Devils and Demons From Antiquity to Chaucer

Sean Hill

Horrifying accounts of demon-possession, encounters with creatures from hell

and any other interaction with evil supernatural beings have always tantalized the human

psyche. As a result, civilizations have extensively developed fables and names for

personifications of evil. The number of names for Satan and his minions is astonishingly

high, but one can gain a comprehensive knowledge of the two most common words for

them by studying the terms “demon” and “devil.” I will survey the evolution and

eventual equality of these two words in literature from their origin to the time of Chaucer

and look at how Chaucer portrays demons and Satan in his writing.

I. The History of “demon”

Found in Homer and Plato, the term demon (daimwn) goes back multiple

millennia. Homer used it to refer to the impersonal power of the gods collectively, while

Hesiod used it in his classification of rational beings: gods, demons, heroes and people

(Ferguson 220). Demons were thought of as mediating beings between gods and

humans. In this way, Hermes/Mercury is a sort of demon since he goes between gods

and men as a psychopomp (from Greek yuxopompo/ς meaning soul guider), leading

souls into Hades. When it came to defining “daimwn,” Plato was perhaps the most

influential of the Greek philosophers. Everett Fergusen comments:

One work says that the demons are the sons of gods by nymphs or other mothers, serving as interpreters between gods and people; in this sense demon is a generic term for divine intermediaries. Plato’s writings also regard the demon as a destiny spirit somewhat like a guardian angel…He also refers “demon” to the highest and divine element in a person. (Ferguson 220-221)

1

Almost all subsequent uses of “demon” come from these Platonic definitions. The

neutral connotations of “demon” even carried over to the period of the New Testament.

In Acts 17:22, Paul, while admonishing Greeks in Athens, describes his audience using

the term “deisidaimoneste/rouς” (very religious). The root, “daimon” is clearly

present, but instead of having evil connotations, the word refers to heightened awareness

of the spiritual realm, which Paul seems to applaud.

“Demon” eventually came to be equivalent to a conscience, due in part to the

work of Plato’s student, Xenocrates. To explain the presence of both good and evil

within humans, Xenocrates popularized the notion that both good and evil demons

existed. Eventually, since blame for bad things could not be placed on the gods, demons

came to be thought of as the instigators of pain and suffering. During the rise of

Christianity, “demon” referred to the evil spirits that Jesus cast out, while church

patriarchs used it in reference to the gods of other religions.

II. The History of “diabolus”

“Devil” derives from the Latin “diabolus” and the Greek “dia/boloς.” These

terms come from the Greek verb “diaba/llw,” which means to accuse or bring charges

against someone. In Christian theology, the devil is perpetually accusing us before God,

trying to prove that we must be sent to hell, while Jesus defends us. Thus, Satan and his

servants came to be called “the accusers.” “Dia/boloς” is also linked to the Hebrew

Old Testament as Rudwin points out:

(Devil) consequently is the exact Septuagint translation of the Hebrew word Satan. (Rudwin 26).

2

Since “dia/boloς” already had negative connotations from its earliest usage, it did not

undergo the same evolution as “demon.” Interestingly, Chaucer prefers to use it instead

of “demon” when describing one of Satan’s servants. In the Friar’s Tale, he uses “devel”

as well as “feend,” which the margin translates as devil, to refer to the creature from hell.

Despite the fact that the terms “demon” and “devil” have separate and different histories,

they seem almost synonymous today. In the words of Jeffrey Russell:

The use of deofol,”devil,” as synonym for “demon” goes back in Old English at least as far as about 825 and persists to this day; (Russell 65)

III. The Dual Imagery of Devils and Demons in literature

Both demons and devils are central parts of literature from antiquity to the

present. Most good literature has a plot in which tension exists. Satan is often the reason

for that tension.

While he is still regarded as the incarnation of all physical and moral evil, his main office has become that of a general mischief-worker in the universe; without him there would be no plot. And the story of the world would lose its interest. (Carus 407)

Hence, literature seems to owe its attractiveness to Satan. Though he may make

storytelling more interesting, the root of evil incarnate is a terrifying thing. Thus, Satan

and his demons were often portrayed in a light-hearted way to reduce their disturbing

character. Russell describes Satan’s dual nature:

Popular Christianity tended to present a vivid, frightening Devil…Folklore on the other hand tended to make the Devil ridiculous or impotent, probably in order to tame him and relieve the tension of fear….Because of the contradictory nature of these traditions, popular opinion about the Devil oscillated between seeing him as a terrible lord and seeing him as a fool. (Russell 62-63)

3

This dual personality of the Devil is somewhat reminiscent of how “demon” had two

completely different connotations in antiquity. Whether this connection exists in reality

is difficult to trace.

What we do know is that the roots of Christianity’s “vivid and frightening Devil”

can be seen in how seriously the New Testament treats evil. Something that comes from

the underworld does not have the potential for positive or neutral connotations as in

Greek antiquity, nor is it powerless or comical as in later literature. Rather,

“daimoni/oi” are able to possess humans, turning them into hysterical, fearful

creatures. We can infer that Satan holds power over the entire earth from how he offers

Jesus the world when he is being tempted in the desert.

Throughout the New Testament, “demon” (daimoni/on) is used when referring

to one of Satan’s minions. For example, “daimoni/on” is used in contexts such as

Matthew 9:33, “Kaὶ eÎblhqe/ntoς tou= daimoni/ou” (and the demon was cast out),

and Luke 4:33, “pneuÚma daimoni/ou aÍkaqa/rtou,” (the spirit of an unclean

demon). We can see that most of the time, when “daimoni/on” is used, it refers to

casting out demons or to the “demon-possessed” (daimoni/zomenai).

While “daimoni/on” refers to Satan’s minions, “devil” (dia/boloς) is used

when talking about Satan himself such as in Ephesians 6:11, “Ta/ς meqodei/aς

tou= diabo/lou;” (the schemes of the devil). The New Testament almost always uses

“dia/boloς” to refer to Satan himself, and not to his servants. Consequently, the

remnant of a distinction between “demon” and “devil” can still be recognized. Looking

at the aforementioned excerpts, one can easily see how the New Testament ascribes

power and terror to demons and the Devil and takes them very seriously.

4

On the other hand, popular culture often tried to make evil less intimidating. In

many stories, normal humans outsmart Satan. In a typical tale, Jack and the Devil build a

bridge with the agreement that Satan will obtain the first soul that crosses it. Jack tricks

Satan by throwing a bone across the bridge so that the first thing that crosses it is a dog.

Jeffrey Russell writes:

As Jack showed with the dog and the bone, the Devil can be foiled and gulled by a quick wit. The function of such stories is to tame the terror. The Devil built a house for a cobbler after the cobbler promised that the Devil could have his soul when a lighted candle guttered out; but the cobbler blew out the candle before it could burn down. (Russell 74)

One of the best examples of Satan’s dual imagery is how St. Nick (Santa Claus)

and Old Nick (Satan) are the same person. Saint Nick was a bishop of Myra, persecuted

by the Roman Emperor Diocletian, while Old Nick is an epithet that Satan picked up

during the Middle Ages. As Maximilian Rudwin says,

The kindly Christian bishop, who suffered persecution during the reign of the roman Emperor Diocletian (284-305), and who is the giver of dowries to poor maids and of gifts to children, has, by some topsy-turvy psychological process, become in popular belief both saint and bogey. (Rudwin 33)

The etymology is seen in the fact that the Christian church didn’t want to keep

recognizing the pagan custom of gift exchange that took place around New Year. The

gift exchange day had shifted to St. Nicholas day on December 6th, thus when the church

denounced it, they tried in vain to demonize St. Nick. Consequently, Old Nick sprang up

as a “nickname” for Satan. A trace of this dual imagery remains in the fact that Santa

traditionally gives gifts to good children and nothing but furnace fuel (coal or sticks) to

bad children.

5

IV. Devils and Demons in the Time of Chaucer

As we have seen, the terms “demon and “devil” have different origins and

histories, but by the time of Chaucer they had become virtually synonymous. Today, as

in the New Testament, we usually say “devil” when we are talking about the devil

himself and “demon” when we are talking about one of his servants. This was not the

case in Chaucer’s writing. Chaucer uses “devel” to refer to the demon that accompanies

the main character in the Friar’s tale:

“I graunte’” quode the devel, ”by my fey,” (Friar’s Tale 1535)

In order to make the distinction between a demon and Satan, Chaucer uses the phrase

“the devel Sathanas” (FT 1526) or just “Sathanas” to refer to Satan himself.

The medieval tendency to portray demons and Satan in a comical or impotent way

surfaces in Chaucer’s writing. The devil in the Friar’s Tale is made to look almost like a

normal traveling companion for the summoner. The two carry on a peculiarly normal

conversation about their occupations and treat each other as friends to the extent that the

summoner calls the devil his brother.

Herkne, my brother, herkne, by thy feith.Herestow nat how that the carter seith? (FT 1548-49)

Perhaps Chaucer’s most blatant jesting of the devil comes in the Summoner’s Prologue.

The summoner, feeling attacked by the Friar’s tale, begins his own story by condemning

his opponent. He tells how a Friar has a dream in which he is taken to hell by an angel in

order to see all of the friars who have been condemned to hell:

Hold up thy tayl, thou Sathanas,’ quod he.‘Shewe forth thyn ers, and lat the frere seeWher is the nest of freres in this place.’ (Summoner’s Prologue 1689-91)

6

The summoner proceeds to describe Friars coming out of Satan’s rear end just as bees

coming out of a hive. The comparison might be made to how Chaucer’s other characters

have described human beings as bodies full of excrement. The Pardoner’s tale describes

humans in an especially derogatory way.

O wombe! O bely! O stinking cod,Fulfiled of donge and of corrupcioun!At either ende of thee foul is the soun. (Pardoner’s Tale 534-36)

In making the comparison between the Summoner’s portrayal of Satan and the

Pardoner’s portrayal of the human body, Friars are likened to human waste and Satan

seems to have human bodily functions. This analogy makes Satan more familiar and less

terrifying, in that he too is full of excrement.

The end of the Friar’s Tale counters this relaxed, jocular attitude when the demon

takes the summoner to hell. The language at the end of the tale is serious and fearsome:

Al be it so no tonge may devyse-Thogh that I mighte a thousand winter telle-The peynes of thilke cursed hous of helle (1650-53)

The Friar’s intimidating description of hell reminds us of the solemn, morbid nature of

Satan and his minions.

Chaucer also portrays a demon-like figure in Part 3 of the Knight’s Tale when

Arcite’s horse is spooked. “Out of the ground a furie infernal sterte, From Pluto sent at

requeste of Saturne,” (KT 3.2684-85). The spirituality of the Knight’s Tale has a Graeco-

Roman backdrop because of the heavy involvement of Roman gods. Since Pluto is the

god of the underworld, it is clear that the fury is what would be conceived by the

medieval mind as a creature from hell. Far from being a comical depiction, this devil

7

plays a central role in the plot of the Knight’s Tale. Overall, though, Chaucer’s

storytellers strike the balance between portraying Satan ominously and playfully.

Since people have always been fascinated with demons and devils, both of these

terms have long and storied pasts. To contrast how seriously the Bible and the church

fathers depicted evil, people found ways of making it less intimidating. Relaxed or even

comical depictions of Satan and his demons have permeated literature since antiquity.

Chaucer partakes of this trend by poking fun at the image of Satan, while in other places

realizing his sinister nature. Regardless of how it portrays them, literature owes a great

deal to the fallen angels and their prince.

8

Sources Cited

Carus, Paul. The History of the Devil and the Idea of Evil. La Salle, Illinois: Open Court

Publishing Company, 1974

Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William

B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993

Rudwin, Maximilian. The Devil in Legend and Literature. New York: AMS Press, 1970.

Russell, Jeffrey Burton. Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages. Ithica and London:

Cornell University Press, 1984.

9