10

Shouldn’t Heaven and Hell be capitalized, as they are the names of places?

tchrist
  • 134,759
nicholas ainsworth
  • 8,708

4 Answers4

10

I don't think either one is a proper noun unless you're talking about a particular version. Here are illustrations:

Common noun:

In any afterlife, one would expect there to be some form of heaven.

The writer is clearly talking about a general concept.

Proper noun:

500 years' walk beyond the edge of the universe lies the sphere of the angels. 500 years' walk beyond that lies an altar where the archangel Michael offers up the souls of the righteous. 500 years walk beyond that lies Heaven.

The writer is clearly talking about a specific place. He's even giving directions.

Ambiguous:

Jesus said that people who do xyz will go to hell.

Ambiguous because while it's clear from context that the writer is talking about a particular Hell, the sentence structure iself would work just as well if hell were a general abstract concept.

Yitzchak
  • 1,326
  • 1
    When describing locations, I would generally base capitalization on whether an article would be necessary when using any other noun in a similar setting (but is absent). One could think about a kind of "store", but one wouldn't go to "store"--one would go to "the store", or to "Bailey's". When using "go to" metaphorically, articles are often not necessary even with common nouns (e.g. "go to pieces"). In the latter situation, I would posit that Jesus was speaking geographically, which would imply capitalization; if one interprets his meaning metaphorically, then no caps. – supercat Oct 16 '12 at 16:41
6

If you refer to a unique place, such as Earth, then you would capitalise it as befits a proper noun.

If you refer to a class of places, such as the city or the country, then you would not capitalise the common noun.

Now you might hold a view that there is one true heaven, and as such deem it unique and worthy of capitalisation. Or you might admit the possibility of many heavens and place it in the category of common nouns, not worthy of capitalisation.

Ed Guiness
  • 8,923
5

ERRATUM: The comments to my answer helped to change my mind on this. I now agree that heaven and hell should always be lowercase.

I believe they should be capitalized when used as place names. I've noticed a tapering-off in their capitalization in my lifetime. I don't believe in either place myself, but belief doesn't enter into it, as we capitalize plenty of fictional and mythological place names -- e.g., Narnia, Vulcan, Hades.

I suppose there is an argument that, because Heaven and Hell can't be categorized as cities, planets, countries, etc., they don't deserve to be proper nouns, but that seems to me a weak argument (especially in light of Hades, Valhalla, etc.). They are places, albeit mythological ones, and there is only one of each.

In some instances, heaven and hell are used in figures of speech, such as: "Thank heaven." "What the hell?" In those instances, lowercase works fine.

Kelly Hess
  • 4,984
  • 23
  • 25
  • 1
    Fictional or not, there are hundreds of religions each with a different proposition of heaven and hell. This alone makes them common nouns, and thus not capitalised. – Ed Guiness Mar 23 '11 at 21:41
  • 1
    When they're used in that sense, I agree - no caps. Just when they refer to the the places named by Christian, Muslim, and Jewish religions. – Kelly Hess Mar 23 '11 at 21:52
  • I'm no theologian, but I don't believe they are necessarily considered physical "places" even by the so-called major religions you've mentioned. How could they be physical if it is (supposedly) your eternal soul, rather than your physical body that ends up there? Some consider that "states of mind" is a bit nearer the mark. Mind you, we use the word "places" (and the word "where") rather loosely in any case... – MickeyfAgain_BeforeExitOfSO Mar 24 '11 at 00:01
  • 2
    If your religion tells you to capitalize a certain word (or not to), then there's no need to consult the opinion of mortals! The King James and New International Bibles both have a lowercase heaven and hell. So, I guess that's the western Christian answer. (Of course, Biblical Aramaic to my knowledge did not have a capital/lowercase distinction, but that's beside the point :) – Kosmonaut Mar 24 '11 at 02:33
  • @Kosmonaut - Unless the devotee has a cosmic hotline direct to their deity then they have only the opinion of mortals to rely upon, and there are so many to choose from.. – Ed Guiness Mar 24 '11 at 10:31
  • @Ed Guiness: For Christians, the Bible is a cosmic hotline direct to their deity. That's the whole point. In order to decide if something in language is "right", you necessarily have to appeal to some sort of authority. If you are a Christian, there is no higher authority than The Bible (regardless of whether the Bible was actually guided by a higher being or not). Sociolinguistically speaking, if you are part of that group, and you want to show you are part of that group, you follow the conventions of that group. Those conventions even include capitalizing all pronouns referring to God. – Kosmonaut Mar 24 '11 at 13:19
  • @Kosmonaut - Well again this depends on exactly which doctrines are accepted within the variation of christianity to which the christian submits. Yes the bible is a high authority to some, but then so is the pope, and so is sacred tradition. Therefore it's not quite accurate to say there is no higher authority than the bible, even within the narrowed domain of christianity. – Ed Guiness Mar 24 '11 at 13:59
  • @Kosmonaut - And when I said hotline I meant to imply no intermediary and since no one disputes that all christian bibles were drafted and compiled by mortals (they dispute the divine nature but not the authorship) then it cannot be disputed that all christian bibles contain second-hand words (of god) rather than words penned directly by burning bushes or bearded super-powers. – Ed Guiness Mar 24 '11 at 14:00
  • @Kosmonaut - And to digress back to the subject of proper nouns for a moment :-) I maintain that apart from a few crackpot zealots no one reasonably argues the position that their particular view of heaven or hell is shared by all of christianity let alone humanity. Therefore heaven and hell are rightly and properly common nouns. – Ed Guiness Mar 24 '11 at 14:04
  • @Ed Guiness: Let me just get back to the point I was trying to make— if you are talking about a religious term, and your religion has an authoritative answer, then within your religious group that's all the answer you need. Certainly if you are in a Christian denomination that would appeal to other sources, then you can follow that! – Kosmonaut Mar 24 '11 at 14:50
  • @Kosmonaut - Yes, I think we're agreed that the capital H would be used only by unreasonable devotees and only within their covens. In other words, nearly nobody. Glad to have that settled. – Ed Guiness Mar 24 '11 at 15:51
  • ..............? – Kosmonaut Mar 24 '11 at 15:53
  • Do you think I should offer more by way of explanation, or have we exhausted our patience with the debate? – Ed Guiness Mar 24 '11 at 15:59
  • @Kosmonaut: I guess it's been too long since I read the Bible! You guys have convinced me of my backslidden ways. I have seen the light and now have utmost faith in a lowercase heaven and hell. :) – Kelly Hess Mar 24 '11 at 16:23
5

No less an authority than Fulton Sheen had the galleys for his latest book come back from the typesetters with “Heaven” and “Hell” knocked down to lowercase. He carefully re-capitalized each occurrence. When his editor called to request an explanation, he gave what I think we can regard as the definitive answer to Nicholas’s question:

Because they’re places. You know, like Scarsdale.

MetaEd
  • 28,488
Michael Lorton
  • 28,092