It is difficult for an European living in the twentieth century to train his mind into the way of thinking like an aboriginal. To require of a person to do so would be like asking his reasoning to slip back through the long ages of progress and mental development, which are primarily responsible for his now being able to hold a foremost position amongst his fellow creatures. The convenience of modern achievements so transcends the awkwardness of primal ways that we might as well suggest to him that the better way of meeting an absent friend would be to walk to a spot he was last seen at, than to catch an electric train bound for the city and despatch a message from the nearest telegraph office to ensure the meeting. The first method would be the primitive, the second the up-to-date. On the other hand, our present systems are satisfied to ascertain a man’s individual identity—his Christian and surnames—but to bother little about anything else. Some of our best families certainly pride themselves upon their ancestral history, and honour the crest which once ranked prominently in the social world, but the general tendency, especially of a democratic world, is to meet this sentiment with a satirical sneer. In consequence, our national history is sacrificing much of its constituent, individual charm, and our nomenclature, so far as any original class-systems are concerned, is daily becoming more meagre and commonplace. Nowadays a Smith is simply a Smith, good or bad, with or without genealogical traditions and records. And this is the point we are leading up to, which is so very different with the aboriginal. His vocabulary bristles with a nomenclature so full of ancestral derivations and traditional origins that a single word combines at once identity with genealogy; the English language does not contain a single word which could convey the same amount of meaning; a number are required to explain the sense. There is no such person as a simple Smith among the aborigines; Smiths there might be, but each is separately described and qualified by his appellation; each person carries his crest, if not his pedigree, embodied in his name. Everybody can understand the significance of the name the moment he hears it; and this understanding is very far-reaching, and as potent as the bonds of freemasonry.

Every individual has a number of names, some of which are never publicly used, but are only known to members of the tribe who stand in very close relationship to him. The names are really more expressions of degree, rank, maturity, and division, rather than personal appellations or addresses. All elders who have officiated during the term of initiation of a novice, or who have instructed or tended a child prior to its attaining its independence, automatically assume a name or title, which, within a restricted circle, explains the social standing of the particular individual.

Then there are factious names, of a religious or sacred character, each of which directly relates to the accepted affinity existing between a living person and an ancestral spirit of semi-human origin. These names are kept very secret, but are embodied in the carved “tjuringas,” which are only exposed to a limited number of persons upon rare occasions, and then very temporarily.

The names which are most commonly applied to individuals are, in reality, pet or nicknames. A special characteristic, a likeness, a scar, or an abnormity is immediately seized upon as a mark of distinction to embody in the individual’s name. Countless examples could be mentioned to illustrate this point. For instance, a man of the Minning tribe at Eucla is called “Jinnabukarre” (Lumpy-foot), an old Arunndta man is known as “Ulgna-bong” (Blind-eye), and a Wongapitcha man as “Jinna-Kularrikna” (Stink-foot). The name I generally travel under amongst the Arunndta is “Atutannya” (Big Man), having been thus christened by them on account of my bodily height. Again, circumstances at birth or any presumed causes of conception often determine the name of the offspring. “Unndulia,” meaning a “shadow,” is both the name of a place with a legend, situated in the MacDonnell Ranges, and of a girl, who is supposed to have entered her mother’s womb there. Many people have names of animals and birds, with which they have some sort of mystic relationship and legendary connections; in the Arunndta such names as “Illiya” (Emu), “Utnguringita” (Witchedy Grub), “Irridja” (Eaglehawk), “Ladjia” (Yam), and the like are daily met with.

Names are frequently compounded, the resulting word embodying locality, peculiarity, ancestry, animal-relationship, and division all in one. As a person grows older his name usually becomes longer, and in a limited sense recounts his biography. There is apparently no limitation to the length of a name, but the whole word is rarely spoken; yet each possessor of a long name commits it well to memory. The longest personal appellation, which has come before our notice, is that of a very aged woman of the Dieri tribe; expressed phonetically it ran: “Yangingurrekupulapaiawattimakantana.”

The intricate and elaborate systems of nomenclature are closely connected with their marriage laws and secret rites. With a few exceptions, these are much the same all over Australia. So far as their marriage systems are concerned, each tribe may be primarily split into two great divisions, between which unions take place; but among members of one and the same division such are forbidden under penalty of death.

Each moiety is further separated into sub-divisions or groups, which are distinguished by a symbol related to a family-crest. The symbol is representative of a natural object, such as animal, bird, or plant, between which and the individual a mysterious relationship is believed to endure. This peculiar belief was first reported to exist among the Australian aborigines by Sir George Grey in 1841, who ascertained that the general name of the mysterious symbol with which an individual identifies himself, was “kobong.” Of later years the word has been replaced in works on Australian anthropology by “totem.” No doubt “Kobongism” and “Totemism” are closely allied conceptions of crude religious significance; but at the same time the “totem” belongs originally to the American Indian, and it is still an open question whether the imported word completely and adequately embraces all fundamental conceptions of the “kobong.”

Among the central tribes the mystical relationship between the present individual and the object (animal or plant) is believed to come through sacred semi-human ancestors which were common to both; the relationship has been handed down from one generation to another. See further, Chapter XXVII.

Each divisional group has a number of such “kobongs” or “totems,” which practically control their marriage-systems. Descent in a family is always reckoned from the mother’s side, at any rate so far as the majority of tribes is concerned. To take a simple example: A tribe is composed, say, entirely of families named Jones and Smith. A Smith is only allowed to marry a Jones, and a Jones a Smith. But, in addition, each individual member of the two groups of families named has a separate crest or symbol, such as, for instance, the cat, the dog, the fowl, the rose. A further restriction is that no two members of the same crest are allowed to join in matrimony, so that no Cat-Jones can marry a Cat-Smith, nor a Dog-Smith a Dog-Jones, because they are “related.” But a Cat-Jones may marry a Dog-, a Fowl-, or a Rose-Smith, and vice versa, without breaking the law. We will find that there are twelve different combinations possible between the Jones and Smiths of the four crests specified. If there be an issue of the marriage, we have heard that the descent always follows the mother’s side, both as regards family and crest. Consequently, if a Mr. Cat-Jones marries a Miss Dog-Smith, the child will be a Dog-Smith; but should the Dog-Smith children again marry into the Cat-Jones’ family-group, the offspring becomes a Cat-Jones if the child be a boy, but remains a Dog-Smith if a girl.

The north-west central tribes split up each moiety into two sub-divisions, between which marriages can take place, but the progeny always goes to the division different from that of its parents. Let us represent the two pairs of subdivision by A and B, and C and D respectively. A man of the A group is only allowed to marry a woman of the B group, and a B-man only an A-woman. The child resulting from the former union becomes a member of neither of its parents’ groups, but passes over to C, and when one from the latter, that is, when the father is a B-man, becomes a D-member. On the other side, when a C-man marries a D-woman, the issue returns to the A line, and when a D-man marries a C-woman, it goes back to the B. If, for instance, we replace the letters A, B, C, and D by the words “Pultara,” “Kumara,” “Panunga,” and “Purula,” in the order specified, we have the general principle of the Arunndta marriage system.

Among the Minning, the four subdivisions are called “Tjurrega,” “Menuaitja,” “Kakera,” and “Ngadeja.” Let us take a simple illustration. A Tjurrega man marries a Menuaitja woman. A male child is born, which becomes a Kakera. When he grows up, this Kakera man must marry a Ngadeja woman. The progeny of the last-named union goes back to the Tjurrega, and, assuming it to be a female, she will have to marry a Menuaitja, and her child becomes a Ngadeja.

A few tribes of central and north-eastern Australia further divide each sub-class into two, making eight in all, but fundamentally the rules governing inter-marriage are much the same as those just mentioned.

It must not be imagined for one moment that the above simple outline represents the complete, and, in reality, very complicated, system upon which the aborigines work. There are numerous others restrictions, which are more or less variable according to the locality of any particular tribe. In its broadest outline, the scheme is much the same all over Australia, and it is possible therefore for tribes living on a friendly footing with each other to inter-marry and yet to strictly adhere to the fundamental principles controlling their respective laws. On the other hand, it will be realized how easily any white man, who is in the habit of having indiscriminate intercourse with native women, can make himself guilty of a criminal offence, when he cohabits first with a woman of one group and then with one of another. This applies, of course, only to the uncorrupted tribes, who still adhere strictly to their ancestral practices and beliefs.

Occasionally one finds a further splitting up of the intermarrying divisions, whilst some of the south-eastern tribes appear to have been without any hard and fast system at all. Here and there, too, the descent runs in the male line.

A child is generally allotted to its husband early in infancy, but actual possession is not taken until the girl is of a marriageable age, that is, when she is about twelve years old. In the interim, however, the future husband has certain claims on the child, and can supervise her domestication and instruction. He, on the other hand, is required to make presentations to the child’s father and other relatives on the father’s side; at this stage, too, he may promise his sister (if she be available) to his future wife’s brother.

The relationship between man and girl is not a love-affair, in the modern sense of the word, but the whole transaction is regarded more like a pure business-matter. The sexual element plays perhaps the least important role, the man looking upon the budding woman as his future associate, helpmate and servant, and also as a valuable asset to his existence wherewith he might be able to barter. Most of his notions in connection with barter are potential, and possibly will never be carried out; in a sense a man’s wealth is gauged by the number of women he possesses, the younger they are the more valuable. As a lord of the wilds, it is, indeed, a fortunate position for any man to be in to own a number of wives; having himself, as a hunter, to travel unaccoutred, the women become the machinery of his transport. When in camp, they collect and prepare food for him, while he is resting or roaming the woods after game. Moreover, the women assist in the cosmetics of his person, and are the means of the education of his children in all matters, except those pertaining to the chase, warfare, and certain ceremonies taboo to women.

There are, of course, many cases where the habit of association grows into mutual affection, but one rarely notices the sacrificing love between man and woman such as is everywhere apparent between a parent and a child. In the former case the intercourse is always touched with a suspicion of subserviency on the part of the woman. Indeed, one cannot fail to be led to the belief that in their conjugal relationship club-rule is the dominant factor. One must not suppose that the weaker sex always submits to this rule without demur or without any resistance at all. On the contrary, she is usually not backward in making her voice felt in indignation, even in defiance of the punishment, which must inevitably, sooner or later, be meted out to her. Whilst the chastisement is proceeding, the husband prefers to sit aside in dignified silence, with his face turned away from the querulous gin, until the bombardment of obscene epithets becomes so strong that he considers drastic intervention necessary, if for no other reason than in the interests of peace and the restitution of order in his camp.

In spite of the strict marriage laws, it occasionally happens that a man elopes with a girl who is outside the permissible inter-marrying limits. Such elopements are the nearest to a selective love-match that it is possible to find among the aborigines. The couple are well aware of the fact that they are committing a serious offence, and that every effort will be made by the tribe to capture them so that they may be punished. If they are caught, both man and girl will be severely battered about with sticks and clubs, as a result of which either or both may die. If the man survives, he will be called upon to make heavy payments of foodstuffs, implements, weapons, ochre, and many other useful commodities to both the girl’s father and the man to whom the girl would have passed in the ordinary course of events. If such couples manage to avoid detection, the fear of punishment, which awaits them, keeps them from returning amongst their tribe, and so they might roam about alone or befriend themselves with a strange tribe, and keep away from their own people for years, or, perhaps, never return. If the absconding gin has been married to another, the offence is not considered so serious. There are, for that matter, usually one or more women in each tribe who are habitually lax in morals. These women are scorned by the other members of the tribe, and are publicly recognized as prostitutes. It goes without saying that these women are the legal property of some of the tribesmen, and for that reason any other men, who are not in the relationship of tribal husbands to the women but cohabit with them, are more or less ostracized, even to the extent of total exclusion from any consequential council meetings of the men.

Apart from these public profligates, the aboriginal women are laudably loyal to the moral principles which have been taught them. Ordinarily a woman is true to her individual husband, but there are certain religious ceremonies during which other men, who are of the same matrimonial division, may have legal access to her; these are her tribal husbands.

It is an expression of goodwill and friendship towards a visitor to offer him one or two of the young married women, who might live with him during his stay in camp. If the visitor appreciates the hospitality of the tribe, he receives the women and, in his turn, offers presents to the old men and to the husbands of his temporary consorts. A similar consideration is extended to men who, through a scarcity of the opposite sex in their particular group, have remained single. Under extraordinary circumstances, arrangements are very casually made for a man to associate with a gin who is not of his recognized class; but in this case it is compulsory to obtain the sanction of the medicine-man, who, after administering some of his sorcery, generally consents to the union.

An exchange of wives is not an uncommon event among two tribesmen, provided always that relationships on both sides are within the subdivisions allowed to inter-marry by law. This interchange takes place mostly between childless couples; when there is a family of young children one generally finds that the parents remain together until, at any rate, the children have grown up.

Those groups of a tribal class-organization, which are not permitted to inter-marry, usually consider themselves in the position of blood-relatives to each other, that is, as brothers and sisters, and fathers and mothers; the forbidden groups of their fathers’ and mothers’ are, however, not necessarily excluded to the children who look upon the members of those groups as the brothers and sisters, respectively, of their parents.