Preliminary note on the rocks used in the manufacture of the tronattas.

The observations here recorded are based on the examination of more than 5,000 specimens, all collected by myself chiefly in the southern and central parts of Tasmania. If the metamorphic theory is correct, it stands to reason that there must be a considerable number of varieties of cherty rocks. A metamorphosed sandstone must be considerably different from a rock whose origin is a shale. But not only are the primary rocks widely different in chemical composition, but each kind, whether sandstone, shale, or anything else, varies considerably. Whenever a collection of native stone implements is made in the island, and such collection be sorted afterwards, it will be found that two large groups can be distinguished at once: Volcanic rocks and Metamorphosed sedimentary rock of a highly siliceous nature. The above investigation has conclusively proved that there is a great variety of rocks used in the manufacture of the tronatta. This variety of substances stands in a sharp contrast to the monotony of the material used in the manufacture of the European implements. Variety of material and monotony of the same are the chief distinguishing feature of an otherwise undistinguisiiable collection of eolithes and archaeolithes from Tasmanian and Europe

The food of the Tasmanian Aborigines

In a previous paper* I made a short calculation as to the quantity of shells that would collect on the refuse heaps within a given time, supposing each person consumed 50 oysters or haliotis per day. The quantity, 36 million shells per year for a population of not more than 2,000 souls, is startling; but subsequently I had my doubts whether such a small quantity, though yielding an enormous number of shells, contained sufficient nourishment to be of material use in sustaining life. Ling Roth in his classical book on the Aborigines of Tasmania devotes an interesting chapter to the subject of food. His account is based on the evidence of numerous eye witnesses, and it must therefore be considered as a reliable source of information. It is certainly more explicit and accurate than Dr. Campbell's account. One source of information with regard to the diet of the Aborigines has not been considered yet, viz., the vocabulary. It is a priori very probable that the vocabulary will contain the names of those substances of either animalic or vegetabilic origin that formed the staple articles of their food. Though it is pretty certain that those animals and plants with which they came in frequent contact, either in a friendly or hostile way, were also distinguished by special names, we may safely assume that chiefly those that were valuable as foodstuffs were specially named. *A peculiar group of tronattas, Pap. and Proceed. Royal Soc. of Tasmania, 1909. See also Noetling Studies ueber die Technik der tasmanischen tronatta, Archiv. f., Anthropologic Neue Folge Bd. viii., heft 3, 1909, pag. 197

The occurrence of gigantic marsupials in Tasmania

It had hitherto been generally believed that the gigantic marsupials were restricted to the continent of Australia, and did not occur in Tasmania. Jack and Etheridge (see footnotes) mention their wide distribution on the continent, and Professor Stirling is of the opinion "that this great marsupial appears to have had an immense range, and to have probably wandered over the whole Continent of Australia." R. M. Johnston, who is better acquainted with the geology of Tasmania than anybody else, states that "in Tasmania no remains of the extinct marsupials, such as Diprotodon, Nototherium, and Thylacoleo, have as. yet been found either in the ossiferous cavern breccias or in the older alluvial beds." It seems rather strange that nobody took the view that remains of such animals ought also to occur in Tasmania. Howitt had already, in 1898, expressed the opinion that Tasmania was connected with the mainland in geologically recent times, and Hedley in 1903, holds the same view. Conseqviently, the discovery of remains of a gigantic marsupial in Tasmania should not have created the general surpi-ise they did. When, in 1910, the news that bones of a gigantic marsupial had been discovered in the Mowbray swamp, near Smithton, became known, the discovery was at first somewhat discredited. However, confirmation soon came, and the remains were purchased by the Launceston Museum from their discoverer, Mr. Lovett. Mr. Scott, the Curator of the Museum, has since described them under the name of Nototherium tasmaniense, but I am somewhat doubtful whether a new species is justified

Notes on the names given to minerals and rocks by the aborigines of Tasmania

The enquiry into the name given by the Aborigines to their stone implements led naturally to a further enquiry into the names of rocks and minerals distinguished by that race. The result is interesting enough; in several instances the literal meaning of the words used would be ascertained, and the meaning of other words which were rather a puzzle could be made out with a tolerable amount of certainty. Yet these studies throw such a curious light on the mental condition of the Aborigines, that, instead of being a mere collection of names, this paper rather deals with a number of questions connected with the life of this primitive race

The antiquity of man in Tasmania.

I. Introductory Remarks:. There exists in Tasmania perhaps the greatest unconformity in the history of evolution of the human race that we know of. Modern civilisation follows immediately on the most typical archaeolithic stage that is known to us. All intermediate stages which we observe in other countries are missing in that island. From this point of view it was fortunate that the contact between the lower and the higher civilised race lasted for such a short time only. Not thirty years lapsed between the first encounter at Risdon ferry and the final deportation of the Aborigines to Flinders Island. This time was not long enough to adulterate the archaeolithic civilisation by the introduction of foreign ideas. However deplorable it may be that the Aborigines died out so rapidly, there is at least one consolation in their fate —their civilisation has been delivered to us in all its characteristic features. But we have to thank another lucky accident for this, viz., the insular seclusion of Tasmani

Notes on the publications of the Royal Society of Tasmania

It appears that the first scientific society in Tasmania was started-in 1838 under the auspices of Sir John Franklin. The name of this society is, however, somewhat uncertain. In the introductory remarks to the first volume of its transactions it was called "The Philosophical Society of Tasmania," but it does not appear that this name found favour, because subsequently the name "Tasmanian Society" was adopted. The object of this society was the study of natural science, in particular that of Tasmania

Further notes on the habits of the Tasmanian Aborigines

The question whether the aborigines used bones of animals, either entirely or in fragments, for implements is of great importance. It has hitherto been assumed that bone as a material for implements did not come in to use earlier than the Magdalenian stage. It would constitute one of the greatest anomalies in the evolution of mankind, if it were a fact that the aborigines did include bone among the materials from which they manufactured their implements. I can safely say that there are few persons living who have so carefully studied and examined the camping grounds as I have, but never did I find a single piece of bone that could even, with the greatest stretch of imagination, be considered as an implement. What conclusion can we draw from the above observations? The fact that the left edge is much less carefully chipped than the rest of the circumference might suggest the view that it represents a reject which was dropped before it was finished. I fully admit the weight of this argument, but we may well ask is it possible to imagine that after such an amount of work had been spent in shaping it, it was dropped when two more blows had been sufficient for completion

The manufacture of the tero-watta

Recent investigations have proved that the aborigines obtained the siliceous rocks used in the manufacture of their stone implements from two sources, viz. 1) From certain localities where such kinds of rocks occur in situ 2) From the gravel deposits of pleistocene and modern age, in the shape of waterworn boulders. The former localities have very aptly been termed "native quarries," but it appears that, though these quarries were extensively worked, the material obtained from this source was not of the same importance as that obtained from the gravel beds. The total of tero-watta made from locally occurring rock, therefore, does not exceed 14 or 15 per cent. We, therefore, see that at the outside 15 per cent, of the tero watta were manufactured from rock obtained in quarries, while 85 per cent, were manufactured from rocks otherwise obtained. Now, how were the tero-watta manufactured? The answer to this question is more difficult than it appears, and we will first see whether the historical accounts help to solve the problem. In Conclusion The raw material required for the manufacture of tero-watta was for the greater part obtained in the shape of water-worn pebbles from the gravel beds, for the smaller part from so-called quarries. It was also concluded that the parent block was broken by means of a hammer-stone. Includes plates

Notes on the hunting sticks (lughkana), spears (perenna), and baskets (tughbrana) of the Tasmanian Aborigines.

In the papers previously published in the Society's journal I have conclusively proved, and it can now be considered as an established fact, that the stone relics of the Aborigines represent implements only, and not weapons. This is a fact of the greatest importance, and its significance will only be fully realised when we apply it to the study of archaeolithic man in Europe. The Aborigines had undoubtedly discovered that these flakes were excellent cutting implements, as they have generally a fine edge, and often enough terminated in a sharp point, however, it is impossible to understand why the Aborigines did not fix a suitable flake to a piece of wood, thus producing a weapon far superior to the primitive wooden spear. If we knew for certain which of the Archaeolithic industries, from the Fagnian to the Mesvinian, used the hunting stick only, and which used the wooden spear besides it, a great stride in our knowledge of the development of the human race would have been made. Includes plates

Notes on a chipped boulder found near Kempton.

It has rather been a problem whence the Tasmanian Aborigines obtained the material for their implements. The discovery of certain localities where the rock suitable for implements occurred in situ, and which were unquestionably worked by the Aborigines, has partly solved the problem. It is unquestionable that the Aborigines obtained a certain amount of the raw material from these so-called quarries, but it is equally certain that a large portion was obtained from different sources. One of the best-known "native quarries" is that situated on Coal Hill, near Melton-Mowbray.However, it was conclusively proven that, though the quarry on Coal Hill was conveniently situated and easily reached from the camping grounds near the river, only 6.1 per cent, of the implements found were derived from it. A number of interesting facts and questions arise from the study of this specimen. Though not completely restored to its entire shape, we can state with absolute certainty that the original was a pebble or boulder, well worn and smooth all over its surface, of deep black colour, weighing not less than 10lb. As there are no gravel deposits or conglomerate anywhere near the place wdiere it was found, it must have been picked up at a considerable distance, and been carried to the camping ground to be used for the manufacture of implements