2

... and [Ruth] happened to come to the part of the field belonging to Boaz... (Ruth 2:3)

Why did Boaz only own part of the field? And was it really just coincidence that Ruth ended up there?

EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine
  • 2,077
  • 4
  • 26
  • 58

1 Answers1

4

When Israel took over the "promised" land, it was divided between the tribes, clans and families (Josh 13, 14, 15, 16). Boaz was the head of the main clan of Judah and had been allocated (by inheritance) a certain section of land. The population understood how these divisions worked as boundary stones were installed to mark such boundaries (Josh 15:6, Deut 19:14, 27:17, Prov 22:28, 23:10).

That is, there were no fences but boundary indicated by stones (possibly at the corners?). A person could wander throughout the country (as some did including animals, see 1 Sam 9 and the story of Saul) without encountering fences but still crossing numerous boundaries.

Clearly, when Ruth went into the fields to glean, she began gleaning in that part of the land marked out for Boaz and his family and thus belonged to Boaz.

Was this an accident or pure happenstance? In the story it appears so; but I cannot escape the conclusion that this was the unseen hand of providence "guiding her steps" (Prov 3:6, 16:9) so that she ended up in the best possible situation.

  • What did "field" mean in this context? How large of an area would it have referred to? – EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine Mar 17 '19 at 22:04
  • We are not told precisely but an idea can be gained from the record in Josh 15 - probably some thousands of acres, not all of which was available at the time because the Jebusites had not yet been dislodged (Josh 15:63) - this was done later by David. –  Mar 17 '19 at 22:08
  • So it could have referred to a very large area? – EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine Mar 17 '19 at 22:11
  • The total area allocated to the tribe of Judah was about 10,000 square km. Not all of this was arable as some was desert and some was too hilly and some was taken up by cities. This area was divided amongst the clans and families in a way that is not recorded. –  Mar 17 '19 at 22:12
  • Yeah, for whatever reason I was getting stuck on a field referring to a relatively small area. I guess that's probably not what the text means, though. – EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine Mar 17 '19 at 22:20
  • 1
    The Hebrew word has a broader meaning: שָׂדֶה (śā·ḏě(h)): n.masc.; …1. … field, i.e., a cultivated area for growing things …; 2. … open field, open country, countryside, i.e., areas which are relatively sparsely inhabited, in contrast to uninhabited forests …; 3. … environs, pastureland, i.e., an open area just outside a walled city or village (…); 4. … territory, region, i.e., an administrative district (…); 5. … mainland, i.e., an area which is in contrast to an island or peninsula (…); … Swanson, J. (1997). Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Hebrew (Old Testament) – Perry Webb Mar 17 '19 at 23:13
  • Property Protection. Israelite farmers enclosed their gardens and vineyards with hedges or walls (Is. 5:5). But it was not possible to build walls around large fields. To prevent border disputes in the fields, the Law placed severe punishment upon anyone who removed the boundary stones used as land-marks (Deut. 27:17).

    Packer, J. I., Tenney, M. C., & White, W., Jr. (1997). Nelson’s illustrated manners and customs of the Bible (p. 256). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.

     – Perry Webb Mar 17 '19 at 23:27
  • Walls and hedges were important for keeping animals in; not necessary for grain fields. Walls were a way to get ride of stones in a field. Thorn hedges on the stone walls served like barbed wire today. Lots of stones in a field would discourage plowing, but serve well for pastures with lots of wall building material. – Perry Webb Mar 17 '19 at 23:36
  • Quite right - the amount of stone would vary from place to place. –  Mar 17 '19 at 23:53
  • @PerryWebb That makes sense - so maybe the ESV translation is a little misleading here. "Boaz's part of the countryside" or "Boaz's part of the district" or "Boaz's part of the patureland" all make a lot more sense to me than "Boaz's part of the field" - that's opinion, though. – EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine Mar 18 '19 at 01:06
  • As a side note, there is no mention here of witness trees, which were used to detail certain areas Abraham visited(and others also). Also compare Eccl. 10:8-9. – user21676 Mar 18 '19 at 06:17