Give the distribution of Palaeolithic sites around the Himalayan and Sub-Himalayan areas, highlighting the typo-technologies of the tools. (Answer in 250 words)

- Give the distribution of Palaeolithic sites around the Himalayan and Sub-Himalayan areas, highlighting the typo-technologies of the tools. (Answer in 250 words)
Introduction
The Himalayan and Sub-Himalayan belt yields Palaeolithic material chiefly from the Siwalik foothills and the terraces of their rivers, and its industries are dominated by pebble tools worked on quartzite.
Body
1. The setting: the Siwalik frontal range and the outer Himalaya, with sites in fluvial terrace gravels and boulder conglomerates. De Terra and Paterson's 1939 Kashmir-Potwar work correlated four terraces with glacial cycles, a framework since abandoned but still the reference sequence.
2. Distribution: the Soan valley of the Potwar plateau, with Riwat and the Pabbi Hills yielding claimed very early artefacts; the Beas-Banganga and Sirsa valleys around Guler, Dehra Gopipur and Nalagarh in Himachal; the Kashmir Karewas at Pahalgam and Sombur; the Doon valley and Uttarakhand foothills; the Dang and Arjun Khola valleys in Nepal; and Sanghao Cave further west for the later phase.
3. Techno-typology: the Soan tradition consists of choppers and chopping tools, discoids and heavy flakes struck from river cobbles by stone-hammer and block-on-block technique. Guler and Dehra Gopipur yield Acheulian handaxes and cleavers made with cylinder-hammer thinning, showing the two traditions coexist rather than succeed one another; Late Soan adds prepared-core Levallois flakes, and the Upper Palaeolithic blade and burin industry appears at Sanghao.
4. Chronology: almost all of it is surface or derived terrace material, so dates are relative and disputed.
Conclusion
The belt is best described as a pebble-tool province with a real Acheulian component. Its chief weakness remains the near-absence of stratified, directly dated occupation floors.