During the last few years much has
been done towards an examination and comparison of
the dialects spoken by the aboriginal tribes of Australia
in different portions of the continent. The labours
of Mr. Threlkeld, of Captain Grey, of Messrs. Teichelman
and Schurmann, of Mr. Meyer, of Mr. Schurman, with
the occasional notes of visitors and travellers, have
done much to elucidate this subject, and have presented
to the world vocabularies of the Hunter’s River
and Lake Macquarie districts in New South Wales; of
Swan River and King George’s Sound in Western
Australia; of Adelaide, of Encounter Bay, and of Port
Lincoln, in South Australia; besides occasional phrases
or scanty manuals of various other dialects spoken
in different districts. From these varied contributions
it would appear that a striking coincidence exists
in the personal appearance, character, customs, traditions,
dialects, etc. among the many and remotely separated
tribes scattered over the surface of New Holland.
Each of these, no doubt, varies in many particulars
from the others, and so much so some times, as to
lead to the impression that they are essentially different
and distinct. Upon close
examination, however, a sufficient general resemblance
is usually found to indicate that all the tribes have
originally sprung from the same race, that they have
gradually spread themselves over the whole continent
from some one given point; which appears, as far as
we can infer from circumstantial evidence, to have
been somewhere upon the northern coast. There
are some points of resemblance which, as far as is
yet known, appear to be common to most of the different
dialects with which we are acquainted. Such are,
there being no generic terms as tree, fish, bird,
etc., but only specific ones as applied to each
particular variety of tree, fish, bird, etc.
The cardinal numbers, being only carried up to three,
there being no degrees of comparison except by a repetition
to indicate intensity, or by a combination of opposite
adjectives, to point out the proportion intended,
and no distinction of genders, if we except an attempt
to mark one among those tribes who give numerical
names to their children, according to the order of
their birth, as before mentioned. All parts of speech appear to be
subject to inflections, if we except adverbs, post-fixes,
and post-positions. Nouns, adjectives, pronouns
and verbs have all three numbers, singular, dual and
plural. The nominative agent always precedes
an active verb. When any new object is presented
to the native, a name is given to it, from some fancied
similarity to some object they already know, or from
some peculiar quality or attribute it may possess;
thus, rice is in the Moorunde dialect called “yeelilee”
or “maggots,” from an imagined resemblance
between the two objects.
The most singular and remarkable fact,
connected with the coincidence of customs or dialect,
amongst the Aborigines, is that it exists frequently
to a less degree among tribes living close to one another,
than between those who are more remotely separated.
The reason of this apparent anomaly would seem to
be, that those tribes now living near to one another,
and among whom the greatest dissimilarity of language
and customs is found to exist, have originally found
their way to the same neighbourhood by different lines
of route, and consequently the greatest resemblances
in language and custom, might naturally be expected
to be met with, (as is in reality the case), not between
tribes at present the nearest to each other, but between
those, who although now so far removed, occupy respectively
the opposite extremes of the lines of route by which
one of them had in the first instance crossed over
the continent.
Without entering into an elaborate
analysis, of either the structure or radical derivation
of the various dialects we are acquainted with, I
shall adduce a few instances in each, of words taken
from the vocabularies I have mentioned before, for
King George’s Sound, Adelaide, Encounter Bay,
and Port Lincoln, and supply them myself from other
dialects, including those meeting on the Murray or
at the Darling, to shew the degree of similarity that
exists in language.
In selecting the examples for comparison,
I have taken first the personal pronouns and numerals,
as being the words which usually assimilate more closely
in the different dialects, than any other. Secondly,
those words representing objects which would be common
to all tribes, and which from their continual recurrence,
and daily use, might naturally be supposed to vary
the least from each other, if the original language
of all were the same, but which, if radically different
in any, render the subject still more difficult and
embarrassing.
Dialects
========
English Western Adelaide Encounter Parnkalla
Aiawong
Australia
Bay (Port Lincoln) (Moorundie)
I Nganya Ngaii Ngaape Ngai,
ngatto Ngappo
Thou Nginnee Ninna Nginte Ninna
Ngurru
She Bal Pa Kitye Panna
Nin
We (Ye) Nganneel Ngadlu Ngane Ngarrinyalbo
Ngenno
They Balgoon Parna Kar Yardna
Ngau-o
We two Ngal-li Ngadli Ngele Ngadli
Ngel-lo
You two Newball Niwa Ngurle Nuwalla
Ngupal
They two Boala Purla Kengk Pudlanbi
Dlau-o
One Gyne Kumande Yammalaitye Kuma
Meiter
Two Kardura Purlaitye Ning Kaiengg Kuttara
Tang kul
Many Partanna Towata Ruwar Kulbarri
Neil
Few Warrang Kutyonde
Baupalata
Upon comparison of the different dialects
given in the two foregoing tables, and which comprise
an extent of country, embracing fully one half of
the continent of Australia, it will be apparent that
a sufficient degree of resemblance exists to justify
the conclusion, that they were derived from one and
the same original. It is true, that in many respects,
there are sometimes even radical differences in some
of the words of various dialects; but as Captain Grey
judiciously remarks, if the comparison in such cases
be extended, and the vocabulary of each enlarged,
there will always be found points of resemblance, either
in the dialects compared, or in some intermediate
dialect, which will bear out the conclusion assumed. This view is still further
strengthened, by including in the comparison the weapons,
habits, customs, and traditions, of the various tribes.
It must be admitted, however, that
where the languages spoken by two tribes, appear to
differ greatly, there is no key common to both, or
by which a person understanding one of them thoroughly,
could in the least degree make out the other, although
an intimate acquaintance with one dialect and its
construction, would undoubtedly tend to facilitate
the learning of another. A strong illustration
of this occurs at Moorunde, where three dialects meet,
varying so much from each other, that no native of
any one of the three tribes, can understand a single
word spoken by the other two, except he has learnt
their languages as those of a foreign people.
The dialects I allude to, are first
that of the Murray river, called the “Aiawong”
and which is spoken with slight variations from the
Lake Alexandrina, up to the Darling. Secondly,
the “Boraipar,” or language of the natives
to the east of the Murray, and which appears in its
variations to branch into that of the south-eastern
tribes; and thirdly, the “Yak-kumban,”
or dialect spoken by the natives, inhabiting the country
to the north-west and north of the Murray, and which
extends along the range of hills from Mount Bryant
to the Darling near Laidley’s Ponds, and forms
in its variations the language of the Darling itself;
these tribes meet upon the Murray at Moorunde, and
can only communicate to each other by the intervention
of the Aiawong dialect, which the north-western or
south-eastern tribes are compelled to learn, before
they can either communicate with each other, or with
the natives of the Murray, at their common point of
rendezvous.
To the tables already given, it is
thought desirable to add two of the dialects, spoken
in the country to the eastward of South Australia,
and which were published for the House of Commons,
with other papers on the Aborigines, in August 1844.
A specimen of the difference
of dialects spoken by the
native tribes of Port Phillip.
Specimen of five dialects
spoken by the aborigines of
the north-western district.
Captain Flinders observed the same
difference to exist in various parts of New Holland,
which he visited, and yet that judicious navigator
inclined to the opinion that all the various tribes
had originally one common origin. Vol. ii. -14, he says,
“I do not know that the language
of any two parts of Terra Australis, however near,
has been found to be entirely the same; for even at
Botany Bay, Port Jackson, and Broken Bay, not only
the dialect, but many words are radically different;
and this confirms one part of an observation, the
truth of which seems to be generally admitted, that
although similarity of language in two nations proves
their origin to be the same, yet dissimilarity of
languages is no proof of the contrary position.
“The language of Caledon Bay
(north-west coast) may therefore be totally different
to what is spoken on the east and south coasts, and
yet the inhabitants have one common origin; but I
do not think that the language is absolutely and wholly
different, though it certainly was no better understood
by Bongarrco (a Sydney native) than by ourselves.
In three instances I found a similarity. The
personal pronoun of Port Jackson, ‘Ngia’
(I), was used here, and apparently in the same sense.
When inquiry was made after the axe, the natives replied
‘yehangeree-py,’ making signs of beating,
and py signifies to beat in the Port Jackson language.
The third instance was that of the lad Woga calling
to Bongarree in the boat, which after he had done
several times without being answered, he became angry,
and exclaimed Bongarree-gah in a vehement manner, as
Bongarree himself would have done in a similar case.”
Captain Grey, in speaking of the Aborigines
of New Holland, says (vol. ii. ,
“One singularity in the dialects
spoken by the Aborigines in different portions of
Australia is, that those of districts widely removed
from one another, sometimes assimilate very closely,
whilst the dialects spoken in the intermediate ones
differ considerably from either of them. The same
circumstances take place with regard to their rights
and customs.”
And again, after comparing some of
the dialects of South Australia and New South Wales
with those of Western Australia, Captain Grey says
(vol. ii. ,
“Having thus traced the entire
coast line of the continent of Australia, it appears
that a language the same in root is spoken throughout
this vast extent of country, and from the general
agreement in this, as well as in personal appearance,
rites and ceremonies, we may fairly infer a community
of origin for the Aborigines.”
Had we a collected and an authentic
account of the dialects, weapons, habits, customs,
and traditions of all the tribes of Australia with
whom Europeans have already been in close or friendly
contact, and which, with very few exceptions, would
embrace the circuit of the whole continent, we should
have a mass of valuable and interesting information,
that would enable us, not only to form a probable
opinion as to the community of origin of the various
tribes, and the point from which they first overspread
the continent, but also to guide us in conjecturing
the routes which the various offsets have taken from
the parent tribe, the places of contact where they
have met from opposite extremities of the continent,
and the gradual change which has taken place in the
habits, customs, and dialects of each.
In the absence of many links necessary
to form a connection, we can at present only surmise
conclusions, which otherwise might have been almost
certainly deduced.
Connecting, however, and comparing
all the facts with which we are acquainted, respecting
the Aborigines, it appears that there are still grounds
sufficient to hazard the opinion, that it is not improbable
that Australia was first peopled on its north-western
coast, between the parallels of 12 degrees and 16
degrees S. latitude. From whence we might surmise
that three grand divisions had branched out from the
parent tribe, and that from the offsets of these the
whole continent had been overspread.
The first division appears to have
proceeded round the north-western, western, and south-western
coast, as far as the commencement of the Great Australian
Bight. The second, or central one, appears to
have crossed the continent inland, to the southern
coast, striking it about the parallel of 134 degrees
E. longitude. The third division seems to have
followed along the bottom of the Gulf of Carpentaria
to its most south-easterly bight, and then to have
turned off by the first practicable line in a direction
towards Fort Bourke, upon the Darling. From these
three divisions various offsets and ramifications
would have been made from time to time as they advanced,
so as to overspread and people by degrees the whole
country round their respective lines of march.
Each offset appearing to retain fewer or more of the
original habits, customs, etc. of the parent
tribe in proportion to the distance traversed, or its
isolated position, with regard to communication with
the tribes occupying the main line of route of its
original division; modified also, perhaps, in some
degree, by the local circumstances of the country through
which it may have spread.
Commencing with the parent tribe,
located as I have supposed, first upon the north-west
coast, we find, from the testimony of Captain Flinders
and Dampier, that the male natives of that part of
the country, have two front teeth of the upper jaw
knocked out at the age of puberty, and that they also
undergo the rite of circumcision; but it does not appear
that any examination was made with sufficient closeness
to ascertain, whether
any other ceremony was conjoined with that of circumcision.
How far these ceremonies extend along the north-western
or western coasts we have no direct evidence, but at
Swan River, King George’s Sound, and Cape Arid,
both customs are completely lost, and for the whole
of the distance intervening between these places,
and extending fully six hundred miles in straight
line along the coast, the same language is so far spoken,
that a native of King George’s Sound, who accompanied
me when travelling from one point to the other, could
easily understand, and speak to any natives we met
with. This is, however, an unusual case, nor indeed
am I aware that there is any other part of Australia
where the same dialect continues to be spoken by the
Aborigines, with so little variation, for so great
a distance, as in the colony of Western Australia.
Following round the southern coast
easterly, the head of the Great Bight is the first
point at which any great change appears to occur, and
even here it is less in the character, language, and
weapons of the natives, than in their ceremonial observances.
For the first time the rite of circumcision is observed,
and conjoined with it the still more extraordinary
practice to which I have before alluded. The ceremony
of knocking out the two upper front teeth of boys
arrived at the age of puberty, is not, however, adopted.
We have already noticed, that for six hundred miles
to the west and north-west from the Great Bight, circumcision
is unknown. The tribes, therefore, who practise
it, cannot have come from that direction, neither
are they likely to have come from the eastward, for
after crossing the head of the Port Lincoln peninsula,
and descending towards Adelaide, we find the rite of
circumcision alone is practised, without any other
ceremony in connection with it. Now, in a change
of habits or customs, originating in the wandering,
unsettled life of savages, it is very likely, that
many of their original customs may gradually be dropped
or forgotten; but it is scarcely probable, that they
should be again revived by their descendants, after
a long period of oblivion, and when those tribes from
whom they more immediately proceeded, no longer remembered
or recognised such cérémonials. By extending
the inquiry still further to the east, the position
I have assumed is more forcibly borne out, for the
rite of circumcision itself then becomes unknown.
It is evident, therefore, that the Adelaide or Port
Lincoln natives could not have come along either the
eastern or western coasts, and retained customs that
are there quite unknown, neither could they have come
across the country inland, in the direction of the
Darling, for the ceremonies alluded to are equally
unknown there. They must then have crossed almost
directly from the north-western coast, towards the
south-eastern extremity of the great Australian Bight.
And from them the Adelaide natives would appear to
be a branch or offset.
Returning to the north-west coast,
and tracing down the route of the third division of
the parent family, from the south-east Bight of Carpentaria,
towards Fort Bourke upon the Darling, we shall find,
that by far the greatest and most fertile portion
of New Holland appears to have been peopled by it.
In its progress, offsets and ramifications would have
branched off in every direction along the various ranges
or watercourses contiguous to the line of route.
All the rivers running towards the eastern coast,
together with the Nammoy, the Gwyder, the Castlereagh,
Macquarie, Bogan, Lochlan, Darling, Hume, Goulburn,
etc. with their many branches and tributaries,
would each afford so many routes for the different
sub-divisions of the main body, to spread over the
varied and fertile regions of Eastern, South-eastern,
and part of Southern Australia. As tribe separated
from tribe, each would retain, in a greater or less
degree, some of the language, habits, or customs of
the original division; but such points of resemblance
would naturally again undergo many changes or modifications,
in proportion to the time, distance, or isolated character
of the separation. If we look at the progress
of any two parties of natives, branching off upon
different rivers, and trace them, either upwards or
downwards, we shall find, that the further they went,
the more isolated they would become, and the less likely
to come again in contact with each other, or with
the original division from which they separated.
We may, therefore, naturally expect a much greater
variety of dialects or customs in a country that is
much intersected by rivers, or ranges, or by any features
that tend to produce the isolating effect that I have
described, than in one whose character has no such
tendency; and this in reality we find to be the case.
In Western and South-western Australia, as far as
the commencement of the Great Bight, the features
and character of the country appear to be but little
diversified, and here, accordingly, we find the language
of the natives radically the same, and their weapons,
customs, and ceremonies very similar throughout its
whole extent; but if, on the other hand, we turn to
Eastern, South-eastern, and part of Southern Australia,
we find the dialects, customs, and weapons of the
inhabitants, almost as different as the country itself
is varied by the intersection of ranges and rivers.
The division I have supposed as taking
a south-easterly course from the Gulf of Carpentaria,
would appear early to have lost the rite of circumcision;
but to have retained among some of its branches, the
practice of knocking out the front teeth of the upper
jaw. Thus, those who made their way to Port Jackson
and to Hunter’s River, and to some of the southern
parts of New South Wales, still retained the practice
of knocking out one of the front teeth at the age
of puberty; but at Keppel’s, Harvey’s,
and Glass-House bays, on the north-east coast, at
Twofold bay on the south-east, at Port Phillip on the
south, and upon the rivers Darling and Murray, of
the interior, no such rite is practised. It is
clear, therefore, that when the continent was first
peopled, the natives of Sydney or Hunter’s River
could not have come round the north-east coast by
Keppel’s or Harvey’s bays, and retained
a ceremony that is there lost; neither could the Murrumbidgee
or southern districts of New South Wales, have been
peopled from Port Phillip, or from South Australia,
or by tribes passing up the Murray for the same reason.
It is not demanding too much, therefore, to suppose
that the general lines of route taken by the Aborigines
in spreading over the continent of Australia, have
been somewhat analogous to those I have imagined, or
that we can fairly account for any material differences
there may be in the dialects, customs, or weapons
of the different tribes, by referring them to the
effect of local circumstances, the length of time that
may have elapsed since separation, or to the isolated
position in which they may have been placed, with
regard to that division of the parent tribe from which
they had seceded.
At present our information respecting
the customs, habits, weapons and dialects of the various
tribes is too limited and too scattered to enable
us to trace with accuracy the division to which each
may have originally belonged, or the precise route
by which it had arrived at its present location; but
I feel quite confident that this may be done with tolerable
certainty, when the particulars I have referred to
shall be more abundantly and correctly recorded.
It is at least a subject of much interest,
and one that is well worthy the attention of the traveller
or the philanthropist. No one individual can
hope personally to collect the whole material required;
but if each recorded with fidelity the facts connected
with those tribes, with whom he personally came in
contact, a mass of evidence would soon be brought
together that would more than suffice for the purpose
required.