The Impact of Social and Climate Changes on Iraqi Earthen Buildings

Written by Ammar Al-Taee

Mud as an essential material has been associated with Mesopotamia since the early maturity of civilization in the land now known as Iraq, with its earliest mentions in religious epics and myths. One of the first concepts that apparently occupied human thought was the origins of existence and the creation of humans. The Sumerians, as well as the Babylonians, considered mud the primary material from which humans were created, with this belief echoed in later Abrahamic ideas.

One of the key features of Mesopotamian construction and architecture was that, throughout the ages, it relied primarily on mud. The environment determined both types of building materials and construction methods, as well as architectural styles and designs. From these historical, ideological and environmental notions, earthen buildings, constructed as they were from mud, became crucially important to ancient Mesopotamia, representing an essential part of the identity of this early civilisation.

Earthen houses:

Today, the towns, cities and even villages of modern-day Iraq are primarily concrete in nature, as cement has become the most widely used basic construction material, at the expense of mud.

To discover why Iraqis have become reluctant to continue the country’s long traditions of relying on earthen buildings, we find examples of earthen houses still in use today. After a long search, we found a small village called Al-Samoud (Resilience) in Babel Governorate. This village still steadfastly preserves some of the ancient traditions of earthen buildings. We met Abu Abbas, the head of the village, who told us about local mud-built houses still in use today and discussed his own involvement in building earthen houses. However, he told us that because of developments in building materials and the popularization of cement – an economic material that can be prepared quickly, unlike mud, which needs specific mixtures and seasons to prepare it for construction – local people increasingly turned to cement.

His son Abbas believes there are other reasons for earthen houses falling from favour. The introduction of cement contributed to the gradual disappearance of craftsmen who specialized in making mud bricks and earthen plaster. The process of building mud bricks is similar, in principle, to the process of building fired bricks. However, building earthen structures requires specialist skills in preparing mud bricks, binding materials, and plastering methods, as well as expert knowledge of the timings and duration required to ferment mixtures appropriately. These processes are far from instantaneous, meaning that building earthen dwellings requires additional time and costs than constructing concrete buildings. In addition, earthen houses require annual maintenance to ensure they remain weatherproof, unlike cement which requires more minimal and sporadic attention. Abbas believes that dwindling local interest in earthen houses is not only a result of these practical aspects and loss of skilled and knowledgeable craftsmen but because people have also come to reject earthen houses as a symbol of poverty and low social standing.

Abu Abbas said that, whilst his son’s points were correct at the current time, building with mud bricks was previously a considerably cheaper option than cement as work depended on villagers helping each other. His perspective is that earthen buildings were linked to a strong, stable and mutually beneficial social environment. Abu Abbas also pointed out that, although the village is surrounded by earth, after several drought years, the decrease in groundwater levels and the increase in salinity has had an additional impact on the environment upon which this community, and even its social cohesion, long depended. “We are no longer able to farm or raise our livestock easily, as both our lives and the lives of our animals today depend on the water truck that stands next to my house,” he said. He views these environmental changes as the main reason for the migration of many village residents towards Iraq’s towns and cities, something which, in turn, has speeded up the disappearance of previously common building methods and customs.

The impact of such climate changes is not only limited to tangible heritage, such as the earthen buildings themselves, but its threat extends to intangible heritage. Traditional customs, social living, especially tribal social structures and the songs and oral traditions that have long been part of the fabric that binds communities together, are now also under threat.

Abu Abbas prefers earthen houses because they are cool in summer and warm in winter, in contrast to concrete properties which retain heat, something which is incompatible with the local climate, especially the soaring summer temperatures of central and southern Iraq. According to recent studies, average temperatures in the region have been consistently rising, something regularly described as a result of climate change. Although Abu Abbas is committed to preserving his earthen house and traditional way of life for the time being, he admits that, if consistent and reliable electricity and water supplies were to become available in his remote village, he would sacrifice his earthen house and replace it with a cement one, relying on air conditioners to cool it in the summer months.

During our visit to the house of Abu Abbas, I noticed beds and chairs also constructed out of mud, which evoked many household scenes depicted on ancient Sumerian cylinder seals. The Iraqi Museum in Baghdad holds collections of miniature models of mud furnishings very similar to those seen in Abu Abbas’ residence. The mud bed was located in the outside courtyard of the house and is where Abu Abbas sleeps at night in the summer, under the stars, to enjoy the cooling dawn breeze. The survival of mud tools and furniture is linked to the presence of earthen houses, which will also disappear with the disappearance of earthen houses.

Earthen heritage monuments:

Many specialists believe that protecting this Mesopotamian heritage of earthen buildings, as well as all aspects relating to mud craftsmanship, is very important. The responsibility of protecting this cultural heritage falls primarily on Iraqi governmental and non-governmental institutions working with heritage, but Iraqi universities should also share this responsibility. To this day, departments of architecture, whether in Baghdad University or at Babil University, do not generally study the earthen architecture of Mesopotamia.

“There is no real interest in teaching the earthen architecture of Mesopotamia in Iraqi universities, and all we know about such earthen buildings is that they used mud to make mud bricks and added straw to them,” said Dima Saad Zabar, an architect who holds a Master’s degree from Nahrain University, Baghdad. “After my work documenting the Temple of Ninmakh in the ancient city of Babylon with the World Monument Fund, I realized the importance of this architecture, and I now believe it deserves to have a special section dedicated to its teaching in Iraqi universities.”

The Iraqi higher education system also faces an additional problem, as archeology departments countrywide lack specialists in teaching conservation. Despite this, there has been a recent trend towards lecturers encouraging students to write theses focusing on the maintenance of historic buildings and/or ancient artefacts. There have been reported instances of professors specialising in, for example, Islamic arts and having no practical field experience in maintenance, supervising theses on the preservation of ancient buildings or artefacts. This not only threatens to undermine the value of Iraqi qualifications but, in the future, could put valuable archaeological sites and artefacts in danger. Graduates with backgrounds lacking in sound historic preservation principles, an understanding of international practice, and practical experiences may one day be responsible for maintaining Iraq’s precious heritage.

During a 2015 overland trip visiting Iranian heritage and religious sites, which encompassed Mehran, Khorramabad, Arak, Qom, Nishapur, Mashhad, Yazd and Isfahan, I found that earthen buildings and related crafts received significant care and attention. Furthermore, I discovered that Iranian plans for managing, preserving, and protecting earthen heritage sites differed greatly from our limited capabilities in Iraq, where heritage management and maintenance has long been a low priority for successive governments.

Today, the earthen monuments in Iraq, and in Babylon in particular, suffer from many problems that urgently need to be addressed. The first of these is the lack of overall management plans for individual sites, as well as a lack of any comprehensive countrywide maintenance strategies. Another problem is one of recent history. Between 1979 and 2003, monument maintenance relied on direct implementation of maintenance work without any prior studies for long-term viability of this and without suitable consideration of materials used. Such prior studies would have represented not only a doctor’s diagnosis of a disease but also could have identified appropriate methods of treating it in the long term.

Therefore, previous maintenance work undertaken on earthen monuments included reinforcing ancient structures by filling them with hundreds of tons of cement, concrete, fire bricks and assorted other materials. For example, more than 40 different non-earthen building materials were used on the Ninmakh Temple alone in order to keep it standing. Whilst this gave an outward appearance of the integral strength of the temple, during a Babylon International Festival, in fact the use of modern construction materials meant that its interior was carcinogenic to the structure itself.

Unfortunately, since 2003 and up to the present day, the reality of Iraq’s earthen monuments has become bitterer. Valuable ancient buildings and sites have suffered from two decades of near-total neglect. The result of an ongoing lack of regular maintenance, the impact of climate change and human interventions, and the negative impact of former inappropriate modern materials deployed during maintenance is that large parts of earthen monuments have been lost.

Today, Iraq’s State Board of Antiquities and Heritage (SBAH) which is the institution responsible for these monuments does not have the funds needed to maintain them. When funds are available, usually at the end of the fiscal year (in the months of October and November) these are very modest and must be spent within these two months. The question is: What can be accomplished in just two months?

A project to maintain parts of just one of Ancient Babylon’s temples in an appropriate scientific manner require at least two years. Here we return to the words of Abu Abbas from the village of Al-Samoud: “Building with mud requires not only prior preparations but also specific seasons for the processes.” Long-term successful maintenance using sympathetic materials requires years not months. In addition, the effects of the climate changes seen in the region over the last few years have further complicated maintenance operations as base materials – including water and earth – now have higher salinity and a greater presence of pollutants. Processes to make sympathetic maintenance materials now have to include more careful soil selection, and the purification of both water and earth before construction materials can be made, which takes still more time.

Another challenge – also seen in Al-Samoud village – is that the mud brick craftsmen and masons have all but disappeared, abandoning their former careers due to the prevalence of cement, fire bricks and concrete in not only construction but also building maintenance.

Today, those specialists and experts have grown old, and their health does not often allow them to practice this arduous craft. Therefore, since 2018, the World Monument Fund has focused on training a new generation of specialists by selecting 10 local youth from villages surrounding ancient Babylon to become mud brick and earthen craftsmen, to fill the gap that the cement created it. The goal is for these young people to have the skills to be able to maintain the earthen buildings in Babylon in the event that Iraqi institutions concerned with heritage preservation ask them to do so in the future.

Although undoubtedly a valuable initiative for Babylon, it does raise concerns about what the future might hold for the thousands of other earthen heritage sites spread across Iraq.

Egyptian architect Mohammad Tantawi, who specializes in earthen buildings, is working with us today to maintain Babylon’s Temple of Ninmakh. He believes that traditional adobe (clay) buildings in Egypt face similar problems to those seen in Iraq, both from maintenance and climate perspectives.

Preserving and maintaining earthen heritage and even reviving traditional building practices in the Middle East and North Africa is something largely dependent on international universities and maintenance missions. Unfortunately, in light of the apparent inability of national governments and institutions to prioritise heritage and provide appropriate levels of financial and practical support and expertise in this field, foreign institutions remain a key supporter in the fight to preserve this cultural heritage from further ruinous deterioration or even extinction.