Pascal Maitre / UNESCO
Mohenjo-Daro
Until now, Mohenjo-daro was generally framed around 2500 BC, as one of the great cities of the third millennium before our era.
The ancient city of Mohenjo-daro, one of the most important urban centers of the Indus Valley civilization, may be older than previously thought.
New geoarchaeological work released by the General Directorate of Antiquities and Archeology, of the Pakistani province of Sindh, indicates that parts of the archaeological site date back to a period before traditionally accepted estimates for its urban expansion.
Until now, Mohenjo-daro was generally framed around 2500 BC, as one of the great cities of the third millennium before our era.
But new radiocarbon dating applied to adobe brick structures in the area of the so-called Stupa Mound, one of the most emblematic sectors of the site, now suggests a chronology between 2700 and 2600 BC., with signs of occupation or construction even further back in the context of the phase Kot Diji, prior to the classical height of the Harappan civilization.
The highlights that this points to earlier urban development than previously established.
The eventual chronological revision reinforces the historical importance of Mohenjo-daro, classified by UNESCO as one of the best preserved ancient urban settlements in South Asia.
The site, located in the current Pakistan, It stands out for its planned layout, grid architecture and remarkably advanced hydraulic infrastructure, including wells, baths and drainage systems, features that continue to surprise archaeologists with their sophistication.
The new chronology does not, however, resolve the main enigmas associated with the city. Mohenjo-daro continues to raise questions about the way it was governed, about the size of its population and, above all, about the reasons for its decline and abandonment, generally placed around 1700 BC.
Over the decades, hypotheses about invasions or massacres have circulated, but this reading has long been contested by experts. As early as 1964, archaeologist George F. Dales rejected the idea of a collapse caused by invaders and instead argued for a combination of natural and environmental factors.
The debate gains urgency at a time when the site itself faces conservation threats. UNESCO and other observers have warned of the damage caused by salinity, humidity and degradation of exposed materials since 20th century excavations.
