27 



FIG. 33. 



FICTIOUS ARROW PIEAD. REALLY KNIFE, 



SCRAPER OR BORER. Old Beach. 



Wo are luckily in the position to answer the above ques- 

 tion conclusively and in the negative. The altercations be- 

 tween Aborigines and Europeans have been frequent 

 enough ever since their first hostile meeting in 1803, but 

 though the accounts are dramatic in every way, not a single 

 one mentions that the Aborigines used bow and arrow or 

 spears provi'ded with stone, heads. Particular stress is 

 always laid on the fact that their only weapons were 

 wooden spears, though they occasionally seemed to have 

 resorted at throwing a shower of stones at their assailants. 

 It 19, therefore, absolutely certain that neither the use of 

 bow and arrow, nor the mounting of their wooden spears 

 with stone heads, was known to the Aborigines. We can, 

 therefore, at once refute any attempt to recognise arrow 

 and spear heads among the Tasmanian Archaeolithes, how- 

 ever suggestive the form of such an implement may be- 



Scott, as well as other observers, state that the Abori- 

 gines never used the "flints' as tomahawks. In order to 

 be effective, a tomahawk, battleaxe, or celt requires an 

 artificial handle, the stone must be hafted. Now, as the 

 Aborigines never used any hafted tool or implement — on 

 this point we have the emphatic statement of Scott ana 

 others — it is equally certain that there are no tomahawks, 

 battleaxes, or celts among the Tasmanian Arohseolithes. 



One of the most important purposes for which th& 

 stone implements of a higher stage of civilisation were 

 used, viz., as weapons of offence and defence, does there- 

 'fore not apply to the Archaeolithes of Tasmania, and this, 

 at once, considerably restricts their scope of utilisation. If 

 the Tasmanian Archaeolithes were neither weapons of 

 offence nor defence, they can have only been used in con- 

 nection with the performances of domestic life, if this 

 word be permitted. 



Enough has been handed over to us to know that this 

 daily domestic life was of the most primitive fashion, and 

 mainly consisted in providing for food- They had no 

 houses, huts, or tents; they had no industries, tbe only 

 art they understood was the plaiting of baskets. The use of 

 the saw, however inefficient it may have been, was wholly- 

 unknown to them. We can, therefore, still further re- 

 strict the scope of use of the Archaeolithes, and arrive at 

 the conclusion that the Archaeolithes were in the first and 

 principal instance cutting instruments in the broadest 

 sense of the word, and the conclusion thus arrived at is, 

 therefore, fully in harmony with Scott's statement. 



