PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. LXXXVIl 



herbivorous, the gnawing or the insectivorous factor has been 

 dominant; but at the same time the group of early mammals now 

 represented by the marsupials possessed also some dominant factor 

 in their germ cells that determined the strong development of the 

 lacteal gestation, and prevented them from passing beyond the 

 marsupial stage. 



I have laid stress upon this, because, whilst only affording 

 indirect evidence in regard to the possible polygenesis of similar 

 customs and inventions amongst human beings, it indicates that 

 what are morphologically similar features of primary importance 

 can be independently developed in groups of animals that have 

 for long ages been completely isolated from one another. 



In regard to the culture of Australian aboriginals, we may regard 

 their ancestors as in the same relative position to them as were 

 the early ancestors of the mammalia to the Australian mar- 

 supials. The present aboriginals are the descendants of a rela- 

 tively early stock of human beings, and we may presume that in 

 their germ cells they possessed factors bearing the same relation to 

 the future idevelopment of the human race as did those in the 

 germ cells of primitive mammalians to the varied descendants of 

 the latter. If we are to accept the theory that there is no such 

 thing as the independent development of similar beliefs, customs, 

 and inventions, that if we find two similar customs in different 

 and widely separated parts of the world, we must assume a 

 common origin for them ; or if, on the other hand, we find, for 

 example, two different modes of treating the dead side by side, 

 this can only be explained by interaction between an indigenous 

 and an immigrant people, each with its own special customs, 

 then we meet with grave difficulties in regard to the Australian 

 culture. 



We must postulate at least five separate immigrations to account 

 for the very different forms of initiation, at least five others to 

 account for the hurial customs, and at least three to account for 

 the methods of firemaking. jSTot only this, but, as in Australia 

 we have in use at the present day a practically complete series of 

 stone implements, representing all the various stages of culture 

 known in prehistoric Europe, from the oldest and most crude 

 eoliths of the earliest Mousterian period, through various forms of 

 flaked implements to the polished neolithic axes and the delicately 

 chipped leaf-shaped spearheads common to the natives of North- 

 west Australia and early Solutrean man in Europe, we must, 

 according to the proposed theory, postulate several immigrations 

 to account for them, because surely a flaked-stone implement made 

 out of quartzite and a polished made out of diorite must be 

 regarded as distinct inventions, indeed, in prehistoric Europe they 



