Timeline: Cueva de las Manos

Volcanic rocks of the Bahía Laura Group formed as part of the larger Deseado Massif. These rocks (including ignimbrite) later became the canyon walls in which Cueva de las Manos developed.

A canyon microclimate between about 400–500 m above sea level supported a grassland ecosystem with useful plants (including Schinus molle, tubers, and fruits) and abundant animals. These conditions helped make the Pinturas Canyon hospitable to early hunter-gatherers.

The Pinturas and Deseado rivers provided water that attracted herds of guanacos, drawing Paleoindians to the area. Hunters used methods such as bolas, ambushes, and game drives, practices reflected in the cave’s imagery.

Cueva de las Manos and nearby sites (including Cerro Casa de Piedra-7 near Lake Burmeister) became key landmarks in a seasonal nomadic circuit across different ecological zones around Pinturas Canyon and the Andean ecotone. Movement patterns tracked plant availability and guanaco birth cycles, with newborn guanaco furs especially valued.

The earliest rock art at Cueva de las Manos was created, marking the start of the site’s long artistic sequence. This early phase corresponds to Stylistic Group A (Río Pinturas I), characterized by dynamic, naturalistic scenes and hand motifs.

Stylistic Group A developed as the earliest major artistic tradition at the cave, combining polychrome hunting scenes with negative hand stencils. Artists used grooves and irregularities in the rock face to help depict terrain features such as ravines, linking imagery to local topography.

Group A diversified into layered sub-styles A1–A5 (Ochre, Black, Red, Purplish/Dark Red, White/Yellow), applied in a general top-to-bottom chronological order. The Black series introduced artistic innovations such as aerial and hierarchical perspective and the use of contrasting colors to separate figures.

Rock art traditions similar to those at Cueva de las Manos—especially hunting-scene styles—began to appear at other nearby sites. Cueva de las Manos remained distinctive for preserving the earliest regional rock art sequence.

The H1 eruption of Mount Hudson is linked to abandonment of the Río Pinturas area and likely brought Stylistic Group A to an end. This event marks a major break in the cave’s artistic sequence.

A new cultural phase began producing Stylistic Groups B (Río Pinturas II) and B1 (Río Pinturas III). Art shifted away from lively hunting scenes toward more static guanaco depictions (often with large bellies, possibly pregnant) and large, multi-colored masses of superimposed hand stencils.

During Groups B and B1, schematic and stylized forms became increasingly common, alongside motifs such as dotted line patterns, bola marks, and occasional human/animal footprints. Around 2,000 handprints in many colors are associated with this extended period.

Toldense groups are described as living in the caves into the third or second millennium BC, using the area as part of hunter-gatherer lifeways. Temporary camps around the cave enabled extended families and larger bands to coordinate collective guanaco hunts.

Artifacts such as projectile points, a bola stone fragment, side-scrapers, and fire pits accumulated alongside animal remains (guanaco, puma, fox, birds, and others). The presence of non-local obsidian indicates trade or exchange networks connecting the cave’s inhabitants to distant groups.

Over millennia, the cave’s art expanded to include more than 2,000 handprints (mostly negative stencils), hunting scenes, animals (guanacos, rheas, felines, deer), and geometric motifs. The predominance of left hands (829 left vs. 31 right reported) suggests most painters sprayed pigment while holding a pipe with the right hand.

Stylistic Group C (Río Pinturas IV) began, marking the final major stylistic sequence at the cave. It emphasized abstract geometric figures and highly schematic animal and human silhouettes, predominantly in red.

The site’s human occupation ended around this time, with the last cave dwellers possibly being ancestors of the Tehuelche. This date also aligns with the start of Group C as the last stylistic phase documented in the cave.

Father Alberto Maria de Agostini—an Italian missionary and explorer—published the first written account of the site, bringing it to wider scholarly attention.

An expedition from the La Plata Museum investigated Cueva de las Manos, representing one of the earliest formal archaeological inquiries into the site.

Archaeologist Carlos J. Gradin and his team began the most substantial research program at the cave, launching a 30-year study. This work was central to establishing the cave’s stylistic sequences and chronology.

Cueva de las Manos was designated a National Historic Monument of Argentina, strengthening its legal recognition and protection status at the national level.

The site became a major subject within a national rock art study initiated by the National Institute of Anthropology and Latin American Thought. This research effort contributed to international recognition of the cave’s significance.

Cueva de las Manos was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, reflecting its outstanding value as a long-term record of hunter-gatherer art and lifeways in Patagonia. Tourist visitation later rose substantially after this listing.

Tourism grew markedly—reported as increasing fourfold following UNESCO inscription—bringing preservation pressures alongside greater global awareness. Conservation responses included controlled access and infrastructure to manage visitor movement.

Rewilding Argentina purchased the land from a private ranch, a key step in shifting the area toward stronger public stewardship and long-term conservation planning.

Cueva de las Manos received its own provincial park designation, further formalizing protection and management of the site and its surrounding rock art complex.

After Rewilding Argentina donated the land, the state assumed direct control of the area. Around this time, visitation was reported at roughly 8,000 people per year, and management emphasized guided access and protective infrastructure.

Conservation measures included fencing, a boardwalk, guided-only entry, and visitor facilities supervised by INAPL and CONICET professionals, alongside education programs and documentation (including 360° video for a virtual reality experience). Authorities have also faced criticism for insufficient staffing and the need for a permanent on-site archaeologist, while graffiti and vandalism remain major threats.