A fragmented map of 19th century Istanbul (English)
Veronika Bernard
A fragmented map of 19th century Istanbul
Istanbul Fragmented, Istanbul 21st-24th September 2005
Abstract
The paper deals with textual and visual representations of Istanbul in 19th century Austrian literature of travel. It provides information on the cultural background, and discusses the relevance of Edward W. Said’s critique of Orientalism and the construction of the other by analyzing texts first and illustrations next. Its main findings are that both texts and illustrations re-construct the city according to a nationalized concept of the other. Orientalist tradition is qualified by this. Ottoman culture serves as a desirable, a neutral, or a rejected other. Thus, the city is shown as a cluster of sights documenting genuine Oriental heritage.
The author of this paper has done research on the approach to the Ottoman Empire represented in 19th century Austrian literature of travel, and on portrayals of urban surroundings in German literature for about ten years each. She has questioned the texts concerned on how the ideas in people’s minds both shape culture, and are shaped by a cultural background. The texts of travels, in particular, may tell us a lot about stereotypes and clichés shared by people of a similar cultural background, and the mechanisms active in forming those stereotypes and clichés. In fact, the author`s very first interest in Austrian literature of travel dealing with the Ottoman Empire was aroused by a simple question twenty years ago: Where do the images of an Oriental world in people’s minds come from? Her first and still valid thesis on this question has been: Well, they come from what people hear, read and see in their traditional surroundings. In this way traditions of stereotypes and clichés are formed. The 18th and 19th centuries were centuries of listening to stories told, of reading, drawing, and painting. Then literature of travel illustrated by steel engravings was read for entertainment and to get prepared for journeys to the places described by the texts. And what people read, and saw on the illustrations stayed in their minds.1 The second of the author’s research interests centres upon a different question: Why have urban surroundings been so relevant for writers of German literature throughout the centuries? The author’s thesis submitted to earn postdoctoral qualification points out that the urban concept seems to be strongly linked to people’s emotions, and because of this has become relevant if it comes to coping with social, political, and religious change in literature. The title of the author’s postdoctoral thesis runs owing to this: „Das emotionale Moment der Veränderung. Stadt als Dichtung“(The Impact of Change. Urban Surroundings in Literature).2 The Urban concept obviously has turned into something like a social symbol over the centuries. Istanbul is a city. German speaking people have written texts of travel in which they represent this city. No question that it has been a challenging idea to ask: What do those texts tell us about the issues shaping 19th century Europe while talking about the city of Istanbul?
19th century Europe as a very special context of literary studies: Cultural and political preliminaries
But why exactly focus on the 19th century in asking this question? Well, there is at least one good reason for this. In fact, the 19th century is essential in many ways as far as Europe’s attempt to establish a new identity is concerned, and because of this it is not surprising, indeed, that the organizers of the conference „Istanbul Fragmented“ have decided to concentrate on the 19th century in discussing what they call „Representation of Istanbul by a foreigner: the past“. In 19th century Europe general living conditions were changing as a sequence of wars seemed to have come to an end. In fact, the 19th century turned out to be a period of relative peace, which lasted for 100 years, after the Napoleonic wars had come to an end in 1815 due to the negotiations at the Viennese Peace Conference („Wiener Kongress“). Besides, the issues of European society had become more diverse during the 18th century. If you look back in history you will see that European identity had been dominated by class background and religious belief during most of the Middle Ages, by confessional denomination after Martin Luther had established what was later called Protestantism during the first third of the 16th century, and it was not until the end of the Thirty Years War in 1648 that a secular concept of identity slowly started to take the place of confessional identity. This secular concept was European Enlightenment. It looks like a paradox that exactly this movement prepared the ground for European nationalism. Yet, it is a fact that the idea of nationalism slowly started to develop towards the end of the 18th century,3 and prevailed to be the leading concept during the 19th century and even throughout most of the 20th. During the 19th century Europe was turned into a place of nations claiming to live in their very own states. Europeans were trained to feel nationally, they were trained to identify with nations that formed states.
However, establishing an identity does not only imply the necessity to define who you are, it also implies the necessity to define who you are not. Shaping an identity means to take positions. Establishing your identity means marking people, nations, and cultures as being just like you are, and marking others as being different from you. So you split the world into a part which is compatible to you, and into another one being incompatible to you. If you look at European history again you will find exactly this strategy, yet, you will also find an amazing result. Europeans always have had two incompatibles: an inner-European one, and an extra-European one, so to speak. The inner-European one was the rebelling member of a lower class, the member of another confession, the king of a rivalling kingdom, and from the 19th century onwards the member of one of the other European nations. You would fight him if considered necessary, and divide Europe by this. The extra-European incompatible was identified with any member of any religion and culture different from Christianity. You would fight him too, even if not necessary – however, unite Europe by this. Enlightenment slightly changed this strategy of cultural discrimination by constructing the „Noble Savage“, the term describing a human being living in what was considered to be a non-civilized state of cultural development but showing features of civilized behaviour and the ability to be brought up to European values. This was felt to be a really positive change in Europe’s approach to other cultures and a big step taken towards cultural emancipation then. Evaluated according to nowadays standards, of course, it is not because the concept still takes for granted that other cultures are inferior anyway. Then, however, the „Noble Savage“ was able to open people’s eyes and minds to the rest of the world and what it had to offer in terms of culture. And this stimulating impact lasted well into the 19th century. Nevertheless, even the secular movement of Enlightenment was not able to abolish the European notion Christianity being at the heart of European civilization. Its merit is to have turned the religious rules of former centuries into values of a secularized society.
So the 19th century created some sort of a cultural paradox. You meet people being educated to feel national concerning nearly every field of life: culture, mentality, politics including political alliances, history, language, even religion and confession. At the same time those people were highly interested in all cultures different from their national ones. The relatively peaceful political situation in Europe gave a marvellous opportunity to those people: They got the chance to travel on a much wider scale than in preceding centuries. Throughout the centuries people have travelled on business. In the 18th century well-to-do people had travelled to broaden their minds. In 19th century Europe travelling for recreation and entertainment was added to those purposes of travelling. Italy, and the Ottoman Empire (with the exception of the Balkans) became Europeans‘ preferred destinations. Greece and Egypt were added to the list by the middle of the century. In those places people found cultures which they felt were different from their national ones. And of course, people took their nationalities with them. They travelled as Germans, British, French and Austrians both in terms of their passports and in terms of their lives back home. Those included the experience of restrictive political systems or more tolerant ones, growing industries, growing cities, growing speed in nearly every field of life, and a private sphere which was constantly shrinking for various reasons, and all this being combined in different ways and at varying extents in different European countries and at different periods of the 19th century. All this was on people’s minds while they were staying at their destinations.
Istanbul as a European construction: Orientalist traditions and functions of urban surroundings in German literature
In terms of 19th century Austrian texts of travel this means that, of course, you will find underlying patterns of what Edward W. Said has defined as Orientalist tradition in his critique of Orientalism.4 You find those patterns in the way the description of the city is structured. Tables of contents document this very well. An excellent example is the table of contents (Fig. 1) to be found in the 1st volume of Murad Efendi’s two volume publication „Türkische Skizzen“ (Turkish sketches).5 The subheading („Türkische Fahrten“) informs the reader that the first volume deals with journeys within Turkey. Next the reader learns which way the author has taken to reach Istanbul. Obviously he has taken the more recent south route6 as soon as rounding Greece and crossing the Aegean Sea and the Sea of Marmara instead of going down the Danube and approaching Istanbul from the North by passing through the Bosporus. Finally the reader is invited to follow the author on walks through Constantinople („Wanderungen durch Konstantinopel“). However, those walks are rather of figurative quality. So the subheadings „A Bird’s-eye View of Stambul“, „Stambul Popular Types“, „An Old Quarter“, „Turkish Means of Transport“, „Pera and the People of Pera“, „Ramadan at Stambul“, „The Ottoman Theatre“, „Schiller’s „The Robbers“ Performed at Gedik Pascha Theatre“, „The Sultan’s Treasure“, „A Turkish Drawing Room“, and „The Stambul Bazar“ all introduce chapters offering information on Istanbul topography, Istanbul population and Istanbul social life rather than a record of how the author went through Istanbul on foot. So Murad Efendi’s representation of Istanbul is a compendium of informative notes. They follow a pattern of introducing the reader to the place by offering general aspects and by progressing to the very special ones. Murad Efendi underlines his expert position by this. He earned this status by being an Austrian who was invited to work for the Ottoman government in the 19th century. He was granted Ottoman citizenship, changed his name Franz von Werner to Murad Efendi, and lived in the Ottoman Empire.7 Said has termed this attempt of piling up information concerning the Eastern Mediterranean by Europeans „Orientalism“.
Nevertheless, the author’s position is that discussing representations of Istanbul, and the Orient exclusively according to Edward W. Said’s critique of Orientalism does not really give you the full scale of their implications.8 In his critique of Orientalism Said argues that Europeans have constructed the Orient by gathering and handing on information, and he further argues that Europeans have constructed the Orient as an inferior Other contrasting the Occident predominantly to exercise power over those territories they have called „the Orient“. He is partly right, of course. Firstly, you will never be able to give full information, and secondly, giving information means filtering the facts at hand and by this interpreting the information rather than passing it on. Giving information on what so ever means representing but never copying the real thing. So, in fact, you construct the matter you give information on. Thirdly, being well informed means being able to act independently. If you lack information you will be at a loss, and you will have to rely on others to fix things for you. They turn into experts. You are in a weak position. Being informed strengthens your position. This means exercising power over those who are not as well informed as you are, and, of course, it also means to exercise power over those you have gathered information on. Consequently, collecting information on the Eastern Mediterranean means exercising power over those territories. The relevance of Said’s points, thus, is undisputed, yet, they ought to be qualified by the inner-European perspective of national profiling. Gathering information on other nations and cultures is one of its central features, and no end in itself. The Eastern Mediterranean is just one example among others for this. The reason is obvious. Gathering information means exercising power over those European nations who are forced to rely on the information you have gathered. And this, of course, is in line with 19th century European nationalist ambitions.
Due to this European representations of Istanbul tell you more about inner-European conditions than about 19th century Istanbul itself. That’s why you positively cannot analyse approaches to the city in British, French, German and Austrian texts of travel by asking the same questions.9 Austrian representations of Istanbul describe the city as some sort of a cultural and social model. This approach partly rests upon the fact that Istanbul was the residence of the Ottoman monarch during the 19th century, and consequently, the capital of the Ottoman Empire for Austrian travellers. The Habsburg Monarchy was maintaining close diplomatic ties with this state after two Ottoman sieges of Vienna. The Ottoman Empire was considered a friendly state. This was part of 19th century Habsburg diplomatic pragmatism. The „Orientalische Akademie“ of Vienna (Academy of Oriental studies) was founded to train diplomats who were to be sent to the Ottoman Empire in the 18th century.10 All this is part of Austrians‘ national identity, and due to this, it is reflected in the travellers‘ attitudes to the Ottoman people and its capital although not mentioned explicitly in the texts. Murad Efendi’s preface points out this aspect best. He says:
„ ... Wenn es mir gelang diesen Zweck annähernd zu erreichen und dabei naturgemäß hie und da einen Irrthum zu berichtigen, und ein der Wahrheit entsprechenderes Bild von dem wenig gekannten, aber dafür gerne verkannten Osmanen-Volke zu geben, so darf ich dieses Buch als kein ganz unnützes betrachten. ... Ich werde, ohne in diesen Blättern irgend ein anderes Ziel anzustreben als durch Darstellung fremdartiger Gegenden, Völker und Bräuche zu unterhalten, also ohne eine Tendenz zu verfolgen, unwillkürlich zu dem Schlusse kommen: Wer den Osmanen kennt, wird ihn achten, wenn er sich auch oft über ihn ärgern muß.“ (On condition that I have been near successful in reaching this purpose (i.e. giving people a true record of his Oriental experiences; author’s remark), and in doing so having corrected some mistakes now and again, and having provided a more realistic and true image of the Ottoman people, who we do still not know much about but who we misjudge a lot, I may consider this book a quite useful one. ... I will just try to entertain people by describing exotic places, people and customs on these pages. I will not follow any tendency in doing so. Nevertheless, I will most certainly reach the conclusion: Who knows the Ottoman people will respect it, although he will feel annoyed by it quite often.)11
This is in line with the urge put upon Austrian citizens not only to define their inner-European compatibles and incompatibles, but also their extra-European ones. Cultures were assigned their position in relation to Austrian national identity by this. Apart from the diplomatic aspect Austrian representations of Istanbul are moulded by the fact that capitals are assigned representative status in 19th century national thinking. They represent the state as a social body. According to this quality capitals hold a double function in 19th century literature written in German. They are used to discuss political, social and cultural issues related to national affairs. Yet, they are also used to discuss matters of social and cultural relevance in general, like possible consequences of what was felt to be overpopulation then, a postulated opposition of country life and city life, of rural and urban population in terms of surroundings, living conditions, crime rate, education, social manners, entertainment facilities, and cultural institutions. In the case of Istanbul this meant discussing the aspects of Muslim religion, society and culture as the Ottoman Empire was identified with Islam and Muslim culture owing to the historical background. Both were identified with the Orient in 19th century Austria. The Ottoman Empire was seen as the legitimate heir and preserver of Muslim cultural traditions in terms of architecture, customs, and everyday life. Following this sequence of logic Istanbul represented Ottoman society and culture, and by this all of Oriental culture for 19th century Austrian travellers. Istanbul was an Oriental microcosm for them.
Istanbul as an Oriental microcosm: the construction of a national other, and the phenomenon of perceiving selectively
This Oriental microcosm was a puzzling paradox for 19th century Austrians. On the one hand Ottoman culture was said to be the culture of a friendly state, which in some way was similar to the Habsburg Monarchy. In both empires people of many different ethnic and religious backgrounds lived, yet, in both empires you had an official religion and a ruling ethnic group.12 On the other hand Islam including polygamy, and a still common slavery were factors considered incompatible in terms of an Austrian national identity. Christianity obliges men to be married to only one woman, and serfdom had been abolished in the Habsburg Monarchy by the end of the 18th century. In order not to get lost in this microcosm 19th century Austrian travellers read a lot of literature dealing with the Ottoman Empire, no matter, whether this was fiction like the poetical works by Lord Byron, personal texts like Lady Montague’s and Ida Hahn-Hahn’s letters or informative literature.13 In this way they are part of Orientalist tradition. However, they broke the tradition by sorting out the information provided. They used what they considered relevant pieces of information to construct Ottoman culture as a national version of the other. The other is a complex construction. Generally speaking it is everything you are not. Taken more closely it is your opposite. It is the negative reflection of your features. The negative ones turn into positive ones and the other way round. The other has got what you miss, and it misses what you have got. Consequently, the paradox nature of Ottoman culture was the perfect other for Austrians. Their approach to Ottoman culture was a function of how well they identified with their national identity. Roughly speaking, those who did not identify with the restrictive political system installed by Metternich,14 the strict regulations being part of this system, accelerating industrialization, growing cities, new means of transport, and their religious background constructed Ottoman culture as a desirable other. Those who were at peace with their national identity constructed Ottoman culture as a more or less neutral other. Those who were enthusiastic about their national identity constructed the Ottoman culture as a rejected other. Amand Freiherr von Schweiger-Lerchenfeld has done so. In 1876 he wrote the following concerning the Ottoman Empire:
„Die Türkei macht heute mehr als je von sich reden. Es sind nicht Reformen, die diese Popularität hervorgerufen haben, nicht das Aufblühen von Industrie, Kunst, Gewerbe und Handel, sondern Episoden von aller Art Mißwirthschaft und Symptome eines stetigen Zersetzungsprocesses. In der Politik ist die Türkei durch den dominierenden Einfluß der europäischen Mächte so viel wie todt.“ (Turkey has given rise to much comment nowadays. It is not the reforms which have caused this attention, it is not a prospering industry, blossoming arts, flourishing craft and trade, but rather episodes of all kinds of mismanagement and symptoms of progressing decay. Politically speaking Turkey is near dead due to the dominating influence of the European states.)15
Mostly, however, the positions are somewhere in between, as to be seen from what Friedrich Fürst von Schwarzenberg wrote, for example, when he was staying at Bujukdére in the middle of August in 1837:
„Genußreich ist für mich hier eigentlich nur das Abentheuerliche dieses Lebens. Es ist dies das einzige Land, wo man spazieren reitet, mit den Pistolen in den Halftern, spazieren fährt mit Segel und Steuerruder, spazieren geht unter Pest und bissigen Hunden; wo nicht jeder Schritt, jede Stunde, jedes Ereignis schon in der Frühe abgezirkelt und im Programm des Tages angezeigt vor uns liegt. Das einzige Land, wo nicht jede Handlung von einer väterlichen Autorität schon vorhinein erlaubt oder verbothen, wo nicht jeder Weg und Steg schon durch die Katastral-Vermessungslinien vorgezeichnet, ja sogar von der löbl. Polizeibehörde jeder Fleck bezeichnet sein muß, wo man in dringenden Fällen hinspucken darf!“ (Strictly speaking, the adventurous nature of this life is the only delightful thing for me here. It is the only country, where you ride on a walk pistols ready, cruise on a walk using sails and helms, take a walk surrounded by the plague and by vicious dogs; it is the only country where not every step, not every hour, not every incident has been planned in the morning and has been marked in the daily schedule. It is the only country where not every action has been either allowed or forbidden in advance by fatherly authorities, where one’s way has been marked in the land register, where even every spot has to be marked by the laudable police where you are allowed to spit in a case of emergency!)16
The construction of the other solved the paradox by embracing all sorts of oppositions: a general opposition of Orient and Occident, and the more particular ones of Islam and Christianity, of an European law and order mentality and a natural moral behaviour reminding of the „Noble Savage“, of rather grey European urban sceneries and colourful Oriental ones, of European mono-culture and Oriental multi-culture, of a cultural identity just being shaped and a long lasting cultural tradition.
Austrian representations of 19th century Istanbul are constructed according to this. In particular when travellers describe their first impression of the city when arriving at Istanbul harbour they are struck by aw at the confrontation with the other. Ida Pfeiffer’s account of her first sight at the Istanbul skyline ought to be quoted at length to illustrate the nature of this experience:
„Morgens drei Uhr, als wir in den Hafen von Konstantinopel eingelaufen waren, lag außer einigen Matrosen alles in tiefster Ruhe, und ich stand auf dem Verdeck und harrte und sah die Sonne im vollsten Glanze ihrer Pracht über die mit Recht bewunderte Kaiserstadt aufgehen. Wir hatten Anker geworfen in der Nähe von Tophane, und ausgebreitet vor meinen Blicken lag nun diese Stadt aller Städte auf mehreren Hügeln, deren jeder selbst wieder eine Stadt trägt und doch sich passend und großartig dem ganzen anschmiegt. Die eigentliche Stadt Konstantinopel ist von Tophane, Galata und Pera durch das sogenannte Goldene Horn getrennt und durch eine lange, breite hölzerne Brücke in Verbindung gesetzt. Skutari und Burgulu erheben sich terrassenförmig am asiatischen Ufer. Der herrlichste und großartigste Zypressenwald umgibt Skutari von außen und innen. Im Vordergrund, auf der Höhe des Berges, liegt die schöne und große Kaserne, welche zehntausend Mann faßt. Die wundervollen Moscheen mit ihren fein gezeichneten Minaretten, die Paläste und Harems, die Kioske und großen Kasernen, die Gärten, die Boskette und Waldungen von Zypressen, die vielfarbig angestrichenen Häuser, über welche oft wieder einzelne Zypressen ihre schlanken Gipfel erheben, und endlich der ungeheure Wald von Masten – dies alles bildet einen unbeschreiblich überraschenden Anblick. Und erst als das rege Leben der Menschen begann, sowohl am Ufer als auf dem Meer, da langten meine Augen nicht aus. Eine Unzahl Kaiks bedeckte nach und nach das Meer und das Goldene Horn, so weit der Blick reichte. Das bewegteste Leben am Ufer, von Menschen aller Nationen und Farben, vom weißen Europäer bis zum schwärzesten Äthiopier, das Gemisch der eigenthümlichsten, verschiedenartigsten Trachten – alles dies und noch viel mehr hielt mich gebannt auf dem Verdeck. Die Stunden flohen gleich Augenblicken dahin – und für mich kam die Zeit der Ausschiffung viel zu früh, obwohl ich von früh drei Uhr bis acht Uhr stand und nichts als schaute. Alle Mühseligkeiten der Reise fand ich reich belohnt, ich war glücklich in dem Anblick dieser wunderbaren, morgenländischen Bilder und hätte nur gewünscht, ein Dichter zu sein, um dieses Wundervolle, Herrliche schildern zu können. (At three o’clock in the morning when we had reached Istanbul harbour and everyone apart from some sailors was still sleeping I was standing on deck waiting and watching the sun showing all her splendor and magnificence in rising over this imperial city which has been admired so much with good reason. We had dropped anchor near Tophane, and now this city of cities was spreading over several hills in front of my eyes, each hill being covered by another city, yet, each one going marvellously with all of the scenery. The actual city of Constantinople is parted from Tophane, Galata and Pera by the socalled Golden Horn and connected with them by a long and wide wooden bridge. Skutari and Burgulu climb the Asian shore in a terrace-like way. Skutari is surrounded by the most beautiful and marvellous cypress wood which is also to be found in the inner of the city. In the foreground, on a level with the mountain, the big and beautiful barracks are situated which accommodates ten-thousand soldiers. The wonderful mosques with their gracefully shaped minarets, the palaces and harems, the kiosks and big barracks, the gardens, the groups of bushes and trees, and the cypress woods, the multicolour houses, above which single cypress trees raise their tops, and last but not least, the immense number of masts – all this formed a view which was breathtaking and surprising. Not to mention the moment when people became busy at the shore and on the sea: I did not have enough eyes to watch them. An uncountable number of small boats one by one filled the sea and the Golden Horn well to the horizon. People of all nations and colours, white Europeans among them as well as the blackest Ethiopians, performing the most lively activities on the shore, and a blend of the most particular, and varied costumes – all this and much more kept me on deck banned. The hours turned into moments – and I still had to get off board much too early although I had been doing nothing else than standing and watching from three to eight in the morning. I was fully rewarded for all the strain experienced on the journey. I was happy when I saw all these wonderful Oriental pictures and I wished I were a poet so I had been able to depict all this being so wonderful and great.)17
Reading back home has shaped and underlined the oppositions constructing this Oriental image. Austrian literature on Istanbul even offered six day itineraries to do sightseeing in Istanbul as soon as 1822.18 Consequently, Austrian travellers had a clearly cut image of the „other“ Ottoman culture in their minds when they arrived at Istanbul. They knew were to go, they knew which sights were considered the representative ones, they knew which of those sights were musts, they knew which excursions were recommended, they knew what the people were like in the several Istanbul quarters and suburbs, they knew which safety measures to take. Austrian travellers followed the hints and toured Istanbul in search of everything which had been described as being part of the other in literature. In fact, Istanbul was not really experienced by Austrian travellers. Instead, they perceived selectively based on what their personal reading of the Ottoman other was. They saw what they wanted to see, and did not see what they did not want to see.19 Their aim was to find their images to be true which they had constructed following the descriptions in the texts. In case Istanbul proved the other based on literature they were satisfied. In case Istanbul did not prove literature they were disappointed or delighted depending on whether the point had been conflicting with their personal reading of the Ottoman other or not. In time selective perception so caused Istanbul to become some sort of a virtual place in Austrian representations of the city. Istanbul existed as a nationalized projection of the Ottoman other being proved by selective perception.
Fragmenting Istanbul, and constructing a second map of a virtual city out of the fragments according to the Ottoman other was part of this projection. A look at G. Freytag&Berndt’s map of the Sea of Marmara and its surroundings published by A. Hartleben’s and being regarded one of the most recent ones in use during the second half of the 19th century (Fig. 2) gives you the topographical aspect of this. Pera (Beyoglu), Skutari (Üsküdar), and Ejub (Eyüp) are the places prominently marked within the range of Constantinople (Istanbul). Kadikiöj (Kadiköy), Bujuk-Dere, and Anadoli hissar are less prominently marked. The name Konstantinopel only loosely refers to a certain place on the shore as it is written well into the Sea of Marmara. This corresponds to what you find in Austrian representations of Istanbul. Ida Pfeiffer’s record (Fig. 3) of her stay at Istanbul in 1842 is a good example of this.20 It starts with an account of her arrival at Istanbul harbour, and continues commenting on the whirling dervishes, describing Skutari, commenting on the howling dervishes, describing the Hippodrom, the Galata tower, the Bazar, the mosques, the slave market, the old Serail, the Hippodrom again, cafés and story tellers, an excursion to Ejub, houses, theatres and carriages, Istanbul recreation areas like the so called sweet waters of Europe and Asia, Istanbul festivals, and finally an excursion to Bursa. Resulting from this Istanbul is reduced to Stambul. Galata, Pera, Skutari, the holy place of Ejub, and the Golden Horn are accepted as its outskirts. The space in between is turned into no-man’s land. It is compressed in such a way the Istanbul sites mentioned may form a continuing urban scenery.
The fragments are fragmented again. Even though the topographic reduction follows the projective pattern of the other anyway, there still remains the search for the so called typical within the Ottoman other. Within the quarters selected only sights remain: the well known mosques, some antique places, and the Sultan’s palace. However, any place where you have a chance to watch the natives being occupied with activities considered typical, like trading and bargaining, drinking coffee or tea and smoking water pipes, or listening to stories and fairy tales, and where you, maybe, could get into contact with them, is considered a sight too. Consequently, the Bazars, cafés, recreation areas, and graveyards are musts. The only criterion is how typical the places are considered to be. For this reason Ida Pfeiffer prefers the sweet waters of Asia to the sweet waters of Europe:
„An dem türkischen Feiertag, dem Freitag, geht es ebenso lebhaft in den asiatischen Süßwässern zu, und hier gibt es für uns Europäer mehr und Interessanteres zu sehen, indem da die Mehrheit aus Türken und Türkinnen besteht. Letztere haben, wie überall, das Gesicht ganz verhüllt, das Schönste aber, ihr feuriges Auge, ist doch sichtbar.“ (On Fridays, which is the Turkish holiday, there are as many people at the sweet waters of Asia. Here, however, there is much more interesting to see for Europeans because the majority of people are Turkish males and females. The latter completely covering their faces just as they do everywhere, the most beautiful parts, however, their flashing eyes, are still to be seen.)21
So what Austrian travellers were interested in when they visited Istanbul was to be provided with stereotypes of Ottoman culture. As a consequence Austrian textual representations of 19th century Istanbul offer a creative re-construction of Orientalist tradition, which is dominated by a national construction of the other identifying the Ottoman other with Oriental stereotypes secured by selective perception.
Istanbul sights as stereotyped arrangements: Illustrations as romanticizing constructions of the Oriental other
This textual approach of fragmenting Istanbul and re-constructing it again according to the above pattern of selecting the so called typical is underlined by the illustrations to be found in Austrian texts on Istanbul. In fact, illustrations are an essential part of 19th century publications. They do not have decorative function but are part of what is told. This is especially true of books of travel and of any other publications to be used for informative purposes concerning foreign places. For this reason, prominent travellers, like the members of the Habsburg royal family and authors of informative publications on the Ottoman Empire, were accompanied by painters. Their only job was to paint sketches of landscapes, people, famous sights, shortly, of anything they regarded representative, and typically Ottoman and Oriental. A motif meeting those requirements was regarded as picturesque. Back home those sketches were used as copies for the steel engravings to be published together with the accounts of the journeys. Illustrations claimed to be drawn or painted from life increased the text author’s expert status. This was true particularly if the illustrations showed what the texts would tell the readers. Consequently, those travellers who could not afford to take their personal painters with them simply chose the illustrations to be used in their books from what was on the market. This market was a European rather than an Austrian or a German one. Books richly illustrated by steel engravings on Oriental regions were translated into German and published in several editions, as, for instance, Thomas Allom’s book of plates on Istanbul in the 1840ies.22 Nevertheless, as with the textual approach to the Orient shown in the national literatures of travel, you cannot speak of a common European tradition of European Orientalist painting either due to the differences in style.23
The illustrations which are published in Austrian books of travel are quite close in style to the British one documented in Thomas Allom’s paintings. It lacks both the dramatic and the erotic quality of most of the French Orientalist painting. Instead the paintings romanticize Oriental life. The motifs chosen are suitable to present Oriental universality. They combine scenery, architecture, and most important, people. You will find almost no arrangements which are not animated. The picturesque quality of the motifs would not be ensured fully without. Even with a picture showing part of the Istanbul panorama (Fig. 4) you will find people performing telling activities. In the left hand side front corner there is a group of men who are situated in front of a mosque. The picture is cut in such a way that the minaret is just within the perspective. The five men all wear turbans, wide trousers and shirts. They are dressed typically. Four of them are shown moving around in performing different activities. One man is presented in a sitting position again regarded as typically Turkish: legs held crossed, body upright, arms on top of the crossed legs in front of the body. This part of the picture is strongly lighted. In the right hand side front part of the picture passengers are just disembarking a big sailing-vessel. You learn this from the small boat going from the ship to the shore. In front of the boat gulls are floating on the water. Three slim rowing boats, called „Kaiks“ in the texts and being mentioned there as being typical of Istanbul, cross the harbour to the right of the ship. This part of the picture is slightly darker. In fact, you have a double foreground in this panoramic view of Istanbul which is highlighted in its animated parts. The perspective chosen draws the line between foreground and background along a bridge starting just next to the mosque in the foreground and reaching the opposite shore to the right of the ship anchoring in the harbour. The bridge is arched near its two ends. It is well lighted, yet, a bit darker at its opposite end. Again people are crossing the bridge in the part best illumined. Behind the bridge there is another big sailing-vessel. Behind the ship you vaguely see the dome of another mosque. In the central background you see still another mosque on the opposite shore. This one, however, is much bigger than the one in the foreground. It is surrounded by minarets and houses which again are drawn only vaguely. So, what you actually see on this painting by Thomas Allom is a view across the Golden Horn from north to south. What you meet on the painting, however, is a picturesque arrangement of almost everything which is considered the essential ingredients of the Ottoman other. And of course, this is what 19th century people saw when they looked at a picture like this one. They did not see the Golden Horn as a topographic aspect of Istanbul. The same is true of Allom’s paintings of the Istanbul Bazar (Fig. 5), and the Sultan Ahmed mosque (Fig. 6), and of his portrayal of a story teller (Fig.7). His painting of the Sweet waters of Europe arranges a scene reminding of a British park hosting a Viennese dance festivity Biedermeier style (Fig.8). The motif so highlights the European element within Istanbul life. Generally speaking, Istanbul life is attributed a strongly picturesque quality in Allom’s paintings which guarantees the tendency of romanticizing Ottoman life and culture.
This exactly is the style to be met in steel engravings illustrating Austrian books of travel. In case they refer to Istanbul they, firstly, show Istanbul sites and Istanbul people being considered Istanbul sights in the sense defined above. Secondly, those motifs are arranged according to the construction of an Ottoman stereotyped other being deeply romanticized. Even if the illustrations have been produced by Austrian artists you will not find much difference. Two steel engravings, one by Th. Mayerhofer showing an Istanbul porter (Fig. 9) and having been published in Anton Erwin Lux‘ book „Die Balkanhalbinsel“24 of 1887, and a second one of Skutari (Üsküdar; Fig. 10), which has been published in one of Schweiger-Lerchenfeld’s books25 in 1887 may be used as evidence. As with Allom’s Istanbul painting you are presented to what is considered a typical scene of everyday life. Mayerhofer’s porter, who is just walking along a wall carrying two chests on his back and a bag in his left hand, has got a quite over-sized moustache, and he is wearing a turban-like cap, wide trousers, a wide shirt, and a sleeveless jacket, just like the men in Allom’s painting do. Like them, he has rolled up his sleeves indicating he is at work. You see from the way he holds his left arm that it is hard work. Still, the man makes a picturesque impression. In the steel engraving showing a view of Skutari people again are dressed typically. They are walking along a path between wooden houses Istanbul style being overlooked by huge trees. Others are engaged in conversations illustrating their words by using telling gestures. And just like with Allom’s painting the perspective of the picture points towards a mosque in the central background. Both illustrations once more combine the fixtures of Oriental life and culture. Everything looks light and easy, idyllic and picturesque.
The tendency of this visual approach stayed consistent throughout the 19th century. Interestingly enough, it even prevailed when painting was competed by photography by the turn of the century. When Richard Freiherr von Eisenstein published his account of a journey to Istanbul in 191126 he had it illustrated by photographs taken on the journey. If you compare those photos to the more traditional 19th century paintings you will find that the motifs are still arranged to provide their picturesque quality. The perspective is still chosen according to this purpose. If the photo shows Istanbul people they will be grouped, and sometimes seated for the photo, and they will be portrayed in so called typical situations. Owing to this Eisenstein’s photo of the wooden houses and trees in Istanbul’s Aiwan-Serail street (Fig. 11) strongly reminds in perspective and motif of the Skutari sketch (Fig. 10) to be found in Schweiger-Lerchenfeld’s publication. His photo of a Turkish coffeehouse situated in a street with only little traffic (Fig. 12) shows similarities in motif to Allom’s portrayal of a story teller (Fig.7). Most of the romanticizing touch has got lost, however, as you cannot add as many picturesque details to the original motif as with a painting. The men in the café, for instance, look just the way they look, whereas Allom’s men listening to the story teller all have the same shape of face and their clothes have been draped picturesquely. This aspect becomes most obvious if the motif is a building, or a street. Allom’s painting of the Sultan Ahmed mosque shows horses dancing, men riding horses, and men sitting on carpets on the square in front of the mosque. Eisenstein’s photo titled „Front of Suleimanijeh mosque at Constantinople“ (Fig. 13) shows a comparable choice of motif and perspective. Yet, the photo looks rather prosaic due to the lack of stylized people in stylized situations, who have been added to the original motif. The same can be seen in his photo of Aiwan-Serail street (Fig. 11), which has been discussed above, and of Yuksek-Caldirim street in Istanbul’s Galata quarter (Fig. 14). A really new point with Eisenstein’s visual approach to Istanbul, however, is that even hotels (Fig. 15) and public institutions, like schools (Fig. 16), have been added to the list of sights. Virtual Istanbul, which had been a cluster of sights standing close to each other throughout the 19th century, widened according to this. The no-man’s land resulting from fragmenting, and re-constructing the Istanbul map got filled at least a bit. However, this development did not start until the beginning of the 20th century, and it seems to have come to an end when Istanbul became a destination of 20th century mass-tourism. Since then the fragmented map of 19th century Istanbul has become relevant again.27
Summing up, 19th century Austrians representing Istanbul textually in their publications re-constructed the city according to a nationalized concept of the other. Orientalist tradition, as firstly defined and discussed by Edward W. Said, has been qualified by this. Ottoman life and culture served as a desirable, a neutral, or a rejected other depending on how well the Austrian travellers identified with their home-country. Resulting from this concept Istanbul was an object to selective perception. The city was seen and shown as a compressed cluster of sights documenting true Oriental heritage. The visual approach to Istanbul shown in illustrations used in 19th century Austrian publications underlines the textual approach. This technique remained relevant throughout the 19th century.
Notes and references
1. On this point see Veronika Bernard, Österreicher im Orient. Wien: Holzhausen, 1996: 137-144.
2. Veronika Bernard, Das emotionale Moment der Veränderung. Stadt als Dichtung. Bonn: Bouvier, 2000.
3. On this point see Veronika Bernard, Das emotionale Moment der Veränderung. Stadt als Dichtung. Bonn: Bouvier, 2000: 174-252.
4. See Edward W. Said, Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books, 1979.
5. Franz von Werner, alias Murad Efendi, Türkische Skizzen. Leipzig: Dürr, 21878: table of contents.
6. This route became popular during the second half of the 19th century after the Austrian Lloyd had taken up regular service between Triest and Istanbul in 1837.
7. See Veronika Bernard, Österreicher im Orient. Wien: Holzhausen, 1996: 30.
8. Natascha Ueckmann takes a similar position. Said’s approach is qualified by a feminist approach here. Natascha Ueckmann, Frauen und Orientalismus. Reisetexte französischsprachiger Autorinnen des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts. Stuttgart: Metzler, 2001.
9. For the point of a national literature on the Orient see the following publications: Helga Schnabl, Wahrnehmung orientalischer Fremde: österreichische Reisende begegnen dem Osmanischen Reich (1800 - 1850). Wien: Univ., Dipl.-Arb., 1993; Natascha Ueckmann, Frauen und Orientalismus. Reisetexte französischsprachiger Autorinnen des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts. Stuttgart: Metzler, 2001; Inge E. Boer, Disorienting vision. Rereading stereotypes in French orientalist texts and images. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2004; Lisa Lowe, Critical terrains: French and British orientalisms. Ithaca, NY [u.a.]: Cornell Univ. Pr., 1991; Susanne Stemmler, Topografien des Blicks. Eine Phänomenologie literarischer Orientalismen des 19. Jahrhunderts in Frankreich, Bielefeld: Transcript-Verlag, 2004; Margaret Topping (Ed.), Eastern voyages, Western visions. French writing and painting of the Orient. Oxford, Wien: Lang, 2004.
10. It was founded a school of Oriental languages in 1754.
11. Franz von Werner, alias Murad Efendi, Türkische Skizzen. Leipzig: Dürr, 21878, IV; translation by Veronika Bernard.
12. For a contrasting analysis of the Hasburg Monarchy and the Ottoman Empire see Bertrand Michael Buchmann: Österreich und das Osmanische Reich: eine bilaterale Geschichte. Wien: WUV-Univ.-Verl., 1999.
13. George Gordon Lord Byron, Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage. Leipzig: Fleicher, 1818; Mary Worthley Montague, Letters Written During her Travels in Europe, Asia and Africa to Persons of Distinction ... London: Phillips, 1803; Ida Hahn-Hahn, Reisebriefe. Berlin:1841. For further titles see Veronika Bernard, Österreicher im Orient. Wien: Holzhausen, 1996: 223-231.)
14. On 19th century Austrian political system see Bertrand Michael Buchmann: Österreich und das Osmanische Reich: eine bilaterale Geschichte. Wien: WUV-Univ.-Verl., 1999.
15. Armand Freiherr von Schweiger-Lerchenfeld: Unter dem Halbmonde. Ein Bild des ottomanischen Reiches. Jena: Costenoble, 1876: 98; transl.: V. B.
16. Friedrich Fürst von Schwarzenberg, Fragmente aus dem Tagebuche während einer Reise in die Levante. Tl. 1 u. 2. Gedruckt als Manuskript von 1837. Wien: Grund, 1857: 85-86; transl.: V. B.
17. Ida Pfeiffer, Reise einer Wienerin in das Heilige Land. Wien: Dirnböck, 1844: 38-39; transl.: V. B.
18. See Joseph von Hammer-Purgstall, Constantinopolis und der Bosporus. 2 Bde. Neudruck der Ausgabe von 1822. Frankfurt am Main: Inst. for the History of Arab.-Islamic Science, 1995: Bd. 2, 379-386.
19. For further details on the point of selective perception see Veronika Bernard, Österreicher im Orient. Wien: Holzhausen, 1996: 83-137; Inge E. Boer states a similar point in Inge E. Boer, Disorienting vision. Rereading stereotypes in French orientalist texts and images. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2004: 149 ff.
20. Ida Pfeiffer, Reise einer Wienerin in das Heilige Land. Wien: Dirnböck, 1844: table of contents.
21. Ida Pfeiffer, Reise einer Wienerin in das Heilige Land. Wien: Dirnböck, 1844: 52; transl.: V. B.
22. Thomas Allom, Constantinopel und seine Umgebungen malerisch und geschichtlich dargestellt. 2 Bde. Leipzig: Hartung, 1844.
23. On the different schools of Orientalist painting see the following publications: Martina Haja, Les orientalistes des écoles allemande et autrichienne. Paris-Courbevoie: ACR Ed., 2000; Gérard-Georges Lemaire, L’univers des Orientalistes. Paris: Èditions Mengès, 2000;
Margaret Topping (Ed.), Eastern voyages, Western visions. French writing and painting of the Orient. Oxford, Wien: Lang, 2004.
24. Anton Erwin Lux, Die Balkanhalbinsel (mit Ausschluß von Griechenland). Freiburg i. Breisgau: Herder, 1887.
25. Amand Freiherr von Schweiger-Lerchenfeld, Zwischen Donau und Kaukasus, Wien: Hartleben, 1887.
26. Richard Freiherr von Eisenstein, Reise nach Konstantinopel, Kleinasien, Rumänien, Bulgarien und Serbien. Wien: Gerold, 1912.
27. For the representation of Istanbul at the end of the 20th century see Merian magazine, volume on Istanbul: Kathrin Sander [Red.], Istanbul, der Große Basar; Bosporus; Kurden; Bauchtanz; Islam, in Istanbul; Beyoglu, das sündige Viertel; Prinzeninseln; türkische Küche; großer Infoteil. Hamburg: 2002.