This article employs an intersectional empire-critical approach to analyze John 4:1â42, examining how imperial ideology shapes ethnic, gendered, cultural, and religious dynamics within the pericope. By considering the consequences of Roman imperialism and its impact on the relevant characters, it highlights the complex nature of Jesusâs dual role as both the victim of imperial oppression and as the perpetuator of his own imperializing ideology that proclaims him as the âSavior of the World.â Foregrounding the historical specificity of Roman Samariaâincluding the imperial cult at Sebaste, auxiliary military forces, and the destruction of the Gerizim templeâthis study demonstrates that the Samaritan womanâs gender, ethnicity, and sexual history intersect to render her structurally necessary for the textâs imperializing mission. Her compounded marginality enables her to serve as the primary point of access for Samariaâs incorporation into Christâs emerging dominion: she mediates the communityâs inclusion while her own agency is instrumentally absorbed; her ethnic identity is dissolved even as her gendered identity remains marked. The narrativeâs mission and harvest language (4:35â38) models a template of acquisition and expropriation that mirrors Roman imperial strategies and anticipates the textâs later utility in global missionary and colonial projects, showing how ostensibly âinclusiveâ rhetoric can simultaneously authorize hierarchical control.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Ademiluka, Solomon O. 2023. ââ[Y]ou Have Had Five Husbandsâ: Interpreting the Samaritan Womanâs Marital Experience (Jn 4:16â18) in the Nigerian Context.â HTS 79 (1): 471â8, https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v79i1.8197.
Alter, Robert . 1988. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic.
Barag, Dan . 1993. âKing Herodâs Royal Castle at Samaria-Sebaste.â Palestine Exploration Quarterly 125 (1): 3â18, https://doi.org/10.1179/peq.1993.125.1.3.
Benko, Andrew . 2019. Race in Johnâs Gospel: Toward an Ethnos-Conscious Approach. Lanham: Fortress Academic.
Bhabha, Homi K. 1994. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.
Bourgel, Jonathan . 2016. âThe Destruction of the Samaritan Temple: A Reconsideration.â JBL 135 (3): 505â23.
Bourgel, Jonathan . 2019. âThe Samaritans During the Hasmonean Period: the Affirmation of a Discrete Identity?â Religions 10 (11): 628, https://doi.org/10.3390/rel10110628.
Calhoun, Craig , Frederick Cooper , and Kevin W. Moore , eds. 2006. Lessons of Empire: Imperial Histories and American Power. New York: New Press.
Carter, Warren . 2008. John and Empire: Initial Explorations. New York: T&T Clark.
Carter, Warren . 2011. âThe Blind, Lame, and Paralyzedâ (John 5:3): Johnâs Gospel, Disability Studies, and Postcolonial Perspectives.â In Disability Studies and Biblical Literature, edited by Candida Moss , and Jeremy Schipper . New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Choi, Jin Young . 2023. âJohnâs Writings and Empire: Views of Empire Studies and Postcolonial Criticism.â In The Oxford Handbook of Postcolonial Biblical Criticism, edited by R. S. Sugirtharajah . New York: Oxford University Press.
Conway, Colleen M. 2017. John and the Johannine Letters. Abingdon: Nashville.
Conway, Colleen M. 2018. âGender and the Fourth Gospel.â In The Oxford Handbook of Johannine Studies, edited by Judith M. Lieu , and Martinus C. de Boer . New York: Oxford University Press.
Conway, Colleen M. , and David M. Carr . 2010. A Contemporary Introduction to the Bible: Sacred Texts and Imperial Contexts. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.
Crenshaw, Kimberlé . 1989. âDemarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex.â University of Chicago Legal Forum: 139â67.
Daube, David . 1950. âJesus and the Samaritan Woman: The Meaning of ÏÏ Î³ÏÏάομαι.â JBL 69 (2): 137â47, https://doi.org/10.2307/3262081.
Derrett, J. Duncan M. 1984. âThe Samaritan Womanâs Pitcher.â DRev 102: 252â61.
Dube, Musa W. 1996. âReading for Decolonization (John 4:1â42).â Semeia 75: 37â59.
Dube, Musa W. 1997. âToward a Postcolonial Feminist Interpretation of the Bible.â Semeia 78: 11â26.
Dube, Musa W. 1998. âSavior of the World but not of This World: A Post-Colonial Reading of Spatial Construction in John.â In The Postcolonial Bible, edited by R. S. Sugirtharajah , 118â35. London: Sheffield.
Edwell, Peter . 2013. âDefinitions of Roman Imperialism.â In A Companion to Roman Imperialism, edited by Dexter Hoyos , 39â52. Leiden: Brill.
Ellis, S. 1997. âPooling Resources: The Use of Water for Social Control in the Roman Empire.â In TRAC 96: Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference Sheffield 1996, edited by K. Meadows , C. Lemke , and J. Heron , 144â50. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Evans, Craig A. 2000. âMarkâs Incipit and the Priene Calendar Inscription: From Jewish Gospel to Greco-Roman Gospel.â Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism 1: 67â81.
Fuchs, Esther . 1987. âStructure and Patriarchal Functions in Biblical Betrothal Type-Scenes: Some Preliminary Notes.â Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 3 (1): 7â13.
Goodman, Martin . 1987. The Ruling Class of Judaea: The Origins of the Jewish Revolt Against Rome, A.D. 66â70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heemstra, Marius . 2010. The Fiscus Judaicus and the Parting of the Ways. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Kim, Jean J. 2004. Woman and Nation: An Intercontextual Reading of the Gospel of John from a Postcolonial Feminist Perspective. Boston: Brill.
Knoppers, Gary . 2013. Jews and Samaritans: The Origins and History of Their Early Relations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Koester, Craig R. 1990. âThe Savior of the World (John 4:42).â JBL 109 (4): 665â80, https://doi.org/10.2307/3267369.
Koester, Craig R. 2003. Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel: Meaning, Mystery, Community. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Liew, Tat-siong Benny . 2005. âMargins and (Cutting-) Edges: On the (IL)Legitimacy and Intersections of Race, Ethnicity, and (Post)Colonialism.â In Postcolonial Biblical Criticism: Interdisciplinary Intersections, edited by Stephen D. Moore , and Fernando F. Segovia , 114â65. New York: T&T Clark.
Lincoln, Andrew T. 2005. The Gospel According to Saint John. BNTC 4. London: Continuum.
Macdonald, John . 1963. Memar Marqah: The Teaching of Marqah, Vol. 2. Berlin: Töpelmann.
Malina, Bruce J. , and Richard L. Rohrbaugh . 1998. Social Science Commentary on the Gospel of John. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Manning, Gary . 2024. âSharing Cups, Associating, or Getting Help? the Meaning of Î£Ï Î³ÏÏάομαι in John 4.9.â NTS 70 (4): 520â30, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0028688524000158.
Mattingly, David J. 2013. Imperialism, Power, and Identity: Experiencing the Roman Empire. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
McClintock, Anne . 1995. Imperial Leather: Race, Gender and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest. New York: Routledge.
McWhirter, Jocelyn . 2006. The Bridegroom Messiah and the People of God: Marriage in the Fourth Gospel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Merrell, James H. 1999. Into the American Woods: Negotiators on the Pennsylvania Frontier. New York: W. W. Norton.
Miller, D. M. 2014. âEthnicity, Religion and the Meaning of Ioudaios in Ancient âJudaismâ.â CurBR 12 (2): 216â65, https://doi.org/10.1177/1476993x13507532.
Neyrey, Jerome H. 1994. âWhatâs Wrong with This Picture? John 4, Cultural Stereotypes of Women, and Public and Private Space.â BTB 24 (2): 77â91, https://doi.org/10.1177/014610799402400205.
Paterculus, Velleius . 1924. Compendium of History. Translated by Fredrick Shipley. LCL. New York: G. P. Putnamâs Sons.
Penwell, Stewart . 2019. Jesus the Samaritan: Ethnic Labeling in the Gospel of John. Leiden: Brill.
Pitre, Brant . 2014. Jesus the Bridegroom: The Greatest Love Story Ever Told. New York: Penguin.
Porter, Stanley E. 2015. âThe Date of Johnâs Gospel and its Origins.â In The Origins of Johnâs Gospel, edited by Stanley E. Porter , and Hughson T. Ong , 11â29. Leiden: Brill.
Pummer, Reinhard . 2016a. The Samaritans: A Profile. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Pummer, Reinhard . 2016b. âWas There an Altar or a Temple in the Sacred Precinct on Mt. Gerizim?â JSJ 47: 1â21. https://doi.org/10.1163/15700631-12340451.
Richey, Lance B. 2007. Roman Imperial Ideology and the Gospel of John. Washington: Catholic Biblical Association.
Saddington, D. B. 1975. âThe Development of the Roman Auxiliary Forces from Augustus to Trajan.â ANRW II.3: 176â201.
Schüssler Fiorenza, Elisabeth . 2009. Democratizing Biblical Studies: Toward an Emancipatory Educational Space. Louisville: Westminster John Knox.
Sharp, Carolyn J. , and L. Juliana Claassens , eds. 2017. Feminist Frameworks: Celebrating Intersectionality, Interrogating Power, Embracing Ambiguity. New York: Bloomsbury T&T Clark.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty . 1988. âCan the Subaltern Speak?â In Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, edited by Cary Nelson , and Lawrence Grossberg , 271â313. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Thatcher, Tom . 2009. Greater than Caesar: Christology and Empire in the Fourth Gospel. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Walsh, Robyn Faith . 2019. âIVDAEA DEVICTA: The Gospels as Imperial âCaptive Literatureâ.â In The Bible and Class Struggle, edited by Robert Myles , 89â114. London: Lexington.
Warren, Meredith J. C. 2021. âFive Husbands: Slut-Shaming the Samaritan Woman.â The Bible and Critical Theory 17 (2): 51â70.
White, Richard . 2010. The Middle Ground: Indians, Empires, and Republics in the Great Lakes Region, 1650â1815. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, Demetrius K. 2022. âJesus and the Samaritan Woman: Taking Risks, Reversing Expectations, and Crossing Boundaries at the Well.â In Reading Biblical Texts Together: Pursuing Minoritized Biblical Criticism, edited by Tat-Siong Benny Liew , and Fernando F. Segovia . Atlanta: SBL.
Wills, Lawrence M. 2008. Not Godâs People: Insiders and Outsiders in the Biblical World. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Yee, Gale A. 2020. âThinking Intersectionally: Gender, Race, Class, and the Etceteras of Our Discipline.â JBL 139 (1): 7â26, https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1391.2020.1b.
| å ¨é¨æé´ | è¿å»ä¸å¹´ | è¿å»30天 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| æè¦æµè§æ¬¡æ° | 91 | 91 | 24 |
| å ¨ææµè§æ¬¡æ° | 13 | 13 | 6 |
| PDFä¸è½½æ¬¡æ° | 29 | 29 | 12 |
This article employs an intersectional empire-critical approach to analyze John 4:1â42, examining how imperial ideology shapes ethnic, gendered, cultural, and religious dynamics within the pericope. By considering the consequences of Roman imperialism and its impact on the relevant characters, it highlights the complex nature of Jesusâs dual role as both the victim of imperial oppression and as the perpetuator of his own imperializing ideology that proclaims him as the âSavior of the World.â Foregrounding the historical specificity of Roman Samariaâincluding the imperial cult at Sebaste, auxiliary military forces, and the destruction of the Gerizim templeâthis study demonstrates that the Samaritan womanâs gender, ethnicity, and sexual history intersect to render her structurally necessary for the textâs imperializing mission. Her compounded marginality enables her to serve as the primary point of access for Samariaâs incorporation into Christâs emerging dominion: she mediates the communityâs inclusion while her own agency is instrumentally absorbed; her ethnic identity is dissolved even as her gendered identity remains marked. The narrativeâs mission and harvest language (4:35â38) models a template of acquisition and expropriation that mirrors Roman imperial strategies and anticipates the textâs later utility in global missionary and colonial projects, showing how ostensibly âinclusiveâ rhetoric can simultaneously authorize hierarchical control.
| å ¨é¨æé´ | è¿å»ä¸å¹´ | è¿å»30天 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| æè¦æµè§æ¬¡æ° | 91 | 91 | 24 |
| å ¨ææµè§æ¬¡æ° | 13 | 13 | 6 |
| PDFä¸è½½æ¬¡æ° | 29 | 29 | 12 |