190 Transactions. 



dialect seems to be closely akin to that of Rarotonga, as is shown by the 

 common use of the plural and dual prefix pu'e. From Tahiti the Paumotu 

 and Manahiki Groups were colonized. 



At the end of the article a sketch-map is given of these branching 

 migrations. But the limitations of the linguistic method are revealed 

 by the accompanying sketch-maps, one made by Horatio Hale in the 

 " forties" of last century on the " Wilkes Expedition," another by Gerland 

 for Waitz's " Anthropologic " in the " sixties," and a third by Weule for 

 Helmolt's " History of the World " early this century. Hale brings the 

 expedition first to Samoa, with offshoots to the Ellice and Tokelau Groups, 

 then to Tonga, and thence direct to New Zealand and the Chatham Islands ; 

 from Samoa, also, one goes off to Tahiti, whence one goes to the south-east 

 Marquesas, a second to the Tubuai Archipelago, and a third to the Cook 

 Group. A third colonizing expedition leaves Samoa for the Cook Group, 

 the Tubuai Archipelago, and Mangareva. Besides the branch to New 

 Zealand, Tonga sent off one to the north-west Marquesas and on to Hawaii. 

 Gerland, like Finck, brings his primary expedition through the Ellice and 

 Tokelau Groups to Samoa, thence, like Hale, over Tonga to New Zealand 

 and the Chatham Islands, whilst, as in Finck's, a Sanioan offshoot goes to 

 Futuna and one Tongan offshoot to Uvea and another to Niue. He also 

 sends a main expedition, like Finck, over the Cook Group to the Tubuai Archi- 

 pelago, and one to the Marquesas, a third to Easter Island, and a fourth 

 to Hawaii. Weule, like Hale, brings his expedition first to Samoa ; thence 

 one colony goes direct to Hawaii and another by way of Tahiti ; a third 

 goes direct to the Cook Group, and thence to the Tubuai Archipelago and 

 Mangareva. From the Cook Group a colony goes to New Zealand, whilst 

 from Tahiti one goes to the Cook Group and another to the south-east 

 Marquesas, and the north-west Marquesas are peopled from Tonga. 



There is no better criticism of the linguistic method of finding lines 

 of migration than the presentation of these differences. The fact of the 

 matter is that these pure philologists isolate a few small phenomena that 

 each belongs to several groups, and ignore hundreds of others in which 

 the groups thus united disagree. One instance will be enough : Finck gives 

 a table of the sounds of each group, and then he proceeds in his sketch 

 to ignore some of the more striking variations. He gives ts (the English 

 missionaries make it ch) as a variation of t in Futuna, Uvea, Tonga, and 

 the Chatham Islands before the vowel i ; all the other dialects have only 

 t ; yet he brings no migration from any one of these direct to the Chatham 

 Islands, skipping New Zealand. So wh is given as a variation of h and / 

 not only in New Zealand and the Chatham Islands, but in the Tokelau 

 Group ; and the same groups are united by using w for v. Yet he ignores 

 this community of linguistic phenomena, and brings no migration from the 

 Tokelau Group to the southern groups, or the reverse. These are quite as 

 important as the break (') for k, on which he bases the linguistic community 

 of the Ellice, Tokelau, Samoan, Tahitian, South Marquesan, and Tubuai 

 Groups ; or the variation of r from /, on which he bases an eastern Polynesian 

 Group, consisting of New Zealand, Chatham Islands, Tahiti, the Paumotus, 

 the Cook Group, Mangareva, the Tubuai Archipelago, and Easter Island. 



The radical mistakes made by these philological ethnologists are the 

 attempts to draw inferences from the language without the culture, and 

 the assumption that there was but one colonizing expedition. The extra- 

 ordinary similarity of the dialects (Finck seems to acknowledge " dialects " 

 as the proper term, for when he says " Sprnchen " he always adds, " that 



