4.6 Article

An improved chronology for the Middle Stone Age at El Mnasra cave, Morocco

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 17, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261282

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. China NSFC [41877430]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

El Mnasra Cave in Morocco is an important archaeological site for studying the development of early Homo sapiens. New trapped-charges dates suggest a human presence in the cave earlier than previously thought, and the age of the largest record of Nassariidae perforated shells has been pushed back. This research provides valuable insights into the cognitive abilities and behavioral innovations of early humans.
North African coastal Middle Stone Age (MSA) sites are key to study the development and expansion of early H. sapiens. El Mnasra cave on the Atlantic coast of Morocco (Temara region) is a crucial site associated with MSA archaeological materials considered advanced cognitive hallmarks of behavioural innovation, such as numerous Nassariidae perforated shells, hematite pigments, bones industry and coastal resources exploitation. We provide new trapped-charges dates (OSL and combined US-ESR ages). Our Bayesian modelling strengthens the new lithostratigraphic interpretation of the cave stratigraphic units (US) and we propose an updated chronostratigraphic model for the Middle Stone Age archaeo-sequence of El Mnasra Cave. We confirm a human presence between 124-104 ka, earlier than what the previous OSL and US-ESR data showed. Our time range intervals allowed us to also extend the age of the MSA occupations considerably to the MIS 4/3 (similar to 62-30 ka), marked by the disappearance of the Nassariidae perforated shells. Outstandingly, our model pushed back the age of the largest record of Nassariidae perforated shells and placed the age of their use by the Aterian groups at El Mnasra from the MIS 5d-5b (similar to 115-94 ka).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available