H— ANTHROPOLOGY 157 



Protolithic and Miolithic type respectively, but later in time, he betrays 

 that he has not freed these terms of typological significance. The time 

 has come when the labels Lower, Middle and Upper Palaeolithic should 

 be used exclusively in a chronological sense, without any typological 

 connotation whatsoever, to cover approximately the periods from the 

 beginning of the Pleistocene to the end of the Riss Glacial, from the end 

 of the Riss to the middle of the Wurm, and from the middle of the Wiirm 

 to the close of the Pleistocene respectively. For purposes of typological 

 classification the three main groups of hand-axe, flake and blade cultures 

 are essential, but should not be made too rigid, and it will be necessary 

 to multiply names derived from type-stations to denote the many variations 

 found within these groups. Here again, however, a warning seems to 

 be needed, for there is a tendency to-day unnecessarily to create distinct 

 labels for industries which are essentially the same, though found in 

 widely separated areas, and this practice tends to obscure those migrations 

 of culture over wide areas which it should be our major interest to trace 

 and interpret. 



These general considerations are necessary to clear the ground for 

 the subject with which I am going to deal — those cultures whose appearance 

 in Europe towards the close of the Pleistocene marks the extinction of 

 Neanderthal man and the arrival of Homo sapiens. In the main these 

 are essentially blade cultures, though in certain areas industries of 

 Mousterian tradition lingered on into Upper Palaeolithic times. Now it 

 is clear that these blade cultures must have passed through the early 

 stages of their development somewhere outside Europe, during Middle 

 or even Lower Palaeolithic times, but we have at present only the faintest 

 clues as to how and where that development took place. In dealing with 

 them we are therefore in fact dealing mainly with that period which 

 we have defined as Upper Palaeolithic, but we should bear clearly in 

 mind that this limitation is due only to a limitation of our knowledge, 

 and should guard against falling into the error of applying the term 

 Upper Palaeolithic to the industries themselves. 



Before showing how recent discovery has modified and enlarged our 

 views on this subject it will be necessary to give an outline of the situation 

 as it stood roughly twelve years ago. In western Europe, at any rate, 

 the succession of blade cultures was pretty clear. We had the Lower 

 Aurignacian with its curved points, the Audi stage followed by the 

 Chatelperron stage ; the various levels of the Middle Aurignacian, with 

 keeled and nose-scrapers and notched blades ; the Upper Aurignacian, 

 subdivided into the Gravette and Font-Robert stages ; the Lower, 

 Middle and Upper Solutrian ; and finally the six stages of the Magdalenian. 

 Outside Europe the only blade industry which had been studied at all 

 seriously was the Capsian of North Africa, and this was regarded as the 

 parent of the Aurignacian, the generally accepted view being that the 

 Lower and Upper Aurignacian represented successive Capsian invasions 

 of Europe, while the Middle Aurignacian developed in situ at a time when 

 contact with Africa was temporarily broken. The Solutrian was recog- 

 nised as an intrusion from central Europe, the special form which it 

 assumed in the West being due to contact with the Upper Aurignacian 



