Rethinking the salons in nineteenth-century Istanbul houses conceptualised in written media

Abstract

Focusing on the salons of Istanbul houses in the nineteenth century of the Ottoman Empire, this article is an attempt to rethink the spatial arrangement of the salon, the daily life practices and furniture and items there, using Bourdieu’s concepts. At that time the salon reflected the wealth, magnificence and social status of the elite families of Istanbul with its spatiality, new life practices it offered and furniture and items. The salon was the most public space in the house, where elites competed with each other to maintain and elevate their privileged position in society. Based on these features, the article draws attention to the social meaning of the existence of the salon, while at the same time it aims to create a perspective on how this space was built in the written and visual media of the Ottoman Empire with the spatial configuration, usage styles, behavioral codes, furniture and items.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank SDU-BAP Unit, whose support is greatly appreciated.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Etimoloji Türkçe, Salon (2023). https://www.Etimolojiturkce.Com/Kelime/Salon.

2 Turkish Language Association, Salon (2023). https://sozluk.gov.tr.

3 Oxford English Dictionary, ‘Salon’ (2024). https://www.oed.com/dictionary/salon_n?tab=factsheet#24405856.

4 P. Bourdieu, Distinction: A Social Critique of Judgement of Taste (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996), p.383. Translated by Richard Nice.

5 S. Ünsar, ‘A Study on Institutional Change: Ottoman Social Structure and the Provision of Public Goods’, Gazi Akademik Bakış, Vol.6/11 (2012), pp.177–200.

6 Ş. Pamuk, Türkiye’nin 200 Yıllık İktisadi Tarihi, Büyüme Kurumlar Ve Bölüşüm, [Turkey’s 200-Year Economic History, Growth, Institutions and Distribution] (Istanbul: İş Bankası Kültür Publishing, 2021), p.49.

7 Researchers have described many situations such as the change in the balance of power within the dynasty, popular uprisings, the Janissaries starting to mingle with the public, the changing power of the kapıkulu, and the new social status of the provincial notables called ayans as situations that made it difficult to maintain centralized control in this century. See B. McGowan, ‘The Age of the Ayans 1699-1812’ in S. Faroqhi, B. McGowan, D. Quataert and Ş. Pamuk (eds), An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire Vol.2 1600-1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), pp.637–758 and C. K. Neumann, ‘Political and diplomatic developments’, in Suraiya N. Faroqhi (ed.), The Cambridge History of Turkey: Volume 3: The Later Ottoman Empire, 1603-1839 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp.44–64.

8 C. K. Neumann, ‘Political and diplomatic developments’, pp.74–5; T. Artan, ‘18. Yüzyıl Başlarında Yönetici Elitin Saltanatın Meşruiyet Arayışına Katılımı’ [The Participation of the Ruling Elite in the Legitimization Efforts of the Sultanate in the Eighteenth Century], Toplum ve Bilim Vol.83, (1999/2000), pp.292–322.

9 C. K. Neumann, ‘Political and Diplomatic Developments’, pp.44–64; F. M. Göçek, Rise of Bourgeoisie, Demise of Empire: Ottoman Westernization and Social Change (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996); C. V. Findley, ‘Political Culture and The Great Household’, in S. N. Faroqhi (ed.), History of Turkey Vol:3 The Later Ottoman Empire 1603-1839 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), pp.65–81.

10 The nineteenth century has been called an era of reforms by researchers. D. Quataert, ‘The Age of Reforms, 1812-1914’, in S. Faroqhi, B. McGowan, D. Quataert and Ş. Pamuk (eds), An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire Vol.2 1600-1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), pp.759–946. For comprehensive studies on the Tanzimat period of the Ottoman Empire and the reform movements of the Ottoman Empire, see B. Lewis, The Emergence of Modern Turkey (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1966), p.440 and Ç. Keyder, State and Class in Turkey: A Study in Capitalist Development (London and New York: Verso Books, 1987); R. H. Davison, Reform in the Ottoman Empire 1856-1876 (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1963).

11 Regarding the integration of the Empire into the capitalist system, the Treaty of Balta Port signed in 1838 is important. With this agreement, the entry of British products into the Ottoman markets accelerated, prohibitions and monopolies in domestic and foreign trade were abolished and taxes were reduced. The growing trade flooded the Ottoman domestic markets with imported goods. For a more detailed assessment by Pamuk, who states that foreign trade increased approximately fifteen-fold in the nineteenth century, see Ş. Pamuk, Türkiye’nin 200 Yıllık İktisadi Tarihi, Büyüme Kurumlar ve Bölüşüm, pp.97–102.

12 İ. Tekeli, Türkiye’nin Kent Planlama ve Kent Araştırmaları Tarihi Yazıları [Articles on the History of Turkey’s Urban Planning and Urban Research] (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt yayınları, İlhan Tekeli Toplu Eserler-15, 2011), pp.47–64.

13 T. Artan, ‘18. Yüzyıl Başlarında Yönetici Elitin Saltanatın Meşruiyet Arayışına Katılımı’, [Participation of the Ruling Elite in the Sultanate’s Quest for Legitimacy in the Early Eighteenth Century], Toplum ve Bilim, Vol.83 (1999/2000), p.301.

14 This group, which Mardin calls the neo-Ottomans, is defined by Akyürek as the Ottoman bureaucrat intellectuals. For detailed information, see Ş. Mardin, The Genesis of Young Ottoman Thought (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1962), pp.10-81; G. Akyürek, Bilgiyi Yeniden İnşa Etmek: Tanzimat Döneminde Mimarlık, Bilgi ve İktidar, [Reconstructing Knowledge: Architecture, Knowledge and Power in the Tanzimat Era] (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 2012), pp.14–19.

15 G. Çeğin, E. Göker, A. Arlı and Ü. Tatlıcan, Ocak ve Zanaat Pierre Bourdieu Derlemesi [Hearth and Craft: Pierre Bourdieu Compilation] (Istanbul: İletişim Publishing, 2014), p.78.

16 D. Swartz, Culture & Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (London: University of Chicago Press, 1997), pp.144–45.

17 There are differences in the sources regarding the date of this building known as ‘Meşruta Yalısı/Köşkü/Konağı’. Belge and Erdenen give the date of the building as 1699, Özbay as 1698 and Birsel as 1697. See Orhan Erdenen, Boğaziçi Sahilhaneleri 1-Beykoz Anadoluhisarı [Bosphorus Waterfront Residence] (Istanbul: Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Publishing, 1993), p.136; Murat Belge, Boğaziçi’nde Yalılar, İnsanlar [Waterfront Residences and People in the Bosphorus] (Istanbul: İletişim Publications, 1997), p.221; Sema Akkoyun Özbay, İstanbul’un Yalıları ve Köşkleri [Waterfront Residences and Mansions of Istanbul] (Istanbul: Librum Publications, 2017), p.33; S. Birsel, Boğaziçi Şıngır Mıngır (Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Publications, 1981), p.204.

18 In all of the aforementioned sources, the surviving part was described as the divanhane belonging to the selamlık. On the other hand, in Erdenen’s quotations from Süheyl Ünver and Behçet Ünsal and Birsel’s detailed description of the divanhane, the term salon was also used. Erdenen states that Ünsal described it as the reception hall of the selamlık section. Belge also states that divanhane is synonymous with salon in today’s terminology. See O. Erdenen, Boğaziçi Sahilhaneleri 1-Beykoz Anadoluhisarı, pp.138–42; S. Birsel, Boğaziçi Şıngır Mıngır, p.204; M. Belge, Boğaziçi’nde Yalılar, İnsanlar, p.222.

19 Although the mansion is known by Halil Ethem Pasha’s name, the first owner of the mansion was Halil Ethem Pasha’s father, Ethem İbrahim Pasha, one of the grand viziers under Abdülhamid II.

20 O. Erdenen, Boğaziçi Sahilhaneleri 1-Beykoz Anadoluhisarı, p.64.

21 Zülveçheyn is a term synonymous with mabeyn in the literature. Indeed, with its location and layout in the mansion, it is also possible to characterize this space as a mabeyn. Therefore, if this is the case, the term mabeyn should be added to the confusion between sofa and salon. As a matter of fact, Şenyurt has also stated that there is an intertwining and blurring in the meanings of terms such as sofa and mabeyn, and the situation here is an example of this blurring. For the details of this discussion, see Oya Şenyurt, Osmanlı Mimarisinin Temel İlkeleri Resim ve İnşa Üzerinden Geliştirilen Farklı Bir Yaklaşım [Basic Principles of Ottoman Architecture: A Different Approach Developed through Painting and Construction] (Istanbul: Doğu Kitabevi, 2015), pp.143–58. This issue is also discussed in detail in Şenyurt’s article on mabeyn as an architectural term. See Oya Şenyurt, ‘İki Oda Arasından Yönetim Merkezine: Bir Mimarlık Terimi Olarak “Mabeyn”’ [From A Space Between Two Rooms to a Central Office: ‘Mabeyn’ as an Architectural Term], Avrasya Terim Dergisi, Vol.7(1) (2019), pp.18–25.

22 According to Nişanyan’s dictionary, the salon began to be seen as early as 1857, but the earliest date when the salon is seen in the advertisements examined is 1840. See Nişanyan, https://www.nisanyansozluk.com/kelime/salon, and the advertisement in Cerîde-i Havâdis, Vol.984 (1840), p.4; according to Öncel’s quotation from Huyot, there was a salon in the house of an Armenian family in the early nineteenth century when Huyot was in Istanbul. See Ayşe Derin Öncel, Apartman Galata’da Yeni Bir Konut Tipi [A New Housing Type in Galata: Apartment] (Istanbul: Kitapyayınevi, 2010), pp.263–306. Therefore, although it cannot be clearly determined when the salon was first seen in houses, it is clear that the salon became widespread in the nineteenth century.

23 Housing sale advertisement, Cerîde-i Havâdis, Vol.902, (1858), p.4.

24 ‘…alt katda yerlü alafranga ocaklu bağçe üzerine nâzır kebîr bir oda ve ittisâlinde diğer iki oda ve bir kiler ve divanhâne ve iki tarafı bağçe üzerine olarak kebîr bir salon…’.

25 ‘…alafranga yerlü ocaklu biri küçük diğerleri kebîr iki oda ve bir sofa ve bir yemek odası ve iki tarafı bağçe üzerine yine alafranga ocaklu bir kebîr salon ve iki küçük oda bu daireye muttasıl bir divanhâne ve iki oda ve bir tütüncü odası ve bir kahve ocağı…’.

26 It is claimed that the mansion was built on the site of another building dating back to the eighteenth century. For information on the subject, see S. A. Özbay, İstanbul’un Yalıları ve Köşkleri, pp.163–65 and M. Belge, Boğaziçi’nde Yalılar, İnsanlar, pp.33–42.

27 This space is also described as a başoda in some sources. See, for example, Zehra Dilek, ‘Şerifler Yalısı’ (Master Thesis, Istanbul University, 2019), p.54.

28 A. D. Öncel quoted architect Jean-Nicolas Huyot on this mansion. See A. D. Öncel, Apartman Galata’da Yeni Bir Konut Tipi, pp.263–306.

29 ‘…haremde üst katda iki oda ve bir mâbeyn odası ve sofa ve bir kiler ve orta katda üç oda ve sofa ve zemîn katda bir kebîr oda ve matbah ve kiler ve hareme mahsûs bağçe ve selamlıkla üst katda iki oda ve bir sofa ve tütüncü odası ve kiler ve orta katda iki oda ve bir kiler ve sofa ve harem ve selamlıkdan kullanılmağa elverişli üst ve orta katda iki aded salon ve zemîn katda iki uşak odası…’.

30 Housing sale advertisement, Tercümân-ı Ahvâl, Vol. 187 (1862), p.4. ‘Beşiktaş’da Şerince yokuşunda câmiʻ-i Şerif civarında haremde üst katda iki oda ve bir mâbeyn odası ve sofa ve bir kiler ve orta katda üç oda ve sofa ve zemîn katda bir kebîr oda ve matbah ve kiler ve hareme mahsûs bağçe ve selamlıkla üst katda iki oda ve bir sofa ve tütüncü odası ve kiler ve orta katda iki oda ve bir kiler ve sofa ve harem ve selamlıkdan kullanılmağa elverişli üst ve orta katda iki ʻaded salon ve zemîn katda iki uşak odası ve karem ve selamlıkda her kata mahsûs abdesthânelere cari mâî lezîz ve selamlıkda iki bin arşun mikdarı çimden tarz-ı cedîd üzere yapılmış çiçek bağçesiyle iki bin zirâʻdan mütecâviz müsmirelü sebze bağçesi ve limonluk ve üç ʻaded havuz ve su hazîresi ve ebniye hâricinde yirmi hayvân alur ahur ve iki ʻaded samanlık ve erkek aşcısı içün sobalu matbah ve bunların üzerinde beş ʻaded aşcı ve sâyis odaları ve müştemilât-ı saireyi hâvî olan ve her tarafa nezâreti bulunan Kıbrıs mutasarrıfı saʻâdetlü Ziya Paşa’nın mücedded konağı satılık olduğundan mübâyaʻasını istek eden zevâtı derûnunda bulunanların gezdirecekleri.’

31 O. Erdenen, Boğaziçi Sahilhaneleri 1-Beykoz Anadoluhisarı, p.95.

32 Housing sale advertisement, Basiret, Vol.730, (1872), p.4. ‘Uzun çarşu civarında nerdubânlu hamam karşusunda on numerolu hânenin selamlıkda iki oda bir hela ve iki oda inşâ olunur mahal ile üç hayvân olur ahur ve sobalu matbah tahtı sahrenc üç araba alur havli iki yüz elli arşun mikdar bağçe ile üç ʻaded kuyu harem tarafında fevkâni iki oda ve iki sandık odasını ve kebîr sofa ve bir büyükce salon ve ikinci katda üç oda ile kebîr sofa ve bir sandık odasıyla harem havlisi döşeli ve hamam ve üç yüz arşun bağçe tahtı mahzen ve ayruca harem matbahu büyücek odunluk kömürlük ile müştemilât-ı sairesi mükemmel olub nezâret-i fevka’l-ʻâdesi olduğu halde satılık olduğundan istek edenleri içinde bulunan sâhibi gezdireceği.’

33 Housing sale advertisement, Basiret, Vol.282, (1871), p.4 ‘Çengel Karyesinde kâin Yeni Mahalle Caddesinde bir numero ile murakkam fevkâni ve tahtâni haremde beş büyük oda ve iki cesîm sofa maʻ-câmekân bir kurnalı hamam ve bir ʻaded malta döşeli kebîr matbah ve iki ʻaded kiler ve mâi lezîzi câri iki kebîr su hazinesi ve mermer döşeli havlisi Ve beş arşub mikdârı bağçe ve selâmlıkda salonvâri bir ʻaded büyük oda ve cesîm sofa ve tahtında iki oda ve diğer bir ʻaded su hazinesi ve çakıl döşeli büyük havlisi ve üç hayvân alur ahur ve üç araba alur arabalık ve etrâf-ı erbâʻsı duvar olarak beş bin Arşun mikdarı muntazam sûretde bağçe ve iki yüzden ziyâde eşcâr-ı müsmire ve gayr-i müsmireli ve bir ʻaded kebîr limonluk ve malta döşeli bir ʻaded cesîm havuz ve diğer mermer döşeli bir ʻaded havuz ve tatlı suyu olarak bir ʻaded kebir bostan dolabı ve etrâfı açıklık olub denize dahi nezâreti olarak bir bab hâne satılık olduğundan gezmek isteyenleri içinde bulunanların gezdire iʻlân olunur.’

34 Sedat Hakkı Eldem, Boğaziçi Yalıları Rumeli Yakası I [The Yalıs of the Bosphorus European Side] (Istanbul: Vehbi Koç Vakfı, 1993), pp.50–1. This mansion, which was built by Sultan Abdülaziz I for his daughter Esma Sultan, was given to her sister Cemile Sultan by Abdülhamid II after the death of Esma Sultan, and is referred to as Cemile Sultan in some sources and Yalı of Esma Sultan in others. See M. Belge, Boğaziçi’nde Yalılar, İnsanlar, pp.23–7; S. A. Özbay, İstanbul’un Yalıları ve Köşkleri, pp.62–3; Baha Tanman (ed), Büyük Mecidiye Camii ve Ortaköy [Grand Mecidiye Mosque and Ortaköy] (Istanbul: Kuveyt Türk Katılım Bankası Publications, 2014), pp.171–72.

35 Cerîde-i Mehâkim, Vol. 2, No. 148 (1882), p.4. ‘Yirmi dokuz numerolu hâne tahminen ve terbîʻin beş yüz yirmi arşun üzerine mebni fevkânî ve tahtânî kebîr ve sagîr on dört oda ve bir salon beş abdesthâne mermer döşeli iki havli iki kurnlı bir hamam ve bir camekan ve hâne hâricinde selamlık diğeri ağalara mahsûs birer katdan ʻibâret iki daire olub tahtânî ve kebîr ve sagîr altı oda iki abdesthâne ve bir kiler ve bir kahve ocağı harem ve selamlığa elverişlü bir matbah tahminen ve terbîʻen yirmi dört bin dört yüz seksen arşun bağçe ve bir harâb limonluk ve ittisâlinde bir çiçeklik kebîr ve sagîr havuz iki bostan kuyusu dört araba ve beş çift hayvân istiʻâbına kâfi bir ahur ile diğer ufak ve bir ahur ve bir matbahı müştemil olun sağ ciheti Aşir Efendi hâne ve bağçesiyle Acem Memiş Ağa’nın bağçesinin divarı sol tarafı Hamdi Bey arsası arka tarafı uncu İskender Efendi’nin bağ ve bostanı ve onu tarîk-i ʻâmm ile mahdûd iki kat bir bâb ahşab hâne elli dokuz bin guruş bedel ile.’

36 According to Özbay, this mansion dates to the late nineteenth century. However, some sources state that the building was built at the beginning of the twentieth century (between 1900 and 1910), as its architect was Vallaury. See S. A. Özbay, İstanbul’un Yalıları ve Köşkleri, pp.25–28.

37 For information on the salons, see Tanman (ed.), Büyük Mecidiye Camii ve Ortaköy, p.188; Özlem Atalan, ‘In 19th Century: Coastal Residence of Between Ortaköy-Kuruçeşme’, Turkish Studies, Vol.10/1 (2015), pp.102–03.

38 Mehmet Rıfat, Tedbîr’i Menzil’den Hane Bahsi [Book on House Management] (Istanbul: Mihran Matbaatsı, 1885-1886), p.33.

39 Hüseyin Remzi Bey, Mir`atü’l-Beyt [Mirror of the House] (Istanbul: Matbaa-ı Amire, 1891), p.152.

40 Mehmet Rıfat, Tedbîr’i Menzil’den Hane Bahsi, p.33.

41 Mehmet İzzet, Rehber-i Umur-ı Beytiyye [Guide to Household Tasks] Volume 2 (Istanbul: Feridiye Matbaası, 1902), p.482.

42 Housing sale advertisement, Cerîde-i Havâdis, Vol. 531, (1851), p.4.

43 Housing sale advertisement, Ma’lumât, Vol.124, (1898), p.4.

44 Mehmet İzzet, Rehber-i Umur-ı Beytiyye Volume 1 (Dersaadet: Feridiye Matbaası, 1901) p.235.

45 Housing sale advertisement, Basiret, Vol.1490, (1875), p.4.

46 T. Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions (New York: B.W. Huebsch, 1922), pp.38–9.

47 Swartz, Culture & Power, p.154.

48 F. T. Yaşar, Alafranga Halleri Geç Osmanlı’da Âdâb-ı Muâşeret Halleri [Alafranga Demeanor: Etiquette in the Late Ottoman Empire] (Istanbul: Küre Publishing, 2016), p.141.

49 H. F. Es, Tanımadığımız Meşhurlar [Famous People We Don’t Know], edited by S. Karakılıç (Istanbul: Ötüken Publishing, 2009), p.269.

50 T. Anar, Mekândan Taşan Edebiyat Yeni Türk Edebiyatında Edebiyat Mahfilleri [Literature Exceeding the Space: Literary Groups in New Turkish Literature] (Istanbul: Kapı Publishing, 2012), p.123.

51 The concept of secularization, which is used to refer to the process of separation of the political-worldly sphere (or the state) from religious institutions on the one hand, and the authority of religious knowledge on the other, is a very important issue for the Ottoman Empire in the nineteenth century. In this period, it permeated almost every aspect of daily life in the Ottoman Empire. For detailed information on the subject, see B. Lewis, The Emergence of Modern Turkey (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1966); Niyazi Berkes, The Development of Secularism in Turkey (New York: Routledge, 1999). While these sources are not directly related to the secularization of the house, they provide a background for thinking about the transformation of the house. The fact that Ottoman houses in the nineteenth century no longer had divanhane, mabeyn or selamlık can be considered as part of the secularization process of the empire. The relationship between secularization and architecture and spaces requires a separate, comprehensive and detailed study. Here, a brief evaluation of the salon space will suffice. However, for those who wish to engage in a detailed discussion, the subject deserves to be addressed starting from the above publications.

52 U. Tanyeli, İstanbul’da Mekân Mahremiyetinin İhlali ve Teşhiri: Gerilimli Bir Tarihçe ve 41 Fotog˘raf [Violation and Exposure of Spatial Privacy in Istanbul: A Tense History and 41 Photographs] (Istanbul: Metis Yayınları, 2013), pp.22–23.

53 For the shrinking of the family in the nineteenth century, the birth of the modern family, and the reconstruction of the family, see Alan Duben and Cem Behar, Istanbul Households: Marriage, Family and Fertility, 1880-1940 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991); İlber Ortaylı, Osmanlı Toplumunda Aile [Family in Ottoman society] (Istanbul: Kronik Books, 2020).

54 Anar, Mekândan Taşan Edebiyat, p.121.

55 Swartz, Culture & Power, p.215.

56 P. Bourdieu and L.J.D. Wacquant, An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1996), p.170.

57 I. U. Altınışık, ‘Osmanlı’da Zaman-Mekân Kavrayışının Değişimi ve Mimarlık’ [Change in the Time-Space Concept and Architecture in the Ottoman Empire] (PhD thesis, Yıldız Technical University, 2012), p.113.

58 N. Meriç, Osmanlı’da Gündelik Hayatın Değişimi: Adab-ı Muaşeret 1894-1927 [Change in Daily Life in the Ottoman Empire: Etiquette 1894-1927] (Istanbul: Kaknüs Publishing, 2000), p.352, and O. Şenyurt, Zamanın Mekanları Mekânın Zamanları Osmanlı’da Mimari Mekân ve Yaşam [Spaces of Time, Time of Spaces Architectural Space and Life in the Ottoman Empire] (Istanbul: Doğu Kitabevi, 2018), p.346.

59 Y. Zarifi, Hatıralarım Kaybolan Bir Dünya İstanbul 1800-1920 [My Memories: A Disappeared World, Istanbul 1800-1920] (Istanbul: Literatür Publishing, 2021), p.136. Translated by K. Skotiniyadis.

60 N. İleri and C. Değirmencioğlu, ‘Erken Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye’sinde Asri Ev Tartışmaları ve Elektrikli Tenvirat’ [Modern Home Debates and Electric Lighting in Early Republican Turkey], ViraVerita E-Journal: Interdisciplinary Encounters, Vol.12 (2020), pp.92–126.

61 Ahmet Mithat, Avrupa Adab-ı Muaşereti Yahut Alafranga [European Etiquette or Alafranga], (Istanbul: Dergâh Yayınları, 2016) pp.144–45.

62 Hüseyin Remzi Bey, Mir`atü’l-Beyt, p.110.

63 Mehmet Rıfat, Tedbîr’i Menzil’den Hane Bahsi, pp.56–67.

64 Mehmet İzzet, Rehber-i Umur-ı Beytiyye Volume 2, pp.481–85.

65 J. Baudrillard, The Consumer Society: Myths and Structure (London: Sage, 1998), p.89.

66 Swartz, Culture & Power, p.110.

67 F. Bozkurt, Tereke Defterleri ve Osmanlı Maddi Kültüründe Değişim (1785-1875 İstanbul Örneği) [Tereke Books and Change in Ottoman Material Culture (1785-1875 Istanbul Example)] (PhD thesis, Sakarya University, 2011), p.267.

68 Uğur Tanyeli, ‘Osmanlı Barınma Kültüründe Batılılaşma-Modernleşme: Yeni Bir Simgeler Dizgesinin Oluşumu’ [Westernization-Modernization in Ottoman Housing Culture: The Formation of a New Symbolic System], in Yıldız Sey (ed.), Tarihten Günümüze Anadolu’da Konut ve Yerleşme [Housing and Settlement in Anatolia: a Historical Perpective] (Istanbul: Ofser Yapımevi, 1996), p.287.

69 S. Bozdoğan, Modernism and Nation Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 2001), pp.212–13.

70 S. M. Alus, Masal Olanlar [Those Who Are Fairy Tales] (Istanbul: İletişim, 1997), p.93.

71 U. Tanyeli, Sınıraşımı Metinleri: Osmanlı Mekanının Peşinde 15.-19. Yüzyıllar [Transboundary Texts: In Search of Ottoman Space 15^th-19^thcenturies] (Istanbul: Akın Nalça Publishing, 2015), p.177.

72 H. V. Moltke, Moltke’nin Türkiye Mektupları [Moltke’s Letters to Turkey] (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1969), p.29. Translated by H. Örs.

73 Zarifi, Hatıralarım Kaybolan Bir Dünya İstanbul 1800-1920, p.239.

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded by Suleyman Demirel University Scientific Research Projects Unit (SDU-BAP) as a PhD Thesis Project under the grant no: FDK-2021-8379.