HISTORY OF MADAGASCAR. 
443 
Thus a table, containing eight new combinations, is 
formed from the figures 1 and 2; and to each column 
is appropriated its own name, whether taken perpendicu¬ 
larly, horizontally, or diagonally. 
The mode of ascertaining decisions is then made by 
comparing, according to certain rules, these columns; say, 
one of the third table with a given column in the second ; 
or of the second and third with another in the third; or 
of some one or two of either with a given column in the 
first. 
It is said by the diviners that the column called Andria- 
minitra (god) is never found to correspond with either 
of the following eight columns in the first table, namely, 
Adikisy, Alezany, Alemora, Abidijady, Adikiajy, Kizo, 
Saka, Vontsira.( # ) 
The sikidy decides respecting the Sorona and the Fa- 
ditra by these comparisons. If the Asorolahy (ninth 
column of first table) correspond with the Andriamanitra, 
a bead must be offered as a sorona, called Vakan-tsi-leon- 
doza, i.e. overcoming the calamity. If the Vohitra meet the 
Tale, then a piece of a tree that grows in the villages 
(not in the fields) must be offered. If the result of Nia 
and Trano (i. e. adding them, and deducting two each 
time) correspond with Tale, the sorona is Vato-tsi-very, 
i. e. “ a stone not lost,” meaning a stone thrown to a short 
distance, and then carefully picked up and preserved by 
some friend or relation, and so not lost. 
Many other comparisons are made in a similar manner, 
♦ The writers of this sketch do not vouch for the correctness of this 
conclusion, namely, that the column called Andriamanitra never agrees with 
either of the above eight columns. Probably the chances are prodigiously 
against such a correspondence. Never having discovered it, the Malagasy 
attribute to the circumstance something supernatural and divine, and hence 
give it the name of god, meaning, probably, wonderful. 
