372 G. Biguzzi (4) Babylon is the Rome of the seven hills, the imperial cult and anti-Christian persecution (see below); (5) Babylon is the Jerusalem which killed the Messiah and, at the time of John, was interpreting the messianic prophecies in a political perspective (see below). Rev 17,10, that states “One (of the seven kings of Babylon, presently) is / e[stin”, seems to demand a zeitgeschichtlich interpretation and so excludes almost automatically the first three interpretations listed above (4). Only Babylon-Rome and Babylon- Jerusalem are left, and, consequently, only the alternative between Rev as an anti-Roman or anti-Jewish libel remains. 1. “Babylon” in the history of the research The history of the research on Rev begins for us with Irenaeus (Adv. haer. 5, 28-30) who reports three names — EUANQAS, LATEINOS, TEITAN — as interpretations, current in his time, of the famous number 666, the number of the Beast’s name (5). Already before Irenaeus, therefore, the Beast was interpreted as: (i) Gessius Florus, procurator in Judaea from A.D. 64-66: ([eu-]anth[o]s, “flower”, lt. flos -ris) (6), (ii) the Latin (empire), or (iii) the Roman- —————— 1926) 112: “So ist der Sinn (…) dieser Tiere, der endzeitliche Erzfeind Gottes und des Lammes zu sein”; W. FOERSTER, “qhrivon”, TDNT (Grand Rapids, MI 1967) III, 135: “… qhrivon denotes the Antichrist (…). The other beast (…) is the false prophet of the last time”. (4) Attention to the statement “One presently is” has been drawn by L. BRUN, “Die römischen Kaiser in der Apokalypse”, ZNW 26 (1927) 129 (“… durch Ernstnehmen der Versicherung des Verfassers: ‘der eine ist’”); H. RONGY, “L’explication eschatologique de l’Apocalypse”, Revue Eccl. de Liège 23 (1931- 1932) 161, 164 (and passim): “Si S. Jean parlait uniquement de l’avenir éloigné, pourquoi distinguerait-il dans les têtes de la bête le passé, le présent et le future?”, “Si les sept têtes appartenaient toutes à l’avenir éloigné, pourquoi S. Jean se placerait-il au moment de la sixième qui n’a aucune importance spéciale? Au chapitre XVII, S. Jean explique lui-même la bête aux sept têtes comme une réalité existant à son époque, et il exclut ainsi l’explication eschatologique de sa prophétie”; J.J. COLLINS, “Pseudonimity, Historical Reviews and the Genre of the Revelation of John”, CBQ 39 (1977) 339: “We must take the author at his word when he tells us that he is contemporary with the sixth king”. (5) It is an interpretation based on gematry, that is on the counting and summing of the numerical value of the letters of the name. (6) Thus F.H. COLSON, “Euanthas”, JThSt 17 (1916) 100, who writes: “It seems to me incredible that the suggestion when first put forward should have been meaningless (…). The governor [i.e. Gessius Florus] whose barbarities are