Albert Barnes Commentary Revelation 9:12

"The first Woe is past: behold, there come yet two Woes hereafter." — Revelation 9:12 (ASV)

1. Their commission was expressly against those men who had not the seal of God in their foreheads (See Barnes on Revelation 9:4).

   That is, they were to go either against those who were not really the friends of God, or those who in their estimation were not. Perhaps, if there were nothing in the connection to demand a different interpretation, the former would be the most natural explanation of the passage. However, the language may be understood as referring to the purpose they considered themselves called upon to execute: that is, they were to go against those whom they regarded as strangers to the true God, namely, idolaters.

   Now, it is well known that Mohammed considered himself called upon, principally, to make war with idolaters, and that he went forth, professedly, to bring them into subjection to the service of the true God. Mr. Gibbon states, "The means of persuasion had been tried, the season of forbearance was elapsed, and he was now commanded to propagate his religion by the sword, to destroy the monuments of idolatry, and, without regarding the sanctity of days or months, to pursue the unbelieving nations of the earth" (vol. iii, p. 387).

   "The fair option of friendship, or submission, or battle, was proposed to the enemies of Mohammed" (Ibid.). Mohammed says, "The sword is the key of heaven and hell; a drop of blood shed in the cause of God, a night spent in arms, is of more avail than two months of fasting and prayer: whoever falls in battle, his sins are forgiven; at the day of judgment his wounds shall be resplendent as vermilion, and odoriferous as musk; and the loss of his limbs shall be supplied by the wings of angels and cherubim" (Gibbon, vol. iii, p. 387).

   The first conflicts waged by Mohammed were against the idolaters of his own country—those who can, on no supposition, be regarded as having the seal of God in their foreheads. His subsequent wars were against infidels of all classes, that is, against those whom he regarded as not having the seal of God in their foreheads, or as being the enemies of God.

2. The other part of the commission was not to kill, but to torment them (See Barnes on Revelation 9:5).

   Compare the quotation from the command of Aboubekir, as quoted above: "Let not the victory be stained with the blood of women and children." "Let them alone, and neither kill them nor destroy their monasteries." The meaning of this, if understood as applied to their commission against Christendom, would seem to be that they were not to go forth to "kill," but to "torment" them; namely, by the calamities they would bring upon Christian nations for a definite period.

   Indeed, as we have seen above, it was an express command of Aboubekir that they should not put to death those found leading quiet and peaceable lives in monasteries, though against another class he did give an express command to "cleave their skulls" (See Gibbon, vol. iii, p. 418). As applicable to the conflicts of the Saracens with Christians, the meaning here would seem to be that the power conceded to those represented by the locusts was not to cut off and destroy the church, but to bring upon it various calamities to continue for a definite period.

   Accordingly, some of the severest afflictions that have come upon the church have undoubtedly proceeded from the followers of the Prophet of Mecca. There were times in the early history of that religion when, to all human appearance, it would universally prevail and wholly supplant the Christian church. But the church still survived, and no power was at any time given to the Saracenic hosts to destroy it altogether.

   In respect to this, some remarkable facts have occurred in history. The followers of the false prophet contemplated the subjugation of Europe and the destruction of Christianity from two quarters—the East and the West—expecting to make a junction of the two armies in the north of Italy and to march down to Rome.

   Twice they attacked the vital part of Christendom by besieging Constantinople: first, in the seven years' siege, which lasted from A.D. 668 to A.D. 675; and, secondly, in the years 716-718, when Leo the Isaurian was on the imperial throne. But on both occasions, they were obliged to retire defeated and disgraced (Gibbon, vol. iii, p. 461 and following).

   Again, they renewed their attack on the West. Having conquered Northern Africa, they passed over into Spain, subdued that country and Portugal, and extended their conquests as far as the Loire. At that time, they designed to subdue France, and having united with the forces they expected from the East, they intended to make a descent on Italy and complete the conquest of Europe.

   This purpose was defeated by the valor of Charles Martel, and Europe and the Christian world were saved from subjugation (Gibbon, vol. iii, p. 467 and following). Mr. Gibbon says, "A victorious line of march had been prolonged above a thousand miles, from the rock of Gibraltar to the mouth of the Loire; the repetition of an equal space would have carried the Saracens to the confines of Poland and the highlands of Scotland. The Rhine is not more impassable than the Nile or the Euphrates, and the Arabian fleet might have sailed without a naval combat into the mouth of the Thames. Perhaps the interpretation of the Koran would now be taught in the schools of Oxford, and her pulpits might demonstrate to a circumcised people the sanctity and truth of the revelations of Mohammed."

   The arrest of the Saracen hosts before Europe was subdued was something there was no reason to anticipate, and it even yet perplexes historians to account for it. Mr. Gibbon states, "The calm historian, who strives to follow the rapid course of the Saracens, must study to explain by what means the church and state were saved from this impending, and, as it should seem, inevitable danger." Mr. Hallam remarks, "These conquests, which astonish the careless and superficial, are less perplexing to a calm inquirer than their cessations—the loss of half the Roman empire than the preservation of the rest" (Middle Ages, vol. ii, pp. 3, 169).

   These illustrations may serve to explain the meaning of the symbol—that their grand commission was not to annihilate or root out, but to annoy and afflict. Indeed, they did not go forth with a primary design to destroy. The announcement of the Muslim always was "the Koran, the tribute, or the sword," and when there was submission, either by embracing his religion or by tribute, life was always spared.

   "The fair option of friendship, or submission, or battle," says Mr. Gibbon (vol. iii, p. 387), "was proposed to the enemies of Mohammed." (Compare also vol. iii, pp. 453, 456). The torment mentioned here, I suppose, refers to the calamities brought upon the Christian world—on Egypt, Northern Africa, Spain, Gaul, and the East—by the hordes that came out of Arabia, and which swept over all those countries like a troublesome and destructive host of locusts. Indeed, would any image better represent the effects of the Saracenic invasions than such a countless host of locusts? Even now, can we find an image that would better represent this?

1. The leader of this host:

   1. He was like a star that fell from heaven (Revelation 9:1): a bright and illustrious prince, as if heaven-endowed, but fallen. Would anything better characterize the genius, the power, and the splendid but perverted talent of Mohammed? Mohammed was, moreover, by birth, of the princely house of the Koreish, governors of Mecca, and to no one could the term be more appropriate than to one of that family.

   2. He was a king. That is, there was to be one monarch—one ruling spirit to whom all these hosts were subject. And never was anything more appropriate than this title as applied to the leader of the Arabic hosts. All those hosts were subject to one mind—to the command of the single leader who originated the scheme.

   3. The name, Abaddon, or Apollyon—Destroyer (Revelation 9:11). This name would be appropriate to one who spread his conquests so far over the world, who wasted so many cities and towns, who overthrew so many kingdoms, and who laid the foundation of ultimate conquests by which so many human beings were sent to the grave.

   4. The description of the leader as the angel of the bottomless pit (Revelation 9:11). If this is regarded as meaning that "the angel of the bottomless pit"—the spirit of darkness himself—originated the scheme and animated these hosts, what term would better characterize the leader? And if it is a poetic description of Mohammed as sent out by that presiding spirit of evil, how could a better representative of the spirit of the nether world have been sent out upon the earth than he was—one more talented, more sagacious, more powerful, more warlike, more wicked, more fitted to subdue the nations of the earth to the dominion of the Prince of darkness and to hold them for ages under his yoke?

2. The duration of the torment. It is said (Revelation 9:5) that this would be five months; that is, prophetically, a hundred and fifty years (See Barnes on Revelation 9:5).

   The Hegira, or flight of Mohammed, occurred A.D. 622; the Saracens first issued from the desert into Syria and began their series of wars on Christendom in A.D. 629. Reckoning from these periods respectively, the five months, or the hundred and fifty years, would extend to A.D. 772 or 779. It is not necessary to understand this period of a hundred and fifty years as the actual continued existence of the bodies symbolized by the locusts, but only as the period in which they would inflict their torment—that they should be tormented five months (Revelation 9:5). That is, this would be the period of the intensity of the woe inflicted by them; there would be at that time some marked intermission of the torment.

   The question then is whether, in the history of the Saracens, there was any period after their career of conquest had continued for about a hundred and fifty years that would mark the intermission or cessation of these "torments." If so, then this is all that is necessary to determine the applicability of the symbol to the Arabian hordes.

   Now, in reply to this question, we only need to refer to Mr. Gibbon. The table of contents prefixed to chapters forty-one and forty-two of his work would supply all the information desired. I looked at that table, after estimating to what period the "five months," or hundred and fifty years, would lead us, to see whether anything occurred at about that time in Mohammedan power and influence that could be regarded as marking the time of the intermission or cessation of the calamities inflicted by the Arabic hordes on the Christian world.

   After Mr. Gibbon had recorded in detail (vol. iii, pp. 360-460) the character and conquests of the Arabian hordes under Mohammed and his successors, I find the statement of the decline of their power at just about the period to which the hundred and fifty years would lead us. For at that very time, an important change came over the followers of the prophet of Mecca, turning them from the love of conquest to the pursuits of literature and science.

   From that period, they ceased to be formidable to the church; their limits were gradually contracted, their power diminished, and the Christian world, in regard to them, was substantially at peace. This change in the character and purposes of the Saracens is thus described by Mr. Gibbon, at the close of the reign of the caliph Abdalrahman, whose reign commenced A.D. 755, and under whom the peaceful sway of the Umayyads of Spain began, which continued for a period of two hundred and fifty years:

   "The luxury of the caliphs, so useless to their private happiness, relaxed the nerves, and terminated the progress, of the Arabian empire. Temporal and spiritual conquest had been the sole occupation of the successors of Mohammed; and after supplying themselves with the necessaries of life, the whole revenue was scrupulously devoted to the salutary work. The Abbasids were impoverished by the multitude of their wants, and their contempt of economy. Instead of pursuing the great object of ambition, their leisure, their affections, and the powers of their minds, were diverted by pomp and pleasure: the rewards of valor were embezzled by women and eunuchs, and the royal camp was encumbered by the luxury of the palace. A similar temper was diffused among the subjects of the caliph. Their stern enthusiasm was softened by time and prosperity: they sought riches in the occupations of industry, fame in the pursuits of literature, and happiness in the tranquility of domestic life. War was no longer the passion of the Saracens; and the increase of pay, the repetition of donatives, were insufficient to allure the posterity of these voluntary champions who had crowded to the standard of Abubeker and Omar for the hopes of the spoil of paradise" (Gibbon, vol. iii, pp. 477-478).

   Of the Umayyads, or princes who succeeded Abdalrahman, Mr. Gibbon remarks in general: "Their mutual designs or declarations of war evaporated without effect; but instead of opening a door to the conquest of Europe, Spain was dissevered from the trunk of the monarchy, engaged in perpetual hostility with the East, and inclined to peace and friendship with the Christian sovereigns of Constantinople and France" (vol. iii, p. 472).

   How much does this look like some change occurring by which they would cease to be a source of torment to the nations with whom they now dwelt! From this period, they gave themselves to the arts of peace; cultivated literature and science; lost entirely their spirit of conquest and their ambition for universal dominion, until they gradually withdrew, or were driven, from those parts of the Christian world where they had inspired most terror and which in the days of their power and ambition they had invaded.

   By turning merely to the "table of contents" of Mr. Gibbon's history, the following periods, occurring at about the time that would be embraced in the "five months," or hundred and fifty years, are distinctly marked:—

   • A.D. 668-675. First siege of Constantinople by the Arabs.
   • A.D. 677. Peace and tribute.
   • A.D. 716-718. Second siege of Constantinople.
   • (A.D. 716-718) Failure and retreat of the Saracens.
   • (A.D. 716-718) Invention and use of the Greek fire.
   • A.D. 721. Invasion of France by the Arabs.
   • A.D. 732. Defeat of the Saracens by Charles Martel.
   • (A.D. 732) They retreat before the Franks.
   • A.D. 746-750. The elevation of the Abbasids.
   • A.D. 750. Fall of the Umayyads.
   • A.D. 755. Revolt of Spain.
   • (A.D. 755) Triple division of the caliphate.
   • A.D. 750-960. Magnificence of the caliphs.
   • (A.D. 750-960) Its consequence on private and public happiness.
   • A.D. 734 and following. Introduction of learning among the Arabians.
   • (A.D. 734 and following) Their real progress in the sciences.

   It will be seen from this that the decline of their military and civil power, their defeats in their attempts to subjugate Europe, and their turning their attention to the peaceful pursuits of literature and science, synchronize remarkably with the period that would be indicated by the five months, or the hundred and fifty years. It should also be added that in the year 762, Almanzor, the caliph, built Bagdad and made it the capital of the Saracen empire. Henceforth, that became the seat of Arabic learning, luxury, and power, and the wealth and talent of the Saracen empire were gradually drawn to that capital, and they ceased to vex and annoy the Christian world. The building of Bagdad occurred within just ten years of the time indicated by the "five months"—reckoning that from the Hegira, or flight of Mohammed; or reckoning from the time when Mohammed began to preach (A.D. 609, Gibbon, vol. iii, p. 383), it lacked but three years of coinciding exactly with the period.

These considerations show with what propriety the fifth trumpet—the symbol of the locusts—is referred to the Arabian hordes under the guidance of Mohammed and his successors. On the supposition that it was John's design to symbolize these events, the symbol chosen was the best adapted of all others to the end. If, now that these events have passed, we should endeavor to find some symbol that would appropriately represent them, we could not find one more striking or appropriate than that which John employed here.

One woe is past. The woe referred to in Revelation 9:1-11. In Revelation 8:13, three woes are mentioned which were to occur successively and which were to embrace the whole period comprised in the seven seals and the seven trumpets. Under the last of the seals, we have considered four successive periods, referring to events connected with the downfall of the Western empire. Then we found one important event worthy of a place in noticing the things that would permanently affect the destiny of the world—the rise, character, and conquests of the Saracens. This was referred to by the first woe-trumpet. We now enter upon the consideration of the second. This occupies the remainder of the chapter, and in illustrating it, the same method will be pursued as before: first, to explain the literal meaning of the words, phrases, and symbols; and then to inquire what events in history, if any, succeeding the former, occurred which would correspond with the language used.

And, behold, there come two woes more hereafter. Two momentous and important events that will be attended with sorrow to mankind. It cannot be intended that there would be no other evils to visit mankind; but the eye, in glancing along the future, rested on these as having a special preeminence in affecting the destiny of the church and the world.