Byzantine Anatolia

This article may need to be rewritten to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards, as currently, the article is a very poor variant of History of the Byzantine Empire. It should focus on Anatolia, not the Empire as a whole except where developments impacted on the peninsula itself. You can help. The talk page may contain suggestions. (January 2013)

Part of a series on the
History of Greece
Neolithic Greece Pelasgians
Greek Bronze Age Helladic Cycladic Minoan Mycenaean Greece 1750 BC–1050 BC
Ancient Greece Greek Dark Ages 1050 BC–750 BC Archaic Greece 800 BC–480 BC Classical Greece 500 BC–323BC Hellenistic Greece 323 BC–31 BC Roman Greece 146 BC–330
Medieval Greece Byzantine Greece Frankish and Latin states 1204
Early modern Greece Venetian Crete Venetian Ionian Islands Ottoman Greece
Modern Greece Septinsular Republic War of Independence First Hellenic Republic Kingdom of Greece National Schism Second Hellenic Republic 4th of August Regime Axis occupation (Collaborationist regime, Free Greece) Civil War Military Junta Third Hellenic Republic
History by topic Agriculture Art Constitution Economy Judaism Military Names
Greece portal
v t e

Part of a series on the
History of Turkey
Prehistory Prehistory of Anatolia Palaeolithic Anatolia c. 500,000–  10,000 BC Mesolithic Anatolia c. 11,000–  9,000 BC Neolithic Anatolia c. 8,000–  5,500 BC
Bronze Age Troy 3000–700 BC Hattians 2500–2000 BC Akkadian Empire 2400–2150 BC Luwians 2300–1400 BC Assyria 1950–1750 BC Kussara 1780–1680 BC Achaeans (Homer) 1700–1300 BC Kizzuwatna 1650–1450 BC Hittites 1680–1220 BC Arzawa 1500–1320 BC Mitanni 1500–1300 BC Hayasa-Azzi 1500–1290 BC Lycia 1450–350 BC Assuwa 1300–1250 BC Diauehi 1200–800 BC Neo-Hittites 1200–800 BC Phrygia 1200–700 BC Caria 1150–547 BC Tuwanuwa 1000–700 BC Ionia 1000–545 BC Urartu 859–595/585 BC
Iron Age Diauehi 1200–800 BC Neo-Hittites 1200–800 BC Phrygia 1200–700 BC Caria 1150–547 BC Doris 1100–560 BC Aeolis 1000–560 BC Tuwanuwa 1000–700 BC Ionia 1000–545 BC Urartu 859–595/585 BC Median Empire 678–549 BC Lydia 685–547 BC
Classical Age Classical Anatolia Classical Thrace Attalid kingdom 282–129 BC Galatia 281–64 BC Parthian Empire 247 BC–224 AD Armenian Empire 190 BC–428 AD Roman Republic 133–27 BC Commagene 163 BC–72 AD Ancient Rome 133 BC-27 BC–330 AD Sasanian Empire 224–651 AD (briefly in Anatolia)
Medieval Anatolia Kara Koyunlu (1375–1468) Ak Koyunlu (1378–1501)
Ottoman Era Periods of Ottoman Empire Defeat and dissolution (1908–1922)
Republic of Turkey Periods of Turkey War of Independence (1919–1922) Provisional government (1920–1923) One-party period (1923–1930) (1930–1945) Multi-party period (1945–present)
By topic Agriculture Anatolian peoples Christianity Genetic history Migration of Turks into Anatolia Constitutional history Diplomatic history Economic history LGBT history Military history Cultural history Jewish history
Timeline
Turkey portal
v t e

Byzantine Anatolia refers to the peninsula of

(years 1080s), when imperial authority in the area began to collapse.

The Byzantine Empire re-established control over parts of Anatolia during the

.

History

Background

(54 BC – 217 AD).

From Constantine to Phocas: 324 to 602 AD

Anatolia's prosperity largely continued during the reign of Constantine the Great and his successors. The Anatolian peninsula would see part of the conflict between Constantine and his rival Licinius at the Battle of Chrysopolis, but on the whole the region would see little of the chaos that wracked other parts of the Empire during the next few centuries.

The first major disruption of this peace was the

, but the region would never be directly threatened.

Heraclian dynasty and the Barbarian invasions

Byzantine Syria

(620–630)

Byzantine–Sasanian wars

In 602 AD, the Byzantine Emperor Maurice was overthrown by the usurper known as Phocas. Maurice had previously been instrumental in the accession of Khosrow II to the Sassanid throne as Emperor, and upon his usurpation, Khosrow declared war with the casus belli of avenging Maurice. Phocas was successful in keeping the war out of Anatolia. However, in 608, Heraclius, the son of a governor of Carthage by the same name, launched a revolt against Phocas, which weakened the eastern frontier. Heraclius was successful in overthrowing Phocas in 610, but in 611, the Persians succeeded in breaking through the Armenian frontier and invading Anatolia proper. Over the next four years, forces under the generals Shahrbaraz and Shahin defeated the Byzantines in several key battles, taking control of the southeastern part of Anatolia, known as Cilicia and eventually opening the way to lay siege to Chalcedon on the northwestern coast. in 617, Chalcedon itself fell. Rejecting a peace delegation sent by Heraclius, Shahin withdrew from Anatolia for the present to continue the war on other fronts, namely Egypt and Syria.^[3]

In 622 AD, driven to desperation by shocking failures to hold onto classically

Arab Muslim invasions

In 633, the Arab Muslim forces under the

The loss of Egypt and Syria would prove catastrophic for the Byzantine Empire, but would dramatically heighten the importance of Anatolia. Previously, Egypt had been the main source of food and wealth for the empire, mainly due to the fertile lands watered by the

. This would be the first in a series of raids into Anatolia that would last for hundreds of years. The desperate straits of the empire at this time caused a massive shift in strategic thinking for the Byzantines. For the next two centuries they would cease being an empire of conquest, of which they were largely incapable at the moment.

Introduction of the thematic system

Constantly menaced by the Arabs to the east, the

These thematic troops utilized

guerilla warfare

tactics to defend against constant Arab raids into Anatolia for hundreds of years. Rather than attempting to defeat Arab armies head on, the troops would often ambush plunder laden Arab raiding parties as they made their way back out of Anatolia in the hope of retaking some plunder and deterring further Arab raids. The empire simply lacked the strength to go on the offensive at this time.

The first siege of Constantniople and Justinian II

Constans's son Constantine IV (668–685 AD) had been made co-emperor in 654, and ruled in the east while his father campaigned in the west (662–668), succeeding him on the latter's death. In 646, almost immediately he had to deal with Arab attacks on Amorium in Phrygia and Chalcedon in Bithynia. This was followed by the capture of Cyzicus in Mysia (670), as well as Smyrna and other coastal cities, finally attacking Constantinople in 674. This first siege of Constantinople demonstrated how vulnerable the city was to attack, but also its strengths which ultimately prevailed, the Arabs lifting the siege in 678, and after further setbacks signing another truce which allowed Constantine to concentrate on the Balkan threat. For a long time the Danube in the Balkans had been considered the frontier that must be defended to maintain the integrity of Thrace. Now a new Slavic threat, the Bulgars crossed the Danube and inflicted heavy losses on the Byzantine forces in 681. Faced with the uncompromising religious controversy that had perplexed his father he convened another ecumenical council, the sixth (Third Council of Constantinople) in 680, which condemned Monotheletism. He also initiated a series of civil and military reform to cope with the shrunken and threatened empire. This was to do away with the original system of provinces with a new administrative structure based on themata (themes), the remaining parts of Anatolia being divided amongst seven themata. When he died in 668 he was succeeded by his son, Justinian II (685–695, 705–711), co-emperor since 681.

Justinian was an ambitious ruler eager to emulate his illustrious ancestor,

Leontios proved equally unpopular and was in turn overthrown by

Tiberios III

(698–705). Tiberios managed to bolster the eastern frontier and reinforced the defences of Constantinople, but meanwhile Justinian was conspiring to make a comeback, and after forming an alliance with the Bulgars succeeded in taking Constantinople and executing Tiberios.

Justinian then continued to reign for a further six years (705–711). His treatment of Tiberios and his supporters had been brutal and he continued to rule in a manner that was despotic and cruel. He lost the ground regained by Tiberios in the east, and imposed his views on the pope. However, before long he faced a rebellion led by

, merging it with emperor, thus strengthening the emperors' constitutional position as absolute monarch.

The non-dynastic years of anarchy 711–717

Main article:

The Years of Anarchy 711-717

The years 711 to 717 were a troublesome time between the two dynasties, Heraclian and Isaurian and reflect a loss of leadership that had occurred under Justinian II, and could equally be dated from his first deposition in 695.

Anastasius II

(713–715).

Anastasius reversed his predecessor's religious policies and responded to Arab attacks by sea and land, this time reaching as far as Galatia in 714, with some success. However the very army that had placed him on the throne (the Opsikion army) rose against him, proclaimed a new emperor and besieged Constantinople for six months, eventually forcing Anastasius to flee.

The troops had proclaimed

(717–741) bringing an end to the cycle of violence and instability.

It was surprising that the Byzantine Empire was able to survive, given its internal conflicts, the speedy collapse of the Sassanid Empire under Arab threat, and it was being threatened simultaneously on two fronts. However the strength of the military organisation within the empire, and factional struggles within the Arab world enabled this situation.

Iconoclasm: Isaurian dynasty 717–802

Main article:

Isaurian dynasty

, was to last for nearly a century.

Leo III 717–741

Having overthrown Theodosius, the first problem Leo faced was the Arab siege of Constantinople, which was abandoned in 718, Leo having continued his predecessors alliance with the Bulgars. His next pressing task was to consolidate his power to avoid being himself deposed and to restore order in the face of the chaos that had ensued from the years of civil strife. And indeed the need to do so became clear in 719 when the deposed

, which unlike Justinian's Corpus on which it was based, was in Greek rather than in Latin. Administratively he subdivided a number of the themata, for reasons similar to that of his predecessors, smaller units meant less power to local officials and less threat to central authority. ^[8] When Leo died he was succeeded by his son, Constantine V (741–775).

Iconclasm 730–842

One of the most significant influences of Leo III was his involvement with the Iconoclastic movement in about 726. This controversy, the removal and destruction of religious icons in favour of simple crosses, and the persecution of icon worshippers was to have a profound effect on the empire, its religion and culture over most of the next century before being finally laid to rest in 842. Leo's exact role has been debated ^[9] An opponent of image worship has been referred to as an εἰκονοκλάστης (iconoclast), while those supporting image worship have been variously described as εἰκονολάτραι (

) or εἰκονόφιλοι (iconophiles).

The traditional view was that Leo III issued an edict ordering the removal of images in 726, followed by prohibiting the veneration of images, but the controversy had existed in the church for some time and received some impetus from the rise of proximity of Islam and its attitude to imagery. The iconoclastic movement in the east considerably exacerbated the rift between it and the western church. The first phase of iconoclasm coincided with the Isaurian dynasty, from the edict of Leo III to Irene and the Second Council of Nicaea (Seventh Ecumenical Council) in 787. Iconoclasm was then revived by Leo V, and it persisted until 842 in the reign of Michael III (842–867) and regency of Theodora.

Leo's successors 741–802

Constantine V (741–775) had a less successful reign than his father, for no sooner had he ascended the throne than he was attacked and defeated by his brother in law, Artabasdos who proceeded to seize the title resulting in civil war between the forces of the two emperors, who had divided the themata between them. However Constantine managed to overcome his adversary by 743. The conflict was at least in part one over icons, Artabasdos being supported by the iconodule faction.

Under Constantine, Iconoclasm became further entrenched following the Council of Hieria in 754, followed by a concerted campaign against the iconodules and the suppression of monasteries which tended to be the centre of iconophilia. He continued his father's reorganisation of the themata and embarked on aggressive and expensive foreign wars against both the Arabs and Bulgars. He died campaigning against the latter, being succeeded by his son, Leo IV.

Leo IV (775–780) also had to put down uprisings, in his case his half-brothers. His marriage epitomised the conflict in Byzantine society over icons, raised an iconoclast himself, he married Irene an iconodule, resulting in a more conciliatory policy. Like his predecessors he had to defend his borders against both Arab and Bulgar, and like his father died campaigning against the Bulgars.

When Leo died his son, Constantine VI (780–797) was coemperor but only nine years old, and reigned with his mother Irene as regent. An unpopular ruler even after gaining majority, he was engaged in power struggles with his mother, who had been declared empress. Eventually his mother's supporters deposed him, leaving her as sole empress.

Irene (797–802), therefore was empress consort (775–780), empress dowager and regent (780–797) and empress regnant (797–80). As sole empress she was able to officially restore icon veneration during her regency in 787 by means of the

) in 800 further deepening the rift between east and west. With Irene ended the Isaurian dynasty when she was deposed by a patrician conspiracy.

Nikephorian dynasty 802–813

Main article:

Nikephorian dynasty

Following the deposition of Irene, there was founded a relatively short-lived dynasty for the era, the Nikephorian dynasty. The empire was in a weaker and more precarious position than it had been for a long time and its finances were problematic. [10] During this era Byzantium was almost continually at war on two frontiers which drained its resources, and like many of his predecessors, Nikephoros (802–811) himself died campaigning amongst the Bulgars to the north. Furthermore, Byzantium's influence continued to wane in the west with the formation of a new empire in the west under Charlemagne (800–814) in 800.

Nikephoros I 802–811

.

Nikephoros' successors 811–813

On Nikephoros' death, he was succeeded by his son and coemperor, Staurakios (811). However he was severely wounded in the same battle in which his father died, and after much controversy regarding the succession was persuaded to abdicate later that year by his sister's husband, Michael I (811–813), who succeeded him.

Michael I pursued more diplomatic than military solutions, however having survived the battle against Krum of Bulgaria that took the lives of his two predecessors, he engaged Krum once more and once more was defeated, severely weakening his position. Aware of a likely revolt he chose to abdicate given the grisly fate of so many prior overthrown emperors, ending the brief dynasty of Nikephoros.

Leo V and the Phrygians 820–867

The Nikephorian dynasty was overthrown by a general, Leo V (813–820), suspected of treachery in the Battle of Versinicia (813) in which the Byzantines under Michael I were routed by the Bulgarians. ^[11] Leo had already played a checkered role in imperial politics, rewarded by Nikephoros I for switching sides in the

from which he was able to orchestrate Michael's downfall and his own succession.

Leo V 813–820

Leo's first task was to deal with the Bulgarian situation, who now occupied most of

.

In religious matters, despite early evidence of image veneration, he adopted iconoclasm, this precipitating the second phase of the divisive controversy (814–842). He appears to have been motivated by the observation that the return of image veneration coincided with a period of untimely ends of emperors. He made this official through the Council of Constantinople in 815.

His downfall was the jailing of one of his generals,

, on suspicion of conspiracy. Michael then organised the assassination of Leo, and assumed power as Michael II (820–829).

Phrygian (Amorian) dynasty 820–867

The interlude of Leo V was followed by yet another short-lived dynasty, variously referred to as the Phrygian or Amorian dynasty after Michael II, who like Leo came from Amorium (Phrygia), the capital of the Anatolic Theme.

Michael II 820–829

No sooner had Michael deposed Leo, than he was confronted with revolt by a fellow military commander, Thomas the Slav, who claimed the throne. The ensuing civil war dragged on until 824, including a siege of Constantinople, when Thomas was defeated and killed. Michael continued the iconoclastic policy of Leo. After his death, he was succeeded by his son and coemperor, Theophilos (829–842).

Theophilus 829–842

Theophilus was now faced with a flare-up of the Byzantine–Arab wars, the Arab forces once again demonstrating their ability to penetrate deep into Anatolia and inflict significant losses on the Byzantine, if short lived, and vice versa. A significant Arab triumph was the sacking of the dynastic homeland of Amorium in 838. When he died in 842, he was succeeded by his son Michael III (842–867).

The demise of iconoclasm: Michael III 842–867

Michael III however was only two years old, so effective control fell to his mother,

.

Theodora, like her predecessor Irene lost no time in putting an end to the iconoclastic movement once and for all.

During his reign important administrative reforms and reconstruction were undertaken.

Michael's reign included the usual wins and losses on the Arab front. However, despite Leo V's

of 860.

Basil then arranged to murder Bardas in 866, and was adopted by Michael and crowned co-emperor a few months later. Michael and Basil were entangled in a complex sexual melange involving Michael's mistress Eudokia Ingerina, and his sister Thekla. Michael also appointed, or announced he was going to appoint as co-emperor, Basiliskianos. This so alarmed Basil, in terms of potentially threatening the line of succession of which he was now the direct heir, that he had both Michael and Basiliskianos murdered, and ascended the throne as Basil I (867–886).

Macedonian dynasty 867–1056

The last Amorian emperor,

in 882 ended in a defeat. Basil managed to make an alliance with Armenia that brought a measure of safety to the east of Asia Minor. Basil died in 886 and was succeeded by Leo VI.

Leo's military record had a fairly unimpressive start. In 897, the emirate of Tarsus was able to sack the headquarters of the

. Additionally, the Armenian allies had to deal with a separate Arab invasion that weakened their position against the Arabs. Combined with other difficulties, Leo was unable to make progress in Anatolia until 900, when he launched a new offensive against Tarsus. This campaign was successful, culminating in the capture of the emir of Tarsus and weakening the emirate. The next few years saw more offensives that gradually weakened the Arab presence in the east and allowed the empire to make its first eastern conquests in years. The empire's grip on Anatolia was stronger at Leo's death than it had been in a long time.

Ending the raids

In the tenth century, Byzantium gradually began regaining strength it had previously lost. On the eastern frontier, this meant a gradual pushing back of Arab power. The first major blow was struck by

Melitene

.

Reconquest 961-1025

In 961, the general

, which dealt a major blow to Sayf al-Dawla. By 965, Cilica was entirely back in Byzantine hands. al-Dawla faced continuous revolts for the rest of his reign that stymied his ability to fight back. The campaign of reconquest continued and culminated in 969 with the retaking of Antioch by Byzantine forces.

The reconquest was due to several reasons. For one, the Abbasid Caliphate was in a fractured state at the time, facing multiple internal issues and the rise of the rival

Fatimid

Caliphate. This meant the caliphate was unable to offer a tangible response to Byzantine aggression. Furthermore, once Sayf al-Dawla was defeated, there was no other Arab state in the immediate region to slow the Byzantine efforts. Finally, Arab raids on the empire had ceased long ago, giving the Byzantines time to assemble a powerful army.

In 969, Nikephoros was overthrown by his subordinate, John I Tzimiskes. Tzimiskes proved to be just as capable and active as Nikephoros. Aleppo soon submitted to the empire and became a Roman vassal, while remaining a Muslim state. This was an unprecedented development that further strengthened Anatolia's southern borders and demonstrated the new power of Byzantium. Tzimiskes continued the offensive with campaigns into Mesopotamia and into Syria against the Fatimid Caliphate. By 975, Tzimiskes had campaigned far south into the Levant and Syria, pushing the borders away from Anatolia and extending Byzantine hegemony into Syria.^[12] Tzimiskes' strengthening of the armies also blunted the only serious attempt to take Antioch in 971.

While neither Tzimiskes nor Phokas had a unified strategy, their conquests tended to be territory that either posed a direct threat to Byzantine territory in Asia Minor, such as Cilcia, or territory that had a large Christian population such as Antioch. These territories, along with the vassalization of Aleppo, secured Anatolia from southern incursion and prevented any Muslim attempts to raid Anatolia from the south.^[13] Initially, it seemed that the empire would resume a defensive posture. However, the next emperor, Basil II, would soon address the north eastern borders of Anatolia.

Prelude to Manzikert

The Macedonian dynasty came to an end with the death of Theodora in 1059, who had no children or heirs to replace her. After a brief succession of emperors, she was replaced by

The Battle of Manzikert and the Crusades

Manzikert

In 1068, the emperor

De Casibus Virorum Illustrium.^[18]

The Crisis of the Normans and the Turks

Weak leadership at the top would lead to civil war and a poor response to the waves of incoming Turks who now entered Anatolia. The exact timeline is unclear due in part to a lack of sources during this time. For the year of 1072, the Byzantines did not have to deal with an organized invasion by the Seljuks, but in 1073, an attempt to stabilize Anatolia would end in disaster. One of the leaders,

The Komnenian Restoration and the First Crusade

In 1081, Alexios Komnenos successfully led a coup against the government and became emperor. Alexios was a capable general and leader, but before he could deal with the situation in Anatolia, his attention was drawn westward by another Norman invasion and incursions by the

Bohemond of Taranto

, an old rival of Alexios.

In 1097, the Crusaders launched an attack against Nicea. Before the city could be sacked, Alexios was able to negotiate a surrender by the city's Turkish garrison and a return of the city into Byzantine hands. The Crusaders then marched eastwards through Anatolia. They were opposed by the Turks at Dorylaeum. The Crusaders were able to defeat the Turkish armies and open the way through Anatolia. They were assisted by a Byzantine general named Tatikios who ensured the handover of several towns to Byzantine hands. In 1098, the Crusaders made their way to Antioch and laid siege to it. Capturing the city in 1099, the Crusaders left Anatolia and proceeded southward to Jerusalem. Absent from their ranks, however, was Bohemond, who stayed behind in Antioch and became a rival once more to the Byzantines.

The result of the First Crusade was a successful reconstruction of control over westernmost parts of Anatolia for the Byzantine Empire. However, the

would prove to be a new threat to Byzantine power in the region. In 1108, Alexios finally defeated Bohemond, who returned to Italy, but failed to return Antioch to Byzantine hands. Byzantium was thus given a foothold from which to attempt to reassert control over all of the peninsula.

John II Komnenos

Alexios was succeeded by his son John in 1118. John continued his father's strategy of slowly taking back control over Anatolia. Contending with both the Seljuks and the Crusader states, John's strategy was one of patience, slowly chipping away at his enemies. By 1140, John had moved his eastern frontiers into central Anatolia and he was able to gain almost total control over the coasts. John was even able to launch campaigns into Syria, echoing his namesake John I Tzimiskes.

Manuel and the Battle of Myriokephalon

John was succeeded by his son Manuel Komnenos in 1143. Manuel initially pursued a similar strategy to his father and grandfather, however the political situation he inherited from them, as well as his own ambitions to restore Roman power, demanded that his attention be primarily focused outside of Anatolia in Italy, Egypt, and the Balkans. However, he did not totally abandon Anatolia, both fortifying the border and launching limited raids into the Sultanate of Rum. By 1162, Manuel and Kilij Arslan II established a truce which allowed Manuel to focus his attention elsewhere.^[20] The treaty proved to be a double edged sword, as Arslan was able to solidify his own position and defeat his rivals. Arslan gradually became more belligerent and refused to honor treaty obligations. Alarmed, Manuel quickly raised an army and marched against the Sultan, hoping to take his capital at Iconium. Manuel made serious tactical errors, however, such as failing to properly scout the way ahead of him and taking predictable routes through Anatolia. He was thus ambushed at Myriokephalon by Kilij Arslan, and his army was soon routed in a humiliating defeat reminiscent of Manzikert a century earlier. Manuel, however, was able to rally his army and avoid the fate of Romanos Diogenes, and Kilij Arslan was quick to seek a peace treaty. Manuel could thus maintain his family's gains over the years in Anatolia, but his offensive drive was finished, and he added no further territory to Byzantine Anatolia.^[21]

The Angeloi and disintegration of Byzantine power

The Komnenian dynasty came to an end in 1186 with the fall of Andronikos I Komnenos. He was replaced by Isaac II Angelos. The primary source of attention for Isaac was a Bulgarian rebellion in the Balkans. The most notable event in Anatolia was the Third Crusade, which witnessed Frederick Barbarossa travel through Anatolia, sacking Iconium along the way and defeating the Seljuks. Unfortunately for the Empire, Isaac was an incompetent emperor who failed to defeat his enemies and alienated those who could have been his friends. He was usurped in 1195 by Alexios III Angelos. Alexios proved to be similarly incompetent and was unable to stop further advances into Anatolia by a resurgent Sultanate of Rum. In 1204, a new Byzantine state emerged in Anatolia based out of Trebizond. They were not met by any imperial response, due to the Fourth Crusade.

The Fourth Crusade and Byzantine successor states

The Fourth Crusade would prove to be a grave challenge to the Byzantine Empire. The loss of a central authority figure shattered the empire, breaking it into four major successor states that each held sway over different parts of the empire.

, would contend for the remains of the empire in Anatolia, with the Nicean Empire holding the northwestern coast and the Trapezuntine empire holding the northeastern coast.

The end of Byzantine Anatolia

The 1300s would see the final end of the last Byzantine territory in Anatolia. The Nicean Empire had largely consisted of the northwestern corner of Anatolia, but these lands now came under threat from the rising power of the

Mehmet II

. In 1461, the Empire of Trebizond, the last Greek possession on Asia Minor, fell to the sultan as well. Thus came an end to Byzantine Anatolia and an end to over a millennium of Roman rule of Asia Minor.

References