Page:Cyclopedia of Western Australia, volume 1.pdf/69

tribes are each divided into two sections or phratries, designated by names signifying in every case "light- blooded" and "dark-blooded," and that these distinctions are not restricted to human beings alone, but are applied to all things concerning the tribe. These terms, so absolutely a part of the tribal organization, are, in their opinion, evidences that the Australian aboriginal is a composite of two original strains, both of whom would colloquially be termed black, but one of whom was of a decidedly lighter complexion than the other. With this we shall have to deal later when discussing Mathew's theory in greater detail.

On the question of the particular ethnological division to which the original race or races belonged Grey does not put forward any theory beyond from time to time drawing attention to certain physical characteristics which appear to be similar to those of the Semitic races, and instituting comparisons between various native rites and customs and similar ceremonies among the Jews. Many of the later investigators have attempted to solve the problem, but have not yet secured unanimity of opinion. Mr. Edmund Curr, in his monumental compilation "The Australian Race," advances the theory, first suggested by Captain Fitzroy, of H.M.S. "Beagle," that the aborigines are descended from the negro race of Africa, mainly on the ground that both are without religion, while they exhibit certain similarities in rites, customs, ceremonies, and superstitions. He is inclined to think that the whole race sprang from a single canoe-load of negroes who landed somewhere on the coast in the north-west, and as their numbers increased scattered over the whole continent. The objection to the theory is that if the ancestors arrived by canoe from so distant a country as Africa they must necessarily have been an ocean-going people, a suggestion which, so far as we know, is entirely foreign to the character of the native inhabitants of Australia. Curr admits that certain peculiarities would lead us to suppose that there has been a cross with some other race, and it is now almost wholly accepted by ethnologists that the Australian is not a pure type, but is the result of admixture of two, if not more, original races. As a result of considering the physical and physiological characteristics Dr. Topinard came to the conclusion that the aborigines were a mongrel race. "It is clear," he says, "that the Australians might very well be the result of a cross between one race with smooth hair from some other place and a really negro or autochthonous race." The opinions expressed by Mr. Huxley are in harmony with this hypothesis. He says "the Australians are identical with the ancient inhabitants of the Deccan." Huxley and Topinard both relate the aborigines to the Dravidians, the ancient inhabitants of the Deccan, but do not arrive at any decision concerning the direction from which the woolly-haired race with which they are crossed may have come.

A. W. Howitt, whose view necessarily carries considerable weight, is of opinion that the Australian ancestors must have reached the continent by some land connection from the north or north-west at a time when Tasmania was part of the mainland; a conclusion which involves a vast antiquity, but which nevertheless has the balance of opinion in its favour. The hypothesis put forward by Howitt as a possible theory of origin does not meet with the same general acceptance. In his own words, it is "an original Negrito population as represented by the wild tribes of Malaysia, a subsequent offshoot represented by the Andamanese and Tasmanians, and another offshoot in a higher state of culture originating the Melanesians. As to the Australians, I may say that the discussion of the problem as to the origin of these savages and of the Tasmanians has led me to conclusions which require, as the original stock of the former, such a race as would be supplied by 'the low form of Caucasian Melanochroi' suggested by Sir W. H. Flower. From such a stock the Dravidians may be also thought to have been in part derived." Flower and Lydekker, however, in their "Introduction to the Study of Mammals" (1891), do not subscribe to the idea that the Caucasian Melanochroi were the original stock. Recognizing that the absence of frizzly hair in a people presenting the features and skeletal characters of the negro forms a stumbling-block in the way of every system proposed, they proceed to point out that "the solution, supported by many considerations … appears to lie in the supposition that they are not a distinct race at all—that is, not a homogeneous group formed by the gradual modification of one of the primitive stocks, but rather a cross between two already formed branches of these stocks. According to this view Australia was originally peopled by frizzly-haired Melanesians such as those who still do, or did before the European invasion, dwell in the smaller islands which surround the north, east, and southern portions of the continent, but that a strong infusion of some other race, probably a low form of Caucasian Melanochroi, such as that which still inhabits the interior of the southern parts of India, has spread throughout the land from the north-west and produced a modification of the physical characters, especially the hair. This influence did not extend across Bass Strait into Tasmania, where the Melanesian element remained in its purity."

This is the view which up to the present finds most favour. Not only can fewer objections be urged against it, but through it, without any undue effort of imagination, almost every phase of aboriginal existence may be accounted for. A later theory has been advanced by by the Rev. John Mathew. While it seems to differ in some degree from the above on the question of the original race, it admits a second invasion resulting in a present crossed people. As it is the most recent solution offered it may be worth extended notice. To quote Mr.