The primary, or at least the ostensible, purpose of the colored map which accompanies Gallatin’s paper was, as indicated by its title, to show the distribution of the tribes, and accordingly their names appear upon it, and not the names of the linguistic families.  Nevertheless, it is practically a map of the linguistic families as determined by the author, and it is believed to be the first attempted for the area represented.  Only eleven of the twenty-eight families named in this table appear, and these represent the families with which he was best acquainted.  As was to be expected from the early period at which the map was constructed, much of the western part of the United States was left uncolored.  Altogether the map illustrates well the state of knowledge of the time.

  1840.  Bancroft (George).

  History of the colonization of the United States, Boston. 1840,
    vol. 3.

In Chapter XXII of this volume the author gives a brief synopsis of the Indian tribes east of the Mississippi, under a linguistic classification, and adds a brief account of the character and methods of Indian languages.  A linguistic map of the region is incorporated, which in general corresponds with the one published by Gallatin in 1836.  A notable addition to the Gallatin map is the inclusion of the Uchees in their proper locality.  Though considered a distinct family by Gallatin, this tribe does not appear upon his map.  Moreover, the Choctaws and Muskogees, which appear as separate families upon Gallatin’s map (though believed by that author to belong to the same family), are united upon Bancroft’s map under the term Mobilian.

The linguistic families treated of are, I. Algonquin, II.  Sioux or Dahcota, III.  Huron-Iroquois, IV.  Catawba, V. Cherokee, vi.  Uchee, vii.  Natchez, VIII.  Mobilian.

  1841.  Scouler (John).

  Observations of the indigenous tribes of the northwest coast of
    America.  In Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London. 
    London, 1841, vol. 11.

The chapter cited is short, but long enough to enable the author to construct a very curious classification of the tribes of which he treats.  In his account Scouler is guided chiefly, to use his own words, “by considerations founded on their physical character, manners and customs, and on the affinities of their languages.”  As the linguistic considerations are mentioned last, so they appear to be the least weighty of his “considerations.”

Scouler’s definition of a family is very broad indeed, and in his “Northern Family,” which is a branch of his “Insular Group,” he includes such distinct linguistic stocks as “all the Indian tribes in the Russian territory,” the Queen Charlotte Islanders, Koloshes, Ugalentzes, Atnas, Kolchans, Kenaies, Tun Ghaase, Haidahs, and Chimmesyans.  His Nootka-Columbian family is scarcely less incongruous, and it is evident that the classification indicated is only to a comparatively slight extent linguistic.