A Tale of Two Women

One of the striking features of the description of the New Jerusalem in the final chapters of Revelation is the identification of the city as "a bride". See, for example, the command of the vision's interpreting angel:

"Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb. And he bore me away in the spirit to a great, high mountain, and he showed me the holy city Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God" (Revelation 21:9-10)

The description of Jerusalem as Jesus' adorned bride contrasts sharply with the preceeding chapters' depiction of Babylon as "the great whore who corrupted the earth with her fornication" (Rev. 19:2). Babylon's presentation in the book is wholly misogynistic. Take this as an example:

"The woman was clothed in purple in scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the unclean acts of her fornication, and upon her forehead was written a name, a mystery, 'Babylon the great, the mother of whores and the abominations of the earth.' And I saw the woman was drunk from the blood of the holy ones and from the blood of their witness, Jesus." (Rev 17:4-6)

Revelation's treatment of women throughout the text is a major cause for concern for a modern reader. Women in Revelation are either adulterers (Jezebel in 2:20-23), mothers (the woman clothed with the sun in 12:1-6), prostitutes (Babylon) or wives (Jerusalem). For a text which expresses a hope for God to intervene and vindicate the oppressed and marginalised, Revelation shows no qualms about stereotyping and, indeed, demonising the female characters that are incorporated into the text.

Still more problematic is the way in which the text invites the reader to make a comparison between the adulterous Babylon and the chaste Jerusalem. Both cities are personified as women, and are presented in remarkably comparable terms. Both women are adorned with jewels and precious metals (see above for Babylon; for Jerusalem see 21:11-21 which expounds at great length the wealth and opulence to be found in the heavenly city). Jerusalem is betrothed to the Lamb, whereas Babylon emphatically declares "I am no widow, and I will never see grief" (18:7). Babylon seduces the nations and the world's kings, trade magnates and seafarers whereas in Jerusalem "the nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it." (21:24). Revelation sets these two cities/women alongside one another and extolls the virtues of the chaste bride whilst condemning the adulterous harlot. We of course must be aware of the symbolic nature of the language here: the choice is not strictly between two women, but the choice between two empires (namely, the profane Roman empire and the sanctified world which falls under the exclusive rule of God). Nevertheless, the binary decision between "whore" and "bride" which the text sets before the reader is highly problematic. (For more on the theme of the comparison between Babylon and Jerusalem as a stylistic device within the text, I highly recommend The Choice Between Two Cities: Whore, Bride and Empire in the Apocalypse by Barbara Rossing - I've given the Oxford library catalogue link here but the book is of course available elsewhere.)

The comparison is perhaps even more problematic when one considers how influential it has been in Revelation's history of interpretation. As I have mentioned in my previous post, I am working my way through Jerusalem by William Blake at present, and the text continually depicts a conflict between two of the poem's pre-eminent female characters, Jerusalem and Vala. The two women are repeatedly depicted in opposition to one another, vying for the affections of Albion, the archetypal human being. Take, for instance this passage from Plate 33 (chapter 2) lines 36-48

"I was a City & a Temple built by Albion's Children.
I was a Garden planted with beauty. I allured on hill & valley
The River of Life to flow against my walls & among my trees.
Vala was Albion's Bride & Wife in great Eternity,
The loveliest of the daughters of Eternity when in day-break
I emanated from Luvah over the Towers of Jerusalem,
And in her Courts among her little Children offering up
The Sacrifice of fanatic love! why loved I Jerusalem?
Why was I one with her, embracing in the vision of Jesus?
Wherefore did I, loving, create love, which never ye
Immingled God & Man, when thou & I hid the Divine Vision
In cloud of secret gloom which, behold, involve me round about?
Know me now Albion: look upon me. I alone am Beauty..."

That Blake has Babylon on the mind when he presents Vala here is confirmed by the very next plate when Albion addresses Vala as "Babylon" (line 8). Vala, here, seems to be the seductress par excellence, placing before Albion the choice between her, and the Divine-endorsed Jerusalem. In the following chapter of the book, Blake depicts Jerusalem in exile, languishing in a mill. Vala's reaction is far from sympathetic...

All night Vala hears, she triumphs in pride of holiness

To see Jerusalem deface her lineaamanets with bitter blows

Of despair, while the Satanic Holiness triumph'd in Vala

In a Religion of Chastity & Uncircumcised Selfishness

Both of the Heart & Heart & Loins, clos'd up in Moral Pride. (Plate 60, lines 45-49)

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Blake presents the Lamb's sympathies as lying with Jerusalem who is presented with a whole series of visions to console her in her predicament. It seems to me that Blake, who is so capable of subverting the usual constraints of morality (see especially The Marriage of Heaven and Hell), in these scenes of Jerusalem is standing in the long shadows cast by Revelation 16-22.

Of course, Blake still has a chapter to prove me wrong on that front though!