THE LEVIRATE AND GOEL

INSTITUTIONS IN THE

OLD TESTAMENT

With Special Attention to

the Book of Ruth

DONALD A. LEGGETT

1974

MACK PUBLISHING COMPANY

Cherry Hill, New Jersey

Digitized with permission by Ted Hildebrandt, GordonCollege, 2006.

TO LINDA

hvhy rxry twx

Proverbs 31:30b

Acknowledgments

IT is with deep gratitude that I take this opportunity to

publicly acknowledge many who have played a key role

in the completion of my work.

It was through training received at Reformed Episcopal

Seminary, Philadelphia, and Westminster Seminary, Phila-

delphia, that I was first introduced to the Free University. A

scholarship received from the University was an impetus to-

ward taking the step of coming to Europe and tackling an

unfamiliar language. I am grateful for the happy years which

I was able to spend in Amsterdam and Dordrecht, from

1960-1964, while pursuing my studies. I would like to single

out Rev. and Mrs. Jacob Vos, fellow-students at the Free

University in those early years, who were tremendously help-

ful to my wife and me and who remain to this day our closest

friends. In Dordrecht, mention should be made of the De

Leng family who extended many kindnesses to us. Drs. Van-

noy and his family graciously allowed me to share their home

in the closing phases of my work.

Research for my thesis was carried on in numerous librar-

ies. Special mention should be made of the libraries of the

Free University and MunicipalUniversity of Amsterdam,

Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh

Theological Seminary, and McMasterUniversity, Hamilton,

Ontario. My sabbatical year was spent in Belfast, N. Ireland,

and I am grateful to Queen's University, Belfast, for the gen-

erous use of their facilities. It was my pleasure to make two

extended visits to the Tyndale House, Cambridge, England,

and to be able to take advantage of their research facilities.

Lastly, I would not wish to omit mention of the extensive

help which I have received from the library personnel at the

OntarioBibleCollege.

v
vi Acknowledgments

This thesis would never have been completed without the

generous grant of a sabbatical year by OntarioBibleCollege.

I am also grateful for the stimulation received in my part-

time involvement at the IrishBaptistCollege during that

year. How can I ever thank those students of mine and their

wives who gave me substantial support during that year and

who have been a constant encouragement to me! To the

Postma, Males, Pointner, Barber, Smith, Stoute, McPhee,

Henkelman, and Taylor families, I am deeply grateful. Simi-

larly, to Dr. and Mrs. C. Wellum and Dr. and Mrs. E. Higbee,

and the congregation of GraceBaptistChurch, Carlisle, Penn-

sylvania, for their kind expressions of Christian love.

To Professor Dr. N. H. Ridderbos, I wish to express my

thanks for his wise counsel and competent criticism of my

work. For the considerable time which he has given in its

supervision and for the high standard of biblical scholarship

which he has exemplified, I remain in his debt.

Finally, I wish to thank my wife and children for their

part in my thesis. Through the loving encouragement of my

wife, I was enabled to persevere in my work. She willingly

assumed the added responsibilities of typing and proofread-

ing to her already busy life. The children too have known

what it is to sacrifice vacation time and other things in the

interest of "the thesis." As a family we are thankful to God,

who has enabled us to finish this work. To Him be glory

forever.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSv

INTRODUCTION1

Part One

THE LEVIRATE AND GOEL INSTITUTIONS IN THE OLD

TESTAMENT (EXCLUSIVE OF THE BOOK OF RUTH)

1. THE LEVIRATE IN THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST 9

Babylonia10

Assyria12

Hittites 21

Nuzi 24

Ugarit25

2. THE LEVIRATE IN ISRAEL29

The Levirate Incident, Gen. 38 29

The Levirate Law, Deut. 25:5-10 49

The Persons Involved, Deut. 25:5 42

The Purpose of the Levirate, Deut. 25:648

The Ceremony of Refusal, Deut. 25:7-10 55

3. THE GOEL IN THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST 63

Parallels to the Goel-Redemption of Property 63

Parallels to the Goel-Redemption of Person 68

Parallels to the God-Redemption of Blood 71

4. THE GOEL IN ISRAEL83

Goel-Redemption of Property, Lev. 25:23-28 83

Goel-Redemption of Person, Lev. 25:47-55 98

God-Redemption of Blood, Num. 35; Deut.19:

1-13; Josh. 20:1-9 107

Restitution to the Goel, Num. 5:8 138

vii

viii Contents

Part Two

THE LEVIRATE AND GOEL INSTITUTIONS IN

THE BOOK OF RUTH

5. THE DATE AND PURPOSE OF THE BOOK OF

RUTH 143

The Date of the Book of Ruth 143

Arguments for a Pre-Exilic Date 143

Arguments for a Post-Exilic Date 146

Argument from Purpose 147

Argument from the Place of the Book in

the Canon 152

Argument from Language 154

Argument from the Social and Legal

Customs 157

The Purpose of the Book of Ruth 163

The Interesting-Story Purpose 164

The Exemplary Purpose 165

The Theological Purpose 166

The Davidic-Ancestry Purpose 168

The Legal Purpose 170

6. NAOMI AND THE LEVIRATE 173

7. NAOMI AND THE GOEL 181

The Discovery of a Goel, Ruth 2:20 181

The Approach to Boaz, Ruth 3:1-9 188

Preparations for the Visit, Ruth 3:1-4 188

The Appeal of Ruth, Ruth 3:7-9 192

The Response of Boaz, Ruth 3:10-15 201

EXCURSUS: THE INITIATIVE OF NAOMI

8. BOAZ AND THE GOEL

The Administration of Law at the Gate, Ruth

4:1, 2209

The Sale of the Property, Ruth 4:3 211

The Double Responsibility, Ruth 4:5, 10 222

The Refusal of the Goel and the Ceremony of

the Shoe, Ruth 4:6-8 249

Contents ix

9. OBED 255

Naomi's Goel, Ruth 4:14 255

Naomi's Son, Ruth 4:16, 17 260

Boaz' Son, Ruth 4:21 265

Part Three

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

10. SUMMARIZING CONSIDERATIONS ON THE

LEVIRATE INSTITUTION IN ISRAEL271

Representative Views 271

Recapitulation and Conclusion 287

11. SUMMARIZING CONSIDERATIONS ON THE

GOEL INSTITUTION IN ISRAEL AND ON THE

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BOOK OF RUTH 292

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ABBREVIATIONS 299

BIBLIOGRAPHY303

Introduction

IN recent years attention from different quarters has been

devoted to the subject of the goel.1 in Israel. Several

importantpublications can be named. In 1940 Stamm

published his work Erlösen und Vergeben im Alten Testa-

ment, which established that the verb lxg was a term taken

from the sphere of family law, as over againsthdp which

belonged to the domain of commercial law.2 In 1947 the

stimulating work of Daube, Studies in Biblical Law, was pub-

lished, in which considerable attention was devoted to the

study of the goel concept and to the verb lxg. Daube made

additional contributions to these topics in his later writings;

in particular in his 1956 work, The New Testament and Rab-

binic Judaism, and in the work published in 1963, The Exo-

dus Pattern in the Bible. He presented very penetrating

studies of the goel and opened serious discussion on the sub-

ject of Yahweh as the Divine Goel. He suggested that the

specific functions of the human goel in Israel were applied in

some instances to Yahweh, although he acknowledged that

there were many general references to Yahweh as Goel where

specific nuances could not be inferred. By studying the spe-

cific functions of the goel, Daubecameto the conclusion

that "lxg primarily suggests the return of men or things into

their own legitimate place. .. The word simply denotes the

1. Throughout the course of this study the active participle of the verb lxg,

"redeem," will be transliterated simply with the word goel and the noun hlxg,

"redemption" with the word geullah.

2. J. J. Stamm (p. 45) concludes: "hdp ist ein Terminus des Handelsrechtes,

welcher einfach den Loskauf durch Stellung eines Gegenwertes ausdrückt.lxg ist

ein familienrechtlicher Begriff, der stets eine vor dem einzelnen Rechtsgeschäft

zwischen dem Loskaufenden und dem Losgekauften bestehende, durch die Zuge-

hörigkeit zu einer Sippe gegebene, Beziehung voraussetzt." Stamm dealt with

Jahweh as Goel in pp. 31-44 and made one passing remark on the goel in Ruth

(cf. p. 28).

1
2 Introduction

rightful getting back of a person or object that had once

belonged to one or one's family but had been lost."3 Daube

proposed therefore that lxg means "to recover."

Jepsen concurred in the main with Daube in his article

written in 1957. He wrote: "Go'el war der, der Besitz,

Freiheit und Leben der Sippe und ihrer Glieder wiederherste

len sollte. . . . Ga'al bedeutet danach: das, was eine Sippe an

Leben, Freiheit und Besitz verloren hat, wiederherstellen.. . .

Die Mittel der Wiederherstellung, der ge'ullah, sind verschie-

den: Blutrache, Heirat, Rückkauf . . . immer aber ist das eine

Ziel, die verlorene Lebenskraft der Sippe wiederzugewinnen."4

An opinion in general agreement with that of both Daube

and Jepsen was Snaith's, who in 1961 argued that "primarily

the root [lxg] is used with reference to the enforcement, the

restoration of a right or claim that has lapsed. . . . Generally,

whenever person or property is freed by purchase, the verb is

G'L if it is reverting to the original owner.. .. The idea of

reversion is essential to the root.”5 The goel is the agent

involved in securing this reversion to the original owner.

An article evoking wide interest on this subject was that

of Johnson, who in 1953 advanced the idea that the basic

idea underlying the varying activities of the goel was that of

protection. "When a kinsman is slain or dies childless, or

when he is forced to sell himself into servitude or to part

with his property, there is a breach of continuity, and the

normal life of both individual and society is upset. Disorder

has been introduced into the life of each, and in the case of

the corporate unit as in that of the ordinary individual, any

weakness or disorder, whether brought about by actual physi-

cal death or not, involves a certain loss of vitality and it is the

function of the lxeGo to "protect" the life or vitality of both

the individual and the kin-group and thus preserve their

3. D. Daube, Studies in Biblical Law, 1947, pp. 3940.

4. A. Jepsen, "Die Begriffe des Erlösens im Alten Testament," Solange es

"Heute" heisst, Festgabe fur R. Hermann, 1957, p. 159.

5 N. H. Snaith, "The Hebrew Root G'L (1)," ALUOS, 3, 1961-62, pp. 60,

61.

Introduction 3

standing in society by keeping intact their essential unity or

integrity."6

Johnson pointed out that lxg in several places means

"defile," and argued that the verblxg, "to defile" may not

be divorced, as is commonly done, from lxg, "to redeem, to

lay claim to." In both cases the basic idea is that of "covering

up" an object. He seeks support for his opinion from Job

3:5, which he translates: "Let darkness, let utter blackness

cover it; Let a cloud settle upon it; Let the o'er-shadowings

of day bring terror to it." By a process of semantic polariza-

tion the original thought of covering was employed both in

the sense of protection from degradation as well as in the

sense of causing degradation or defilement.7 Johnson's opin-

ion on the root meaning of the verb did not receive wide-

spread support8 although the article as a whole was a worth-

while contribution to the growing material on the goel in

Israel.

Within more recent years, Holmgren,9 Baltzer,10 Stamm

(for the second time),11 Ringgren,12 Stuhlmueller,13 and

6., A. R. Johnson, "The Primary Meaning of lxg," SVT, 1, 1953, pp. 71, 72.

7. A. R. Johnson, op. cit., pp. 72-74. RSV translates the verb vhlxgy in Job

3:5 with "claim" as does the NV, "beslag op hem leggen"; KJV translates with

"stain" and the NEB with "sully."

8. Johnson's argument has been accepted for example, by A. Guillaume,

"Unity of the Book of Job," ALUOS, 4, 1962-63, pp. 26-46, and R. de Vaux,

Ancient Israel, 1961, p. 21, who comments that the root "means 'to buy back, or

to redeem,' ‘to lay claim to,’ but fundamentally its meaning is 'to protect.' " It is

disputed, in my opinion correctly, by J. Blau, "Uber Homonyme und angeblich

Homonyme Wurzeln," VT, 6, 1956, p. 243. Blau argues that the verbvhlxgy in

Job 3:5 is parallel with the verb vhwrdy in Job 3:4 in an abc bca parallelism, in

which case the thought is, God need not claim the day, for the darkness shall

claim it for its own.wrd is used in a sense similar to lxg in Genesis 42:22 and

Psalm 9:13 (12) which supports Blau's argument. Cf. also K. Koch "Der Spruch,

‘Sein Blut bleibe auf seinern Haupt,' und die israelitische Auffassung vom vergos-

senen Blut," VT, 12, 1962, p. 410 n.l.

9. F. Holmgren, The Concept of Yahweh as Go'el in Second Isaiah, unpub-

lished Ph.D. dissertation, Union Theological Seminary, New York, 1963.

10. D. Baltzer, Ezechiel und Deuterojesaja (BZAW, 121), 1971, pp. 84-99.

11. J. J. Stamm, "lxg," THAT, 1, pp. 383-397.

12. H. Ringgren, "lxg," TWAT, 1, pp. 884-895.

13. C. Stuhlmueller, Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah, 1970, pp. 97-

131.

4 Introduction

Sklba14 have published materials relevant to the topic of the

goel in Israel. In these newer studies the question of a basic

root meaning for the verb has receded somewhat into the

background and more emphasis has been given to an exami-

nation of the usage of the terms.

It was my intention initially to seek to handle the topic

of the goel in Israel in its broadest sense, including the topic

of Yahweh as Divine God. It soon became apparent that such

a task was precluded by the sheer quantity of materials in-

volved.

It also turned out that in the literature cited above rela-

tively little was being said about the goel in the book of

Ruth. Yet of the forty-four usages of the substantive goel,

nine occur in Ruth; and of the fifty-one occurrences of the

verb lxg in the qal form, twelve are found in Ruth.15 In the

face of these statistics and the paucity of material to be

found in the general works cited above dealing with the goel

in Ruth, it seemed that a study which specialized in the role

of the goel in Ruth was needed. Further research into the

literature brought to light a considerable number of articles

and other small works which discuss the specialized questions

arising from the book of Ruth. These individual questions all

have a bearing on the basic problem of how the marriage of

Boaz as goel to Ruth is to be related to the levirate16 law of

Deuteronomy 25:5-10, which requires only the marriage of

"brothers dwelling together." It is necessary, therefore, as

well as, we trust, useful to devote considerable space to pre-

senting this literature and to sketching the views taken by

various authors.17 In addition, a thorough study of the levirate

14. R. Sklba, "The Redeemer of Israel," CBQ, 34, 1972, pp. 10-18.

15. Cf. G. Lisowsky, Konkordanz zum Hebräischen Alten Testament, pp.

299, 300 and J. J. Stamm, "lxg,"THAT, 1, p. 383.

16. The term "levirate" is derived from the Latinword levir meaning "a

husband's brother."

17. The commentary of W. Rudolph, Das Buch Ruth, Das Hohe Lied, Die

Klagelieder, KAT, 17, 1962, provides considerable literature as does especially the

article by H. H. Rowley, "The Marriage of Ruth," in The Servant of the Lord,

Introduction 5

institution in Israel is indispensable to the topic of the goel in

Ruth. Some authors write that the book of Ruth has essential-

ly nothing to do with levirate marriage,18 some find it neces-

sary to coin the special term "ge'ullah marriage"19 to define

the marriage of Boaz and Ruth, and others are convinced that

this marriage is to be properly reckoned as a levirate mar-

riage.20 The strong majority of scholars seek to fit the data of

the book of Ruth concerning the levirate-type marriage into a

particular phase of the levirate development within Israel. It

seems, therefore, that the book of Ruth is crucial to the

understanding of the levirate and goel institutions in Israel.

Tentatively, two conclusions affecting methodology were

reached. In the first place, the commonly accepted methodol-

ogy of tracing the historical development of the levirate by

dating Ruth either before or after Deuteronomy was con-

cluded to be faulty. In the second place, it was decided that

the narrative sections of the Old Testament which tell of a

levitate situation (Gen. 38; Ruth) should be given as serious

consideration and weight in the study of the levirate

tion as the levirate law of Deuteronomy 25.

In addition to studying the levirate institution as the

background for the goel activity in Ruth it was deemed

imperative to examine the sections of the Old Testament law

where the duties of the goel are prescribed, to see if any

correlation might exist between these duties and the levirate

type-marriage undertaken by the goel, which was not pre-

scribed in the Old Testament laws.

In the examination of the goel and levirate institutions in

Israel a study of possible parallels to these institutions in the

ancient Near East was felt to be of interest and importance.

19652, but many significant articles appeared in more recent times. See chapter 1

nn. 2, 4.

18. Cf. for instance, K. Dronkert, Het Huwelijk in het Oude Testament,

1957, pp. 68, 69.

19. L. Epstein, Marriage Laws in the Bible and the Talmud, 1942, pp. 86,

140.

20. Cf. the definition of the levirate given by J. Mittelmann in chap. 2, n. 1.

6 Introduction

Finally, because the book of Ruth occupies the central part

of this study, it is necessary to give special attention to the

question of the date (in spite of the first of the above-named

conclusions affecting methodology) and the purpose of the

book of Ruth.

Part One discusses the levirate and goel institutions in the

Old Testament (excluding Ruth) with their Near Eastern

counterparts. Part Two, after dealing with the date and the

purpose of the book of Ruth, focuses the reader's attention

upon the light this book sheds on these important institu-

tions within Israel. Chapter 6 discusses Naomi's reference to

the levirate in Ruth 1:11-13. Chapter 7 is a study of the data

in Ruth 3 which centers on Ruth's night-time encounter with

Boaz. An excursus tackles the question, Why did Naomi take

the initiative and send the widow, Ruth, to Boaz instructing

her to request marriage from him on the basis of his being a

goel? Chapter 8 directs attention to Ruth 4: 1-8, the account

of the completion of Ruth's request by Boaz in hismeeting

with the nearer kinsman and the subsequent shoe transaction

ceremony. Chapter 9 centers on Obed, who is called Naomi's

goel in Ruth 4:14, Naomi's son in Ruth 4:16, 17 and Boaz'

son in Ruth 4:21. Part Three is given over to our conclusions

on the levirate and god institutions, which have been drawn

through integrating the results of the general study in Part

One with those of the specific study of the book of Ruth in