In a note upon “The Religious Ceremony of the Four Winds or Quarters, as Observed by the Santee Sioux,” Miss Fletcher[2] remarks: “A name implies relationship, and consequently protection; favor and influence are claimed from the source of the name, whether this be the gens or the vision. A name, therefore, shows the affiliation of the individual; it grades him, so to speak, and he is apt to lean upon its implied power. * * * The sacred import of a name in the mind of the Indian is indicated in that part of the ceremony where the “Something that moves” seems to overshadow and inclose the child, and addresses the wakan man as father. The wakan man replies, calling the god, child, at the same time invoking the supernatural protection and care for the boy, as he lays at the feet of the messenger of Unseen Power the offerings of gifts and the honor of the feast. The personal name[3] among Indians, therefore, indicates the protecting presence of a deity, and must, therefore, partake of the ceremonial character of the Indian’s religion.” In this ceremony the superhuman being is addressed by the term implying _juniority_, and the human being, the wakan man, by that associated with _seniority_, an apparent reversal of the usual custom; but, doubtless, there can be found some explanation for this seeming exception to the rule. MYTH AND LEGEND DISTINGUISHED FROM THE SUPERHUMAN. § 10. The Omaha, Ponka, and cognate tribes distinguish at the present day between the myth (higaⁿ, higu) and the legend or story (iuȼa, etc.) on the one hand; and what on the other hand is called “Wakandaʇaȼicaⁿ,” “uqubeaʇaȼicaⁿ,” and “iȼa‘eȼĕaʇaȼicaⁿ.” The former are told only for amusement and are called, “iusictaⁿ iuȼa,” lying tales. They are regarded as “iqawaȼĕaʇaȼicaⁿ,” pertaining to the ludicrous. With this may be compared the statements of Lang:[4] “Among the lowest and most backward, as among the most advanced races, there coexist the mythical and the religious elements in belief. The rational factor (or what approves itself to us as the rational factor) is visible in religion; the irrational is prominent in myth.” * * * “The rational and irrational aspects of mythology and religion may be of coeval antiquity for all that is certainly known, or either of them, in the dark backward of mortal experience, may have preceded the other.” The author has found certain Indian myths which abound in what to the civilized mind is the grossest obscenity, and that too without the slightest reference to the origin of any natural phenomena. Myths of this class appear to have been told from a love of the obscene. Nothing of a mysterious or religious character can be found in them. Perhaps such myths are of modern origin; but this must remain an enigma.