1869.] Proceedings of the Asiatic Society. 185 



Fig. 3, on pi. Ill, belongs to a curious type of which I have only 

 seen one specimen, and it seems probable from the variety of pattern 

 displayed inthese implements, that each type was fashioned for some 

 special purpose. 



All the above specimens have once been finely ground and finished, 

 though from the nature of the material employed and subsequent 

 exposure and use, some are fresher as well as more perfect than others. 

 The specimen has been recently broken by its discoverer, in picking 

 it up in a field, when at work. 



Other specimens of not an uncommon type, and which vary in size, 

 also occur. The form resembles that represented in fig. 4, pi. Ill, 

 but they are not so regular ; one is much flatter and on the edges 

 rather injured. Another specimen consists of some schistose rock, 

 split and roughly ground down, and the working of the lashings, 

 used to fasten the handle, often leave traces on the side, which in the 

 present specimen are clearly seen. From its shape I think this type 

 was probably impacted hatchet-wise in its handle and used for cutting, 

 and that specimen has evidently seen hard usage. 



Fig. 2, pi. IV, represents a rough, stout, wedge-shaped implement, 

 of which I have never seen another, and belonged to a man near 

 Moulmein who declined to part with it. 



The above are all the types of stone implements I have noticed in 

 Pegu, though their form is very variable, much more so than the 

 Indian " celts." The great bulk, however, of those noticed by me 

 belong to some variety of the types represented in fig. 4 on pi. Ill, 

 and figs. 3 and 4 on pi. IV, the entire number of all types which I have 

 observed in Pegu amounting to 50, or thereabouts. 



I may mention, that I picked up somewhere near Jabalpur, a 

 roughly shaped stone spindle whorl,* or weight of soapstone, the 

 shape of an India-rubber-ring, the margins being broader and thicker. 

 At the time I had no suspicion of its interest. Since then, however, 

 I have seen precisely similar articles in European collections, and have 

 no doubt, what I threw away was an authentic antique spindle weight, 

 as I think they are considered. 



* It resembles in form the specimen figured on pi. 1 of the Proceedings for 

 1866 (vide July number, p. 136), but was considerably smaller. 



