I think the idea of a site inherently implies a construct of time within a temporal period.

For instance: the Haimalayas were once under water -- although the 'site' spelled in global co-ordinates may be the same the geo-physical condition is markedly different now than it had been 50m years ago.


Also the definition of a site inherently has as a parameter : a lack of mobility. ( in german, and possibly in other cultures/languages for instaAlsonce, real estate is classified, translated, as immobilien -- quite legibly, for us im- mobile -- lack of mobility -- stationary)


On a cultural level, one must question migration itself -- does a migratory condition preclude the potential existence of a site? When a living being dies in a particular place in its journey,
the journey remains dynamic, the place of death becomes immortalized.

A site, with regard to a narrative, then requires more than the glacially
slow movements of geological time, less than the temporary transience of a migrant -- but certainly somewhere in between.

In some ways this intersticial temporality is of our own, culturally specific construction.