The Myth of Female Submission By Kate Hendrickson

With the rediscovery of classical texts, the Christian West came to connote a myth as something decidedly untrue, like a fairy tale or a ghost story. Because its meaning is so deeply ingrained in Greek and Roman stories of origin, the West also tends to consider a myth inevitably pagan. For this reason, the notion of a Christian myth is blasphemous. However, Jaan Puhvel’s definition of myth as “deadly serious to its originating environment” widens the idea of a myth past purely pagan stories to encompass any story that attempts to explain a group’s origin and identity. As Puhvel notes, myths express “the thought patterns by which a group formulates self-cognition and self-realization, attains self-knowledge and self-confidence, explains its own source and being and that of its surroundings, and sometimes tries to chart its destinies” (2). In this context, not only does the Bible qualify as a myth, but because Milton’s Paradise Lost expands on Biblical scenes to confirm Christian identity and justify its subjugation of women, it occupies the realm of myth as well.

Milton wrote his masterpiece nearly a century and a half after the Reformation, the greatest upheaval of Christendom since the schism of 1054. As a Protestant, Milton opposed monarchial power and the Restoration of Charles II. In the midst of such religious turmoil, it is no wonder Milton felt his faith challenged and in need of reassurance. Paradise Lost represents Milton’s undertaking to reconfirm the preeminence of Christianity and its traditions. In particular, Milton validates the inferior status of women propagated by Christianity through his dichotomous depiction of pre- and postlapsarian Eve.

In his description of prelapsarian Eve, Milton draws on two major influences, the classical epic and the medieval romance. Traditionally, epic female characters are not very involved in the action. They are relegated to the background to perform domestic duties like housekeeping and weaving. For example, Homer only lets readers in on Helen’s thoughts when she converses with others in private or works at the loom. Similarly, while Raphael and Adam discuss science and knowledge, Eve removes herself, going “forth among her fruits and flow’rs” (Bk. VIII v. 44). But the epic woman is not consigned entirely to the shadows; her goddess-like beauty transfixes men. Helen certainly affects men of the Iliad this way, and Milton borrows this trait in his description of prelapsarian Eve. After Adam’s rapturous praise of Eve’s beauty, the angel Raphael fixes him with a “contracted brow” and admonishes him not to attribute “overmuch to things / Less excellent, as thou thyself perceiv’st” (v. 560, 565-566).

Although prelapsarian Eve illustrates these qualities of the epic female character, Milton fuses these traits with those of the female from medieval romance. The literary tradition of courtly love depicts women as scheming participants in the game of love. In these stories, a man pursues the love of an unattainable woman (usually the wife of his master) and the woman seems to hold the upper hand, at times cuckolding her husband. On the surface, courtly love appears to elevate the status of women as they wield power by virtue of sex appeal, but in reality, by idealizing women and placing them on pedestals of perfection, the genre dehumanizes them. Drawing on this medieval notion of romance, Milton inverts the gender hierarchy of Adam and Eve before their fall from Paradise.

As Satan observes Adam and Eve in Book IV, he notices that “both / Not equal, as their sex not equal seemed” (v. 295-296). The connotation of equal in the seventeenth century meant “identical,” but Satan’s comments address more than physical differences between the humans. Immediately upon viewing Adam, Satan notes he is “For contemplation . . . and valour formed” (v. 297). On the other hand, Satan perceives Eve as formed “For softness . . . and sweet attractive grace” (v. 298). In the following verse, Satan clearly states the unequal status of Adam and Eve: “He for God only, she for God in him” (v. 299).

Yet despite these observations, Milton’s development of the human characters reveals a different balance of power, one resembling courtly love. Although Eve demonstrates submission to Adam in her speech, her actions reveal a longing for autonomy. Conversely, although Adam possesses absolute authority, he reveres Eve like a goddess. He commonly addresses her as his “Sole partner and sole part of all these joys, / Dearer thyself than all” (Bk. IV v. 411-412). Eve refers to him as “thou for whom / And from whom I was formed flesh of thy flesh, / And without whom am to no end” (v. 440-442), but in Book IX her independent impulse manifests itself with destructive consequences.

She suggests to Adam they tend the gardens separately. She argues Adam’s presence distracts her from her work. Trying to dissuade her, Adam responds, “Yet not so strictly hath our Lord imposed / Labour, as to debar us when we need / Refreshment, whether food, or talk between” (v. 235-237). Adam also worries that by herself, Eve will be more susceptible to the evil influence Raphael warned them about in Book V. But intent on working separately, Eve presents an infallible argument: Their virtue must be tested to prove their true loyalty to God. Adam at once recognizes the logic of this argument. “Go in thy native innocence,” he tells her, “rely / On what thou hast of virtue” (v. 373).

Before the fall from Paradise, Milton depicts Eve as the stronger, more complex character. Eve is a contradiction because although she is submissive to Adam, she holds a certain power over him. By portraying Adam as prone to Eve’s influence, it seems at first that Milton is countering the inferior status of women held in his day. Milton’s writing grew out of a Christian tradition with a long history of subjugating women. After the early Christian church firmly established itself and no longer needed women to proselytize, it severely restricted their role in the church. Clergy justified this action with Scripture, citing passages such as I Timothy 2:12: “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” (Shahar 22). One medieval order of monks went so far as to abolish its parallel female order, vowing to avoid women “as we do mad dogs” (Shahar 36). Since the inception of Christianity, numerous didactic treatises instructed pious women to submit to the better judgment of their fathers and husbands. By linking the influential beauty of the epic female and the wiliness of the medieval romantic female figure, Milton seems to create a woman with a forceful personality who is able resist the servile female model of Christianity. However, Milton does not use Paradise Lost to oppose male domination within the church. Rather, he portrays prelapsarian Eve as powerful and independent precisely to emphasize the humble, reformed postlapsarian Eve—the model of penitence for all Christian women.

After succumbing to Satan’s temptation, Eve encourages Adam to partake of her sin as well. In a Christ-like parallel, Adam sacrifices himself for Eve’s sake. Although he recognizes the enormity of Eve’s sin, he does not hesitate to eat the forbidden fruit. “Certain my resolution is to die,” he declares. “How can I live without thee?” (v. 907-908) Thankful to have a partner in crime, Eve replies, “O glorious trial of exceeding love, / Illustrious evidence, example high!” (v. 961-962) Milton stresses Adam’s decision was not influenced by deception. Milton tells us “he scrupled not to eat / Against his better knowledge, not deceived, / But fondly overcome with female charm” (v. 997-999). Eve’s charm wears off, however, as Adam laments his decision in Book X. He condemns the female form, “this fair defect / Of nature” (v. 891-892). Eve’s autonomous ambition dissipates and she humbles herself before Adam, pleading for mercy. She no longer acknowledges her sex appeal while interacting with Adam. Instead she begs his forgiveness. Whereas before the fall Adam swore he could not live without Eve, now Eve declares her dependence on Adam. He is her “only strength and stay,” and she beseeches him, “Forlorn of thee, / Whither shall I betake me, where subsist?” (v. 921-922) She accepts full responsibility for the fall of man in Book XII as she professes her devotion to Adam. “Thou to me / Art all things under Heav’n,” she declares, “all places thou, / Who for my willful crime art banished hence” (v. 617-619).

In the act of eating God’s forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve not only condemn themselves to death, but in that moment they also switch positions in the gender hierarchy. Adam’s codependence on and worship of Eve ends as he recognizes his full authority, and actual humility replaces Eve’s pseudo-submission. Whereas prelapsarian Eve embodies the selfish and sexual aspects of epic and medieval romance female figures, postlapsarian Eve illustrates the domestic side of the epic female and the humility of Christian female that had been preached for centuries.

The drastic contrast between prelapsarian and postlapsarian Eve illustrates the danger inherent in female freedom. In Book III, God explains at length how He created both the fallen angels and man “just and right, / Sufficient to have stood, though free to fall” (v. 98-99). Although He foresees the fall of Adam and Eve, He insists this in no way influences their decision to sin. God grants Adam and Eve absolute freedom as a way to test their loyalty. If they obey His will only because they are forced, they are merely puppets acting out heavenly decrees. Choosing to remain faithful to their Maker in spite of the freedom to sin proves their ultimate fidelity. As God insists to His Son, “I formed them free, and free they must remain” (v. 124).

But as Milton vividly illustrates in Book IX, this freedom is too much for Eve to handle. She is not satisfied with the freedom granted by God because it includes one restriction, the Tree of Knowledge. After disobeying God and partaking of the forbidden fruit, she debates whether or not to tell Adam of her transgression. She relishes the idea of hiding her secret and rendering herself “more equal, and perhaps, / A thing not undesirable, sometime / Superior; for inferior who is free?” (v. 823-825) By sharing her new-found knowledge with Adam, she will relinquish the freedom and superiority it gives her. However, faced with the prospect of the unknown—death—Eve ultimately encourages Adam to keep her company in her sinful state. As Milton describes it, after Eve greedily pursues freedom beyond that granted by God, she finds it too great to bear alone. By selfishly persuading Adam to join her, she brings about the downfall of mankind—instigating centuries of female subservience.

The issue of female inferiority to males was of deadly seriousness not only to Milton and his contemporaries, but also to writers preceding the seventeenth century. In answer to the dilemma, classical epic poets depict women as objects of beauty and performers of duty. Medieval romantic writers also portray women as beautiful beings, with the added element of superficial control gained through sexual appeal. Milton addresses this age-old debate with the bifurcation of Eve’s character. The sensuous, negative aspects of the epic and medieval female characters in prelapsarian Eve give way to the repentant, positive traits of postlapsarian Eve.

Milton emphasizes that God grants freedom to man and woman equally because this is the key point in justifying man’s control over woman. Because Eve, the original woman, failed to responsibly accept the freedom given by God, it is up to Adam, the original man, to limit her access to that freedom by his God-given authority over her. Milton fleshes out this short scene from Genesis in order to better explain the acceptability—even inevitability—of woman’s submission to man. As defined by Puhvel, a myth seeks to establish the self-confidence of a group; thus, by demonstrating and justifying the necessity of restricting female freedom, Paradise Lost serves a mythic purpose.


Works Cited
Milton, John. Paradise Lost. Ed. John Leonard. New York: Penguin Books, 2000.
Puhvel, Jaan. Comparative Mythology. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press,
       1989.
Shahar, Shulamith. The Fourth Estate. Trans. Chaya Galai. New York: Routledge, 2003.

1