Introduction
Mountain landscapes in Mediterranean Europe are increasingly recognised as key areas of mobility, resource use and cultural interaction rather than marginal spaces (Farinetti Reference Farinetti and Cambi2015). Yet their archaeological record is often sparse and discontinuous, and surface visibility is strongly conditioned by geomorphological and post-depositional processes and human impact. The apparent scarcity of upland prehistoric evidence may therefore reflect research bias and surface visibility rather than the absence of past occupation, calling for approaches that read these landscapes through their formation and preservation history rather than site density alone. These problems are well recognised in Mediterranean survey archaeology, where surface patterns are shaped by survey intensity, land use and variations in archaeological visibility associated with vegetation cover and the exposure or burial of archaeological material. In addition, distribution models are filtered by geomorphological processes and accessibility bias, meaning mountainous areas remain less extensively investigated than coastal plains and lowland basins (Attema et al. Reference Attema2020; Knodell et al. Reference Knodell2023). The Archaeological Landscape Survey at Rascino Plateau (ALSRaP), a joint project between Sapienza University of Rome and the University of Milan, extends work begun in Sabina caves within the Farfa Valley Project (Forti et al. Reference Forti2026) to examine prehistoric mobility and long-term upland occupation between Latium and Abruzzo (Figure 1). It follows a tradition of geoarchaeological research pioneered in Italy (Stoddart & Malone Reference Stoddart, Malone and Sulas2022), most notably by the Biferno Valley Project, which integrated fieldwalking with soil profiling and the reconstruction of geomorphological processes (Barker Reference Barker1995). Comparable integrated geoarchaeological research remains limited in the central Apennines. ALSRaP compares surface archaeological evidence across different geomorphological units to assess how natural processes and human activities influence its preservation and visibility.
Location and landscape setting of the Rascino Plateau (figure by L. Forti).
Study area and methods
The Rascino Plateau lies in the Cicolano Mountains of Latium (province of Rieti), at approximately 1150m above sea level. It is a broad karst basin (polje) of tectonic origin, filled with Quaternary lacustrine and alluvial deposits that form a flat basin floor. Dolines and dry valleys characterise the local carbonate landscape (Centamore et al. Reference Centamore2010). The permanent lakes of Rascino and Cornino make the intermontane basin an unusual high-elevation water source, historically suited to seasonal cultivation, pastoral mobility and transhumant use.
The main archaeological reference remains the Cicolano Archaeological Survey (1988 & 1990), which documented evidence of Roman (c. 300 BC–AD 500), medieval (c. AD 500–1500) and post-medieval (after c. AD 1500) activity, alongside enclosures, dry-stone structures, charcoal kilns and seasonal settlement traces, while prehistoric evidence was limited to a few lithic artefacts (Barker et al. Reference Barker1991). Since the 1980s, rural depopulation, vegetation change and altered ploughing have transformed the visibility conditions recorded by that survey.
Given these visibility constraints, the 2025 campaign adopted a non-site strategy, systematically recording surface artefacts across the surveyed areas, including isolated finds and low-density scatters (Dunnell & Dancey Reference Dunnell, Dancey and Schiffer1983). Geographic information systems analysis of satellite imagery, 1954 aerial photographs, elevation models, geological maps and soil data guided fieldwork. The geomorphological framework distinguished slopes, the slope-plain transition and the basin-floor-lakeshore sector, characterised respectively by erosion and sediment transfer, colluvial accumulation and lacustrine-alluvial deposition. Three survey zones were investigated on a 100 × 100m grid. Visibility, land use, geomorphology and archaeological evidence were recorded. Artefacts and features were mapped with Real-Time Kinematic GPS and QField; selected landforms and soil profiles were described to assess preservation and exposure (Figure 2).
ALSRaP survey design, showing survey areas, grids and 1954 aerial imagery (figure by L. Forti).
Results
The campaign recovered 57 lithic artefacts—40 from zone 1, none from zone 2 and 17 from zone 3—and a few ceramic fragments, mainly Roman-medieval. The principal contrast concerns artefact condition and taphonomic state. Zone 1, beside the active lake margin, yielded lithic artefacts with limited surface alteration, including a carinated bladelet core, an end-scraper on a laminar blank and various rejuvenation flakes associated with the maintenance of laminar and lamellar cores reduced by pressure flaking (Figure 3). The technological features of the artefacts are consistent with a late Upper Palaeolithic (c. 15 500–9700 BC) technological system. In the same sector, geomorphological mapping identified shoreline scarps and benches, while a pedological profile on an erosional scarp documented soil development within the lacustrine succession. Seasonal water-level fluctuations, shoreline erosion and livestock trampling create local exposure surfaces, and the lithic scatter is directly associated with these erosional lake-margin dynamics (Figure 4).
Lakeshore survey sectors and selected lithic artefacts from the 2025 campaign. Zone 1: 1) end-scraper; 2 & 6) rejuvenation flakes; 3) cortical blade; 4 & 5) fragmented blades. Zone 3: 7) more patinated and rounded fragmented flake with denticulated retouch, illustrating the contrasting taphonomic condition (drawings by E. Carletti & V. Leopardi; figure by L. Forti).
Western lakeshore sector, showing artefact distribution, shoreline scarps and the pedological profile (figure by L. Forti).
Zone 2 yielded no artefacts under poor visibility conditions. Zone 3, in the cultivated southern plain, yielded lithic artefacts that are more patinated, rounded and mechanically disturbed than those from zone 1, consistent with longer exposure, colluvial redistribution, ploughing and trampling. Corrals, enclosures, dry-stone walls, clearance cairns, fields and livestock trails show that Roman-medieval, post-medieval and recent land use continues to influence archaeological visibility (Figure 5). Differences between the zones therefore reflect both artefact distribution and contrasting preservation and exposure.
Agropastoral features recorded on the plateau (figure by L. Forti).
Discussion and wider significance
Low-density upland assemblages cannot be read as direct proxies for occupation intensity. The lakeshore concentration may represent a redistributed scatter exposed by water-level oscillations, shoreline erosion and trampling, rather than an in situ surface. The more weathered zone 3 material may reflect prolonged exposure, colluvial reworking and mechanical disturbance, and does not necessarily indicate a weaker prehistoric signal. Rascino thus extends the concept of ‘hidden landscapes’ (Attema et al. Reference Attema2020): visibility varies within a single basin according to landform, sediment history and land use. Geomorphological investigation provides an interpretive framework for distinguishing past activity from burial, exposure and redistribution. This contrast is important for Mediterranean uplands, where seasonal and ephemeral activities leave discontinuous, easily reworked traces. At Rascino, the apparent scarcity of prehistoric evidence is largely a problem of archaeological visibility, modulated by long-term geomorphic and climatic processes and by the intensity of historical and modern land use. The scarcity of later portable artefacts does not imply an absence of Roman-medieval or post-medieval activity, as exemplified by the results of the Cicolano Archaeological Survey and the pastoral structures recorded. The rarity of ceramics may instead reflect the low-density and ephemeral material signature of seasonal pastoral activities, combined with uneven surface visibility. The upland basin is better understood as a landscape palimpsest, where active and relict landforms preserve overlapping records of human activity unevenly across the basin. Although the surface context prevents a detailed reconstruction of occupation duration, the Rascino assemblage adds an open-air upland occurrence to a regional Pleistocene record more commonly documented in caves and rock shelters.
Conclusion
The first ALSRaP campaign shows the value of integrating non-site survey, geomorphological and pedological analysis in low-visibility uplands. At Rascino, prehistoric activity, erosional lake-margin dynamics, soil development and agropastoral land use have shaped what is preserved and visible. The late Upper Palaeolithic finds add new evidence for Pleistocene activity in the intermontane-karst basin. Future work will extend survey and test buried deposits through coring, micromorphology, geochronology and palaeoenvironmental reconstruction.
Acknowledgements
We thank N. Fagiani, F. Licordari and D. Raiano (Soprintendenza Archeologia, Belle Arti e Paesaggio, Rome), the Mayor of Fiamignano, S. and G. Adriani, and the Pro Loco of Fiamignano. The research was conducted under an archaeological survey permit issued by the Soprintendenza Archeologia, Belle Arti e Paesaggio per l’area metropolitana di Roma e per la provincia di Rieti (MIC-SABAP-MET_RM, no. 0010974-P, 20 May 2025).
Funding statement
This research was funded by Sapienza Grandi Scavi 2024 (SA1241900E726869) and Sapienza Grandi Scavi 2025 (SA1251975DDB29F4). LF also received funding from the University of Milan’s 2025 Research Support Plan (PSR 2025, Line 8 Early Career Development, Submeasure B) and is supported by a research fellowship funded by the Italian Ministry of University and Research (MUR) through the ‘Dipartimenti di Eccellenza 2023–2027’ project awarded to the Department of Earth Sciences “A. Desio”, University of Milan (WP3).
Competing interests
The authors declare none.
Author contributions: CRediT categories
Luca Forti: Conceptualization-Equal, Formal analysis-Equal, Investigation-Equal, Methodology-Equal, Project administration-Equal, Supervision-Equal, Visualization-Equal, Writing - original draft-Lead, Writing - review & editing-Equal. Valentina Leopardi: Formal analysis-Equal, Investigation-Equal, Visualization-Equal. Elena Carletti: Formal analysis-Equal, Investigation-Equal, Visualization-Equal. Cecilia Conati Barbaro: Conceptualization-Equal, Formal analysis-Equal, Funding acquisition-Lead, Investigation-Equal, Methodology-Equal, Project administration-Equal, Supervision-Equal, Writing - review & editing-Equal.
Open access
