[109] Dr. Stapf thinks it is probably a species of Podocarpus or Dacrydium.
[110] Dr. Seligmann refers (Melanesians of British New Guinea, p. 185) to a specimen of Ficus rigo, in which a taboo, having the power of making Koita folk sick, is believed to be immanent. I do not know whether or not the gabi tree is Ficus rigo, but, if it be so, there is an interesting similarity in this respect between these people and the Mafulu.
[111] A knotted wisp of grass is, I think, a common form of taboo sign in parts of New Guinea; and Dr. Seligmann refers (Melanesians of British New Guinea, pp. 136 to 138) to its use by the Koita for the protection of cocoanuts and other trees and firewood, and as part of the protective sign for new gardens. The use of the wisp by the Mafulu people, as above described, is not a taboo used for the protection of an object from human interference, being intended to protect the travellers in some way from the spirit or spirits haunting the spot. But there is, I think, an underlying similarity of superstitious ideas involved by the two purposes for which the wisps are used.
[112] Melanesians of British New Guinea, p. 281.
[113] The Melanesians, p. 203.
[114] Seligmann, Melanesians of British New Guinea, p.85.
[115] I imagine a somewhat similar superstitious origin may be assumed as regards the idea of general purification (I of course do not refer to mere physical surface washing) by bathing: and Father Egedi says (Anthropos, Vol. V., p. 755) that the Kuni people, after a cannibal feast, had to confine themselves until the end of the moon which commenced before the feast to certain food, and that they then all bathed in running water and returned purified and free to eat any food.
[116] Apparently flying foxes are good omens in Tubetube (Southern Massim). See Seligmann’s Melanesians of British New Guinea, p. 653.
[117] This is very different from the extensive food taboo restrictions which Father Egedi told me were placed upon the bachelors of Mekeo.
[118] Dr. Seligmann puts their average stature at 60.5 in. (Lancet, Feb. 17th, 1906, p. 427), which is less than the Mafulu average of 61.1 in. given by me above.
[119] Dr. Seligmann puts their average cephalic index calculated from fifteen measurements at 78 (Geographical Journal, Vol. XXVII., p. 234), which is below the Mafulu average cephalic index of 80 given by me above.