"Éliphas Lévi's iconic image of Baphomet, the "Sabbatic Goat," was first published in 1854". But it sounds like this was going on way back before it. What is this character's deal here.
I talk to Google Gemini AI about it.
baphomet.. he's not one of the 72 demons from the ars goetia. There was also another class of demons. But he wasn't one of those. You have the hierarchy of the demonic realm.. like generals.. this baphomet wasn't in any of these categories
You are absolutely correct. Baphomet is not one of the 72 demons listed in the Ars Goetia, nor does he typically appear in traditional hierarchies of the demonic realm found in grimoires like the Lesser Key of Solomon.
Here's why Baphomet stands apart:
Origin in the Knights Templar Trials: Baphomet first appears in historical records during the trials of the Knights Templar in the early 14th century. Accused of heresy, some Templars, often under torture, confessed to worshipping an idol named Baphomet. The exact nature or appearance of this "idol" varied widely in their confessions, and many scholars believe it was a fabrication by the inquisitors or a misunderstanding/misspelling of "Mahomet" (Muhammad), suggesting an accusation of Islamophilia.
19th Century Occult Revival: The modern image of Baphomet, the winged, goat-headed, hermaphroditic figure, was largely popularized by the French occultist Éliphas Lévi in the mid-19th century. Lévi intended this image to be a symbolic representation of balance, duality, and the equilibrium of opposites in the universe, incorporating various esoteric symbols. It was not originally presented as a specific demon to be invoked in the way the Goetic spirits are.
Not a Traditional Demonological Figure: Unlike the demons of the Ars Goetia, who have specific seals, offices, legions, and methods of conjuration described in grimoires, Baphomet doesn't have a place in those older, established demonological systems. The Ars Goetia lists 72 spirits with distinct roles (Kings, Dukes, Princes, Marquises, Earls, a Knight, and Presidents) and is focused on practical ceremonial magic for summoning and controlling them.
So, while Baphomet has become a widely recognized symbol associated with occultism and sometimes mistakenly linked with Satanism, its origins and nature are quite different from the demons of the Ars Goetia and other classical demon hierarchies.
checking the Dictionnaire infernal from 1863.. it's 748 pages, so it's pretty thick. Baphomet doesn't seem to be listed in there. This Éliphas Lévi image.. what year was that?
You're very astute to notice Baphomet's absence from the Dictionnaire Infernal! Jacques Auguste Simon Collin de Plancy's Dictionnaire Infernal (which had its final, most comprehensive edition in 1863, the one you're likely referring to) aimed to be a compendium of demons, occult figures, and superstitions. The fact that Baphomet isn't prominent or even listed in it reinforces that he wasn't considered a traditional demon within established demonology at that time.
Éliphas Lévi's iconic image of Baphomet, the "Sabbatic Goat," was first published in 1854 in his influential book, Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie (Doctrine and Ritual of High Magic). It was then featured as the frontispiece for the two-volume edition of the same work, published between 1855 and 1856.
So, Lévi's image of Baphomet was created and widely circulated just before or around the same time as the final edition of the Dictionnaire Infernal. This timing further explains why it wouldn't have been included, as Baphomet was more of a symbolic creation of the burgeoning occult revival, rather than a historical or traditional demonic entity.
There was also when I was checking out the white house, broken pentagram in the DC street layout. The bottom tip point was inside entrance hall. If you'd go in there, look to the right, big mirror. At the top of the border carvings, this goat head guy with the flame on top. Let me get that post.
Just search for: "entrance hall" in here for those research posts.
I put together an album of the version from the Dictionnaire Infernale, from 1863.. A later illustrations version. And this more realistic one from lately. The 3 beside each other, for each of the 72. Let me get that bookmark.
"Comparing different versions of the 72 Ars Goetia demons"
So what's these guys deal, compared to the hierarchy of hell, characters .
1 Theological classification of demons
2 The government of Hell
3 Kings of the cardinal directions
4 The Hierarchy
4.1 Kings
4.2 Princes
4.3 Dukes
4.4 Marquises
4.5 Counts
4.6 Knight
4.7 Presidents
5 Nine degrees of diabolical spirits
One can't be at the top without being under. Where is that which one climbed to the top of situated under?
at the top on the rite
A rite implies a passage from/to...how could one be at the top of a bottom, while being moved from origin towards outcome? Which one came first...from/to or top vs bottom?
Why the "vs" in-between top and bottom? Because climbing to the top turns (versus/verto) one away from bottom. While being (life) moved from origin (inception) towards outcome (death)...can one turn away from the only way one is in?
sounds like
Sound/sanus - "entire; whole"...whole cannot be alike, only partials within whole can be alike one another, when ignoring to be differentiated from one another.
Comparing different...
...equalizing differences makes them alike. What set those differences apart from one another, before one can make comparisons in-between them?
If all is one in energy, then what does one within all compare energy to?
The earliest known mention of “Baphomet” appears in a letter from Anselm of Ribemont during the Siege of Antioch in the First Crusade, where Christian chroniclers reported that Muslim defenders “called loudly upon Baphomet,” a term almost certainly derived as a corruption of “Mahomet”
You do have the knights templar worshipping him though. Like the wiki page of Baphomet.. let me go get that.
"During trials starting in 1307, the Knights Templar were accused of heresy for worshipping Baphomet as a demonic idol."
Don't forget about "the steps of freemasonry", with Knights Templar at the top on the York rite side.
"structure-of-freemasonry-1956-life-magazine"
https://i.imgur.com/Qr4UMqa.jpeg
This post baphomet image was from:
"Éliphas Lévi's iconic image of Baphomet, the "Sabbatic Goat," was first published in 1854". But it sounds like this was going on way back before it. What is this character's deal here.
I talk to Google Gemini AI about it.
baphomet.. he's not one of the 72 demons from the ars goetia. There was also another class of demons. But he wasn't one of those. You have the hierarchy of the demonic realm.. like generals.. this baphomet wasn't in any of these categories
You are absolutely correct. Baphomet is not one of the 72 demons listed in the Ars Goetia, nor does he typically appear in traditional hierarchies of the demonic realm found in grimoires like the Lesser Key of Solomon.
Here's why Baphomet stands apart:
Origin in the Knights Templar Trials: Baphomet first appears in historical records during the trials of the Knights Templar in the early 14th century. Accused of heresy, some Templars, often under torture, confessed to worshipping an idol named Baphomet. The exact nature or appearance of this "idol" varied widely in their confessions, and many scholars believe it was a fabrication by the inquisitors or a misunderstanding/misspelling of "Mahomet" (Muhammad), suggesting an accusation of Islamophilia.
19th Century Occult Revival: The modern image of Baphomet, the winged, goat-headed, hermaphroditic figure, was largely popularized by the French occultist Éliphas Lévi in the mid-19th century. Lévi intended this image to be a symbolic representation of balance, duality, and the equilibrium of opposites in the universe, incorporating various esoteric symbols. It was not originally presented as a specific demon to be invoked in the way the Goetic spirits are.
Not a Traditional Demonological Figure: Unlike the demons of the Ars Goetia, who have specific seals, offices, legions, and methods of conjuration described in grimoires, Baphomet doesn't have a place in those older, established demonological systems. The Ars Goetia lists 72 spirits with distinct roles (Kings, Dukes, Princes, Marquises, Earls, a Knight, and Presidents) and is focused on practical ceremonial magic for summoning and controlling them.
So, while Baphomet has become a widely recognized symbol associated with occultism and sometimes mistakenly linked with Satanism, its origins and nature are quite different from the demons of the Ars Goetia and other classical demon hierarchies.
checking the Dictionnaire infernal from 1863.. it's 748 pages, so it's pretty thick. Baphomet doesn't seem to be listed in there. This Éliphas Lévi image.. what year was that?
You're very astute to notice Baphomet's absence from the Dictionnaire Infernal! Jacques Auguste Simon Collin de Plancy's Dictionnaire Infernal (which had its final, most comprehensive edition in 1863, the one you're likely referring to) aimed to be a compendium of demons, occult figures, and superstitions. The fact that Baphomet isn't prominent or even listed in it reinforces that he wasn't considered a traditional demon within established demonology at that time.
Éliphas Lévi's iconic image of Baphomet, the "Sabbatic Goat," was first published in 1854 in his influential book, Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie (Doctrine and Ritual of High Magic). It was then featured as the frontispiece for the two-volume edition of the same work, published between 1855 and 1856.
So, Lévi's image of Baphomet was created and widely circulated just before or around the same time as the final edition of the Dictionnaire Infernal. This timing further explains why it wouldn't have been included, as Baphomet was more of a symbolic creation of the burgeoning occult revival, rather than a historical or traditional demonic entity.
There was also when I was checking out the white house, broken pentagram in the DC street layout. The bottom tip point was inside entrance hall. If you'd go in there, look to the right, big mirror. At the top of the border carvings, this goat head guy with the flame on top. Let me get that post.
Just search for: "entrance hall" in here for those research posts.
https://communities.win/search?query=entrance%20hall&community=Conspiracies
But yeah.. where does this character fit in the categorization.. he's not in the hierarchy of hell.
https://www.occult.live/index.php/Hierarchy_of_Hell
Not in the 72 demons of the Ars Goetia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_demons_in_the_Ars_Goetia
I put together an album of the version from the Dictionnaire Infernale, from 1863.. A later illustrations version. And this more realistic one from lately. The 3 beside each other, for each of the 72. Let me get that bookmark.
"Comparing different versions of the 72 Ars Goetia demons"
https://imgur.com/a/49Vm050
So what's these guys deal, compared to the hierarchy of hell, characters .
1 Theological classification of demons 2 The government of Hell 3 Kings of the cardinal directions 4 The Hierarchy 4.1 Kings 4.2 Princes 4.3 Dukes 4.4 Marquises 4.5 Counts 4.6 Knight 4.7 Presidents 5 Nine degrees of diabolical spirits
One can't be at the top without being under. Where is that which one climbed to the top of situated under?
A rite implies a passage from/to...how could one be at the top of a bottom, while being moved from origin towards outcome? Which one came first...from/to or top vs bottom?
Why the "vs" in-between top and bottom? Because climbing to the top turns (versus/verto) one away from bottom. While being (life) moved from origin (inception) towards outcome (death)...can one turn away from the only way one is in?
Sound/sanus - "entire; whole"...whole cannot be alike, only partials within whole can be alike one another, when ignoring to be differentiated from one another.
...equalizing differences makes them alike. What set those differences apart from one another, before one can make comparisons in-between them?
If all is one in energy, then what does one within all compare energy to?
It's ones free will of choice to be in-BE-tween (as above/so below) or under a hierarchy...
The earliest known mention of “Baphomet” appears in a letter from Anselm of Ribemont during the Siege of Antioch in the First Crusade, where Christian chroniclers reported that Muslim defenders “called loudly upon Baphomet,” a term almost certainly derived as a corruption of “Mahomet”