The extent of different approaches to Revelation There are of course a number of different approaches to, and interpretations of the book of Revelation. When I read theological works on end times I stumble upon some of those. But I never really understand how widespread those are.

Approaches: Idealist approach, the futurist approach, the church historical approach and the preterist approach (among others).

Different views on the millennium: Historic premillennialism, premillennialism (and dispensialism), postmillennialism and amillennialism. 

What I am interested in is some statistics of present day Christianity. Are there any estimates on how many people that support those different approaches and views on the millennium (I'm most curious of the later). And what kind of Christians do generally hold on to which view?
I have still not found any good answer to this question. But I post some hints that have been helpful to me. Hoping that it might be helpful for someone else and maybe intriguing to give a better answer. The following is a quotation from Steve Gregg, Revelation - four views, 1997, p. 33-34.


  The contemporary conservative protestant scene
  
  Conservative Protestants commentaries (those that not follow the
  literary-critical approach) in the 19th and 20th centuries have been
  divided:
    The historicist approach continued into the 19th century in
  the writings of E. B. Elliott (Horae Apocalypticae, 1847), A. J.
  Gordon, Albert Barnes, and others. To my knowledge, the only modern
  commentaries that espouse this view have not come from recognized
  scholars (not that this fact should condemn them), but from
  essentially self-published authors who are desirous to reintroduce
  this viewpoint to a modern readership. Eugene Boring would seem to be
  correct when he writes, "Although widely held by Protestant
  interpreters after the Reformation and into the twentieth century, no
  critical New Testament scholar today advocates this view."   The
  preterist approach was followed in the 19th century by Moses Stuart (1845), and in the early 20th century by James Snowden (1919).
  Preterism has had a recent resurgence in the writings of Christian
  Reconstructionists like David Chilton and Kenneth Gentry.   On of the
  first popular presentations of the futurist approach, and the most
  influential, was that of J. A. Seiss (Lectures on the Apocalypse,
  1909). In the 20th century, the futurist approach to Revelation has
  become most common - especially since the publication of the
  phenomenally successful The Late Great Planet Earth, by Hal Lindsey
  - having its place almost in the very common stock of American pop culture. Futurism has been advocated by sound scholars, such as
  Walvoord, Mounce, and Ladd, as well as by innumerable cranks and
  eschatelogical faddists, who have often given it a bad name by their
  repeated speculations concerning the date of the Second Coming and
  their assigning of correspondences between the symbolic visions and
  specific developments in an ever-changing modern political milieu.
  The spiritual approach has received wide acceptance in modern
  commentaries, though various labels have been attached to it. Since
  Eichhorn, in the 18th century the dramatic nature of the book has
  intrigues many students of the book. In 1939, William Hendriksen
  popularized this view in his book, More Than Conquerors, though it
  was found in a number of works earlier in the 20th century as well. As
  I write, there appear to be more new commentaries published advocating
  a dramatico-spiritual approach to Revelation than there are
  advocating any of the other conservative approaches.


Authors emphasis. All spelling mistakes are (probably) mine. I do, by the way, highly recommend this book (even though I only started).