304 • ANIMISM AND FOLK-LORE OF GUIANA INDIANS [e.-h. ann-. 30 



operation lasts. The pot in whic-li it is boiled must be a new one. and must never have 

 held anything before, otherwise the poison would be deficient in strength; add to this 

 that the operator must take particular care not to expose himself to the vapor which 

 arises from it while on the fire. . . . Still the Indians think that it affects the health; 

 and the operator either is, or what is more probable, supposes himself to be sick, for 

 some days later . . . and it would seem that they imagine it affects others as well as 

 him who boils it; for an Indian agi'eed one evening to make some for me, but the next 

 morning he declined having anything to do with it, alleging that his wife was with 

 child! [W, 93-4.] 



Schomburgk more or less confirms these restrictions when he says 

 that before and during the making of the poison the operator must 

 submit to a strict fast, and that during the cooking, no woman, 

 especially a pregnant woman, or maid may come near the house; 

 furthermore his own wife must not be pregnant. In the particular 

 instance cited the distinguished traveler was asked not to eat sugar- 

 cane or sugar during the manufacture of the poison (Sc,Ri, 455-7). 

 "Thus the greater the abstention from food on the part of the peai 

 men, the greater the virulence of the in-aU, its action being supposed 

 to be deadly in correspondence with the degree of hunger of the maker ' ' 

 (J. J. Quelch, Ti, 1895, p. 2G2). Im Thurn supphes the following: 

 "Water was fetched especially for the poison-making from a stream 

 nearly a quarter of a mile distant; and care was taken in carrying 

 this to the house, to rest it on the ground every few yards. For, 

 say the Indians, a bird wounded by a poisoned dart will fly only as 

 far as the water, with which the poison was made, was carried without 

 rest" (IT, 311). 



363. There would appear to be some intimate relationship between 

 an individual and his personal name (cf. Sects. 12/^, 125), of such 

 nature that the very mention of it in his presence would be fraught 

 with serious consequences ; neither, as in the case of spirits (Sect. 172), 

 may he be pointed at, or trodden over (Sect. 220). The name is 

 deemed to be part and parcel of the individual, and the mention of it 

 under those circumstances would put liim in the power, as it were, 

 of the person speaking. This rule held good for both Mainland 

 (KG, I, 184; II, 147) and Island Indians. Accordmg to age and sex, 

 one will address another as brother, sister, father, motherj son or 

 daughter, etc., or will speak of him or her as the father or mother, 

 etc., of such an one; or, to specialize, "they will speak half the name, 

 e. g. Mala instead of saying Mala-kaaU, and Hiba for Hiba-lomon" 

 (RoP, 451; KG, ii, 147). This fact will thus render the followiag 

 statements of de Goeje and Kirke more mtelligible: "Some Trios 

 have two names, one reserved for friends, the other for strangers: 

 Crevaux says that the Ojanas might have two names, one for ad- 

 dressing the person and the other for referrmg to him when absent" 

 (Go, 26). "It is a curious thing that you can never discover an 

 Indian's real name ... he never divulges it, nor is he ever called 



