The widow: homeless and post-menopausal.

Abstract

The biblical `almanah or "widow" has been understood recently as a woman whose husband has died and who is without a male guardian, such as an adult son. Several texts have complicated this picture: in two cases women are called "widows" in spite of the identification of their sons, while younger women are not designated as "widows" upon the deaths of their husbands. Both of these apparent contradictions are resolved by understanding the `almanah as a woman who is past the age of bearing children and who is not part of a male-headed household.

**********

The Hebrew word `almanah connotes a somewhat different social reality than our word "widow" by which it is invariably translated. This was recognized by Paul Hiebert, who has examined references in the law codes of several ANE cultures to words which are cognate to the term. She found that in the Middle Assyrian laws, for instance, a women became an almattu at the death of her husband when she lacked a male from her husband's family, i.e. a son or father-in-law, to provide for her. The biblical term seems to have a similar circumstance in view. Hiebert points out that the majority of biblical texts in which `almanah appears combine this word with yatom (orphan) and ger (alien), all persons "in a situation with no supporting kinship ties" (130). The precarious existence of such individuals is clear from the frequency of the biblical injunctions to treat them with justice and charity, as well as the passages which condemn those who do not.

John Rook, in two papers recently published in BIBLICAL THEOLOGY BULLETIN, has extended Hiebert's work and made some cogent observations about the life circumstance covered by the Hebrew term. Rook places it in the context of socio-anthropological terminology regarding honor and shame in the Mediterranean world, particularly as they apply to issues of sexuality. "The responsibility of a male in this ancient world is to control the sexuality of the women who are within his household and are `embedded' to him." (1997:11) The core circumstance which causes a woman to be referred to as `almanah then is the lack of a guardian who will not only support her but also control access to her sexuality.

A few texts remain which fail to fit perfectly under the umbrella of these understandings. Some scholars, such as J. Otwell, have in the past noted that this word `almanah is not used of all women whose husbands have died. Conversely, in two instances women who have living adult sons are called `almanah despite the fact that these sons could presumably have functioned as guardians and supporters of their widowed mothers. Adding to the confusion are the concubines of David (2 Sam 16:20-22, 20:3) who are placed under guard to live as if they were "widows" after Absalom's insurrection and attempted usurpation. His taking of his father's concubines was an element in his plan to discredit and dishonor his father by demonstrating David's inability to control access to the women under his "guardianship."

Although it seems inexplicable to us moderns, for whom individual freedom is so important, the preferred situation for a woman of any age in Ancient Israel was circumscribed and protected: controlled by husband or father, restricted by household, enclosed by house. The female child in ancient Israel was to grow up within the confines of the family to which she was born until the time of her marriage, when she would transfer her residence and her allegiance to the household of her husband--the new household which she was to help to build up.

The bet 'ab, "father's house" or "extended family household," was the central unit of production and also of representation in the agrarian world of ancient Israel, including during the period of the monarchies, as has been elucidated by Gottwald and by Meyers (1991), among others. It was through the head of household that relationships with persons outside the household were conducted, whether buying or selling, making alliances (including marriages), or receiving justice through the assembled elders. Extended family households often lived in clusters of dwellings, arranged around a central courtyard area where common tasks were carried out. (Both Meyers [1983] and Stager provide excellent discussions of archaeological and anthropological evidence for the nature and composition of the Israelite household.)

A wife, who came into her husband's household as an outsider, contributed her labor and her fertility. Her task was to build up the bet 'ab by bearing children, particularly sons, and to contribute to the production of food and other items for use by the family or perhaps for trade. Upon the death of her husband, the fragile tie to his family was likely to be broken, unless she had given birth to a son in the household. Her son would become a part of the household in a way that she could never be, and he would bind her to it and make a place for her in it.

The fragility of this tie to her late husband's household is illustrated clearly by the situation, albeit fictitious, of the Wise Woman of Tekoa (2 Sam 14:1-7). She has become estranged from her husband's household by the murder of one of her adult sons by the other. Once the extended family has exacted vengeance, she will have no remaining bond to her dead husband's family, in which she has always lived as something of an outsider. The reader of this story has no information about the identity of the family members who are so energetically pursuing revenge, but we can easily imagine a situation in which their prospects for inheritance would improve by eliminating other heirs, all under the cloak of seeking justice for the dead. The `almanah lived a most precarious existence.

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.

For the post-menopausal woman, with no remaining reproductive potential (and perhaps limited remaining potential for hard physical labor), the situation of childlessness represented a greater threat to survival. To be a "dis-embedded woman" of this particular type, whose loss of breeding potential made her disposable to the patriarchal project of population growth, was especially perilous, and most references in the Hebrew Bible to the "widow" are injunctions to treat these women with charity. Clearly for her, the institution of the levirate was of no help, since she would not be able to bear a son for her dead husband's household.

If she controlled wealth which would be attractive to a new marriage partner, the childless post-menopausal widow might be able to find a place in a new household. Otherwise, even if a widow had sufficient resources to live on, her detachment from a male-headed family meant she had no representation in judicial matters, and she might easily be defrauded of what was rightfully hers. If the loss of her husband did not leave her destitute, her lack of anyone to represent her in the justice system made the slide into abject poverty all too easy. These are the "widows" of the biblical ethical injunction--women without husband or household, and without hope of securing either.

These two important factors have been overlooked by previous scholars in describing the life situation of the `almanah: that she is post-menopausal and that she lacks not just a patron or guardian but a home, a male-headed household. Both Hiebert and Rook came very near to this second observation about the importance of household, without explicitly stating it. Hiebert stresses the loss of "kinship ties" (137). Rook states, "A woman who is not under the care of a male guardian, who is not inside the threshold of his household, is said to be in a liminal or marginalized state. A woman in such a state is outside the threshold, with no male guardian to protect her and her interests" (1997:10). An explicit articulation of this social reality is crucial to our ability to understand how the term `almanah functions in the cases which appear to be exceptions, while obviating the necessity of positing a diachronic shift in the meaning of the Hebrew term, as suggested by Rook in his second article on this subject (Rook 1998: 5).

Women with adult sons were usually protected and thus spared the circumstance of being an `almanah in the Hebrew narratives, since they still had a male patron, as well as a tie to a household. In two texts, however, women whose husbands have died, but who still have living adult sons, are nevertheless called widows. An examination of these texts reveals that, although they have a male guardian (an adult son), they lack an extended family household within which to be enclosed and protected.

Jeroboam, who is said to be son of Zeruah, a widow (`almanah), is the corvee master in Solomon's royal administration (1 Kgs 11:26). As such he is part of the royal household, not master of his own "house," as he might have been in a premonarchic agrarian village setting. The stories of David joining Saul's court illustrate this transfer of residence when a man serves the king (1 Sam 16:21-23; 18:1-2). A similar reality is part of the basis of Samuel's warning about the consequences to Israel of initiating a monarchy: family members, both sons and daughters, will be removed from the agrarian household and placed in the service of the king, as part of his household (1 Sam 8:11-13). Baltzer has shown how this redirects a man's "family ties":

   At every level, the master-servant relationship evinces identical
   characteristics: regulation under law and custom, with mutual rights and
   responsibilities. Service and unconditional allegiance are demanded of the
   servant. The master provides sustenance and protection. He replaces the
   bayit (the clan, the family) as the source and focus of the servant's life
   [478].

As a result, a man such as Jeroboam who serves the king (or a wealthy landowner) is not able to provide a place in his own household in which to care for his aging widowed mother. Similarly, Hiram of Tyre, son of a widow of the tribe of Naphtali, came to Solomon as resident bronze-worker (1 Kgs 7:14). A craftsman, just like a servant, would have lived in the capital under the king's patronage, not in his home village. He too would have been without a household within which to protect his mother.

Consideration of each of these biblical texts suggests, then, that the `almanah, the biblical "widow," is a post-menopausal woman whose husband has died and who has no secure attachment to a household headed by an adult male, in which she can be protected and represented. With no remaining value to the society and no one on earth to protect her, she epitomizes the powerless and vulnerable one whose only hope is in the ethical demands of Yahweh.

Works Cited

Baltzer, Klaus. 1987. Liberation from Debt Slavery after the Exile in Second Isaiah and Nehemiah. Pp. 477-84 in ANCIENT ISRAELITE RELIGION: ESSAYS IN HONOR OF FRANK MOORE CROSS, edited by Patrick D. Miller, Jr., Paul D. Hanson, and S. Dan McBride. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press.

Gottwald, Norman K. 1979. THE TRIBES OF YAHWEH: A SOCIOLOGY OF THE RELIGION OF LIBERATED ISRAEL, 1250-1050 B.C. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books.

Hiebert, Paula S. 1989. "Whence Shall Help Come to Me?" The Biblical Widow. Pp. 125-41 in GENDER AND DIFFERENCE IN ANCIENT ISRAEL, edited by Peggy L. Day. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.

Meyers, Carol L. 1991. To Her Mother's House: Considering a Counterpart to the Israelite Bet 'Ab. Pp. 39-52 in THE BIBLE AND THE POLITICS OF EXEGESIS: ESSAYS IN HONOR OF NORMAN K. GOTTWALD ON HIS SIXTY-SIXTH BIRTHDAY, edited by David Jobling. Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim Books.

1983. Procreation, Production, and Protection: Male-Female Balance in Early Israel. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF RELIGION 51/4: 569-93.

Otwell, J. 1977. AND SARAH LAUGHED: THE STATUS OF WOMEN IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. Philadelphpia, PA: Westminster Press.

Rook, John. 1998. When is a Widow Not a Widow? Guardianship Provides an Answer, BTB 28: 4-6.

1997. Making Widows: The Patriarchal Guardian at Work, BTB 27: 10-15.

Stager, Lawrence E. 1985. The Archaeology of the Family in Ancient Israel, BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN SCHOOLS OF ORIENTAL RESEARCH 260: 1-35.

Carolyn S. Leeb, Ph.D. (Lutheran School of Theology, Chicago) is Assistant Professor of Theology at Valparaiso University, Valparaiso, Indiana 46383; e-mail: [e-mail]. She is the author of AWAY FROM THE FATHER'S HOUSE: THE SOCIAL LOCATION OF NA` AR AND NA` ARAH IN ANCIENT ISRAEL (Sheffield Academic Press, 2000). Her current research interest is using Haiti as a model for understanding the social world of ancient Israel.