Nineteenth-Century Conservation of Byzantine Heritage in the Ottoman Empire: The Significance of the 1893 Istanbul Historic Peninsula Fortification Map

ABSTRACT

City walls are essential urban elements contributing to the identity of historical cities. Their significance as a component of a city’s image is reflected on historical city maps, revealing the physical traces of urban history. The Istanbul Historic Peninsula, a multi-layered historical city centre surrounded by Byzantine-period walls, has been represented on different maps and drawings by Ottoman and foreign experts ever since the fifteenth century. One of the first architectural documentation studies focusing on these city walls is the Historic Peninsula Fortification (HPF) Map, dated 1893. Archival and literature research shows that the map is a copy of the Nineteenth-Century Istanbul Map, also called the Ayverdi Map. In this paper, we discuss the value of the 1893 Istanbul HPF Map as a historical document, its properties, and its historical and cultural significance for documenting the city walls for conservation purposes in the Ottoman period.

KEYWORDS:

• Istanbul Historic Peninsula
• city walls
• fortification map
• architectural conservation
• architectural documentation
• conservation history

Acknowledgments

We sincerely thank the editor, the anonymous reviewers and Prof. Zeynep Dörtok Abacı for sharing their comments. We are also grateful to Eyüp Aşık for the transliteration of the Ottoman archival documents, and Esther Bloch and Beyhan Erel for proofreading and editing the article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. Kuban, İstanbul 1600 yıllık müzedir, 97.

2. Kayra, İstanbul haritaları, 61–125; Yetişkin Kubilay, İstanbul Haritaları 1422–1922, 78–198; Koçak et al., Sultan II. Abdülhamid Devri, 42–69.

3. Pedley, ‘Enlightenment Cartography,’ 29.

4. Kayra, İstanbul Haritaları, 33–36.

5. Aksoy and Kıvılcım Çorakbaş, ‘Politics of Loss,’ 114–115.

6. Çelik, 19. yüzyılda Osmanlı başkenti değişen İstanbul, xiii-xvi, 63–68; Madran, Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e kültür varlıklarının, 60–61.

7. Oktay, Osmanlı’da büyükşehir belediye yönetimi, 49–51.

8. Shaw, ‘The Dialectic of Law and Infringement,’ 108.

9. Madran, Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e kültür varlıklarının, 60–61.

10. Şahin Güçhan and Kurul, ‘A History of the Development of Conservation Measures’, 22–23.

11. Çal, ‘Osmanlı Devleti’nde Âsâr-ı Atîka Nizamnâmeleri,’ 392–393; Madran, Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e kültür varlıklarının, 189–196; Önge, ‘Kültür mirasını tanımlamak,’ 11–12.

12. See note 9 above, 81.

13. Önge, ‘Kültür mirasını tanımlamak,’ 10.

14. Shaw, ‘The Dialectic of Law and Infringement,’ 110–111.

15. See note 9 above.

16. Ergin, Mecelle-i Umûr-ı Belediyye, 1784–1785.

17. Madran, ‘Osmanlı Devleti’nde eski eser ve onarım,’ 517.

18. See note 11 above.

19. Acar Bilgin and Kıvılcım Çorakbaş, ‘Between Demolition and Conservation’, 128–130.

20. The catalogue system of the Ottoman State Archive gives a short summary of the documents. The information was taken from those summaries, and was not translated especially for this article.

21. See note 19 above, 128.

22. Çelik, The Remaking of Istanbul, 169. In footnote 97, the author dates the map to 1891. Acar Bilgin and Kıvılcım Çorakbaş, ‘Between Demolition and Conservation’, 123–125. In this study, it is mentioned that the map was created by the Istanbul Municipality (Şehremaneti) for the conservation of the city walls and include one of the map sheets.

23. Istanbul Historic Peninsula Fortification Map. The authors made a digital copy of this map in 2017 and received permission to publish it in 2022.

24. See note 19 above, 124.

25. See note 23 above.

26. Sheet 37, on which the Marble Tower is located, contains the seal of the Istanbul Municipality Engineering Office (Şehremaneti Hendesehanesi) and the date, Hijri 13 Teşrinisani 1309 (Gregorian November 25, 1893). The online ‘Date Conversion Guide’ of the Turkish Historical Society was used to convert the Hijri calendar to the Gregorian calendar. Available at https://www.ttk.gov.tr/tarih-cevirme-kilavuzu/

27. See note 23 above.

28. Built during the reign of Theodosius II, the Theodosius Walls, also known as the ‘Land Walls’ today, extend from the Marble Tower and Yedikule Fortress in the south to Tekfur Palace in the north.

29. Sümertaş, ‘Dr. Aleksandros G. Paspatis’ten Dersaadet,’ 44; Sümertaş, ‘İstanbul’u “Rumca” Okumak,’ 632.

30. Sümertaş, ‘Dr. Aleksandros G. Paspatis’ten Dersaadet,’ 42–44.

31. Ottoman State Archive, ‘İstanbul. Eski İstanbul surlarının durumu,’ Box 689.

32. See note 31 above. Ottoman State Archive, Box 689.

33. Sümertaş, ‘Dr. Aleksandros G. Paspatis’ten Dersaadet,’ 43, 47–49; ‘İstanbul’u “Rumca” Okumak,’ 636.

34. Altan, Dimitriadis Efendi’nin Marmara sahil surları, 33–93.

35. Binark, ‘Doğumunun yüzüncü senesi münasabetiyle,’ 21–36. Ekrem Hakkı Ayverdi was an engineer, architect, restorer, historian, and writer, and he is also known for his works on Ottoman architecture.

36. Ayverdi, 19. asırda İstanbul haritası, 6; Bilecik, ‘Ayverdi Haritası’nın ışığında’, 5–6.

37. Ayverdi, 19. asırda İstanbul haritası, 6. To answer the question as to who drew the map, Ayverdi cited Osman Nuri Ergin: ‘A map of the city walls of Istanbul was drawn by the Ministry of War (Erkan-ı Harbiye) officers and Ottoman engineers between [the] years 1291–1307 Hijri (1875–1890 Gregorian)’.

38. Okur, ‘Galata Surlarının Yıkım Süreci,’ 66–68; Kuş, ‘Galata Surları,’ 130–136, 290–296. Some of the Ottoman State Archive documents analysed by Okur and Kuş are included in this article as they also contain relevant information on the Istanbul city walls.

39. See note 2 above.

40. Madran, ‘Tarihi çevrenin tarihi,’ 6.

41. See note 2 above.

42. Ayverdi, 19. asırda İstanbul haritası, 5–8.

43. Ayverdi, 19. asırda İstanbul haritası, 5–8; Artan, ‘Ayverdi’nin 19. Asırda İstanbul Haritası’, 117–118; Bilecik, ‘Ayverdi Haritası’nın ışığında’, 9.

44. See note 42 above, 4–5.

45. SALT Research, Archive code: APLAYISTD7.

46. Ayverdi, 19. asırda İstanbul haritası, 7; Ottoman State Archive, ‘Sadaret’in, Dersaadet sokak ve mahallelerinin.’

47. Ottoman State Archive, ‘Sadaret’in, Dersaadet sokak ve mahallelerinin,’ File 30.

48. See note 38 above.

49. Sakaoğlu, ‘Kaleler ve şehir surları’, 25. The space between two towers of the city walls was called ‘kule-i zemin’, which means ‘tower ground. The encroachment of these spaces for residential and commercial use formed one of the common problems of fortified cities. For more information, see Ergin, Mecelle-i umûr-ı belediyye, 1775–1783. According to Ergin, the City Walls’ Lot Commission was responsible for collecting the taxes for the privately occupied areas and selling the empty lots after the destruction of sections of the city walls. The earnings of the commission formed a financial resource for the municipality. The date of the commission’s foundation remains unclear, but according to Osman Nuri Ergin, the commission was abolished in the 1910s.

50. Okur, ‘Galata Surlarının yıkım süreci’, 66. For the original source, see Ottoman State Archive, ‘Galata ve İstanbul surları tarihi eserden,’ File 18.

51. Kuş, ‘Galata Surları’, 130, translation of the document is on page 290. For the original source, see Ottoman State Archive, ‘Galata ve İstanbul surlarının asar-ı atika,’ File 112 (May 2, 1892).

52. Okur, ‘Galata Surlarının yıkım süreci’, 66. For the original source, see Ottoman State Archive, ‘Galata ve İstanbul surlarının asar-ı atika olması nedeniyle,’ File 112 (May 12, 1892).

53. Kuş, ‘Galata Surları’, 133. The translation of the document can be found on page 292. For the original source, see Ottoman State Archive, ‘Galata ve İstanbul surlarının mevki ve miktar-ı ziraileri,’ File 46.

54. Okur, ‘Galata Surlarının yıkım süreci’, 66–67. For the original source, see Ottoman Archive. ‘Galata ve İstanbul surlarından mail-i harab,’ File 16,554.

55. Okur, ‘Galata Surlarının yıkım süreci’, 67; Kuş, ‘Galata Surları’ 131. The translation of the document can be found on page 291. For the original source, see Ottoman Archive, ‘Galata ile İstanbul surlarının durumunun bilinmesi,’ File 47.

56. Okur, ‘Galata Surlarının yıkım süreci’, 67; Kuş, ‘Galata Surları’, 132. The translation of the document can be found on page 292. For the original source, see Ottoman Archive. ‘Emlak tecavüzüne mâni olmak için,’ File 53.

57. Okur, ‘Galata Surlarının yıkım süreci’, 67–68. For the original source, see Ottoman Archive, ‘Galata ve İstanbul surlarının mevaki,’ File 9382.

58. Ottoman State Archive, ‘Galata ve İstanbul surlarının Emanet’de müstahdem,’ File 13,004.

59. Okur, ‘Galata Surlarının yıkım süreci’, 68; Kuş, ‘Galata Surları’, 135–136. The translation of the documents can be found on pages 295–296. For the original source, see Ottoman Archive, ‘Galata ve İstanbul surları civarında,’ File 77.

60. See note 47 above.

61. Ottoman State Archive, ‘Surların tehlikeli olan mahallerinin,’ File 31.

62. Ottoman State Archive, ‘İnşaat Dairesi marifetiyle keşfi,’ File 59.

63. See note 23 above.

64. Kuş, ‘Galata Surları’, 136. Kuş argues that no documents on the outcome of the correspondence could be found due to changes in the cataloguing system of the Ottoman Archives since 1310 Hijri (1892 Gregorian) and the fact that the archive is still being digitised today.

65. See note 47 above.

66. See note 62 above.

67. See note 23 above.

68. Photo album of Abdulhamit II in the Rare Works Library of Istanbul University, Istanbul.

69. See note 23 above.

70. The antiquity of the sheet makes it difficult to see the colours.

71. Necipoğlu, ‘Sinan çağında mimarlık kültürü’, 36.

72. Uras, Balyanlar: Osmanlı Mimarlığı.

73. Republic of Türkiye, Ministry of National Defence, General Directorate of Mapping Archive, 2021. The aerial photographs were taken with permission in 2021.

74. Personal archive of the second author, 2017.