Anotace:
This article discusses two contrasting approaches to archaeological survey using aerial reconnaissance. A more traditional strategy is to look for interesting spots in the landscape with a highly concentrated archaeological record. These are usually called “sites”. This concept is still used in everyday practice, despite its long-standing problematic character. The opposing approach divides the studied region into analytical units, which are sampled for evidence in a standardized manner and only then is the collected information subsequently interpreted. Varying densities of recorded facts across space are now studied rather than the binary categories of “on-site” and “off-site”. In Czech archaeology, this operational difference has often been classified as the “synthesizing” vs. “analytical” research methodology. This debate has been ongoing for quite some time in the context of field-walking and surface collection of archaeological finds. This text examines an analogous problem in the field of aerial survey, where it seems to be closely connected to another long-standing methodological and terminological discussion: the comparative usefulness of “oblique vs. vertical” aerial photography.