The book of Genesis chapter 38 records another example of levirate marriage. Tamar was married to Him, a son of Judah. He died, leaving Tamar without heirs (Genesis 38:6–7). Judah, the father-in-law, promised Tamar that she would receive the brother of the deceased according to the custom of levirate marriage (verse 8). But he is a brother: “Onan knew the child would not be; Thus, whenever he slept with his brother`s wife, he spread his seed on the ground so as not to give his brother offspring” (verse 9). Onan`s selfish actions displeased the Lord and He punished Him (verse 10). Among the Mambila of northern Cameroon, in terms of “inheritance of wives: the two levrates are practiced throughout the tribe”. [17] Given the common wording and concerns, it appears that Deuteronomy 21:15-17 contains a clause that would have appeared in Israelite marriage or adoption contracts. The pungent case of the unloved woman would have turned into a creative way to teach aspiring writers contractual terminology. In turn, its inclusion in the Collection of Deuteronomic Laws would have transformed it from a colorful pedagogical case for scribes into a standard required of the Israelites. This process, I would say, also explains the development of the levirate law. Levirate was practiced by societies with a strong clan structure, where exogamous marriages – warlike ties outside the clan – were prohibited.
It is best known from the stories of the Hebrew Bible, where it was practiced among the early Israelites. In Jewish tradition, the most famous marriages took place in the family of Judah, whose daughter-in-law Tamar eventually married Judah herself after two previous marriages led to the deaths of her husbands. The story of Ruth and Boaz describes a derived form of marriage levirate involving relatives more distant than brothers. Later and present Jewish tradition allows the parties to decide not to levirate him through a process known as halizah. Marriage to the widow of a brother was normally forbidden among the Jews (Leviticus 18:16; 10:21), except in the case of Yibbum. The advantage for the brother who agreed to marry his sister-in-law was that he would be the sole benefactor of his brother`s estate instead of sharing it with the family. The disadvantage would be that if the union of the levirate resulted in male offspring, the child would bear the name of the deceased brother and would be considered his offspring. The custom of levirate marriage was revived when economic conditions were unstable in the family of the deceased. Khazanov cites [Abramzon, 1968, pp. 289-290] that the levirate was resurrected in Central Asia during World War II.
In these circumstances, the adult sons and brothers of the deceased considered themselves responsible for caring for his loved ones. One of them would marry the widow and adopt her children, if there were any. [8] [24] Editor`s note: For further discussion of the connection between these stories and the levirate passage, see Pamela Barmash, “Tamar`s Extraordinary Risk: A Narrative – not a Law – of Yibbul,” TheTorah (2016); ibid., “Achieving Justice Through Narrative,” TheTorah (2016). The story of Judah and Tamar served to emphasize the importance of levirate marriage when the Israelites were still a family kinship. However, later a provision was made for the parties to legally leave Yibbum. In such cases, a ceremony known as halizah would be celebrated, implying a symbolic act of renunciation of their right to contract that marriage. Jewish law (halakha) has seen a gradual decline of yibbum in favor of halizah, to the point where yibbuum is strongly discouraged in most contemporary Jewish communities. [7] The oldest biblical legal text, what scholars call the Collection of the Covenant, is found in the Exodus and has many similarities in form and content with the ancient law collections of the Near East and in particular the laws of Hammurabi. For a more in-depth discussion of parallels with Hammurabi`s laws, see David Wright, Inventing God`s Law: How the Covenant Code of the Bible Used and Revised the Laws of Hammurabi (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009); ibid., “How the Exodus Revised the Laws of Hammurabi,” TheTorah (2019).
Wright asserts that the laws of Hammurabi were known to the scribes who drafted the Code of the Covenant. But not everyone agrees. See William Morrow, “Legal Interactions: The Mišpāṭîm and the Laws of Hammurabi,” OB 70.3-4 (2013): 309–31 and Bruce Wells, “The Covenant Code and Near Eastern Legal Traditions: A Response to David P. Wright,” Maarav 13.1 (2006): 85–118. This detail is rather unusual in that the old laws of the Middle East generally do not regulate what happens if the person does not want to comply. Nor do they tend to contain direct speech. If the man repeats his refusal before the elders, they do not force him to comply[4] or impose a standard penalty (flogging or fine). Instead, the offended woman herself performs an elaborate ritual of shame: levirate marriage is a type of marriage in which the brother of a deceased man is forced to marry his brother`s widow.
The term levirate is derived from the Latin word levir, meaning “husband`s brother”. [1] The custom of levirate survived in Hun society in the Northeastern Caucasus until the 7th century AD. Armenian historian Movses Kalankatuatsi notes that the Savirs, one of the Hunnic tribes in the region, were generally monogamous, but sometimes a married man took his brother`s widow as a polygynous wife. Ludmila Gmyrya, a historian from Dagestan, argues that the Levirate survived in “ethnographic modernity” (out of context, probably in the 1950s). Kalankatuatsi describes the form of levirate practiced by the Huns. Since women have a high social status, the widow has the choice to remarry or not. Her new husband could be a brother or son (of another woman) of her first husband, so she could end up marrying her brother-in-law or son-in-law; The age difference didn`t matter. [9] Levirate, in its most positive form, can serve as protection for the widow and her children, ensuring that they have a male provider and protector. Livirate marriage can be positive in a society where women have to rely on men to care for them, especially in societies where women are under the authority of, dependent on, dependent on, or considered the property of their husbands, and to ensure the survival of the clan. The practice of levirate marriage is strongly associated with patriarchal societies.
The practice was in antiquity (e.g., in the ancient Middle East) and is still the case today in some parts of the world. Having children allows for the inheritance of land that offers security and status. In the New Testament, Jesus gave an example by using levirate marriage to teach the Sadducees the certainty of the resurrection. The Sadducees tried to stumble upon Jesus and asked: “Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and raise his offspring for him. Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died, and as he had no children, he left his wife to his brother.