[ Inhaltsverzeichnis ] [ Contents ] [ Table des matières ] |
||
Caroline Vander Stichele Just a Whore The Annihilation of Babylon According to Revelation 17:16
The woman/whore called Babylon in Revelation
17-19 has often been interpreted as representing Evil or the Evil
Empire. [1]
What such interpretations have in common is that they see this
woman as representing something else. Sure enough, the text itself
points in that direction, when it states in 17:18: ‘The woman
you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth.’
[2] The revelation of this meaning of the woman stands at the end of a long
episode in which the vision of the whore is first introduced,
(17:1-3a), described (17:3b-6) and then explained (17:7-18) by
one of the seven angels, featured in the previous context. [3] The identity of this
woman as city is more specifically disclosed after her annihilation
has been announced and motivated as part of God’s purpose in the
preceding verses: ‘And the ten horns that you saw, they and the
beast will hate the whore; they will make her desolate and naked;
they will devour her flesh and burn her up with fire. For God
has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose by agreeing
to give their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God will
be fulfilled.’ Commentaries on this text show a tendency to explain away the more troubling
aspects of this prediction. They do so in different ways, for
instance, by stressing that the sentence concerns Babylon as city.
[4] In support of this
point, reference is made to texts from the Hebrew Bible where the same judgement is also passed over other cities, be it
Jerusalem, Tyre or Nineveh. Another observation concerns the executors
of this sentence, namely the ten horns and the beast. The actions
they undertake against the whore are often understood to show
the self-destroying power of evil. [5]
I find these interpretations problematic in so far as they obscure
other implications present in these verses. In what follows, I will concentrate on Revelation
17:16, which describes the annihilation of Babylon, because in
my view this disturbing scene resists a facile reduction of the
woman/whore to ‘just a metaphor’. [6] But before pointing that out, I want to analyse
what precisely is being stated in verse 16. 1. A Closer Look at Revelation 17:16 The subject named in this verse are the ten horns and the beast, which
were mentioned for the first time in 17:3 together with the woman.
The ten horns are later identified as ten kings: ‘And the ten
horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom,
but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together
with the beast.’ (verse 12) As the object of their collective
actions in verse 16 the whore is named. Together, the beast and
its horns will undertake four actions against the whore: first,
they ‘will hate the whore’; second, ‘they will make her desolate
and naked’; third, ‘they will devour her flesh’ and fourth, they
will ‘burn her up with fire’. Some of these statements either
explicitly state or presume a person as object: they will hate
the whore, they will make her naked, and they will devour her
flesh. The two other statements, namely ‘they will make her desolate’
and ‘they will burn her up with fire’ are more ambiguous. They
also recur in the following context with respect to the city.
Her desolation is mentioned more specifically in 18:17.19 and
her being burned in 18:8.9.18 and 19:3. [7] As already noted, the identification of the woman with the great city
is made in 17:18. It is important to stress here that the term
‘woman’ (gunh&) has already been used five
times in the preceding context to describe Babylon (vv.3.4.6.7.9)
and the term ‘whore’ (po&rnh) four
times (verses 1.5.15.16). [8] In the following
context, to the contrary, the term ‘woman’ does not occur anymore
and the term ‘whore’ only once, namely at the end of this section
in 19:2, where she is mentioned for the last time as ‘the great
whore’. This expression corresponds with the one in 17:1, the
opening verse, thus forming an inclusion and framing the whole
section. But while Babylon is only named ‘woman’ in the context preceding 17:18,
the reverse holds true for Babylon as city. The term ‘city’ (po&lij) is namely used for the first
time in verse 18 and further only occurs in the following context,
more concretely in 18:10.16.18.19.21. In the narrative logic of
this text, therefore, the reader is first confronted with a female
character, called Babylon in 17:5, which is only identified in
verse 18 with ‘the great city’. [9]
That verse thus forms a turning point in the representation of
Babylon, because precisely in this verse the identification of
the ‘woman’ with the ‘great city’ is explicitly made. Verse 16,
by consequence, still belongs to the section where Babylon is
predominantly described as woman. Moreover, this verse explicitly
names ‘the whore’ as object and several elements in the sentence
presume a person as character. In sum, taking in consideration
both the context and the content of verse 16, it does not seem
justified to limit the meaning of verse 16 to Babylon as city,
as some commentators tend to do, nor do I agree with Aune who
states that the judgement of the great whore, announced in 17:2,
does not refer ‘primarily to Rev 17 (though her judgement is briefly
mentioned in 17:16) but to Rev 18’. [10] We can take this analysis
a step further by looking at the name Babylon. This name occurs
for the first time in 14:8, where the fall of Babylon is already
announced: ‘Then another angel, a second, followed, saying, ”Fallen,
fallen is Babylon the great! She has made all nations drink of
the wine of the wrath of her fornication”.’ The same name (Babulw_n h( mega&lh) occurs
again in 16:19, where it is said that God remembered ‘great Babylon’
and gave her the wine-cup of the fury of his wrath. Next, in 17:5
the name ‘Babylon the great’ is attributed to the whore on the
beast: ‘on her forehead was written a name, a mystery: ”Babylon
the great, mother of whores and of earth’s abominations”.’ In
the following context, the name reappears in chapter 18 (verses
2.10.21), which deals with the destruction of the city. What these
texts have in common is that, on the one hand, the name of a well-known
city is used, while on the other hand the description is that
of a female character, whose behavior is described in terms of
fornication. The name Babylon thus
forms a link between the whore and the city. The identification,
which is made explicit in 17:18, is already prepared for in the
preceding context. And yet, this name is a ‘chiffre’, a mystery,
because both ‘the great whore’ and ‘Babylon the great’ refer to
a third party, hinted at but never explicitly mentioned in the
text. [11] As far as the identity
of this third party is concerned, I think the most probable candidate
here is Rome. [12] Both metaphors thus
have a common denominator and in both cases, the message delivered
is a negative one. In the first case, the story told is one of
seduction and sexual perversion, in the second case, one of oppression
by a colonial power. The great whore/mighty city is clearly pictured
as evil. |
2. Cities and Whores Similar views can be
found in the Hebrew Bible, as in several prophetic books
other cities are equally addressed and condemned as whores.
[13] The metaphoric use
of Babylon operates against this background. I will analyse
in what follows how the comparison between a whore and
a particular city is made and investigate, more specifically,
which of the images used in verse 16 are also present
in those cases. [14] Looking more specifically
at the destruction of Babylon announced in 17:16, the
closest parallel can be found in Ezekiel 16 and 23, where
Jerusalem is pictured as a whore undergoing a similar
fate. In both Revelation and Ezekiel, the punishment of
the whore is presented as reflecting God’s will, although
in both cases, the sentence will be executed by others.
In Ezekiel, this is done by the woman’s lovers, in Revelation
by the beast and its horns. Other, though less elaborate,
parallels can be found in Nahum 3:1-7, where Nineveh is
first addressed as city and then compared with a prostitute
and in Isaiah 23:15-17, where the fate of Tyre is compared
with that of a whore, but no judgement or sentence follows
the comparison here. [15] However, it is important
to note here that there is also an important difference
if in Revelation, as I presume, Babylon indeed refers
to Rome. In that case, Babylon is a symbolic name. Nevertheless,
a disturbing correspondence between these prophetic traditions
and Revelation exists as far as their rhetorical strategy
is concerned, because the way the women in question are
depicted, makes their punishment look as something they
deserve. [16] With respect to Ezekiel
16 it can be noted that Jerusalem is addressed directly
by God through the prophet as a woman (verse 3). In verses
15-41, the woman is more specifically depicted as a whore.
Her future fate is announced to her in verse 35 (‘Therefore,
O whore, hear the word of the Lord’) and elaborated in
the following verses: Her clothes will be stripped and
she will be left naked (verse 39), she will be stoned
and cut to pieces (verse 40) and her houses will be burned
(verse 41). Several of these elements correspond with
the ones found in Apocalypse 17:16, namely her being made
naked and the burning, in this case, of her houses. In another text of
the same book, namely Ezekiel 23:2
two women are introduced who are first specified
as Oholah and Oholibah and then identified with Samaria
and Jerusalem (verse 4). They too are criticised for playing
the whore and judged accordingly. [17] In verse 9, Oholah
has already been delivered to her lovers. They have made
her naked and killed her with the sword (verse 10). In
verse 22, Oholibah is addressed: ‘Therefore, O Oholibah,
thus says the Lord God...’. She will undergo a similar
fate as her sister (verses 22-35): Her nose and ears will
be cut off (verse 25), she will be hated and left naked
(verse 29). Both Oholah and Oholibah will thus be made
an object of terror and of plunder (verse 46) and the
houses of their sons and daughters will burn up (verse
47). Here again parallels with Apocalypse 17:16 can be
found, more specifically the mention of hatred (verse
29), the being made naked (verses 10.29), and the burning
(verse 29). [18] In two instances, non-israelite
cities are condemned as whores. The first case is Nahum
3:1-7 where Nineveh is first addressed as city in verse
1 and later compared with a prostitute. Her fate is announced
in verses 4-7. ‘I will let nations look on your nakedness
and kingdoms on your shame’ (3:5). She will be made a
spectacle. ‘Then all who see you will shrink from you
and say, ”Nineveh is devastated; who will bemoan her?”’
(verse 7). In this text, we find the reverse situation
as in Ezechiel, in that Nineveh is first addressed as
city and then compared with a whore. The image of the
city resurfaces in the following context, where more specifically
her being devoured by fire is mentioned (Nahum 3:13.15). The comparison is even
more limited in the second case, namely Isaiah 23:15,
where it is the fate of Tyre which is compared with that
of a whore: ‘At the end of seventy years, it will happen
to Tyre as in the song about the prostitute’. The comparison
with a whore is repeated in verse 17, where it is said
that Tyre ‘will prostitute herself with all the kingdoms
of the world on the face of the earth’. In this case,
however, no judgement or sentence follows the comparison.
[19] What Nahum 3:1-7 and
Isaiah 23:15-17 have in common with Ezekiel is that cities
are condemned as whores. A major difference, however,
is that these are foreign cities and that the notion of
adultery is absent, because no relation between these
cities and JHWH is presumed. The same is the case with
Babylon in Revelation 17, where the issue of adultery
is equally absent. However, if the elements
used in Revelation 17:16 to describe the fate of Babylon,
already show up in prophetic texts, there is one remarkable
omission: no direct parallel occurs for the image that
her flesh will be devoured. [20]
For that we have to look elsewhere, namely in 1 Kings
21:23 where being devoured is first predicted by Elijah,
and later recalled by Jehu in 2 Kings 9:36-37, as the
fate awaiting Jezebel. The Septuagint version of this
text shows a clear verbal correspondence with Revelation
17:16 as the same expression, namely ‘to eat someone’s
flesh’ is used. [21]
But there are also other features that these women have
in common, which can serve as further evidence that the
author of Revelation may have Jezebel in mind here. Striking
is especially the reference to the many whoredoms and
sorceries of Jezebel by Jehu in Kings 9. A similar accusation
already shows up earlier in Revelation where the woman
prophet called Jezebel is accused of practicing fornication
(pornei&a: Revelation
2:20). This is also a key concept in the depiction of
Babylon. Moreover, Babylon is also accused of having deceived
all nations by her sorcery (Revelation 18:23) and a further
hint may be found in the way Babylon sees herself ruling
as a queen in Revelation 18:7. [22] 3. The Meaning of a Metaphor What the parallels
with Jezebel as well as the whore/cities in the prophetic
texts in my view make clear, is that the Great Whore is
a gendered metaphor. Both its being gendered and its being
a metaphor, are relevant. First, as far as the issue of
gender is concerned. I think gender is by no means accidental
here. Babylon could not be just as well a male character.
In a patriarchal society, to compare the enemy with a
woman is a way of ridiculing and denigrating him on the
one hand, and of ascertaining one’s own male superiority
on the other. What Exum states for the prophetic texts
under discussion also holds true here: ‘Already inscribed
in the metaphors themselves is a whole range of negative
views about women and about female behavior and female
sexuality, as well as about power in gender relations:
men dominate and women submit.’ [23] Therefore, I disagree
with Schüssler Fiorenza, who considers the use of female
images for cities to be ‘conventional language because
then, as today, cities and countries were grammatically
construed as feminine’. [24]
To use a woman as metaphor for a city, is more than just
a matter of grammar, because it reflects an androcentric
perspective. In the case of Babylon, the woman/city represents
the other, viewed as alien territory to be conquered and
eventually destroyed, thus presuming and affirming an
analogy between military and sexual invasion, the colonizer
presented as male, the colonized as female. [25]
Gender, then, is more than just a matter of convention,
but plays a role in the message to be delivered. However, Babylon is
not only depicted as a woman, she is moreover presented
as a whore (po&rnh).
In the Hebrew Bible, this image appears to be gender-specific.
[26]
In my view, this is also the case in Revelation 17-19,
as only the woman is called a whore, not her male partners.
They are described in terms of their male power status
as kings, while others, such as ‘the nations’ or ‘the
inhabitants of the earth’, are said to participate in
‘her fornication’ (14:8; 17:2.4;
18:3; 19:2: pornei&aj au)th~j).
Moreover, the use of this terminology, namely po&rnh /
pornei&a and
porneu&w, [27] is
not merely descriptive, but implies a moral judgement.
In line with its use elsewhere in the New Testament, prostitution
appears here in the first place as a moral evil. [28] This also contributes to the negative image of
the woman, who is held responsible for it. But, not only
her being a whore, also her death is gender-specific,
because it destroys her sexuality and makes an end to
her seductiveness. [29] Second, as far as its
metaphorical character is concerned, the fact that the
Great Whore is a metaphor does not make it less dangerous
and harmful to ‘real’ women, because as metaphor it both
reflects and reinscribes gender relations. On the one
hand, such a metaphor can only work and be powerful if
it is rooted in existing views and practices, which shape
the lives of real people; on the other hand, its power
and danger also lie in the fact that it confirms such
views and practices and thus legitimizes them, which again
affects the lives of real people. I agree with Stenström
who states that ‘an image as ”Babylon the Prostitute”
speaks, on one, explicit, level about an earthly power
which is not obedient to God. Still, on an implicit level,
it reflects, expresses and reinforces views of female
prostitutes, which are linked to views of women in general.
Therefore, a feminist analysis of Revelation must be concerned
with all the implicit assumptions about gender in the
text.’ [30] The view that the
Great Whore is just a metaphor or image and therefore
‘does not speak about a female person or refer to actual
historical wo/men,’ [31]
tends to obscure this relation between metaphor and reality.
As Exum rightly observes: ‘That metaphoric violence against
women is not the same as real violence is true, but (…)
it is nonetheless harmful to real women because it shapes
perceptions of reality and of gender relations for men
and for women.’ [32] Reading for gender,
therefore, reveals, as Pippin puts it, the ‘apocalypse
of women’ [33]
turning, in the case of Revelation 17, into a ‘pornoapocalypse’.
[34]
Schüssler Fiorenza, however, criticizes Pippin’s interpretation
stating that ‘reading simply in terms of gender reinscribes
cultural femininity by naturalizing Revelation’s symbolic
figurative language.’ [35]
In my view, however, this critique is not justified, because
Pippin is not reading simply
in terms of gender, nor does she reinscribe cultural femininity. ‘Here, the
strategy is to imply (or, indeed, argue) that if an interpreter
describes how something works, she or he is advocating
for the maintenance of the practice.’ [36] Schüssler Fiorenza’s
own view is that ‘although Babylon is figured as an elite
woman, the rhetorical-symbolic discourse of Revelation
clearly understands it as an imperial city and not as
an actual woman.’ [37] But, as I have stated
earlier, Revelation 17:16 resists such a reduction of
the woman/whore to just a metaphor. The killing of the
whore is too disturbing for that. It is like watching
a horror movie telling yourself that the blood is not
real. That may well explain why this verse often gets
so little attention in the discussion of these chapters
or that the focus is solely on the destruction of Babylon
as city. However, rather than
focusing only on Babylon as city, it seems important to
me to consider both sides of Babylon as Great City and Great Whore, as oppressive, colonial
power and
prostitute. I agree with Schüssler Fiorenza that ‘the
”female” personifications of mother, virgin, or whore
in Revelation must be problematized not only
in terms of gender but also in terms of systemic structures
of race, class and imperialist oppression.’ [38] However, it is hard
to understand then why she herself sets up an opposition
between two reading strategies, namely a reading which
focuses on gender, and a rhetorical-political reading.
The first reading is identified as the position of white
Western feminist scholars and the second as that of feminist
subaltern and postcolonial studies. I find this opposition
problematic and dangerous, because it suggests that gender
research is a-political. As Stenström states: ‘feminist
researchers must repeat basics: to speak about gender
is to speak about a structure of power. To speak about
power structures is to speak about something political.
We must not allow that ”gender” is taken from us and used
as a code word for depoliticized research.’ [39] Moreover, I find the
formulation of this opposition is problematic. In the
first case, ‘being white’ and ‘Western’ are used as seemingly
unproblematic labels and the focus is on individual scholars.
The other position, however, is described as feminist
subaltern and postcolonial studies. Here no reference is made to the
scholars in question nor to their color or cultural background.
Thus the first category is presented as exclusively white
and western, while the second category seems to include
all ‘others’. 4. Double Bind In her postcolonial
reading of Revelation 17, Kim observes how female readers
of this text are placed in a double bind ‘because we are
forced to betray our sexual identity in order to share
the perspective of the author/God; otherwise we have to
identify ourselves with the female object in the text.’
[40] Kim further argues
that the Whore not only refers to Rome as colonizing power,
but also represents a colonized woman, exploited by the
colonizers and abandoned by her own man. Thus ‘sexually
oppressed women are caught in a no-win situation between
foreign and native men.’ [41] I would like to
complement her analysis with some observations from my
own context, namely that of a colonizing country. I find myself caught
in another double bind here, because I share the critique
of an oppressive and violent regime, while I resist the
violence done to the whore. However, there is more, as
citizen of Fortress Europe, I rather find myself identified
with Babylon as locus
of colonial power and oppression. The red light district
of Amsterdam with its prostitutes from all over the world
is only one block away from where I work. The traffic
in women is flourishing there. Since the eighties the
European sex-business has become big business. Women from
Asia, Africa, South-America and Eastern Europe are lured
to Western Europe with false promises, and often false
passports too, and then forced into prostitution. One
famous luxury brothel in Hungary is actually called ‘Villa
Babylon’. [42]
Soon enough, however, the women who arrive in Europe find
out about the real nature of the jobs or wealthy husbands
they were promised. The fate of Babylon
described in Revelation 17:16 reminds me of the violence
done to the women who refuse to prostitute themselves.
Sometimes their passports are taken from them, sometimes
they are guarded, locked up, intimidated and threatened,
abused, raped and most often financially exploited. The
death of the Great Whore reminds me of Nicolasa Duarte,
a Dominican woman who worked in a striptease bar in Kortrijk,
the city where I was born, and whose dead body was found
packed in a suitcase thrown in the river in 1984. The
pimp, who was responsible for her death, was arrested
and even admitted the murder, but spent only three years
in jail. Nicolasa had accepted a contract as bailarina in Europe to earn money for her
poor family, but her life literally ended in this strip-tease
bar. [43] Reading Revelation
17 from this particular context or Sitz im Tod, [44] makes
me aware of yet another aspect of the gender ideology
embedded in the text, namely how the negative depiction
of the whore obscures the social reality of prostitution.
The focus of the text is on the character of the whore
and the strategy is to present her as morally evil. This
is done in a number of ways. Not only is she presented
as a prostitute, but as actively pursuing prostitution.
‘She has made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath
of her fornication.’ (14:8) This clearly puts the blame
with her, since she
made them drink and it is ‘her fornication’. What also
contributes to her negative image, is that she is presented
as being drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood
of the witnesses to Jesus (17:6). As the consumption of
blood is explicitly forbidden in the Torah, this practice
appears as particularly repulsive. Besides the negative
elements in the description of the whore, there are also
more explicit value judgements in the text. Babylon is
accused of blasphemy, impurity, abomination, iniquity,
deceit and corruption, [45]
and her sins are said to be ‘heaped high as heaven’ (Revelation
18:5). What all these elements have in common is that
the woman is pictured as a bad woman and this in turn
makes her punishment look as something she deserves. The
measures taken against her are legitimized as well as
sanctioned by presenting them as in accordance with Gods
will. The violence against her thus appears as justified. However, in order to
reach this conclusion the Great Whore needs to be isolated
and the social dimension of prostitution blended out.
With social dimension I mean here prostitution as trade,
and thus as a specific form of labour. [46]
The only, though indirect, trace in the text that the
whore is rewarded for her services, may be found in the
description of her wealth. According to Revelation 17:4,
‘the whore was clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned
with gold and jewels and pearls’. This description is
repeated in 18:16 by the merchants who mourn for the destroyed
city: ”Alas, alas, the great city, clothed in fine linen,
in purple and scarlet, adorned with gold, with jewels,
and with pearls!” Although in the previous context reference
has been made to the commercial activity of the city,
it is never made explicit where all her luxury comes from.
[47] The suggestion of
the text seems to be that she is making profit from her
lovers, one way or another. That may be fairly obvious
as far as the wealth of Babylon as colonial power is concerned.
And it could even hold true for a whore, but than again
the focus is on a particular whore, and the social reality
of prostitution remains out of sight. Still, a trace may
be left, precisely in the gendered character of the metaphor.
What the metaphor also reveals is namely the ‘gender-based
division of labour’. That the Great Whore is a woman has
everything to do with economics and power. As Uy Eviota
puts it: ‘The intersection between economy, politics and
gender is embodied in the sexual division of labour: the
demarcation of those tasks which are paid and those not
paid, differentials in pay, concentrations in occupations
and job-levels within these occupations, and sexual servicing
as the paid work of women.’ [48] Gender ideology not only determines what sexual
behaviour is considered male or female, and what sexual
needs are natural and how one is supposed to fulfill them,
but also the kind of work men or women are supposed to
do. Economic and political forces play their role in the
social and financial valorization of this work as they
determine if and what labour is being paid and how much. What is only a trace
in the picture of the Great Whore, is further substantiated
in the examples I mentioned from my own context. They
show, on the one hand, how the ‘traffic in women’ serves
the sexual and economic needs of the still colonial West,
and how on the other, these women are used and abused
as slaves. In my view, the ideology-critical power of
Revelation falls short when it comes to gender ideology.
The abuse of a whore as metaphor for a colonial power
reveals this, or as Kim puts it: ‘the whore metaphor does
not simply stand for the imperial city of Rome but also
stands for women sexually involved in a colonizing context.’
[49] The dramatic consequences of such metaphorization
are exposed in the violence done to her. And the reader
is supposed to rejoice in her death, but not every reader
does. At least not the resisting reader.
[1] So for instance Resseguie: ‘The characterization of evil as a whore portrays the beguiling, stupefying side to evil’s Janus-face – one side is ugly and repugnant, while the other side is attractive and desirous.’ (J.L. Resseguie, Revelation Unsealed. A Narrative Critical Approach to John’s Apocalypse. Biblical Interpretation Series, 32. Leiden: Brill, 1998, p.137) And Beale: ‘She includes the entire evil economic-religious system of the world throughout history. She receives power from the devil himself.’ (G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans; Carlisle: Paternoster, 1999, p.888) [2] Unless stated otherwise, citations from the Bible come from the New Revised Standard Version. [3] The angel is introduced in Revelation 17:1 as ‘one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls’. This refers back to the scene related in Revelation 16. The angel serves more concretely as angelus interpres. As Aune points out, this is the only time in Revelation that John actually gets an explanation of what he sees. According to Aune, ‘this may reveal the importance of Revelation 17 in the estimation of the author-editor, who emphasizes the revelatory role of the angelus interpres at the beginning and end of the book (1:1; 22:6,8-9), although this angel in fact appears only in Revelation 17:1-18; 19:9-10 and (if it is the same angel) in 21:9-22:9.’ (D.E. Aune, Revelation 17-22. Word Biblical Commentary, 52C. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1998, p.919) [4] So for instance Müller who speaks about ‘die Zerstörung Roms, der Hure Babylon. Dies schildert der Verfasser in Vers 16-18 und weist damit auf Kap. 18 voraus.’ (U.B. Müller, Die Offenbarung des Johannes. Ökumenischer-Taschenbuch-Kommentar zum NT 19. Gütersloh/Würzburg: G. Mohn/Echter Verlag, 1984, p.296) Visser understands ”make naked” to refer to thorough plundering and ‘devouring her flesh’ to the total extermination of all the inhabitants of Rome (A.J. Visser, De openbaring van Johannes. De prediking van het Nieuwe Testament. Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1972, p.199). Aune states that ‘since the whore is a city, the phrase h)rhmwme&nhn poih&sousin au)jth&n, ”they will make her desolate,” i.e. depopulate her, is appropriate.’ (D.E. Aune, Revelation 17-22, p.957) [5] So for instance G.B. Caird, A Commentary to the Revelation of St. John the Divine. London: A. & Ch. Black, 1966, p.221; C.H. Giblin, The Book of Revelation. The Open Book of Prophecy. Good News Studies, 34. Collegeville (MN): Liturgical Press, 1991, p.166; R.W. Wall, Revelation. New International Biblical Commentary. NT Series, 18. Peabody (MA): Hendrickson, p.209; J.L. Resseguie, Revelation Unsealed, p.140; G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, p.887. [6] Such a metaphorization of the whore’s punishment is, for instance, undertaken by Beale, when he writes: ‘Perhaps three metaphors have been combined in the description: Babylon’s nakedness is exposed like that of a whore, she is devoured like a victim of a fierce beast, and she is burned like a city.’ (G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, p.883) [7] Burning could of course also apply to a person. According to Leviticus 21:9, the daughter of a priest who has prostituted herself, is to be burned to death. For Lietaert Peerbolte the similarities between this text and Revelation 17:16 ‘should probably lead to the conclusion that the author of Revelation depicts the fate of the Harlot as her well-deserved punishment prescribed by the Mosaic Law.’ (L.J. Lietaert Peerbolte, The Antecedents of Antichrist. A Tradition-Historical Study of the Earliest Christian Views on Eschatological Opponents. Leiden: Brill, 1996, p. 163) In my view, however, the correspondence between these texts is too limited to be convincing. As I will demonstrate below, other texts from the Hebrew Bible play a far greater role. [8] In 17:5 Babylon is in fact identified as h( mh&thr tw~n pornw~n. According to Aune, this could be understood in an archetypical sense, meaning that she is the source of the whoredom of others, or in a superlative sense, meaning ‘the most depraved whore’. (D.E. Aune, Revelation 17-22, p.937) However, her being called ‘mother’ can also be related to the preceding Babylon ‘the great’ (h( mega&lh). In that case, the whore appears not just as mother, but as represention of the Great Mother. For Yarbro Collins ‘the great prostitute of ch. 17 is the Terrible Mother. Her character as a prostitute symbolizes the seductive and charming power of the Great Mother’s lure toward self-dissolution in the unconscious sea of participation, of non-individuation.’ (A. Yarbro Collins, ‘Feminine Symbolism in the Book of Revelation’ in Biblical Interpretation 1 (1993) 20-33, p. 30) I have made a similar point, using the work of Kristeva, in my article ‘Apocalypse, Art and Abjection: Images of the Great Whore’ in: G. Aichele (ed.), Culture, Entertainment, and the Bible. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000 (forthcoming). [9] As Aune points out, the order of the elements mentioned by the angel in verse 7 is reversed in what follows. First, the beast, the seven heads and ten horns are explained and only at the very end, in verse 18, the woman. (D.E. Aune, Revelation 17-22, p.959) [10] D.E. Aune, Revelation 17-22, p.916. [11] I consider it more likely that musth&rion (mystery) is part of the introduction to the title, than part of the title itself. This interpretation is also supported by verse 7 where the angel announces that he will explain ‘the mystery of the woman’ (to_ musth&rion th=j gunaiko&v). In both cases, however, ‘it describes a hidden meaning of Babylon the Great, that needs further revelatory interpretation’ (G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, p.859) [12] This is the majority view. According to Beale, however, not just Rome is meant, but ‘the apostate church and unbelieving Israel are included inasmuch as they have become part of that sinful world system.’ (G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, p.886). Other authors suggest that with Babylon not Rome, but Jerusalem is meant. So, for instance, J. Massyngberde Ford, Revelation. The Anchor Bible, 38. Garden City (NY): Doubleday, 1975, p.285. [13] As G. Corrington Streete observes: ‘The prophets of the exile (…) are particularly jealous for the honor of JHWH, which becomes symbolic of their own, a point illustrated by the fact that by far the largest number of occurences of the terminology of adultery (thirty-four) are found in the writings of the exilic prophet Ezekiel, who is also the prophet with the most graphic and violent imagery of sexual punishment.’ (G. Corrington Streete, The Strange Woman. Power and Sex in the Bible. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1997, pp.79-80). [14] In other prophetic texts Israel or Judah are presented as a whore (for instance Hosea 2; Jeremiah 2:20-3:20). The accusation of prostitution also occurs in Jeremiah 13:20-27 with respect to Judah/Jerusalem. It should further be noted that in other cases cities (especially Jerusalem) are presented in a more positive sense for instance as Gods bride or wife. [15] See also Isaiah 47:1-3 where Babylon and Chaldea are addressed as women facing divine vengeance. [16] Many commentators uncritically reproduce this view. So for instance Ruiz when he writes: ‘In Rev 17,16 the devouring of the Prostitute’s flesh is part of the punishment justly inflicted because of her crimes.’ (J.-P. Ruiz, Ezekiel in the Apocalypse: The Transformation of Prophetic Language in Revelation 16,17-19,10. European University Studies Series XXIII. Theology Vol. 376. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang, 1989, p.366. Italics are mine). [17] As Van Dijk-Hemmes remarks ‘The intention is probably to strengthen the audience’s resolve that both metaphorical women, so perverse since their very maidenhood, indeed deserve the utterly degrading and devastating treatment to which they are to be exposed.’ (F. van Dijk-Hemmes, ‘The Metaphorisation of Woman in Prophetic Speech: An Analysis of Ezekiel 23’ in: A. Brenner, F. van Dijk-Hemmes, On Gendering Texts. Female and Male Voices in the Hebrew Bible. Leiden: Brill, 1993, 167-176, p.175) [18] As Ruiz argues ‘in all three texts (Ezekiel 16; 23; Revelation 17) the metaphors are so constructed that the language of hating, stripping/devastating and burning serve on the sociopolitical stratum as they would in describing the fate of a woman punished for sexual misconduct.’ (J.-P. Ruiz, Ezekiel in the Apocalypse, p.365) However, in his view, Revelation 17:16 differs from the parallel texts in Ezechiel in so far as: 1. different cities are in view and 2. ‘devouring her flesh’ is absent in Ezechiel 16 and 23. As a third difference I would add that the notion of sexual infidelity/adultery present in Ezechiel 16 and 23 is absent in Revelation 17, where no partner is mentioned. [19] As Fekkes points out this text may rather have played a role in the formulation of Revelation 17:2a and 18:3b.9b. (J. Fekkes, Isaiah and Prophetic Traditions in the Book of Revelation. Visionary Antecedents and their Development. Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Supplement Series, 93. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994, p.211-212) [20] According to Ruiz, this image ‘looks ahead to the use of Ezek 39,17-20 in Rev 19,17-8.21’ (J.-P. Ruiz, Ezekiel in the Apocalypse, p.366). There are indeed verbal correpondences between these texts in so far as the expression ‘to eat someone’s flesh’ is used, but in my view the correspondence with 2 Kings 9:36-37 is more prominent in Revelation 17:16 than that with Ezekiel 39:17-20. Massyngberde Ford sees a relation with Leviticus 26:27-33, because this text ‘suggests that one should look for cannibalism’ (J. Massyngberde Ford, Revelation, p.283). However, he overlooks the difference in subject, because in Leviticus 26 the one punished (the people of Israel) will eat the flesh (namely, of their sons and daughters), while in Revelation the one punished will be eaten (namely, by the beast and its horns). [21] The prediction in 2 Kings 9:36 that the dogs ‘shall eat the flesh of Jezebel’ (katafa&gontai ta_j sa&rkaj Iezebel) corresponds with the one in Revelation 17:16 (ta_j savrkaj au)th~j fa&gontai). The wording is the same, except that the Septuagint uses the compositum rather than the simplex form of the verb used in Revelation 17:16 and 19:18. [22] Besides the common expression (to eat her flesh), Beale also mentions that the fate of both women happens according to ‘the word of the Lord’ and lists 11 more parallels between Jezebel and Babylon. (G. Beale, Revelation, p.884). In my view, however, not all of them are equally relevant or to the point. [23] J. C. Exum, Plotted Shot, and Painted. Cultural Representations of Biblical Women. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Supplement Series, 215 – Gender, Culture, Theory, 3. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996, p.120-121. [24] E. Schüssler Fiorenza, Revelation. Vision of a Just World. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1993, p.95-96. [25] J.K. Kim, ‘ ”Uncovering her Wickedness”: An Inter(con)textual Reading of Revelation 17 from a Postcolonial Feminist Perspective’ in Journal for the Study of the New Testament 73 (1999) 61-81, p.73. See also M. Bal, ‘Metaphors He Lives By’ in: Semeia, 61: Women, War, and Metaphor (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993) 185-207, p.203; A. Yarbro Collins, ‘Feminine Symbolism’, p.31/ [26] Ph. Bird, ‘ ”To Play the Harlot”: An Inquiry into an Old Testament Metaphor’ in: P.L. Day (ed.), Gender and Difference in Ancient Israel. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989, 75-94, p.79: ‘Prostitution shares with fornication, as defined in Israel, a fundamental female profile, despite the fact that both activities require active male participation and may involve male initiation (cf. Gen. 38:15-16).’ See also J.C. Exum, Plotted, Shot, and Painted, p.112-113. [27] Po&rnh: 17:1.5.15.16; pornei&a: 17:2.4; 18:3; 19:2; porneu&w: 17:2; 18:3.9. [28] See for instance its occurrence in lists of vices: Mark 7:21-22; Galatians 5:19-21; Colossians 3:5. [29] T. Pippin, Death and Desire. The Rhetoric of Gender in the Apocalypse of John. Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992, p.64. [30] H. Stenström, The Book of Revelation: A Vision of the Ultimate Liberation or the Ultimate Backlash? A Study in 20th Century Interpretations of Rev 14:1-5, with special emphasis on feminist exegesis. (Unpublished dissertation) Uppsala, 1999, p.53. [31] E. Schüssler Fiorenza, The Book of Revelation. Justice and Judgment. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998 (2nd ed.), p.218. [32] J. C. Exum, Plotted, Shot, and Painted, p.120 n.55. [33] T. Pippin, Death and Desire, p.47. [34] T. Pippin, Apocalyptic Bodies. The Biblical End of the World in Text and Image. London/New York: Routledge, 1999, p.92. [35] E. Schüssler Fiorenza, The Book of Revelation, p.218. [36] The Bible and Culture Collective, The Postmodern Bible. New Haven/London Yale University Press, 1995, p.262. [37] E. Schüssler Fiorenza, The Book of Revelation, p.219. [38] E. Schüssler Fiorenza, The Book of Revelation, p.218 (italics are mine). [39] H. Stenström, The Book of Revelation, p.284-285. [40] J.K. Kim, ‘ ”Uncovering her Wickedness” ’, p.61. [41] J.K. Kim, ‘ ”Uncovering her Wickedness” ’, p.63. [42] Ch. de Stoop, Ze zijn zo lief, meneer. Antwerpen: Kritak, 1992, p.93. [43] Ch. de Stoop, Ze zijn zo lief, meneer, p.53-55. [44] The expression originally comes from Jon Sobrino, but is adapted by Stenström to refer more specifically to the death context of women: ‘By ”death context of women”, I understand the circumstances under which women die because they are women, and those where women do not die physically but are subjected to destructive powers with create a state of death during life.’ (H. Stenström, The Book of Revelation, p.23). [45] blasfhmi&a: 17:3; a)ka&qartoj: 17:4; 18:2; bde&lugma: 17:4.5; a)di&khma: 18:5; plana&w: 18:23; fqei&rw: 19:2. [46] Reference to the situation of prostitutes in antiquity is made by Sutter Rehmann. According to her ‘the waters’ in 17:1.15 can be seen as a realistic reference to the places where prostitutes were contacted. ‘Für Korinth ist es z.B. belegt, daß Sklavinnen in Bädern arbeiteten und dort, neben Handtuch und Seifenartikeln, den Gästen sexuelle Dienste anboten.’ (L. Sutter Rehmann, Vom Mut, genau hinzusehen. Feministisch-befreiungstheologische Interpretationen zur Apokalyptik. Luzern: Edition Exodus, 1998, p.97. [47] So also Sutter Rehmann: ‘Es ist aber auffallend, daß wir nichts von einem Lohn erfahren, den sie von den Freiern erhalten würde.’ (L. Sutter Rehmann, ‘Die Offenbarung des Johannes. Inspirationen aus Patmos’ in L. Schottroff; M.-T. Wacker (eds.), Kompendium Feministische Bibelauslegung. Gütersloh: Chr. Kaiser/Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 725-741, p.735.) [48] E.Uy Eviota, The Political Economy of Gender. Women and the Sexual Division of Labour in the Philippines. London/New Jersey: Zed, 1992, p.9: [49] J.K. Kim, ‘ ”Uncovering Her Wickedness” ’, p.69. © Caroline Vander Stichele 2000, lectio@theol.unibe.ch, ISSN 1661-3317 |
||
© Theol. Fakultät der Universität Bern, lectio@theol.unibe.ch
produced by moka, 2000