How Does Milton Challenge or Reinforce Patriarchal Structures Through Adam’s Character in Paradise Lost
Author: Martin Munyao Muinde
Email: Ephantusmartin@gmail.com
Introduction
John Milton’s Paradise Lost (1667) is one of the most influential epic poems in English literature, notable not only for its theological and philosophical depth but also for its complex representation of gender roles. Central to the poem is the relationship between Adam and Eve, a relationship that has sparked centuries of debate over Milton’s stance toward patriarchy and gender hierarchy. The portrayal of Adam, in particular, raises essential questions about whether Milton reinforces traditional patriarchal structures—those privileging male authority and female subservience—or whether he subtly challenges them through his nuanced depiction of Adam’s authority, reason, and fallibility.
This research paper explores how Milton both challenges and reinforces patriarchal structures through Adam’s character in Paradise Lost. By analyzing Adam’s authority, his relationship with Eve, his moral and intellectual role, and his fall, this essay argues that Milton creates a complex portrait of masculine authority that both mirrors and critiques the patriarchal ideologies of 17th-century England. Through this, Milton engages with his era’s religious, philosophical, and social debates surrounding gender, reason, and divine order.
For Search Engine Optimization (SEO) purposes, this paper emphasizes the following keywords: Milton and patriarchy, Adam in Paradise Lost, gender hierarchy in Paradise Lost, Eve and Adam relationship, Milton feminist criticism, and Paradise Lost gender analysis.
17th-Century Context: Patriarchy, Theology, and Gender
Understanding Milton’s representation of Adam requires an appreciation of the patriarchal culture of 17th-century England. Society during Milton’s lifetime was governed by rigid hierarchies that linked gender order to divine order. According to the Book of Genesis, man was created first, woman second and “for” man’s companionship and help (Genesis 2:18–23). The dominant interpretation of this story reinforced male headship both in the home and the state.
As literary critic Barbara Lewalski notes, “Milton was deeply embedded in a culture that viewed patriarchy as the natural and divinely sanctioned social order” (Lewalski, Paradise Lost and the Rhetoric of Literary Forms, 1985, p. 210). At the same time, Milton’s Puritan beliefs emphasized individual conscience, reason, and equality of spiritual access to God—principles that could be interpreted as anti-hierarchical.
Thus, Milton’s theological and political background is marked by tension. He valued freedom and reason, but also believed in an ordered hierarchy derived from divine authority. This tension shapes his portrayal of Adam: a character who is both the image of divine authority and a fallible being who fails to lead responsibly. In this way, Paradise Lost becomes a profound meditation on the nature of patriarchy, obedience, and shared human responsibility.
Adam as Patriarchal Head: Reinforcing Divine Hierarchy
From the beginning of Paradise Lost, Adam is depicted as the patriarchal head of creation. God appoints him as the ruler over the Garden of Eden and over Eve. This reflects Milton’s belief in a divinely ordained hierarchy where God rules angels and men, and men rule women (Milton, Paradise Lost, IV.295–300). Adam’s superiority is clearly articulated in Raphael’s conversations with him, where Raphael emphasizes the chain of command: “God made thee perfect, not immutable; / And good he made thee, but to persevere / He left it in thy power” (V.524–526).
Adam’s intellectual and moral superiority over Eve is also emphasized in the poem. He is rational and contemplative, while Eve is portrayed as intuitive and emotional. Adam explains to Eve that her beauty is for delight but his reason is for guidance (IV.635–638). This idea aligns with the patriarchal ideology that associates masculinity with intellect and femininity with emotion. As critic Diane McColley observes, Milton’s depiction of Adam “conforms to the humanist ideal of man as reason embodied, ordained to govern woman as nature’s law dictates” (Milton’s Eve: Gender, Theology, and the Language of Reception, 1983, p. 57).
By presenting Adam as rational governor and Eve as dependent helper, Milton reinforces the social order of his time. In the 17th century, patriarchal hierarchy was justified as an imitation of divine order: the male head of the family represented God’s governance. Thus, Milton’s Adam initially upholds patriarchal norms, serving as an emblem of rational male authority within a divinely sanctioned hierarchy.
Adam’s Love for Eve: Subverting Patriarchal Authority
While Adam embodies patriarchal authority, Milton also undermines that authority by showing how Adam’s love for Eve becomes a source of weakness and disobedience. Adam’s fall, unlike Eve’s, is not motivated by deception but by passion and affection. After Eve eats the forbidden fruit, Adam consciously decides to share in her fate: “How can I live without thee, how forgo / Thy sweet converse and love so dearly joined?” (IX.908–909).
In this moment, Adam’s decision challenges patriarchal ideals of rational male supremacy. His reason yields to emotion, suggesting that the patriarch is not invulnerable to desire or dependence. As critic Sandra M. Gilbert notes, “Adam falls because he cannot conceive of life without his other half; his authority collapses under the weight of his affection” (The Madwoman in the Attic, 1979, p. 193).
Milton’s portrayal of Adam’s emotional vulnerability subtly critiques the patriarchal notion of the male as self-sufficient rational authority. Adam’s dependence on Eve humanizes him but also exposes the fragility of masculine control. This subversion is particularly striking given Milton’s context—an era when women were legally and economically dependent on men.
Therefore, through Adam’s decision to join Eve in disobedience, Milton introduces a tragic irony: the patriarch who was supposed to lead and instruct is undone by his love, suggesting that emotional interdependence, not rigid hierarchy, defines human relationships.
Adam’s Dialogue with Raphael: Knowledge, Obedience, and Authority
Milton further explores patriarchal structures through Adam’s dialogue with the archangel Raphael in Books V–VIII. Raphael educates Adam about obedience, the nature of freedom, and the limits of human knowledge. These conversations reaffirm the hierarchical order: Adam learns that humans must submit to God, and Eve must submit to Adam. Raphael reminds Adam that “thee I have adorned with higher gifts / of intellect, therefore obey” (VIII.561–562).
However, Milton complicates this hierarchical instruction by showing Adam’s intellectual curiosity and questioning spirit. Adam inquires about celestial motion, angelic existence, and divine will—topics that even Raphael hesitates to answer. As critic Stephen Fallon notes, “Milton’s Adam is no passive recipient of authority; he reasons, questions, and pursues knowledge in ways that stretch the limits of obedience” (Milton Among the Philosophers, 1991, p. 114).
This portrayal challenges the static model of patriarchal dominance. Adam’s authority is not absolute but dialogic; it depends on communication and the exercise of reason. In this way, Milton’s Adam becomes a figure of intellectual agency rather than blind authority. His questioning nature reflects Milton’s own humanist and Protestant belief in the use of reason as a divine gift.
Thus, while Adam embodies patriarchal order, his dialogue with Raphael demonstrates Milton’s ambivalence: reason and inquiry—traits central to masculine authority—can both sustain and undermine hierarchy.
Adam’s Relationship with Eve: Partnership or Domination?
The portrayal of Adam and Eve’s relationship lies at the heart of Milton’s treatment of patriarchy. On one hand, the poem seems to affirm male dominance; on the other, it presents moments of mutual respect and partnership.
In Book IV, Adam and Eve are described as “not equal, as their sex not equal seemed; / For contemplation he and valor formed, / For softness she and sweet attractive grace” (IV.295–298). This description establishes a gender hierarchy consistent with patriarchal ideology: Adam is rational and strong, Eve is beautiful and submissive. Yet, Milton also depicts their relationship as one of harmony and mutual need. Adam values Eve’s companionship and converses with her as an equal in intellect and emotion.
Moreover, before the Fall, Adam’s authority is gentle and rational, not tyrannical. As critic Joseph Wittreich points out, “Milton’s Adam is no despot; his governance is the governance of reason, not coercion” (Feminist Milton, 1988, p. 84). The prelapsarian relationship thus models an ideal form of patriarchy—hierarchical yet benevolent.
However, after the Fall, this balance collapses. Adam’s words to Eve become harsh: “Out of my sight, thou serpent, that name best / Befits thee with him leagued, thyself as false / And hateful” (X.867–869). The harmony of partnership turns into domination and blame, mirroring the degeneration of divine order into human tyranny.
In this way, Milton dramatizes the corruption of patriarchal relations after the Fall. While Adam’s leadership was once based on reason and love, it becomes tainted by anger and pride. Milton seems to suggest that hierarchy itself, when divorced from reason and love, leads to oppression—a critique of patriarchal power structures.
The Fall and the Transformation of Patriarchy
The Fall represents the most crucial turning point in Milton’s exploration of patriarchy. Before eating the fruit, Adam’s authority is rooted in divine order; afterward, it becomes a function of sin and domination. This transition mirrors the theological shift from innocent hierarchy to fallen patriarchy.
In the aftermath of the Fall, God tells Adam: “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” (X.195–196). This echoes the biblical curse of Genesis 3:16, marking the institutionalization of patriarchy as a consequence of sin. As critic Mary Nyquist argues, “Milton presents patriarchy as the result of the Fall, not as the condition of Edenic perfection” (Re-Membering Milton: Essays on the Texts and Traditions, 1988, p. 123).
Thus, Milton’s Paradise Lost both reinforces and critiques patriarchy: it portrays male rule as divinely instituted but also as historically and morally fallen. Adam’s rule after the Fall is no longer rational or benevolent; it becomes coercive and punitive. Eve’s subordination, once voluntary, is now enforced.
By dramatizing this shift, Milton exposes the inherent instability of patriarchal power. The Fall reveals that patriarchy, rather than a divine ideal, is a flawed human construct—a response to disobedience and sin.
Adam’s Repentance: Toward a Redemptive Model of Masculinity
After the Fall, Adam undergoes profound moral transformation. His repentance, expressed through prayer and self-reflection, restores harmony between him and Eve. Adam’s repentance involves humility, recognition of error, and acceptance of mutual responsibility. He tells Eve, “Both have sinned; but thou against God only, I against God and thee” (X.930–931).
This recognition marks a departure from patriarchal blame and reasserts spiritual equality. Milton uses Adam’s repentance to redefine masculinity not as domination but as humility and compassion. As critic Catherine Belsey observes, “In Adam’s repentance Milton imagines a form of manhood purged of the desire for mastery” (John Milton: Language, Gender, Power, 1988, p. 142).
By the end of the poem, Adam and Eve walk hand in hand out of Eden, symbolizing a new form of partnership. This image challenges patriarchal hierarchy and suggests the possibility of redeemed relationships founded on equality and mutual love.
Therefore, through Adam’s repentance, Milton envisions an alternative to fallen patriarchy—a model of spiritual partnership that transcends domination and subordination.
Milton’s Ambivalence Toward Patriarchy
Critics have long debated whether Milton was a defender of patriarchy or an early voice of gender equality. Some, like C. S. Lewis, view Milton as “of his age, not ahead of it,” asserting that his vision is “thoroughly patriarchal” (A Preface to Paradise Lost, 1942, p. 92). Others, such as Barbara Lewalski and Diane McColley, argue that Milton’s portrayal of Adam and Eve offers a subtle critique of gender hierarchy and anticipates feminist concerns.
The truth likely lies in Milton’s ambivalence. On one hand, he accepts the divine hierarchy of male over female; on the other, he undermines it by revealing the fragility of Adam’s authority and the indispensability of Eve’s role. Eve’s intellectual and moral growth after the Fall contrasts with Adam’s earlier errors, suggesting a rebalancing of gender relations.
Milton’s Adam therefore functions as both a representative of divine order and a critique of its corruption. Through Adam, Milton exposes the contradictions within patriarchy: it is divinely modeled yet humanly distorted, rational in theory yet often emotional and oppressive in practice.
Conclusion
In Paradise Lost, John Milton constructs a complex representation of patriarchy through the figure of Adam. On the surface, Adam embodies traditional patriarchal ideals—rational authority, moral leadership, and divine order. Yet Milton also destabilizes these ideals by portraying Adam as emotionally vulnerable, intellectually inquisitive, and morally fallible. His love for Eve, his curiosity, and his repentance all reveal the limitations of patriarchal dominance and point toward a more equitable vision of human relationships.
Thus, Milton both challenges and reinforces patriarchal structures. He reinforces them by presenting hierarchy as part of divine design, yet challenges them by showing that true leadership requires humility, love, and equality. Adam’s character becomes a vehicle for Milton’s broader meditation on freedom, obedience, and the human condition.
Ultimately, Paradise Lost mirrors the gender and theological tensions of 17th-century England while anticipating later debates about feminism, equality, and the nature of authority. In portraying Adam as both patriarch and penitent, Milton crafts a timeless reflection on the possibilities and perils of human power—one that continues to resonate in modern discussions of gender and morality.
References
-
Belsey, Catherine. John Milton: Language, Gender, Power. Blackwell, 1988.
-
Fallon, Stephen M. Milton Among the Philosophers: Poetry and Materialism in Seventeenth-Century England. Cornell University Press, 1991.
-
Gilbert, Sandra M., and Susan Gubar. The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination. Yale University Press, 1979.
-
Lewalski, Barbara K. Paradise Lost and the Rhetoric of Literary Forms. Princeton University Press, 1985.
-
McColley, Diane K. Milton’s Eve: Gender, Theology, and the Language of Reception. Cambridge University Press, 1983.
-
Milton, John. Paradise Lost. Edited by Alastair Fowler, 2nd ed., Longman, 1998.
-
Nyquist, Mary. “Gender and the Fall: Revising Patriarchy in Paradise Lost.” In Re-Membering Milton: Essays on the Texts and Traditions, edited by Mary Nyquist and Margaret W. Ferguson, Methuen, 1988.
-
Wittreich, Joseph. Feminist Milton. Cornell University Press, 1988.
-
Lewis, C. S. A Preface to Paradise Lost. Oxford University Press, 1942.