Levirate Marriage and the Family[ ]presence of the elders; the language of the ritual suggests that the widow
represents her deceased husband, the acknowledged victim of the levir’s
refusal. Does the widow also represent the community, whose expecta-
tions the levir has scorned? Does her assigned role in this very public
ceremony also acknowledge her pain and anger at being rejected? Why
does the woman remove her brother-in-law’s sandal?
According to Deuteronomy, the primary goal of levirate marriage
is to provide the deceased with an heir.^6 Deuteronomy focuses on the
needs of the deceased, but levirate marriage may have fulfilled other
needs within Israelite society. The brother-in-law would acquire a wife
without the need to pay a bride-price (mohar). A not her beneficia r y of le-
virate would be the widow. While women could inherit their husbands’
estates in many parts of the ancient Near East, this was not the case
in ancient Israel.^7 A widow with children could expect her children to
provide for her. If a man died childless, his estate reverted to his broth-
ers or other male kin;^8 in these circumstances, a widow would be left
with no source of support. Levirate marriage would ensure a childless
widow a home and the possibility of children.^9 One scholar argues that
it was the bearing of children that truly made a woman part of her hus-
band’s family.^10 The death of her husband left a childless widow in an
awkward position in her husband’s home; levirate marriage thus “reaf-
firms the young widow’s place in the home of her husband’s people.”^11
One can argue that levirate marriage benefits several parties: the de-
ceased, the brother-in-law, and the widow. Still, the words of the widow
in Deuteronomy underscore the primacy of the deceased’s need for
an heir.
Deuteronomy acknowledges that in some cases “a man does not
want to marry his brother’s widow.” The man himself need offer no
explanation; he may simply state, “I do not want to marry her.” Since
the purpose of levirate marriage is to provide an heir for the deceased,
the levir’s refusal is treated as a refusal to honor his obligations to his
brother. The widow appears before the elders complaining, “My hus-
band’s brother refuses to establish a name in Israel for his brother.” A
similar charge is made in the declaration that accompanies the act of
halitza: “Thus shall be done to the man who will not build up his broth-
er’s house!”
Why might a man refuse to marry his brother’s widow? One could