hand of one recording, late in life, the most prominent and most vividly remembered of many visions and many revelations. If Revelation was written by John the son of Zebedee, and if the same John supplied to a disciple traditions that form the basis of the Fourth Gospel, then some of the characteristics of Revelation may be expected to reappear in the Gospel, though tinged by a different personality and expressed in entirely different language. It is for this reason that Revelation is so fully discussed here, as to its date and unity, and later on (2998 (xxvi)-(xxxiii)) as to some of its visions, and as to the influence exerted on the Seer by Ezekiel and by Daniel. § 2. The Argument (as to the date) from numbers [2942* (i)] Bishop Lightfoot maintained that the Apocalypse was written before the fall of Jerusalem. And it has been argued with much apparent cogency that the language used about the heads and horns of the Beast points to that conclusion. But the number of the heads can be made to vary (1) by including or excluding the great Dictator Julius-as in the two widely differing alternative lists of Roman Emperors given by Clement of Alexandria (405—6) -and the three short-lived rivals for Nero's throne (Galba, Otho, and Vitellius), (2) by reckoning the three emperors of the Flavian House as "under one [head] (vp' ev)" as in Barnabas and the Sibylline Oracles, (3) by playing on the popular saying that Domitian was, as Juvenal says, "a bald Nero," or (as Tertullian) "a Sub-Nero”—and this at a time when it was believed by many that Nero would really return to take vengeance on Rome1. It can 1 [2942* (i) a] See Orac. Sib. v. 222: Πρῶτα μὲν ἐκ τρισσῶν κεφαλῶν σὺν πληγάδι ῥίζης Ὥστε φαγεῖν σάρκας γονέων βασιλῆος ἀνάγνου. The previous lines shew the meaning. The returning Nero is to destroy the "three heads" of the Flavian dynasty. Barnabas says (iv. 4—5) Xéyel dè oûtws καὶ ὁ προφήτης (Dan. vii. 24) Βασιλεῖαι δέκα ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς βασιλεύσουσιν, καὶ ἐξαναστήσεται ὄπισθεν αὐτῶν μικρὸς βασιλεύς, ὃς ταπεινώσει τρεῖς ὑφ ̓ ἓν τῶν βασιλέων. ὁμοίως περὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ λέγει Δανιήλ (Dan. vii. 7 foll.) καὶ εἶδον τὸ τέταρτον θηρίον πονηρὸν καὶ ἰσχυρὸν καὶ χαλεπώτερον παρὰ πάντα τὰ θηρία τῆς γῆς, καὶ ὡς ἐξ αὐτοῦ ἀνέτειλεν δέκα κέρατα καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν μικρὸν κέρας παραφυάδιον, καὶ ὡς ἐταπείνωσεν ὑφ ̓ ἓν τρία τῶν μεγάλων κεράτων. He changes Daniel's order and might give a reader the impression that "the prophet" is distinct from the subsequently mentioned "Daniel." Also where Daniel says (vii. 24) “ten kings," he says "ten kingdoms" 66 also be shewn that the numbers in the Apocalypse are in very many cases obviously mere symbols, as when the Seer speaks of "seven churches," and one hundred and forty-four thousand" of the "sealed," and that (as Origen suggests) he has almost always in view spiritual Powers of evil rather than (like Daniel) earthly kings or emperors. More particularly, his interest in numbers is of an antithetical nature. He shews the "seven" churches, and the "seven " spirits, and the "seven " angels, of God, conquering the Dragon as the Beast with the "seven " heads, and the Harlot that sits on "seven " hills1. (comp. Dan. vii. 17 “four kings," LXX and Theod. "kingdoms"). He twice inserts up' ev, which is not in either passage of Daniel. Similarly 2 Esdr. xii. 23 explains the three heads as "three kingdoms," but goes on to say, as though they were "kings" (ib. 26) “unus ex eis [Vespasian] super lectum suum morietur et tamen cum tormentis," and, of the two next (ib. 28) "unius [Domitian] enim gladius comedet [eum, i.e. Titus] qui cum eo, sed tamen et hic [Domitian] gladio in novissimis cadet." The legend that Domitian killed Titus may reflect a current tradition that the former not only (Suet. Titus 9) "plotted" his brother's death, but also effected it. [2942* (i) b] On Domitian, regarded as a second Nero, comp. Juvenal (iv. 38) who describes how "the last Flavian lacerated the almost lifeless world, and Rome served bald Nero"-for which utterance, the Scholiast says, he was banished. Mayor ad loc. quotes also Pliny Pan. 53, and Auson. Monost. de ord. xii imper. 11-12, who speaks of Titus as followed by "Frater quem calvum dixit sua Roma Neronem." Tertull. calls Domitian (Apol. 5) "Portio Neronis de crudelitate," and (De Pall. 4) "Subnero." Comp. Euseb. iii. 17 Tŷs Népwvos deoex@pías diádoxos. 1 [2942* (i) c] Origen has left no commentary on the Apocalypse. But in Comm. Johann. tom. i. 1-2 he questions the literal accuracy of the numbering in Rev. vii. 2-8, and implies that the passage has a mystical meaning. In his Comm. Ps. lxviii. 21 he suggests that "the heads of his enemies" may mean тà πрúτшS ÈK τῶν δαιμόνων ἐπισυμβαίνοντα νοήματα τῇ ψυχῇ, and this indicates that he would have at all events included a spiritual meaning in interpreting the "heads" of the Dragon and of the Beast in Rev. xii. 3 &c. if he had written his intended commentary, referred to at the end of this paragraph. He speaks of churches as being (Comm. Numb. iii. 3, Lomm. x. 28) "non solum in terris sed et in coelis ecclesias ex quibus et septem quasdam Joannes enumerat." Concerning Rev. xi. 8 "the great City, which is called spiritually Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified," he raises the question (Comm. Matth. Lomm. iv. 314) whether "the whole world" or "Judæa" is signified. On Rev. xii. 3 seven heads and ten horns," he says (Lomm. iv. 307) “Omnia haec exponere singillatim de capitibus septem draconis, quae forsitan possunt referri ad aliquos principes rerum nequitiae, sive ad tanta ducentium ad mortem peccata, non est temporis hujus ; exponentur autem tempore suo in revelatione Joannis. Sed et decem cornua dicere, quoniam sunt regna serpentinae malitiae, et habentis serpentis naturam...." 66 [2942* (i) d] The only striking exception to this rule-of the spiritual, not literal, significance, of numbers—is the mention of (Rev. xvii. 9—11) the “ seven hills" of Rome, followed by a mention of "seven kings," of whom " five have fallen, the one is, the other hath not yet come, and when he shall have come he must remain a little and the beast that was and is not " [the punctuation is here doubtful] even he [or, and he] is eighth and from the seven and goeth into destruction (kal ὅταν ἔλθῃ ὀλίγον αὐτὸν δεῖ μεῖναι καὶ τὸ θηρίον δ ἦν καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν καὶ αὐτὸς ὄγδοός ἐστιν καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἑπτά ἐστιν καὶ εἰς ἀπώλειαν ὑπάγει).” Comp. Enoch 18 "seven mountains," of which the middle one "reached to heaven like the throne of God," contrasted with ". 'seven stars, like great burning mountains, and like spirits "—afterwards (En. 21) described as "bound together" in chaos, “like great mountains, and flaming as with fire." The seven stars, or mountains, have (ib.) transgressed the commandment of God, and are bound in "the prison of the angels." [2942* (i) e] Here, doubtless, the Seer has been influenced by Daniel's description of Antiochus Epiphanes, as a Portent of Evil, who is to be (Dan. vii. 8) "among (Theod. èv μéow, LXX ȧvà μéσov),” and yet (Dan. vii. 24) “after,” the previously mentioned ten "horns." Applying this to the popular belief in a returning Nero-identified with Domitian, who is said by Pliny to have "avenged" the former he is struck, as a poet might be, by the similarity between the Beast (who is to be "from the seven and yet "the eighth ") and Daniel's horn (which is to be "among," and yet "after," the other horns). Perhaps, in the quarries of Patmos, he may have heard from fellow-toilers, fresh from the streets of Rome, something about the "seven" ancient kings of Rome repeated in the "seven " imperial kings from Augustus to Titus, to whom there is now added the returning Nero, in his imitator and avenger, Domitian. [2942* (i)ƒ] This mysterious (Rev. xvii. 9—11) "king"-whether he is regarded as the Beast, or as one of the heads of the Beast, or as both, is uncertain, but in any case the masc. autós denotes a "king”—is called "eighth." The only other instance of "eighth" in N.T., applied to persons, is 2 Pet. ii. 5 "Noah the eighth person," meaning "with seven others." At first sight there would appear to be no possible connexion between a number applied to Noah, and also applied to the Beast or the Beast's representative. But a brief consideration will shew that the numbers in this book (as well as occasional expressions) are influenced by what may be called the writer's recognition of :— THE PRINCIPLE OF ANTITHESIS [2942* (i) g] This is expressed by Sir. xxxiii. (xxxvi.) 14—15 “Good is set over against (ȧrévavтɩ) evil, and life over against death. So is a sinner over against a saint (evσeßoûs); and thus discern thou (čμßλeyov eis) all the works of the Most High two [and] two, one right against the one (ềV KATÉVAVTI TOû évós)." [2942* (i) h] The unity of the Roman Empire has been typified by Virgil in the line "Septemque una sibi muro circumdedit arces." This material unity has been taken by the Seer of the Apocalypse as a symbol of spiritual unity of a bad kind, a unity of consistent policy, dominating and (as Juvenal says) "lacerating" the nations of the earth, and compelling them to receive its "brand (xápayμa)” (xiii. 16, 17 etc., 7 times mentioned) which is opposed to the (vii. 2) "seal (σppayîda) of the living God" with which believers are "sealed," and perhaps also opposed to the (v. 1) "seven seals" of the Book of Redemption. [2942* (i) z] This contrast is especially manifest in the use of "seven," which is applied to a very great number of the manifestations of God, or to their adjuncts, 3966 ""stars, 9966 66 66 66 e.g. "spirits,' candlesticks,' angels," torches,' ""seals," the "horns" of the Lamb, the "eyes" of the Lamb, trumpets" and "thunders." Antithetically, "seven " is applied to the (xii. 3) "heads" and "diadems" of the dragon" and (xvii. 3, 7) to the "heads" of the "scarlet beast," and it is said that (xvii. 9-11) the "seven heads" are seven hills" (i.e. the seven hills of Rome) and that they are also "seven kings," and that the "eighth " is one of "the seven." This (with the exc. of xxi. 9) is the last mention of "seven," and it shews the spirit in which the writer uses seven throughout the book, as indicating spiritual antithesis, "good over against evil, life over against death." 66 [2942* (i)j] Note also the following antitheses relating severally to God or the Lamb on one side, and to the Beast on the other, or to the two causes for which they contend: In xvii. 11, taken with iv. 8, there appears to be a bitter antithesis, contrasting the past present and future, as applied to God, with the past present and future, as applied to the Power of Evil--the only abiding positive statement about the latter being that it "was." [2942* (i) k] Returning to Rev. xvii. 11 in the light of these illustrations of numerical antithesis, we may reasonably suppose that antithetical allusion exists in "the eighth [king]," as contrasted with 2 Pet. ii. 5 Noah "the eighth [person]." Also the Valentinians early in the second century (Iren. ii. 24. I, comp. i. 14. 4 Clark's note, and i. 15. 2) recognised 888 as a number symbolic of the Saviour. "Eighth" is connected with circumcision in the familiar phrase "circumcised the eighth day,” and with baptism, the ark, and Noah, in 1 Pet. iii. 20, 21 "in the days of Noah........few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water..... even baptism." That being so, the "eighth [king]," who is to precede the fiery destruction of the world, may be called "eighth" in antithesis to Noah. Elsewhere the writer thinks it well to tell us that the "number" of the Beast, instead of being 888, is (Rev. xiii. 18) 666. Philo (P. A. 101) deals with the latter indirectly in connexion with Noah. He speaks of 6, 60, and 600, and says that God would never have destroyed mankind "sub forma sexti" except for their excessive wickedness. Elsewhere he adds (P. A. 124) “in sexti numeri ratione corruptio." Apparently he would have thought that 666 represented the essence of diabolical power as the Valentinians found the essence of its opposite in 888. What precise name, or word, the Seer may have had in view, we do not know. But we may feel sure that he laid stress upon it, not solely because it represented any of the conjectured historical names, but also (if not entirely) because it represented spiritual evil. THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST [2942* (i) ] In connexion with Rev. xvii. 11, must be considered Rev. xiii. 18 "Here is wisdom. He that hath understanding let him count the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666." Compare an obscure passage in Clem. Alex. 812 about Christ going up to the Mount of Transfiguration "fourth," i.e. with three others. Then He "becomes Sixth," i.e. because Moses and Elijah join Him. Then He is "proclaimed Son of God, through the Voice as Seventh (δι' ἑβδόμης ἀνακηρυσσόμενος τῆς φωνῆς υἱὸς εἶναι θεοῦ).” Clement proceeds, iva dǹ oi μèv...ò dè dià yevéoews (ŷv édýλwoev ǹ éžás) étionμos, ὀγδοὰς ὑπάρχων, φανῇ θεὸς...ἀριθμούμενος μὲν ὡς ἄνθρωπος, κρυπτόμενος δὲ ὃς ἦν, τῇ μὲν γὰρ τάξει τῶν ἀριθμῶν συγκαταλέγεται καὶ ὁ ἕξ, ἡ δὲ τῶν στοιχείων ἀκολουθία ἐπίσημον γνωρίζει τὸ μὴ γραφόμενον. Apparently he is referring to the ancient sixth letter of the alphabet (the digamma ♬) which had dropped out of the alphabet, and only remained as an arithmetical symbol (5). Comp. Gow's History of Greek Mathematics p. 45 "The tickets of the ten panels of Athenian jurymen were marked with the letters of the alphabet from a to κ, 5 being omitted. So also the books of Homer as divided by Zenodotus (flor. c. B.C. 280) were numbered by the 24 letters of the ordinary Ionic alphabet, 5 and 9 being omitted: and the works of Aristotle were also at some ancient time divided into books numbered on the same principle." Irenæus quotes from the Valentinians an apparently similar use of ẻπionμos (i. 14. 4) Ἰησοῦς μὲν γάρ ἐστιν ἐπίσημον ὄνομα (Lat. insigne nomen) ἓξ ὢν γράμματα. Here Grabe says, "'Eπíonμov hic non insigne vel celebre nomen denotare puto, sed sex constans literis, ut mox additur. Cum enim eπionμov Baû sextum in Alphabeto locum teneret, indeque numeri 6 nota esset, tam hic ipse numerus, quam quae illum haberent, éπionua dici sueverunt." Comp. i. 14. 6—7 and ii. 24. 1 "Jesus enim nomen...aliquando quidem episemon esse dicunt sex habens literas, aliquando autem plenitudinem Ogdoadum, 888 numerum habens." Hesych. and Steph. Thes. do not recognise any technical use of emionuos. It means "sign-bearing," "stamped," "conspicuous [for good or ill].” There may be different views as to the ways in which the word might be played on and applied to Christ; but it was certainly used by the Valentinians (e.g. Iren. i. 15. 2) to denote the incarnate Jesus, the Hexad, as distinct from the celestial Christ, the Ogdoad; and it bears on Rev. xiii. 18 because it shews that there were early heretical disquisitions on the number six. [2942* (i) m] The extract given above from Clem. Alex. may have some bearing on the possibility of early glosses and corruptions in Rev. xiii. 18, where 666 has been most variously transliterated. A priori the conjecture entitled to most consideration would be the very early one favoured by Irenæus (v. 30. 3) TEITAN. This, in itself, would be suitable as denoting a Monster of earth rising up against the Powers of heaven. The word occurs in 2 S. v. 18, 22 to represent "Rephaim," "giants," and in Judith xvi. 6 (8). An objection against it is, that it is not (Rev. xiii. 18) "the number of a man' "in the sense of representing a man's name. But, even if that phrase (“the number of a man”) is regarded as above suspicion of being a gloss, it may be replied that (1) every one of the three Flavian emperors was called TITUS, (2) the name TITUS was used as early as the middle of the first century in Rome in bitter satire on vicious and degenerate Roman nobles "Hic neque more probo videas neque voce serena Persius i. 19-21 |