194 



NA rURE 



[December 28, 1899 



Several of these statements are open to question. Some 

 of the " Dravidian" peoples are amongst the hairiest of 

 mankind, and perhaps none have perfectly straight hair. 

 Although the present writer agrees with the hypothesis 

 that the Australians arose in part from the same stock as 

 the pre-Dravidians— that is, the indigenous population of 

 Southern India— there are numerous difficulties which 

 have not yet been thoroughly faced. Most writers assume 

 that they arrived by sea, but there is no evidence that the 

 pre-Dravidians were ever seamen ; their descendants are 

 not so to-day either in India or Australia. If they came 

 by land, as Howitt suggests, it is strange that no trace of 

 their migration has been noted in the East Indian Archi- 

 pelago, and there are many other points that require ex- 

 planation. There is also some ambiguity in the use of 

 the term "Dravidian," as, from the researches of 

 Thurston, it would appear that there is a dark, broad- 

 nose, curly-haired primitive race in Southern India which 

 may for the present be termed the pre-Dravidian race. 

 The typical Dravidians (Telugus, Kanarese, &c.) are 

 regarded by some as a later immigrant people. In his 

 "Man: Past and Present," Keane states that "all at- 

 tempts to affiliate this group [the Australian languages] 

 to the Dravidian of Southern India, or to any other, have 

 signally failed." 



The Malay invasion is supposed to have taken place 

 *'also from the north, first with some degree of continuity 

 and then intermittently" (p. 6i). " In the extreme north- 

 west, where Malay words might be most naturally ex- 

 pected, very few are distinguishable. ... It is rather in 

 unexpected places that Malay words turn up" (p. 57). 

 "... A track across the centre of Australia from the 

 Gulf of Carpentaria southward is marked by a few 

 Malay words . . . another region where unquestionable 

 Malay lingual traces exist is a tract on the east coast of 

 Queensland, from about \^'^ to 21° S. lat., and inland to 

 a distance of some two hundred miles" (p. 59). "There 

 is proof positive that the best cave paintings have been 

 executed by people of Malay blood from the island of 

 Sumatra, a strong presumption also that the rite of cir- 

 cumcision was derived from the same people and place, 

 and I am disposed to think that the Australian message- 

 stick is a childish imitation of Malay writing upon 

 bamboo and rattan as practised in Sumatra " (p. 60). 



As the author lays great stress on the linguistic side of 

 his investigations, the present writer consulted his friend 

 Mr. L. H. Ray on this very matter in order to obtain the 

 opinion of an expert. Mr. Ray informs me that 'the 

 author's elaborate comparisons of Australian words with 

 Malay and New Hebridean are absurd and misleading, 

 and show that, in spite of his disclaimer on p. 44, Mr. 

 Mathew belongs to that school of Australian pseudo- 

 philologists who believe that a likeness of words in 

 sound and meaning is a proof of common origin. 

 In Chapter iv. we are asked to believe that 

 Malay immigrants, presumably from various parts 

 of the Archipelago, entered Australia from the north, 

 and wandering about the interior scattered "astonish- 

 ing relics " of the speech (of one of their sections) 

 all over the island continent. They left the words 

 for "father "and "where" in New South Wales and East 

 Queensland, and " hand " in the extreme east. The word 

 for "head" (not the Malay, but Indian) [was left on 

 NO. 1574, VOL. 61] 



the Hunter River, the terms for "elder brother," "little," 

 and " louse " were scattered from the Gulf of Carpentaria, 

 southward through Central Australia. " Father," " moon," 

 and "rain" were stranded on the east coast of Queens- 

 land ; there are other " remarkable analogies " which Mr. 

 Mathew uses to support his theories. Philologists will 

 scarcely be inclined to admit the " especially valuable 

 analysis " which derives the Australian word " wenyo " or 

 " wendyo "(' where ') from a New Hebridean interroga- 

 tive " wa" or " we," and" the verb " to " (' to stand ') (p. 

 157). Although Mr. Mathew has evidently taken great 

 pains to make his book of real service to students, indi- 

 vidual words in the languages quoted are not always 

 accurately given or properly understood by the author, 

 although he uses them as pegs upon which to hang a 

 theory. For example, he regards the "bapa" type of 

 terms for "father" as a mark of Malay descent, and the 

 " mama " type as evidence of Papuan influence. Yel 

 connectives of " mama" are more common in the Malay 

 region than " bapa," and words like " bapa " are found in 

 all kinds of unconnected languages, e.g. Dravidian and 

 Tibeto-Burman in Asia, Bantu in South Africa, and in 

 North America. Other examples are seen in the com- 

 parison of numerals.(pp. 165, 169), where the New Guinea 

 words are explainable compounds. " Ori Kaiza"(p. 67) 

 is mongrel, " ori " (' bird ') is Toaripi, Papuan Gulf, and 

 " kaiza " (' big thing ') is Saibai, West Torres Straits. Mr. 

 Mathew might have made a stronger case if he had 

 drawn his examples, not from the colloquial Mala y of 

 commerce, but from that common root-stock of the lan- 

 guages of the Indian Archipelago, which is undoubtedly 

 akin to that of the Melanesian tongues. It would have 

 been of great advantage to students if uniformity in 

 spelling had been attempted in the numerous languages 

 quoted.' 



Mr. Mathew dwells at some length on some re- 

 markable rock paintings discovered in North-West 

 Australia by Grey and by Bradshaw. One of Grey's 

 figures he identifies with Siva of Hindu mythology, the 

 other he identifies as Daibaitch, a deity of the Battas of 

 Sumatra. This identification is based on some marks 

 on the figure which Mr. Mathew compares with speci- 

 mens of Sumatran writing in Van der Tuuk's " Les 

 Manuscripts Lampongs." Of course this interpretation 

 assumes that Grey copied the painting with perfect 

 accuracy, and that it was in perfect preservation. These 

 two figures copied by Grey certainly have a non- 

 Austrahan appearance. Bradshaw's figures are more 

 complicated. The author considers 



" it is obvious that there has been an attempt to present 

 pictorial fragments of Hindu mythology in the confused 

 form which has been developed by naturalisation in 

 Sumatra." 



These rock paintings are certainly very puzzling, and 

 deserve renewed investigation on the spot. Mr. Mathew's 

 interpretation of them strikes the present writer as 

 somewhat far-fetched. 



It is to be regretted that Mr. Mathew does not dis- 

 tinguish between the Malays and the taller, light-coloured 

 Indonesian or non-Malayan inhabitants of the Eastern 

 Archipelago. Keane in his " Ethnology " says : 



" Dr. Hamy points out that the Battas and other pre- 

 Malay peoples of Malaysia so closely resemble the 



