232 



SYSTEMS OF CONSANGUINITY AND AFFINITY 



upon a comparison of the respective dialects of these three stems of the GanowA. 

 nian family, it would bo that the Dakotan became first detached from the common 

 trunk, the Algonkin second, and the Athapasco- Apache third. For similar reasons 

 the Shoshonee, hereafter to be considered, must be placed subsequent to the last. 

 In other words, since there is no ascertainable common trunk, these three streams 

 of speech flowed outward from the common source of the language, in the order of 

 time named with respect to each other. The subjoined comparative table of five 

 Athapascan dialects taken in connection with the terms of relationship in the table 

 (Table II;, will illustrate the degree of their nearness to each other.^ Of these vo- 

 cabularies, the first two were furnished to me by the late Robert Kennicott, who spent 

 several years in the Hudson's Bay Territory in scientific explorations. The others 

 were taken from Richardson's Arctic Expedition. They represent the extremes of 

 the Athapascan area east of the mountains. The dialect of the TacuUies, Avho are 

 west of the mountains, shows more divergence, but the identity is obvious. The 

 Sussees occupied the extreme southwestern corner of the Athapascan area east of 

 the mountain, and were the frontagers of the Blackfeet. When in the Hudson's 

 Bay Territory in 1861, I was unable to procure either the Sussee system of rela- 



