Categories
Uncategorized

Al-Zubarah: Preserving the narrative

Strands of narrative woven through the stories told for generations suggest considerations of value in relating to one’s landscape and understanding place through nonrational processes. O’Neill et al. suggests that one of the ways we value things is “simply in virtue of their displaying some cluster of properties”; and “historical or process-based” in which they are appreciated “not merely as a cluster of properties but as particular individuals individuated by a temporal history and spatial location”. The many values people find in nature are of the latter kind. “History matters … in our evaluations of environments,” (McShane, 2012). In “The Trouble with Wilderness” Cronon examines the way the traditional wilderness concept emerged in America and how it reflects older Western perceptions of the separation between humanity and nature. Cronon argues that, “it (the wilderness) is quite profoundly a human creation – indeed, the creation of very particular human cultures at very particular moments in human history.” (Cronon, 1995). Cronon sees the wilderness concept as mirror-like and reflecting the “unexamined longings and desires” of Americans, and thus adding to the problematic relationship with the non-human world (Cronon, 1995). The human-constructed narratives associated with the wilderness became the essence of American preservationism tendencies. The Qatari sentiments towards al-Zubarah slightly parallels that of the contemporary American relationship to the wilderness. While the wilderness is simultaneously considered ontologically separate from civilization and humanity, and a place to escape from the overbearing of civilization, al-Zubarah is the gate to glimpsing into the pre-modern life of Qatari ancestors. The cultural landscape of the al-Zubarah is storied: they are the embodiment of the narratives of the human and non-human lives that have shaped them. In this blog, I compare the role played by wilderness in the American cultural imaginary and the role played by Al-Zubarah as a historical site in the Qatari cultural imaginary to show that the meanings that humans project onto the landscape are structured into valuable narratives and the protection of the land is the prerequisite to protecting these narratives.

Preserving the landscape protects the imagined cultural identity and the narratives of values we cognitively construct. Most interpretations of the landscapes identities are passed on through memory, which constitutes the basis of a tradition. Tradition is what remains over time, representing a central theme for the narrative identity. It is clear how the national narrative of US history renders wilderness an especially valuable role in American societies, conceptualizing it as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. This generates the national urge to preserve the wilderness’s ontological separation from the humankind, thus, the minimal human intervention in nature is imperative to maintaining its native ecological state. In a similar manner, the Qatari incentive to protect al-zubarah’s historical stories and outstanding cultural integrity resulted in the national project Qatar Islamic Archaeology and Heritage Project (qiah). In a region where archeologists often deal in millennia, QIAH revealed the story of a place that went from sand to riches and back to sand in just a bit more than a century. A story reconnecting Qataris with their ambitious ancestors did not just indulge in extensive cultural and economic connections locally and inter-regionally (including relations directly or indirectly to inland Arabia, Oman, China, India, Iran, Iraq, East Africa, and Europe) but suffered the retributions of the nearby dominance-driven neighbors. Al-Zubarah illustrates a life prior to modern Doha where the northwest coast, once a prominent centre of population on the peninsula, became a landscape peppered with abandoned villages in addition to the large ruins field of Al-Zubarah. In this context, appreciation of a landscape does not overlook the story forming its basis and constituting its narratives. In other words, viewing and admiring are subjective behaviours which come to life from the narratives elaborated by the inhabitants. The meaningful stories we attribute to the wilderness-mainly fueled by American sentiments- and the al-Zubarah produced similar national narratives of protecting those sceneries from man interventions in the form of resources’ extractions and destructive knowledge-driven discoveries, respectively.  Landscape identity is therefore a cultural identity which is not only recognizable by its appearance but, above all, by its narratives.

The visual element plays a significant role in recognizing the landscape and its narratives. Without such references little would be understood about the landscape: much would be seen, but little would be fully appreciated. In the specific composition of the characters of the landscape components, the identity of a landscape is defined. Al Zubarah has layers, different levels of construction that highlight dramatically shifting fortunes, like a Gulf version of the 19th-century gold rush towns in the us—a place of rapid change and fast money producing a life of prosperity and economic development. Stumps of long-dead date palms revealing an enriched port with seasonal fresh product. White pearl scattered all over the site depicts how pearling dominated the thoughts and way of life of nearly all the coastal inhabitants of the Gulf for centuries. Analyzing the different construction layers of al-Zubarah eroded walls reveals that some of the buildings in the surrounding areas had been stripped and abandoned in the years before the Omani attack, the final blow that led people to completely abandon an archaeological fortune. All these visual characteristics of al-Zubarah accumulated to produce different stories of the life of Qataris in the past. The national narrative had embraced these stories, leading us to conceive of the landscape as an important part of Qatari heritage. It is also part of a cultural process-reactivating the unique aspects (stories) that have either been obscured or simply never fully enhanced- that gives the current Qatari generation a sense of tradition. Paying attention to the visual elements of the cultural landscape and understanding the narratives behind them turns an a-historical and artificial nature into something valuable.

Our constructed imaginations of the al-Zubarah, aided by its historical visual characteristics displays strong expression of aesthetic preservationism. Aesthetic preservationism holds that through the sensitive perception characteristic of aesthetic attention and the discovery of beauty, majesty, and so on, we may develop care and respect for nature. In this way, a kind of aesthetic awareness potentially feeds into ethical attitudes and forms of environmental action. For example, “aesthetic protectionism” argues that natural beauty can serve as an important motivation for protecting the environment, as long as we can provide sufficient justification—some kind of objectivity—for our aesthetic judgments of nature. Looking firstly at the case of the wilderness, as you stroll the wilderness, your senses are triggered as you are wandering through a forest of giant sequoia trees. As you see the red-brown color, touch the thick texture of the bark, and enormous girth of the trunk, you are having an aesthetic experience. However, emphasizing on the senses alone cannot sufficiently describe why we have the urge to preserve wild nature. The aesthetic experience is also perceptual and can thicken with a range of components or layers. Thoughts, narratives, knowledge, and emotion may all become equally integrated into the experience. While the mesmerizing form of the pearl enclaves buried under the al-Zubarah buildings had captured our attention at first glance, when we pay close attention to history, it is said to be a true testimony of an urban trading and pearl- diving tradition which has sustained a large part of the coastal town from the Islamic period. And while our memories are triggered by the typical old, traditional Middle Eastern towns when we look at the organic layout of the Zubarah, it reminds us of a certain historical fact that there was a central authority responsible for the town’s design and construction. In this sense, our senses are our important in our drive towards preserving the aesthetic of the Zubarah, but it is not the most essential component as other elements such as imaginations, historical and cultural narratives as well as perceptual notions come into play.

Despite of the focus on how our human-constructed narratives shape our preservation efforts towards the wilderness and al-Zubarah, it takes our attention away from the real issues. Environmentalism generated a romanticized narrative that discourages alienation from nature, driving us towards a constant urge of preserving nature.  Whether it is for preserving our constructed narratives of nature or preserving its aesthetic experiences, this dangerously obscure the greater that leads us to produce intensive preservation efforts in the first place. In the al-Zubarah case, the state of conservation of the fort has become more difficult, reflecting the inherent weaknesses of the archaeological remains in a hostile maritime and desert climate that have been intensified by anthropogenic processes. In a pragmatic sense, true problem lies in our lifestyle… in our industry, our pollution, and our sprawling urbanity which affects entire systems of natural and cultural landscapes. Cronon is arguing that we need to figure out how to live with nature ethically, sustainably, and honorably. This is also applicable in the al-Zubarah case. I am not arguing for integrating the fort into our cities or moving humans out of cities to live in al-Zubarah but trace the real problem of why conservation measures in nature became more intensive.

Bibliography:

  1. William Cronon, ed., Uncommon Ground: Rethinking the Human Place in Nature, New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1995, 69-90
  2. Rosendahl, S., Nymann, H., Kinzel, M., & Walmsley, A. (Eds.) (2013). Qatar Islamic Archaeology and Heritage Project: End of Season Report : Spring 2013. Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen and Qatar Museums Authority.
  3. Brugiatelli, D. V. (2018). The landscape, its narrative identity and man’s well-being. European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 3(4), 150. https://doi.org/10.26417/ejms.v3i4.p150-154
  4. Gardiner, S. M., Thompson, A., & Cafaro, P. (2019). Valuing Wild Nature. In The Oxford Handbook of Environmental Ethics (pp. 125–135). essay, Oxford University Press.
  5. Gray, M. A. (2008). The traditional wilderness conception, postmodern cultural constructionism and the importance of physical environments (dissertation). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. Retrieved November 6, 2022, from https://scholarworks.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=2114&context=etd.
  6. McShane, K. (2012). Some challenges for narrative accounts of value. Ethics and the Environment, 17(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.2979/ethicsenviro.17.1.45
  7. Plumwood, V. (2006). The concept of a cultural landscape:nature, culture and agency in the land. Ethics & the Environment, 11(2), 115–150. https://doi.org/10.2979/ete.2006.11.2.115
  8. Saudi Aramco World : The Pearl Emporium of Al Zubarah. AramcoWorld. (n.d.). Retrieved November 6, 2022, from https://archive.aramcoworld.com/issue/201306/the.pearl.emporium.of.al.zubarah.htm
  9. Walmsley, A. (2014). Islamic Archaeology in Qatar: Al Zubarah and its hinterland(s). Research Gate. Retrieved November 6, 2022, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284189371_Islamic_Archaeology_in_Qatar_Al_Zubarah_and_its_hinterlands.
Categories
Non-Invasive Archaeology Uncategorized

Al-Zubarah as an Aesthetic Experience

Looking at different conceptualizations of wilderness in environmental aesthetics illustrated how human understandings of the aesthetic engagement construct our judgments and valuing of environments (Cronon, 1996). The dynamic manifestations of wilderness centered around concepts like beauty and sublime do not merely present nature as a classical object of aesthetic experience but they emphasize human perceptual qualities as the determinant of aesthetic experiences. In other words, aesthetic experience is largely human-constructed which shapes the whole idea behind Nature’s aesthetic value. However, the sole focus on the ‘natural’ landscape in aesthetic conceptualizations discriminates between a component of the landscape created by natural processes and one created by human cultural actions. This perhaps marks Arntzen and Brady’s goal, in Humans in the Land, to shift environmental aesthetics and ethics away from ‘wilderness’ or ‘natural landscapes’ towards humanized landscapes (Arntzen & Brady, 2008). In line with this, I will frame Al-Zubarah as a cultural aesthetic subject, an alternative view to nature aesthetics in an attempt to value its landscape.

Al-Zubarah as a cultural landscape produces an aesthetic experience. Environmental aesthetics is largely concerned with the environmental character of natural objects as opposed to the object-centered approach typical of the art of artifacts, where the aesthetic object is conceived as relatively static and bounded. However, lifeless attributes of cultural landscapes stem from human perceptions, thoughts, imaginings, knowledge, and emotion. Simply, we conditioned our minds to think of them as ‘too lifeless’ to be considered an aesthetic experience while we scrutinize naturalness as in value aesthetics. The way nature is admired for its mesmerizing sceneries, converging colors, and addictive touch is all cognitively produced by humans. In the same way we aptly describe nature in terms of its aesthetic appeal could be exactly applied in the presence of culture-created landscapes. We can aesthetically conceive of the al-Zubarah beyond its practical concerns or economic value. Implementing the aesthetic narrative in al-Zubarah archaeological processes allows us to think of destructive archaeology as disruptive to our aesthetic conceptualizations of the site. In this sense, invasive archaeology is not merely physical, as in destroying pure forms of al-zubarah artifacts, but it significantly disturbs our aesthetic appreciation for its pure artifact. Alternatively, the landscape preservation efforts are the preservation of human-created aesthetic meanings.

Although the aesthetic appreciation of the environment is often deemed insignificant in conservation and preservation due to its subjective nature, one must understand its importance in igniting environmental movements. Nature as an aesthetic experience, however, is yet centralized in theoretical and practical discussions of environmentalism. Nonetheless, with the slow shift from environmental aesthetics’ sole focus on the natural environment to human-produced environments, this discipline became inclusive of all non-human entities, including non-living beings. The aesthetics of objects and environments (artificial and natural) are not only appreciated because of how they are produced in human cognitive formulations but they open for non-cognitive components such as scientific knowledge and cultural traditions. In this sense, we do not only conceive of the al-zubarah in our imaginary realm but also how its cultural significance comes into play. Combining cognitive and non-cognitive elements of environmental aesthetics minimizes/eliminates the discipline’s superficiality that critics have pointed out. This presents non-invasive archaeological preservation/excavation as not just necessarily for our aesthetic narratives that I previously talked about, but how it is important due to its cultural symbolism for Qatar.

References:

Arntzen, S., & Brady, E. (2008). Humans in the land: The Ethics and aesthetics of the Cultural Landscape. Google Books. Unipub. Retrieved October 16, 2022, from https://books.google.com.qa/books?id=quwJAQAAMAAJ&printsec=front_cover&redir_esc=y.

Carlson, A. (2019, April 9). Environmental aesthetics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved October 16, 2022, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/environmental-aesthetics/

Cronon, W. (1996). The Trouble with Wilderness: Or, Getting Back to the Wrong Nature.   Environmental History, 1(1), 7–28. https://doi.org/10.2307/3985059

Gardiner, S. M., & Thompson, A. (2019). Aesthetic value, Nature and Environment . In The Oxford Handbook of Environmental Ethics (pp. 186–196). essay, Oxford University Press.

Categories
Non-Invasive Archaeology Uncategorized

Land Ethics

In non-invasive archaeological traditions, it is the archaeologist’s duty to cautiously preserve cultural and natural heritage without adopting destructive excavating technology that alters its landscape. From this perspective, archaeologists are inherently just-either consciously or subconsciously- just towards their landscape, even if they are guided by intuition rather than a strict landscape ethical framework. However, the most important factor in determining whether preservation archaeology embraces land ethic understandings is if its practices conceive of serving environmental and ecological interests as a prerequisite to serving a higher entity, humans. In land ethics, which Leopold had contrasted against the prevailing anthropocentrism of his time, the role of “Homo sapiens (shifts) from conqueror of the land-community to plain . . . citizen” (Leopold, 1949). Humans are merely citizens of a large community where all members- humans, and nonhumans- matter; the boundaries of the community include soils, waters, plants, and animals; or collectively: the land.

Non-invasive archaeology is not solely a practice, but a mindset that intrinsically values the landscape over the ego-centric needs of individuals. Under human-centric archaeological traditions, value resides in a particular kind of aesthetic experience – scenic beauty – and in the resources and services that the landscape provides for human beings. Human interests in amenity and utility are what matter and human beings are the agents who can provide for or deny those interests. The transition to land ethics decentralizes the human agent, and in extreme versions, completely separates the human from the landscape, such as in the wilderness case we discussed in previous classes. However, land ethics, in Leopold’s terms, accords moral standing to all the agents contributing to a landscape to ensure an undisrupted, interdependent relationship between humans and non-human members without disregarding the distinctiveness of each entity. These relationships come in different forms: social (human-human relations), material (human-object relations), and ecological (nonhuman-nonhuman relations), and they are all united by the landscape they occupy. Land ethics establishes the ethical basis that protects a community of land against any human-created threats by protecting the land to which all entities belong.

The landscape is a matter of relationships; it is always a plural concept that involves complex networks of relationships. Land-either natural or cultural-cannot be perceived as a lifeless entity because landscapes are living in the sense that it embraces all forms of life. In this context, archaeologists conceptualize landscape as a meaningful environment that must be protected by non-destructive methods. An ethical landscape practice must concern itself with landscape justice to serve the greater community’s justice (humans, animals, objects, soil, air, and generally the land). The principle of landscape justice points to an equitable entitlement to circumstances of living that are characterized by good landscape relationships. It is important to maintain such relations by refraining from introducing any external threats no matter how insignificantly it affects the community’s members. Al-Zubarah’s case, which I mentioned in my previous blogs, gives a great example to how an ethical landscape is practiced as non-invasive technology is favored to conduct safe conservation actions that respect the land of al-Zubarah.

Leopold, A., Schwartz, C. W., Bradley, N. L., Leopold, A. C., & Leopold, E. B. (2007). The land ethic. In A Sand County Almanac (pp. 201–226). essay, Land Ethic Press; The Aldo Leopold Foundation.

Categories
Non-Invasive Archaeology Uncategorized

Non-invasive Archaeology

To some extent in contemporary environmental philosophies, nonhuman natural entities are granted moral standing independent of human-centric interests. Human-created ‘objects’ or ‘things’ are overlooked in environmental ethics because of their mere ontological relationship with humans. Consider the character of archaeological artifacts. Artifacts are conceived and designed to meet the demands of human need and purpose, thus, they are fundamentally anthropocentric as their meanings derive from the concerns of human agents, either as individual personas or as social institutions. Ethical considerations of non-living considerations cannot go beyond the constraints of human function. In this sense, they are only seen as valuable for their cultural and historical significance. Al-Zubarah fort, as my case study, consistently undergoes site preservation, research, and community engagement to continue its human legacy as part of UNESCO world heritage. The Al-Zubarah’s importance for Qatari history demands a careful archaeological excavation to restore and protect parts of Qatar that flourished long ago. It is clear that preserving culture lies at the center of Qatar’s artifact archaeological efforts, and not because of its intrinsic values independent of cultural interests.

Jane Bennett, in her book Vibrant Matter, is challenging her readers to abandon their human-centric worldview, specifically where we conceive of there being inanimate matter (in my case, artifacts) and animated life (us) (a binary view that she posits is the dominant way of approaching our world), and asks us to understand things as complex “vibrant” (a term that she uses throughout her book) materials constantly interacting with one another in not fully determinate ways. By believing that matter has vitality and life no matter how lifeless it may appear to be, we promote more responsible, ethical human engagement with our world and ensure the long-term survival of the planet. This is Bennett’s theory of vital materialism. All physical materials have their own unique agentic capacity, trajectories, interactions, and potentialities outside of, and distinct from, human agency. Although this is a hard concept to grasp, as Bennett suggests, she points to the fact that all inanimate objects change over time. The only reason why Al-Zubarah requires preservation is to protect its coral walls against long-term erosion which shows that al-zubarah will not always stay in its original form. Quite simply, things act and groups of things act together because of their vibrant characteristic which renders them agency and intrinsic value beyond anthropocentric conceptions.

Obviously, I am not trying to alter non-invasive archaeological processes carried out in The Al-Zubarah but I am presenting the site as an intrinsically valuable object that requires preservation not because it serves cultural purposes, but just because it as a respected entity on its own. In Chapter 1, “The Force of Things,” Bennett develops the concept of thing-power. Thing-power is the agency of material objects to act and impact other materials, thereby producing effects in the world. Under such conditions, we stress on the agency of inanimate objects because they are able of interacting with its surrounding.

css.php