A study from the corpus
How old are the Goetic demons?
The Ars Goetia is a seventeenth-century compilation, printed in 1904, listing seventy-two spirits in a fixed format. It is the most-copied demonology in English and the source of nearly every list circulating online. The obvious question — how much of it is old, and how old — is answerable by counting, and this is the count.
Computed from the corpus at build time. Corpus last revised 29 August 2026.
Published · Updated
The count
72
Spirits listed
68
No witness before 1500
94% of the list
4
Named in an older text
6% of the list
4
Named before 1 BCE
6% of the list
The list turns out to have a small ancient core and a large early-modern body. Of the 72 spirits the Ars Goetia lists, 4 are named in any text older than the early-modern grimoire tradition. The remaining 68 — 94% of the list — first appear in this corpus in the sixteenth century or later, overwhelmingly in Weyer’s Pseudomonarchia of 1577, from which the Goetia derives.
That is not two independent witnesses to seventy-two ancient spirits. It is one list, copied and extended, with a handful of genuinely old names embedded in it — and those 4 are the ones everybody already knows: Astaroth, Asmoday, Bael, Belial. Each is a name the earlier literature already carried — a Canaanite goddess, a Persian demon of wrath, a Semitic storm-god title, a biblical byword for worthlessness — and all of them are attested before the common era.
When is each name first attested?
| Period of earliest attestation | Spirits | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Before 1 BCE | 4 | 6% |
| 1 – 599 CE | 0 | 0% |
| 600 – 1499 CE | 0 | 0% |
| 1500 CE onward | 68 | 94% |
Shares are of the 72 spirits whose earliest attesting text carries a date. The Ars Goetia itself is dated 17th c.; ed. 1904.
The ten oldest names on the list
| Spirit | As the Goetia names it | Earliest attesting text | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Astaroth#29 | Astaroth | The Baal Cycle (Ugaritic Tablets) | c. 1400-1200 BCE |
| Asmoday#32 | Asmoday | The Avesta | c. 1000-400 BCE |
| Bael#1 | Bael | Hebrew Bible & Deuterocanon | c. 900–100 BCE |
| Belial#68 | Belial | Hebrew Bible & Deuterocanon | c. 900–100 BCE |
| Agares#2 | Agares | Pseudomonarchia Daemonum | 1577 |
| Vassago#3 | Vassago | Pseudomonarchia Daemonum | 1577 |
| Samigina#4 | Samigina | Pseudomonarchia Daemonum | 1577 |
| Marbas#5 | Marbas | Pseudomonarchia Daemonum | 1577 |
| Valefor#6 | Valefor | Pseudomonarchia Daemonum | 1577 |
| Amon#7 | Amon | Pseudomonarchia Daemonum | 1577 |
What the count does and does not show
The list is mostly early-modern, not ancient
The popular claim that these are demons of great antiquity does not survive the count. The overwhelming majority enter the written record in the sixteenth century, and the text they enter it in is the one the Goetia copies from.
The ancient names are the famous ones
The handful with genuinely old attestations are precisely the figures that were already famous from scripture and from the Canaanite and Persian material. Their fame is why they were available to be included, not a result of being included.
Old name does not mean old figure
Even for those few, the name is what carries over. A Canaanite goddess and a Goetic duke share a name and almost nothing else — the rank, the legions, the offices and the form are all the grimoire's own invention.
It is bounded by this corpus
Earliest attestation means the earliest dated text on this site. A wider corpus would move some of these dates earlier and none of them later, so every figure here is a lower bound.
Method
Every attestation in the corpus is one named text saying something about one figure. The cut at 1500 is the boundary of the early-modern grimoire tradition: Weyer’s Pseudomonarchia and the Ars Goetia are one lineage rather than two witnesses, so counting a spirit as attested because both list it would double the evidence without adding any. For each spirit the Ars Goetia lists, this page takes every other text on the site that names the same figure and reports the earliest one carrying a date. Identifications between a Goetic spirit and an older deity are the attributed relations already recorded on the profiles — this study makes no identification of its own, and every row links to the profile where the chain can be checked. The full weighting method is documented separately.
How to cite this
ColossiansOne, “How old are the Goetic demons?”, https://colossiansone.com/studies/how-old-are-the-goetic-demons (corpus revised 29 August 2026).
The underlying texts are public domain. The compilation, the scoring and this analysis are the site’s own, and corrections that identify a misattributed claim or a mis-dated source are the most useful thing anyone can send.