Shoe, Shoe-Latchet
shoo, shoolach-et (, naal, literally, that which is fastened, with denominative verb , naal, to provide with shoes (2Ch 28:15; Eze 16:10); , hupodema (Sirach 46:19; Mat 3:11, etc.), from the verb , hupodeo (Mar 6:9; Eph 6:15), to bind under, , sandalion, sandal (Judith 10:4; 16:9; Mar 6:9; Act 12:8); the King James Version, the Revised Version margin also have shoe for , minal, bar (so the Revised Version (British and American) text) in Deu 33:25; the latchet is either , serokh, twisted thing (Gen 14:23; Isa 5:27), or , himas, leather thong (Mar 1:7; Luk 3:16; Joh 1:27)): The naal was a simple piece of leather tied on the foot with the serokh, so easy of construction that its low cost was proverbial (Amo 2:6; Amo 8:6; Sirach 46:19; compare Gen 14:23), and to be without it was a sign of extreme poverty (2Ch 28:15; Isa 20:2). Women, however, might have ornamental sandals (Son 7:1; Judith 16:9), and Ezekiel names sealskin (Eze 16:10) as a particularly luxurious material, but the omission of sandals from the list of Isa 3:18-23 shows that they were not commonly made articles of great expense. The hupodema was likewise properly a sandal, but the word was also used to denote a shoe that covered the foot. The contrast between hupodema in Mat 10:10 and sandalion in Mar 6:9 seems to show that this meaning is not unknown in the New Testament, the shoe being regarded as an article of luxury (compare Luk 15:22). But in Mat 3:11 and parallel’s, only the sandal can be meant.
Sandals were not worn indoors, so that putting them on was a sign of readiness for activity (Exo 12:11; Act 12:8; Eph 6:15), the more wealthy having them brought (Mat 3:11) and fastened (Mar 1:7 and parallel’s) by slaves. When one entered a house they were removed; all the more, naturally, on entering a sanctuary (Exo 3:5; Jos 5:15; Act 7:33). Mourners, however, did not wear them even out of doors, as a sign of grief (Eze 24:17, Eze 24:23), perhaps for the same reason that other duties of the toilet were neglected (2Sa 12:20, etc.). A single long journey wore out a pair of sandals (Jos 9:5, Jos 9:13), and the preservation of the latchet of their shoes from being broken (Isa 5:27) would require almost miraculous help.
Rth 4:7 f states as a custom in former times in Israel, that when any bargain was closed a man drew off his shoe, and gave it to his neighbor. This was of course simply a special form of earnest-money, used in all transactions. In Deu 25:9 f the custom appears in a different light. If a man refused to perform his duty to his deceased brother’s wife, the elders of the city were to remove his shoe and disgrace him publicly, And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe loosed. The removal of the shoe is apparently connected with the rite in Rth 4:7 as a renunciation of the man’s privilege. But the general custom seems to have become obsolete, for the removal of the shoe is now a reproach.
The meaning of Psa 60:8 parallel Psa 108:9, Upon (margin unto) Edom will I cast my shoe, is uncertain. , al, may mean either upon or unto. If the former, some (otherwise unsubstantiated) custom of asserting ownership of land may be meant. If the latter, the meaning is Edom I will treat as a slave, to whom the shoes are cast on entering a house.