[This post is the beginning of a longer work that I plan to do. This post is just a draft with errors, inconsistencies and missing elements. I plan to address these, but I wanted to just get this out. It has been in gestation way to long.]
When I was a child, I went to school and I learned that that
there were two kinds of narratives—history and literature. History was true,
but it was sterile and boring. The purpose of a history book was to present the
just the facts, and nothing but the facts, in chronological order. History was
a sequence of names and dates and places with a little bit of action.
Literature on the other hand was far more interesting and entertaining, but in
its narrative form—novels and short stories—literature was fiction. For the
most part, it was not true. As I got older, I learned that literature was not
just entertaining, but it was also art. Good authors use a variety of literary
devices to paint pictures on the canvas of the page.
Admittedly, I had no teacher who explicitly taught her class
that there are two kinds of narratives, but it was ingrained in the culture of
education. So I grew up with this dichotomy in my mind that is also
pervasive in Western civilization—truth is artless and art deviates from the
truth. Art and truth do not go together. There is a genre in Western literature
known as historical fiction, where writers of literature have taken a
hand at writing books presenting history in a way that is interesting and
entertaining to their readers using all their literary skills to produce a work
of literary art. But the writers are expected to use their artistic license to
embellish, adjust, interpret, or otherwise deviate from the recorded historical
truth to for the sake of their art. Nobody expects these works to be a reliable
source of information.
As a young man, when I started reading the Old Testament, I
encountered very similar stories appearing in multiple places. I interpreted
these occurrences from my Western point of view as the same story being retold
in different places with different facts, flaws in the text that gave evidence
that the stories were probably not historically accurate. It wasn’t until much
later that I learned that the Hebrew people were not bound by the dichotomy
that art and truth do not go together, and that their historical narratives
were rather full of artistic literary devices, and what I had initially
interpreted to be flaws was actually the application of literary devices.
One class of literary devices that is well known to be a
major feature of Hebrew literature is parallelism, where the author
deliberately makes two or more elements of the text parallel in one way or
another, whether it be syntactically, lexically, phonologically, or
semantically, or some combination thereof. Two well-known types of parallelism
in Hebrew literature are the poetic couplet and the palindrome
or chiasmus. Another type of parallelism that occurs in the book
of Ruth is what I call plot parallelism. When employing plot
parallelism, the author composes the story line of two pericopes in a way that
maximizes their similarity. The author first develops a single skeletal plot or
storyline template and develops the storylines of each pericope around that one
template. The two pericopes can be developed very differently, but they each
have the same template.
One example of a Hebrew historical narrative that is written
as literature is the book of Ruth, which uses a rich variety of literary
devices including various kinds of parallelism, one of those being plot
parallelism. It is a story about a family from the town of Bethlehem[1]. In the first paragraph we learn that
there is a famine in the land and the family leaves Bethlehem and goes to Moab
where the husband and two sons die, leaving the wife Naomi alone with her
childless daughters-in-law. So in the first paragraph, Naomi loses both food
and family. The rest of the story is about the restoration of food and family
to Naomi and her daughter-in-law Ruth.
Chapters two[2]
and three of Ruth contain an excellent example of plot parallelism. Each
chapter represents a pericope or mini-story, and each chapter has three parts
or scenes. In both chapters, the first part is an introduction in which Naomi
and Ruth plan what Ruth is to do, the second part is the story of Ruth
implementing the plan, and the third part is a summary in which Ruth reports to
Naomi about happened (see Table 1). Within the middle part of each chapter,
there are three sections: a) Boaz meets Ruth, b) Boaz and Ruth’s dialogue, and
c) Boaz provides for Ruth. The breakdown is shown in the following table.
Chapter 2
|
Chapter 3
|
Storyline Template
|
1.22b – 2.2
|
3. 1-5
|
Naomi and Ruth plan what Ruth is to do.
|
2.3-17
|
3.6-15a
|
Ruth implements the plan
|
2.3-7
|
3.6-9
|
a. Boaz
encounters Ruth
|
2.8-13
|
3.10-13
|
b. Boaz and
Ruth dialog
|
2.14-17
|
3.14-15a
|
c. Boaz
provides for Ruth
|
2.18-23
|
3.16-18
|
Ruth reports to Naomi
|
The parallelism does not stop there. Within each pair of
corresponding pericopes, there are additional points of parallelism. In the
first pericope in both chapters it is mentioned that Naomi has a kinsman named
Boaz (see Table 2). A suggestion is made that Ruth go to where he works. In
chapter two Ruth makes the suggestion, and Naomi agrees, and in chapter three
Naomi makes the suggestion and Ruth agrees. In chapter two the place of work is
Boaz’s field where the barley is being harvested, and in chapter three the
place is Boaz’s threshing floor where the barley is winnowed. In chapter two
Ruth merely hopes to find favor in a land owner’s sight and be permitted to
glean. In chapter three, Naomi wants Ruth to do things deliberately to gain
Boaz’s favor, by getting all dressed up and perfumed, and going to lie at his
feet. In chapter two, the plan is to solve the problem of their lack of bread
(food), while in the third chapter, the plan is to
solve the problem of their lack of house (family).
Before proceeding any further, I would like to introduce
some terminology that I will be using throughout my writing.
Pericope – a part of a larger written work that is
structured as a standalone story, and can be analyzed
and studied as a standalone story. Chapters two and three of Ruth are each
pericopes.
Template – plot skeleton that is shared by two or
more pericopes. A template is a sequence of story elements that occur in
each pericope. There is a single template that chapters
two and three are built on. Three of the elements in this template are 1) Naomi
and Ruth plan what Ruth is to do, 2) Ruth implements the plan, and 3) Ruth
reports to Naomi concerning the success of the plan.
Correspondence pair – the story
elements in each of the pericopes that correspond to an element in the
template. For example, an element in the template for chapters two and
three is “Naomi’s kinsman Boaz.” The pair of story elements that correspond to
this template element are “Naomi had a kinsman of her husband…whose name was
Boaz” in chapter two, and “Boaz our kinsman” in chapter three.
Points of similarity – how the
correspondence pairs are similar. In order for a correspondence pair to
be associated with an element in a template, they must be similar in some way.
A correspondence pair frequently has multiple points of similarity. For the
template element Naomi’s kinsman Boaz (2.1, 3.1), there are three points of
similarity: 1) the word kinsman, 2) the word Boaz, and 3) the
fact that the kinsman is related to Naomi. The first two points of similarity
are very explicit and easy to see, but the third one is less explicit. In
chapter two the text says, “Naomi had a kinsman”, while in chapter three
the text says, “our kinsman”. In both elements the relationship is
stated, but different words and syntax are used.
The manner in which elements in a correspondence pair are
similar to each other varies quite a bit. Sometimes the points of similarity
are specific words such as kinsman and Boaz (2.1, 3.1), or a
phrase such as “went into the city” (2.18, 3.15). At other times a point
of similarity is a lot less explicit and may be based on references to the same
person, place, thing or activity, or even references to semantically similar
people, places, things, or activities. One example of this is references to
Ruth—“Moabite maiden” (2.6) and “Ruth your maidservant” (3.9), and another is
references to barley work—“barley harvest” (1.22) and “winnowing barley”
(3.1) A point of similarity may even be based on similar grammar such as
similar questions like “Whose maiden is this?” (2.5) and “Who are you?” (3.9).
Sometimes the point of similarity is simply an idea.
The reader may be skeptical that all these template elements
and points of similarity that I am identifying were consciously composed by the
author of Ruth to be deliberately parallel. I admit that I may be seeing a few
points of similarity that the author never intended to be parallel. There are
some that I personally find questionable, but I challenge the reader to patient
and consider the overall picture that I am presenting, and realize that
something is going on here that does not occur in Western literature. The plot
parallelism that occurs in the book of Ruth is only the tip of an iceberg that
extends throughout Hebrew historical narratives.
I need to clarify a significant point here. The Hebrew
narratives were written in the Hebrew language, and not in English. The
parallelism was composed in Hebrew. For English readers, this parallelism can
best be observed in a highly literal English translation, like the RSV, that
preserves much of the underlying Hebrew structures. The parallelism may be more
difficult to identify or be missing altogether in a more dynamic translation
like the TEV or paraphrase like the Message.
Table
2 - Introduction
Chapter 2
|
Chapter 3
|
Storyline Template
|
Naomi had a kinsman of her husband's … whose name was Boaz.
(2.1)
|
is not Boaz our kinsman (3.1)
|
Naomi’s kinsman Boaz
|
Ruth the Moabitess said to Naomi, “Let me
go to the field, and glean among the ears of grain …” (1.2)
|
Then Naomi her mother-in-law said to her, “My daughter, should
I not seek a home for you, that it may be well with you?...”
(3.1)
|
A plan for Ruth is suggested.
|
barley harvest … go to the field and glean (1.22b, 2.2)
|
winnowing barley … go to the threshing floor (3.1,2)
|
The setting and destination is where barley work is occurring
|
In section a) of the middle part
Table 3 – a) Boaz enounters Ruth
Chapter 2
|
Chapter 3
|
Storyline Template
|
4 Boaz came
|
7 Boaz … went to lie down at the end of the heap of grain.
|
Boaz came to where Ruth was
|
5 Then Boaz said … “Whose maiden is this?”
|
9 He said, “Who are you?”
|
Boaz asks Ruth identity
|
6 And the servant … answered, “It is the Moabite maiden, who came
back with Naomi
|
And she answered, “I am Ruth, your maidservant;
|
Ruth is identified
|
She said, ‘Pray, let me glean and gather among the sheaves after the
reapers.’ 2.7
|
… spread your skirt over your maidservant,
for you are next of kin.
|
Ruth’s request made to Boaz
|
I have labeled section b) of the middle pericope, “Boaz and
Ruth Dialog,” even though in chapter 3, Boaz does all the talking. There are
several points of similarity between the two sections that are not quite so
obvious at first glance, mainly because the points of similarity do not occur
in the same order in both chapters.
Table 4 – b) Boaz and Ruth
dialog
Chapter 2
|
Chapter 3
|
Storyline Template
|
my daughter (2.8)
|
my daughter (3.10,11)
|
Boaz addressed Ruth as “my daughter”
|
do not go to glean in another field or leave this one (2.8)
|
Lie down until morning (3.13)
|
Boaz tells Ruth to stay with him
|
Have I not charged the young men not to molest you? (2.9)
|
you have not gone after young men, whether
poor or rich. (3.10)
|
no interaction between Ruth and young men
|
All that you have done for your mother-in-law since the death of your
husband has been fully told me (2.11)
|
for all my fellow townsmen know that you are a woman of worth (3.11)
|
Boaz tells Ruth the good things about
her he has heard from others.
|
The Lord recompense you for what you have done, and a full reward be
given you by the Lord, the God of Israel (2.12)
|
May you be blessed by the Lord (3.10)
|
Boaz blesses Ruth
|
You are most gracious to me, my Lord, for you have comforted me and
spoken kindly to your maidservant (2.13)
|
you have made this last kindness greater than the first (3.10)
|
kindness appreciated
|
In section c) …
Table 5 - c) Boaz provides for Ruth
Chapter 2
|
Chapter 3
|
Storyline Template
|
she sat (2.14)
|
she stayed (3.14)
|
Ruth relaxes in Boaz’s presence
|
she arose (2.15)
|
she arose (3.14)
|
she arose
|
Come here, and eat some bread, and dip your morsel in the wine.
(2.14)
|
Bring the mantle you are wearing and hold it out. (3.15)
|
Boaz gives a command to Ruth to come so he can give her food
|
Let her glean even among the sheaves, and do not reproach her (2.15)
|
Let it not be known that the woman came to the threshing floor.
(3.14)
|
Boaz gives a command concerning Ruth, guarding her reputation.
|
an ephah of barley (2.17)
|
six measures of barley (3.15)
|
amount of barley Ruth takes home
|
she … went into the city (2.18)
|
she[3] went into the city (3.15)
|
she went into the city
|
In the final part, Ruth reports to her mother-in-law Naomi.
Table 6 - Ruth Reports to
Naomi
Chapter 2
|
Chapter 3
|
Storyline Template
|
her mother-in-law said to her, “Where did
you glean today? And where have you worked? (2.19.)
|
… her mother-in-law, she said, “How did you
fare, my daughter?” (3.16.)
|
Her mother-in-law asked Ruth for a report
|
she showed her mother-in-law what she had
gleaned, and she also brought out and gave her what food she had left over
(2.18.)
|
These six measures of barley he gave to me (3.17)
|
Ruth showed/gave Naomi the barley she had acquired.
|
So she told her mother-in-law with whom she had worked, and said,
“The man's name with whom I worked today is Boaz.” (2.19)
|
she told her all that the man had done for her (3.16)
|
Ruth reported to her mother-in-law about the man
|
It is well, my daughter, that you go out with his maidens
(2.22)
|
Wait, my daughter, until you learn how the matter turns out (3.18)
|
Naomi told her “daughter” what to do
|
[1] Bethlehem
literally means House (Beth) of Bread (Lehem). Bread
in Hebrew culture can be used to refer to food in general. House in
Hebrew culture is frequently used to refer to one’s family, and more
specifically to one’s male descendants. For a woman, her house is composed of
her husband, her sons, and their male descendants. The author uses the name
Bethlehem as part of his presentation of the theme of the book which is loss
and restoration of house and bread.
[2]
For the purposes of this study, I am considering the last phrase of chapter 1,
“at the beginning of barley harvest,” to be part of chapter 2. Syntactically,
the phrase is part of chapter 1, but topically it is part of chapter 2
because it introduces the setting of chapter 2, the barley harvest.
[3]
There is a textual variant here. The MT says “he”, but many other ancient
manuscripts say “she”. Either way, the parallelism is still apparent.
