1888.] R. Bruce Foote — Bemarlcs on Mr. BalVs Note. 195 



the Forms and Geograpliical Distribution of Ancient Stone Implements 

 in India," (Proceedings, Roy. Irish Acad., 1879.) 



It is quite true that I charged him with not giving me full credit 

 for my discoveries, but I nowhere called in question his intention to do 

 me full justice in the matter. I simply pointed out several omissions 

 on his part to make himself acquainted with prehistoric facts relating to 

 South India published by me at different times, and which omissions 

 were, to say the least, unfortunate for a writer dealing in an ex- cathedra 

 style with the whole literature on the subject. 



In the tabular list of " Localities in India where stone implements 

 have been discovered " given in his paper just quoted, he gives me credit 

 for the discovery of a ring-stone, but omits to - quote a celt which I 

 mentioned in the same note to a paper I published in the Journal of the 

 Madras Literary Society for 1866.* This celt I found in 1864 and made 

 it known in 1865, when I had fifty copies of the paper in question struck 

 off, nearly a year before the regular publication of the Journal, and 

 distributed among the leading Geologists and Archaeologists in England. 

 I do not refer to Mr. Ball's paper in the Proceedings of the B. A. 

 S. for 1867, as I have been unable to get sight of it since reading his 

 note whi(;h I am now replying to. 



When an author who claims to be a great authority on any subject 

 (as Mr. Ball distinctly does in the matter of Indian Prehistoric Stone 

 Implements) brings out a second edition of a work, or part of a work, 

 on such a subject the public has a very distinct right to expect such 

 second edition should be fully up to date, and it was Mr. Ball's failure 

 in this respect that obliged me to draw attention to his omissions. 

 They were the following : 



1. He repeated in the list to his paper read to the Royal Irish 

 Academy the omission of any mention of the celt above referred to. 



2. He failed to notice a paper I read to the International Prehistoric 

 Congress at Norwich in 1868, and which was published in the Congress 

 volume the next year. In this paper I referredf pointedly to my first 

 celt and ring-stone when speaking of the relations between the Indian 

 palasolithic and neolithic stone-workers, and also mentioned a second 

 very perfect celt I had found near Nellore in 1866. 



3. Mr. Ball also overlooked my letter to the Geological Magazine 

 (in 1873) on the subject of the late Mr. W. Fraser's discoveries of 

 neolithic centres at Bellary, and some similar finds of my own in that 



* See second part of footnote (2), page 10. 



t Vide Transactions of the International Congress of Prehistoric Arcliceoloo'y, 

 Norvvicli, 1868. Longmans, London, 1869, p. 236. 



