30 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [bull. 73 
but the form without a terminal a seems to be nearer the original, 
and I would suggest kdllo, strong, powerful, or violent, followed by 
an artiele pronoun such as ash, the aforesaid, or osh. In case the 
final a were original the seeond word in the compound might be 
a n sha, to sit, to be. Mayaimi recalls Choctaw maiha, wide, and 
mih, it is so, it is like that, although mih is usually initial in position. 
I can do nothing with Zertepe, but, as suggested, this may not be 
a generic word. Guasaca-esgui should probably be pronounced 
Wasaka-esgi, and both parts bear a strong resemblance to the Choc- 
taw uski or osTci, cane, though of course, in any case, only one would 
represent that word; the Choctaw word for river is hacha. In expla- 
nation of No, Gatschet cites Creek anoMtcha, "lover," anukidshas, 
"I love," the Choctaw equivalent of which is anushkwnna, no or nu 
being assumed as the radix, but anoa, "famous," "noted," "illus- 
trious," may also be mentioned in this connection. Perhaps the 
most suggestive of all of these words is Cafiogacola, because the 
ending looks suspiciously like Choctaw oTcla, people, which we often 
find written by early travelers ogala or oTcala. The first part might 
be explained by Alabama kdngo, not good, bad, or as a shortened 
form of Choctaw i n lcana Tceyu, unfriendly. Finally, se-le-te-ga may 
contain cheli, you fly, you go rapidly, followed by -t, used in con- 
necting several verbs, and possibly TiaiaTca, to appear, to peep, 
though I am not certain that this particular combination is admissible. 
Romans is the only writer to attempt an interpretation of names 
along the southeastern Florida coast. He gives the name of Indian 
River as Aisa hatcha and interprets this as meaning "Deer River." ' 
The word hatcha, however, was probably given by himself or else 
obtained from the Seminole Indians and there is no proof that it 
belonged to the ancient language of Ais, while the first was probably 
translated arbitrarily in terms of the Choctaw language with which 
Romans was to some extent familiar. 
Upon the whole more resemblances between these words and 
Choctaw seem to occur than would be expected if the languages 
had nothing in common, and those which we find in Guasaca-esgui 
and Cafiogacola are almost too striking to be merely accidental. 
In connection with the first of these reference should be made to 
the name of a province mentioned only once by Fontaneda and 
seemingly located near Tampa Bay. This is Osiquevede, in which 
it is possible we again have oski. The latter part of the word might 
be interpreted by means of Choctaw fitih a, to whirl or veer about. 
Putting all of the above evidence together, we may fairly conclude 
that a connection with Choctaw, or at all events some Muskhogean 
dialect, is indicated, but w r e must equally admit that it is not proved. 
i Romans, Concise Nat. Hist, of E. and W. Fla., p. 273. 
