iscredit a spurious conception of heroism" (39). Francis C. Blessington adds an interesting note to the discussion when she calls Satan not a classical hero but a classical villain: Satan is made the archetype of the sophistical rhetoric, the shallow egotism, and the destructive pride, the vices of the classical epic as well as of the classical world. In addition, he is the perversion of classical heroic virtues. He often begins by resembling a victim, sometimes even a perversion of that . . . . [He is] not a classical hero but a classical villain who unheroically defeats creatures far below him in stature. (18)Steadman would concur:In the course of Milton's epic his fallen archangel conceives and executes an enterprise of conquest and destruction closely resembling that of the conventional epic hero. Nevertheless, for a seventeenth-century Protestant, this apparently heroic exploit should have fitted into a familiar ethical category, a pattern already delineated and condemned by theologians in their discussions of pagan virtue.Besides preoccupying Luther and Calvin, this subject had also engaged Paolo Sarpi and Richard Humfrey. These authors had advanced the following charges against the ancient Gentiles:In their deeds of valor and virtuous acts, they sought their own glory instead of God's. However heroic such works might appear, they were performed for a bad end and were therefore sinful. The ancient Gentiles were only superficially virtuous, for they lacked inward sanctity. They sought their reward on earth rather than in Heaven, pursuing worldly renown rather than celestial glory. Their religion tended to fill man with pride by persuading him that he was naturally virtuous. Their teachings incited him to revenge rather than to patience. (Milton's . . . 211-12) That Milton wanted his readers to be forced to face the problem of Satan seeming heroic is certain. Satan is, after all, an angel. He was a mighty angel in Heaven. In order f...
