19 · TREASURE · medieval occupation; prominent phases between the 11th and 13th centuries
Kumbi Saleh
Urban archaeological site of Kumbi Saleh
The city was important in the western Sahel and is a possible capital of Ghana, although that identification remains open.
Museum documentation · free public access, no account required.
Generated reconstruction · Declared visual hypothesis
Declared visual reconstruction for museographic context; it is not a photograph of the original nor documentary evidence.
History and context
The site preserves stone architecture, a mosque, cemeteries and material evidence of exchange.
It was a major node in the western Sahel and a plausible candidate in the search for Ghana’s capital. Limitation: plausible does not mean identified; al-Bakri’s text and the excavated layout do not automatically correspond.
Evidence and interpretation
ARQ+EXT+CUR. The site preserves stone architecture, a mosque, cemeteries and material evidence of exchange. What this does not establish: plausible does not mean identified; al-Bakri’s text and the excavated layout do not automatically correspond.
Catalogue facts
- Narrative date
- medieval occupation; prominent phases between the 11th and 13th centuries
- Location
- South-eastern Mauritania
- Material
- archaeological landscape in situ
- Context
- In situ; on the World Heritage Tentative List. Custody: the state and relevant heritage authority of Mauritania; confirm the current points of contact and permissions.
- Curatorial reading
- The documented fact and its interpretation appear separately in the evidence block.
- Dossier axis
- settlement
- Research record
- MANDE · EVI-05
- Documentary coverage
- 3 museum, heritage, primary corpus or research sources for this stop.
A SHARED TOPIC, DIFFERENT MOMENTS
Objects connected through time
Follow a topic across the collections. A shared tag is a way to compare objects, not proof that one culture influenced another.
The order uses the midpoint of each approximate date range; ranges can overlap. Spacing does not represent elapsed time. Swipe, scroll or use the arrows. With the sequence focused, use ← / →, Home or End.
THE CURRENT OBJECT
Its date is not sufficiently established to place it on the timeline. We keep it here, separate from the dated objects.
medieval occupation; prominent phases between the 11th and 13th centuries
Kumbi Saleh
Mande Worlds
Phases of a city’s medieval occupation, not the date of an object.
Current recordStone19 dated objects

≈425,000–375,000 years
Swanscombe handaxe
Prehistory
Approximate catalogue age for the Hoxnian interglacial (MIS 11); editorial reference 2026 for ordering only, not calibrated dating.
Read the record
≈77,000–75,000 years
Engraved ochre from Blombos
Prehistory
Approximate catalogue age; editorial reference 2026 for ordering only, not calibrated dating.
Read the record
≈25.500–23.500 BCE
Before the San
San histories
Date of the representative element, not ethnic attribution of its authors.
Read the record
≈25.500–23.500 BCE
Before the name San
San histories
Dating of the context of the slabs; anonymous authors.
Read the record
PPNA · site proposal: ≈9600–8800 BCE, provisional
Engraved stone from Çakmaktepe
Prehistory
Provisional date range for the site; not direct dating of this stone.
Read the record
PPNA · ≈9600–8800 BCE, provisional proposal for the site
Grinding stone from Çakmaktepe
Prehistory
Provisional date range for the site and the published tools; the identification of the image is unverified.
Read the record
End of the 4th millennium BCE
Warka Mask
Sumer
The full 4th millennium BCE provides broad limits for chronological ordering; the record specifies the end of the millennium.
Read the record
c. 3500–3100 BCE
Cylinder seal
Sumer
Approximate dating according to the record.
Read the record
ca. 3300–3000 BCE
Uruk Vase
Sumer
Approximate dating according to the record.
Read the record
ca. 3100 BCE
Narmer Palette
Ancient Egypt
Approximate dating according to the record.
Read the record
Towards 2900–2600 BCE
Worshiper of Tell Asmar
Sumer
Approximate dating according to the record.
Read the record
Towards 2400 BCE
Statue of Ebih-Il
Sumer
Approximate dating according to the record.
Read the record
ca. 2600–1900 BCE
Weights
Indus civilisation
Date range for the system of weights, not a year-specific date for each example.
Read the record
Reign of Sargon II · 721–705 BCE
Lamassu of Khorsabad
Sumer
Reign interval associated with the piece.
Read the record
645–635 BCE
Ashurbanipal Hunt
Sumer
Approximate dating according to the record.
Read the record
c. 800–300 BCE
Heads on the wall
Pre-Inca cultures
Framework of the set of architectural heads.
Read the record
first quarter of the 5th century BCE
Sarcophagus of Eshmunazar
Phoenicians
First quarter of the 5th century BCE
Read the record
First half of the 4th century BCE
The statue was the urn
Iberians
First half of the 4th century BCE; date of the funerary context.
Read the record
4th century BCE
The inscription of Pistiros
Thracians
Approximate dating according to the record.
Read the record
Also connected, without a comparable date (9)
These objects are not placed after the others: an unknown date does not mean a more recent object.
- A White Wall on the DanubeCeltic worlds · 6th century BCE
- CemeteryIndus civilisation · ca. 2600–1900 BCE
- Engraved stonePrehistory · Before ≈39,000 cal BP
- Four gardens and waterAchaemenid Persia · 6th century BCE
- Soma stonesVedic and later Indian worlds · Rigvedic strata; later ritual tradition
- The quarry remained visibleGojoseon and early Korea · Mainly 6th–5th centuries BCE
- The Thracian HorsemanThracians · Roman era · diffusion especially in the 2nd–3rd centuries CE
- Tichitt wallsMande Worlds · II–I millennia BCE
- Writing with gapsGaramantes · Diverse chronologies
A closer look
About 1 min to read · 1 section. Further reading and sources · free access. Editorial review recorded: .
Inscriptions and metal among the ruins
The heritage file submitted by Mauritania mentions finds that expand the image of Kumbi Saleh beyond its buildings: inscribed plaques, a mail coat and other metallic objects few in number. Bringing them together obliges distinguishing different activities, from writing on durable supports to manufacturing or using bodily protection. Their presence in the site’s inventory does not mean they all come from the same room or phase. To reconstruct these associations, excavation records are needed, not only the general description of the assemblage.
Sources and references
Did you enjoy this exhibit?
Your opinion helps us improve the museum. You can change it whenever you like.
Loading your rating…