ANALECTA PRAEHISTORICA LEIDENSIA

1999

ANALECTA PRAEHISTORICA LEIDENSIA 31

ANALECTA PRAEHISTORICA LEIDENSIA

PUBLICATION OF THE FACULTY OF ARCHAEOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF LEIDEN

HUNTERS OF THE GOLDEN AGE

THE MID UPPER PALAEOLITHIC OF EURASIA 30,000 - 20,000 BP

EDITED BY WIL ROEBROEKS, MARGHERITA MUSSI, JIRI SVODOBA AND KELLY FENNEMA

UNIVERSITY OF LEIDEN 1999 This volume is dedicated to the memory of Joachim Hahn

Published in cooperation with the European Science Foundation

Editorial supervision of this volume: W. Roebroeks

ISSN 0169-7447

ISBN 90-73368-16-2

Copyright 2000 Faculty of Archaeology, Leiden

Subscriptions to the series Analecta Praehistorica Leidcnsia and single volumes can be ordered exclusively at:

Faculty of Archaeology P.O. Box 9515 2300 RA Leiden The Netherlands contents

1 Margherita Mussi, Wil Roebroeks and Jiri Svoboda: Hunters of the Golden Age: an introduction /

2 Dale Guthrie and Thijs van Kolfschoten: Neither warm and moist, nor cold and arid: the ecology of the Mid Upper Palaeolithic 13

3 Paul Pettitt: Chronology of the Mid Upper Palaeolithic: the radiocarbon evidence 21

4 Steven Churchill, Vincenzo Formicola, Trenton Holliday, Brigitte Holt and Betsy Schumann: The Upper Palaeolithic population of Europe in an evolutionary perspective 31

5 Olga Soffer: Gravettian technologies in social contexts 59

6 Wil Roebroeks and Raymond Corbey: Periodisations and double standards in the study of the Palaeolithic 77

7 Jean Clottes: Art between 30,000 and 20,000 bp 87

8 Margherita Mussi, Jacques Cinq-Mars and Pierre Bolduc: Echoes from the mammoth steppe: the case of the Balzi Rossi 705

9 Ludmila Iakovleva: The gravettian art of Eastern Europe as exemplified in the figurative art of Kostenki 1 125

10 Yvette Taborin: Gravettian body ornaments in Western and Central Europe 135

11 Martin Oliva: The Brno II Upper Palaeolithic burial 143

12 Lars Larsson: Plenty of mammoths but no humans? Scandinavia during the Middle Weichselian 155

13 Pavel Pavlov and Svein Indrelid: Human occupation in Northeastern Europe during the period 35,000 - 18,000 bp 165

14 Sergey Vasil'ev: The Siberian mosaic: Upper Palaeolithic adaptations and change before the Last Glacial Maximum 173

15 Jiri Svoboda, Bohuslav Klfma, Lenka Jarosova and Petr Skrdla: The Gravettian in Moravia: climate, behaviour and technological complexity 197

16 Martin Oliva: Some thoughts on pavlovian adaptations and their alternatives 219 17 Viola Dobosi: Interior parts of the Carpathian Basin between 30,000 and 20,000 bp 231

18 Anta Montet-White: A scarcity of MUP sites in the Sava Valley, stratigraphic hiatus and/or depopulation 241

19 Joachim Hahn: The Gravettian in Southwest Germany - environment and economy 249

20 Anne Scheer: The Gravettian in Southwest Germany: stylistic features, raw material resources and settlement patterns 257

21 Gerhard Bosinski: The period 30,000 - 20,000 bp in the Rhineland 271

22 Martin Street and Thomas Terberger: The German Upper Palaeolithic 35,000 - 15,000 bp. New dates and insights with emphasis on the Rhineland 281

23 Wil Roebroeks: A marginal matter: the human occupation of northwestern Europe - 30,000 to 20,000 bp 299

24 Francois Djindjian: The Mid Upper Palaeolithic (30,000 to 20,000 bp) in France 313

25 Jean-Philippe Rigaud: Human adaptation to the climatic deterioration of the last Pleniglacial in southwestern France (30,000 - 20,000 bp) 325

26 Joäo Zilhäo: Nature and culture in Portugal from 30,000 to 20,000 bp 337

27 Margherita Mussi: Heading south: the gravettian colonisation of Italy 355

28 Catherine Pedes: Greece, 30,000 - 20,000 bp 375

General index 399

Site index 405 Anne Scheer 20 The Gravettian in Southwest Germany: stylistic features, raw material resources and settlement patterns

Gravettian sites are rare in Southwest Germany and are Salching (Weissmüller 1985, 1987, 1990; Weissmüller and mainly limited to cave sites. Nearly all have to be considered Bausch 1986) in Bavaria. In Ried near Dollnstein, a single as early Mid Upper Palaeolithic. Font Robert points are rare Font Robert point was found (Freund 1963; Zotz 1964), as in caves and innre abundant in open air .sites. Ivory pendants well as some blades and endscrapers (Rieder 1989). seem to play a characteristic role in the Gravettian of South The only site with Font Robert points in Eastern Germany Germany. The art is poor, in contrast to the Aurignacian, and is Bilzingsleben (Mania 1981). Probably also is represented l>y some engravings and the female figurine of Ilsenhöhle/Ranis (Feustel 1989) should be considered, but Weinberghöhle. Local raw material was mainly used but Font Robert points are absent there. other lithic and organic materials indicate long distances of If one compares the local results of climatic analyses with up to 300 km; movements seem to be dictated by the river those of French sites, most of the old dates of two gravettian Danube. The most intensive relationship exists between the cave sites (Geissenklösterle and Hohle Fels) assumed a caves in the Ach Valley, as proven by the raw materials and parallelism with the 'Tursac' oscillation (Laville and Hahn the pendants. Contemporaneity of the Ach Valley sites is 1981), a period which in the Ach Valley is cool and humid, demonstrated by the refittings of stone artefacts between the changing to a cold and dry climate (Hahn, this volume). The caves. The independency of the settlement groups is reflected l4C dates correlated approximately to this oscillation, but in their own special material, as well as in production newly available AMS dates are evidently older, as at other techniques or in different contacts and activities, as shown by sites, more comparable with the older datings from the distinct raw material resources and tool assemblages. Weinberghöhle and Brillenhöhle, and they could be Settlement density seems to decrease from the Middle correlated to what Movius called the 'Les Eyzies/Kesselt' Palaeolithic to the Gravettian, with a hiatus during the oscillation (Bricker et al. 1995). Pleniglacial and an increase towards the late Magdalenian. For the open air site of Salching, which should be This change in settlement pattern could have been caused by considered because of its microgravette- and Font Robert climatic events. Even though there is a partial overlapping of points, the climatic situation also points to the early MUP. settlement areas we cannot speak of a real cultural Artefacts were found in a loess layer above a soil which is continuity. Only in some techniques, like the production of referred to as 'Paudorf-Denekamp' (Weissmüller 1985: fig. ivory beads, does there seem to be a development from the 4, 199, 239), which is comparable to the stratigraphic Aurignacian to the Gravettian. position of Mainz-Linsenberg and Sprendlingen above the 'Lohne-soil' (cf. Bosinski, this volume). Notable in Salching 1. Introduction is the vertical distribution of artefacts over about 70 cm, Most gravettian sites in Southwest Germany are cave sites, certain indications of solifluction, and the position in a loess concentrated in the Swabian Jura in the Ach Valley, 20 km without soil which indicates a cold climatic situation. It is west of Ulm: Brillenhöhle (Riek 1973), Geissenklösterle uncertain here whether a correlating soil has eroded or that it (Hahn 1988), Sirgenstein (Schmidt 1910, 1912), and Hohle is a matter of (sheet)solifluction originally deposited on top Fels (Saier 1994). The cave site of Bockstein-Törle (Hahn of the soil which corresponds to the 'Denekamp'. 1977) in the Lone Valley should probably also be considered The geochronological position of Steinacker (Holdermann a Mid Upper Palaeolithic (MUP) site. More cave sites are 1997) still requires investigation of the soil. The artefacts situated in the Bavarian Jura, such as the Weinberghöhle were found above a loess layer in a decalcified loess with near Mauern (Böhmers 1951; Zotz et al. 1955), and perhaps gastropods characteristic of a cold and humid period. also the nearby Mittlere and Obere Klause (Freund 1963), as well as the Abri im Dorf (Prüfer 1961). 2. Lithic industry Open air sites are less numerous: Steinacker (Pasda 1995, Not only the climatic references but also the lithic typology in prep: Holdermann 1997) in the Upper Rhine Valley, and (Table 1) of Geissenklösterle correlates to the early French 258 HUNTERS OF THE GOLDEN AGE

Table 1. Tools of the main cave sites in southwest Germany, numbers considered until 1983.

SITE elk nil III SI WH ST

artefact number 3 141 6554 1135 522 1641 17650 tool number 239 535 1 13 42 151 210 perc. of tools' 7.6 8.2 10.0 8.1 9.2 1.2 perc. of tools2 12.4 9.8 1 1.1 7.5 10.1 1.5

TOOLS

burins 59 24.7 146 27.3 28 24.8 16 38.1 50 33.1 59 28.1 backed points 47 19.7 31 5.8 13 1 1.5 2 4.8 16 10.6 9 4.3 backed blades 40 16.7 15 2.8 18 15.9 1 2.4 9 6.0 5 2.4 scalar pieces 31 13.0 168 31.4 1 1 9.7 5 1 1.9 8 5.3 scrapers 12 5.0 5 7 10.7 8 7.1 7 16.7 14 9.3 16 7.6 borers 8 3.3 1 0.2 3 2.7 7 4.6 5 4.3 flcchcttes 7 2.9 13 2.4 6 5.3 14 9.3 scraper/burins 6 2.5 13 2.4 2 1.8 truncated pieces 5 2.1 10 1.9 7 6.2 3 7.1 13 8.6 22 10.5 pointed blades 5 2.1 4 0.7 ? 2 4.8 6 4.0 Font Robert 2 0.8 1 1 5.2 shouldered points 1 0.4 2 0.4 2 1.8 1 0.7 2 1.0 Kostenki 7 1.3 1 0.9 1 0.7 1 0.5 others 16 6.7 68 12.7 14 12.4 6 14.3 12 8.0 80 38.1

spalls1 134 4.3 95 1.5 13 1.1 13 0.8 44 0.3 unfinished/deblet 15 0.5 8 0.1 I 0.1 1 0.1 16 0.1 backed pieces

GK = Geissenklösterle BH = Brillenhöhle HF = Hohle Fels SI = Sirgenstein WH = Weinberghöhle St = Steinacker ' without spalls and debiet 2 with spalls and debiet ' percentage of whole assemblage

Gravettian (Abri Pataud V; Bosselin 1996) with more than Geissenklösterle has the lowest percentage of tools. The data 34% backed pieces (backed points, 60% of which are of the Hohle Fels assemblage are only preliminary, as Gravette points, and blades), burins (of which 19.4% are analysis of the last excavations has not yet been done. A truncation burins and 29.1% dihedral burins), scalar pieces, large part of the sieve residue artefacts are still awaiting endscrapers, a few fléchettes, two Font Robert points and one analysis, which means that the small tools are probably shouldered point. Because of the two Font Robert points, we underrepresented. Even the tool percentage has to be have to consider Geissenklösterle as early Gravettian. Apart regarded with caution. from Hohle Fels, the other sites were excavated without The open air sites have a lower percentage of tools, with (Brillenhöhle, Weinberghöhle) or with wide-meshed sieving 5.6% for Salching and only 1.2% for Steinacker (2.2% only (Sirgenstein), thus preventing a comparison of the small tools excavated assemblage). (mainly microgravette-points, backed blades or burin spalls). Burins generally form the largest group of tools, with the Excluding Steinacker, and neglecting the backed pieces, exception of Brillehöhle, especially if we do not consider the the percentages of tools vary only 2.4% between the small backed pieces. At Geissenklösterle, the low percentage presented cave sites (Table 1), so they are more or less of tools is compensated by a high number of burin spalls. comparable. With an estimate of the missing small tools in This means that originally more burins were produced there, Brillenhöhle, Weinberghöhle and Sirgenstein, we reach which were used outside the cave. Burin spalls from the nearly 10% (even more when tool spalls are included). other sites cannot be compared. 259 ANNE SCHEER - THE GRAVETTIAN IN SOUTHWEST GERMANY

Fig. 1. Distribution of gravettian sites and their raw material sources in South Germany. Circle: cave site, square: open air site, triangle: surface collection, empty symbols: gravettian attribution uncertain. 1. Muffendorf: 2. Unkelbach: 3. Metternich; 4. Rhens; 5. Wildscheuer; 6. Magdalenahöhle; 7. Königsberg; 8. Aspelt; 9. Adlerquelle; 10. Mainz- Linsenberg; 11. Sprendlingen; 12. Sirgenstein; 13. Hohle Fels; 14. Brillenhöhle; 15. Geissenklösterle; 16. Bockstein-Törle; 17. Weinberghöhlen; 18. Dollnstein; 19. Obere Klause; 20. Abri im Dorf; 21. Räuberhöhle; 22. Salching; 23. Steinacker; 24. Bilzingsleben; 25. Ilsenhöhle/Ranis.

Backed points and blades as small tools can only be combined total is comparable to the total of Weinberghöhle. considered in Geissenklösterle, with the highest percentage, Truncated pieces are well-represented only in Sirgenstein, followed by Hohle Fels and, with a higher number than Hohle Fels and Weinberghöhle, elsewhere they are as rare as expected, in Weinberghöhle. In the latter site, fléchettes occur all the other tools: Font Robert points only in Geis- frequently, and they are well represented in Hohle Fels. senklösterle, Kostenki technique in Brillenhöhle, Hohle Fels The scalar pieces seem to play a characteristic role in the and Weinberghöhle. Ach Valley, while rarely elsewhere. In Brillenhöhle, they In the cave site of Obere Klause, a separation of the even represent the largest group of tools, whereas in gravettian material (with three Gravette points) from the Weinberghöhle and Hohle Fels a much smaller percentage of other assemblages is difficult. The geological interpretation scalar pieces is evident. of the Abri im Dorf also seems to be problematic (Prüfer Scrapers are well represented, particularly in Sirgenstein. 1961). The lithic assemblage differs from the Ach Valley In Geissenklösterle, their small number is somewhat Gravettian and even the Weinberghöhle, but the tools (c. 8%) compensated by the combined scrapers/burins category. This clearly show gravettian elements, with burins as the most 260 HUNTERS OF THE GOLDEN AGE

0 5 cm l—i—i—i—i—l

Fig. 2. Antler tool from Hohle Fels with an engraving of a bovid and incisions, (drawing by C. Pasda).

common type of tool, backed blades and points, one Gravette fléchettes or scalar pieces. The largest group is again formed point and afléchette, pointed blades (partly with a heavy by the burins, while truncated pieces, and mainly retouched marginal retouch), shouldered points, laterally retouched blades are well presented. Most of the artefacts are surface borers, and notched blades, but no scrapers or scalar pieces. finds, about 40% of the total, but without sieving. So also for In Salching, as well as in these other sites, a large number this site the small tools must be underrepresented. of dihedral, truncation or break burins were produced. Less In the Ranis cave, a small gravettian assemblage (n=62) frequent are scrapers. The Gravettes and one Font Robert includes some backed points and backed blades, burins and point, and perhaps another two fragmented Font Robert scrapers. A survey at nearby Bilzingsleben showed that the points, show the chronological order; pointed blades, scalar burins are well represented; 20 Font Robert points were pieces and some Kostenki ends accompany the tools. found there, representing 10% of all tools. Scalar and The open air site of Steinacker was found near the Isteiner truncated pieces are rare, and no fléchettes were found. The Klotz, about 40 km south of Freiburg, with a very large percentage of backed pieces is lower than expected for a number of blades, flakes and cores of jasper, a high-quality survey, but the percentage of burin spalls with 3.4% is really homogeneous fine-structured material: this jasper can be red high. In comparison to Salching and mainly to Steinacker the (Blutjaspis), pink, yellow or white. Only very few tools percentage of tools here reaches 16.3%. (Table 1) are among the material (about 17,650 artefacts) Although these different assemblages represent primarily a from the survey and excavation: a large number of Font typical gravettian industry, they may also signify different Robert points (better worked than those from Geis- functions of sites or different activities of the occupants. senklösterle), burins, microgravette points, backed blades, Most striking is the high percentage of Font Robert points in scrapers, a shouldered point, a Kostenki end, etc. but no the open air sites, the absence offléchettes and none or a low 261 ANNE SCHEER - THE GRAVETTIAN IN SOUTHWEST GERMANY number of scalar pieces. This may have a chronological but (Geissenklösterle, Brillenhöhle, Weinberghöhle). In some also a functional reason. sites bilobées were also found (Geissenklösterle, Hohle Fels, and Weinberghöhle). Pendants from all three Ach Valley 3. Bone industry sites had very similar reduction strategies. Slightly different The bone artefacts in the gravettian layers of the Ach Valley but also comparable, are the pendants from Weinberghöhle are characterised by numerous projectile points with rounded and Obere Klause in Bavaria. Despite the similarity, in form, bases, so-called bone polishers, some awls and needle-like technology and dimensions, there are small differences bone points without loops, chisels or punches, worked antler between all the sites. This shows that they were not made by and ivory, such as for example small rods. Some of the one person (Scheer 1995), but that one common tradition projectile points show transversal engravings, particularly in may have existed, close inside the Ach Valley and less Brillenhöhle. The cross section mostly ranges from oval to intensive in Weinberghöhle. The pendants are also found in nearly rectangular; originally some rods must have been other gravettian sites (Scheer 1995) but only as single pieces longer than 30 cm but they are only preserved in fragments. and often made of different material or in a different form, Very similar are two shafts made from reindeer antler, one such as for instance in Bockstein-Törle (Lone Valley) and from Geissenklösterle, the other from Weinberghöhle. Both Mainz-Linsenberg (Middle Rhine Valley), and even at long were hollowed out at the distal end, between 1.3-3.8 cm deep distances as for example in Willendorf, Dolnf Vëstonice, and 0.5-0.7 cm in diameter. Notable are a pierced baton from Pavlov, Mamutowa, some French sites (Pataud, La Gravette), Brillenhöhle and two antler tools from Hohle Fels, which at Isturitz, Barma Grande, etc., sometimes made of bone, in the first sight seem similar to the antler adzes from Pavlov or Moravian sites often of stone. There, form and reduction Lyngby (Scheer 1994 a and b), but the basal, proximal end strategies are changing slightly. of the main beam is bevelled along the longitudinal axis. The Many other characteristic, ornamental objects of various bevel is highly polished with only a few notches. This may materials are comparable, especially in the Ach Valley caves infer a different function, perhaps a scraper-like tool. (Table 2, Fig. 4). Each cave also shows its individual or The antler tool from Hohle Fels (Fig. 2) has been fashioned another quantity of materials for pendants: there are bone out of the left antler beam. The bevel of this tool is complete tubes, animal teeth, pierced molluscs, canines of deer, tubes and highly polished; the end of the bez antler is broken, while of ivory, ammonites, and pendants of bone, antler or stone the end of the main beam, in continuation of the bevel, shows and fish vertebras. In South Germany, they are found only in traces of having been cut off. On the surface, the antler tool cave sites, perhaps as a result of preservation. In the lower has transverse incisions and a figural engraving. The bevel of Rhineland, however, organic remains, and art and jewelry the second antler tool from Hohle Fels (comparable in form, were found in loess sites, where gastropods were also technology and probable use) is broken but seems less preserved. So the reason could also be a functional one, as polished. The two legs are longer than in the first tool and the proposed by Bosinski (1985), who mentions art and jewelry end is coloured by red ochre, the surface shows geometrical, as characteristic for settlement sites. rhomboid engravings. The bone tools from Weinberghöhle are comparable, with their round-based projectile points (only one 5. Art has a single bezel), transversally engraved bone polishers. Mobiliary art in South Germany is very poor in the awls, etc. For the Abri im Dorf, apart from only one worked gravettian layers, in contrast to the Aurignacian. Riek (1973) bone Spatula and a fragment of cut ivory, an ivory 'shovel' mentions a female figurine which broke during the (Zotz 1961; Freund 1963) is striking, and could indicate some excavation but nobody has ever seen it. In his descriptions, relation with the east (Pfedmosti and Pavlov). No bone tools he notes an ivory fragment as part of the seat of a Venus but are known from the open air sites. it could also have been a fragment of a big ivory pendant. Only in the Weinberghöhle was a complete figurine 4. Decorative objects discovered, the well-known female statuette made of Other chronological and even regional items are the limestone (Zotz 1955: fig. 40), and found in a soil coloured numerous ivory pendants (Fig. 3) in Geissenklösterle, as well by red ochre - comparable with other female statuettes of as in Brillenhöhle, Hohle Fels and Weinberghöhle. These this period. Zotz also describes figural engravings on an pendants in the shape of tear drops (Scheer 1985), perhaps animal rib, at least one of which resembles a female imitating canines of deer, are characteristic for this period representation (Zotz 1955: fig. 39.12). and especially for this region. The production scheme is well There was no sure reference to art in the Ach Valley until known, especially from Geissenklösterle. They were made 1994 when the antler tools were found in Hohle Fels. The both in series and as individual pieces. For the production in surface of the first antler tool (Fig. 2) has been worked in the series served a notched, in cross section oval ivory stick lower third part of the bevel with incised, transverse rows of 262 HUNTERS OF THE GOLDEN AGE

Fig. 3. Ivory pendants from Geissenklösterle with production pieces. For serial production: ivory stick, notched ivory stick, limb; individual manufacture: ivory flake and roughout.

parallel engravings, which were applied before use, while the of Paglicci could also be attributed to an early phase of the lowest part is polished, probably from use. Perhaps a figure, MUP, with an a-typical Font Robert point and an absence of which can be interpreted as a bovid (Scheer 1994b), was at Noailles burins. the same time engraved on the upper part of the tool, The second antler tool shows only geometrical, rhomboid together with these parallel engravings. Only the main lines engravings and lines. These antlers were dated to 29,000 bp. of the figure are visible: the back, the abdomen, a hint of the In the same level highly polished limestones from the former legs and the two horns. The figure shows an archaic style, cave wall were found (Hahn 1994). The polish was produced comparable to the animal engraving of the Paglicci cave in by cave bear, and men used these stones later for fine Italy, which has a younger 14C (conventional) date of about engravings. So far no figures or symbols can be recognised. 23,000 bp (Mezzena and Palma di Cesnola 1972). Another The design seems to form irregular lines. comparable figure, an ibex, is described from Gargas No art is known from Geissenklösterle. Only one bone (Zampetti 1987). In spite of the younger date, the lithic tools was covered with engraved lines, which could represent a 263 ANNE SCHEER - THE GRAVETTIAN IN SOUTHWEST GERMANY

fish in the same archaic style as Hohle Fels, but not as clear; the lines could also be accidental. Despite the uncertainty of the chronostratigraphy of the Obere Klause, a piece of ivory must be discussed on which several mammoths were engraved. Bosinski (1982) attributes it cautiously to a middle phase of the Late Upper Palaeolithic, a phase rather rare in 2$ South Germany. The object was described by the excavator as coming from a 'Solutréan' layer below the lower magdalenian layer (Freund 1963), together with an ivory tusk and a lower jaw of a cave bear - both animals are rare in the Late Upper Palaeolithic.

6. Lithic raw materials Settlement or trade patterns as well as regional mobility are shown primarily by sources of lithic raw material. Therefore the provenance of raw material must be known, which of course is not possible in all cases (Fig. 1). The sites of the Swabian Jura have lithic raw materials which mainly (more than 50%) come from local sources in the immediate vicinity of the caves, and not more than 30 km away. Mainly local Jurassic chert was used but also radiolarite. There are also raw materials from much farther away than 30 km which come from Bavaria and the Black Forest. The main east-west axis of long distance movement is dictated by the river Danube. The greatest number of different raw materials (20 raw materials and 59 variants) with the largest spatial distribution was found at Brillenhöhle. The Bavarian connections of the lithic raw material between Brillenhöhle, Geissenklösterle, Sirgenstein and Hohle Fels were supported by the presence of ivory beads. In Brillenhöhle, as in Hohle Fels and

1 cm Table 2. Number of ornamental objects in the caves of South Germany.

SITES GK mi III WH

OBJECTS teeth pierced 7 5 5 6 Fig. 4. Ornamental objects from Geissenklösterle: pierced tooth, ammonites, notched tooth of ibex, hare tubes. canines of deer 1 - 1 - molluscs 1 31 2 - tubes bone 2 4 1 - lubes ivory -- 1 - ammonites 3 - 2 - Sirgenstein, we have some raw material which comes from pendants Ivor) 56 34 20 15 the Upper Rhine Valley, from around the Isteiner Klotz. (finished) At Steinacker we most probably have an extraction site pendants bone - 2 - - where a first reduction took place before exportation. This is pendants stone - 1 -- demonstrated by the very few blades (28.7%), the high vert, lish 1 - - - percentage of cortex material and the few tools. The cores are very large and most (70%) were in a primary reduction GK = Geissenklösterle, BH = Brillenhöhle, HF = Hohle Fels, stage, while debris is rare; the raw material (Holdermann WH = Weinberghöhle. 1996) which comes from around 50 to 150 m from the site 264 HUNTERS OF THE GOLDEN AGE

was abundant, of good quality and probably well known to the chert was often brought onto the sites as complete cores the people or tested outside the site. Probably not only cores without prior testing, and then prepared, flaked and used. but also blades were exported. Maybe it is this site which Most of the tools are made of Jurassic chert. had connections with the Ach Valley. However, also Radiolarite from slightly more distant sources (Alpine southeast of Isteiner Klotz, the same facies of this Tertiary rivers) comes in tested and prepared, and shows only partial material is known. In Brillenhöhle we have three or four of reduction; apparently, complete nodules never arrived at these nodules, partially reduced before being introduced in the site and this radiolarite yielded a relatively larger the site. Connections with France with some Cretaceous flint number of tools. More distant lithics come onto the sites as material are not as sure; perhaps there are also sources of blades or sometimes as prepared tools or as partially this raw material less far away, for example in Bavaria. reduced cores (Brillenhöhle). The distance of the sources is Many raw materials with sources between 50 and 300 km also reflected in the quality of the raw material: the greater away are represented in small numbers and consist of the distance, the better the quality. Many tools are evidently imported blades or tools. But also reduced cores were missing, they were probably used elsewhere. The ratio of imported in the caves. burins and spalls may give a good indication. In In the Bavarian site of Weinberghöhle, the raw material Geissenklösterle, for example, we can estimate that 50-70% also comes mainly from local sources (92%), more than in of the burins are missing; maybe this statement also applies the Swabian sites. This contrasts with the Rhineland sites, to other tools. which have a higher percentage of raw material with longer Refitting shows besides horizontal movements between distances. In Salching on the other hand, the sources are structures also vertical movements; nearby layers have to be presumed to be not in the immediate vicinity; the nearest interpreted carefully, even if distributed in different source of keratophyr (42% of the raw material) was found sediments. Both in Geissenklösterle and in Brillenhöhle approximately 150 km away. The longest distance of the refitting proves that the various gravettian layers, source of the other raw material is about 50 km. The largest differentiated by geological criteria, cannot be separated nor group of keratophyr artefacts came in as prepared cores with could they have been caused by a single occupation a lot of blades in production. Although refittings were not (Lauxmann and Scheer 1986; Scheer 1990). possible, the chips prove a debitage at the site. Also in the At the same time refitting shows the high mobility of cave site of Obere Klause and in Abri im Dorf, most of the artefacts; in no case could large series be conjoined. This raw material seems to be local, mainly tabular flint and flint means that on the one hand many blades and flakes were pebbles from the nearby Danube. Radiolarite is rare in these taken away from the sites, on the other hand other examples Bavarian sites. The few radiolarite nodules from Wein- also show that the cores were transported and flaked outside berghöhle, mainly blades, might indicate, together with the or in the other caves. In Geissenklösterle, for example, six ivory beads, contacts with the Ach Valley. At Bilzingsleben stages of reduction of nodules were brought into the site: raw material can be proven in the immediate vicinity. complete, tested, prepared, reduced nodules and imported Not only in the raw material but also in ornamental blanks or tools, which often could be associated with the objects, for example molluscs, can we prove long distances distance to the source (Scheer 1993). from the caves of the Ach Valley: there are the fossil The sites in the Ach Valley hint at a remarkable mollusc outcrops in the Steinheimer and Mainzer basins, and resemblance between some groups of raw materials. there are molluscs sites at Geissenklösterle and Brillenhöhle Exploitation, use and discard were puzzling: in one of the which await determination and may have come from an even caves the results of the first stage of the reduction sequence greater distance. Especially the Mainzer basin seems to be a were found, while at another cave the products of the next source, not only for the South German sites but also for the stage of the process were found. But transportation of the Upper Rhineland sites. This could be one of the places where material would indicate a contemporaneity of the sites, if we contact with other groups was possible. exclude the possibility of re-use of the material by later In order to reconstruct the distribution mobility, the inhabitants of the caves. First contact was suggested already primary production of blades, flakes, cores and tools must be by the ivory beads. Confirmation can be given only in known and refits have to be considered. Partial reduction and refittings between the sites. final use of nodules, cores and blanks did not always take place in one cave, even if local raw material was used. 7. Settlement patterns and relationships Local material is usually reduced at the site. In the Ach In the Ach Valley, all the caves are less than one hour's walk Valley caves, local chert is often of very poor quality, with a from each other, with only the Ach in between. In a brief lol of debris and the greatest number of preparation Hakes test, refittings were possible in eight cases, mainly between with cortex and a high percentage of flakes. This means that Geissenklösterle and Brillenhöhle, but also between 265 ANNE SCHEER - THE GRAVETTIAN IN SOUTHWEST GERMANY

Brilleiihöhle and Hohle Fels. These refittings included population of about 500 persons for Southwest Germany Hakes, blades, debris and even tools, such as two burins or a (50,000 km2) during the Magdalenian. Jochim (1976) also scalar piece (in general two pieces could be conjoined, only gives an indication of about 900 persons but only for the once could three pieces be conjoined; Scheer 1986, 1990). upper Swabian region (6700 km2) for the Mesolithic period. The direction of transport following the reduction sequence So perhaps for the Gravettian we should consider a sparse was mainly towards Brillenhöhle (four from Geis- density of between 0.01 and 0.1 persons/km2. senklösterle, one from Hohle Fels), but also in other Dwelling structures are not known from the open air sites. directions (two from Brillenhöhle to Geissenklösterle and Only Riek (1973) mentions a stone structure in the back of one or two to Hohle Fels), so it seems to have been an open the Brillenhöhle cave and interprets it as a kind of tent; he relationship. This fact also precludes the interpretation of re- describes an accumulation of bone ash inside this use of old materials at the site. The high number of 'stonewall'. In any case we can discern a certain connections with Brillenhöhle may be caused by the larger organisation in the cave sites (Geissenklösterle, Brillenhöhle, number of artefacts. In addition to these conjoined pieces, Weinberghöhle) with fireplaces and activity areas. there are several raw materials which correspond to each No burials are known so far in South Germany, whether other in all or some of these caves, and even to Sirgenstein. in caves or in the open air, if we do not attribute the burial Nine nodules from Sirgenstein correspond with material of an adult (30 yrs) in the Mittlere Klause (Bavaria) to the from the other sites - all of them are found at Geis- Gravettian. There is no chronostratigraphical assignment but senklösterle, half at Hohle Fels and Brillenhöhle. From the bones of a modern human with cut marks was found in a Hohle Fels, 15 nodules are comparable to those from concentration of red ochre, with fragments of mammoth Geissenklösterle, and several to those from Brillenhöhle and teeth above and below the head. Nearby two bone polishers Sirgenstein. This implies that probably also Sirgenstein is were found, abundant in the Gravettian. The Magdalenian connected contemporaneously with the other three sites. can be excluded on stratigraphical grounds (Freund 1963: The independency of the settlement groups can be proven 46), and the burial should be older. Freund (1963) and with the rest of the raw materials. In all caves we find Müller-Beck (1956) would not exclude an attribution to the comparable material or material from the same nodules, but Late Middle Palaeolithic with bifacial points. Arguing 14 each cave also has its own different raw material, of which against this are C and amino acid datings which indicate a only a small portion was conjoinable. Together with the date of about 18,000 bp (Schröter 1979) - a phase which observations on production techniques of the ivory beads or normally presents a hiatus. other ornamental objects, we can probably suppose different An important resource of food during the Gravettian are (independent?) groups, who had some kind of relationship. mammoth, reindeer and equids, a few bovids, capra ibex and Depending on the raw material resources, the contacts were hares. The recently found cut marks on cave bear bones different. It seems that Brillenhöhle had the largest contacts. from Geissenklösterle renews the old question of cave bear The most evident relationship seems to be between the as hunting game (Münzel et ai 1994). Even though Bavarian site of Weinberghöhle and the caves of the Ach Geissenklösterle is an open cave shelter, the number of cave Valley, based on raw material and ivory beads, even if no bear remains is much higher than in all other caves. The refittings were possible between these sites. Contact with the MNI of hunting game lies only between 8 and 42 MN1 Upper Rhine Valley is demonstrated by the red jasper. A (Hahn, this volume). We have different proportions from the first short test to conjoin this material with that from gravettian cave sites of the Ach Valley and Weinberghöhle. Brillenhöhle gave no result, but it would take a great deal of It seems therefore that there was a specialisation of time to examine the thousands of flakes and blades from mammoths in the Weinberghöhle (MNI=6), whereas in Steinacker. Contacts (even if indirectly) have to be Brillenhöhle we have the largest number of reindeer and considered also to the east with the Pavlovian, mainly based capra ibex but fewer horses. In Geissenklösterle horse is on the pendants and bone tools. A local contribution to more frequent, reindeer on the other hand is less well technological development might be the pendants in represented. Horse, capra ibex and bison are missing in Southwest Germany. Hohle Fels (but we have to take into account the restricted This conclusion about contemporaneity also implies a excavation area). In all caves the hare is well represented different interpretation of the settlement pattern. During the with the highest MNI. This discard underlines the Gravettian, the visits of group(s) of the Ach Valley were independent character of the sites. even rarer but with a greater number of members than For the early MUP in South Germany we can assume a assumed before. This also means that groups probably made sparse human population, not an intensive occupation as their own migration but met from time to time. Based on the during the late Magdalenian. The caves were visited only estimations of Weniger (1982), we can postulate a seasonably (probably including winter!) for a short time for 266 HUNTERS OF THE GOLDEN AGE

hunting or for raw material procurement. The inhabitants of From the Aurignacian to the Gravettian we can observe a the caves in the Ach Valley probably belonged to different climatic change. In the gravettian levels, a cooling seems but related groups, with a strong exchange of technologies evident after the humid temperate climate of the upper and even objects, meeting perhaps for a hunting season or Aurignacian, with a new increase in temperatures but less something else. The inhabitants of Weinberghöhle were less warm perhaps and more humid. closely related, but more than Salching where no relationship A comparison of the aurignacian lithic material from is evident. Raw material shows an indirect or direct (?) Geissenklösterle with the gravettian material shows that the connection with the region of the Isteiner Klotz Steinacker. percentage of tools for the Aurignacian with 11.3% (both Ammonites point to the northern Swabian Jura and molluscs aurignacian levels combined) is higher than for the Gravettian. to Steinheim, and also to the Mainzer basin. In the Aurignacian, the scalar pieces (32%) represent the The open air sites differ from the cave sites with their low largest group of tools, followed by the scrapers (24%), a higher percentage of tools (with the exception of Bilzingsleben), the percentage than in the Gravettian. Nearly half of the scrapers number of Font Robert and shouldered points but fewer or no are carinated and nosed scrapers; burin scrapers reach only fléchettes, scalar or truncated pieces, and the absence of art and 1.4%. The burins (16%) are much rarer than in the Gravettian. ornamental objects. This discard pattern may have chronologi- The laterally retouched pieces (15%), mainly blades, are rare cal or simply functional reasons. Then also these industries in the Gravettian. Pointed blades (10%) are better represented have to be placed in an early Middle Upper Palaeolithic. in the Aurignacian, borers (1%) are rare. There are some Kostenki truncations (2%). All typical gravettian backed and 8. Discussion truncated pieces are missing in the Aurignacian. We cannot speak of a real cultural continuity from the We can also observe a change in raw material, distance to Middle Palaeolithic to the Upper Palaeolithic, even if we resources, technology and debitage. In the Aurignacian, 96% have both in the Ach Valley and in the Lone Valley a rich of the raw material is local chert, while only 56% in the Middle Palaeolithic. Not only the technology but also the Gravettian, when radiolarite with 39% is well represented. raw material is changing. The distribution of archaeological During the Aurignacian, radiolarite was very rarely used sites indicates that the settlement area of the Middle (1%). Jasper on the other hand was used more by the Palaeolithic in Southwest Germany is more extended than in Aurignacians (1.2%) than by the Gravettians (0.2%). 99% of the following Aurignacian - a development which seems to the exploitation area in the Aurignacian lies in the immediate continue in the Gravettian, with even fewer known sites. We vicinity or nearby areas (under 25 km) and only less than 1 % could also assume a certain shift, perhaps based on different of the raw material was brought from distances over 25 km. hunting methods or different prey species. In the Gravettian, more than 8% was imported from upto 300 Stratigraphically the Middle Palaeolithic of Geissen- km. This could be the reason why in the Aurignacian the klösterle is followed by an early and middle Aurignacian. percentage of pieces with cortex (39%) is higher than in the Mainly here and probably also in Sirgenstein, we can speak Gravettian (30%), and also why the flakes (54%) in the of a continuity from the Aurignacian to the Gravettian when Aurignacian are more abundant than in the Gravettian (40%). referring to the objects, even though the late Aurignacian is Cores and blades occur more frequently in the Gravettian. lacking. This period on the other hand is well known in the Particularly the blades and nearly all cores had more often Lone Valley. Comparing the gravettian with the aurignacian cortex in the aurignacian assemblage. This means not only a settlement sites, we notice an overlapping of settlement areas different reduction technique but also that the Aurignacians for the moment only in the Ach Valley (without interpreting brought in more whole nodules and produced blades in early it as a continuity of settlement), mainly in Geissenklösterle stages of reduction. It is also possible that there was either and Sirgenstein. In Brillenhöhle is a very rich level with less mobility or less trade contact with distant regions, if we Gravettian but only two fragments of split-based bone assume that it is not only a different view of the importance points. On the other hand, we have a rich Aurignacian in the of the raw material. The percentage of debitage, however, Lone Valley, and only a few dates for the Gravettian in shows no significant difference between the Aurignacian and Bockstein-Törle, probably a younger facies and not the Gravettian. comparable with the Gravettian of the Ach Valley. Also in For the bone tools it is obvious that in the Gravettian there Bavaria there are not many aurignacian sites: a few artefacts are no longer split-based bone points and maybe less ivory are mentioned by Böhmers (1951) at Weinberghöhle and working. Above all, there are the ivory pendants, the production there are old excavations of Kematenhöhle, Fischleitenhöhle, of which begins in the Aurignacian already with the technique Obernederhöhle, Ofnet, etc. (Freund 1963). Open air sites of manufacturing in series, similar to that in the later Gravettian. are really rare. Recently, four open air areas were excavated In the technology of the production of these pendants, there near Regensburg (Uthmayer 1996). seems to be a development from the Aurignacian to the 267 ANNE SCHEER - THE GRAVETTIAN IN SOUTHWEST GERMANY

Gravettian, as demonstrated in Geissenklosterle and some other also for example to those of Italy (Grimaldi etc.)? In any sites. The size of the beads increases towards the Gravettian and case, the decrease in the number of sites in South Germany is the flattening of the cutting ends is no longer used for obvious. So far there are no techno-complexes with Noailles piercing/cutting a hole at both ends; now only one hole is burins which are missing all over Germany. pierced at the smaller and thinner end of the piece. During the Pleniglacial we notice a hiatus all over until Also other ornamental objects, like pierced canines, the late Magdalenian, when we can observe an increase in continue to be used. The variety of other ornamental objects the settlement area. Thus the change in settlement pattern increases in the Gravettian. could be caused by and correlated with climatic events: Striking is the rarity of mobiliary art. which is abundant in parallel to the cooling of the climate, we have a decrease in the Aurignacian. It is present in the eastern and western settlements towards the Upper Palaeolithic in the south of Gravettian, and nearly missing in the Swabian Gravettian, Germany, close to the Alpine glaciers. Maybe settlement even when there is enough ivory. Perhaps the art was made only took place during warmer periods or interstadials. The from a different organic material. full decrease or even absence of a late Gravettian, and No change could be established in the food resources from above all the Epigravettian or Solutrean, until the late the Aurignacian to the Gravettian. In the Magdalenian we Magdalenian, can be interpreted climatically as a migration can recognise an increase in hare and birds. before, during and after the Pleniglacial, until that time The late Gravettian is obviously missing in the Ach Valley when in the south we have an increase in settlements. as well as in Bavaria but may be present in Bockstein-Törle Alternatively, we could attribute the apparent change in in the Lone Valley. This site is comparable to the sites of the settlement pattern to a sediment hiatus, or to a large-scale Middle Rhine Valley, with their ivory pendants, and similar erosion/solifluction. 268 HUNTERS OF THE GOLDEN AGE

references

Böhmers, A. 1951 Die Höhlen von Mauern. Kulturgeschichte der altsteinzeitlichen Besiedlung, Palaeohistoria I, Groningen.

Bosinski, G. 1982 Die Kunst der Eiszeil in Deutschland und in der Schweiz, Kataloge vor- und frühgeschichtlicher Altertümer 20, Bonn: Habelt.

lins The period 30,000-20,000 hp in the Rinneland. volume

Bosinski. G. et cd, 1985 Sprendlingen. Ein Fundplatz des mittleren Jungpaläolithikums in Rheinhessen, Jahrbuch des RGZM, 32, 5-91.

Bosselin. B. 1996 Contribution de l'Abri Pataud ä la chronologie du Gravettien Francais, Bulletin de la Socicté Préhistorique Frant;aise 93(2), 183-194.

Blicket, H.M. et al. 1995 Le Paléolithique Supérieur de 1'abri Pataud (Dordogne). Les fouilles de H.L. Movius Jr., Documents d'Archéologie Fran^aise, 50, Paris.

Feustel, R. 1989 Ranis. Archäologie in der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, 384-385, Berlin.

Freund, G. 1963 Die ältere und die mittlere Steinzeit in Bayern, Jahresbericht der Bayr. Bodendenkmalpflege 4,9-167.

Hahn. J. 1977 Aurignacien. Das ältere Jungpaläolithikum in Mittel- und Osteuropa, Fundamenta A 9, Köln.

1988 Die Geißenklösterle-Höhle im Achtal bei Blaubeuren 1. Fundhorizontbildung und Besiedlung im Mittelpaläolithikum und Aurignacien, Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 26.

1994 Geritzte Bärenschliffe aus dem Hohle Fels Schelklingen. In: A. Scheer (ed.), Höhlenarchäologie im Urdonautal bei Blaubeuren, 96-98, Museumsheft 1 des Urgeschichtlichen Museums Blaubeuren.

this The Gravettian in Southwest Germany - environment and economy. volume

Holdennann, S. 1996 Steinacker. Eine Freilandfundstelle des mittleren Jungpaläolithikums im Markgräfler Hügelland, Gemeinde Müllheim, Ldkr. Breisgau-Hochschwarzwald. Magisterarbeit an der Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen.

Jochim, M. 1976 Hunter-Gatherer subsistence and settlement. A predictive Model. In: S. Struever (ed.), Studies in Archeology.

Lauxmann, C.. 1986 Zusammensetzungen von Silexartefakten - eine Methode zur Überprüfung archäologischer A. Scheer Einheiten, Fundberichte Baden-Württemberg 11, 101-131.

Laville, H.. 1981 Les depots de Geissenklösterle et 1'évolution du climat en Jura souabe entre 36 000 et J. Hahn 23 000 bp, C. R. Acad. Sc. Paris 292, 225-227.

Mania. D. 1981 Préhistoire de la Grande Plaine de 1'Europe. Archaelologia lnterregionalis 1, Kraków/Warszawa, 89-93. 269 ANNE SCHEER - THE GRAVETTIAN IN SOUTHWEST GERMANY

Mezzena, F., 1972 Ogetti d'arte mobiliare di etä Gravettiana ed Epigravettiana nella Grotta Paglicci (Foggia), A. Palma di Cesnola Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche 27/2, 211 ff.

Müller-Beck, H. 1956 Das Altpaläolithikum in Süddeutschland. Teil I.

Mttnzel, S. et al. 1994 Jungpleistozäne Tierreste aus der Geissenklösterle-Höhle bei Blaubeuren, Fundberichte Baden-Württemberg. 19(1), 63-93.

Otte, M. 1981 Le Gravettien en Europe centrale. Diss. Arch. Gandenses 20. Brussels: de Tempel.

Pasda, C. 1995 Neue und alte paläolithische Fundstellen an Oberrhein und Hochrhein, Archäologische Nachrichten aus Baden 53, 5-14.

in prep Wildbeuter im archäologischen Kontext. Das Paläolitlükum in Südbaden. Habilitationsschrift an der Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg 1996.

Prüfer, O.H. 1961 The Abri Schmidt, an important upper palaeolithic site in Bavaria, The Ohio Journal of Science 61(1), 2-16.

Rieder. K. 1989 Neues Artefaktmaterial vom Stielspitzenfundplatz Ried, Ldk. Eichstätt. Steinzeitliche Kulturen an Donau und Altmühltal, Ingoldstadt.

Riek. G. 1973 Das Paläolithikum der Brillenhöhle bei Blaubeuren (Schwäbische Alb), Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-Württemberg 4, Stuttgart.

Saicr, C. 1994 Hohler Fels. In: A. Scheer (ed.), Höhlenarchäologie im Urdonautal bei Blaubeuren. Museumsheft 1 des Urgeschichtlichen Museums Blaubeuren, 35-39.

Scheer. A. 1985 Elfenbeinanhänger des Gravettien in Süddeutschland, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 15, 269-285.

1986 Ein Nachweis absoluter Gleichzeitigkeit von Paläolithischen Stationen?, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 16, 383-391.

1990 Living floors and settlement patterns. Refitting as an interpretative method. In: E. Cziesla et al (ed). Studies in modern Archaeology vol.1: The Big Puzzle, International Symposium on Refitting Stone Artefacts, 623-649.

1993 The Organization of Lithic Resource Use during the Gravettian in Germany. In: H. Knecht, A. Pike-Tay and R. White (eds), Before Lascaux: the complex record of the Early Upper Paleolithic, 193-210, Boca Raton: CRC Press.

1994a Neue jungpaläolithische Funde aus dem Hohle Fels bei Schelklingen, Archäologische Ausgrabungen in Baden-Württemberg 1993, 24-27.

1994b Besondere Neufunde aus dem Hohle Fels Schelklingen. Das verzierte Geweihgerät des Gravettien. In: A. Scheer (ed.), Höhlenarchäologie im Urdonautal bei Blaubeuren, Museumsheft 1 des Urgeschichtlichen Museums Blaubeuren, 91-96.

1995 Pendeloques en ivoire durant le Gravettien en Allemagne du sud - un indice chronologique et social? In: J. Hahn, M. Menu, Y. Taborin, Ph. Walter and F. Wideman (eds), Le travail et I 'usage de l'ivoire au Paléolithique supérieur, 137-171, Roma: Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato.

Schmidt. R.R. 1910 Der Sirgenstein und die diluvialen Kulturstätten Württembergs. Stuttgart.

1912 Die diluviale Vorzeit Deutschlands. Stuttgart. 270 HUNTERS OF THE GOLDEN AGE

Schröter, P. 1979 Ein Knochenartefakt beim "jungpaläolithischen" Skelettfund aus der Mittleren Klause bei Neu-Essing (Niederbayern), Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 9, 153-158.

Uthmeier. Th. 1996 Ein bemerkenswert frühes Inventar des Aurignacien von der Freilandfundstelle "Keilberg- Kirche" bei Regensburg, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 26, 233-248.

Weissmüller, W. 1985 Eine Freilandfundstelle des mittleren Jungpalaolithikums (Perigordien-Gravettien) am Südrand der Straubinger Senke bei Salching, Lkr. Straubing-Bogen, Niederbayern, Das Archäologische Jahr in Bayern 1984, 30-32.

1987 Eine Freilandfundstelle des mittleren Jungpalaolithikums (Perigordien-Gravettien) am Südrand der Straubinger Senke bei Salching, Lkr. Straubing-Bogen, Quartär 37/38, 109-134.

1990 Rohmaterialkartierungen in einer Oberflächenfundstelle und die darin vorkommenden zeitgleichen Bruchflächen. In: E. Cziesla et al (ed.), Studies in modern Archaeology vol. 1: The Big Puzzle. International Symposium on Refitting Stone Artefacts. 239-251 Bonn: Halos.

Weissmüller, W.. 1986 Eine Keratophyr-Industrie aus dem mittleren Jungpaläolithikum (Perigordien-Gravettien) W. Bausch von Salching, Ldkr. Straubing-Bogen, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 16, 235-243.

Weniger, G. 1982 Wildbeuter und ihre Umwelt. Ein Beitrag zum Magdalénien Süd Westdeutschlands aus ökologischer und ethnoarchäologischer Sicht, Archacologica Venatoria 5.

Zampetti, D. 1987 L'arte zoomorfa del Paleolithico superiore in Italia, Scienze dell Antichitä 1, 9-35.

Zotz, L. 1955 Das Paläolithikum der Weinberghöhlen bei Mauern. Quartärbibliothek, Bd 2.

1961 Die Forschungen des Instituts für Urgeschichte der Universität Erlangen im Altmühltal, Prähistorische Zeitschrift XXXIX, 266-73.

1964 Eine Stielspitze westeuropäischen Typs aus dem Altmühltal, Germania 42, 1-15.

Anne Scheer Urgeschichtliches Museum Blaubeuren Karlstrasse 21 89143 Blaubeuren Germany