The Eye Belief Among the Amhara of Ethiopia1

Ronald A Reminick ClevelandState University

Variationsof the beliefin the areknown throughout much of the world,yet surprisinglylittle attentionhas been given to explainingthe dynamicsof this aspectof culture(cf. SpoonerI970; FosterI972; Douglas I970). The Amharaof Ethio-piahold to this belief.Data for this study weregathered among the ManzeAmhara of the centralhighlands of Shoa Province,. Their habitatis a rollingplateau ranging in altitude fromg,soo to I3>000 feet.The seasonsvary from temperate and dry to wet and cold. The Amharaare settledagriculturists raising primarily barley, wheat,and a varietyof beansand importingteff grain cotton,and spices from the lower and warmerregions in the gorgesand valleysrlearby. Amharatechnology is simple,involving the bull-drawnplow, crop rotation, soil furrowingfor drainage,and some irrigationwhere streamsare ac- cessible.The soil is richenough to maintainthree harvests annually. Other importanttechnological items includethe sicklenloom, and the walking and fightingstick for the men; the spindle largeclay waterjug grind- stone,and cookingutensils for the women.The most highlyprized item of technologyis the ride which symbolizesthe proudwarrior of the Amharaand a man'sduty to defendhis inheritedland. The homesteadis the primarydomain of authoritywithin the larger politicalstructure. The homesteadvaries in size from that of a nuclear familyto a largehamlet consisting of severalrelated families and their servants,tenants, and formerslaves. The systemof authoritycan be char- acterizedin termsof Weberspatriarchalism, where a groupis organized on the basisof kinshipand economicswith authorityexercised by a par- ticularperson controlling the resourcesupon which the group depends (WeberI948: 346H). Obedienceand loyaltyare owed to the personrather than to the role or the rule,and this personrules only by the consentof the grolupmembers who standto gain a portionof theirpatriarch's wealth as a legacyupon his death.This institutionof patriarchalauthority is re- inforcedby a culturalemphasis on malequalities of aggressivenessoriented aroundthe acquisitionand defenseof land.Land is the fundamentalre- quirementof the patriarchalsystem, for withoutit a man cannotfulfill his hasicrole of supportinghis dependentsand providinga legacyfor his childrenas a rewardfor theirloyalty and service.But land is a scarcere- 27g 280 ETHNOLOGY source,and thereare often more claimsto land than can be supported. Thus,closest siblings may unite against a moredistant relative to maintain land amongthemselves or siblingsmay competefor scarceland among themselves,beco-ming bitter enemies and dividingthe kinshipor domestic group. The Amharapeasant's world includes both Christianand paganelements. Although Monophysite Christianity is the legitimatere-- ligionof the Amharapeople, who in factdefine their tribal identity largely in termsof theirChristian God, the paganor "nonlegitimate"systems of beliefalso play an importantrole in the everydayroutine o-f the peasant's socialand culturallife. Thereare essentially four separate realms of super- naturalbeliefs. First, there is the dominantMonophysite Christian religion involvingthe Almighty God, the , and the saints and angels in Heaven. Second,there are the zar and the adbar spirits,"protectors" who exact tributein returnfor physicaland emotionalsecurity and who deal out punishmentsfor failureto recognizethem through the practiceof the ap- propriaterituals. Third is the beliefin the , a classof peoplewho possessthe evil eye,and who exerta deadlypower over the descendentsof God's"choserI children." The fourthcategory of beliefsincludes the ciraq and satan, ghoulsand devilsthat prowlthe countryside,creating danger to unsuspectingpersons who crosstheir path. THE STATUSOF THE EVIL EYE PEOPLE In contrastto muchof sub-SaharanAfrica, evil poweris not attributed to a personoccupying a statusat a pointof socialdisjunction within the structureof socialrelations. Rather, those people who arebelieved to have a dangerouspower are not a part of Amharasociety. The buda or evil eye peopleare a completelyseparate category of populationof different ethnic origin,with a ratherminimum amount of interactionwith the Amharapeople. The bu!daown no landand therefore work in handicrafts, makingpots from clay, fashioning tools from iron, and weaving cloth from hand-spuncotton and sheep'shair. They are known generallyas tayb. The termis derivedfrom the nounteAib which means C'craftsman." It is alsoassociated with an ideawhich means "to be wise"or "tohe veryclever." The termstayb and buda are synonymous.To be buda is to have the evil eye. The term"evil eye" is alsoknown as ayn og and sometimestifU ayn. It designatesthe powerto curseand destroy and reincarnate, harnessing the laborof the deadfor one'sown ends. The beautifulcraftsmanship of the buda'swork is one sign of his status. The finelymade, well-proportioned water pots with theirblack finish are unmatchedby any Amharapeasant who woulddeign to makeone in the firstp-lace. Fashioning tools from iron takesconsiderably more skill and is not practicedby anyonebut the tayb people.Although weaving is asso- ciatedwith the taybpeople, many Manze peasants have also taken up the skill,not as a tradebut to accumulateneeded cash. Yet the peasantssay the tayh knowa specialform of weavingthat the Amharacannot learn. There is, though,a criticaldistinction made by the Amharapeasant that frees EVILEYE BELIEF AMONG THE AMHAM 28I himfrom the stigmaof the craft,uiz., that he did not inheritthe tradefrom his father. Thereare) then two majorsocial categories. The rega are thosepeople whoseancestry are nisu atint}of '

wishesto drawthe reggnearer, the buda will waitfor a momentof privacy andthen will utterto the rega somethingabout seeing the genitalsrevealed throughthe rega'sclothes. This will fill the rega with excitementand then the rega will "fallwith" the huda lover.The warmaffectionate relationship can be maintainedwithout serious danger; but when thereis a quarrel, the rega, alreadyweakened by the bloodgiven up to the buda, will be "eaten"and becomeseriously ill. Howeverthe attackis effectuatedand howeverthe corpseis takenfrom the grave,the ultimategoal of the buda is to use the victimas a slave. Afterbeing exhumed, the corpseis takento the houseof the buda where it is broughtback to life in orderto servethe buda. But the slaveis mute, unableto uttera singlesound. The buda cxwnstwo switches.One switch is used to turn the slaveinto a pot when visitorscome; and then when the outsidershave left, a rap on the pot with the otherswitch transforms the pot into a slaveagain. In this way outsideinterference is prevented. When the slave is treatedcruelly, it will shed silent tears,desperately tryingto weep. (It is interestingto note that to be silentin the presence of one'ssuperiors and to suderindignities in silenceis the obligationof childrenand the traits attributed to the despiseddog.) The slaveof the buda does not go on indefinitelyin its risenstate. After sevenyears the body beginsto disintegrate,finally turning into ashes and leaving the buda without a "helper." The biuda'sdistinctive activities are not fully intentional.The buda has withinhis bodya qualityor powerknown as qalb. Qalbis a subtle,internal, unconsciousdesire to performthose activitieswhich make the buda so notorious.In the buda's daily interactionswith the rega peopleof the community,there is reallylittle diflerencebetween the two groups,both sharingfeelings of love and hate,envy and covetousness,anger and ag- gressionBut the bludahas this additional power gained from the association with the devil that createsan illegitimateadvantage over thoseof higher statusand greaterlegitimate advantage. The buda, by his very nature, must"eat" others. He doesthis in orderto betterhis chancesfor gaining opportunitiesand achievingsuccess in his dailylife amongthe rega people. He uses his power,then, to makehimself equal with otherswho have more land, more "helpers"such as tenants,servants, and formerslaves, and thus he attemptsto acquirethose objects, persons and, servicesthat he covetsamong the rega Amharapeople. There is a differenceof opinion as to whetheror not the buda himselfcan be the objectand victimof evil eye attack.Some Amhara say thatjust as the rega fightamong themselves forthe wealthof the lineage,so the hudapeople I5ght and attack each other with the evil eye for moreequal shares of wealth.But otherAmhara say thatthis is not true;that the buda peoplehave much more to gain from the rega, and furthermore,know how to protectthemselves from each other'sattack. PRECAUTIONSAGAINST EVIL EYE ATTACK Sinee amorousrelations with buda are not condonedby the Amhara, 284 ETHNOLOGY especiallyby the clergy,the prieststeach that one's only protection against a buda loveris to crawlto churchon one'shands and kneesfor sevendays, the priest'sintent being to frustratethe heginningsof sucha relationship. Parentswho fear theirchild is weak and vulnerableto the influenceof the evil eyemay, on theadvice of a dabtara(lower order clergyman), adopt the customof addressingtheir child in the genderopposite to the child's actualsex. The customof shavingthe headsof children,leaving only a tuftof hairover the formerfontanelle of the boysand a ringof hairaround the headsof the girls, providesprotection against minor attacks of lice, mostoften considered initiated by an enviousbudar. If an Amharais worried abouta child'simminent danger from an evil glance,a light,rapid spitting into the child'sface providesa short-termprotection. Compliments are alwayssuspect if not accompaniedwith the invocation,"Let God protect youfrom the evil eye!" And at feastsall mustbe servedequally lest someone deprivedbecomes envious and the food,making the participantssick. Anotherprecaution taken by the Amharapeasant against the pLossibility of attackis to be silentand guarded. When one expresseshis emotionstoo freelyand becomes too outgoingwith others, he placeshimself in a position of vulnerabilityto the evil eye.This dispositionis fairlygeneralized. When one is seenlaughing and jokingfreely with othersit is usuallywith close and trustedfriends and relatives.At mostother times the peasantpresents a facadeof stolidityand silence. In thisway one does not attract the attention of an enviousbuda, who may resentpersons enjoying themselves while he is not invitedto sharein the mirth.The customof hidingone's face behindthe largesoft cloak,concealing especially the mouthand the nose, is one commonway to avoidthe penetrationof the evil eye. If a personsuccumbs to the attackof the evil eye, the familyof the de- ceasedmay intercede and preventthe b?wdafrom wresting the corpsefrom its grave.A memberof the familymust watchthe gravefor forty days and fortynights (some say twelvedays and twelvenights) after the body hasbeen interred, allowing suflicient time to elapseso thatthe bodywill be adequatelydecomposed and thereby deprive the buda of a bodyto possess. If the graveis watchedthe buda will not come.In this way the family savestheir relative from seven years of slavery. DIAGNOSISANDCURES FOR THE EVIL EYE ATTACK Diagnosisof the symptomsand subsequenttreatment may be carried out in one of fourways. In the firstmethod, if the familyis poorand they knowa dabtaraof the localchurch, they may take the patientto him. For a modestfee, he performsa riteover holy water, praying and pronouncing wordsin the ancientlanguage of Ciz usedin the Christianreligious cere- monies.The patientthen drinks the holywater and breathes in the smoke of a burningroot. The dabtaramay find the diagnosticanswer in his starbook, while the holy waterand inhaledsmoke may effect a cure. A secondalternative is to bringthe patientto a wizard,one who has powersgained through agents of the devil,to communicatewith the zar EVILEYE BELIEFAMONG THE AMHARA 285 spiritsand to effectcures for manykinds of illness.First, a silverbracelet is placedon the patient'sleft wrist.The wizardthen goes into a trance, seekingpossession by a devilwho mayreveal the appropriatecure for the illness.In seekingout the attacker,a veryhot fire is madein the hearth and a pieceof metal a sickleor knife blade,is put into the flamesand heateduntil glowing. The hot metalis appliedto the patient'sface, making a smallpattern of burns.As the woundsheal, the scarswill becometrans- ferredonto the face of the attackerin the sameplace and with the same pattern.The familymust then seek out the guilty party. A thirdmethod does not involvethe use of specialistsoutside of an elder memberof the familywhe knowsthe proceduresand whose age giveshim a bit Ixtterjudgment. When a personbegins biting his lip it is the first sign that he has been attackedby the evil eye, althoughthis symptom doesnot alwaysappear. If relativesare arourld they will firsttie the victim's left thumbwith string.Then the victimwill be madeto breathethe smoke fromthe dungfire. After taking in suH;cientdung smoke, the victimgains the powerto speakin the spiritand voice of his attacker.The victimJoegins recountingthe chainof eventsof his attackerthat led to the confrontation and the attack.Then the relativesask the possessedvictim what formof compensationshould be givento counteractthe attack.The victim,speaking iIl the voiceof the attacker,demands some filthy matter such as beerdregs, ashes,a deadrat, or humanor animalexcrement. The victimeats this and sooncries, "I've left him! I've left my victim!"or somethingof this order. Then the familyknows that the devil has left the body,and the stricken personmay now recover.The cureinvolves active vocal participation. If the victimcannot speak, he will surelydie. The fourthmethod cxf diagnosis and counter-actioninvolves the evil eye personin a moredirect, mundane way. When the victim is attacked andhe beginsto bitehis lip andto act strangely,he mayappear to go into a dazeand beginto jumpand shout"in tongues.'At this point,a relative musttry to get the victimto utterthe nameof his attacker.If he doesnot, the familymay tie a ropeto the victimand then havethe victimlead the relativesto the houseof his attacker.If neitherof thesetactics are successful, they mayhave one otherindication. If the victimbegins crying suddenly, it is a sign that the attackeris in close proximityand that the relatives mustonly scoutthe areaand seize the b-udaperson they come across.If the suspectis found,he is broughtto the bedsideof the victim,by gunpoint if need be. The relativestake a and a bit of clothingfrom the buda, preferalblywithout his knowledge,and then the huda is made to spiton the victimand walkover him. A Ereis builtwith the hairand cloth and the victimthen breathesin the smoke.He continuesinhaling the smokeuntil he cries,in the voiceof the spirit,that the illnesshas left his body. No matterwhat the method,if the huda gives up his victimthere will be no reprisalsby the victim'sfamily. I£ the victimdies, the hurdamay be ejectedfrom the communityor killed. 286 ETHNOLOGY

THE MYTHOLOGYOFTHE ORIGIN OF THEBUDA PEOPLE Accordingto the Amhara,the beginningsof budotstatus go back to Creation.It is saidthat Eve had thirtychildren, and one day God asked Eveto show Him her children.Eve becamesuspicious and apprehensive andhid fifteenof themfrom the sightof God.God knew her act of dis- obedienceand declaredthe fifteenchildren she showedGod as His chosen childrenand cursedthe fifteenshe hid, declaringthat they go henceforth intothe worldas devilsand wretchedcreatures of the earth.Now some ofthe childrencomplained andibegged God's mercy. God heard them and, beingmerciful, made some of themfoxes, jackals, rabbits, etc., so thatthey mightexist as Earth'screatures in a dignifiedmanner. Some of the hidden childrenhe left human,but sentthem away with the curseof beingagents ofthe devil.These human counterparts of the devilare the ancestorsof the hudapeople. There occurs a pleatin timeand the storytakes up its theme againwhen Christwas haptizedat age thirty.As told by an old Amhara peasantfarmer: The angrydevils, envious of God'sfavoring Christ while they sufferedGod's , triedto kill Christ.But Christran and fled his enemies.He hid in the creviceof a greatcliff, sharingit with the giant gabalolizard. While hidden,many children were killed by the in their searchfor "God'schild," but they were unsuccessfulin findingChrist. All the animalswere askedto betraythe whereaboutsof Christ,but they refusedand they were beatenand torturedto no avail.But the lizardwaved his head from side to side showingChrist's pursuers where he hid. Christsaw this and cursedthe lizardso that to this day this lizardstill swayshis head so. No one could get Christdown out of the crevicein the cliff. They tried with ropes and ladders plucked to no avail. Then, the cleYer budapeopIe made giant tongs of wood and JesusChrist out of the crevice.The blacksmithsmade the nails and the carpenters madethe crossand while Christhung on the crosshe cursedthose people whose skills made it possibleto crucifyhim. SomeAmhara claim that the devilis the sole sourceof bu.daqualities and power.Others say the originof budaexistence is differentfrom the sourceof theirpower. Although their existence is associatedwith the devil, theirpower comes from a differentsource only questionablyrelated to the devil.Although there are several versions of themyth thefollowing example narratedby an adolescentAmhara student is typical: The sourceof budapower is an ancientman who has immortality.He has no arms and no legs. He is like a lump of fleshand just sits at a placecalled Yerimma which is a cave of extremelygreat depth. He is, indeed,endowed with supernaturalpowers. Each year the buda peoplemake their annualvisit to this lump of man with their small childrenwho are just learningto walk and to talk. This ancientman can distinguishbetween the rega who may come and the budathemselves. He rejectsthe formerand acceptsthe latter.The ancientman then teachesthe buda childrenall the "arts"to the budatrade and then presentsthe child with the leaf from an is plant (also used by devils to make themselvesinvisible so as to avoid being eaten by the hyena). And everyyear each budamust make a sacrificeto this ancientman of one humanbeing. The sacrificeis like a tax)and if the budacannot find a suitablevictim by the time the sacrificeis due, he must sacrificehis own child. EVILEYE BELIEF AMONG THE AMHARA 287

INTERPRETATI0N Thereare essentiallythree analytically separable levels of behaviorupor whichto focus.First, there is the overtand manifest level of verbalbehavior that expressesthe configurationof ideas and feelingsrecognized as the evil eye beliefsystem. This level of behavioris explicatedthrough ethno- graphicdescription. Second? there is the analysisof valuesand psychological predispositions,areas of positiveattraction, indifference, anger? and fearor dread.The symbolsin the culturalconfigurations as expressedthrough the narrativesof the Amhara,point out theseareas of emotionalsalience andfoci of concern.Through a symbolicanalysis particular kinds of themes becomeevident. Some of thesethemes are basedin the manifestfun-ctions of the belief,while others point to covertsymbolic and latentfunctions of the beliefsystem. Third, there is the socialcontext that the symbolsexpress andthe socialcontext of the actualbehavior that expresses the evil eyebelief. With this approachit is possibleto examine'4the relationship between explicitcultural forms (symbols)and underlyingcultural orientations" tOrtner I973: 49), wherethese symbolic forms provide the vehiclefor the analysisof the relationshipsbetween underlying cultural orientations and observablepatterns of socioculturalbeihavior. Foster (I972: I66) c>dersa caveatthat must be takeninto considerationwhen analyzingthe motiva- tionalsignificance of a particularbelief or custom,which is that original motivesoften disappear with the institutionalizationof the beliefor custom, and in its place,habit becomes the primarysource for the reinforcement of the pattern.Also Kennedy(I+9) arguesagainst the morefamiliar teleo- logicalfunctional interpretations odered by socialanthropolc)gists when he proposesthat these institutionalized beliefs and customsmay themselvesbe the sourceof fears?or pathologicalresponses to situatio-nsthat presentno real threatand could conceivablyhe definedin more innocuousterms. In his discussionof witchcraftbelief, Kennedy (I969: I77) states: . . . witchcraftsystems are forms of institutionalizedpatterns of psychopathologywhich tend to be pathcxgenicand which createbuilt-;n self-perpetuating stress systems . . . (and) tend to regularlygenerate the hateand aggressionwhich they allegedlyfunction to re leve.. Includingthe evil eye belief within the purviewof the problemof witchcraftis notwithout justification, for, although there are quite noticeable differences,the similaritiesdemand some scrutiny.Spooner (I970: 3I I ) noteshow well knownthe evil eyebelief is to us all,yet how littleattention has heengiven to it by ethnographers: . . . the conceptof ie Evil Eye is reportedthroughout , the MiddleEast, and NorthAfrica, and in so manycultures elsewhere that it may be regardedas a universal phenomenon.FurtherX it is reportedin circumstanceswhich show it to be undoubtedly of the same orderof phenomenaas . Douglas,in agreementwith Spooner,identifies the evil eye belief as a specialcase of witchcraftbelief which becomes expressed at criticalsocial 288 ETHNOLOGY disjunctionsbetween perbns who hold structurally generated enmity toward eachother. Her definition (Douglas I970: XXX) of a witchcan be generalized to the Amhara'sconception of the buda: The witch is an attackerand deceiver.He uses what is impureand potentto harm what is pure and helpless.The symbolsof what we recognizeacross the globe as witchcraftall build on the themeof vulnerableinternal goodness attacked by external power. Douglasfits the evil eye beliefinto a typologyshe developsfrom the caseswritten up in the volumeshe edited.She (DouglasI970: XXVii) proposestwo generalcategories of witches:(a) the witchas outsider,and (b) the witch as internalenemy. Each of these categorieshas subtypes. The outsidertype can be either(I) a witchnot identifiedor punished,or (2) a witchexpelled from the community.In thiso-utsider type, the primary functionof accusationis to redefinethe boundariesof socialsolidarity. The witchas internalenemy appears in the morecomplexly organized societies, wheretwo or morefactions are involved within the community.The body of the victimis usuallysymbolized in the imageof the betrayedcommunity, wherethe internalstrength is sappedor pollutedby one in very close contactwith the othermembers of the community.Where the witch is conceivedas an internalenemyy the witchcan be identified(I) as a member of a rivalfaction, where the functionof the accusationis to redefinefaction boundariesor the factionhierarchy; (2) as a dangerousdeviant, where the functionof the accusationis to controlthe deviantin the nameof com- munityvalues, or (3) as an internalenemy with outside liaisons, where the functionof accusationis to promotefactional rivalry, split the community, and/or redefinethe hierarchy.Given this typology,Douglas (Ig70: xxx) then suggestsan hypothesisfor furthertesting: . . . when the sourceof witchcraftpower is thoughtto come from inside the witch, particularlyfrom an areabeyond conscious control the socialsituation will correspond to type 3 above,where the witch is seen as an internalenemy, not as a memberof a rival faction. In the Amharacase, we canrecognize similar qualities between the witch definedby I)ouglasand the buda as conceivedby the Amharapeasant. However,the correspondencethat Douglas suggests is not borneout in the Amharacase. The buda with internaland somewhat uncontrollable powers is not conceivedof as a personinternal to the Amharagroup. The Amhara conceiveof the bmdaas an outsiderwho neverthelesslives, geographically but not integrally,within the socialnetworks of the Amharapeople. Thus, the huda does not quite fit into any of the categoriesthat Douglashas proposed.This exceptionto her typologysuggests that muchwider com- parisonis still necessary. The dominanttheme expressed in the Amharaevil eye belief system is one whichis sharedby possiblyall thosesocieties that maintaina belief in the evil eye: the fearof beingenvied and the interpretationof certain misfortunesas the consequencesof another'senvy. In Spooner's(I970- 3I4) EVILEYE BELIEE AMONG THE AMHARA 289 discussionof the evil eye beliefin the MiddleEast, this themeis especially salient: . . . the conceptof the Evil Eye appearsto be an institutionalizedpsychological idiom for the . . . personificaiionof misfortune,. . . insofaras misfortune,or ie fear of it, may relateto the fear of outsidersand ieir envy.

In his carefulanalysis of the conceptof envyFoster (I972: I67) defines envyas the act of lookingmaliciously upon someone; looking askance at; castingan evil eye upcon;feeling displeasure and/or ill-willin relationto the superiorityof anotherperson. Foster (I972: I68) statesthat envy, along with the closelyassociated feeling of jealousy,"involves a dyad. . . whose relationshipis mediated,or structured,by an interveningproperty or ob; ject."Thus, a jealousperson is jealousof what he possessesand fearshe might lose while an enviousperson does not envy the thing, but rather enviesthe personwho has it. Fosterconsiders the predispositionto envy to be most apparentin peasantsocieties, or in what he calls "deprivation soscieties"of scarceresources where people hold to the "imageof limited good"and where social interaction and transaction is definedand perceived as a "zero-sum"game, and where one's advantage derives from the other's loss.Foster (I972: I69) maintainsthat in thosesocieties where the "zero- sum"game is the definitionof the situation,it is the relativedifferences betweentwo partiesthat triggersthe omnipresentlylatent envy into overt expression.He furthernotes that in primitiveand peasantsocieties, food, childrenand health,those things most vital for the survivalof the family, rankat the top as objectsof envy.Cattle and cropshave some but lesser, salience. Congruentwith suNSaharanwitchcraft belief in the contextof well- definedand enforced rules and norms,envy and its consequencesare miti- gatedto a considerabledegree, primarily because both the structuresof the familyand of the class/castesystem involve cultural definitions stip-ulating that the relationshipsbetween status classes or betweenthe generations are noncompetitive.Foster (I972: I7I) maintainsthat the functionof this kind of definitionis to eliminateor mitigaterivalry between persons in d;fferentcategories of statusor betweenpersons in differentsocial classes, therebylubricating interclass and interpersonaltransactions. Among the Amhara,the principleof patriarchaldomination maintains order in do- mesticand politicalgroups. The absenceof the patriarchor of a mediating superiorauthority generates, or is believedto generate,anarchy within a grouphaving no mediatingauthority among equals. Although this prin- cipleholds among the Amhara,the buda peopleare of non-Amharatribal identity,and hence can only pose a threatto the Amharaby virtueof their beingdifferent. This difference,I maintain, is symbolicof whatthe Amhara detest,fear, or dread. The buda peopleare "strangers" to the landof the Amhara.Originating from a diderentregion, they are landlessand make a living with their manualskills of smithing tanning,weaving, andl pottery-making. Buda E290THNOLOGY statuscontrasts with regaor "nobility"status. Both statusesare inherited consanguineallyon a bilateralbasis. The originmyth of the bada people expressesthe basicthemes found in the beliefsystem in generaland in certainactual social sitllations: envy and conflictbetween siblings who are treateddifferentially by a superiorauthority. In the myth,envy and conflict aregenerated by the curseof God for the sins of the motherEve. Added to thisis God'sfavoring of His child,Christ, the "chosen"son of God.The storyof the envioussiblings' hunting down of Christin orderto attain equalityamong siblings has a strongparallel in real-lifesituations where a fatherfavors one child with the lion's shareof land creatingsibling conflictover the equalizationof theirrights to their father'sland.2 The mythand the beliefhave it thatthe budapeople inherit their qaZb, a power gainedfrom the devilwhich gives them the uncontrollabledrive to "eat" the rega people,who happento be the Amhara,to causetheir death and to bringthem back to life as slaves.It is a coIlceptionthat expresses a dominant themeof enviousstatus inferiors using illegitimate means to gain an ad- vantageover status superiors who possessa legitimatemeans of domination. The buda beliefsuggests that the bu-daare the symbolicexpression of the latentconsequences of unmediatedequal status relationships between men andbetween a manand a woman.Without pyramidal control mechanisms, thisform of relationshipgenerates the anxietyof unstableand unpredictable consequencesbetween two dependentand self-orientedegos, the ultimate consequencesof which are symbolizedin the logicallyextended extreme of domination-the relationshipof masterand slave. The functionof theevil eye beliefin maintainingthe socialsystem can be teleoilogicallyinterpreted as the displacementof a threatand its projectiononto an outgroup.The threatof equal statusrivalry between kin and siblingsoutside of well- definedsituations is projectedonto the buda people,thereby preserving the internalsolidarity (what there is of it) of the Amharapeople. Buda belief appearsto be a functionof a powersuperiority among status equals based on the modelof the eldestson as the objectof envyby his less fortunate youngersiblings, for it is the eldestson, in M,anz,whc) normally is the faveredone and who inheritsthe lion'sshare of the father'sland. Beliefin the evil eye amongthe Enze Amhara,then, has a projective functionwhich throughthe transformationfrom personalitytrait to cul- tural configuration,becomes manifest as a form of dominationanxiety expressedthrough culturally legitimated ideas of reference.This projective processis by no meanscomplete, for it is knownthat the most serious concernsof the Amharainvolve sibling and other kin conflictsover unequal usufructoryrights to land.The landlessbuda, who is dependentupon others forhis livelihood, is thesymbolic reflection of thethreat of becominglandless andwithout authority, ergo, without identity, because of the ambitionsof a more powerfulrelative or the father'scurse of disinheritance. NOTES I. The researchupon which this paperis basedwas carriedout in the centralhighlands of ShoaProvince, Ethiopia from JulyI, I967 to MarchI, I969. I wish to acknowledge EVILEYE BELIEF AMONG THE AMHARA 29I the financialsupport of the NationalInstitute of MentalHealth (Grant No. I TOI MH-II2I4-oI).Partial supplementary funding was also made availableto me by the Committeeon AfricanStudies, University of Chicago. 2. Withinthe structureof thismyth a Freudianoedipal theme is presentwhich employs universaltypes of symbols.The favoredson seeksrefuge and securityin a creviceof a largecliff whichis the openingto a deepcave. The creviceand caveare classicsymbols of female sexualityand maternalsuccorance. The lizard'sphallic function is obvious here.Its presencein the caveand its defenseof its abodehave verysexual connotations. And, the lizard'sbetrayal of Christ,because of its wish to rid itself of this interloper, is also quite significantin its oedipalfunction. But the role of the enviousand hostile siblings,and Christ'sdeath ratherthan the lizard's,complicates the problem.It may be thatwe mustlook at this themewith moregeneralized symb