Content uploaded by Ewa Dutkiewicz
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ewa Dutkiewicz on Oct 13, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
74
The Swabian Jura
2
The Vogelherd Cave and the discovery of the earliest art –
history, critics and new questions
Ewa Dutkiewicz
Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte und Archäologie des Mittelalters – Universität Tübingen – Germany
Introduction
The region of the eastern Swabian Jura is particularly known for the earliest evidence of figurative art in the Aurignacian
around 43 to 35,000 years ago (Conard and Bolus, 2003, 21; Conard and Bolus, 2008; Higham et al., 2012; Kind, 2014, this
volume; Wolf, 2014, this volume). This paper will focus especially on four caves: the Geissenklösterle and the Hohle Fels
Cave in the Ach Valley, and the Hohlenstein-Stadel and the Vogelherd Cave in the Lone Valley (see Conard, 2014, Figure
1, this volum e). Al l four sites have yie lded fi gurat ive ar t, us ually in the form of ani mal fi gurin es, but also r epresentati ons
of humans and hybrids are known. First excavated by Gustav Riek in 1931 in the Vogelherd Cave and published in 1934
(Riek, 1934), the Swabian Aurignacian figurines are mentioned in every summary of European Palaeolithic art. That
these pieces represent the world’s oldest figurative art so far was not always accepted in the scientific community. The
aesthetic quality and elaborate work of the figurines were often seen as arguments against their provenance from
the Aurignacian (for example, Zotz, 1951; Freund, 1957) or it is argued that there must have been older precursors (for
instance, Bosinski, 1987; Bosinski, 2013). Even if the latter cannot be excluded, the dating to the Aurignacian is proved
(for example, Conard and Bolus, 2008). Since their discovery, the figures from the Swabian Jura have always been the
subject of art historical reflections. Despite their fine processing and their charisma, they remain enigmatic. Especially
enigmatic to us are the numerous engraved marks – points, parallel lines, crosses and cross-lines – which are found on
almost all the figurines and also on numerous organic tools of the same time period. We face many interesting questions
concerning these marks: which signs are present on which figurines? Which marks or combinations of marks are typical
of the particular sites? Were they placed simultaneously or with a time interval? Is it possible to establish a kind of
‘signature’ on the marks? What significance did the marks have in the Aurignacian social system in the Swabian Jura?
In this article an overview of Swabian Aurignacian research history will be given, with special attention to Vogelherd
and the other find spots that have delivered figurative art from this period. A summary of the main responses to these
findings and a contextualization of their cultural significance follow. A new research approach that focuses on the sign
system of the Swabian Aurignacian will be presented at this point.
The discovery of the cave and excavation at Vogelherd
It was 23 May 1931 when Hermann Mohn, an interested amateur researcher from Heidenheim, found flint artefacts in
the backdirt of a badger den on a hill near Stetten by Niederstotzingen. Mohn had discovered the site Heidenschmiede in
Heidenheim in 1930 and participated in the excavations there and could therefore determine the archaeological material
safely (Huber, 2010). Soon after the discovery, he informed the members of the University of Tübingen about the discovery of
another potential Palaeolithic cave, which was named ‘Mohnloch’ – ‘Mohn’s hole’ firstly (Figure 1), and became later known
as Vogelherd Cave. A short time later, the junior researcher and later Professor Gustav Riek was sent to Stetten to inspect
the site. In the company of Mohn he went to the approximately 30 cm high and 40 cm wide entrance to the badger den on
{"}&&#}#"}=\##On the evening of the second day they found evidence for
a Palaeolithic settlement. Subsequently, a large systematic excavation was undertaken and in the course of just three months,
the cave was excavated completely. As a reason for the high speed of excavation Riek called the fear of illegal excavations.
;''~=YY['
Jahrzehnten anderen Diluvialstationen der Alb schon zuteil geworden ist, anheimgefallen und die
Y'='Z'~~=[~='Y
1
(Riek, 1934, VIII).
1 ‘The mass of finds from our archaeological site is not in such regrettable disruption as other diluvial stations of the Jura have become in previous
decades, and the scientific observations have been arranged in order from the first day on without gaps’.
75
The Swabian Jura 2
The excavations began on the 15 July 1931 and were completed the 1 October of the same year. Riek, who was constantly
on the site, led the diary, measured the finds, made profile drawings and photographed during the excavation. Four local
fieldworkers, A. Bamberger, H. Feiertag, K. Gring and E. Bamberger were employed for the excavation (see Bolus, 2014, Figure
3, this volume). Riek had planned a three-volume publication, of which only the first volume, ‘Kulturen’, was published in
1934 (Riek, 1934). Therein, Riek presents a detailed description of the geological processes, the petrography of the sediments
and the traces of Palaeolithic settlement of this site. He published a cave plan with the expansion of the various layers (Riek,
1934, 11) and five profile drawings (Riek, 1934, 41-49). According to the cave plan twelve profiles were drawn. All of them
are described individually, but not all are published as a drawing.
New excavations at Vogelherd
During the 1931 excavation the backdirt from the Vogelherd Cave was driven out by workers in wheelbarrows and poured
down the slope in front of the cave. The fresh debris mound is clearly visible in old photos (Figure 2). This debris mound also
attracted many amateur collectors, so that further discoveries were made after 1931, such as two fragments of a little lion
head made of mammoth ivory and a possible figurative representation of sandstone, which is difficult to determine (Riek,
1954; Hahn, 1986). The first official excavation in the backdirt after 1931 was conducted by Eberhard Wagner in 1978. Two
small test trenches in front of the two cave entrances were undertaken, but no significant results were obtained (Wagner,
1978). Seventy-four years after the first excavation, a team from Tübingen University under the direction of Prof. Nicholas J.
Conard began a systematic investigation of the backdirt. The aim was to save objects that must have been overlooked during
Riek’s relatively fast excavation (Conard, 2007, 324-325). The excavation ran from 2005 to 2012 and supplied numerous
finds, including new figurines, fragments of figurines, as well as stone artefacts, faunal remains and an important number of
personal ornaments (Conard and Malina, 2006; Conard et al., 2007; Conard and Malina, 2008; Conard et al., 2009; Conard
and Zeidi Kulehparcheh, 2011; Conard et al., 2010; Conard et al., 2013; Conard and Malina, 2012; Wolf, 2013; Conard,
2014, this volume; Wolf, 2014, this volume).
The significance of Vogelherd Cave for the Swabian prehistory
The Vogelherd Cave is one of the most important prehistoric sites in Germany. It is located on a limestone offset in the middle
of the Lone Valley, about 20 m above the valley bottom. It possesses a surface of approximately 170 m
2
and a ceiling height of
about 3-4 m. The Y-shaped cave has three openings: the south entrance, the southwest entrance and a small opening in the
north, which is too small to serve as an entrance. Riek distinguished a total of eight Palaeolithic layers. Four of these are Middle
Palaeolithic deposits and four belong to the Upper Palaeolithic. Two of the latter, layer V and VI belong to the Aurignacian
(Riek’s ‘middle’ and ‘upper’ Aurignacian). The two Aurignacian layers are the richest of the site and form the cultural level for
which Vogelherd is famous. The Magdalenian is also represented in two layers. The Gravettian is not present, as in almost all
the cave sites of Lone Valley. Remains from the Neolithic are the last traces of human activity at Vogelherd.
Figure 1. Hermann Mohn, his wife, Frieda Mohn, and Gustav
Riek (left to right) at the excavation of Vogelherd Cave in 1931
(with kind permission of Ulrich Huber).
Figure 2. Backdirt in front of the Vogelherd Cave during the
@@_?^_`[Q
76
The Swabian Jura
2
The Middle Palaeolithic
The Middle Palaeolithic at Vogelherd is documented in four layers (VI-IX) and provides one of the most complete stratigraphic
sequences for West Germany, with the receipt of Early Mousterian, Mousterian and Late Mousterian (Müller-Beck, 1983, 250-
251). The oldest layer IX lies directly on the bedrock and delivered only six stone artefacts. One find makes this layer especially
interesting: the molar of a young forest elephant documents the settlement of Vogelherd by the Neanderthals already in the
penultimate interglacial period, the Eemian, at least 115,000 years ago (Lehmann, 1954; Niven, 2006, 10, 77). Joachim Hahn,
due to erosion processes, does not rule out a younger, Würm glacial age of these finds (Hahn et al., 1985, 86-87). Whether
from the Eemian or from the beginning of the last glacial period, these find are the oldest evidence for Neanderthals in this
region.
The Upper Palaeolithic
Above a sterile layer, on top of the Middle Palaeolithic, two Aurignacian layers (V and IV) follow. Both yield the largest amount
of finds from Vogelherd, for example, a very rich lithic assemblage with 910 tools and 1,223 blanks from 1931 (Hahn,
1977, 87), plus numerous finds from the excavations of 2005 to 2012. This extensive inventory is currently being edited
and re-examined in an ongoing dissertation (Chang, 2014, this volume; Chang, in prep.). The osseous industry is also very
abundant. Especially the split base points are frequently found. Exceedingly rich are also the personal ornaments that were
added, due to careful water screening and sorting, in the 2005-2012 excavations (Dotzel, 2011; Wolf, 2012; Wolf, 2014, this
volume). Some find concentrations show an organized use of the cave with designated work areas. The Aurignacian settlement
traces were extremely rich, according to Riek´s descriptions. Thus, several fireplaces and find concentrations in the form of raw
material, tool depots and work waste are reported in the two layers or even an accumulation of mammoth bones that was
found nearby the southwest entrance (Riek, 1934, 52-55; Hahn, 1986, 18-22). This bone accumulation is one of the oldest
of its kind so far (Niven, 2006, 221; Wolf, 2012, 182). A pyrite (FeS2), with clear traces of shock was recovered in the lower
Aurignacian layer V within a burning place in the main hall (Riek, 1934, 161). It represents the earliest archaeological evidence
of fire production with shock technology (Weiner and Floss, 2009). Riek described two sculls in the lower Aurignacian V, which
were regarded for a long time as the earliest fossil evidence for anatomically modern humans in central Europe. They have
recently been dated and show a Neolithic age of about 3,900-5,000
BP
now (Conard et al., 2004).
Two layers of the Magdalenian (III and II) are also present at the Vogelherd cave. There were several tool accumulations
and worked reindeer antlers. The Magdalenian settlement of Vogelherd takes place in the early phase after the Last Glacial
Maximum. The low find density suggests that they were rather short-time stays (Riek, 1934; Niven, 2006, 232).
The figurines
Riek’s excavation yielded eleven figurative representations. The lower Aurignacian layer V supplied a total of seven, including
the famous horse, the mammoth with the perforations between the legs, the rear part of a large mammoth figure and the
front leg with neck area, which is likely to be the same figure, the animal figure with the striking surface structure but without
a head, the sculptured lion figure and the animal figure to which a head fragment from the new excavations in 2012 was
refitted (Conard et al., 2013). Four figurines come from the upper layer IV: the lion in relief, the steppe bison, the relief of a
mammoth and an anthropomorphic figure. Although the layer of each figurine is known, in his publication unfortunately Riek
gives no indication of the exact position of the finds and their context. Riek’s personal communication to Eberhard Wagner
was that all the pieces were found in the central hall, right at the mouth of the eastern corridor, visible from the entrance at
the right cave wall (Wagner, 1981, 42-43). Wagner reconstructs the position seen from the south entrance. Hahn, however,
reconstructs the position at the opposite spot at the right wall, seen from the south-western entrance. He refers to Wolfgang
Taute who received this information from Riek himself (Hahn, 1986, 20). This position is also confirmed by an oral notification
by Erwin Pregel to the author. Pregel knew one of the workers of 1931, Anton Bamberger, who indicated the same position
for the figurines.
After Riek’s excavations, three further pieces of figurative art have been discovered. On the one hand, there are two fragments of
a lion head, which probably originate from one and the same figure, but unfortunately cannot be joined, since the middle lamella
of ivory is missing (Wagner, 1981; Hahn, 1986). One of them was found by S. Weber in the dump area in front of the south-
west entrance and is, to this day, in private possession (Riek, 1954; Hahn, 1986, 104-106). The other one, the more complete
part of the head, derives from the inheritance of E. Scheer and is now in the State Museum of Württemberg (Mauser, 1973). On
the other hand, a perforated piece in sandstone was found by K. Bleich. Riek suggests this figure as a mammoth (Riek, 1954)
and Hahn remains in the naming of this piece as a pendant, due to the lack of clarity of this presentation (Hahn, 1986, 98-104).
77
The Swabian Jura 2
History of reception of the figurines
With regard to the impressive examples of Palaeolithic art from France, Riek was particularly keen on having found works of art
from this period in Germany. Riek sets the stratigraphic position of the figures from Vogelherd clearly to the two Aurignacian
layers V and IV. He places his Aurignacian sequence in the cultural division according to Henri Breuil (Breuil, 1907) and sees
clear parallels to it. Riek’s ‘unteres Aurignacien’ corresponds to the ‘Aurignacien inférieur’ and is no longer addressed as
Aurignacian. Hansjürgen Müller-Beck (1957, 26) and Gerhard Bosinski (1967, 150) assign this layer to the Middle Palaeolithic
based on the stone artefacts. Riek’s ‘mittleres’ and ‘oberes Aurignacien’ correspond to the ‘Aurignacien moyen’ and ‘supérieur’
after Breuil and cover the part of the Upper Palaeolithic, which nowadays is referred to as Aurignacian (Riek, 1934, 262-264;
summarized: Hahn, 1986, 23-25).
Riek’s cultural assignment of layers IV and V to the Aurignacian on the basis of the lithic and the organic industry was generally
accepted, but there were doubts as to the allocation of the figures in this period. As Zotz emphasizes:
Einige Speerspitzen mit gespaltener Basis und andere, zum Teil durchlochte oder randlich mit Kerbreihen
verzierte Gegenstände aus Knochen und Elfenbein passen durchaus an die Seite dieses offensichtlich unserer
Stufe I nahestehenden Aurignacien. … Aber wie steht es mit den Tierskulpturen, die mit zu den besten Werken
Aurignacien I, im ersten Interstadial, so reife Kunstwerke erwarten?’2 (Zotz, 1951, 197).
He explains this phenomenon with an unidentified region of origin in Western Europe, in keeping with the then generally
accepted Franco-centric view:
Zeit nachgewiesen wurden, es ein eigentliches Spätaurignacien [Gravettien] aber am Vogelherd offenbar gar
nicht gibt, kann man nur schließen, diese Kunst wäre vom Westen während des Interstadials bereits bis in die
notwendige hinausgehenden Breite der Vogelherdmonographie, wo viel unbedeutendere Funde genau nach
der so bedeutenden Skulpturen nichts verlautbart wird3 (Zotz, 1951, 203).
He clearly sees the figures from Vogelherd Cave as the precursors of the art in Moravia. The temporal gap appears strange to
him, but seems irresolvable at this point. His doubts are reinforced by the fact that Riek indicates no exact find location for
the figurines.
Gisela Freund follows the same argument:
Les trouvailles les plus importantes sont représentées, sans doute, par une dizaine des statuettes animales,
sculptés en ivoire que Riek a daté de l’Aurignacien moyen et de l’Aurignacien supérieur dont les industries
appartiennent selon l’auteur à l’interstade Wurm I/II. Quant à cette date, nous ne sommes pas tout à fait
d’accord avec l’auteur et nous supposons que l’habitation aurignacienne dont les couches étaient situées
au-dessus d’une strate argileuse que nous datons aussi comme l’auteur, dans l’interstade Wurm I/II, a commencé
plus tard. N’entrons pas dans une discussion sur la chronologie de Vogelherd qui est, sans doute, une des plus
importantes stations paléolithiques en Europe centrale. Mais en ce qui concerne les œuvres d’art seulement,
précises sur leur situation stratigraphique. Nous y apprenons seulement que Riek regarde les plastiques rondes
comme appartenant à l’Aurignacien moyen et les demi-reliefs comme témoignages de l’Aurignacien supérieur
4
(Freund, 1957, 16).
2 ‘Some spearheads with a spitted base and other objects made of bone and ivory, partially perforated or decorated with grooved lines at the margins,
obviously fit perfectly to our Aurignacian Level I. … But what about the animal sculptures with some of the best works of Palaeolithic European art?
May we expect, already in this early time in the Central European Aurignacian I, in the first interstadial, such mature works of art?’
3 ‘Since comparable products [to the figures from Vogelherd Cave] were found nowhere else in Central Europe in that early time, but apparently there
does not exist a real Late Aurignacian [Gravettian] at the Vogelherd Cave, one can only conclude that this art would come to the Swabian Jura from the
West during the interstadial, to have then only in Wurm III with very similar levels reached Moravia – a strange, but for now unsolvable discrepancy. In
the far beyond the necessary width of the Vogelherd monograph, where much less significant finds are precisely fixed by their local position within the
layer, one must strike at any rate, that to the circumstances of the finds as significant as the sculptures, nothing is announced’.
4 ‘The most important findings are represented, no doubt, by a dozen of animal statuettes, carved in ivory, which Riek dated to the Middle Aurignacian
and Upper Aurignacian industries, these industries belong to the interstade Wurm I/II according to the author. Regarding the date we do not completely
agree with the author and we assume that the Aurignacian settlement, whose layer was located above a clay layer, that we too are dating as the author,
78
The Swabian Jura
2
Freund assumes that Vogelherd was to be settled later and explains this with the stylistic similarity of the figures with the
findings from the Moravian open air sites. While it is true that Riek does not tell anything about the precise location of the
figurines, he still indicates the layer where each one was found. Thus, Freund’s critique is not fully justified.
The dating of the figurines to the Aurignacian is not doubted by Graziosi:
Auf französischem Boden sind bis heute in den Schichten des Aurignacien-Perigordien keine Tierplastiken
gefunden worden. Tierdarstellungen, die einwandfrei dieser Zeit angehören, wurden dagegen sehr viel weiter
='='''=?[Q''=_Y<Y
''><'>;=<
5
(Graziosi, 1956, 43).
He even very clearly says that these figures are the oldest known so far: ‘nach unserer heutigen Kenntnis also … die ältesten
Beispiele dieser Kunst’
6
(Graziosi, 1956).
André Leroi-Gourhan established a chronology of Palaeolithic art based on stylistic features in his comprehensive book on
Palaeolithic art. He compares the figurines from Vogelherd Cave with the central and eastern European mammoth ivory
figurines: ‘Le domaine de la sculpture animalière est le Centre et l’Est européen ou les figurines se trouvent contemporaines
des représentations féminines’
7
, thus the Gravettian.
A Vogelherd, dans le Wurtemberg, toute une série de statuettes d’ivoire a été découverte: félins, cheval,
bison, mammouth. Dolni Vestonice a livré, en pâte d’argile et d’os broyé, des figurines de félin, ours, cheval,
rhinoceros, oiseau. Predmost, en Moravie, a donné un mammouth de style très voisin de ceux de Kostienki et
d’un mammouth de grès du gravettien d’Isturitz’8 (Leroi-Gourhan, 1965, 63).
Stylistically, he sets the figurines of Vogelherd into the eastern and central European Gravettian, completely ignoring Riek’s
dating to the Aurignacian. For the Aurignacian he mentions only the engraved and painted blocks from the Dordogne, at which
he defines his Style I. He clearly assigns the figurines from Vogelherd Cave to his style II, which is chronologically equivalent to
the Gravettian (Leroi-Gourhan, 1965, 63, 67-68, 244-245). The fine and elaborate presentation of the figures seems to make
a dating to the Aurignacian impossible for him.
In 1939 another figurative representation was found in the Lone Valley, but it was not recognised until 1969. Robert Wetzel
began his work at Hohlenstein-Stadel in 1935, from 1937 to 1939 under the local direction of Otto Völzing. Fragments of
worked ivory were found on the last day of excavation in 1939 in the back part of the cave. They were collected in a box and
were stored together with the rest of the inventory from the Hohlenstein-Stadel in the Museum of Ulm. In 1969 Joachim Hahn,
with the help of two colleagues, restored from about 200 fragments, one nearly 30 cm high figure with human and animal
attributes, the so-called Lion Man (Hahn, 1970, 1; see also Kind, 2014, this volume, Figure 3). Since then, more fragments have
been completed (Schmid, 1989; Wehrberger, 2007), most recently in 2013, after the discovery of new fragments during the
excavations of the State Office for Cultural Heritage of Baden-Württemberg under the direction of Claus-Joachim Kind (Kind
and Beutelspacher, 2009; Ulmer Museum, 2013). The stratigraphic position of the Lion Man is described by Hahn as followed:
Aufgrund der Tiefenangabe und der Erdspuren an den Elfenbeinfragmenten und an den Tierknochen läßt
'''=''''=;_@¡¡@¢¡
£='='=''['~<
Schicht sprechen auch die rötlichgelben Erdreste an den Elfenbeinfragmenten und ihre schwach rötliche bis
stellenweise braune Färbung9 (Hahn, 1970, 2-5).
in the interstade Wurm I/II, started later. We shall not enter into discussion about the chronology of Vogelherd, which is undoubtedly one of the most
important Palaeolithic stations in central Europe. But with regards just to the works of art, one thing should be noted: in the large monograph on
Vogelherd, we do not find any specific reference to their stratigraphic position. We learn there only that Riek attributes the sculptures as belonging to
the Middle Aurignacian and the semi-reliefs as evidence of the Upper Aurignacian’.
5 ‘On French territory no animal sculptures have been found in the layers of the Aurignacian-Perigordian to that date. Representations of animals that
belong to this period, however, were found much further east in the Vogelherd Cave (Wurttemberg), these layers refer to the middle Aurignacian and
in two Moravian sites belonging to the Périgordien, Predmost and Dolni Vestonice’.
6 ‘according to our present knowledge... the oldest examples of this art’
7 ‘The domain of animal sculpture is Central and Eastern Europe and the figures are contemporary to the female representations’.
8 ‘A Vogelherd in Wurttemberg, a series of ivory statuettes was discovered: felid, horse, and bison, mammoth. Dolni Vestonice delivered in clay paste and
crushed bones, figurines of felid, bear, horse, rhinoceros and bird. Predmost in Moravia has a mammoth stylistically very close to those of Kostienki and
a Gravettian mammoth in sandstone from Isturitz’.
9 ‘Because of the depth indication and the rests of sediments on the ivory fragments and animal bones, however, the former find layer can be determined
with great certainty. […] The find depth at 1.00 to 1.20 m below the surface is the one of the lower – reddish yellow – Aurignacian level. The traces of
reddish yellow sediment on the ivory fragments and their thin reddish, sometimes brownish colour confirm their provenance from this layer’.
79
The Swabian Jura 2
He excludes an inversion from a younger Gravettian horizon, because there are no deposits from this period reported in the
Lone Valley (Hahn, 1970, 5). The Lion Man from Hohlenstein-Stadel is thus further evidence of the early artistic creativity of
the Swabian Aurignacian.
The assumed direction of creative influence in the 1950s was from west to east. In the 1970s opinion about this began to
change. Züchner, in his thesis on the human representation in the French Palaeolithic, describes:
10
Slowly, the idea became accepted, that a very early epoch can produce very high-quality works of art. Likewise, a creative
influence from east to west is considered, after a long period of a Franco-centric view on prehistory.
As the figures did not fit stylistically in such an early time, Riek’s assignment of them to the Aurignacian has been questioned
several times. Especially the excavation method and the shortness of time were strong arguments for the assumption that
the figurines could not derive from the Aurignacian. But Riek’s layer assignment is strongly supported by the results of the
systematic excavations at Geissenklösterle in the Ach Valley, conducted in 1973 under the direction of Wagner, 1974 to 1991
by Hahn and, after his death, from 2001 to 2002 under the direction of Conard. In the 1970s, several ivory figurines were
recovered in the Aurignacian levels AH IIa and IIb (Hahn and Wagner, 1976; Hahn, 1978; Hahn, 1982). This modern excavation
brought to light figurines that are stylistically very close to those from Vogelherd and certainly come from the Aurignacian
layers. From the layer AH IIa the mammoth figure and the upright bear originate, in the layer AH IIb the so-called Adorant
and the bison figure were found. Thus, Riek’s layer assignment for the figurines from Vogelherd Cave to the Aurignacian was
confirmed (Müller-Beck, 1987, 10-11).
Although the figures from Hohlenstein-Stadel and the Geissenklösterle were already known, in 1993 Henri Delporte wrote,
the new edition of his work from 1979:
Leroi-Gourhan classe les figurines animales du Vogelherd dans son style II, donc, en principe, dans la même
période que celle, qui marque, en France, la fin de l’Aurignaco-périgordien et les débuts du Solutréen. On ne
associée aux pointes de la Gravette et qu’elle soit contemporaine des statuettes gravettiennes
11
(Delporte,
1993 , 128-129).
He refers to the stylistic classification of Leroi-Gourhan and does not exclude an attribution to the Gravettian, although the
Gravettian at Vogelherd Cave is not reported. In contrast, in his work on Palaeolithic animal representations, he also refers
basically to the stylistic classification of Leroi-Gourhan, but classifies the animal figurines from Vogelherd and Geissenklösterle
as Aurignacian, without further discussing this (Delporte, 1990, 145, 246).
In his work on the Ice Age art in Germany and Switzerland, Gerhard Bosinski does not deny Riek’s dating for the figurines
from Vogelherd to the Aurignacian (Bosinski, 1982, 11). However, he sees the outstanding design of the figurines as evidence
that these figures cannot stand at the beginning of human artistic creativity:
Die Tierdarstellungen, besonders die Beispiele aus dem Vogelherd, sind in Ausdruck und Modellierung
Kunstgegenstände vor dem Aurignacien gegeben haben. Aus unserem Raum sind keine entsprechenden Funde
bekannt, doch scheinen die Figuren von Sungir‘ […] wesentliche Merkmale einer solchen Vorform unserer
Tierstatuetten aufzuweisen12 (Bosinski, 1982, 14).
10 ‘The animal representations from the Aurignacian of Vogelherd in the Lone Valley, Southern Germany, ... appear to have an external influence on the
development of art in France, as they rise far beyond the very primitive works of the entire French Aurignacian’.
11 ‘Leroi-Gourhan classes the animal figurines Vogelherd in his Style II, therefore, in principle, in the same period that corresponds in France to the late-
Aurignaco-Perigordian and early Solutrean. We do not know the position of the [anthropomorphic] statue in layer 4, and therefore we cannot exclude
that it was associated with Gravette points and it was contemporary to the Gravettian statuettes’.
12 ‘The animal representations, especially the examples from Vogelherd, are perfect in expression and modelling … It is unthinkable to see here an initial
phase of artistic design. There must have been objects of art before the Aurignacian. From our region no corresponding findings are known, but it
appears that the figures from Sungir’... have essential features of such a preform to our animal statuettes’.
80
The Swabian Jura
2
Accordingly, the mobile art of Sungir in style and content provide for him a possible precursor of the art from Swabian Jura,
‘denn es ist faktisch unmöglich, in den vollkommenen Vogelherdstatuetten den Anfang der Kunst zu sehen’
13
(Bosinski,
&*Chronologically, Bosinski places the figurines from Sungir anterior to the Aurignacian (Bosinski, 1982, 19; Bosinski,
1987, 13; Bosinski, 2013). New dating shows, however, that Sungir, at approximately 26,000 to 27,000
BP,
is significantly
younger than the Swabian Aurignacian (Kuzmin et al., 2004; Dobrovolskaya et al., 2013).
New finds from Hohle Fels substantiate the fact that the earliest, highly elaborate Aurignacian art tradition is to settle in
the region of the Swabian Jura. In 1999, a horse’s head in mammoth ivory was found at the top of the Aurignacian layers
(Conard, 2000). Other discoveries followed, for example, a piece from the AH IV in 2001 and in the following year its head,
which allowed identifying this figure as a water bird. In 2002 a figure only 2.5 cm high was found in the same layer, which
has strong similarities with the figure of the Lion Man from Hohlenstein-Stadel and is therefore called the ‘Little Lion Man’
(Conard, 2007; Conard et al., 2003). In 2008, at the base of the Aurignacian (AH Vb), the Venus from Hohle Fels was found
(Conard and Malina, 2009). This figure shows distinctive sexual characteristics and has a bail instead of a head. It was probably
worn as a pendant. It represents the oldest human representation to date. Recent finds from Hohle Fels clearly show that small
figurative art made of mammoth ivory was a widespread phenomenon in the Swabian Aurignacian. So far nothing comparable
in quality and quantity has been found in any other region. Although their quality is surprising, it has to be admitted that this
sort of art is no exception, but probably more the rule in this region. The figures stand at the beginning of artistic creation of
humankind and they bear witness to the astonishing ability of their creators.
The figurines of the Swabian Jura in the European context
Artistic creation is a common phenomenon at the beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic. This is proven by an increasing
number of Aurignacian art-related artefacts in Europe. Some have been known since the end of the nineteenth century like
engraved blocks from the Dordogne region of France, which show mostly pictographic vulvae representations and animals
in simple outlines like in Castanet, Blanchard, La Ferrassie or Abri Cellier (for example, Delluc and Delluc, 1991). Their
stratigraphic assignment to the Aurignacian is supported by the latest finds from excavations at Abri Castanet. There, an
engraved and coloured limestone block was found in 2007, which had fallen directly on top of the Aurignacian layer and
sealed it. Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) data reveal an average age of 32,400 BP for the Aurignacian settlement
(White et al., 2012). Paintings from the Périgord, mostly animals, are also common, for instance, from Les Bernous, La
Croze à Gontran and La Cavaille (Chiotti et al., 2007, 181-186). From Grotta di Fumane in Italy some small paintings on
limestone blocks are known. The pieces were found within the Aurignacian layer, dating between 36,800&&{ and
30,320±320
BP.
Originally the representations were painted on the walls and the ceiling, but fell down on the settlement
layers. Due to the break off, many motifs are no longer readable. However, two fragments are clearly recognizable: an animal
and an anthropomorphic representation. The 18 cm high anthropomorphic figure is shown in front view with two horns on
the head; the arms are stretched laterally from the body carrying an object in the right hand. Within the settlement layer, a
large area with ochre scattering was found, indicating an intensive use of this pigment. This proves that the paintings must
have originated in Aurignacian and not in an earlier phase of settlement (Broglio et al., 2007). Similarly as in the Grotta di
Fumane, several limestone blocks with traces of colour were found in the Aurignacian layers of Abri Pataud, France, probably
fallen down from the wall and the ceiling. Although the vast majority of these blocks were found in the Gravettian layers (n
= 1414), a total of 9 pieces were found already in the Aurignacian layers 6 and 10/11. These are not specifically identifiable
illustrations in red and black colour (Chiotti et al., 2007).
The spectacular parietal art from the Chauvet Cave provides an impressive testimony of Aurignacian art. The cave in the
Ardèche Valley, France, was discovered in 1996 and shows a number of outstanding paintings. Direct
14
C dating of charcoal
used as a pigment yielded a time position of 32,500 to 30,000
BP
, but there are also more recent dates ranging from 26,000
to 28,000
BP
(Valladas et al., 2001a; Valladas et al., 2001b). Stylistically, the paintings are comparable with some paintings
from the Solutrean and Magdalenian, and so this early dating has been repeatedly questioned by some researchers (Combier
and Jouve, 2012; Züchner, 1995; Züchner, 1998). Although there are quite justifiable doubts as to the dating of paintings with
14
C (Pettitt and Pike, 2007), the assumption that these paintings were also elaborated for the Aurignacian is not convincing, as
the example of mobile art from the Swabian Jura clearly demonstrates. The pure stylistic argument does not work out for the
pieces from the Swabian Aurignacian either. Through new radiometric dating, more and more painted caves are considered
Aurignacian. Charcoal residues in the two horizons from Grotte d’Aldène gave an age of 37,080620
BP
to 30,260±220
BP
(Ambert and Guendon, 2005). For the so-called Panel de las Manos El Castillo, northern Spain, a date of about 40,800
years was obtained on uranium-series (Pike et al., 2012);
14
C dates for the same site gave an age of 32,410 ± 720
BP
(Pike
13 'because it is virtually impossible to see the beginning of art in the perfect statuettes from Vogelherd Cave’.
81
The Swabian Jura 2
et al., 2012). In Altxerri B, northern Spain, recently a very high age was postulated for some of the paintings. A range of
{{{
BP
was obtained by
14
C dating of herbivore bones (González-Sainz et al., 2013). A recently
discovered cave in Romania, Coliboaia, has given a
14
C date of approximately 32,000
BP
. The rhino and bear representations
are stylistically very similar to the ones from Chauvet Cave (Clottes et al., 2011; Guy, 2012).
Likewise, mobile art from the Aurignacian is abundant. From El Castillo, in addition to the wall paintings, originate some small
decorated objects, but these are hard to read and their artificial character is not certain. The beginning of the Aurignacian
(level18) was dated through AMS and ESR (Electron Spin Resonance), dating to an age between 42,200 ± 2,100 and
37,000±2,200
BP
. Some other sites in northern Spain delivered decorated objects in simple design (see also: Barandiarán and
García Diez, 2007). From Belgium two objects from the site of Trou Magrite are known: a small anthropomorphic ivory figure
and a carved reindeer antler decorated with abstract motifs. Since the site was excavated in 1867 by Dupont, the assignment
of the two pieces to the Aurignacian is not certain. Their style and content is comparable with finds from West Germany and
France and suggest an Aurignacian date. Recent studies of Duponts reports and new
14
C#{
BP
were able to confirm that these pieces are Aurignacian (Dewez, 1985; Lejeune, 2007, 138-140). In 1988, a 7.2 cm large,
anthropomorphic relief sculpture was found in Stratzing in Lower Austria. Unlike most other small works of Aurignacian art this
is not carved in mammoth ivory, but schist. The layer in which the figurine was found dates back to about 32,000
BP
. Because
of the attitude and design in relief, a comparison with the Adorant from Geissenklösterle urges (Neugebauer-Maresch, 2007).
Artistic creativity in the Aurignacian was therefore not unusual, but – more and more discoveries confirm this – rather the
rule. Although discussions on the dating problems of parietal art are not yet completed, small art from the Swabian Jura,
which comes directly from the Aurignacian layers, leaves no doubt on the cultural assignment. The new
14
C AMS data
from Geissenklösterle #@~@@{
BP
prove that the Swabian Aurignacian is currently the oldest known
Aurignacian in Europe (Higham et al., 2012). No precursor of these artworks has yet been discovered and thus the findings
from the four caves of Vogelherd, Hohlenstein-Stadel, Geissenklösterle and Hohle Fels represent the oldest figurative art
worldwide to date. All attempts to find older art forms are unconvincing. At the beginning of the Aurignacian strong changes
in material culture are visible. Suddenly, we see ‘at least 600’ documents for artistic creation ‘from a total of at least 20 sites’
(Floss, 2007, 314; see also: Floss, 2005; Conard, 2007). The sites of the Swabian Jura stand at the beginning of human artistic
expression and represent with more than fifty pieces the richest region for Aurignacian art.
The marks – a new research approach to the figurines
A striking, though still insufficiently studied feature of the figurative art of the Swabian Jura are the numerous markings. Many
figurines bear sequences of marks, usually found in the form of parallel lines, crosses and cross-lines, diamonds, V-shaped
signs and points. An important comprehensive study was carried out by Joachim Hahn (Hahn, 1986) in which he categorized
and counted all signs on the then-known figurines and discussed them in relation to the representations. Unfortunately his
statistical studies could not provide largely interpretable results. In view of the significance of the marks and a possible notation
system, the work of Alexander Marshack should be mentioned (Marshack, 1972). He interprets a large part of the marks as
notations of astronomical observations. Recent works, which deal with the signs on the figurines of the Swabian Jura, were
done by Hansjürgen Müller-Beck (2001) and Harald Floss (2007). Müller-Beck interprets the marks as ‘clearly reflective’ and with
an evident ‘scoring’ character, sometimes with astronomical information. Harald Floss emphasises the amount of decorated
objects and the importance of the individuality of each figurine and its marks.
In Figure 3, the pieces investigated so far are listed. About half of all hitherto examined figurines bear marks (54%). The ones
from Vogelherd are included as far as possible; the figurines for the other sites are to be regarded only as preliminary results.
From Vogelherd Cave at least 31 reliable figures and fragments of figures are known, 22 of them bear markings of various
kinds. Another 21 potential, not certainly identifiable fragments were recorded, of which 8 bear marks. Thus 58% of the
figurative elements from Vogelherd are marked. The finds from this site alone show the enormous importance of marks in
the Swabian Aurignacian.
82
The Swabian Jura
2
Figure 3. Overview of the number of so far recorded figurines from the Aurignacian of the Swabian Jura (as of 2013). Breakdown
by marked and unmarked figurative representations and possible figurative representations.
Only little attention has been paid so far to the marks on tools and not precisely definable artefacts made of osseous material
(ivory, antler and bone) and personal ornaments. Even if these are not to be found in such large numbers as on the figurines,
they are still regularly present. In her dissertation, Sibylle Wolf has dealt with the ivory finds from Hohle Fels and Vogelherd
extensively. She recorded many tools and tool fragments
with striking patterns. These are mainly cross lines and
parallel lines (Hahn, 1977, Taf. 34.2-4, 36.2-3, 37.1,
58.2,4, 59.2-5; Wolf, 2012, Taf. 41.1, 42.1-2,4-5,7,9-
12,15,17-31, 43.2-4). Hohle Fels and Geissenklösterle
delivered the so called ‘bands’; made in mammoth ivory
and bearing parallel notches on the sides and interpreted
as decorative elements (Hahn, 1988, Taf. 45.18; Wolf,
2012, 70, 72, 146-147, 171-173, Taf. 32.3). In addition
to the figures and the figurative fragments from Hohle
Fels, some ornamented rod fragments, points, jewellery
and not specifically identified objects are known $%{*
(Wolf, 2012, Taf. 3.2, 4.1-4, 7.1, 8.1-2, 9.6, 10.3,9,
15.14, 15 a.1, 18.2, 19,1-2, 20.1-3,6-7, 28.6-7, 30.10-
11). From Hohlenstein-Stadel a pierced cervid canine with
four parallel lines on the front and two on the back is
known (Beutelspacher and Kind, 2012, Abb. 36). From
the Swabian caves, which have not yielded any figurative
art, some other decorated artefacts are known. In
Bockstein Törle a ring of siliceous shale with lateral
notches was found (Hahn, 1977, Taf. 12.6; Wolf, 2012,
Abb. 112.3). From Sirgenstein an ivory rod with notched
edges is known (Hahn, 1977, Taf. 67.9) and from the
Göpfelstein Cave derives a bone splinter grooved with
X-patterns (Hahn, 1977, Taf. 69.10).
Explanatory approaches
Looking at the interpretive possibilities, the first interpretation as fur drawings, especially in the case of animal figures, comes
to mind. In some cases, this interpretation cannot be excluded, as, for example, in the case of the horse from Vogelherd,
which carries a line of X-marks from the head to the tail, with a break in the part of the front legs. This could reflect the
typical dorsal stripe that wild horses and many of today’s horse breeds possess (Figure 5). Also, the irregular crossing lines on
the soles of the complete mammoth figurine found in 2006 in Vogelherd could reflect the wrinkles that are clearly visible in
elephant footprints (Figure 6).
Figure 4. Selection of non-figurative decorated ivory and antler
artefacts from Hohle Fels (1-10) and Vogelherd (11-13).
1. point, 2. point, 3. rod fragment, 4. extensively decorated ivory
fragment, 5. basis of a point (antler), 6. rod fragment,
7. rod fragment, 8. band, 9. band, 10. band (pendant),
11. basis of a point, 12. smoother, 13. unidentified object
?^_`[{===¢¡@Q
83
The Swabian Jura 2
Figure 5. Cross line ornament on the back of the horse from
Vogelherd and dorsal stripe of a wild horse today
?^_`[¥=Y'
=Q
Figure 6. Irregular cross patterns on the soles of the mammoth
found in 2006 in Vogelherd and a footprint of an actual
='?^_`[=
Y'$<~Q
Despite these rather easily explainable features, other signs are enigmatic and it is not obvious what they could represent. As
found, for example, on the mammoth that comes from Riek’s 1931 excavation, several parts of the body bear cross lines and
other signs. The cross lines are usually located in prominent places, such as the shoulder or the high forehead. This could be
explained by the highlighting of those body parts, but many signs on the animal cannot simply be interpreted with natural
features. On the right hip area a series of seven points is represented that does not occur on the other side. Also on the lower
back, above the cross line on the tail area, a series of three marks appears. On the right head area there is a row of three
points (Figure 7). The asymmetry of these markings stands especially against an interpretation as coat pattern – this is rather
distinctive information, noted in a specific code.
On the left arm of the Lion Man, seven or eight clearly incised notches appear which are not found on the right arm.
Additionally, the left ear bears some incisions that were recognised just recently during the 2013 restoration of the Lion
Man (Ebinger-Rist et al., 2013) The situation is similar with the Adorant from Geissenklösterle. Although the relief of the
anthropomorphic figure is no longer preserved in the uppermost layer, on the left of the raised arms at least five notches
are clearly visible. In addition, the piece bears a total of 39 notches along the edges and 48 points on the back, which are
often interpreted as a moon calendar (Marshack, 1972; Müller-Beck, 2001). All these marks cannot be explained so easily
by natural features. Rather, it is clear that these marks transmit a certain content of information that has symbolic value and
can only be read if one knows the clue. That the marks are not simply just coat patterns is particularly evident in the case of
the decorated tools (Figure 4). The cross lines, for example, which are found on many different objects, certainly convey a
substantive message.
How can the phenomenon be explained,
that some marks look very similar to coat
patterns and other or sometimes even the
same marks appear to have elsewhere an
abstracted symbolic content? Steven Mithen
presented a theoretical explanation of such
phenomena (Mithen, 1998). He describes a
hypothetical evolution of the human brain
that has developed certain areas, which
have become specialized for certain tasks.
To better cope with the many challenges of
life, man, next to the general intelligence
that is also peculiar to many other mammals,
developed prepared intelligences on specific
topics to make learning faster than would
be possible with general intelligence, which
allowed a modification of behaviour only
Figure 7. Mammoth figurine with numerous marks from Riek’s excavation at
='@@?^_`['#=*Q
84
The Swabian Jura
2
through slow and very frequent sampling. The areas that are particularly necessary for human life, such as language, social
intelligence, technical intelligence and the so-called natural history intelligence are the basic structures for the individual zones.
They are equipped with certain ‘before settings’ such as an understanding of grammar, that will be filled by the person during
his lifetime. The system is designed for grammar, which language is filled in is secondary. According to Mithen, these different
areas of the brain have developed differently in different stages of human evolution and have always acted independently.
Only in anatomically modern human brains have these different areas become permeable and information can be viewed
simultaneously from different angles. He calls this phenomenon the ‘cognitively fluid mind’. Whether this theory, especially
the different stages of development in detail, is founded or not shall not be discussed further in this point. What is important
to this paper is the observation that modern humans can perfectly and effortlessly transform objects or ideas into a variety
of other fields. It is so easy for us to use a certain object that acts as a basic commodity, such as a knife, as an expression of
social ranking. Fortune tellers find it easy to read the flight of a bird and to make conclusions about upcoming events within
a social society, and for the society, it is easy to believe this. Diverse examples can be found for it. Taking this into account,
it is obvious that certain natural observations, such as the highly visible dorsal stripe in a wild horse, is incorporated in the
presentation and probably has a content beyond the mere reproduction of what is seen and has a deeper meaning. Similarly,
the appearance of wrinkles in the footprint of a mammoth may carry a broader cultural significance. And beyond, such signs
can become independent and be used as a vehicle to transport this or other meanings to other objects. Even if this is difficult
to prove, since we do not know the code for these symbols, it is very likely that the application of such marks goes beyond
the mere decoration of objects.
What opportunities are available to study the marks on the Swabian Aurignacian figurines? On the one hand, a complete
recording of the repertoire and a statistical analysis of the occurrence and absence of certain marks at the sites, the
determination of combinations and the appearance of signs in certain representations are to be carried out. Through this, an
approach to the ‘grammatical’ structure of the marks is aimed and should lead to a deeper understanding of the semantics
of the Swabian Aurignacian signs repertoire. On the other hand, the technological analysis is an important aspect. First, there
is the identification of the tools and thereafter the applied movements and gestures, which are used for carving the marks.
In a final step it will be investigated whether there are significant differences in the technique so that it will be possible to
retrieve certain patterns and to identify characteristic styles of groups of people (for instance, right and left handed) or even
individuals (Figure 8). This would help to understand the making of this art, to define if it was done by all group members or
by several individuals as well as to comprehend the social context and impact of this artwork. A review of existing models and
new models of explanation for the analysis of the sign will follow. These analyses are currently being prepared by the author.
No results can be presented at the moment.
\;='~'==='?^_`['#=*Q
85
The Swabian Jura 2
Conclusions
The Vogelherd Cave is one of the most important sites in Germany with Middle and Upper Palaeolithic deposits. It was
discovered by Hermann Mohn in 1931 and excavated by Gustav Riek in the same year in just three months. In the years 2005 to
2012 new excavations in Riek’s backdirt were conducted under the direction of Nicholas J. Conard and completed the inventory
with many important discoveries. Vogelherd was inhabited by people since the last interglacial period, the Eemian. First, it was
an important station of the Neanderthals, which is demonstrated in four Middle Palaeolithic layers. After the Neanderthals
had withdrawn from the area, shown by a sterile layer between the Middle and the Upper Palaeolithic, anatomically modern
humans arrived following the Danube Valley about 43,000 years ago (Conard, 2002; Conard and Bolus, 2003) and established
themselves in this area with the Aurignacian culture. Here they created art, personal ornaments, musical instruments and
there is evidence for religious beliefs. Since its first discovery by Gustav Riek in 1931, the figurative art of the Swabian Jura still
remains mysterious. Riek’s observations, that the figurines come from the Aurignacian, were not initially universally accepted.
Their most elaborate drafting was often the reason for doubts, as the figures stand at the beginning of human artistic creativity.
Until the 1980s and beyond this was questioned by some scholars. Even if Riek’s descriptions could still be questioned and a
false layer assignment remains possible, the strongly resembling finds from modern excavations as Geissenklösterle and Hohle
Fels then confirmed the early date of the finds from Vogelherd. A layer assignment to the Aurignacian cannot be questioned
nowadays, especially since the stylistic comparisons with Gravettian figurines from Central and Eastern Europe become
obsolete, as there is only minimal evidence for the presence of this techno-complex in the Lone Valley. Up to the present day,
the figurines of the Swabian Aurignacian represent the oldest evidence of figurative art worldwide. Recent dates show that
the Aurignacian of this region starts around 43,000
BP
and thus belong to the oldest in the European context. Other sites
with Aurignacian art are significantly younger or do not have such an outstanding ensemble of unique artwork and symbolic
expressiveness. Due to the eventful history of research the figures from Vogelherd, Hohlenstein-Stadel, Geissenklösterle and
Hohle Fels are now displayed in different places (see below: Museum Schloss Hohentübingen, Prehistoric Museum Blaubeuren,
Ulmer Museum, State Museum of Wurttemberg Stuttgart and Archäopark Vogelherd).
Although much has been written about the figurines of the Swabian Jura, the striking marks attached to almost all the figures
remain enigmatic. Some attempts to interpret them have been made. Joachim Hahn first recorded the sign inventory and
presented first statistical analysis (Hahn, 1986). Alexander Marshack examined the marks on their astronomical value and
got some interesting results (Marshack, 1972), but these are not convincing for the whole ensemble though. The studies of
Hansjürgen Müller-Beck aim for a similar direction, favouring an astronomical interpretation especially for the Adorant from
Geißenklösterle (Müller-Beck, 2001). A new recording and reassessment of all accessible marks of the Swabian Aurignacian
today is currently undertaken by the author. Besides quantitative and qualitative studies, technological analyses are carried out.
A statistical study of the ‘grammatical’ structure of the sign inventory aims to approach the semantic content of the marks,
even if a full decryption certainly cannot be achieved.
The Vogelherd Cave stands at the beginning of the history of research in a particular region (see further Bolus, 2014, this
volume) that together with its other famous sites – Hohlenstein-Stadel, Geissenklösterle and Hohle Fels – gives us insights to
one of the most decisive phases of cultural development of man. The oldest evidence for figurative art, three-dimensionally
shaped jewellery (see further Wolf, 2014, this volume), music and religious expressions (see further Conard, 2014, this
volume) is found there. These sites shed light on the origins of what is now called the cultural modernity and is visible in
a fully developed manner around 40,000 years ago. The value of these four sites for the understanding of human cultural
development cannot be rated highly enough.
Whereabouts – the museum presentation of the earliest art
The Museum at the Schloss Hohentübingen
The figurines from Gustav Riek’s excavation initially remained in his private collection. After the Second World War, he kept
them in a bank vault for a long time. After Riek’s death, they passed into the possession of his heirs. In 1978 the University
of Tübingen finally bought the figures from Riek’s family. Since then, they remain in the possession of the University. First, the
figurines from Vogelherd were exhibited in the University library until they were brought to the museum at Hohentübingen
Castle in 1998. Today they are exhibited there within a newly designed exhibition that was opened in May 2012.
86
The Swabian Jura
2
The Prehistoric Museum Blaubeuren, Urmu
The history of the Prehistoric Museum in Blaubeuren dates back to Gustav Riek. In 1963 and 1964 he set up an exhibition to
showcase the finds from Brillenhöhle and Große Grotte. In the years 1979 to 1984, the permanent exhibition was redesigned
by Joachim Hahn and Hansjürgen Müller-Beck. In 2002 the museum was extended by the ‘Art Gallery 40,000 years’. Currently,
the museum is under reconstruction and will reopen in 2014. The figurines from Hohle Fels will be presented there and the
Venus found in 2008 will be a special highlight of this exhibition.
Museum Ulm
Robert Wetzel was, like Gustav Riek, owner of his finds from Hohlenstein-Stadel. He kept his discoveries in the city museum of
Ulm where he eventually bequeathed the entire collection. Among them was the box with the carved ivory fragments, found
25 August 1939, on the last day of the excavation in the Stadel Cave. In 1969 Joachim Hahn reviewed the collection and put
the ivory fragments together. The 31 cm high figure of the Lion Man was refitted. After several restorations, the figure was
completed in 2013 with the newly found fragments from Hohlenstein-Stadel that were recovered during the excavations of
State Office for Cultural Heritage of Baden-Württemberg. The newly restored figure of the Lion Man has been displayed in
the Museum of Ulm since November 2013.
State Museum Württemberg
Joachim Hahn’s excavations at Geissenklösterle ran on behalf of the State Office for Cultural Heritage of Baden-Württemberg.
The figurines from this site have therefore been assigned to the Württemberg State Museum in Stuttgart. Likewise there are
two finds from Vogelherd Cave that were found after the excavation by collectors and were brought to the State Museum of
Württemberg. Since May 2012, the permanent exhibition has been displayed in a new design.
The Archäopark Vogelherd
On 1 May 2013 the Archäopark Vogelherd was opened. A 6.5 acre outdoor area has been modelled with several Palaeolithic
themes and action areas. The site of Vogelherd is located within the park and is incorporated into the trail through the park
(Figure 9). In the visitor centre two original finds are presented: the completely preserved mammoth found in 2006 and the
lion figure from the same year. Conceptually, the Archäopark is designed as a learning and adventure park, where visitors are
able to explore Stone Age hunter-gatherers lifestyle.
Figure 9. Overview
of the outdoor area
of the Archäopark
Vogelherd
(©Archäopark
Vogelherd, Photo G.
Serino).
87
The Swabian Jura 2
Bibliography
Ambert, P. and Guendon, J.-L. 2005. Estimations ams des âges de l’art pariétal et des empreintes de pas humains de la grotte
d’Aldéne (sud de la France) / Ams estimates of the age of parietal art and human footprints in the grotte d’Aldéne (southern
France). M637Vol. 43, pp. 6-7.
Barandiarán, I. and García Diez, M. 2007. Les débuts du graphisme paléolithique dans le Nord de la péninsule Ibérique. Die
Anfänge graphischer Gestaltung im Paläolithikum des Nordens der Iberischen Halbinsel. H. Floss and N. Rouquerol (eds.),
5)B(!(-(!(!"((0(
M+!(! Aurignac 2005: Editions Musée-forum Aurignac.
Beutelspacher, T. and Kind, C.-J. 2012. Auf der Suche nach Fragmenten des Löwenmenschen in der Stadelhöhle im Hohlenstein
bei Asselfingen. !(!$(!.;<=)$!7 2011, pp. 66-71.
Bolus, M. 2014. History of Research and the Aurignacian of the Sites in the Swabian Jura. <!%7 Vol. 41.
Bosinski, G. 1967.-)+()6(7Köln.
Bosinski, G. 1982. -"(#-((6#7Bonn, Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH.
Bosinski, G. 1987. -!I?#W!>(#6bbbb(_bbbb7Mainz, Römisch-Germanisches
Zentralmuseum.
Bosinski, G. 2013. Les précurseurs de l’art aurignacien. P. Bodu, L. Chehmana, L. Klaric, L. Mevel, S. Soriano and N. Teyssandier,
N. (eds.), 5%/0((/(B((;('/2[ZB(W
(((.'(0(]_x;_jwbb`^Paris: Société préhistorique
française.
Breil, H. 1907. La question aurignacienne. Etude critique de stratigraphie comparée. (%/0(.
Broglio, A. Giachi, G. Gurioli, F. and Pallecchi, P. 2007. Les peintures aurignaciennes de la Grotta di Fumane (Italie). Die
aurignacienzeitlichen Malereien aus der Grotta die Fumane (Italien). H. Floss and N. Rouquerol (eds.), 5)B
(! (-(!(! "((0(M
+!(! Aurignac 2005: Editions Musée-forum Aurignac.
Chang, J.-Y. 2015. Vogelherd. The lithic technology of the Swabian Aurignacian and its importance for early modern humans
in Europe. <!%7 this volume.
Chang, J.-Y. in prep. 8(!0((6*)2';)!2
&! Dissertation, Eberhard Karls Universität.
Chiotti, L., Delluc, B. and Delluc, G. 2007. Art et parure aurignaciens de l’Abri Pataud (Les Eyzies-de-Tayac, Dordogne,
France) dans le contexte aurignacien du Périgord. Kunst und Schmuck aus dem Aurignacien des Abri Pataud (Les Eyzies-
de-Tayac, Dordogne, Frankreich) im Kontext des Aurignacien des Périgord. H. Floss and N. Rouquerol (eds.), 5)
B(!(-(!(!"((0(M
+!(! Aurignac 2005: Editions Musée-forum Aurignac.
Clottes, J., Gély, B., Ghemis, C., Kaltnecker, É. and Lascu, V.-T. 2011. Un art très ancien en Roumanie. Les dates de Coliboaia,.
M637 Vol. 61.
Combier, J. and Jouve, G. 2012. Chauvet cave’s art is not Aurignacian: a new examination of the archaeological evidence and
dating procedures. O(7 Vol. 59, pp. 131-152.
Conard, N. J. 2000. Die Grabungen 1999 in den Gravettien-Schichten des ‘Hohle Fels’ bei Schelklingen, Alb-Donau-Kreis.
!(!$(!.;<=)$!7 1999.
______. 2002. The timing of cultural innovations and the dispersal of modern humans in Europe. 87\\{
88
The Swabian Jura
2
Conard, N. J. 2007. De nouvelles sculptures en ivoire aurignaciennen du Jura Souabe et la naissance de l’art figuratif. Neue
Elfenbeinskulpturen aus dem Aurignacien der Schwäbischen ALb und die Entstehung der figürlichen Kunst.H. Floss and N.
Rouquerol (eds.), 5)B(!(-(!(!"((0(
M+!(!Aurignac 2005, Editions Musée-forum Aurignac.
______. 2014. Current research in caves of the Swabian Jura, the origins of art and music, and the Outstanding Universal
Value of the key sites. <!%7 this volume.
Conard, N. J. and Bolus, M. 2003. Radiocarbon dating the appearace of modern humans and timing of cultural innovations
in Europe: new results and new challenges. Journal of Human Evolution, Vol. 44, pp. 331-371.
Conard, N. J. and Bolus, M. 2008. Radiocarbon dating the late Middle Paleolithic and the Aurignacian of the Swabian Jura.
Journal of Human Evolution, Vol. 55, pp. 886-897.
Coanrd, N. J., Grootes, P.M. and Smith, F.H. 2004. Unexpectedly recent dates for human remains from Vogelherd. Nature,
Vol. 430, pp. 189-201.
Conard, N. J., Langgth, K. and Uerpmann, H.-P. 2003. Einmalige Funde aus dem Aurignacien und erte Belege für ein
Mittelpaläolithikum im Hohle Fels bei Schelklingen, Alb-Donau-Kreis. !(!$(!.;<=)$!7
2002, pp. 21-27.
Conard, N. J., Lingnau, M. and Malina, M. 2007. Einmalige Funde durch die Nachgrabung am Vogelherd bei Niederstotzingen-
Stetten ob Lontal, Kreis Heidenheim. !(!$(!.;<=)$!7 2006, pp. 20-24.
Conard, N. J. and Malina, M. 2006. Schmuck und vielleicht auch Musik am Vogelherd bei Niederstotzingen-Stetten ob Lontal,
Kreis Heidenheim. !(!$(!.;<=)$!7 2005, pp. 21-25.
Conard, N. J. and Malina, M. 2008. Die Fortsetzung der Nachgrabung am Vogelherd bei Niederstotzingen-Stetten ob Lontal,
Kreis Heidenheim. !(!$(!.;<=)$!7 2007, pp. 21-24.
Conard, N. J. and Malina, M. 2009. Spektakuläre Funde aus dem unteren Aurignacien vom Hohle Fels bei Schelklingen, Alb-
Donau-Kreis. !(!$(!.;<=)$!7 2008, pp. 19-22.
Conard, N. J. and Malina, M. 2012. Zur Fortsetzung der Ausgrabungen am Vogelherd im Lonetal. !(!$(!
.;<=)$!7 2011, pp. 61-65.
Conard, N.J., Malina, M. and Verrept, T. 2009. Weitere Belege für eiszeitliche Kunst und Musik aus den Nachgrabungen
2008 am Vogelherd bei Niederstotzingen-Stetten ob Lontal, Kreis Heidenheim. !(!$(!.;
<=)$!7 2008, pp. 23-26.
Conard, N. J., Malina, M. and Zeidi Kulehparcheh, M. 2010. Neue Kunst und erste Einblicke in ungestörte Schichten am
Vogelherd. !(!$(!.;<=)$!7 2009, pp. 57-61.
Conard, N. J. and Zeidi Kulehparcheh, M. 2011. Der Fortgang der Ausgrabungen am Vogelherd im Lonetal. !
(!$(!.;<=)$!7 2010, pp. 61-64.
Conard, N. J., Zeidi, M. and Bega, J. 2013. Die letzte Kampagne der Nachgrabungen am Vogelherd. !
(!$(!.;<=)$!7 2012, pp. 84-88.
Delluc, B. and Delluc, G. 1991. L’art pariétal archaique en Aquitaine. *%/ Paris: Éditions du CNRS.
Delporte, H. 1990. 5B)!)(B/0(7Paris, Picard.
______. 1993. 5B)!))B0((/(!)/7Paris, Picard.
Dewez, M. 1985. L’art mobilier paléolithique du Trou Magrite dans son contexte stratigraphique. .(//
0(/!0((%/!7 Vol. 38, pp. 246-261, 321-345.
89
The Swabian Jura 2
Dobrovolskaya, M., Richards, M.-P. and Trinkaus, E. 2013. Direct radiocarbon dates for the Mid Upper Paleolithic (eastern
Gravettian) burials from Sunghir, Russia. .()/)//B!%7 Vol. 24, pp. 96-102.
Dotzel, K. 2011. 2(!.8&! Master, Eberhard Kalrs Universität.
Ebinger-Rist, N. Kind, C.-J., Wehrberger, K. And Wolf, S. 2013. Von Kopf bis Fuß. Der Löwenmensch, näher betrachtet. Ulmer
Museum, (ed.), -=33546)*727! Ostfildern: Thorbecke Verlage.
Floss, H. 2005. Die Kunst der Eiszeit in Europa. W. Schürle and N.J. Conard (eds.), ?6<#3((.6
<.() Ostfildern-Ruit.
______. 2007. L’art mobilier aurignacien du Jura Souabe et sa place dans l’art Paléolithique. Die Kleinkunst des Aurignacien
auf der Schwäbsichen Alb und ihre Stellung in der paläolithischen Kunst. H. Floss and N. Rouquerol (eds.), 5)
B(!(-(!(!"(( Colloque international. Internationale
Fachtagung. Aurignac 2005: Editions Musée-forum Aurignac.
Freund, G. 1957. L’art aurignacien en Europe centrale. .(//%/0(B[!7 Vol. 12, pp. 1-24.
González-Sainz, C. Ruiz-Redondo, A., Garate-aidagan, D. and Iriarte-Avilés, E. 2013. Not only Chauvet: Dating Aurignacian
rock art in Altxerri B Cave (northern Spain). Journal of Human Evolution, Vol. 65, pp. 457-464.
Graziosi, P. 1956. -"(#7Stuttgart, W. Kohlhammer.
Guy, E. 2012. Le style Chauvet : une beauté fatale? 6660()[Online].
Available: http://www.paleoesthetique.com/le-style-chauvet-une-beaute-fatale/ (Accessed 6 January 2014).
Hahn, J. 1970. Die Stellung der männlichen Elfenbeinstatuette aus dem Hohlenstein-Stadel in der jungpaläolithischen Kunst.
Germania, Vol. 48, pp. 1-12.
Hahn, J. 1977. (!7@(!3();((7Köln, Böhlau Verlag.
______. 1978. Die altsteinzeitliche Schichtenfolge des ‘Geißenklösterle’ bei Blaubeuren nach den Grabungen 1977.
!(!$(!71977, pp. 5-9.
Hahn, J. 1982. Eine menschliche Halbreliefdarstellung aus der Geißenklösterle-Höhle bei Blaubeuren. +($(.;
<=)$!7 Vol. 7, pp. 1-12.
Hahn, J. 1986. "(!!-.#3()(!=(F7Tübingen.
Hahn, J. 1988. - *I34;4 ) $ .($( M +(#$(! ( .(! )
3()()(!Stuttgart, Konrad Theiss Verlag.
Hahn, J., Müller-Beck, H. and Taute, W. 1985. #4)5Stuttgart, Konrad Theiss Verlag.
Hahn, J. and Wagner, E. 1976. Ausgrabungen in der paläolithischen Station Geißenklösterle bei Blaubeuren, Alb-Donau-Kreis.
!(!$(!71975, pp. 5-9.
Higham, T., Basell, L., Jacobi, R., Wood, R., Bronk Ramsey, C. and Coanrd, N. J. 2012. Testing models for the beginnings of
the Aurignacian and the advent of figurative art and music: The radiocarbon chronology of Geißenklösterle. Journal of Human
Evolution, Vol. 62, pp. 664-676.
Huber, U. (ed.). 2010. <6)FHeidenheim.
Kind, C.-J. 2015. Protecting the Stratigraphic Sequences of Caves on the Swabian Jura. <!%7 this volume.
Kind, C.-J. and Beutelspacher, T. 2009. Neue Ausgrabungen am Hohlenstein-Stadel im Lonetal, Gde. Asselfingen, Alb-Donau-
Kreis. !(!$(!.;<=)$!7 2008, pp. 27-31.
90
The Swabian Jura
2
Kuzmin, Y.V., Burr, G.S., Jull, A.J.T. and Sulerzhitsky, L.D. 2004. AMS 14C age of the Upper Palaeolithic skeletons from Sungir
site, Central Russian Plain. (M()%2.7 pp. 223-224, 731-734.
Lehmann, U. 1954. Die Fauna des ‘Vogelherd’ bei Stetten ob Lontal (Württemberg). (@$(=*!(
%!7 Vol. 99, pp. 33-146.
Lejeune, M. 2007. Le Trou Magrite et l’art mobilier aurignacien en Belgique : synthèse et problems. Das Trou Magrite und
die aurignacienzeitliche Kleinkunst in Belgien: Synthese und Probleme. H. Floss and N. Rouquerol (eds.),5)
B(!(-(!(!"((0(M
+!(!Aurignac 2005, Editions Musée-forum Aurignac.
Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1965. %/BParis, Mazenod.
Marshack, A. 1972. 8#8!$!!)B72)$London,
Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Mauser, P. F. 1973. Eine neuentdeckte eiszeitliche Tierkopfplastik aus der Vogelherd-Höhle bei Stetten ob Lontal. @$(
"())(!.;<=)$!7 Vol. 10, pp. 7-10.
Mithen, S. 1998. 82)London, Phoenix.
Müller-Beck, H. 1957. -$3()=(7&(#(*
Bonn, R. Habelt Verlag.
Müller-Beck, H. 1983. Sammlerinnen und Jäger von den Anfängen bis vor 35.000 Jahren. H. Müller-Beck (ed.), !
.;<=)$! Stuttgart, Kondrad Theiss Verlag.
______. 1987. Die Anfänge der Kunst im Herzen Europas. H. Müller-Beck and G. Albrecht (eds.), -!"(
ybbbb@ Stuttgart, Konrad Theiss Verlag.
Müller-Beck, H. 2001. Gravierungen und gravierte Marken – Aurignacien. H. Müller-Beck, N.J. and W. Schürle (eds.), #3(
)=(;6#@(-!"( Stuttgart, Konrad Theiss Verlag.
##X##`
und das Aurignacien in Niederösterreich. H. Floss and N. Rouquerol (eds.), 5)B(!(-
(!(!"((0(M+!(!Aurignac 2005, Editions
Musée-forum Aurignac.
Niven, L. 2006. 8%(&!'M)($.5
2()7Tübingen, Kerns Verlag.
Pettitt, P. and Pike, A. 2007. Dating European Palaeolithic Cave Art: Progress, Prospects, Problems. @(!
827 Vol. 14, pp. 27-47.
Pike, A. W. G., Hoffman, D. L., García-Diez, M., Pettitt, P. B., Alcolea, J., De Balbín, R., González-Sainz, C., De las Heras, C.,
Lasheras, J.A., Montes, R. and Zilhão, J. 2012. U-Series Dating of Paleolithic Art in 11 Caves in Spain. 7 Vol. 336, pp.
1409-1413.
Riek, G. 1934. -#W!)&!)57Leipzig.
______. 1954. Zwei neue diluviale Plastikfunde vom Vogelherd (Württemberg). Germania, Vol. 32, pp. 121-130.
Schmid, E. 1989. Die altsteinzeitliche Elfenbeinstatuette aus der Höhle Stadel im Hohlenstein bei Asselfingen, Alb-Donau-Kreis.
+($(.;<=)$!7 Vol. 14, pp. 33-118.
Ulmer Museum (ed.). 2013. -=33546)*727!Osatfilder, Thorbecke Verlag.
91
The Swabian Jura 2
Valladas, H. Clottes, J., Geneste, J.-M., Garcia, M. A., Arnols, M., Cachier, H. and Tisnerat-Laborde, N. 2001a. Palaeolithic
paintings: Evolution of prehistoric cave art. Nature, pp. 413, 497.
Valladas, H., Tisnérat-Laborde, N., Cachier, H., Arnold, M., Bernalso de Quierós, F. Cabrera-Valdés, V., Clottes, J., Courtin, J.,
Fortea-Pérez, J.J., Gonzáles-Sainz, C. and Moure-Romanillo, A. 2001b. Radiocarbon AMS dates for Paleolithic cave paintings.
$7 Vol. 43, pp. 977-986.
Wagner, E. 1978. Untersuchungen an der Vogelherdhöhle im Lonetal bei Niederstotzingen, Kreis Heidenheim. !
(!$(!, pp. 7-10.
Wagner, E. 1981. Eine Löwenkopfplastik aus Elfenbein von der Vogelherdhöhle. +($(.;<=)$!7 Vol.
6, pp. 29-58.
Wehrberger, K. 2007. Der Löwenmensch vom Hohlenstein-Stadel. L’homme-lion de la grotte du Hohlenstein-Stadel.H. Floss
and N. Rouquerol (eds.), 5)B(!(-(!(!"((
0(M+!(! Aurignac 2005, Editions Musée-forum Aurignac.
Weiner, J. And Floss, H.2009. Funken schlagen. Das älteste Feuerzeug der Welt. #>"(("((.!$#(
*I5((!#>"(("(()"(!$((!7_j)$wbb`$_b@(wb_b
Ostfildern, Thorbecke.
White, R., Mensan, R., Bourrillon, R., Cretin, C., Higham, T.F.G., Clark, A. E., Sisk, M.L., Tartar, E., Gardére, P., Goldberg, P., Pelegrin,
J., Valladas, H., Tisnérat-Laborde, N., De Sanoit, J., Chambellan, D. And Chiotti, L. 2012. Context and dating of Aurignacian vulvar
representations from Abri Castanet, France. %!)27 Vol. 109, pp. 8450-8455.
Wolf, S. 2013. )(3=3>$$$(!)6$(! Dissertation, Eberhard Karls Universität.
______.
2015. Personal ornaments as signatures of identity in the Aurignacian – the case of the Swabian Jura and Western
Germany. <!%7 this volume.
Zotz, L. F. 1951. #3((Stuttgart, Ferdinand Enke Verlag.
Züchner, C. 1972. -(!#4@(!3().!#(*#
"(<( Friedrich-Alexander-Universität.
______.
1995. Grotte Chauvet (Ardèche, Frankreich) oder Muß die Kunstgeschichte wirklich neu geschrieben werden? O(7
Vol. 45/46, pp. 221-226.
______.
1998. Grotte Chauvet Archaeologically Dated. M3!M[Online]. Available: http://www.
uf.unierlangen.de/publikationen/zuechner/chauvet/chauvet.html (Accessed 6 January 2014).
