^{page 164 note 1} Patte, E., Le Paléolithique dans le centre-ouest de la France. Masson, Paris, 1941Google Scholar.

^{page 164 note 2} Louis, M., Le Gard préhistorique, 1936Google Scholar.

^{page 165 note 1} See Patte, E., ‘Les enseignements de la vallée de la Charente’ in Revue Scientifique 1941Google Scholar, for a conservative statement of this point of view. The full acceptance of Breuil's scheme would involve dating the earliest handaxes to the antepenultimate interglacial, but the concern of a discussion like the present must be with minimum conclusions rather than with maximum hypotheses.

^{page 165 note 2} Breuil, H. in Nature, vol. 160, 1947, p. 831CrossRefGoogle Scholar, following Oakley, K. P. and King, W. B. R., in Nature, vol. 155, 1945. P. 51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

^{page 165 note 3} Patte, E., ‘Les enseignements de la vallée de la Charente,’ Revue Scientifique, 1941Google Scholar.

^{page 165 note 4} Vaufrey, R., ‘Le paléblithique Italien,’ Archives de l'Institut de Paléontologie Humaine, 1928Google Scholar.

^{page 165 note 5} Schmidt, R. R., ‘Die diluviale Vorzeit Deutschlands,’ Stuttgart, 1912Google Scholar.

^{page 165 note 6} Obermaier, and Wernet, , ‘Eine Revision der Acheuléen Fundplätze Deutschlands.’ Mitteilungen der antropologischen Gesellschaft Wien, vol. 44, 1914Google Scholar.

^{page 165 note 7} Murg, mentioned below, is a case in point.

^{page 168 note 1} The two specimens in question are illustrated by Jakob-Friesen, in ‘Die Altsteinzeitfunde aus dem Leinetal bei Hannover,’ Veröfent. der Urgesch. Sammelungen des Landesmuseum zu Hannover, vol. 10, 1950, figs. 44, 49–50Google Scholar. Unlike the other specimens undoubtedly from the gravel they are unrolled, unstained, virtually unpatinated, and were found loose on the floor of the pit.

^{page 168 note 2} All closely comparable to the High Lodge types, in Suffolk.

^{page 168 note 3} Here and elsewhere the marginal error quoted is the Standard Error.

^{page 168 note 4} Most authorities are now agreed that this industry is indistinguishable from Levallois v of Breuil's classification in the Somme.

^{page 170 note 1} Obermaier, H., Der Mensch der Vorzeit, Münich, 1912Google Scholar.

^{page 170 note 2} The reasons for omitting the oft-quoted specimens from the Polish caves of Okiennik and Galoska, together with the so-called Micoquian stations of Central and Eastern Europe will appear in the next section.

^{page 171 note 1} Field, H. and Prostov, , American Anthropologist, vol. 39, no. 2, p. 268Google Scholar.

^{page 171 note 2} Illustrations quoted by Golomshtok, , The Old Stone Age in Russia, pp. 249Google Scholaret seq.

^{page 171 note 3} Quoted in Golomshtok, op. cit., p. 278.

^{page 171 note 4} Golomshtok, op. cit., pp. 239–40, mentions surface finds near Rzhev of atypical bifacial tools vaguely resembling ovates, and referred by P. P. Ephimenko to the Neolithic. Also a single small cordiform hand-axe said to have been found somewhere on the lower Volga towards the beginning of the century.

^{page 172 note 1} Vaufrey, R., ‘Les Eléphants nains des Isles Mediterranéennes et la questions des isthmes pléistocènes’ Archives de l'Institut de Paléontologie Humaine, no. 6, 1929Google Scholar.

^{page 172 note 2} Cartailhac, E. in Les Grottes de Grimaldi, Monaco (1912)Google Scholar, says ‘Le matérial de ces grottes … est en beau silex et il a le même fadés que celui de la Grotte du Prince. C'est le même moustérien pur, dégagé de touts legs acheuléens …’

^{page 172 note 3} Boule, M. and de Villeneuve, L., ‘La grotte de l'Observatoire à Monaco,’ Archives de l'Institut de Paléontologie Humaine, no. 1, 1927, p. 106Google Scholar.

^{page 172 note 4} Rivière, E., ‘Grotte Lympia,’ Association française pour l'avancement des sciences, Congrés d'Alger, 1881, P. 575Google Scholar.

^{page 172 note 5} Information published by kind permission of the discoverer, M. André Bonnet. The site known as ‘La Colombière’ is exposed in a quarry near Montpellier. The fauna was dominated by Equus sp. and Cervus Elaphus, with traces of Ursus spelaeus and Hyaena crocuta.

^{page 174 note 1} The existence of an eastern or southern facies of Mousterian would seem to have been suspected by such workers as Obermaier, R. R. Schmidt and Gorjanovic-Kramberger at the beginning of this century (see for instance the latter in ‘Zivot i kultura diluvijalnoga coyjeka iz Krapine’). Later interest was largely focussed on the variety of facies disclosed in South-west France, which were assumed to occur far outside that area.

^{page 174 note 2} According to the figures quoted by the Abbé Parat the average would be less than one hand-axe per deposit, and more recent work in the same area has done nothing to alter this conclusion.

^{page 175 note 1} Obermaier, H. and Wernet, P. in Mitt Anthrop. Ges. Wien, vol. 44, 1914Google Scholar.

^{page 175 note 2} Op. cit., pp. 298–300.

^{page 176 note 1} At Schulerloch for instance, see the collection in the Prehistoric Museum at Münich.

^{page 176 note 2} Several specimens are in the Natural History Museum, Weimar.

^{page 176 note 3} Kozlowski, , ‘Die ältere Steinzeit in Polen,’ Eiszeit, vol. 1, 1924Google Scholar.

^{page 176 note 4} Breuil, , ‘Notes de voyage paléblithique en Europe central,’ l'Anthropologie, 1923Google Scholar.

^{page 176 note 5} Garrod, D. A. E., ‘Excavations in the Cave of Bacho Kiro, North East Bulgaria,’ American School of Prehistoric Research, Bulletin 15, May 1939, p. 71, fig. 55Google Scholar.

^{page 176 note 6} Fraipont, J. and Tihon, F., ‘Cavernes de la vallée de la Mehaigne,’ Mém. courronnées, etc., Académie Royale de Belgique, vol. 43Google Scholar.

^{page 177 note 1} It must be admitted that both here and elsewhere there is a certain tendency on the part of local workers to coin culture names for what may well be no more than chance variations due to raw material or other local circumstances.

^{page 177 note 2} Observations based on unpublished material in the municipal collections at Reggio di Calabria.

^{page 177 note 3} Vaufrey, op. cit., 1928, p. 73.

^{page 177 note 4} Unpublished material in the Museo Bellucci at Perrugia.

^{page 177 note 5} Vaufrey, op. cit., 1928, p. 77.

^{page 177 note 6} Battaglia, R., Rivista dell'istituto italiano di speleologia, 1930Google Scholar. Considerable unpublished collections are in the municipal natural history collection of Postumia.

^{page 177 note 7} Brodar, S., ‘Das Paläolithikum in Jugoslawien,’ Quartär, vol. 1, 1938Google Scholar.

^{page 177 note 8} E. Cartailhac, op. cit., 1912, pl. 12, fig. 15, and pl. 15, fig. 11.

^{page 177 note 9} Deydier, M. and Lazard, F., C. R. Cinquième Congrés Préhistorique de France, 1909, pp. 158–78Google Scholar.

^{page 177 note 10} Information mainly from unpublished collections in the Musée d'Histoire Naturelle de Nîmes.

^{page 178 note 1} Deevey, E. S., ‘Biogeography of the Pleistocene,’ Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, vol. 60 (1950), P. 1315CrossRefGoogle Scholaret seq., provides the summary of the present position on which I have drawn.

^{page 179 note 1} Firbas, F., ‘Vegetationsentwickelung und Klimawandel in der mitteleuropäischen Spät- und Nacheiszeit,’ Naturwissenschaft, vol. 27, 1939, pp. 81–9, fig. 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

^{page 179 note 2} Ibid, pp. 104–8, fig. 4.

^{page 179 note 3} Poser, H., ‘Auftautiefe und Frostzerrung im Boden Mitteleuropas während der Würm-Eiszeit,’ Naturwissenschaften, vol. 34, p. 266Google Scholar.

^{page 179 note 4} F. Firbas, op. cit., 1939, fig. 6.

^{page 180 note 1} The facies is of rare occurrence and only known from a small group of sites in South Western France, where it occurs in a thin stratigraphical zone at the base of the Upper Palaeolithic sequence. The case for the exotic origin of the blade tradition of Europe as a whole rests mainly on two arguments: the lack of satisfactory terms of transition between the two great industrial traditions of the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic, the absence of any single instance of stratigraphical overlap, and finally the consistency of the association of the two species of homo—the Neanderthal and the Sapiens—with the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic respectively.

Biologically it is held to be overwhelmingly unlikely that evolution can have taken place from the one species to the other within the limits of the time indicated by the geological evidence.

The second argument can also be used to support the idea of the rapid immigration of blade-using Homo Sapiens into Europe at this time. On the other hand no satisfactory prototype for the Chatelperronian has yet been identified outside Europe, although it appears possible that the Upper Palaeolithic may have been evolved in situ out of the local Middle Palaeolithic in the Levant. (This last is a verbal comment kindly supplied by Professor Garrod on reading through the above passage in the text in proof).

^{page 180 note 2} Garrod, D. A. E., ‘The Upper Palaeolithic in the light of recent discovery,’ Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 1938, p. 1Google Scholaret seq. I understand that Professor Garrod has considerably altered her views since the publication of this paper in 1938.

^{page 180 note 3} The suggestion occasionally seen that traces of Solutrean can be detected at Spy is perhaps due to confusion of one or two typical East Mousterian miniature bifacial points with rough feuilles-de saule. Identical specimens to those at Spy are found in the Mousterian horizon at Kartstein. The mass of the material at Spy is, however, West European in character.

^{page 181 note 1} The fact that a proportion of art sites can probably be associated with the Aurignacian and Gravettian does not, of course, affect this particular issue.

^{page 181 note 2} See forthcoming report by Graziosi, P. in Proceedings of the Third International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, Zürich, 1950Google Scholar.

^{page 182 note 1} Vaufrey, op. cit., 1928, pp. 19–22.