Notes on the New Testament, Explanatory and Practical: RevelationBarnes, Albert
Religion
Notes on the New Testament, Explanatory and Practical: Revelation
Barnes, Albert
Bible. New Testament -- Commentaries; Bible. Revelation -- Commentaries
describe the happy condition of the Roman world during the period now
referred to――for this is substantially his object in the first three
chapters of his history. The _titles_ of these chapters will show their
object. They are respectively the following:――Ch. i., “The Extent and
Military Force of the Empire, _in the Age of the Antonines_;” ch. ii.,
“Of the Union and Internal Prosperity of the Roman Empire, _in the Age
of the Antonines_;” ch. iii., “Of the Constitution of the Roman Empire,
_in the Age of the Antonines_.” In the language of another, this is
“the bright ground of his historic picture, from which afterwards more
effectively to throw out in deep colouring the successive traits of the
empire’s corruption and decline” (Elliott). The introductory remarks
of Mr. Gibbon, indeed, professedly refer to “the age of the Antonines”
(A.D. 138‒180); but that he designed to describe, under this general
title, the actual condition of the Roman world during the period which
I suppose to be embraced under the first seal, as a time of prosperity,
triumph, and happiness――from Domitian to Commodus――is apparent (a) from
a remarkable statement which there will be occasion again to quote,
in which he expressly designates this period in these words: “If a man
were called to fix the period in the history of the world during which
the condition of the human race was most happy and prosperous, he would,
without hesitation, name that which elapsed _from the death of Domitian
to the accession of Commodus_,” i. 47. The same thing is apparent also
from a remark of Mr. Gibbon in the general summary which he makes of
the Roman affairs, showing that this period constituted, in his view,
properly an _era_ in the condition of the world. Thus he says (i. 4):
“Such was the state of the Roman frontiers, and such the maxims of
imperial policy, from the death of Augustus _to the accession of
Trajan_.” This was A.D. 98. The question now is, whether, during
this period, the events in the Roman empire were such as accord with
the representation in the first seal. There was nothing in the first
century that could accord with this; and if John wrote the Apocalypse
at the time supposed (A.D. 95 or 96), of course it does not refer to
that. Respecting that century Mr. Gibbon remarks: “The only accession
which the Roman empire received, during the first century of the
Christian era, was the province of Britain. In this single instance the
successors of Cæsar and Augustus were persuaded to follow the example
of the former rather than the precept of the latter. After a war of
about forty years, undertaken by the most stupid, maintained by the
most dissolute, and terminated by the most timid of all the emperors,
the far greater part of the island submitted to the Roman yoke,”
i. 2, 3. Of course the representation in the first seal _could not_
be applied to such a period as this. In the second century, however,
and especially in the early part of it――the beginning of the period
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account