The belief in the evil eye is not only widely spread, but extremely ancient, and in some places is still firmly rooted among the folk. ‘Overlooking’ may be intentional, but it is believed that many persons, without intention and even against their will, by the glance of their eye, have caused injurious effects; so that, in some cases, mothers would not venture to expose their infants to the look of their own fathers. Plutarch ([18, 13]) vouches for this, and admits that envy exerts an evil influence through the eyes, and adds that it is wise to employ charms and antidotes to turn aside these evil glances. A friend of his stated that some even fascinate themselves by their own gaze, and alluded to the story of Eutelidas, who, like Narcissus, fell a victim to the admiration he felt for his own likeness. Women and children seem to have been accounted by all old classical writers as the most liable to injury. Among the Greeks and Romans statues of Nemesis were erected which were adored and invoked to save their worshippers from fascination. In Rome, according to Pliny, special laws were enacted against injury to crops by incantation, excantation, or fascination ([18, 15]).
‘Eat not the bread of him that hath an evil eye’ is just as much a maxim to-day as it was in the time of Solomon, and Mr. Elworthy says ([18, 107]) in Naples, at the appearance of a person having this reputation, a cry of ‘Jettatore!’ is passed, and even in a crowded street it causes an instantaneous vanishing of everybody—a rush up entries, into shops, or elsewhere. Ever since the establishment of the religious orders, monks have had the special reputation of possessing the fatal influence. The last Pope but one, Pius the Ninth, was firmly believed to have had the evil eye. A Roman would candidly say: ‘Nothing succeeds with anybody or anything when he wishes well to it. When he went to St. Agnese to hold a great festival, down went the floor, and the people were all smashed together. Then he visited the column to the Madonna in the Piazza di Spagna, and blessed it and the workmen; of course, one fell from the scaffold the same day and killed himself’ ([18, 23, 25]).
Domestic animals always have been considered as peculiarly susceptible to this evil influence. Cows are particularly liable to fascination in Scotland, while in England of all animals the pig is most often ‘overlooked.’ The Turk and the Arab think the same of their horses and camels; above all the Neapolitan cabman of to-day believes in the great danger to his horse from the eye of the jettatore.
The commonest of all ancient Egyptian amulets, except the scarab, was ‘the Eye of Osiris,’ as it is called by us. These mystic eyes were worn equally by the living and the dead as amulets; it being natural, from the associations of homœopathic magic, that representations of the eye itself should have been considered potent amulets against its malign influence. All the peoples round the Mediterranean employed representations of eyes as amulets. In Syria and Cairo necklaces composed of flat glass eyes are sold to the present day, and eye-designs protect the clothes, horse trappings, and many of the objects of daily use of the Moors ([72, 211]).
Plutarch declares that the objects that are fixed up to ward off witchcraft or fascination derive their efficacy from the fact that they act through the strangeness and ridiculousness of their forms, which fix the mischief-working eye upon themselves.
It was this firm belief, says Elworthy ([18, 143]), which led to the design of those extremely grotesque figures, of which the ancient Romans were so fond; indeed, anything that was ridiculous or indecent was supposed to be a corrective to the harmful influence of fascination. Amulets which protect against this power are of three classes: (1) Those the object of which was to attract upon themselves the harmful glance (those were necessarily exposed to view); (2) charms worn or carried secretly; and (3) written words of Scripture, Koran, and other sacred writings, or cabalistic figures and formulæ ([18, 149]).
The crescent moon was a symbol of many deities, Parvati, Devaki, and other Indian goddesses, Isis, Athena or Minerva, Artemis or Diana and the Madonna. Artemis or Diana was the patroness of domestic animals as well as of the wild creatures of the wood ([21, 14]); hence we may trace the extreme prevalence of amulets symbolic of their attributes upon horses. The crescent—that is the horned moon—and horns appear to be interchangeable: thus horns, in one form or another, are of all objects the most common as amulets against the evil eye, whether affecting man or beast; so much so, that at last it has come to be fully believed by the Neapolitans, that in default of a horn, in coral or other form, the mere utterance of the word corno or corna (‘horn’) is an effectual protection. In Italy, particularly in Naples, the cart harness is literally made up of charms and prophylactics, such as feathers, hair, brightly coloured ribbons, and especially objects of shining brass; of the last the crescent is the most common.
It would take too long to describe all the objects that are employed to counteract the evil eye in Italy alone. The following may be mentioned: fish, snakes, and various other animals, tigers’ teeth, keys, a hunchback (gobbo). A single pendent horn, whether of coral, shell, or metal is extremely common, as are miniature hands, these frequently have all the digits closed up except the index and little finger, which are fully extended. This is a potent gesture, and a Neapolitan’s right hand is almost constantly in that position pointing downwards, just as the hand-charms are made to hang downwards, as a prophylactic against unknown or unsuspected attacks ([18, 261]). Dr. Westermarck has recently ([72, 211]) given an illuminating description of the use and representations of the hand against the evil eye in Morocco.
On studying various kinds of talismans and amulets, it at once becomes evident that while some are credited with contagious sympathy, others are mimetic or symbolic, that is homœopathic in their action, while there are many others that owe their efficacy to an intimate relation with a spiritual being of some kind or other, or with a deity. The charms of this third group are to be regarded as fetishes so long as the recognition lasts that they are dependent for their virtue upon these extraneous beings; but when this belief is lost the charm becomes a mere talisman or amulet. The change from a fetish to a luck-object is constantly taking place owing to the despiritualising effect of increasing civilisation. To take one example, Mr. E. Lovett first drew my attention to the ‘luck bones’ that are worn by Whitby, and probably by other Yorkshire, fishermen, and another friend subsequently confirmed the fact that these bones not only bring good fortune but are safeguards against drowning. The bone in question being the T-shaped hyoid- or tongue-bone of a sheep, Mr. Lovett suggested that this bone might have something to do with Thor’s hammer. Later Professor Boyd Dawkins showed me the identical bone worn for a similar purpose by Manx fishermen, and it is worthy of note that there were Scandinavian settlements at both Whitby and the Isle of Man. I informed Herr E. Friedel of these facts and inferences, and he discovered ([22, 412]) that the men in the Berlin slaughter-yards have a similar custom, the end of the long arm of the bone being perforated for a thread that is fastened round the neck of the wearer. On looking into the archæological evidence he found that in the early iron age unmistakable representations of Thor’s hammer were worn as charms in Denmark and Schleswig-Holstein. In those early days there can be little doubt that the influence of the god passed into the models of his weapon, and that these objects partook of the nature of fetishes, but later the symbols of the god degenerated into luck-objects.