Unseeing the Shown, Showing the Unseen: The Images of John’s Apocalypse and the Visual Culture of Ancient Asia Minor Andrew Ryan Guffey Danville, Iowa Master of Theology, Princeton Theological Seminary, 2005 Master of Divinity, Emory University, 2004 Bachelor of Arts, Coe College, 2001 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Religious Studies University of Virginia April 24, 2014 Copyright © 2014 Andrew R. Guffey All Rights Reserved i Abstract The present study explores the visuality of John’s Apocalypse, with particular attention to John’s employment of images throughout the book, and in the context of the visual culture of ancient Asia Minor. The central argument of this study is that the images of the book of Revelation obliquely resemble the images (particularly of the divine world and divine persons, i.e., gods) that populated ancient Asia Minor. The question of the relationship between the images of the book of Revelation and those of ancient Asia Minor is not, however, a question of “influence,” “sources,” or “local reference,” but rather one of deep cultural resonance. The symmetry is not in the images themselves, but in their function: to provide for an artificial presence of something perceived to be absent—to “present,” by means of the techniques and practices of visual culture, the divine world and its denizens. The study unfolds in three parts. Part I introduces the problem of “apocalyptic images,” surveying two trends in apocalyptic scholarship (Chapter 1), tracing a history of the concept of “images” in apocalyptic studies (Chapter 2), and recommending a specific use of the term “image” in the study of apocalyptic literature which draws on recent Visual (Culture) Studies and Image Studies (Chapter 3). Part II compares images from ancient Asia Minor with images from the book of Revelation: The so-called Great Altar of Pergamum and the throne-room scene of Revelation 4-5 (Chapter 4); Domitianic numismatic iconography and the celestial woman of Revelation 12 (Chapter 5); and Artemis Ephesia, the celestial woman of Revelation 12 and the Great Whore of Revelation 17 (Chapter 6). The comparison of Part II leads to the conclusion that John’s images are not dependent on the ii images of Asia Minor, but that there is a resonance between them. Part III therefore analyzes the images of the book of Revelation as a work analogous to ancient oratory (Chapter 7). Ancient oratory knew a technique—ekphrasis—for evoking the visual in the verbal (Chapter 8), a technique that is strikingly similar to the Apocalypse’s images (Chapter 9). The images of the New Testament book of Revelation, or the Apocalypse of John, have long vexed interpreters: their presence has long been noted, but any coherent theory of the role of vision and images in the book of Revelation is lacking. This study is a first step towards such a theory. The book of Revelation, I conclude, is a fundamental work of Christian paideia: it is an education in unseeing the shown—the images of the divine in the visual culture of Asia Minor—and showing the unseen—the divine world of John’s Christian imagination. iii Dedicated… To the memory of my beloved father, Ronald Paul Guffey, …, … And to my beloved mother, Nancy Ann Guffey, To my beloved bride, Emily Ann Williams Guffey, And to my beloved sons, Owen Nathaniel Guffey and Ezra James Guffey, Without whom… iv Table of Contents Abstract i Dedication iii Table of Contents iv Acknowledgements v Introduction: Seeing the Apocalypse 1 Part I: Apocalyptic and Visual Culture 14 Chapter 1. Two Tales of Apocalyptic 16 Chapter 2. Apocalyptic Images beyond the Verbal-Visual Opposition 34 Chapter 3. What is an Image? 64 Part II: Revelation and Realia 81 Chapter 4. : The Great “Altar” of 89 Pergamum and the Divine Throne-room (Rev 4-5) Chapter 5. Domitianic Iconography and the Woman of Revelation 12 117 Chapter 6. “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!”: The Woman of 127 Revelation 12 and the Great Whore of Revelation 17 Conclusion to Part II 156 Plates for Part II 161 Part III: Ekphrasis and Apocalypse 172 Chapter 7. Rhetoric and the Book of Revelation 174 Chapter 8. Ancient Ekphrasis 207 Chapter 9. John’s Apocalypse as Ekphrasis 226 Conclusions 250 Bibliography 261 v Acknowledgements I have incurred many debts over my years of graduate work and in my work on this project. Judith Kovacs devoted incredible amounts of time and attention to this project from the beginning. She kept me honest and pushed me to clarify my thoughts, always with unflagging support and confidence in the project. For all of this I will long remain profoundly grateful. Martien Halvorson-Taylor directed the dissertation through its final stages and defense. I owe her thanks for our many conversations about the dissertation, and not less for her mentoring in teaching Hebrew Bible to undergraduates, but especially for her encouragement and administrative savvy at a crucial juncture in the dissertation process, which played no small role in getting the dissertation finished and defended. Harry Gamble’s excellent tutelage in the New Testament and Early Christianity and their Hellenistic context has left an indelible mark on this study, and indeed on my other scholarly endeavors. Tyler Jo Smith guided my first steps in working with material culture from Classical antiquity, and her excellent remarks on this study have saved me from several errors. Greg Goering encouraged and modeled many of the methodological positions taken in this study. He introduced me to a body of theoretical literature on the sensorium—not least David Morgan’s stimulating and helpful work—all of which informs this study, if not always explicitly. The University of Virginia, and its Department of Religious Studies, has been a rich environment in which to study, teach, learn, and work. Elizabeth Shanks Alexander, a masterful sage herself, illuminated for me the writings of the Rabbis. I was privileged to study with Robin Darling Young for a year, and I will ever be in her debt for teaching me vi the rudiments of Syriac. Among the other faculty at UVa from whose expertise and collegiality I have profited, Ben Ray, Karl Shuve, Heather Warren, Kurtis Schaeffer, and Coulter George deserve special mention, though space forbids more specific mention of their great deeds and virtues. My peers in the Judaism and Christianity in Antiquity (JCA) program have taught me much. I especially wish to thank David Litwa, Blaire French, Matt Burgess, Christine Landau, David Griffin, and Ben Laugelli from JCA. While in Charlottesville I made many friends, had many arguments, many of them over coffee at “the Lighthouse” or over a beer at Mellow Mushroom. For this fecund fellowship my thanks are due especially but not exclusively to Gillian Breckenridge, Robert LeBlanc, Ashleigh Elser, Ashley Faulkner, Nik Forti, Olivia Hutton, Mark James, Joe Lenow, Reuben Shank, and Brian Siebeking. Liz Smith deserves no small praise for keeping track of the graduate students in Religious Studies at the University of Virginia, since we can be an incorrigible lot. My thanks especially to Liz for “penciling me in” for a defense date at Mr. Jefferson’s Rotunda, which shortly thereafter was written over in ink and proved an effective carrot at the end of a daunting stick. Doug Burgess sustained me almost daily not just with administrative help, but also with conversation, bagels, and his photography. The University was generous enough to fully fund me under a Presidential Fellowship for most of my degree, which I acknowledge gratefully, as it eased our transition to Virginia and the burdens of graduate studies. St. Paul’s Memorial Church at the University of Virginia was also a tremendous help in easing the burdens of being a graduate student. My heartfelt thanks to all our friends at St. Paul’s, and to the Rev. Jim Richardson, vii rector. I wish especially to thank the Skinner Scholarship committee at St. Paul’s for four years of financial and vocational support. This dissertation builds on my many years of fine education, and for that education I have many to thank. To David M. Hay, who was my first mentor and guide in the world of biblical scholarship, Mark Elliott, and Rich Hoffman, all of Coe College and all of blessed memory, I owe much that cannot now be repaid. My thanks also to Elizabeth Galbraith for patiently broadening my inquiries in religious studies in those early years, much to my benefit. I owe a great deal to the wisdom, intelligence, and good humor of Luke Timothy Johnson and Carl Holladay at the Candler School of Theology. Both have been fair and honest advisors as well as constant supporters since my time at Emory. I wish also especially to thank Steve Ahearne-Kroll for years of supererogatory service and advice, and for pulling every string. I have no doubts I am where I am because of his support. Others I must thank, if all too briefly, for their various roles in making me the scholar I am today include: Brian Blount, John L. Drury, Karlfried Froehlich, Ryan Hansen, Kelby Harrison, Jonathan Lace, Steve Long, Tom Long, Travis McMaken, Matt Milliner, and Shane Wood. I finished this dissertation while in residence at Virginia Theological Seminary. I wish to record my humble thanks for the outpouring of prayers and support from the VTS community. Too many students, faculty, and staff could be named here, but a few deserve special mention: Mitzi Budde, Joani Peacock, Karen Madigen, and the staff of the Bishop Payne Library; John Yieh, Lisa Kimball, Melody Knowles, Tim Sedgwick, and Kate Sonderegger; Stephen, Lisa, and Maddie Trever.