The Superstitious Mystery Behind The Eye

Tarih Okulu Dergisi (TOD) Journal of History School (JOHS)
Haziran 2014 Haziran 2014

Yıl 7, Sayı XVIII, ss. 11-50. Year 7, Issue XVIII, pp. 11-50.
DOI No: http://dx.doi.org/10.14225/Joh496
THE SUPERSTITIOUS MYSTERY BEHIND THE EYE: THE SYMBOL

OF EYE AND THE WAY THAT THE EVIL EYE BEAD IS REFLECTED
IN TURKISH SOCIETY FROM THE ANCIENT HISTORY TO THE
PRESENT
Bozkurt KOÇ
Akın TEMÜR
Abstract
It is observed that several symbols from the mythology still survive in today’s
modern world, just as they do in Ancient History, in the same or in the modified
versions. One of these symbols is the symbol of Eye. The symbol of Eye has a strong
functionality in the lives of the individuals and the society of today as it had in those of
the past. In this study, three points are discussed regarding their relationships with one
another. First, the Eye Symbol from Ancient History to present is presented. Second, the
Evil Eye Bead, which is the reflected version of Eye Symbol on Turkish Society, is
evaluated from an intercultural point of view. Finally, the similarities and the
differences of both the Eye Symbol and the Evil Eye Bead, as its reflected version on
Turkish Society, from the superstitious believes and the irrational thought structures are
assessed from a psycho-social point of view.
Key Words: Eye, eye symbol, evil eye, evil eye bead, superstitious belief,
irrational thought, psychology, archeology, mythology, ancient history, good luck, bad
luck, talisman, hex.

Doç. Dr., Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, Psikoloji Bölümü.

Yrd. Doç. Dr., Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, Arkeoloji Bölümü.
Bozkurt Koç / Akın Temür
Gözün Ardındaki Batıl Gizem: Antik Çağ’dan Günümüze Göz Sembolü Ve

Türk Toplumuna Yansıyan Şekliyle Nazar Boncuğu
Özet
Mitolojide yer alan bazı sembollerin Antik Çağ’da olduğu gibi günümüz modern
dünyasında da benzer ya da şekil değiştirmiş olarak varlıklarını sürdürdükleri
görülmektedir. Bu sembollerden biri de göz sembolüdür. Göz sembolü, geçmişte olduğu
gibi günümüzde de birey ve toplum hayatında güçlü bir fonksiyonelliğe sahiptir. Bu
çalışmada üç şey birbirleriyle ilişkisi açısından ele alınmaktadır. İlk olarak Antik
Çağ’dan günümüze göz sembolizmi ortaya konulmaktadır. İkinci olarak kültürlerarası
bir bakış açısıyla göz sembolünün Türk toplumuna yansıyan şekli olan nazar boncuğu
incelenmektedir. Son olarak ise, gerek göz sembolü gerekse Türk toplumuna yansıyan
şekliyle nazar boncuğunun fonksiyonları ile batıl inanç ya da irrasyonel düşünce
yapıları arasındaki benzerlik ve farklılıklar psiko-sosyal açıdan değerlendirilmektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Göz, göz sembolü, kötü göz, nazar boncuğu, batıl inanç,
irrasyonel düşünce, psikoloji, arkeoloji, mitoloji, Antik Çağ, şans / şanssızlık, uğur /
uğursuzluk.
Introduction
Each society has developed specific symbols which are shared and deep-
rooted within the society and which enable individuals to build a strong bond
with their own society. People intend to give a meaning to things that they
experience, sense, see or believe to exist without seeing. These symbols which
appear in various distant regions around the world are, in fact, the expressions
of past wisdom and aphorism (Fromm 1990, 212). It is an issue still in question
whether they are the reflections of people’s subconscious fear, hate and such
abstract concepts or they are just the meaningless shapes emerged when the
thoughts were transferred from one country to another. Furthermore, it is
another facet of the issue that some symbols are used for similar purposes in
societies which are unrelated to each other and settled in very distant locations.
While it is possible that, in casual life superficial meanings are given to these
symbols, in terms of art they could have different profound meanings
(Wilkinson 2011, 9). In this way, symbols are significant arguments which
transfer us the religious and philosophical views of societies and the
experiences of the souls where these symbols are used. The Eye symbol, which
is the subject of the current study, is one of those symbols. In order to identify
the psycho-social dynamics which stand as the factors behind the emergence
and the survival of the Eye symbol and also to evaluate the connection of this
[12]
The Superstitious Mystery Behind the Eye: The Symbol of Eye and the Way that the
Evil Eye Bead is Reflected in Turkish Society from the Ancient History to the Present
symbol with superstitious believes, the information about both the Eye symbol
in Ancient History (Ref. Karaş 2003), and the Evil Eye Bead, as its reflected
version on Turkish society, will be presented as a groundwork.
The Symbolism of Eye in the Ancient History

When the roots of the eye symbol are investigated, it is observed that the
first instances are found in Old Mesopotamian and Egyptian Art. One of the
earliest samples is observed in a vase which is found in Hassuna and dated back
in B.C. 5000 figure 1 (Stromenger 1962, 375, Fig.1; Goff 1963, 5, Fig. 42).
Figure: 1 Figure: 2
While the eyes on the neck of the vase are engraved as a bas relief in an
exaggerated way, the united eyebrows, nose and mouth are painted. In another
vase, which is found in Uruk and dated back in B.C. 4000, an eye symbol is
placed in the metopes at the shoulders of the vase figure 2 (Stromenger 1962,
22, Pl. VI; Goff 1963, 116, Fig. 479).
The eye symbol in this example is oval shaped and the pupils are defined
with dots. A similar eye symbol is also detected in a vase in the period of
Cemdet Nasr (Goff 1963, 94-95, Fig. 346), however differing from others in the
way that a shape of a face is obtained with the eyes in metopes which are placed
side by side. Compared with the Uruk example, there is a more detailed work in
the eyes with a more anatomic structure of the eye lashes and pupils. In
Mesopotamian art, the eye symbol is not only observed in ceramic. The most
noteworthy example is the “Idols with Eyes” which is made of marble found in
[13]
a temple from Tell Brak and dated back in B.C. 4000 figure 3 (Goff 1963, 150-
151, Fig. 650-662; Leick 1988, 207; Roaf 1996, 67). These idols (god
sculptures) have the structure with measures ranging from 2 to 11 cm, with a
rectangular body form and a short neck. Their most remarkable characteristic is
that there is a pair of big pop eyes placed on the head. These eyes, shaped in
oval or round, have a united eyebrow with empty eyeholes. Thousands of these
votive idols are obtained and they are also found in other centers.
Figure: 3
Moreover, the most astonishing examples of the eye symbol are observed
in Egyptian art figure 4 (Pinch 2004, 89, Fig. 8). We encounter this symbol in
all the fields of the Egyptian art. This eye symbol which is called as “Celestial
Eye” is designed by combining the human eye and the hawk eye. There are
different views about which god or goddess this eye symbol represents. One of
these views argues that it is the eyes of Egyptian God of the Sun Ra (Pinch
2002, 128; Pinch 2004, 90), while another view states that it is the eyes of the
hawk-headed Horus (Wedjat-Udjat), (Pinch 2004, 90; Bietak 2007, 266, Fig. 3;
Wendrich 2010, 125; Wilkinson 2011, 107). When both eyes are described at
the same time, it is believed that the Sky god Horus’ right eye represents the sun
[14]
and the daytime, and his left eye represents the moon, stars and the night figure
5 (Pinch 2002, 131; Pinch 2004, 90).
Figure: 4 Figure: 5
Although this belief is widely accepted, there are many other researchers
putting Ra instead of Horus (Budge 1904, 60). Even if it is Horus or Ra, when
two eyes are described there is a consensus on the idea that they represent the
sun and the moon. When the eye symbol is used alone, it is sometimes the right
eye and sometimes the left eye that is used. In general, the eye symbol is
recognized as the window of the soul which sees everything (Wilkinson 2011,
104). Furthermore, the eye symbol in Egyptian art is also used as a hieroglyph
figure 6 (Budge 1904, 138).
Figure: 6
In Egyptian Hieroglyphs, the god Osiris implies the eye on a throne,

which means “the place of the eye” (Wilkinson 2011, 107). Especially, it is
observed that the eye symbol is used very frequently in the descriptions in the
[15]
book of the dead. The Egyptians did not only use the eye symbol as a sign of the
gods, but also they carried it on their bodies with other symbols such as scarabs
as an amulet which protects them from the malignity (Baines and Malek 1986,
207; Wilkinson 2011, 107). Indeed, the eye symbols made of metal are very
frequently observed on the elite mummies.
In general, when it is used as an amulet, from these eye symbols the eye
of Horus is used for curative functions, and the eye of Ra is used for the purpose
of power and protection from the evil (Pinch 2002, 132).
When we observe the examples in the Anatolia, the places where the eye
symbol is most frequently found are the idols which are also observed in
Mesopotamian art. In these idols which have been closely observed since the
Bronze Age, the eyebrows and the eyes are the most commonly used parts of
the body (Gündogan-Aydıngün 2003, 103). It is possible to observe these
characteristics on the marble idols which are found in Kultepe and which date
back to B.C. 3000. The first of these idols has a pair of triangle head structure
which rises from the body of a disk shape figure 7 (Özgüç 1957, 66, Res. 16;
Kulaçoğlu 1992, 98, 194, Res. 118; Aydıngün 2005, 39, Res. 31).
Figure: 7 Figure: 8
As it is also observed in the idols with eyes from Tell Brak in

Mesopotamian art, the head structure has a round eye shape and a united
eyebrow. Likewise, the pupils are also left empty with the shape of a dot. What
is interesting is that all the body parts except for the dotted round eye structure
and the neck are filled. Moreover, in the second example which has a broken
[16]
head and neck, a similar body structure is observed figure 8 (Kulaçoğlu 1992,
99, 194, Res. 119).
On the other hand, the second idol bas relief is placed in the body. This
idol, which is interpreted as the son of the god, has a triangle head shape and a
round body shape as it has in the first example. Both the main body and the
second idol’s body which is shaped as a bas relief are filled with dotted round
symbols as it is in the eyes. It can be considered that the round symbols on the
body of this idol, which is regarded as the god-goddess couple, are filled
motives. However, according to the researchers, the reason why the eyes are
bigger or more emphasized compared with the other body parts is that it is
accepted as the “the eyes of the goddess which see everything” (Gimbutas 1989,
51). From this point of view, it has a similar meaning to the celestial eye of
Egypt.
Figure: 9 Figure: 10
Furthermore, another type of finds in Anatolia where the eye symbols are
observed is the ceramics. Specifically, in the finds which are named as “hawk-
faced pot” and found in the first Bronze Age in Toria, the human face is placed
right under the edge of the pot figure 9 (Aydıngün 2005, 63, Res. 61). In
addition, another find type which is named as “jug with eye” is common in the
centers such as Kültepe, Alişar, and Yumuktepe. It is the Greek art where the
eye symbol is described most on the ceramics. Particularly, it is witnessed that
the eye symbol is used very frequently with the Geometric Period. It is possible
to examine this on a plate from Rodos figure 10 (Arias 1962, 280, Fig. 27;
[17]
Boardman 1976, 93, Abb. 75; Simon 1976, 54, 55, Abb. 31; Borbein 1995, 88,
89; Boardman 2001, 38, Fig. 43; Albersmeier 2010, 16, Fig. 2).
On the edge of the palmette which dangles from the top of the plate on
which a scene from the war of Toria is described, a pair of human eyes is
noticed. It is believed that the human eyes observed in this plate represent Zeus,
the main god of Greek mythology, and the justice of god towards two people
who are in fight. The most common place where the eye symbol is used in
Greek art is the kylix type beverage cups in Attika ceramic. These cups are
named as “kylix with eyes” because of the eye symbols placed on them (Çiçek
2009, 5). Even though they are called as “kylix with eyes”, in the early
examples there are not only eyes but also nose and ears on a human face. On the
other hand, in the late period the nose and the ear are removed and only a pair of
eyes is placed instead. The kylix’ with eyes are mostly preferred type by the
craftsmen on the Attika ceramic. One of the earliest examples is the kylix of an
Exekias Artist in Berlin figure 11 (Arias 1962, 300, Fig. 59; Boardman 1995,
57, Fig. 104-1,2; Borbein 1995, 312).
Figure: 11
Figure: 12
[18]
In this example, while a fight scene is described under the handles, a pair
of eyes with a nose and eyebrows is placed as well. In another kylix (Guntner
1997, 42, Abb. 11), while there is only one fighter description, on a kylix from
Boston the body of a siren is composed of an eye symbol figure 12 (Boardman
2001, 61, Fig. 78).
It is displayed by an amphora from London on which there is a picture of
Osysseus and Polyphem myths (Andreae 2000, 113, Abb. 36), and by a crater
(Andreae 2000, 124, Abb. 41) that these eyes which are observed in the kylix
with eyes are also quite common in different cup forms. Besides the kylix with
eyes, the eye symbol which is placed on a fighter’s shield on a lekythos from
Atina figure 13 (Arias 1962, 362, Fig. 187; Buschor 1969, 212, Abb. 218b;
Simon 1976, 136,137, Abb.196-197; Borbein 1995, 320,321; Boardman 2001,
95, Fig. 129) and on a stamnos from Munich stands as an evidence that the eye
symbol is not only pictured on the vases but they are also placed on the
weapons figure 14 (Arias 1962, 368, Fig. 193; Buschor 1969, 218, Abb. 228;
Boardman 1976, 155, Abb. 215; Simon 1976, 143, Abb. 205-207; Boardman
1976, 155, Abb. 215).
These eye symbols, which are observed on the shields of the fighters, are
used for the purpose of frightening the enemy and being protected from the evil.
[19]
Similarly, there are numerous examples where the eyes are described. One of
them is the ships. The eye symbol must be pictured on the head of the ship for
the same purpose as the ones observed on a stamnos example from London on
which Odysseus and Sirens are pictured figure 15 (Boardman 1995, 113, Fig.
184-1).
Figure: 15
However, it is quite difficult to say that each eye symbol Fig.ed in these
examples is a celestial eye. In the early ages, it is obvious that the eye symbol
which is either affected by Mesopotamia or Egypt is used as a sign of God’s
seeing eyes and as a symbol protecting from the evil. Nevertheless, it should
also be taken into consideration that the first purposes of the eye symbol are
altered by time and this symbol is only used in a modal way as an ornament
element by the vase artists.
Another example where the eye symbolism is observed in ancient Greek
art is the descriptions of the mixed creature Gorgo-Medusa. Gorgo or Gorgos
are horrible creatures which are believed to be the daughters of Phorkys and
Keto in Greek mythology and which have a body of a human, with wings,
[20]
snakes coming out of their heads instead of hair, teeth of a pig, and which turn
people into a stone with a glance. According to the mythology, they are three
sisters who are named as Sthenno, Euryale and Medusa (Erhat 1993, 118; Can
1994, 416; Hamilton 1996, 101-106; Grimal 1997, 217). From these three
sisters while Meduse is mortal, the other two sisters are immortal. Hence, the
name of Gorgo is mostly identified with Medusa. When the emergence of the
creature is examined, first a mask is mentioned which is argued to be the
adaptation of such animals as lions and gorillas (Howe 1954, 209). The most
reasonable believe about its emergence is that Gorgo is the sign of undefined
fear of the people (Rose 1928, 29-30). Furthermore, the most debated issue is its
roots. While some researchers claim that its roots are based on a Greek image
(Payne 1931, 79), some others suggest that its roots are based on the god Bes in
Egyptian art (Budge 1904, 286) and Humbaba in Mesopotamian art (Hopkins
1934, 344-345; Suhr 1965, 98-99; Phinney 1971, 446). This creature, which has
a few images survived until today, is explained best by the examples in the
British Museum figure 16 (Howe 1954, 217, Fig. 5; Frankfort 1989, 114, Fig.
125) and its mask in Jerusalem figure 17 (Westenholz 2004, 177, Fig. 144).
It has a quite frightening face structure with a big nose and eyes, big
mouth and wrinkled face. It is shown in a fight with the creature Gılgamış on a
bas relief from the age of New Assur (Hopkins 1934, 349, Fig. 4; Howe 1954,
217, Fig. 6) and on a cylindrical seal from Cyprus (Hopkins 1934, 351, Fig. 5).
[21]
These images have a significant role in Gorgo’s roots. Because these examples
relate Perseus-Gorgo mythology which is observed in the Greek art to Eastern
art. It is most probably brought to Greek art through Cyprus and Syria (Hopkins
1934, 347). Therefore, the Greek artists attributed Gorgo, the creature which is
indeed rooted in East, to the Greek art by involving it to the adventure of Greek
hero Perseus.
Another dimension of the legend is that Gorgos are composed of three
sisters and from them only Medusa is mortal. Even though they are immortal,
the sisters which are named as Euryale and Sthenno have no mythologies and
are mostly observed in their images following Perseus (Simon 1976, 67, Abb.
47-48). These two sisters do not have a killing glance as Medusa has. Indeed,
what is mortal is the body of Medusa. On the other hand, her head has an
immortal impact. Therefore, the mortal Medusa head is turned into an immortal
head by Perseus through cutting her head off. Hence, the horrifying Humbaba
mask taken from the Eastern art is replaced with Medusa head in Greek art and
set on a mythological basis. From then on, the Gorgo head has gained a
protective functionality against supernatural powers or evil souls (Besig 1937,
15). Thus, the purpose of using Medusa head is to give the person who carries
this head or mask a look of this creature which intends to encounter the evil
powers with a similar evil and frightening glance. For this purpose, the head of
the creature started to be used in all the fields of the Greek art. This creature,
images of which do not exist in Geometric age, is observed after B.C. 7th
century in Greek art (Besig 1937, 5).
Figure: 18
[22]
Figure: 19
In its images, while sometimes, based on its mythology, it is portrayed in

a human body as it can be observed in the west façade of Korkyra Artemis
Temple figure 18 (Hopkins 1934, 352, Fig. 7; Howe 1954, 215, Fig. 4; Hamann
1956, 499, Fig. 522-523; Shefold 1964, 49, Fig. 16; Schefold 1967, 165, Fig.
24; Richter 1970, 29, 38, Fig. 81,401; Robertson 1975, 762, Fig. 11d;
Charbonneaux 1969, 16,26, Fig. 16-17,24; Stewart 1990, 113, Fig. 62-63;
Boardman 1995, 17, Fig. 11; Simon 1998, 149, Fig. 154; Carpenter 2002, 107,
Fig. 155) or in the terracotta metope bas relief from Syrakusa figure 19
(Hopkins 1934, 354, Fig. 9; Langlotz and Hirmer 1963, 58, Pl. I; Schefold
1964, 52, Pl. II; Demargne 1965, 434, Fig. 525; Richter 1970, 29, 38, Fig. 84;
Stewart 1990, 115, Fig. 82; Schefold 1993, 86, Fig. 66; Durando 2005, 42, Fig.
42), sometimes, based on the mythology after Perseus cut her head off, it is
portrayed only as a head as it can be observed on a plate of a Lydos artist
figure 20 (Boardman 1995, 53, Fig. 69; Carpenter 2002, 107, Fig.151) and on
the façade of the Selinus C Temple figure 21 (Boardman 1995a, 146, Fig. 155).
[23]
Figure: 22
In each image, the emphasized head structure has a frightening face with
big eyes and nose, and with a big mouth having a tongue which is dangled out
and ending with pig teeth on both sides. The eyes of the creature are the symbol
of a glance which protects from the evil. In a way, Gorgo head is responding to
the evil with and evil glance. For this purpose, it is reflected as the desire of the
protection from the evil in the temples or the other holy places (Besig 1937, 70).
[24]
The idea of the protection of the palaces, cities, temples or other holy
places from the evil has a history which dates back to Egyptian and
Mesopotamian Civilizations. To this end, it is known that the animals such as
lion and panther which symbolize the power and strength are commonly used as
well as the mixed creatures such as sphinks and griffin which have the role of
protecting from the evil or of a guard. The panther heads, which are figured in
each side of Gorgo in the west façade of the Korkyra Artemis Temple, should
be placed there in order to strengthen and increase the impact of the glance of
Gorgo protecting from the evil (Besig 1937, 70).
As we have examined in the eye symbol figured on a shield on a lekythos
from Atina, the Gorgo head is also commonly figured, besides temples and holy
places, on primarily goddess Athena’s shield (Robertson 1975, 762, Fig. 12d;
Floren 1977, 23, 114-15, Pl. 9,6; Cohen 2006, 2, Fig. 2) and on her dress (Otto-
Herbig 1950, 73, Pl. 20,4; Floren 1977, 116, Taf. 8,3; Knell 1990, 64, Abb.94;
Boardman 2001, 172-173, Fig. 205,3) which are placed both on ceramics and
sculptures. These Gorgo heads, which are figured on the plates and the shields
as they can also be observed on an amphora of the artist Akhilleus from Vatikan
figure 22 (Buschor 1969, 212, Abb.217; Simon 1976, 137, Abb.198, XLIII;
Boardman 2005, 208, Fig. 202), should be used for its role of frightening people
and protecting from the evil just as it was used in the temples. Even though it
involves a different ingredient, the desired outcome is similarly the protective
functionality of the creature from the evil.
All these examples demonstrates that the usage of eye symbol has an
ancient history dates thousands years back. While this symbol appears as a
celestial image in the earliest samples, by time it gains a functionality of
protecting from the evil, and in some instances it has a protective role by casting
an evil and frightening glance to the evil. Moreover, it should also be taken into
consideration that sometimes the artists used this symbol just as a modal figure
without any meaning.
[25]
The Evil Eye Bead as a Reflection of the Eye Symbol on Turkish

Society
It is seen that the eye symbol in the Ancient History appears as an evil
eye bead in Turkish society. Even though people in Turkish society do not
believe that all the malignity and negativities stem from the evil eyes or looks,
they still do some rituals about it. One of the rituals is to use a blue bead (evil
eye bead) in the shape of an eye which is believed to protect from the evil looks.
The evil eye belief, today, is explained with such terms as “to be touched
by an evil eye”, “to be struck by an evil eye”, “to be touched of an eye”, “to be
struck by an eye”, “the evil/malice eye” (Acıpayamlı 1962, 1). The items such
as blue bead or dear horn, which are believed to banish and neutralize the evil
eye, are also called as amulet. This belief, which has been surviving from past
to present, still exists in everyday life and in each corner of Turkey. Currently,
there are various rituals in Turkey in order to be protected from the evil eye
such as using amulets as blue bead figure 23, stone with a hole, and horseshoe,
writing a talisman, and casting a lead. The studies reveal that the evil eye bead
is defined as “a bead in blue color, with an eye image or different eye pictures
on it” figure 24, figure 25. The color of evil eye beads is mostly blue. It stems
from the common and ongoing belief from the past about the usage of blue bead
in order to neutralize the evil looks of blue eyed people (Çıblak 2004, 104-112).
Figure: 23 Figure: 24 Figure: 25
One of the most common believes which is revealed by the studies on this
issue, is that not only the living ones, but also the materials which could be the
subject to jealous thoughts can be struck by an evil eye figure 26, figure 27,
figure 28, figure 29, figure 30. In other words, it is believed that the jealous
look of any person towards these living ones or materials would cause a struck
[26]
of an evil eye (Acıpayamlı 1962, 1; Çıblak 2004, 105-110; Yoleri et.al. 2006,
105; Yıldırım and Baylan 2010, 424).
Figure: 26 Figure: 27 Figure: 28
The literature review also reveals that there are beliefs about the evil eye
causing malignity or harm. For instance according a research, 37% of the
sample believed that the evil eye causes a headache (Beytut et al. 2009, 16).
Another study finds that it is believed that when struck by an evil eye, the
people and the animals could get sick or even die (Yılmaz 2005, 163).
Furthermore, wearing an evil eye bead is one of the beliefs that assume
protecting from the evil eye (Acıpayamlı 1962, 2-5; Yılmaz 2005, 163). It is
agreed that the evil eye bead catches the attraction on itself and by this way it
neutralizes the evil eye and protects from the looks of the evil-eyed people
figure 31 (Çıblak 2004, 110-111; Yoleri et. al. 2006, 105; Ögenler and Yapıcı
2012, 5). For instance, according to a study, 32.1% of students declared that
they carry an evil eye bead (Ögenler and Yapıcı 2012, 3-4). Another study
suggests that 72% of the mothers believe the effect of an evil eye and from
[27]
those 20.4% carry evil eye beads. Another research ın this issue cites that 10.8%
of the nurses wear evil eye beads in order to be protected from the evil eye
(Beytut et. al. 2009, 16). The study of Çetinkaya et. al. denote that one of the
traditional practices for the health of the new-borns is that after birth women
put colored beads (mostly blue) or items with the shape of an eye on the new-
borns so that they would be protected from the evil eye (%75.8) (Çetinkaya,
Özmen and Cambaz 2008, 42). Further study findings reveal that in order to
protect the mother and the baby from the “Kırk basması” during the 40-day
period after birth, the baby wears an evil eye bead figure 32 (Yılmaz 2005, 65).
(“Kırk basması” means the sickness or the death of the baby without any reason
during the 40-day period after birth.)
Figure: 31
Figure: 32
[28]
So far, there are two conclusions that could be derived from the
arguments stated above. First, the evil eye bead is the reflection of the eye
symbol from the Ancient History to present. One of the rituals that the people
apply in order to protect others that they value (living ones or materials) from
the struck of an evil eye and the malignity is to carry or use an evil eye. Second
and more importantly, the evil eye bead and the evil eye still exist in modern
ages, and it has a significant functionality in the lives of individuals and the
society as it did in the past. On the other hand, the way that the eye symbol is
reflected to present from the Ancient History points out that there are
similarities to a great extent between the functionalities of the belief and the
rituals about the evil eye and the evil bead, and the characteristics of
superstitious belief structures. Indeed, Saenko suggests that “the roots of
superstitious beliefs and behaviors are closely related to the witchcraft and the
mythological thoughts which were common in the social consciousness during
the first periods of human evolution.” (Saenko 2005, 77). It is also proposed by
Bidney that the myths could result in superstitious beliefs as well as the
superstitious believes could result in myths (Bidney 1994, 20). Hence, could the
believes and the rituals about either the eye symbol in the Ancient History or the
evil eye bead as its reflected version to present, be called as superstitious
(irrational) believes due to the similarities they have in terms of their
functionalities and their impact? Let us find an answer to this question based on
the evaluations about this issue.
What is Superstitious Belief/Behavior?

Superstitious belief is defined as “inclination to explain an event that has
a natural cause with causes that are unnatural or rejected by the science”
(Warren 1934, 268; Drever 1952, 283; Rudski 2003, 431). According to Maller
and Lunden superstitious belief is “claiming a relationship between phenomena
and items which do not have a cause and effect relationship” (Maller and
Lundeen 1933, 321). For this reason, superstitious believes rely on the
supernatural and mysterious powers and omens which contribute to cause and
effect relationship between the unrelated events and which cause the application
of protective rituals as a precaution (Saenko 2005, 79). The superstitious rituals
which are abnormal and different from routine behaviors and to which the
individuals place a special and magical value, are extraordinary, repeated, and
strict behaviors which are believed to have positive effect on the events and
[29]
behaviors which, in fact, do not have any cause-effect relationship (Schippers

and Lange 2006, 2533). Taken these definitions into considerations, it could be
concluded that the superstitious believes are irrational since they are incoherent
with the scientific facts (Vyse 1997, 187), relativity in time and location (Žeželj
et al. 2009, 142), and beneficial for the individuals (Köse and Ayten 2009, 50).
Superstitious believes are also related to the structure of the society. The
superstitious believes which are believed in one society could be nonsense or
nonexistent in another one (e.g. the knot of a grass symbolizing a marriage for
singles etc.). Similarly, sociocultural factors such as family, politics, economy,
religion and ethics have an impact on the emergence of superstitious believes.
Some believes are specific to one culture, while some others cross the borders
of the location where they were born (e.g. the jinx of passing under a ladder, the
jinx of a black cat passing by the front of a person, the numbers bringing good
luck, or carrying an item which is believed to bring good luck etc.). Therefore,
superstitious believes and behaviors could be classified as “superstitious
believes which are globalized and common in each culture”, “superstitious
believes which are specific to one culture”, and “superstitious believes which
are specific to one group or segment”. Moreover, the superstitious believes
which are specific to one culture could give information about the specific
characteristics of that culture (Kaneko 1990; Arslan 2004, Rabiei et al. 2013,
76-77).
Superstitious believes could be classified in various ways. For instance,
Saenko (2005, 78, 84) analyzes superstitious believes in two groups based on
their purposes. First one is the superstitious behaviors which are conducted for
the purpose of keeping away from the possible evil actions and danger. The
second is the superstitious behaviors which are conducted for the purpose of
attaining the desired outcomes. There are emotional, cognitive and behavioral
factors when superstitious believes are examined as an attitude.
One of the most significant issues that should be emphasized here for the
sake of the systematic of the research is that the belief in the holy religions,
paranormal believes, and the belief and myths of the societies have different
meanings and scopes from the superstitious believes (Kaneko 1990, 3; Bidney
1994, 20; Tobacyk 2004, 94-98). For instance, according to Islam religion,
while the belief of struck of an evil eye is acceptable, the rituals such as using
an evil eye bead in order to be protected from the struck of an evil eye is
considered to be a superstitious belief (Buhârî, “Tıb”, 36; Ebû Dâvûd, “Tıb”,
[30]
38, 79; Nesâî, “Zînet”, 17; İbn Mâce, “Tıb”, 39; Ahmet b. Hanbel, Müsned, IV,
154, 156; Yel, 1998).
Superstitious Believes from Past to Present

Superstitious believes and behaviors also existed in cultures and societies
having different levels of technological advancement, as the most primitive
tribes (Žeželj et al. 2009, 142). Even though it was assumed that the
superstitious believes and behaviors would slowly fade away with the
educational and technological advancements in the modern world (Campbell
1996, 151), they have survived for thousands of years and they still evolve in
the modern time (Wiseman and Watt 2004, 291). Despite scientific and
technological advancements, modern age witnesses the popularity of
superstitious believes (Case et al. 2004, 848). Furthermore, no matter what the
socioeconomic and educational levels that people have, they could have
superstitious believes (Žeželj et al. 2009, 142). The studies applied in different
cultures show that superstitious believes are the universal problem and that
superstitious believes demonstrate specific functions in different societies.
Concurrently, superstitious believes still survive in societies since the rational
side of a person is affected by the irrational and the emotional side (Beck and
Forstmeier 2007, 35-46; Rabiei, Ghasemi and Arzani 2013, 75). The most
effective factor, which enables the sustainability of superstitious believes and
behaviors, is the benefit that the people believe they bring. Superstitious
believes will continue to exist as long as people have the desire to know the
future, desire to be safe, and hopelessness and fear. Therefore, they have
survived for thousands of years in each culture. While in the past people
inclined to superstitious believes due to their desperation towards natural
events, today they inclined to them due to reasons such as economic crisis or
family issues (Köse ve Ayten 2009, 46-67). According to Anisimov and
Lebedev, the possibility of superstitious believes and behaviors to occur, rises in
negative physiological conditions such as hunger, thirst, exhaustion and
sickness. It is also observed that superstitious believes and behaviors increase
with psychologically negative experiences such as the emotions of fear, unrest,
depression, hopelessness and sorrow which get stronger in extreme conditions
such as economic collapse, inflation, unemployment, and cultural breakdown.
Thus, it explains why superstitious believes and behaviors are common in
[31]
modern day world in which people are sensitive about the threats from the
uncontrollable natural powers (Saenko 2005, 77-78).
The functions of superstitious believes

The main functions of superstitious belief and behaviors and their
benefits to the individuals would be explained in general. People conduct
superstitious behaviors in order to lower the anxiety (Vyse 1997, 14).
Superstitious thoughts provide people emotional and moral help, and lower their
fear about bad luck, distress, and misfortune (Saenko 2005, 86). The
superstitious believes which stem from the desire to control the faults in the
external environmental conditions of the individuals, help reducing the anxiety
and the psychological tension of the individual (Taylor 1983; Schippers and
Lange, 2006, 2535). Taken all these into consideration, it could be suggested
that the environmental conditions and current safety level have significant
impact on the emergence, spread, and the sustainability of the superstitious
believes. The superstitious believes and behaviors are common in the conditions
where there are uncertainty, distrust, danger, fear and threat, stress and high
level of anxiety. On the other hand, people are less inclined to superstitious
believes and behaviors when the events are explainable and interpretable, and
when the environment is more understandable and the conditions are less
uncertain (Barsky et al. 2004, 133-134; McGregor 2006).
Saenko (2005) suggests that superstitious believes have the following
functions. 1) Control function: The individual believes that he has the
opportunity to organize, plan, control and evaluate his behaviors by executing
superstitious rituals. Various necessary behaviors are conducted in order to
achieve the desired outcome. 2) Cognitive function: Superstitious believes and
behaviors help interpreting the negative events such as distress, bad luck and
failure. In order to forecast the possible future events, the individual uses the
superstitious believes. 3) Emotional Defense Function: The superstitious
believes organize the individual’s emotional space, protect from the negative
thoughts, lower the tension, and provide comfort and relieve for the individual.
As a matter of fact, the study of Saenko states that the students execute
superstitious rituals for the following purposes: First motivation is “to be safe”
(86%). It occurs in two ways: “motivation to keep away from the failure”
(42.5%); and “motivation for emotional balance” (43.5%). Second, “the
motivation to reach success and be self-confident” (18%), third, “the cognitive
[32]
motivation” (15%), and fourth, “the social comfort” (about 15%). According to
these results, it could be concluded that the main motivation of the students to
have superstitious believes and conduct superstitious rituals is the need to feel
safe and to protect themselves from the negative thoughts. Therefore, the main
function of the superstitious believes is the emotional defense. Saenko, in this
study, reveals that 76.7% of the students who attended to the research has
always or sometimes superstitious believes and behaviors.
There are various evaluations regarding the psychosocial dynamics based
on which the superstitious believes and behaviors have emerged and survived
until today, and affected the lives of the individuals and societies in certain
ways.
The Psychosocial Causes of Superstitious Believes

Superstitious believes are the combination of the emotions triggered by
the environmental phenomena and the cognitive factors. Majority of
superstitious believes are learned during the childhood and kept for the rest of
the life without judgment (Saenko 2005, 77). The superstitious believes and
behaviors, like any other behaviors, can be achieved during the whole life of a
person. People learn traditional superstitious believes along with the other social
traditions. The most effective factor in the transfer of social superstitious
believes and behaviors, is the direct learning and social learning (Vyse 1997).
There are various ideas, behavioral and cognitive explanations about how
superstitious belief and behaviors have emerged and why they sustained. People
desire to have a control even on the events the results of which are only
determined by the luck. There are various explanations about this issue
(Schippers and Lange 2006).
The first possibility is that, people are inclined to see a connection
between the results and their actions even though in the situations they are not
related. This rational explanation is based on Skinner’s research on pigeons
(Skinner box) which puts forward that superstitious believes could be emerged
through conditioning. Skinner suggests that superstitious believes are the
stereotypic and repeated behaviors which stem from the association of the
pigeons’ reactions with reinforcements by luck. Skinner evaluates irrational
issues and superstitious believes in connection with each other and in the same
category by examining superstitious believes in terms of conditioning. Skinner’s
explanation of the coincidental relationship between the behaviors and its
[33]
effects could also explain the emergence and survival of the superstitious
believes (Ayhan and Yarar 2005, 17-18; Skinner 2006, 2533-2534). Skinner
claims that majority of superstitious believes and behaviors emerged through
similar mechanisms. He claims that the behaviors people do on the gambling
tables to bring luck, the good luck bracelets, necklaces that the sportsmen wear
or habits they develop, emerge due to the exposure of coincidental
reinforcements just as the pigeons’ aforementioned behaviors (Domjan 2004,
78-79; Alıcı 2010, 99). For instance, even though there is no causal relationship
between the pen used in an exam and the grade received, an individual could
build an irrational relationship between the pen and the success and develop a
superstitious belief that the pen brings luck. The same mechanism could be
observed on the behavior of a person who kisses the dies before throwing
during the game of backgammon in order to have the desired numbers.
Another explanation is that people believe that the world is fair.
According to the fair world belief, people want to believe that their environment
is fair and organized where they receive what they deserve and deserve what
they receive. Due to this misconception, people could behave as if the luck does
not have any role and there is only direct relationship between the behaviors and
their effects (Lerner 1965).
Yet another explanation is regarding attributions. The explanations based
on attributions mostly claim that people are inclined to attribute their success to
their talents and skills, and their failure to external factors. This could explain
why people tend to attribute positive results to their talent and skills even if they
happen coincidentally. In other words, people attribute the coincidental events
to their talent and skills. Therefore, they tend to confuse talent and luck. This
could also explain why people think that they can affect the luck and fate
through superstitious believes and behaviors (Feather 1969; Schippers and
Lange 2006, 2534).
Furthermore, “self-fulfilling omen” which means the occurrence of the
things which are believed to be true is another explanation about this issue.
People tend to realize and audit the superstitious believes they acquired.
However, these trials are not even close to rationality and objectivity. For
instance, a person who believes to have a sign of Aquarius would probably
ignore the characteristics of his sign which do not fit, and emphasize the ones
which do. The person who takes the advice of a fortune teller by horoscope
which says that “you can prevent something undesired to happen if you limit
[34]
your connections with others today” and who sees that nothing bad happens as
it is said by the fortune teller, could as a result strengthen his believes about the
these daily fortune tellers by horoscope (Merton 1948; Ciborowski 1997; Budak
2003, 440; Ayhan and Yarar 2005, 18).
Some researchers suggest that the mechanisms such as “concurrency”,
“coincidence”, and “continuity” have an impact on the emergence of
superstitious believes. People are prone to build relationships and make
inductive reasoning when a certain outcome arises after a behavior. This
concurrency gains value if one of the specific needs or requirements is
achieved. Even if there is no causal relationship, the repeated concurrencies
strengthen the belief. The interpretation of this concurrence and coincidence
between the behavior and the result requires the continuity of the space, place,
and time (Vyse 1997; Rabiei et al. 2013, 76).
Moreover, people tend to exercise superstitious believes more in the
situations when there is psychological stress, uncertainty, unpredicted
conditions and low-control conditions. In other words, superstitious rituals are
more possible and evident in the situations when the outcomes are characterized
more with uncertainty (Schippers and Lange 2006, 2535). Likewise, the
research findings reveal that superstitious believes and behaviors occur
naturally in the situations when interpreted as uncontrollable, and when there is
psychological stress and uncertainty (Vyse 1997, 14). Uncertainty and stress
threatens the control conceptions and people tend to regain the control by
developing superstitious belief systems. In short, the outcomes associated with
stress, uncertainty, and luck weakens the control conception and the
superstitious strategies provide the opportunity to regain the feeling of control
(Case et al. 2004, 849). Thus, it is suggested that superstitious believes evolve
from the intention to deal with the uncertainty which is interpreted in the
external environment by the people who are anxious and have a strong need for
control (Irwin 1993, 27-30; Wiseman and Watt 2004, 291). Langer states that
even in the situations where people could not influence the conditions, they still
tend to see themselves as causes. This explanation expresses that people
exercise superstitious rituals in order to influence the situations even if they
have no control over. According to Langer, this is specifically relevant in the
situations when the luck is replaced with skill. Therefore, in these situations
people are more prone to control mistake and superstitious believe (Langer
1975; 1977).
[35]
When people lose their control feelings over the events and outcomes or
when the uncertain conditions arise, their acceptance of irrational and
superstitious believes also rises. People try to convert the world they are
surrounded with to a more meaningful, predictable and controllable one through
developing superstitious believes and behaviors (Keinan 2002, 102-108; Case et
al. 2004). It is suggested that the value attributed to the outcome has also a
significant effect on superstitious believes. When it is believed that the outcome
is not important, the psychological tension of the people is low. On the other
hand, when it is believed that the outcome is very important, people generally
feel much more psychological tension. For instance, the sportsmen feel
psychological tension in the final matches much more than they feel in
preliminary matches. Hence, the inclination to superstitious believes increases
when the value of the outcome is high compared to the situations when the
outcome is not important (Schippers and Lange 2006, 2536).
Besides, people exercise superstitious rituals in order to feel safe and to
prevent undesired events. The needs which motivate people to behave in
superstitious ways are also the factors that motivate the superstitious belief.
These needs comprise protection and safety needs, emotional consistency needs,
self-confidence needs and lack of fearfulness. Specifically, the need for safety
could be embodied through superstitious believes which help people to escape
from the fear, anxiety and uncertainty and to obtain safety and comfort. The
superstitious believes mostly stem from irrational and unexplainable fears. An
individual who has superstitious believes is motivated by the desire to escape
from the fear, to gain self-awareness, and to keep emotional balance towards
various negative emotions (Saenko 2005).
The arguments discussed so far have explained the question asked in the
beginning of this study which is what psychosocial dynamics enabled the
mythological eye symbol and the evil eye bead, as its reflected version to
Turkish society, still exist in today’s modern world and have a significant
functionality on the lives of individuals and the society. At this point, a second
question which was declared in the beginning of the study needs to be
answered. Could the believes and rituals regarding the eye symbol in the
Ancient History and the evil eye bead as its reflected version to Turkish society
be regarded as superstitious belief when their similarities are taken into
consideration in terms of functionalities and influences? Let us find the answer
on the basis of the discussions we have made so far.
[36]
Is it superstitious or not?
The thesis proposed and the studies undertaken on the issue of
superstitious believes reveal that the probability of the superstitious believes
and rituals to occur increases when there are conditions such as desire to know
the future, desire to be safe, uncertainty, desperateness, anxiety and fear (Barsky
et al. 2004, 133-134; McGregor 2006; Schippers and Lange 2006, 2535).
While in the past people are inclined to superstitious believes due to their
desperation towards natural events, today they are inclined to them in extreme
conditions such as economic crisis, family issues, inflation, unemployment, and
cultural breakdown when the negative feelings such as fear, depression,
desperateness, and sorrow get stronger (Saenko 2005, 77-78). Likewise, the
research findings suggest that superstitious believes and behaviors evolve
naturally under the circumstances of psychological stress, uncertainty, and
uncontrollable situations (Vyse 1997, 14). Uncertainty and stress threatens the
control conceptions and people tend to regain the control by developing
superstitious belief systems (Case et al. 2004, 849). People exercise
superstitious rituals in order to influence the situations even if they have no
control over. Therefore, in these situations people are more prone to control
mistake and superstitious believes (Langer 1975; 1977). People try to convert
the world they are surrounded with to a more meaningful, predictable and
controllable one through developing superstitious believes and behaviors
(Keinan 2002; Case et al. 2004). The superstitious believes which stem from the
desire to control the faults in the external environmental conditions of the
individuals, help reducing the anxiety and the psychological tension of the
individual (Taylor 1983; Schippers and Lange, 2006, 2535).
It can be deduced from the arguments presented so far that there are
similarities to a great extent between both the mythological eye symbol and the
eye bead as its reflected version to Turkish society and the superstitious believes
and behaviors and irrational thoughts in terms of their functionalities and
attributions.
For instance the Egyptians carried the eye symbols with other items on
themselves as a protective talisman (Baines and Malek 1986, 207; Wilkinson
2011, 107). The eye of Ra is used as a protection from the power and the evil
(Pinch 2002, 132). Likewise, besides the eyed kylix’ in Greek art, the eye
symbols which are observed on the shields of the warriors on a lekythos from
[37]
Atina (Arias 1962, 362, Fig. 187; Buschor 1969, 212, Abb.218b; Simon 1976,
136,137, Abb.196-197; Borbein 1995, 320-321; Boardman 2001, 95, Fig. 129 )
and on a stamnos from Munchen (Arias 1962, 368, Fig. 193; Buschor 1969,
218, Abb.228; Boardman 1976, 155, Abb. 215; Simon 1976, 143, Abb. 205-
207; Boardman 1976, 155, Abb. 215) are used for the purpose of frightening the
enemy and escape from the evil.
Similarly, numerous eye images, including the ones on the head of the
ships, are pictured for the same purpose as it can also be observed on the sample
of stamnos from London (Boardman 1995, 113, Fig. 184-1) on which Odysseus
and Sirens are illustrated. Therefore, it is evident that the eye symbol is used as
a protective power from the evil with an influence of Mesopotamian and
Egyptian examples. In Ancient Greek art, Gorgo carried a role which protects
from the evil souls and the supernatural powers. Likewise, the purpose of giving
the person who carries the Medusa head or the mask the look of the creature is
to respond the evil powers with the similar evil and horrifying glance. Gorgo
head is pictured on the temples and the holy places as a reflection of the desire
to be protected from the evil (Besig 1937: 5, 15, 70). As it can also be observed
on an amphora in Vatikan by the artist Akhilleus (Buschor 1969: 212, Abb.217;
Simon 1976: 137, Abb.198, XLIII; Boardman 2005: 208, Fig.202) that the
Gorgo heads pictured on the shields and plates are used for its role in
frightening the enemy and protecting from the evil. Even if it is a different
ingredient being used, the purpose is the same function of the creature which
protects from the evil. While in the earliest examples it emerges as a celestial
image, by time this symbol gains a function of protection from the evil and in
some examples gains a protective role through responding the evil powers with
a similar evil and horrifying glance.
Likewise, in Turkish society, one of the believes about evil eye, evil
glance, and protection from the evil is the usage of evil eye bead. It is believed
that the evil eye is neutralized as the blue beads in the shape of an eye (amulets)
catch the attraction to them and protect from the evil eye of the people. The
studies show that people in Turkish society put evil eye beads on living ones or
on materials in order to be protected from the evil eye, the struck of the evil eye
and various malignity. For instance, the evil eye beads, which are believed to
protect from the evil eyes and malignity, have a wide area of usage on both
living ones and materials such as newborns and adults, cars, homes, furniture,
plane, bus, offices, animals etc. (Acıpayamlı 1962; Çıblak 2004; Yılmaz 2005;
[38]
Çetinkaya et. al. 2008; Yoleri et. al. 2009; Ögenler and Yapıcı 2012). In
general, the evil eye beads in the shape of an eye are believed to have a function
which protects form the malignity in Turkish society.
Therefore, the main motivation of the usage of the eye symbol or the evil
eye bead, as its reflected version to present, both in Ancient History and today’s
modern societies as Turkish society, is to obtain control over uncontrollable
things. Today, people use the eye symbol or the evil eye bead under the
circumstances of uncertainty, desperateness, and fear with an inclination to
interpret uncontrollable events and to see their control over events just as the
people in Ancient History. Indeed, in the past people had uncertainty,
desperateness, and fear towards natural events and the happenings around them.
People, today, have negative feelings such as anxiety, fear, and discomfort due
to economical, family related and psychosocial problems. From this point of
view, while in the Ancient History people used celestial or non-celestial eye
symbols for the purpose of protection form the evil eye, in today’s Turkish
society people also use amulets in the shape an eye. Under the circumstances of
fear, the possibility of the individuals to be inclined to demonstrate avoiding
behaviors gets higher. As a matter of fact, the evil eye is a warning symbol of
avoiding behavior. In both situations, irrational superstitious believes and
behaviors are conducted in order to avoid evil or negative things.
Taken all into consideration, it can be suggested that both in Ancient
History and today, the eye symbols which are used as a protection from the evil
served to controlling, cognitive and emotional defense functions of superstitious
believes (Saenko 2005). For instance, based on the fair world misconception,
people, from Ancient History to present, tend to behave as if the luck does not
have a role and there is only a direct relationship between the behaviors and the
outcomes (Lerner 1965, 355-360). In other words, they attribute the
uncontrollable events to external powers by believing that an eye is protecting
and controlling them. On other hand these people think that they can influence
the luck through superstitious believes and behaviors (Feather 1969; Schippers
and Lange 2006, 2534). These people tend to realize and audit the superstitious
believes they acquired, however these trials are not even close to rationality and
objectivity (Merton 1948; Ciborowski 1997; Budak 2003, 440; Ayhan and
Yarar 2005, 18). Thereby, taken together, it can be suggested that the dynamics
attributed to evil eye is the product of the efforts of people to control the
behaviors of the individuals and the society at optimum level. All these show
[39]
that both the mythological eye symbol and the evil eye bead, as its reflected
version to Turkish society, have similarities with superstitious believes and
behaviors or irrational thought structures in terms of various characteristics.
Exactly at this point, it will be noteworthy to mention another issue. That
is to say, all the arguments so far could answer the question “What kind of an
eye?”. However, there is another question here that should be explained: “Why
is it the eye?”. Why has the eye symbol or the evil eye bead been used in order
to be protected from the evil? Indeed, as it is known by majority of people – at
least the ones interested in the issue – that it is not only the eye symbol or the
evil eye bead that is used to be protected from the evil either in the Ancient
History or the Turkish society. The eye symbol and the evil eye beads are only
one example of irrational thoughts and rituals. However, even if it takes
different forms, it manages to exist in almost all cultures and to sustain its
functionality in the lives of the individuals and the society. The extent to which
the belief of the eye symbol and the evil eye beads reaches could be explained
with “analogy law” which is one of Frazer (1922)’s witchcraft laws. According
to this law, the primitive people, who think that the similar things are in fact the
same, use the same or similar evil things in order to be protected, as they might
have developed an irrational belief that when a behavior is conducted towards
things which are similar to living creatures or materials, the same effect on the
originals will be observed. It can be suggested that the same thought might lead
the usage of amulets in the shape of an eye in order to be protected from the
danger of evil eyes. On the other hand, this kind of irrational thought regarding
eye symbol might also stem from the fact that the eyes are the source of
significant clues about the target in interpersonal communications. The eyes are
particularly the windows of people opening outside. The feelings such as love,
fear, jealousy, sorrow, joy, anger, hate, like, or dislike could be caught on eyes
as a body language. The positive and negative thoughts are transferred to other
person through eyes. From this point of view, the starting point of the
emergence of positive or negative thoughts is the eyes. This is sometimes a
celestial eye, and sometimes an eye of a person which observes and controls
behaviors.
[40]
Conclusion
The mythological eye symbol, which is one of the symbols that has been
surviving since the Ancient History till present, continues its existence in
today’s modern world in almost all cultures. Furthermore, the eye symbol still
has a significant functionality in the lives of both individuals and the society
just as it had in the past. It is because, people want to explain the uncontrollable
events and see their control over them, under the circumstances of uncertainty,
desperateness, and fear. However, this effort appears more as irrational thoughts
and irrational rituals instead of being rational. As a matter of fact, while in the
Ancient History people used eye symbols in order to be protected from the evil
and the evil eye, in the modern world and in Turkish society people use evil eye
bead in the shape of an eye.
In this study, different from the other studies, three factors are analyzed
in relation with each other. First, the state of the eye symbol from the Ancient
History to present is explained. Second, the concepts of “evil eye bead” which
is the reflected version of the eye symbol to Turkish society and the “evil eye”
are examined from an intercultural point of view in order to identify the cultural
differences. Finally, the similarities and the differences between the believes
and rituals about both the mythological eye symbol in the Ancient History and
the evil eye bead, as its reflected version to Turkish society, and the
superstitious belief and irrational thought structures are examined from a
psychosocial point of view.
The findings in the current study draw on the theoretical and empirical
studies regarding mythological eye symbol and the evil eye beads. However,
different form the classical studies, this study examines the relationship of the
mythological eye symbol and evil eye bead, with the superstitious believes and
irrational thoughts though back and forth projections. Finally, a problem
regarding the issue is defined and an analysis is made in order to answer the
problem. All these discussions take us to this conclusion: both the mythological
eye symbol and the evil eye bead as its reflected version to Turkish society
demonstrate similarities to a great extent with the superstitious believes or
irrational thought structures in terms of their functionality and attributions. The
fact that the characteristics of superstitious belief and the irrational thoughts are
very similar to the functionalities of the eye symbol and the evil eye beads
supports this evaluation.
[41]
This study, which draws on both psychosocial and archeological data, has
a significant value differentiated from the other studies in that it examines the
relationship of the eye symbol and the evil eye bead with the superstitious
believes and rituals from a multidisciplinary and intercultural point of view.
IMAGE LIST
Figure 1: Vase form Hassuna. Photograph: Stromenger 1962, Fig.1
Figure 2: Vase form Uruk. Photograph: Stromenger 1962, Pl. VI
Figure 3: Idols with Eyes from Tell Brak. Photograph
http://www.flickr.com/photos/antiquitiesproject/4908454460/ (Date accessed:
10.02.2014).
Figure 4: Eye symbol from Egyptian. Photograph
http://strictlyhauschka.blogspot.com.tr/2012/11/eye-of-horus.html (Date
accessed: 10.02.2014).
Figure 5: Eye symbol from Egyptian. Photograph: Pinch 2002, 131
Figure 6: The eye symbol in Egyptian art is hieroglyph. Photograph:
Budge 1904, 138
Figure 7: Marble idols which are found in Kultepe. Photograph:
Kulaçoğlu 1992, Res. 118
Figure 8: Marble idols which are found in Kultepe. Photograph:
Kulaçoğlu 1992, Res. 119
Figure 9: Hawk-faced pot and found in Toria. Photograph: Aydıngün
2005, Res. 61
Figure 10: Plate from Rodos. Photograph: Arias 1962, Fig. 27
Figure 11: Kylix of an Exekias Artist in Berlin. Photograph
http://www.kam.uiuc.edu/collection/ancient/GreekVaseTour2.html (Date
accessed: 10.02.2014).
Figure 12: Kylix from Boston. Photograph
http://educators.mfa.org/ancient/drinking-cup-kylix-depicting-two-satyrs-64646
(Date accessed: 10.02.2014).
Figure 13: Lekythos from Atina. Photograph: Arias 1962, Fig. 187
Figure 14: Stamnos from Munich. Photograph: Boardman 1976, Abb.
215
Figure 15: Stamnos from London. Photograph
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Odysseus_Sirens_BM_E440_n2.jpg
(Date accessed: 10.02.2014).
[42]
Figure 16: Humbaba mask from British Museum. Photograph
http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/me/c/clay_
mask_of_the_demon_huwawa.aspx (Date accessed: 10.02.2014).
Figure 17: Humbaba mask from Jerusalem. Photograph: Westenholz
2004, Fig. 144
Figure 18: Gorgo from Korkyra Artemis Temple. Photograph
http://www.studyblue.com/notes/note/n/greeks-and-romans/deck/5843275 (Date
accessed: 10.02.2014).
Figure 19: Terracotta Gorgo relief from Syrakusa. Photograph
http://www.davidpratt.info/americas1.htm (Date accessed: 10.02.2014).
Figure 20: Plate of a Lydos. Photograph: Carpenter 2002, Fig.151
Figure 21: Gorgo from Selinus C Temple. Photograph: Boardman 1995a,
Fig. 155
Figure 22: Amphora of the artist Akhilleus from Vatikan. Photograph
https://www.beazley.ox.ac.uk/tools/pottery/painters/keypieces/redfigure/achilles
.htm (Date accessed: 10.02.2014).
Figure 23: http://rickzullo.com/tag/evil-eye/ (Date accessed:
09.02.2014).
Figure 24: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_eye (Date accessed:
09.02.2014).
Figure 25: http://nazarblue.co.uk/tag/turkish-food/ (Date accessed:
09.02.2014).
Figure 26: http://www.mihav.com/forum/kayip-kedi-buldum/selimiyede-
nazar-boncuk-tasmali-kedi-32709/ (Date accessed: 09.02.2014).
Figure 27: http://janebb-fiberplus.blogspot.com.tr/2010/07/evil-eye-
fabric-postcards.html (Date accessed: 09.02.2014).
Figure 28:
http://moonlightcat13.blogspot.com.tr/2012/06/stepnelerim.html (Date
accessed: 09.02.2014).
Figure 29: http://benyohum.tumblr.com/ (Date accessed: 09.02.2014).
Figure 30: Tree with nazars in Cappadocia, Turkey.
http://www.pinterest.com/mochihime/hierology/ (Date accessed: 09.02.2014).
Figure 31: http://stayinspiredblog.blogspot.com.tr/2012/03/stay-inspired-
with-evil-eyes.html (Date accessed: 09.02.2014).
Figure 32: http://moderngirllife.blogspot.com.tr/2011/05/blue-baby-
belly-bell-review-and.html (Date accessed: 09.02.2014).
[43]
REFERENCES
ACIPAYAMLI, Orhan. "Anadolu’da Nazarla İlgili Bazı Âdet ve
İnanmalar" Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi. Cilt
XX, Sayı: 1-2 (1962): 1- 40.
ALBERSMEIER, Sabine. Heroes, Mortals and Myths in Ancient Greece,
London: Walters Art Museum, 2010.
ALICI, Tevfik. Öğrenmenin Bilimsel Temelleri, Ankara: Palme, 2010.
ANDREAE, Bernard. Mythos und Erinnerung, München: Zabern, 2000.
ARIAS, Paolo Enrico. A History of Greek Vase Painting London: H.N.
Abrams, 1962.
ARSLAN, Mustafa. “Kişilerin Batıl İnanç Kaygı Düzeylerinin Bazı
Değişkenler Açısından İncelenmesi”. Değerler Eğitimi Dergisi 2, 6
(2004): 7-34.
AYDINGÜN, Şengül. Tunç Çağının Gizemli Kadınları, İstanbul: Yapı ve
Kredi Bankası, 2005.
AYHAN, İnci, and Ferhat YARAR. “Batıl İnançların Psikolojisi”
Pivolka, 4 (17) (2005): 15-19.
BAINES, John and Jaromir MALEK. Eski Mısır (Çev. Z. Aruoba- O.
Aruoba), İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1986.
BARSKY, Arthur J., Ralph SAINTFORT, Malcolm P. ROGERS, and
Jonathan F. BORUS. “Nonspecific Medication Side Effects and the Nocebo
Phenomenon” Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 10, Issue 1 (2004): 133-
134.
BECK, Jan and Wolfgang FORSTMEIER. “Superstition and Belief as
Inevitable By-products of an Adaptive Learning Strategy” Human Nature. Vol.
18, No. 1 (2007): 35-46.
BESIG, Hans. Gorgo und Gorgoneion. In der Archaischen Griechischen
Kunst. Berlin: H. Markert, 1937.
BEYTUT, Dilek; Gonca KARAYAĞIZ Muslu, Zümrüt BAŞBAKKAL,
and Hatice Bal YILMAZ. “Pediatri Hemşirelerinin Ağrıya İlişkin Geleneksel
İnanç ve Uygulamaları” Maltepe Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Bilim ve Sanatı
Dergisi. Cilt: 2, Sayı: 3 (2009): 12-18.
BIDNEY, David. “Mit Kavramı” (Çev. Mehmet Ali Gülel. Selçuk
Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. Sayı: 3 (1994): 19-25.
BIETAK, Manfred. Egpt and the Levan. International Journal for
Egyptian Archaelogy and Related Disciplines. XVII. 2007.
[44]
BOARDMAN, John (a). Greek Sculpture The Late Classical Period,
London: Thames & Hudson, 1995.
BOARDMAN, John. Athenian Black Figüre Vases, London: Thames &
Hudson, 1995.
BOARDMAN, John. The History of Greek Vases, London: Thames &
Hudson, 2001.
BOARDMAN, John. Yunan Heykeli: Arkaik Dönem (Çev. Y. Ersoy),
İstanbul: Homer Kitabevi, 2001.
BOARDMAN, John. Yunan Sanatı, İstanbul: Homer Kitabevi, 2005.
BOARDMAN, John, Jose DÖRIG, Werner FUCHS, and Max HIRMER.
Die Griechische Kunst, München: Hirmer, 1976.
BRATTON, Fred Gladstone. Yakın Dogu Mitolojisi (Çev. N.
Muallimoğlu) İstanbul: Marmara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Vakfı
Yayınları, 1995.
BUDAK, Selçuk. Psikoloji Sözlüğü. Ankara: Bilim Sanat Yayınları,
2003.
BUDGE, Ernest Alfred Wallis. The Gods of the Egptians or Studies in
Egyptian Mythology, Vol. II, London: Open Court Publishing Co., 1904.
BUSCHOR, Ernst. Griechische Vasen, München: R. Piper & Co., 1969.
CAMPBELL, Colin. “Half-Belief and the Paradox of Ritual Instrumental
Activism: A Theory of Modern Superstition”. British Journal of Sociology. Vol.
47, No. 1 (1996): 151-166.
CAN, Şefik. Klasik Yunan Mitolojisi, İstanbul: Ötüken Neşriyat, 1994.
CARPENTER, Thomas H. Antik Yunan’da Sanat ve Mitoloji (Çev.
B.B.M. Ünlüoğlu), İstanbul: Homer Kitabevi, 2002.
CASE, Trevor I., Julie FITNESS, David R. CAIRNS, and Richard J.
STEVENSON. “Coping With Uncertainty: Superstitious Strategies and
Secondary Control”. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 34, 4 (2004): 848-
871.
CHARBONNEAUX, Jean, Roland MARTIN, and Francois VILLARD.
Das Archaische Griechenland: 620-480 v.Chr., München: C.H. Beck, 1969.
CIBOROWSKI, Tom. “Superstition in the Collegiate Baseball Player”.
The Sport Psychologist, 1 (1997): 305-317.
COHEN, Beth. The Colors of Clay: Special Techniques in Athenian
Vases, Los Angeles: Getty Publications, 2006.
[45]
ÇETİNKAYA, Aynur, Dilek ÖZMEN, and Seval CAMBAZ,.

“Manisa’da Çocuğu Olan 15-49 Yaş Kadınların Doğum Sonu Dönemde
Yenidoğan Sağlığı İle İlgili Geleneksel Uygulamaları”. Celal Bayar
Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Yüksekokulu Dergisi 12, 2 (2008): 39-46.
ÇIBLAK, Nilgün. “Halk Kültüründe Nazar, Nazarlık İnancı ve Bunlara
Bağlı Uygulamalar”. Türklük Bilimi Araştırmaları. (TÜBAR) Bahar XV (2004):
103-125.
ÇİÇEK, Ümit. Göz Boncuğu. İzmir: İzmir Ticaret Odası, 2009.
DEMARGNE, Pierre. Die Geburt der Griechischen Kunst. München:
Beck, 1965.
DOMJAN, Michael. Koşullama ve Öğrenmenin Temelleri (Çev. Hakan
Çetinkaya). Türk Psikologlar Derneği: Ankara, 2004.
DREVER, James. A Dictionary of Psychology. Penguin Books: Boston,
1952.
DURANDO, Furio. Greece: Splendours of an Ancient Civilization.
London: Thames & Hudson, 2005.
ERHAT, Azra. Mitoloji Sözlüğü. İstanbul: Remzi Kitapevi, 1993.
FEATHER, Norman T. “Attribution of Responsibility and Valence of
Success and Failure in Relation to Initial Confidence and Task Performance”.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 13, No. 2. (1969): 129-144.
FLOREN, Josef. Studien zur Typologie des Gorgoneion. Münster:
Aschendorff, 1977.
FRANKFORT, Henri. The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient.
London: Yale University Press, 1989.
FRAZER, James George. The Golden Bough: A Study of Magic and
Religion. London: Temple of Earth Publishing, 1922.
FROMM, Erich. Rüyalar, Masallar Mitoslar, Sembol Dilinin
Çözümlenmesi (Çev. A. Arıtan-K. H. Ökten). İstanbul: Arıtan Yayınevi, 1990.
GIMBUTAS, Marija. The Language of The Goddess, London: Thames &
Hudson, 1989.
GOFF, Laura Beatrice. Symbols of Prehistoric Mesopotamia. London:
Yale University Press, 1963.
GRIMAL, Pierre. Mitoloji Sözlüğü: Yunan Roma (Çev. S. Tamgüç).
İstanbul: Kabalcı Yayınevi, 1997.
GUNTNER, Gudrun. Mythen und Menschen: Griechische Vasenkunst
aus einer Deutschen Privatsammlung. Mainz: P. von Zabern, 1997.
[46]
GÜLDOGAN-Aydıngün, Şengül. Eski Tunç Çağında Anadolu Pişmiş
Toprak Figürün ve İdolleri (Unpublished PhD Thesis). Hacettepe University,
Institute of Social Sciences: Ankara, 2003.
HAMANN, Richard. Geschichte der Kunst. Von der Vorgeschichte bis
zur Spätantike. München: Dromersche Verlagsanstalt, 1956.
HAMILTON, Edith. Mitologya (Çev. Ü.Tamer). İstanbul: Varlık
Yayınları, 1996.
HOPKINS, Clark. "Assyrian Elements in the Perseus-Gorgon Story".
American Journal of Archaeology, 38 (1934): 341-358.
HOWE, Thalia Phillies. "The Origin and Function of the Gorgon-Head".
American Journal of Archaeology, 58 (1954): 209-221.
IRWIN, Harvey J. “Belief in the Paranormal: A Review of the Empirical
Literature”. The Journal of The American Society for Psychical Research.
Volume: 87, Number: 1. (1993): 1-39.
KANEKO, Satoru. “Dimensions of Religiosity among Believers in
Japanese Folk Religion”. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. Vol. 29,
No. 1, Mar. (1990): 1-18.
KARAŞ, Abdurrahman. Antikçağ'da Göz Sembolizmi Atatürk University
(Unpublished Thesis Work). Faculty of Science, Department of Archaeology:
Erzurum, 2003.
KEINAN, Giora. “The Effects of Stress and Desire for Control on
Superstitious Behavior”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 28, 1
(2002): 102-108.
KNELL, Heiner. Mythos und Polis Bildprogramme Griechischer
Bauskulptur, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1990.
KÖSE, Ali and Ali AYTEN. “Bâtıl İnanç ve Davranışlar Üzerine Psiko-
Sosyolojik Bir Analiz”. Dinbilimleri Akademik Araştırma Dergisi. IX, Sayı: 3
(2009): 45-70.
KULAÇOĞLU, Belma. Anadolu Medeniyetleri Müzesi, Tanrılar ve
Tanrıçalar. Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1992.
LANGER, Ellen J. “The Illusion of Control”. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology. Vol. 32, No. 2 (1975): 311-328.
LANGER, Ellen J. “The Psychology of Chance”. Journal for the Theory
of Social Behaviour. Volume: 7, Issue: 2, (1977): 185-203.
LANGLOTZ, Ernst and Max HIRMER. Die Kunst der Westgriechen in
Sizilien und Unteritalien. München: Hirmer Verlag, 1963.
[47]
LERNER, Melvin J. “Evaluation of Performance as a Function of

Performer’s Reward and Attractiveness”. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 1 (1965): 355-360.
MALLER, Julius B. and Gerhard E. LUNDEEN. “Sources of
Superstitious Beliefs”. Journal of Educational Research. Volume: XXVI,
Number: 5 (1933): 321-343.
MCGREGOR, Ian. “Offensive Defensiveness: Toward an Integrative
Neuroscience of Compensatory Zeal After Mortality Salience, Personal
Uncertainty, and Other Poignant Self-Threats”. Psychological Inquiry, Vol. 17,
No. 4 (2006): 299-308.
OTTO, Walter, and Reinhard Herbig. Handbuch der Archäologie.
München: C.H.Beck, 1950.
ÖGENLER, Oya and Gülçin YAPICI. “Bir Grup Üniversite Öğrencisinin
Batıl İnanışlar ve Hastalıklara Karşı Tutum ve Davranışlarının
Değerlendirilmesi”. Cumhuriyet Tıp Dergisi, 34 (2012): 1-8.
ÖZGÜÇ, Nimet. “Kültepe Kazılarında Bulunan İdoller” Belleten XXI
(1957): 61-80.
PAYNE, Humfry. Necrocorinthia, Oxford: McGrath Pub. Co., 1931.
PHINNEY, Edward Jr. "Perseus battle with the Gorgons". Transactions
and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 102 (1971):
445-463
PINCH, Geraldine. Handbook of Egyptian Mythology. Oxford: Abc-
Clio, 2002.
PINCH, Geraldine. Egyptian Myth, A Very Short Introduction. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2004.
RABIEI, Kamran, Vahid GHASEMI, and Habib-Reza ARZANI.
“Superstition and Cultural Diversity-Case Study: Isfahan Province, Iran”.
Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, Vol 4, No 4, March (2013): 73-82.
RICHTER, Gisela Marie Augusta. The Metropolitan Museum of Art: The
Sculptors of the Greeks, London: Yale University Press, 1970.
ROAF, Michael. Mezopotamya ve Eski Yakın Doğu, (Çev. Z. Kılıç).
İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1996.
ROBERT K. Merton. “The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy”. The Antioch
Review, Vol. 8, No. 2, Summer (1948): 193-210.
ROBERTSON, Martin. A History of Greek Art 2. London: Cambridge
University Press, 1975.
[48]
ROSE, Herbert Jennings. Handbook of Greek Myhthology. London:
Methuen and Co., 1928.
RUDSKI, Jeffrey. “What Does a ‘Superstitious’ Person Believe?
Impressions of Participants”. The Journal of General Psychology 130. 4 (2003):
431-445.
SAENKO, Iu V. “The Superstitions of Today’s College Students”.
Russian Education and Society, Vol. 47, No. 12, December (2005): 76-89.
SCHEFOLD, Karl. Frühgriechische Sagenbilder. München: Hirmer
Verlag, 1964.
SCHEFOLD, Karl. Die Griechen und Ihre Nachbarn. Berlin: Propyl en
Verlag, 1967.
SCHEFOLD, Karl. Götter und Heldensagen der Griechen in der Früh
und Hocharchaischen Kunst. München: Hirmer Vermag, 1993.
SCHIPPERS, Michaéla and Paul M. Von LANGE. “The Psychological
Benefits of Superstitious Rituals in Top Sport: A Study Among Top
Sportpersons”. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 36, 10 (2006): 2532-2553.
SIMON, Erika. Die Götter der Griechen. München: Hirmer Verlag,
1998.
SIMON, Erika. Die Griechischen Vasen. München: Hirmer Verlag, 1976.
SKINNER, Burrhus Frederic. “Superstition in the Pigeon”. Journal of
Experimental Psychology 38 (1948): 168-172.
STEWART, Andrew. Greek Sculpture Vol. I-II. New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1990.
STROMENGER, Eva. Fünf Jahrtausende Mesopotamien. München:
Hirmer Verlag, 1962.
SUHR, Elmer G. “An Interpretation of the Medusa”. Folklore. 76, 2
(1965): 90-103
TAYLOR, Shelley E. “Adjustment to Threatening Events: A Theory of
Cognitive Adaption”. American Psychologist. Vol. 38, No. 11 (1983): 1161-
1173.
TOBACYK, Jerome J. “A Revised Paranormal Belief Scale”. The
International Journal of Transpersonal Studies Volume 23 (2004): 94-98.
VYSE, Stuart A. Believing in Magic: The Psychology of Superstition.
New York: Oxford University Press. 1997.
WARREN, Howard C. Dictionary of Psychology. Cambridge: Houghton
Mifflin, 1934.
[49]
WENDRICH, Willeke. Egyptian Archaeology. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell,

2010.
WESTENHOLZ, Joan Goodnick. Dragons, Monster and Fabulous Beast,
Jerusalem: Published by Bible Lands Museum, 2004.
WILKINSON, Kathryn. Semboller ve İşaretler. İstanbul: Alfa Yayınları,
2011.
WISEMAN, Richard and Caroline WATT. “Measuring Superstitious
Belief: Why Lucky Charms Matter”. In Proceedings of the 47th Annual
Convention of the Parapsychological Association. Vienna, Austria. (2004): 171-
177.
YEL, Ali Murat. “Hurafe”. TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi. C. 18. İstanbul:
Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 18 (1998): 381-382.
YILDIRIM, Mustafa and Zühal BAYLAN. “Kelkit Yöresi Zililerinden
Çuval, Heybe, Palaz ve Çanta Örnekleri”. Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi Sayı:
28 (2010): 415-446.
YILMAZ, Mehmet Ali. Aladağ Halk Kültürü Araştırması (Unpublished
Master's Thesis). Çukurova University Institute of Social Sciences: Adana,
2005.
YOLERİ, Halil, Sevim Çizer, Yasemin YAROL, and Duygu
KAHRAMAN. “Nazar İnancı ve Geleneksel Katır Boncuklar”. Sanat. Mart-
Nisan, No.14 (2006): 104-113.
ŽEŽELJ, Iris, Maša Pavlović, Marko VLADISAVLJEVIĆ, and
Branislava RADIVOJEVIĆ. “Construction and Behavioral Validation of
Superstition Scale”. Psihologija Vol. 42, 2 (2009): 141-158.
[50]

The Superstitious Mystery Behind The Eye

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

The Superstitious Mystery Behind The Eye

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Superstitious Mystery Behind The Eye

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tarih Okulu Dergisi (TOD) Journal of History School (JOHS)

Haziran 2014 Haziran 2014

DOI No: http://dx.doi.org/10.14225/Joh496

THE SUPERSTITIOUS MYSTERY BEHIND THE EYE: THE SYMBOL

Gözün Ardındaki Batıl Gizem: Antik Çağ’dan Günümüze Göz Sembolü Ve

The Symbolism of Eye in the Ancient History

In Egyptian Hieroglyphs, the god Osiris implies the eye on a throne,

As it is also observed in the idols with eyes from Tell Brak in

In its images, while sometimes, based on its mythology, it is portrayed in

The Evil Eye Bead as a Reflection of the Eye Symbol on Turkish

Figure: 23 Figure: 24 Figure: 25

Figure: 26 Figure: 27 Figure: 28

What is Superstitious Belief/Behavior?

behaviors which, in fact, do not have any cause-effect relationship (Schippers

Superstitious Believes from Past to Present

The functions of superstitious believes

The Psychosocial Causes of Superstitious Believes

ÇETİNKAYA, Aynur, Dilek ÖZMEN, and Seval CAMBAZ,.

LERNER, Melvin J. “Evaluation of Performance as a Function of

WENDRICH, Willeke. Egyptian Archaeology. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell,

You might also like