docteur noir. True in spirit while inaccurate in detail, these stories, exquisitely told, are intended to teach poets the lesson of self-renunication. Stella was followed, in 1835, by another prose work of equal, perhaps superior, literary merit, entitled Servitude et grandeur milltaire. This too, like Stello, is composed of three stories ; and in these is depicted the soldier s life, his sufferings, his duty, and his true reward. " The poem of human life," says J. S. Mill, in his review of De Vigny s works (Dissertations, vol. i.), " is opened before us, and M. de Vigny does but chant from it, in a voice of subdued sadness, a few strains telling of obscure wisdom and unrewarded virtue, of those antique characters which, without self-glorification or hope of being appreciated, carry out, as he expresses it, the sentiment of duty to its extremest consequences. " De Vigny s latest gift to the world was his Foemes philo- sophiques, or Les Destinees, part of which appeared in his life-time in the Revue des J)eux Mondes ; the rest, with these, were published after his death by his literary executor. These poems are mainly utterances of unbelief and despondency, intermixed with exhortations to a stoical resignation and self-reliance. De Vigny was received at the French Academy in January 1846 ; but, in con sequence of the coldness of the reception and the offensive speech of M. Mole" on the occasion, he refused to be presented to the king. He died at Paris, after severe and prolonged sufferings bravely borne, September 17, 1863. (W.L. R.C.)
DEVIL is the name which has been given in the New
Testament and in Christian theology to a supreme evil
personality supposed to rule over a kingdom of evil spirits,
of whom he is the chief, and to be the restless and unfail
ing adversary of God and man. The Hebrew term denot
ing " adversary," or Satan, is also applied to this supreme
evil spirit, or prince of the kingdom of evil. There can
be no question that such an evil spirit is frequently spoken
of in the New Testament. He is designated by various
names in addition to these mentioned, such as " the
Tempter," "Beelzebub," "the Prince of Devils," "the
Strong One," " the Wicked One," " the Enemy," or " the
Hostile One." Throughout the Gospels these terms are
used interchangeably, and in all cases seem to denote the
same active power or personality of evil outside man and
exercising influence over him. It may be a question how
far Jesus Christ himself acknowledges the existence of such
an evil power, but there can be no question that such a
being was recognized in the current belief of the Jews in
His time.
But it is also certain that this belief amongst the
Jews was one ofgradual growth, and is not to be traced in
the Old Testament in any such definite form as we meet
with it in <he New. The expression " Satan " is iudeed
found in the Old Testament, but only five times, if so
frequently, as a proper name, thrice in the book of Job
(i. 6, 12 ; ii. 1), once in the opening of the 21st chap, of 1
Chronicles (although here the allusion to a distinct person
ality may be held doubtful), and in Zechariah (iii. 1). In
all other places where the word occurs, " Satan " is used in
its common sense of " adversary," a sense in which it also
occurs in the Gospels, in the well-known passage (Matt,
xvi. 23) where our Lord addresses St Peter, " Get thee
behind me, Satan," or "adversary." The books of
Chronicles and Zechariah are indisputably amongst the
latest writings of the Old Testament ; and, although the
date of Job is unsettled, it may also be presumed to belong
to a late period in the history of revelation. In the earlier
prophetic literature of the Hebrews there is no recognition
of any spirit of evil at war with Jehovah. All power and
dominion are, on the contrary, clearly ascribed to Jehovah
himself, who is supreme in heaven, OH earth, and under
the earth. The connection of Satan with the serpent in
the garden of Eden in Genesis (iii. 1-7) is an inference of
later dogmatic opinion, arising probably out of the use of
the expression "Old Serpent" applied to Satan in Rev.
(xx. 2), but receives no countenance from the scriptural
narrative itself, which speaks of the serpent purely as an
animal, and pronounces a curse against him with reference
to his animal nature solely. The idea of a distinct
personality of evil, therefore, is not to be found in the
earlier Hebrew Scriptures, and is, in fact, inconsistent with
the cardinal "principle of the older Hebrew theology that
Jehovah was the sole source of all power, the author both
of good and evil, who hardened Pharaoh s heart (Exod. x.
27), and sent a lying spirit among the prophets of Ahab (1
Kings xxii. 20-3). Even in the later Scriptures in which
" Satan " is spoken of as a distinct person, there is little or
no analogy betwixt what is said of such a person in these
Scriptures and what is said of him in the New Testament.
The " Satan " of the book of Job is described as coming
among the " sons of God " to present himself before the
Lord. He is the image of malice, restlessness, and envy
the willing messenger of evil to Job ; but he is not repre
sented as the impersonation of evil, or as a spiritual assail
ant of the patriarch. He is really a delegated agent in the
hands of Jehovah to execute His will, and the evils with
which he assails Job are outward evils. The picture is
quite different from that of the " Archangel ruined," or
the devil, or Satan, of later theology.
The question then arises as to the special source of the
conception of the devil as a fallen and evil spirit. The
explanation commonly given of this conception by our
modern critical schools is that it sprang out of the inter
course of the Jews with the Persians during their period of
exile. In the Persian, or Iranian, mythology it is well
known that a personal power of evil was conspicuously re
cognized. The Iranian religion divided the world betwixt
two opposing self-existent deities, the one good and the
other evil, but both alike having a share in creation and in
man. Ormuzd, or Ahuramazda, was holy and true, and to
be honoured and worshipped. But Ahriman, or Anra-
mainyu, the evil-minded, the spirit of darkness, was no
less powerful, and claimed an equal share of man s homage.
These were the good and the evil in thought, word, and
deed. Man has to choose betwixt the two. He cannot
serve both. With this dualistic system the Jews came in
contact during their captivity at Babylon, and are supposed
to have retained permanent traces of it in their subsequent
theology. The conception of the devil, and of a lower
kingdom of demons, or devils, is the evident illustration of
this. The case is put in this way by a Christian writer of
moderation and knowledge : " That the Hebrew prophets
had reiterated their belief in one God with the most pro
found conviction is not to be questioned ; but as little can
it be doubted that, as a people, the Jews had exhibited
little impulse towards monotheism, and that from this time
(the period of their captivity) we discern a readiness to
adopt the Zoroastrian demonology " (Cox s Aryan Mytho
logy, ii. 356). The conception of Satan in the later
canonical books of Chronicles and Zechariah is even
attributed to this source. " Thus far Satan had appeared,
as in the book of Job, among the miuisters of God ; but in
later books we have a closer approximation to the Iranian
creed, In Zechariah and the first book of Chronicles,
Satan assumes the character of Ahriman, and appears as
the author of evil. Still later he becomes the prince of
devils, the source of wicked thoughts, the enemy of the
Word and Son of God" (Ibid., p. 351).
The process by which the Jewish mind worked out this
conception and the whole scheme of demonology found in
the New Testament was of course gradual. The Book of
