Editing Song of Songs (section)

== Composition ==
The poem seems to be rooted in festive performance, and connections have been proposed with the "sacred marriage" of [[Ishtar]] and [[Tammuz (mythology)|Tammuz]].{{sfn|Loprieno|2005|p=126}} It offers no clue to its author or to the date, place, or circumstances of its composition.{{sfn|Exum|2012|p=247}} The superscription states that it is "Solomon's", but even if this is meant to identify the author, it cannot be read as strictly as a similar modern statement.{{sfn|Keel|1994|p=39}} The most reliable evidence for its date is its language: [[Aramaic]] gradually replaced Hebrew after the end of the [[Babylonian exile]] in the late 6th century BCE, and the evidence of vocabulary, [[Morphology (linguistics)|morphology]], idiom and syntax clearly point to a late date, centuries after King Solomon to whom it is traditionally attributed.{{sfn|Bloch|Bloch|1995|p=23}} It has parallels with Mesopotamian and Egyptian love poetry from the first half of the 1st millennium, and with the pastoral idylls of [[Theocritus]], a Greek poet who wrote in the first half of the 3rd century BCE;{{sfn|Bloch|Bloch|1995|p=25}}{{sfn|Exum|2012|p=248}}{{sfn|Keel|1994|p=5}} as a result of these conflicting signs, speculation ranges from the 10th to the 2nd centuries BCE,{{sfn|Exum|2012|p=247}} with the language supporting a date around the 3rd century.{{sfn|Hunt|2008|p=5}} Other scholars are more skeptical about the idea that the language demands a post-exilic date.<ref>{{cite book |title=Goochem in Mokum, Wisdom in Amsterdam: Papers on Biblical and Related Wisdom Read at the Fifteenth Joint Meeting of the Society for Old Testament Study and the Oudtestamentisch Werkgezelschap, Amsterdam July 2012 |last=Exum |first=J. Cheryl |publisher=BRILL |year=2016 |isbn=978-90-04-31477-1 |pages=57 |editor-last=Brooke |editor-first=George J. |chapter=Unity, Date, Authorship and the 'Wisdom' of the Song of Songs |editor-last2=Hecke |editor-first2=Pierre van |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=R7otDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA57}}</ref>

Debate continues on the unity or disunity of the book. Those who see it as an anthology or collection point to the abrupt shifts of scene, speaker, subject matter and mood, and the lack of obvious structure or narrative. Those who hold it to be a single poem point out that it has no internal signs of composite origins, and view the repetitions and similarities among its parts as evidence of unity. Some claim to find a conscious artistic design underlying it, but there is no agreement among them on what this might be. The question, therefore, remains unresolved.{{sfn|Exum|2012|p=3334}}