Response to the Claim That King Solomon Was Black
The idea that King Solomon was of African descent is based on the old English translations of the Song of Solomon that rest primarily on how a specific passage—most notably “I am black, but comely” in The Song of Solomon 1:5–6—has been translated and interpreted over time. In the issue of translation, there is a common mistake made when it is asserted that the English text properly and correctly renders the Hebrew. We will try to show that the question of how this phrase is translated and interpreted is far from being semantic and hope to provide a more complex answer below.
Thus, it is the object of this work to explain the Hebrew text of The Song of Solomon 1:5–6, as we will expose a certain alteration in the KJV translation which significantly changes the messages of the Song. But it is only possible to explore this issue once we know what the Hebrew text indeed reads, and once we understand the meaning of its words and know its grammar. We will explain the reason for this in due course.
In the King James’ version (KJV) of the Bible and other English translations, the speaker in The Song of Solomon 1:5–6 (allegedly king Solomon himself) states:
“I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon. Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked upon me: my mother’s children were angry with me; they made me the keeper of the vineyards; but mine own vineyard have I not kept.” (Song 1:5-6, KJV)
Note: The Hebrew title of Song of Songs (Hebrew, Shir HaShirim) is “Song of Solomon”.
The object of our work will become clear once we understand what the Hebrew text behind “I am black, but comely” really says and why the KJV translators decided to render it the way they did.
While the speaker in Chapter 1 is traditionally understood by the non-Jewish commentators to be Solomon, thus linking King Solomon to be black, stem from three main textual and historical arguments, which we will explain and critique below.
Who is speaking in The Song of Songs?
In the 1611 KJV, the word rendered as “black” in The Song of Solomon 1:5 translates the Hebrew word shachor (שָׁחֹור), while some modern translations often translate the same word as “dark” or “dusky“, framing it as a suntan caused by outdoor sun-exposure. This latter translation stems from the reading of “the sun hath looked upon me”. Those who adhere to the old English translations “I am black” (attributing this to Solomon) take the English text quite literally as a reference to his race, namely of African descent, rather than merely having a dark skin from a sun exposure, as the new translations have taken it. Many readers, therefore, view the descriptive language throughout the book—such as hair being “black as a raven”— as indicative of Afro-Semitic physical traits, reading verse like,
His head is as the most fine gold, his locks are bushy, and black as a raven. (Song 5:11, KJV)
In contrast, verse 5:10 describes the beloved (often interpreted as Solomon), as follows: “My beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among ten thousand” (KJV). Other translations read, “My beloved is dazzling and ruddy, Chief among ten thousand” (Song 5:10), replacing “white” with “dazzling”.
But is it so? Was King Solomon black (KJV) or did he have a “dusky” suntan? As the studious reader will learn, neither of them is correct. Moreover, the Hebrew text does not refer to Solomon’s skin color or race at all. We will explain.
The first Hebrew word in question, which is also the first word in verse 5 is שָׁחוֹר shachor. This word comes from the primitive root שָׁחַר shachar, which means properly “dusky”, but also black, as we cite several examples in verses such as Lev 13:31, Lev 13:37, Song 1:5, Song 5:11, Zec 6:2, and Zec 6:6, where shachar is used in its literal meaning unaltered in the translations. The second Hebrew word is נָאוֶה naveh, meaning “beautiful”, “comely”.
The first thing a native Hebrew speaker will notice is the discrepancy between what the Hebrew text says and the translation which influenced the interpretation of the English text. What do we mean?
The explicit claim “I am black” in The Song of Songs 1:5 is incorrectly attributed to Solomon based on translation such as KJV and similar. However, the words “I am black” are spoken not by Solomon himself, but by a woman, as we can see in what will follow below.
The third word in question is the English conjunction “but”, which has also contributed to the wrong interpretation of the verse. As a coordinating conjunction, “but” primarily introduces contrasting ideas, exceptions, opposition, or difference from what has been just stated. “But” can also indicates a shift in direction, or an expression of surprise. In Biblical Hebrew, there is no single, standalone word that perfectly matches the English conjunction “but”. Instead, Biblical Hebrew relies heavily on context and multi-purpose particles to communicate contrast.
For instance, when a writer wants to express a strong, corrective contrast, especially after a negative statement like in “Not A, but B”, he can use the compound phrase כִּי־אִם (ki-im). Another use is the particle אַךְ (ak) meaning “only.” In certain contexts, it acts as a restrictive “but”, “however”, or “nevertheless” to limit a previous statement. But none of these Hebrew words can be found in our text. What we find, however, is the Hebrew word vav, which means “and”. The Hebrew vav can also double down what has already been stated to mean “moreover”, as the context in 1 Kings 11:1 and 1 Kings 11:3 suggests, and the special treatment she received (1 Kings 3:1, 2 Chronicles 8:11).
But King Solomon loved many foreign women, and the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites… And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.
Did King Solomon love 1,001 women, or the Egyptian princess was his favorite and one of the one thousand? Hence, 1 Kings 11:1 can be translated thus: “But King Solomon loved many foreign women, and/moreover the daughter of Pharaoh”, she was his favorite one. Thus, considering the unique standing of vav, it follows that this Hebrew conjunction in verse 1:5 can be translated as either “black and beautiful” or “black moreover beautiful”. Translating it as “and” highlights black skin as an inherent aspect of beauty, while “but” reflects a translational bias framing dark skin as an opposite to beauty. It is not the object of this work to explain why such a choice has been made by the translators. It is quite obvious. The very words “black but beautiful” is a veiled reminder to the reader what it is all about.
With that being said, in Hebrew we read שְׁחוֹרָה אֲנִי וְנָאוָה, shechorah ani ve’navah, whose literal rendering is: “Black (feminine singular) I am and beautiful (feminine singular), or a woman is speaking, “I am black and beautiful”. This cannot be overlooked by a native Hebrew speaker. The present author would like the reader to appreciate the true meaning of the words shechorah ani ve’navah. No English translation can capture the true sense of this phase, as these words do not depart from their usual and literal meaning. The reason why we give this translation, which is quite clear, is that this explains explicitly who is speaking here.
So, where has the problem come from?
Even though, there are three genders in English (masculine, feminine, and neuter), unlike Hebrew which has two (masculine and feminine), the nouns, verbs, and adjectives are not gendered and numbered, unlike in Hebrew. What this means is that when reading an English text, a reader would not know who is speaking, whether a man or a woman, one or many persons, unless it is explicitly stated by other means. Not so in Hebrew. The Hebrew nouns, verbs, and adjectives carry identifiers as prefixes and suffixes, which determine gender and plurality. So, in our case, the phrase “I am black and beautiful” does not identify the gender of the subject in the sentence, but in Hebrew it is obvious: it is a woman, who is identified as black and beautiful.
The Ethiopian tradition
According to Ethiopian tradition, Solomon and the Queen of Sheba had a love affair the result of which was their son Menelik I, who founded the Ethiopian Solomonic Dynasty that lasted until Emperor Haile Selassie in 1974. According to this tradition, the Song of Songs is read and interpreted as an intimate poetic dialogue between Solomon and the Queen of Sheva (of Ethiopia). The identification of Solomon’s bride as the Queen of Sheba, who is recorded in 1 Kings 10 and 2 Chronicles 9, heavily influences this view. Thus, the Shulamite woman in Song of Songs is identified as Solomon’s lover, the Queen of Sheba.
Dialogue of Love-Song Between God and Israel
Another factor that influences the way The Song of Songs is interpreted is the misunderstanding what this book represents.
The Song of Songs is considered in the classic Jewish commentaries the most obscure book of the Hebrew Scripture. Whatever principle of interpretation one may apply, there always remain a number of unexplainable passages in the book. But why such a love-song in the Hebrew canon?
In its opening verse, King Solomon (Hebrew, Shelomoh) records poetic conversations between two lovers, describing their pursuit of each other in vineyards and fields of blossoming flowers. This poem is traditionally understood as a metaphor for the loving relationship between the Eternal and Israel.
At the literal and plain level of reading of Song 7:1 (6:13 in the Christian Bibles), medieval commentators read The Song of Songs as a poetic dialogue between a young maiden, the Shulammite, and her beloved, King Solomon, expressing mutual love and desire in their pursuit of each other. Solomon calls on Israel saying, “Turn back, turn back, Shulammit”! The word Shulammit is used in the Hebrew text with the article “the” as a proper name for Israel from the epithet shalam, peaceful. The reason Solomon calls Israel thus is that the King to whom the everlasting peace שָׁלוֹם shalom (more properly, completeness, wholeness) belongs will be ushered in the land of Israel and in the world-to-come (see Isaiah 2).
The classical commentators see the song as a poem of passionate love. Ibn Ezra states: “Far be it, far be it that The Song of Songs should be about erotic passion, but rather it is built as an allegory; yet if not for its great depth, it would be understood according to its literal sense as a song of love between a youth and a maiden.” [Ibn Ezra, Commentary on The Song of Songs, Preface]. The literal narrative moves through scenes of longing and praise of physical beauty using idyllic metaphors such as “eyes like doves, hair like a flock of goats”), or “I am my beloved’s, and my beloved is mine; he browses among the lilies” (The Song of Songs 6:3).
On an allegorical level of reading, Shulammit is the personification of Israel. She is depicted as dark-complexioned acquired from the open sunshine to which she has been exposed as the keeper of a vineyard. In body and soul, the Shulammite (Israel) is born to be a princess, but in reality, she is a mere child in a humble family with her joy in the open fields and the quiet life of her village home. Thus, the interpretation of the poem Song of Songs is universally understood as an allegory depicting the historical and spiritual covenant between the Eternal (the Beloved) and the Nation of Israel (the Maiden/Bride). The Rabbinic tradition establishes the book’s supreme sanctity precisely through this allegorical reality, saying, “All the Scriptures are holy, but The Song of Songs is the Holy of Holies.” [Mishnah, Yadayim 3:5]
The influential medieval Torah and Talmud commentator Rabbi Shlomo ben Yitzchak, best known by the acronym “Rashi” explains that Solomon composed The Song of Songs through celestial inspiration to comfort Israel during their bitter exiles by reminding them of the enduring love the Eternal has for the nation of Israel. In Rashi’s words in Commentary on The Song of Songs 1:1, Introduction: “King Solomon foresaw through the Holy Spirit that Israel was destined to go into exile after exile, destruction after destruction… and would recall their former love… Therefore, this book was composed in the language of a woman abandoned into living widowhood, longing for her husband”.
On a deep and mystical level of reading of The Song of Songs, Kabbalah sees the Bride as a human soul (Neshamah) longing to cleave to its Creator. Zohar, Part II, 144a says: “The Song of Songs contains the entire Torah, the entire mystery of Creation, the mystery of the Patriarchs [Avraham, Yitschak, and Ya’akov], the mystery of the exile in Egypt and the Exodus of Israel, and the mystery of the praises of the King”. Blessed be His Name!
Knowledge known to only a few will die out. If you feel blessed by these teachings of Time of Reckoning Ministry, help spread the word!
May we merit seeing the coming of our Mashiach speedily in our days!
This page contains sacred literature and the Name of the Creator. Please, do not deface, discard, or use the Name in a casual manner.