First I want to say that given Revelation 11 prior to the Seventh Trumpet is specifically what the Angel of Revelation 10 is saying as opposed to the normal mode of John narrating what he sees. I'm willing to consider that even within my generally highly Chronological reading of Revelation this material could be chronologically displaced.
An Atheist Website called Vridar.org agrees with me on Revelation being written during the reign of Hadrian. But for them that means what Revelation is claiming to foretell also happens then while I see that fulfilment as mostly still in the future when it as written.
But it’s possible Revelation 11 prior to the Seventh Trumpet could be a more immediate future then most of this vision. Or it could be further in the Future, given my current Post-Millennial view on the Bodily Resurrection this could be at least in part after the Millennium.
There are two particular Vridar Articles I’m interested in here.
[Update: Here's a Third.
They argue that the Two Witnesses are Jewish but not Christian leaders and are political figures of sorts not mere homeless Prophets preaching doom in the Streets. Specifically that they are figures in Military conflict with Rome being represented by The Beast.
The argument has a lot to do with the quoting of Zechariah 4 comparing them to Zerubbabel and Jeshua. But also the fact that The beast “makes war” on them. But also how their power and authority seem to come from the Chapter 10 Angel not God directly.
This logic I should note could also apply to Samaritans leaders.
They also hold the view that verses 11-13 were not in the original text. I’m not inclined to agree with that but the sudden switch in tense here is an issue I don’t have an answer for yet. What I am considering is a way to justify arguing their Resurrection doesn’t happen immediately, which is only viable if I can argue the three and a half days of verse 11 are different from the earlier three and a half days.
There has been much speculation about the text in the Greek using singular language to describe the two witnesses, with appeals to John 8:17-18 and 2 Corinthians 13:1 making a single person more then one witness, as well as how the two offices represented by Zachariah 4's Olive Trees are to Christians united in Jesus. I don't think that'll be too important to any theories I suggest here, but it's worth noting.
Now for Vridar's time frame that means arguing they are Simon bar Kochba and one of the other leaders of that revolt. And I am currently open to that possibility as well.
But AD 70 Preterists could instead look at rebel leaders of the First Jewish-Roman War. Simon bar Giora is the one we know for certain was killed in Titus’s Triumph, but I do think at least one of the others was as well, probably John of Gishchala or maybe Eleazar ben Simon.
If you watch the Historia civillis YouTube video on The Roman Triumph and then read Josephus’s description of Titus and Vespasian’s Triumph in celebration of Conquering Judea in Wars of The Jews Book 7 Chapter 5 Section 5-6, the possibility that Revelation 11:7-10 could be describing that Triumph with the Two Witness representing executed leaders of the Jewish Revolt will be become quite compelling.
I read an article about how Josephus while an eyewitness to Titus's Triumph also drew in his description on prior literary accounts of Triumphs. In that context I think when describing the execution itself Josephus focuses on just Simon mainly because the accounts of Caesar's Triumph focused on a singular enemy leader, regardless he had earlier told us there were two leaders in the procession, Simon and John. I've come to find it highly unlikely John wasn't also killed with Simon.
But another possibility in this context is how Book IV Chapter 5 describes the former High Priests Ananas ben Ananias and Joshua ben Gamla being killed by the Zealots and their bodies left unburied. Other people killed around this same time include Zacharias son of Baruch and then in the first part of Chapter 6 Joseph Ben Gorion/Gurion.
Going back to the Hadrianic period however. We do not have a complete list of every Roman Triumph that happened. So while no known Triumph celebrating the defeat of the Bar Kochba Revolt is recorded one could have happened. Maybe Hadrian had an unconventional Triumph that wasn’t in Rome but in the newly founded Aelia Capitolina and killed Bar Kochba and Akiva at the site of one of its newly consecrated Temples? One of which would come to be believed by local Christians to be where Jesus was Crucified. Or maybe because of how Rome did things they definitely were executed where Jesus was Crucified wherever that was.
But going further into the future there are more options. The Jewish Revolt against Constantius Gallus also had two leaders, Isaac of Diocaesarea and Patricius aka Natrona.
Then comes the often overlooked history of Samaritan Revolt during the late 5th through much of the 6th Century.
The Justa Revolt’s history is interesting for how it’s inciting incident parallels the Hasmonean Revolt, including there being Secular Historians who want to deny that this Greek Gentile Ruler was actually oppressing these Semitic YHWH Worshipers and claim they brought it on themselves.
I'm gonna repeat here what I said in some comments on Thersites the Historian's Zeno video.
On the subject of the Samaritan Revolt I find the desire of modern scholars to say no the Persecution came after the Revolt to be an offensive Revision. Just like the revisions people try to do regarding the Hasmonean Revolt. The Empire had been increasingly trying to standardize Christianity as the only legal religion in the Empire for a Century by this point, it's absurd to suggest the Samaritans revolted for no reason after being perfectly content for centuries.
We also know archaeologically that the Marian Church he built at Gerizim is similar to others being made at the same time like the Church of Mary's Seat north of Bethlehem.
Much of their argument is based on when Zeno could have been there personally. The Problem is I don't think the Samaritan account actually intended us to think he was there personally, these kinds of Semitic Texts frequently treat a King and his Kingdom as inseparable entities. I don't think Antiochus Epiphanes personally performed a big sacrifice in the Jerusalem Temple, a detail not even in the books of Maccabees, but I do believe his policies resulted in an Idol of Zeus being set up on the Brazen Altar in December of 167 BC. So I don't think Zeno was ever personally in Samaria, it was the actions of his Regime.
A Church of specially Mary Theotokos being built at this time was probably tied to the whole Henotikon thing, Emperors trying to reunify with the Miaphysites loved to scapegoat the Nestorians and stress their common support of calling Mary Theotokos. And 482-484 is the timeframe for that being a priority.
And that's the end of the Zeno comments.
The Bar Sabar revolt under Justinian is the most compelling, it's connected to the building of the Nea Ekklesia of the Theotokos which Porcipius describes in ways that make it sound like a rebuilding of Solomon’s Temple. I no longer think its location is where The Temple actually was, but I do think a Tabernacle housing the Ark briefly before Solomon’s Temple was finished may have been there. Its construction seems to have started in 531 and been completed in 543.
Justinian also sent The Menorah and other treasures of Herod’s Temple back to Jerusalem to be placed in Christian Churches after Belisarius’s Triumph in 534. Which is notable considering The Menorah’s role in how Revelation 11 relates to Zechariah 4.
The 556 revolt could be of interest too, for in that one alone it seems Samaritans and Jews worked together, Judah and Joseph, and thus there could have been a leader for each.
We do not have exact dates for the terms of any of the Samaritan High Priests during this period. So one of them being executed alongside a Civil Leader of one of these Revolts is possible.
Interestingly there is a potential Samaritan Revolt not listed on the main Samaritan Revolts Wikipedia page, and that's one implied to have happened in the time of Babba Rabba traditionally dated to 308-328.
Constantine contrary to Eusebius and his modern critics did across the board advocate Religious Tolerance so the source of any Samaritan Persecution during this time period couldn't be him. But perhaps the persecutions of Monotheistic religious minorities under Diocletian, Galerius and Maximinus Daza could be relevant, or even Licinius who's alleged relapse into pro Pagan Persecution is controversial. It's possible his traditional dates are off and that the references to Constantinople were originally Nicomedia.
One source places Babba Rabba's death in 362 during the reign of Julian, but he didn't persecute anyone either. So basically the exact timing of Babba Rabba is highly unclear.
The Tyrant of Babba Rabba's rebellion being called Pharoah of Egypt fits in well with my Maximianus Daza thesis.
Finally there was the Revolt against Heraclius which I discussed in my main Heraclius Post. It too had two prominent leaders, Nehemiah ben Hushiel and Benjamin of Tiberias. And the Sefer Zerubbabel has some compelling parallels to Revelation 11 in how it talks about Nehemiah ben Hushiel.
