---

When the Byzantine monuments of Asia Minor and Syria first came to the attention of scholars, in about the year 1900, they were viewed largely in an art-historical perspective focused on form and technique. Their importance lay in the contribution they made, or were thought to make, to the grand debates of the time: were the origins of Christian art to be sought in the West or the East? Was Hellenism or the Orient the formative influence during the transition from antiquity to the Middle Ages? The monuments in question were above ground. They could be measured and photographed and were then classified typologically. In the same period the great excavations of the classical cities of Asia Minor started, those of Syria following later, in all of which little interest was expressed in the late antique and later, namely Byzantine phases.

What has happened in the last 60 years, since World War II interrupted these ventures? Urban excavations resumed and their numbers expanded. At Sardis, Anemurium, Amorium, Sagalassos, Apamea, Bostra there is now an overt interest in post classical periods. This is accompanied by advances in techniques, including a greatly increased knowledge and classification of ceramics, both Late Roman and Byzantine, as well as an invasion of scientific analysis. More importantly, the continued investigation of urban life is now paired with a shift in interest to the countryside, as exemplified by Georges Tchalenko's Villages antiques de la Syrie du Nord (1953-58) where the study of monuments was replaced by an interest in settlement. Art history gave way via archaeology to economic history as the prime explanatory factor. An understanding of the city interacting with its hinterland was now possible. That is to be welcomed, but another important element cannot be overlooked. We are dealing with a historical period and without the written word even the most refined techniques will not always tell us all we want to know.