RESUMEN

Se presenta una clasificacion de La colecci6n en-tera de Ober:maier del nivel Solutrense Superior deAltamira, que incluye 522 piezas Iiticas retocadas,699 de material de desecho, otros objetos de pie-dra, 37 utiles de :hueso y de asta, y los restos defauna con procedencia solutrense segura. Se com-para la distribucion de utiles lieicos de Altamira,sirviendose de indices 'Y ·gni6cos cumulativos, conlas colecciones del Solutrense Superior de Cueto dela Mina y de Laugerie-Haute Est. En tanto que elsilex predomina como materia prima 10 mismo parapuntas solutrenses que para el resto de la industria,la cuarcita en cambio fue utilizada celativamentecon mas £recuencia para fabricar puntas, que parahacer otros utiies. Las azagayas oseas ipresentan unagran variedad de secoiones (incluso cuadrangulares),siendo representadas t-anto las de bisel sencillo enla base como las de bisel central.

La nueva idenrificacion ouanritariva de la fau-na corrobora sustancialmente la lista de Oberrnaierde 1935, acerea de "a relative abundancia de las es-pecies. Se confirrna la presencia de foca y can me-nos seguridad rarnbien .la de reno. La presencia de.garno no ha podiclo ser confirmada y las pia-cas grabadas de collar, interpretadas anteriorrnen-te como de marfil de mamut, han sido aharaidenrlficadas de.6:nitivamente como trozos de hiodesde caballo, Numericamente, la mas importanre es-pecie abatida fue el ciervo, pero result a igual 0 in-ferior en peso de carne aproveehable a los grandes

ZEPHYRVS, XXVI-XXVII, 1976

The Solutrean of Altamira:The Artifactual and Faunal Evidence

JESUS ALTUNA y LAWRENCE G_ STRAUS

Bovidos y caballo, tarnbien cazados durante la ocu-paci6n solutrense de Altamira.

Trata de los posibles habitats ecologicos de losdiferentes anirnales representados.

INTRODUCTION

In 1924 and 1925, Profesor Hugo Obenmaierconducted excavations in the vestibule of the c-aveof A~tamira, vhe last and most important in a se-ries of suoh investigations w.hidh began with thefirst collection of objects by Sautuola. Obermaier'sexcavation, still visible today, consisted of a large,rougHly square trench located on tlhe left side oftlhe vestibule, between ehe cave entrance and thelocation of Alcalde del Rio's earlier excavation(now covered <by the massive artificial roof-supportbetween the vestibule and the entrance to the«Hall of Paineings»), 'Dhe results of this latest ex-cavation, along with a resume of anterior aroheo-logical investigations in Altamira, were publishedten years later in ~he magnificent volume, The Ca-ve 0/ Altamira by Breuil and Obermaier (1935).

Below rockfall and stalagrnitic layers, Obermaierencountered Lower Magdalenian and Upper Soluerean levels, both located in ehe midst of layers ofrockfall. He was unable to excavate Iurrher, dueto a massive amount of rockfall below the Solu-trean, at an average depth of 2.5 metres. Accordingto the publication (1935: 178):

/'

176

<~No clear-cut definite separation existed[between the MagdaJenian and Solutreanlevels] in the part excavated, but the So-Iutrean level was more reddish».

Naturally, especially given the large quantity ofSolutrean 'points in the Altamira site, the two le-vels were distinguishable on the basis of their arti-fact assemblages, even if vhe exact depositional li-mits were not completely secure, in ·the absence,for example, of any separating sterile lens. Judgingfrom nhepublished section (fig. 164), vhe Solutreanlevel had a maximum tthickness of about 0.5 m.,and was probably excavated in an area of some-what less dJan 8 by 6 metres, on the basis of in-spection of ,the excavation in its present state. How-ever the actual volume of Solutrean cultural deposits excavated must -have been substantially lessthan 24 cubic metres, since much of ohe Solutreanlevel (like clJe Magdalenian one) was filled withroof-fall blocks (1935: 177-9).

It is the purpose of obis brief note to present aClassi.fication and .preliminary analysis of tthe mate-rials collected by Obermaier from vhe Upper Solu-trean of Altamira -lir.hics, bone tools, and fauna-especially to provide a quantitative picture of thedata already published by ~he excavator, to whosework one is 'Teferred for a more ample descriptionof the investigations, complete witth excellent illus-trations of some of the materials recovered. Thecollections studied are located in the old museumconstructed 'by the Duke of Alba at Altamira, andhave been organized following indications on l.a.bels (and on German newspapers of the era) In

Obermaier's handwriting. In addition, a small lotof seventeen Altamira Solutrean artifacts located inthe Field Museum of Chicago, probably pertainingto Oberrnaier's excavations as well, has been addedto the large lithic inventory compiled at Santi11~na.The Sautuola and Alcalde del Rio lithic collectionsdisplayed in the Museo Provincial de Prehistoriain Santander have not been amalgamated with thelarge and representative Obermaier collection, sin-ce they are both clearly highly selected, composedoverwhelmingly of Sohrtrean points.

ARTIFACTS

Table I includes the classification of those pie-ces wivh clear Solutrean provenience, following the

Jesus Altuna y Lawrence G. Straus

type-list for the Upper Paleolithic of de Sonneville-Bordes and Perrot (1954, 1955, & 1956)_ 52 ofthe 91 types are represented, a figure wbich arteststo the completeness of the collection, as does thefact that most of tihe Solutrean points figured inthe original publication (Breuil and Obermai ir

1935) are present in it, despite their well-knownsuitability (or susceptability) for presentation tomuseums or private collectors. A Solutrean collec-tion of similar size, that of Level E of Cueto de laMina, excavated a few years earlier (Vega del Sella1916), has at least one of each of 47 of the 91 deSonaeville-Bordes and Perrot types (Str-aus 1974).

Figure I is a graphic representation of the Altamira Solutrean industry. It should be noted thatthere is a distinct similarity between this cumula-tive graph of the total provenienced collection of522 pieces, and the one published by GonzalezEohegaray in a study of the Magdalenian III (1971:326), based on a sample of 216 pieces. In terms.ofquantity of artifacts alone, Alrarnira, together WithCueto de la Mina, is ehe most important Solutreansite in Cantabria.

It is instructive to compare these two large andimportant sites by means of their respective arn-fact indices. The Altamira collection (see Table I)has 13.2 % Solutrean points, whereas Cueto de laMina F, with 117 tools, has 15.4 %, and the com-bined Level E collection, with 584, has 15.9 %.Alramira remains somewhat lower in «Solutrean-characteristics, wi th 16.1 % of its (total) toolsbearing some «Solutrean» retouch, as opposed to24.8 % and 22.1 % in Cueto de 1a Mina F and ErespectiveLy. An important difference betw.een AI·tarnira and both Cueto de 1a Mina levels, IS appa-rent in the proportions of endscrapers and burins:Altamira has 25.1 % endscrapers and 20.8 % bu-tins (i. e. nearly the equal of the endscraper per-centage); Cueto de la Mina F, on the contrary, has350% endscrapers and only 6.8 % bucins, whileLe~el E has 30.8 % endscrapers and only 6.8 %burins. This difference can hardly be fortuitous,and is possibly indicative of somewhat differentactivities in the two sites. Naturally, Altamira basmuch larger percentages of both dihedral burinsand burins on truncations that Cueto de 1a Mina ':;assemblages, but in both sites, rhe former are moretlhan twice as numerous as the latter.

Perforators, while rare at both sites -as isusual in the Cantabrian Upper Paleolirhic- are

The Solutrean 01 Altamira: The Artilactual and Faunal Evidence

much more frequent (4.6 %) in Altamira's Solu-trean tlMn in either Cueto de la Mina F (with noperforators of «becs») or E (wi rh 2.6 %). On thecontrary, Altarnira has only 12.8 % denticulate andnotched pieces, as compared with 23.9 % (nearlydouble) in Cueto de la Mina F, and 17.8 % inLevel E. All rhree industries have about 8 % ofartifacts composing tthe so-called «Aurignacian»group index, while there is a range of from be-tween 1.7 and 6.2 % for the «Perigordian» group,with the Altamira percentage (4.24 %) falling be-tween those of Cueto de la Mina F and E.

lG

10 /./~--'

177

re II also includes rhe published composite distri-bution (Smith 1966: Graph 10) of the Final Solutrean levels of Laugerie-Haute Est with shoul-dered point-so Despite the notable lack of nudeiformendscrapers, which are a hallmark of rhe Canta-brian Upper Paleolithic in general, the absence ofbladelet artifacts, and rhe richness of perforators(a1most always rare in Cantabria), the Laugerie-Haute graph shows the same general tendencies astlhe two great Cantabrian sites. On the contrary,Altamira's Solutrean cumulative percentage graphhas very little in common with those of Cueva

-------.------

Aside from "he differences in relative quantityof burins and endscrapers, etc., noted above, theCueto de la Mina E assemblage generally resemblestlhat of Altamira's Upper Solotrean, as can be seenin Figure II. Both these industries include relativejy large numbers of shouldered points of varioussubtypes, as well as many laurel leaf points (inclu-ding concave-base ones), and unifacial points. Figu-

Morin or Cueva Ambrosio (see Gonzalez Echega-ray 1973: fig. 82), of the Solurrean levels of theSpanish Basque Provinces (Straus unpublished da-ta).

Table I also lists tlhe flaking debris and otherlirhics included in the Obermaier Solutrean collec-tion from Altamira, Wthlle ~he number of blades,flakes, and bladders is low, relative to the number

178

of cores and tools made on cores, it is sufficientlylarge to judge rhe relative care with which Ober-maier dug in Altarnira. Missing are many of thesmallest flakes, bladelets, and chips, such as werecollected in the recent excavation of Cueva Morin.

An interesting fact, also presented in Table 1,

Jesus Altuna y Lawrence G. Straus

circular cross-section wirh central flattening, 4 withsingle-bevel ends, and 2 with quadrangular cross-section. Many of these points are engraved, espe-cially with diagonal tick-marks. In addition, thereare a number of pierced animal teeth: pierced hor-se and large bovid incisors, red deer and fox ca-

deals with the selection of Hinr versus quartzite forehe manufacture of Solutrean points and orher arti-facts. Wlhile flint predominates as raw material forboth, it is relatively less important in the makingof points, where-as quartzite was apparently usedrelatively more for making points than for othertools. This phenomenon has also been noted in thecollections of certain Solutrean occupations in As-turias (Sm.us 1974).

The worked bone and antler collection withSolutrean provenience is relatively small, but typi-cal, consisting of 30 «points», 2 retouchers, 3needJeor pin fragments, one pierced needle, and atleast one awl. The points include 7 of oval and

nines, and pierced and engraved horse hyoid bonesections, commented upon below.

FAUNA

The 1935 publication of Obermeier's excavationin Altarnira includes a list of animal species encoun-tered in the SoJutrean stratum (pp. 179-80), which,however, gives only a relative assessment of theabundance of each animal form. Permission waskindly granted by Dr. M.-A. Garda Guinea, Di-rector of ehe Museo Provincial de Prehistoria, San-tander, to transport the faunal collection stored at

The Solutrean of Altamira: The Artifactual and Faunal Evidence

TABLE I: Lithic Industry

ALTAMIRA Solutrean (Oberrnaier 1924-25)

(Sant'Ilana & Chicago collections) de Sonneville-Bordes & Perrot Type List (traslaiion after Moure)

] . Raspador simple 22. » arlpico 153. » doble 15. » sobre hoja retocada 68. » sobre lasca 111. » aquillado 612. » aqurllado aripico 1413. » alto en hocico 1214. » plano en hocico 815. »nucleiforme 5416. Cepillo (Rabor») 1217. Raspador - buril 322. Perforador - buril 123. Perforador 1424. » atipico (<<Bec») 825. »multiple 126. Microperforador 127. BuriJ diedro recto 828. » diedro rebsjado 329. » diedro de angulo 230. » sobre rorura 3731. » multiple diedro 832. » curvo arqueado 235. » sobre truncarura retccada obEcua 1236. » sobre truncatura retocada concava 637.38.39.

» sobre truncatura retocada convexa 3transversal sobre truncatura lateral 3transversal sobre escoradura 1

»

»

.39 %2.86%.19%

1.15 %.19 %

1.15 %2.69%2.30%1.53 %

10.34 %2.30%.59 %.19%

2.68%1.53 %.19%.19%

1.53 %.59 %.39%

7.09%1.5.3%.39%

2.30%1.15%.59%.59%.19%

40. Burn multiple =obre truncatura retocada 441. » multiple mixto 243. » nuclei forme 144. » plano 1658. Hoja de borde rebajado total59. Hoja de borde rebajado parcial 160. Pieza de rruncatura recta 461. »» » oblicua 662. »» »c6ncava 663. »» » convexa 365. » de retoques cont. sobre 1 bor. 4566. »de reioques cont. sobre 2 bor. 1968. Hoja de escoradura ]69. Punta de cara plana 2070. Hoja de laurel 1571. Hoja de sauce 1472. Puma de muescs solurrense 2073. Pico74. Pie-a de escotadura75. » denticulada76. » esquirlada77. Raedera78. Raclera (<<Raclette»)85. Hojira de dorso89. Hojita de escotadura92. Diversos

TOTAL: 522

179

50172193

.79%

.39 <r"

.19 %3.06%.19%.19%.79%1.15%1.15 %.59 %

8.62%3.63%.19%

3.83%2.85%2.68%3.83%.19%

958%3.26 %.39 %

3.64%.59%.19%.39%.96%

25

IN!>JCES:

Indice de Miles solutrenses:» » retoque solutrense:» » raspadores:» » buriles:)} » perforadores:» » piezas denticuiadas:» » raspadores «aurifiacienses»:» del grupo aurifiaciense:» »grupo perigordiense:» de buriles diedros:» » buriles sobre truncatura:

Proporciones de materia prima:

Silex Cuaeeita Cuarao Calcedo,

Puntas solurrenses!~5 dernas piezcs reto.Debris

13.2 %16.1 %25.1 %20.8 %4.6 %12.8 %7,67%8.25%4.25%11.1 %4.0 %

WASTE, etc.:

Numero de micleos:» » hojas:» » lascas:» » hojitas:» » hojitas de golpe de buril:» » rrozos de ocre:» » percu rores:» »piedras a molinar:» » chopper I chopping tools:

79.1 %89.3%80.1 %

17.9% 3.0%3.5% 5.9% 1.0%7.2 % 12.3 % 0.4 %L. G. Straus 1973

56249204837

102572

180

TABLE II: Fauna

Jesus Altuna y Lawrence G. Straus

AUAMIRA Solutrean (Oberrnaier 1924·25) (Sanrillana collection)

Minimum Number of individual per anima "pC"1C~

Cercus elaphusEquus cabal/usLarge Bovid (Bos / Bison)Capra pyrenaicaRupicapra rupicapraCapreolus capreolusSus scro]aRangiler tarandus (?)Ursus spelaeusVulpes oulpesPboca cf. uitulinaGyps or Aegypius (vulture)Aquila (?)

Middle - size bird

208522121521111

MolluscaAbout 300 Patella oulgata of medium to large sizeAbout 75 Litorina littorea.

Santillana to San Sebastian for definitive identifcation and quantitative analysis in the Laboratoriode Paleonrologia, Sociedad de Ciencias NaturalesAranzadi. The results of this study are presentedin Table II in the form of minimum numbers ofindividuals per species.

In general, the quantitative analysis gives re-sults corresponding to Obermaier's estimates of re-lative abundance: red deer (20 individuals mini-mum), horse (8), and large bovids (probably bothBos and Bison) (5) are all listed by Oberrnaier as«very abundant» (1935: 179). Mountain goat andchamois, both with a minimum of two individualsin the preserved collection, are listed as «fairlyabundant», though fox and wild boar, also withtwo individuals each, are described' by Obermaieras «rare» (1935: 179). Roe deer, with only oneindividual represented in nhe collection, is descri.bed as «rare». Not represented in ehe collection ofrecently re-identified remains are wolf, lynx, fallowdeer, and mammoth, either due to misidentificationin the original publication (as in me case of mam-moth at least), or due to loss of the relevant bones

(2 young) it

(2 young)(all adult)(1 very young)(1 very young)(adult)(1 quite aId)(1 fragment of antler badly eroded)(1 old, 3 yong, & 1 very young)(1 very yong)(1 phalanx)

,> all individuals are adult, except where noted.

]. Altuna 1974

or teeth of these species, whioh, at any rate, wereoriginally published as «r-are» or questionable i.e.:(Dama).

There is indeed a seal represented in ehe So-lutrean of Altamira; however its new identificationis based on a rear first phalanx, and not on a ca-nine, as published in 1935 (p. 180). This canineis apparenti1y missing. There is also at least one(probable) reindeer represented in the collection,based, as in ehe original identification, on one flatantler fragment, unfortunately rather eroded. The-re are no reindeer teeth or bones represented. Theoriginal identification of mammoth was based onfour carved and pierced pendants, said by Ober-maier to be of ivory (1935: 180 & 188). Althoughat least one mammoth is represented in the Solu-trean Level E of Cueto de la Mina (Vega del Sella1916) (identification kindly confirmed by E. Agui-rre), these four Altamira pendants, of which pho-togrephs (1935: fig. 171) and measurement'S wereprovided by Oberrnaier, are cut sections of horsehyoid bones, borh on vhe basis of their over-allmorphology and internal structure. There Me no

The Solutrean of Altamtra: The Artilactual and Faunal Evidence

remains of mammoth in the collections studied.1lhc probable presence of reindeer in the UpperSolutrean of Altarnira, Aitzbitarte, and Ermittia(Altuna 1972), and of mammoth in Cueto de laMina E (Vega dell Sella 1916) confirms, however.ehe picture of a rigourous, albeit fluctuating UpperSolutrean-age climate, as generally indicated by sedimentological and palynological studies in the up-per levels of Cueva Morin (see Butzer 1971 g1973, and Leroi-Gourhan 1971).

The 1935 listing of a doubtful fallow deer re-mains unconfirmed: there are no remains of thisanimal in the preserved Altamira Solurrean prove-nience collection. In effect, it would be unusual tofind remains of this Mediterranean species in anUpper Pieniglacial deposi t in Cantabria (especiallyif it be that of a stadial oscillation), vhough thereare three possible parietal representations of Damain El Buxu (Obermaier and Vega del Sella 1918:Plate 17), Castillo (Garcia Guinea & GonzalezEchegaray 1966: 32 & fig. 4), and La Pasiega (Gon-zalez Eohegaray & Moure 1971: 403). Unpublishedidentifications of Dama in the Solutrean of Cas-tillo by Vaufrey also remain unconfirmed to date(along wi tin that of Dama in rhe Magdalenian [?1of La Paloma [Hernandez-Pacheco 1923: 211).

1'he three birds (one vulture, one probable ea-gle, and a mediumsize bird) .nay well have beencaptured, or collected (already dead) for their fea-thers. The seal -vhe only one known from a Can-tabrian Peleolithic midden deposit- was probablypicked up on a nearby beach after becoming stran-ded at low tide, or after washing ashore dead.llhe presence -at least occasional- of seals in

Cantabrian waters is in addition testified to by thetwo parietal engravings of ~his animal in Pefia deCandamo (Hernandez-Pacheco 1919: figs. 62 & 63).The some 300 limpets and 75 winkles -if at allrepresentative of the original quantity of molluscsin the Solutrean level- would have contributed lit-tle to rhe diet, except in the way of providing va-riety. They could have been procured on coastalrocks only '3 couple of hours wa1k from the cave.even if the Wiirun-age sea level had been severalscore metres lower than at present, due to thenarrowness of the neighboring coastal shelf. Ober-maier (1935: l80) states that shellfish were farfewer in the Solutrean level than in t'he Magdale-man.

Clearly, red deer, essential a woodland animal

181

at present, was the numerically most frequentlyhunted animal in vhe Altamira Solutrean, a statusw1hich it holds in all rhe studied Asturian Solu-trean faunal collections (Straus 1974), and in allthose of Santander and the Basque Country, exceptBolinkoba (Straus unpublished data), Ermittia, andCueva Morin (Aruna 1972). However, in terms ofusable meat weight, the five large Booidae -alladults- together with the eight .horses, would po-tentially have more than equaJIed red deer in die-tetic importance. Of course, red deer had moreshan simply a food use, since its antler tines wereoften converted into various types of tools, and itsteeth into ornaments. .

In addition to red deer, there are two otherspecies represented in the Altamira Solutrean collec-tion which would have preferred woodland or fo-rest-edge habitats: roe deer and boor. Horse and,possibly, Bos and Bison would have lived on opengrasslands, whereas reindeer can be found in agreat variety of habitats -open or wooded (arleast today}- given certain climatic limitations.The Wiirm glacial environment of rhe large rollingcoastal plain surrounding the Altarnira hill wouldhave provided booh large rich grasslands, as wellas woodlands located in sheltered valleys, such as,perhaps, the deep, protected Santillana uvala.

There are four animals (two eaoh of mountaingoat and chamois) which, while not necessarilyconfined (except by active hunting with guns) t:"heights suoh as those of the Picos de Europa,where at least the chamois still lives today, prefersteep, rocky slopes or diMs. The presence of theseanimals in a site in the midst of a large plain -al-beit rolling- may indicate ehar the Solut·rean hun-ters may ,have made occasional expeditions to foot-hills or areas witlh cliff-faces. (Hills of some 800m. in altitude are located starting at a minimumof 11 km. north of Altamira, but there are steepslopes and cliffs dominating the course of the RioSaja in places at less than half this distance. Oneof these cliffs, incidentally, contains nhe minor So-lurrean site of Peiia de Carranceja (see Cartaihac &Breuil [1906: 274], possibly a hunting camp forAltamira).

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, the Obermaier collection from Ai·zamira contains an important Solutrean lirhic and

182

bone industry, comparable, within the limits imposed by possible functional and cultural differen-ces among sites and regions, wirh some other typical Upper Solutrean assemblages. The equally im·portant faunal collection includes a wide range 0.'

game animals (as well as fur and feather-bearingspecies), but seems to suggest :1 degree of speciali-zation in ·red deer hunting, coupled with an at leastequally heavy dietetic dependence on horse and lar-

Jesus Altuna y Lawrence G. Straus

ge Bovidae. As its name implies, Altamira is situa-ted on a hill with a commanding view of the sur-rounding plain, with many sheltered karstic hol-lows. In addition, this site, so famous for its rupes-tral art, is located within practicable walking distan-ce of tiheseacoast and vheCordilleran foothills, with,their respective Wiirm"age food and raw materialresources.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ALTUNA, J.: 1972. Fauna de Mamileros de los YacimientosPrebistoricos de Guipazcoa, «Munibe» 24.

BREUIL, Hand OBERMAIER, H.: 1935. The Cave 01 Alta-mira at Santillana del Mar, Spain. Madrid.

BUTZER, K. W.: 1971. Comunicacion preliminar sabre lageologia de Cueva Morin, in Gonzalez Echegaray, Free-man, et al., Cueva Morin. «Excavaciones 1966-1968».Santander, pp, 343-56,

Ibid.: 1973. Notas sabre la geomorlologia regional de laparte occidental de la Provincia de Santander y la estra-tigralia de Cueva Morin, in Gonzalez Ecbegaray, Free-man, et 01., Cueva Morin. «Excavaciones 1969». San-tander.

CARTAILHAC, E. and BREUIL, H.: 1906. La cauerne d'Alte-mira a Santillane, pres Santander (Espagne). Monaco.

GARciA GUINEA, M.-A. and GONZALEZECHEGARAY,J: 1966.Nouvelles representations d'art rupestre dans la grottede Castillo, «Bulletin de la Societe Prehistorique del'Ariege». 21: 27-34.

GONZALEZ ECHEGARAY, J: J.971. Apreciaciones cuantita-tiuas sobre el Magdaleniense II T de la costa cantabrica,«Munibe» 23: 327-7.

Ibid.: 1973. Nuevas aportaciones al estudio del Paleoliticosuperior de Cueva' Morin, in Gonzalez Ecbegaray, Free-man, et al., Cueva Morin. «Excavaciones 1969». Santan-der, pp, 165-216.

GONZALEZ ECHEGARAI', J. and MouHE ROMANILLO, J. A.:1971. Representaciones rupestres ineditas en la Cuevade la Pasiega (Puente Viesgo, Santander), «Trabajos dePrehistoria» 28: 4101-5.

HERNANDEZ-PACHECO,E.: 1919. La Cauerna de la Peii« deCandamo, «Comisi6n de Investigaciones Paleontol6gicasy Prehistoricas», Mem. 24.

Ibid.: 1923. La vida de nuestros «ntecesores paleoliticos,segtin los resultados de las excauaciones en la Caoernade la Paloma (Asturias), «c. 1. P. P. Memoria», 31.

LEROl·GOURHAN, Arl.: 1971. Analisis polinico de CuevaMorin, in Gonzalez Ecbegaray, Freeman et al., op. cit.,pp, 359-65.

OBERMAIER, H. and EL CONDE DE I,A VEGA DEl. SELLA:19-18. La Cueva del Buxu (Asturias), «c. I. P. P. Me-moria», 20.

SONNEVILLE-BoRDES,D. de and PERROT, J.: 1954, 1955 &1956. Lexique typologique du Paleolitbique superieur,«Bulletin de 1a Societe Prehistorique francaise», 51: 327-35, 52: 76·9, 53: 408·12 & 547-59.

STRAUS, L. G.: A preliminary note on the Solutrean 0/Asturias (unpublished m.s. 1974).

VEGA DEL SELLA, CONDEDE LA: 1916. Paleolitico de Cuetode la Mina (Asturias). «c. 1. P. P. Memoria», 13.

SMITH, P. E. L.: 1966. Le Solutreen en France. Bordeaux

Acknowledgements:

Thanks are gratefully extended ro Dr. M.-A. GardaGuinea, Director of the Santander Museum, for permissionto transport the faunal collection to San Sebastian for stu-dy. Sr. F. Mendez de la Torre, Director of Public Relationsfor the Caves of Altamira, and his staff graciously providedall facilities required for the organization and study of thecollections located in Santillana, as did Dr. Glen Cole, Cu-rator of Prehistory, for those located in the Field Museumof Natural Sciences in Chicago. Research conducted byStrauss was in large part supported by the National Scien-ce Foundation (U.S.A.).