A completely natural environment? I think you just excluded two thousand years worth of pastoral landscape paintings.
A completely natural environment? I think you just excluded most places on Earth for the last several thousand years (see for example, "Australia’s Original Landscape Gardeners").
However, I am struggling to understand why we would describe some image as a landscape if the intention was not to express the 'intellectual and emotional' essence of a place.
The word "completely" may not have been the best choice of words in the context. To express it another way, I'd say that for me
, the completely natural elements in a landscape, that is, those elements in the scene that have not been created by man, are the elements that tend evoke the emotional essence of that place, if it is defined as a landscape.
If the main feature in a landscape is a building, for example, then there would be good reason to use the term architecture rather than landscape to describe the scene.
Words have to have agreed meanings for us to communicate, or confusion reigns.
For example, if I were to ask my wife to buy a few landscape photos or paintings to decorate the walls of our new house, and after a day's shopping she returned with a handful of works that looked like Eric Meola's abstract patterns of neon lights, I would exclaim that those were not landscapes. I would probably say, "Don't you know what a landscape is?", whereupon she would probably slap my face.