Michael Psellus on the Operation of Daemons

translation, the German of Luther, or the Geneva French. It has been rigidly preserved, however, by the Syriac version, all the Latin translations (ancient and modern), and Diodati’s Italian version. We cannot do better than cite what Dr. Campbell has so lucidly written on this subject. After remarking that there is scarcely any perceptible difference between daimōn original: "δαιμων" and daimonion original: "δαιμονιον", this acute critic observes (Diss. vi. p. 1, § 8):—

“Daimonion, or demon, occurs frequently in the Gospels, and always in reference to possessions, real or supposed; but the word diabolos, or devil, is never so applied. The use of the term daimonion (demon) is as constantly indefinite as the term diabolos (devil) is definite; not that it is sometimes attended by the article, but that is only when the ordinary rules of composition require that the article be used of a term that is strictly indefinite. Thus, when a possession is first named, it is called simply daimonion (a demon), or pneuma akatharton (an unclean spirit); never to daimonion (the demon) or to pneuma akatharton (the unclean spirit). But when, in the progress of the story, mention is again made of the same demon, he is styled to daimonion (the demon)—namely, that already spoken of. In English, as well as Greek, this is the usage in regard to all indefinites.

Further, the plural daimonia (demons) occurs frequently, applied to the same order of beings as the singular. But what sets the difference of signification in the clearest light is that, though both words (diabolos and daimonion) occur often in the Septuagint, they are invariably used for translating different Hebrew words. Diabolos is always used for the Hebrew tsar (enemy) or Satan (adversary)—words never translated as daimonion. This word, on the contrary, is made to express some Hebrew term signifying idol, Pagan deity, apparition, or what some render as satyr. What the precise idea of the demons to whom possessions were ascribed then was, it would perhaps be impossible for us to affirm with any certainty. But as it is evident that the two words diabolos and