Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wp2c8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-19T22:00:21.892Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Rebuilding of İstanbul Revisited: Foreign Planners in the Early Republican Years

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

İpek Akpınar
İpek Akpınar*
Affiliation:
İstanbul Technical University, Faculty of Architecture, Department of Architecture, Taşkışla 34437, Taksim, İstanbul
*
akpinari@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the 1930s, the attention of Turkey’s politicians shifted back from Ankara and Anatolian cities to İstanbul. In 1932, the Governorship-Municipality of İstanbul organized an urban design competition for İstanbul, and four foreign city planners were invited. In the meantime, Martin Wagner came to İstanbul for the preparation of urban reports. In 1937, Henri Prost, the prominent urbanist of Paris, was invited to İstanbul and prepared the first master plan of the city. In Turkey and in İstanbul, town planning processes have been significantly influenced by “Western” planning principles, cultures, and experiences while gaining a local meaning in the context of Turkish politics and the state-formation process. The aim of this study is to describe the urban design competition of 1933 and the first master plan of 1937. Beyond references to Western European cities as in the “city-beautiful” planning approach, this study, based on a series of official documents, plan reports and their rhetoric, investigates in particular the role of foreign planners/urbanists in İstanbul in the context of the construction of a nation-state. The analysis of these foreign planners’ work suggests that urban planning in Republican Turkey was closely linked to the construction of the nation state.

Keywords

Early Republican erarebuilding of İstanbulforeign expertsurbanizationmodernization
Type
Articles
Information
New Perspectives on Turkey , Volume 50: Special Issue on “Ambivalent Architectures” from the Ottoman Empire to the Turkish Republic , Spring 2014 , pp. 59 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © New Perspectives on Turkey and Cambridge University Press 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

50 Yılda İmar ve Yerleşme. Ankara: İmar ve İskan Bakanlığı, 1973.Google Scholar
Abercrombie, Patrick. “Halen Hazırlanmakta Olan Nazım Planlardaki Teklifler ve Metotlar Hakkında Muvakkat rapor.” 26 April, 1954.Google Scholar
Afife\Batur, . “1925-1950 Döneminde Türkiye Mimarlığı.” in Istanbul: World City, exhibition catalogue. İstanbul: Türkiye Ekonomik ve Toplumsal Tarih Vakfı, 1996, 209-34.Google Scholar
Agache, Alfred. Büyük İstanbul Tanzim ve İmar Programı. İstanbul: İstanbul Belediyesi, 1934.Google Scholar
Ahmad, Feroz. The Making of the Modern Turkey. London: Routledge, 1993.Google Scholar
Akcan, Esra. Architecture of Translation: Germany Turkey and the Modern House. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2012.Google Scholar
Akpınar, İpek. “The Making of a Modern Pay-ı Taht in Istanbul: Menderes’ Executions after Prost’s Plan.” in From the Imperial Capital to the Republican Modern City: Henri Prost’s Planning of Istanbul (1936–1951), edited by Bilsel, Cana and Pinon, Pierre, 167-199. İstanbul: Araştırmaları Enstitüsü, 2010.Google Scholar
Akpınar, İpek. “İstanbul’u (Yeniden) İnşa Etmek: 1937 Prost Planı” in Cumhuriyet’in Mekanları Zamanları İnsanları, edited by Ergut, Elvan Altan and İmamoğlu, Bilge, 107-124. Ankara: Dipnot Yayınları, 2010.Google Scholar
Akpınar, İpek. “The Rebuilding of Istanbul After the Plan of Henri Prost, 1937–1960: From Secularization to Turkish Modernization.” (PhD Dissertation, University College London, 2003).Google Scholar
Aksoy, Asu and Robins, Kevin. “Istanbul Between Civilization and Discontent.” New Perspectives on Turkey 10 (1994): 57-74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alsaç, Üstün. “The Second Period of National Architecture.” in Modern Turkish Architecture, edited by Holod, Renata and Evin, Ahmet, 94-104. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1984.Google Scholar
Angel, Aron. “Projets et amenagements urbains à Istanbul de 1933 à nos jours.” Lettre d’Information de l’Observation urbain d’Istanbul 2 (1992): 2-4.Google Scholar
Artun, Ali and Aliçavuşoğlu, Esra. Bauhaus, Modernleşmenin Tasarımı. (İstanbul: İletişim, 2009).Google Scholar
Aru, Kemal Ahmet. “Türkiye’de İmar Planı Yarışmaları Tarihi.” Türkiye Birinci Şehircilik Kongresi (Ankara: ODTÜ, 1982), 1-9.Google Scholar
Aslanoğlu, İnci. “1928–1946 Döneminde Ankara’da Yapılan Resmi Yapıların Mimarisinin Değerlendirilmesi.” In Tarih Içinde Ankara, edited by Yavuz, Yıldırım, (Ankara: ODTÜ, 2001), 271-286.Google Scholar
Aslanoğlu, İnci. Erken Cumhuriyet Dönemi Mimarlığı. Ankara: ODTÜ, 2000.Google Scholar
Auffret, Cyril. İstanbul: Fin de Siécle. Grenoble: Université de Pierre Mendes, 1994.Google Scholar
Ayataç, Hatice. “The International Diffusion of Planning Ideas: The Case of İstanbul.” Journal of Planning History 6, no. 2 (2007): 114-137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batur, Afife. “To be Modern: Search for a Republican Architecture.” in Modern Turkish Architecture, edited by Holod, Renata and Evin, Ahmet, 68-93. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1984.Google Scholar
Bazoğlu, Akif. “İstanbul İmarında Karşılaşılan Güçlükler ve Şikayetler.” Arkitekt 4 (1950): 198-202.Google Scholar
Behçet, and Bedrettin, . “Mimarlıkta İnkılâp.” Mimar 3, no. 8 (1933): 245-247.Google Scholar
Behçet, and Bedrettin, . “Türk İnkılâp Mimarisi.” Mimar 3, no. 9-10 (1933): 265.Google Scholar
Bilsel, Cana and Pinon, Pierre, eds. From the Imperial Capital to the Republican Modern City: Henri Prost’s Planning of Istanbul (1936–1951). İstanbul: İstanbul Research Institute, 2010.Google Scholar
Bilsel, Cana. “Ideology and Urbanism during the Early Republican Period: Two Master Plans for İzmir and Scenarios of Modernization.” Journal of the Faculty of Architecture 16 (1996): 13-60.Google Scholar
Bozdoğan, Sibel. Modernism and Nation-Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001.Google Scholar
Bozdoğan, Sibel and Akcan, Esra. Turkey: Modern Architectures in History. London: Reaktion Books, 2012.Google Scholar
Cengizkan, Ali. 1924–1925 Lörcher Planı: Ankara’nın ilk Planı. Ankara: Arkadaş, 2004.Google Scholar
Cohen, Jean-Louis, “From Grand Landscapes to Metropolises: Henri Prost.” in From the Imperial Capital to the Republican Modern City: Henri Prost’s Planning of İstanbul (1936–1951), edited by Bilsel, Cana and Pinon, Pierre, 49-98. İstanbul: İstanbul Research Institute, 2010.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. L. and Eleb, M.. Casablanca: Mythes et Figures d’une Aventure Urbaine. Paris: Éditions Belvisi, 1998.Google Scholar
Cohen, Jena-Louis, “Henri Prost.” in Dictionnaire de l’Architecture du XXe siècle, edited by Midant, J. P., 731-732. Paris: F. Hazan; Institut Français d’Architecture, 1996.Google Scholar
Collins, George Roseborough and Collins, Christiane Crasemann. Camillo Sitte: The Birth of Modern City Planning. New York: Rizzoli, 1986.Google Scholar
Cumhuriyet Devrinde İstanbul. İstanbul: İstanbul Belediyesi, 1949.Google Scholar
Çelik, Zeynep. Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations: Algiers under French Rule. Berkeley: University of California, 1997.Google Scholar
Çelik, Zeynep. İmparatorluk, Mimarlık ve Kent. Translated by Kılıç, Z.. İstanbul: Garanti Kültür A.Ş., 2012.Google Scholar
Çelik, Zeynep. The Remaking of Istanbul. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deckker, Thomas, ed. The Modern City Revisited. London: Spon Press, 2000.Google Scholar
Dilaver, Abidin. “İstanbul’un İmarı.” Cumhuriyet, 20 January 1950.Google Scholar
Doğramacı, Burcu. Kulturtransfer und nationale Identität. Deutschsprachige Architekten, Stadtplaner und Bildhauer in der Türkei nach 1927. Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 2008.Google Scholar
Duben, Alain and Behar, Cem. İstanbul Households, 1880–1940. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
Duranay, Niyaziet al., “Cumhuriyetten bu Yana İstanbul’un Planlaması.” Mimarlık 7 (1972): 65-118.Google Scholar
Egli, Ernst. “Şehir Planları.” Arkitekt 5-6 (1936): 148-152.Google Scholar
Egli, Ernst. “Şehirlerde Mesken ve İskan Meselesi.” Arkitekt 5-6 (1936): 191-195.Google Scholar
Ehlgötz, Hermann. İstanbul Şehrinin Umumi Planı. İstanbul: Ahmet Sait Matbaası, 1934.Google Scholar
Ergut, Elvan Altan and İmamoğlu, Bilge, eds. Cumhuriyet’in Mekanları Zamanları İnsanları, Ankara: Dipnot Yayınları, 2010.Google Scholar
Frampton, Kenneth. Modern Architecture: A Critical History. London: Thames and Hudson, 1994.Google Scholar
Franck, Oya Atalay. Architektur und Politik: Ernst Egli und die türkische Moderne 1927–1940. Zürich: GTA Verlag, 2012.Google Scholar
Franck, Oya Atalay. “Bir Modernlik Arayışı: Ernst Egli ve Türkiye (1927–1940).” in Cumhuriyet’in Mekanları Zamanları İnsanları, edited by Ergut, Elvan Altan and İmamoğlu, Bilge, 253-262. Ankara: Dipnot Yayınları, 2010.Google Scholar
Gallatti, Jean. “Un Grand Urbaniste Français: H. Prost.” Bulletin Officiel du Touring et Automobil de Turquie (February 1954): 12.Google Scholar
Gül, Murat. The Emergence of Modern İstanbul: Transformation and Modernization of a City. New York: I. B. Tauris, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Güner, Kağan. Modern Türk Sanatının Doğuşu: Konstrüktivist Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nde Kültür ve İdeoloji. İstanbul: Kaynak Yayınları, 2014. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Güzelleşen İstanbul, XX. Yüzyıl. İstanbul: İstanbul Maarif Matbaası, 1944.Google Scholar
Hautecœur, Louis. “Henri Prost à la Villa Medicis, 1902–1907.” in L’Œuvre de Henri Prost: Architecture et Urbanisme, 11-30. Paris: Académie d’Architecture, 1960.Google Scholar
Hénard, Eugène. Etudes sur les Transformations de Paris. Paris: l’Equerre, 1982.Google Scholar
Holod, Renata and Evin, Ahmet. Modern Turkish Architecture. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1984.Google Scholar
İstanbul’un Kitabı. İstanbul: İstanbul Belediyesi, c. 1959.Google Scholar
“İstanbul Şehir Planı: Imar Komisyonu Raporu.” Arkitekt 50, no. 2 (1935): 33-60.Google Scholar
Keyder, Çağlar. “Whither the Project of Modernity? Turkey in the 1990s.” in Rethinking Modernity and National Identity in Turkey, edited by Bozdoğan, Sibel and Kasaba, Reşat, 37-51. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997.Google Scholar
Keyder, Çağlar. Istanbul: Between the Global and the Local. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999.Google Scholar
Kırdar, Lütfi. “Vali ve Belediye Reisi Dr. Lütfi Kırdar’ın Mektubu.” in Cumhuriyet Devrinde İstanbul, 8-10. İstanbul: İstanbul Belediyesi, c. 1949.Google Scholar
Koraltürk, Murat. “Cumhuriyetin İlk Yıllarında İstanbul.” Toplumsal Tarih 59 (1998): 38-42.Google Scholar
Köksal, Duygu. “Cumhuriyet İdeolojisi ve Estetik Modernizm: Baltacıoğlu, Yeni Zamanlar ve Bauhaus.” In Bauhaus: Modernleşmenin Tasarımı İçinde, edited by Artun, Ali and Çavuşoğlu, Esra Ali, 241-259. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2009.Google Scholar
Küçükler, E. “Kemal Ahmet Aru ile Söyleşi.” Kent Gündem 2 (April 1997): 7-11.Google Scholar
Lambert, Jacques-Henri. İmar Yurdu. İstanbul: Milli Neşriyat Yurdu, 1934.Google Scholar
Lapidus, Ira. Muslim Cities in the Later Middle Ages. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1967.Google Scholar
Le Musée Social, Annales 13, no. 1 (1908).Google Scholar
Leontidou, Lila. The Mediterranean City in Transition: Social and Urban Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leontidou, Lila. “Postmodernism and the City: Mediterranean Versions.” Urban Studies 30 (1993): 951-954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leveau, Theo. “İstanbul.” in L’Œuvre de Henri Prost: Architecture et Urbanisme, 183-208. Paris: Académie d’Architecture, 1960.Google Scholar
Lewis, Bernard. The Emergence of Modern Turkey. New York: University of Oxford Press, 1968.Google Scholar
Mango, Andrew. Atatürk. London: John Murray, 1999.Google Scholar
Mansel, Philip. Constantinople: City of the World’s Desire, 1453–1924. London: John Murray, 1995.Google Scholar
Meats, Tony. “Constantinople, otherwise called Stanbole the Beautiful.” Architectural Review 168, no. 1001 (1980): 38-45.Google Scholar
Menteşe, Ertuğrul. “İmar Planları Hakkında” Mimarlık (1949): 42-45.Google Scholar
Menteşe, Ertuğrul. “İstanbul’un İmarı.” Arkitekt 24 (1955): 27-38.Google Scholar
Morley, David and Robins, Kevin. Spaces of Identity, Global Media, Electronic Landscapes and Cultural Boundaries. London: Routlegde, 1995.Google Scholar
Mortaş, Abidin. “Harp Sonrası İmar İşleri,” Arkitekt 3, no. 165-166 (1945): 191-192.Google Scholar
Nasr, Joe, and Volait, Mercedes. Urbanism Imported or Exported: Native Aspirations and Foreign Plans. Chichester: Wiley Academy, 2003.Google Scholar
Nicolai, Bernd. Moderne und Exil, Deutschsprachige Architekten in der Turkei 1925–1955. Berlin: Verlag fur Bauwesen, 1998.Google Scholar
Olsen, Donald J.The City as a Work of Art: London, Paris, Vienna. London: Yale University Press, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettifer, James. The Turkish Labyrinth: Atatürk and the New Islam. London: Penguin Books, 1998.Google Scholar
Pinon, Pierre. “Henri Prost: Paris’ten Roma’ya, Fas’tan İstanbul’a.” in İmparatorluk Başkentinden Cumhuriyet’in Modern Kentine: Henri Prost’un İstanbul Planlaması (1936–1951), edited by Bilsel, Cana and Pinon, Pierre, 15-47. İstanbul Araştırmaları Enstitüsü, İstanbul, 2010.Google Scholar
Prost, Henri. “Istanbul.” Arkitekt 17 (1948): 82-85.Google Scholar
Prost, Henri. TC İstanbul Belediyesi, İstanbul İzah Eden Rapor, 15.10.1937. İstanbul: İstanbul Belediye Matbaası, 1938.Google Scholar
Prost, Henri. İstanbul Hakkında Notlar, 1937. İstanbul: İstanbul Belediye Matbaası, 1938.Google Scholar
Prost, Henri. TC İstanbul Belediyesi, Anadolu Sahili Nazım Planını İzah Eden Rapor. İstanbul: İstanbul Belediye Matbaası, 1940.Google Scholar
H. Prost Raporlarını Revizyon Komisyonu Raporu. İstanbul: Belediye Matbaası, 1954.Google Scholar
Protsenko, Michel. “Henri Prost et Istanbul.” MA Thesis, L’Institut Français d’Urbanism de Paris, 1988.Google Scholar
Rabinow, Paul. French Modern: Norms and Forms of the Social Environment. London: The University of Chicago Press, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Royer, J. “Istanbul.” in L’Oeuvre de Henri Prost: Architecture et Urbanisme, 199-207. Paris: L’Académie d’Architecture, 1960.Google Scholar
Sutcliffe, Anthony, ed. Metropolis 1890–1940. London: Mansell, 1984.Google Scholar
Tafuri, Manfredo. Architecture and Utopia. London: MIT Press, 1994.Google Scholar
Tankut, Gönül. “Jansen Planı: Uygulama Sorunları ve Cumhuriyet Bürokrasisinin Kent Planına Yaklaşımı.” In Tarih içinde Ankara, edited by Yavuz, Yıldırım, 301-316. Ankara: ODTÜ, 2001.Google Scholar
Tapan, Mete. “İstanbul’un Kentsel Planlamasının Tarihsel Gelişimi ve Planlama Eylemleri.” in 75 Yılda Değişen Kent ve Mimarlık, edited by Sey, Yıldız and Tekeli, İlhan, 77-80. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı, 1998.Google Scholar
Tekeli, İlhan. Modernite Aşılırken Kent Planlaması. Ankara: İmge, 2000.Google Scholar
Tekeli, İlhan. “Türkiye’de 19. Yüzyıl Ortalarından 1950’ye Kadar Kentsel Araştırmaların Gelişimi.” in Türkiye’de Sosyal Bilim Araştırmalarının Gelişimi, edited by Atauz, Sevil, 247-250. Ankara: Türk Sosyal Bilimler Derneği, 1986.Google Scholar
Tekeli, İlhan. The Development of the Istanbul Metropolitan Area: Urban Administration and Planning. İstanbul: Kent Basımevi, 1994.Google Scholar
Tekeli, İlhan. “19.y. İstanbul Metropol Alanının Dönüşümü.” in Modernleşme Sürecinde Osmanlı Kentleri (Villes Ottomanes a la Fin de I’empire, 1992), edited by Dumont, Paul and Georgeon, François, 31-60. İstanbul: Türk Tarih Vakfı, 1996.Google Scholar
Tekeli, İlhan. “Türkiye’de Cumhuriyet Döneminde Kentsel Gelişme ve Kent Planlaması.” in 75 Yılda Değişen Kent ve Mimarlık. İstanbul: İş Bankası ve Tarih Vakfı, 1998.Google Scholar
Tekeli, İlhan and İlkin, Selim. “1923 Yılında İstanbul’un İktisadi Durumu ve İstanbul Ticaret ve Sanayi Odası İktisat Komisyonu Raporu.” in Bildiriler: Tarih Boyunca İstanbul Semineri, 271-275. İstanbul, 1989.Google Scholar
Tekin, İlke. “Türkiye’de İkinci Dünya Savaşı Sonrası Betonarmenin İnşası.” PhD Dissertation, İTÜ, 2013.Google Scholar
Tümer, Gürhanet al., eds. Sempozyum: Ideoloji, Erk ve Mimarlık. İzmir: Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, 1996.Google Scholar
Uludağ, Zeynep. “Mimarlık Tarih Yazımına Eleştirel Bakış: Cumhuriyet’in Modern Kent Peyzajını Okumak.” In Cumhuriyet’in Mekanları Zamanları İnsanları, edited by Ergut, Elvan Altan and İmamoğlu, Bilge, 153-168. Ankara: Dipnot Yayınları, 2010.Google Scholar
Uludağ, Zeynep. “Cumhuriyet Döneminde Rekreasyon ve Gençlik Parkı Örneği.” in 75 Yılda Değişen Kent ve Mimarlık, edited by Sey, Yıldız. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı, 1998.Google Scholar
Uluoğlu, Belkıs. “İTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi’nin Kuruluş Yılları: Holzmeister, Bonatz Diğerleri ve Mimarlık Eğitiminin Örgütlenmesinde Orta Avrupalı İzler.” in Bauhaus, Modernleşmenin tasarımı, edited by Artun, Ali ve Aliçavuşoğlu, Esra, 347-372. İstanbul: İletişim, 2009.Google Scholar
Wagner, Martin. “İstanbul Şehrinin Düzeltilmesi Meselesi.” Arkitekt 8 (1936): 217-218.Google Scholar
Wagner, Martin. “İstanbul’un Seyrüsefer Meselesi.” Arkitekt 9 (1936): 252-255.Google Scholar
Wagner, Martin. “İstanbul Havalisinin Planı.” Arkitekt 10-11 (1936): 301-306.Google Scholar
Wagner, Martin. “İstanbul Havalisinin Planı 2.” Arkitekt 12 (1936): 333-337.Google Scholar
Wagner, Martin. İstanbul Havalisinin Planı: Der Landesplan von Istanbul. Report of 11 December, 1936. İstanbul, 1937.Google Scholar
Wolf, P. M.Eugène Hénard and the Beginning of Urbanism in Paris, 1900–1914. The Hague: Ando, 1968.Google Scholar
Wright, Gwendolyn. The Politics of Design in French Colonial Urbanism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991.Google Scholar
Yada, Sait. “Tatbiki Güzel Sanatlar Okullarının Doğuş Sebepleri ve Fonksiyonları.” in Bauhaus, Modernleşmenin Tasarımı, edited by Artun, Ali ve Aliçavuşoğlu, Esra, 525-567. İstanbul: İletişim, 2009.Google Scholar
Yeşilkaya, Neşe. Halkevleri: İdeoloji ve Mimarlık. İstanbul: İletişim, 1999.Google Scholar
Yerasimos, Stefanos. “Tanzimat’ın Kent Reformları Üzerine.” in Modernleşme Sürecinde Osmanlı Kentleri, edited by Dumont, Paul and Georgeon, François, 1-18. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı, 1996.Google Scholar
Yerasimos, Stefanos. Azgelişmişlik Sürecinde Türkiye. İstanbul: Belge, 1974.Google Scholar
Yerasimos, Stefanos. “Istanbul and Its Westernization Process.” in Istanbul: World City, 48-53. İstanbul: Türkiye Ekonomik ve Toplumsal Tarih Vakfı, 1996. Exhibition catalog.Google Scholar
Yeşilkaya, Neşe Gürallar. Halkevleri, İdeoloji ve Mimarlık. İstanbul: İletişim, 1999.Google Scholar
Yürekli, Zeynep. “Modernleştirici Devrimlerde Geçici Mimarlık ve Türkiye örneği.” MA Thesis, İTÜ, 1995.Google Scholar