When the railway reached Istanbul: the making of Sirkeci terminus, 1870–1888

ABSTRACT

Since its establishment as a capital city, the historical topography of Istanbul has witnessed significant changes, created not only by devastating earthquakes and fires, but also by the implementation of large-scale imperial projects. In the existing literature, the transformation of Istanbul’s urban area in the nineteenth century has largely explored the topics of new urban regulations, institutions and their implication after the Tanzimat (reform) decree of 1839. This article aims to explore a lesser-known dimension of nineteenth-century developments of the city: the extension of the railway into the heart of Istanbul’s historical peninsula, and the spatial change around the Sirkeci district due to the physical expansion of the terminus area. The construction of a larger terminus (inaugurated in 1890) is relatively well documented in architectural history, yet developments prior to this monumental construction have been less explored so far. Thus, this article also aims to investigate the project’s development and implementation phases in the second half of the nineteenth century, when the city witnessed continuous urban reformation processes by focusing on the intertwined relations of different agents in the urban space.

KEYWORDS:

• Railway terminus in Istanbul
• urban transformation in Istanbul
• railway stations
• railway history
• railway architecture
• Ottoman Railways
• Istanbul in the nineteenth century

Notes on contributor

Dr Ahmet Erdem Tozoğlu received his PhD degree from Middle East Technical University (METU) Architectural History Graduate Program in 2013. He is currently working at Abdullah Gül University Department Architecture. His research interests include nineteenth century architecture and urbanism, architecture and modernity, twentieth century architecture, Ottoman architecture, architecture of Islamic societies, architecture in Turkey, and architectural historiography.

ORCID

Ahmet Tozoğlu http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8434-7882

Notes

1 De Amicis, Constantinople, 7, 21–2.

2 Schivelbusch, The Railway Journey, 33–44.

3 Saner, 19. Yüzyıl İstanbul Mimarlığında Oryantalizm and Batur, “Sirkeci Garı,” 838–9.

4 For a detailed account of the railway proposals see Gounaris, Steam over Macedonia, 1870–1912.

5 Çelik, Remaking of Istanbul, 53.

6 Yerasimos, “A Propos des Reformes Urbaines des Tanzimat,” 17– 35.

7 Çelik, Remaking of Istanbul, 53–63.

8 Although the name Istanbul corresponds to a wider geographical region including the historical peninsula, Galata, and Anatolian side and beyond, in the nineteenth century, Istanbul (or Dersaadet at the time) corresponded to the intra-muros city. The other districts were called bilad-ı selase (three towns) namely, Eyüp, Galata (Pera) and Üsküdar. Hereafter, otherwise stated, Istanbul will correspond to the intra-muros city of the nineteenth century.

9 Gounaris, Steam over Macedonia, 42.

10 Engin, Rumeli Demiryolları, 50.

11 Anon, Actes de la Concession des Chemins de fer de la Turquie d’Europe.

12 Gounaris, Steam over Macedonia, 42–3.

13 Hertner, “The Balkan Railways,” 6.

14 Gounaris, Steam over Macedonia, 43 and “The Roumelian Railway Scheme” in Levant Herald, 6 September 1869.

15 Engin, İstanbul’un Atlı ve Elektrikli Tamvayları, 39–47.

16 Gavand, Chemin de fer Métropolitain Constantinople, 13–14.

17 The Levant Herald, 5 January 1871.

18 BOA, İ.DH 620/43155 (11 September 1870) and I.MMS 41/1659 (14 December 1870).

19 BOA, İ.MMS 41/1659 (14 December 1870). Among the documents mentioned, it is the summary report that still remains in the archive folder. Other three valuable drawings are missing.

20 Listed in the petition are buildings belonging to the School of Medicine at that time, two buildings belonging to the ministry of war, and a marble kiosk owned by the Sultan. Daye Hatun Mosque was preserved and was used by Muslim workers and passengers for years to follow.

21 La Turquie, 3 February 1871.

22 BOA, İ.MMS 41/1659 leaf 8, 27 Za 1287 (18 February 1871)

23 La Turquie, February 3, 1871.

24 BOA, ŞD. 496/16, 13 M 1288 (4 April 1871)

25 Le Levant Herald, 4 February 1871.

26 BOA, HR.TO. 453/71, ŞD 496/16, ŞD. 2878/42 and ŞD. 682/13.

27 Le Levant herald, 12 January 1872 and BOA, A.}MKT.MHM 448/74, 29 Z 1289 (27 February 1873)

28 Le Levant Herald, 15 November 1871.

29 A comment published in Le Levant Herald describes this straightforwardly:

“The continuation of the suburban section of the Roumelian railway from Seven Towers into Stamboul is, we understand, making slow progress, the government having undertaken to defray the cost of expropriation of the property through which the line is to pass, and being just at present but ill-prepared for the outlay.” Le Levant Herald, 9 March 1871.

30 Levant Herald, 12 January 1872.

31 BOA, İ.DH. 634/44088 (20 June 1871) and İ.MMS 45/1874 (30 December 1872)

32 BOA, EV.D. 36661 and Le Levant Herald, 6 September 1871.

33 Müller-Wiener, Bildlexikon zur Topographie Istanbuls, 225–8.

34 Necipoğlu, Architecture, Ceremonial and Power, 210.

35 Ibid., 218–40.

36 Du Bocage’s drawing is based on Kauffer’s famous map of Istanbul.

37 Anon, Actes de la concession des Chemins de fer de la Turquie d’Europe, 5–29.

38 Ibid, Convention of Exploitation, Art. 12.

39 Ibid, Annex C, Art. 5.

40 Hastaoglou-Martinidis, “The Building of Istanbul Docks,” 88–9.

41 Anon, Actes de la concession des Chemins de fer de la Turquie d’Europe, Annex C, Art.6.

42 BOA, A.MKT.MHM 457/81, 7/Ca/1290 (3 July 1873).

43 BOA; A.MKT.MHM 454-18, 15/Ra/1290 (15 May 1873).

44 BOA, A.MKT.MHM 457/81, 7/Ca/1290 (3 July 1873).

45 IBB TAK, # Hrt_003143. The drawing is a part of a map set initially introduced by Ekrem Hakkı Ayverdi in 1958. The date and author is not indicated; most probably it was drafted in R.1292–93 (1875) by military engineers.

46 In the original map, the mosque is named as Elvan Mosque by mistake.

47 IBB TAK # Hrt_006557.

48 Yavuz, “Mimar August Jasmund Hakkında Bilmediklerimiz,” 181–205 and Yavuz, “Mimar August Carl Frederich Jasmund ve Mimari Faaliyetleri,” 187–209.

49 Araz, “Impact of Political Decisions,” 80–1.

50 Saner, 19. Yüzyıl İstanbul Mimarlığında Oryantalizm, 83.