4. If the immigration took plaee at so remote a, 



period, the camping grounds could not pre- 

 sent that modern look which they unques- 

 tionably have. 



5. Is it probable that a race remained absolutely 



stationary for about 12,000 years, without 

 advancing one step in civilisation, when m 

 Eui'ope it has practically only taken that 

 time to reach our present stage? 



6. The objections under 4 and 5 are so weighty that 



it is almost impossible to assume Tasmania 

 has been inhabited by the Aborigines for 

 any lengthy period. 



7. The only hypothesis to get out of this difficulty 



is to assume, that though the ice may have 

 disappeared at the time above stated, Tas- 

 mania was not inhabited till at a very recent 

 date, and that the tribes which, at the time 

 of glaciation, may have dwelt to the North 

 and East, were driven to this formerly unin- 

 habitable haven of refuge by geological dis- 

 turbances taking place at very recent times, 

 and resulting in the jDroduction of Tasmania's 

 present outline. 



8. The earliest date at which we could fix this is 



about 3,000 years before our present time, 



though, of course, the commencement of the 



geological disturbances may go back to a 



much earlier date. 



Whichever view we take, two facts remain unrefutable : 



Present Tasmania became only inhabitable after the ice 



had disappeared, and the aboriginal population can only 



have moved into it after the melting of the ice, but previous 



to the present isolation of the island- The only question 



about which there can be a divergence of opinion is the 



question of fixing this time. If certain geological views 



be accepted, then the event of the first populating ol the 



island may date back to a very remote period; but there 



is evidence to show that it cannot be dated earlier than 



10 — 12,000 years, and probably not later than 3,000 years 



before our present times. (1). 



For the present, we have to content ourselves with this 

 result, but much remains still to be done in either proving 

 or disproving it. In the first instance, the relationship 



(1) I may remark here that it seems a great pity that liardly any of the legends 

 of the Aborigines have Ijeeii collected, at least not to my knowledge. As it is un- 

 questionable that tjicy v.itiiessed great geological changes, the recollection of 

 these terrible f-vents must liave impressed itself so vividly in the mind of the 

 survivors that it is fair to assimie that it was handed over to future generations in 

 the shape of legend. 



