A levirate marriage provided a way for a woman to have a child, so that her husband's name would be carried on and she could be provided for in her old age.

Simply put, a young widow was given to her dead husband's brother. A child conceived between them was considered to be that of the deceased, and became the heir which carried on the father's place in the family.

A Biblical example of this is the case of Judah's son, who dies unexpectedly. His young wife, Tamar, is given to the boy next in line but he refuses to do his duty by her. God strikes him down, and Tamar is given to son number three.

This boy also doesn't do his part, and he also comes to an end. Judah, being now alarmed at his dwindling household, asks Tamar to wait until son number four is a bit older.

In the end, Judah himself is the one who provides Tamar with twin boys, who take the place of the elder son in the line of Christ (Matt.1:3)

One has to wonder why they wouldn't want to fulfill their duty. There must be more to the story.

Yesterday I was reading the story of Ruth. It seemed that her situation with Boaz was a sort of the same thing.

To enable Elimelech's name and line to carry on, the redeemer had to 1) purchase the capital assets (property) and 2) marry Ruth

Re: "One has to wonder why they wouldn't want to fulfill their duty."

Shane, I am not up-to-date on the details of such. But, going by memory, the man who "fulfilled his duty" took on obligations that affected property rights. As in the case of Ruth, some were not willing to do that.