Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103

brill.com/jaa

Early Holocene Occupations at Ashash Rock Shelter (Zemmur, Western

Sahara)

Ferran Borrell
Institució Milà i Fontanals, Spanish National Research Council (IMF-CSIC), Egipcíaques 15, 08001 Barcelona, Spain
ferran.borrell@imf.csic.es

Gabriel Alcalde
Institute of Historical Research, Universitat de Girona, Spain

Ignacio Clemente
Institució Milà i Fontanals, Spanish National Research Council (IMF-CSIC), Egipcíaques 15, 08001 Barcelona, Spain

Maria Saña
Department of Prehistory, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain

Joaquim Soler
Institute of Historical Research, Universitat de Girona, Spain

Narcís Soler
Institute of Historical Research, Universitat de Girona, Spain

Abstract Résumé

The archaeological record of the Western Sahara remains ex-
tremely fragmentary, with very few sites systematically exca-
vated. The excavation at Ashash rock shelter (Zemmur region)
has provided, for the first time in the region, the evidence of
superimposition of two prehistoric occupations that have been
radiocarbon dated to the early 9th millennium cal. BP and to
the mid-7th millennium cal. BP. The Epipalaeolithic occupation
is strongly marked by the standardised production of geomet-
ric microliths and points using a microburin blow technique.
The Neolithic occupation of the site has yielded a few potsherds
that provide the first unambiguous evidence of pottery in the
Zemmur area in the mid-7th millennium cal. BP.
Keywords
Les données archéologiques du Sahara occidental sont encore
très lacunaires et l’exploration systématique des sites demeure
exceptionnelle. Les fouilles de l’abri sous roche Ashash (région
de Zemmour) ont fourni, pour la première fois dans la région, la
preuve de la superposition de deux occupations préhistoriques
datées par radiocarbone du début du 9ème millénaire et du mi-
lieu du 7ème millénaire cal. BP respectivement. L’occupation
épipaléolithique est fortement marquée par la production nor-
malisée de microlithes géométriques et de pointes de projec-
tiles fabriqués par la technique du microburin. L’occupation
néolithique du site a livré quelques tessons de céramique qui
fournissent la première preuve sans ambiguïté de la présence
de poterie dans la région de Zemmour au milieu du 7ème mil-
lénaire cal. BP.

Epipalaeolithic – Neolithic – Western Sahara – lithic Introduction

technology – microburin technique – Neolithic pottery
Western Sahara is a large area in Northwest Africa that has
contributed little knowledge to the prehistory of the conti-
nent, particularly compared to other parts of North Africa
where research has been carried out on a continuous basis
by local and international research teams. Archaeological

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi:10.1163/21915784-20180007

84
studies in Western Sahara have been scarce and discon-
tinuous, affected by the area’s political history and, to a
lesser extent, by the harsh climatic conditions of the
Sahara Desert.
The first archaeological studies took place in the early
twentieth century (Font 1902), but it was not until the
1940s, when Spanish control was exerted over the colony,
that pioneering studies were carried out in the region
mainly oriented to recording the abundant and varied
rock art and to studying surface-collected prehistoric as-
semblages (Almagro-Basch 1946; Balbín et al. 2009). Later
archaeological activities were equally scarce, apart from
the excavation of some megalithic mounds and monu-
ments (Balbín 1973; Pellicer & Acosta 1991) and necropo-
lises located in shell middens, the latter enabling the first
palaeo-environmental studies of the region (Petit-Maire
1980). Research was interrupted by the Moroccan oc-
cupation in late 1975, the Spanish withdrawal from the
Sahara in February 1976, and the subsequent Saharan lib-
eration war until the 1991 ceasefire. Research was resumed
in the least unstable areas after that time (Riser 1996;
Onrubia-Pintado 1996; Onrubia-Pintado & Ballouche
1996; Onrubia-Pintado et al. 1996) as was the study of ar-
tefacts found on the surface (Salih et al. 1997). After 1995,
the presence of international teams in the Sahrawi Arab
Democratic Republic, many of them Spanish (from the
universities of Girona, Granada and the Basque Country),
has increased, especially since the beginning of this cen-
tury (Brooks et al. 2006, 2009; Sáenz de Buruaga 2006;
Sáenz de Buruaga et al. 2012, 2014-2015; Sáenz de Buruaga
& Milburn 2015-2016).
From 2006, the University of Girona enlarged the field
of study, which had initially been restricted to prehistoric
rock art, by launching an archaeological project in the
region. The aim of the project was to establish an under-
standing of human occupation in the area during the Early
Holocene (the Epipalaeolithic-Neolithic transition) by re-
constructing the chrono-cultural sequence of occupation
and setting it in the context of the immediate neighbour-
ing regions, which had benefited from continued archae-
ological research (Vernet 2007, 2014a; Vernet et al. 2007,
2016). The project also aimed to study the potential rela-
tionship between the abundant rock art and the rest of
the archaeological record. To achieve these objectives, the
project conducted excavations at three prehistoric sites in
two different areas between 2006 and 2009: Ashash rock
shelter (2006) and the site of Sluguilla Lawash (2009) in
the Zemmur region and the site of Lajuad 2 (2007) in the
Tiris region.
This paper presents the results of the excavation at
Ashash, a small rock shelter where, despite the problems
Borrell et al.
inherent in excavating geological deposits with mini-
mal sedimentation, evidence of two periods of occupa-
tion during the Early Holocene were documented. The
occupation levels were largely differentiated through
radiocarbon dating (9th and 7th millennia cal. BP) and
complemented by the abundant archaeological material
found, which was mainly chipped lithic implements but
also ceramic sherds and ostrich eggshell beads. This dis-
covery throws new light on the chronology and nature of
human occupation in the Zemmur region in the first half
of the Holocene and contributes to establishing the chro-
nology of the adoption/introduction of ceramics in this
part of Northwest Africa.
Ashash Rock Shelter: Location and Geographic Context
Ashash rock shelter (known as Nidos rock shelter in previ-
ous publications: Soler et al. 2007) is in the northeastern
sector of Western Sahara, on the left bank of Wadi Kenta
(Fig. 1). The wadi is part of the dense network of dry wadis
typical of the Zemmur region, which have formed the
characteristic tabular relief in the region, with low sand-
stones hills (a few tens of metres, at the most, with flat
tops) formed in the Ordovician. Erosion has caused large
sandstone blocks to fall from the hills and roll down to the
small river terraces, thus giving a ruinous appearance to
the banks of the wadis. These piles of boulders and the
erosion of the sandstone matrix have created numerous
rock shelters of differing sizes and shapes, many of which
preserve evidence of prehistoric activity in the form of
rock art or archaeological artefacts on the ground surface.
During the survey conducted by the University of
Girona team in 2000 and 2002 oriented to study rock art
in the region, a series of archaeological sites showing sur-
face material were found in different spots along the Wadi
Kenta. A large number of archaeological objects were
identified both on the floor of the Ashash rock shelter and
on the small slope down from the rock shelter to the bot-
tom of the wadi (Soler 2005, 2007). The rich lithic collec-
tion, which included diagnostic elements attributable to
the more recent (Epipalaeolithic-Neolithic) prehistory of
the region together with the presence of rock paintings
inside the rock shelter, determined the choice of Ashash
rock shelter for the first excavation in December 2006.
Human Occupation at Ashash Rock Shelter
The specific objectives of the archaeological work in the
rock shelter were to determine whether it had a preserved
Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103
Early Holocene Occupations At Ashash Rock Shelter ( Zemmur, Western Sahara ) 85

SPAIN TURKEY
A
Témara caves Capeletti TUNISIA
(El Harhoura 2, Ifri Oudadane Mushabi III
El Mnasra) Ifri Ouzabour SHM-1 Mediterranean Sea
Ifri el Baroud Mushabi XV,
Taghit Mushabi XX

C CO Hassi Ouenzga Jefara Plain Lagama IV

O RO
M
EGIPT
Tarfaya Ashash Sluguilla Lawash ALGERIA
Taruma Masra A
RA N

LYBIA
HA ER

Uad Idki
SA EST

Tintan
Et Teyyedché
W

Zouerate Nabta
Lajuad 2
Tiferchai Ounan
Foum Aftout
Arguin
FA-1 MAURITANIA NIGER CHAD SUDAN
FA38 MALI
FA-39
SENEGAL

B C
Hamra
Seguia el

Moroccan military wall

Wa
SMARA di
Te
rg
ue
t

W
WESTE RN SAHARA
R

Wadi Ymal
Rekeiz Lemgasem
D
Rekeiz Ajahfun
WS100 Goulet
Ashash
sha
has
a WS103
WS104
Wadi Kenta WS107
TIFA
TIFAR
IF
I A ITI
TI

N MAURITANIA
40 Km

Figure 1 A+B: Map of Western Sahara with the location of Ashash rock shelter and the sites mentioned in the text; C: General view of the area
from Wadi Kenta, with Ashash rock shelter (red arrow); D: Ashash rock shelter.

archaeological stratigraphy, and if so, its thickness and
chronology, and finally to establish whether the archaeo-
logical remains were related to the rock paintings in the
shelter. With this in mind, a rectangular test pit measuring
3.5 × 1 m was dug partly inside the rock shelter, perpen-
dicular to its wall (Fig. 2A). All the sediment extracted in
the excavation was dry-sieved with a 1 mm mesh.
The excavation revealed that archaeological materials
were abundant beginning two or three centimetres below
the surface layer, within a homogenous sedimentary de-
posit about 20 cm thick. The sedimentary matrix con-
sisted of silt, transported and accumulated by the wind
or from the weathering of local sandstone, and it also in-
cluded sandstone slabs of different sizes that had fallen

Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103

86 Borrell et al.

A B m

ROCK-SHELTER
(lower perimeter) 2

Excavated area 0
Excavated area

(dr
ip l -1
in e) N m
5m 1 2 3 4 5

5620 +/- 30 BP
C 2,00 2,20 2,40 2,60 2,80 3,00 3,20 3,40 3,60 3,80 4,00
-0,50

-0,55

-0,60
Sub-level I
-0,65

-0,70
Sub-level II
-0,75

-0,80
Flint artefacts Pottery sherds 14C dates
8020 +/- 40 BP
Figure 2 A: Plan of Ashash rock shelter; B: Cross-section of the rock shelter and the excavated area; C: Plot of the archaeological material (2 m ×
25 cm transect). The line shows the hypothetical separation of the two occupations of the site (Sub-levels I and II). The two 14C dates have
been included in the plot although they do not correspond to the transect plotted.

from the rock shelter wall or broken off the boulders on
the floor. At its base, this archaeological level overlay a
large boulder that stopped further excavation, except in
the area inside the rock shelter, where it was possible to
dig almost 50 cm deeper, although this revealed no more
archaeological remains (Fig. 2B). The excavation of the
test pit thus allowed us to conclude that there was only
one relatively homogenous archaeological deposit and no
other – earlier – human occupation.
Occupation Sequence and Chronology
During excavation (and subsequently confirmed dur-
ing study of the artefacts), it became apparent that this
20 cm thick archaeological deposit corresponded to two
different periods of activity, visible only in some areas
as sub-levels termed I and II. These sub-levels were in
direct stratigraphic contact in some parts of the trench,
whereas in others they were separated by about 5 or 6 cm
of sediment (Fig. 2C) which in places contained artefacts
of uncertain attribution. The overall homogeneity of the
sedimentary matrix, the limited sedimentation between
the two occupation levels in some areas, and elsewhere
the presence of artefacts found in-between sub-levels
hampered the precise attribution of all archaeological re-
mains to one or the other sub-level. Consequently, in this
paper the archaeological remains are presented as a unit

Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103

Early Holocene Occupations At Ashash Rock Shelter ( Zemmur, Western Sahara )
before being attributed to either of the two periods, based
on the results of the subsequent study of each category of
materials and the radiocarbon dates obtained.
The radiocarbon dates have allowed a clear chrono-
logical differentiation of the two sub-levels (Fig. 3).
The first date (Beta-432144, 5620±30 BP) came from the
upper occupation (Sub-level I) and was obtained by AMS
dating the bulk sherd organics of a pottery sample. The
second date (Beta-226191, 8020±40 BP) came from the
AMS analysis of an indeterminate charred angiosperm
(identification by Dr. Ethel Allué) from the lower occu-
pation (Sub-level II). A third determination, on a bone
fragment from the lower occupation level, could not be
performed due to the lack of collagen. These two dates
allow to assign the human occupation in Sub-level I to
the start of the second half of the 7th millennium cal.
BP (Neolithic), whereas the occupation in Sub-level II
would have taken place in the early 9th millennium cal.
BP (Epipalaeolithic).
Chipped Stone Industry
A total number of 3,778 lithic artefacts were recovered.
Lithic artefacts are, by far, the most common archaeologi-
cal category at the site and represent one of the larger, if
Sub-level I (lower)
Sub-level I (Upper Occupation)
(Beta-432144)
Sub-level II (Lower Occupation)
(Beta-226191)
Figure 3 Radiocarbon dates obtained from Ashash rock shelter. Dates calibrated with OxCal v4.3.2 (2017) (Bronk Ramsey 2009) using the IntCal13
calibration curve (Reimer et al. 2013).
Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103
87
not the largest, well-dated Early Holocene lithic assem-
blage in Western Sahara. In addition, the artefacts are
generally in an excellent state of preservation which has
allowed us to characterize lithic production at Ashash
rock shelter in depth.
I Raw Materials
Macroscopic criteria were employed to differentiate the
different raw materials used for chipped lithic production:
jasper, flint, filonian quartz, hyaline quartz and quartzite.
Filonian quartz is the most abundant raw material and
represents 36.6% (n=1,383) of the chipped lithic assem-
blage. Jasper and quartzite appear in almost identical per-
centages: 24.8% (n=938) and 25.1% (n=949), respectively.
Flint is less numerous, accounting for 12.1% (n=456) of the
remains, whereas hyaline quartz is very scarce, constitut-
ing only 0.8% (n=29) of the total.
The diversity of raw materials is noteworthy. In all
cases, the size, both of the finished products and of some
pebble stones, indicates that the original size of the nod-
ules was quite small, about 10 cm in diameter. In addition,
the presence of rounded cortex on most cortical artefacts
suggests that the small nodules were procured from the
terraces of the different wadis in the surrounding area,
Sub-level II (upper)
88 Borrell et al.

though determining their exact provenance would re-
quire further studies.
Ii Technology
The most abundant blanks are flakes, which make up
41.8% of the total number of artefacts (n=1,578). The num-
ber of laminar objects is also considerable, with 14.3%
blades (n=540) and 5.5% bladelets (n=207). Small knap-
ping waste is equally abundant and amounts to 20.9%
(n=791), whereas cores (1%; n=36) and hammerstones
(0.2%; n=6) are very scarce. The assemblage is complet-
ed by a large number of indeterminate fragments that
are hard to classify because of their small size or non-
diagnostic form; they represent 16.4% (n=620) of the total.
Quartz and hyaline quartz were used almost exclusive-
ly to produce flakes (Fig. 4) with unipolar or alternating
unipolar reduction on a single percussion plane that is
modified very little or not at all, using direct percussion. In
some instances, when two opposing percussion platforms
were worked at different times, true bipolar reduction has
been identified, which may have been achieved over an
anvil, so that the core received two simultaneous impacts
(one from the hammerstone and the other from the anvil,
which acted as an underlying hammerstone). In all cases,
initial preparation of the cores seems to have been very
limited. The extent of the surface being worked is quite
high, and reduction often covers the whole perimeter of
the surface although it amounts to only 3 or 4 extractions
per core. Owing to the reduction method and the litholog-
ical and morphological characteristics of the raw material,
the blanks are small and quite heterogeneous in shape.
The butts tend to be flat, with a single facet or often cor-
tical. A large number of quartz fragments do not display
knapping scars but, despite this, their presence in Ashash
rock shelter must be due to anthropogenic activity.
In contrast, quartzite, flint and jasper were the raw
materials used to produce blades and bladelets, with flint
predominant in bladelet production. Flakes of these three
raw materials occur as well, but many of them are inter-
preted as by-products obtained during the laminar reduc-
tion of the cores. Flake cores of these raw materials are
rather scarce and display characteristics similar to the
quartz cores in that they are small in size and show main-
ly unipolar or alternating unipolar reduction by direct
percussion with a hard hammerstone. Some examples of
bipolar reduction, probably on an anvil, have also been
identified. Blade debitage was carried out mostly from a
single percussion platform, although bipolar reduction
on one working surface has sometimes been identified
(Fig. 5). The preparation of the six blade and bladelet
cores that were found does not seem to have been very
intense. The flaking face would have been prepared using
a frontal crest, as indicated by the relatively large num-
ber of crested blades in the assemblage (Fig. 5: 19, 21). The
backs of the cores were usually only minimally modified,
and only one example with a dorsal crest, shaped by bifa-
cial removals, was identified (Fig. 5: 22). Blade reduction
was carried out mostly by direct percussion. The butts are
generally flat with one or two facets, with a few examples
of linear and punctiform butts. Complete blades and bl-
adelets are infrequent and make up less than 10% of the
total number of laminar products. The maximum length

U N DET ERM I N ED
JASPER FLINT QUARTZ HYALINE Q. QUARTZITE UNDET.
QUART Z I T E
FLAKE 419 166 519 13 453 8
Blade
Fragment
BLADE 176 100 8 0 245 9 Flake
QUART Z
BLADELET 87 68 10 1 42 1
JASPER
H YALI N E QUART Z
INDET. FRAG. 42 18 446 6 104 4
FLI N T
Chipped debris
CHIPPED DEBRIS 203 99 383 9 96 1 Core
Bladelet
CORE 11 5 16 0 4 0

RAW MATERIAL BLANK

Figure 4 Absolute frequency of the different raw material categories (left) and correspondence analysis showing the variables blank and raw
material (right). The X-axis represents 84.1% of the variance and the Y-axis 14%. Note that hammerstones have not been included in the
chart or in the correspondence analysis.

Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103

Early Holocene Occupations At Ashash Rock Shelter ( Zemmur, Western Sahara ) 89

2 3

4 5 7
6 8

13

10 12
11
9
0 5

15
14 19
16 20

17 18 21
22
Figure 5 Cores, crested blades, blades, bladelets and microburins from Ashash rock shelter. Artefacts 6, 7 and 22 are made of flint; 2-4, 8,
9, 12, 13, 15, 17 and 18-20 are made of jasper; 1, 5, 10, 11, 14, 16 and 21 are made of quartzite.

Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103

90 Borrell et al.

is 73 mm, while most whole blades are between 35 and 65
mm long. The blades and bladelets have trapezoidal and
triangular cross-sections. The numbers of proximal, medi-
al and distal fragments are quite similar, with medial frag-
ments predominating. The high degree of fragmentation
and the similar proportions of segment types were prob-
ably related to the intentional breakage of the blades to
produce retouched implements, as explained below. The
presence of cores, knapping waste, cortical remains, and
several technical elements (crested blades, etc.) as well
as six hammerstones (five in quartzite and one in quartz)
suggest that the entire debitage process was carried out
on-site. A few blades and bladelets display a series of mor-
phological traits (narrow blanks, very parallel edges, and
curvature of the distal third) that are often used to iden-
tify pressure knapping (Tixier 1984; Inizan 1991; Inizan
et al. 1992). However, the use of this technique cannot be
confirmed, owing to the small size of the sample and the
high degree of fragmentation of the blades.
Finally, a small number of blades and some flakes have
a glossy and greasy appearance. However, the simulta-
neous presence of opaque and glossy negatives, a trait
thought to be indicative of thermal treatment to improve
knapping qualities (Inizan et al. 1976; Domanski & Webb
1992; Inizan & Tixier 2000), could not be identified clearly.
Therefore, it cannot be affirmed that intentional heat was
applied during blade and bladelet production, but this
possibility should be examined in future studies to deter-
mine whether this technique may have been used in this
part of Northwest Africa during the Early Holocene.
Iii Typology
The number of retouched products is quite high; a total of
429 artefacts have been identified, representing 11.35% of
the total lithic assemblage. Most of these were made from
quartzite, jasper and flint, in that order (Fig. 6). Quartz,
despite being very common in the total assemblage, was
rarely used to make retouched implements. It was used
mainly for denticulates and some notched pieces and
scrapers. In contrast, quartzite was used for nearly all
categories. Flint and jasper were used in a similar way,
showing a high number of geometrics/microliths, points
and microburins, as well as the other categories in the
assemblage.
The most common blanks selected for retouched arte-
facts are blades and bladelets (Fig. 7). Indeed, blade and
bladelet production was basically used for the produc-
tion of geometric microliths and small projectile points.
The microburin technique was used systematically for the
fragmentation of the blades made from jasper, flint and
quartzite. The breakage of the blades followed a repeti-
tive pattern: a notch with direct retouch, mostly abrupt,
and a very oblique fracture. The negative of the microbu-
rin is always left on the ventral face of the part that was
discarded and on the dorsal face of the fragment which
was made into a tool. Blades were broken into three or
four segments, thus maximising the use of these blanks.
32% of the fragments are proximal (Fig. 5: 8-10), 24% are
distal (Fig. 5: 11-13), and 44% are medial, with a microbu-
rin at each end (Fig. 5: 4-7). In only three cases do medial
blade fragments have a single microburin scar, whereas
the other end was worked with abrupt retouch to create
a pointed shape (Fig. 8: 23). This would not have been ac-
cidental, but quite intentional to create a particular tool
which is, however, difficult to classify.
In the classic categories of retouched implements
(apart from flakes and blades with different kinds of iso-
lated retouch, which are the most abundant), the most

JASPER FLINT QUARTZ HYALINE Q. QUARTZITE UNDET. TOTAL

SCRAPER 8 (44.8 %) 3 (16.7 %) 1 (5.6 %) 0 6 (33.3 %) 0 18 Microlith

MICROBURIN 54 (26.3 %) 43 (21.0 %) 0 0 107 (52.2 %) 1 (0.5 %) 205 Borer
Burin
NOTCH 9 (36.0 %) 7 (28.0 %) 1 (4.0 %) 0 8 (32.0 %) 0 25 Backed Blade
RET. FLAKE/BLADE 31 (33.0 %) 19 (20.2 %) 16 (17.0 %) 1 (1.1 %) 23 (24.5 %) 4 (4.3 %) 94 JASPER
Scraper
DENTICULATE 3 (37.5 %) 1 (12.5 %) 2 (25.0 %) 0 1 (12.5 %) 1 (12.5 %) 8 Notch
FLI N T Point
SIDESCRAPER 1 (14.3 %) 3 (42.9 %) 1 (14.3 %) 0 2 (28.6 %) 0 7 Ret. Flake/Blade Microburin
Denticulate
BURIN 5 (71.4 %) 0 0 0 2 (28.6 %) 0 7 Sidescraper
QUART Z QUART Z I T E
BORER 6 (75.0 %) 0 0 0 2 (25.0 %) 0 8 H YALI N E Q.
POINT 7 (38.9 %) 3 (16.7 %) 0 0 8 (44.4 %) 0 18
U N DET ERM I N ED
MICROLITH 22 (57.9 %) 14 (36.8 %) 0 0 2 (5.3 %) 0 38
BACKED BLADE 0 1 (100 %) 0 0 0 0 1
RAW MATERIAL RET. TOOL TYPE
TOTAL 146 94 21 1 161 6 429

Figure 6 Absolute frequency of the different categories of retouched tools by raw material (left) and correspondence analysis showing the
variables of tool type and raw material (right). The X-axis represents 82.7% of the variance and the Y-axis 7.7%.

Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103

Early Holocene Occupations At Ashash Rock Shelter ( Zemmur, Western Sahara ) 91

FLAKE BLADE BLADELET INDET. FRAG. TOTAL

SCRAPER 15 (83.3 %) 3 (16.7 %) 0 0 18 Backed Blade

MICROBURIN 2 (1.0 %) 156 (76.1 %) 46 (22.4 %) 1 0.5 %) 205
I N DET. FRAG.
NOTCH 16 (64.0 %) 6 (24.0 %) 2 (8.0 %) 1 (4.0 %) 25
RET. FLAKE/BLADE 53 (56.4 %) 26 (27.7 %) 6 (6.4 %) 9 (9.6 %) 94 Denticulate
Borer
DENTICULATE 5 (62.5 %) 1 (12.5 %) 0 2 (25 %) 8 Burin
SIDESCRAPER 5 (71.4 %) 2 (28.6 %) 0 0 7 BLADELET
Microlith
BURIN 3 (42.9 %) 2 (28.6 %) 1 (14.3 %) 1 (14.3 %) 7 Ret. Flake/Blade
BORER 2 (25 %) 3 (37.5 %) 2 (25 %) 1 (12.5 %) 8 FLAK E Microburin
POINT 1 (5.6 %) 17 (94.4 %) 0 0 18 Notch BLADE
MICROLITH 0 24 (63.2 %) 13 (34.2 %) 1 (2.6 %) 38 Scraper
Sidescraper Point
BACKED BLADE 0 0 1 (100 %) 0 1
TOTAL 103 239 71 16 429 BLANK RET. TOOL TYPE

Figure 7 Absolute frequency of the different categories of retouched tools by type of blank (left) and correspondence analysis showing the
variables of tool type and blank (right). The X-axis represents 59% of the variance and the Y-axis 26.3%.

numerous are microlithic geometric pieces, scrapers (end
rounded by abrupt direct distal retouch), notches (formed
by simple or abrupt direct retouch), and points of vari-
ous forms. Borers (with little standardisation and some of
them dubious), burins (simple at the distal end, apart from
a dihedral one), sidescrapers and denticulates (abrupt di-
rect retouch) are less frequent; only a single backed blade
was found (Figs. 6, 7). The projectiles belong to two over-
arching categories: geometric pieces and points (Fig. 8).
The diversity of typologies and manufacturing processes
is noteworthy, with the greatest variety seen in the points.
Most of them were made from laminar blanks although
this can be difficult to identify in the case of the most fully
retouched specimens. The raw materials used were jasper
and quartzite, and flint to a lesser extent. The points can
be divided into six groups according to their characteris-
tics. Four pieces were excluded owing to their fragmented
and dubious state.
• Group 1: Two leaf-shaped points (Fig. 8: 6, 7). The
retouch is very invasive, flat and by pressure. Both
points are in jasper and are particularly small.
• Group 2: Two arrowheads made of jasper, with a rhom-
boidal shape and a quite characteristic triangular tang
and incipient or vestigial barbs (Fig. 8: 3, 4). Retouch is
flat, by pressure and covers all or nearly all of the sur-
face of the objects.
• Group 3: A point made from a jasper blade, with mini-
mal simple or even abrupt retouch by percussion
(Fig. 8: 5). The tang is small and short, while the barbs
are not identifiable.
• Group 4: Four small points with very particular char-
acteristics (Fig. 8: 20-22), made from blades and blade-
lets in flint and jasper. They are medial fragments with
a pointed end made using the negative of a microbu-
rin on the dorsal face. At the other end, a small trian-
gular tang was shaped by a little abrupt retouch that
may be equally direct or inverse. This type of point has
been called Tarfaya point (Grébenart 1975a) based on
the examples found at Cape Juby on the Saharan coast
opposite the Canary Islands. The definition of this rare
point is “subtrapezoidal armature whose small base
and one side display mostly inverse retouching. This
side, concave and asymmetric, forms a protrusion next
to the small base; the other side displays the scar of a
microburin that is always visible” (Grébenart 1975a: 69).
• Group 5: Four points made from the distal end of
quartzite blades or bladelets (Fig. 8: 25-28). The pointed
distal ends show little retouch. The tangs are made by
two notches with a small amount of abrupt retouch. In
some of the objects, the longitudinal cross-section is
slightly curved, as a consequence of the original cur-
vature of the preform. According to their morphology
and shaping method, these are similar to Ounan points
(stemmed points), defined by Tixier (1963, 1974). They
are, however, a small version with a very short, pointed
and robust tang.
• Group 6: Distal fragment of a quite large point with flat
bifacial retouch made from jasper (Fig. 8: 31).
The geometric pieces are made mostly made from blades
and bladelets in jasper, and to a lesser extent in flint. There

Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103

92 Borrell et al.

3 4 5
1 2

8 9 10
6 7

11 12 13 14

15 16 17 18 19

20 21 22 23

24

25 26 27 28

0 5

29 31
30

33 34
32
35 36

Figure 8 Projectiles, scrapers, a notch and a borer from Ashash rock shelter. Artefacts 2, 9, 12-15 and 19-21 are made of flint; 3-7, 8, 10, 11,
16-18, 22, 23, 29-31 and 34-36 are made of jasper; 1, 24-28, 32 and 33 are made of quartzite.

Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103

Early Holocene Occupations At Ashash Rock Shelter ( Zemmur, Western Sahara )
are very few geometrics in quartzite. A large group of tra-
pezes and triangles as well as one segment were all made
from the medial fragments of small blades and bladelets.
Trapezes predominate, some of them with concave sides.
Most of them display abrupt retouch that may be direct
or inverse, while bifacial flat retouch has only been docu-
mented on one of the few (isosceles) triangles (Fig. 8: 10).
A small segment with abrupt retouch has also been in-
cluded in this group (Fig. 8: 19).
Finally, two pieces of the projectile type are difficult to
classify as they do not fit easily into the categories of ei-
ther points or geometrics (Fig. 8: 1, 2). The small artefacts,
one in flint and the other in quartzite, have their whole
surface covered by invasive flat retouch by pressure. They
are asymmetrical and their cross-section is triangular and
slightly thick. It is difficult to determine what preform they
were made from, but it is likely that they were made from
blade or bladelet fragments. Although their morphology
is very different from the other geometrics, it seems they
may have been a part of a composite projectile made of
several pieces and, for this reason, they have been includ-
ed in the total count of geometric microliths. They most
resemble the scalene triangles (type 95 and 99) defined by
Tixier (1963) in his typology for the Epipalaeolithic in the
Maghreb, despite not displaying total invasive retouch.
Iv Summary
The lithic assemblage, and above all the retouched tools,
shows that at Ashash rock shelter lithic implements were
manufactured with the express purpose of making com-
ponents of composite projectiles. This production pro-
cess was quite standardised, from the procurement and
use of raw materials, their differentiated management
and core preparation to the reduction techniques and
methods used to produce small laminar blanks that were
made into a small range of implements (mainly projec-
tiles) with very homogeneous morphologies and charac-
teristics. This was not an expedient use of materials and
tools, to the contrary, there was a clear objective aimed at
obtaining standardised products (projectiles) that could
be easily replaced if they broke; they were probably used
in very standardised ways too. This standardisation, which
can be seen in all the laminar reduction, has often been
linked with pressure knapping (Rahmani 2004) and is
documented throughout the eastern Maghreb (eastern
Algeria and western Libya) at about 8200-8000 BP (Tixier
1976; Sheppard 1987; Rahmani 2004; Jackes & Lubell 2008;
Belhouchet et al. 2014). However, the use of this technique
cannot be confirmed at Ashash rock shelter, although
some evidence has been found to suggest that this was
the case.
Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103
93
V Use-Wear Analysis
Macro-wear can often be seen with the naked eye, and
impact fractures have been identified on many of the
projectiles (Fig. 8: 7, 12, 18, 20, 21, 28). However, the use-
wear study focused on a particular aspect, which is the
scarcity of implements that morphologically might be
associated with piercing activity. As explained below,
the presence of a large number of complete beads made
from ostrich eggshells and others in the process of being
manufactured undoubtedly shows that these were being
made at the site. In contrast, the identification of imple-
ments in the lithic assemblage that might have been used
to pierce these beads is difficult and often doubtful. Out
of eight pieces generically classified as borers, only one is
complete (Fig. 8: 24). This tool has a pointed end whose
size coincides with the diameter of the holes in the beads.
However, when observed under a binocular microscope
(50×, 100× magnification), no evidence of its use as a borer
was seen, and its edges were sharp. Based on this result,
the classification of some objects that had been included
in the point category was reviewed. The eight points in
Groups 4 and 5 display minimal shaping, which focused
on creating a small triangular tang. Some of these points
are asymmetric and quite roughly made, which would
make it difficult to use them as projectiles. This aspect has
also been noted for other tanged points of similar date
in the same region (Vernet et al. 2007). Thus, it was pro-
posed that some of these artefacts might have been used
as borers, using both their apex and their tang. They were
examined by binocular microscope and later with a Leica
DM2500 metallographic microscope at between 50× and
200× magnification. However, none of them showed any
evidence of piercing, rotation or other kind of wear at ei-
ther the distal or the proximal ends. The possibility that
some of the objects classified as projectile points were
used as borers can therefore be ruled out. In addition, on
some of them, a small micro-facture at the distal end may
indeed be the result of their use as a projectile (Fig. 9: 1, 3).
This observation suggests two possibilities: that tools
associated with bead manufacture were not recovered be-
cause they had been transported elsewhere or, secondly,
the limited hardness and thickness of the object being
pierced (ostrich eggshell) might mean that the work could
be done with different kinds of lithic artefacts, retouched
or not, as long as they possessed a quite sharp and narrow
angle. In that case, it would not be necessary to produce
a tool with techno-morphological characteristics making it
easily recognisable as a borer. Similar interpretations have
been made in distant but quite comparable contexts, at
ostrich eggshell bead-making factory sites in South Africa,
where borers are also extremely rare (Kandel & Conard
94
2005; Orto, 2008). The conclusion there was that it would be
necessary to search more widely for suitable drilling imple-
ments and not focus exclusively on the use of lithic borers.
Ceramics
A total of 24 sherds of hand-made pottery were found
at Ashash rock shelter (Fig. 10), which are related to the
Neolithic occupation of the site (Sub-level I). Most of the
Borrell et al.
Figure 9
Detail of the surfaces of three
projectile points observed with a
metallographic microscope, where
the acute angles of the fractures in
the proximal parts (2, 4 and 5) and
the impact fractures at the apical
ends (1 and 3) are clearly visible.
fragments were recovered from Sub-level I (the upper
level). A few sherds were found at a greater depth, where
the two occupation levels are not clearly differentiated;
they may correspond to the lower part of Sub-level 1 or to
the upper part of Sub-level II.
The degree of fragmentation is very high, and all sherds
are small, varying between 42 × 33 mm and 15 × 13 mm.
This fragmentation impedes the determination of the
Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103
Early Holocene Occupations At Ashash Rock Shelter ( Zemmur, Western Sahara )
shape and volume of the vessels and does not allow the
minimum number of vessels nor the volumes to be es-
timated. The thickness of the sherds varies but most of
them are between 5 and 15 mm thick.
In this assemblage, only one fragment is not a wall-
sherd, while four display a decorated outer surface. The
former is a rim fragment, with a rounded lip, 7 mm thick.
Unfortunately, its size (16 × 17 × 7 mm) is too small to allow
the diameter of the rim to be calculated or the character-
istics of the vessel to be determined. The other four frag-
ments were decorated with impressed motifs. One sherd
(18 × 17 × 6 mm) displays half-moon impressions forming
a band; a second band can be seen next to it (Fig. 10C).
Another sherd (22 × 32 × 6 mm) was decorated with a
rectangular object forming a series of lines, which cre-
ate a herring-bone pattern (Fig. 10A). The third fragment
(22 × 25 × 10 mm) is decorated with impressions made by
a rounded object, forming several parallel lines that are
slightly curved (Fig. 10B). The surface of the fourth frag-
ment (22 × 28 × 8 mm) is badly deteriorated, but is also
decorated with impressions made by a rounded object
forming a series of parallel lines (Fig. 10D).
Ostrich Eggshell and Shell Artefacts
A total of 103 ostrich eggshell fragments were found,
of which the largest is 33.8 × 20.1 mm in size. Six pieces
Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103
95
Figure 10
Potsherds decorated with
impressions from Ashash rock
shelter.
display engraved lines (Fig. 11A). Due to their small size, it
has been difficult to determine whether the lines formed
part of figurative or abstract representations, although in
some cases they do appear to have been abstract.
A total of 47 complete beads made from ostrich egg-
shell fragments were found (Fig. 11B: 6-8). These are nearly
all large beads (Orton 2008) as 95% possess an outer di-
ameter larger than or equal to 6 mm, with one bead reach-
ing a diameter of 8.3 mm; 2% are small beads (5 mm) and
2% are medium-sized beads. As well as finished beads,
objects in different stages of manufacture were found
(Fig. 11B: 1-5). The two manufacturing pathways identi-
fied by Orton (2008) in the study of Northern Cape (South
Africa) beads have been identified at Ashash as indicated
by the presence of perforated (complete and unfinished)
roughly-fashioned, polygonal fragments (Stages IIb and
IIIb of Pathway I) (Fig. 11B: 3-5) and by well-fashioned
discs ready to be perforated (Stage IIIa of Pathway II)
(Fig. 11B: 1-2).
The presence of finished beads, others in the process
of being made, and fragments of unworked raw material
clearly indicates that beads were being manufactured at
the site. However, it is difficult to attribute this activity to
one of the two occupations (Epipalaeolithic or Neolithic)
as beads and remains of ostrich eggshell were found
in both sub-levels without any clear distribution being
96 Borrell et al.

A B

1 2

C 3 4 5

6 7 8

Figure 11 A: Drawings of ostrich eggshell fragments with engraved motifs; B: Finished beads and beads in different stages of manufacture; C:
Pierced Gibberula sp. shell from Ashash rock shelter (photograph of C by Joan Oller).

recognised. In addition, literature shows that ostrich egg-
shell beads and fragments of ostrich eggshell are often
found at prehistoric sites on the Atlantic seaboard of the
Sahara (Vernet 2007; Vernet et al. 2006) dated to both the
Epipalaeolithic and the Neolithic, from the 8th to 4th mil-
lennia cal. BP.
Finally, the excavation also recovered a bead made
from a small marine gastropod (Gibberula sp.) that had
been pierced by anthropogenic action using repeated
abrasion/percussion along the longitudinal surface of the
shell (study by Joan Oller) (Fig. 11C).
Rock Art
Wadi Kenta, with 23 rock shelters displaying rock art (in-
cluding the Ashash rock shelter), constitutes one of the
most important concentrations of rock art recorded in the
Zemmur region. They were part of a comprehensive doc-
toral study that included a total of 110 shelters with pre-
historic rock-art from the Wadi Kenta, Rekeiz Lemgasem,
Rekeiz Ajahfun, and Wadi Ymal (Soler 2005). This research
classified the images on stylistic criteria and created a
relative chronological sequence of the styles based on
superimpositions. Because direct radiocarbon dating of
the paintings was not successful, the chronological frame
of the rock art of the Zemmur region was defined through
the representation of fauna, weapons and inscriptions.
According to these parameters, a chronology ranging be-
tween 3800 and 2000 BP was tentatively proposed (Soler
2007; Soler & Soler 2016).
In the case of Ashash rock shelter, the paintings are lo-
cated on the main wall of the shelter (Fig. 12) and they
were grouped into three panels (Fig. 13A). The state of
conservation is not very good, and photo-editing software
was required in order to study the panels. Panel 1 is formed
by four human figures in red arranged in a circle, a bicolor
(red and white) non-figurative motif and other stains that
could not be identified. The four human figures, badly
deteriorated, possess visibly elongated heads (Fig. 13B).
Panel 2 contains numerous depictions that could not be
identified because of the poor preservation of both the
wall and the painting. A headless quadruped and a hand
imprint are the only images that could be recognised.
The third panel includes five hand imprints as well as
wavy lines made by running paint-soaked fingers across
the wall. There are also straight lines (some in groups and
some separated) and crosses.

Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103

Early Holocene Occupations At Ashash Rock Shelter ( Zemmur, Western Sahara )
A B
Figure 12 Location of panels 1 and 2 in Ashash rock shelter.
The four human figures from Panel 1 belong to the Shaped
Style, which is well represented at the Rekeiz Lemgasem
site, where the depictions have tentatively been assigned
to between the late 4th and mid-3rd millennia BP (Soler
2007, 2012). Thus, we would suggest the same chronol-
ogy for at least some of the paintings from Panel 1 at the
Ashash rock shelter . However, one of the objectives of
the excavation undertaken at Ashash rock shelter was to
try an alternative way to date the rock art of the Zemmur
region and to test the validity of the previously proposed
chronology. Because the rock art in the Zemmur is af-
fected by erosion of the shelter walls through flaking, we
expected to recover fallen fragments of paintings from
the sediment. If this were the case, the dating of the stra-
ta by radiocarbon or typological means would provide
a terminus ante quem. Unfortunately, none of the rock
fragments recovered from the excavation contained re-
mains of pigment, and no colouring matter was found.
In addition, the pieces of charcoal that were recovered
during the excavation cannot be associated with the
production of the paintings themselves, which are in red
and, in one case, in white. Consequently, the excavation
provided neither any evidence to test or refute the pro-
posed chronology for the rock-art record of the site nor
a link to the Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic occupation at
the site.
Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103
97
5m
1
2
3
1 2 3 4 5
Discussion and Conclusions
Chronology and Contextualization
The excavation at Ashash rock shelter (Zemmur region in
Western Sahara) has provided evidence of two superim-
posed prehistoric occupations that have been radiocar-
bon dated to the early 9th millennium cal. BP and to the
mid-7th millennium cal. BP, thus to the Epipalaeolithic
and Neolithic period respectively. Contextualization of
the results obtained is a difficult task as the archaeologi-
cal record of Western Sahara remains extremely fragmen-
tary. Very few sites have been excavated in this region
which still can be considered a terra incognita, or, citing
R. Vernet (2014b), an “unknown prehistoric region in the
remote northwest”. Comparison of the most diagnostic ar-
tefact categories (e.g. lithics and pottery) with distant re-
gions is, thus, a must despite the significant gaps and the
obvious difficulties in interpreting the similarities and/or
differences observed in the archaeological record of sites
located hundreds, if not thousands, of kilometres apart.
The results of the techno-typological study of the lithic
assemblage from Ashash rock shelter, the most com-
mon and diagnostic material category at the site, show
that most of the assemblage displays a series of clearly
Epipalaeolithic traits: standardised production of geo-
metric microliths and points using a microburin blow
98 Borrell et al.

PANEL 2
A

1m
PANEL 1

PANEL 3

20 cm

Figure 13 A: Graphic representation of the three painting panels in Ashash rock shelter; B: Detail of Panel 1 with four human figures (photograph
enhanced with D-Stretch software using the LDS colour space).

Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103

Early Holocene Occupations At Ashash Rock Shelter ( Zemmur, Western Sahara )
technique but, interestingly, with no backed blades/bl-
adelets. It is thus reasonable to assume that they might
correspond to the main occupation at the site. In general
terms, and despite the notable absence of backed blades/
bladelets, the Epipalaeolithic component from Ashash
shares a large number of characteristics with the range
of Epipalaeolithic industries defined in the Maghreb
and neighbouring regions in the 10th-7th millennia cal.
BP, as largely discussed by a wide range of authors work-
ing in the region (e.g. Tixier 1963, 1976; Rahmani 2004;
Mulazzani et al. 2009, Belhouchet et al. 2014). In this
sense, strong similarities are observed with industries
dating to the 9th millennium cal. BP such as the Early
Holocene Epipalaeolithic sites from northern Morocco
(Ifri Oudadane, Ifri Ouzabour, Ifri el Baroud, Taghit, etc.)
(Linstädter et al. 2012), the Typical Capsian assemblages
from Algeria and Tunisia (e.g. SHM-1, Hergla region), the
Terminal Palaeolithic assemblages in the Nabta region
in Egypt (SMU-416 is dated to 8840±90 BP) (Wendorf &
Schild 1980), the Epipalaeolithic sites at Masra A in the
central region in Egypt, Dakhleh Oasis (McDonald 1991)
or the Harifian in the Sinai (Bar-Yosef & Phillips 1977), all
of them roughly contemporary with the Epipalaeolithic
occupation at Ashash.
The closest and more relevant parallels are, though,
found at several sites in the region of the Wadi Tifariti
(Brooks et al. 2009) as Ashash shares with those assem-
blages the high proportion of laminar products (blades
and bladelets), a large number of geometric pieces, mi-
croburins and Ounan points, as well as the use of bipo-
lar reduction on an anvil. Similarly, it seems that Tarfaya
points (Group 4) may also have been found in that re-
gion, described by the authors as “small backed points
made using the microburin technique to form a point”
(Brooks et al. 2009, 922). This type of point is often found
at sites regarded as Epipalaeolithic in the region of Cape
Juby (Grébenart 1975a) and between Agadir and Tangier
(Almagro-Basch 1946).
Still at a regional scale, but further south, the Ashash as-
semblage can also be compared to the lithic record in the
“Foum Arguin culture” (Vernet 2004; Vernet et al. 2007).
This is an Epipalaeolithic culture in the area between the
Gulf of Arguin (Northwest Mauritania) and Cape Juby
(northern Western Sahara), dated to the 8th-7th millen-
nia cal. BP and defined by a series of Epipalaeolithic sites
(FA-1, FA-38 and FA-39) that could not be radiocarbon
dated but which also contain later Neolithic occupations
that have been dated to about 5500 BP. The characteristic
lithic elements of the Epipalaeolithic occupation are the
production of blades and a retouched component that in-
cludes points, with or without a tang, forming the largest
Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103
99
part of the assemblage. Projectile points of different sizes
are numerous and diverse. Points made from backed
blades and Ounan points are also abundant. The latter
are made mainly from short blades, where the proximal
part is shaped into a marked tang. Leaf-shaped points are
also common, sometimes with bifacial retouching that
rarely covers the entire surface. Comparison between the
Ashash rock shelter and the Foum Arguin culture lithic
assemblages reveal, though, clear differences between
them. For instance, microburins and geometric pieces
are scarce at the Foum Arguin culture sites while, in clear
contrast, laminar production at Ashash was aimed almost
exclusively at the production of geometric pieces, and the
segmentation of blades was by the microburin technique.
The differences in the projectile points are equally clear.
The Ounan points at Ashash rock shelter are small and ro-
bust, with very short and pointed tangs. They were made
from the distal end of segmented longer blades with two
notches, a technique that, according to different authors
(Riemer et al. 2004; Vernet et al. 2007). precedes the one
documented at Foum Arguin culture sites. At the same
time, the large number of Tarfaya points at Ashash rock
shelter, made on a microburin, clearly shows the relation-
ship between this projectile typology, the microlithic tech-
nology and the use of the microburin technique, which is
practically absent at the Foum Arguin sites. The other pro-
jectiles at Ashash are also very different from the points
that define the last stages in the regional Epipalaeolithic.
No Idki points have been found, a type that has recently
been defined in the assemblage found at Uad Idki, very
near to El Aiuun (Western Sahara) (Rodrigue 2009). This
projectile typology has been considered pre-Neolithic and
probably related to the Arguin sites (Mauritania). In sum,
only one artefact (Fig. 8: 31, and perhaps 5) displays the
size and bifacial retouching resembling the projectiles
found at Foum Arguin culture sites dated to the 8th and
7th millennia cal. BP.
In conclusion, contextualization of the Epipalaeolithic
lithic component at a regional scale has revealed signifi-
cant differences, especially with the well-characterized
Foum Arguin culture, which are to be interpreted from
both a chronological and cultural perspective. There is
little doubt that the Epipalaeolithic occupation at Ashash,
radiocarbon dated to the first quarter of the 9th millen-
nium cal. BP, precedes the late Epipalaeolithic record
identified in northwestern Mauritania. The range of dif-
ferences observed is, though, difficult to attribute them
only to the chronological gap/distance between the as-
semblages compared. The differences might also be due
to cultural specificity that is reflected in the regional
lithic assemblages. In this sense, we propose that the
100
lack of data and radiocarbon dates for the period in this
part of Northwest Africa might have meant that part of
the Epipalaeolithic record in the region, including that of
the first half of the 9th millennium BP that we now have
started to understand, could have been included in or as-
similated with the Foum Arguin culture. In this respect,
the absence of some defining elements in the surface col-
lections gathered in the 1960s and 1970s (Grébenart 1975b)
has been explained as both the result of intensive pillaging
that had affected certain categories of implements in par-
ticular and of non-systematic sampling strategies (Vernet
et al. 2007). The results obtained at Ashash rock shelter
show that this cannot always have been the case, and that
the presence and absence of a series of diagnostic ele-
ments in itself might define the material culture of those
groups of hunter-gatherers that lived in the northwestern
part of the Sahara in the 9th millennium BP. In this way,
Ashash provides a fuller picture of the Epipalaeolithic in
the region by contributing information about a poorly
understood period, which may also correspond to some
of the sites and/or lithic collections in the Tarfaya area
that are hard to date. Despite this difficulty, the results
obtained support the existence of a specific aspect of
the Epipalaeolithic in the region, as already suggested by
other researchers (Grébenart 1975b; Petit-Maire & Dutour
1996a, 1996b; Onrubia-Pintado & Ballouche 1996; Vernet
2004; Vernet et al. 2007).
The later occupation of the site corresponds to the
Neolithic period. It has yielded a significantly less abun-
dant lithic assemblage and a small number of potsherds,
suggesting that this occupation might have been less
important than the preceding Epipalaeolithic occupa-
tion. The most diagnostic elements of the Neolithic lithic
component are the points and projectiles with full inva-
sive retouching by pressure (Fig. 8: 1-4, 6, 7). Such elab-
orately retouched points, with either fairly rectilinear
edges or a somewhat more foliate shape, are common
in lithic assemblages dated or attributed to the 7th and
6th millennia cal. BP across the Sahara and are always,
consequently, regarded as indicative of Neolithic occupa-
tion (e.g. Vernet et al. 2007). Arrowheads very similar to
some of those found at Ashash (Fig. 8: 3-4) were found
at Taruma in the Western Sahara (Almagro Basch 1945-
46). A range of foliate and tanged points with invasive
retouch are also common in Neolithic lithic assemblages
from Northwest Mauritania such as Et-Teyyedché and
Tintan (Vernet 2007), Zouérate, Aftout and Tiferchaï
(Lafanechère 1968, 1970, 1981; Vernet 1998) and more dis-
tant parts of the eastern Maghreb such as Capeletti in
Northeast Algeria (Bachir Bacha 2000) and Jefara Plain in
Tunisia (Barich 2014).
Borrell et al.
Regarding the pottery, the assemblage recovered at
the site, though small, is of great interest for tracking and
reconstructing the appearance and diffusion of pottery
in northern Africa. There is agreement that the earliest
pottery appeared in the southern part of the Sahara and
the Sahel in different contexts and localities in the 12th-
11th millennia cal. BP (e.g. Huysecom et al. 2009; Jesse
2010; Watson 2017). In the northern Sahara, the first oc-
currences (e.g. Ifri Oudadane in northern Morocco) are
dated to the mid-8th millennium cal. BP, during the ini-
tial stages of the Early Neolithic (phase A) (e.g. Daugas &
El Idrissi 2008; El Idrissi 2012; Linstädter & Wagner 2013).
The result of the 14C date on organic material from a sherd
from Ashash provides the first unambiguous evidence of
pottery in the Zemmur area in the mid-7th millennium
cal. BP, thus indicating that pottery might have been in
this part of Northwest Africa a much later occurrence,
during the later stages of the Early Neolithic (phase C).
In general terms, the few decorated sherds show certain
similarities with contemporary pottery assemblages from
Northwest Africa displaying a range of impressed motives
and techniques such as those found at different sites in
the nearby Wadi Tifariti (Brooks et al. 2009; Ehrenreich
& Fuchs 2012), Tarfaya (Almagro-Basch 1946; Balbín et al.
2009; Brooks et al. 2006; Sáenz de Buruaga et al. 2012), El
Harhoura 2 (Stoetzel 2014), and Ifri Oudadane (Linstädter
& Wagner 2013) or the pottery dated in the Ancient
Neolithic from northwestern Mauritania (Vernet 2007).
However, the scanty number of decorated sherds and
their degree of fragmentation hinder closer comparison
and a detailed contextualization of the assemblage. In this
sense, the absence of rocker-stamped impressions in the
small assemblage from Ashash, a technique documented
in some of the above-mentioned sites during the later
stages of the Early Neolithic (Phase C), might not be taken
as a regional absence of this decoration technique but
as the result of the limited number of decorated sherds
recovered.
The Nature of the Site
Defining the nature of the two occupations
(Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic) identified at the Ashash
rock shelter is not an easy task. The absence of essential
categories of the material record (such as faunal, fruits
and seeds remains) hinders reconstructing key aspects
(e.g. subsistence strategies) of the socio-economic orga-
nization of those groups who settled at the Ashash rock
shelter. Secondly, it has not been possible to associate os-
trich eggshell bead production with one of the two occu-
pations at the site. Finally, the chronology of the rock art
inside the rock shelter remains elusive and its relationship
Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103
Early Holocene Occupations At Ashash Rock Shelter ( Zemmur, Western Sahara )
with the archaeologically defined occupations is not clear.
Despite such difficulties, investigations at the site have
provided substantial evidence, both direct and indirect,
to support a tentative interpretation of the site, thus con-
tributing to reconstructing the human occupation and
cultural dynamics that took place in the region during the
first half of the Holocene.
In general terms, the elements recovered during the
excavation – and the absence of architectural features or
other elements of arrangement of the space – lead us to
interpret the archaeological deposit at the site as the re-
sult of repeated short-lived occupations during, at least,
the late Epipaleolithic and Neolithic. Occupation of the
site could have been related to the exploitation of natural
resources (seasonal hunting?) as indicated by the abun-
dance of projectiles in both occupations (particularly
remarkable during the late Epipalaeolithic). However,
the wide range of stone tool types present at the site (e.g.
scrapers, burins, borers, etc.) and of other activities of a do-
mestic type carried out, at least partially, at the site (stone
tool production, ornament production, food preparation
or storage [pottery], etc.), make it difficult to consider the
Ashash rock shelter a small ephemeral single-task specific
site, but rather we consider it a site with a relatively com-
plex history of use.
Acknowledgements
The excavation at Ashash rock shelter took place in
December 2006, with the permission of the Ministry
of Culture of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.
This archaeological research formed part of the project
“Prehistory and Rock Art in the Western Sahara”, directed
by Narcís Soler Masferrer (University of Girona) and fund-
ed by the Generalitat de Catalunya (2006EXCAVA00009).
Part of this research (FB and IC) has been developed with
the logistic and financial support of the “Archaeology
of Social Dynamics” group (ASD-2017SGR995). Gabriel
Alcalde, Ferran Borrell, Brahim Chej Breh, Erika G. Brüder,
Jordi Gibert, Mark A. W. Milburn, Sonia Ramió, Laura
Romero, Maria Saña, and Joaquim Soler took part in the
fieldwork. We would like to acknowledge the administra-
tive and logistic support of the Sahrawi heritage authori-
ties, especially Jadiya Hamdi, Minister of Culture of the
SADR, and Hossien Mohamed Ali, Director of Archaeology
and Cultural Heritage of the SADR. We would also like to
thank Mahfur and Brahim Hamuda, who accompanied
us during the fieldwork. Finally, we gratefully acknowl-
edge the interesting comments and corrections made by
Elizabeth Healey of the first version of the manuscript
Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103
101
and those made by two anonymous reviewers. All errors
are, of course, our own.
References
Almagro-Basch, M. 1945-46. Un yacimiento del Neolítico de
tradición capsiense del Sahara español. Las Sebjas de Taruma
(Seguía el Hamra). Ampurias 7-8, 69-81.
Almagro-Basch, M. 1946. Prehistoria del Norte de África y
del Sahara Español. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones
Científicas, Instituto de Estudios Africanos, Barcelona.
Bachir Bacha, A. 2000. Nouvelle contribution à la compréhen-
sion du Néolithique de l’Algérie orientale: le matériel
archéologique de la grotte Capeletti, collection Thérèse
Rivière. L’Anthropologie 104, 301-340.
Balbín, R. 1973. Excavación de un túmulo preislámico en la zona
de Guelta Zemmur, Sáhara espanyol. Trabajos de Prehistoria
30, 363-380.
Balbín, R., Bueno, P., González, R. & del Arco, C. 2009. Grabados
rupestres de la fachada atlántica europea y africana – Rock
carvings of the European and African Atlantic facade. BAR
international series 2043, Archaeopress, Oxford.
Barich, B. E. 2014. Northwest Libya from the early to late
Holocene: new data on environment and subsistence from
the Jebel Gharbi. Quaternary International 320, 15-27.
Bar-Yosef, O. & Phillips, J. L. 1977. Prehistoric Investigations
in Gebel Maghara, Northern Sinai. QEDEM 7, Institute of
Archaeology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem.
Belhouchet, L., Mulazzani, S. & Pelegrin, J. 2014. Evolution
of a 9th-8th mill. Cal BP Upper Capsian site: the techno-
typological study of bladelet production at SHM-1 (Hergla,
Tunisia). Quaternary International 320, 28-42.
Bronk Ramsey, C. 2009. Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates.
Radiocarbon 51 (1), 337-360.
Brooks, N., Clarke, J., Crisp, J., Crivellaro, F., Jousse, H.,
Markiewicz, E., Nichol, M., Raffin, M., Robinson, R., Wasse, A.
& Winton, V. 2006. Funerary sites in the ‘Free Zone’: Report
on the second and third seasons of fieldwork of the Western
Sahara Project. Sahara. Prehistory and History of the Sahara
17, 73-94.
Brooks, N., Clarke, J., Garfi, S. & Pirie, A. 2009. The archaeology
of the Western Sahara: results of environmental and archae-
ological reconnaissance. Antiquity 83, 918-934.
Daugas, J. P. & El Idrissi, A. 2008. Le Néolithique ancien au Maroc
septentrional: donnés documentaires, sériation typochro-
nologique et hypothèses génétiques. Bulletin de la Société
préhistorique française 105 (4), 787-812.
Domanski, M. & Webb, J. A. 1992. Effect of heat treatment on
siliceous rocks used in prehistoric lithic technology. Journal
of Archaeological Science 19, 601-614.
102
Ehrenreich, S. & Fuchs, G. 2012. Archaeological investiga-
tion of the “Goulet” site no. 338 in the Wadi Tifariti,
West Sahara. http://milburn-stiftung.org/english/archeology
-western-sahara/.
El Idrissi, A. 2012. Le Néolithique du Maroc: État de la ques-
tion. In: Borrell, M., Borrell, F., Bosch, J., Clop, X. & Molist,
M. (eds.), Congrés Internacional Xarxes al Neolític – Neolithic
Networks. Rubricatum 5, Gavà, pp. 333-341.
Font, N. 1902. Los kiokenmodingos del Río de Oro (Sáhara espa-
ñol). Boletín de la Real Sociedad Española de Historia Natural
2, 305-309.
Grébenart, D. 1975a. Une armature nouvelle de l’Epipaléolithique
Saharien: La pointe de Tarfaya. Bulletin de la Société préhisto-
rique francaise 72 (3), 68-69.
Grébenart, D. 1975b. Matériaux pour l’étude de l’Épipaléolithique
et du Néolithique du littoral du Maroc saharien. In:
L’Épipaléolithique méditerranéen (Actes du Colloque d’Aix-
en-Provence, 1972). CNRS, Paris, pp. 151-188.
Huysecom, E., Rasse, M., Lespez, L., Neumann, K., Fahmy,
A., Ballouche, A., Ozainne, S., Maggetti, M., Tribolo, Ch. &
Soriano, S. 2009. The emergence of pottery in Africa during
the tenth millennium cal. BC: new evidence from Ounjougou
(Mali). Antiquity 83, 905-917.
Inizan, M. L. 1991. Le débitage par pression: des choix culturels.
In: 25 ans d’études technologiques en préhistoire. XIº Rencontres
Internationales d’Archéologie et d’Histoire d’Antibes. Éditions
APDCA, Juan-les-Pins, pp. 367-377.
Inizan, M. L., Roche, H. & Tixier, J. 1976. Avantages d’un trait-
ement thermique pour la taille des roches siliceuses.
Quaternaria 19, 1-18.
Inizan, M. L., Roche, H. & Tixier, J. 1992. Technology of Knapped
Stone. Préhistoire de la Pierre Taillée, 3. CREP, Meudon.
Inizan, M. L. & Tixier, J. 2000. L’émergence des arts du feu: le
traitement thermique des roches siliceuses. Paléorient 26 (2),
23-36.
Jackes, M. & Lubell, D. 2008. Early and middle Holocene envi-
ronments and Capsian cultural change: evidence from the
Télidjène Basin, Eastern Algeria. African Archaeology Review
25, 41-55.
Jesse, F. 2010. Early pottery in Northern Africa – an overview.
Journal of African Archaeology 8, 219-238.
Kandel, A. & Conard, J. 2005. Production sequences of ostrich
eggshell beads and settlement dynamics in the Geelbek
Dunes of the Western Cape, South Africa. Journal of
Archaeological Science 32 (12), 1711-1721.
Lafanechère, R. 1968. Flȃneries dans le lontain passé maurita-
nien. Miferma-Informations 14, 45-52.
Lafanechère, R. 1970. Retour as ȃges révolus. Miferma-
Informations 16, 49-56.
Borrell et al.
Lafanechère, R. 1981. Deux stations originales du Nord-
Mauritanien. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 78
(8), 230-238.
Linstädter, J., Eiwanger, J., Mikdad, A. & Weniger, G. C. 2012.
Human occupation of Northwest Africa: a review of Middle
Palaeolithic to Epipalaeolithic sites in Morocco. Quaternary
International 274, 158-174.
Linstädter, J. & Wagner, G. 2013. The early Neolithic pottery of
Ifri Oudadane, NE Morocco. Qualitative and quantitative evi-
dences. Journal of African Archaeology 11 (2), 155-196.
McDonald, M. 1991. Technological organization and sedentism
in the Epipaleolithic of Dakhleh Oasis, Egypt. The African
Archaeological Review 9, 81-109.
Mulazzani, S., Belhouchet, L. & Jeddi, Z. 2009. Aspects techno-
typologiques de l’industrie lithique des chasseurs-pécheurs-
cueilleurs de SHM-1 (Hergla e Tunisie). Le premier niveau
d’occupation durant le VIIème millénaire cal. BC. Africa LXIV
(3-4), 458-473.
Onrubia-Pintado, J. 1996. Archéo-écologie des occupations
humaines holocènes du bassin côtier de Tarfaya. In: Riser,
J. (ed.), Le bassin de Tarfaya (Maroc atlantique, 28e Nord).
Paléoenvironnements, paléoanthropologie, préhistoire.
LʼHarmattan, Paris, pp. 237-249.
Onrubia-Pintado, J. & Ballouche, A. 1996. Les industries épi-
paléolithiques de Taoulekt. Les sites TR-3 et TR-15. In: Riser,
J. (ed.), Le bassin de Tarfaya (Maroc atlantique, 28e Nord).
Paléoenvironnements, paléoanthropologie, préhistoire.
LʼHarmattan, Paris, pp. 153-190.
Onrubia-Pintado, J., Ballouche, A. & Petit-Maire, N. 1996.
La nécropole TY-7 et lʼhabitat TF-1. Une contribution à
lʼétude du Néolithique littoral de la région de Tarfaya. In:
Riser, J. (ed.), Le bassin de Tarfaya (Maroc atlantique, 28e
Nord). Paléoenvironnements, paléoanthropologie, préhistoire.
LʼHarmattan, Paris, pp. 193-235.
Orton, J. 2008. Later Stone Age ostrich eggshell bead manu-
facture in the Northern Cape, South Africa. Journal of
Archaeological Science 35 (7), 1765-1775.
Pellicer, M. & Acosta, P. 1991. Enterramientos tumulares preis-
lámicos del Sahara occidental. Tabona 7, 127-157.
Petit-Maire, N. 1980. Le Sahara atlantique a lʼHolocène, peuple-
ment et écologie. Centre de Recherches Anthropologiques,
Préhistoriques et Ethnologiques, Alger.
Petit-Maire, N. & Dutour, O. 1996a. Les restes humaines
d’Izriten – les premières découvertes. In: Riser, J. (ed.), Le
bassin de Tarfaya. Ed. L’Harmattan, Paris, pp. 121-127.
Petit-Maire, N. & Dutour, O. 1996b. Etude anthropologique des
restes humaines de la nécropole d’Izriten (TY-7; mission
1987). In: Riser, J. (ed.), Le bassin de Tarfaya. Ed. L’Harmattan,
Paris, pp. 129-135.
Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103
Early Holocene Occupations At Ashash Rock Shelter ( Zemmur, Western Sahara )
Rahmani, N. 2004. Technological and cultural change among the
last hunter-gatherers of the Maghreb: the Capsian (10,000-
6,000 B.P.). Journal of World Prehistory 18 (1), 57-105.
Reimer, P. J., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J. W., Blackwell, P. G.,
Bronk Ramsey, C., Buck, C. E., Cheng, H., Edwards, R. L.,
Friedrich, M., Grootes, P. M., Guilderson, T. P., Haflidason, H.,
Hajdas, I., Hatté, C., Heaton, T. J., Hoffmann, D. L., Hogg, A. G.,
Hughen, K. A., Kaiser, K. F., Kromer, B., Manning, S. W., Niu,
M., Reimer, R. W., Richards, D. A., Scott, E. M., Southon, J. R.,
Staff, R. A., Turney, C. S. M. & van der Plicht, J. 2013. IntCal13
and Marine13 radiocarbon age calibration curves 0-50,000
years cal BP. Radiocarbon 55 (4), 1869.
Riemer, H., Kinderman, K. & Eickelkamp, S. 2004. Dating and
production technique of Ounan points in the Eastern Sahara.
New archaeological evidence from Abu Tartur, Western
Desert of Egypt. Nyame Akuma 61, 10-16.
Riser, J. 1996. Le bassin de Tarfaya (Maroc atlantique, 28e Nord).
Paléoenvironnements, paléoanthropologie, préhistoire.
LʼHarmattan, Paris.
Rodrigue, A. 2009. New kind of weapon head in Western Sahara.
Lithic Technology 34 (1), 6-9.
Sáenz de Buruaga, A., Dilla, G., Escribano, S., Núñez, J. & Telleria,
E. 2012. Primeras aportaciones a la cronología cultural de la
región del Tiris (Sahara Occidental) desde el análisis de res-
tos cerámicos. Munibe 63, 145-164.
Sáenz de Buruaga, A. & Milburn, M. 2015-2016. Documentation
of burial practices around the Tingefuf E-1 goulet (Dougaj,
West Sahara). Almogaren 46-47, 87-100.
Sáenz de Buruaga, A., Mohamed Ali, H., Arruabarrena, J. M.,
Mohamed Mberek, D., García, M. R., Abdi Ali, A., Telleria, E.,
Iselmu Abderrahman, A. S., Alberdi, J., Chafe Sidahmed, O.,
Aomar Sidi Said, M., Hamdi Ali, A., Mahmud Abderrahman,
S., Baba Ali Salem, C. & Mohamed Lamin Ali, S. 2014-2015.
Aportaciones científicas sobre el pasado y la cultura del Tiris
(Sahara Occidental) tras las campañas vasco-saharauis de
2014-2015. Krei 13, 5-40.
Salih, A., Onrubia-Pintado, J. & Noçairi, M. 1997. El Aioun-
Tindouf. Sahara. Paléomilieux et Peuplement Préhistorique au
Pléistocène Supérieur. LʼHarmattan, Paris, pp. 21-30.
Sheppard, P. J. 1987. The Capsian of North Africa. Stylistic
Variation in Stone Tool Assemblages. BAR international series
353, Archaeopress, Oxford.
Soler, J. 2005. Les pintures rupestres prehistòriques del Zemmur
(Sàhara Occidental). Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Universitat
de Girona, Girona.
Soler, J. 2007. Les pintures rupestres prehistòriques del Zemmur
(Sàhara Occidental). Documenta Universitaria, Girona.
Soler, J. 2012. The age and the natural context of the Western
Saharan rock art. In: International Colloquium The Signs
of Which Times? Chronological and Palaeoenvironmental
Journal of African Archaeology 16 (2018) 83-103
103
Issues in the Rock Art of Northern Africa. Royal Academy for
Overseas Sciences, Brussels, pp. 27-45.
Soler, J., & Soler, N. 2016. Cattle without herdsmen. Animal and
human beings in the prehistoric rock-art of the Western
Sahara. Quaternary International 410, 93-102.
Stoetzel, E., Campmas, E., Michel, P., Bougariane, B., Ouchaou,
B., Amani, F., El Hajraoui, M. A. & Nespoulet, R. 2014. Context
of modern human occupations in North Africa: contribu-
tion of the Témara caves data. Quaternary International 320,
143-161.
Tixier, J. 1963. Typologie de l’Epipaléolithique du Maghreb. Cercle
de Recherches et d’Études Préhistoriques, 2, Arts et Métiers
Graphiques, Paris.
Tixier J. 1974. Glossary for description of stone tools, with special
reference to the Epipaleolithic of the Maghreb. Newsletter of
Lithic Technology: special publication, 1. Washington State
University, Pullman.
Tixier, J. 1976. L’industrie lithique Capsienne de l’Aïn Dokkara
(Région de Tébessa, Algérie). Lybica 24, 21-54.
Tixier, J. 1984. Le débitage par pression. In: Préhistoire de la
pierre taillé 2: Économie du débitage laminaire. Cercle de
Recherches et d’Études Préhistoriques, Paris, pp. 57-70.
Vernet, R. 1998. Le littoral du Sahara atlantique mauritanien au
Néolithique. Sahara 10, 21-30.
Vernet, R. 2004. L’industrie de Foum Arguin (nord-ouest de la
Mauritanie). Une culture épipaléolithique de l’Ouest saha-
rien, entre cap Juby et Cap Timiris. Sahara 15, 75-82.
Vernet, R. 2007. Le golfe d’Arguin de la préhistoire à l’histoire, lit-
toral et plaines interieures. Collection PNBA nº 3, Nouakchott.
Vernet, R. 2014a. Les marges préhistoriques du nord-est de
la Mauritanie: le Tiris et le Zemmour. Cahiers de l’AARS 17,
185-223.
Vernet, R. 2014b. Regards sur une région préhistorique mécon-
nue des confins du nord-ouest saharien. Ikosim 3, 21-54.
Vernet, R., Rodrigue, A. & Tous, P. 2006. Les tests d’œuf
d’autruche gravés du littoral atlantique saharien: du nord du
Banc d’Arguin à l’oued Draa. Sahara 17, 59-72.
Vernet, R., Ott, M., Tarrou, L., Gallin, A. & Géoris-Creuseveau,
J. 2007. Fouille de la butte de FA 10 (Banc d’Arguin) et son
apport à la connaissance de la culture Épipaléolithique
de Foum Arguin, nord-ouest du Sahara. Journal of African
Archaeology 5 (1), 17-45.
Vernet, R., Le Floch, R., Pasty, J-F. & Gauthier, Y. 2016. Une région
archéologique sinistrée: préhistoire de la région de Zouarate
(Mauritanie). Ikosim 5, 21-56.
Watson, D. J. 2017. Bosumpra revisited: 12,500 years on the
Kwahu Plateau, Ghana, as viewed from ‘On top of the hill’.
Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa 52 (4), 437-517.
Wendorf, F. & Schild, R. 1980. Prehistory of the Eastern Sahara.
Academic Press, New York.