Albert Barnes Commentary Revelation 12:3

"And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold, a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his heads seven diadems." — Revelation 12:3 (ASV)

And there appeared another wonder in heaven (Revelation 12:3). This was represented as in heaven (see commentary on Revelation 12:1).

That is, he saw this as occurring at the time when the church was in this way about to increase.

And behold a great red dragon (Revelation 12:3). The word translated dragon—drakwn—occurs in the New Testament only in the book of Revelation, where it is uniformly rendered as here—dragon (Revelation 12:3–4, 7, 9, 13, 16-17; 13:2, 4, 11; 16:13; 20:2).

In all these places, there is a reference to the same thing. The word properly means a large serpent, and the allusion in the word commonly is to some serpent—perhaps like the anaconda—that lives in a desert or wilderness. For a full account of the ideas that prevailed in ancient times respecting the dragon, see Bochart, Hierozoicon, book 3, chapter 14, volume 2, pages 428-440. Much was fabulous respecting this monster, and many notions were attached to the dragon that did not exist in reality. These were ascribed to it by the imagination at a time when natural history was little understood. According to Bochart, the characteristics ascribed to the dragon are that it was distinguished:

• For its vast size;
• It had something like a beard or dewlap;
• It had three rows of teeth;
• Its color was black, red, yellow, or ashy;
• It had a wide mouth;
• In its breathing, it not only drew in air but also birds flying over it; and
• Its hiss was terrible.

Occasionally, feet and wings were also attributed to the dragon, and sometimes a lofty crest. According to Bochart, the dragon was supposed to inhabit waste places and solitudes (compare commentary on Isaiah 13:22), and it therefore became an object of great terror. It is probable that the original of this was a huge serpent, and that all the other circumstances were added by the imagination.

However, the prevailing ideas regarding it should be kept in mind to see the force and propriety of John's use of the word. Two special characteristics are stated by John in the general description of the dragon: one is its red color; the other, that it was great.

Regarding the former, as mentioned above, the dragon was supposed to be black, red, yellow, or ashy (see the authorities referred to in Bochart, as cited above, pages 435-436). There was doubtless a reason why the one seen by John should be represented as red. As for the other characteristic—great—the idea is that it was a huge monster, and this would properly refer to some mighty, terrible power that would be appropriately symbolized by such a monster.

Having seven heads (Revelation 12:3). It was not unusual to attribute many heads to monsters, especially to fabulous ones, as these greatly increased the animal's terror. Professor Stuart, on this passage, notes: "Thus Cerberus usually has three heads assigned to him; but Hesiod (Theogony 312) assigns him fifty, and Horace (Odes 2.13.34) one hundred. So the Hydra of the Lake Lerna, killed by Hercules, had fifty heads (Virgil, Aeneid 6.576); and in Kiddushim, folio 29, 2, Rabbi Achse is said to have seen a demon like a dragon with seven heads." The seven heads would somehow denote power, or seats of power.

Such a number of heads increases the terribleness and, as it were, the vitality of the monster. What is represented here would be as terrible and formidable as such a monster; or, such a monster would appropriately represent what was intended to be symbolized here. The number seven may be used here "as a perfect number" or merely to heighten the terror of the image. However, it is more natural to suppose that there would be something in what is represented here that would provide the basis for using this number. There would be something either in the origin of the power, in the union of various powers now combined in the one represented by the dragon, or in the seat of the power, which this would properly symbolize (Compare commentary on Daniel 7:6).

And ten horns (Revelation 12:3). These are emblems of power, denoting that, in some respects, there were ten powers combined in this one (See commentary on Daniel 7:7; Daniel 7:8; Daniel 7:20; Daniel 7:24).

There can be little doubt that John had those passages of Daniel (Daniel 7:7–8, 20, 24) in mind, and perhaps as little doubt that the reference is to the same thing. The meaning is that, in some respects, there would be a tenfold origin or division of the power represented by the dragon.

And seven crowns upon his heads (Revelation 12:3). Greek: diadems (See commentary on Revelation 9:7).

There is a reference here to some kingly power, and doubtless John had some kingdom or sovereignty in mind that would be properly symbolized in this manner. The way in which these heads and horns were arranged on the dragon is not stated and is not important. All that is necessary for the explanation is that there was something in the power referred to that would be properly represented by the seven heads, and something by the ten horns.

In applying this, it will be necessary to inquire what was properly symbolized by these representations and to refer again to these particulars for this purpose:

1. The dragon. This is explained in Revelation 12:9 (see also commentary on this verse): And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world. So again, Revelation 20:2: And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil. (Compare Bochart, Hierozoicon, volume 2, pages 439-440). There can be no doubt, therefore, that the reference here is to Satan, considered as the enemy of God and the enemy of human peace, and especially as giving origin and form to some mighty power that would threaten the church's existence.

2. Great. This well describes the power of Satan as originating the organizations that were engaged for so long in persecuting the church and endeavoring to destroy it. It was a work of vast power, controlling kings, princes, and nations for ages, and could have been accomplished only by one to whom the appellation used here could be given.

3. Red. This, too, is an appellation properly applied here to the dragon, or Satan, considered as the enemy of the church and as originating this persecuting power, for one of two reasons:

   1. because it well represents the bloody persecutions that would ensue, or
   2. because this would be the favorite color by which this power would be manifest (18:12, 16).

4. The seven heads. There was, doubtless, as remarked above, something significant in these heads, referring to the power intended to be represented. On the supposition that this refers to Rome, or to the power of Satan as manifested by Roman persecution, there can be no difficulty in the application. Indeed, it is such an image as the writer would naturally use if it had such a designed reference. Rome was, as is well known, built on seven hills (compare commentary on Revelation 10:3) and was called the seven-hilled city (Septicolis), from having been originally built on seven hills, though subsequently three hills were added, making the whole number ten (See Eschenburg, Manual of Classical Literature, page 1, section 53). Thus Ovid says:

   "Sed quae de septem totum circumspicit orbem
   Montibus, imperii Romae Deumque locus."

   Horace:

   "Dis quibus septem placuere colles."

   Propertius:

   "Septem urbs alta jugis, toti quae praesidet orbi."

   Tertullian states: "I appeal to the citizens of Rome, the populace that dwell on the seven hills" (Apology, 35). And again, Jerome, when urging Marcella to leave Rome for Bethlehem, writes: "Read what is said in the Apocalypse of the seven hills," etc. The city's situation, if that was intended to be represented by the dragon, would naturally suggest the idea of the seven-headed monster (Compare commentary on Revelation 18:1 and to the end of the chapter). The explanation given here of the meaning of the "seven heads" is, in fact, one that is given in the book of Revelation itself, and there can be no danger of error in this part of the interpretation. See Revelation 17:9: The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. .

5. The ten horns. These were emblems of power, denoting that concerning that power there were, in some respects, ten sources. The same thing is referred to here as in Daniel 7:7-8, 20, 24 (See commentary on Daniel 7:24).

6. The seven crowns. This would merely denote that kingly or royal authority was claimed.

The general interpretation that refers this vision to Rome may receive confirmation from the fact that the dragon was at one time the Roman standard, as represented by engravings from Montfaucon. Ammianus Marcellinus (16.10) thus describes this standard: "The dragon was covered with purple cloth and fastened to the end of a pike, gilded and adorned with precious stones. It opened its wide throat, and the wind blew through it; and it hissed as if in a rage, with its tail floating in several folds through the air." He elsewhere often gives it the epithet purpureus—purple-red: "purpureum signum draconis," etc. Claudian's description also agrees well with this:

"Hi volucres tollent aquilas; hi picta draconum
Colla levant: multumque tumet per nubila serpens,
Iratus stimulante noto, vivitque receptis
Flatibus, et vario mentitur sibila flatu."

The dragon was first used as an ensign near the close of the second century of the Christian era, and it was not until the third century that its use had become common. According to this fact, the reference here would be to that period of Roman power when this had become a common standard, and when the applicability of this image would be readily understood. It is simply Rome that is referred to—Rome, the great agent for accomplishing Satan's purposes towards the church. The eagle was the common Roman ensign in the time of the Republic and in the earlier periods of the empire, but in later periods the dragon also became a standard as common and as well known as the eagle. "In the third century it had become almost as notorious among Roman ensigns as the eagle itself; and is in the fourth century noted by Prudentius, Vegetius, Chrysostom, Ammianus, etc.; in the fifth, by Claudian and others" (Elliott, volume 2, page 14).