Geography and Global Change Science: Relationships Necessary,Absent, and Possible

Initiated by geoscientists, the growing debate about the Anthropocene, ‘planetary boundaries’ and global ‘tipping points’ is a significant opportunity for geographers to reconfigure two things: one is the internal relationships among their discipline's many and varied perspectives (topical, philosophical, and methodological) on the real; the other the discipline's actual and perceived contributions to important issues in the wider society. Yet, without concerted effort and struggle, the opportunity is likely to be used in a ‘safe’ and rather predictable way by only a sub‐set of human‐environment geographers. The socio‐environmental challenges of a post‐Holocene world invite old narratives about Geography's holistic intellectual contributions to be reprised in the present. These narratives speak well to many geoscientists, social scientists, and decision‐makers outside Geography. However, they risk perpetuating an emaciated conception of reality wherein Earth systems and social systems are seen as knowable and manageable if the ‘right’ ensemble of expertise is achieved. I argue that we need to get out from under the shadow of these long‐standing narratives. Using suggestive examples, I make the case for forms of inquiry across the human‐physical ‘divide’ that eschew ontological monism and that serve to reveal the many legitimate cognitive, moral, and aesthetic framings of Earth present and future. Geography is unusual in that the potential for these forms of inquiry to become normalised is high compared with other subjects. This potential will only be taken advantage of if certain human‐environment geographers unaccustomed to engaging the world of geoscience and environmental policy change their modus operandi.     

Preliminary Characterization of Pottery by Cathodoluminescence and SEM–EDX Analyses: An Example from the Yeha Region (Ethiopia)

Yeha was a political and cultural centre of the Ethio‐Sabaean culture (D’MT) in northern Ethiopia and southern Eritrea. Part of the archaeological research deals with pottery of local, regional and imported origin. The research—investigations and examinations—tries to classify local pottery in two ways: first, by analysing the mineralogy of the temper using light microscopy and cathodoluminescence; and, second, by analysing the main element composition of the clay matrix using a scanning electron microscope with energy‐dispersive X‐ray detection (SEM–EDX). The cathodoluminescence shows that the temper material has differences in the colours of feldspars with a similar mineralogical composition. The results demonstrate that the pottery was produced by using local material that originates from various sources in the Yeha region and that the same raw materials were used in different types of pottery.     

The Architectural Reuse of Roman Marble and Stone Spolia in the Early Medieval Monte Sorbo Church (Sarsina,Central Italy)

We present the results of a multi‐method archaeometric study concerning the architectural elements reused in Monte Sorbo church (Sarsina, central Italy) between the eighth and ninth centuries AD . The provenance study has focused on classical marbles and stones, which clearly do not originate from the local Apennine geological formations and are thought to come from extra‐regional sources. A large fraction of the tested marbles is from Asia Minor, coming from both the Proconnesian district on Marmara Island and, probably, the Hasançavuslar site near Ephesus (Greco scritto). Of the four remaining marbles investigated, one is from the Carrara district and three are from different Greek quarrying areas, such as Mount Pentelikon (Athens) and the Thasos and Paros islands. The data also highlight the reuse of decorated gravestones made of Pietra di Aurisina as architectonic elements. This limestone is a fossiliferous carbonate stone outcropping in the Trieste Karst region (north‐eastern Italy), which was exploited by both the Romans and the Byzantines. The assignment of all of the columns of the central nave to the same source area provides an argument in favour of their provenance from a single monument, which was probably located in Sarsina or Ravenna, with the ‘colourful taste’ that is typical of the late Antonine and Severian periods.     

On The Grounds Of Post‐Byzantine Greek Icons

The grounds of 51 post‐Byzantine icons (Eastern Orthodox panel paintings) were studied by means of analytical techniques. The artefacts cover the period from the mid‐15th to the mid‐19th century and originate mainly from western (Epirus and the Ionian Islands) and southern Greece (Crete). The findings are examined in the light of technical recipes from related areas and eras, while special insights are gained from the exploration of a gypsum processing recipe by Dionysius of Fourna. A spectrum of ground fabrication practices that is richer than that reported so far or can be deduced from surviving Greek recipes is documented; three instances of ‘grosso‐sottile’ type grounds and a case of ‘inverse grosso‐sottile’ ground are among the reported novel, for post‐Byzantine icons, findings. Moreover, a case of an early icon restoration intervention is documented.     

IN SEARCH OF NEW TIMES: TEMPORALITY IN THE ENLIGHTENMENT AND COUNTER‐ENLIGHTENMENT

Isaiah Berlin and other representatives of historicism have made the Enlightenment and the Counter‐Enlightenment into opposite cultures. The Counter‐Enlightenment is a criticism of the Enlightenment from within, so in many respects they overlap. However, with regard to perceptions of time they contradict each other. The times of the Enlightenment lean heavily toward chronology and can be labeled as “empty,” whereas the time perceptions of the Counter‐Enlightenment can be called “incarnated” and are identical with historical times. As a consequence the differences between the two temporalities lead necessarily to differences in synchronization.     

Arcangelo Ghisleri and the “Right to Barbarity”: Geography and Anti‐colonialism in Italy in the Age of Empire (1875–1914)

This paper addresses the work of early critics of colonialism and Eurocentrism within Italian geography in the Age of Empire. At that time, a minority but rather influential group of Italian scholars, influenced by the international debates promoted by the anarchist geographers Reclus, Kropotkin and Me?nikov, fumed publicly at Italy's colonial ambitions in Africa. Their positions assumed, at least in the case of Arcangelo Ghisleri, the character of a radical critique of both political and cultural European hegemony. These approaches were linked to a similar critique of “internal colonialism”, both Austrian in the Italian‐speaking regions of Trento and Trieste, and Piedmontese in southern Italy. Based on primary sources, and drawing on the international literature on imperial geography and colonial and postcolonial sciences, this paper conjures up the Italian example to discuss how some European geographers of the Age of Empire were also early critics of racism, colonialism and chauvinism, and how these historical experiences can serve current debates on critical, radical and anarchist geographies.