I) M M O N. 550 
they became, the objedls of divine vvorfliip. “ If idols are 
nothing, (fa'ys Celfus, apud Origen. cent. Cclf. 1 . viii. p. 
393.) what harm can there be to join in the public fefti- 
vals ? If they are daemons, then it Is certain that they 
are gods, in whom we arc to confide, and to whom we 
fhould offer fiicrifices and prayers, to render them pro¬ 
pitious.” 
Several of the heathen philofophers held that there 
were different kinds of daemons ; that forne of them were 
fpiritual fubftances of a more noble origin than the hu¬ 
man race, and that others had once been men. . Ammo, 
nius pbferves there are tv/o kinds of daemon's, viz. “ Souls 
fe para ted from bodiespor-fuch as never had any connexion 
with bodies.” Pint dc DefeEl. Orac. vol. ii. p. 431. Paris 
ed. 1624. And Apuleius, in his work quoted above ; 
Superius aliud augujliufque Damonum genus, qui femper a cor¬ 
poris cornptdibus et ncxibus liberi. Ex hac Jiiblintiori Ddmo- 
num copia autumat Plato fingulis hominibus in vita agenda tef- 
tes et cujlodes additos. “ There is another and more digni¬ 
fied kind of daemons, who were always free from the 
(hackles and reftraints of the body. Front this more fub- 
lime abundance of daemons, Plato conjectures that wit- 
neffes and guardians were appointed to every individual 
man during the courfe of his life.” But thofe daemons 
who were the more immediate objects of the eftabliihed 
worfhip amongft the ancient nations were human fpirits, 
fuch as were believed to become daemons or deities after 
their departure from their bodies. Plutarch teaches, 
(Vit. Romul. p. 36. ed. Paris,) “ that, according to a di¬ 
vine nature and jultice, the fouls of virtuous men are 
advanced to the rank of daemons; and that from dae¬ 
mons, if they are properly purified, they are exalted into 
gods, not by any political inftitution, but according to 
right reafon.” The fame author fays in another place, 
(de IJ\ & OJir. p. 361.) “ that Ifis and Oiiris were, for 
their virtue, changed from good daemons into gods, as 
were Hercules and Bacchus afterwards, receiving the 
united honours both of gods and daemons.” Hefiod and 
other poets, who have recorded the ancient hiffory or 
traditions on which the public faith and worfhip were 
founded, affert, that the men of the golden age, who were 
(uppofed to be very good, became daemons after death, 
and difpenfers of good things to mankind. 
Though daemon is often ufed in a general fenfe as equi¬ 
valent to a deity, and is accordingly applied to fate or 
fortune, or whatever elfe was regarded as a god ; yet 
thofe daemons who were the more immediate objedls of 
divine worfhip amongft the heathens, were human fpi¬ 
rits; as is fhown in Farmer on Miracles, chap. iii. fedt. 2. 
The word damcn is alfo ufed indifferently in a good and 
a bad fenfe. In the former fenfe, it was very common 
among the ancient heathens. “ We muff not (fays Me¬ 
nander) think any daemon to be evil, hurtful to a good 
life, but every god to be good.'” Neverthelefs, thofe 
are certainly mi (taken who affirm, that daemon never fig- 
nified an evil being till after the time of Chrift. Pindar 
in his 13th Olympic Ode fpeaks of the .frca/xair, 
“ the daemon, or genius which is born with us,” in a 
fenfe indifferent: but in his third Pythian he has “ frcapuii 
sTEgo? e; y.ay.av rgs-^s,” “ the other, i. e. the bad daemon 
which turned to evil.” Pythagoras held daemons who 
lent difeafes to men and cattle, ( Diog. Laert. Vit. Pythagor. 
p. 514. ed. Amjlcl.y Zaleucus, in his preface to his Laws, 
(apud Stobaum, Serm. 42.) fuppofes that an evil daemon 
might be prefent with a man, to influence him to injuf- 
tice. The daemons of Empedocles were evil fpirits, and 
exiles from heaven; (Plutarch,nsgt-re pn hiv§a.ni;feaba,i.) 
And in his life of Dion,-(p. 958,) he fays, “ It was the. 
opinion of the ancients, that evil and mifehievous dae¬ 
mons, out of envy and hatred to good men, oppofe what¬ 
ever they do.” Perhaps no opinion more generally pre¬ 
vailed in ancient times than this, viz. that as the de¬ 
parted fouls of good men became good daemons, fo the 
departed fouls ot bad men became evil daemons. 
It has been generally thought, that by daemons we are 
to underftana,devils, in the Septuagint verfion of ti-.e 
Old Teftament. And St. Auftin, in his book “ de Civi- 
tate Dei,” contends that “malignant fpirits” are always 
meant, in the mention of that name. Others think the 
word is in that verfion certainly applied to the ghofts of 
fuch dead men as the heathens deified, in Deut. xxxii. 
17. Pf. cvi. 37. That daemon often bears the fame mean¬ 
ing in the New Teftament, and particularly in Adis xvii. 
18. When St. Paul, in his celebrated addrefs to the 
Athenians, tells them he perceives they were already 
S'eiqt^a.ifxovis'epec, he means to fay, “ they were more de¬ 
voted than they ought to be to the worfhip of gods-dx- 
mon ;” i. e. of men deified. Adts x.vii. 22. That deemon 
has the fame import in 1 Cor. x. 21. 1 Tim. iv. 1. Rev. 
ix. 13. is Ihewn at large by Mr. Jofcph Mede, (p. 623, 
et-feq.) That the word is applied always to human fpi¬ 
rits in the New Teftament, Mr. Farmer has attempted, 
to fhow in his Eflay on Dcemcniacs, p. 208, et feq. As 
to the meaning of the word damon in the fathers of the 
Chriftian church, it is ufed by them in the fame fenfe 
as it was by the heathen philofophers, efpecially the 
latter Platonifts ; that is, fometimes for departed human 
fpirits, and at other times for fuch fpirits as had never 
inhabited human bodies. The word however, when 
ufed by the early Chriftian writers, is more commonly 
taken in an evil fenfe, than in the ancient philofophers. 
Whence VolTius.fays, “ Daemonum nomine, folum capio 
Spiritus rnalos, ut Chriftiani folent.” L. 7. c. 8. dc 
Phyfiol. Chriftiana. 
Different orders of daemons had different Illations and 
employments aftigned them by the ancients. Good dx~ 
mons were conlidered as the authors of good to mankind ; 
evil daemons brought-innumerable evils both upon men 
and beafts. Amongft evil daemons there was a great dif- 
tindlion with refpedl to the offices aftigned them; feme 
compelled men to wickednefs, others ftimulated them 
to madnefs. See Demoniac. 
Muclrhas been faid concerning the daemon of Socrates. 
He alferted to his friends and difciples, and even declared 
to the world, that a friendly fpirit, whom he called his 
deemon, diredted him how to adt on every important oc- 
cafion in his life, and reftrained him from imprudence 
of condudt. In contemplating the character of this great 
. philofopher, while we admire him as a fuperior pattern 
of virtue and moral wifdom in the heathen world, we arc 
naturally led to inquire, whether what he gave out con¬ 
cerning his daemon were the fidtion of impofture, or the re¬ 
verie, of a heated imagination, ora fober and true account 
of a favour which Heaven defigned to confer onfo extra¬ 
ordinary a man. To afeertain in this cafe the objedt of 
our inquiries, is by no means fo eafy as the fuperficial 
thinker may be apt to imagine. When we conlider the 
dignity of fentiment and fimplicity of manners which 
Socrates difplayed through the general tenor of his life, 
we cannot readily bring ourfelves to think that he could 
be capable of defigned impofture. Nothing of the wild- 
nefs of an enthuliaft appears in his character; the mc- 
defty of his pretenlions, and the refpedl which in his 
converfation and conduit he uniformly teftified for the 
ordinary duties of focial life, fufficiently prove that he 
was free from the influence of blind enthufiafm : we 
cannot infer, therefore, that, like the aftronomer in Ral- 
felas, he was deceived with refpedl to his daemon by an 
overheated imagination. It is no lefs difficult to believe, 
that God would diftinguifh an heathen in fo eminent a 
manner, and yet leave him uninftructed in the principles 
of true religion. Surely, if ever Icepticifm be reafon- 
able, it mult be in fuch matters as the prefent. Yet, 
if it be (till infilled, that fome one of thele three notions 
concerning the daemon of Socrates mull be more pro¬ 
bable than the others; we would rather efteem Socrates 
an enthuliaft in this inftance, than degrade him to the 
bale charadter of an impoftor, or fuppofe that a fpiritual 
being actually revealed hirnfelf to the philofopher, and 
condefcended to become his conftant attendant and coun- 
fellor. 
