1898-99. | ON THE CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE DENE TRIBES. 
~I 
mn 
ON THE CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE DENE TRIBES. 
BY THE REV. FATHER A. G. MoRICE, O.M.I. 
(Read December 17th, 1898.) 
THE fifth volume of the “Transactions of the Canadian Institute ” 
contained a paper by the Rev. John Campbell, LL.D., which could not 
fail to interest me.* To say that, after a careful perusal of its pages, all 
doubt and uncertainty as to the origin of my Déné Indians have vanished 
from my mind would certainly be going beyond the truth. It may be 
that I am too exacting; but, as I went on reading, I could not but 
mentally formulate the strongest objections against, especially, the 
philological portion of the reverend author’s effort. My intention to-day 
is not to expatiate on what I consider the shortcomings of that most 
important part of his essay, nor do I even wish to take exception to his 
conclusions. | intend to confine my attention to answering a few 
questions, correcting some misinformation and supplying omissions, and 
that in so far only as I am directly or indirectly concerned. In other 
words, I would beg to hazard a few remarks on the classifications of the 
Northern Dénés, such as reviewed by Prof. Campbell. 
I hold that the reverend gentleman needlessly impugns the accuracy 
or appositeness of my information on the subject, such as embodied in 
my previous communications to the Institute, and, were his queries and 
hints left unanswered, ethnology would retrograde, on that particular 
point, to what it was ten years ago. Nor should it be forgotten that 
other well-meaning ethnographers have lately re-edited the errors 
against which I have several times protested. Hence the necessity of 
the following remarks. 
Before going any further, and the better to define once for all our 
respective positions, may I, at the risk of appearing egotistical, be 
pardoned a remark of asomewhat personal character 7+ Ethnographers 
~ “The Dénés of America identified with the Tungus of Asia.” My interest in that essay will appear 
so much the more natural as, some years ago, I published myself a short paper ‘‘ Déné Roots,” the main 
object of which was to ask for the collaboration of philologists towards the discovery of the Dénés’ origin. 
t The fact that the opening pages of my first paper contributed to the Institute were devoted to a 
criticism of an inaccurate classification of the Dénés, a criticism which Prof, Campbell now implicitly 
rejects, must be my excuse for offering remarks of such a personal character. People should know the 
grounds of my assurance, so that they may gauge the degree of accuracy of my information. A good 
point in favour of Prof. Campbell’s essay is that, in common with a few other ethnographers, he has 
adopted the name Déné, which is the only appropriate word to represent that great aboriginal family which 
in other quarters continues to be called Athapaskan or Tinneh. 
