Before Jerusalem Fell

The ldenti~ of tb Sixth King 161
tory.GO If these three are removed, then it is difficult to account for
the seventh emperor being one who rules only a “short while.” For
if we begin with Julius and exclude Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, we
arrive at Vespasian as the seventh. Yet Vespasian ruled for 10 years
(A.D. 69-79), hardly a “short time.”
To find the objectors citing Suetonius as evidence that the three
emperors of Rome’s Civil War were not really considered emperors
is somewhat surprising. After all, Suetonius does include them in his
book Lives of the Twelve Caesars! Furthermore, these three are considered
emperors by Tacitus, Josephus, Sibylline Oracles, and 4 Ezra,
as well.G]
As to their being inconsequential to far-flung provinces such as
Asia Minor, such is simply not the case. Certainly their policy
changes (such as there were) would have had little time to make even
a negligible impact on provincial affairs. But the fact of their warring
for the purple would most definitely be taken note of by the provinces.
And this is as true for the eastern provinces, as for other provinces.
Jerusalem and Judea certainly breathed a sigh of relief at these rapid
accessions. Josephus tells us that Vespasian halted his devastating
military operations against Israel while awaiting the outcome of the
Roman Civil War.G2 And as noted in an earlier portion of the present
study, Revelation has as a major focus God’s judgment on the Jews.
We should not consider it “doubtfiul whether a writer living under
the Flavian Emperors would reckon Galba, Otho, or Vitellius among
the Augusti.”G3 Indeed, the contortions through which H. B. Swete
(and others of like position on the line of the kings in Revelation 17)
must pass to arrive at a Domitianic date are almost evidence enough
to discredit his entire enterprise. Swete laboriously confronts the
problem in a way damaging to the unity of the book and antithetical
to its revelatory character: “How can the date which appears to be
assigned to this vision by the writer himself be reconciled with the
traditional date [i.e., 95] of the Apocalypse? It may of course be that
the Apocalyptist incorporates at this point an older Christian prophecy,
or reedits his own earlier work. But it is equally possible that in
60. Moffatt, RsoeLztion, p. 318.
61. Tacitus, HiJ.kmies 1: lff.; 2: lQ Josephus, War$ OJ h Jsws 49:2; Sibylline Oracles
5:35; and 4 Ezra 12:20ff.
62. Wars 49 and 411.
63. Swete, Revelation, p. 220.