Iberomaurusian

Geographical range	Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya (not shown on map).
Period	Later Stone Age, Epipalaeolithic, or Upper Paleolithic
Dates	c. 25/23,000 – c. 11,000 cal BP
Type site	La Mouillah
Major sites	Taforalt, Afalou bou Rhummel, Haua Fteah, Tamar Hat, Columnata
Preceded by	Aterian
Followed by	Mushabian, Cardium pottery, Capsian

The Iberomaurusian is a backed bladelet lithic industry found near the coasts of Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia. It is also known from a single major site in Libya, the Haua Fteah, where the industry is locally known as the Eastern Oranian.^{[note 1]} The Iberomaurusian seems to have appeared around the time of the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), somewhere between c. 25,000 and 23,000 cal BP. It would have lasted until the early Holocene c. 11,000 cal BP.^[1]

The name of the Iberomaurusian means "of Iberia and Mauretania", the latter being a Latin name for Northwest Africa. Pallary (1909) coined this term^[2] to describe assemblages from the site of La Mouillah in the belief that the industry extended over the strait of Gibraltar into the Iberian Peninsula. This theory is now generally discounted (Garrod 1938),^[3] but the name has stuck.

In Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya, but not in Morocco, the industry is succeeded by the Capsian industry, whose origins are unclear. The Capsian is believed either to have spread into North Africa from the Near East,^[4] or to have evolved from the Iberomaurusian.^[5][6] In Morocco and Western Algeria, the Iberomaurusian is succeeded by the Cardial culture after a long hiatus.^[7]

Mr. Luis Siret had already noticed in Southeastern Spain a Palaeolithic industry that included a microlithic toolkit: small and narrow instruments, variously retouched and with these, colouring substances, grinding tools, and hammerstones. However, this very industry, we have noticed it in the La Mouillah shelters, close to Marnia [western Algeria]: it includes hammerstones, cores, simple and backed [à bord retaillés] blades, notched blades, an excessive profusion of very small blades with retouch on their backs and very sharp points [très petites lames à dos retouché et à pointe très aigüe [sic]], circular endscrapers, disks, alterative flake pebbles, and a whole set of tools for grinding colours: pebbles in greenish rock, sandstone wheels, pebbles with median depressions, still impregnated with red colour, and as colouring substances, hematites, ocre, oligist iron. Finally, some boring tools in polished bone and objects of adornment: ellongated pebbles and shells pierced for suspension. But nothing in the way of polished stone or pottery.

[...]

What clearly distinguishes this industry is the smallness of the toolkit, especially the crescent-shaped backed blades of which one finds thousands of examples. True geometric pieces (in the shape of trapeziums) are excessively rare, barely three parts per thousand, whereas in the ancient Neolithic with pottery and polished stone, small pieces of flint with geometric shapes are very common.

I named Ibero-Maurusian the period that characterises this industry.

— Paul Pallary, Instructions pour les recherches préhistoriques dans le nord-ouest de l'Afrique (1909, pp. 45-46, translation)

Because the name of the Iberomaurusian implies Afro-European cultural contact now generally discounted,^[3] researchers have proposed other names:

• Mouillian or Mouillan, based on the site of La Mouillah (Goetz 1945–6).
• The Oranian, based on the Algerian region of Oran (Breuil 1930, Gobert et al. 1932, McBurney 1967, Barker et al. 2012).
• The Late Upper Palaeolithic (of Northwest African facies, Barton et al. 2005).

What follows is a timeline of all published radiocarbon dates from reliably Iberomaurusian contexts, excluding a number of dates produced in the 1960s and 1970s considered "highly doubtful" (Barton et al. 2013). All dates, calibrated and Before Present, are according to Hogue and Barton (2016). The Tamar Hat date beyond 25,000 cal BP is tentative.

In 2005, the Mitochondrial DNA of 31 prehistoric skeletons dated from the site of Taforalt, Morocco in a cave called ‘Grotte des pigeons' was analyzed by the Tunisian geneticist Rym Kefi (Pasteur Institute of Tunis) and her team.^[8] The remains at Taforalt were dated between 23,000 YBP and 10,800 YBP (Ferembach 1985). Later analysis of bones and charcoals using a high precision radiocarbon chronology showed that the Iberomaurusian industry appeared in TAF at least 22,093–21,420 Cal BP (calibrated YBP) (Barton et al. 2013) . In 2016 she updated the research and wrote a new article which also included 8 skeletons from the Algerian Iberomaurusian site called 'Afalou'. The Afalou site is dated from 15,000 to 11,000 YBP. 23 individuals from the original 2005 Taforalt sample were determined in Kefi's 2016 article to be of the maternal genetic lineage U6 and of Eurasian haplogroups H, U, R0 and at the Algerian Afalou site maternal groups were JT, J, T, H, R0a1 and U. This suggests genetic flow between North Africa and southern Mediterranean littoral since the Epipaleolithic.^[9][10]

In an article entitled 'Pleistocene North African genomes link Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African human populations', Marieke Van de Loosdrecht et al. (2018) did a full genome-wide analysis including Y-DNA from seven ancient individuals from the Taforalt site. The fossils were directly dated to between 15,100 and 13,900 calibrated years before present. All males at Taforalt belonged to haplogroup E1b1b1a1 (M-78). This haplogroup occurs most frequently in present-day North and East African populations. The closely related E1b1b1b (M-123) haplogroup has been reported for Epipaleolithic Natufians and Pre-Pottery Neolithic Levantines. Loosdrecht states: "Present-day North Africans share a majority of their ancestry with present-day Near Easterners, but not with sub-Saharan Africans", although the predominant Y-DNA of the Maghreb is E-M81 (see Haplogroup E-Z827). Maternally, six individuals of the Taforalt remains bore the U6a haplogroup and one individual was of the M1b haplogroup, these Eurasian haplogroups proposed as markers for autochthonous Maghreb ancestry which might have been originally introduced into this region by a back-to-Africa migration from West Asia. A two-way admixture scenario using Natufian and modern sub-Saharan samples (including West Africans and the Tanzanian Hadza) as reference populations, inferred that the seven Taforalt individuals are best modeled genetically as 63.5% West-Eurasian-related and 36.5% sub-Saharan ancestry (with the latter having both West African-like and Hadza-like affinities), with no apparent gene flow from the Epigravettian culture of Paleolithic southern Europe.^[11] However, the Sub-Saharan African DNA in Taforalt individuals was not found to have a good proxy in any present-day or ancient Holocene African groups.^[11] It was also found that if Iberomaurusians harbor sub-Saharan African-like ancestry, they would fail as a possible contributing source for Natufians or other Middle Eastern groups, except if the sub-Saharan African geneflow postdated Iberomaurusian geneflow into the Levant, or was a locally confined phenomenon.^[12] Jeong (2020) indicated that the Sub-Saharan African DNA of the Taforalt population has similarity with the remnant of a more basal African lineage (e.g. a basal Eurasian and/or basal West African lineage).^[13]

Iosif Lazaridis et al. (2018), as summarized by Rosa Fregel (2021), contested the conclusion of Loosdrecht (2018) and argued instead that the Iberomaurusian population of Upper Paleolithic North Africa, represented by the Taforalt sample, "can be better modeled as an admixture between a Dzudzuana [West Eurasian] component and a sub-Saharan African component" (or an "Ancient North African" component, "that may represent an even earlier split than the Basal Eurasians"). Iosif Lazaridis et al. (2018) also argued that an Iberomaurusian/Taforalt-like population contributed to the genetic composition of Natufians "and not the other way around", and that this Iberomaurusian/Taforalt lineage also contributed around 13% ancestry to modern West Africans "rather than Taforalt having ancestry from an unknown Sub-Saharan African source". Fregel (2021) summarized: "More evidence will be needed to determine the specific origin of the North African Upper Paleolithic populations."^[14][15] Later, Iosif Lazardis documented that the Natufians had a total of 9.1% non-West Eurasian ancestry, and the explanation by the geneticist was because of their partial descent from the Paleolithic Iberomaurusians, who's contributions were estimated at 22% in Natufians.^[16]

Martiniano et al. (2022) later reassigned all the Taforalt samples to haplogroup E-M78 and none to E-L618, the predecessor to EV13.^[17]

D’Atanasio et al. (2023) found that Iberomaurusian-like ancestry was characterizing for the unsampled "ancient Green Saharan" population about 12,000-5,000 years ago, and that modern-day Fula people derive around 30% of their ancestry from this ancient Saharan population, which was "modeled as a sister group of ancient Northern Africans, or alternatively, as an outgroup of all the “Eurasian-ancestry” enriched groups".^[18]

Despite researchers thinking they ate mostly game meat being hunter-gatherers, further study has indicated that their diet included a substantial incorporation of plant-based foods. This evidence challenges the prevailing notion of solely a high reliance on animal proteins in pre-agricultural human societies.^[19][20]

• Afroasiatic Urheimat
• Aterian
• Mushabian
• Taforalt
• Ifri N'Ammar
• Mechta-Afalou
• Haua Fteah