La Cueva del Niño (Ayna, Albacete) and its cave paintings

We continue to talk to you about areas with great archaeological value and that we attach to our section of Archaeological Assessment and Control, in this case we show you La Cueva del Niño, located in the municipality of Ayna, in the southwest of the province of Albacete.

The place where the cave is located is about 700 meters above sea level, in the eastern foothills of the Sierra de Alcaraz, and in the upper reaches of the Mundo River, a tributary of the Segura River that collects water from the entire southern slope of this mountain range and into which a multitude of ravines converge. In one of them, called Barranco del Infierno, and at half a height, the cave is located; it has an irregular, more or less oval plan with the entrance located at one of its ends and is divided into two main rooms separated by a thick stalactitic column.

The discovery of the cave

Although this cave had been known in the region for a long time, it was on May 1, 1970, as told us by M. Almagro (1971, 1972), when the existence of the cave paintings that existed in it was discovered. This was a completely random discovery made by some young hikers who penetrated the cave with flashlights. Upon returning from their excursion, they announced the discovery to the mayor of Peñas de San Pedro, who notified the then director of the Museum of Albacete and Provincial Councillor of Fine Arts, Don Samuel de los Santos Gallego, that he visited the cave on May 9 of that year. Given the undoubted interest of the discovery and the possible uncontrolled visits and destruction of the cave, the general commissioner of excavations decided to send Martín Almagro Gorbea to carry out an exact assessment of the site and to proceed with its adequate protection. Thus, the cave was enclosed with an iron fence to prevent visitors from passing through without at the same time altering the interior climate of the paintings. During successive visits, it was possible to discover remains of the lithic industry and printed ceramics that proved the existence of an interesting archaeological site, in addition to the presence of other representations painted outside the cave belonging to the Levantine Art cycle.

The excavations at the site

In 1973, the sedimentary filling of the deposit was the subject of a series of stratigraphic surveys carried out by Dr. Iain Davidson whose main objective was to obtain some type of information about the economic models and the chronology of the different occupations that should have taken place in this site during the Upper Paleolithic (Higgs et al. 1976). The excavations focused on four small surveys, two inside the cave, where the greatest stratigraphic development was obtained, and two inside, together with the panels with rock paintings. The dating of the site proved to be quite problematic in the absence of a radiocarbon chronology or clear typological or faunal evidence. According to Davidson (1980), the site could have three main phases of occupation: the first of them, documented in external surveys, would take place during the Middle Paleolithic. At this time, livelihood was based on the hunting of a variety of mammals, mainly goats and horses, although there are also remains of other animals such as deer, roe deer, rabbits, auros and even rhinoceros. All of this would take place during seasonal visits of very short duration. In these lower strata, the remains of carnivores, such as lynx and bear, were also recovered, although it is not clear if they were prey to Neanderthals, or if, on the contrary, they occupied the cavity once humans had abandoned it.

In the middle phase, perhaps related to some of the final periods of the Upper Paleolithic and documented in the open survey in front of the main panel, a series of structural levels were discovered with evidence of homes, ditches and pole holes, elements that were poorly documented as extensive excavation had not been carried out at the site. Here, in the so-called Inner Trench survey, remains about 27,000 years old were documented based on Carbon-14 dating of a bone fragment.

Finally, the upper deposits contain an Epipaleolithic industry which is finally superimposed by two moments of intensive occupation of the deposit already in ceramic periods; Dr. Chapman distinguished two episodes based on the small sample of ceramic material recovered, one corresponding to the Neolithic period and the other from a later chronology.

Paleolithic pictorial representations

The study of the paintings, both those from the Paleolithic period located inside and those in the Levantine style outside, was carried out by Dr. Martín Almagro Gorbea (1971, 1972) who noticed the existence in the cave of two panels with Paleolithic representations; the most important in the entrance room, and the second on one side of the interior room. In total, the figures represented by Paleolithic man in the Cueva del Niño are twenty-two; among them, thirteen are representations of animals and the rest is made up of a series of abstract or complementary representations to the previous ones. It is important to highlight that all these representations, always painted (there are no engraved representations or no engraved representations have been found so far), are monochrome, offering only a range of red colors with variations in tone and intensity that are due, as the author mentioned above, to the use of different types of colorant, which could have a certain relative chronological value, indicating different moments in the making of the paintings.

In the main room, the cave representations are concentrated on a single panel, a wall canvas located to the left of the entrance, and in an area of twilight, so that the figures can be seen with natural light. This lobby panel is composed of 13 spellings, of which 3 correspond to two lines and a dye stain, while the remaining 10 to animal figures, although in one of them it is not possible to specify which one. Among the identified figures we find:

• A goat horizontally oriented to the left, that is, to the outside of the cave. This figure has great detail, such as a cut on the belly (a line parallel to the belly that could indicate a change in the color of the animal's coat) and two vertical lines on it, which could represent two projectiles. It is located on a lower canvas, at a different level from the rest of the panel, and is currently covered by a layer of calcite, although it is perfectly visible.
• Two facing forks, one of them facing to the right (towards the inside of the cavity) and slightly tilted downwards, and the other facing to the left.
  In the center of the panel we find three figures of deer, two large male deer and a female deer. The latter is located below the larger deer, and only the front half of the animal (the head and the front half of the body) has been represented. It presents some of the most typical conventions for this type of animal in Paleolithic rock art, such as the elongated nose and the V-shaped ears. The two deer are undoubtedly the main figures in the panel, both because of their central position and their size, since they are the largest figures in the panel. Both are made with great detail, featuring the antlers, ears, eye and inner lines.

Under the deer we find two figures, both arranged horizontally and facing to the right. It is a horse, the only one existing in the cavity, and a goat, very similar to the one that exists at the opposite end of the panel, since it also has a colored filling and an interior cut line, as well as a possible projectile.

This panel is completed by a vaulted figure, impossible to identify due to its poor state of preservation. It is located on a separate canvas, perpendicular to the rest of the panel and inclined towards the floor. It shows a horn facing forward or the start of another, and it could correspond to a uro (prehistoric bull), but it is impossible to specify it.

Separated from the vestibule by a chaos of blocks and a large stalagmitic formation, is the second sector with rock paintings, divided into three zones: a first passage area, formed by the fallen blocks that separate the inner area of the cavity from the vestibule, where a stain is located; a second area, located on the left side of the cave, which contains the main panel of the interior sector; and finally, a third panel located at the bottom of the cavity, and which contains an indeterminate animal figure.

On the other hand, and finally, we just need to point out the existence at the entrance of the cave of three stylized anthropomorphic figures belonging to the Levantine art style and therefore quite chronologically removed from the paintings found inside, without being able to speak of relationships between the two styles due to their presence in the same site.

Interpretation and meaning of paintings

The great importance of the Paleolithic paintings in the Cueva del Niño (Almagro 1972) lies, apart from their artistic quality, in their geographical location, which occupies an empty space in terms of the distribution of rock art from this period, and which relates the Paleolithic artistic areas of the peninsular Levant (Parpalló, Cova Fosca) with the abundant seasons in Malaga (La Pileta, Doña Trinidad, Nerja, Higuerón, Toro). Likewise, the discovery of this type of representation in various areas of the plateaus (Cueva de La Griega in Segovia, Los Casares in Guadalajara) has meant a certain rupture of the traditional concept of “Mediterranean artistic province” as characters typical of Cantabrian art are united in these sites with the stylization and schematization of the Mediterranean (Villaverde 1988).

Regarding the chronology of these paintings, Almagro (1973) points out the great stylistic unity between them and, although separated into four different phases of production, he believes that they could be placed in the Aurignaco-Perigordian cycle according to the chronology established by H. Breuil (1952), although according to the system of styles coined by Leroi-Gourham (1965), the representations of the Cueva del Niño could correspond to this author's Style III, with a chronology of the end of the Solutrensian or the beginning of the Magdalenian.

For J. Fortea (1978), a distinction could be made between deer and horses, on the one hand, which would have a chronology of the Middle and Upper Solutren (20,000-17,000 years) and the large deer and goats on the main panel, whose cut lines on the neck and belly respectively are typical conventions of differences in color in the coat typical of the ancient Style IV of Leroi (Barandiarán 1972). To these more recent representations, we should add the serpentiform with an internal stripe that finds its greatest parallels in the engraved platelets of the Magdalenian III of Parpalló, dated 13,800 B.p. For the time being, it is very difficult to discern this dilemma because we lack sufficient knowledge of the development of the Upper Paleolithic in this region or in the cave itself, where the excavations carried out by I. Davidson and H. Higgs in 1973 did not yield the desired results, as we have already mentioned.

After their discovery and subsequent excavation, the cave paintings in the Cueva del Niño were revised several times, such as in 1978 by Javier Fortea or in 1994 and 2003 by Javier Alcolea and Rodrigo de Balbín, works that focused mainly on the possible chronology of the representations and their parallels with other Cantabrian, Levantine or Meseta centers. Along with the revision of the paintings, several works were also published on the archaeological site and the surface sites documented during the survey campaign, highlighting the work of José Luis Serna on the Middle Paleolithic of the region.

Visit the cave

As reported by the Ayna City Council, a visit to the Cueva del Niño is mandatory with a guide, being 16 kilometers away by car by road, 2 kilometers of forest track and 45 minutes walking on a mountain path from Ayna. It is necessary to bring water, flashlight and appropriate footwear.

The reservation of the tour must be made several days in advance. For more information:
Tourism Office. Tel.: 967 29 53 16 or City Hall. Tel.: 967 29 50 01

Bibliography

• ALMAGRO GORBEA, M. (1971). “La Cueva del Niño (Albacete) and La Cueva de la Griega (Segovia). Two rock art sites recently discovered in the Iberian Peninsula.” Prehistoric Works, 28, 9-62.
• — (1972). “Discovery of a cave with Paleolithic rock art in the province of Albacete.”. At Santander International Rock Art Symposium, 475-497. Santander.
• BALBÍN BERHMANN, R. and ALCOLEA GONZÁLEZ, J. (1994). “Paleolithic art of the Spanish Plateau”. Complutum, 5, 97-138.
• DAVIDSON, I. (1989). The economy of the end of the Paleolithic period in eastern Spain. Valencia: Prehistoric Research Service of the Provincial Council of Valencia. 85.
• DAVIDSON, I. and GARCÍA MORENO, A. (2013): The 1973 archaeological excavation of the Cueva del Niño (Ayna, Albacete): stratigraphic sequence and materials. Al-Basit 58, pp. 91-117.
• FORTEA, J., (1978). Paleolithic Art of the Spanish Mediterranean, Prehistoric Works, 35.
• MARTI OLIVER, B. (1988). “Neolithic vase from the Cueva del Niño (Ayna, Albacete).”. In Homage to Samuel de los Santos, 77-80. Albacete: Institute for Albacete Studies “Don Juan Manuel”.
• SERNA LOPEZ, J.L. (1997). “Considerations on the economy and occupation of the territory during early prehistory. The case of the Paleolithic and Epipaleolithic sites in the Mundo River basin”. Levantine Prehistory Archive, 22, 57-71.
• — (1999). The Middle Paleolithic in the province of Albacete. Albacete: Institute for Albacete Studies “Don Juan Manuel”.
  VILLAVERDE, V. (1988). “Considerations about the Parpalló sequence and the Paleolithic art of the Spanish Mediterranean” Levantine Prehistory Archive 18, 1988, pp. 11-47
• ALEJANDRO GARCIA-MORENO “https://cuevadelnino.wordpress.com”