Venus figurine
Such figurines were carved from soft stone (such as steatite, calcite or limestone), bone or ivory, or formed of clay and fired.
Various figurines exaggerate the abdomen, hips, breasts, thighs, or vulva, although many found examples do not reflect these typical characteristics.
There are widely varying and speculative interpretations of their use or meaning: they have been seen as religious figures,[5] an expression of health and fertility, grandmother goddesses, or as self-depictions by female artists.
[6] The Vénus impudique, which was the figurine that gave the whole category its name, was the first Palaeolithic sculptural representation of a woman to be discovered in modern times.
[7] Four years later, Salomon Reinach published an article about a group of soapstone figurines from the caves of Balzi Rossi.
[10] The Marquis then contrasted the ivory figurine to the Aphrodite Of Knidos, a Greco-Roman sculpture depicting Venus covering her naked body with both her hands.
[11] Most scholars that have differing opinions on the purpose of the figurines, such as anthropologist Randall White, also disapprove of the "Venus" name as a result.
This perception is said to have derived from the fact that attention is directed to certain features common to most of the figurines, in particular emotionally charged primary and secondary sexual characteristics such as the breasts, stomachs and buttocks.
Some human bodies from the Palaeolithic era are found similarly covered, so it is assumed this colour had a significant meaning in their culture even though we do not know what.
Within the Magdalenian cultures, the forms become finer with more detail and the styling of said figures started to become similar within areas of close contact.
[1] McCoid and McDermott suggested that because of the way these figures are depicted, such as the large breasts and lack of feet and faces, these statues were made by women looking at their own bodies.
They state that women during the period would not have had access to mirrors to maintain accurate proportions or depict the faces or heads of the figurines.
[21] Another modern interpretation, providing an explanation for visible weight variety amongst the figurines, comes from Johnson et al.[22] Here, they argue that differences in the statues can be said to relate to human adaption to climate change.
This is because figurines that are seen to be obese or pregnant originate to the earlier art from 38,000 to 14,000 BP - a period where nutritional stress arose as a result of falling temperatures.
[22] In "The Mythology of Venus Ancient Calendars and Archaeoastronony," Helen Benigni argues that the consistency in design of these featureless, large-breasted, often pregnant figures throughout a wide region and over a long period of time suggests they represent an archetype of a female Supreme Creator.
