Popular Hierarchies of Angels
There are multiple lists that attempt to explain angels, their division of duties, and their hierarchy. The most well known and cited of these are De Coelesti Hierarchia by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite written in the 400's AD, Mishneh Torah by Maimonides written in the 1100's AD, and Summa theologiae by Thomas Aquinas written in the 1200's AD.
| Pseudo-Dionysis & Aquinas | Maimonides |
| #1 Seraphim | #1 Chayot Ha Kodesh (the Cherubim from Ezekiel 1 & 10) |
| #2 Cherubim | #2 Ophanim (wheels; Thrones from Pseudo-Dionysis) |
| #3 Thrones | #3 Erelim |
| #4 Dominions | #4 Hashmallim |
| #5 Virtues | #5 Seraphim |
| #6 Powers | #6 Malakhim (Angels from Pseudo-Dionysis) |
| #7 Principalities | #7 Elohim (gods) |
| #8 Archangels | #8 Bene Elohim (Sons of God) |
| #9 Angels | #9 Cherubim |
| #10 Ishim |
The various hierarchies disagree on the kinds, rankings, and reasons for the orderings. While the hierarchies reference the biblical writings, they were composed primarily by inference rather than anything explicit found in those writings. The biblical writings are, I believe intentionally, sparse with any actual insight into the inner workings of the spiritual world. The emphasis of the Bible is on Yahweh and references to lesser, created, spiritual beings are used to point back to Yahweh and not to draw attention for themselves, inspiring wrongly directed worship.
In Allies of Majesty: I have chosen not to use either of these or any lesser known hierarchies. Firstly, they were composed long after the biblical authors' time and I am seeking to reflect beliefs from the time. Secondly, both of these seem to miss an important feature in the biblical content, which is the focus on function over form.
The biblical writings and related writings from the time seem to be more concerned with the function a being is serving than they are with the form of the being. For example, angel, or messenger, is used of both spiritual beings and humans. The word cherub, or kerub, bear some similarities in function and imagery to other ancient Near Eastern divine throne guardians such as the Assyrian kirubu, but these and other creatures are most often portrayed as more sphinx-like, whereas the cherubim in Ezekiel (the only place in the Bible where cherubim's appearance is described) are clearly described as more human in their bodies, for example having both arms and legs. But the function is the same in both cases. The beings in Ezekiel and the beings of similar name in other ancient Near Eastern cultures are divine throne guardians. The focus is on their function more than their form. Their form is rife with symbolic imagery. The same can be said of the seraphim described in Isaiah 6. Isaiah would have been more influenced by Egyptian culture than Ezekiel. Isaiah may have used the term seraph, one meaning of which is snake, in order to draw a connection to the role of the Egyptian uraeus, the snakes atop the pharaoh's headdress depicting divine protectors. Isaiah, however, did not describe these beings as snakes, as they covered their feet (sometimes a euphemism for legs or genitals) and their faces with wings, they were "standing" above Yahweh, implying feet, and one took a coal with tongs and held it in its hand. Again, the term may be one of function more than form.
As I will demonstrate further in other entries, I think the desire to connect each of these terms with a specific and unique form of spiritual being may be an example of humans assuming the spiritual realm and the material realm are more similar than they actually are. I have come to believe most of the terms used for spiritual beings are used to communicate those beings' function within the context and not to classify beings as being of differing permanent forms. I recommend thinking of these terms as more akin to job descriptions such as lawyer or artist rather than species such as monkey or dog. Even if they do describe form, all can agree that they still describe function and so function is my focus within the lore of Allies of Majesty.