Why are there no bearded angels?

 

Have you ever seen a bearded angel - not in real life, but in paintings? It is a convention that both God and the adult Jesus wear beards, while angels are androgynous in appearance, wear loose-fitting, flowing robes and have bird wings (although there are a few exceptions to this, e.g. in Piero’s Nativity).

Botticini‘s (1475-1476) painting of The Assumption of the Virgin (see above – from [1]) shows Heaven as viewed above the concentric rings of the geocentric universe. In Heaven, we recognise Jesus and Mary, surrounded by rows of angels all having “colour coded” robes and wings, each row representing a category of angel as recognised by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite and accepted by the Catholic Church. In ascending order these are:

Angels - pink robes: gold and black wings

Archangels - white robes: pink wings (all holding urns – my theology is so limited that I don’t know why) (It is accepted that there are three archangels, but there is reference to others in religious texts, but the number shown here is unusual).

Principalities - blue robes: black and red wings

Dominions - olive robes: red wings

Virtues - blue robes: blue and red wings

Powers - white robes: pink and olive wings

Thrones, Cherubim and Seraphim are shown as babies (cherubs) surrounding Mary and Jesus - although The Bible describes Seraphim as having six wings and Cherubim as having four wings. Is there any evidence for as many Seraphim and Cherubim as Botticini has shown?

All have their roles to play, but only Angels and Archangels leave Heaven to visit Earth, so need their wings. At first glance, we miss the other figures shown and perhaps confuse them with the angelic throng. Seated between the ranks of angels are women and both bearded and clean-shaven men. Many are clothed in monastic, or ecclesiastical, garb and have gained entry to Heaven as Saints, Old Testament figures, and persons of similar status. Adam and Eve are also here [1] (see below)

The image of angels as androgynous, winged figures emanated from 4th Century Christianity, probably using classical statues of winged goddesses as models [2], the wings being important symbols of the “flight” between Heaven and Earth. That they were bird wings, comes from our observations of birds’ power of flight and our envy of this ability. But why this accepted image? In her fascinating essay, Therese Martin [3] explains that the earliest angels in Christian Art were not winged, were also referred to as men (used as an interchangeable term), and were wrapped in brilliant light. Some wore beards and “at least one is balding” [3] and Martin explains the transition from male to androgynous, winged angels was because “angels as men were too attractive to women – and too susceptible to their female charms.” She concludes [3]:

Thus the image of the winged angel manages to combine a female model with a male nominative (“angelos”) in order to portray a creature that is spirit, not belonging to either gender. The visual form of a man with wings satisfied the perceived need in the fourth century for an angel that was neither man nor woman, neither man nor God. The winged image was a successful visual metaphor that managed to capture all the ambiguities inherent in the angelic nature and explain them in a way that has remained clearly convincing to the present day.

So convincing, that the image has remained largely unaltered for hundreds of years, while the Devil has changed markedly in appearance over the same period of time [4]. Billy Graham described angels as being sexless [5] and, while the Archangels have male names, they are still what we would now call gender neutral in appearance. With our current sensitivity to gender issues, the image fits as well now as it did in the 5th Century.

[1] https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/francesco-botticini-the-assumption-of-the-virgin

[2] https://rwotton.blogspot.com/2016/05/angels-nike-superman-and-darth-vader.html

[3] Therese Martin (2001) The Development of Winged Angels in Early Christian Art. Espacio, Tiempo y Forma, Serie VII, Historia del Arte 14: 11-29.

[4] https://rwotton.blogspot.com/2019/08/how-devil-has-changed-through-time.html

[5] https://rwotton.blogspot.com/2017/04/angels-billy-graham-and-me.html