OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

Chapter28

Da imon ic Pow er
Giulia Sfameni Gasparro

The Problem
A Long-LastingSystem
In dealing with daimonic power in the Greek religious tradition, we need to make a premise:we cannot, in fact, presume that we can reconstruct a daimonology, in the sense of a
clearly defined doctrine or a coherent and final system of ideas. Rather, daimonology is
a more or less homogeneous and articulated set of ideas and beliefs, sometimes associated
with ritual practice, relating to the category of the divine which the Greeks, from the time
of Homer, denoted by the term daimon/daimones. This set of ideas is to be assessed in the
context of the Greek religious tradition as it originated and developed over time, without
dogmas and institutions or official religious authorities with the power to impose rigid regulatory uniformity on beliefs and ritual practices. There is, also, the difficulty of applying
clear steps within this long historical process, establishing, as it were, the precise phases
and isolating compact, autonomous blocks within the mobile flow of ethnicnational
religious beliefs. Avoiding anachronisms by interpreting the sources of the Archaic and
Classical age in the light of subsequent developments, according to ideological schemes of a
different historicalcultural situation, seems to be key. The more or less complex formulations of the Hellenistic and Roman Imperial periods must, therefore, be placed in relation to
earlier traditions, to measure any continuity, mutations, or innovations.

The Sources
There are numerous problems stemming from the nature of the source material available
for the study of daimonic power. Literary texts outnumber direct documents, such as
inscriptions. It is difficult, indeed sometimes impossible, to differentiate, within the literary

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 413

3/16/2015 7:59:14 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

414Giulia Sfameni Gasparro

tradition, between material derived from a writers own interpretations and ideological
views, and that which might reflect the more widespread beliefs and practices of the common people. However, the gap between learned speculations of individuals and the broader
mentalities and religious experiences of Greek communities and numerous Hellenized
peoples within the Mediterranean world is not unbridgeable if we consider the stability of
religious traditions in ancient cultures, and of Greek religion in particular. In the absence of
an official normative authority, there was a deeply conservative attitude with regard to the
beliefs and cult practices of the civic communities. None of those who deal with religious
themes, be they poets, historians, philosophers, or writers, innovates in a radical fashion,
even when adopting a critical position. Rather, to a greater or lesser degree, they draw on the
common tradition, which also nourished their own ideological and culturalroots.

Different Notions ofDaimon

There are three basic meanings that make up the flexible and varied content of Greek
daimonology in the long course of its historical development. One meaning, which
we may term theological, uses daimones to refer to a category of superhuman beings
within a graduated hierarchy, often including heroes, whose extremes are occupied by
gods and men. Within this continuum, the daimones constitute a group wielding specific powers and tasks, as intermediaries between gods and men. According to a second, anthropological meaning, the daimon is conceived of as equivalent to the soul of a
person, living or dead. This view correlates with the protective function often ascribed
to the daimon, which is probably the oldest conception, the one most deeply rooted
in the Greek ethical and religious tradition, and is linked to that of the individuals
destiny (moira) and his lot or fortune (tyche). In its third meaning, daimonology also
assumes a cosmological function, since the daimones are located in either of the cosmic
levels that form the graduated structure of theAll.

Historiographical Overview
Although the scholarly debate on the subject has generated numerous, authoritative
works, recent studies taking a broad documentary and methodological look at the whole
chronological span of Greek daimonology are still extant. Useful and praiseworthy
early studies in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Hild 1892; Andres 1918;
Heinze 1965 [1892]) aimed at providing a broad overview of the theme for the Archaic
and Classical ages, and, in part, for the early Hellenistic period. Later research, however,
focused merely on specific contexts. This research often provided a philosophical reflection aimed at systematizing the complex, shifting horizon of Greek religious traditions rather than looking at the specifically religious aspects of the topic. In this field we
should mention the many, varied studies on the Pythagorean environment, including,

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 414

3/16/2015 7:59:14 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

DaimonicPower415
of particular interest, that by Detienne (1963), which also reflects on the Platonic context.
The latter, in fact, throughout its long history, is deeply interested in the daimonological
theme, often adopted as an interpretative key to bridge the gap between popular belief
and worship on the one hand, and rational speculation of philosophers on the other.
After Jensen (1966) and the contribution of Marx-Wolf (2009), the documented essay
by Timotin (2012) is of interest. From an eminently philosophical perspective, this work
examines the history of the notion of daimon from Plato to the last Platonists. From
Porphyry to Iamblichos, up to Proklos and Damaskios, these last Hellenes opposed the
increasingly pervasive and ultimately victorious affirmation of Christianity. They tried,
with all the tools of philosophical reflection, to propose a new interpretation of the traditional Greek religious heritage. Daimonological exegesis, variously articulated according to context, often offered them an interpretative key to include aspects of this heritage
deemed incompatible with the canons of the philosophical religion they desired.

The Various Faces ofthe Prism: The

Daimon betweenTheology
and Anthropology
Daimones asa Category ofSuperhuman
Beings inthe Theology oftheGreeks
In Plutarchs (c. 47127 ce) dialogue On the Disappearance of Oracles, Kleombrotos
focuses on the somewhat thorny issue of Providence. In his view:those persons have
resolved more and greater perplexities who have set the race of demigods (ton dai
monon genos) midway between gods and men, and have discovered a force to draw
together, in a way, and to unite our common fellowship (De def. or. 10 414e415a; trans.
Babbit 1962 [1936], with changes).
A history of the problem is proposed:
Among the Greeks, Homer, moreover, appears to use both names in common and
sometimes to speak of the gods (theoi) as daimones; but Hesiod was the first to set
forth clearly and distinctly four classes of rational beings:gods, daimones, heroes,
in this order, and, last of all, men; and as a sequence to this, apparently, he postulates his transmutation, the golden race into daimones. (415ab)

In On Isis and Osiris Plutarch also appeals to the authority of Plato, Pythagoras,
Xenokrates, and Krysippos,who,
following the lead of early writers on sacred subjects (theologoi), allege (the dai
mones) to have been stronger than men, yet not possessing the divine quality

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 415

3/16/2015 7:59:14 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

416Giulia Sfameni Gasparro

unmixed and uncontaminated, but with a share also in the nature of the soul and
in the perceptive faculties of the body, and with susceptibility to pleasure and pain
and to whatsoever other experience is incident to these mutations, and is the source
of much disquiet in some and of less in others. For in daimones, as in men, there are
diverse degrees of virtue and of vice. (De Is. et Os. 25.360de)

Some modern scholars have questioned whether the men of the golden race (Hes.
Op. 1216), who became daimones after death, could have been a distinct category for
Hesiod. Instead, it has been argued that he understands daimones in the Homeric sense
of gods, beings of divine status without special connotations. Such a view contradicts
the entire ancient tradition, which always understood Hesiods daimones as beings of
special status within the general theological scheme, different from the greatgods.
Plato provides the earliest attestation of this interpretation. In the Cratylus
(397e398a) and Leg. (713cd) there is talk of a race of daimons, defined as superior, a
particular category of superhuman beings that acts as guardians of men at the time of
Kronos. This notion can also be found in the Pythagoreans, whose interest in Hesiod,
whom they considered almost a sacred writer, is well known. At the same time, this
interpretation makes nonsense of the deeper import of the myth of the four races and
certainly reflects its authors attempt to construct a coherent framework for the disorderly religious inheritance that he was trying to rethink in terms of his own ethicalview.
Among the various meanings of the myth, we may insist here upon its vocation, in
terms of nature and functions, as a classification of beings which operates on different levels of reality that are notionally distinct, but does not imply any break within a
homogeneous, continuous chain of being. The history of man is linked to that of the
gods by virtue of the metamorphosis into daimones of the golden race of mortal men
(Hes. Op.109).
The word daimon retains, throughout Greek tradition from the Homeric poems to
the very end, its meaning as a synonym of theos. It has its own specific nuancesalready
evident in Homerwhich embody a supernatural presence and power, difficult for
humans to identify, and that often intervenes unexpectedly, bringing with it risks for
people. Among the many examples analysed by Franois (1957), we need merely to
recall Menelaus reflection on the outcome of his fight with Hector (Hom. Il. 17.89104).
Within the terms used to define the divine power that protects the Trojan hero, daimon
alternates with theos, but takes on the meaning of an indefinite supernatural force that
directs the course of events according to its own design, which humans cannot oppose.
In Hesiods text, the variables of meaning of the words used to identify superhuman
powers, such as theos and daimon, are emphasized to indicate a particular status. The
poets moralizing perspective represents the daimones as guardians of mortal men,
acting justly, but also as plutodotoi, bestowers of wealth. This is their geras basileion
or royal privilege, which characterizes their position as divine beings (Hes. Th. 1226).
In Hesiods scheme we can see a whole series of ideas, familiar from different levels
of Greek religious tradition, neatly imbricated into a consistent framework. The dai
mones, as an ancient race of men hidden beneath the earth, are related to the souls

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 416

3/16/2015 7:59:14 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

DaimonicPower417
of the dead. The role of watchers (phylakes) suggests a notion familiar from Homeric
poems, and recurrent in later Greek tradition. In lyric (Pind. Ol. 13.105; Pind. Pyth.
5.1223) and gnomic (Thgn. 14950, 1616, 4026, 6378) poetry, tragedy (Aesch. Pers.
158, 825 and passim; Soph. OC 76; Eur. Med. 1347; Eur. Alc. 499, 561; Eur. Andr. 98, 974;
Eur. Phoen. 1653), history (Xen. An. 5.2.25.), and oratory (Lys. 2.78f), the daimon appears
as a divine agent intervening at will in human affairs, positively or negatively, for good
or ill, often to revenge crimes, as the Daimon Alastor in works of tragedy (Aesch. Per.
355554), and invariably exercising a decisive influence upon humanfate.
From Euripides (Bacch. 894)who provides the first testimonyonwards, in the
semantic sphere of theos/oi and daimon/es, along with the neuter to theion attested for
the first time in Aesch. Cho. 957, we see the neuter to daimonion. Both forms of neuter
substantivized adjective, according to the contexts, have an abstract (the divine, the
daimonic) or collective sense, that is, corresponding to theoi and daimones. These two
new semantic formations were to have an important role in influencing the evolution
of the meaning of Greek theology and daimonology. These terms are often used as
alternative and converging designations of the power that stands over and directs cosmic and human life. In the many peculiar articulations of a polytheistic scenario (on
which see, in this volume, Pirenne-Delforge and Pironti, Chapter4), they also assume a
differentiated significance and make it possible to circumscribe, in the various historical contexts, the two distinct spheres of the divine and the daimonic.

Daimones betweenFolklore and Learned

Speculations:Presocratics and Pythagoreans
In Hesiods scheme the daimones-guardians appear as a well-defined category of
beings, midway between gods and men, and acting as intermediaries between them.
There are many elements that lead us to conclude that this notion is not the poets invention, but reflects popular belief that the daimones were superhuman beings related to,
but distinct from, the gods, who acted as intermediaries between gods andmen.
According to a doxographic tradition, Thales of Miletos (c. 624546 bce) was the
first to establish a systematic classification of theos, daimones, and heroes:God was
the intelligence (nous) of the world, daimones were psychic essences, and heroes were
human souls separated from the body, good or bad, according to the moral quality of
the relevant soul (Athenagoras Leg. pro Christ.23).
According to Thales, souls are intermingled in the universe, in such a way that all things
are full of gods (De anima A5.411a 7, DK 11A22. Cf. Plato, Leg. 10.899b). Platos scholiast
affirms that, according to Thales, the world is besouled and full of daimones (Schol. In
Remp. 600 A:apud Hesychios DK 11[1]A3. Cf. At., Plac. 1.7.11, Dox. 301, 202=DK 11A23).
Daimones correspond to Aristotles theoi. This represents an attempt to express in philosophical terms the conceptual categories of religious tradition. It is uncertain whether the
two terms carried different connotations in Thales cultural and religious contexts.

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 417

3/16/2015 7:59:14 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

418Giulia Sfameni Gasparro

As Detienne (1963) shows, such a distinction between theoi and daimones seems to
be relatively clear within the Pythagorean tradition. It is significant that, among the
numerous senses of daimon in Pythagorean sources, there is a category of beings with
a particular function in the life of men, to whom they are linked, inasmuch as they are
souls detached from their bodies. The Pythagorean Commentaries cited by Alexander
Polyhistor (first century bce:Diog. Laert. 8.2433) revealthat
The whole air is full of souls. We call them daimones and heroes, and it is they who
send dreams, signs and illnesses to menand not only to men, but also to sheep
and other domestic animals. It is toward these daimones that we direct purifications and apotropaic rituals, all kinds of scryings, kledonomancy and other things
of a similarkind.

The date of the Pythagorean Commentaries is uncertain (an early Pythagorean work or
an expression of second or first century bce Neopythagorism). The text contains different
senses of daimon because it draws upon sources of diverse age and origins:the idea that
the daimones and heroes are equivalent to the souls that swarm in the air, analogous to the
doctrine of Thales, may hark back to an Archaic idea, such as daimonic influence upon
animals. The oracular function of these daimonic beings, and, in particular, the ascription
of purifying and apotropaic rituals, as well as scrying and kledonomancy, to the daimonic
world, probably derives from intellectual speculations in a Pythagorean milieu, similar to
that represented by commentary on the Derveni Papyrus in Platos Symposium, and continued in the Platonic tradition from Xenokrates to Plutarch and Porphyry.
Before examining these authors, the position of Empedocles (c. 490430 bce) should
be mentioned. He was a complex, original figure of great philosophical and religious
interest. In his poems (On Nature and Purifications), which have reached us through
an indirect fragmentary tradition, we see the notion of the daimon as a psychic entity
involved in the cosmic drama of the struggle between Neikos (Strike) and Philia (Love),
and caught in a cycle of painful transmigrations into different bodies (humans, animals, plants). Empedocles daimones are entities closely linked to the anthropological
sphere. In fact, the poet-philosopher, having evoked the cycle of metensomatosis (reincarnation) to which the murderer and perjurer must be subjected, far from the blessed,
who like long-lived daimons have attained life, can claim to be one of them, exiled by
divine decree and wandering (fr. 115; cf. Plut. De def. or. 418e,420d).

Plato
The intermediate and intermediary nature of daimones reformulates the polyvalent
meaning represented by the popular notion of daimon, and appears formalized for the
first time in the well-known Platonic myth ofEros.
In the myth, Diotima of Mantinea tells Sokrates (Pl. Symp. 203a204c), in support
of the revelation that Eros is a daimon:he is a big daimon, and the entire daimonion is

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 418

3/16/2015 7:59:15 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

DaimonicPower419
half-way (metaxu) between god and mortal. The power (dynamis) of the daimones is to
play between heaven and earth, flying upwards with our worship and our prayers, and
descending with the heavenly answer and commandments... They form the medium
of the prophetic arts, of the priestly rites of sacrifice, initiation, and incantation, of divination and sorcery (202d203a). The theological aim of the discourse is clear in the
conclusion, The god will not mingle with the human, and it is only through this (to
daimonion) that the gods have intercourse and conversation with men, whether waking or sleeping. The wise woman concludes, The daimones are many and of many
kinds (203a).
This is probably a collective representation shared both by ordinary people and
by the learned, as the same idea is found in an increasing number of texts from the
fourth century bce onwards. In several dialogues, Plato develops the notion of a personal daimon who protects the individual during this life and guides him in the life to
come (Phd. 107d108b, 113d; Resp. 620de), and maybe is actually the superior, divine
part of the soul (Ti. 90ac). Plato also makes use of the traditional tripartite scheme of
gods/daimones/heroes to define the categories of superhuman beings.

The Platonic TraditionEpinomis

The author of Epinomis, probably Philippus of Opus (c. 350 bce), set out a cosmological
scheme with a hierarchy of beings closely linked with the five physical elements. First
comes the divine host of the stars (981e), visible, immortal, and composed of fire. Last
is the creature made of earth, entirely mortal (984b). The author distinguishes two
kinds of daimones:ethereal and of the air. Without specifying the precise relationship
between the Olympian gods and the three elements, ether, air, and water, which fall
between the poles (984d), the author puts the daimones in second and third place after
the stars (984de). Both are invisibleand
of a kind that is quick to learn and of a retentive memory:they read all our thoughts
and regard the good and noble with signal favour, but the very evil man with deep
aversion. For they are not exempt from feeling pain whereas a god who enjoys
the fullness of deity is clear above both pain and pleasure, though possessed of
all-embracing knowledge and wisdom. (984e985a)

The intermediate beings, who are subject to pain, form the link between the poles of
the universe, acting as interpreters, and interpreters of all things, to one another and to
the highest gods. Their agency is at work in dreams and oracles, and forms the basis of
various city cults (984e985a).
The Epinomis bears witness to the process of systematization of the Pythagorean
and Platonic doctrine, with regard to the intermediate and intermediary status of the
daimones. It also foreshadows a theme developed later by Xenokrates and Plutarch by
expressing the notion of daimon as a tool for reinterpreting Greek myths and cults.

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 419

3/16/2015 7:59:15 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

420Giulia Sfameni Gasparro

Whereas the god is perfect and impassible, the daimones are capable of experiencing
suffering. In this intellectual context, it follows that mutability and vicissitude must
also be characteristic of the lower orders of divine being. This notion allows writers
such as Xenokrates and Plutarch to reinterpret the adventures of the gods of traditional
mythology, as well as the ecstatic and orgiastic cults, with reference not to the higher
gods but to daimones, who belong to a level close to human beings, and who are susceptible to suffering and, on occasion, ambiguous or downright wicked.

The Platonic TraditionXenokrates

According to Plutarch, Xenokrates (396/5314/3 bce) accepted the compound nature of
daimones and distinguished between daimones that were good and those that were evil,
those who were beneficent and those harmful to mankind (De Is. et Os. 26, 361b=fr. 25
Heinze 1965 [1892]:168; cf. De def. or. 17, 419a=fr. 24 Heinze 1965 [1892]:167). Plutarch
accepts this distinction, and sometimes also attributes it to the Stoic Chrysippos (De Is.
et Os. 25, 360e; De def. or. 17, 419a). The role of Xenokrates in the history of Greek daimonology must be reconsidered in the light of Pythagoras, who should be attributed
both with identifying daimon-tyche and with the distinction between good and bad
daimones, which, in turn, is rooted in ancient folk beliefs. It is important to note that,
in the age of Xenokrates, on the basis of popular notions probably filtered down from
and elaborated by the Pythagoreans, there was already a clear distinction between two
aspects in the intermediate level of the daimones, one positive and beneficial, the other
negative and malevolent in its intervention in humanlife.
Peculiar to Xenokrates daimonology, as expounded in the De defectu oraculorum
(13, 416cd), is the Platonic notion of the characteristically intermediate nature of daimons, which is defined according to the contemporaneous presence of the power of
the god (theou dynamis), and of human emotions (pathos thnetou). The notion of dai
mon has already been seen in the sense of a mutability typical of everything that pertains to the pathetic, passionate, and compatible element, peculiar to the mortal world,
and therefore capable of turning to good or bad (De Is. et Os. 25,360e).
Although Xenokrates did not identify daimones with the gods of traditional polytheism as Heinze would have him do, he did take a decisive step in this direction. According
to Plutarch, this occurred once he related important Greek mythicalritual religious systems associated with figures such as Demeter and Dionysos, to those pathetic, mutable
entities that are daimons. The result is a clear daimonization of the ritual sphere, highly
typical of ancient Greek religion, in which are involved pathetic gods, subject to a vicissitude far from the detached and unchangeable stability of the Olympian gods. Under
the gaze of the philosopher, the pathetic gods reveal themselves to be incompatible with
the impassable image of the divine, being better suited to exemplifying an intermediate
category such as the daimonic and, indeed, the most disturbing and dangerous sideofit.
In conclusion, Platos second successor expounds a keen interest in ancestral religious traditions, reinterpreted in the light of his own philosophical postulates, together

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 420

3/16/2015 7:59:15 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

DaimonicPower421
with an organically structured and functioning daimonology in which several contributions converge, not only Platonic, naturally, but also Pythagorean.
Many voices contributed to the formulation of the daimonological theories that were
particularly in favour in Platonic environments and were more or less influenced by
Pythagorism. The major exponents of this tradition included Antiochus of Ascalon
(late second, early first century bce) and Maximus of Tyre (second century ce),
who affected other philosophical traditions in various ways, from Aristotelianism to
Stoicism.

The Platonic Tradition and theStoics

It is worth noting the views of certain Stoics, to whom Diogenes Laertios (7.151) attributes a doctrine of guardian daimones. Atius (first or second century ce) records that
daimones are equated with the ousiai psychikai (Plac. 1.8.2; Dox. 307a 914=SVF 2, 1101).
The Stoics, like the Pythagoreans and the Platonists, attributed the working of oracles
to daimones (Stob. Ecl. 2.6.5b.12). Later, Poseidonios (c. 13651 bce) accepted the idea
that the spirits of the dead became daimones (Sext. Emp. Math. 9, 714 Mutschmann
231=fr. 400b, Theiler 317). This view comes nearest to the Greek popular belief that persisted from the Hesiodic myth of the races through the centuries to the Mediterranean
world of the Hellenistic period, and beyond, throughout the Roman imperial period.
Since various traditions shared the assumption that the dead profoundly interfered in
the existence of the living, it was one of the many themes on which the complex cultural amalgam of late antique civilization could converge.

The Platonic TraditionPlutarch

The positions of Plutarch and Celsus are of particular importance in the Greek Platonic
tradition while, in the field of Latin culture strongly influenced by Greek philosophical
traditions, we should mention Apuleius. In Plutarchs elaborate, complex daimonology
(Soury 1942), the two most significant aspects are those indicated by Plutarch himself as
peculiar to Xenokrates; these assume a fundamental role and a precise theoretical systematization in Plutarch's religious vision. This vision makes the distinction between
good daimons and bad daimonsand the systematic formulation of the intermediate
nature of the daimon category between the divine and human levels, in both its components (positive and negative)by virtue of the typical instability and pathetic nature
that intrinsically defines the daimon category.
The two crucial aspects of Plutarchs daimonology, proposed with reasoned arguments in De defectu oraculorum (1022, 414e422c), act, in De Iside et Osiride, as an
interpretive module for the mythicalritual cycle associated with the Egyptian couple IsisOsiris and similar Greek religious systems, such as those related to Demeter
and Dionysos. As it is understood, these religious systems do not represent the whole

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 421

3/16/2015 7:59:15 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

422Giulia Sfameni Gasparro

daimonological framework of Plutarch, who contemplates a dynamic communication
between different levels:the notion of daimones-souls, sometimes capable of purification that enables their transfer to the divine rank, or degradation with subsequent
imprisonment in human bodies (De def. orac. 10, 415bc).
Plutarch was also familiar with the idea, developed in numerous forms in the Moralia
and the Vitae, of a personal daimonthe individuals guardian (cf. De genio Socratis),
and/or the superior, divine element of the soula notion of clear Platonic origin (Vit.
Tim. 90ac). The personal daimon survives the death of the body and undergoes an
often dramatic eschatological experience, as seen in the three great myths, respectively
of Sylla (De fac. 940f945d), of Timarchus (De gen. 589f 592e), and of Tespesios (De
sera 563b568f).

The Platonic TraditionCelsus

A substantially similar vision characterizes the author of the True Doctrine; Origen
passed on long excerpts of this work in his detailed confutation. Celsus repeatedly
rebukes Christians for refusing to pay the necessary homage to the daimones, to whom
the custody of the world is entrusted (Origen, C. Cels. 8.55). The daimones must be worshipped in accordance with the traditional laws of each city (8.57). Christians are thus
in a contradictory position because, while enjoying all the sustenance offered by the
world, they do not worship its guardians and guarantors (8.33). Celsus mentions that
these beings, if deprived of their rightful honours, may cause serious harm to humanity (8.35), but will bring numerous benefits through oracles and apparitions when they
are properly venerated (8.45).
Origen states that Celsus had said nothing about daimons being evil (8.39). Unlike
Xenokrates and Plutarch, and like Apuleius, he outlines a unitary framework where
the true recipients of worship were the daimones, intermediate and pathetic. This
worship was commonly addressed to the gods of the various traditional polytheistic
religions, but here is attributed to both daimones and gods without distinction, given
their power over cosmic events and human life. There is, therefore, no inherent negativity of daimones but rather a common passionate nature, since they are the source of
benefits and of harm to humans, as a result of the respectively benevolent or disapproving attitude of these guardians of worldly existence.
The observance of traditional cults is thus seen as an essential tool for the maintenance of cosmic equilibria and the correct relationship between men and daimones.
The foundation for harmonious functioning of cosmic and human life is perceived
as being based on the religious vision of a polytheistic structure characterized by the
functional breakdown of tasks and attributes among the various divine figures, and the
celebration of ancestral rites by the city community. Celsus restraint regarding mans
relationship with the lords of cosmic life, leads him to firmly distance himself from
blood sacrifice. This reveals the changed spiritual climate as well as Celsus attitude;
the latter seems similar to the positions of contemporary Platonism. He warns readers

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 422

3/16/2015 7:59:15 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

DaimonicPower423
not to be absorbed by the worship rendered to the daimones, which leads away from the
higher god. He evokes the opinion of the wise men, according towhom
most of the earthly daimones are absorbed with created things, and are riveted
to blood and burnt offerings and magical enchantments, and are bound to other
things of this sort, and can do nothing better than healing the body and predicting
the coming fortune of men and cities, and that all their knowledge and power concerns merely mortal activities. (8.60; trans. Chadwick1965)

The two key themes of Porphyrys discourse are evoked:first, there is the close connection between daimonic power and the practice of blood sacrifice. These terrestrial
beings nourish themselves with the vapours emanating from the victim, and, in particular, with its blood, causing that thickening of the pneumatic vehicle that binds them
firmly to the corruptible and passionate world. The second key notion is that the power
of daimons is concerned solely with bodily and worldly goods, whose possession nevertheless risks, as Celsus stresses, distancing man from those higher goods in which
can be found his true spiritual and religious dimension. Adaimonic presence was considered necessary for the maintenance of cosmic order, although such a presence possessed disturbing and even dangerous aspects due to its ability to distract man from the
real spiritual good. The uninterrupted tension of the soul must be directed towards the
supreme, transcendentdeity.

The Platonic TraditionDaimones and Blood Sacrifice

inPorphyry
Porphyrys extensive and complex argument is aimed at demonstrating the obsolete
and improper nature of blood sacrifice, with the consequent consumption of meat, the
central act of worship in the polis. In it, he states that he shall not attempt to dissolve
the legal institutes which the several nations have established... But as the laws...
permit us to venerate divinity by things of the most simple, and of an inanimate nature,
hence... let us sacrifice according to the law of the city (Abst. 2.33; trans. Taylor 1965).
Porphyry continues:Let us therefore also sacrifice, but let us sacrifice in such a manner
as is fit, offering different sacrifices to different powers (2.34).
Having proposed the notion of diverse dynameis (powers) to which the thysia (sacrifice) of man is addressed, he outlines an initial theological framework that seems to
have been borrowed partially from the treatise On Sacrifices by Apollonios of Tyana
(see quotation in Euseb. Praep. evang. 4.12, 1,142).
After the highest god there is a second level of the intelligible Gods who are derived
from him. Addressed to these gods are hymns orally enunciated (2.34.4). The third
divine level is that of the stars, in whose honour, according to Pythagorean teaching,
there must be lit a fire of a similar nature to them. This means that no animate being
must be sacrificed, but only vegetable elements (2.36.34):For he who is studious of

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 423

3/16/2015 7:59:15 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

424Giulia Sfameni Gasparro

piety knows, indeed, that to the Gods no animal is to be sacrificed, but that a sacrifice
of this kind pertains to daimons, and other powers, whether they are beneficent, or
depraved (2.36.5).
To illustrate the practice of animal sacrifice, with all the related miasma (contamination) that springs from it and from relative dietary practices, Porphyry appeals to a
second theological scheme, attributed to the Platonists, which partly coincides with
that of Apollonios of Tyana already mentioned, to offer the basis for an articulated and
solidly constructed daimonological doctrine.
At the top of a ladder of divine beings is the protos theos (First God), incorporeal,
immoveable, and impartible, completely self-sustaining. This First God is followed by
the Soul of the world, incorporeal, and liberated from the participation of any passion.
The other gods are the heavens (kosmos) and the fixed and wandering stars who are
visible Gods. While the First God and the Soul of the world do not require anything
outside themselves, meaning that no material homage need be made to them, thanks
are given to the visible gods for the benefits received through offerings of inanimate
objects (2.37.1). Porphyry speaks of the multitude... of those invisible beings... who
Plato indiscriminately calls daimones (2.37.4). Using this wide and varied categorization Porphyry situates traditional polytheistic structures within the theological
vision of contemporary Platonism. The result is the establishment of a clear dichotomy
between the planes of belief and worship, at least in relation to the central act of the latter, consisting in offering the gods an animal victim.
Porphyry, in fact, distinguishes between two classes of daimon, good and bad
respectively, and identifies the first with the gods of polytheism:
The remaining multitude is called in common by the name of daimones. The general persuasion, however, respecting all these invisible beings, is this, that if they
become angry through being neglected, and deprived of the religious reverence
which is due to them, they are noxious to those by whom they are thus neglected,
and that they again become beneficent, if they are appeased by prayers, supplications, and sacrifices, and other similarities. (2.37.5)

In the opinion of Porphyry, the information related to daimones is confusing, and leads
to incorrect judgements aboutthem.
Porphyry illustrates a doctrine that, by being linked to the theological schema set
forth in Daimones as a Category of Superhuman Beings in the 'Theology' of the Greeks,
above, places the daimones in direct relation to the Universal Soul (Psyche). They are,
in fact, none other than psychai (souls) derived from the Universal Soul and destined
to govern the sublunary regions. The souls, with pneumatic support, that is, a sort of
material garment, are distinguished from each other with regard to the relationship
established with this inferior component, later defined as corporeal, passive and corruptible (2.39.2). Those souls that manage to dominate the pneuma by directing it in
agreement with reason become good daimones and exert a beneficial power on the
various cosmic regions and on human activity (2.38.2). They are thus identified with

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 424

3/16/2015 7:59:15 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

DaimonicPower425
the gods, as functioning typically in the polytheistic tradition. Porphyry adds a category of intermediary daimons. He explicitly appeals to the Platonic doctrine of the
Symposium (202e) to define these beings as those who announce the affairs of men
to the gods, and the will of the gods to men; carrying our prayers, indeed, to the gods
as judges, but oracularly unfolding to us the exhortations and admonitions of the gods
(2.38.3).
To these beings, man mistakenly attributes feelings of revenge and the ability to
cause injury if they are not worshipped. This malevolent capacity is instead characteristic of those souls who, overwhelmed by the passionate support of the pneuma, are
themselves prey to sensitive appetites. Although belonging to the common category
of daimones, these souls can rightly be termed malevolent (2.38.4). Porphyry then
expounds a complex daimonology that uses various elements already present in an
extensive and well-established tradition that, in Greece, flowing from a diverse and
mobile substrate of Archaic folk beliefs, seems to have found, in ancient Pythagorism, a
fruitful soil where it could take root to assume more or less elaborate shapes and move
towards new solutions.
Having defined the unique character of the daimons as being invisible and imperceptible to the senses, Porphyry affirms their ability to assume various guises so that
they can manifest themselves visibly. The evil daimons occupy the regions near to the
earth and attempt to commit all sorts of evil and violent acts against men. Instead, the
intervention of the good daimons, even when aimed at correcting human behaviour, is
distinguished by its regularity and moderation (2.39.14).
Porphyry concludes that:On this account a wise and temperate man will be afraid,
in a religious sense, to use sacrifices of this kind, through which he will attract to himself such-like daimones; but he will endeavor in all possible ways to purify his soul
(2.43.1). Porphyrys perspective, with its firm condemnation of blood sacrifice, reveals
the specific originality of some of its aspects, primarily the fundamental anthropological motivation of the entire context, oriented to the salvation of the soul. This perspective nevertheless presents itself as a last, radical result of attitudes and trends variously
present in the Greek tradition, where sometimes the criticism of sacrifice is found
within a theological framework with a structure that, by degrees, links ritual practice,
or other aspects of worship considered somewhat at odds with divine dignity, with the
daimonic rank, seen as intermediate between gods andmen.

Daimones andCult
Some documents, particularly epigraphic, reveal more clearly traditional popular
beliefs and rituals and show the process by which Greek religious thinking came to distinguish between the words theoi and daimones so as to define two categories of divine
beings. In the inscriptions from the oracular sanctuary of Zeus at Dodona, a couple
ask Zeus Naios and Dione by praying to which of the gods or heroes or daimones and

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 425

3/16/2015 7:59:15 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

426Giulia Sfameni Gasparro

sacrificing will they and their household do better both now and for all time (SGDI
1582A:fourth century bce; cf. 1585B, 1566A). Daimones are often evoked in the curses
and defixiones, or curse formulae, usually placed in tombs against adversaries by whom
one feels threatened or for purposes of love magic (Sfameni Gasparro2001).
A text of one of the gold tablets from two tomb mounds at Thurii in Magna Graecia,
also from the fourth century bce, relates to the Orphic tradition that extensively permeates the whole of Greek religious history, from the Archaic Age to its last expressions in late antiquity. The dead person declares:I come from among the pure, pure,
Queen of the subterranean beings, Eukles, Eubouleus, and the other gods and daimons (Thurioi 5 Graf and Johnston 2013). An Orphic ritual environment, which
involves the daimones, is referred to in the Papyrus recovered from a funeral pyre at
Derveni (Macedonia), dated to the fourth century bce (see, in this volume, Edmonds,
Chapter37). The text is the oldest by nearly a century and is an allegorical commentary on an Orphic theogony, although it opens with the exegesis of a rite relating to
the same environment. This text assumes extraordinary importance in terms of the
religious significance of daimones, and is the subject of extensive literature and different interpretations due to its extremely fragmentary nature. In addition to some occurrences in excessively fragmentary contexts, the mention of these beings as the object
of apotropaic propitiatory rites is clear in Col. VI of the Papyrus. It accompanies the
exegesis of the commentator, who identifies daimones hindering with the vengeful
souls. Between the fifth and fourth centuries bce there was a well-established tradition, with religious implications, that distinguished a class of superhuman beingsthe
daimoneswhich could be identified with the souls of thedead.
Plutarch tells us that, at Opuntian Locris, there were two priests, one of them in
charge of the worship of the gods, the other of daimones (Quaest. graec. 6.293bc). At
the very beginning of the Hellenistic period several texts addressed to a broad public
make it clear that the distinction between gods and daimones had, by then, become traditional. We need do no more than recall an exclamation by a character in Menanders
Arbitrator, by the gods and daimones (Epitr. 1083; ed. Sandbach 1972:128, fr. 8)or the
orator Aischines invocation of the earth, the gods, the daimones and men as witnesses
(In Ctes. 137). It is the funerary inscriptions, however, which provide the clearest proof
of the lively presence of daimones within the popular religious consciousness (Nowak
1960). There is a series of texts from Asia Minor, and Caria in particular, which may well
have ritual implications, despite being expressly funerary. There is plenty of epigraphic
evidence, from Carian Olymos, of a public cult and priests of the Daimones Agathoi
from the first century bce. These Carian documents, both funerary and cultic, suggest
a local form of belief and public worship directed towards a specific category of superhuman beings distinct from the gods. The association between the Daimones Agathoi
of the Carian chthonic funerary beliefs and practices does not mean that these beings
cannot have enjoyed a specific status within the sacred sphere. Moreover, the same conception is present, albeit with lesser frequency and intensity, in other parts of the Greek
and Hellenized world, from Athens and several Aegean Islands, to Macedonia, Lykia,
Egypt, Arabia, and Rome (Sfameni Gasparro1997).

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 426

3/16/2015 7:59:16 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

DaimonicPower427

Suggested Reading
After Detienne (1963) and Jensen (1966), who emphasize the importance of the Pythagoreans
in the history of Greek daimonology, few monographs have been devoted to the theme in
recent years. Marx-Wolf (2009, 2011) investigates the way in which third-century bce
Platonists used daimonology as a medium to establish a hierarchy in the realm of spirits and
to organize a complex ritual praxis (theurgia). Timotin (2011) tracks changes in the notion of
daimon in the Platonic tradition, from the Old Academy to the last Neoplatonists. He analyses the relationship between daimonology, cosmology, and theories of thesoul.

References
Andres, F. 1918. Daimon, RE, suppl. 3:267322.
Babbit, F.C. 1962 [1936]. Plutarchus Moralia V. London.
Chadwick, H. 1965. Origen. Contra Celsum. Cambridge.
Detienne, M. 1963. De la pense religieuse la pense philosophique. La notion de damn dans
le pythagorisme ancient.Paris.
Franois, G. 1959. Le polythisme et lemploi au singulier des mots QEOS, DAIMWN dans la
littrature grecque dHomre Platon.Paris.
Graf, F. and Johnston, S.I. 2013. Ritual Texts for the Afterlife (2nd edn). London.
Heinze, R. 1965 [1892]. Xenokrates. Darstellung der Lehre und Sammlung der Fragmente.
Leipzig.
Hild, J. A. 1892. Daemon, in Dictionnaire des Antiquits grecques et romaines, ed. Ch.
Daremberg and E. Saglio, 919.Paris.
Jensen, S.S. 1966. Dualism and Demonology:The Function of Demonology in Pythagorean and
Platonic Thought. Munksgaard.
Marx-Wolf, H. 2009. Platonists and High Priests:Daemonology, Ritual and Social Order in
the Third Century CE. Diss., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,MI.
Nowak, N. 1960. Zur Entwicklungsgeschichte des Begriffes Daimon. Eine Untersuchung
epigraphischer Zeugnisse von 5 Jh. v.Chr. bis zum 5.Jh. n.Chr.. Diss.,Bonn.
Sandbach, F.H. 1972. Menandri Reliquiae Selectae. Oxford.
Sfameni Gasparro, G. 1997. Daimn and Tuch in the Hellenistic Religious Experience, in
Conventional Values in the Hellenistic World. International Conference Rungstedgaard
2528 January 1995, ed. B. Bilde, P. Engberg-Pedesen, and L. Hannestad, 67109. Aarhus.
Sfameni Gasparro, G. 2001. Magie et dmonologie dans les Papyrus Graecae Magicae, in Res
Orientales, vol. 13:Dmons et merveilles dOrient, ed. R. Gyselen, 15774. Bures-sur-Yvette.
Timotin, A. 2011. La dmonologie platonicienne. Histoire de la notion de daimon de Platon
aux derniers noplatoniciens. Leiden.

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 427

3/16/2015 7:59:16 PM

OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF FIRSTPROOFS, Fri Mar 13 2015, NEWGEN

Eidinow171114OUK.indb 428

3/16/2015 7:59:16 PM