PalaeolithicVenusfigures Theirpurpose

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/348445553
Palaeolithic Venus figures - their purpose
Preprint · January 2021

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29729.43361
CITATIONS READS
0 499
1 author:
Don Hitchcock
1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
The Szeletian culture, an outgrowth of the Mousterian, was widespread in what is now Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and southwestern Poland. View project
The Venus Figures of the Palaeolithic View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Don Hitchcock on 14 January 2021.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

14/01/2021 Palaeolithic Venus figures - their purpose
Back to Don's Maps
What was the purpose of the Palaeolithic Venus figures?

A personal opinion
There can be no single reason or purpose for the creation of venus figures, since the figures came from such disparate
groups, across many thousands of years, and in any case with mutually incomprehensible languages.
First and foremost, however, they are not meant to enhance fertility.
We can see the result of unrestricted fertility in any number of predator/prey studies of animals, as below:
The wolves and moose of Isle Royale have been studied for more than five decades. This research represents the longest
continuous study of any predator-prey system in the world.
When the respective populations of predators and prey is not controlled, we get a boom-bust cycle, as shown here
for the populations of wolves and moose.
The effect is complicated by random effects of weather, parasites and disease.
Source: Vucetich & Peterson (2012)
If the humans of the Palaeolithic had not taken an active part in regulating their numbers, we would see a similar
cycle for human populations.
Instead, the populations of Palaeolithic humans remained at a steady state for tens of thousands of years. This was
not an accident.
file:///Users/donhitchcock/file:/Users/donhitchcock/Sites/donsmaps.com/venusfigurespurpose.html 1/25
One thing that we can see immediately from this graph is that the population of humans in Europe during the Palaeolithic was
at a constant level, and quite low.
There was a small uptick in population when anatomically modern humans were able to colonise western and eastern
Europe, and displace and replace the resident Neanderthals, but it was only when farming began that the population really
began to climb.
For the duration of the Palaeolithic, human populations remained low, especially outside the equatorial region. The
entire population of Europe between 16 000 BP and 11 000 BP likely averaged some 30 000 individuals, and between
40 000 BP and 16 000 BP, it was even lower at 4 000 – 6 000 individuals.
Source: https://worldhistoryconnected.press.uillinois.edu/6.3/christian.html
This indicates that the population was kept artificially low by use of population limiting cultural practices. This could arise
using a number of means, all available to the people of those times:
• Prolonged nursing of newborns
with the resulting lack of fertility for at the very least six months, perhaps a lot longer.
• Sexual abstention
This is easier than it sounds - all that is necessary is for fertile women to be denied a husband, and vice versa, for a
significant period of their reproductive lives. Historically that was achieved by women not being allowed to marry until they
had reached a certain age, and/or until a suitable partner was found, thus truncating their possible reproductive life. There are
various mechanisms to achieve this goal, and the systems can be very complex.
• Food taboos
to reduce protein, carbohydrates and fat intake for women who were likely to become pregnant, rendering them infertile. In
modern times, elite female athletes may experience a loss of menstruation and thus fertility because of low fat levels, low
body weight, and the effects of exercise related hormones.
• Infanticide
This could take the form of abandonment/exposure, suffocation, or ritual sacrifice, all methods which have been used in the
times before agriculture. Neglect and intentional malnourishment may also have occurred. Even after agriculture was
adopted, exposure of newborns was widely practiced in ancient Greece. It may have been that female children were more
likely to be the objects of infanticide, further lowering the birth rate. As with present hunter/gatherer societies, they knew
perfectly well how many people they could feed, and in times of shortage would have abandoned or killed unwanted children.
Thus I do not believe that Venus figures were used to enhance fertility.
The idea was to reduce fertility to replacement levels only, so that the land available could support the existing population at
its optimum level.
The hunter gatherers of the Palaeolithic ranged far and wide, often travelling large distances during the year in order to
harvest resources which were time and place dependent, such as the migration of reindeer and ibex between summer and
winter pastures, or the movements of fish up the rivers, or the migrations of horses, bison and aurochs.
Thus each band or group of bands had their own territories. Humans are territorial, like birds or lions or ants, and all
other animals.
A wonderful book on this topic is by Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative (1966). It changed my life.
When hunting reindeer, the band cooperated closely. Their long, thin and flexible darts were launched from a spear thrower
or atlatl, which was a lever which allowed the hunters to get a much greater range and force for their shafts. The darts were
armed with both flint blades and with barbed antler harpoons.
We think of harpoons (that is, barbed bone or antler spear points) as being used for fish and large sea animals such as seals
and whales, but they were first developed for reindeer hunting, and only later adapted for use with fish and marine mammals.
Photo and text: Adapted from Caselli (1985)

Additional text: Bibby (1956)
Which leaves us with the question - Why?
Often a great deal of time and effort was expended in making the Venus Figures, and they were often works of
considerable artistic merit. Most must have had some very important purpose.
The obvious purpose is that of the representation of gods and goddesses. The Löwenmensch is obviously a male
deity, and most female venus figures are probably of female deities.
I believe that most served some useful ritual or spiritual purpose - perhaps to protect the group from injury or
disease, or to ensure successful hunts, or simply as a tribute to the deities that controlled the herds and the
weather, and perhaps the rising of the sun, and the passage of the seasons.
If so, this would imply the existence of, at the very least, spirits or deities which could influence events.
Some of the Venus figures may well have been cult figures, and the subject of idolatry, the worship of an idol or cult
image. They may have been asked for favours of all kinds.
This is especially possible where a large amount of time, effort, and skill has been expended in the carving or
making of the figure. Candidates for this role include the Löwenmensch, the Venus of Willendorf, the Venus of
Lespugue, the Venus of Dolni Vestonice, and the large limestone venus from Kostenki.
In the latter case, the limestone venus from Kostenki has been broken, which may be accidental or for good
perceived reason.
We can now have no knowledge of exactly how these sculptures, paintings, and engravings were used, but there are
historical parallels, as below.
Cycladic Idols, circa 3 000 BC, developed from an interplay of naturalistic and abstract forms, and, like the
Gönnersdorf culture sculptures, were made in large numbers.
They reference stone age idols, but reduce their bulky physicality and use a number of stylised protocols. The
canonical figure shows a standing naked woman with arms crossed under her breasts. These idols are subdivided
into subtypes that co-existed during the golden age of Cycladic culture, due to certain design features.
Classic Cycladic Idols
Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015

On loan from Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe
Source and text: Archäologische Staatssammlung München
Ancient Egypt provides us with many examples of statues of gods, often placed within temples, and prayed to by
the priests of the temple dedicated to that god, and, on occasion, by the Pharaoh. One such is the Egyptian Falcon-
headed god, Horus, as shown below:
Eighteenth Dynasty: 1 550 BC - 1 292 BC
Horus
Standing-striding statue of the god Horus.
New Kingdom, circa 1 360 BC
Catalog: Granodiorite, Theben-West, Mortuary Temple of Amenhotep III / Amenophis III (?), Gl.WAF 22a

Source: Original, Ägyptischen Museum München
Text: © Ägyptischen Museum München
From Ancient Egypt we have parallels to the painted or quickly engraved images of the female symbol from the
Gönnersdorf/Lalinde culture, in the Wedjat, or 'Eye of Horus':
Twelfth Dynasty: 1 991 BC - 1 802 BC
Funerary Boat Oar
Close up of a painted wooden model of a funerary boat oar, circa 1 850 BC.
( note the Wedjat eyes on the oar to provide protection from harm - Don )
The Eye of Horus, also known as wadjet, wedjat or udjat, is an ancient Egyptian symbol of protection, royal power, and good
health. Ancient Egyptian and Middle-Eastern sailors would frequently paint the symbol on the bows of their vessels to ensure
safe sea travel.
Catalog: Thebes, EA9524

Source: Original, British Museum
Text: Card with the display at the British Museum, © Trustees of the British Museum, CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Additional text: Wikipedia
From Ancient Egypt, we also have, like the chimeric male Löwenmensch from the Palaeolithic, a sculpture of
Sekhmet, a lion-headed female goddess:
Eighteenth Dynasty: 1 550 BC - 1 292 BC
Sekhmet
Black granodiorite statue of the lion-headed goddess of healing, circa 1 370 BC.
Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015, 2018

Source: Original, British Museum
Text: © Card with the display at the British Museum, © Trustees of the British Museum, CC BY-NC-SA 4.0,
http://www.britishmuseum.org/
Overview of various types of Venus Figures
The Oldest Venus Figure
The female figurine from Berekhat Ram, in Israel. It is the oldest known figurative carving in the world, and is somewhere
between 233 000 and 800 000 years old, older than Neanderthal man, and probably carved by Homo Erectus. The date is
between these values because it has been found between two layers of volcanic rocks, the upper one about 230 000 years
old, and the lower one approximating 800 000 years old. The figurine itself is estimated to be approximately 250 000 -
280 000 years old, based on the stratigraphy.
Its dimensions are 35 mm high, 25 mm wide, and 21 mm thick, and it weighs 10.33 g.
The original pebble bore a resemblance to a female, and this was enhanced by the carver, who cut grooves around the neck
and along its arms. Microscopic analysis by Alexander Marshack has now made it clear that humans were responsible. It is
carved into a piece of tuff, which is formed when volcanic ash settles on the landscape and is hot enough to weld together
into a light, porous rock, often like pumice stone, which is tuff formed on the surface of the ocean.
Photo: Bahn (1998)

Text: Various sources
Obese Venus Figures

These are the iconic type of Venus figure that most people think of when the topic
of Venus figures comes up
Many, though by no means all of the venus figures are obese, such as the Venus of Willendorf and the Venus of Hohle
Fels.
Obesity may have been a desirable trait because of the fat reserves to tide the bearer over times of famine. But why carve
these figures at all, whether overweight, of normal fat distribution, or downright skinny?
I spent some time in the Vienna Natural History Museum one day in September 2008. This image of the original Venus of
Willendorf is from that session.
This venus, and the Löwenmensch, or Lion Man, share equal top billing for the most important venus figures.
Opinion is divided about the pattern around the head.
Some say it is braided hair, others say it is a woven (or crocheted!) hat pulled low over the face. There is evidence for woven
textiles from that time. It could also be basketry.
But all agree that it is deliberate, to hide the face. The question is, why?
All sorts of theories have been put forward - that it is an anonymous female, or that it is the earth mother, whose face not only
cannot be seen, but must not be seen.
All conjecture, and your guess is as good as anyone else's.
The thick circles at the top of the breasts of the Willendorf venus are vestigial arms. If you look at the figure closely, you can
see the matchstick arms starting at the shoulders, and continuing down the body and across the breasts. Look closer still,
and you can see bangles or arm ornaments at the wrists. Even hands with fingers are indicated.
Photo: Don Hitchcock, 2008

Source: Original in the Vienna Natural History Museum
The Venus of Hohle Fels, height 59.7 mm
This must surely be the ugliest, most grotesque, and least artistic venus figure ever discovered.
It slots easily into the obese venus figure genre.

Source: Original, Urgeschichtliches Museum Blaubeuren
The Lespugue Venus, Front and back view.
Photo:Don Hitchcock 2018

Source: Original, Paris, Musée de l'Homme
Venus of Dolní Věstonice
Moravia, Czech Republic
Ceramic
31 000 – 30 000 cal. BP (dating from Professor Jiří Svoboda)
Loan: Anthroposmuseum in Brno
Source: Original, Vienna Natural History Museum
The Kostenki limestone venus.
Height: 137 mm
Gravettian, circa 25 000 BP, original,
Kostenki is a very important Paleolithic site on the Don River in Russia. It was a settlement which contained venus figures,
dwellings made of mammoth bones, and many flint tools and bone implements. Kostenki / Kostienki is not actually a single
site but really an area on the right bank of the Don River in the regions of the villages of Kostenki and Borshevo, consisting of
more than twenty site locations, all dating to the Paleolithic.
Photo: Thilo Parg

Permission: CC BY-SA 4.0
Source: original, exhibited at the Archeological Museum Hamburg (Ice Age - The Art of the Mammoth Hunters from 18
October 2016 to 14 May 2017)
On loan from the Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Abstract, naturalistic, and thin Venus Figures
A symbolic, abstract Venus Figure from Gönnersdorf.
Ivory statuette with rod-shaped upper body.
Height 54 mm, width 14 mm.
Modern researchers have mostly concentrated on the voluptuous or obese female venus figures, for whatever reasons, and
have ignored the vast majority, which are of normal proportions, or are obviously symbolic only, although with sometimes
exaggerated female characteristics, which in the case of the Lalinde/Gönnersdorf figures (see photo above and the more
detailed examination below), means only the buttocks, and not the breasts, which are barely shown or nonexistent.
Photo: Müller-Beck et al. (1987)
In marked contrast to the obese venus figures, is the first venus figure found in France, the Venus Impudique, which is of a
young girl, barely pubescent. This venus is closer to a portrait than a sculpture with deep meaning.

Source: Paris, Musée de l'Homme
Some, in particular from some Siberian sites such as Mal'ta - Buret', look to me more like children's dolls than what might
normally be called venus or mother goddess figures.
The Lalinde/Gönnersdorf enigma
At first blush it would be thought to be axiomatic that there could be little cultural exchange between
palaeolithic sites a thousand or more kilometres apart.
The Lalinde/Gönnersdorf cultural artefacts blow this theory out of the water. We can talk of obviously
identical cultural norms more than 3000 km apart. In Palaeolithic times this is hard to believe, but
the evidence is there.
(left) La Roche de Lalinde engravings.
(right) engravings from Gönnersdorf, more than 1000 km to the east of Lalinde.
Note the almost identical shape and form in these engravings, more than 1000 km apart. It is unclear how this transfer of a
style and the associated cultural definitions could possibly have happened.
(left) Chipped stone female figurine in the Lalinde/Gönnersdorf style from Wilczyce, Poland
(right) Venus figurine in bone from Gönnersdorf.
The Gönnersdorf venus shown here is important not just because it is superbly made, but because it defines the
orientation of the Lalinde/Gönnersdorf venus figures.
This is not always easy to determine, and some sculptures of this genre have been displayed 'upside down', as was formerly
the case with the Venus of Pekarna, from Moravia, not far from Brno in the Czech Republic, as shown below:
The Venus of Pekarna (Moravia). Pekárna Cave is about 900 km east of Gönnersdorf, and 300 km south of Wilczyce in
Poland.
At one time the venus was displayed in a different orientation, as at left.
Photo: (left) Müller-Beck and Albrecht (1987)
Photo: (right) Ralph Frenken

Source: Facsimile, exhibited at the Archeological Museum Hamburg (Ice Age - The Art of the Mammoth Hunters from 18
October 2016 to 14 May 2017). On loan from the Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Ölknitz Venus in ivory.
Ölknitz, or Oelknitz, is about 400 km east of Gönnersdorf. A number of Gönnersdorf culture venus figures have been found
there.
Photo: Rau et al. (2009)
Some are not much more than abstract female figures, completed in a short time as engravings or painted outlines, as in the
Lalinde/Gönnersdorf engravings, while others, similarly abstract, and with the same general design, would have taken a lot
of time and effort to make.
This is especially so for the Lalinde/Gönnersdorf figurines and art works. In this case we have one of the few cases where a
similar art form was used over vast distances - even if we just take the artworks at Lalinde and Gönnersdorf, they are very
similar in form and content, yet are separated by more than 1000 km. Wilczyce is a further 880 km to the east of
Gönnersdorf.
Petersfels Venus figure.
Petersfels is a few kilometres from Engen, Baden-Wurttemberg, and more than 400 km from Gönnersdorf.
This site has no engravings, but a large number of Gönnersdorf style venus figures, made in jet, a form of hard coal.

Source: Original, Archäologisches Museum Colombischlössle, Freiburg, Germany
Drawings of thirteen of the Petersfels Venus figures, to scale.
Though this series is not complete, it is a valuable reference for many of the venus figures from Petersfels.
Artist: Not recorded

Rephotography: Don Hitchcock 2018
Source: Adapted from a display at the Engen Municipal Museum and Gallery
The variously designated bird/phallic/female figurines from Mezin or Mezyn, in the Ukraine, are also a part of the
Lalinde/Gönnersdorf culture.
Mezin is more than 3000 km from Lalinde, but the artworks are clearly part of the same tradition, though translated into a
more 'chunky' style, and in mammoth ivory, like the venus figurines of Gönnersdorf (done as figurines in bone and antler, and
ivory at the nearby Andernach), rather than in the form of just engravings, as at Lalinde.
Photo: Soffer (1986)
These Lalinde/Gönnersdorf culture sculptures, and others like them from Mezin, have been variously described as phallic
figurines, birds, and bird/woman hybrids. They were made originally in Mammoth ivory.

Source: Facsimiles in the Vienna Natural History Museum
Some of the red and black figures from the main gallery of Niaux.
Note in particular the four 'claviform' figures, which appear to be derived from the Lalinde/Gönnersdorf culture.
Photo: Breuil, Cartailhac (1907)
Salon Noir
Two claviform symbols from Niaux, and a double line of dots.
Photo: Heinrich Wendel (© The Wendel Collection, Neanderthal Museum)
This 'claviform figure' from Niaux (close up from the image above) is identical in shape to those of the the
Lalinde/Gönnersdorf culture, an effect which may be better seen by rotation of the image, as at right.
Photo: Heinrich Wendel (© The Wendel Collection, Neanderthal Museum)
From inspection of the available evidence, it seems to me that the centre of the
Lalinde/Gönnersdorf culture was the area surrounding the present day towns of Gönnersdorf
and Andernach, which are less than 20 kilometres apart. It is at these sites that there were venus
sculptures of many types, as well as a multitude of engravings in the Lalinde/Gönnersdorf style.
At Lalinde, the only examples are of engravings. At Niaux, the only examples are paintings, and
these are often inverted.
We have a series of well made Venus figures in flint from Wilczyce, Poland. We have a series of
well made sculptures in mammoth ivory from Mezin.
Thus this Venus culture was exported essentially unchanged to Pekarna in the Czech Republic,
to Wilczyce in Poland, and to Mezin in the Ukraine, from the Lalinde/Gönnersdorf area of present
day Germany.
However only parts of the culture made their way to France, at Lalinde (engravings) and Niaux
(paintings). Nevertheless this is an amazing concept to contemplate - that the culture could be
spread over such a huge area during the Palaeolithic.
This would seem to indicate that this set of venus figures were hugely important to the people of
the Lalinde/Gönnersdorf culture, and that the venus figures (expressed variously as sculptures,
engravings and paintings) had great importance in their spiritual life.
None of the other venus figures spawned such a huge geographic distribution, more than 3300
kilometres apart from one end of the range to the other if we measure from Niaux to Mezin.
Clothed, slim Venus Figures
Apart from what may be described as a 'loin cloth' or possibly a short skirt on the Lespugue Venus, all the clothed venus
figures found so far come from the Mal'ta site in Siberia.
(left) Figurine, Mal'ta, Height 42 mm, Width 8 mm
(right) Figurine, Mal'ta. At first the head on this piece looks grotesquely wide and high, but I think it is just the effect of a face
peeking out from a fur head dress. Height 44 mm.
Twenty heads are known, isolated or belonging to figurines, but two of them are mere sketches. For all the others, the hair, or
hairstyle, is shown. It should be pointed out, however, that in several cases as shown here it is a hairstyle, such as a
'balaclava', for which the hairstyle is indistinguishable from that of clothing.
In any case, the hair or hairstyle is long, often narrowly framing the face and falling down the back. For two or three
statuettes, this hairstyle is represented only in outline, but more generally, it is marked by incisions, which may be of several
types: relatively straight and following the natural movement of long hair, wider and wavy, but mostly in the form of small
crescents arranged in various ways or from small circular cupules.
Photo (left): http://www.nihilum.republika.pl/

Photo (right and centre): http://www.hermitagemuseum.org/
Text: Delporte (1979)
An in-depth study of the Mal'ta Venuses conducted by Dr Lyudmila Lbova (photo above) and Dr Pavel Volkov of the Russian
Academy of Sciences has determined that the figurines are not idealised nude females, but depictions of clothed individuals -
many of them depicting men, teenagers, and children.
Through microscopic examination and macro photography, Drs. Lbova and Volkoy were able to discover traces of lines that
were not able to be seen by the naked eye due to ravages over time. These lines depicted more details of clothes that were
not previously seen such as bracelets, hats, shoes, bags, and even back packs. The team also discovered that the creators
of the figurines depicted different hats, hairstyles, and other accessories, and use different carving techniques to highlight the
different materials such as fur and leather.
Although the function of these figurines are still unknown, it is clear from the study that the Venus/Mother Goddess
connotations attached to these figurines will have to be completely reevaluated. According to Dr. Lbova: 'What we can say for
sure is that these realistic details of clothes, accessories, hairstyle clearly show that ancient masters made the figurines of
some real people, maybe their relatives. I strongly doubt that these were the images of abstract goddesses or spirits in the
sense often used to understand so-called Venus depictions.'
Photo: © Vera Salnitskaya

Source: http://siberiantimes.com/
Text: adapted from http://fuckyeaharchaeology.tumblr.com/post/139873235297/siberian-venus-figurines-are-not-venuses-
after
A lithe, naturalistic, well proportioned, and well muscled venus figure
The Lion Man of Ulm, Germany - the Löwenmensch. Aurignacian, in a level dated to between 40 000 BP - 35 000 BP.
This is one of the most important venus figures, and one of the oldest, along with the Venus of Hohle Fels, of similar age.
Originally thought to be female, since it was patently a venus, it has since been found to be male.
In about 2013, Wulf Hein and Kurt Wehrberger recreated this sculpture, using only palaeolithic tools available at the time of
the creation of the original.
The time required to create the original was possibly 400 hours, or seven weeks at eight hours a day with no days off. As all
of this probably needed to be done in daylight rather than firelight to achieve the accuracy and detail in work that was often
hard and monotonous, two months or more is perhaps a reasonable estimate of the time required.
This also suggests that, unless the sculpture was created slowly at odd moments over several months, someone as skilled as
an artist may have been excused from other subsistence tasks to work specially on this piece. The experiment emphasises
how valuable this sculpture must have been and, although little is known about its meaning or significance, it is clear that it
was produced by a mind that could imagine and manufacture an artwork of symbolic importance.

Source: Original, Ulmer Museum, Germany
Text: adapted from Cook (2013)
The fact that the Löwenmensch, the Lion Man, is a chimera, a 'hybrid' creature composed of the parts of more than
one animal, in this case a lion and a human, is very significant. It is a strong indication that this venus figure is,
indeed, meant to be a god or spirit figure.
References
1. Bahn P., 1998: The Cambridge illustrated history of prehistoric art, Cambridge University Press
2. Bibby, G., 1956: The Testimony of the Spade, Alfred A. Knopf, 424 pp.
3. Breuil, H., Cartailhac É., 1907: Une seconde campagne aux cavernes ornées de Niaux (Ariège) et de Gargas (Hautes-
Pyrénées). Comptes-rendus des séances de l'année.. - Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, 51e année, N.4,
1907. pp. 213-222.
4. Caselli, G., 1985: The Everyday Life of an Ice Age Hunter, Macdonald & Co.
5. Cook, J., 2013: Ice Age art: arrival of the modern mind, The British Museum, 18 Feb 2013, ISBN-10: 0714123331,
ISBN-13: 978-0714123332
6. Müller-Beck, H. and Albrecht, G. (Ed.), 1987: Die Anfänge der Kunst vor 30000 Jahren, Theiss: Stuttgart.
View publication stats

7. Rau, S., Naumann D., Barth M., Mühleis Y., Bleckmann C., 2009: Eiszeit: Kunst und Kultur, Thorbecke, 2009, 396p.
ISBN: 978-3-7995-0833-9
8. Soffer, O., 1986: The upper palaeolithic of the central Russian plain, New York, Academic Press, 1986
9. Vucetich, J., Peterson R., 2012: The population biology of Isle Royale wolves and moose: an overview.,
https://isleroyalewolf.org/data/data/home.html
Sources
1. Ice age Hunters: https://www.donsmaps.com/iceagehunters.html
2. Graph of human population in the Palaeolithic: https://worldhistoryconnected.press.uillinois.edu/6.3/christian.html
3. Venus of Berekhat Ram: https://www.donsmaps.com/berekhatram.html
4. Venus of Willendorf: https://www.donsmaps.com/willendorf.html
5. Venus of Hohle Fels: https://www.donsmaps.com/hohlefelsvenus.html
6. Lespugue Venus: https://www.donsmaps.com/lespuguevenus.html
7. Venus figures from Lalinde/Gönnersdorf: https://www.donsmaps.com/couze.html
8. Venus figures from Gönnersdorf/Andernach: https://www.donsmaps.com/gonnersdorf.html
9. Venus figures from Petersfels: https://www.donsmaps.com/petersfels.html
10. Venus figure from Pekarna (Moravia, Czech Republic): https://www.donsmaps.com/venuspekarna.html
11. Venus figures from Mal'ta - Buret': https://www.donsmaps.com/malta.html
12. The Löwenmensch, the Lion Man from Hohlenstein-Stadel: https://www.donsmaps.com/lionlady.html
Back to Don's Maps

PalaeolithicVenusfigures Theirpurpose

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

PalaeolithicVenusfigures Theirpurpose

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PalaeolithicVenusfigures Theirpurpose

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Palaeolithic Venus ﬁgures - their purpose

Preprint · January 2021

The Venus Figures of the Palaeolithic View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Back to Don's Maps

What was the purpose of the Palaeolithic Venus ﬁgures?

The effect is complicated by random effects of weather, parasites and disease.

Source: Vucetich & Peterson (2012)

• Prolonged nursing of newborns

Photo and text: Adapted from Caselli (1985)

Which leaves us with the question - Why?

Classic Cycladic Idols

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015

Eighteenth Dynasty: 1 550 BC - 1 292 BC

Standing-striding statue of the god Horus.

New Kingdom, circa 1 360 BC

Catalog: Granodiorite, Theben-West, Mortuary Temple of Amenhotep III / Amenophis III (?), Gl.WAF 22a

Twelfth Dynasty: 1 991 BC - 1 802 BC

Funerary Boat Oar

Close up of a painted wooden model of a funerary boat oar, circa 1 850 BC.

Catalog: Thebes, EA9524

Eighteenth Dynasty: 1 550 BC - 1 292 BC

Black granodiorite statue of the lion-headed goddess of healing, circa 1 370 BC.

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015, 2018

Overview of various types of Venus Figures

The Oldest Venus Figure

Photo: Bahn (1998)

Obese Venus Figures

Opinion is divided about the pattern around the head.

All conjecture, and your guess is as good as anyone else's.

Photo: Don Hitchcock, 2008

The Venus of Hohle Fels, height 59.7 mm

It slots easily into the obese venus ﬁgure genre.

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2015

The Lespugue Venus, Front and back view.

Photo:Don Hitchcock 2018

The Kostenki limestone venus.

Gravettian, circa 25 000 BP, original,

Photo: Thilo Parg

Abstract, naturalistic, and thin Venus Figures

A symbolic, abstract Venus Figure from Gönnersdorf.

Ivory statuette with rod-shaped upper body.

Height 54 mm, width 14 mm.

Photo: Müller-Beck et al. (1987)

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2018

The Lalinde/Gönnersdorf enigma

(left) La Roche de Lalinde engravings.

(right) Venus ﬁgurine in bone from Gönnersdorf.

At one time the venus was displayed in a different orientation, as at left.

Photo: (left) Müller-Beck and Albrecht (1987)

Photo: (right) Ralph Frenken

Ölknitz Venus in ivory.

Photo: Rau et al. (2009)

Petersfels Venus ﬁgure.

Photo: Don Hitchcock 2018

Drawings of thirteen of the Petersfels Venus ﬁgures, to scale.