the word peyote comes from the Aztee peyutl (a silky co- 
coon) and was applied to Lophophora Williamsu and the 
several species of Cacalia because certain parts of these 
plants were velvety or silky (the tufts of hair of the cac- 
tus, the soft tuberous roots of the composites), resem- 
bling caterpillar cocoons. Although generally accepted, 
this etymology does not seem to explain the application 
of the same name to the great array of plants which pos- 
sess no soft or silky parts whatsoever. As far as the bo- 
tanical evidence is concerned, the etymology (10) which 
derives peyote from the Aztec prefix pi (small) and yauth 
or yolli (herb with narcotic odor or action) seems more 
probably correct. Thus, in this broad sense (a small, nar- 
cotic herb), the word could have been and was applied to 
scores of Mexican plants. There may be some doubt as 
to the validity of this etymology in the minds of Ameri- 
‘an Uto-Aztecan linguistic experts, but the botanical evi- 
dence seems to support it as a more logical origin of the 
term. 
Unfortunately for the botanist and anthropologist, 
teonandcatl (‘flesh of the gods’’) has, in recent years, 
become a common name for mescal buttons in America. 
This is the result of an erroneous identification by Safford 
(13) of peyote with the sacred, intoxicating mushroom 
of the Aztecs. Failing to find a fungus possessing nar- 
cotice properties in Mexico, and noting that the dried head 
of Lophophora Williamsu resembles ‘a dried mushroom 
so remarkably that at first glance it will even deceive a 
mycologist’’, Safford concluded that the two (mescal 
buttons and the sacred mushrooms) were identical (73). 
It is to be regretted that the misapplication of this 
Aztee word (teonandcat!) to peyote had established itself 
so firmly before a correction was forthcoming. Inasmuch 
as refutation of this has not been made by English au- 
thors, the following contradiction made by Reko (72 
[ 136 | 
