Folia archeologica 43.

10 VIOLA T. DOBOSI - ISTVÁN VÖRÖS Middle and Upper pleistocene forest had a subordinated role, it was replaced by arctic tundra and subarctic steppe. The determination of the archeological material is clear. In the uppermost layers in spite of the absence of characteristic bone objects and artistic pieces there are the finds of Magdalenian culture flourishing in Western Europe. The "primitive hand-axe" of the brownish layer, resembling of the finds of the Szeleta and Balla caves is of Aurignacian age. In the lowermost layers pieces analogous to the Mousterian finds from Tata published by Tivadar Kormos came to light. He emphasizes especially the blades made of the canines of cave bears by "extreme manual skill" which were most probably used for working on hides. This determination is the basis of the term "Kiskevélyi type tooth blade" and Hillebrand is so sure of their artificial, manufactured nature that he considers them to be the proof of human presence even in the classic "bone caves". The excavations were supported financially by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the Speleological Committee and the Hungarian Geological Society.

2 1913. In May and June J. Hillebrand was commissioned to continue his work by the Geological Institute and the Speleological Section. The stratigraphie sequence revised after this excavations is the following: - a great number of tools of definitely Magdalenian character had come to light from the uppermost yellow diluvium, till a 40 em's depth. - below it there was a sterile yellow clay without archeological finds - in the brown clay there were Kiskevélyi type tooth blades which according to the latest experience were considered to be of not Mousterian but of Protosolutrean, perhaps of Upper Aurignacian age - lower yellow layer; arcneologically sterile.

3 Remarks: 1. Those items which were determined by Jenő Hillebrand in his 1935 summary as to be Mousterian, though questionably, appear in the inventory book of the Hungarian Geological Institute (which had got into the Hungarian National Museum transcribed by Mária Mottl in 1936) already as to be Middle Paleolithic. Also the Abbé Breuil had the same opinion. 2. It refers to either incomplete stratigraphie observations or to a rush work that for example the raw material of the "Protosolutrean" (Inv. No. Pb. 486), of Magdalenian (Inv. No. Pb. 411 /a) and of Mousterian (Inv. No. Pb. 826) items is seemingly identical. 3. If we suppose that serial numbers, marking the chronological order of their coming to light, written on the tools to be consistent it is difficult to understand how could the tools marked with the serial numbers 24,150 and 180 get under the same inventory number. In 1914, between the 11th of May and the 21st of May Jenő Hillebrand continues the excavations which yield archeological andpaleontological finds. According to the excavators the inner part of the cave is already completely excavated, perhaps only the entrance might contain something worth to note.

4 2 Hillebrand, J. 1913/b. 153-163. ' Hillebrand,]. 1914. 115-116. 4 Kadic, O. 1915. 16.