In the ever-evolving narrative of human history, ancient structures continue to captivate and challenge our understanding of civilisation’s dawn.
While the pyramids of Egypt and the monumental sites of Peru have long held the spotlight, a recent discovery hints at an even older origin of human architectural prowess.
A team of scientists has unearthed a megalith with a lava core, nestled in the verdant landscapes of Indonesia, that defies conventional wisdom about the beginnings of civilisation.
This monumental find, known as Gunung Padang, reveals a structure dating back to the Palaeolithic period, potentially rewriting the chronicles of human achievement.
Published in the journal Archaeology Prospection, the study suggests that construction of this enigmatic pyramid may have commenced as early as 16,000 years ago, or possibly even 27,000 years ago, predating by millennia the iconic pyramids of Giza and the awe-inspiring monuments of Peru.
Gunung Padang, once misconceived as a natural mountain veiled in foliage, has been revealed as a meticulously crafted pyramid, its layers unfolding a saga of ancient ingenuity. Divided into distinct units, each representing an epoch in human history, the pyramid boasts a timeline spanning millennia.
Unit 4, the oldest stratum, harks back to a time between 25,000 BC and 14,000 BC, when early artisans sculpted the hill from natural lava and basaltic rocks. Successive layers, added over epochs, tell a tale of human endeavour and evolution, culminating in Unit 1, adorned with stone terraces and topsoil, dating from 2000 BC to 1100 BC.
However, amid the enthusiasm of this groundbreaking discovery, controversy has emerged. The paper published in 2023 by Archaeological Prospection, boldly proclaiming Gunung Padang as the world’s oldest pyramid, was later retracted due to what the editors term a “major error”.
The study’s claim, based on the dating of soil samples, has been contested, casting a shadow over the pyramid’s claimed age.
Despite the retraction, the debate rages on, with proponents of the original research decrying what they perceive as an unjust dismissal of pioneering scholarship.
