The term “Daemon” (δαίμων / daímōn) is a religious and philosophical concept in ancient Greece that refers to the divine and serves as its representation. Unlike God (θεός / theós) or hero (ἥρως / hḗrōs), the daemon is not tied to any specific worship, deity, or representation.
Daemon in Greek literature
Daemon as a deity
The term “Daemon” is found in ancient Greek literature, either referring to a specific deity or an undefined divine entity.
In the first case, it is relatively rare in Greek literature but still noteworthy. Daimones and theoi (Daemon and gods) are sometimes used interchangeably, especially in the works of Euripides. In Homer’s Iliad, daemon most often refers to Aphrodite but occasionally to Zeus and Apollo. In Plato’s Apology of Socrates, Socrates claims that “the demons are children of gods, bastards born of nymphs or other characters as tradition reports.”
The second case is more common, particularly in Homer’s works. The term daemon is often used to denote an unidentified divine power mentioned by someone who is unaware of its identity. It is the unidentified force that causes events. It can induce thoughts, such as when a daemon influences Achilles with reckless thoughts in the Iliad. Telemaque invokes it when rescued from enemies and brought back to the port in the Odyssey. In this case, the author might later replace the term daemon with theos, assimilating this sense of daemon to an undefined god.
Daemon as fate or destiny
Sometimes, the daemon is equated with fate, specifically the μοίρα / moíra (moira) or τύχη / týkhē (Tyche). There’s an etymological connection between the ideas of sharing, distribution, and destiny. The term daemon is derived from the Indo-European root *da(i)-, seen in the ancient Greek verb daiomai (“to share, divide, distribute”), which gives rise to dais (meal), for example. Moira comes from meiromai (“to share, divide”).
In this context, the daemon is a kind of higher power that causes events binding or constraining the hero, usually to their disadvantage. The Odyssey provides examples of using the term daemon in this sense, attributing Ulysses’ adventures that separate him from home to the daemon. In the Pythics, Pindar writes that “success does not depend on men. It is the daemon who grants them. Sometimes, he raises and elevates one, other times his hand lowers another.”
Daemon as avenging spirit
The daemon is sometimes associated with a vengeful spirit, expressing punitive actions against those who violate social norms (θέμις, Themis). In the Greek mindset, transgressing these social norms implicitly endangers the social group and must be punished.
In this scenario, the daemon is closely linked to traditional avenging figures like the Keres and the Erinyes. The Erinyes, whose mythological task is to ensure that members of a genos (family) do not violate norms, are regularly associated with the daemon and the concept of Δίκη (justice). For example, in Agamemnon, the chorus laments the daemon that has befallen the protagonists’ family. In The Seven Against Thebes, the daemon is described as “perched on the corpse like a loathsome raven.”
Moreover, the daemon is sometimes specifically identified as an avenging spirit of crimes, taking on the role of ἀλάστωρ / alástōr. Jean Carrière notes that the daemon is both “the frenzy that inflames, but also the vengeance that pursues.”
Agathos Daemon
Agathos Daemon or Agathodaimon was a domestic deity to whom, along with Zeus Soter, libations were made after a meal. In later (post-Ptolemaic) antiquity, he took on two partially distinct roles; one as Agathos Daemon, an eminent serpentine civic god who served as a special protector of Alexandria. The other was a kind of domestic serpentine deity, the Agathoi Daimones, individual protectors of the houses in which they were worshipped.
The daemon in philosophy
Plato mentions the daemon multiple times in his dialogues, with sometimes varying meanings. This will lead his commentators to explore the multiplicity of demonic figures in the centuries that follow (cf. Posteriority of Platonic demonology). Plato specifically mentions Socrates’ daimonion and the figures of daemon in Phaedo (107d – 108c), Republic (617e – 620d-e), and Timaeus (90a-c).
The cult of the inner daemon
Socrates’ daemon (or daimon) is one of the most well-known concepts related to Socrates, even though the term is never used by Plato to name it; the author indeed prefers the term ‘demonic sign’ (δαιμόνιον σημεῖον / daimonion sêmeion).
According to Plato, Socrates’ daimonion whispers answers to him when he speaks on a subject; Socrates considered himself inspired by it because it suggested resolutions and, most importantly, what he should not do. It is thus a “mysterious hindrance” (θαυμάσιον τι γέγονεν / thaumasion ti gegonen). It is defined as “a kind of voice” (φωνή τις / phônè tis). Socrates says he “thinks that few people, if anyone, have ever had it before [him].” This daemon would have advised him, one day, not to take a certain route. The philosopher followed his advice while his companions did not. Later, they were blocked by a herd of pigs and arrived covered in mud.
The daemon as metaxu
In The Symposium, Plato reports Diotima’s teaching to Socrates, where she describes the daemon as a messenger, an intermediary (metaxu) between the mortal and the immortal:
“All that is demonic is intermediate between what is mortal and what is immortal.
— For what purpose?” I asked.
— It interprets and communicates to the gods what comes from humans and to humans what comes from the gods: the prayers and sacrifices of the former, the commands of the latter, and their favors in exchange for sacrifices; and, on the other hand, being intermediate between the two, what is demonic is complementary, in a way that connects the Whole with itself. It is thanks to this kind of being that divination as a whole, the science of priests concerning things related to sacrifices, initiations, incantations, general predictions, and magic, could come into being. The god, however, does not mingle with humans; but nevertheless, thanks to this intermediate nature, it is in a complete way that the possibility for gods to enter into a relationship with humans and converse with them is realized, either during wakefulness or during sleep.”
Socrates uses this discussion with Diotima in The Symposium to liken Eros, who was then considered a god, to a daemon. The term then does not refer to Socrates’ personal daemon but rather an external deity.
Posteriority of Platonic Demonology
Exegetes following the philosopher have attempted to create coherence between Socrates’ daimonion and the various previously mentioned daemon figures. The inquiries on the subject are manifold: firstly, whether Socrates’ daimonion is the same as the general daemon , and if the daemon is external to us, as indicated in these first two dialogues, or if it is a part of our soul, as indicated in the Timaeus.
The polysemy of the daemon, its multiplicity of meanings, allows for extensive fertility in the centuries that follow but makes reconciling all its senses challenging.
The daemon as the ethos of the philosopher
In the 2nd century, Apuleius of Madaura wrote a small treatise titled On the God of Socrates. His thoughts are symptomatic of the blending of meanings of the word daemon after Plato. In De deo Socratis, an exhortation to the practice of philosophy as both thought and life, Apuleius relates the philosopher to his way of life, guided, he says, by his daemon. The daemon thus becomes the hallmark of the philosophical way of life.
Inspired by Plato’s dialogue, he states:
“No, Plato will answer through my mouth, no, the gods are not so distinct and separate from men that they cannot hear our prayers. They are, indeed, strangers to contact but not to the care of human affairs. There are intermediate divinities that dwell between the heights of heaven and the earthly element, in the middle occupied by the air, and they transmit to the gods our desires and the merits of our actions: the Greeks call them daimons. Messengers of prayers and blessings between humans and gods, these daimons carry and bring back, on one side the requests, on the other the aids; interpreters to some, helpful geniuses to others…”
From the Greek daemon to the Latin genius
Latin-speaking philosophers gradually transpose the concept of daemon into their own language, notably to the soul and genius. This turn is either due to the reading of the Timaeus, where Plato writes that the daemon is a part of the soul, or to etymological reasoning, noting that the word daemon, when preceded by the prefix eu- (eudaimonas, or eudaemonas in Latin), means “having a good daemon, having a virtuous soul.”
Apuleius, in De deo Socratis, establishes an equivalence between daemon, animus, and genius. Andrei Timotin writes, “Genius thus becomes progressively, by contamination with the Greek notion of δαiμων, a companion (comes) of the individual, possibly doubled (Lucilius, Servius), or his rational soul (animus / νοῦς, Noûs) […] a divine hypostasis of personality, a double constituted at birth.”
The daemon as genius possesses certain characteristics of both original concepts. Like the daemon in one of its Greek meanings, it is personal; like the Socratic daemon, it acts as a guide; like the genius of Stoic philosophy, it is divine, attached to the individual, and born simultaneously with them. Timotin thus characterizes this syncretism as a “Platonic-Stoic reading of the daemon.”