Is this true?: North African landscape

[Gladius Hispaniensis]

Salve

I have heard that the landscape of North Africa in Classical times was completely different from what it is now. Apparently it was a heavily forested area, and that included the Sahara itself. Apparently the heavy deforestation is what caused the barren landscape you see now in places like Cyrenaica and the Tunisian coast. I have never been able to get any independent confirmation on this so I wonder if fellow forum members have any input on this subject?

[Kosmo]

Sahara was as barren as it is today, but smaller. Forests covered some mountainous regions in the Atlas as they do, to a much lesser extent, today. Maybe the climate had a bit more water, but generally speaking the climate it's the same. It's known that forest brings rain and that is why local goverments of today launched large reforestation programs.

The differences in climate are generally due to human activity: grazing, deforestation, soil destruction that have led to distruction of habitats and extinction of species since Antiquity.

[Flavia Gemina]

I don't think North Africa was ever heavily forested and I don't think it's changed.

 

We recently visited Libya. The coastal region is surprisingly green because storms from the Med break on the mountains and the coulds release water onto the limestone escarpments. It was only the interior that was dry (because the mountains caused all the watert to drop on the coast). Apart from some very rich oases, it was mainly desert or savannah.

 

I believe this was the case from Morocco to Egypt. Egypt was the bread basket of Rome, producing a huge amount of grain, thanks to flooding in the Delta. Morocco did and does still have forests in the Upper and Lower Atlas mountains and valleys like that of Volubilis which were and still are very lush during the winter rains.

 

To answer your question: no, I don't think the landscape of North Africa has changed much at all. The big difference has been in the deep interior which has been affected by droughts caused to global warming and draining of lakes caused by man. This has turned what was probably cultivatable land into desert.

[Nephele]

FG, I've read that the building of the Aswan Dam has impacted negatively on Egypt's fishing industry, and ruined the fertilizing silt that would come from the Nile each year. Have I got this right? Did you see much evidence of this when you were over there?

 

-- Nephele

[Flavia Gemina]

FG, I've read that the building of the Aswan Dam has impacted negatively on Egypt's fishing industry, and ruined the fertilizing silt that would come from the Nile each year. Have I got this right? Did you see much evidence of this when you were over there?

-- Nephele

 

I've heard it the dam has had a detrimental influence the effects of which we haven't even begun to see.

 

We didn't visit the Delta in May but will be going in December. I suspect it is still pretty green, but I don't know!

Edited October 19, 2007 by Flavia Gemina

[Gaius Octavius]

There is a swath of desert beginning in the western United States and circling the globe, eastwards, to Mongolia. The Sahara is presently expanding both to the north and the south. The area was greener in Roman times, but not a rain forest by any means.

Edited October 19, 2007 by Gaius Octavius

[Vibius Tiberius Costa]

Salve

I have heard that the landscape of North Africa in Classical times was completely different from what it is now. Apparently it was a heavily forested area, and that included the Sahara itself. Apparently the heavy deforestation is what caused the barren landscape you see now in places like Cyrenaica and the Tunisian coast. I have never been able to get any independent confirmation on this so I wonder if fellow forum members have any input on this subject?

 

I assume because there were less people less wood would (no pun intended) be needed. I still expect that Cyrenaica would have suffered its greatest stage of deforestation wouldn't have caused such a desolate landscape. The Sahara was smaller but was never a forested area.

 

vtc

[Bryaxis Hecatee]

From what I gather the area was greener at the time than it is now, but desert always existed. Yet it seems that more could be done by horse at the time and areas like Morocco and Algeria had more fertile lands with more woods and more steppes and savannas better suited for grazing animals. Same is true of Tunisia for example and it lasted at least until the 3rd century A.D.

 

But we see that the situation had taken a turn for the worse by the time the Arabs came because they met harsher conditions, which would only get worse with time up to the present days situation.

 

Cities like those the roman built in those areas did exist and survive because the land was richer, more water was available and we can see that today the local populations don't have so rich a city anymore.

[ASCLEPIADES]

Salve, Amici:

Here comes the Sahara pump theory, from en. wikipedia:

 

The Sahara Pump Theory is one which is used to explain the various phases by which African flora and African fauna have left that continent to penetrate the Middle East and possibly, thereafter, the rest of the world. African pluvial[1] periods are associated with a "wet Sahara" phase, in which large lakes and many rivers are found.

One example of the Saharan pump has occurred since the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM). During the Last Glacial Maximum, the Sahara desert was, if anything, more extensive than it is now, as tropical forests were of reduced extent. During this period, the lower temperatures reduced the strength of the Hadley Cell where rising tropical air of the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) brings rain to the tropics, while dry descending air, at about 20 degrees north, flows back to the equator and brings desert conditions to this region. This phase is associated with high rates of wind-blown mineral dust, found in marine cores that come from the north tropical Atlantic. Around 12,500 BCE, the amount of dust in the cores in the B

[Faustus]

From what I gather the area was greener at the time than it is now, but desert always existed. Yet it seems that more could be done by horse at the time and areas like Morocco and Algeria had more fertile lands with more woods and more steppes and savannas better suited for grazing animals. Same is true of Tunisia for example and it lasted at least until the 3rd century A.D.

 

But we see that the situation had taken a turn for the worse by the time the Arabs came because they met harsher conditions, which would only get worse with time up to the present days situation.

 

Cities like those the roman built in those areas did exist and survive because the land was richer, more water was available and we can see that today the local populations don't have so rich a city anymore.

 

Salve,

 

My first thought was that after an initial and early dry period shortly after the (last) glaciation weather/climate in North Africa should've been more moist and cooler than at present with warmer and dryer coming about as the glacial period receded into the past.

 

I consulted my copy of CLIMATE THROUGH THE AGES (C.E.P.Brooks 1926/rev 1949) in which he devotes a chapter to the climate of Africa since the last glaciation. He lists as data, records of rainfall in the Nile by flood level both low and high, the rise and fall of populations and cities, in (north) Africa, post glacial fluctuations of lake levels, shorelines of the Caspian Sea, and the human occupation of the Kharga Oasis (which is at best an indirect measure of rainfall). He has rendered his data which summarizes rainfall onto a curve chart which spans 8,000 years bp to present, and divided between Africa and East Africa.

 

The chart shows a greater amount of rainfall on both curves from about 3,000 years bp to about 1400 bp, being well above the base line which he does not define, but on which both curves are plotted. As the time frame comes closer to the present the two lines charting amount or rainfall plotted on both curves become ever more precise, as one would expect, as reports and research data become more reliable. After about 1600 bp the rainfall curve falls below and above the base line about equally, but more below the line from about 300 bp.

 

Valete -

[caldrail]

Contrary to some answers, the climate in north africa has been undergoing change for millions of years, and there has been a small change since roman times. Generally speaking the climate is slightly drier than previously, and the spread of the sahara isn't entirely man-made, although we haven't helped at all.

 

There is some emperical evidence for this, in that the egyptian sphinx at Gaza has signs of rain erosion, but this has been hotly debated, mostly by people who don't like the idea that the sphinx is older than the pyramids nearby or that the climate has changed significantly.

 

As for forests, I don't know of any evidence. Savana style scrubland and grassy steppes are known to have existed in roman times over large areas of north africa and most of these have now atrophied considerably. With agriculture and the irrigation that went with it, north africa was able to support a highly urbanised population in that region, and we know that the african coast had more roman towns and cities than any other part of the empire.

[Melvadius]

Contrary to some answers, the climate in north africa has been undergoing change for millions of years, and there has been a small change since roman times. Generally speaking the climate is slightly drier than previously, and the spread of the sahara isn't entirely man-made, although we haven't helped at all.

 

There is some emperical evidence for this, in that the egyptian sphinx at Gaza has signs of rain erosion, but this has been hotly debated, mostly by people who don't like the idea that the sphinx is older than the pyramids nearby or that the climate has changed significantly.

 

As for forests, I don't know of any evidence. Savana style scrubland and grassy steppes are known to have existed in roman times over large areas of north africa and most of these have now atrophied considerably. With agriculture and the irrigation that went with it, north africa was able to support a highly urbanised population in that region, and we know that the african coast had more roman towns and cities than any other part of the empire.

 

A few years back on a trip to Tunisia a local archaeologist stated his view that it was the Berbers who by curring down trees for firewood were responsible for the desertification of parts of Tunisia that during Roman times extremely fertile. Now this may have simply been an example of long term local rivalries however it is true that on a trip to Thuburbo Majus there were several olive oil presses installed within the ruins of the Roman town that because of their location must have been in operation when the town went into decline as a major population centre in the area One I saw was actually built within a temple with the counter weight of the press using sections of a decorated friezes. Although it doesn't show the counter weight c/f 4th picture showing the press itself at:

 

http://www.cavazzi.com/roman-empire/articl...rticle-038.html

 

There were apparently edicts made during Roman times that required large parts of what is now modern Tunisia to change over from cereal prodction to olives and olives are still a major industry in Tunisia. We did go through several areas in Tuniisa where there were signs of olive groves extending into areas that were now desert but it was impossible to tell by eye when they had been in operation.

 

Melvadius

[Moonlapse]

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Mediterrane...d_mixed_forests

 

It is difficult to establish a reliable chronology for the intense forest clearance of the North African moist conifer and broadleaf mixed forests. Forest stands of considerable size occurred in this region in Roman times (as it is reported by Strabo, Herodotus and Pliny) and in medieval times (as it is reported from the descriptions written by Leo Africanus). These medieval forests remained plentiful enough that Fez could serve as a major lumber center until the twelfth century, deriving its timber from both the Rif and the Middle Atlas Mountains. Pollen evidence indicates considerable clearing and widespread deforestation from about 1600 to 1900, presumably through the advent of livestock raising and settlement in the mountains. Some statistics indicate very rapid deforestation in the twentieth century in the three countries of this ecoregion. A quarter of Morocco

[Ursus]

Very interesting, Moonlapse. That solves that mystery.

[Horatius]

But where is the Silphium of yesteryear?