This psalm is entitled "To the chief Musician upon Shoshannim, for the sons of Korah, Maschil. A song of love." On the phrase" To the chief Musician," see the notes at the title to Psalm 4:1-8. The words "Upon Shoshannim" occur also, as a title, or part of a title, in Ps. 69; 80; and, in a different form, in the title to Psalm 60:1-12, "Shushan-eduth." The word Shoshan - שׁושׁן shôshân - occurs in 1-Kings 7:22, 1-Kings 7:26; Song 2:16; Song 4:5; Song 5:13; Song 6:2-3; Song 7:2; and, in a modified form - שׁושׁנה shôshânnâh - in 2-Chronicles 4:5; Song 2:1-2; Hosea 14:5; in all which it is rendered lily, or lilies. The word, therefore, probably means a lily; and then it came to denote, probably, a musical instrument that had a resemblance to a lily, or that was shaped like a lily. It is not known to what kind of musical instrument there is a reference, but it would seem probable that something like the trumpet or the cymbal was intended.
The special reference here would seem to be to the chief musician who presided over this part of the musical instruments employed in public worship - as it would seem not improbable that each of the different parts, as trumpets, horns, viols, harps, etc., would have a special leader. On the portion of the title, "for the sons of Korah," and on the word "Maschil," see the notes at the title to Psalm 42:1-11. The portion of the title, "A Song of Loves," would properly denote a song devoted to love, or in celebration of love; that is, in which love would be the main idea. The phrase "a lovely song," or "a charming song," as Gesenius renders it here, would not, it seems to me, express the meaning of the original. An author would hardly prefix such a title to a psalm himself, as indicating that the psalm had special beauty, or was especially adapted to please; and if we suppose that the titles were prefixed by some other person than the author, or by common usage, it would be difficult to see why such a title should be prefixed to this psalm rather than to many others. It has, indeed, great beauty; but so have very many of the rest. If we suppose, however, that the title was prefixed as indicating the general subject of the psalm, or as indicating the feelings of the author toward the main persons referred to in it, the title is eminently appropriate. In this sense the title would be proper whether we regard the psalm as having reference to the Messiah, or as an epithalamium - a bridal or marriage hymn.
The author of the psalm is wholly unknown, and nothing can be determined on the subject, unless it be supposed that the portion of the title "for the sons of Korah," or "of the sons of Korah," conveys the idea that it was the composition of one of that family. On that point, see the notes at the title to Psalm 42:1-11. That it may have been written by David no one can disprove, but there is no certain evidence that he was the author, and as his name is not mentioned, the presumption is that it is not his.
Very various opinions have been entertained in regard to the reference of the psalm, and the occasion on which it was composed. A very material question is, To whom does the psalm refer? And especially, Has it reference to the Messiah, and is it to be classed with the Messianic Psalm?
Nearly all the older Christian interpreters, without hesitation, suppose that it refers to the Messiah. This opinion has been held, also, by a large part of the modern interpreters of the Bible, among others by Michaelis, Lowth, Dathe, Rosenmuller (in his second edition), Hengstenberg, Tholuck, Professor Alexander. Many, however, have defended the opposite opinion, though they have not been agreed on the question to whom the psalm refers. Grotius, Dereser, and Kaiser suppose it to have been sung at the marriage of Solomon with a foreign princess, probably the daughter of the king of Egypt. Doederlein supposes the king whose praises are sung to be an Israelite. Augusti thinks that it was sung at the nuptials of a Persian king. This last opinion DeWette adopts.
On this question it may be remarked,
(1) There is no evidence that the psalm refers to David; and, indeed, from the psalm itself it is evident that it could not have such a reference. The term "O God" Psalm 45:6 could not be applied to him, nor the expression "Thy throne is forever and ever," ibid. In the life of David, moreover, there was no marriage with a foreign princess that would correspond with the statement here; and no occasion on which the "daughter of "Tyre" was present with a gift, Psalm 45:12.
(2) it seems equally clear that the psalm does not refer to Solmon. In addition to the considerations already suggested as reasons why it does not refer to David, and which are as applicable in the main to Solomon as to him, it may be added that Solomon was never a warlike prince, and was never distinguished for conquests. But the "hero" of the psalm is a warrior - a prince who goes forth to conquest, and who would be distinguished for his victories over the enemies of the king, Psalm 45:3-5.
(3) for stronger reasons still the Psalm cannot be supposed to refer to a Persian prince. Such a supposition is a mere conjecture, with not even the pretence that there are any historical facts that would justify such an application, and without even the suggestion as to a particular case to which it could be applicable. It is, moreover, wholly improbable that a nuptial ode designed to celebrate the marriage of a Persian king - a foreigner - would have been introduced into a book of sacred poetry among the Hebrews.
(4) The remaining opinion, therefore, is, that the psalm had original and exclusive reference to the Messiah. For this opinion the following reasons may be assigned:
(a) The authority of the New Testament. If the Bible is an inspired book, then one part of it may properly be regarded as an authoritative interpretation of another; or a statement in one part must be admitted to be proof of what is meant in another, since the entire book has one Author only - the Holy Spirit. But there can be no doubt that the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews meant to quote this psalm as having reference to the Messiah, or as containing an intended statement in regard to him which might be appealed to as proof that he was divine. Thus, in Hebrews 1:8-9, he quotes Psalm 45:6-7, of the psalm, "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever," etc., in proof that the Son of God is superior to the angels. See the notes at the Epistle to the Hebrews, on the passage referred to, where this point is considered at length. There can be no doubt that the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews meant to quote the passage as having original reference to the Messiah; and his argument would have no force whatever on the supposition that the psalm had original reference to David, or to Solomon, or to a Persian prince.
(b) The testimony of tradition, or of early interpretation, is in favor of this supposition. Thus, the Chaldee Paraphrase Psalm 45:3 applies the psalm expressly, to the Messiah: "Thy beauty, king Messiah - משׁיחא מלכא malekâ' meshı̂yachâ' - is more excellent than the sons of men." This may not improperly be understood as representing the current opinion of the Hebrews at the time when the Chaldee interpretation was made, in regard to the design and reference of the psalm. The two eminent Jewish interpreters, Aben-Ezra and Kimchi, explain the psalm in the same manner, and may be supposed also to represent the prevailing mode of explaining it away among the Hebrews. On this point, also, the Epistle to the Hebrews may be referred to, as showing that such was the current explanation up to the time when that was written. I have referred to the fact that the author of that epistle quotes the psalm as an inspired man, and as thus furnishing the authority of inspiration in favor of this interpretation. I now refer to it as showing that this must have been the prevailing and well-understood opinion in regard to the design of the psalm. The author of the epistle was establishing by argument, not by authority, the claims of the Messiah to a rank above that of the angels. He made use of an argument which he evidently believed would have force among those who regarded the Old Testament as of divine origin. But the argument which he used, and on which he relied, would have no weight with those for whom he wrote unless they admitted that the psalm had reference to the Messiah, and that this point might be assumed without further proof. The fact, therefore, that he thus quotes and applies the psalm demonstrates that such was its current and admitted interpretation in his time.
(c) The internal evidence may be referred to. This will be further illustrated in the notes. At present it is necessary only to remark:
(1) That there are passages in this psalm which cannot be applied to any man - to any created being - and which can be applied only to one who may properly be called God, Psalm 45:6.
(2) The characteristics of the principal personage in the psalm are such as accurately describe the Messiah. These points will be illustrated in the notes.
(d) The psalm, on the supposition that it refers to the Messiah, is in accordance with a prevailing mode of writing in the Old Testament. See the notes at Hebrews 1:8; compare Introduction to Isaiah, Section 7; and Introduction to Ps. 40. It is to be remembered that the expectation of a Messiah was the special hope of the Jewish people. He is really the" hero" of the Old Testament - more so than Achilles is of the Iliad, or Aeneas of the Aeneid. The sacred poets were accustomed to employ their most magnificent imagery in describing him, that they might present him in every form that was beautiful in conception, and that would be gratifying to the pride and the hopes of the nation. Everything that is gorgeous and splendid in description is lavished upon him. And they were never under any apprehension of attributing to him too high a rank, too great perfection of moral character, or too wide an extent of dominion.
They freely applied to him language which would be a magnificent description of an earthly monarch; and the terms which usually denote splendid conquests, or a wide and permanent reign, are freely given to hint. Under this view, and in this style, this psalm was evidently composed; and although the language may have been taken from the magnificence of the court of David or Solomon, or even from the splendor of a Persian king, yet there can be no reason to doubt that the description is that of the Messiah, and not of David or Solomon, or any Persian prince. The writer in the psalm imagines to himself a magnificent and beautiful prince - a prince riding prosperously to his conquests; swaying a permanent scepter over a wide empire; clothed in rich and splendid vestments; eminently upright and pure; and scattering blessings on every hand. That prince was the Messiah. He describes the queen - the bride of such a prince - as attended by the daughters of kings; as clad in the gold of Ophir; as greatly beloved by the prince; as glorious in her appearance and character; as having on robes of wrought gold and raiment of needlework; as followed by a numerous retinue; and as brought to the king in his palace. That queen is the "bride of the Lamb" - the church. All this is in the magnificent style of the Orientals, but all accords with the custom of the sacred writers in speaking of the Messiah.
(e) It may be added that this is in harmony with the constant language of the sacred writers in the New Testament, who speak of the Messiah as the "husband" of the church, and of the church as his "bride." Compare the notes at Ephesians 5:23-32; notes at 2-Corinthians 11:2; notes at Revelation 21:2, notes at Revelation 21:9; notes at Revelation 22:17.
The proof, therefore, seems to me to be conclusive that the psalm had original and sole reference to the Messiah.
The contents of the psalm are as follows:
I. A statement of the purpose or design of the psalm. It is to speak of the things which the psalmist had meditated on respecting the "king;" some one in his view to whom that title was applicable, and whose praises he intended particularly to set forth Psalm 45:1.
II. A description of the king, Psalm 45:2-9.
(a) He is the fairest among people; distinguished for grace and beauty, Psalm 45:2.
(b) He is a warrior - a conqueror. He will go forth to conquest, and will be successful in overcoming his enemies, Psalm 45:3-5.
(c) His throne is the throne of God, and will endure forever, Psalm 45:6.
(d) His character is eminently righteous, Psalm 45:6-7.
(e) He is clad in robes of beauty; his garments are rich with perfumes; his attendants are the daughters of kings, Psalm 45:8-9.
III. A description of the queen, the bride, Psalm 45:9-17.
(a) She is clad in robes of gold - the gold of Ophir, Psalm 45:9.
(b) She is entreated to forget her own people, and her father's house - to become wholly devoted to him who had espoused her, assured that thus she would secure his heart, and be certain of his love, Psalm 45:10-11.
(c) She would be honored with the favor of the rich, and the attendance of foreign princesses, represented by the "daughter of Tyre;" Tyre, distinguished for wealth and splendor; Tyre, the representative of the commercial world, Psalm 45:12.
(d) The daughter of the king - the bride - is glorious and beautiful, as seen "within" her own palace or dwelling, Psalm 45:13.
(e) Her raiment is of wrought gold; of needlework of delicate finish and taste, Psalm 45:13-14.
(f) She is attended by virgins, her companions, who with her shall enter into the palace of the king, Psalm 45:14-15.
IV. An address to the king. He is to be honored by his children, who will be more to him than even his ancestors. His praise will spring from those children rather than from the luster and fame of his great progenitors. He will be remembered in all coming generations, and praised forever and ever, Psalm 45:16-17. See the notes at Psalm 45:16.
Such is the outline or substance of this exquisite specimen of sacred song - this very beautiful Hebrew ode. It must be apparent, I think, at once, that it cannot be applied with propriety to either David, or Solomon, or to a Persian prince. How far it is applicable to the Messiah and the church; to him as the bridegroom, and to the church as a bride - will be made apparent in the exposition of its particular words and phrases.

The contents of this Psalm are generally summed up thus: The majesty and grace of Christ's kingdom; or an epithalamium of Jesus Christ and the Christian Church; the duty of this Church, and its privileges. The Psalm contains a magnificent description of the beauty, ornaments, valor, justice, and truth of the Divine Bridegroom; the beauty, magnificence, and riches of the bride, who was to become mother of a numerous and powerful posterity. The preamble is found in the title and Psalm 45:1. The description and character of the Bridegroom, Psalm 45:2-9. The address to the bride by her companions, Psalm 45:10-15. A prediction of her numerous and glorious descendants, Psalm 45:16, Psalm 45:17.
The title is nearly the same with that of Psalm 69: and 80: "To the chief musician, or master of the band of those who played on the six-stringed instruments, giving instruction for the sons of Korah; a song of loves, or amatory ode; or a song of the beloved maids." The Vulgate and Septuagint have, For those who shall be changed, or brought into another state, which some have interpreted as relating to the resurrection of the just, but if I could persuade myself that the title came by Divine inspiration, I would say it more properly belonged to the calling and conversion of the Gentiles, and bringing them over from idolatry to the worship of the true God. By some the word ששנים shoshannim, is translated lilies; and a world of labor has been spent to prove that these lilies mean the saints, Jesus Christ himself, and the Divine light which is a banner to them that fear him. I cannot believe that any such meaning is intended, and, consequently, I cannot attempt to interpret the Psalm after this model. I believe it to be an epithalamium, or nuptial song, which primarily respected Solomon's marriage with the daughter of Pharaoh; and that it probably has a prophetic reference to the conversion of the Gentiles, and the final aggrandizement of the Christian Church.

INTRODUCTION TO PSALM 45
To the chief Musician upon Shoshannim, for the sons of Korah, Maschil, A Song of loves.
There are some things in this title we have met with already in other psalms; as the direction, "to the chief Musician, for the sons of Korah"; and one of its names, "Maschil". The word "shoshannim", according to Kimchi and Ben Melech, is the name of a musical instrument, on which this psalm was sung; an instrument of six strings, as Junius: but Aben Ezra thinks it was the first word of a song, to the tune of which it was sunny; though others are of opinion that it points at the persons, the subjects of this psalm, and may be rendered, "concerning Shoshannim"; that is, as the Targum interprets it, "concerning those that sit in the sanhedrim of Moses": and Jarchi's note is, "for the glory of the disciples of the wise men", comparable to lilies; for so this word signifies, and may be translated, "concerning the lilies" (t); that is, concerning Christ and his church, who are manifestly the subject of this psalm, and are compared to lilies, Song 2:1. This psalm is called "a song of loves", an epithalamium, or marriage song, setting forth the mutual love of Christ and his church; or "a song of the beloved ones" (u) or "friends"; of Christ, who is the beloved and friend of his church; and the church, who is the beloved and friend of Christ; see Isaiah 5:1; and the word here used being in the feminine gender, some have supplied the word "virgins", and render it thus, "a song of the beloved virgins" (w); sung by them on account of the marriage between Christ and his church, who are the companions of the bride, mentioned in Psalm 45:14, and friends and lovers of the bridegroom; see Song 1:3. The writer of this psalm is not mentioned; it was not written by the sons of Korah, as say the Targum and Syriac version; but most probably by David, though not concerning his son Solomon, as some have thought, who, though wiser than all men, is never said to be fairer; nor was he a warrior, as the person is represented; nor was his throne and kingdom for ever and ever; nor he the object of worship; nor was his marriage with Pharaoh's daughter so commendable a thing; nor is she ever praised, as the queen herein mentioned is: but the person who is spoken of is the Messiah, as is owned by several Jewish writers: the Targum interprets Psalm 45:2 of the King Messiah; and Ben Melech says, he is meant by the King in Psalm 45:1. Aben Ezra observes, that this psalm is said concerning David, or concerning the Messiah his son, for so is his name, Ezekiel 37:26; and Kimchi expressly says, it is spoken concerning the Messiah; and Arama affirms, that all agree that it treats of him.
(t) "de liliis", Tigurine version. (u) "canticum amicarum", Junius & Tremellius, Piscator; "amatarum", Cocceius. (w) "Dilectarum sen de dilectis Christo virginibus", Michaelis; "a song of the well beloved virgins", Ainsworth.

This psalm is a prophecy of Messiah the Prince, and points to him as a Bridegroom espousing the church to himself, and as a King ruling in it, and for it.

Marriage Song in Honour of the Peerless King
To a Korahitic Maskı̂l is appended a song of the same name, and likewise bearing a royal impress after the style of the Korahitic productions. But whilst in Psalm 44:5 the words "Thou, Thou art my King, Elohim," are addressed in prayer to the God of Israel, in this Psalm the person of the king who is celebrated is a matter of doubt and controversy. The Epistle to the Hebrews (Hebrews 1:8) proceeds on the assumption that it is the future Christ, the Son of God. It is supported in this view by a tradition of the ancient synagogue, in accordance with which the Targumist renders Psalm 45:3, "Thy beauty, O King Messiah, is greater than that of the children of men." This Messianic interpretation must be very ancient. Just as Ezekiel 21:32 refers back to שׁילה, Genesis 49:10, גּבּור אל among the names of the Messiah in Isaiah 9:5 (cf. Zac 12:8) refers back in a similar manner to Ps 45. And whilst the reception of the Song of Songs into the canon admits of being understood even without the assumption of any prophetically allegorical meaning in it, the reception of this Psalm without any such assumption is unintelligible. But this prophetically Messianic sense is therefore not the original meaning of the Psalm. The Psalm is a poem composed for some special occasion the motive of which is some contemporary event. The king whom it celebrates was a contemporary of the poet. If, however, it was a king belonging to David's family, then he was a possessor of a kingship to which were attached, according to 2 Sam. 7, great promises extending into the unlimited future, and on which, consequently, hung all the prospects of the future prosperity and glory of Israel; and the poet is therefore fully warranted in regarding him in the light of the Messianic idea, and the church is also fully warranted in referring the song, which took its rise in some passing occasion, as a song for all ages, to the great King of the future, the goal of its hope. Moreover, we find only such poems of an occasional and individual character received into the Psalter, as were adapted to remain in constant use by the church as prayers and spiritual songs.
With respect to the historical occasion of the song, we adhere to the conjecture advanced in our commentary on Canticles and on the Epistle to the Hebrews, viz., that it was composed in connection with the marriage of Joram of Judah with Athaliah. The reference to the marriage of Ahab of Israel with Jezebel of Tyre, set forth by Hitzig, is at once set aside by the fact that the poet idealizes the person celebrated, as foreshadowing the Messiah, in a way that can only be justified in connection with a Davidic king. It could more readily be Solomon the king of Israel, whose appearance was fair as that of a woman, but majestic as that of a hero.
(Note: So Disraeli in his romance of Alroy (1845).)
Even to the present day several interpreters
(Note: So even Kurtz in the Dorpater Zeitschrift for 1865, S. 1-24.)
explain the Psalm of Solomon's marriage with the daughter of Pharaoh; but the entire absence of any mention of Egypt is decisive against this view. Hence Hupfeld imagines a daughter of Hiram to be the bride, by reference to the Zidonian Ashtreth which is mentioned among Solomon's strange gods (1-Kings 11:5, 1-Kings 11:33). But the fact that the king here celebrated is called upon to go forth to battle, is also strange, whilst the glory of Solomon consists in his being, in accordance with his name, the Prince of Peace, or אישׁ מנוּחה, 1-Chronicles 22:9. Further, the wish is expressed for him that he may have children who shall take the place of his ancestors: Solomon, however, had a royal father, but not royal fathers; and there is the less ground for any retrospective reference to the princes of Judah as Solomon's ancestors (which Kurtz inclines to), since of these only one, viz., Nahshon, occurs among the ancestry of David.
All this speaks against Solomon, but just with equal force in favour of Joram, as being the king celebrated. This Joram is the son of Jehoshaphat, the second Solomon of the Israelitish history. He became king even during the lifetime of his pious father, under whom the Salomonic prosperity of Israel was revived (cf. 2-Chronicles 18:1 with Psalm 21:3, 2-Kings 8:16, and Winer's Realwrterbuch under Jehoram); he was also married to Athaliah during his father's lifetime; and it is natural, that just at that time, when Judah had again attained to the height of the glory of the days of Solomon, the highest hopes should be gathered around these nuptials. This explains the name שׁגל which the queen bears, - a name that is elsewhere Chaldaean (Daniel 5:2.) and Persian (Nehemiah 2:6), and is more North-Palestinian
(Note: In Deborah's song (Judges 5:30) probably שׁגל is to be read instead of לצוּארי שׁלל.)
than Jewish; for Athaliah sprang from the royal family of Tyre, and was married by Joram out of the royal family of Israel. If she is the queen, then the exhortation to forget her people and her father's house has all the greater force. And it becomes intelligible why the homage of Tyre in particular, and only of Tyre, is mentioned. The Salomonic splendour of Asiatic perfumes and costly things is thus quite as easily explained as by referring the Psalm to Solomon. For even Jehoshaphat had turned his attention to foreign wares, more especially Indian gold; he even prepared a fleet for the purpose of going to Ophir, but, ere it started, it was wrecked in the harbour of Ezion-geber (1-Kings 22:48-50; 2-Chronicles 20:35.). And Solomon, it is true, had a throne of ivory (1-Kings 10:18), and the Salomonic Song of Songs (Song 7:5) makes mention of a tower of ivory; but he had no ivory palace; whereas the mention of היכלי־שׁן in our Psalm harmonizes surprisingly with the fact that Ahab, the father of Athaliah, built a palace of ivory (בּית־שׁן), which the Book of Kings, referring to the annals, announces as something especially worthy of note, 1-Kings 22:39 (cf. Amos 3:15, בּתּי השּׁן).
But why should not even Joram, at a crisis of his life so rich in hope, have been a type of the Messiah? His name is found in the genealogy of Jesus Christ, Matthew 1:8. Joram and Athaliah are among the ancestors of our Lord. This significance in relation to the history of redemption is still left them, although they have not realized the good wishes expressed by the poet at the time of their marriage, just as in fact Solomon also began in the spirit and ended in the flesh. Joram and Athaliah have themselves cut away all reference of the Psalm to them by their own godlessness. It is with this Psalm just as it is with the twelve thrones upon which, according to the promise, Matthew 19:28, the twelve apostles shall sit and judge the twelve tribes of Israel. This promise was uttered even in reference to Judas Iscariot. One of the twelve seats belonged to him, but he has fallen away from it. Matthias became heir to the throne of Judas Iscariot, and who has become the heir to the promises in this Psalm? All the glorious things declared in the Psalm depend upon this as the primary assumption, as essential to their being a blessing and being realized, viz., that the king whom it celebrates should carry out the idea of the theocratic kingship. To the Old Testament prophecy and hope, more especially since the days of Isaiah, the Messiah, and to the New Testament conception of the fulfilment of prophecy Jesus Christ, is the perfected realization of this idea.
The inscription runs: To the Precentor, upon Lilies, by the Ben-Korah, a meditation, a song of that which is lovely. Concerning Maskı̂l, vid., on Psalm 32:1. שׁושׁן is the name for the (six-leafed) lily,
(Note: This name is also ancient Egyptian, vid., the Book of the Dead, lxxxi. 2: nuk seshni pir am ṫah-en-Phrā, i.e., I am a lily, sprung from the fields of the sun-god.)
that is wide-spread in its use in the East; it is not the (five-leafed) rose, which was not transplanted into Palestine until a much later period. In על־שׁשׁנּים Hengstenberg sees a symbolical reference to the "lovely brides" mentioned in the Psalm. Luther, who renders it "concerning the roses," understands it to mean the rosae futurae of the united church of the future. We would rather say, with Bugenhagen, John. Gerhard, and other old expositors, "The heavenly Bridegroom and the spiritual bride, they are the two roses or lilies that are discoursed of in this Psalm." But the meaning of על־שׁשׁנים must be such as will admit of the inscribed על־שׁוּשׁן עדוּת, Psalm 60:1, and עדוּת על־שׁשׁנּים (which is probably all one expression notwithstanding the Athnach), Psalm 80:1, being understood after the analogy of it. The preposition על (אל) forbids our thinking of a musical instrument, perhaps lily-shaped bells.
(Note: Vide C. Jessen, On the lily of the Bible, in Hugo von Mohl's Botanische Zeitung, 1861, No. 12. Thrupp in his Introduction (1860) also understands שׁושׁנים to mean cymbals in the form of a lily.)
There must therefore have been some well-known popular song, which began with the words "A lily is the testimony..." or "Lilies are the testimonies (עדות)...;" and the Psalm is composed and intended to be sung after the melody of this song in praise of the Tפra.
(Note: The point of comparison, then, to adopt the language of Gregory of Nyssa, is τὸ λαμπρόν τε καὶ χιονῶδες εἶδος of the lily.)
It is questionable whether ידידת (Origen ιδιδωθ, Jerome ididoth) in the last designation of the Psalm is to be taken as a collateral form of ידידת (love, and metonymically an object of love, Jeremiah 12:7), or whether we are to explain it after the analogy of צחות, Isaiah 32:4, and נכחות, Isaiah 26:10 : it is just on this neuter use of the plur. fem. that the interchange which sometimes occurs of ōth with ūth in an abstract signification (Ew. 165, c) is based. In the former case it ought to be rendered a song of love (Aquila ᾀσμα προσφιλίας); in the latter, a song of that which is beloved, i.e., lovely, or lovable, and this is the more natural rendering. The adjective ידיד signified beloved, or even (Psalm 84:2) lovable. It is things that are loved, because exciting love, therefore lovely, most pleasing things, which, as שׁיר ידידת says, form the contents of the song. שׁיר ידידת does not signify a marriage-song; this would be called שׁיר חתנּה (cf. Psalm 30:1). Nor does it signify a secular erotic song, instead of which the expression שׁיר עגבים, שׁיר דּודים, would have been used. ידיד is a noble word, and used of holy love.