160 REPORT— 1872. 



of late been especially drawn; and on this subject I propose to make a few ob- 

 servations. 



There are two ways in which it has been attempted to account for these ana- 

 logous coincidences : one by the hypothesis of inheritance, to which I have already 

 referred ; the other by the view of the independent origin of culture in distant 

 centres, assimilated in consequence of the similitude of the conditions under which 

 it arose. It is said that the wants of man being identical, and the means of sup- 

 plying those wants by external nature being alike, like causes would produce like 

 effects in many cases. There can be little doubt that many remarkable analogies 

 have arisen in this manner, especially amongst the very variable myths, customs, 

 religions, and even languages of savage races, and that it would be dangerous to 

 assume connexion to have existed except in cases where a continuous distribution 

 of like arts can be traced. On the other hand, we should commit a gi-ave error if 

 we were to assume the hypothesis of independent origin, because no connexion is 

 found to exist at the present time ; for we are as yet almost entirely ignorant of the 

 archaeology of savage and barbarous races. It is but fifteen years since we began 

 to study the prehistoric archaeology of our own race, which has ah-eady carried us 

 so far on the road towards connecting us with savages ; and can we say what 

 further connexions may be brought to light when the nver-drifts of such rivers as 

 the Niger or the Amazons come to be studied ? Nor can it fairly be said that the 

 wants of mankind are alike in all cases ; for if we adopt the principle of evolution, 

 it is evident that the wants of man must have varied in each successive stage of pro- 

 gress, diminished culture being associated with reduced wants, thus carrying us back 

 to a condition of man in which, being analogous to the brutes, he could scarcely be 

 said to have any wants at all of an intellectual or progressive character. 



It would be an error to apply either of these principles exclusively to the inter- 

 pretation of the phenomena of civilization. In considering the origin of species, we 

 are under the necessity of allying ourselves either on the side of the monogenists or 

 that of the 2}ol!/ffi')iists ; but in speaking of the origin of culture, both principles may 

 be, and undoubtedly are, applicable. There is, in fact, no royal road to knowledge on 

 this subject by the application of general principles ; the history of each art, 

 custom, or institution must be diligently worked out by itself, availing ourselves 

 of the clue afforded by race as only the most probable channel of communication 

 and development. We may be certain, however, that in all cases culture was con- 

 tinuously and slowly developed. Wherever we find an art or institution in an ad- 

 vanced or a conventionalized state, we may be certain that it did not originate and 

 was not invented in that condition, but was the result of slow growth ; and if the 

 evidence of such growth is wanting in the locality, or amongst the people with 

 whom it exists, it is rational to look for it elsewhere. Where, on the other hand, 

 the arts are in a low stage of development, closely allied to each other in their 

 objects, forms, or appliances, and largely dependent on the unaltered productions of 

 nature, we may assume that they are indigenous. 



There is but one existing race the habits of which are sufficiently well known, 

 which can be said to present in any great degree the characteristics of a primaeval 

 people, and that is the Australians. As I have elsewhere noticed, all the weapons 

 and tools of the Australians, whatever the uses to which they are applied, are 

 closely allied to each other in form. The spear, the club, the malga, the boomerang, 

 and the heileman, or rudimentary shield, all pass into each other by subvarieties and 

 connecting links, and all consist of the but slightly modified natural forms of the 

 stems of trees and other natural productions. The Australian in his arts corresponds 

 the most closely of any people now living to those of the palaeolithic age. His stone 

 axe is sometimes held in the hand when used, and, like the palaeolithic man, he has 

 not yet conceived the idea of boring a hole through it for the insertion of a handle. 

 In some cases he cannot without instruction even understand the use of such a hole 

 when he sees it in the axes of European manufacture. A most remarkable instance 

 of this was brought to my notice not long ago by Mr. Grimaldi, who found on the 

 site of a deserted native camping-ground a European axe having a hole for the 

 handle, which the natives, unaole to conceive the use of this part, had filled up with 

 gum, and hafted by means of a withy bent round the outside of the hole, in 

 accordance with their traditional custom. Through the kindness of the owner, I 



J 



