When was Ruth Composed?
“The scholarly consensus is that the book was composed in the 5th century BCE.”
“What took place during this period?” asked Theophil.
“Cyrus the Great sanctioned the return from exile in 538. A first stream of ascendants returned a year later. Ezra and Nehemiah came to Jerusalem after another one hundred years. In due course, Nehemiah was constituted the Governor of Jehud.”
“What was their orientation, Peter’le? It is discernible from their two respective books: Ezra and Nehemiah.”
“The two books are stylistically very different. Ezra is written partly in Hebrew and partly in Aramaic. The Hebrew style is, in my opinion, poor. Nehemiah is expressed in resonant Hebrew. And it is an elegant piece of writing. In some ways, though, it is written as a memoir, in which the author (presumably Nehemiah) asks God to remember him ‘for good’ [13:31].”
“I agree, Peter’le. But what was the policy or outlook of the two leaders?”
“Segregation. They wanted the Jews to remain a nation apart. Both condemned mixed marriages, that is, marriages in which one of the spouses is a gentile [Ezra: 9:10-12; Neh. 13: 23-27]. Jews were induced to divorce their foreign wives: Ezra chapter 10.”
“Were these measures popular?”
“I have my doubts, Maestro. On the one hand we are told that the people did as ordered and even entered into a covenant confirming the adoption of this policy. The principle involved became a cornerstone of the Jewish religion. It still applies in Israel of today, where family law remains governed by religion. On the other hand, intermarriages were common during the 5th century BCE. Ezra tells us that even Priests and Levites married out [9:1-2; 10:2-3].”
“Are your doubts about the popularity of the policy supported by the scriptures?”
“They are, Maestro. Nehemiah relates how he had been called back by his Persian Emperor. Upon his return to Jehud, he discovered that his principles had not been adhered to. The day of rest – the Sabbath – was not observed [Neh. 13:15-22], one of Nehemiah’s opposers (Tobia the Ammonite) was given an office in the Temple and also ‘Jews … had married wives of Ashdod, of Amon and of Mo’av [Moab]: and their children spoke half of the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the language of Jehudah [Hebrew], but according to the language of various other people [ibid. 23-24].” To me this suggests that, when Nehemiah was not there to enforce his policy, the population reverted to its older ways.”
“I take your point, Peter’le. Tell me a bit more about the supporters of Nehemiah’s policy and its opponents.”
“The supporters included the Perez family, which originated from the cohabitation of Jehudah and Tamar [Gen. 38].”
“The tale is relevant. Let us hear it,” interjected Theophil.
“Jehudah himself married a Canaanite woman. His first born, Er, wedded Tamar. It is not clear whether she was an Israelite. When Er died without an heir, Tamar had a levirate-marriage ceremony with his brother, Onan. The marriage, though, was not consummated by Onan. Upon his demise, Tamar expected to be given to Jehudah’s third son, Shela. Jehudah blocked this levirate marriage because he thought it might lead to Shela’s death. Tamar thereupon dressed up as a temple prostitute. Jehudah, who did not recognise her, cohabited with her and, as a guarantee of her reward, pledged with her his seal, cord and staff. Later, when Tamar was accused of sexual impropriety, she produced these to identify the biological father of her embryo.”
“Was her cohabitation with Jehudah not incestuous?”
“It was not, Maestro. When Tamar solicited Jehudah, she was a widow.”
“How did Jehudah react when exposed?”
“He conceded that Tamar was ‘more righteous’ than himself. In due course, Tamar gave birth to Perez, whose family became prominent in his tribe. When its scions returned to Jerusalem after the Babylonian exile, they became staunch supporters of the policy ordained by Ezra and Nehemiah. They were also listed by Nehemiah amongst the followers, who helped him in the restoration of Jerusalem’s ruined fortress walls.”
“Was there a group opposed to the doctrines emphasized by Ezra and Nehemiah?”
“There was. That much can be gleaned from their books. Nehemiah singled out Tobiah (to whom he refers as ‘the Ammonite slave’) and Sanballat the Horonite.”
“What can you tell me about them?”
“Tobiah is a Hebrew name, meaning ‘God is good’. It has remained in use in today’s Israel. Moreover, as already mentioned, the Great Priest, Elyashiv, gave Tobiah quarters in the Temple itself when Nehemiah was called back to the Emperor’s capital. It seems clear that Tobiah was a highly influential head of a group opposed to Ezra and Nehemiah. Sanballat was, in all probability, the governor of a province adjacent to Jehud. Notably, Elyashiv is condemned as being too close to Tobiah but, at the same time, is mentioned positively as aiding in the restoration work.”
“And, as already pointed out by you, Ruth was composed during the period involved, that is, the 5th century BCE. Any direct support for this scholastic conclusion from the book?”
“Not really, Maestro. Still, the opening words indicate that the story took place at an early age. Further, when the author discusses the removal of a shoe, he refers to an obsolete custom that prevailed ‘long ago’. And the genealogy at the end of the book is in point. It would not have been set out before King David became an icon.”
“To sum up, the scholarly consensus is that the book was composed during the 5th century BCE. The text indicates that it was composed long after the events described in it. Further, Ruth is included in the last part of the Tanakh – the Ketuvim [Scriptures] – which comprises other late books, like Job and Ecclesiastes. Well, let us now turn to the next issue.”
Where and by Whom Was Ruth Composed?
“To deal with this issue, we have to start by describing Jewish settlements that existed during the 5th century BCE,” I began.
“Quite so,” agreed Theophil. “Well, start the ball rolling.”
“Esther, which is also a late book, tells us that the Jews were a nation spread all over the Persian Empire. Large communities congregated in Babylon, Shushan and Damascus. There were also communities in Egypt.”
“So much for the Diaspora, Peter’le. How about Jehud?”
“Jerusalem was a major centre, although we know that the town was sparsely populated. The Temple [Mikdash] was the centre of Judaism. Its position was entrenched even prior to the arrival there of Ezra and Nehemiah.”
“Was Ruth composed there?”
“I think so, Maestro. To start with this is the scholarly consensus. In addition, there is a clear indication in the book.”
“Please spell it out. But avoid technicalities. These are superfluous here.”
“The plot takes place in Beth Lehem, in Jehud. In contrast, Job and Jonah have no close nexus with it. Job lived in Utz – in Transjordan – and Jonah was ordered to proceed to Nineveh (in Assyria). His main, unfortunate, experience took place in a ship sailing away from Jaffa. In both books, the outlook is broader than in Ruth. The theodicy issue – discussed in Job – is not confined to Jews. And Jonah tells us that God is universal, and that his mercy is shown even when the repenting nations is gentile. Ruth deals solely with issues concerning Judaism.”
“How about the style, Peter’le? But, please, refer to it succinctly.”
“I am not a philologist, Maestro. Still, I noticed that Aramaisms are less numerous in Ruth than in the other two books. This indicates that the author’s Hebrew vocabulary was broad. He did not have to borrow words from foreign tongues. And we do know that the Temple’s scribes and priests in Jerusalem had an excellent command of Hebrew.”
“Very well. So, we conclude that Ruth was composed in Jehud, most likely in Jerusalem. What can you tell me about its author?”
“Biblical books do not disclose the author’s identity. But I have a hunch – a mere guess.”
“Out with it, my friend. If you do not assert that a guess forms a reliable conclusion, you have every right to voice it.”
“Both Ezra [2:62] and Nehemiah [7:64] refer to defiled priests. These were defrocked because they were unable to verify their pure origin. Such individuals were, effectively, deprived of their living, which was based on tithes and a portion of certain offerings. I suspect that one of these individuals composed Ruth.”
“Our conclusion, then, is that Ruth was composed in Jehud – in all probability in Jerusalem – in the 5th century BCE. We cannot be certain about its author’s identity, but your hunch is that he was a defrocked priest. Let us now turn to the normative principles discussed in the book.”
“I agree,” I replied. “There are quite a few of them, and it is best to cover each on its own. To my mind, they are (i) land redemption, (ii) levirate marriages, and (iii) Ḥaliza, viz. shoe removal. We then have to consider the role of ḥésed (viz. generosity or grace) and the purity of race issue.”