Abstract
In the book of Ruth, seed images help shape Naomi's reversal from emptiness to fullness. In ch. 1, Naomi has no hope of having another son, yet in ch. 4, she receives Ruth's son. In ch. 2 food is used to indicate Boaz's acceptance of and generosity towards Ruth beyond all expectations by consciously shaping his actions in a direct reversal of Deuteronomy's ban on Moabites. In ch. 3, Boaz tells Ruth to hold out her garment and then places six measures of barley on her—an unrealistically heavy amount—which makes her appear pregnant. Ruth tells Naomi that Boaz did not want her to return to her mother-in-law ‘empty’. This use of ‘empty’ plays off of the other occurrence in ch. 1, implying that Obed's birth fills Naomi's emptiness. Attention to the symbolic relationship between food and fertility gives greater shape to the interactions between Ruth, Boaz and Naomi and moves the story towards fullness in ch. 4.
Introduction
Despite growing interest among biblical scholars on agrarian and food-related issues, the symbolic role of food in the book of Ruth has seldom been explored. 1 Yet food permeates the book: it begins with famine and ends with a marriage in which the acquisition of a piece of land (which was surely intended for cultivation) is pivotal, while scenes occurring in fields surrounding a town called ‘House of Bread’ take place throughout the narrative. The aim of the present study is to move the issue of food from the periphery into the spotlight in order to show how they are integral to the story's themes and development.
This examination builds upon D.F. Rauber's excellent essay, which deftly sketches Naomi's transformation from empty bitterness to restored fullness. 2 Rauber argues that the book's narrative arc traces the central theme of Naomi's journey from emptiness in ch. 1 to fullness in ch. 4. Within Rauber's framework I will focus on how food gives greater shape to the interactions between Ruth, Boaz and Naomi and moves the story towards fullness in ch. 4. In particular, the symbolic relationship between food and fertility corresponds to the narrative arc of the book as it moves the story from famine and infertility to food and fertility. There are four major sections in Ruth coinciding with the chapter breaks. I will briefly examine each section regarding the role of food in the story.
Chapter 1
Chapter 1 sets the scene and introduces the central problem: Naomi's hopeless situation. The story begins with death: that of the land, due to famine, and that of Naomi's family—including her husband and two sons. Her sons’ marriages to Moabite women have been infertile; 3 the land's fruitlessness was the impetus for the journey to Moab, hope of renewed abundance motivates Naomi's return to Bethlehem. Naomi is, at first, unable to dissuade her two daughters-in-law from following her; then she emphasizes the desperation of her situation, hyperbolically insisting that there is no chance that she will have a son (Ruth 1.11–13). Following Tamar's example in Genesis 38 or the instructions in Deut. 23.4–5 [Eng. 23.3–4]) is impossible for Orpah and Ruth: both sons are dead and there is no chance for more. Naomi's situation cannot be assuaged by levirate marriage. 4 In this light, Orpah's decision to return to Moab is understandable, but Ruth is not dissuaded by Naomi's discourse. Using covenant language, Ruth swears an oath of faithfulness to Naomi; binding herself as strongly as one can to Naomi. 5 Even so, returning to Bethlehem, Naomi admonishes those who greet her not to call her Naomi (‘pleasant’) but Mara (‘bitter’), attributing her misfortune to God, who has brought her back ‘empty’ though she left ‘full’. This ‘empty’ state refers to the loss of her husband and two sons, 6 a state which, from Naomi's perspective, Ruth's loyalty does not remedy. Thus is the bleak scene set. Into this emptiness, the narrator informs the reader, Naomi and Ruth returned ‘at the beginning of barley harvest’ (1.22b). 7 Naomi had heard a rumor that God had given them bread (1.6); the narrator confirms this. 8 The harvest begins to reverse the pattern with which the story began—famine and then death—perhaps hinting at a greater reversal to come. Perhaps the fertile soil foreshadows the fertile womb. 9
Chapter 2
Chapter 2 is the first step in Naomi's renewal, foreshadowing her coming fullness. In two related areas, greater attention to the symbolic role of food may elucidate this renewal's beginning. Attention to food highlights Boaz's extreme generosity to and acceptance of Ruth. Commentators have long noted that Boaz's command to his workers to pull out extra stalks of grain from the bundles in Ruth 2.16 far exceeds the provisions given to foreigners and widows in Deut. 24.19. Also, by inviting Ruth to share a meal, the story symbolically indicates her inclusion within the community and, quite possibly, Boaz's family or clan in contrast to Deut. 23.4–5's exclusion of Moabites. 10 Thus food plays a key role in Boaz's generosity to and acceptance of Ruth as he moves beyond and in contradiction to Deuteronomy's instructions.
These are vital observations, but they do not reveal how Boaz's actions break down the ethnic barrier between him and Ruth. In Deut. 23.4–5, two reasons are given for excluding Moabites from the community: they did not meet Israel with bread and water when they came out of Egypt, and they hired Balaam to curse Israel. It is clear that Boaz offers Ruth bread in Ruth 2.14; that he offers her water is not. However, in Ruth 2.9, although ‘water’ is not mentioned, it is certainly in view—the verb באש refers exclusively to drawing water. 11 Furthermore, in Boaz's prayer in Ruth 2.12, he pronounces a blessing on Ruth. 12 Boaz's generosity with water, bread, and a prayer of blessing symbolically reverses the Moabites’ past wrongs. For each evil done to Israel by Moab, Boaz does the opposite, demonstrating his exceptional דםח towards Ruth.
Another way in which Boaz displays his generosity is through the significant amount of food that Ruth brings home to share with Naomi. After working until evening, Ruth returns to Naomi with a considerable amount of grain, probably between 30 to 50 pounds—in any case, a large amount 13 —and some leftovers from the meal Boaz gave her. Ruth's work, however industrious, cannot account for this amount; it reveals Boaz's acceptance of and extreme generosity towards Ruth. Eying the bounty, Naomi perceives that someone has taken special notice of Ruth, pronouncing blessing on him even before she learns his identity.
The pattern of interchange of food between Boaz, Ruth, and Naomi is repeated in ch. 3 and foreshadows the pattern of their relationship regarding Obed's birth in Ruth 4. As noted above, Ruth received a large amount of grain due to Boaz's extreme generosity, which she in turn shares with Naomi. 14 This pattern repeats in ch. 3: at the threshing floor Boaz again shares with Ruth, who then shares with Naomi. In the last chapter, Boaz graciously marries a Moabite and then Ruth gives the fruit of their union to Naomi. Even though Naomi does not meet Boaz in the story, through Ruth's kindness and loyalty, she receives first his grain and then his son.
Chapter 3
Food continues to add color to the relationships between Ruth, Boaz, and Naomi in ch. 3 as well as foreshadowing Naomi's future fullness. First, at Boaz's threshing floor in the black of night, Ruth asks Boaz to marry her. 15 In this scene full of sexual innuendo, one is usually overlooked: Boaz is sleeping next to a huge pile of grain. 16 This pile probably represents offspring rather than semen, because conceptually seed was most often associated with offspring. 17 As such, this pile of grain contributes to the overall portrait of Boaz's fertility, implying that Boaz has offspring to give. When Ruth asks Boaz to spread his wings over her, it appears that Ruth asks Boaz to marry her with the goal of raising up an heir for Naomi. This complex and highly debated point, 18 while not central to food's symbolic role in Ruth, warrants a small aside.
Scholarly debate has focused on whether or not the practice of levirate marriage and/or redemption applies to Ruth. Katharine Sakenfeld, for instance, does not see the legal context of Deut. 25.5–10 forming the background to Ruth's request since, among other reasons, reference to Boaz as a ‘redeemer’ has no relationship to levirate marriage. For Sakenfeld, the goal of Ruth's marriage is ‘familial and economic security’. 19 In this line of reasoning, the last kindness of Ruth is ‘long-term’ security and ‘commitment to the promises she made to Naomi, since the marriage will make permanent Ruth's bond to Naomi's place and people’. 20 Tamara Eskenazi lists seven objections to interpreting Ruth 3–4 as an example of levirate marriage. 21 Eskenazi does not view Ruth as asking Boaz to marry her; the vocabulary of levirate marriage is absent from the book. Eskenazi prefers to discuss the exchange between Ruth and Boaz in ch. 3 in terms of redemption (esp. Lev. 25.23–34).
Chapter 1 indicates that Naomi's situation lies outside the legal requirements of Deut. 25.5–10; the book cannot strictly follow it. As Eskenazi has shown, Ruth is under no legal obligation to marry Boaz. 22 She could marry whomever she wishes—young men, whether rich or poor—as Boaz declares, and as Naomi implies in ch. 1.
The intertextual connection between Deut. 25.5–10 and Ruth 4.7–10 is strong, however, and indicates some kind of relationship between the two texts. Ruth's interaction with Deuteronomy is not limited to this issue; as Bernard Levinson notes, Ruth ‘constitutes something closer to a counter-narrative that seeks to revise and liberalize the requirements of Deuteronomy regarding gleaning rules (Deut 24.19), the exclusion of Moabites from the community (Deut 23.4–5 [English 23.3–4]); and the law of levirate marriage (Deut 25.5–10)’. 23 Genesis 38 and Ruth also have a strong intertextual connection, not least because Ruth's potential offspring is explicitly compared to Tamar's (Ruth 4.12). The issue, in my view, is not whether Ruth interacts with levirate marriage as expressed in Deut. 25.5–10 and Genesis 38, but how it interacts.
In my view, Ruth's request is a דםח-motivated application of levirate marriage as defined in Deut. 25.5–10 to a situation that lies outside its literal domain. In ch. 4, the goals of the levirate marriage are fulfilled although Boaz is not Naomi's son. Eskenazi's summary of the extensive literature on the meaning of דםח is vital for understanding how דםח functions in Ruth. According to her it refers to ‘acts of benevolence that one does out of kindness, not out of any obligation’. Alternatively, it demonstrates kindness and generosity that goes ‘beyond the call of duty’. 24 Ruth's request, then, is a demonstration of exceeding the call of duty—what דםח is all about. From her many options, Ruth asks Boaz to marry her because he, as a close relative, can raise up the name of Mahlon, continuing Naomi's family line, as Boaz explicitly says in Ruth 4.10. This clarifies Boaz's veiled reference to Ruth's first and last kindness in Ruth 3.10. For this reason, Ruth's last kindness is greater than her first—probably referring to her decision to return from Moab and care for Naomi—of which Boaz is well aware (Ruth 2.11–12). 25 If, as Sakenfeld has argued, marriage and long-term family security are the only things in view, I fail to see how this is a greater kindness since Ruth's complete commitment to Naomi even unto death occurs in ch. 1. Ruth's actions are not motivated by a concern for her own security or by some romantic attraction to Boaz, but her faithful commitment to Naomi. 26 It is a greater kindness precisely because it extends beyond Ruth's earlier commitment to Naomi by seeking an heir for her.
Eskenazi's position, that only redemption and not levirate marriage is in view, may appear to be a more literal reading of Ruth since the word ‘redemption’ is the one Ruth uses, but this view still faces the same difficulties that levirate marriage does. Neither redemption nor levirate marriage can be directly applied in Ruth. Eskenazi can only apply redemption to Ruth's situation by abstracting the specific texts on redemption to an ‘overriding notion’ where one takes ‘responsibility for a needy relative’. 27 One can redeem land (Lev. 25.25–38), slaves (esp. Lev. 25.47–50), and things dedicated to the sanctuary (Lev. 27.9–28), but one does not, in the technical sense, redeem a person like Ruth (Ruth 3.12–13). Eskenazi's position still goes beyond Leviticus’ legal requirements. It may be that Ruth harmonizes the instruction of land redemption (Lev. 25.23–25) and levirate marriage (Deut. 25.5–10). If so, this reading is similar to Bush's solution that Boaz is morally, but not legally, obligated to marry Ruth. He labels this a ‘levirate-type responsibility’. 28 In my view, Ruth's request in the dead of night is a דםח-motivated application of levirate marriage, revealing that she is there to acquire seed from Boaz for Naomi. If this is so, it is appropriate that a huge pile of Boaz's seed sits in the background to Ruth's request.
The second food issue in ch. 3 concerns Boaz's taking seed and putting it on Ruth, which may be full of symbolic meaning. In the pre-dawn darkness, Boaz instructs Ruth to hold out her cloak and grasp it tightly 29 so he can lay six measures of barley on her. There has been a great deal of scholarly ink spilled in an attempt to estimate the amount of weight intended here since the designation for the six measures is unstated. 30 However, almost no matter what kind of measurement is determined, it is likely a very large amount. Perhaps this scene is not concerned with the weight so much as it is with the shape that such a large amount would make in Ruth's garment as she holds it out for Boaz to fill. It is vital not to miss that this grain is placed on Ruth's front and would inevitably pile up over her stomach. Yet even if one grants that the scene unfolds in this way, according to many, Boaz then takes the grain and puts it on her, which for Sakenfeld and others means that ‘Boaz himself loads the grain-filled garment onto Ruth's back’. 31 This may be so, but perhaps closely examining the Hebrew leads to a different appraisal of the scene. The root דדט is often translated into English in Ruth as ‘measured out’, connoting that Boaz measured the amount out and into Ruth's garment. In English usage, ‘measure out’ easily denotes the movement of what is measured from one place to another. 32 Then, naturally, since Boaz has measured the grain into Ruth's garment, when he then puts it on her, he cannot be putting it into the garment since he has already done that, but must be taking the full garment from before her and placing it on her back or head. However, the verbs of the root דדט do not function this way. 33 It indicates that a certain amount or distance has been determined or measured; it does not imply movement of what is measured from one place to another. For example, in Num. 35.5 the space allotted to the Levites around the city is measured. This is a typical example; the verb is almost always used to measure distances. The occurrence in Ruth is the only time in the Old Testament where the root דדט is used to measure grain; nothing in context indicates movement. In fact, the use of תיש in the next line to describe Boaz's actions leaves no room for a verb, which elsewhere does not connote movement, to acquire it here. If this is so, then the scene unfolds like this: Boaz asks Ruth to hold out her garment and firmly grip it. He then measures six measures and puts that amount on Ruth. There is no indication that she changes positions or moves the load to her back or head. The narrative portrays Ruth as holding this huge pile of seed in a garment held in her arms, which means that the load would land over her stomach. As Ruth departs, the image is one of her with a full cloak, struggling, like a very pregnant woman, to return to Naomi. 34
The image of Ruth walking home at dawn, then, would be unquestionably pregnant with meaning. 35 Ruth explains to Naomi what Boaz has done for her and then says that Boaz did not want her to return to her mother-in-law empty. This is the second and last use of the adjective םקיד in Ruth; 36 the first describes Naomi's destitute state on her return to Bethlehem after losing her husband and sons (Ruth 1.21). Surely, this grain, whatever the amount, could not fill Naomi's emptiness at the loss of her husband and two sons. Rather, this inner-textual reference to the word ‘empty’ symbolically foreshadows that Ruth will give Boaz's son to Naomi—filling Naomi's emptiness.
Chapter 4
What food has merely foreshadowed comes to fruition in ch. 4. After Boaz secures the land and takes Ruth to be his wife, the LORD gives Ruth conception. The LORD only ‘gives’ (זתנ) two things in the book of Ruth: bread where there was famine (1.6) and a baby where there was barrenness (4.13). 37 This twofold repetition brings together the relationship between food and fertility that we have been tracking in the story, uniting all four chapters through this symbolism. 38 The LORD gives life to the barren field, causing Bethlehem to live up to its name. Boaz graciously shares his field's yield with Ruth who, in faithfulness to Naomi, brings all she has been given to her mother-in-law. The outworking of this motif in the scenes we have explored in chs. 2 and 3 foreshadows Obed's birth. These scenes also set the stage for what follows Obed's birth. Some readers are bewildered that Naomi takes Ruth's child to her bosom so that it is even said: ‘A son has been born to Naomi’ (4.17). 39 Yet all along, the story has been preparing the reader for this climatic moment. 40 As Ruth has done with the fruit of the field, so she now does with the fruit of her womb. 41 This is the reversal of Naomi's hopeless situation from ch. 1; she returned empty from Moab, but in ch. 4 she is full.
Conclusion
Food plays a significant role in the narrative arc of the book of Ruth as it subtly and skillfully traces Naomi's transformation from empty to full. Beginning with famine followed by death, the storyline reverses this initial position. Boaz's generosity to and acceptance of Ruth in ch. 2 directly reverse the commands in Deut. 23.4–5 (Eng. 23.3–4), beginning a series of events culminating in Obed's birth. First there is food; then there is new life as Obed replaces the sons that died in the book's introduction. The fertility and the narrative pattern of exchange between Boaz, Ruth, and Naomi established by the motif of food crescendos in ch. 4 when Ruth gives Obed to Naomi.
While few have explored these issues, and even fewer have foregrounded their importance, it seems that paying greater attention to food and related issues may help us appreciate a literary masterpiece like the book of Ruth yet further.
Footnotes
1.
Nathan MacDonald, Not Bread Alone: The Uses of Food in the Old Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), does not discuss Ruth, and Ellen Davis, Scripture, Culture, and Agriculture: An Agrarian Reading of the Bible (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009), mentions the book only in passing. Barbara Green's dissertation, ‘A Study of Field and Seed Symbolism in the Biblical Story of Ruth’ (PhD dissertation, Graduate Theological Union, 1980), remains unpublished, and as yet only features in the footnotes of major commentaries. Elsewhere, in her ‘The Plot of the Biblical Story of Ruth’, JSOT 23 (1982), pp. 55–68, Green asserts that the ‘story's main intent is to relate the restoration of seed: food in the land, food for Naomi and Ruth, a husband for Ruth, a redeemer for Naomi and an heir (leading to a king) for the whole people’ (p. 56). For Green, ‘The field, a symbolic representation of the woman, is the locus of resolution of all these needs’ (p. 56). Yet the examination does not explain how the field symbolically represents the woman or how this may relate to the restoration of seed. Talia Sutskover, ‘The Themes of Land and Fertility in the Book of Ruth’, JSOT 34 (2010), pp. 283–94, supports the notion that Ruth's vocabulary is saturated with the themes of fertility and land, but the analysis is somewhat disjointed and the roles of these themes in the story's literary art and plot development are unclear.
2.
F.D. Rauber, ‘Literary Values in the Bible: The Book of Ruth’, JBL 89 (1970), pp. 27–37. Many cite Rauber's article, but Frederic Bush, Ruth/Esther (WBC, 9; Waco, TX: Word Books, 1996), works out this perspective in much greater detail. In agreement with Rauber, Bush argues that Naomi's restoration from emptiness to fullness is the central ‘problem’ of the story (p. 51).
3.
See n. 37 below.
4.
Tamara Cohn Eskenazi and Tikva Frymer-Kensky, Ruth (The JPS Bible Commentary; Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 2011), p. xxxvi, note that in Ruth a ‘levirate union is impossible’.
5.
Mark S. Smith, ‘“Your People Shall Be My People”: Family and Covenant in Ruth 1.16–17’, CBQ 69 (2007), pp. 242–58. Cf. Edward Campbell, Ruth (AB, 7; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1975), p. 31.
6.
Eskenazi and Frymer-Kensky, Ruth, p. 25, observe that Naomi's emptiness likely reflects her loss of children.
7.
All quotations are taken from the
8.
Eskenazi and and Frymer-Kensky, Ruth, p. li, credit God's gift of conception in Ruth 4.13 as the ‘single reference to God's action’ in the book. It is probably better, however, to see the two references to God giving (Ruth 1.6 and 4.13) as related and thus framing a story that is dominated by human actions.
9.
For more on this, see Kristin Saxegaard, Character Complexity in the Book of Ruth (FAT, 2/47; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), p. 95, who states that the ‘fertile soil’ mentioned here is a ‘symbol for human fertility’.
10.
Peter Lau, Identity and Ethics in the Book of Ruth: A Social Identity Approach (Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 2011), pp. 60–64; Katharine Sakenfeld, Ruth (Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1999), p. 45; Bush, Ruth/Esther, pp. 125–29.
11.
Water is in view in every occurrence of the verb outside of Ruth; see Gen. 24.11, 13, 19, 20, 43, 44, 45; Deut. 29.10; Josh. 9.21, 23; 1 Sam. 7.6; 9.11; 2 Sam. 23.16; Isa. 12.3; Nah. 3.14; 1 Chron. 11.18. Eskenazi, Ruth, pp. 35–36, notices that Boaz's offer of water recalls and reverses the Moabites refusal in Deut. 23.5. Cf. Bush, Ruth/Esther, p. 122.
12.
Bush, Ruth/Esther, 128.
13.
Though the exact weight is uncertain, Campbell, Ruth, p. 104, surmises that Ruth gleaned between 47.5 and 29 pounds—in his view, probably closer to the latter. Cf. Bush, Ruth, p. 133.
14.
Green, ‘Seed Symbolism’, p. 93, makes a similar observation.
15.
Sakenfeld states that even if the language is ‘symbolic’, ‘its reference to marriage would be clear to the ancient Israelite hearer’ (Ruth, p. 58). On the other hand, Eskenazi doubts that marriage is in view with Ruth's request (Ruth, p. 57). This means, then, that Boaz, who apparently interprets Ruth's request in terms of marriage, has misunderstood her.
16.
Campbell lists several sexually loaded double entendres in this scene, but does not mention this one (Ruth, pp. 131–32). To my knowledge only André LaCocque, Ruth: A Continental Commentary (trans. K.C. Hanson; CC; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2004), p. 193, and Linafelt, Ruth, p. 59, make this observation.
17.
Marten Stol, Birth in Babylonia and the Bible: Its Mediterranean Setting (Groningen: Styx, 2000), p. 4. Semen is in view and is for the purpose of bringing about offspring in Gen. 38.9. Cf. Lev. 15.16, 17, 18, 32; 18.20; 19.20; 22.4; Num. 5.13 where seed is modified by הבבש and thus means semen in context. Contra LaCocque, Ruth, p. 103.
18.
Campbell, Ruth, pp. 132–37, and Robert Hubbard, The Book of Ruth (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), pp. 212–13, both argue that levirate marriage occurs in Ruth. For a succinct summary of the view that argues that neither land nor an heir is in view, see Sakenfeld, Ruth, pp. 60–61. Cf. Eskenazi, Ruth, pp. xxxvi-xxxvii. Also see Tod Linafelt, ‘Narrative and Poetic Art in the Book of Ruth’, Int 64 (2010), pp. 118–29, who recently lists several more options and cites scholars defending each approach (p. 122).
19.
Sakenfeld, Ruth, p. 60.
20.
Sakenfeld, Ruth, pp. 61–62. Cf. Bush, Ruth/Esther, pp. 181–227.
21.
Eskenazi, Ruth, pp. xxxvi-xxxvii. The seven objections: (1) levir or levirate marriages is not mentioned; (2) Boaz is not a actual brother to Mahlon; (3) Ruth's request on the threshing floor is redemption, not marriage; (4) in the books closing genealogy Ruth's child is reckoned as Boaz's son, not Mahlon's; (5) Boaz is never referred to as a levir; (6) the meaning of Ruth 4.5 is uncertain; (7) the ritual in Ruth 4.7–8 differs from the one found in Deut. 25.5–10 since the sandal has a different function and the deceased name is not preserved in the genealogy. It should be noted that points 1 and 5 are the same and that point 6 proves nothing since if a text is uncertain it only proves the point to be uncertain—it cannot logically negate anything.
22.
Eskenazi, Ruth, pp. xxxvi-xxxvii.
23.
Bernard Levinson, Legal Revision and Religious Renewal in Ancient Israel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), p. 35.
24.
Eskenazi, Ruth, pp. xlviii, l; cf. Bush, Ruth/Esther, p. 171.
25.
Most scholars agree on this point; see Bush, Ruth/Esther, p. 170.
26.
Hubbard, Ruth, p. 215.
27.
Eskenazi, Ruth, p. liv.
28.
Bush, Ruth/Esther, p. 227.
29.
Campbell, Ruth, p. 127, notes that the Hebrew (זחא) means ‘to grasp tightly or with great strength’. He lists a number of parallels supporting this: Gen. 25.26; Exod. 4.4; Judg. 16.3; 20.3; 2 Sam. 20.9; and 1 Kgs 1.51, which amply illustrate the intensity and strength implied by this verb.
30.
Hubbard, Ruth, p. 222, suggests that the weight might be between 95 and 58 pounds. Cf. Campbell, Ruth, pp. 127–28.
31.
Sakenfeld, Ruth, p. 65; Cf. Hubbard, Ruth, p. 222, who observes that Boaz ‘set the burden either atop her head or shoulder, or even her back’. Bush, Ruth/Esther, p. 179, indicates that ‘Ruth shouldered and carried home’ the load.
32.
It is natural to think of this phrase in English in terms of a person with a big scoop measuring out grain into a sack.
33.
For all the occurrences of the root דדט in the Old Testament, see Exod. 16.18; Num. 35.5; Deut. 21.2; 2 Sam. 8.2; 1 Kgs 17.21; Isa. 40.12; 65.7; Jer. 31.37; 33.22; Ezek. 40.5–6, 8–9, 11, 13, 19–20, 23–24, 27–28, 32, 35, 47–48; 41.1–5, 13, 15; 42.15–20; 43.10; 45.3; 47.3–5, 18; Hos. 2.1; Zech. 2.6; Pss. 60.8; 108.8; Job 7.4; Ruth 3.15. Isa. 65.7 may be an exception.
34.
Linafelt, Ruth, pp. 59–60, sees the exchange of seed between Ruth and Boaz as a double entendre—Boaz gives his seed to Ruth.
35.
Hubbard, Ruth, p. 226, makes basically the same observation: the ‘grain’, in his view, ‘represents a down-payment’ on Naomi's greater emptiness. He also notes that the rabbis interpreted the six measures of barley ‘as symbolic of six great descendants of Ruth’ (226 n. 12). Cf. Eskenazi, Ruth, pp. lvi and lviii. On this see b. Sanh. 93a.
36.
Campbell, Ruth, p. 129, calls this one of the narrator's most effective ‘long-range inclusios’.
37.
It seems likely that Ruth, in the tradition of the matriarchs, was barren—having been married to Mahlon, and childless, for about ten years. See Sakenfeld, Ruth, p. 20. Cf. Eskenazi, Ruth, pp. 7–8. I am aware of Linafelt's critique of this position and find it anachronistic and thus unconvincing (Ruth, pp. 77–78).
38.
Lesley Smith, Medieval Exegesis in Translation: Commentaries on the Book of Ruth (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 1996), pp. ix-x, makes a similar point.
39.
Naomi has a son where there was no legal or biological recourse. See Eskenazi, Ruth, p. 91.
40.
Rauber, ‘Literary Values’, p. 35, argues that chs. 2 and 3 prepare the reader for this moment through the symbolic use of food.
41.
As Boaz put (תיש) the grain on Ruth in 3.15, so Naomi, in what is the second use of תיש in 4.16, takes Obed and puts (תיש) him in her lap. This may be yet another interplay between the seeds of the field and the seed of the womb. See Campbell, Ruth, pp. 13–14, who notes the importance of words that occur only twice in Ruth even though he does not mention תיש or that the L