References to the Mishnah, Tosefta, Sipre Numbers, Sipre Deuteronomy, Babylonian Talmud and Palestinian Talmud are indicated respectively by m., t., Sipre Num., Sipre Deut., b. and y., followed by an abbreviation for the name of the tractate. A version of this paper was read at the 1993 AAR/SBL Annual Meeting in the “History and Literature of Early Judaism” section. In addition to the participants of that section and the two anonymous referees for this journal, I owe thanks to several people who read this paper in one or another of its various forms and offered many helpful suggestions: Shaye Cohen, Richard Kalinin, Benny Kraut, Holt Parker, Amy Richlin, Benjamin Sommer, Richard Sarason, and Judith Romney Wegner. I, of course, remain responsible for the ideas and remaining errors.

1 Austin, J. L., How to Do Things with Words (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1962).Google Scholar

2 Ibid, pp. 4–11,94–107.

3 Ibid., pp. 5–6.

4 I return below to this issue in greater detail. The scholarly controversy over the limits of the application of speech act theory is beyond the scope of this paper, but see especially Searle, John R., Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1969). Throughout this paper I follow the conclusions of Petrey, who argues that all language, including textual language (for which Austin did not allow), is performative, that is, has illocutionary force (Sandy Petrey, Speech Acts and Literary Theory [New York: Routledge, 1990], pp. 22–41).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 One notable exception is Fraade, Steven D., From Tradition to Commentary: Torah and Its Interpretation in the Midrash Sijre to Deuteronomy (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1991). Fraade argues that Sifre Deuteronomy had an illocutionary effect on its audience, helping rabbis to establish group identification and solidarity: In a sense, as they work through the commentary the commentary works throught [sic] them, (p. 19). I argue here that disparate traditions, like a fixed text, can also have a transformative force.Google Scholar

6 See for examples Mulvey, Laura, Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, Screen 16, no. 3 (1975): 6–18;CrossRefGoogle ScholarLauretis, Teresa de, Alice Does not: Feminism, Semiotics, Cinema (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984); Judith Mayne, Feminist Film Theory and Criticism, Signs 11 (1986): 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 See Martin, Emily, The Egg and the Sperm: How Science has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male–Female Roles, Signs 16 (1991): 485–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 Rabbinic social organization is poorly understood. Lee Levine postulates that in Palestine in the mid–late third century the rabbis formed a class, although his use of the term is somewhat vague (Lee Levine, The Rabbinic Class of Roman Palestine [New York: Jewish Theological Seminary and Yad Izhak Ben–Zvi, 1989], pp. 13–14). Goodblatt and Gafhi have debated whether rabbis in Babylonia were organized in disciple circles or larger learning academies. See Goodblatt, David, Rabbinic Instruction in Sassanian Babylonia (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975);Google Scholar and idem, New Developments in the Study of the Babylonian Yeshivot, lion 46 (1981): 14–38 (in Hebrew); Isaiah Gafni, Yeshiva and Metivta, Zion 43 (1978): 12–37 (in Hebrew). Both of these alternatives share the assumption that these groups were organized expressly for the purpose of study and learning of texts. The intended reader of rabbinic texts, especially the Talmudim, is also not well understood. For some preliminary comments, see Kraemer, David, The Intended Reader and the Bavli, Prooftexts 13 (1993): 125–140, esp. 132–133.Google Scholar

9 Rabbinic jurisdiction over the punishment of offenders who did not voluntarily submit to the rabbinic courts is not well understood. It appears, however, that only in exceptional cases did the rabbis administer punishments other than flogging, and even then they were said to have acted illegally. See Origen, Ep. adAfricanus 14 (Patrologia Graeca, 11:41); b. Git. 67b; b. B. Qam. 59a–b. See further Isaiah M. Gafhi, The Jews of Babylonia in the Talmudic Era (Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center 1990), pp. 99–100 (in Hebrew); Jacob Neusner, A History of the Jews in Babylonia (5 vols.; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965–70), 2:282–287, 3:220–29; Goodman, Martin, State and Society in Roman Galilee, A.D. 132–212, (Totowa, N.J.: Rowman & Allanheld, 1983), p. 123.Google Scholar

10 I make no argument throughout this paper on the thorny issue of whether, and when, these texts circulated in oral or written form. While my argument is neater if we assume assume that they circulated in written form at a fairly early stage of their genesis, it is not invalidated if we assume an oral circulation (whether in a public context via sermons or a narrower context in individual rabbinic schools or academies). Although it strikes me as unlikely that the texts considered here, many of which are highly stylized, circulated orally, it is likely that the attitudes expressed in them were part of public discourse. I thank a referee for raising this issue.

11 For a statement on how these strategies of control, among others, were manipulated and deployed, see Foucault, Michel, The History of Sexuality, vol. 1, An Introduction, trans. Hurley, Robert (New York: Random House, 1980).Google Scholar

12 See Lauretis, Teresa de, Technologies of Gender (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987), pp. 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 What this passage means in its biblical context—especially its similarity or dissimilarity to trials by ordeal — is not our concern. In this article I deal only with the rabbinic use of this passage. For some comments on its biblical context, see Frymer–Kensky, Tikvah, The Strange Case of the Suspected Sotah (Numbers V 11–31), Vetus Testamentum 34 (1984): 11–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14 Milgrom argues that (2) and (3) may be inherent in the biblical text. See Milgrom, Jacob, Numbers, TheJPS Torah Commentary (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1989), p. 303, nn. 55, 64.Google Scholar

15 See t. Sot. 14:2 (ed. S. Lieberman, The Tosefta [4 vols.; New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1955–88], 3.2:235–236).Google Scholar

16 m. Sota 1:4, 6 (ed. H. Albeck, The Mishnah [rpt. 6 vols.; Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1988], 3:234, 235). All translations of rabbinic texts are my own. All translations of biblical texts are from Tanakh: A New Translation of the Holy Scriptures according to the Traditional Hebrew Text (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1985). Some translations have been slightly modifiedGoogle Scholar

17 For another example on the link between the suspected adulteress and public humiliation, see Sipre Deut. 26 (ed. L. Finkelstein, Sipre on Deuteronomy [rpt New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1969], 36–37); Sipre Num. 137 (ed. H. S. Horovitz, Sipre Numbers [rpt. Jerusalem: Shalem, 1992], 183); b. Yoma 76b. On this tradition, see Lieberman, Saul, Greek in Jewish Palestine (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1942), pp. 162–164; Steven D. Fraade, Sipre Deuteronomy 26 (ad Deut. 3:23): How Conscious the Composition? Hebrew Union College Annual 54 (1983): 245–301. The role that honor and shame played in Jewish societies in late antiquity is obscure.Google Scholar

18 b. Sofa 8b, my emphasis.

19 m. Sofa 1:5–6 (ed. Albeck, 3:234–235). See also. Sofa 1:7, 17a.

20 On this phrase, see m. Sofa 2:1 (ed. Albeck, 3:237); 6. Sofa 14a; y. Sofa 2:1, 17d. On the meal offering, see Destro, Adriana, The Law of Jealousy: Anthropology of Sotah (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989), pp. 89–106.Google Scholar

21 m. Sofa 3:3 (ed. Albeck, 3:240).

22 t. Sofa 2:3 (ed. Lieberman, 3.2:159). The same phrase is used in m. Sanh. 7:2 (ed. Albeck, 4:189–190), to describe how execution by burning is carried out.

23 m. Sofa 1:7 (ed. Albeck, 3:235), cited below.

24 This follows Liebermans suggestion (Lieberman, Saul, Tosefta Ki–fshutah: A Comprehensive Commentary on the Tosefta [10 vols.; New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1955–1988], 8:637 [in Hebrew]. Hereafter abbreviated Tos. Kip.). The force of this action–a woman putting on a head–covering for her lover–is obscure, but seems to imply that this is a form of dressing up for her lover.Google Scholar

25 Following Lieberman, Ibid.

26 Following Lieberman, Ibid.: pSS.

27 t. Sota 3:2–4 (ed. Lieberman, 3.2:159).

28 See also t. Sota 4:10 (ed. Lieberman, 3.2:174).

29 t. Sota 4:16 (ed. Lieberman, 3.2:175–176).

30 SipreNum. 21 (ed. Horovitz, 25).

31 y. Sota 3:5, 19a. See alsoy Sota 1:5, 17a; 4:1, 19c.

32 See, for examples, Lev 21:7, 14; Josh 2:1, 6:17, 22, 25; Ezek 16:30, 35. See further Loewenstamm, S., Encyclopedia Biblica (9 vols.: Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1964–1988), 2: 935–937 (in Hebrew).Google Scholar

33 For examples of types of intercourse that render a woman a zonah, see m. Yebam. 8:5 (ed. Albeck, 3:43) (levir and his levirate wife when one of them is sterile); m. Ketub. 5:1 (ed. Albeck, 3:103–104) (man and a wife to whom he pledged less than the minimum marriage settlement); Sipre Deut. 213 (ed. Finkelstein, 247)

34 Sipra Emor 1:7 (ed. J. H. Weiss, Sipra [Vienna: Jacob Schlossberg, 1862], 94b). See also, Sipra Kod. 7 (ed. Weiss, 90d). The statement is cited three times in the Palestinian Talmud, and in each is considered authoritative: y. Yebam. 6:5, 7c; 7:5, 8b; 13:1, 13b. Its citation in the Babylonian Talmud is always counter–normative: b. Yebam. 59b, 61b, 76a; b. Sank. 51a; b. Tern. 29b, 30a. On this, see further, Michael, L.Satlow, Talking about Sex: Rabbinic Rhetorics of Sexuality (Brown Judaic Studies; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995]), pp. 121–23.Google Scholar

35 For examples, see Sipre Num. 115 (ed. Horovitz, 128–129); y. Taan. 1:4, 64d; b. Ber. 23a; b. Sanh. 82a. See further, Jastrow, M., Dictionary of the Targumim, Talmud Babli, Yerushalmi and Midrashic Literature (2 vols.; London: Duckworth, 1886–1903), 1:388, s.v.Google Scholar

36 Fields: m. Ketub. 1:6 (ed. Albeck, 3:90–91); Bread: b.Sabb. 62b; b. Yoma 18b; Fish: b. Yoma 75a; Cup: t. Sofa 5:9 (ed. Lieberman, 3.2:178–79); b. Ketub. 75b. The rabbis regularly use euphemisms when discussing female sexuality. See J. Nacht, Euphemismes sur la femme dans la litterature rabbinique, Revues des Etudes Juives 59 (1910): 36–41; Melamed, E. Z., Lashon Nikiyyah Kinuyim bmishnah, Leshonenu 47 (1982–1983): 3–17, esp. 7–10 (in Hebrew). See also Page duBois, Sowing the Body: Psychoanalysis and Ancient Representations of Women (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988).Google Scholar

37 See, for examples of women as temptresses, t. Qidd. 5:14 (ed. Lieberman, 3.2:297); m. Avot 1:5 (ed. Albeck, 4:354); Sipre Num. 139 (ed. Horovitz, 185); y. Ketub. 1:8, 25d; y. Sabb. 14:4, 14d (par. y. Abod. Zar 2:2, 40d); b. Sanh. 75a. Occasionally women are portrayed as more actively seducing men. See y. Sota 3:4, 19a; b. Ketub. 65a; b. Sabb. 62b (par. b. Yoma 9b).

38 m. Sota 3:4 (ed. Albeck, 3:240–241); b. Qidd. 80b; b. Ketub. 51b, 54a, 62b.

39 See The Babylonian Talmud with Variant Readings: Tractate Nedarim (Jerusalem: Yad HaRav Herzog, 1991), part 1, p. 174, esp. n. 56. From this passage, it is not clear what position is being referred to. The dictionaries and commentators take it to mean anal intercourse. See Jacob Levy, Worterbuch iiber die Talmudim und Midraschim (reprinted 4 vols.; Berlin and Wien: B. Harz, 1924), 1:485, s.v., and Kohuts remarks in A. Kohut, Aruch Completum (8 vols.; Vienna, 1878–92), 3:232, s.v., idem, Additamenta ad Aruch Completum, (Vienna, 1937), p. 81.Google Scholar

40 b. Ned. 20b.

41 For other examples of women compared to food in rabbinic literature, see above and b. Sanh. 100b; b. Sota lib; b. Sabb. 13a. Such comparisons were common in the ancient world. See Athenaeus 10, 457d; Henry, Madeline M., The Edible Woman: Athenaeuss Concept of the Pornographic, in Pornography and Representation, ed. Richlin, Amy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), pp. 250–268. My interpretation runs counter to two recent comments on this passage. According to Biale, R. Judah, by symbolically throwing up his hands implicitly criticizes such practices (David Biale, Eros and the Jews: From Biblical Israel to Contemporary America [New York: Basic Books, 1992], p. 51). This reading strikes me as forced. Boyarin examines this text in more detail, arguing that the context in which it occurs serves exactly to counter the idea of female sexual objectification. See Daniel Boyarin, Carnal Israel: Reading Sex in Talmudic Culture (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993), pp. 109–122. Boyarin goes so far as to label this text a very embryonic ars erotica, (p. 132), following Foucaults mistaken understanding of classical sources. See Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, vol. 1, An Introduction, pp. 57–8. Cf., Holt N. Parker, Loves Body Anatomized: The Ancient Erotic Handbooks and the Rhetoric of Sexuality, in Pornography and Representation, pp. 90–111, esp. 103–4.Google Scholar

42 b. Nid. 45a

43 m. Nid. 5:4 (ed. Albeck, 5:390); b. Nid. 45a. Alternatively, the mishnah might mean that there is no hymen.

44 My thanks to Judith Romney Wegner who brought this fact to my attention.

45 y. Sofa 4:5, 19d.

46 The principle is termed For a full discussion, see b. Ketub. 51b. Most of the discussion is attributed to Babylonian amoraim.

47 To the sources already discussed may be added several other texts of generally more legal flavor. Women are legally penalized, for example, for immodest behavior in m. Ketub. 7:6 (ed. Albeck, 3:112); they are, according to some authorities, forced to tend to those needs of their husbands that have sexual overtones even when they themselves are in mourning (b. Moed Qat. 19b); and they are threatened with death in childbirth if they do not inform their husbands that they are menstruating (m. Sabb. 2:6 [ed. Albeck, 2:23], especially as interpreted in b. Sabb. 31b–32a). My thanks to Shaye Cohen, who directed me to some of these sources.

48 Most scholars who have written on rabbinic constructions of sexuality have confined themselves primarily to examinations of rabbinic legislation. See Epstein, Louis, Sex Laws and Customs in Judaism (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1948). More sophisticated is David Biale, Eros and the Jews, pp. 33–59; Boyarin, Carnal Israel.Google Scholar

49 m. Sofa 1:7–8 (ed. Albeck, 3:235–236).

50 This shift is partly to be accounted for by the associative grouping of m. Sofa 1:7–9 (ed. Albeck, 3:235–236). All of these passages are linked by their discussion of measure for measure. Such associative groupings are common in the Mishnah. See H. L. Strack and G. Stemberger, Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992), pp. 137–138. Nevertheless, this particular grouping appears not to be coincidental, but to have been intentionally constructed in order to convey its point. It is interesting to note, although beyond the scope of this paper, that the next pericope, 1:9, shifts suddenly again. This passage not only applies the measure for measure principle to reward rather than punishment, but begins with Miriam. The purpose of beginning with Miriam might be to contrast the bad woman with the good woman.

51 According to 2 Sam 16:22, Absalom had intercourse with his fathers concubines. The number of concubines is inferred from 2 Sam 15:16.

52 m. Sofa 9:9 (ed. Albeck, 3:258–259). See the interpretation of this passage offered in t. Sofa 14:2 (ed. Lieberman, 3.2:235–236).

53 Num 25:6–8.

54 SipreNum. 131 (ed. Horovitz, 172).

55 y. Sank 10:2, 27d. See also,. Sank 9:11, 27b.

56 The printed edition reads kutit. I am following MS Munich 95.

57 b. Sank. 81b–82b. See also b. Abod. Tar. 36b.

58 To my knowledge, this is the only place in the literature that such a claim is made, although the stories in the Babylonian Talmud of rabbis flogging men who have had intercourse with Gentile women seem to assume it. See b. Ber. 58a (attributed to R. Shila). The printed edition reads that he was caught with an Egyptian woman, but manuscripts replace this with the more general Gentile woman. See J. Rabbinovicz, Dikduke Soferim (reprinted 14 vols.; Brooklyn and Jerusalem: Meain Hahohmah, 1959/60), 1:326; b. Ta an. 24b (attributed to Court of Raba); y. Taan. 3:4, 66c (a rabbi castigates the Jews of Sepphoris for their acts of Zimri. The act of Zimri as recorded in the Bible and discussed in talmudic literature was intercourse with a Gentile woman. But the talmudic use of this phrase is not necessarily consistent. See, for example, b. Sofa. 22b, which appears to use acts of Zimri to refer to general transgressions. The reference in this tradition to the plague, however, echoes that of the biblical story of Zimri).

59 See Satlow, Michael L., Wasted Seed: The History of a Rabbinic Idea, Hebrew Union College Annual, 65 (1994): 137–75.Google Scholar

60 Not surprisingly, the only passages in rabbinic literature where, to my knowledge, men are sexually objectified discuss pathic male homoeroticism, i.e., situations where men are thought to be behaving like women. See Satlow, Michael L., They Abused Him Like a Woman: Homoeroticism, Gender Blurring, and the Rabbis in Late Antiquity, Journal of the History of Sexuality 5 (1994): 1–25.Google Scholar

61 Austin, How to Do Things, pp. 25–38

62 Kappeler, Susanne, The Pornography of Representation (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1986), esp. pp. 18–62. The androcentric nature of representation is also discussed by de Lauretis, Alice Doesnt pp. 12–36.Google Scholar

63 This position is most often identified with Catherine MacKinnon. See MacKinnon, Catherine, Feminism Unmodified (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1987). See further Susan Gubar, Representing Pornography: Feminism, Criticism, and Depictions of Female Violation, in For Adult Users Only, ed. Susan Gubar and Joan Hoff (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989), pp. 47–67.Google Scholar

64 Langton, Rae, Speech Acts and Unspeakable Acts, Philosophy & Public Affairs 22 (1993): 313.Google Scholar

65 See, for examples, Livy 3.44–58; Ovid, Ars Amatoria, 1.99–134. See also Amy Richlin, Reading Ovids Rapes, in Pornography and Representation, pp. 158–179Google Scholar

66 See, for example, Martial 3.85, 86; 6.23.

67 See Athenaeus 13.605f4–10. See further Henry, The Edible Woman.

68 See Amy Richlin, Roman Oratory, Pornography, and the Silencing of Anita Hill, Southern California Law Review 65 (1992): 1321–32.

69 Pornography and Representation, p. xviii.

70 See for examples Sir 23:22–26, 26:10–12, 41:22, 42:9–10. Camp sees 26:10–12 as pornographic (Claudia V. Camp, Understanding a Patriarchy: Women in Second Century Jerusalem Through the Eyes of Sira, Ben, in Women Like This: New Perspectives on Jewish Women in the Greco–Roman World, ed. Levine, Amyjill [Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991], pp. 1–39, esp. 22).Google Scholar

71 See Betsy Halpern–Amaru, Portraits of Women in Pseud–Philos Biblical Antiquities in Women Like This, pp. 83–106.Google Scholar

72 Paul, especially in 1 Cor 7, also appears to objectify women. This is not to suggest that all Jewish literature from this time had these characteristics. Far from it: this literature, more than most contemporaneous bodies of literature, gives remarkable expression to female characters. See, for examples, Judith and Testament of Job. See further Richard I. Pervo, Aseneth and Her Sisters: Women in Jewish Narrative and in Greek Novels, in Women Like This pp. 147–160, esp. 155–159; van der Horst, Pieter W., Images of Women in the Testament of Job, in Studies on the Testament of Job (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 93–116.Google Scholar

73 See Mascialees, Frances E., Sharpe, Patricia, and Cohen, Colleen Ballerino, The Post Modernist Turn in Anthropology: Cautions from a Feminist Perspective, Signs 15 (1989): 11;Google Scholar Susan Gal, Between Speech and Silence: The Problematics of Research on Language and Gender, in Gender at the Crossroads of Knowledge: Feminist Anthropology in the Postmodern Era, ed. Micaela di Leonardo (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), pp. 175–203. Bourdieu too notes that strategies of reproduction of cultural norms are intrinsically related to strategies of social domination. See Bourdieu, Pierre, Outline of a Theory of Practice, trans. Nice, Richard (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), p. 70.Google Scholar

74 Christine Froula, The Daughters Seduction: Sexual Violence and Literary History, Signs 11 (1986): 633. See also Gilbert, Sandra M. and Gubar, Susan, The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth–Century Literary Imagination (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979), pp. 16–17.Google Scholar

75 Although in later times, different kinds of humiliating ceremonies do appear to have existed in Jewish communities. See Lieberman, Saul, Shaving of the Hair and Uncovering of the Face Among Jewish Women, in his Texts and Studies, (New York: Ktav, 1974), pp. 52–56.Google Scholar

76 The relationship between pornography and actual violence against women is, of course, a still unanswered question. Other rabbinic dicta, however, are clear in prohibiting marital rape. See Boyarin, Carnal Israel, pp. 113–131; Nahum Rackover, Coercive Marital Relations Between a Man and His Wife, Shenaton Ha–Mishpat Ha–Ivri: Annual of the Institute for Research in Jewish Law 6–7 (1979–80): 295–317 (in Hebrew). We might also presume that women had recourse against abusive husbands in their own families, as appears to have been the case in ancient Rome. See Pomeroy, Sarah B., The Relationship of the Married Woman to Her Blood Relatives in Rome, Ancient Society 7 (1976): 215–27. The relationship between Jewish women and their families in late antiquity, however, requires further investigation.Google Scholar

77 Hence also the trouble that the rabbis, like other men in antiquity, had in legislating and regulating women who had no male guardians, such as widows. See Wegner, Judith Romney, Chattel or Person? The Status of Women in the Mishnah (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), esp. pp. 114–144.Google Scholar

78 My thanks to a referee for encouraging me to clarify my argument at this point

79 For some other methods recommended by the rabbis in the fight against the evil desire see Urbach, Ephraim E., The Sages: Their Concepts and Beliefs, trans. Abrahams, Israel (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1987), pp. 475–483; Boyarin, Carnal Israel, pp. 134–166.Google Scholar

80 This would coincide with the general Palestinian rabbinic emphasis on the reproductive function of sex, in contrast to the Babylonians. Cf. Satlow, Testing the Dish, pp. 317–20.Google Scholar

81 Trible, Phyllis, Texts of Terror: Literary–Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984).Google Scholar