250 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 83 



The list of animal species from the cave comprises now the fol- 

 lowing : 



Elephas ftrogonthcrii Dicrostonyx torquatus 



Elephas primtgenius Microtus ratticeps 



Rhinoceros tichorhinus Arvicola sp. 



Cervus mcgaceros Lepus fcunicuUis 



Cervus tarandus Sorex araneus 



Cervus elaphus Anser brachyrhynchns 



Cervus fcapreolus Bernicla leucopsis 



Cervus sp. Bernicla brenta 



Equus GaUimila chtoropus 



Bos primigenius Cinclus aquaticus 

 Hyaena crocuta, var. spelaea Tetrao sp. 



Canis flnpns fLagopus mutus 



Canis vulpes Falco tinnunculus 



In the case of the ox, horse, reindeer, and rabbit, considerable 

 discrepancies occur in the size of the teeth and other bones, and it 

 may well be that bison coexisted with the urus, Prjewalski's horse 

 with the " forest horse," caribou with a smaller reindeer, and Arctic 

 hare with the rabbit. The bones of all the species were in close associ- 

 ation with implements of Mousterian pattern. 



The stratigraphy was rather disappointing. 



Among the artifacts there was a small flat piece of bone on which 

 are to be seen a number of parallel double cuts of artificial, human 

 origin. Several sharply pointed pieces of bone may have served as 

 drills ; but a convincing example of a bone implement has up to the 

 end of 191 5 not come to light. As to the flint industry, the total 

 number of flints showing human work recovered from the cave to 

 the end of 1915, was 15,070. Among these 155 were perfect specimens 

 of Mousterian tools of first quality, showing the classic forms of this 

 industry. Then came several thousands of rougher examples, of 

 second and third quality; the remainder being waste of manufacture. 



Marett inclined at this period to assign the industry of the cave 

 to two periods, probably separated by a chronological hiatus. The 

 industry of the first period he assigns to the Middle Mousterian. 

 " It is, in fact, the typical industry of Le Moustier itself." The work 

 of the upper bed on the other hand he assigns to the Upper Mousterian. 

 It is not Aurignacian in his opinion, " but nevertheless foreshadows 

 the Aurignacian industry in a number of ways. There are particular 

 implements, though in no sense typical ones, that closely resemble 

 Aurignacian forms as regards their outline ; but the trimming is 

 Mousterian, not Aurignacian, in its technique." The conclusion of 



