Cover
Title Page
Copyright page
Contents Page
List of Figures
Figure 1. Coat of arms of the Gudenus family.
Figure 2. Plan view of Gudenus Cave and its proximity to the Kleine Krems on the left, and section from the creek to the main cave entrance, looking north (after Woldřich 1893).
Figure 3. Plan of the Gudenus Cave (after Szombathy 1913).
Figure 4. Prof. Jan Nepomuk Woldřich.
Figure 5. Map of the lower valley of the Kleine Krems, from Hartenstein to the Kremszwickel, indicating the distribution of caves and rockshelters in the area. The numbers correspond to the last two digits of the Austrian Cave Cadastre numbers. Selected n
Figure 6. Artefacts from the Gudenus Cave (after Woldřich 1893).
Figure 7. Hugo Obermaier (on the left) and Henri Breuil.
Figure 8. ‘Magdalenian’ blade tools from Gudenus Cave, after Obermaier and Breuil (1908: Pl. I).
Figure 9. ‘Magdalenian’ lithics from Gudenus Cave, after Obermaier and Breuil (1908: Pl. II).
Figure 10. ‘Magdalenian’ bone and antler tools from Gudenus Cave: (1) engraved ‘needle case’ of bone; (2–6, 14) bone and antler needles; (7) bone awl; (9) very worn bone chisel; (10, 16, 20) spear points with presumed blood or poison grooves; (12, 15, 18,
Figure 11. Rolled-off recording of the engraved markings on the presumed needle case from Gudenus Cave, see Figure 10, No. 1. After Obermaier and Breuil 1908: Fig. 5.
Figure 12. Three of the bone fragments that have been worn intensively by sand. After Obermaier and Breuil 1908: Fig. 6.
Figure 13. Three hand axes worn by sediment. After Obermaier and Breuil 1908: Pl. IV.
Figure 14. Ten amorphous lithics worn by sediment. After Obermaier and Breuil 1908: Pl. V.
Figure 15. Eight unifacial stone tools worn by sediment. After Obermaier and Breuil 1908: Pl. VI.
Figure 16. Six hand axes unworn by sediment. After Obermaier and Breuil 1908: Pl. VII.
Figure 17. Six lithics unworn by sediment. After Obermaier and Breuil 1908: Pl. VIIIa.
Figure 18. The ‘undersides’ of the same six lithics as shown in Figure 17. After Obermaier and Breuil 1908: Pl. VIIIb.
Figure 19. Ten stone implements made from amorphous flakes not worn by sediment. After Obermaier and Breuil 1908: Pl. IX.
Figure 20. Nine lithics not worn by sediment. After Obermaier and Breuil 1908: Pl. X.
Figure 21. Thirteen knapped flakes of rock crystal. After Obermaier and Breuil 1908: Pl. X.
Figure 22. The location of the Waldviertel, shown in black, within Lower Austria; the white dot indicates the location of Gudenus Cave.
Figure 23. Site plan of Burg Hartenstein: 10 – two entrances of Gudenus Cave, 14 – Gudenus Rockshelter, 135 - Untere Zisternenlucke, 136 - Obere Zisternenlucke.
Figure 24. The main and southern entrances of Gudenus Cave below one of the ruined towers of Burg Hartenstein.
Figure 25. View of the northern passage of Gudenus Cave, with Blocks 1 and 2 visible, and the emptied vertical crevice to their left (arrow). Note the dark bands of amphibolite.
Figure 26. Geology in the vicinity of Gudenus Cave.
Figure 27. North-eastern wall of Gudenus Cave after removal of Blocks 3 and 4, Block 2 remains on the left. Note parallel bedding of amphibole strata on the wall.
Figure 28. The division of Gudenus Cave into six descriptive zones: northern (1), main (2) and southern (3) portals, northern passage (4), central chamber (5), eastern passage (6), Bayer’s Niche (7), southern passage (8) and southernmost passage (9).
Figure 29. Speleological map of Gudenus Cave by Hartman and Hartman (1985).
Figure 30. Map of Gudenus Cave for the documentation of its archaeology, made for the present study.
Figure 31. Schematic section illustrating how the vertical crevice was formed before the Riss glacial.
Figure 32. Mean annual temperatures 1971–2000 of occupied places in Austria as a function of elevation. The six entries from the Waldviertel are shown as circles.
Figure 33. Thermal environment of Gudenus Cave, as indicated by the study results in 1981. The thick line represents Botsball responses, the thin continuous line the cave temperature, and the broken line the external temperature.
Figure 34. The seven test locations for smoke dispersal in Gudenus Cave; see text for details.
Figure 35. The catchment areas of the Große Krems (A+B+C), the Kleine Krems (D+E) and the Krems river upstream of Imbach (F+G) in km2. Also shown are the four zones of average annual precipitation that apply across the combined catchments.
Figure 36. Original 1963 field sketch depicting the morphology of the recess behind Blocks 1 and 2; at that time, it was anticipated that the two occupation horizons would be of Breuil and Obermaier’s two proposed strata.
Figure 37. NW-SE section of the sediment excavated in the recess behind Blocks 1 and 2: the first stratigraphic depiction ever secured from Gudenus Cave, drawn on-site in October 1963.
Figure 38. Chert flake U/23 in situ, upper occupation layer [III], looking SE and showing the recess behind Block 2 (right). Block 1 is visible in the foreground, the foot of the cave wall on the left.; 7 July 1963.
Figure 39. Upper occupation layer [III], NW part: the recess behind Blocks 1 and 2. Osteal and lithic remains are numbered.
Figure 40. Lower occupation layer [II], NW part: the recess behind Blocks 1 and 2. Remains are numbered.
Figure 41. Section AA through the recess behind Block 1 and 2, looking SE, referring to Figures 39 and 40.
Figure 42. The Crevice was formed as Blocks 3 and 4 slid down along the steep fault slope until they came to rest on the sediment.
Figure 43. Upper occupation layer [III], SE part: the recess behind Blocks 3 and 4.
Figure 44. Part of the upper occupation layer in the SE Crevice, visible across the upper part of the photograph, and cleft separating Blocks 3 (left) and 1, with several finds in situ.
Figure 45. Lower occupation layer [II], SE part: the recess behind Blocks 3 and 4.
Figure 46. Lowest occupation layer [I]: the recess behind Blocks 3 and 4. The hatched area provided sediment sample DS-6. Objects U/131 to U/139 may not form part of the occupation deposit, occurring somewhat lower, and most have been omitted here.
Figure 47. Section of the sediment column in the Crevice concealed by Blocks 3 and 4, roughly NW to SE, looking NE. Occupation Layers I, II and III are shown, as are the collection sites of sediment samples DS-1 to DS-7.
Figure 48. Section A of the sediment column in the Crevice concealed by Blocks 3 and 4, roughly SW to NE, looking NW.
Figure 49. Upper part of Section A, above Benchmark in Figure 48, roughly SW to NE, looking NW.
Figure 50. Section through Bayer’s Niche, showing its state in 1976.
Figure 51. Stone implement U/109, Occupation Layer I, dorsal side in the two left images.
Figure 52. Stone implement U/113, Occupation Layer I, dorsal side in the two left images.
Figure 53. Stone implement U/114, Occupation Layer I, dorsal side in the two left images.
Figure 54. Stone implement U/118, Occupation Layer I, dorsal side in the two left images.
Figure 55. Stone implement U/124, Occupation Layer I, dorsal side in the two left images.
Figure 56. Stone implement U/26, Occupation Layer II.
Figure 57. Stone implement U/20, Occupation Layer III.
Figure 58. Stone implement U/23, Occupation Layer III, dorsal side in the two left images.
Figure 59. Stone implement U/35, Occupation Layer III, dorsal side in the two left images.
Figure 60. Stone implement U/37, Occupation Layer III.
Figure 61. Stone implement U/29, Occupation Layer IV, dorsal side in the two left images.
Figure 62. Stone implement U/143, Occupation Layer IV, dorsal side in the two left images.
Figure 63. Stone implement U/143, Occupation Layer IV, dorsal side in the two left images.
Figure 64. The bâton percé from Gudenus Cave.
Figure 65. Perforated teeth of (a) fox, (b) red deer and (c) wolf of the Gudenus Cave Magdalenian.
Figure 66. Bone whistle, probably produced with a metal tool.
Figure 67. Sample DS-8, cumulative grain size distribution curve.
Figure 68. Fine fractions of samples DS-8 and DS-9, compared to those of the present river sediment, DS-10.
Figure 69. Sample DS-9, cumulative grain size distribution curve.
Figure 70. Sample DS-1, cumulative grain size distribution curve.
Figure 71. Fine fractions of samples DS-1, DS-2 and DS-3, compared to those of the present river sediment, DS-10.
Figure 72. Sample DS-2, cumulative grain size distribution curve.
Figure 73. Sample DS-3, cumulative grain size distribution curve.
Figure 74. Sample DS-6, cumulative grain size distribution curve.
Figure 75. Fine fractions of samples DS-6, DS-7 and DS-5, compared to those of the present river sediment, DS-10.
Figure 76. Sample DS-7, cumulative grain size distribution curve.
Figure 77. Sample DS-5, cumulative grain size distribution curve.
Figure 78. Sample DS-10, cumulative grain size distribution curve.
Figure 79. The stratigraphical models by (a) Hacker (1884); (b) Woldřich (1893); (c) Obermaier and Breuil (1908); and (d) Bayer (1924a).
Figure 80. Flow patterns of floodwaters within Gudenus Cave during the inundation phases recorded by this project. The powerful eddy in the cave’s central chamber is responsible for the tribological wear on walls, stone tools and faunal remains.
Figure 81. Tree pollen spectra from the Gudenus Cave sediment samples.
Figure 82. Non-tree pollen spectra from the Gudenus Cave sediment samples.
Figure 83. Spore spectra from the Gudenus Cave sediment samples.
Figure 84. Frequency distribution of dolomite contents for 302 loesses from open-air sites in central Europe. YL (‘younger loess’) is of the Würm glacial, ML (‘middle loess’) of the Riss, and OL (‘older loess’) is from two earlier facies (after Hädrich 19
Figure 85. Schematic depiction of the analytical procedures, carbonate differentiation analysis of Gudenus Cave sediment samples (after Bednarik 2008).
Figure 86. Dolomite fractions of carbonates in % as a function of absolute depth; sample 5 is partly fluvial sand with small lenses of worn gravel and does not reflect the trend in loess composition (after Bednarik 2008).
Figure 87. The marine isotope stages from the Mindel-Riss (Holstein?) Interglacial to the present time.
Figure 88. (a) Heavily waterworn and patinated amygdaloidal hand axe of quartzite, fractured at the base and of archaic typology. (b) Drawing of the implement by Obermaier and Breuil (1908).
Figure 89. Another amygdaloidal waterworn hand axe but made from high-quality jaspilite and fire damaged.
Figure 90. Amygdaloidal rolled hand axe of yellow jaspilite.
Figure 91. Heavily waterworn ovoid chert flake attributed to the Acheulean occupation layer.
Figure 92. The eight most commonly found hand axe types are distinguished based on ideal morphological forms.
Figure 93. Cordiform hand axe with distinctive méplat.
Figure 94. Cordiform Middle Palaeolithic hand axe of Micoquian type.
Figure 95. Distal fragment of a lanceolate chert hand axe.
Figure 96. Reconstruction by Obermaier and Breuil (1908) of Micoquian-type hand axe.
Figure 97. Very small Micoquian-type hand axe of jaspilite.
Figure 98. Three artefacts of Occupation Levels II or III: (a) flint scraper 17-6, (b) un-numbered pre-1962 specimen, (c) convex jaspilite scraper 17-1.
Figure 100. Some of the translucent quartz crystal implements from Gudenus Cave.
Figure 99. An example of a pre-1962 lithic from Gudenus Cave not included in Obermaier and Breuil’s (1908) analysis: a Mousterian point most probably from Occupation Layer III.
Figure 101. Palaeolithic cave sites in Austria: 1 – Gudenus Cave, 2 – Teufelslucken, 3 – Promenadensteighöhle, 4 – Herdengelhöhle, 5 – Drachenhöhle, 6 – caves near Peggau (see Figure 104), 7 – Ramesch-Knochenhöhle, 8 – Salzofenhöhle, 9 – Griffener Tropfs
Figure 102. Watercolour by S. Rosenstingl of an expedition J. A. Nagel led into the Drachenhöhle in 1748.
Figure 103. North-south section of the occupation site, adapted from Abel and Kyrle (1931).
Figure 104. Palaeolithic occupation sites in the vicinity of Peggau, central Styria: 1 – Drachenhöhle, 2 – Repolusthöhle, 3 – Badlhöhle, 4 – Tunnelhöhle, 5 – Tropfsteinhöhle, 6 – Lurgrotte-Vorhöhle.
Figure 105. Wolf incisor, expertly perforated at its root, from the Middle Palaeolithic occupation layer of Repolusthöhle.
Figure 106. Global distribution of Acheulean sites.
List of Tables
Table 1. Climatic data from the plateau margin and outside Gudenus Cave, 13 to 16 October 1981, listing air temperature, relative air humidity, wind speed in m/s, wind direction and percentage of cloud cover.
Table 2. Climatic data from outside and inside Gudenus Cave, 13 to 16 October 1981, listing air temperature, relative air humidity, wind speed in m/s, wind direction and percentage of cloud cover.
Table 3. Botsball measurements and air temperatures inside and outside Gudenus Cave, taken over 24 hours on 3 and 4 February 1981.
Table 4. Botsball measurements, air temperatures inside and outside Gudenus Cave, and air temperatures at the entrances taken over 24 hours on 8 and 9 August 1981.
Table 5. Measured annual water flows at the Krems river Imbach gauge and the calculated annual flows of the Kleine Krems at Gudenus Cave for selected 19 years between 1948 and 1975.
Table 6. The finds from the upper occupation layer [III] in the recess behind Blocks 1 and 2.
Table 7. The finds from the lower occupation layer [II] in the recess behind Blocks 1 and 2.
Table 8. The finds that had eroded from an occupation layer higher up [IV] and were collected in a rock fissure about -20 cm below BM, and the two lithics recovered in situ from the cultural layer.
Table 10. The finds from the lower occupation layer [II] in the Crevice behind Blocks 3 and 4.
Table 9. The finds from the upper occupation layer [III] in the Crevice behind Blocks 3 and 4.
Table 11. The finds from the lowest occupation layer [I] in the Crevice behind Blocks 3 and 4.
Table 12. The complete or fragmentary stone tools of reliably known provenance from Gudenus Cave.
Table 13. Faunal remains from Gudenus Cave identified by Woldřich (1893), listing about 1590 specimens; some designations updated.
Table 14. The sediment samples from Gudenus Cave.
Table 15. Granulometric analysis of the fraction >60 microns of the nine sediment samples analysed. All measurements in grams were taken after deducting the organic matter and after drying until no further loss of mass.
Table 16. Sample DS-8, Sedimentation test to determine small particle size distribution.
Table 17. Sample DS-9, Sedimentation test to determine small particle size distribution.
Table 18. Sample DS-1, Sedimentation test to determine small particle size distribution.
Table 19. Sample DS-2, Sedimentation test to determine small particle size distribution.
Table 20. Sample DS-3, Sedimentation test to determine small particle size distribution.
Table 21. Sample DS-6, Sedimentation test to determine small particle size distribution.
Table 22. Sample DS-7, Sedimentation test to determine small particle size distribution.
Table 23. Sample DS-5, Sedimentation test to determine small particle size distribution.
Table 24. Sample DS-10, Sedimentation test to determine small particle size distribution.
Table 25. Sample weight, the weight of organic matter and percentage of organic matter.
Table 26. The nine sediment samples subjected to pollen analysis.
Table 27. The pollens, spores and algae found in eight of the nine sediment samples from Gudenus Cave.
Table 28. The percentages of pollens, spores and algae found in each of the eight spectra from Gudenus Cave.
Table 29. Primary matrix of results of the carbonate differentiation analysis, Gudenus Cave, Austria.
Table 30. Regression analysis of carbonate differentiation analysis of Gudenus Cave sediments.
Table 31. Bayer’s comparison of his chronology with the sequences of Obermaier, Soergel and Penck (after Bayer 1927d).
Preface
Acknowledgments
Chapter 1
History of Gudenus Cave
1.1. The pre-1962 investigations
1.2. The post-1962 investigations
1.3. The scientific status of Gudenus Cave in 1962
Chapter 2
Gudenus Cave and its environment
2.1. Geography and geology
2.2. The cave
2.3. Past and present environmental settings
2.4. The speleoclimate of Gudenus Cave
2.5. Hydrology and sedimentation
Archaeology and palaeontology of Gudenus Cave: the data
3.1. The 1963 to 1966 salvage excavations
3.2. The new lithic implements
3.2.1. The Occupation Layer I stone tools
3.2.2. The Occupation Layer II stone tool
3.2.3. The Occupation Layer III stone tools
3.2.4. The Occupation Layer IV stone tools
3.3. The palaeoart
3.4. The palaeontology of the cave
3.4.1. Bone fragmentation study of the post-1962 bone remains
3.4.2. Summary — faunal remains
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Sediments of Gudenus Cave
4.1. The sedimentary analyses
4.1.1. Methods of sediment analyses
4.1.2. Description of the sediment samples
4.2. Reconstructing the sediment stratigraphy
4.3. The pollen and spore analysis
4.4. The carbonate diffraction study
Chapter 5
Interpretation of Gudenus Cave data
5.1. Recapping
5.2. The new interpretations
5.2.1. The sediment stratigraphy
5.2.2. The climatic and environmental sequence
5.2.3. The hominin occupations
5.2.4. The history of Gudenus Cave
Chapter 6
The Palaeolithic context of Gudenus Cave
6.1. The Lower Austrian context
6.2. The broader Austrian context
6.3. The central European context
6.4. The global context
6.5. A synopsis
References
Index
Back cover
