When John Saw It
Two of this site's readings, Babylon as Jerusalem on Armageddon and 666 as Nero on Antichrist, lean on Revelation having been seen before the year 70. Most of the early church said 95. We owe the reader both, in the voices' own words, and we owe him where we land and how firmly. This page is that.
Every quotation is verbatim and attributed, public domain, checked against the site's database. The boxes marked "Where we land" are ours, and they are a lean, not a verdict.
1. The one sentence everyone cites
The external evidence for the late date comes down to a single sentence of Irenaeus, written about AD 180, in the middle of a discussion of the number 666. Everything after him, Eusebius, Victorinus, Jerome, repeats it. Here it is whole:
“if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.”
Irenaeus, Against Heresies V.30.3 · c. 180Domitian died in 96, so "towards the end" is about 95. The crack in the sentence is that the Greek verb "was seen" has no stated subject. Read one way, the vision was seen under Domitian. Read the other, John was seen, alive, under Domitian, which is what Irenaeus's point needs: nobody now knows the name because the man who saw the vision lived so recently. Both readings are grammatically possible, and scholars on both sides are honest enough to say so.
Gill gathers the rest of the early witnesses in one place:
“Ignatius says (w), John ‘was banished to Patmos’: by Domitian emperor of Rome, as Irenaeus says (x), at the latter end of his reign, about the year 95 or 96; and, as Tertullian (y) after he had been cast into a vessel of flaming oil, where he got no hurt”
John Gill, on Revelation 1:9 · 1748Tertullian names the oil and Rome but not the emperor. Clement of Alexandria says John came back from Patmos "after the tyrant's death" and does not name the tyrant. On the other side, and later, Epiphanius in the fourth century says John prophesied under Claudius, and the Syriac versions of Revelation carry a title saying he was banished by Nero. Those are the early-date witnesses, and they are thin.
The fathers say 95, and we do not wave them away. But it is one sentence, with a crack in it, repeated.
2. The commentators
“It is commonly supposed that John was banished to this island by Domitian, about 94 a.d.”
Albert Barnes, on Revelation 1:9 · 1851“I was in the island Patmos - In the reign of Domitian and of Nerva. And there he saw and wrote all that follows.”
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes on Revelation 1:9 · 1755“See Introduction on this island, and John’s exile to it under Domitian, from which he was released under Nerva.”
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, on Revelation 1:9 · 1871“It has derived all its celebrity from being the place to which St. John was banished by one of the Roman emperors; whether Domitian, Claudius, or Nero, is not agreed on, but it was most probably the latter.”
Adam Clarke, on Revelation 1:9 · 1826“Grotius, who is followed by Hammond, supposes this was written in the times of Vespasian, and reckons them thus; Clandius, Nero, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, and Titus; the first five of these were dead in John’s time, one was then, the sixth, Vespasian, the then reigning emperor, and the other, Titus, was yet to come to the empire; and when he came to it, continued but a short time, two years and two mouths: others, who more rightly judge that John wrote in Domitian’s time, reckon them after this manner; Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, Titus, Domitian, and Nerva”
John Gill, on Revelation 17:10 · 1748Four for Domitian, Clarke for Nero, and Gill honest enough to report Grotius for Vespasian before disagreeing with him. Notice that Gill's own Domitian count has to begin at Galba, skipping Augustus through Nero, which is the difficulty the next section is about.
3. The emperor count
Revelation 17:9-10 · KJVAnd here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Count from Augustus, the first emperor: Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero. Five, fallen. The sixth, who "is," is then Galba, who reigned seven months in 68-69, or, if the three short reigns of that year are passed over, Vespasian. The one "not yet come" who "must continue a short space" is Titus, who reigned two years. The modern Tyndale notes run the count exactly this way:
“Five kings have already fallen: If these kings represent Roman emperors, and the starting point for numbering them is the switch from a republic to an empire with Augustus (29 BC–AD 14), then the fifth in line would be Nero (AD 54–68), the sixth would be Vespasian, and the seventh would be Titus.”
Tyndale Open Study Notes, on Revelation 17:10-11To make the sixth king Domitian you must start counting somewhere other than the first emperor. That can be done; Gill does it. But it is done to fit a date already chosen from Irenaeus, not read out of the verse.
Counted plainly, the verse was written while the sixth emperor after Augustus reigned: between Nero's death in June 68 and Titus. That is the strongest single piece of evidence on either side, and it is in the text.
4. The temple
Revelation 11:1-2 · KJVAnd there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
“Measure the temple of God - This must refer to the temple of Jerusalem; and this is another presumptive evidence that it was yet standing.”
Adam Clarke, on Revelation 11:1“Nor does the language used here prove that the temple was standing at the time when the book was written; for, as it is symbolical, it is what would be employed whether”
Albert Barnes, on Revelation 11:1Both are fair. John is told to measure a temple with an altar and worshippers in it, and to leave out a court that the Gentiles will trample for forty-two months, three and a half years, which is close to the length of the Roman war from 66 to 70. If the temple was already forty years gone when this was written, the instruction is a symbol with no referent, and nothing in the text says so.
Read plainly, the temple is standing. Barnes's "it is symbolical" is the only reply, and it can be said of anything.
5. The seven mountains, and who the woman is
Revelation 11:8; 17:18; 18:24 · KJVAnd their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. … And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth. … And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.
"Seven mountains" is Rome's own description of itself, and most of the fathers took the woman for Rome. That is the honest case against us, and it is on the Armageddon page. Three things are said for Jerusalem. The book itself names "the great city" once, in 11:8, as the place "where also our Lord was crucified," and "the great city" is then the woman's title in 16:19, 17:18 and all of chapter 18. The word "harlot" is covenant language, used by Isaiah, Ezekiel and Hosea of Jerusalem and never of a pagan city. And "the blood of prophets" is what Jesus said of one city only: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets" (Matthew 23:37). On the mountains: the woman sits on them; she is carried by the beast, not identical with it, and in 17:16 the beast turns and burns her, which is what Rome did to Jerusalem in 70. Some also note that Jerusalem's own hills were later counted as seven (Zion, Ophel, Moriah, Bezetha, Acra, Gareb, Goath), though that is a later tradition, not in Scripture, and we do not lean on it.
Jerusalem, loosely; Rome the honest alternative. And 666 as Nero is our best fit, not our certainty: Irenaeus himself listed three names and said the Spirit had withheld it. The early date does not depend on the beast being Nero; it depends on the count and the temple.
6. Putting it together
The external witness says 95 and rests on one sentence with a crack in it. The text says, in two places that do not need a theory to read, that the sixth emperor was reigning and the temple was standing. Those two can be reconciled without calling anyone a liar: John may have seen the visions before 70 and the finished book may have been circulated later, which is what Irenaeus's "was seen" may even be saying. So we hold the early seeing, we say why, we quote the fathers whole, and the two pages that lean on it now say that they do. "The time is at hand" (Revelation 22:10) reads the same way under either date, and that is the part that matters.
Commentary from public-domain editions held in the site's database (Irenaeus in ANF; Gill, Clarke, Barnes, Wesley, JFB in their standard editions; Tyndale Open Study Notes under their open licence). Scripture in the King James Version. Back to Daniel and Revelation, Read Together, Armageddon and Babylon, or Antichrist.