1888.] R. Bmce Foote—Bemarhs on Mr. BalVs Note. 197 



grand ethnographic theory could have been based by any man on such 

 purely negative evidence as his belief in the occurrence of only one 

 specimen of a polished celt in the Peninsula. Why he should be 

 angry at all I don't quite see, for he vs^inds up his note in a most self- 

 contented spirit by the remark : *' At the same time I must add that 

 had these particular finds (which he had overlooked or forgotten) been 

 well known and fully considered, they would not have very materially 

 affected my conclusions as to the general features of the then ascer- 

 tained Geographical Distribution of ancient stone implements in India.'' 

 I daresay not ! for even now he is strongly inclined to back up his 

 theory and to regard the neolithic settlements of the Peninsula as only 

 " offshoots from the Main Areas of distribution." By the Main Areas 

 of distribution he doubtless means the province which he has shown 

 by a grey tint in the map illustrating his paper, and yet in his list of 

 localities for neolithic finds, he does not quote a single instance of the 

 connection of such finds with any locality known to have been inhabited 

 by the people that made the polished implements, much less does he 

 point out the connection of the implements with centres of their manu- 

 facture, or mention localities where other articles for domestic use, or 

 for purposes of ornament, have also been found in intimate and un- 

 mistakable association with the celts. All the celts enumerated in his 

 list (with one doubtful exception) were found either casually on the 

 surface or else arranged in temples around Mahadevs (Lingams, Phalli), 

 positions which throw not the faintest light on their origin or local 

 derivation. 



It would certainly appear to me that the region in which the loca- 

 lities inhabited by the celt-makers are distributed in considerable num- 

 bers, and traces of the manufacture of celts and the very various other 

 implements used by the same people abound, should rather be regarded 

 as the main area of distribution. 



In my paper I enumerated over 40 localities inhabited by the celt- 

 makers, and I can now add 16 more to my list ; several of them of great 

 importance, besides many fresh places in which casual finds have been 

 made by myself or others. Within the last few months celts have been 

 found in Malabar, on the West Coast (by Henry Gompertz, Esq., 

 Deputy Superintendent, Madras Survey) and near Chingleput (by the 

 Rev. A. Andrew.) 



On the question of priority of neolithic finds, I have only claimed 

 priority for my finds in South India. The agate flakes found by 

 Captain Abbott in 1845, in the banks of the !N'erbudda, were not re- 

 garded by him as of human origin, and the flint flakes found in the 

 Circar Warangal in the Nizam's Dominions, in 1847, are so briefly al- 



