THOMAS] INDIAN LANGUAGES OF MEXICO AND CENTRAL AMERICA 41 
the Zacateco, and on the south and southeast with the Otomi. The 
missions established among these Indians by the Franciscans, accord- 
ing to the author last quoted (who gives as his authority a manuscript 
in the Archivo General), were San Luis, Saltillo, Venado, Charcas, 
Valle de Atotonilco, Pinos, Asuncién Tlaxcalilla, and San Miguel 
Mezquitic. 
Their language, says Orozco y Berra (1:285), was distinct. He 
says also, in another place (1:298), “su lengua ‘era propia,’ y es 
una de las que han desaparecido.”” Laet (281) says that it was dif- 
ferent from that of the Zacateco. Arlegui (86), speaking of the 
natives at and about the Convento of Asuncién de Tlascalilla, one 
of those mentioned above, calls them ‘“Guachichiles Chichime- 
cos.’ Orozco y Berra (1: 280) appears to bring together the Cazcan 
and the Guachichile: as pertaining to the “Teules Chichimecas.”’ 
When referring to the Indians of the region under consideration, 
Mota Padilla usually terms them Chichimecas. These people are 
classed as Nahuatlan, on the authority of Doctor Hrdli¢ka, who 
states that the most intelligent man among the Huichol told him 
that Guachichil was the ancient name of his tribe. Doctor Hrdlitka 
adds that the Huichol to this day go over to San Luis Potosi to 
camp during certain seasons of the year. This fact would account 
for Orozco y Berra’s puzzle in not finding Huichol referred to in the 
early narratives. 
THe TERM CHICHIMECA 
It is probable that this term should be given a somewhat more 
definite signification than philologists appear disposed to accord to 
it. That it has been used in the past in widely different senses is 
true, but when the more extravagant applications are cast aside 
and the others are carefully studied, the use of the term is found 
to be more limited. The fact that it has been interpreted as a 
term of contempt signifying “dogs,” or “dog people,” even if 
correct (although it is really doubtful), does not necessarily mean 
that it was applied by those with whom it originated to any 
and every barbarous people. When this elimination shall have 
taken place, the name will be found to include people of more than 
one stock, yet it seems to have had a geographical limitation, and if 
the Otomi, or that portion of this stock usually included, be excluded, 
there appears to be to some extent a linguistic signification. 
It is unnecessary to quote authorities to show that the name 
Chichimeca was applied geographically to tribes living north of 
Mexico City, as this is generally admitted. The range may be fur- 
ther limited, as follows: It does not appear that the name was ever 
applied to the Tepehuane in Durango, or to any tribe living north 
or west of them; it was never applied to the Cora on the southwest, 
8347°—Bull. 44—11——4 
