Blaz0ej S0trba, «hn#$w#$ of the Canticle», Vol. 85 (2004) 475-502
The term hn#$w#$ is revisited
primarily in the Canticle of Solomon. The most ancient translation –– "lily" ––
of this flower though questioned in recent decades is still widely used. The
LXX’s rendering kri/non is examined and found as the
best translation for the lexeme N#$w#$ –– meaning
"lotus" –– being an Egyptian loan word. This translation fits to the OT
references better than "lily". The textual employment of
hn#$w#$ in the poetry of the Canticle is a chief and commanding proof for
"lotus". The "lily" translation for both hn#$w#$
and kri/non for the majority of the OT cases is seen
as incorrect since it does not pay due attention to the literary and historical
context of the Canticle.
of the Canticle 491
hnvwv
a surprising confidence in her beloved. She seems to be extremely
delighted by his actions which are again strongly coloured by the
repetition of the phrase, which underlines his enjoyment. Her words are
the answer to the question of her chorus: “where has gone your beloved,
o you, fairest among the women?†6,1. She responds, v. 2:
2 (a) My beloved has gone down to his garden,
wngl dry ydwd
(b) to the beds of spices
µcbh twgwr[l
(c) to pasture in the gardens,
µyngb tw[rl
(d) and to gather πôπannîm
µynvwv fqllw
She presents herself as a garden for him (v. 2a). This may be more
obvious from the following vv. 2b-3. He is somewhere where he
gathers the µynvwv and as in v. 3 the reciprocal ownership is
strengthened by the phrase “he feeds among µynvwvâ€.
3 (a) I am my beloved’s and my beloved is mine
yl ydwdw ydwdl yna
(b) he feeds among πôπannîm
µynvwvb h[rh
It is this phrase “feeds among µynvwv†which links her beloved with
twins of gazelle, which “feed among µynvwv†in 4,5. Although her
beloved is linked to a gazelle by this phrase, he is not compared to a
gazelle (74). The comparison is not between her beloved and gazelle
twins, but lies in the fact that the expression “feed among µynvwvâ€
tries to convey the most intense enjoyment. This interpretation is
(74) There are two cases where the beloved (he) is compared (?) to the gazelle
hybx indirectly, 6,3; 2,16 and three times directly: 2,9.17; 8,14. Only in direct
comparison the form is coherently masculine ybx. The remaining 4 uses of this
lexeme ybx are in feminine form hybx, 2,7; 3,5; 4,5; 7,4. Of these four, the first two
cases have the plural form and both of them in the oath “I adjure you, O daughters
of Jerusalem, by the gazelles...â€. The last two are used in singular when her
breasts are compared to the “twins of gazelleâ€. Concluding we see that out of 7
occurrences of “gazelleâ€, only 3 times is it in masculine form and it is in the
context where the he-beloved is to be quick and swift like ybx – “(he) gazelleâ€.
This connotation of the boy with gazelle (his swiftness) is in contrast to the
context of 6,2-3 and 2,16 in which the beloved pastures, therefore he is not in a
hurry at all! In 6,2-3 and 2,16 rules calmness, satisfaction, and enjoyment. Here
there is no association of her beloved to the swiftness of gazelle. Therefore, this
image of her beloved as gazelle in the context 6,2-3 and 2,16 does not fit and has
no support. For the further discussion about the animal imagery, see O. KEEL,
Jahwes Entgegnung an Ijob. Eine Deutung von Ijob 38-41 vor dem Hintergrund
der zeitgenössischen Bildkunst (FRLANT 121; Göttingen 1978) 61-125.