Cesmag, The Lie, And the Logic of Zoroastrian Demonology‪.‬

For all that demonology was a major part of many theological systems, the topic has received relatively little serious attention. The claims made by demonological discourse having been conclusively discredited in the European Enlightenment, it is as if the topic had been drained of all but antiquarian interest. While mild curiosity about the benighted beliefs of distant others may still be permitted, until recently most research remained distanced, condescending, and superficial, as if reflecting residual anxiety that the foolishness of these beliefs might be contagious or--a less magical construction of the same dynamic--that showing too much interest in such things might damage one's reputation. (1) As the result of such skittishness, our understanding of many religions is impoverished, for some of the most serious issues of ethics, cosmology, anthropology, and soteriology were--and still are--regularly engaged via demonology. Though we may now reject the foundational assumptions of that discourse, this does not force the conclusion that beliefs about demons were of necessity naive, ridiculous, or infantile. As a working hypothesis, it seems preferable to assume that the demonological components of any religion are no less intelligent, complex, or profound than those of its other constituent parts and thus deserving of equally serious study.