Ancient Linear Measures. 225 



bronze objects, a scaling from an Etruscan unit of '230 mentioned 

 by Petrie, but with very few accordances. 



The few measurements I have been able to collect with refer- 

 ence to the stone and bronze age in India do not lead to great 

 results, but may be worth giving. The remarkable and almost 

 unique series of bronze celts found at Gungeria in Central India, 

 and now in the British Museum, give lengths for the larger ones 

 17-27 inches ; averaging about 21 J, which comes very near 

 Petries' 22*0 prehistoric unit before referred to. The smaller ones 

 range from 4J-8J inches; the average being about 5 J inches, 

 x 4=22 ; which again is in accordance. They have possibly been 

 hammered out, or subsequently cut, acccording to Mr. Franks. 



In Breek's account of the Primitive tribes (Todas, etc.) of the 

 Nilgiris in South India are figured several cromlechs, on some of 

 the upright stones of which are sculptured rows or series of figures 

 in relief. The average width of these rows and divisions gives 

 about 1*15 rnetre=45 inches, which divided by 2 would give22J, 

 again an excellent accordance with Petrie's 22*0 unit, and four 

 times my prehistoric foot. I have also got 33 inches for a num- 

 ber of objects from modern Polynesia, which is, of course, a mul- 

 tiple of 11*0. The diameter of a hole at Kakusi, in India, in a 

 kistvaen, is about 44 inches. It is doubtful if this apparently old 

 Aryan and worldwide prehistoric unit of 11*0 inches has any con- 

 nection with the hasta of 16 J — 18 J- inches. 



Whether there is anything in common in the dimensions of 

 Indian cromlechs, dolmens, and stone circles with those of Europe, 

 I cannot at present say. The proportion for prehistoric as com- 

 pared with English measurements should be as 12 to 11. Waring 

 gives 19, 27, 45 and 66 English feet for some small stone circles 

 in India, which would give in prehistoric feet a close approxim- 

 ation to the very likely round numbers of 20, 30, 50 and 70 . 

 Mr. Ferguson also, in his u Rude Stone Monuments," p. 474 

 gives two common dimensions of a class of small stone circles 

 as 24 and 32 feet diameter, which would give 26J and 35 prehis- 

 toric feet. The age, however, of this class of stone monuments 

 is uncertain, and varies greatly, and may even not be pre- 

 Buddhist ; but it is very probable that there may have been some 

 pretty accurate standard or standards of linear measurement 

 going back to at least the commencement of the bronze period, 



15 



