eexl Proceedings of the Asiatic Soc. of Bengal. [N.S., XVII, 
relations for purposes of the generalizations of Science,—is still 
a erving desideratum in Indian Ethnography. 
In one Indian Province meets the value of such intensive 
Biot studies appears to have been recognized. 
at Ser sobs. *" Tn 1903, Sir Daiaptyhle iialict: then Chief 
missioner of Assam, proposed and _ re- 
ceived the sanction of the Government of India for the prepa- 
organization, laws and institutions, religion and folklore, poe 
age, racial affinities, and traditions as to the origin of t 
people concerned. Major Gurdon who was appointed Biber 
intendent of Ethnography and, later, Honorary Director of 
Ethnography for Assam, edited the series of excellent mono- 
graphs beginning with his own book on the ‘ Khasis’ (first pub- 
lished in 1906) which has now passed through a second and 
enlarged edition (1914) and followed by similar books on the 
‘ Meithies’ (1918) by T. C. Hodson, the ‘ Mikirs’ (1908) by 
Edward Stack, the ‘Garos’ (1909) by Major Playfair, the 
— (1911) by Rev. 8. Endle, the ‘ Lushai Kuki Clans’ 
(1911) by Lt.-Col. J. Shakespeare, and the ‘ Naga Tribes’ of 
Manipur (1911) by T. C. Hodson. Other books of the series. 
are reported to be under preparation. ' So far as this intensive 
form of ethnographic study is concerned, it has uafortunately 
as yet attracted but few Indian workers. Indeed, with the 
exception perhaps of monographs on a couple of Chota Nagpur 
tribes there is hardly any other work of the kind from the pen 
of an a lian. 
n, there is another important branch of anthropologi- 
cal Renner eins which has been left severely alone not only 
by Indian students but even by most European investigators 
of man in India. I refer to what is known as Prehistoric 
Archaeology but what may not inappropriately be as well 
named Prehistoric ptt pang ,—for, this is our only source 
of direct knowledge of Prehistoric man and his culture. Prac- 
tically all the stendiee knowledge that we now possess of Indian 
Pre-history is mainly derived from the scanty accidental finds of 
a few Europeans, mostly members of the Geological Survey of 
the Central Provinces, the Central India rote and Bajpoten, 
Guzerat, the United Provinces, in the valleys of the Godavari 
and the ‘Narmada, and in various districts of the penne Presi- 
dency ,—no undoubted fossil human remains have yet been 
discovered i in association with Indian palaeoliths, and only in 
