I decided to officially archive this blog on the day my DPhil was confirmed. But I have waited for the electronic publication of my thesis, Interrogating Archaeological Ethics in Conflict Zones: Cultural Heritage Work in Cyprus, to announce the archiving. From now on, I will blog at Conflict Antiquities.
Saturday 27 August 2011
Tuesday 22 December 2009
Kuru: warred village, resettled
[Thanks to Dave S's comment on the Evretou photo blog, I will try to give each site photo blog a proper introduction; until then, I'll cross-post the introductory posts from Cultural Heritage in Conflict (or samarkeolog).]
The personal page for the resettled, warred village of Kuru/Xirabebaba is now up at Kuru: cultural heritage and community.
I had originally visited the village to inspect the destroyed mass grave of victims of the Armenian Genocide, but during my visit I was also able to view the ruins of some of the homes destroyed by the Turkish military, as well as the palimpsest of features that have developed in the landscape and given it its character (which, sadly, now include that destruction).
[This was originally posted on samarkeolog on 20th June 2007.]
[Thanks to Dave S's comment on the Evretou photo blog, I will try to give each site photo blog a proper introduction; until then, I'll cross-post the introductory posts from Cultural Heritage in Conflict (or samarkeolog).]
The personal page for the resettled, warred village of Kuru/Xirabebaba is now up at Kuru: cultural heritage and community.
I had originally visited the village to inspect the destroyed mass grave of victims of the Armenian Genocide, but during my visit I was also able to view the ruins of some of the homes destroyed by the Turkish military, as well as the palimpsest of features that have developed in the landscape and given it its character (which, sadly, now include that destruction).
[This was originally posted on samarkeolog on 20th June 2007.]
Wednesday 20 June 2007
Kuru building 5a: this was the first view I had of the ancient ruins in the distance that locals called a church.
[Updated on the 21st of June 2007.]
Blogian considered that it could have been an '(Armenian or Assyrian?) church'.
[Updated on the 21st of June 2007.]
Blogian considered that it could have been an '(Armenian or Assyrian?) church'.
Kuru buildings 4c: the sagging floor of the former home in Kuru buildings 4b is still visible, but behind it is a still-standing, stone-built home and another, plastered, which give an idea of the kind of places destroyed by the Turkish military and the character of the village landscape prior to that destruction.
Kuru buildings 3e: at the base of one of the stone terraces I was walking by on my way to some ancient ruins on the outskirts of the village, I saw this line of stones in the soil, though I'm not sure whether it's the base of the terrace, gradually being submerged, or a spill or tumble of stones from the top, now being grown over by grasses and pretty purple wild flowers.
Kuru buildings 3b: the second feature I noted was this stone basin-type object, which may have been a basin of some form, or, I think, may have been part of an olive or wine press, although I can't remember which of olives or grapes couldn't have been grown in this area in the climate that prevailed at the time this object was in use and I don't have the photographs of the press I saw in Ani, because my camera was lost/stolen with those photos on it.
Kuru buildings 3a: this shows a palimpsest - a build-up of features produced at two or more distinct times - in the landscape; here, you can see the field terraces and walls established on top of the natural bedrock and, in the distance, the ruined remains of one or more now-unidentifiable buildings.
Kuru building 2d: this photograph again shows the few remaining bones, but its most important feature is an absent presence - dozens of skulls are missing, which the Turkish Historical Society claimed was caused by natural conditions, like rain, when it was the result of deliberate, human intervention.
In my fieldwork notes and analysis of the skulls' disappearance, I considered that,
In my fieldwork notes and analysis of the skulls' disappearance, I considered that,
I later concluded that, even if the Turkish military and/or Turkish Historical Society had not actively interfered with the material, but had allowed it to be destroyed passively (by villagers robbing the tomb of its human remains and grave goods and so on), thatall of the diagnostic bones from the top of the stack in the centre had gone; only a few long bones and one jaw fragment appeared to have remained.So, some diagnostic material has been removed.
If it were natural factors that had reburied or degraded "all" of the remains after the reopening of the tomb,it[they] would have to have been exceptional conditions, to have covered the material on top without covering the material beneath that, or to have been such caustic rain, etc., to have decomposed the material on top entirely without leaving any identifiable wear or residue on the material beneath.
would have been sufficient to cause concern and to challenge the state's narrative: after all, if it were not a mass grave, why not protect it, excavate it and prove that it were not a mass grave?Elsewhere, I've collated sources on the story of the mass grave's destruction and examined the excuses given when it was covered up. The other annotated photographs are available here: 2a; 2b; 2c.
Kuru building 2c: this photograph shows the bones left behind after the destruction of the mass grave by the Turkish military.
In fieldwork notes and subsequent analysis, I observed that:
In fieldwork notes and subsequent analysis, I observed that:
Elsewhere, I've collated sources on the story of the mass grave's destruction and examined the excuses given when it was covered up. The other annotated photographs are available here: 2a; 2b; 2d.In the very poor light available, the few remaining bones looked very greyish-black; some villagers attributed this to the Turkish army's use of chemicals on the site, although that's wholly unconfirmed.Before, I could only go on what I'd seen during the flash of the camera; now I've been able to upload and look at the photos. Some of the bones are greyish-black, others brown, while some of the long bones have new breaks in them (clearly visible because of the contrast between the brown or greyish-black exterior and the cream interior).
The newly-broken bones could have been trodden on by anyone and their presence cannot do anything apart from confirm some form of disturbance. The brown bones may be covered in or stained by dirt, soil, etc. and we cannot infer anything from their mere presence; scientific analysis could have told us something - if only that they were stains from the soil - but that is now impossible. The only greyish-black bones I've seen have been exposed to fire, burned.
Kuru building 2b: this is the new, disturbed surface layer of the ancient tomb/mass grave.
In my fieldwork notes from the visit, I stated that:
There was new soil inside the entrance that had fallen in since its reopening, however, the floor inside was different, quite soft soil, only compacted by trampling.Analysing the Turkish Historical Society's theory that the human remains in the mass grave had been destroyed by heavy rain, I concluded that,
There was one pocket of saturated and subsequently hardened soil - a solid mud puddle - but that was in the far left corner (as approached from the current entrance), the other side of the few remaining bones.
the surface layer sounds much less like mud formed by rain and much more like 'the mass grave was dumped with soil by the Turkish military'.Elsewhere, I've collated sources on the story of the mass grave's destruction and examined the excuses given when it was covered up. The other annotated photographs are available here: 2a; 2c; 2d.
Kuru building 2a: this photograph shows the empty rock-cut graves of the original Roman tomb; I'm not displaying its entrance.
This tomb was reused as a mass grave, where Armenians killed in 1915 were dumped: before, I collated the most relevant and informative English and Turkish-language sources on the planned forensic excavation of the mass grave and its destruction by the Turkish military; and after, I visited the site, photographed it and examined the indefensible excuses offered by the Turkish Historical Society in their attempt to cover up the Turkish military's destruction of the site. The other annotated photographs are available here: 2b; 2c; 2d.
This tomb was reused as a mass grave, where Armenians killed in 1915 were dumped: before, I collated the most relevant and informative English and Turkish-language sources on the planned forensic excavation of the mass grave and its destruction by the Turkish military; and after, I visited the site, photographed it and examined the indefensible excuses offered by the Turkish Historical Society in their attempt to cover up the Turkish military's destruction of the site. The other annotated photographs are available here: 2b; 2c; 2d.
Kuru building 1b: this is the interior of the possibly Roman ancient tomb on the outskirts of the village (the entrance of which is shown in Kuru building 1a); it may have been robbed out in antiquity or more recently and there has certainly been rubbish dumped in it recently, but it hsan't been treated or reused the same way the other tomb I visited there was.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)