|
W.H. KENT
Transcribed by Tomas Hancil
Article Headings:
Assyrian & Akkadian
Demonology
Iranian Demonology
Jewish Demonology
Demonology of the Early Christian Writers
Medieval and Modern
Demonology
Conclusion
As the name sufficiently
indicates, demonology is the science or doctrine concerning demons. Both in
its form and in its meaning it has an obvious analogy with theology, which
is the science or doctrine about God. And with reference to the many false
and dangerous forms of this demonic science we may fitly adapt the
well-known words of Albertus Magnus on the subject of theology and say of
demonology, A daemonibus docetur, de daemonibus docet, et ad daemones ducit
("It is taught by the demons, it teaches about the demons, and it leads to
the demons"). For very much of the literature that comes under this head of
demonology is tainted with errors that may well owe their origin to the
father of falsehood, and much of it again, especially those portions which
have a practical purpose (what may be called the ascetical and mystical
demonology) is designed to lead men to give themselves to the service of
Satan.
There is, of course, a true doctrine about demons or evil spirits, namely,
that portion of Catholic theology which treats of the creation and fall of
the rebel angels, and of the various ways in which these fallen spirits are
permitted to tempt and afflict the children of men. But for the most part
these questions will be dealt with elsewhere in this work. Here, on the
contrary, our chief concern is with the various ethnic, Jewish, and
heretical systems of demonology. These systems are so many that it will be
out of the question to deal with them all or to set forth their doctrines
with completeness. And indeed a full treatment of these strange doctrines of
demons might well seem somewhat out of place in these pages. It will be
enough to give some indication of the main features of a few of the more
important systems in various lands and in distant ages. This may enable the
reader to appreciate the important part played by these ideas in the course
of human history and their influence on the religion and morals and social
life of the people. At the same time some attempt may be made to distinguish
the scattered elements of truth which may still be found in this vast fabric
of falsehood -- truths of natural religion, recorded experience of actual
facts, even perhaps remnants of revealed teaching that come from the Jewish
and Christian Scriptures or from primitive tradition. This point has some
importance at the present day, when the real or apparent agreement between
heathen legend and Christian theology is so often made a ground of objection
against the truth of revealed religion.
Perhaps the first fact that strikes one who approaches the study of this
subject is the astonishing universality and antiquity of demonology, of some
belief in the existence of demons or evil spirits, and of a consequent
recourse to incantations or other magical practices. There are some things
which flourished in the past and have long since disappeared from the face
of the earth; and there are others whose recorded origin may be traced in
comparatively modern times, and it is no surprise to find that they are
still flourishing. There are beliefs and practices, again, which seem to be
confined to certain lands and races of men, or to some particular stage of
social culture. But there is something which belongs at once to the old
world and the new, and is found flourishing among the most widely different
races, and seems to be equally congenial to the wild habits of savages and
the refinements of classical or modern culture. Its antiquity may be seen
not only from the evidence of ancient monuments, but from the fact that a
yet more remote past is still present with us in the races which remain, as
one may say, in the primitive and prehistoric condition. And even amid these
rude races, apparently innocent of all that savours of science and culture,
we may find a belief in evil spirits, and some attempts to propitiate them
and avert their wrath, or maybe to secure their favour and assistance. This
belief in spirits, both good and evil, is commonly associated with one or
other of two widespread and primitive forms of religious worship -- and
accordingly some modern folklorists and mythologists are led to ascribe its
origin either to the personification of the forces of nature -- in which
many have found a "key to all the mythologies" -- or else to Animism, or a
belief in the powerful activity of the souls of the dead, who were therefore
invoked and worshipped. On this last theory all spirits were at first
conceived of as being the souls of dead men, and from this aboriginal
Animism there were gradually developed the various elaborate systems of
mythology, demonology, and angelology. But here it is well to distinguish
between the facts themselves and the theory devised for their
interpretation. It is a fact that these rude forms of worship are found
among primitive peoples. But the manner in which they began and the motives
of the first prehistoric worshippers are and must remain matters of
conjecture. In the same way, with regard to the later phases, it is a fact
that these primitive beliefs and practices have some features in common with
later and more elaborate ethnic systems -- e.g. the Iranian demonology of
the Avesta -- and these again have many points which find some counterpart
in the pages of Scripture and Catholic theology; but it by no means follows
from these facts that these facile theories are right as to the nature of
the connection between these various ethnic and Christian systems. And a
further consideration of the subject may serve to show that it may be
explained in another and more satisfactory manner.
Assyrian and Akkadian
Demonology
Some idea of the antiquity of demonology and magical practices might be
gathered from notices in the Bible or in classic literature, to say nothing
of the argument that might be drawn from the universality of these beliefs
and practices. But still more striking evidence has been brought to light by
the decipherment of the cuneiform hieroglyphics which has opened a way to
the study of the rich literature of Babylon and Assyria. In consequence of
their bearing on the problems of Biblical history, attention has been
attracted to the evidence of the monuments in regard to such matters as the
cosmology, the tradition of the Deluge, or the relations of Assyria and
Babylon with the people of Israel. And possibly less interest has been taken
in the religious beliefs and practices of the Assyrians themselves. In this
question of demonology, however, some of the Assyrian monuments may be said
to have a special importance. From certain cuneiform texts which are more
especially described as "religious", it appears that besides the public and
official cult of the "twelve great gods" and their subordinate divinities,
the Assyrians had a more sacred and secret religion, a religion of mystery
and magic and sorcery. These "religious" texts, moreover, together with a
mass of talismanic inscriptions on cylinders and amulets, prove the presence
of an exceedingly rich demonology. Below the greater and lesser gods there
was a vast host of spirits, some of them good and beneficent and some of
them evil and hurtful. And these spirits were described and classified with
an exactness which leads some to liken the arrangement to that of the choirs
and orders of our own angelic hierarchy. The antiquity and importance of
this secret religion, with its magic and incantations of the good spirits or
evil demons, may be gathered from the fact that by order of King
Assurbanipal his scribes made several copies of a great magical work
according to an exemplar which had been preserved from a remote antiquity in
the priestly school of Erech in Chaldea. This work consisted of three books,
the first of which is entirely consecrated to incantations, conjurations,
and imprecations against the evil spirits. These cuneiform books, it must be
remembered, are really written on clay tablets. And each of the tablets of
these first books which has come down to us ends with the title, "Tablet No.
- of the Evil Spirits". The ideogram which is here rendered as kullulu --
"accursed" or "evil" -- might also be read as limuttu -- "baneful". Besides
being known by the generic name of udukku -- "spirit" -- a demon is called
more distinctly ecimmu, or maskimmu. One special class of these spirits was
the sedu, or divine bull, which is represented in the well-known figure of a
man-headed bull so common on the Assyrian monuments. This name, it may be
remarked, is probably the source of the Hebrew word for demon. The Assyrian
sedu, it is true, was more commonly a beneficent or tutelary spirit. But
this is hardly an obstacle to the derivation, for the good spirits of one
nation were often regarded as evil by men of rival races.
Iranian Demonology
In many ways one of the most remarkable demonologies is that presented in
the Avesta, the sacred book of the Mazdean religion of Zoroaster. In this
ancient religion, which unlike that of the Assyrians, still exists in the
Parsee community, the war between light and darkness, good and evil comes
into greater prominence. Over against the good God, Ahura Mazda, with his
hierarchy of holy spirits, there is arrayed the dark kingdom of demons, or
daevas, under Anro Mainyus (Ahriman), the cruel Evil Spirit, the Demon of
Demons (Daevanam Daeva), who is ever warring against Ahura Mazda and his
faithful servants such as Zoroaster. It may be remarked that the name of
Daeva is an instance of that change from a good to a bad sense which is seen
in the case of the Greek word daimon. For the original meaning of the word
is "shining one", and it comes from a primitive Aryan root div, which is
likewise the source of the Greek Zeus and the Latin deus. But while these
words, like the Sanskrit deva, retain the good meaning, daeva has come to
mean "an evil spirit". There is at least a coincidence, if no deeper
significance, in the fact that, while the word in its original sense was
synonymous with Lucifer, it has now come to mean much the same as devil.
There is also a curious coincidence in the similarity in sound between daeva,
the modern Persian dev, and the word devil. Looking at the likeness both in
sound and in significance, one would be tempted to say that they must have a
common origin, but for the fact that we know with certainty that the word
devil comes from diabolus (diabolos -- diaballein) and can have no
connection with the Persian or Sanskrit root.
Although there are marked differences between the demons of the Avesta and
the devil in Scripture and Christian theology (for Christian doctrine is
free from the dualism of the Mazdean system), the essential struggle between
good and evil is still the same in both cases. And the pictures of the
holiness and fidelity of Zoroaster when he is assailed by the temptations
and persecutions of Anro Mainyus and his demons may well recall the trials
of saints under the assaults of Satan or suggest some faint analogy with the
great scene of the temptation of Christ in the wilderness. Fortunately for
English readers, a portion of the Vendidad (Fargard xix), which contains the
temptation of Zoroaster, has been admirably rendered in a doctrinal
paraphrase in Dr. Casartelli's "Leaves from my Eastern Garden". The
important part played by the demons in the Mazdean system may be seen from
the title of the Vendidad, which is the largest and most complete part of
the Avesta, so much so that when the sacred book is written or printed
without the commentaries it is generally known as Vendidad Sade which means
something that is "given against the demons" -- vidaevodata, i.e. contra
daimones datus or antidaemoniacus.
Jewish Demonology
When we turn from the Avesta to the Sacred Books of the Jews, that is to say
to the canonical Scripture, we are struck by the absence of an elaborate
demonology such as that of the Persians and Assyrians. There is much,
indeed, about the angels of the Lord, the hosts of heaven, the seraphim and
cherubim, and other spirits who stand before the throne or minister to men.
But the mention of the evil spirits is comparatively slight. Not that their
existence is ignored, for we have the temptation by the serpent, in which
Jews as well as Christians recognize the work of the Evil Spirit. In Job,
again, Satan appears as the tempter and the accuser of the just man; in
Kings it is he who incites David to murder the prophet; in Zacharias he is
seen in his office of accuser. An evil spirit comes upon the false prophets.
Saul is afflicted or apparently possessed, by an evil spirit. The activity
of the demon in magic arts is indicated in the works wrought by the
magicians of Pharaoh, and in the Levitical laws against wizards or witches..
The scapegoat is sent into the wilderness to Azazael, who is supposed by
some to be a demon (see ATONEMENT, DAY OF), and to this may be added a
remarkable passage in Isaias which seems to countenance the common belief
that demons dwell in waste places: "And demons and monsters shall meet, and
the hairy ones shall cry out one to another, there hath the lamia lain down,
and found rest for herself" (Isaias, xxxiv, 14). It is true that the Hebrew
word here rendered by "demons" may merely mean wild animals. But on the
other hand, the Hebrew word which is rendered very literally as "hairy ones"
is translated "demons" by Targum and Peshitta, and is supposed to mean a
goat shaped deity analogous to the Greek Pan. And "lamia" represents the
original Lilith, a spirit of the night who in Hebrew legend is the demon
wife of Adam.
A further development of the demonology of the Old Testament is seen in the
Book of Tobias, which though not included in the Jewish Canon was written in
Hebrew or Chaldean, and a version in the latter language has been recovered
among some rabbinical writings. Here we have the demon Asmodeus who plays
the part assigned to demons in many ethnic demonologies and folk-legends. He
has been identified by some good authorities with the Aeshmo Daeva of the
Avesta; but Whitehouse doubts this identification and prefers the
alternative Hebrew etymology. In any case Asmodeus became a prominent figure
in later Hebrew demonology, and some strange tales told about him in the
Talmud are quite in the vein of "The Arabian Nights". The rabbinical
demonology of the Talmud and Midrashim is very far from the reticence and
sobriety of the canonical writings in regard to this subject. Some modern
critics ascribe this rich growth of demonology among the Jews to the effects
of the Captivity, and regard it as the result of Babylonian or Persian
influence. But though in its abundance and elaboration it may bear some
formal resemblance to these external systems, there seems no reason to
regard it as simply a case of appropriation from the doctrines of strangers.
For when we come to compare them more closely, we may well feel that the
Jewish demonology has a distinctive character of its own, and should rather
be regarded as an outgrowth from beliefs and ideas which were present in the
mind of the chosen people before they came into contact with Persians and
Babylonians. It is certainly significant that, instead of borrowing from the
abundant legends and doctrines ready to their hand in the alien systems, the
rabbinical demonologists sought their starting point in some text of their
own scriptures and drew forth all they wanted by means of their subtle and
ingenious methods of exegesis. Thus the aforesaid text of Isaias furnished,
under the name of Lilith, a mysterious female night spirit who apparently
lived in desolate places, and forthwith they made her the demon wife of Adam
and the mother of demons. But whence, it may be asked, had these exponents
of the sacred text any warrant for saying that our first father contracted a
mixed marriage with a being of another race and begot children other than
human? They simply took the text of Genesis, v: "And Adam lived a hundred
and thirty years, and begot a son to his own image and likeness". This
explicit statement they said, plainly implies that previous to that time he
had begotten sons who were not to his own image and likeness; for this he
must needs have found some help meet of another race than his own, to wit a
demon wife, to become the mother of demons. This notice of a union between
mankind and beings of a different order had long been a familiar feature in
pagan mythology and demonology, and, as will presently appear, some early
Christian commentators discovered some countenance for it in Genesis, vi, 2,
which tells how the sons of God "took to themselves wives of the daughters
of men". One characteristic of Jewish demonology was the amazing multitude
of the demons. According to all accounts every man has thousands of them at
his side. The air is full of them, and, since they were the causes of
various diseases, it was well that men should keep some guard on their
mouths lest, swallowing a demon, they might be afflicted with some deadly
disease. This may recall the common tendency to personify epidemic diseases
and speak of "the cholera fiend", "the influenza fiend", etc. And it may be
remarked that the old superstition of these Jewish demonologists presents a
curiously close analogy to the theory of modern medical science. For we now
know that the air is full of microbes and germs of disease, and that by
inhaling any of these living organisms we receive the disease into our
systems.
Demonology of the
Early Christian Writers
Whatever may be said of this theory of the Rabbis, that the air is full of
demons, and that men are in danger of receiving them into their systems it
may certainly be said that in the days of the early Christians the air was
dangerously full of demonologies, and that men were in peculiar peril of
adopting erroneous doctrines on this matter. It must be remembered, on the
one hand, that many of the Gospel miracles, and particularly the casting out
of devils, must in any case have given the faithful a vivid sense of the
existence and power of the evil spirits. At the same time, as we have seen,
Scripture itself did not furnish any full and clear information in regard to
the origin and the nature of these powerful enemies; on the other hand, it
may be observed that the first Christian converts and the first Christian
teachers were for the most part either Jews or Greeks, and many of them were
living in the midst of those who professed some or other of the old Oriental
religions. Thus, while they naturally wished to know something about these
matters, they had but little definite knowledge of the truth, and on the
other hand their ears were daily filled with false and misleading
information. In these circumstances it is scarcely surprising to find that
some of the earliest ecclesiastical writers, as St. Justin, Origen, and
Tertullian, are not very happy in their treatment of this topic. There was,
moreover, one fruitful source of error which is rather apt to be forgotten.
Now that common consent of Catholic commentators has furnished a better
interpretation of Genesis, vi, 2, and conciliar definitions and theological
arguments have established the fact that the angels are purely spiritual
beings, it may seem strange that some early Christian teachers should have
supposed that the phrase, sons of God, could possibly mean the angels or
that these pure spirits could have taken unto themselves wives of the
daughters of men. But it must be borne in mind that the old commentators,
who read the Septuagint or some derivative version, did not put this
interpretation on the passage; the word itself was in the text before them,
that is to say, the old Greek Bible expressly said that "the Angels of God
took wives of the daughters of men". This unfortunate reading was certainly
enough to give a wrong direction to much of the demonology of early
Christian writers and those who went astray in other matters also naturally
adopted peculiar ideas on this subject. In some ways one of the most
remarkable examples of this mistaken demonology is that to be found in the
pseudo-Clementine Homilies (Hom. viii, ix). The writer gives a very full
account of the mysterious episode of Genesis, vi, 2, which, in common with
so many others, he takes to be the origin of the demons who were in his
view, the offspring of the supposed union of the angels of God and the
daughters of men. But on one point, at any rate, he improves the story and
does something to lighten our initial difficulty. The first objection to the
legend was, that the angels as pure spirits, were plainly incapable of
feeling sensual passions; and it was possibly a keen sense of this
difficulty that led some who had adopted the story to deny the spirituality
of the angelic nature. But the moralist evades it in a more ingenious
manner. According to his account, the angels were not overpowered with the
passion of sensual love while they were as yet in their purely spiritual
state; but when they looked down and witnessed the wickedness and
ingratitude of men whose sins were defiling the fair creation of God, they
asked of their Creator that they might be endowed with bodies like those of
men, so that coming down to earth, they might set things right and lead a
righteous life in the visible creation. Their wish was granted, they were
clothed in bodies and came down to dwell on earth. But now they found that
with their raiment of mortal flesh they had acquired also the weakness and
passions which had wrought such havoc in men, and they too, like the sons of
men, became enamoured of the beauty of women and, forgetting the noble
purpose of their descent to earth, gave themselves up to the gratification
of their lust, and so rushed headlong to their ruin. The offspring of their
union with the daughters of men were the giants -- the mighty men of
superhuman build and superhuman powers, as became the sons of incarnate
angels, yet at the same time mortal, like their mortal mothers. And when
these giants perished in the Flood their disembodied souls wandered through
the world as the race of demons.
Medieval and Modern
Demonology
Throughout the Christian Middle Ages the external systems of demonology
among the uncultured races or in the ancient civilizations of the East
continued their course, and may still be found flourishing in the home of
their origin or in other lands. Within the Catholic fold there was less
scope for the worse form of the old errors. The early heresies had been cast
out, and theological speculation had been directed in the true way by the
decision of the Fifth Ecumenical Council (545), which condemned certain
Origenist errors on the subject of demons. But while the theologians of the
great scholastic period were setting forth and elucidating the Catholic
doctrine concerning angels and devils there was withal a darker side in the
popular superstitions, and in the men who at all times continued to practise
the black arts of magic, and witchcraft, and dealing with the devil. In the
troubled period of the Renaissance and the Reformation there appears to have
been a fresh outbreak of old superstitions and evil practices, and for a
time both Catholic and Protestant countries were disturbed by the strange
beliefs and the strange doings of real or supposed professors of the black
arts and by the credulous and cruel persecutors who sought to suppress them.
In the new age of the Revolution and the spread of practical ideas and exact
methods of science it was at first thought by many that these medieval
superstitions would speedily pass away. When men, materialized by the growth
of wealth and the comforts of civilization, and enlightened by science and
new philosophies, could scarce find faith to believe in the pure truths of
revealed religion, there could be little room for any belief in the
doctrines of demons. The whole thing was now rudely rejected as a dream and
a delusion. Learned men marvelled at the credulity of their fathers, with
their faith in ghosts, and demons, and black magic, but felt it impossible
to take any serious interest in the subject in their age of enlightenment.
Yet in fact there was still stranger delusion in the naive faith of the
early Rationalists, who fondly fancied that they had found the key to all
knowledge and that there were no things in heaven or earth beyond the reach
of their science and philosophy. And much of the history of the last hundred
years forms a curious comment on these proud pretentions. For far from
disappearing from the face of the earth, much of the old occultism has been
revived with a new vigour, and has taken new form in modern Spiritism At the
same time, philosophers, historians, and men of science have been led to
make a serious study of the story of demonology and occultism in past ages
or in other lands, in order to understand its true significance.
Conclusion
With all their variations and contradictions, the multitudinous systems of
demonology yet have much in common. In some cases this may be accounted for
by the fact that one has freely borrowed from another. Thus, the demonology
of early Christian writers would naturally owe much both to the systems of
Jewish and Greek demonology, and these in their turn can hardly have been
free from other foreign influences. And since not only heretical opinions,
but orthodox teaching on this subject has at any rate some elements in
common with the ethnic systems -- from the Animism of the simple savage to
the elaborate demonology of the Chaldeans and Iranians -- the mythologist or
folklorist bids us come to the conclusion that all are from the same source,
and that the Biblical and Catholic doctrine on evil spirits must be no more
than a development from Animism and a more refined form of ethnic
demonology. But it may be well to observe that at best this solution is but
a plausible hypothesis and that the facts of the case may be explained just
as well by another hypothesis which some philosophic writers do not seem to
have considered, to wit: the hypothesis that the teaching of revealed
religion on this topic is true after all. Can it be said that if this were
so there would be no trace of belief in demons among races outside the
Christian fold or in religious systems older than the Bible? If, as our
theology teaches, the fallen angels really exist and are permitted to try
and tempt the sons of men, should we not expect to find some belief in their
existence and some traces of their evil influence in every land and in every
age of human history? Should we not expect to find that here as elsewhere
the elements of truth would be overlaid with error, and that they should
take different shapes in each nation and each succeeding age, according to
the measure of knowledge, and culture, and new ideas current in the minds of
men? This hypothesis, to say no more, will fit well all the facts -- for
instance, the universality of the belief in evil spirits and any evidence
adducible for actual influence on men, whether in the records of demonic
possession and magic in the past or in the phenomena of modern Spiritism.
And we can scarcely say the same of the other hypothesis. (v)
|
