What Role Does Hierarchy Play in the Heavenly and Earthly Societies of Paradise Lost?
Author: MARTIN MUNYAO MUINDE
Email: Ephantusmartin@gmail.com
Introduction
John Milton’s Paradise Lost, published in 1667, stands as one of the most significant epic poems in English literature, exploring profound themes of obedience, free will, and divine authority. At the heart of this monumental work lies the concept of hierarchy, which serves as a fundamental organizing principle governing both heavenly and earthly societies. Milton’s intricate portrayal of hierarchical structures reflects the theological, political, and social concerns of seventeenth-century England while simultaneously offering timeless insights into the nature of power, order, and rebellion. The role of hierarchy in Paradise Lost extends beyond mere organizational structure; it becomes a lens through which Milton examines the consequences of challenging divine order, the nature of legitimate authority, and the delicate balance between obedience and freedom. Understanding how hierarchy functions in Milton’s epic is essential for comprehending the poem’s central conflicts and its exploration of humanity’s relationship with the divine.
Throughout Paradise Lost, Milton presents hierarchy as both a natural and necessary component of cosmic order, yet he simultaneously exposes its potential for corruption and misinterpretation. The hierarchical systems in Heaven, Hell, and Eden operate according to different principles and produce vastly different outcomes, revealing Milton’s nuanced perspective on authority and subordination. In Heaven, hierarchy reflects divine perfection and maintains cosmic harmony through voluntary submission to God’s supreme authority. In Hell, Satan attempts to recreate a perverted form of heavenly hierarchy, establishing a tyrannical system built on deception and false promises of equality. On Earth, the relationship between Adam and Eve introduces questions about gender hierarchy, mutual responsibility, and the proper ordering of human relationships within God’s creation. By examining these three distinct hierarchical systems, readers gain insight into Milton’s complex theology and his views on legitimate versus illegitimate forms of authority, obedience as freedom versus servitude, and the catastrophic consequences of hierarchical disruption.
The Hierarchical Structure of Heaven in Paradise Lost
The heavenly hierarchy in Paradise Lost represents Milton’s vision of perfect order, wherein all celestial beings occupy divinely appointed positions that reflect their nature and purpose. At the apex of this celestial structure stands God the Father, whose absolute sovereignty is unquestioned and whose authority derives from His role as Creator and sustainer of all existence. Below God exists the Son, who serves as the mediator between the divine and creation, embodying both authority and humility in his willing subordination to the Father. The angelic orders, including archangels like Michael and Raphael, occupy subsequent tiers within this heavenly hierarchy, each fulfilling specific functions that contribute to the maintenance of cosmic order. Milton’s presentation of heavenly hierarchy draws upon traditional Christian angelology, particularly the pseudo-Dionysian system of nine angelic orders, while adapting these concepts to serve his theological and narrative purposes (Danielson, 1982). The stability and harmony of Heaven depend entirely upon the voluntary acceptance of this hierarchical arrangement, with each being recognizing their proper place and willingly submitting to those above them in the chain of being.
Milton’s portrayal of heavenly hierarchy emphasizes the paradoxical relationship between obedience and freedom within divine order. Unlike earthly hierarchies that often rely on coercion and fear, the celestial hierarchy in Paradise Lost functions through love, reason, and willing submission. The angels serve God not because they are compelled to do so, but because they recognize His infinite worthiness and understand that true freedom consists in aligning one’s will with divine purpose. Raphael explains to Adam that the hierarchical ordering of creation reflects a principle of gradual ascent, wherein lower beings may potentially rise to higher states through obedience and merit: “O Adam, one Almighty is, from whom / All things proceed, and up to him return, / If not depraved from good” (Book V, lines 469-471). This concept suggests that hierarchy in Heaven is not static but dynamic, offering the possibility of spiritual advancement through faithful service. The emphasis on voluntary submission distinguishes Milton’s heavenly hierarchy from tyrannical systems, presenting it instead as a structure that enables rather than constrains the flourishing of celestial beings (Fish, 1967). However, this very emphasis on free will and voluntary obedience also creates the possibility for rebellion, as Satan’s fall demonstrates the catastrophic consequences of rejecting one’s place within the divinely established order.
Satan’s Rebellion and the Perversion of Heavenly Hierarchy
Satan’s rebellion against God represents the first and most devastating challenge to the hierarchical order established in Heaven, transforming the perfect harmony of the celestial realm into a battleground of competing authorities. Milton presents Satan as a being of remarkable abilities who held a high position within the heavenly hierarchy before his fall, suggesting that his rebellion stems not from insignificance but from pride and ambition to rise above his appointed station. The immediate cause of Satan’s revolt is God’s exaltation of the Son, which Satan perceives as an arbitrary elevation that diminishes his own status and violates principles of merit and equality. Satan’s rhetoric throughout Paradise Lost consistently employs the language of republican liberty and resistance to tyranny, appealing to concepts that would have resonated powerfully with Milton’s seventeenth-century audience familiar with debates about monarchical versus parliamentary authority (Worden, 2007). By framing his rebellion as a justified resistance to despotism, Satan attempts to reinterpret the heavenly hierarchy as an oppressive system rather than a natural and beneficial order, revealing how revolutionary discourse can mask self-interested ambition beneath appeals to liberty and equality.
The hierarchical structure Satan establishes in Hell represents a dark parody of the heavenly order he rejected, revealing the inherent contradictions in his revolutionary rhetoric and exposing the tyrannical tendencies lurking beneath his claims of liberation. Despite his stated opposition to hierarchy and monarchy, Satan quickly establishes himself as the supreme ruler of Hell, occupying a throne and receiving the homage of his followers in ceremonies that mirror the heavenly court he despised. Milton’s description of Satan’s palace, Pandemonium, emphasizes the elaborate hierarchical arrangements among the fallen angels, with Satan presiding over councils and deliberations that superficially resemble democratic assemblies but ultimately serve only to ratify decisions he has already made. The fallen angels occupy various ranks within this infernal hierarchy—Beelzebub serves as Satan’s second-in-command, while other demons hold positions of military and administrative authority—creating a system that replicates the very structures Satan claimed to oppose (Revard, 1980). This contradiction exposes Satan’s rebellion as motivated not by genuine opposition to hierarchy itself, but rather by his desire to occupy the highest position within such a system. The hellish hierarchy differs fundamentally from its heavenly counterpart in that it operates through fear, deception, and the exploitation of subordinates rather than through love and mutual recognition of divine authority.
Hierarchy and Gender in Eden: Adam and Eve’s Relationship
The hierarchical relationship between Adam and Eve in Paradise Lost introduces complex questions about gender, authority, and mutual obligation within the earthly paradise, reflecting both seventeenth-century patriarchal assumptions and Milton’s more nuanced theological perspectives on human relationships. Milton explicitly establishes Adam as superior to Eve in his prelapsarian Eden, describing Adam as “for contemplation he and valor formed, / For softness she and sweet attractive grace” (Book IV, lines 297-298), suggesting a hierarchical ordering based on gendered characteristics and divine design. However, this hierarchy differs significantly from both the heavenly order and Satan’s infernal tyranny because it operates within the context of companionship, mutual affection, and complementary purposes rather than simple domination and subordination. Eve acknowledges Adam’s authority willingly, addressing him as her “Author and Disposer” and recognizing his role as her guide in understanding God’s commandments (Book IV, line 635). This voluntary acceptance of subordination parallels the angelic submission to God in Heaven, suggesting that the prelapsarian hierarchy between Adam and Eve functioned harmoniously through love and reason rather than coercion.
Milton’s presentation of gender hierarchy in Eden proves more ambiguous and contested than his portrayal of heavenly order, revealing tensions between theological doctrine and narrative sympathy that have generated extensive scholarly debate. While Adam theoretically holds authority over Eve, Milton depicts Eve as possessing considerable intellectual independence, aesthetic sophistication, and moral agency that complicate any simple reading of female subordination. Eve’s decision to work separately from Adam in Book IX, despite his gentle attempts to dissuade her, demonstrates her capacity for independent judgment and her resistance to being treated as intellectually inferior or incapable of withstanding temptation. Scholars have noted that Milton’s Eve, particularly in her prelapsarian state, exhibits qualities of reason, eloquence, and self-possession that challenge straightforward patriarchal readings of their relationship (Nyquist, 1987). The hierarchy between Adam and Eve becomes most problematic after the Fall, when it transforms from a relationship of loving guidance to one characterized by blame, recrimination, and the imposition of harsher forms of subordination as part of humanity’s punishment. The curse imposed upon Eve—”he shall rule over thee” (Book X, line 196)—suggests that postlapsarian patriarchy represents a corruption of the gentler hierarchical arrangement that existed in Eden, introducing the possibility that Milton viewed extreme forms of male dominance as consequences of sin rather than original divine intention.
The Chain of Being and Cosmic Hierarchy
Milton’s Paradise Lost incorporates the medieval and Renaissance concept of the Great Chain of Being, a hierarchical ordering of all existence from God down through angels, humans, animals, plants, and inanimate matter, which provides the cosmological framework for understanding relationships between different orders of creation. This philosophical and theological system, which dominated Western thought from classical antiquity through the seventeenth century, conceived of the universe as a continuous hierarchy wherein each being occupied a specific rank determined by its degree of perfection, complexity, and proximity to the divine (Lovejoy, 1936). In Milton’s epic, this cosmic hierarchy establishes the proper ordering of creation and provides the standard against which rebellion and obedience are measured. God occupies the highest position as the source of all being and perfection, while the Son, angels, humans, and lower creatures occupy subsequent positions based on their nature and capacities. This hierarchical arrangement is not arbitrary but reflects essential differences in the ontological status, intellectual capacities, and moral responsibilities of different types of beings.
The Chain of Being in Paradise Lost functions not merely as a static organizational chart but as a dynamic system with the potential for both ascent and descent depending on the moral choices of free beings. Raphael’s explanation to Adam regarding the nature of creation emphasizes the possibility of upward movement within the hierarchy through obedience and spiritual refinement: “one first matter all, / Endued with various forms, various degrees / Of substance, and in things that live, of life” (Book V, lines 472-474). This concept suggests that the hierarchical ordering of creation includes the possibility of transformation and elevation, with lower forms potentially rising toward higher states of being through their participation in divine order. However, the cosmic hierarchy also permits descent, as demonstrated catastrophically by Satan’s fall from his exalted angelic status to the degraded form of a serpent crawling on the ground. Milton uses the transformation of Satan and his followers into serpents in Book X to illustrate visually the ontological consequences of rebelling against hierarchy, showing how rejection of one’s proper place within the cosmic order results not in elevation but in degradation and deformation (Lewis, 1942). The Chain of Being thus serves both as a map of existing reality and as a moral framework indicating the consequences of upholding or violating one’s position within the divinely established order.
Obedience, Free Will, and Hierarchical Authority
The tension between obedience to hierarchical authority and the exercise of free will constitutes one of the central theological and philosophical problems explored throughout Paradise Lost, particularly in Milton’s attempt to “justify the ways of God to men” while maintaining human responsibility for sin. Milton’s theodicy requires that both angelic and human beings possess genuine free will—the capacity to choose either obedience or rebellion—because without such freedom, moral responsibility becomes meaningless and God would be the author of evil. However, the existence of free will introduces the possibility that beings will choose to reject the hierarchical order established by divine wisdom, creating a permanent tension between the stability required by hierarchy and the unpredictability inherent in freedom. God explicitly affirms this tension in Book III, declaring that He created angels and humans “Sufficient to have stood, though free to fall” (Book III, line 99), acknowledging that authentic freedom necessarily includes the possibility of choosing disobedience (Lewalski, 2003). This theological framework means that hierarchy in Paradise Lost cannot function through determinism or compulsion without contradicting God’s justice and transforming Him into a tyrant rather than a loving Creator.
Milton’s solution to this dilemma involves presenting true obedience to hierarchy not as the surrender of freedom but as its highest expression, wherein rational beings freely choose to align their wills with divine wisdom because they recognize its goodness and justice. The unfallen angels exemplify this ideal relationship between hierarchy and freedom, serving God with perfect obedience not because they lack alternatives but because they understand through reason and experience that submission to divine authority represents the path to genuine fulfillment and happiness. Abdiel’s response to Satan’s temptations in Book V demonstrates this principle, as he exercises his free will to reject Satan’s arguments for rebellion and remain faithful to God despite social pressure from his peers: “who can think submission? War then, war / Open or understood must be resolved” (Book V, lines 871-872). Abdiel’s choice reveals that true freedom consists not in the absence of authority but in the capacity to recognize legitimate authority and voluntarily submit to it, making freedom and hierarchy complementary rather than contradictory principles (Danielson, 1982). However, this ideal synthesis of freedom and obedience exists only in unfallen states; after the Fall, the relationship between human freedom and divine authority becomes more problematic, marked by internal conflict, imperfect understanding, and the need for grace to repair humanity’s damaged will.
The Fall and the Disruption of Hierarchical Order
The Fall of humanity in Paradise Lost represents the catastrophic disruption of all hierarchical relationships, producing cascading disorder throughout the created world as the proper ordering of creation gives way to chaos, confusion, and corruption. Eve’s decision to eat the forbidden fruit initiates this collapse by violating the hierarchical relationship between Creator and creature, asserting human autonomy and wisdom against divine command and effectively rejecting humanity’s subordinate position within the cosmic order. Her disobedience introduces disorder into Eden immediately, as the natural world begins to reflect humanity’s moral corruption through the appearance of destructive weather, predatory animal behavior, and the general degradation of the harmonious environment that characterized the prelapsarian paradise. Milton emphasizes that Eve’s sin involves not merely breaking a specific commandment but fundamentally disrupting the hierarchical principle itself: “Her rash hand in evil hour / Forth reaching to the fruit, she plucked, she eat: / Earth felt the wound” (Book IX, lines 780-782). The cosmic resonance of this action demonstrates that hierarchy in Paradise Lost is not merely a social convention but a fundamental principle whose violation produces universal consequences.
Adam’s subsequent decision to join Eve in disobedience, though motivated by love rather than ambition, represents an equally serious disruption of hierarchy because it involves the conscious choice to prioritize horizontal human relationship over vertical divine authority. Milton presents Adam as fully aware that eating the fruit constitutes rebellion against God, yet he chooses to fall with Eve rather than remain faithful to his Creator: “How can I live without thee, how forgo / Thy sweet converse and love so dearly joined” (Book IX, lines 908-909). This decision reveals the complexity of hierarchical obligations in Milton’s theology, as Adam faces the apparent dilemma of choosing between his duty to God and his bond with Eve, ultimately deciding that separation from Eve would be more unbearable than alienation from God (Lewalski, 2003). The immediate aftermath of the Fall demonstrates the comprehensive disruption of hierarchical order, as Adam and Eve’s relationship transforms from one of mutual affection and gentle guidance to accusation, blame, and the assertion of harsh male dominance. Their spiritual disorder manifests physically through shame, lust, and the loss of the rational self-control that previously enabled them to maintain proper hierarchical relationships. The Fall thus exposes how the rejection of hierarchy in one domain inevitably produces disorder throughout all interconnected hierarchical systems, from the cosmic to the personal level.
Post-Fall Hierarchy and the Redemption of Order
Following the Fall, Milton depicts the imposition of more rigid and punitive forms of hierarchy as part of humanity’s punishment, suggesting that the gentle hierarchical arrangements of Eden have been replaced by harsher systems necessitated by human sinfulness and moral weakness. God’s judgment upon Adam and Eve in Book X establishes new hierarchical relationships characterized by conflict, domination, and suffering rather than the harmonious cooperation that existed before the Fall. Eve receives the curse that intensifies gender hierarchy: “To thy husband’s will / Thine shall submit, he over thee shall rule” (Book X, lines 195-196), indicating that postlapsarian patriarchy involves a more severe form of male authority than existed in Eden. Similarly, humanity’s relationship with the natural world becomes hierarchical in a new sense, as humans must now struggle against a resistant environment through painful labor, while previously they enjoyed easy dominion over a cooperative nature. These changes suggest that Milton views the harsher forms of hierarchy prevalent in fallen human society not as the original divine intention but as necessary accommodations to human sinfulness, protective structures that prevent complete moral and social collapse while humanity remains in its fallen state.
However, Milton’s theodicy requires that the Fall not represent the final word on hierarchical relationships, as the promise of redemption through Christ offers the possibility of restoring proper order while transforming the nature of hierarchy itself. The Son’s willing submission to the Father in accepting the mission of redemption and his eventual incarnation, suffering, and death model a form of hierarchy based on sacrificial love rather than domination, suggesting that redeemed hierarchical relationships will differ from both prelapsarian innocence and postlapsarian corruption. Michael’s prophecy to Adam in Books XI and XII reveals that human history will involve a long struggle to establish and maintain legitimate forms of authority in families, churches, and political systems, with constant dangers of hierarchy degenerating into tyranny on one hand or dissolving into chaos on the other. The poem concludes with Adam and Eve’s expulsion from Eden but also with their education in obedience, humility, and hope, suggesting that redeemed humanity can learn to navigate hierarchical relationships with greater wisdom and grace than they possessed in their original innocence (Fish, 1967). The final image of Adam and Eve leaving Paradise “hand in hand” indicates a restored, though chastened, partnership that maintains hierarchical structure while incorporating mutual support and shared responsibility for the difficult journey ahead.
Political Implications of Milton’s Hierarchical Vision
Milton’s treatment of hierarchy in Paradise Lost inevitably engages with the political controversies of seventeenth-century England, particularly debates about the nature of legitimate authority, the rights of subjects, and the proper relationship between rulers and ruled. Writing after the English Civil War, the execution of Charles I, the Commonwealth period, and the Restoration of Charles II, Milton lived through tumultuous conflicts over whether political authority derived from divine right, consent of the governed, or some combination of these principles. Satan’s rebellion against God has often been read as Milton’s indirect commentary on revolution and resistance to tyranny, though scholars disagree sharply about whether Satan represents justified resistance against arbitrary power or self-serving ambition masked by revolutionary rhetoric (Worden, 2007). Some interpreters argue that Milton uses Satan’s fall to criticize his own earlier support for regicide and revolutionary politics, suggesting that the poem warns against the presumption of challenging established authority. Others contend that Milton distinguishes between legitimate resistance to tyranny and Satan’s unjustified rebellion against a perfect and benevolent authority, implying that the righteousness of revolution depends entirely on the character of the authority being challenged.
The political dimension of Milton’s hierarchical vision becomes particularly evident in his depiction of different forms of government among the fallen angels in Hell. The council scenes in Books I and II present elaborate debates about strategy that superficially resemble parliamentary deliberation, yet Milton reveals these apparently democratic procedures as essentially theatrical, with Satan manipulating discussions to achieve predetermined outcomes while maintaining the illusion of collective decision-making. This portrayal may reflect Milton’s disillusionment with both monarchical and parliamentary systems as he witnessed them in practice, suggesting that the nominal form of government matters less than the character and motivations of those exercising authority (Dzelzainis, 1995). Ultimately, Paradise Lost presents hierarchy itself as neither inherently good nor evil but rather as a neutral structure whose moral character depends entirely on whether it operates according to principles of justice, reason, and love (as in Heaven) or through deception, coercion, and self-interest (as in Hell). This perspective suggests that Milton’s mature political thought recognized the necessity of hierarchical order in human society while remaining deeply suspicious of concentrated power and insistent that legitimate authority must serve the common good rather than private ambition.
Conclusion
The role of hierarchy in Paradise Lost extends far beyond simple organizational structure to encompass fundamental questions about authority, obedience, freedom, and the proper ordering of relationships between God and creation, between different orders of beings, and among humans themselves. Milton presents hierarchy as essential to cosmic order, yet he simultaneously explores how hierarchical systems can be perverted, misunderstood, and transformed into instruments of oppression rather than frameworks for flourishing. The contrast between the harmonious hierarchy of Heaven, the tyrannical parody established in Hell, and the ambiguous hierarchical relationships in Eden reveals Milton’s nuanced understanding of how the same structural principle can produce radically different outcomes depending on the motivations, character, and wisdom of those involved. Throughout the epic, Milton grapples with the tension between hierarchy and freedom, ultimately suggesting that true liberty consists not in the absence of authority but in the voluntary submission to legitimate authority recognized through reason and love.
Milton’s exploration of hierarchy in Paradise Lost remains relevant to contemporary readers precisely because it addresses perennial questions about power, authority, obedience, and resistance that continue to shape political, social, and religious life. The poem challenges simplistic views that either uncritically endorse all hierarchical arrangements or reflexively reject any form of ranked order, instead insisting on the crucial importance of distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate forms of authority, between hierarchy that enables flourishing and hierarchy that produces oppression. By examining the catastrophic consequences of both rejecting proper hierarchy (Satan’s rebellion) and perverting it (Satan’s tyranny in Hell), while simultaneously exposing the potential for abuse even in divinely sanctioned structures (the post-Fall intensification of gender hierarchy), Milton creates a complex meditation on authority that resists reduction to simple political formulas. The enduring power of Paradise Lost lies partly in this sophisticated treatment of hierarchy, which refuses easy answers while insisting that questions about the proper ordering of relationships and the nature of legitimate authority remain central to understanding human existence and our relationship with the divine.
References
Danielson, D. (1982). Milton’s Good God: A Study in Literary Theodicy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dzelzainis, M. (1995). Milton’s classical republicanism. In D. Armitage, A. Himy, & Q. Skinner (Eds.), Milton and Republicanism (pp. 3-24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fish, S. (1967). Surprised by Sin: The Reader in Paradise Lost. London: Macmillan.
Lewalski, B. K. (2003). The Life of John Milton: A Critical Biography (Revised ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Lewis, C. S. (1942). A Preface to Paradise Lost. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lovejoy, A. O. (1936). The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Milton, J. (1667). Paradise Lost. In S. Orgel & J. Goldberg (Eds.), John Milton: The Major Works (2003 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nyquist, M. (1987). The genesis of gendered subjectivity in the divorce tracts and in Paradise Lost. In M. Nyquist & M. W. Ferguson (Eds.), Re-membering Milton: Essays on the Texts and Traditions (pp. 99-127). New York: Methuen.
Revard, S. P. (1980). The War in Heaven: Paradise Lost and the Tradition of Satan’s Rebellion. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Worden, B. (2007). Literature and Politics in Cromwellian England: John Milton, Andrew Marvell, Marchamont Nedham. Oxford: Oxford University Press.