The widow: homeless and post-menopausal - term "widow" in the Bible

Biblical Theology Bulletin, Winter, 2002 by Carolyn S. Leeb

For a woman who was not the mother of a son, the future was indeed tenuous. If she was young and healthy (and perhaps attractive or wealthy), her productive and reproductive power might be transferred to another household. Her remaining childbearing potential could be put to use in another man's household, where she could live under his authority as wife or concubine. Such is clearly the case with Abigail, who is nowhere referred to as `almanah after the death of her husband Nabal. She simply transfers her residence, sexuality, and worldly goods to the household of David by becoming his wife (1 Sam 25:39-42). That Abigail was still able to bear children is made clear by the report that she bore to David his second son Chileab (2 Sam 3:3). In the case of Bathsheba, the transfer of her fertility to the king's household is accomplished prior to her husband's death, but she likewise is never called `almanah (2 Sam 11:2-26). Both Abigail and Bathsheba are able to find a new male patron and a new household since they each have assets for helping to "build a house."

In some cases, the family of the deceased husband might wish to retain the woman's reproductive potential within the household, since it represented as asset for which the family had negotiated and perhaps expended resources. The institution of the levirate marriage made it possible that her fertility could build up the "house" of her husband's family, while the birth of a child would provide the bond which would give her a secure place within the household. This is the circumstance envisioned by the Deuteronomic description of this legal requirement, which is said to be in effect "when brothers live together" (Deut 25:5-10).

Levirate marriage as portrayed in the book of Ruth differs in detail from the way it is envisioned by the law code. Nevertheless, Ruth is able, through creative deployment of her own "feminine assets," combined with an invocation of kinship obligations, to achieve a new patron and security within a new household for both herself and her mother-in-law. Because of her resourcefulness, neither Ruth nor Naomi is referred to by the word `almanah, despite the deaths of their husbands. Although they endure a period of uncertainty and need, they are able to find the protection which saves them from destitution.

The operation of the levirate contributes to the fact that `almanah is not used to describe Tamar at the time of the deaths of her husbands, first Er and then his brother Onan (Gen 38). Judah, their father, does insist that she return to her father's family and live as if she were an `almanah--that is without making available to anyone her sexuality and childbearing potential--until his youngest son reached maturity (v 11). Similarly, the concubines of David, taken by Absalom to dishonor his father when they had been left unprotected in Jerusalem, are shut away by David afterward, as if they were old widows (2 Sam 20:3), forever childless. They will be provided for, but they will never be bound to a household by the birth of a son.