Reference for Yevamot 167:17
ומאי איריא דקתני אלמנה ליתני בתולה
the middle clause: IF A HIGH PRIEST WHO BETROTHED A WIDOW HAD A BROTHER A COMMON PRIEST!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the expression used was BETROTHED, and not 'married'. ');"><sup>40</sup></span> — The determining factor,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the use of the expression of MARRIED. ');"><sup>41</sup></span> rather, is the case immediately following in the same context.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'but because of the daughter of the (same) valley'. ');"><sup>42</sup></span> As it was desired to teach, IF A HALAL WHO MARRIED A WOMAN OF LEGITIMATE STATUS, where the reason [for her prohibition<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To his brother. ');"><sup>43</sup></span> is] because [the halal] MARRIED her and thus caused her to become a halalah, but where he had only betrothed her she would have been permitted to him; MARRIED was, therefore, taught [here also].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the first case, that of the common priest who married a widow. ');"><sup>44</sup></span> What point, however, was there in teaching, A widow? He should have taught: 'A virgin'!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who, becoming a widow after her husband's death, is, like one who was married as a widow, forbidden to a High Priest. ');"><sup>45</sup></span>