Tag Archives: Daemons/demons

Expanded: Problems of Theocritus Regarding the Perception of the Child Killing Demon

The concept of daemons and daemonology within Greco-Roman antiquity is extremely complex. Not only are the sources on daemons limited, but the descriptions of these figures is brief and short-lived. Portrayals of daemons are inconsistent across time and cultures and may even vary between individuals. With all the difficulties associated with this topic, I conclude that it is much too challenging to write a broad overarching research paper about daemons and have decided it is much more useful to discuss a single kind of daemon or demon. Doing so, my paper may remain less frustrating and allow it to possibly fall into the domains of how demons and daemons were actually perceived in antiquity.

After countless hours of research on daemons, I have chosen to write about the origins and perceptions of the child-killing demons in Greco-Roman antiquity. My scope of focus remains in the Mediterranean world, including Ancient Rome and Greece, but may also extend to places in the Near East depending on where the origin of the demon takes me. Additionally, now that my essay has a specific subject, I may be able to track the child-killing demon across time. In addition to tracing the origins of the child-killing demons, I aim to find different types of these demons and how they may relate to one another. Lastly, my final objective is to find an explanation as to what the purpose of having the concept of this demon within society. What may be the benefits of possessing knowledge of such a demon and why it exists in the first place?

Continue reading →

The Problems with Theocritus

The topic that I decided to write about for my term paper was daemons and daemonology. Although my thesis is only in its infancy, I have explored a number of sources that portray how demons are perceived across Greco-Roman antiquity. A problematic but also useful source I have come across is the fifteenth Idyll by Theocritus.

Idyll 15 accounts a mime scene in Alexandria describing Theocritus’s companions in a Festival of Adonis. In this scene, Gorgo pays a visit to Praxinoa with her two-year old child and asks her to attend the Festival of Adonis with her in the palace of Ptolemy II. Hesitant at first, Praxinoa gives in to an insisting Gorgo and they set out to the Festival. After some sundry encounters in the crowded streets, they arrive at the palace and the scene ends with a dirge that describes the setting of the festival.

A significant problem with this primary text is that little is known about the life of Theocritus apart from what can be implied in his writings. He was likely born during the 3rd century BC on the island of Sicily. Interestingly, we know this because he called the cyclops Polyphemus as his countryman. He also may have lived in Alexandria during the reign of Ptolemy II or Syracuse or Cos where he flourished and wrote many of his poems. Additionally, since so little is known about him, we are unsure if we Theocritus even wrote all of the Idylls’. This poses a problem because the very author is disputed, along with the background and setting that may be important to my paper topic.

Continue reading →

What was a Demon?

Consider, if you will, a word. It could be any word, big or small, well used or rarely heard. However, it must be a word to which you apply significant meaning. In my case, the word I chose was “demon”. When I began to research the subject of demons with reference to the Ancient Greek world I discovered a rather irksome situation. Many of the texts which I looked into to see what they had to say on the subjects of demons were problematic, in that too often the translated version shied away from the term “demon”, likely to avoid the association that word has due to the Judeo-Christian context with which a large majority of people read.  However, despite this irritating hindrance, eventually, I came to a source which was clear, one which, by dint of being functionally a discussion “περὶ ὀνομάτων ὀρθότητος” (About the Accuracy of Names), was forced to state things without such obfuscatory language as Hesiod’s “they are called pure spirits dwelling on the earth”. This source that actually sets things out plainly, in a slight departure from his usual style, is Plato’s “Cratylus”.

In “Cratylus” the subject of demons comes up only for one exchange, when Socrates and the men questioning him are discussing the order in which they should deal with topics going forwards in the text, and Hermogenes asks that it must make logical sense that, following Gods, they should discuss Demons. In his typical style, Socrates immediately launches into a discussion of demons, prompted, as he was, by a question. Socrates first makes reference to Hesiod’s mention of demons as the sprits of the golden race of men, and here the translator, Benjamin Jowett, does not shy away from translating the Greek “δαίμονες” as “demon”. As the translations of Hesiod which I have read previously have all translated that δαίμονες with any applicable word except “demon”, the reference to Hesiod made by Plato in “Cratylus” directed me to a Greek version of “Works and Days”, where, sure enough, the word which had been translated as “pure spirits” was revealed to be “δαίμονες”.

Continue reading →