These and his other arguments I think that they are sufficient to give substance to his thesis; and I me effort to expose it because I consider it to be of extraordinary importance in its application to the relations that existed in prehistoric times between the tribes of the two continents. In order to illustrate these points, the author copies the following comparative table of languages chibcha, talamanca and guaymi, formed by Dr. Max Uhle. As between the Talamanca and the Guaymies stood the Dorasques or Dorachos, inhabiting the Highlands of Chiriqui; We judge natural that everyone did part of a same village in continuous territory. Comparison of dialects chumulu, gualaca and changuene, or changuina, of the tribe of the Dorasques with the chibcha language, spoken by installments has shown us that our presumption was founded. It considers the reader if we are right in view of the following table: returning to the appointment of Brinton, we interrupt in order to check their observations, we feel not agree with the conclusion that out of its premises.
It says: what makes the migration, I don’t think that discussion of the dialectical changes leave no way to doubt. All of them indicate rubbing and loss of the original shape, such as draw them from South to North America; Obviously the wandering hordes moved within the last, starting with the southern continent. Since there is no evidence of any North American tribe Jew to the South America. This last proposition, which seems to us to be too absolute nothing, test, once you can oppose the opposite: no there is evidence of any South American tribe Jew to the North America. Neither nor the Talamanca and Guaymies Chibchas had no genre of writing, therefore not retained a memory of its origin. Returning to the affirmation of this author, we present a case of migration of a partiality that sailed from Mexico and settled in the Northwest corner of the South America, in Colombian territory.