A new study, published in the Cambridge Archaeological Journal by Dr. Esther Jacobson-Tepfer, reveals an astonishing transformation in elk images in 12,000 years of Altai rock art in western Mongolia. Once drawn in realistic detail, elk gradually evolved into stylized, nearly unrecognizable wolf-like figures, reflecting deep transformations of environment, mobility, and identity.
The Altai region, where Mongolia, Russia, China, and Kazakhstan meet, has one of the world’s longest continuous rock art traditions, from the Late Paleolithic (c. 12,000 BP) to the Bronze Age and on into the Early Iron Age. Of all prehistoric carvings, the elk (Cervus elaphus sibiricus) held a special place. In the earliest paintings, elk were drawn in natural poses, sometimes with their young or with other then-extant animals like mammoths and woolly rhinos. These early depictions, carved in profile with proportional realism and vestigial legs, revealed a deep observational knowledge of the natural world.
Over time, particularly in the Bronze Age, these images changed. Elk became more dynamic and were inserted increasingly into human activity contexts, such as hunting. By the later Bronze Age, realism gave way to abstraction—elk became elongated, antlers exaggerated, and facial details distorted into snout- or beak-like forms. Eventually, elk no longer resembled the real animal so much, but rather turned into a symbol, possibly of status, clan identity, or spiritual belief.
Given the weather and the elapsed time since the Bronze and Early Iron Ages, it would be out of the question for painted images to survive outdoors in the Altai Mountains. There is only one known surviving set of painted elk images today, located in Khoit Tsenkir Cave in Khovd Aimag.
This symbolic development appears very much connected with social and environmental change. During the Holocene, the Eurasian steppe cooled and dried, and forests—attractive elk environments—receded. Elk shifted west, and people increasingly adopting pastoralism followed the shifting landscape up into higher altitudes. Rock art itself attests to this shift, as carvings appear at greater elevations over time.
Dr. Jacobson-Tepfer’s long experience in fieldwork in the region underscores the effects of climate and movement on daily life and on art. While surveying Tsagaan Salaa IV in 1995, she found a vast glacial boulder overlooking a broad valley floor. One elk image carved on its surface, distorted and otherworldly, stood out from hundreds more. “It seemed to reflect a complex interweaving of deep geological time, iconography, and its social implications,” she wrote, describing the boulder as not only an artifact—but a symbol of evolving cultural identity.
Later, travel on mounted horses changed humans’ relation to the world. Art featured stylized animals on personal items, symbolizing new social hierarchies and mobility. The elk, which was once a living element of nature, became a symbolic representation. By the Turkic period, it disappeared completely from the art tradition.
Disclaimer: This website is a science-focused magazine that welcomes both academic and non-academic audiences. Comments are written by users and may include personal opinions or unverified claims. They do not necessarily reflect the views of our editorial team or rely on scientific evidence.
Comment Policy: We kindly ask all commenters to engage respectfully. Comments that contain offensive, insulting, degrading, discriminatory, or racist content will be automatically removed.
“ There is only a single known surviving painted elk image today, in Khoit Tsenkir cave in Khovd Aimag.”
How did the scientists manage to do a comparative study of how elk images evolved over time if only one image survived?
I am guessing that the boulder image, being distinct from the cave image, must be from a glacier that receded recently, enabling the boulder paintings or engravings to survive despite the weathering erasure process mentioned above which destroyed the other images. So if in fact only two paintings survive then is that enough to validate the comparative evolutionary thesis of the argument, or are we just looking at two different elk paintings from two artists with different interpretations? Thank you for sharing the images and for the article. It is a privilege to see such ancient and beautiful art and imagine the lives of the artists and animals.
The authors are using rock images (pictures “engraved” by repetive strikes of stones on rock surface). These are plentiful in Mongolia, and style evolution is evident. Main point is that when climate and ecological situation changed, elks were no longer common in the region but well remebered and still found as stylised pictures.
However similar cultures, like Pazyrik nomads, used simultaneously both stylised versions of elks and highly realistic carvings of them which could be made only by people who witnesed the beasts.
Mentions of painted pictures are made to compare the scene with for example Sahara paintings, where similar evolution is evident (from hunting scenes to chariots).
Well, this bit of information about the paintings (= pigment paste stuck on a surface) is slightly confusing and has actually not much to do with the study which focuses on engravings (= scratched into a hard surface/stone) and ornaments on items (e.g. modelled into metal of a belt buckle). These survive outdoors for a very long time and there are thousands! The study is about those images. I’m not sure why the article even mentions the paintings fun fact.
Greetings, courtesy and respect to you. In my opinion, this fossil is a picture of a battle between two male deer. The hind legs of the male deer are clearly visible on the right and left sides of the image, and the heads of the two deer and their antlers are intertwined at the height of the battle.