The Pulpit Commentary — Ruth — Section 35

CHAPTER II. 1-9. wjdow's husband was a strong and :mbstan- tULl y_eoman. He was of the family or clan IT is by way of introduction to the re- o~ Ehmelech. The word family is conven- maining narrative that the writer says- tionally too narrow, and the word clan too Ver. 1.-And Naomi had, on her husband's broad, to represent the import of :,r,51~ as side, a friend. The C'tib reading 11~'.'9 here used. The idea intended li,;sT ~o-me- (absolute 11~'..'9) is much to be preferred io where between. And his name was Boaz. the K'ri ll;1iO. But 11;!'.!t is ambiguous in The ro?t of this name is not found, appar- import. It primarily means known, well- ently, rn Hebrew, as was supposed by the known, a,equainted, an acquaintance (see older philologists, and hence its essential Job xi.x. 14; Ps. lv. 13; lxxxviii. 8, 18). idea is as yet undetermined. Raabe finds its But as intimate acquaintances, especially in original form in the Sanscrit bhuvanti a primitive and comparatively uuwelded state which yields the idea of prosperousness. ' of society, are generally found within the Ver. 2.-And Bnth the Moabitese said to circle of kinsfolk, the word may be used, Ne.omi, Let me go, I pray thee, to the corn- and is here used, in reference to a kinsman. fields, that I may glean among the ears The Vulgate translates it consanguineus. after whosoever she.11 show me favour. In The translation is interpretatively correct ; modern style one would not, in referrinl)' at but the original term is less definite, and this stage of the narrative, to Ruth dee~ it hence, in virtue of the ambiguity, there is not in the least degree necessary or adv~ntageous absolute redundancy in the ap,Pended clause, to repeat the designation '' the Moabitess." of the famil,y or clan of Elvmelech. This The repetition is antique, and calls to mind friend of Naomi on her husband's side is the redundant pa.rticula.risation of legal said, in King J ames's version, to be a mighty phraseology - "the aforesaid Ruth, the man of wealth. But the expression so Moabitess." She was willinl)' and wishful rendered has, in the very numerous passages to avail herself of an Israelitish privilege in which it occurs, a conventional import accorded to the poor, the privilege of [)'lean- that stretches out in e. different e.nd nobler ing after the reapers in the harvestfields direction. It is 'the expression that is so (see Levit. xi.x. 9 ; xxiii 22 : Deut. xxiv. frequently transle.ted " e. mighty me.n of 19). Such gleaning was a humiliation to valour" (see Josh. i. 14 ; vi. 2 ; viii. 3 ; x. those who had been accustomed to give 7; Judges vi 12; xi. 1, &c.). In only one r~ther than to get. But Ruth saw, in the other passage is it rendered as it is by King pmched features of her mother-in-law, that James s translators in the passage before us, there was now a serious difficulty in keeping viz., in 2 Kings xv. 20. There it is correctly the wolf outside the door. And hence, so translated, interpretatively. Here there although there would be temptntion in the seems to be a leaning in the same direction, step, as well e.s humiliation, she resolved to and yot it is not strongly pronounced. Cassel, avail herself of the harvest season to gather however, takes the other cue, and translates as large a store as possible of those nutritious "a valiant hero." "Probably," says he, "he cereals which form the staff of life and had distinguished himself in the conflicts of which they would grind for themsel~es in Israel with their enemies." The expression their little hnndmill or quern. She said originally means "strong in strength" with beautiful courtesy, "Let me go, I pray (ovvarai; l11xv,, Sept.), but is ambiguous in thee ; " or, "I wish to go, if you will please consequence of the many-sided import of the to allow me." Such is the force of the peculiar Hebrew idiom. "There is no place," latter word ~m, which means originally, says Lawson, "where our tongues ought to either strength, e.nd then valour; or, clan- be better governed than in our own houses." nishfollowi,ng (see Raabe), and then militaMJ To the cornfields. Very literally, "to the ho~t,. or force, or forces,· o.lso, faculty or field." It is the language of townspeople ability, and then, as so often "answering when referring to the land ronml about th~ all things," riches or wealth. The idea of town that was kept under tillage. It wa... the writer seems to be that the friend of the not customary to separate cornfield fro1r  30 THE BOOK OF RUTH. [CH. II. 1-9