APPENDIX. 
527 
To go into the reasons of this wonld take up much time and 
paper. It is sufficient to state that^ whether the percentage 
of similar words be great or small_, it tallies with the similarity 
of the prefixes. This may he verified by noticing the distri- 
bution of such words as the following : — 
Head = root b-d in Uainamheu^ Tariana (?), Isanna (?). 
Mouth = root n-min Uainamheu^ Tariana_, Isanna_, Barre, 
Tomo-Maroa. 
Eye — root -t or -d, in Uainamheu_, Tariana^ Isanna^ Barre. 
Nose = root in Uainamheu^ Tariana^ Isanna. 
Teeth = root -i- in Uainambeu^ Tariana^ Isanna^ Barre. 
This list may he extended, but the foregoing words suffice 
for illustration. That the root, in many cases, agrees where 
the pronouns difier is evident : but it must be remembered 
that the position to which the present writer commits himself 
is simply that of the greatest amount of radical affinities going 
along with the greatest amount of pronominal similarity. He 
by no means asserts, that where the pronouns differ everything 
else differs also. 
When specimens of a language are laid before the public, 
and such specimens are, at one and the same time, limited in 
extent and the first of their kind, it is rarely safe to go be- 
yond the indication of their probable affinities, and a general 
sketch of the class they illustrate. This is the reason why 
the present writer limits himself to observations of the miscel- 
laneous and unsystematic character of those here made. 
The Barre. — The Barre forms the centre of a group — a 
group of which the value is uncertain. The other members 
of this, are the Baniwa of the Tomo and Maroa to the north, 
the Uainambeu to the south, the Tariana, and Baniwa of the 
Isanna to the west. 
This statement (as has been already suggested) lies in the 
identity of the prefix throughout. 
The name requires notice. In Humboldt^s account of the 
population between the Orinooko and Amazon, we meet with 
