The reference to the Egypt. Amon Ra, which would direct rather to Baalbec, the Coele-Syrian Heliupolis, is improbable; because the poet would certainly not have introduced into his poem the name of the place where the vineyard lay, if this name did not call forth an idea corresponding to the connection. The Shulamitess, now become Solomon's, in order to support the request she makes to the king, relates an incident of no historical value in itself of the near-lying Sunem (Sulem), situated not far from Baal-hamon to the north, on the farther side of the plain of Jezreel. She belongs to a family whose inheritance consisted in vineyards, and she herself had acted in the capacity of the keeper of a vineyard, Son 1:6, - so much the less therefore is it to be wondered at that she takes an interest in the vineyard of Baal-hamon, which Solomon had let out to keepers on the condition that they should pay to him for its fruit-harvest the sum of 1000 shekels of silver (shekel is, according to Ges. §120. 4, Anm. 2, to be supplied).
יָבִא, since we have interpreted היה retrospectively, might also indeed be rendered imperfect. as equivalent to afferebat, or, according to Ewald, §136c, afferre solebat; but since נָתַן = ἐξέδοτο, Mat 21:33, denotes a gift laying the recipients under an obligation, יָבִא is used in the sense of יָבִא (אֲשֶׁר) לְמַען; however, למען is not to be supplied (Symm. ἐνέγκη), but יָבִא in itself signifies afferre debebat (he ought to bring), like יַע, Dan 1:5, they should stand (wait upon), Ewald, §136g. Certainly נארים does not mean tenants, but watchers, - the post-bibl. language has חָכַר, to lease, קִבֵּל, to take on lease, chikuwr, rent, e.g., Mezîa ix. 2, - but the subject here is a locatio conductio; for the vine-plants of that region are entrusted to the “keepers” for a rent, which they have to pay, not in fruits but in money, as the equivalent of a share of the produce (the ב in בְּפִרְ is the ב pretii). Isa 7:23 is usually compared; but there the money value of a particularly valuable portion of a vineyard, consisting of 1000 vines, is given at “1000 silverlings” (1 shekel); while, on the other hand, the 1000 shekels here are the rent for a portion of a vineyard, the extent of which is not mentioned. But that passage in Isaiah contains something explanatory of the one before us, inasmuch as we see from it that a vineyard was divided into portions of a definite number of vines in each. Such a division into mekomoth is also here supposed. For if each “keeper” to whom the vineyard was entrusted had to count 1000 shekels for its produce, then the vineyard was at the same time committed to several keepers, and thus was divided into small sections (Hitzig). It is self-evident that the gain of the produce that remained over after paying the rent fell to the “keepers;” but since the produce varied, and also the price of wine, this gain was not the same every year, and only in general are we to suppose from Son 8:12, that it yielded on an average about 20 per cent. For the vineyard which Shulamith means in Son 8:12 is altogether different from that of Baal-hamon. It is of herself she says, Son 1:6, that as the keeper of a vineyard, exposed to the heat of the day, she was not in a position to take care of her own vineyard. This her own vineyard is not her beloved (Hoelem.), which not only does not harmonize with Son 1:6 (for she there looks back to the time prior to her elevation), but her own person, as comprehending everything pleasant and lovely which constitutes her personality (4:12-5:1), as îøֶêֶ is the sum-total of the vines which together form a vineyard.
Of this figurative vineyard she says: לְפָנָי שֶׁלִּי כַּרְמִי. This must mean, according to Hitzig, Hoelem., and others, that it was under her protection; but although the idea of affectionate care may, in certain circumstances, be connected with לפני, Gen 17:18; Pro 4:3, yet the phrase: this or that is לְפָנַי, wherever it has not merely a local or temporal, but an ethical signification, can mean nothing else than: it stands under my direction, Gen 13:9; Gen 20:15; Gen 47:6; 2Ch 14:6; Gen 24:51; 1Sa 16:16. Rightly Heiligst., after Ewald: in potestate mea est. Shulamith also has a vineyard, which she is as free to dispose of as Solomon of his at Baal-hamon. It is the totality of her personal and mental endowments. This vineyard has been given over with free and joyful cordiality into Solomon's possession. This vineyard also has keepers (one here sees with what intention the poet has chosen in Son 8:11 just that word נארים) - to whom Shulamith herself and to whom Solomon also owes it that as a chaste and virtuous maiden she became his possession. These are her brothers, the true keepers and protectors of her innocence. Must these be unrewarded? The full thousands, she says, turning to the king, which like the annual produce of the vineyard of Baal-hamon will thus also be the fruit of my own personal worth, shall belong to none else, O Solomon, than to thee, and two hundred to the keepers of its fruit! If the keepers in Baal-hamon do not unrewarded watch the vineyard, so the king owes thanks to those who so faithfully guarded his Shulamith. The poetry would be reduced to prose if there were found in Shulamith's words a hint that the king should reward her brothers with a gratification of 200 shekels. She makes the case of the vineyard in Baal-hamon a parable of her relation to Solomon on the one hand, and of her relation to her brothers on the other. From מָאתַיִם, one may conclude that there were two brothers, thus that the rendering of thanks is thought of as מַעֲשֵׂר (a tenth part); but so that the 200 are meant not as a tax on the thousand, but as a reward for the faithful rendering up of the thousand.