590 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 1907. 
carefully at the specimens in order to see to which group they belong. 
On the other hand, it is evident that the suggestion that the pestle 
and mortar is the prototype of the eastern fire piston is based solely 
upon this superficial similarity, which is evidently appreciated by 
the Malays, since they apply the word gobek to both instruments. 
We have only to remember that, for all practical purposes, charac- 
teristics which are essential to the efficiency of the one instrument 
are absolutely detrimental to that of the other. In the case of the 
betel mortar, it is imperative that the pestle should work loosely 
in the mortar, and it is equally essential that in the fire apparatus 
the piston should very accurately fit the bore. A shght departure 
from this rule in either case renders the instrument useless for its 
purpose, and it is, consequently, most improbable that either could 
have accidentally performed the function of the other and so have 
suggested it. 
One other appliance seems to have a claim to consideration. In 
the process of cleaning the barrels of the small muzzle-loading can- 
nons, such as are frequently seen in the East Indies, it is conceivable 
that in driving an accurately fitting cleaning rod up the bore with 
some force a considerable compression of the air inside might result, 
and that a piece of readily combustible matter might have been 
ignited thereby. The touchhole, being very small, might not have 
caused a too great diminution of the air pressure, since the air could 
only escape relatively slowly through this orifice; or on some occa- 
sions the touchhole may have been temporarily blocked, in which 
case the compression would have been greater and more effective. 
In some respects this appears to be the least unlikely of the pos- 
sible suggestions as to the prototype of the fire piston, and color is 
lent to the idea by the form of the North Borneo fire piston (fig. 37), 
in which the cylinder has the appearance of a miniature cannon 
actually fitted with a “ touchhole.” 
At the best, however, I am not at present able to offer any very 
convincing suggestions as to how the fire piston may possibly have 
been discovered in its eastern home, and it seems all too likely that 
the question of its monogenesis or polygenesis may never be com- 
pletely determined. The problem remains an exceedingly interesting 
one, both from technological and ethnological standpoints, and, in 
concluding this attempt to bring together the material available for 
comparative study, I may express the hope that further information 
may be forchcoming, both as regards the earliest records of the fire 
piston in the east and as regards the geographical distribution and 
varieties of this peculiar method of producing fire. 
I wish to thank heartily those who have so kindly assisted me to 
procure specimens or information. More especially am I indebted 
to Messrs, Skeat, Annandale, Shelford, Leveson, Miller Christy, 
Joyce, and Bidwell, whose assistance has been of much value to me. 
OOO EE 
