Ecological Patterns in the Upper Pleistocene and Holocene in the Jebel Gharbi, Northern Libya: Chronology, Climate and Human Occupation

Abstract

Surveys and test excavations in the Jebel Gharbi have brought to light a large quantity of prehistoric sites indicating intensive human occupation from the Upper Pleistocene to the Holocene. Several radiometric dates (standard 14 C, AMS and U/Th) provide a detailed framework of the absolute chronology of the local peopling of the area. Generalised Middle Stone Age archaeological materials represent the earliest term of reference in the geological series. Aterian complexes are well-represented, being widely spread throughout the mountain range and in the lowlands. Lower Later Stone Age, or "Dabban", artefacts are also attested to both geological and archaeological sequences. Human occupation continued with the Upper and Final Epipalaeolithic (or "Iberomaurusian") and later, with Capsian and Neolithic groups. Permanent and seasonal water springs and raw material sources influenced settlement strategy and selected areas offered particularly favourable conditions and became intensively occupied.Résumé Reconnaissances et sondages dans le Jebel Gharbi ont mis au jour une grande quantité de sites préhistoriques qui suggèrent une occupation intensive du Pléistocène supérieur à l'Holocène. Nombreux dates radiométriques ( 14 C, AMS et U/Th) fournissent un cadre détaillé de la chronologie absolue de l'occupation locale de la zone. Matériels archéologiques du Paléolithique moyen représentent le terme de référence le plus ancien dans les stratigraphies géologiques. Les assemblages atériens sont bien représentés, en étant présent soit dans le massif soit dans la pleine. Des sites du Paléolithique moyen ou "Dabbéen" sont aussi connus dans les séquences géologiques et archéologiques. L'occupation humaine continue avec les Upper et Final Epipaléolithique (ou "Ibéromaurusien") et, après, avec des groupes Afr Archaeol Rev (2008) 25:87-97 capsiens et néolithiques. Sources d'eau permanentes et saisonnières ont influencé la stratégie des gisements et des zones sélectionnées ont offert des conditions particulièrement favorables et sont devenu intensivement occupées.

Divorcing the Late Upper Palaeolithic demographic histories of mtDNA haplogroups M1 and U6 in Africa

“…Whilst a techno-typological shift occurred within the Dabban ~33 KYA [19], starker changes in the archaeological record occurred throughout North Africa and Southwest Asia ~23-20 KYA, represented by the widespread appearance of backed bladelet technologies. The appearance of these backed bladelet industries more or less coincides with the timing of the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) (~23-18 KYA), including: ~21 KYA in Upper Egypt [20]; ~20 KYA at Haua Fteah with the Oranian [21]; the Iberomaurusian expansion in the Jebel Gharbi ~20 KYA [22]; and the first Iberomaurusian at Tamar Hat in Algeria ~20 KYA [23]. The earliest Iberomaurusian sites in Morocco appear to be only slightly younger ~18 KYA [24].…”

Aterian lithic technology and settlement system in the Jebel Gharbi, North-Western Libya

“…This study provides elements of further discussion on the Aterian from the Jebel Gharbi (Barich et al 2006;Garcea and Giraudi, 2006;Barich and Garcea, 2008;Garcea, 2009;Garcea, 2010aGarcea, , 2012Spinapolice and Garcea, 2013). Following the descriptions by Jacobs et al (2012), the Aterian from the Jebel Gharbi is comparable with the Moroccan Late Aterian, dated to between 80 and 70 ka at El Harhoura 2, El Mansra and Dar es-Soltane 1, as well as at the northern sites of Taforalt, Ifri n'Ammar and Rhafas.…”

“…Sites are often found located close to water sources and streams. This pattern does not change in the LSA period (Barich et al 2006;Barich and Garcea, 2008;Mutri and Lucarini, 2008).…”

Untitled

“…Not unexpectedly, the diversity of tool classes and types mainly is similar to those recorded for the 1950s Iberomaurusian collections ( Figure 36; Roche 1963;Olszeand Belhouchet 2008) between the Great Eastern Sand Sea and Mediterranean coast of Algeria and Tunisia; Zaouïa elKebira (Chavaillon 1960) and Hassi Ouchtat (Chavaillon 1985) in Wadi Saoura, western Algeria; Uan Afuda in the Tadrart Acacus Mountains of western Libya (Cremaschi et al 1998) Barich et al 2006;Barich and Garcea 2008). The relevant material from the Haua Fteah in Cyrenaica, Libya, is also equivocal both in regards to its classification as either Mousterian or Aterian, and the nature of the excavation units employed (McBurney 1967: 105-134).…”

“…Furthermore, in many key regions-especially in the Sahara-most data come from surface contexts (e.g., Caton-Thompson 1946; Cremaschi et al 1998: 279-208;Pasty 1999;Hawkins 2004Hawkins , 2008Barich et al 2006;Barich and Garcea 2008) and many collections were either acquired before the advent of modern excavation standards or have an insufficient amount of material for comparison. It is for these reasons that we do not include lithic data from the collections like Dar es-Soltane I (Ruhlman 1951;Roche 1956), Mugharet al-Aliya (Howe 1967;Bouzouggar et al 2002), Aïn Fritissa (Tixier 1958(Tixier -1959 and Station Météo (Wengler 1997) in the area from the Atlantic coast of Morocco to the Oujda Mountains; Koudiat Bou Gherara (Cadenat 1953) and Bérard (Vaufrey 1955) near the Atlas Tellien Mountains of northern Algeria; Oued Djouf el-Djemel (Morel 1978), Bir el-Ater (Oued Djebbana) (Reygasse 1921(Reygasse -1922Morel 1974), Aïn Métherchem (Vaufrey 1955) and Aïn El-Guettar (Gruet 1958(Gruet -1959; Aouadi-Abdeljaouad occur naturally in the immediate proximity and thus had to be transported to the site (Bouzouggar 1997), these low ratios are the results of the movement of fine grain artifacts in and out of the site.…”