Kommata
historical region and administrative unit of the Byzantine Empire in southern Galatia
Kommata (Greek: τὰ Κόμματα) was a historical region and administrative unit of the Byzantine Empire in southern Galatia (central Anatolia), in modern Turkey.
History
The origin of the name is unknown, but may refer to a locality, or fortress, somewhere south of Ankara. it is first mentioned in 872, as being the target of a raid by the Paulicians under Chrysocheir, shortly before they were defeated by the Byzantine army at the Battle of Bathys Ryax.
Emperor Leo VI the Wise (r. 886–912) created the tourma of Kommata out of four banda of the Bucellarian Theme (Aspona, Akarkous, Bareta, Balbadona) and three banda of the Anatolic Theme (Eudokias, Hagios Agapetos, Aphrazeia), and assigned it to the Theme of Cappadocia. The tourma and region of Kommata thus encompassed the area between the Halys River in the east, Lake Tatta in the south, and the Sangarios River in the west.
References
Sources
Belke, Klaus (1984). Tabula Imperii Byzantini, Band 4: Galatien und Lykaonien (in German). Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. ISBN 978-3-7001-0634-0.
“Kommata” enters the record as historical region and administrative unit of the Byzantine Empire in southern Galatia. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Kommata, historical and region can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Kommata” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Kommata, historical and region provides the most credible route into that argument.
Chronology, provenance and viewpoint should be read together before a broad social or political interpretation is accepted. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 15, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q38251558. The first chronological checks are 1984.
Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.
- Event chronology
- Institutional context
- Locating named record creators
Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Kommata”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Kommata primary sources, Kommata archive and Kommata research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Kommata”?
- Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
- What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Kommata” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.