Christine’s commentary on the dating of John’s vision (Introduction, pp. 1-2):
If John did indeed see the vision before the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in AD 70, then it seems that the Preterist view would have been the prevailing view among the Church fathers, since it would have been seen to have been fulfilled right in front of their eyes by them.
However, Jamieson, Faussett, and Brown’s Commentary, in its “Introduction to Revelation,” says,
“The first theory [speaking of the Preterist] was not held by any of the earliest Fathers, and is only held now by Rationalists, who limit John’s vision to things within his own horizon, pagan Rome’s persecutions of Christians, and its consequently anticipated destruction.”
Furthermore, the traditional Preterist commentators have displayed the most aggressive Replacement Theology I have ever come across in print.
See for example, Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Whole Bible.