|
Αθήνα 22.2.2011, 11:31
Τα χαμένα στοιχεία της Αγίας Σοφίας μετά τις αποκαταστάσεις του Φοσάτι, η συντήρηση και ανάδειξη του βυζαντινού παρελθόντος της Κωνσταντινούπολης, οι ελληνορθόδοξες εκκλησίες, είναι ορισμένα από τα θέματα που θα βρεθούν στο επίκεντρο του Σεμιναρίου, με τίτλο «Αποκατάσταση Μνημείων από την πολυπολιτισμική κληρονομιά της Κωνσταντινούπολης - Πολιτιστικής Πρωτεύουσας της Ευρώπης το 2010».
Το Σεμινάριο διοργανώνεται στο πλαίσιο του Διατμηματικού Προγράμματος Μεταπτυχιακών Σπουδών της Πολυτεχνικής Σχολής του Aριστοτελείου Πανεπιστημίου Θεσσαλονίκης και θα πραγματοποιηθεί την Παρασκευή 25, το Σάββατο 26 και την Κυριακή 27 Φεβρουαρίου 2011, στο Αμφιθέατρο «Παναγής Παναγιωτόπουλος» της Πολυτεχνικής Σχολής του ΑΠΘ.
Οι εργασίες του Σεμιναρίου θα αναφέρονται σε σημαντικά μνημεία όλων των ιστορικών περιόδων της πολυπολιτισμικής κληρονομιάς της Κωνσταντινούπολης, στα οποία έγιναν αποκαταστάσεις κατά τη διάρκεια του έτους της «Κωνσταντινούπολης – Πολιτιστικής Πρωτεύουσας της Ευρώπης», το 2010.
Το Σεμινάριο θα περιλαμβάνει γενικές εισηγήσεις για τον τρόπο διαχείρισης της πολιτιστικής κληρονομιάς, τις μεθόδους και τις τάσεις αποκατάστασης των μνημείων, καθώς και μεγάλο αριθμό ειδικών παρουσιάσεων για την ανάδειξη και αποκατάσταση αντιπροσωπευτικών αρχαιολογικών τόπων και μνημείων από την κλασική, βυζαντινή, οθωμανική και κοσμοπολίτικη περίοδο της Πόλης.
Για τους σκοπούς του σεμιναρίου έχουν κληθεί να συμμετάσχουν διακεκριμένοι επιστήμονες οι οποίοι εργάστηκαν στην αποκατάσταση των μνημείων από την Κωνσταντινούπολη και την Ελλάδα.
Στόχος του Σεμιναρίου είναι να αναδειχθούν οι ειδικευμένες επιστημονικές τεχνικές αποκατάστασης, που απαιτούν οι διαφορετικές κατηγορίες μνημείων και να συζητηθούν τα ζητήματα ανάδειξης και επανάχρησης των μνημείων.
* Ακολουθούν το πρόγραμμα του Σεμιναρίου και περιλήψεις των εισηγήσεων.
ΠΡΟΓΡΑΜΜΑ
Παρασκευή, 25 Φεβρουαρίου 2011
15:30-16:30 Εγγραφές
16:30-17:30 Χαιρετισμοί
Ιωάννης Μυλόπουλος, Πρύτανης ΑΠΘ
Νικόλαος Μάργαρης, Κοσμήτορας Πολυτεχνικής Σχολής ΑΠΘ
Γεώργιος Παπακώστας, Πρόεδρος Τμήματος Αρχιτεκτόνων
Αιμιλία Στεφανίδου, Διευθύντρια Προγράμματος
Βίλμα Χαστάογλου-Μαρτινίδη, Υπεύθυνη Προγράμματος Α΄ Κατεύθυνσης
Ι Εισαγωγική ενότητα
Συντονιστές: Β. Χαστάογλου, Χρ. Ιγνατάκης
17:30-18:00 Nuran Zeren Gülersoy, Δρ. αρχιτέκτων-πολεοδόμος, Καθηγήτρια İTÜ
Η συντήρηση της πολιτιστικής κληρονομιάς της Κωνσταντινούπολης
18:00-18:30 Mehmet Gürkan, Υποδιευθυντής του Οργανισμού Κωνσταντινούπολη - ΠΠΕ 2010
Η επίπτωση της Πολιτιστικής Πρωτεύουσας της Ευρώπης στην πόλη: το παράδειγμα της Κωνσταντινούπολης
18.30-19:00 Sevinç Özek Terzi, Διευθύντρια πολεοδομικών μελετών, Οργανισμός Κωνσταντινούπολη – ΠΠΕ 2010
Εμπειρία για ένα νέο μοντέλο διαχείρισης πολιτιστικής κληρονομιάς: Κωνσταντινούπολη - ΠΠΕ 2010
19:00-19:30 Λόης Παπαδόπουλος, αρχιτέκτων, Καθηγητής Πανεπιστημίου Θεσσαλίας
Στρατηγικές συντήρησης που συντηρούν την αίσθηση της πόλης. Oι μελέτες αρχιτεκτονικού και αστικού σχεδιασμού του Οργανισμού "Θεσσαλονίκη 1997 – Πολιτιστική Πρωτεύουσα της Ευρώπης"
19:30- 20:00 Συζήτηση
26 Φεβρουαρίου 2011, Σάββατο
ΙΙ Τοποθεσίες της παγκόσμιας κληρονομιάς της UNESCO
Συντονιστές: Μ. Νομικός, I. Παπαγιάννη
10:00-10:30 Nuran Zeren Gülersoy, Δρ. αρχιτέκτων-πολεοδόμος, Καθηγήτρια İTÜ
Σχέδιο διαχείρισης της ιστορικής χερσονήσου της Κωνσταντινούπολης
10:30-11:00 Mehmet Şimşek Deniz, M. αρχιτέκτων και Πρόεδρος του KUDEB
Δραστηριότητες των συνεργείων εκπαίδευσης στο ξύλο και την πέτρα, του Μητροπολιτικού Δήμου της Κωνσταντινούπολης - το KUDEB το 2010
11:00-11:30 Esra Kudde, M. αρχιτέκτων στη Συντήρηση
Το παραδοσιακό σπίτι στην ιστορική χερσόνησο της Κωνσταντινούπολης: αξιοποίηση, προβλήματα συντήρησης και μια μελέτη εφαρμογής για τη μεθοδολογία της αποκατάστασης-συντήρησης σε σχέση με τις μελέτες του KUDEB (Ινστιτούτο Συντήρησης στην Κωνσταντινούπολη)
11:30-12:00 Διάλειμμα-καφές
ΙΙI Βυζαντινή κληρονομιά
Συντονιστές: M. Καμπούρη, E. Şarlak
12:00-12:30 Hasan Fırat Diker, Μ. αρχιτέκτων και Δρ. ιστορικός τέχνης, Υπουργείο Πολιτισμού και Τουρισμού
Τα χαμένα στοιχεία της Αγίας Σοφίας μετά τις αποκαταστάσεις του Fossati (1847-1851)
12:30-13:00 Alessandra Ricci, Δρ. αρχαιολόγος, Επίκ. καθηγήτρια Πανεπιστημίου Koç
Συντήρηση και ανάδειξη του βυζαντινού παρελθόντος της Κωνσταντινούπολης: η μελέτη του αρχαιολογικού πάρκου στο Küçükyalı
13:00-13:30 Συζήτηση για τις ενότητες ΙΙ και ΙΙΙ
ΙV Οθωμανική κληρονομιά
Συντονιστές: N. Gülersoy, Κλ. Παλυβού
16:30-17:00 Suay Aksoy, Διεύθυνση Πολιτιστικής Κληρονομιάς και Μουσείων
Στρατηγικό σχέδιο για την προστασία της τοποθεσίας Sur-ı Sultanı και η δημιουργία ενός υπαίθριου μουσείου
17:00-17:30 Filiz Özer, Δρ. ιστορικός τέχνης, Καθηγήτρια İTÜ
Συζητώντας για τη συντήρηση του παλατιού Τοπ Καπί
17:30-18:00 Διάλειμμα-καφές
V Κοσμοπολίτικη κληρονομιά
Συντονιστές: Γ. Καραδέδος, Στ. Λεφάκη
18:00-18:30 Kevork Özkaragöz, αρχιτέκτων, Nadin Demircioğlu, πολεοδόμος-αρχιτέκτων
Η αποκατάσταση και μετατροπή σε κέντρο πολιτισμού της αρμένικης εκκλησίας Vortvots Vorodman και η ανακαίνιση του αρμενικού Πατριαρχείου
18:30 -19:00 Σάββας Τσιλένης, Δρ. αρχιτέκτων-πολεοδόμος, ΕIE
Η αποκατάσταση του ναού των Εισοδίων της Παναγίας της κοινότητας Σταυροδρομίου Κωνσταντινούπολης
19:00-19:30 Hayım Beraha, αρχιτέκτων
Μελέτη αποκατάστασης του εβραϊκού μαυσωλείου του Kamondo
19:30-20:00 Συζήτηση για τις ενότητες ΙV και V
VI Εκθέσεις προβολής της πολιτιστικής κληρονομιάς
Συντονιστές: Αι. Στεφανίδου, Β. Χαστάογλου
20:00-20:45 Hasan Kuruyazıcı, M. αρχιτέκτων
Οι Ρωμιοί και οι Αρμένιοι αρχιτέκτονες της Κωνσταντινούπολης στην περίοδο του εκδυτικισμού
20:45-21:00 Eva Aleksandru Şarlak, Δρ. Αναπλ. Καθηγήτρια, Πανεπιστήμιο IŞIK
Οι Ρωμιοί αρχιτέκτονες της Κωνσταντινούπολης και οι ελληνορθόδοξες εκκλησίες με θόλο, οι οποίες σηματοδοτούν την αλλαγή της φυσικής μορφής της Κωνσταντινούπολης
21:00-21:30 Τελική Συζήτηση
27 Φεβρουαρίου 2011, Κυριακή
Επισκέψεις σε μνημεία και τοποθεσίες της Θεσσαλονίκης
Αναχώρηση στις 10:00 π.μ. με πούλμαν από την Πολυτεχνική Σχολή του ΑΠΘ. Επιστροφή στις 18:00 μ.μ. περίπου.
ΕΙΣΗΓΗΣΕΙΣ
preservation strategies preserving city sense architecture and urban design projects of “Thessaloniki Cultural Capital of Europe 1977”
LOIS PAPADOPOULOS
Architect, School of Architecture, University of Thessaly
The completion of the “Architecture and Urban Intervention Program”, planned and carried out, in an absolute lack of public consensus, by the Organization for the Thessaloniki Cultural Capital of Europe 1997, rendered the city radically changed: metropolitan space was significantly expanded, historic places and monuments were structurally and aesthetically revalorized, urban and particularly cultural infrastructure became modernized. As a consequence, the supposed as eternal hierarchies residing inside listed historical buildings and urban loci was significantly rearranged, the perception of urban scale and intercity distances was redefined, city routines have been enriched, the city dwellers’ gaze has been re-educated in the urban space new schemes, new commons emerged.
The Program itself - consisting of a bunch of more than 200 distinct commissions and twenty national and/or international architectural competitions - referred to urban areas, to archaeological sites or to individual monuments, to building complexes or to cultural infrastructural buildings - as theatres, museums or community centres – and, in some cases, to broader urban landscapes, or even to urban furniture elements. Apart from its thematic dispersion, from an epistemological point of view, the Program was simultaneously based on diverging premises: on the one hand it recalls the architecture of the city paradigm – aiming at the consolidation of established urban hierarchies and building typologies – and on the other it is inspired by the literature of the architecture of metapolis – focusing on the less photogenic urban realms: the non-spaces of the urban periphery, the left over urban voids, the de-industrialised areas, the abandoned natural commons, the devaluation of monuments, the semiology of the urban ugly.
Despite its overt theoretic discrepancy but also of its expressed will for urban renewal, the Program was infused by its concern for the sustaining of what might be vaguely described as historic urban physiognomy or, more accurately, as the genius loci of Thessaloniki.
Reassessing their capacity to perform as urban artifacts regenerating the structures and qualities of the urbanity inherent in this historic city, remaining invariant though under continuous transformation, we cannot but realize that each single project – even the non architecture - conservation projects - relates itself with the system of social significations associated with the built universe of the Thessaloniki durée. From this point of view the Program of the Cultural Capital is proved to be in its entirety a Program of architectural and urban preservation. And by extent, as ten or fifteen years after, all major architecture and urban spatial novelties are fully and positively integrated in civic life, we dare say that urban and architectural conservation policies preserving the city sense but also revigorating the historing city pride are proved to be creative and progressive rather than conservative policies at all.
Conservation of the heritage potential of Istanbul
Ms. NURAN ZEREN GULERSOY
Dr. Professor ITU
The city of Istanbul, once the capital of Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman Empires, reflects the unique values of these cultures through urban, historical, archeological and natural sites and numerous monuments and examples of civilian architecture. In Istanbul, monuments, examples of civil architecture, regions and areas, archeological remains and natural assets that have historic and cultural value are officially registered as “ Cultural Heritage” and/or are declare as "Conservation Sites".
The most important sites of Istanbul are located in the Historic Peninsula, the Bosphorus, Beyoğlu, Eyüp, Karaköy, Üsküdar and the Princes’ Islands. Besides these, there are other smaller sites in and outside the city.
The Bosphorus Conservation Area, which have a special importance with their natural and historic values, cover a large part of the Sarıyer and Beşiktaş district on the European side and the Beykoz and Üsküdar district on Asian side. The Bosphorus and the historic Ottoman settlements, fishing villages and waterside palaces on and around the Bosphorus with its unique topographical formations, offer the most attractive view of Istanbul’ silhouette when combined with cypress, Judas, wisteria and pine trees.
The areas within the boundaries of the Bosphorus Beykoz and Sarıyer districts and neighboring areas that are not covered by the Bosphorus Law No. 2960 and are under the threat of dense settlements have been declared Natural Sites by the Istanbul Commission for the Protection of the Cultural and Natural Assets No. 3 on 15.11.1995 and by decision No. 7755.
Designated in 1995, the Historic Peninsula Urban and Archeological conservation site can be divided into three different areas with consideration to their level of protection and the density of historical buildings. The Topkapı Palace, where central functions are gathered, and the surroundings of the 1st Degree Archeological Site make up the first priority area, the area composed of 14 neighborhoods with a dense historic fabric is the second priority area, and the rest of the Historic Peninsula forms the third priority area. The Historic Peninsula forming a large part of the historical city center of Istanbul has an approximate population of 500,000.
Another important urban conservation site in Istanbul is the Beyoğlu Urban Conservation Site, which was designated in 1993, has an area of 360 ha with an approximate population of 77,000. There are many churches and monasteries in this area where Levantines used to live during the Ottoman period. Rural migrants and people with low income now live in this area which was abandoned by its first owners. Work on the development plan for the protection of this area is continuing.
Another area in Istanbul which contains numerous historical assets is Eyüp, declared an Urban Conservation Site in 1977, and measuring 180 ha with an approximate population of 30,000. Eyüp, which developed around the complex commissioned by Sultan Mehmet the Conqueror, plays an important role in the cultural life of Istanbul.
Kadıköy and the Princes’ Island have important features as natural urban sites. The Princes’ Islands were a summer resort in the 19th century. The Adalar district comprising of nine islands called Büyükadai, Heybeliada, Burgazadası, Kınalıada, Sedefadası, Yassıada, Kaşıkadası, Sivriada and Tavşanadası, has a total population of 17,750. However, it is estimated that during the summer season the population reaches almost 100,000. In Büyükada, Heybeliada, Burgazadası, Kınalıada and Sedefadası, which were designated as a Natural Conservation Site in 1984, one cans still enjoy the magical atmosphere of the previous century.
The Kadıköy Urban Conservation Site with a very old history is important as it contains numerous lat 19th and early 20th century examples of timber and masonry architecture. There are large and small natural, urban and urban-natural conservation sites of city block scale in various locations in Kadıköy.
Üsküdar, another urban site on the Asian Side of the city, is an important settlement with monumental complexes like Mihrimah Sultan, Atik Valide, Sultan Selim, timber houses, tekkes and türbes. The Büyük and Küçük Çamlıca Natural and Urban Conservation sites and the historical Karacaahmet Cemetery are also in Üsküdar.
In addition to these, Bakırköy, Silivri, Küçükçekmece, Avcılar on the European side, Kartal Pendik, Şile and Tuzla on the Asian side have conservation sites with important features.
Management plan for the Historic Peninsula-Istanbul
Ms. NURAN ZEREN GULERSOY
Dr. Professor ITU
Istanbul 2010 European Capital of Culture (ECOC) Agency has financed the “preparation processes” of the Site Management Plan, designed as a four-phase study to be accomplished in one year and supported by several participatory workshops with experts and key stakeholders.
“Management Site” and “Management Plan” concepts are represented in Turkey, in Act Number 2863 Conservation of Cultural and Natural Assets with the revision ratified in 2004.
According to the Act, “management site” includes; “places formed in order to ensure coordination between central government authorities, local governments, non-governmental organizations, and boundaries determined by the Ministry in consideration of the sought opinions of related bodies for the effective preservation, excavation and evaluation of conservation areas, historical sites and interaction sites in their natural integrity, developing around a particular vision and theme while serving the cultural and educational needs of society”.
A “Management plan” in turn should indicate annual and quinquennial implementation stages and budgets for preservation and conservation which are formed in consideration of business plans, excavation plans, and conservation development plans in order to provide the preservation, sustenance and assessment of the management site reviewed quinquennially.
The preparation period for the Istanbul Site Management Plan has been designed as a four-phase structure:
Phase 1: Conducting and combining analytical studies capturing the psychical, social and institutional dimensions to establish a common database with major projects affecting the Site supported with participatory workshops where key stakeholders contribute,
Phase 2: Carrying out participatory workshops to mature SWOT analysis, to determine a vision with main objectives in a strategic framework for the Site by letting key stakeholders and experts make use of the information generated in the first phase,
Phase 3: Focusing on objectives and strategies in order to come up with action plans and programs with participatory workshops,
Phase 4: Sharing the draft Site Management Plan with the public for feedback before finalization.
The Rum/Greek and Armenian Architects of İstanbul
in the Era of Westernization
Mr. HASAN ORHAN KURUYAZICI
M. Architect
Historical records tell us that non-Muslim architects took on a prominent role in the construction of palace buildings and official buildings in the Ottoman Empire. The staff of the Imperial Architects Office that directed such construction projects always included Rum (Greek) and Armenian architects. Young recruits to this office would be trained within a master-apprentice relationship. In other words, the Imperial Architects Office also operated as a kind of school of architecture.
Changes in various fields based on the example presented by Europe had already begun to be implemented in the Ottoman Empire by the 18th century. The first examples of a new style in architecture that would later be described as the Ottoman Baroque were also seen during this century.
Still, the Ottoman state’s more decisive turn towards Western norms took place in the 19th century. The Tanzimat (Reorganization) Edict in 1839 and the Islahat (Reform) Edict in 1856 form the most important turning points in this new direction. Winds of change blowing from the West continued to influence architecture as much as any other field and the 19th century became a period of change for Ottoman architecture. Innovations in the fields of administration, law, education, health and in social life led to the emergence of new building types. The Topkapı Palace, an example of traditional palace architecture, had already been abandoned in the first half of the 19th century; and ‘European’ style palaces were built in its wake.
European states were moving their embassies to the Pera/Beyoğlu neighbourhood and were commissioning new embassy buildings to their exclusively selected architects in architectural styles in vogue in their own countries. The Greek and Armenian communities, benefiting from the new rights they gained with the Tanzimat and Islahat Edicts, began to build the large-scale, domed, bell-towered churches that were previously prohibited. Mosques built immediately after the proclamation of the Tanzimat Edict display a number of innovations in terms of typology and therefore also appearance. In the past, Ottoman bureaucracy was managed from the residences of the Grand Vizier, of the Kazasker (Chief Military Judge) and the Şeyhülislam (Chief Religious Official) and people would apply here; now buildings of the Grand Vizierate and Ministries were replacing these.
Rüştiyes (secondary schools) and idadis (senior high schools) had been opened in addition to the traditional madrasahs, and new types of school buildings were necessary for them. The traditional darüşşifas were now replaced by hospital buildings designed on the basis of European models. Previously unseen building types such as post offices and train stations began to appear. In the second half of the century, in line with changing living conditions, in neighbourhoods such as Galata, Pera/Beyoğlu and Tarlabaşı and later, Cihangir, Taksim, Pangaltı and Kurtuluş where non-Muslims and also Muslims who were trying to acclimatize themselves to the new life-styles; a new residential building type, the apartment block, began to appear. Business life had also changed, the older, two-storey hans (business buildings) featuring central courtyards in the business area that included the Galata, Eminönü, Sultanhamam and Mahmutpaşa neighbourhoods began to be replaced by multi-storey business hans (office buildings).
Current Western architectural styles dominated in all these buildings based on their Western counterparts. As the result of a historicist perspective and often an eclectic attitude, buildings in neo-classical, neo-Renaissance, neo-baroque and even neo-Byzantine styles began to fill the abovementioned neighbourhoods of the city. Along with these buildings that Ottoman architecture was so far alien to, the physical appearance of at least one part of the city was undergoing a significant change.
As a result of the changing conditions, in the first half of the century, in 1831, the Imperial Architects Office had been abolished and replaced by the Directorate of Imperial Buildings and the architects on the staff of the office had been transferred to this new institution. However, the training of architects was not among the duties assigned to this directorate. Thus, until the beginning of education in 1883 at the Imperial School of Fine Arts, that also formed the core of the present-day Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University, there was no organized architectural education in the country.
A part of the buildings mentioned above were designed and constructed by foreign architects who came to build the embassy buildings of their own countries and then stayed on in Istanbul to work on other projects. The architects of the Armenian Balyan family on the other hand, had already been realizing the construction projects of the palace. Almost all the large mosques commissioned by sultans in Istanbul in the first half of the century were the work of the Balyans.
Increasingly, Levantine, Greek and other Armenian architects began to carry out the projects of public buildings such as churches, schools and hospitals in their own communities and also those of private buildings such as apartment blocks and office buildings. Some of these architects had received their training in the industry itself, they were architects by training, however a significant number of them were architects carrying diplomas and had studied in a European country. The Rome Academy of Fine Arts and the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris were the most popular schools of architecture during this period.
In the meantime, architecture was no longer a ‘popular’ profession for the Muslim section of Ottoman society. After the opening of the School of Fine Arts, for a long period of time, the majority of students at the Department of Architecture were Rum/Greek and Armenian. According to records, the first Muslim Ottoman architect to study abroad and return was Vedat (Tek) Bey, in 1900.
The changing of Istanbul’s physical appearance during the era of Westernization that took place throughout the entire 19th century and is also known as Ottoman Modernization continued, albeit at a slower pace, in the early 20th century, until the founding of the Republic. First and foremost the Balyans, but also other Armenian and Greek architects who in earlier periods received their initial training within the industry, but later also graduated from schools in European countries, and ultimately graduated from the School of Fine Arts, played a great role in this transformation.
Our two exhibitions that bears the names “Greek Architects of Istanbul in the Era of Westernization” and “Armenian Architects of Istanbul in the Era of Westernization” have been organized to introduce the Greek and Armenian architects who for over a hundred years contributed to Istanbul’s architectural richness with their works. This attempt is the first of its kind. However, unfortunately we have very little or no information at all on most of them. A great stride will be made if these effort paves the way to arousing the interest of those with an urban awareness on the subject, provide support with the material they present for academic studies to be carried out in the future and facilitate access to new information and documents.
KAMONDO MOUSELEUM REHABILITATION PROJECT:
Mr. HAYIM BERAHA
Architect
Hasköy is one of the main Jewish settlement areas of Istanbul golden horn. There has been numbers of synagogues schools and the cemetery uphill of Hasköy. During the e5 motorway construction 1972 huge amount of the cemetery land has been expropriated. The Camondo mausoleum has been left at these expropriated lands periphery. The building has been squatted as housing till 1980’s. The building is neo gothic style 10x8x6 mt dimensions. Build with brick and Carrara and Marmara marbles.
Abraham Camondo is a well known Jewish Banker and reformist. He is also known as the Rothschild of east. Born in Istanbul and lived in Venice and Paris. Due to his return to Istanbul he builds the mausoleum at the Hasköy Jewish cemetery. He died in Paris at 1873. According his will his remains has delivered to the Hasköy.
It is known that the some of the family members has also been burred to the mausoleum.
Our project started at Sep 2010 with the coloration of Istanbul 2010 European Cultural Capital Agency and Istanbul Chief Rabbinate.
Recovery of the Abraham and Rafael Camondo thumb stones defined our fist layer of ground excavations. Beside these ones there are three different types of pieces of tombstones has been found. During the project excavations will continue and the documentation of those items will bring light to the matter.
Aim of the project is to re define the territorial problem to the expropriated and left alone land with the cemetery into a landscape project that relates the internal design of the mausoleum. And restore the of the Camondo mausoleum building structural and architectural enclave.
The internal situation and the landscape projects are in a developing state. Although the pieces founded inside the mausoleum reference some of the historical references they are not defining the architectural status of the internal design.
The project will shape parallel to the excavations and site applications to bring the spatial properties back to this memorial space.
AN EXPERIENCE FOR A NEW MODEL OF CULTURAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT: Istanbul 2010 ECoC
Ms. SEVINC OZEK TERZI
Architect
When the city of Istanbul received the title of “2010 European Capital of Culture” in 2006, with a special regulation, an Agency was founded to gather the local, national and international capacities and experiences for the city. This multi-disciplinary organization also deals with the protection of cultural heritage and creation of new cultural infrastructure in the city.
As the Urban Projects Department we try to perform a facilitating role to carry out urban projects and restoration/conservation works for preservation of cultural heritage. The energy and experience of different actors who have a word to say in city management are brought together in order to help them realize their projects through cooperation.
The basic success criteria for this aim is the appropriation of a new interactive management model which will enable different institutions to work together as partners and making it a permanent element of city management.
“Site Management plan for the Historic Peninsula of Istanbul”, a project included in Istanbul 2010 ECoC program, will play a key role in the cultural heritage management in Istanbul.
As well as carrying out restoration and conservation works of cultural heritage, our aim is also to encourage the projects that examine the concept of public space by Creative City Projects: “Flying grass carpet” and “Temporary city: A Dialogue among the 2010 ECOC” etc.
With the exhibitions “History and Destruction in Istanbul / Ghost Buildings” “Armenian Architects of Istanbul in the era of Westernization”, “Greek Architects of Istanbul in the era of Westernization”, and “Underground Revolution” city’s history and its lost and existing assets are brought to daylight.
As the Istanbul 2010 ECoC, we act as the facilitator on the way to “capacity building” of the institutions for a future management model.
Both the initial objectives of Agency and the results achieved during these 3 years needs to be discussed in the near future, to understand the progress in the management of the city and cultural heritage.
Talking About the Preservation of the Topkapi Palace
Summary
Ms .FILIZ OZER
Dr. Professor ISIK University
Nearly for four hundred years Topkapi Palace has been the home of the Ottoman sultans. At the same time, this palace served as the administrative center of the Empire. However, after the construction of the new Dolmabahce Palace in 1856 this historical monument did not receive the attention it deserves. Today, the Topkapi is a museum with two different kinds of display spaces. It is both a palace museum and a convenient space for various kinds of displays and collections. Time has come to decide which will be future of this most important monument of Ottoman history. In other words, will it lose all its authentic qualities and become a museum like Louvre or will it be displayed on its own merit like Versailles. If it is going to be preserved as a palace then both the gardens and the buildings must be restored according to their former authentic layout plans and views. This brings us to the question of what is really restoration and what is only taking care of the existing buildings and gardens. When it comes to the restoring a palace like Topkapi the first step is to decide what to demolish and what to keep. For instance, centuries of collected plaster over the woodwork must be pealed out. Authentic furniture and interior decoration must be manufactured. Aside from this, all the new trees planted during the latter part of the 20th century require to be cut down in order to begin reviving the gardens to their former magnificence. Fortunately, we have adequate visual and written source material on the palace. Nevertheless, many years of through research into the archives need to be conducted before the real work begins.
Conserving, Portraying and Making Accessible Istanbul`s Byzantine Past:
the Küçükyalı ArkeoPark Project
Ms. ALESSANDRA RICCI
Dr. Arcaeologist, Assit. Prof. Koc University
Prominently positioned on the Marmara seashore facing the Prinkipo islands in the hinterland of Byzantine Constantinople, and dominating the surrounding landscape with its monumental architecture, the patriarchal monastery of Satyros was built by the eunuch Ignatios in 867 – 887, as has been recently discovered. The largest surviving archaeological area of present-day Istanbul’s Asian side, remains of the monastic complex represent the only project-based excavation in the city and one of the few Byzantine-period interdisciplinary archaeological projects there over the past decades.
The complex stands as the single securely identified testimony of patriarchal patronage in the Byzantine capital. Its katholikon -or, monastic church- represents the first ecclesiastical building in Constantinople to be securely dated to the ninth century, while the funerary chapel annexed to it is the first burial associated with a Byzantine patriarch. Furthermore, recent excavations have revealed the monastery’s monumental tower as well as its annexed buildings. The unprecedented level of preservation of the site’s historical layers offers materials to expand knowledge of life in middle and late Byzantium, ranging from archeobotany to agricultural patterns of the area and climactic changes.
Until recent times, the historical and archaeological relevance of the site, did not reverberate in the conservation and public fruition of the area. Furthermore, misconceptions about the identification of the complex and resistance to integrate this Byzantine monument in neighborhood life and the city`s multiple pasts were factors that had to be carefully weighed.
Activities at the site took the broad and historically unattached name of Küçükyalı ArkeoPark Project. Through a close institutional collaboration with the Istanbul Archaeological Museum and the financial support of the Istanbul 2010 European Capital of Culture Agency, the Küçükyalı ArkeoPark Project has shaped itself in a interdisciplinary and community centered project.
The presentation will analyze ways in which the Project has defined itself since its establishment in 2009, its activities and goals for the immediate future.
Η ΑΠΟΚΑΤΑΣΤΑΣΗ ΤΟΥ ΙΕΡΟΥ ΝΑΟΥ
ΤΩΝ ΕΙΣΟΔΙΩΝ ΤΗΣ ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑΣ
ΤΗΣ ΚΟΙΝΟΤΗΤΑΣ ΣΤΑΥΡΟΔΡΟΜΙΟΥ ΚΩΝΣΤΑΝΤΙΝΟΥΠΟΛΗΣ
Σάββας Ε. Τσιλένης
Δρ αρχιτέκτων μηχανικός και πολέοδόμος, ΕΙΕ
ΠΕΡΙΛΗΨΗ
Ο ναός που αποτελεί την έδρα της Κοινότητας Σταυροδρομίου, της μεγαλύτερης πληθυσμιακά ελληνορθόδοξης ενορίας σήμερα στην Κωνσταντινούπολη, χωροθετείται μεταξύ της Μεγάλης Οδού του Πέρα (İstiklal Caddesi) και της λεωφόρου Μεσρουτιγέτ (Meşrutiyet Caddesi). Κτίσθηκε σταδιακά μεταξύ των οικοπέδων τεσσάρων ομογενών, ως μικρός ναός το 1804. Βρίσκεται στο κέντρο μιας εσωτερικής αυλής που περικλείεται από διώροφα και τριώροφα κτίρια, έχει δύο περάσματα από στοές και μία κυρία είσοδο με κλίμακα. Η όλη οργάνωση του χώρου κοινή σε πολλές εκκλησιές της Πόλης, διαφέρει ως προς την προσβασιμότητα σε διαφορετικής κατεύθυνσης δρόμους θυμίζοντας μοναστηριακό συγκρότημα. Στη βορειοανατολική του πλευρά συνορεύει με τη στοά Χατζόπουλου (Passage Hazzopulo).
Σύμφωνα με την παράδοση το πρώτο κτίσμα ανοικοδομήθηκε μέσα σε μια νύχτα με πάνδημη συμμετοχή των ενοριτών. Ο αρχιτέκτων του ήταν ο Χατζή Κομνηνός κάλφας, ο οποίος είχε ανακαινίσει στα 1793 το ναό της Ζωοδόχου Πηγής Βαλουκλή. Στα 1831, όταν ο σουλτάνος Μαχμούτ Β’, επιτρέπει την ανακαίνιση των εκκλησιών, επεκτείνεται ο ναός ο οποίος εντάσσεται στον τύπο της τρίκλιτης βασιλικής. Προστίθενται δυο κλίτη και κατασκευάζεται νέα στέγη, ενώ επισκευάζονται και τα κελιά στον περίβολο. Εμπλουτίζεται ο διάκοσμος, κατασκευάζεται ξυλόγλυπτο τέμπλο, αρχιερατικός θρόνος και ο άμβωνας. Το 1837 αντικαθίσταται το σήμαντρο του ναού με καμπάνα και διαμορφώνεται ο περίβολος. Περί τα 1860, γίνονται επίσης γενικές επισκευές στο ναό και διευρύνονται τα κλίτη, λαμβάνοντας πιθανότατα τη σημερινή του κάλυψη ίσως δίχως τον νάρθηκα. Αργότερα αναφέρονται ανακαινίσεις κατά τα έτη 1875, 1890 και το 1904, ενώ ο ναός, ως έχει σήμερα διαμορφώνεται μόλις το 1893 ή το 1894. Για τον εορτασμό της εκατοντετηρίδος από την ανέγερση του ναού το 1904, περιγράφονται σε δημοσιεύματα της εποχής οι προετοιμασίες, και τα προβλήματα, πληροφορούμαστε για τον «ανακαινισμόν και καλλωπισμόν του Ναού» καθώς και του Εφορείου, με επιστασία του Έλληνα αρχιτέκτονα Λέοντα Καζανόβα.
Τον Φεβρουάριο του 1946 ανακαινίζεται εξωτερικά και εσωτερικά με την επίβλεψη του αρχιτέκτονα Χρήστο Ευθυμιάδη. Την ίδια χρονιά αρχίζει η αποκατάσταση των φθαρμένων εικονογραφιών από τον Κωνσταντινουπολίτη ζωγράφο Χαρίλαο Ξανθόπουλο και το διάσημο Ρώσο αγιογράφο – σκηνογράφο Νικόλαο Περόφ. Σήμερα ο ναός είναι ελάχιστα ορατός από την λεωφόρο Ιστικλάλ λόγω της θέσης του στο κέντρο του οικοδομικού τετραγώνου. Από τότε ο ναός είχε εγκαταληφθεί και είχε έντονα προβλήματα ανερχόμενης υγρασίας, αποφλοίωσης του ζωγραφικού διάκοσμου εκτός από τα προβλήματα της κεραμοσκεπής και στερέωσης του δομικού συστήματος του. Γενικότερα ήταν εμφανής η ανάγκη συντηρήσης του. Ευτυχώς ξεκίνησαν οι εργασίες αποκατάστασης του τον Σεπτέμβριο του 2007 και ολοκληρώθηκαν τον Νοέμβριο του 2009.
THE RESTORATION OF THE CHURCH OF THE FEAST OF THE PRESENTATION OF THE VIRGIN (EISODIA TIS PANAGIAS)
OF THE STAVRODROMI COMMUNITY IN ISTANBUL
by Savvas E. Tsilenis
Dr architect engineer and town planner, NHRF
SUMMARY
The main church of the Stavrodromi (Beyoğlu) Community, the most numerous Greek orthodox parish in today’s Istanbul, is situated in the area between the “Grand Rue de Pera”, now İstiklal Avenue (Caddesi) and the Meşrutiyet Avenue (Caddesi) in Galatasaray district. It was progressively built in 1804 as a small temple between the plots belonging to four citizens of Greek descent. It stands in the centre of an internal courtyard, which is encompassed by two and three-storeyed buildings, and it possesses two passages through galleries and a main entrance with a staircase. The organisation of space, common in many churches of Istanbul, differs from the others because of its accessibility from various streets, which is reminiscent of a monastery. Its north-eastern side abuts on the Chatzopoulou arcade (Passage Hazzopulo).
According to tradition, the initial building has been reconstructed in one single night, with the participation of the whole of the community. The architect was Chatzi Komninos kalfas (kalfas: empirical architect), who in 1793 had restored the church of Zoodochos Pigi (fountain of life)/ Balıklı. In 1831, when the sultan Mahmut II allowed the renovation of the churches, this church is expanded and acquired the characteristics of a basilica with three naves, with the addition of two aisles and the construction of a new roof, while the cells in the parvis were also repaired. During these works, there was also an enrichment of the decoration and the construction of a carved chancel screen, an episcopal throne and a pulpit. In 1837, the existing semandron was replaced by a bell and the parvis was laid out. In 1860, during the general repairs to the church, the aisles were extended, so as to cover an area that probably corresponds to that of the present day, perhaps without taking account of the narthex. Subsequent renovations are reported in the years 1875, 1890 and 1904, while the church took its current shape in a relatively recent period, in 1893 or in 1894. In publications of that period, we find information about the preparations for the celebration of the centennial from the construction of the church in 1904, as well as about the problems that occurred, and we are also informed that the works for the renovation and the embellishment of the church as well as the community offices were carried out under the supervision of the Greek architect Leon Casanova.
In February 1946 the church was restored externally and internally under the supervision of the architect Christos Euthymiades and during that same year the restoration of the weathered iconographies by the Constantinopolitan painter Charilaos Xanthopoulos and the famous Russian icon painter and scenographer Nikolaos Perof began. Today the temple is hardly visible from the İstiklal Avenue and it is precisely because of its location in the centre of this block of buildings. Since then the church had been abandoned and presented serious problems of rising humidity and peeling of the painted decoration, in addition to the problems of the tile roof and the consolidation and fixing of structural system. Finally, the overall lack of maintenance and need for repairs is obvious. Fortunately, the works of restoration have started in September 2007 and were completed in November 2009.
RUM ARCHITECTS AND THEIR DOMED GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCHES THAT MARKED THE CHANGE IN THE PHYSICAL FEATURES OF ISTANBUL IN THE 19TH CENTURY
Ms. EVANGELIA SARLAK
Dr. Assoc. Professor, ISIK University
The cosmopolitan characteristic of Istanbul, a world city, expresses itself clearly not only in the political, economic and social domains but also in that of architecture. The works produced in this area of art are significant testimonials that convey the traces left by different cultures and creeds in the long history of the city to the present and ensure its contemplation. These testimonials that can be defined as elements of the world’s cultural heritage also convey the architectural history of Istanbul. Elements such as change, westernization, traditionalism, diversity, colorfulness, multi-culturalism play an important role in forging the content of this history. One of the sections of the history forged by the above mentioned elements is the religious sites of the various creeds. Another section of this history is the Westernization movement and process in the Ottoman Empire and its consequences in this contex.
The content of this study was executed within this scope and was approached from the view point of the stylistic analysis of the architecture of Greek Orthodox churches connected to the Phanar Greek Patriarchate in Istanbul during the Ottoman Westernization process. The study is limited to domed churches built in the 19th century as there are 90 Greek Orthodox churches in Istanbul including those of the monasteries. The main aim of the study was by examining the preferred styles of the Rum architects, to determine the dominant styles used on the exterior facades and the interior organization of the churches built during the westernization movement that led to modernization and change in the features of Istanbul during the Ottoman period.
"The lost traces of Hagia Sophia after Fossati restorations(1847-1851)"
Mr. HASAN FIRAT DIKER
PhD (history of arts) MS (Architecture)
The present view of Hagia Sophia, particularly, does neither remind its Byzantine nor Ottoman appearances, for 160 years after Fossati restorations. The modifications of Fossati did not only convert Hagia Sophia’s elevations into an ecclesiastical mood, but also lost its ancient soul as while as demolishing its Ottoman transformation.
Removal of the flying butresses attached to the main dome, brick-stone imitation façade paintings, plastered and masked faces of seraph angels upon the pendentives, his characteristic reliefs and ornamentations above re-plastered moaic faces and some masonic traces left in interior decoration can be defined as some profane transversions of Fossati during his restoration. But these details have not been studied in a detailed manner as Hagia Sophia have been suggested.
The lack of official documents regarding to Fossati’s modifications may obstruct to understand the reasons of these transversions but studying the visual data is a must to understand the evolution of Hagia Sophia. In this lecture, it is tried to be understand this evolution from the visul sources from 16th to 19th century of different artists including Fossati.
While some new inventions from recent Hagia Sophia restorations between the years 2006-2010 have exposed interesting cases to us, a small detail from d’Ohsson’s engraving of Hagia Sophia’s interior from 1787, has recentlysed light to its Ottoman soul by an interesting process. D’Ohsson’s, Bartlett’s, Allom’s and Fossati’s drawings all had defined an important detail of a classiscal Ottoman interrior view of Hagia Sophia, which is very unique for mosque architecture. The demolished calligraphy on the eastern semidome from 17th century, has been tried to be understood and deciphered by archivist and calligraphist colleagues, so it has been seen that, the text from Koran within calligraphy on the middle of main dome had been survived on the semi eastern dome.
The classical Ottoman period of Hagia Sophia, has hot been dealed too much by architectural historians. I think this lecture will be one of the studies trying to understand Hagia Sophia’s evolution during Ottoman period and may let us to understand how the profane transversionf of Fossati might be deliberate.
A Strategic Plan to Protect the Sur-iSultani Site and Create a Museums Quarter
Ms. SUAY AKSOY
President, CAMOC-ICOM
This paper aims at explaining the process of developing a Strategic Plan to preserve,rehabilitateand reattribute functions to the complex of buildings and gardens circumscribed by the Imperial Walls, aka Sur-iSultani, in the heart of the Historic Peninsula in one of the four UNESCO World Heritage Sites in Istanbul. It also points out to the fact that aholist plan such as this one spills over to an area larger than the initial starting point and to a time frame longer than short term.
The main motive behind this project has been to inquire into possible solutions to stop the steady depreciation of the Topkapi Palace mainly by tourist groups.The problem, however, is more extensive than this, as the currentlayout of exhibitionspaces and thevisitor routes in the Palacedo not allow for a correct reading of its original architecture andof the original functions of its parts.
At stake on the premises are the Topkapi Palace, the Archaeology Museum, the Imperial Mint, the Hagia Irene Museum, the unused or malfunctioning buildings and those currently used by the military, as well as, the Palace gardens and parks. An off-site Museums Storage and Support Centre is envisioned not only to gain exhibition space in the buildings but also to provide for protection of museum collections in proper conservation conditions. A Database System for Museums in Turkey has been proposed but no agreement was reached with the Ministry.
Once the problem was defined with all its aspects, it was inevitable that a site management plan would be required. This is actually what the Sur-iSultani Strategic Plan aimed to fulfill on a smaller scale. Therefore,issues of governance, sustainability, education and policy are also addressed with concerns for a preservation strategy that is sustainable and not arbitrary.
Activities of Timber and Stone Training Workshops of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality- KUDEB in 2010
Mr. MEHMET SIMSEK DENIZ
M. Architect
In this paper, aims and activities of ‘Directorate for the Inspection of Conservation Implementations’ (KUDEB) under Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality is generally presented and the activities of Timber and Stone Training Workshops in 2010 are defined in detail. Timber and Stone Training Workshops are established in order to educate the trainees about either the traditional techniques of these crafts or restoration and conservation idea and to provide well-educated staff for restoration works. Both theoretical and practical education programmes supported by seminars and publications are organized by the mentioned workshops in approximately six months’ term. A wide range of subjects including restoration and conservation theories, documentation techniques, identification of traditional building materials and their characteristics, decay phenomena, conservation techniques such as impregnation, cleaning, partial reintegration or repair and their implementations are included in these programmes. 2010 activities of Timber Training Workshop on traditional timber houses and of Stone Training Workshop on historical fountains especially focused in Historical Peninsula of Istanbul are explained by the help of their before-after photographs and via the relationship with other departments of KUDEB are described by this paper.
‘Traditional ‘House' in the Historical Peninsula of Istanbul: Development, Conservation Problems and a Case Study for the Restoration-Conservation Methodology via the Relationship with Studies of KUDEB’
Ms. ESRA KUDDE
M. Architect, in Conservation, KUDEB
Development of the traditional ‘house’ types in Istanbul is shortly explained, their conservation problems are clarified. Timber civil architecture dominantly takes place in this context, so arguments are led through the conservation of these examples managed to survive in the World Heritage Sites of the Historical Peninsula in Istanbul. Preservation of the cultural heritage requires a wide range of activities undertaken by different actors in various fields. Methodological work is inevitable to make an efficient schedule among these actors. Restoration-conservation methodology developed in ‘Directorate for the Inspection of Conservation Implementations’ (KUDEB) in accordance with universal criteria for preservation is presented. The efficacy of this methodology is especially pronounced for the cultural properties in world heritage sites, so mentioned studies are focused in ‘Süleymaniye’ -one of the world heritage sites in Istanbul- including many examples of these traditional timber houses.
Studies in restoration and conservation on several fields such as scientific research, documentation, education, implementation, inspection and publication are defined thoroughly in the paper. These are classified as: ‘Architectural documentation’ including analytical work on periods, materials and damages observed, comparative study by ‘laboratory work’ for characterization of the traditional materials and determination of the conservation techniques by an interdisciplinary team with consultance of professors, ‘theoretical and practical education’ programmes carried out by timber and stone training workshops to provide the continuity of crafts and develop the potentiality of the qualified staff to be employed, ‘inventory’ work, ‘implementation’ of restoration-conservation techniques either in situ or in the workshop, ‘inspection’ in terms of national and international preservation criteria and sharing the experiences via the ‘publications’. This whole of studies executed in parallel with the restoration-conservation methodology is described as a model, its results and effects are discussed.
|
