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.

You do not currently have access to this content.