Part 22

_Lule._ _Vilela._ _Chunupi._ _Mataco._ Man, pelé, nitemoi, nitepac, { pairé, { inoon, D. Woman, uacal, quisle, jiolé, chiegua. Sun, yny, olò, oló, iguala. Moon, alit, copī, cocpi, huela. Fire, ycuá, niè, nié, etog. Water, to, fo, ma, maá, { elot, { guag, D. Head, tocó, niscone, niscan, litec, D. Eye, zu, chù, toqué, tacqui, teloy. Ear, cusanep, maslup, mas leguep, kiotei. Mouth, cá, yep, notagni, D. Nose, nùs, limic, niji veppe, nognes. Tongue, lequy, lequip. Tooth, llu, lupe. Hand, ys, isip, ysivep, nog-guez. Foot, ellú, ape, huopep, kalay´. House, uyâ, enú, guane, huane, { guoslo, { lubuque, D. 1, alapea, agit, { hotequachi, { efagla, D. 2, tamop, uke, { hotequoasi, { tacuas, D. 3, tamlip, nipetuei, { lach tdi qua jel, { tacuya, D. 4, locuep, yepkatalet, { tdi-qua less-hichi, { nocuepogec, D. 5, ype befagla, D.

The near relationship of the Lule, Vilela and Chunupi appears clear from the above comparison. The Chunupi words are taken from Fontana (_ubi suprá_), the Vilela from the vocabulary of Gilii’s _Storia Americana_, and the Lule from Machoni’s Grammar.

The Mataco is also from Fontana, and represents the dialect as spoken to-day. The words marked D. are from the D’Orbigny MSS.

LANGUAGES OF THE LA PLATA BASIN AND PAMPAS.

_Guachi._ _Guato._ _Caraja._ _Araucanian._ Man, chacup, matai, abou, che. Woman, outie´, mouhaja, awkeu, domo. Sun, ō-es, nouveai, tisu, antu. Moon, o-alete, upina, aadou, endo, cuyen. Fire, mata, eastou, cuthal. Water, euak, maguen, be-ai, co. Head, iotapa, dōkeu, woara, lonco. Eye, iataya, marei, waa-rouwai, ge. Ear, irtanmété, mavi, wana-outai, pilun. Mouth, iape, dijio, wa-a-rou, uun. Nose, ia-note, taga, wa-day-asan, yu. Tongue, iteche, chagi, wa-cla-rato, que-uun. Tooth, iava, maqua, wa-a-djon, voro. Hand, iolai-mason, ida, wa-debo, cuu. Foot, iacalep, apoo, wa-a-wa, namun. House, poecha, mucu, aeto, ruca. 1, tamak, tchenai, wadewo, quiñe. 2, eu-echo, du-uni, wadebo-thoa, epu. 3, eu-echo-kailau, tchum, wadeboa-heodo, cula. 4, eu-echo-way, dekai, wadebo-jeodo, meli. 5, localau, toera, wadewa-jouclay, quechu.

The vocabularies of the Guachis, Guatos and Carajas are from the collections of Castelnau (_Expédition_, Tome V., Appendix); that of the Araucanian from Febres’ _Diccionario_.

The Guachis are classed as belonging to the Guaranis (Tupi stock), and by tradition came from the west (see _anté_, p. 233). A comparison with the Samucu vocabulary (page 359) seems to me to suggest several resemblances which would be worth further study on more extended material.

The Guatos may be a mixed off-shoot of the Tapuya stock, as has been suggested (_anté_, p. 318). Of the Caraja, we must await the publication of the abundant material collected by Dr. Paul Ehrenreich.

PATAGONIAN AND FUEGIAN STOCKS.

_Tsoneca, 1._ _Tsoneca, 2._ _Yahgan._ _Alikuluf._ Man, nuken, chonik, ohă, uön, ack´inish. Woman, nacuna, karken, kepa, shepush, ack´hanash. Sun, chuina, gengenko, lŭm, lŭm. Moon, chuina, showan, han´nuka, cunnequa. Fire, ma-ja, yaik, pushaky, tĕtal. Water, karra, ley, shamea, chanash. Head, guil, kittar, lukabe, of´chocka. Eye, gottel, g-ötl, della, telkh. Ear, shene, shaa, ufkhea, teldil. Mouth, shahan, yeak, uffeare. Nose, oo, tchal, or, cushush, nohl. Tongue, del, tal, lŭn, luckin. Teeth, curr, oër, orre, tu´un, cauwash. Hand, ore, fan, tsicc’r, { jösch, } yuccaba. { marpo, } Foot, keal, { shankence, } cŏeeă, cutliculcul. { alj, } Home, cocha, kou, uk kral, hŭt. 1, cheuquen, chuche, ocoale, tow quid ow. 2, xeukay, houke, combabe, telkeow. 3, keash, { aäs, } mutta, cup´eb. { kaash, } 4, kekaguy, { carge, } carga, inadaba. { kague, } 5, keytzum, ktsin, cup´aspa.

The vocabularies of the Tsoneca, Tehuelhet or Patagonian differ considerably in the various writers. No. 1 is from Von Martius, completed from D’Orbigny’s lists. No. 2 is based on Lt. Muster’s examples, supplemented from the vocabularies in Ramon Lista’s _Exploraciones_.

The Yahgan and Alikuluf pass for independent stocks. Yet in a number of words they resemble each other, and in a few, for example, those for “eye,” “woman,” “moon,” “man,” there seems more than a chance similarity.

ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS.

P. 24. AURIFEROUS GRAVELS OF CALIFORNIA. The principal reference is J. D. Whitney, _The Auriferous Gravels of the Sierra Nevada of California_, pp. 258-288 (Cambridge, Mass., 1879). Professor Whitney believes that the evidence is sufficient to attribute the mortars, pestles, beads, etc., found in the auriferous gravels to late pliocene man. But Dr. Joseph Leidy describes equine skulls, molars, incisors, etc., found in these gravels, thirty-five to forty feet below the surface, “not differing in any respect from those of the modern horse,” and “unchanged in texture” (see _ibid._, p. 257). Dr. Leidy informs me personally that for such reasons he gravely doubts the antiquity of the formation, and distrusts the great age of the human relics it contains.

P. 27. PALÆOLITHIC IMPLEMENTS. Reports of the discovery of very large numbers of supposed palæolithic implements in various parts of the United States have been collected and published by Mr. Thomas Wilson in the _Report of the U. S. National Museum_, 1887-88, pp. 677-702. These implements, however, are called palæolithic from their form and workmanship only, and not from the stratigraphic relations in which they were found. As palæolithic forms often survived in the riper culture of the neolithic age, the only positive proof of their older origin must be that they are found in undisturbed relation to older strata.

P. 33. REMAINS OF MAN IN THE EQUUS BEDS. What American geologists call the Equus Beds are those which yield in abundance the bones of various species of fossil horse, as _E. major_, _occidentalis_, _excelsus_, _barcenæi_, _fraternus_, _crenidens_, etc., most of which have been determined by Dr. Joseph Leidy and Prof. E. D. Cope. The principal localities of these beds are: 1. The Oregon Desert; 2. The country of the Nueces, in southwestern Texas; and 3. The valley of Mexico. The horizon to which these beds should be referred was considered by Prof. King to be the Upper Pliocene; but by Prof. G. K. Gilbert, Dr. Joseph Leidy, and I think, by Prof. Cope, it is rather held to be pleistocene or early quaternary, probably as old as the great glacial phenomena of the Continent. According to Cope and Gilbert, rude stone implements have undoubtedly been found _in place_ in the Equus beds of Nevada, California and Southwestern Texas. See the _American Naturalist_, 1889, p. 165; _Proc. Acad. Nat. Sciences_, Phila., 1883, p. 134, sq.

Pp. 106, 108. KWAKIUTL AND NOOTKA STOCKS. After the pages referred to had been printed, I received, through the kindness of Mr. Horatio Hale, advance sheets of the Sixth Annual Report of the Committee of the British Association on the tribes of the Northwest Coast, prepared by Dr. Franz Boas, with an introduction by Mr. Hale, and including eighteen vocabularies. Dr. Boas’ researches furnish clear evidence of a connection between the Kwakiutl and the Nootka tongues, and there is little doubt that they are distantly related. An instructive article on the physical characteristics of the Indians of the North Pacific coast is contributed by Dr. Boas to the _American Anthropologist_ for January, 1891. His conclusion is: “Each tribe appears composed of many types, but in each we find a marked prevalence of a certain type.”

P. 123. SUPPOSED CONNECTION OF SONORAN LANGUAGES WITH THE MAYA STOCK. In his _Etudes Aztèques_, published in the _Museon_, 1890, p. 506, M. W. Baligny endeavors to show a connection between the vocabularies of Sonoran languages and the Maya dialects. His strong points are some of the numerals and the personal pronouns of the first and second person. I have elsewhere given good reasons for not depending on these pronominal analogies in American languages (see _Essays of an Americanist_, p. 396). And as to the numerals, “dont la ressemblance est évidente” (according to him), when the Sonoran tongues disagree with the Nahuatl, they have almost always clearly borrowed from the Yuma stem, as in “two,” _guoca_, _kuak_ (see _Vocabs._, _anté_, pp. 335, 336).

P. 163. LANGUAGE OF THE RAMAS. Since my negative observations about the Ramas were in type, I have received a short vocabulary of their language from the Rev. W. Siebärger, Moravian missionary on the Musquito coast. The orthography is German.

_Rama._ Man, nikikna, Woman, kuma, Sun, nunik, Moon, tukan, Fire, abung, Water, sii, Head, kiing, Eye, up, Ear, kuka, Mouth, kaka, Nose, taik. Tongue, kup. Tooth, siik. Hand, kuik. Foot, kaat. House, knu. 1, saiming. 2, puk sak. 3, pang sak. 4, kun kun beiso. 5, kwik astar.

My informant writes me that the Ramas are about 250 in number, and are all Christians and able to speak and write English, except a few very old persons. Their language will probably be extinct in a few years. They are confined to their island in Blewfield Lagoon. It is particularly interesting, therefore, to fix their affinities before the opportunity passes. From the above vocabulary I think there is little doubt but that they are a branch of the Changuina or Dorasque stock, described pp. 174, 175. The following words attest this, the Changuina forms being from A. L. Pinart’s _Vocabulario Castellano-Dorasque, Dialectos Chumulu, Gualaca y Changuina_ (Paris, 1890):

_Rama._ _Changuina._ Sun, nunik, kĕlik u. Fire, abung, kebug-al (fire-brand). Water, sii, si. Head, kiing, kin-unuma. Ear, kuka, kuga. Mouth, kaka, kaga. Nose, taik, θakai. Tongue, kup, kuba. Tooth, siik, su. Hand, kuik, kula. House, knu, ku.

The numerals for “two” and “three,” _puk sak_, _pang sak_, are doubtless the Cuna _pocua_, _pagua_. The Ramas, therefore, belong to the Isthmian tribes, and formed the vanguard of the South American immigration into North America. What time they moved northward and possessed themselves of their small island is unknown, but it was probably after the conquest. Mr. Siebärger writes me: “They were always kept under, even ill-treated, by the Musquito Indians, and are still very submissive and teachable.”

The following errata should be noted:

P. 69, line 3; for _Nehaunies_ read _Nahaunies_.

Pp. 89, 95, 98 and 101, the numbers of the sections should read 7, 8, 9, 10, instead of 5, 6, 7, 8.

P. 169, line 17, for _maternal_ read _paternal_.

P. 197, for _Morropas_ read _Malabas_.

P. 251, line 11, for _Wapiana_ read _Woyawoi_.

Transcriber’s Note: the listed errata have been corrected.

FOOTNOTES

[1] For the full development of these principles, I would refer the reader to my work entitled _Races and Peoples; Lectures on the Science of Ethnography_ (David McKay, Philadelphia.)

[2] Notably, Adair’s _History of the North American Indians_, and Lord Kingsborough’s magnificent _Mexican Antiquities_.

[3] For a complete refutation of this venerable hypothesis see an article “L’Atlantide,” by Charles Ploix, in the _Revue d’Anthropologie_, 1887, p. 291; and de Mortillet, _Le Préhistorique Antiquité de l’Homme_, p. 124.

[4] De Quatrefages, _Histoire Générale des Races Humaines_, p. 558. He adds the wholly incorrect statement that many Japanese words are found in American languages.

[5] The nearest of the Aleutian islands to Kamschatka is 253 miles distant. The explorer Behring found the western Aleutians, those nearest the Asian shore, uninhabited. See W. H. Dall, “Origin of the Innuit,” pp. 96, 97, in _Contributions to North American Ethnology_, Vol. I. (Washington, 1877).

[6] The evidences of a vast ice-sheet once covering the whole of East Cape are plainly visible. See Dr. I. C. Rosse, _Medical and Anthropological Notes on Alaska_, p. 29. (Washington, 1883.)

[7] Joseph Prestwich, _Geology_, Vol. II, p. 465, (Oxford, 1888). J. D. Dana, _Text Book of Geology_, pp. 355-359 (New York, 1883). Geo. M. Dawson, in _The American Geologist_, 1890, p. 153. The last mentioned gives an excellent epitome of the history of the great Pacific glacier.

[8] James D. Dana, loc. cit., p. 359.

[9] James D. Dana, “Reindeers in Southern New England,” in _American Journal of Science_, 1875, p. 353.

[10] See “On an Ancient Human Footprint from Nicaragua,” by D. G. Brinton, in _Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society_ 1887, p. 437.

[11] J. S. Wilson, in _Memoirs of the Anthropological Society of London_, Vol. III., p. 163.

[12] The finders have been Messrs. H. P. Cresson and W. H. Holmes. From my own examination of them, I think there is room for doubt as to the artificial origin of some of them. Others are clearly due to design.

[13] Her account is in the _American Naturalist_, 1884, p. 594, and a later synopsis in _Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science_, 1889, p. 333.

[14] G. K. Gilbert, in _The American Anthropologist_, 1889, p. 173.

[15] W. J. McGee, “Palæolithic Man in America,” in _Popular Science Monthly_, November 1888.

[16] See G. Frederick Wright, _The Ice Age in North America_.

[17] Dr. Abbott has reported his discoveries in numerous articles, and especially in his work entitled _Primitive Industry_, chapters 32, 33.

[18] De Mortillet, _Le Préhistorique Antiquité de l’Homme_, p. 132, sq.

[19] Mariano de la Barcena, “Fossil Man in Mexico,” in the _American Naturalist_, Aug., 1885.

[20] Florentino Ameghino, _La Antiguedad del Hombre en el Plata_, passim. (2 vols, Buenos Aires, 1880.)

[21] _The Descent of Man_, p. 155. Dr. Rudolph Hoernes, however, has recently argued that the discovery of such simian forms in the American tertiary as the _Anaptomorphus homunculus_, Cope, renders it probable that the anthropoid ancestor of man lived in North America. _Mittheil der Anthrop. Gesell. in Wien_, 1890, § 71. The Anaptomorphus was a lemur rather than a monkey, and had a dentition very human in character.

[22] Quoted by G. F. Wright in _The Ice Age in America_, p. 583.

[23] H. Habernicht, _Die Recenten Veränderungen der Erdoberfläche_, s. 27 (Gotha, 1882). He further shows that at that time both northern Russia and northern Siberia were under water, which would effectually dispose of any assumed migration by way of the latter.

[24] J. W. Spencer, in the London _Geological Magazine_, 1890, p. 208, sqq.

[25] James Scroll, _Climate and Time_, p. 451.

[26] G. F. Wright, _The Ice Age in North America_, pp. 582-3 (New York, 1890). De Mortillet, _Le Préhistorique_, etc., pp. 186-7. H. Rink, in _Proc. of the Amer. Philos. Society_, 1885, p. 293.

[27] In his excellent work, _The Building of the British Isles_, (London, 1888), Mr. A. J. Jukes-Browne presents in detail the proofs of these statements, and gives two plates (Nos. XII. and XIII.), showing the outlines of this land connection at the period referred to (pp. 252, 257, etc.).

[28] Wright, _The Ice Age_, p. 504.

[29] Gilbert, _Sixth An. Rep. of the Com. of the N. Y. State Reservation_, p. 84 (Albany, 1890).

[30] _Races and Peoples_, chapter III. (David McKay, Philadelphia.)

[31] “Palæolithic Man in America” in _Popular Science Monthly_, Nov., 1888.

[32] “No one could live among the Indians of the Upper Amazon without being struck with their constitutional dislike to heat.” “The impression forced itself upon my mind that the Indian lives as a stranger or immigrant in these hot regions.” H. W. Bates, _The Naturalist on the Amazon_, Vol. II., pp. 200, 201.

[33] See E. F. im Thurn, _Among the Indians of Guiana_, pp. 189, 190, who speaks strongly of the debility of the tropical Indians.

[34] See J. Kollmann, _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, 1884, s. 181 _sq._ The conclusion of Virchow is “que les caracteres physionomiques des têtes Américaines montrent une divergence si manifeste qu’on doit renoncer definitivement à la construction d’un type universel et commun des Indigènes Américains.” _Congrès des Américanistes_, 1888, p. 260. This is substantially the conclusion at which Dr. James Aitken Meigs arrived, in his “Observations on the Cranial Forms of the American Aborigines,” in _Proc. of the Acad. Nat. Sci. of Phila._, 1866.

[35] Henry Gilman, _Report of the Smithsonian Institution for 1885_, p. 239. Other perforated skulls from similar graves in the same locality showed indices of, 82, 83, 85.

[36] D. G. Brinton, _Races and Peoples; Lectures on the Science of Ethnography_, p. 20. (David McKay, Philadelphia.)

[37] Dr. Washington Matthews, in the _American Anthropologist_, 1889, p. 337.

[38] _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, Bd. II., s. 195.

[39] Cf. Lucien Carr, in the _Eleventh Annual Report of the Peabody Museum_, p. 367.

[40] Lucien Carr, “Notes on the Crania of New England Indians,” in the _Anniversary Memoirs of the Boston Society of Natural History_, 1880; and compare Topinard, _Elements d’Anthropologie Générale_, p. 628. (Paris, 1885.)

[41] H. Fritsch, in _Compte-Rendu du Congrès des Américanistes_, 1888, p. 276.

[42] For instance, some of the Mixes of Mexico have full beards (Herrera, _Decadas de las Indias_, Dec. IV., Lib. IX., cap. VII.); the Guarayos of Bolivia wear long straight beards, covering both lips and cheeks (D’Orbigny, _L’Homme Américain_, Vol. I., p. 126); and the Cashibos of the upper Ucayali are bearded (Herndon, _Exploration of the Valley of the Amazon_, p. 209).

[43] “Report on the Blackfeet,” in _Trans. Brit. Assoc. Adv. of Science_, 1885.

[44] “Les Indiens de la Province de Mato Grosso,” in the _Nouvelles Annales des Voyages_, 1862.

[45] The Mexican president Benito Juarez was a full-blood Zapotec; Barrios of Guatemala, a full-blood Cakchiquel.

[46] _Vues des Cordillères, et Monumens des Peuples Indigènes de l’Amérique_, Tome I. p. 51.

[47] _Ancient Society_, by Lewis H. Morgan (New York, 1878); _Houses and House-Life of the American Aborigines_, by the same (Washington, 1881); Bandelier, in the _Reports of the Peabody Museum_; Dr. Gustav Brühl, _Die Culturvölker Alt Amerikas_ (Cincinnati, 1887); D. G. Brinton, _The Myths of the New World_, 3d Ed. revised, David McKay (Philadelphia, 1896); _American-Hero Myths_, by the same (Philadelphia, 1882).

[48] The word totem is derived from the Algonkin root _od_ or _ot_ and means that which belongs to a person or “his belongings,” in the widest sense, his village, his people, etc.

[49] Among the Brazilian hordes, for instance, Martius, _Beiträge zur Ethnographie und Sprachenkunde Amerikas_, Bd. I. s. 116 (Leipzig, 1867).

[50] Thus the Heiltsuk and Kwakiutl of the northwest coast, though speaking close dialects of the same stock, differ fundamentally in their social organization. That of the former is matriarchal, of the latter patriarchal. Boas, _Fifth Report to the Brit. Assoc. Adv. Science_, p. 38.

[51] _Races and Peoples; Lectures on the Science of Ethnography_, p. 55 (David McKay, Philadelphia.)

[52] _Die Entstehung der Arten durch Räumliche Sonderung_ (Basel, 1889).

[53] J. W. Sanborn, _Legends, Customs and Social Life of the Seneca Indians_, p. 36 (Gowanda, N. Y., 1878).

[54] Father Ragueneau tells us that among the Hurons, when a man was killed, thirty gifts were required to condone the offence, but when a woman was the victim, forty were demanded. _Relation des Jesuits_, 1635.

[55] Dr. W. H. Corbusier, in _American Antiquarian_, Sept., 1886; Dr. Amedée Moure, _Les Indiens de Mato Grosso_, p. 9 (Paris, 1862).

[56] This opinion is defended by Max Schlosser in the _Archiv für Anthropologie_, 1889, s. 132.

[57] The lama was never ridden, nor attached for draft, though the opposite has been stated. See J. J. von Tschudi, “Das Lama,” in _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, 1885, s. 108.

[58] See “The Lineal Measures of the Semi-Civilized Nations of Mexico and Central America,” in my _Essays of an Americanist_, p. 433 (Philadelphia, 1890).

[59] The Caribs and some of the Peruvian coast tribes sometimes lifted a large square cloth when running with the wind; but this is not what is meant by a sail.

[60] _American Hero-Myths_ (Philadelphia, 1882).

[61] Carlos de Gagern, _Charakteristik der Indianischen Bevölkerung Mexikos_, s. 23 (Wien, 1873.)

[62] I have treated this subject at considerable length in opposition to the opinion of Lucien Adam and Friedrich Müller in my _Essays of an Americanist_, pp. 349-389 (Philadelphia, 1890).

[63] Packard, “Notes on the Labrador Eskimo and their former range southward,” in _American Naturalist_, 1885, p. 471.

[64] John Murdoch, in _The American Anthropologist_, 1888, p. 129; also Dr. Henry Rink, _The Eskimo Tribes_ (London, 1887); Dr. Franz Boas, _The Central Eskimo_, in the Sixth _Annual Report_ of the Bureau of Ethnology; W. H. Dall, _Tribes of the Extreme Northwest_ (Washington, 1887); Ivan Petroff, in _The American Naturalist_, 1882, p. 567.

[65] Dall is positive that there is no racial distinction between the Innuit and the other American Indians, loc. cit., p. 95. He adds: “The Tartar, Japanese or Chinese origin of these people finds no corroboration in their manners, dress or language.”

[66] Commander G. Holm found the East Greenlanders, a pure stock, well marked mesocephalic, with a maximum of 84.2 (_Les Grönlandais Orientaux_, p. 365, Copenhagen, 1889). Dall gives the range to his measurements of Innuit skulls from 87 to 70 (_Contributions to American Ethnology_, Vol. I, p. 71).

[67] “Unlike the Indian,” writes Mr. F. F. Payne, “the Eskimo is nearly always laughing, and even in times of great distress it is not hard to make them smile.” “The Eskimo at Hudson Strait,” in _Proc. Canad. Institute_, 1889, p. 128.

[68] W. J. Hoffman, “On Indian and Eskimo Pictography,” in _Trans. Anthrop. Soc. of Washington_, Vol. II, p. 146.