Bruston takes καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἑπτὰ ἐστιν as a translation of השבעה הוא ומן, in the sense that the eighth was more (or greater) than the seven, i.e., realising more fully the ideal of the Beast. But even were the case for a Hebrew original clearer than it is, such an interpretation is forced. The verse is really a parenthesis added by John to bring the source up to date. Domitian, the eighth emperor, under whom he writes, is identified with the true Neronic genius of the empire; he is a revival and an embodiment of the persecuting Beast (cf. Eus. H. E. iii. 17, Tert. Revelation 5; Revelation 5 : portio Neronis de crudelitate, de pallio 4: a sub-Nero) to the Christian prophet, as he proved a second Nero to some of his Roman subjects (cf. Juvenal's well-known sneer at the caluus Nero). This does not mean that John rationalises Nero redivivus into Domitian, which would throw the rest of the oracle entirely out of focus. Domitian, the eighth emperor, is not explained as the Beast which was and is not and is to come up out of the abyss (Revelation 17:8), but simply as the Beast which was and is not; no allusion is made to his term of power, and the concluding phrase καὶ εἰς ἀπ. ὑπάγει is simply the conventional prophecy of doom upon persecutors; it need not be a post-factum reference to D.'s murder in 96. He belonged to the seven, as he had been closely associated with the Imperial power already (Tac. Hist. iii. 84, iv. 2, 3; cf. Jos. Bell. iv. 11, 4). The enigmatic and curt tone of the verse shows that either from prudence (“some consideration towards the one who is beseems even a prophet,” Mommsen), or more probably from pre-occupation in the grim, ulterior figure of the Neronic antichrist, the prophet does not care to dwell minutely on the emperor's personality as an incarnate Nero. He does not even allude to the suspicion, voiced by his contemporaries (4 Esd. 11:12) that Domitian had made away with Titus. His vision is strained, like that of his source, to the final and supernatural conflict; the Satanic messiah, the Beast who is to return from the abyss, bulks most prominently on the horizon. The absorbing interest of the oracle, even in its edited form, is eschatological. John simply puts in a few words, as few as possible, to bring this Vespasianic source up to date, since the death of Titus had not been followed by the appearance of the Nero-antichrist. The latter is still and soon to come however! John thoroughly shares, though he expands and applies, the prediction of his source. The addition he makes to it in Revelation 17:11 must on no account be taken as if it meant the substitution of “Domitian = Nero redivivus” for the supernatural expectation of the latter. There is certainly some awkwardness in the juxtaposition of Domitian as a second Nero and of Nero redivivus, but this was inevitable under the circumstances.

Continues after advertising
Continues after advertising

Old Testament