Malta is an archipelago in the central Mediterranean; just under 100 km south of Sicily, and almost three times as much to North Africa. As well as being remote, it is small. Consisting of two main islands (Malta and Gozo) and several other small islands, it has a combined last mass of just 316 km2. As well as being remote and small, it has a semi-arid climate, with long, hot, summers and most rain falls in the form of a few intense storms. Despite these factors, Malta has a long and fascinating history. In the recent past the strategic location at the very centre of the Mediterranean and the excellent natural harbours meant that different empires have fought for control of Malta. As a result, in the Second World War Malta was the most intensively bombed place.

Archaeologically, most attention in Malta is given to the late Neolithic ‘temples’. When first investigated, these were argued to be Phoenician temples, and the name 'temple' stuck. Subsequent work by generations of archaeologists, such as Temi Zammit’s excavations at Tarxien, revealed that these megalithic structures, are in fact much older, dating to the Neolithic. They are among the oldest complex buildings in the world. Around thirty of these structures are known, some spectacular in scale and execution, along with remarkable underground burial sites such as the Ħal Saflieni hypogeum and the Xagħra Circle site (which produced over 200,000 human bones when recently excavated). The ‘meaning’ of these temple sites has long been debated, and Malta both reflects and has catalysed changes in archaeological theory and practice over the decades. There is still much to learn about the ‘Temple Period’ (Late Neolithic), which is unique to Malta.

My own research interests in Malta centre on understanding the wider landscape of prehistory, away from the spectacular sites that have traditionally dominated interest. I am also interested in exploring the environmental context of Maltese societies, as well as areas of material that are traditionally somewhat neglected, such as stone tools. I am working with colleagues on understanding the first arrival of humans in the islands, as well as a variety of themes relating to the more recent past. Colleagues here include Prof. Eleanor Scerri, who runs the IslandLab ERC project and Prof. Nicholas Vella from my department in Malta. Along with a large international group of collaborators, we are exploring various aspects of the Maltese landscape and past societies.

The uneven distribution of resources is an important aspect in determining the course of the human past, as well as how we interpret it today. In the case of Malta, for instance, we know that high quality chert (flint) was imported, probably from Sicily, as well as obsidian from Lipari and Pantelleria. Yet the total amounts of these materials are quite limited, and it is clear that local chert was widely used in Maltese prehistory, yet very little is known about it. The chert had been described as quite rare, and poor quality, but its distribution, characteristics, and stone tools made from it have been little studied. This catalysed my interest in the topic. For instance, I have conducted surveys to explore the distribution of chert. I found that it is more widespread than previously known, along the west coast of Malta (link). However, it only occurs in one geological formation (the Middle Globigerina limestone), and often in relatively hard to access locations. Further, I found that it was more varied than previously argued, and that care is needed in assuming what is imported and what is local chert.

To try and explore the reasons that Maltese prehistoric lithic assemblages have the characteristics that they do, and what they therefore tell us about human societies, I conduct ‘knapping’ experiments where I use traditional techniques to create stone tools in the way that prehistoric humans did. This can offer insights into the extent to which the available raw material and its particular characteristics and limitations influenced the stone tools made, as opposed to other factors such as societal isolation or particular functional uses. My experiments show that the Maltese chert is easy to knap, but there are frequent fracture planes in the rock which means the cores often break during knapping. It is also relatively soft material, meaning that the sharp edges are rapidly blunted. In my opinion, these characteristics influence the character of core reduction (simple, multidirectional flaking) and the frequent presence of ‘scrapers’. I do not think that these Maltese ‘scrapers’, as classified in a traditional typological scheme, were necessarily for ‘scraping’. Rather, I think that retouching the edges was a way to make the edges stronger and less prone to breaking. I have various other experiments making and using stone tools at various stages of completion.

I am also working on the use of limestone as a raw material for stone tools. A site we are currently excavating in Malta has lithics dominated by limestone, but little has been written in the past about its use in the area. Deliberate limestone flaking can be hard to recognise compared to on material such as high-quality chert and obsidian. I am combining detail attribute analysis of the archaeological assemblage with further knapping experiments and raw material studies.

My studies on chert, and exploration of the Maltese countryside during the covid pandemic, have increasingly led me in the direction of landscape studies. Two key elements here are cart ruts and field systems/terraces. I want to understand both how the particular geological and environmental characteristics of the islands have influenced human societies, but also how humans have changed the landscape over time.

Cart ruts are enigmatic features of the Maltese landscape; pairs of ‘incised’ grooves in the bedrock which occur across the islands (link). In insolation, they don’t really seem to lead anywhere, and they often seem to end heading straight out over large cliffs, and in one case they extend into the sea (although possibly returning to land a few metres away across a short bay). The age and purpose of these cart ruts has been much discussed. Working with a PhD student, Joel Grima, we are conducting various studies on cart ruts. Some have suggested that they date to the classical (Punic/Roman) period, and were used to transport quarried stone. Others say they are Neolithic, for moving soil up hills to increase the area of farmland. Others, such as D. Trump (David, that is!), argued they were Bronze Age. Some say they are just the accidental byproduct of the erosion of carts or some other kind of vehicle over the shallow soil and exposed rock of Malta. Others suggest they were, at least initially, cut into the bedrock. Some say they were produced by limestone dissolution, with water gathering in indentions created by carts in the overlying soil. Claudia Sagona argues they were not created by vehicles at all, but rather are field furrows. In our work we aim to cast light on the age and purpose of cart ruts.

Another aspect of my work in Malta is surveying and studying caves, for archaeological and palaeoclimate record. Malta is full of caves, but in most cases they have been repeatedly used in the past, including the recent past, and hence emptied of early deposits. Part of my work is therefore currently trying to identify caves which are less disturbed and can provide useful deposits. Another aspect is that one cave, the Għar Ħasan, had been claimed to prehistoric cave paintings in it. Did this represent some kind of Palaeolithic presence in Malta? I was part of the team which undertook a reanalysis of the claims. Analyses of paint samples from the cave showed that all of the paints which produced results were from the last century (link). While this does not disprove the presence of Palaeolithic societies in Malta, it does suggest that Għar Ħasan does not provide evidence for such an occupation. The paintings were modern ‘fakes’.

Bringing together these themes about past societies, landscape and environment, in 2022 I led a study on one of the major debates in Maltese prehistory, the timing, character of, and reasons for the end of the ‘Temple Period’ (i.e. the Neolithic to Bronze Age transition) (link). In this study I assembled a team of collaborators to explore various aspects of this topic. As well as a general review, we sought to test the specific hypothesis that the end of the Temple Period was associated with the ‘4.2 ka event’, an abrupt climate event associated with drought conditions in some of the Mediterranean and area like Mesopotamia, but rather complex globally. As no good local records of long-term climate change are currently available in Malta, we used speleothem isotopes from Italy as a proxy, which is perhaps a reasonable first estimation, but not without its issues. Using the ‘radiocarbon event count’ method developed by my postdoc, Chris Carleton, we explored the correlation between local climate (in the form of rainfall) and indications of archaeological activity (radiocarbon dates from Maltese archaeological sites). We found that archaeological activity peaked several centuries before the end of the Temple Period, and before the 4.2 ka event. This implies that the end of the Temple Period was not caused by a sudden climatic crisis (i.e. the 4.2 ka event), but rather it was a society in decline for several centuries. This matches other sources of evidence, such as on the indications of health from skeletons. It might have been that the 4.2 ka event was the coup de grâce for humans in Malta, but it was after a long process of decline. There is then a couple of centuries in which evidence for people in Malta is sparse, and then people return with a radically different material culture, marking the start of the Bronze Age. 

Another aspect we looked at in our paper on the end of the Temple Period (link) was the character of cultural change. One fascinating aspect of this site is that a few archaeological sites present indications for destruction in the form of things like smashing statues. However, because some of the key evidence is from disturbed contexts or was excavated before the development of modern archaeological practices, this hypothesis was hard to test. The situation improved with the recovery of multiple pieces of a smashed statue at the Xagħra Circle, in stratigraphic context. In our paper we used radiocarbon modelling to explore the most likely age of the smashing of the statue at this site. We found that it probably occurred before 4.4 thousand years ago, again, long (in human terms) before the 4.2 ka event. So we can see indications of important changes occurring in the Temple Period. What drove these changes? Gradual environmental deterioration perhaps? But there are also indications from a distinctive form of pottery (Thermi Ware) that new human groups were filtering into the islands, who may have a disruptive effect. Another possibility is that such groups brought plague with them, for it is known from sites across Europe that the first plague epidemic occurred around this time. 

I am currently particularly interested in changing land use across time, particularly the development of field walls and terraces. The Maltese islands are covered with dry-stone walls, of unclear age. In many cases these fields have been abandoned, and the walls are collapsing and contained soil fast eroding. There are hints that some Maltese terraces could be prehistoric in origin, followed by a long history of use and change. I am currently working to cast light on the character and implications of the profound change in the landscape represented by the construction of terraced fields. The construction of walls provides a thread across the Maltese past, from the first farmers as known sites like Skorba, to the Early Modern fortifications of Mdina and Valletta, through to the present.