Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBallance, Michael H.en
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-29T12:15:53Z
dc.date.available2018-03-29T12:15:53Z
dc.date.issued1961en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1842/29076
dc.description.abstracten
dc.description.abstractThe study of the archaeology and topography of the Central Anatolian Plateau has been subject to great fluctuations in interest and emphasis. It was begun, to all intents and purposes, by Leake, Hamilton Texier and Arundell in the first half of the last century. Interest then waned somewhat until Ramsay, in the early eighties, took up the subject with an enthusiasm and brilliance that made him within ten years the almost undisputed authority on the topography and epigraphy of the Plateau. After Ramsay's retirement from active field-work the American Society for Archaeological Research in Asia Minor began the programme of work that resulted in the publication of Monuments Asiae Minoris Antiqua. The emphasis, in this series, was primarily epigraphical, and although points of topography arising from individual inscriptions were faithfully dealt with, no general revision of Ramsay's topographical scheme was attempted. The value of the seven volumes of MAMA, so far published, lies in their consolidation of so much of the basic material on which future topographical and epigraphical studies will have to be based and in the standards of accuracy and objectivity that they have laid down.en
dc.description.abstractArchaeology in the more general sense, the study of the ancient inhabitants of an area from the material remains of their civilisation, has made less progress on the Anatolian Plateau than in most other areas of western Asia simply because there has been no excavation to speak of and the material remains V visible above ground are limited both in variety and quality. She number of standing pre-3yzantine buildings in the Central Plains is very small. It includes the temples at Ankyra and Aizanoi, aqueducts at Antiocheia and Tyana and the badly-damaged remains of a few theatres. Sixteen hundred years of Byzantine and Turkish stone-robbing have resulted in the destruction of everything else, except in montainous areas such as Pisidia and Cilicia Tracheia, where the population has been much reduced in numbers since the Roman period. But if the monuments are few on the ground, publications concerning them are even more meagre. Excavation and architectural survey work has been confined, for practical jeurposes, to Aizanoi and Ankyra. Antiocheia was partly excavated by Ramsay and Robinson many years ago, but the results have never been published.en
dc.description.abstractByzantine buildings are far more numerous than Roman ones, and far more of them have been published. The pioneering work ox Crowfoot and SmirnoV, which formed the basis of Strzygowski's Eleinaslen, was followed by Rott's Kleinasiatisehe Benkmaler, Ramsay and Bell's Thousand and one Churches, and de Jerphanion's monumental Sglises Hupestres. But the almost complete lack of internal evidence for the dating of these churches still remains to be made good, and this will, in the end, involve a good deal of excavation of the most meticulous kind, a process which has as yet only just begun. Until it has been carried much further, a balanced judgement of the importance of Anatolian church-architecture and of its effects on Byzantine art as a whole cannot be attempted.en
dc.description.abstractOur knowledge of the Classical archaeology of Central Asia Minor is now at a point where it would be possible to compile, without further field-work, a very bulky corpus of its inscriptions, a map showing the majority of its cities, some of its villages, and the greater part of its Homan road-system, and lastly a fairly comprehensive general work on its churches. From inscriptions we know a good deal about its social anthropology, its provincial and municipal administration, and its religion. Of the daily life of its inhabitants, we know nothing except from literary sources, from the reliefs on their gravestones and to some extent from the study of the village life of the present-day lurks, who, although differing from their r<jw predecessors in religion and to a large extent in^s-tfcial origin, have inherited from them many of their traditional crafts in building and agriculture.en
dc.description.abstractIt is inevitable in any subject that the emphasis laid on it depends largely on the nature of the evidence. The earlier nineteenth century travellers had ir many ways a more balanced view of the archaeology of Central Anatolia than we can have now, simply because the remains of antiquity that they saw around them were better preserved and more varied. They identified ancient sites by the ruins of buildings upon them, as one can still do today in Syria or the more montainous parts of Turkey. Most of these ruined buildings have since been removed to provide material for Turkish houses, and today the best indication of an important ancient site is the presence of inscriptions in a modem village. As a result, almost all the work done on the subject in the last years has had an epigraphical bias. In another hundred years the number of inscriptions will have been much reduced and we shall fall back more and more on excavation and the study of pottery, neither of which has yet been seriously attempted on the Plateau, so far as the Classical period is concerned.en
dc.description.abstractIn this volume I have attempted to maintain a balance between the three points of view, architectural history, epigraphy and what, for want of a better term, is often called field archaeology.en
dc.publisherThe University of Edinburghen
dc.relation.isreferencedbyen
dc.subjectAnnexe Thesis Digitisation Project 2018 Block 17en
dc.titleAn archaeological reassessment of the classical period in central Asia Minoren
dc.typeThesis or Dissertationen
dc.type.qualificationlevelDoctoralen
dc.type.qualificationnamePhD Doctor of Philosophyen


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record