The Apocalypse preoccupied many English writers from the Reformation to the civil wars, and in this book Warren Johnston sets out to demonstrate that interest remained strong throughout the later seventeenth century, a period which has attracted rather less attention. He more than proves his point, with a bibliography of primary sources running to almost five hundred items. Johnston provides a careful and immensely thorough survey, setting out the concerns and interpretative framework of commentators across the religious spectrum, giving equal weight to Anglicans and nonconformists. The identification of AntiChrist with the papacy remained a constant, as did the expectation that biblical prophecies would be fulfilled in the relatively near future. As Thomas Manton observed, ‘distant things, though never so great, will hardly move us’. But concerns and interpretations shifted over time as circumstances changed, and the book identifies three discrete periods: the early Restoration, the Popish Plot and 1685–9, with an epilogue looking forward to 1700. The first period saw radical nonconformists using Revelation to comprehend recent events and justify their call for resistance. Moderate nonconformists urged obedience to the crown while interpreting their sufferings within the framework of the biblical prophecies. The later 1670s and 1680s brought new alarms and prompted new interpretations, including one bizarre identification of Titus Oates with one of the two witnesses of Rev. xi. Anglicans and nonconformists alike continued to see the papacy as AntiChrist throughout the reign of the Catholic James ii, while still stressing the duty of obedience. And many in both camps saw the Revolution as deliverance from the tyranny of AntiChrist, a view publicly endorsed by the future archbishop John Tillotson. Johnston's thorough study of printed texts tells us less about how far apocalyptic speculation interested the wider public, though he makes effective use of broadsides and almanacs to show how such issues crossed over into popular print in times of crisis. What emerges clearly overall is how Anglicans and nonconformists both found the Apocalypse of value in attempting to make sense of their age and situation. For most commentators, for most of the period, there is less sense of the overheated and urgent expectations of the mid-century. Anglican commentators had no wish for any dramatic overturning; like Henry More, they saw the fulfilment of prophecy in the gradual strengthening of godly rule under a benign monarchy and the established Church. Moderate nonconformists, welcoming 1688–9, looked for further reformation of the Church, paving the way for Comprehension. That seems a modest dream, set against the dreams of an earlier age. Johnston's work offers an admirably balanced and comprehensive survey of apocalyptic thought, charting its survival and development as an important if now less febrile element in the cultural world of the later Stuarts.