Beelzebub

← Encyclopedia

Beelzebub is a name for the chief of the demons in Jewish and Christian tradition — a figure assembled, over centuries, out of a foreign god, a scribal insult, and a Gospel accusation. By the time it reaches medieval demonology it designates one of the highest powers of hell, a prince ranking with or just beneath Satan; later magical handbooks list him among the great infernal lords. The familiar epithet “Lord of the Flies” is a literal reading of the oldest form of the name. Three layers of language are folded into it, each from a different century and a different quarrel — and the whole career of the demon can be read out of the layers in order, from a city’s patron to a prince of the underworld.

The god of Ekron

The oldest layer is Baʿal-zĕbûb, “lord of the fly” — the Hebrew carries the singular, where English has settled on the plural. The name belongs to the patron god of Ekron, one of the five cities of the Philistines on the southern coastal plain, and it surfaces in a single narrative. King Ahaziah of Israel falls through the lattice of an upper room in Samaria and lies injured; rather than inquire of the God of his own house, he sends messengers south to the Philistine shrine to ask whether he will recover. The prophet Elijah intercepts them on the road with the charge that frames the whole episode — is it for lack of a God in Israel that the king goes to consult Baʿal-zĕbûb, the god of Ekron? The sentence is a death sentence: Ahaziah will not rise from the bed he lies on. The scene (2 Kings 1) is the first appearance in scripture of the name that would travel so far, and already it is set inside a polemic. The Philistine god is named only to be rejected, his oracle consulted only as an act of apostasy.

What the cult of this god actually was, the narrative is not interested in preserving. Later tradition tried to make the epithet do biological work: a fly that comes obedient to certain atmospheric conditions might be taken to govern those conditions, and so a fly-god might be consulted as a god of weather and recovery — the kind of reasoning that turns an effect into a deity. The Greek translators of the Hebrew scriptures read the name flatly as the insect: in the Septuagint the god of Ekron is Baal Myian, “Baal the Fly,” and Josephus, retelling the episode, calls the god of Ekron simply the Fly. The literal “lord of flies,” in other words, was already the ancient reading. Whether it was ever the true reading is the philological question.

Zebub for zebul: a defaced honorific

Most scholars take the biblical form to be a deliberate distortion. The deity was, on this account, Baʿal-zĕbûl — “Baal the prince,” or “lord of the lofty dwelling,” the zĕbûl meaning an exalted abode, a high house, even a temple or the heavens. The reading rests on the Ugaritic evidence recovered at Ras Shamra from 1929 onward, where the storm-god of the Canaanite world is repeatedly styled with the very root: zbl bʿl, “Prince Baal,” and zbl bʿl arṣ, “Prince, Lord of the Earth.” The title zbl sits at home in the Baal Cycle as an honorific of sovereignty. To turn zĕbûl into zĕbûb is to change a single consonant — l for b — and so to convert “the Prince” into “the Flies.” Hebrew scribes, on the standard reconstruction, defaced the honorific on purpose: the title that proclaimed a rival god’s lordship was rewritten as a swarm of vermin, an insult fossilized into the proper noun. T. K. Cheyne read the underlying form as “Lord of the High Place”; the zĕbûl of the temple and the zĕbûl of heaven are the same word the mockery erased. A minority of scholars resist the distortion theory, arguing that a genuine fly-god could have mattered to the economy of seventh-century Ekron and that the biblical name preserves a real cult-title rather than a pun; but the zebul-original reading is the working consensus, and the Ugaritic material is its anchor.

The mechanism on display is older than this one case. Across the ancient Near East the gods of rival peoples were routinely reassigned — demoted, defamed, drained of their dignity by the cult that displaced them — and the syncretistic traffic ran in both directions, gods absorbed as readily as they were vilified. Beelzebub belongs to the demoting end of that traffic, a case where the act of idolatry charged against a neighbor’s worship is recorded in the very spelling of the neighbor’s god. The general storm-god behind the title, the great Baal of the clouds, has his own long history; what the Ekron name preserves is one local application of that lordship, frozen at the moment of its defacement.

The Gospel charge

The decisive turn comes in the Gospels. Jesus, casting out the demons that afflict the people who come to him, is met by an accusation: that he drives out demons by Beelzeboul, named the ruler of the demons. The charge appears in three Gospels — at Matthew 12, Mark 3, and Luke 11 — and his answer turns it back on the accusers. A kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; a house divided against itself cannot stand; if Satan casts out Satan, his kingdom has already fallen. The logic is airtight: the head of the unclean order would not arm a man to destroy his own order. From this single exchange the later figure grows, for it is here that the defaced god of a Philistine city is named, in so many words, as the prince over an entire host of evil spirits.

The Greek manuscripts almost unanimously keep the older ending: Beelzeboul, with the -zebul that points back to the prince and the lofty dwelling, not to the flies. The “flies” reading re-entered the name later, through translation — the Latin Vulgate standardized the spelling as Beelzebub, carrying the insect sense back into the word, and the Syriac versions did the same; from the Latin the form passed into the European vernaculars and into common use. So the name as it is usually written and spoken today is the Hebrew scribes’ insult, restored by Jerome’s pen over the Evangelists’ Greek. Recent study of the Markan passage has pressed the point that the two names in the scene — Beelzeboul on the accusers’ lips, Satan on Jesus’ — are doing different work: the foreign, loaded Beelzeboul serves to mark Jesus as an outsider trafficking with an alien power, while Jesus reframes the contest as the cosmic opposition of God’s will and its adversary. The accusation and the rebuttal are arguing, in part, over which vocabulary the conflict belongs in.

The fallen angel of the Testament

What the developed tradition made of him varied, but one early and influential portrait is fixed. The pseudepigraphal Testament of Solomon — a Greek text of the early centuries of the common era, in which the king interrogates and binds the demons who labor on his Temple — brings Beelzeboul forward as the foremost of the bound spirits, the prince and commander of the demons, who promises to parade his subject powers before the king. Compelled by Solomon to give an account of himself, he names his origin: he was once the highest of the angels of heaven, the first angel, and he fell; now he rules over the spirits below and works ruin through tyrants. Here the foreign god has become a fallen angel — the highest in heaven before his fall, the chief among the demons after it — and the story of his descent is told in the same breath as the story of his authority. The standard critical edition of the text, assembled by C. C. McCown in 1922 from manuscripts gathered across Europe and the Levant, made the work the key witness to how Beelzeboul was imagined in late antiquity: not as a mere named idol but as a once-luminous power, undone and commanding, made to speak under constraint.

That same architecture of the bound and questioned demon — the spirit forced to name itself and disclose its rank — runs forward into the literature of exorcism, where the naming of an unclean power is the hinge of the rite. The name figures in that literature, and in the warding and invocation texts that grew up around it, as a power to be named with precision; the precision is the point, and the operative detail belongs to those manuals, not here.

The unstable summit

Medieval and early-modern demonologists ranked the hierarchy of hell in different ways, and Beelzebub’s place in it was never fixed. The classifications were systematic in form and unstable in detail, since they rested on no single authoritative source. Sometimes he stands at the summit, the supreme chief of the infernal court; sometimes he is placed second, just beneath Lucifer or beneath Satan. The grimoire current that the Grand Grimoire represents seats him immediately below Lucifer; John Milton, building his own infernal order in Paradise Lost, makes Beelzebub the greatest of the fallen save one — than whom, Satan excepted, none higher sat — and joins him with Lucifer in a dark counterpart to a holy triad. The Pseudomonarchia Daemonum, Johann Weyer’s catalog of conjurable spirits appended to his De praestigiis daemonum in 1577, does not list Beelzebub among its sixty-nine demons at all — a telling omission, since it places him above the rank of spirits one summons and among the emperors who command them. Jacques Collin de Plancy’s Dictionnaire Infernal, in the nineteenth century, returned to the oldest layer of the name and made it visible: in the illustrated edition of 1863 the engraver Louis Le Breton drew Beelzebub as a monstrous fly, reading “Lord of the Flies” back out of the syllables and into the picture. The demonological hierarchies, taken together, agree only that he is great; they disagree, century to century, on exactly how great, and the disagreement is itself a record of how little firm ground the systems stood on.

Through all of this the figure keeps company with the other named powers of the infernal order without ever merging into them. He is distinct from the Devil as a category and distinct from Belial, the worthless or lawless one of the older Hebrew idiom; he is not a synonym for Satan but, in most of the systems, a great prince serving or rivaling him. The pattern that produced him — a neighbor’s god read as a demon by the cult that supplanted it — produced companions for him too, the defeated deities of Canaan and the Phoenician coast conscripted into the same ranks, Dagon and Astarte among them, so that the demonology of one religion preserves, in distorted form, the pantheon of another.

The texts and the scholarship

The Ekron episode is read in the Hebrew of 2 Kings 1, with the Greek of the Septuagint and the Beelzeboul of the New Testament Gospels alongside it; the standard reference works trace the zĕbûl/zĕbûb alternation and its Ugaritic background in detail — the entry on Beelzebul in the Encyclopedia of Religion sets out the “lord of the dwelling” reading and the zbl parallel (encyclopedia.com). The Ugaritic root that anchors the prince-reading — zbl bʿl, “Prince Baal” — is read today from the poetic corpus being newly edited at the University of Göttingen’s Edition of the Ugaritic Poetic Corpus, the legally clean modern transliteration of the Baal material in which the title sits. For the Gospel scene, recent exegesis has examined why the accusers reach for the foreign name at all: Jeremy Otten’s 2023 study in Religions reads the Beelzeboul/Satan alternation in Mark 3 as a contest over which identity and which framing the conflict belongs to (mdpi.com). The late-antique afterlife of the name is carried chiefly by the Testament of Solomon, edited critically by C. C. McCown (Leipzig, 1922) and englished in F. C. Conybeare’s translation of 1898; the demonological systematizers — Weyer’s Pseudomonarchia Daemonum (1577) and Collin de Plancy’s Dictionnaire Infernal (1818; illustrated 1863) — supply the unstable hierarchies of the later tradition. The broad mechanism by which a rival god becomes a demon is the subject of Jeffrey Burton Russell’s history of the figure of evil; the particular philology of Baʿal-zĕbûl is the subject of the comparative West Semitic literature gathered around the Ras Shamra discoveries.

The history is, in part, a history of one religion’s reading of another’s god. A neighboring deity becomes a demon; the act of demotion is recorded in the name itself, an insult fossilized into a proper noun. Comparable transitions recur across the ancient Near East, where the gods of rival peoples were regularly reassigned to the ranks of the hostile and the unclean. Beelzebub is among the clearest cases: a demon that carries its own genealogy audibly inside three syllables — the Baal of Ekron, the scribe’s pun, the Gospel charge — so that to parse the name is already to read the demonology, the philology and the fear become one object.

→ Related: Baal · Lucifer · Demon · Devil · Demonology · Hell · New Testament · Belial · Canaan · Phoenician Religion · Syncretism · Idolatry · Exorcism · Dagon · Astarte