NAKED INNOCENCE REPRESENTING UNFALLEN ANGELS IN MILTON AND THE VISUAL ARTS Larisa Kocic-ZAMBO Buake's claim that Milton wrote at liberty of Devils and Hell because “he was a true Poet and of the Devil’s party without knowing it” (1994, 6 = plate 6) played a large role in initiating the Romantics’ obsession with the devil in Mil- ton’s Paradise Lost and making Satan the most controversial character of Mil- ton scholarship. Milton’s angels, although no less fascinating than their fallen counterparts, have nevertheless been neglected unless discussed with regard to their sexual life, digestion, or Neoplatonic references. And yet, Renaissance man, of whom Milton is usually considered to be the last, was far more fasci- nated with angels, seeing in them the potential of human elevation, exaltation from a lower state of being to that approaching or even reaching deity. Indeed, one can notice this fascination in Milton in the very central role he assigns to the interlude Adam has with Raphael, when man and angel converse “as friend with friend” (PL 5.229) and which Suerry calls the “civilized centre of the poem” (1979, 227). Milton was definitely not “in fetters,’ as Blake would have it, when writing of angels and God. On the contrary, I aim to show how Mil- ton’s peculiar way of representing angels in Paradise Lost liberates them from the conventional angelic representations of his age, both visual and literary, and at the same time reinforces the compatibility of angelic and human free- dom Milton emphasized in his epic. A “STRIPLING CHERUBE” ForsyTH’s observation that one is “always tempted to tell stories” about Satan (1987, 4) seems to hold true even when one is about to focus on Milton's an- gels. For this, we can rightly blame Milton because he gives us the first detailed description of an angel in the persona of Satan, albeit disguised as “a stripling Cherube” + 310+Naxep Innocence Not of the prime, yet such as in his face Youth smil’d Celestial, and to every Limb Suitable grace diffus’d, so well he feignd; Under a Coronet his flowing haire In curles on either cheek plaid, wings he wore Of many a colourd plume sprinkl’d with Gold, His habit fit for speed succinct, and held Before his decent steps a Silver wand. (3.636644) Roland Mushat Frys in his seminal work Milton's Imagery and the Visual Arts singles out this description because of the two special attributes Milton employs: “the silver staff, and the robe girded up for speed succinct” (1978, 178). The ex- pression “habit fit for speed succinct” particularly struck Frye as describing “an- gelic robes which are girded up by a belt or a sash or tucked up in some other way, so as to allow free movement of the leg” (178). This description, Frye notes, suits only one angel's visual representation, namely, that of the guardian angel, more specifically, that of Raphael. Raphael, whose place among the angelic hi- erarchy was assured by his dramatic appearance in the popular apocrypha, the Book of Tobit,! was primarily “sent to heale”’ “to scale away the whitenesse of Tobits eyes, and to giue Sara the daughter of Raguel for a wife to Tobias the sonne of Tobit” (Tob 3:17), and hence regarded as the celestial physician of both corporal and spiritual maladies. In art, however, Raphael was far more often represented as the chief of the guardian angels and the patron saint of peregri- natores, travelers and pilgrims, who set out under his protection because the completion of his mission of healing entailed that he first accompany Tobit’s son, Tobias, as a guide from Niniveh to Ecbatan (see Tob 5:4—6:16).? Thus, A late Jewish work, never received into the Jewish canon, although pronounced canonical by the Council of Carthage (397) and later reaffirmed by the Council of Trent (1546). The Protestants count it among the apocrypha, books that were not considered part of the canon, and yet it was retained in Protestant Bibles up until the early nineteenth century. Images relating to the Book of Tobit are relatively rare in the Middle Ages. However, there is an ostentatious boom in the production of Tobiasbilder in mid-fifteenth-century Florence, most of them depicting the angel Raphael on a journey with young Tobias and his dog. A catch-on theory explaining this interest is that of Hans Mackowsky's, who sees in these pictures a religious ex-voto of the wealthy Florentine parents whose sons were sent off, like Tobias, on long and often dangerous trading journeys. Gomarict, however, is cautious in accepting this theory lacking documentary ev- idence and instead points to a connection between these images and the Florentine confraternities such as the Compagnia di Raffaello (1972, 26~30; see also Hart 2006, 82-84). The other cluster of ‘Tobiasbilder was symptomatic of the seventeenth-century Dutch “Golden Age’ its most prominent artist, Rembrandt, alone producing more than a dozen of them. The Tobiasbilder of the Northern Renaissance, however, differ from their Florentine counterparts in that they depict Tobit’s healing and the departure of the angel quite as often as the journeying part of the apocryphal narrative. +3lleLarisa Kocic-ZAM80 “whether Raphael or any other guardian angel was intended; he was expected to appear “with staff and girded robes,’ according to Frye (1978, 178). Building on this iconography of Raphael, Frye claims that Milton in the depiction of the disguised Satan provides “a hint fraught with powerfully ironic significance: Satan enters the created world not only disguised as an angel, but even disguised in a form which artistically sophisticated readers could readily identify as the usual form of the guardian angel” (179). Frye’s interpretation, on the one hand, opens a new horizon on the Raphael/Satan comparison and contrast, but, on the other hand, it closes an- other avenue of interpretation which reads Milton’s ambiguous expression, “[h]is habit fit for speed succinct” as referring to the wings the “stripling Cherube” wore “[o]f many a colourd plume sprinkl’d with Gold” (3.642). The “habit” in this reading stands metaphorically for the cherub’s wings and is thus indeed “fit for speed succinct” This second reading might seem incompatible with diction- ary definitions of the word “succinct” because the majority of them quote the aforementioned Miltonic line in order to illustrate the sense of being “girded upy” or “tucked in” thus supporting Frye’s argument.’ If, however, one takes a look at Pope's translation of the Odyssey, in Book 20, one stumbles upon the phrase “speed succinct” in a quite different context: From council strait th’ assenting peerage ceas‘d, And in the dome prepar'd the genial feast. Dis-roab‘d, their vests apart in order lay, Then all with speed succinct the victims slay[.] (The Odyssey 20.310-313; italics mine) It is obvious that Pope’s use of the word “succinct” has nothing to do with the length of the garments but all with “speed” and thus with the action of the suitors who promptly fell on slaying the “sheep and shaggy goats” (The Odyssey 20.314). Nor is this meaning inapplicable to Milton, for Thomas NewTon in his comment on PL 3.641-643 wrote: If the author meant that Satan had clothes on as well as wings, it is contrary to his usual manner of representing the Angels; but I rather understand it, that the wings he wore were his habit, and they were certainly a habit fit for speed succinct, but succinct The OED also quotes PL 3.643, illustrating the adverbial meaning of succinct as “Of garments: Not ample or full, close-fitting, scant” (s.v. “succinct” adj. 3). The OED here proves its occasional unreliability, for it quotes Pope's line illustrating the girded up definition of the word succinct omitting the “speed” part of the phrase (s.v. “succinct” pa. pple. & ppl. a. 2.0: “Aside they lay Their garments, and succinct, the victims slay") and provides a mis- taken source reference to boot (“Odyss. XVII.200") + 312+Nakep INNocENCcE Lunderstand with Dr. Pearce, not in its first and litteral sense, girded or tuckd up; but in the metaphorical sense, ready and prepari: As Fabius in Inst. Orat. 11.2, says: “Proni succinctique &c." (1749, 1:216-217n) Thus, Milton's “stripling Cherube” is wearing nothing but wings, and, quite con- trary to Frve’s claim that it “would be difficult to find another literary description which so graphically evokes the visual tradition” (1978, 176), there is hardly a description so diametrically opposed to the traditional visual representations as this one or the one Milton gives of Raphael in Book 5. RAPHAEL, ADAM, AND Eve Visual representations of Raphael where he is holding a staff and wearing a girded or short robe are mostly characteristic of the seventeenth-century North- ern Renaissance—among artists such as de Keuninck, Jan Massys, Pieter Last- man (Plate X), to mention just a few beside those already listed by Frye (1978, 178). However, a number of earlier Tobiasbilder by fifteenth-century Florentine artists have Raphael holding instead of a staff an attribute befitting the etymol- ogy of his name: as the “medicine of God’ he is holding a kind of medical etui, a box of wholesome drugs as on images by Lippi, Perugio, Botticini, and a fol- lower of Verrocchio (Plate XII). To support his argument, Frye notes that the angel on the painting from Verrocchio’s school “has not only belted his under garment but is holding up his outer robe with his hand” (178). However, he men- tions neither the etui in Raphael's right hand nor the missing staff. His observa- tion concerning the robe of the angel hardly seems relevant if we consider Bot- ticini’s The Three Archangels with Tobias—where both Raphael and Gabriel have belted undergarments and it is the latter one who is holding up his outer robe (Plate X1)°—or Savoldo's Tobias and the Angel, where the length of Raphael’s robe is practically overwhelming (Plate XII). Had Milton wanted to make an allusion 5 Gompnic would simply label Botticini’s painting as The Three Archangels for he sees Tobias merely as an identifying token for Raphael, a symbolic pointer equivalent to Michael's sword and Gabriel's lily. However, pursuing this line of argument, Tobias should properly be equated with Mary and the dragon, the latter two being the non-object “emblems” of Gabriel and Michael. Gombrich points out the “golden container” in Raphael's hand, which he describes as “the box containing the fish’s entrails” and “which was identified as the golden censer (turibulum [sic!))” (1972, 28)—an interesting claim, since the box in Raphael's hand bears no resemblance to a metal censer suspended on chains—but fails to see it as a sufficient identifier of Raphael. However, more to the point is Gombrich’s omission of a staff and/or the mentioning of the length of the angelic robe when enumerating and defining Raphael's iconographic signifiers. +3136Larisa Kocic-ZAMs6 to Raphael with his depiction of a succinctly clad Satan in disguise, his source would have been rather literal than visual. Raphael is described in the Vulgate as a splendid youth, girded up as if ready to walk.’ This, however, would have been an odd choice, for Milton was quite aware that the description in question was particular to the Vulgate only and omitted from other translations.” So when it comes specifically to Raphael’s description, Milton, although in- troducing him with allusions to his role in the apocrypha “Raphael, the sociable Spirit, that deign’d / To travel with Tobias, and secur’d / His marriage with the seaventimes-wedded Maid”; 5.221-223), departs from established visual repre- sentations of western art to adhere to the description found in the Book of Ezekiel: “and their wings were stretched upward, two wings of euery one were ioyned one to an other, and two couered their bodies. [...] euery one had two which couered on this side, & euery one had two, which couered on that side their bodies” (Ezek 1:11, 23). Consequently, Raphael wore six wings [...], to shade His lineaments Divine; the pair that clad Each shoulder broad, came mantling o’re his brest With regal Ornament; the middle pair Girt like a Starrie Zone his waste, and round Skirted his loines and thighes with downie Gold And colours dipt in Heav’n; the third his feet Shaddowd from either heele with featherd maile Skie-tinctur’d grain. (5.277-285) ‘Tune egressus Tobias, invenit juventum splendidum, stantem preacinctum, et quasi paratum ad ambulandum. Et ignorans quod angelus Dei esset, salutavit eum” (Tob 5:5~6a in WatTON 1655— 1657, 4:46). Voracine’s Golden Legend (2000), translated by William Caxton, follows the Vulgate account word for word: “Then Tobias went forth and found a fair young man girt up and ready for to walk, and not knowing that it was the angel of God, saluted him” (para. 5). Milton read the Bible both in Hebrew and Greek, but “he definitely preferred among the English translations the Authorized Version and among the Latin translations the Junius-Tremellius version” (ME 8:89 = s.v."Tremellius, John Immanuel”) while also perusing the Biblia Sacra Polyglotta by Brian ‘Walton (RanziNowicz 1999, 204). The account of Raphael's appearance in the 1611 edition of the King James Bible differs from the Vulgate in that it omits all the details describing the angel: “There- fore when he went to seeke a man, he found Raphael that was an Angel. But he knew not; and he said ynto him...” (Tob 5:4~5a). Similarly, in the Junius-Tremellius Latin Bible it reads: “Abiens igitur ad conquirendum aliquem invenit Raphaelem, qui erat Angelus, sed nesciebat Tobija” (Tob 5:5-6). This is important, for the Junius-Tremellius version was “the standard Latin Bible for nearly all Protestants, and after certain alterations, was even sanctioned by the universities of Douai and Lou- vain? Milton himself “frequently used Junius and Tremellius as the basis for the prooftexts in his, Latin prose works" (ME 8:88-89 = s.v. “Tremellius, John Immanuel”). Hence, Milton's choice to de- scribe Satan in terms reminiscent of Raphael as described in the Vulgate would also provide “a hint fraught with powerfully ironic significance” (Frvt 1978, 179)—although not as Frye would have it. +314Nakep Innocence Milton’s extensive description of the wings Raphael “wore,” which “clad” “man- tled,’ “girt,’ and “skirted” “his lineaments Divine,’ gives the reader a visual im- pression of elaborate clothing while in reality there are no clothes on the angel at all. Milton here seems to share Dipron’s opinion that “where angels are given three pairs of wings [...] it is superfluous to endow them with robe and mantle besides” (1851-1886, 2:96). All the same, Didron makes it clear in his Christian Iconography that from the Middle Ages on “miniaturists, painters and sculptors, have arrayed their angels, already clothed with six wings, in robe and mantle” due to the “invincible tendency” of western nations “to humanize, and to give an ordinary, every-day character to their angelic beings” (2:95-96). In Milton, however, the tenJency works in the opposite direction. “Vaild with his gorgeous wings” (5.250), his Raphael is no more clothed than the fish who “sporting with quick glance / Show to the Sun thir wav'd coats dropt with Gold” (7.405—406) or the swan who “with Arched neck / Between her white wings mantling proudly, Rowes / Her state with Oarie feet” (7.438-440). Similarly, “In- sect[s] or Worme[s]” are said to be lavishly dressed, for their “smallest Linea- ments exact / In all the Liveries [are] dect of Summers pride / With spots of Gold and Purple, azure and green” (7.477-479). Adam and Eve, when first spot- ted by Satan, are also described “with native Honour clad / In naked Majestie seemd Lords of all” (4.289-290). As Kristen Poote keenly observes, “Paradise is a place strikingly devoid of nudity. This pure environment is in fact primarily constructed through incessant description of cloth and clothing” (2006, 178). One gets the impression that in Paradise everything is naked and yet everything is clothed, or, to say it differently, nothing is naked and nothing is clothed. In Poole’s words: The form of “clothing” the earth and its species wear are a manifestation of their nakedness; clothing is not indicative of a divided sign, of a split between internal and external, but is an integrated element of the essence of creation. It is only after the Fall that the reader encounters extended and blatant representations of nakedness in Paradise Lost. (180) Not that I completely agree with Poole’s last statement. She makes quite an oversight when comparing the Biblical account of Adam and Eve's realization of their nakedness and their construction of fig-leaf clothing to that in Paradise Lost and concludes that “while prelapsarian nakedness becomes invisible, post- lapsarian nakedness—emblematic of human misery, insufficiency, exile and guilt—is the topic of extensive, reiterated discussion” in the epic (180). Milton indeed clothes his prelapsarian couple into “native Honour,’ and shows Eve, in particular, wearing “as a vail down to the slender waste / Her unadorned golden 2315sLarisa Kocic-ZAmao tresses” (4.289, 304-305), but he is just as adamant, even blatant, in asserting their naked, “undeckt” state: Nor those mysterious parts were then conceald, ‘Then was not guiltie shame, dishonest shame Of nature works, honor dishonorable, Sin-bred, how have ye troubl'd all mankind With shews instead, meer shews of seeming pure, ‘And banished from mans life his happiest life, Simplicitie and spotless innoncence. So passd they naked on, nor shund the sight Of God or Angel, for they thought no illl.] (4.312-320) The emphasis he puts on their physical nakedness is most pronounced in case of Eve (4.494~497), especially when Milton contrasts the human pair's natural surroundings (“With flourets deck’t”) with the “undeckt” beauty of Eve (5.378— 385) prompting a spontaneous jubilation of “innocence / Deserving Paradise!” (5. 445-446). This praise of innocence “Deserving Paradise” does not pertain merely to Eve's nakedness but bears a reference to the Sons of Gods, too, who are not libidinously affected by the sight of undecked Eve. “Vertue-proof” Eve needs no veil, nor does the visiting angel, for both in the case of the prelapsarian humans and God's un- fallen angels “no thought infirme / Alterd [their] cheek{s]” (5.384385). EXERCISING “HEROIC GAMES” At this point I would like to turn to Milton’s description of Raphael being “like Maia’s son” (5.285)—a comparison that the majority of glosses warrant with the role of Raphael as God’s messenger.’ The lines follc wing the comparison would apparently support such glosses: Strait knew him all the Bands Of Angels under watch; and to his state, And to his message high in honour rise; For on som message high they guessd him bound. _(5.287-290) * A role that, given the etymology of the Hebrew word 19987) melakh (messenger) and the Greek word dyyehos (messenger), would be common to all members of the celestial hierarchy. However, following Trithemius’ De Septem Secundeis and Acrirea’s Occult Philosophy (2000, 533), Raphael was regarded the governing spirit of the planet Mercury (Litty 1647, 43) and as such readily iden- tified as the Judeo-Christian counterpart of Maia’s son, Mercury (Hermes). + 316+Naxep INNOCENCE In addition, Milton’s comparative description has a strong visual connotation and sounds almost as if Raphael were striking a pose for an artist: “like Maia’s son he stood, / And shook his Plumes, that Heav’nly fragrance filld / The circuit wide” (5.285287). Milton was no doubt aware of the fact that the messenger of the gods, Mercury/Hermes, featured prominently naked in the visual arts al- though, as LewaLski writes, it is nearly impossible to determine Milton's reac- tions “to much that he saw—for example, Italian art, which he nowhere men- tions” (2003, 88). Mercury/Hermes was also represented nude or as a herm in his capacity of a god presiding over games, the god of palaestra and of wrestling (BONFANTE 1989, 549n), which in turn leads us to another short but telling description of unfallen angels in Paradise Lost: Betwixt these rockie Pillars Gabriel sat Chief of th’ Angelic Guards, awaiting night; About him exercis‘’d Heroic Games TW unarmed Youth of Heav'n, but nigh at hand Celestial Armourie, Shields, Helmes, and Speares, Hung high with Diamond flaming, and with Gold. (4.549-554) Fow1ER (2007, 253n) emphasizes that these young celestial warriors engaged in heroic games are “unarmed” and, hence, their exercise is contrasted with the warlike games of the devils that “with feats of Arms / From either end of Heav’n” make the sky burn (2.537-538). In my reading, the angels’ being “unarmed” while exercising “Heroic Games” also means that they were yuuivs, which, in a military context, indeed “meant ‘unarmed’ [...], not covered by armor, exposed [...]; and ‘light-armed? as opposed to the heavy-armed hoplite” (BoNFANTE 1989, 547). But the word also refers to total nudity,’ for its most common usage was specifically “exercising in the nude” (547). Hence, Milton's emphasis on the armor laid aside, although “nigh at hand,” serves rather to identify the heroic games exercised by the “Youth of Heav'n” as wrestling and to reinforce what NewTon calls the poet's “usual manner of representing the Angels” (1749, > BonFANTE, referring to earlier studies by Sturtevant from 1912 and by Mann from 1947, notes that “modern prudery caused a standard dictionary such as LSJ (yuuvds, 3) to translate yuuvis as ‘wearing a chiton’ ” (1989, 547n). With more recent editions of the LSJ, this is no longer the case; it is, however, interesting to note that no such prudery inhibited early modern lexicogra- phers (see e.g. Brount’s Glossographia (1656) s.v. “gymnosophists” and Cooren's Thesaurus Lin- quae Romance & Britanicee (1565) s.v. “gymnos”). Nor could it inhibit a poet who so eloquently praised the naked glory of both prelapsarian humans and angels. +3176Larisa Kocic-ZAMBo 1:217n)—wearing nothing besides wings—than to contrast the two types of games, that is, unarmed-celestial versus armed-demonic. Especially, since Mil- ton prescribes both as recommended physical exercises in the “institution of breeding” delineated in his treatise Of Education: The exercise which | commend first, is the exact use of their weapon; to guard and to strike safely with edge, or point; this will keep them healthy, nimble, strong, and well in breath, is also the likeliest meanes to make them grow large, and tall, and to inspire them with a gallant and fearlesse courage, which being temper'd with seasonable lec- tures and precepts to them of true fortitude, and patience, will turn into a native and heroick valour, and make them hate the cowardise of doing wrong. They must be also practiz’d in all the locks and gripes of wrastling, wherein English men were wont to excell, as need may often be in fight to tugge, to grapple, and to close. And this perhaps will be anough, wherein to prove and heat their single strength. (YP 2:409) One almost feels disappointed that Milton, in blaming the cold air for the in- ability of the English to open their mouths “wide enough to grace a Southern tongue” (YP 2:383 = £), omits to lament how it also prevents the youth to exer- cise, as it were, in the naked. “CLAD TO MEET MAN” There is only one instance in Paradise Lost when an unfallen angel is described literally wearing robes: th’ Arch-Angel soon drew nigh, Not in his shape Celestial, but as Man Clad to meet Man; over his lucid Armes A militarie Vest of purple flowa Livelier then Melibean, or the graine Of Sarra, worn by Kings and Hero’s old In time of Truce; Iris had dipt the wooff; His starrie Helme unbuckl’d shew’d him prime In Manhood where Youth ended; by his side As ina glistering Zodiac hung the Sword, Satans dire dread, and in his hand the Spear. (11.238-248) Adam, before the fall, “to meet / His god-like Guest, walk[ed] forth, without more train / Accompani’d then with his own compleat / Perfections” (5.350— 353). Here, however, the scene is reversed. Michael is dressed up in order to + 318+Nakep INNOCENCE meet not an ufallen man, as Raphael did, but a fallen one. In a way, Michael's meeting is a scene of accommodation. While Adam and Raphael met on equal terms, and in their “proper shape” and “own compleat / Perfections,” Michael in Book 11 is wearing robes, “as Man / Clad to meet Man” in order to accom- modate to the now fallen and hence dressed human pair, He is no longer metaphorically vested in his own feathers; as a matter of fact, there is no men- tion of his wings at all as if the two, clothes and wings, were incompatible. Frye claims that “[O]n the critical point of identifying the agent of the Expul- sion, Milton departs from Biblical authority to follow the visual tradition” (1978, 310). Frye, of course, is far from claiming that Milton is a slavish follower. He is careful to note how Milton adapts aad alters the visual tradition to suit his own ends. A particularly unique point of departure for Frye is Milton’s emphasis on Michael taking “the hands of Adam and Eve in his hands” (1978, 313) and leading them out of Eden as opposed to the oppressive pushing gesture common in the visual arts, But equally unique and departing from conventional visual repre- sentations is Milton’s eradication of the difference in the appearance of Adam and Eve, and the angel. For no matter by whom or how the fallen human pair is expelled, one thing seems to be common to all visual renditions of the expulsion: Adam and Eve's vulnerability and postlapsarian condition are magnified by the fact that they are naked, or scantily clad, while the expeller is clothed and/or armed (Plates IX and XVJ)."° But it is not so in Paradise Lost. Adam and Eve are dressed, and lest Michael’s naked-winged glory be a sad reminder of their lost innocence, the angel conducting the expulsion is also clothed. In the visual arts the nakedness of angels indicates their postlapsarian, fallen, and clothes their prelapsarian, unfallen state while in the case of the first human pair, nakedness signifies a transitory, prelapsarian condition always already in- dicative of the postlapsarian vulnerability (also marked by the leaves concealing their genitalia). Milton's representation of the unfallen angels—their nakedness and accommodative clothing—accords with the emphasis he puts on the com- patibility of angelic and human freedom. In Raphael's words men and angels are given the same condition of happiness: ‘That thou art happie, owe to God; ‘That thou continu’st such, owe to thy self, That is, to thy obedience; therein stand. [...] °© There are, of course, exceptions to this representational pattern, one of them being that of Gio- vanni di Paolo's The Creation and the Expulsion from the Paradise (1445, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York) that depicts both men and angel naked. + 319+Larisa Kocic-ZAMB6 My self and all th’ Angelic Host that stand In sight of God enthron’4, our happie state Hold, as you yours, while our obedience holds; On other surety none; freely we serve, Because we freely love, as in our will To love or not; in this we stand or falll.] (5.520-540) Freedom being equally their share, they face the same choice in their will: “To love or not” In this they “stand or fall” Since, according to Milton, there is no difference between men and angels with regard to their obedience or disobedi- ence, neither is there a need for a difference in the representation of their stand- ing or falling. Works CiTED ‘Acnippa of Nettesheim, Henry Cornelius (2000) Three Books of Occult Philosophy, ed. Donald Tyson, trans. James Freake (Woodbury: Llewellyn). BLake, William (1994) The Marriage of Heaven and Hell: In full Color (facsimile of the 1794 ed.] (Mineola: Dover). BonFANTE, Larissa (1989) ‘Nudity as a Costume in Classical Art, American Jour- nal of Archeology 93, 543-570. Biount, Thomas (1656) Glossographia: or A dictionary, interpreting all such hard vvords, whether Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Italian, Spanish, French, Teutonick, Bel- gick, British or Saxon (London). Coorer, Thomas (1565) Thesavrvs lingvae Romane & Britannicce: tam accurate congestus, ut nihil pene in eo desyderari possit, quod vel Latiné complectatur am- plissimus Stephani Thesaurus, vel Anglicé, toties aucta Eliotae Bibliotheca; opera & industria Thome Cooperi Magdalenensis (London). Diwron, Adolphe N. (1851-1886) Christian Iconography: Or, the History of Christian Art in the Middle Ages, trans. E.J. Millington, 2 vols. (London: Bell), ForsyH, Neil (1987) The Old Enemy: Satan and the Combat Myth (Princeton: Princeton UP). Fow er, Alastair, ed. (2007) John Milton, Paradise Lost (rev. 2" ed.; Harlow: Longman). Faye, Roland M. (1978) Milton's Imagery and the Visual Arts: Iconographic Tradi- tion in the Epic Poems (Princeton: Princeton UP). Gooaricn, Ernst H. (1972) Symbolic Images: Studies in the Art of the Renaissance (London: Phaidon). + 320+Nakep INNOCENCE Haxr, Trevor (2006) ‘Tobit in the Art of the Florentine Renaissance’ in Mark Bredin, ed., Studies in the Book of Tobit: A Multidisciplinary Approach (London: T&T Clark) 72-89, Lewatskt, Barbara K, (2003) The Life of John Milton: A Critical Biography (rev. ed.; Oxford: Blackwell). Litty, William (1647) The vvorld’s catastrophe, or, Europes many Mutations until, 1666 (London). NewTon, Thomas, ed. (1749) Paradise Lost: A Poem in Twelve Books. The Author John Milton, 2 vols. (London). PooLe, Kristen (2006) Radical Religion from Shakespeare to Milton: Figures of Non- conformity in Early Modern England (Cambridge: Cambridge UP). RapziNowicz, Mary Ann (1999) ‘How Milton Read the Bible: The Case of Para- dise Regained’ in CCM 202-218. Sueray, Beverley (1979) ‘Milton's Raphael and the Legend of Tobias; JEGP 78, 227-241. Voracine, Jacobus de (2000) “The Life of Saint Tobit’ in The Golden Legend: Or Lives of the Saints, ed. ES. Ellis, trans. William Caxton, 7 vols. (repr.) 2:27— 35; unpaginated online edition at http://www-fordham.edu/halsall/basis/gold- enlegend/GoldenLegend-Volume2.htm#Tobit (last accessed June 4, 2011); references by paragraphs. Watron, Brian [Brianus Waltonus], ed. (1655-1657) Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, 6 vols. (London). +321Plate IX Albrecht Durer, Small Passion: 2 Expulsion from the Paradise (1510)(S912) YSId Oy) YIM seIqo], PUL JaSuUy oY. NYWISYT 21979 4A} X AVI(0z#T'2) SeIqO], YIM sjaSuRYIy Bay, PY, INIILLOG OIsaauD1y TX AVL(€081-008T'2) UOrT JO WeIOg VIG WPI} AX Vd (SZP1-OZ6T) UIA ay PPM pPSuy oy pur seiqo, HooowlaA Jap vaupuy fo doysyior\ TIX 1d (2281) Stopnea arp Jo JoaI}0Ig ‘JPMWOID ‘NAOYG XOGVPY P4OJ ATX PVAPlate XVI Masaccio, The Expulsion from the Garden of Eden (1424-1425)