Three citations that hit me off the top of my head; these should be available in used/secondhand shops (Davidson, Russell), and new shops as well, (Davidson, Pagels).
Davidson, Gustav.
A Dictionary of Angels, including the Fallen Angels. New York: Free/Macmillan, 1967.
* I love this thing; it's described on its cover, by Time magazine as "A wacky and wonderful compendium of angelic lore." At any rate, it's exactly what it sounds like; an alphabetic listing of angels' names, and capsules of varying length describing the traditions surrounding the angels, including a pretty good bibliography, and several appendices including medieval spells, angelic alphabet, and other fun stuff.
Russell, Jeffrey Burton.
Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages. Ithaca: Cornell, 1984.
* I battered Exosci with this for a couple of weeks in '99. Burton made his reputation as a writer exploring religious superstition, focusing largely on the Devil. As a writer who has not yet, it seems, abandoned the idea that evil is a controllable deviation from nature, Burton provides an excellent picture of the developing superstitions surrounding the Devil in the philosophical explorations of Christianity, and, to some extent, Islam.
Pagels, Elaine.
The Origin of Satan. New York: Random House, 1995.
Hands-down, this is the best work I've come across on the Devil. Somewhat compact (214 pgs, incl. index & notes), the book is essentially a perspective on the development of satan/Satan in apocalyptic Judaism and early Christianity, focusing largely on the socio-political conditions present during the writing of each gospel. I was actually looking for a book on Satan when I came across this, and bought it instantly because I had used the second chapter of the book as a citation in a paper in about '94, when that chapter was merely an article entitled
The Social History of Satan. But I recommend this book above most; it's really quite ... amazing.
There's stuff there on the web, too, but I've had severely less luck. Places like bible.org and newadvent.org are pretty cool (Newadvent includes the Knights of Columbus'
Catholic Encyclopaedia), but remembering that they're Christian-oreinted sites, one must remember the obvious biases (I'm thinking of the Encyclopaedia, which sometimes borders on the hilarious; it isn't that they're flat-out liars, but that they dismiss less-relevant or contradictory ideas so easily one wonders if this ideological rigidity hasn't spilled over into society in general). But that's the problem with the Web right now; the really big projects still aren't done. When the whole world has access to Harvard Divinity's library (
http://www.hds.harvard.edu/library/ ... I think you need a Harvard ID, but someday ) we'll be making some progress. (I'm waiting for Emerald to humiliate me on that one.
)
It's out there, though, if you read through the editorializations all around. Good luck in your search. And let us know how the theory works out.
thanx,
Tiassa
------------------
Let us not launch the boat until the ground is wet. (Khaavren of Castlerock)