A Critical and Exegetical Commentary
The Revelation of St. John

R. H. Charles
T. & T. Clark, 1920

Scanned and Proofread by Dan Dyke and Brad Johnson
Chapters will be added as scanned.

Bibleworks font need to read these pages fully.

(INTRODUCTION, pp. xxi-cxci.)
I. <No Title>
§ 1. Short account of the Seer and his Book, pp. xxi-xxiii.

§ 2. Plan of the Book, pp. xxiii-xxviii.

II. Authorship of the Johannine Writings. Evidence internal-purely linguistic. The Apocalypse (Jap) and the Gospel (J) from different authors.
§ 1. Grammatical differences, p. xxix.

§ 2. Differences in diction, p. xxix sq.

§ 3. Different words and forms used by these writers to express the same idea,
pp. xxx sq.

§ 4. Words and phrases with one meaning in Jap(1) and another in J, p. xxxi sq.

§ 5. Authors of Jap and J were in some way connected with each other, pp. xxxii-xxxiv.

§ 6. J and 1. 2. 3 J by the same author, pp. xxxiv-xxxvii.

§ 7. The importance of these conclusions for Johannine criticism, p. xxxvii.

III. Authorship of the Johannine Writings. Evidence partly internal, but mainly external.
§ 1. Jap not pseudonymous, but the work of John the Seer, p. xxxviii sq.

§ 2. The author of Jap is distinct from the author of J, p. xxxix sq.

§ 3. There were two Johns according to Papias, the Apostle and the Elder, the latter being the author of Jap according to Dionysius, p. xl sq.

§ 4. 1. 2. 3 J by the author of J, p. xli sq.

§ 5. If John the Elder is admitted to be the author of 2. 3 J, as is done by many competent scholars, then he is the author also of J and 1 J, pp. xlii-xliii.

§ 6. If John the Elder is the author of J and 1. 2. 3 J, is John the Apostle the author of Jap? No. Its author claims to be a prophet, not an apostle. He was a Palestinian Jew who migrated late in life to Asia Minor, p. xliii sq.

§ 7. The silence of the writers of the first two centuries as to any residence of John the Apostle in Asia tells against his being author of Jap, p. xlv.

§ 8. These conclusions confirmed by the tradition of John the Apostle's early martyrdom, which, if trustworthy, renders his authorship of Jap or J, I. 2. 3 J impossible. That John the Apostle died a martyr's death before 70 A. D. is to be inferred on the following grounds: 

IV. The Editor of Jap. The present order of 204-22 could not possibly have originated with its author. Hence the necessary hypothesis of an editor, whose existence, though suggested occasionally by certain intrusions in the earlier chapters, was not demonstrable till 204-22 was reached. The interpolations in 1-19, when restudied from the standpoint of this hypothesis, appear in a new light, and these combined with those in 20-22 make it an easy task to sketch the main lines of this editor's character. He was apparently a Jew of the dispersion, a better Grecian than his master, but otherwise a person profoundly stupid and ignorant; a narrow fanatic and celibate, not quite loyal to his trust as editor; an arch-heretic, though, owing to his stupidity, probably an unconscious one, pp. l-lv.
V. Depravation of the Text through
§ 1.  Interpolations, pp. lvi-viii;

§ 2.  Dislocations, pp. lviii-lx;

§ 3.  Lacunae, p. lx sq.;

§ 4.  Dittographs, p. lxi.

VI. Greek and Hebrew Sources, and their Dates, pp. lxii-lxv.
VII. Books of the O.T., of the Pseudepigrapha, and of the N.T. used by our author.
§ 1. General summary of the facts, p. lxv sq.

§ 2. John translated directly from the O.T., and did not quote any Greek version, though often influenced by the LXX (i.e. o' ) and another later version a revised form of o', which was subsequently revised and incorporated by Theodotion in his version (i.e. q'), pp. lxvi-lxviii.

§ 3. Passages based directly on the Hebrew of the O.T. (or the Aramaic of Daniel) ; these are hardly ever literal quotations, pp. lxviii-lxxvii.

§ 4. Passages based on the Hebrew of the O.T., or on the Aramaic of Daniel, but influenced, in some cases certainly, in others possibly, by o', p. lxxviii sq.

§ 5. Passages based on the Hebrew of the O.T. or on the Aramaic of Daniel, but influenced, in some cases certainly, in others probably, by a later form of o', which is preserved in q', p. lxxx sq.

§ 6. Phrases and clauses in our author which are echoes of O.T. passages, p. lxxxi sq.

§ 7. Passages dependent on or parallel with passages in the Pseudepigrapha, p. lxxxii sq.

§ 8. Passages in some cases dependent on, and in other cases parallel with, earlier books of the N.T., pp. lxxxiii-lxxxvi.

VIII. Unity of Jap.
§ 1. Unity of thought and dramatic development, lxxxvii sq.

§ 2. Unity of style and diction. Examples of unity of diction, lxxxviii sq.

§ 3. The unity in dramatic movement does not exclude the use of sources and earlier visions of his own. Some earlier visions and writings of his own re-edited. Generally their inclusion gives them a new meaning (footnote, p. lxxxix). Sources re-edited and incorporated, pp. lxxxix-xci.

IX. Date of Jap.
§ 1. External evidence. The Trajanic, Claudian, and Neronic dates. The Domitianic date, pp. xci-xciii.

§ 2. Internal evidence.

     (1) Such evidence exists alike for the Neronic, Vespasianic, and Domitianic dates. 
     (2) Evidence for the Domitianic which explains all the rest.

X. Circulation and reception.
§ 1. No certain trace of Jap in the Apostolic Fathers, p. xcvii sq.

§ 2. In the 2nd cent. Jap was all but universally accepted in Asia Minor, Western Syria, Africa, Rome, South Gaul, pp. xcviii c.

§ 3. Two protests against its Johannine authorship and validity in the 2nd cent.

XI. Object of the Seer. His Methods Vision and Reflection or Reason.
§ 1. Object of the Seer, p. ciii sq.

§ 2. Methods of the Seer generally psychical experiences and reflection or reason -- Psychical experiences.

XII. Some doctrines of our author.
§ 1. Doctrine of God.

§ 2. Jesus Christ.

XIII. Grammar of the Apocalypse, pp. cxvii clix. For contents, see p. cxvii.
XIV. Relative Value of the Uncials.
§ 1. Relative values of the uncials provisionally arrived at, p. clx clxii. 

§ 2. Absence of conflation from best uncials confirms result arrived at in § i, p. clxii sq. 

§ 3. Readings of uncials taken singly and also in groups of two give further confirmation. Classification of uncials on the basis of the above data, pp. clxiii-clxv. 

§ 4. Evidence of uncials taken in groups of three or more in chaps. 1-4, p. clxv sq. 

§ 5. Character of the Latin and Syriac-Versions, and their classification, pp clxvi-clxix. 

§ 6. Armenian, Bohairic, and Ethiopic Versions. Their classification, pp. clxix-clxxi. 

§ 7. Relations of Bohairic, Sahidic, and Ethiopic Versions to each other, p. clxxi. 

§ 8. Textual value of the uncials, pp. clxxi-clxxiii. 

§ 9. Cursives collated for this edition, and their groupings, pp. clxxiii clxxvi. 

§ 10. Origen's so-called text, p. clxxvi sq. 

§ 11. Some account of the Versions, pp. clxxviii clxxxiii

XV. Methods of interpretation adopted in this Commentary. 
§ 1. Contemporary-Historical. 

§ 2. Eschatological. 

§ 3. Chiliastic. 

§ 4a. Philological in earlier form. 

§ 5. Literary-Critical, embracing

XVI. Bibliography-Commentaries, Studies Exegetical and Critical, Texts, Abbreviations, pp. clxxxvii-cxci.
Addenda et Corrigenda, p. cxcii.
Commentary on Chapters I.-XIII. and XIV. 12-13, 1-373.
1. Jap = the Apocalypse, J the Gospel, 1 J the First Epistle, etc.