OF THE HUMAN FAMILY. 253 



gwach shows some affinity; and second, the discrimination of a difference in the 

 relationship to Ego between the children of an elder, and the children of a younger 

 brother. 1 This is shown by the use of different terms to express the relationships. 



It is an extension of the principle of discrimination beyond any point reached in 

 other systems as shown in the Table. The same peculiarity may exist in the 

 Spokane, and the Yakama without having been necessarily discovered, since there 

 were no questions on the schedule to test the fact. It may yet be found to explain 

 the ambiguities in the system of the former nations. With the American Indians 

 it is a peculiarity never to supplement information when answering special ques- 

 tions put to them by Americans. In the case in hand, if asked what he called his 

 brother's son, he might elect to answer as to the son of his elder brother, and treat 

 that as a sufficient answer to the question, although the son of his younger brother 

 stood to him in different relationship. 



The most that may be claimed upon this incomplete representation of the 

 Tabegwach system of relationship is, that it is classificatory in its character, and 

 that it tends to show the same elaborate discriminations of the relationships by 

 blood and marriage, which are characteristic of the common system. It also fur- 

 nishes sufficient grounds for the provisional admission of the Shoshonee nations 

 into the Ganowanian family. 



We have now presented the system of consanguinity and affinity of all the 

 Indian nations represented in the Table, with the exception of the Village Indians 

 of New Mexico, and Central America ; and the Eskimo. It remains to consider 

 separately the forms of the latter, together with some fragments of the system which 

 prevails among a portion of the South American Indian nations. The knowledge 

 of the system as it exists amongst the nations on the Pacific side of the continent, 

 is not as full and precise as could have been desired ; but the main fact of the nearly 

 universal prevalence of a common system of relationship throughout all the nations, 

 thus far enumerated, is sufficiently demonstrated, and the fundamental characteristics 

 of the system are sufficiently ascertained, to create a definite and substantial founda- 

 tion for the consolidation of all of these nations into one genealogically connected 

 family. The further prosecution of the inquiry amongst the unrepresented Indian 

 nations will be necessary to determine the question whether or not they belong to 

 this great family of mankind, the unity of origin of which may now be considered 

 established. 



1 In the Grammar and Dictionary of the Yakama, by Father Pandosy (Chamoisy Press, 1862), 

 the following terms are given, which are expressive of reciprocal relationship. 



Uncle, Pitr. b Pirar Father-in-law, Pshes 



Nephew, Pitr. b Pimr Son-in-law, Pshes 



Aunt, Parar Mother-in-law, Pnash 



Niece, Pitr. "Pimr. Paia Daughter-in-law, Pnash 



