Regional Patterns of Transition at Çadır Höyük in the Byzantine Period

Abstract

Byzantine archaeological sites tend to be seen as representative of the empire as a whole, with little concern given to regional context. Within the imperial narrative that shapes Byzantine history, sites—whether urban or rural—are often used to explain and illustrate imperial trends. However, when we remove that overarching narrative, the sites in Anatolia provide the potential to view them as singular examples of local and regional identity. In this article, we have separated out four types of data: fortifications, coins, faunal material, and archaeobotanical evidence to illustrate how a close examination of the data provides new ways of understanding regional identity. In doing so, we posit that the Byzantine empire needs to be seen as a collection of local identities working alongside one another, but always expressing individual needs and resources.

Not Seeing Is Believing: Ritual Practice and Architecture at Chalcolithic Çadır Höyük in Anatolia

“…This might suggest that the central plateau, within which Çadır Höyük rests, would then exist as its own regional and cultural entity, but the ceramic evidence does not confirm this Çadır Höyük rests within the bend of the Kızılırmak (river) in the province of Yozgat (Figures 1-3). Since 1994, continuous excavations have revealed 6000 years of occupation on the Çadır mound, spanning the late sixth millennium BCE to the 14th century of this era (Cassis et al 2019;Ross et al 2019a;Steadman et al 2019a). Excavations on all four slopes of the mound, as well as on the North Terrace, have revealed the fortifications built by residents during the second millennium BCE Hittite age (Ross et al 2019b;, and the various industries undertaken during the Iron Age (first millennium BCE) Phrygian and later empires (Steadman et al 2019b, forthcoming).…”