Please sign in to post.

Lascaux - II or IV

We are travelling to France in June and are planning on stopping at Lascaux on our way closer to the Dordogne river from the Loire. I'm wondering if we should do Lascaux II or IV, I don't think we'll have time for both. We are planning on seeing a couple of other caves as well during our time in the Dordogne if that helps. Do I need the razzle-dazzle of IV or maybe the quieter II would be better suited for us? We are driving a car and love museums, history, food, and culture.

Anyone been to both and can explain better what you get/experience with each?

Thanks!
Jodi

Posted by
4775 posts

I can't speak for #2 but #4 is spectacular and if you love museums you may enjoy the gallery after the cave tour. I'm not sure if #2 has more then the cave. We spent a week in the Dordogne in late September/early October and loved it. If you're also thinking of Font de Gaume, start checking the website now because tickets sales for your date will just spring up and you need to be quick.

Posted by
1271 posts

Thanks Allan. I'm also wondering now if maybe IV has too much stuff and we should keep it simple with II. Hmmm. We are going to try for Font-de-Gaume. Thanks!

Posted by
2583 posts

Both caves are replicas, Lascaux IV is a 100% replica of the original while Lascaux II is partial (about 50%)

Lascaux II is more intimate, unlike Lascaux IV which appeals to those who prefer new technologies.

But if the emotional aspect matters to you and you would rather see for example the real Mona Lisa than the copy hanging on the wall in your living room, then forget Lascaux and go see the real original paintings drawn 15,000 years ago or more in the following caves:

  • Grotte de Pech Merle
  • Grotte de Combarelles
  • Grotte de Villars
  • Grotte de Cougnac
  • Grotte de Font-de-Gaume
  • Grotte des Merveilles
  • Grotte de Rouffignac
  • Grotte des sorciers
Posted by
1271 posts

JoLui-thank-you, although Rick's book says II is 90%?? We are planning on seeing Grotte de Pech Merle, Grotte de Font-de-Gaume, and Grotte de Rouffignac as well as the museum and Abri du Cap Blanc. Of the ones you listed do you have any favorites?

Posted by
1615 posts

jlkelman,
I went to Lascaux II in 2001 and Lascaux IV in 2023. I also went to Font de Gaume in 2023. Lascaux II was very nice, but I prefer IV as it answers so many questions and explains things so well. Yes, it is less "intimate", but the reproductions are terrific, and I wouldn't classify them or the display areas as razzle-dazzle. That makes them seem frivolous and unimportant. They were educational and engaging.
For seeing an original, any of JoLui's suggestions are good. We were thrilled with Font de Gaume, and managed to snag an English language tour for our party of seven (groups are about 12-13 at a time). I was diligent about checking the website daily and booked for our date as soon as it became available. We also prebooked for Lascaux IV, but they have larger and more frequent groups, so it was easier. This was in early June. I am sure later in June and in July and August, things may be more crowded and difficult. Familiarize yourself with the website so you can snag your reservations when you want.
Try to plan your trip so you can visit the National Museum of Prehistory in Les Eyzies (Near Font de Gaume). It is supposed to be excellent. Heals! It was closed the day we went to Font de Gaume. Next time!
Amusez-vous bien!

Posted by
944 posts

We went to IV in June and the exhibits added a lot to the experience. We also went to Font de Gaume and Peche Merle. They were all great and complemented each other. The tour guides did a great job.

Posted by
1712 posts

When I was at Lascaux IV a few months ago Lascaux II was not open and the signs stated that anyone looking for access would have to make special arrangements.

Posted by
8770 posts

IV is designed to get tours through more conveniently. Like Chauvet, it is not an exact replica but a gallery designed to show case the art. II was an exact replica of part of the cave. II and IV both fabulous and so is the replica of the Chauvet cave in the Ardeche --- While Roffignac, Font du Gaume and Pech Merle are original cave art and thus high on the must see list, they are much degraded or in the case of Roffignac and Pech Merle less impressive original art, they are the real deal. I like to pair Font du Gaume which we have visited twice with Lascaux. One shows you what it looked like new and the other is the real deal. With the exception of the spotted horses, Pech Merle is not very impressive (nice cave though). Roffignac is scratched line drawings and not the colorful paintings of Lascaux and Chauvet -- or font du Gaume when it was new. Font du Gaume is not black on black -- but thrilling because it is the original art.

Posted by
15102 posts

I've been to Pech Merle, Rouffignac and Lascaux IV.

I was most blown away by Pech Merle. The things that had the most impact to me were the human footprint, the reverse image handprints and the drawings of spotted horses. I live in North Idaho and lived on the Idaho Palouse for a number of years. This is where the Nez Perce tribe initially bred the Appaloosa (Ap = from, Paloosa = Palouse) horse so it was quite shocking to me to see 25,000 year old spotted ponies! Wow.

I enjoyed Rouffignac as well...and laughed at the bison on the ceiling there because yep, they look like the bison still living in Yellowstone.

Lascaux IV was busier than the others and more "people-y", lol. Still quite interesting to see, though.

Whichever caves you see it will be an amazing experience!

Posted by
1271 posts

Thanks Pam! It sounds like what wowed you about Peche Merle is exactly why we want to see it. Thanks!

Posted by
15102 posts

Well, I live in the land of "deniers" and those who think the earth is just 6,000 years old...so I always look for opportunities to be able to say...Look, I saw a footprint that is 25,000 years old, lol!! That actually gave me chills and such a human to human connection! Moreso even than dinosaur trackways, lol!