Fated or Free: When is the Moment of the Fall of Man?

About the new-arrived, in multitudes

The ethereal people ran, to hear and know
How all befell…
— Paradise Lost: Book X, lines 26-8

McColley says: “I have been unable to reach a conclusion as to what, in Paradise Lost, is the poet's
precise belief”1. Milton’s own view is that man has freewill to do good and ascend to heaven, or through
evil descend to hell, but in Paradise Lost, this does not always spring forth. Hill names him “the great
eclectic”2, for one can extract multiple religious doctrines from his epic. Hutchinson, believing contrarily
in predestination, also offers a certain amount of interpretability in Order and Disorder.
There are arguments to be made in both cases which see that the Fall was inevitable from the outset;
that Adam and Eve are swayed in the spur of the moment by a force not their own – an evil tongue or
heavenly design – and led to disobey, or are perhaps fated, even purposely created, to fall. However, it
is also possible to reason that they exert their own freewill or desire and consciously choose to sin. Thus
according to the poets, whether the world revolves around the free choices of each individual man, or is
in fact governed by an inevitable fate, is a topic of study which is a continued source of debate. Here we
will decipher what each poem depicts by questioning the one key aspect which runs centrally through
both works: the Fall of Man. In searching for exactly when this takes place and thus for the true beliefs
embedded in each text, I will consider among the main aspects the significance of the fruit, the designs
of God and Satan, and the desirous nature of humanity and the possibility of an extended, gradual
decline.

To open the debate of when the Fall occurs is the loaded question of whether it is man or woman to
blame. Poole observes that Milton “treats both the feminine and masculine falls as equally damaging” 3;
however, Poole admits that Eve’s role is of greater detriment. For him, when compared to Adam, Eve is
a “rapidly better-informed, argumentative being”, and she subtly hides her true cunning. She is the first
to eat the fruit, persuades Adam to “freely taste” 4, and makes him “weak/ Against the charm of beauty’s
powerful glance”5. Additionally, Eve is the object of Satan’s temptation, able to make an independent

1
McColley, ‘Paradse Lost’, The Harvard Theological Review, p232 [footnote 247]
2
Hill, Milton and the English Revolution, p336
3
Poole, Milton and the Idea of the Fall, p182-5
4
Milton, Paradise Lost, IX:988 [here on referred to ‘PL’]
5
PL, VIII:532-3

1
choice. In effect, Adam is merely a bystander in the fall, a victim swept along by spousal loyalty. Hill goes
further to equate Adam’s worship of Eve analogously to “the relationship of Christ to his church” 6; Adam
must choose to follow Eve not only as his wife but as his faith. Whilst Milton piles the blame onto Eve,
Hutchinson surreptitiously shifts it back onto Adam for his failure as a protector, saying that “had she
not from her firm protection strayed” 7 Eve would not have fallen. Milton’s Adam does also try to
shoulder this burden, saying Eve was “to me committed and by me exposed” 8. However, the
misogynistic tone of Paradise Lost undermines this sentiment (“her the inferior, in mind and inward
faculties”9). In fact it becomes apparent after Eve has taken from the tree that her inferiority to Adam
may be part of her motive, for she ponders whether to “keep the odds of knowledge… for inferior who
is free”10. If so, in its search for equality, Eve’s Fall resembles that of Satan, for he too is offended by
inequality. It is possible to see here that Adam’s condescending manner towards Eve pushed her to sin,
and that perhaps then the blame shifts back to him. The pendulum motion of blame is represented by
Milton in a long passage of “mutual accusation” 11.
In Milton and the English Revolution, Hill describes “liberty as iconoclasm” 12; looking then at Eve’s
awe towards the Tree of Knowledge, and Adam’s wonder towards Eve, we can see they are both already
sinners for idolatry, and perhaps equal in their sin. Both writers conclude the debate with God punishing
both genders, showing that it is impossible for even God to make a categorical judgement on either. The
fact remains unequivocal that for the entire human race to fall, both its parents had to consume the
forbidden fruit, both did consume, and both did Fall. Therefore, regardless of which sex sinned first, the
role of each was equally effectual, and regardless of motives, they both chose to disobey God. So
perhaps we must see that when Milton describes Adam’s eating of the fruit as “completing of the mortal
sin”13, he is implying that the sin begun by Eve is ultimately and willingly finished by Adam.

The putative moment of the Fall is when Adam and Eve consume the apple. However, Thompson argues
that the apple “must be interpreted as a symbol… In Christian Doctrine Milton persuades himself that
God purposely made an insignificant matter the sole test of man's obedience, since an apparently
useless prohibition would offer the surest proof of man's obedience”14. Hill adds that the actual
knowledge comes from a “long and bitter experience, not from the rind of one apple tasted” 15. We can

6
Hill, p376
7
Hutchinson, Order and Disorder, 4:172 [here on referred to ‘OD’]
8
PL, X:957
9
PL, VIII:541
10
PL, IX:120-5
11
PL, IX:1187
12
Hill, p262
13
PL, IX:1003
14
Thompson, ‘The Theme of Paradise Lost’, p106
15
Hill, p379

2
see then that perhaps no physical change occurs in the pair when they ingest the arbitrarily forbidden
fruit, but from a world consisting of only goodness they come to the knowledge of evil through the act
of disobedience itself. Consequently, guilt and conscience evolve in remorse for their crime, not through
some elixir inherent in the golden fruit. Hill also observes that “gardening was necessary in paradise
even before the Fall”16, insinuating the external world does not alter either, only their outward
perception of it; “the decision to be evil has to take place internally and before the temptation itself” 17.
Eve displays a real contemplative consideration in both texts before she chooses to sin. It seems original
sin was not an act of rash negligence, capricious fancy or error, but an act of freewill, a calculated
solution, premeditated to end the “present state” of man, and fill a vacuous desire. The Fall conceivably
occurs by the choice to eat, not the act of consumption or by a preordained fate.

Savage asserts that “no other idea means quite so much for Milton… as the idea of freedom” 18 and that
we must “dismiss from mind any notion of cause” 19. Paradise Lost certainly argues for the freewill of
mankind, for God is not in control of fate in Milton’s epic; He says: “I formed them free, and free they
must remain”20, and that they cannot “…justly accuse their maker, or their making, or their fate… they
themselves decreed their own revolt, not I” 21. When God, as here, is categorically removed from blame,
our gaze must shift to man. Instead God is a spectator, “survey[ing] Hell” 22, and constantly delegating to
his angels, Raphael, Michael and Messiah. To this end, Milton uses the Fall of Man as his narrative
epicentre, around which the entire text revolves. Order and Disorder, and indeed the Bible itself, utilises
the Fall more like a setting; almost a prologue to the larger story of Fallen Man. Milton’s technique,
however, creates a foreboding effect for his readers, all of whom would know the eventual outcome –
not least because of the title – giving a sense of narrative inevitability to the poem itself. This could be
seen as a mimesis of God’s omniscience, allowing the reader to occupy His position looking in upon
these creatures so soon to doom themselves to exile, but unable to do anything except watch.
On the other hand, in Order and Disorder, we are not shown God’s reaction when he discovers that
man will sin, as we are by Milton; Hutchinson’s God thus appears more in control by causing fate, rather
than observing it. Haller describes how Puritanism “made men slaves of an over-ruling providence” 23.
Hutchinson displays many examples of this providence. For example, God declares to Abraham that “a

16
Hill, p260
17
Poole, p184
18
Savage, ‘Freedom and Necessity in Paradise Lost’, ELH, p286
19
Savage, p288
20
PL, III:125
21
PL, III:112-7
22
PL, III:69-70
23
Haller, ‘Order and Progress in Paradise Lost’, PMLA, p225

3
holy seed out of thy loins shall rise” 24, and later tells him of his “quiet death and honourable grave” 25.
Hutchinson uses prolepsis to show that nothing can surprise God, as He knows the futures of the chosen
families and directs them along the righteous path. Perhaps he has no reaction to man’s disobedience
because he has always known this as the inevitable outcome. Furthermore, Hutchinson’s God is ever-
present in the affairs of man, talking directly to every generation. Not only is the future offered without
fear that it might fluctuate, but its divination is imbued with such authority and accuracy that it seems
impossible to alter, and where its course is indefinite, God intervenes to redirect events correctly. Here,
in the essence of God, we can clearly see the authors diverge upon their contrasting paths of belief. For
whereas Milton’s God is staunchly set against helping man, and deems him a free being, Hutchinson
uses divine foresight to argue a strong case for the providential fate of man.

In Paradise Lost we can trace its initiation to the point at which the angels in heaven divide. That Milton
opens his poem with Satan is a clear indication of the importance he attributes to the role of the Fallen
angels in the Fall of man. The revolt of “innumerable force… that durst dislike [God’s] reign” 26, the war in
heaven, the parliament in Pandemonium, the journey of Satan to Earth, and the fruit taken; these are all
events in a chain which pave the route of man’s decline. The beginning of this chain, acknowledged by
the starting point of Raphael’s account, is when God increases the status of his son to “head” 27 over the
other angels. By doing this, God recognizes the hierarchical nature of goodness: that some are better
than others and others can be worse. So when Messiah attains his unequal position of pre-eminent
goodness, Lucifer also distinguishes his position of pre-eminent evil. It is almost as if there is a balance
which must be upheld and God, in raising one, simultaneously lowers the other. At this moment the
tempter is made and fated to journey in vengeance to Earth. The course of events is here set in motion,
unstoppably, inevitably to bring man to his Fallen stature. Thus Satan’s Fall and the beginning of evil in
Heaven can be seen as the exact same moment when man’s fate becomes sealed, and he too is destined
to Fall.
Alternatively, in Paradise Lost when Satan whispers into Eve’s dreams she awakes remembering
“fruit divine… able to make gods of men” 28. Her dream leaves her and Adam unsettled and infected with
“inspiring venom”29 and “vain hopes”. Eve awakes fearful that her perfection has been tainted by
“offence and trouble”30 and here we see the commencement of her desire to taste the forbidden fruit. It
could be seen here that she changes internally and resolves, whether she knows it or not, to discover
what makes this fruit so special. This offers an explanation as to why she so adamantly wishes to tend
24
OD, 11:15
25
OD, 12:54
26
PL, I:101-2
27
PL, V:606
28
PL, V:67-70
29
PL, IV:804-8
30
PL, V:34

4
the gardens alone despite knowing there is a powerful threat afoot. In Order and Disorder, Hutchinson
does not show Satan infecting Eve’s dreams, but she is equally subjected to “tempting and urging” 31 by
Satan, coercing her to make a decision. It is possible to isolate this pivotal dream as the moment when
the Fall becomes inevitable; unquenchable desire, aided by serpentine temptation, from this point must
be fulfilled.

We must ask the question: would man still have eaten the apple without Satan’s influence? It appears in
both texts that Eve was easily swayed, having already an underlying desire to fill a void within herself.
Adam is described by Poole as “already prone to sin” 32, and certainly we can see him as desirous prior to
the satanic dreams of Eve. In fact he displays a lust for knowledge from the moment of his creation,
immediately asking “how came I thus”33. He pleads with God that something is missing, and that he
needs companionship, yet when given this he still desires something further, and tries to extract it from
Raphael (“subtly to detain thee I devise” 34). Still though, each time the angel offers him more
information he asks again for more, and finds in the angelic words “sweetness [but] no satiety” 35,
imitating the flesh of the apple which is still to come. In Order and Disorder we see a similar “want of
partner”36, and then they pursue “attainments… climbing higher” 37. Eve also desires to experience
knowledge, for Satan ensnared Eve because “she wished… and did believe a forgery that suited her
desire”38. Hutchinson takes Eve from a state of “dissatisfaction” 39 through “ambition” and into “longing”.
In both texts then, man’s inherent thirst for knowledge is present from creation, and from this moment
our progenitors were to inevitably disobey God to feed their insatiable desires.

The Fall can in some ways be viewed as part of man’s journey to reach heaven. Hunter explores how
“God made man when Satan fell… to replace the fallen legions; having tried once (with the angels) and
failed, he tried again (with man) and failed again… because both failures derived from the same basic
law – that the individual freedom is created by escaping” 40. He goes on to say that the second fall differs
from the first because when Satan is depicted as fallen, he is ruined, without hope of regaining Heaven,
fated to spend eternity in punishment. However Man in both texts is given the opportunity to repent

31
OD, 5.47
32
Poole, p47
33
PL, VIII:286
34
PL, VIII:207
35
PL, VIII:216
36
OD, 3:341
37
OD, 3:574-6
38
OD, 5.43-55
39
OD, 4.207-10
40
G.K. Hunter, Paradise Lost, p137

5
and re-enter God’s grace. Moreover man wants to repent, whereas Satan believes that “never can true
reconcilement grow where wounds of deadly hate have pierced so deep” 41.
To develop this then: Hutchinson’s God, aware that Adam and Eve would sin, still places the Tree of
Knowledge in Eden and creates man with his innate desire. God is said to plot “even by man’s fall,
th’advance of human race”42. The question then: Implicitly, did God want – even plan – Man’s fall? He
quickly reverts from “judge’s frown… [to] a tender father’s kind and melting face” 43; this could be
because He was not displeased with his creations, for they are acting according to His design. God,
looking to replace His lost angels, wants to avoid another rebellion in His new race of beings. Perhaps
then He resolves to test His future progenies, and so created man with the purpose of falling so that his
second attempt would not fail. Once tasted and lost, paradise would become a constant aspiration for
future generations to regain. Unlike Satan, who took Heaven and its bliss for granted, any man capable
of “merit”44 and “long obedience” would rejoin God, be enamoured with paradise and appreciative of
God’s grace. So whilst it is tenuous, it is not impossible that man’s fall from paradise is the first stage of
God’s plan: a screening process to disambiguate the unworthy from those worthy of Heaven.

Haller quotes Stoll’s argument, “falling back upon the convenient notion of predestination… there is no
change where the change was intended from the beginning” 45. If we continue to see Man created to
intentionally fall, then according to Stoll’s philosophy: from the moment of creation, Man is fallen.
When Adam and Eve each ate the apple in Paradise Lost, Nature “felt the wound” 46, sighing and
groaning, and consequently paradise turns to exile. Milton shows the external world, or human
perception of it, altering. However there is no inherent change in Man. Thus when Adam bites the apple
and Milton describes him as “completing of the mortal sin” 47, the implication may be that the sin has
been a continuous action up until this point. Additionally, Milton spreads what the Bible recognises as
the Fall of Man across a longer time period: initially after they eat the apple Adam and Eve appear
unaffected; later, they realise what they have done and begin to feel guilt and shame; then finally Adam
is shown the future of mankind and “his eyes are opened” 48. All this occurs at the moment the apple is
bitten in the biblical story, and in Hutchinson’s rendition. It is possible then to see that Milton depicts
the fall of man as a gradual decline, beginning with creation and perhaps ending with Christ in the
desert. Thus the search for a moment of the fall is fruitless because it is not a moment at all, but a
constant decline; a permeation of sin which seeps ever-deeper into humankind.
41
PL, IV:98-9
42
OD, 5.72
43
OD, 5.268
44
PL, VII:157-9
45
Haller, p218
46
PL, IX:782
47
PL, IX:1003
48
PL, XI:429

6
In conclusion, whilst there are strands of fate visible in Paradise Lost, it chiefly professes man’s freewill.
Order and Disorder, presents us with the opposite depiction, containing inferable elements of freewill,
yet primarily dealing in the inevitability of fate. Both authors depict equal punishment for Adam and
Eve, as equal participants in original sin; they show the apple as an arbitrary symbol, for the real sin is
the disobedience of God in an attempt to satiate an unquenchable thirst; and Satan’s Fall and his
infiltration of Eve’s dreams are intrinsically linked to the Fall of man. Where they differ is in their
approaches to God, for Milton’s God inhabits the background, merely watching his creations flourish
and fall, whilst allowing them to exert their own freedom of choice. Contrarily, Hutchinson’s God is
always intervening, and perhaps even designs man to fall in order to test his worthiness to enter the
Gated of Heaven. Unable to assign a specific moment to the Fall but discovering multiple possibilities, it
is fair to conclude that the Fall of man is, in both instances, a steady decline into sin, begun with man’s
intrinsic, even purposely-built, flaw from creation and continuing beyond the scope of either text.
So we have explored when the Fall occurs, and we have concluded that the authors, whilst showing
both freewill and fate, overall oppose each other; but our original question still remains: were we fated
to Fall, or did we choose? It is possible that the answer to this debate is that man is both: man is fated
and free. If we look to Heaven, and to the predestined elite shown to us by Hutchinson, fate exists
because they obey God and so he can control their actions with his commands. Conversely, the fallen
angels shown in Paradise Lost form a kind of parliament, and discuss multiple options before coming to
a decision; their recognition of multiple approaches to the future is also a recognition of their freedom
to choose which path to follow. Thus in Hell freewill exists because they disobey, and God cannot fully
anticipate their choices. It seems then that freewill itself may be considered a choice: we can choose to
be free, make our own decisions and spiral ever downwards towards Hell; or we can choose to obey,
allow all future decisions to be guided in fate by God, and rise angelically towards Heaven. It would
seem logical then that the pre-Fall man is fated and the post-Fall man is free, but it is after Adam and
Eve have eaten the forbidden fruit that Michael comes to them with full knowledge of the future,
implying that only after sin have their fates been set. We must look then to their initial choice: whether
to obey or not is an instance of freewill, and it is only after Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit that
they make their choice, saying in Paradise Lost, “I submit”49 and, in Order and Disorder, “to God’s will
sacrifice”50. Our answer is in fact both: pre-Fall man must choose God or freewill; post-Fall man, having
chosen God, walks the fated path of obedience. So we must conclude, then, that the Fall of man, as an
on-going-process, is neither an act of Fate, nor of Freewill, but a transitional movement between the
two. The initial disobedience is essential in teaching man that he can choose, and leads to his eventual
choice: to obey.

49
PL, X:769
50
OD 5:640

7
Word Count: 3497

8
Bibliography:

HALLER, William. ‘Order and Progress in Paradise Lost’; PMLA. Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 218-225. Modern
Language Association: 1920 [via JSTOR]

HILL, Christopher. Milton and the English Revolution. Faber and Faber: 1977

HIRST, Derek. ‘Remembering a Hero: Lucy Hutchinson’s Memoirs of her Husband’, English Historical
Review, Vol. 119, No. 482, pp. 682-691. 2004 [accessed via The Portal]

HUNTER, G.K. Paradise Lost, George Allen and Unwin: 1980

HUTCHINSON, Lucy; Ed Norbrook, David. Order and Disorder. Blackwell: 2001

HUTCHINSON, Lucy. Memoirs of the Life of Colonel Hutchinson. [Seminar Handout]

McCOLLEY, Grant. ‘Paradse Lost’; The Harvard Theological Review. Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 181-235,
Cambridge University Press: 1939

MILTON, John. Paradise Lost. Oxford University Press: 2005

NORBROOK, David. ‘Hutchinson [Née Apsley], Lucy (1620–1681),Poet And Biographer’; Oxford
Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford University Press: 2004 [via The Portal]

POOLE, William. Milton and the Idea of the Fall. Cambridge University Press: 2005

SAVAGE, J.B. ‘Freedom and Necessity in Paradise Lost’; ELH, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 286-311. Johns Hopkins
University Press: 1977 [via JSTOR]

THOMPSON, Elbert N. S. ‘The Theme of Paradise Lost’; PMLA. Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 106-120. Modern
Language Association: 1913 [via JSTOR]

PICCIOTTO, Joanna. ‘Reforming the Garden: The Experimentalist Eden and Paradise Lost’; ELH. Vol. 72,
No. 1, pp. 23-78. Johns Hopkins University Press: 2005 [via Project Muse <http://muse.jhu.edu>]

PORTERFIELD, Amanda. ‘Women's Attraction to Puritanism’; Church History. Vol.60.2, pp. 196-209.
Cambridge University Press: 1991 [via JSTOR]

WALDOCK A.J.A. Paradise Lost  and Its Critics. Cambridge University Press: 1947

WILLIAMS, Norman Powell. The Ideas of the Fall and of Original Sin. Longmans, Green and Co: 1927

FERRY, Anne. ‘Milton's Creation of Eve’; Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900. Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 113-
132. Rice University: 1988 [via JSTOR]