7G NOTES ON THK HUNTINti STICKS, ETf. 



All accovints agree, and the records are corroborated by 

 the evidence of the specimens preserved that onlv one kind 

 of spear was used; in fact, that the Aborigines used no 

 other weapon but the spear. It is therefore very improb- 

 able to assume that the words pilhah — pleeplar, 

 and arlenar represent different kinds of spears, but 

 what their exact meaning is I am unable to say. unless 

 we accept the very improbable theory that, besides the 

 spear, they used another weapon of which there is neither 

 record nor specimen preserved. 



The words iiigga or raccah may apply to a different 

 kind of hunting stick, of which, as we have seen, two forms 

 are known, and I think they had better be excluded alto- 

 gether. (See above.) 



We have, therefore, the following words for the desig- 

 nation of spear : — 



(1) Perenna — - peearner — preana — preena — pe-na — 

 poena, a wooden spear. 



(2) Pilhah — pleeplar, correct meaning unknown. 



(3) Arlenar, correct meaning unknown, a very doubt- 

 ful word. 



In speaking of the spears I use the word perenna. leav- 



^ it to others to settle the question which would be the 



correct way of spelling (16). 



insf 



(16) The following contains Mr. Ritz's opinion on these words: — 

 These words may be classified, according to my theory, thus: — 



1. Pe-na, peearner equal to pienna (where the two vowels may indi- 



cate a curve corresponding with tlie motion of the vocal 

 organs from one position to the other.) 



2. Pe-ren-na, where the "ren" would indicate speed, cf., "run" 



(Eng.); preana or preena would be variants of perenna. 



3. Pilhah equal to pe-illa, equal to the moving thing (ilia) aimed at 



(pe) something. We had "lilla" before: arlenar equal to illa-na. 



Pleeplar equal to piUa-pilla, a very effective missile. 

 I am disposed to thinli that the Tasmanians used all these words 

 Indiscriniinatelv for "missile:" the phonology does not support a 

 distinction between a simple stick and a fashioned lance. 



I think Mr. Ritz is greatly mistaken if he assumes that all these 

 words were indiscriminately used for "missile," and that there was 

 no distinction between a simple stick and a fashioned lance. He has ap- 

 parently entirely overlooked that in all probability the hunting stick 

 had been in use for immemorial times before the invention of the 

 spear was made. But even If this theory is not accepted, there is a 

 fundamental difference between the hunting stick and the spear. The 

 former was thrown with a rotatory motion, the latter in a straight line, 

 spinning round its longitudinal "axis. However primitive the language 

 mav be, I cannot consider for a moment the Idea that the aborigines did 

 not' distinguish carefully between two instruments, used for distinctly 

 different purposes, and thrown in quite a different manner, quite apart 

 from the view that the hunting stick was probably the older instru- 

 ment. 



