How humans adapted to Mediterranean islands more than 6,000 years ago
An international team shows how prehistoric communities transformed their environment and developed surprisingly efficient subsistence strategies on Ustica and Pantelleria
The results have been published in Frontiers in Environmental Archaeology, in a study led by researchers from IPHES-CERCA
An international team of researchers has reconstructed in detail how early human communities managed resources, organized subsistence and transformed the landscape of the volcanic islands of Ustica and Pantelleria, two small, isolated and environmentally demanding settings in the central Mediterranean. The research identifies when and how plants and animals were introduced, which subsistence strategies enabled these groups to establish themselves sustainably, and why these islands represent an exceptional model for understanding human adaptation in fragile environments.
This is the main conclusion of the article published in the prestigious journal Frontiers in Environmental Archaeology, in a study led by Dr. Claudia Speciale, researcher at IPHES-CERCA, with participation from Dr. Ethel Allué (URV – IPHES-CERCA) and researchers from the University of Bologna and the University of Padua. The study integrates archaeobotanical, anthracological and zooarchaeological data to understand the subsistence strategies developed on Ustica during the Neolithic (4800–4300 BCE) and on Pantelleria during the Bronze Age (1800–1500 BCE).
Ustica: Neolithic colonization and flexible adaptation
At the site of Piano dei Cardoni (Ustica), the analyses recovered a significant assemblage of plant remains including cereals such as barley, fig, olive and mastic. This combination reveals that the first inhabitants deliberately introduced crops to ensure a stable food base in a territory with scarce water and limited cultivable land. According to IPHES-CERCA researchers Ethel Allué and Claudia Speciale, the simultaneous presence of cultivated species and wild plants typical of Mediterranean maquis indicates a diversified and balanced exploitation of resources, with no signs of overexploitation or ecological stress.
The animal diet reinforces this image of flexible adaptation, with predominant consumption of sheep and goats, birds, and intense fishing and shellfish gathering activities that compensated for the absence of large mammals in a reduced and demanding insular environment.
Pantelleria: complex strategies in a volcanic landscape
At the Mursia site (Pantelleria), the picture is more complex and reflects an economy that evolved over time. The recovered remains show increasing use of wild plants and fruit trees such as fig, combined with cereals and legumes that point to a consolidated agriculture. The study of charcoal reveals careful selection of woods used for combustion and for domestic or technical activities, and shows how each decision responded to specific needs of the community.
Animal husbandry, focused mainly on sheep and goats, was complemented by marine resources and by highly adaptive management of the volcanic landscape, which required detailed environmental knowledge and constant adjustment.
A natural laboratory of human adaptation
According to Speciale, the small Mediterranean islands functioned as true natural laboratories of human adaptation. Despite their limitations (few terrestrial resources, reduced spaces and fragile ecosystems), prehistoric communities developed flexible, sustainable and remarkably efficient subsistence systems based on agriculture, herding, gathering and the exploitation of marine resources.
The research shows that these groups not only survived in seemingly marginal environments, but built stable and resilient economies capable of lasting for centuries.
Article reference
Speciale, C., Allué, E., Carra, M., Fiori, F., Prillo, V. G., & Cattani, M. (2025). Adapting to Mediterranean island environments: prehistoric human interaction with plants and animals at Piano dei Cardoni (Ustica) and Mursia (Pantelleria). Frontiers in Environmental Archaeology, vol. 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fearc.2025.1621064
