![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
Abstract
The aim of this article is to provide a comprehensive explanation for the reasons behind governments’ decisions to relocate and build new capital cities. The process of capital-building is not a mere phenomenon of urbanization; rather it is a process of “text inventing” for nation-building projects. To emphasize implications for identity behind city constructions, the paper will discuss urbanization practices of Soviet Yerevan and post-Soviet Astana. However, to verify the validity and generalizability of the proposed argument, the article will also briefly provide historical analysis of relocation of capitals from Moscow to St. Petersburg, and from Istanbul to Ankara. The reconstruction of the capital of Soviet Armenia, Yerevan, in the 1920s is important in understanding the role of utopias in initiating identity transformations. The central conceptual premise of the article is Samuel Huntington’s theoretical concept of a “torn country” and the redefinition of civilizational identity. One reason capitals have been relocated and new capitals have been built throughout history is a need to initiate a long-term transformation of identity.
Notes
1. The first builder-architecture of St. Petersburg is considered to be P.M. Yeropkin, who, by an order of Peter the Great, had lived and received education on architecture in Rome. Sometimes it is argued that St. Petersburg is based on the idea of Rome (Kantor Citation2011).
2. As Lang put it, “St. Petersburg was to be a ‘paradise’ whose splendor was intended to surpass anything Europe had to offer” (Citation2006, 59).
3. Taking into the occupation of Istanbul by Entente powers, Ataturk decided to move capital to a safer location.
4. The central church of Constantinople – known as Hagia Sophia 537 CE in Greek and later converted into a Muslim mosque – is an excellent case in point. The church remained a European point of reference, especially for Orthodox Christians, while for the Turks it is a symbol of superiority or a sign of victory and Muslim conquest. From 1453 to 1935 the church had been utilized as a mosque, and only on 24 November 1934, to emphasize the secular approach of Turkey’s nation-building, Ataturk converted it into a museum (Nelson Citation2014, 180). On 30 May 2014, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (now President) suggested converting Hagia Sophia into a mosque.
5. The Ataturk regime saw the popularization of Western music as an important pillar for the establishment of contacts with wider European civilization. This took place also via the public sphere. The restaurants were used as public spheres. Karpiç’s restaurant, which was located near Ankara Palace, was an interesting case. As the leader of the Turks, Ataturk personally asked Armenian Baba Karpiç to come from Istanbul to run a modern, exclusive restaurant where Ataturk himself and representatives of the elite could enjoy listening to music performed by a live band, as well as classical Western music (Cinar Citation2014, 245–246). However, Ataturk went even further and decided to transform the discipline of music from public spheres into academia. In 1927–1928, Ataturk ordered the Conservatory of Music to be built, where classical Western music, opera, and ballet could be taught as universal norms of Turkish music and the arts (Cinar Citation2014, 246).
6. In the 1920s, the process of identity redefinition took place not only in the sphere of architecture, but was also evident in the works of other intellectuals, for example, the paintings of Martiros Saryan, the writings of Yeghishe Charents, and so on.
7. Indeed, the construction of Yerevan was an innovative phenomenon but not an absolute novelty to Armenian reality. There is quite an interesting case in the Armenian ancient history, when the founder of the Artaxiads dynasty, King Artaxias I (189–160 BC) united the territory of Greater Armenia and to have a new civilizational center for the nation constructed the capital Artashat near modern Yerevan. See Stepanyan (Citation2012, 36).
8. The idea of the garden city was initially coined by British urban planner Ebenezer Howard in 1898. For more details see Howard (Citation2013).
9. Moreover, the emblem of the Soviet Armenian was designed with the symbol of Mount Ararat. The prominent Armenian painters Martiros Saryan and Hakob Kojoyan designed it in 1921.
10. For More details on Kars Treaty and Turkey Soviet relations, see Hakobyan (Citation2013, 105).
11. Ani was the capital city of the medieval Armenian Kingdom of the Bagratid dynasty from 961 to 1045 CE. It had been known also as a city of 1001 churches. Nowadays, Ani is located in the territory of modern Turkey. Tamanyan initiated the project of Peoples’ House or House of Opera, that has on its own walls symbols from the medieval capital city of Ani, for example, symbolic figures of goats, grapes, pomegranates, flowers and pillars, arches and capitals ornamented with symbols of Aries, and so on. See Haykazun (Citation2016).
12. Note that even most of Armenian Communists lived in Tbilisi, and refused to reside in Yerevan. The idea of Yerevan was also comprehended by Soviet Armenian leadership as an attractive project that would trigger a number of Armenian politicians, economists, intellectuals, and businessmen to come to Yerevan and pledge to the development of Soviet Armenia. This also had a deep political subtext. Previously, Yerevan was populated by ethnic Azeris, Turks, and Muslims too, who were perceived by Armenians as a potential threat, because after the Armenian Genocide Turkey also had pretensions toward Eastern Armenia and to this end Turkish armies invaded Transcaucasia, but Armenian forces could manage to prevent the invasion and save Armenia in 1918.
13. It seems that the utopian ideals of Campanella’s “Sun-City” had a great influence on Charents when he wrote his work. See Campanella (Citation1981).
14. Note that among the latest capital cities is Naypyidaw, which became the capital of Myanmar in 2005, replacing Yangon.
15. In fact, this phenomenon is a reflection of Kazakhstan’s domestic policy toward its multi-ethnic society. Civic symbols embodied in various buildings of Astana seem to provide other nationalities with the opportunity to meet with basic satisfaction in terms of self-identification. In addition, this is an important issue in generating pan-Kazakh identity in Kazakhstan.
16. It seems that the participation of foreign architects in capital or city construction processes was a pattern in the architectural history of Kazakhstan. For example, the chief architect of the first master plan of Almaty (1936), which was created in Moscow, was Mikael Nerses an ethnic Armenian. See Kazakhstan (Citation2011).
17. The term “third industrial revolution” was coined by Rifkin (Citation2013).