Introduction[ xxv ]rabbis’ lack of enthusiasm for levirate can thus be understood, in part,
by their views of marriage and family, which were similar to those of
their Greek and roman neighbors. Levirate was not employed in these
cultures, and the primary purpose of reproduction was the establish-
ment of a household, rendering the engendering of a child for a man
after his death unnecessary. Satlow notes that the Babylonian milieu
was more supportive of levirate and polygyny, allowing the Babylonian
rabbis to promote, or at least condone, levirate.^17
Satlow’s treatment of levirate supports his thesis about the connec-
tions between Jewish views of marriage and those of the Greco-roman
world and Babylonia. while I do not dispute his primary arguments,
I think that in labeling levirate as an irregular union, Satlow misses a
key aspect of the rabbis’ transformation of levirate. Both Palestinian
and Babylonian sources, whether discouraging levirate or promoting
it, describe levirate as a union that, once consummated, is reg ular. The
Tosefta recommends that a levirate union be preceded by a declaration
of intent that parallels formal betrothal. The mishnah states that after
a man marries his brother’s widow, “she is like his wife in every way,”
insisting that a levirate union operates like a “regular” marriage. The
children of the union are recognized as the children of the woman’s
new husband rather than of the deceased, thus contravening the bib-
lical view. In these ways, the rabbis “regularize” levirate; the union is
irregular only in its inception.
Satlow claims that Palestinian and Babylonian rabbinic attitudes to-
ward levirate can be understood through the lens of Greco-roman and
Sasanian culture. my work demonstrates that while rabbinic preference
for levirate or halitza can better be understood against the backdrop of
these cultures, the rabbis’ decision to regularize levirate can best be
appreciated in the context of their views of the family and their focus
on the nuclear family. The elements of levirate the rabbis emphasize
reflect their concern for individual men and women, whose marriage
choices the rabbis defend against the claims of the deceased and the
extended family, and their construct of paternity, which privileges the
rights of the living husband and father over those of his dead brother.
The rabbinic law of levirate, therefore, represents not only the influence
of the broader culture on Jews but the employment of rabbinic herme-