Herodias and Salome in Mark’s story about the beheading of John the Baptist

TL;DR

This article offers a narrative analysis of Mark 6:14–29 and then compares that story intertextually with Flavius Josephus and with Oscar Wilde’s and Richard Strauss’s *Salome*. It argues that in Mark Herod Antipas is most guilty for John’s death, Herodias less guilty, and Salome least guilty, while later artistic rewritings transform Salome into a leading sexualized figure.

Key findings

• In Mark 6:14–29, Herod Antipas is the most guilty of the three: he says “John, whom I beheaded” (6:16), orders the execution without trial (6:27), and rashly swears to give the girl whatever she wishes. Herodias is less guilty because she wants John dead but cannot kill him herself; Salome is least guilty because she only asks what her mother wants and adds the “on a platter” detail (6:25). The paper argues her dance is described only as pleasing Herod (ἤρεσεν), not as erotic seduction, and that she is a κοράσιον, a little girl of around 12.
• On Mark 6:22, the article prefers the text-critical reading with αὐτοῦ, printed in Nestle-Aland from the 26th edition, which implies the girl is the daughter of Antipas and Herodias and is named Herodias like her mother. It nevertheless notes reluctance because this conflicts with Josephus’s claim that Salome is the daughter of Herodias and her first husband Herod.
• Compared with Josephus, Mark’s account is historically unreliable apart from the core that John was arrested and executed by Antipas. Josephus (*Jewish Antiquities* XVIII, 5.2 §116–119) says John was killed at Machaerus because Antipas feared an uprising; Herodias and Salome play no role, and there is no dance. The paper concludes that Josephus’s story is to be preferred for the true historical facts, and cites Meier’s judgment that Mark 6:17–29 is “erroneous in key historical matters” and “suffused with legendary and folkloric traits.”
• In Wilde’s 1894 play and Strauss’s 1905 opera, Salome becomes the leading role, falls in love with Jochanaan, performs the “dance of the seven veils,” and kisses his severed head; Strauss’s cuts shift Wilde’s relatively innocent girl further toward a sex-seeking woman. Recent performances in 2009 and 2017 further deconstruct the story, including a happy ending in 2009 and a bath in a bowl with a bloody corpse in 2017.

Methods

• Narrative analysis of Mark 6:14–29, including its sandwich construction with 6:7–13 and 6:30–31, its internal A/B/C structure, its flashback technique, and its function as foreshadowing of Jesus’ passion.
• Intertextual comparison with Flavius Josephus’s *Jewish Antiquities* XVIII and with Oscar Wilde’s *Salome* (1894) and Richard Strauss’s opera/libretto *Salome* (1905), with attention also to two recent performances (2009, 2017).
• The article is a literary-exegetical study; it states that it does not provide a historical reconstruction of what happened at Herod Antipas’s court, and it creates no new data.

Limitations

• The author states that his perspective is limited to the textual aspects of Wilde’s play and Strauss’s libretto, not a complete intermedial analysis; he also says there is a “great leap” from Mark to Wilde and Strauss, with many intermediate links.
• The author states that “intertextuality” is not strictly the right term for the transfer from Mark to Wilde/Strauss because the material moves across art forms; he prefers “intermediality” and says a complete analysis should do justice to that interplay.
• Evident in the text: the argument depends on a preferred textual-critical reading that conflicts with Josephus and on a selective reception history, with only two recent opera performances discussed; no independent historical evidence is introduced beyond literary comparison.