I Journal of Islamic Studies 1 (1990) pp. 1-23 ISTANBUL: AN ISLAMIC CITY HAUL INALCIK Emeritus Professor, University of Chicago D o CONQUEST AS AN ACT OF FAITH w n lo a d The Prophet himself is said to have ordered the first military action of e d Muslims against the Byzantines, namely in Palestine in the year 624.1 A fro m mere twenty-six years after that, a Muslim army approached the gates jis of Constantinople. In some sense, from a Western viewpoint, the forces .o x of Islam may be regarded as having espoused the ancient struggle of fo rd Sassanid Persia against the Greek empire. However, among Muslims it jo u was a conviction, from the time of the Prophet onward, that the rn a conquest of Constantinople was predestined for them by God. The ls .o Ottomans adopted that conviction as their own. Altogether the Muslims rg had organised twelve separate expeditions against the Byzantine capital at C before Mehmed II eventually took it in 1453.2 o v e Constantinople was so powerful a symbol of resistance to the n expansion of Islam that a whole series of ahadtth, some authentic and try U some not, as well as legendary and folk-epic material, spread about the niv e future Muslim conquest of the city. rs The Ottomans would recall, and cite on every appropriate occasion, ity o one of these ahadtth which said: 'One day Constantinople will definitely n S be conquered. What a good amir and what a good army is the one that ep will accomplish this.'3 They claimed to have found the tombs of many tem b Companions of the Prophet who had taken part and fallen in the sieges e of Constantinople under the Umayyads. Following the conquest, they r 19 constructed mausolea for them which became the most venerated places , 2 0 1 0 1 See Abu Bakr Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Wasitl, Fada'il al-Bayt al-Maqdis (ed. Isaac Wasson, The Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 1979) 52-3; E. Sivan, 'Le caractere sacre de Jerusalem dans l'lslam aux XII-XIII siecles', Studia Islamica xxvii (1967) 149-82. 2 M. Canard, 'Les Expeditions des Arabes contre Constantinople dans l'histoire et dans les legendes', journal Asiatique (1926), 61-121. .3 Evhya Celebi, Seyahatname (Istanbul 1314/1896), vol. i. 2. HALIL tNALCIK in and around the city.* In the Ottoman tradition, the number of Companions who had actually fallen came to be multiplied by as many as seventy (a sacred figure). The most venerated of these Companions, the Prophet's standard- bearer, Abu Ayyub al-AnsarI,J became the patron saint of Ottoman 'IslamboP. That Abu Ayyub was indeed one of the Prophet's compan- ions and did take part in and die during the siege of Constantinople in 668 is historically attested.' Mehmet II chose Abu Ayyub as the patron saint of the conquered city, perhaps because he had declared himself the standard-bearer of the ghaza' in the whole Islamic world.7 Mehmed the Conqueror believed that the conquest would be the D work of Allah, a miracle of His providence. The Sufi §eyh Aq- o w §emseddln, a follower of the famous mystic philosopher of light, 'Umar nlo a al-Suhrawardl, became mur§id (spiritual guide) to the Sultan and his d e raerlmigyio duus rrientgr etahte i ns ioegrdee. rT thoe k nyoowun gth eS udlitvainn ea dskeceids iothne omf uthre§ iedx taoc tg doa tien otof d from the conquest. The conquest did not occur on the date the mur§id gave, jis .o rather the Christians recorded a naval success on that day. The letter x fo written by the §eyh to the Sultan after this event has been discovered in rd the Palace archives.8 In it the §eyh acknowledges that rumours about the jou rn failure of his prayers and the Sultan's lack of wisdom and authority had a ls spread to the army. He attributes the failure to the fact that many .o rg soldiers in the Ottoman army were not true Muslims, having converted a to Islam under pressure. But, being a practical man, he at the same time t C o advises the Sultan to severely punish the commanders responsible for ve n this disgraceful situation. He adds that when he went back to sleep after try reading the Qur'an, God revealed to him the good news of ultimate U n success. From the gesta et vita of the §eyh9 we learn that, during the final ive rs attack, the saints (all clad in white robes and led by the Prophet of ity miracles, Khidr) guided the Sultan's army to victory. Aq §eyh claimed o n S * See Siiheyl Unver, Him ve Sanat Bakimindan Fatih Devn (Belediye Press, Istanbul, ep 1948), i, 108-11. te m 5 Paul Wittek, 'Ayvansaray, Un sanctuaire prive de son heros', Annuaire de I'lnstttut de b e Philologte et d'Histoire Orientates et Slaves (Brussels, 1951), 505-26. r 1 El2', i',A 1b0u8 A-9y.yub Khalid b. Zayd b. Kulayb al-Nadjdjarl al-Ansarf, (E. Levi-Provencal), 9, 20 1 7 FeridOn Ahmed, Munsha'at al-Salatm (Istanbul 1274/1858), i, 236. Cf. A. Ates, 0 'Fatih Sultan Mehmed Tarafindan Gondenlen Mektublar ve Bunlara Dair Gelen Cevablar', Tarth Dergtsi (Istanbul, 1952), iv-7, 16. 1 See H. Inalcik, Fatih Devn Vzerinde Tetkikler ve Vesikalar (Turk Tanh Kurumu, Ankara, 1954), 217-18. ' Manakib-t Aq Semseddtn [Shams al-Dln] by Seyyid Husayn EnlsT; many copies in the MS collections in Turkey and Europe, see Mustafa Faya, Aq §emseddm, Ph.D. thesis, Faculty of Theology, University of Ankara. I used here the MS in the Nuruosmamye Library, Istanbul, no. 2175. ISTANBUL: AN ISLAMIC CITY 3 that the conquest was the work of providence through the prophet Khidr and Faqih Ahmed whom he called Qutb-i 'alem, the pole of the universe.10 The role and influence of Aq §eyh in the events leading up to the conquest were further amplified in folk imagination. According to popular traditions related by Evliya Celebi, Aq §eyh had revealed the impending conquest in 1444, long before the siege itself, when Mehmed was not yet the Sultan." Placing his dervish cap on Mehmed's head, the §eyh foretold that, according to God's favour, the conquest of Constan- tinople would be Mehmed's doing. Aq §eyh is protrayed in all of these traditions as more powerful than the Sultan. Evliya claimed that during the siege three thousand men of religion, including §eyhs and 'ulama', D exhorted the soldiers to fight and that the well-known §eyhs participated o w actively in attacking the city's main gates. n lo According to some folk traditions,12 even the great §eyhs of the a d e Islamic world came and fought alongside the Muslim army on this great d day for Islam. The Sultan had promised the §eyhs that, after the fro m conquest, he would allocate half the booty to them, build for each of jis them a convent, and do other charitable works besides. Evliya13 also .o x tells us that a group of Greek priests, spiritually overwhelmed, came out ford of the fortress to join the Muslim army. This is a general theme in the jo u folk epics of this period: that God eventually guided Christian priests rna ls towards the 'ultimate truth'—Islam. The significance of all of these .o stories is that the Muslim populace in those days believed that the city arg had been conquered through the spiritual power of the Muslim saints. It t C o remains uncertain whether the Sultan shared in these beliefs. But there is v e n every reason to affirm his belief in the necessity of having and keeping try the blessings of these charismatic holy men on his side.1* U n The Sultan's decisions for the reconstruction of the conquered city fell iv e in with the overwhelming religious zeal among the Muslim masses. rs ity Indeed, in that Islamic reconstruction of the city, the religious orders o n assumed a key role.15 S e §eyh Aq §emseddln was also charged, upon the Sultan's order, with pte locating the tomb of Ayyub al-Ansarl. Its discovery by the §eyh was no m b e less miraculous and significant than the conquest. It assured the r 1 9 10 Cf. H. Inalcik, 'An Analysis of the Otman Baba Vilayetnamesi', paper read at the , 2 0 Colloquium on Saints and Sainthood in Islam, held at the University of California, 10 Berkeley, 1986, to be published in the forthcoming volume of the Colloquium papers. 11 Evliya Celebi, Seyahatname, 94, 97, 105; also the Conqueror's waqfiyya 29/32, mentioned in n.16, where the conquest is attributed to the spiritual power of Aq §eyh. 11 Evliya Celebi, Seyahatname, 97. 13 ibid., 111. 14 H. Inalcik, 'Analysis ..." (n. 10 above). 15 ibid. Mehmed II apparently did not like the popular kalenderi dervishes, but recognized their immense popularity with the populace and army. 4 HALIL INALCIK Muslims that providence was still on their side. Mehmed built a mausoleum at the site, a mosque and a dervish convent.16 Ayyub's tomb, which rapidly grew into a town outside the walls of the city on the Golden Horn, became the most sacred place in Istanbul. Each day hundreds of believers would visit with offerings and seek the saint's help. The most famous of the dervish convents as well as a huge cemetery clustered around the tomb. It is also significant that each Sultan upon his accession to the throne visited the tomb following the same route as the legend described for Ayyub.17 At the site, the most venerated §eyh of the day girded the Sultan with the sacred sword of ghaza". Thus, the saint's presence not only made the whole area of D Istanbul a consecrated place for Muslims, but also gave the Sultan's rule ow n over the Muslims a religious sanction. lo a It should be noted that every Ottoman city had its own wall or saint d e d wIslhaomseic tmomysbt,i cu tsruaadliltyio lno cwatiethd ao pnr ea- Ihsliallm-toicp moouutsnidtaei nt hceu lct.i1t8y ,C citoiemsb wineerde from regarded as persons and a prayer formula recited each time the name of jis .o the city was mentioned. x fo rd jo u rn CONSTANTINOPLE BECOMES 'ISLAMBOL' a ls .o rg After the conquest, Mehmed's first act was to convert Constantinople a into an Islamic city. The preamble of his waqf deed for his mosque t C o reads:19 'Sultan Mehmed conquered Kostantiniyye with the help of God. ve n It was an abode of idols He converted its churches of beautiful try U decoration into Islamic colleges and mosques.' There were six churches n iv converted into mosques and one into a college. Interestingly enough, the e monastery of Aya-Marina was given to Baba Haydarl dervishes.20 In rsity general the best sites were assigned either to members of the military or on S to the men of religion including the SufT orders. e p On the day following the conquest the Sultan went straight to St te m b e " Wittek, 'Ayvansaray ..." (n.5 above), 523—4. For the wakfiyya of the complex see r 1 9 Fatih Mehmed 11 Vakfiyelen (Vakiflar Uraum Miidiirliigu, Ankara, 1938), 285-327. , 2 17 On the ceremony of swordgirding see I. H. Uzuncarsili, Osmanlt Devletmin Saray 0 1 Tejkilati (Turk Tarih Kurumu, Ankara, 1945), 189-200. 0 " On the dervish convents built on a hill outside the Ottoman towns see Semavi Eyice, 'Zaviyeler ve Zaviyeli Camiler', Istanbul Oniversitest Iktisat Fakultesi Mecmuast xxiii (1962-3), 23, 29. F. Hasluck, Christianity and Islam under the Sultans (ed. Margaret M. Hasluck, Oxford, 1929), i, 324-5. G. E. von Grunebaum, 'The Sacred character of Islamic Cities', A. Badawi, ed., Melanges Taha Husain (Cairo, 1962), 25-37. " The Conqueror's waqfiyya in Evliya Celebi, Seyahatndme, (see n.ll), 30-31. 20 Mentioned in the Ottoman survey of Istanbul made in 1455. The survey, preserved at the Basvekalet Archives, Istanbul, is being prepared for publication. ISTANBUL: AN ISLAMIC CITY 5 Sophia church and converted it into a mosque, saying there his first prayers, an act that symbolized the dedication of the city as an Islamic one. He also solemnly gave it the name 'Islam-bol' (Islam abounds)21, which actually reflects the centuries-long aspiration of Muslims to convert the great city of Constantine ('Qostantiniyya al-Kubra') into a city of Islam. The new name was hereafter strictly maintained by the ulema, though the people at large continued to use the pre-Ottoman Turkish name Istanbul. Folk memory of the congregational prayers on the first Friday after the conquest, as described by Evliya Celebi," records: 'When the muezzins began to recite the verse 'inn 'Allaha wa mala'ikatahu'13 in a touching tone, Aq §emseddln, taking Sultan D o Mehmed by his arm, in great respect led him to the pulpit. There he w n called out in a strong deep voice, "Praise to God, Lord of all creatures," lo a and the ghazis present in the mosque, deeply touched, broke into tears de d of joy.' fro Islamic faith and the popular imagination combined to convert m Constantinople into Islambol. For the Ottomans it was a Muslim city jis .o from the time it held the sacred remains of the Prophet's companions. In xfo Islamic tradition, a place where Muslims had built a mosque and prayed rd jo was considered Islamic territory. The churches, Hagia Sophia in particu- urn lar, were admired as works of God which the Muslims believed He als would ultimately grant to the true religion. Legend tells us2* that Abu .org Ayyub Ansarl performed his prayers there before his martyrdom. Also, a t C while an area or a city of non-Muslims who had submitted to a Muslim o v state was accepted as, administratively, a part of Islamic territory, its e n ultimate islamization remained a constant hope. Tolerant enough to try U resettle the city with Greeks, Armenians, and Jews, Mehmed the n iv Conqueror nevertheless took measures to ensure that 'Islambol' had a e rs Muslim majority—a policy systematically applied to the major cities ity o conquered for Islam." n S For the Ottomans, the most celebrated symbolic action, after conquest e p of a Christian city, was to convert the churches into mosques. The minaret te m for the call to prayer (adhan) became the visible symbol, and most striking b e feature, of the Islamic city. In their descriptions of conquests, the r 1 9 Ottomans always referred to this as the symbol of Islam's victory. , 2 0 1 21 See H. Inalcik, 'Istanbul', EP, IV, 224. 0 u Evliya Celebi, Seyahatname, 111. " The Qur'an, 2: 30-34. u Evhya Celebi, Seyahatname, 1, 76. " H. inalcik, 'Istanbul', (n.21), 238. H. Inalcik, 'Ottoman Methods of Conquest', Studta Islamica 11 (1954), 122-9. For the Balkans see Structure sociale et developpement culturel des villes sud-est europeennes et adnatiques (Bucharest, 1975); N. Todorov, La vtlle balkamque aux XV-XIX slides, developpement socioiconomique et detnographt- que (Bucharest, 1980); and Istanbul a la jonction des cultures balkaniques, mediterra- neennes, slaves et ortentales: Actes du colloque organise par AIESEE, Bucharest, 1977. 6 HALIL INALCIK Every city or town with a Muslim population had to have a Friday Mosque or masjid (smaller mosque) and it was a religious duty to assemble there on Fridays. Suleyman the Magnificent, in order to extirpate the Kizilbash heresy, extended this obligation to villages.26 The great mosque in the centre of each ndhiye (see infra) was the centre not only of religion but also of various other aspects of urban life. Aside from the tnadrasa built within the mosque complex, regular courses were held in the mosque for the general public (dars-i ldm): the teaching of Islam was considered one of the greatest pious acts in the Islamic tradition. It was a religious duty for the Sultan (as well as the ordinary Muslim citizen) to go to prayers in the great mosque of the D o capital city, especially on Friday (jum'a). It was there that the Sultan w n had direct contact with ordinary people and received oral and written lo a grievances (riq'a) on abuses of power they had suffered. The ceremony de d was symbolic of the Sultan's concern for his people's suffering, a fro concern regarded, in the Islamic state tradition, as the ruler's most m important function. In miniature paintings of the Sultan receiving a riq'a jis.o from the hands of an old woman, symbolically the most helpless of the xfo subjects, an image of the Sultan as the ideal ruler is created. The sermon rd jo (khutba) following Friday prayer, delivered by the most venerated §eyh urn a of the time, had more than a religious function. The congregation ls [jama1 a) would respond to the praises of the Sultan offered in the .org khutba—a ceremony interpreted in Islamic society as recognition of the a t C Sultan's sovereignty by the public. Indeed, this Friday mention and the o v minting of coins were always regarded as the two necessary symbols for en the independence of any ruler in Islamic lands. try U Furthermore, the law courts were customarily located at the mosques. n iv The busiest of them was in the courtyard of the Grand Vizir Mahmud ers Pasha Mosque, situated on the main street of the city in the vicinity of ity o the Great Bazaar. n S e p te The organization of space in 'lslatnbol' m b e r 1 The world view of Islam determined the physical and social landscape of 9 the city which was prepared as a space where the prescriptions of the , 20 1 Islamic religion could be observed properly and in their entirety.27 0 The basic objective in the expansion of Islam was to acquire political control over an area and establish the symbols of Islamic sovereignty. " 'Osmanli Kanunnameleri' (Kanunname-i Djedid ve Mu'teber), Millt Tetebbu'lar Medjumu'ast, 1, 338. 27 Cf. G. E. von Grunebaum, Islam: Essays m the Nature and Growth of a Cultural Tradition (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1955), 142; Al-Mawardi, Tashil al-Nazar ..., ed. Ridwan al-Sayyid (Beirut, 1987), 209-13. ISTANBUL: AN ISLAMIC CITY 7 An area inhabited by non-Muslims which had submitted to the power of Islam was considered to be within the Dar al-lslam, that is, part of the Islamic territory, whether or not the people living there had converted to Islam. If the city had had to be taken by force, Islamic Law allowed that the inhabitants could be removed as captives, the buildings becoming the property of the Islamic state. This happened in Constantinople on 29 May, 1453—over thirty thousand were enslaved and removed from the city.28 Under Ottoman rule, anyone who wanted to build a house had to pay rent to the state treasury for the plot used. The principle of state ownership of land had the most significant consequences for the reconstruction of the city under the Ottomans. The Sultan was free to D carry out his own plans for the location of the palace, bazaars, military o w barracks, and storehouses: he had a free hand in organizing the space nlo and creating a typical Islamic-Ottoman city. ad e wiItht oisu ot ftaenny asrgourte do ft hpatl atnhnei nIsgl amanidc ctihtya tc aitms ep ionptou lbateiionng swpaosn taonnelyo u'salny d from amorphous crowd.'2' The Ottoman practice, which we know basically jis followed Islamic tradition, challenges this view. The urban space of .ox fo Istanbul, as with other cities before it that had been founded or rd reorganized by the Ottomans, followed a traditional pattern of organi- jou zation laid down under the direction and supervision of the Sultan.30 rna ls " H. Inalcik, 'Istanbul', (n.21), 224-5. .org " M. E. Bonine, 'The Morphogenesis of Iranian Cities', Annals of the Association of a American Geographers lxlx/2 (1979), 208-24; Ira Lapidus, Muslim Cities in the Later t C Middle Ages (Harvard University Press, 1967), in particular ch.3, 'The Urban Society' and ov e 185-91; M. E. Bonine, 'From Uruk to Casablanca, Perspectives in the Urban Experience of n the Middle East', Journal of Urban History, in/2, 141-80. Comparing always with the try chartered cities and communes of medieval Europe, urban historians stress that in Islamic U n history there was no urban organization that can properly be called Islamic, that Muslim iv e cities had no independent or autonomous guilds or workmen associations; see A. H. rs Houram and S M. Stern, eds., The Islamic City (Oxford, 1970); C. Brown, ed., From ity o Madina to Metropolis (Darwin, Princeton, 1973); R. B. Serjeant, ed., The Islamic City n (Paris, 1980), H. A. Miskimin and A. L. Udovitch, 'A Tale of Two Cities', in The Medieval S e City (eds. D. Herlihy and A. L. Udovitch, Yale University Press, New Haven, London, pte 1977), say (144): 'the Muslim conquerors... founded many more towns themselves, which m b provides at least a partial justification for using the epithet "Islamic" to designate the e cities and towns of the medieval Near East.' Now see in particular, Urbanism in Islam r 1 9 (Tokyo, 1989, 5 vols.) Also see Excursus I and II at the end of this paper. On space , 2 organization see P. Wheatley, 'Levels of Space Awareness in the Traditional Islamic City', 0 1 Existics xliv (1976), 354-66. 0 30 See H. Inalcik 'Istanbul' (n.21), 226—48. A pioneer on Ottoman urbanism is Osman Nun Ergin, Medjelle-t Umur-t Beledtyye (Istanbul, 1922), vol. l; idem, Turktye'de Sehiraligm Tanhi lnkisafi (Istanbul, 1936). On Turkish urbanism in Asia Minor see Faruk Sumer, Eskt Turklerde Sehtrcilik (Istanbul, 1984); Ugur Tanyeh, Anadolu Turk Kentinde Fiztksel Yaptnm Evrim Stireci (11-15 yy) (Istanbul, 1987); Tuncer Baykara, Konya (Ankara, 1985); Tarih Iftnde Ankara (Seminar Papers, Ankara, 1984); Emel Esin, 'The Genesis of the Turkish Mosque and Madrasa Complex', Proceedings of the Twenty- Seventh International Congress of Orientalists (Napoli, 1967): (Annali dell'Istituto 8 HALIL INALCIK The view that an Islamic city lacked any planning really does need to be modified. The founders of pious endowments followed a traditional plan in establishing the main complexes of the religious and commercial centres of the city. The complexes themselves had a distinct arrangement of buildings within their boundaries. Of whatever origin—Hellenistic, Sassanian or Central Asiatic—a certain type of planning was followed in creating such centres. On the other hand, the lack of planning in the residential sections of the city is a fact and can be explained by certain Islamic concepts to be discussed later. As early as 1453 the Sultan had issued orders for the construction of certain buildings without which the Ottomans would not consider a D city as complete.31 Important among these were a citadel within the ow n walls surrounding the Golden Gate of the Roman city, a royal palace lo a on the hill, Forum Tauri, in the centre of the city, and a huge bazaar de d with a central bedestan (compact hall) for valuable commodity fro imports.32 m The citadel, symbol of the Sultan's power, and housing the state jis .o treasury, was the main stronghold in the city, its garrison the ultimate xfo force for city-defence in the event of invasion or popular uprising. rd jo The royal palace (later abandoned for another on the Topkapi site) urn a ls .o onentale di Napoli, 1972), n.s. xxn, 115-23. For Ottoman urbanism, publications of the rg qadl records are essential: for titles see Turkologischer Anzeiger, Cengiz Orhonlu, at C Osmanlt Imparatorlungunda §ehirctlik ve Ulastm, Turk Tarihtnde ve Kiilturunde Tokat, o Symposium, 2-6 July 1986 (Ankara, 1987). An important sixteenth century source for the ve n Ottoman idea of city with plans showing the basic buildings and complexes is Nasuhu's- try SilahT (Matrakci), Beyan-i Menazil-i Sefer-t Irakeyn-i Sultan Suleyman Han, ed. H. G. U Yurdaydm. (Turk Tarih Kurumu, Ankara, 1976); ilhan Tekeli, 'On institutionalized niv External Relations of Cities in the Ottoman Empire: A Settlement Models Approach', ers Etudes Balkantques (Sofia, 1972), n, 49-72; Z. Vesela-Prenosilova, 'Quelques remarques ity sur devolution de l'orgamsation urbaine en Empire ottoman', Archiv Onentalm (Prague, o n 1974), 200-224; 0. L. Barkan, 'Tiirkiye Sehirlerinin Tesekkul ve Inkisaf Tarihi S e Bakimindan Imaret Siterlennin Kurulus ve Isleyi; Tarzina ait Arastirmalar', iktisat p Fakultest Mecmuast (Istanbul, 1963), xxiii, 239-398. For examples of the cities 'created' tem by the Ottomans' waqfs see O. L. Barkan, 'Vakiflar ve Temlikler: I. Istila Devirlerinin b e Kolonizator Turk Dervisleri, Vakiflar Dergisi (Ankara, ii, 355); cf. E. Pauty, 'Villes r 1 spontanees et villes crees en Islam', Annales de I'lnstttut d'Etudes Orientates IX (1951); K. 9, 2 Liebe-Harkort, Beitrage zur sosizalen und wirtschaftlichen Lage Bursas am Anfang des 0 1 16. Jahrhunderts (Hamburg, 1970); S. Faroqhi, Towns and Townsmen of Ottoman 0 Anatolia: trade, crafts and food production in an urban setting, 1S20-1650 (Cambridge U. P., Cambridge, 1984); idem, Men of Modest Substance, House Owners and House Property in Seventeenth-century Ankara and Kaysert (Cambridge U. P., Cambridge, 1987). 31 See H. Inalcik, 'Istanbul' (n.21), 226-9. 32 See H. Inalcik, 'The Hub of the City: The Bedestan of Istanbul', International Journal of Turkish Studies (Madison, 1980), 311-58; and Excursus II at the end of this paper. ISTANBUL: AN ISLAMIC CITY 9 was also surrounded by walls making it a fortified city within the city. The Sultan's palace was revered as a quasi-sacred place where God's disposition for his creatures manifested itself in the Imam, the Sultan. As the Prophet's saying reads: 'The Imam is the trusted agent of Allah amongst his people and the proof of His care over His creatures and His representative over the country.' On the day of conquest, Mehmed announced that Istanbul was his capital city in the words: 'From now on Istanbul is my taht (throne)'.33 The capital is called tahtgah or dar al-Saltana, literally 'the abode of the throne' or of the saltana (political sovereignty, distinct from khilafa, the supreme spiritual—political authority of the successor of the Prophet.) D The capital was thus conceived as the place of residence of the holder of o w the saltana. n lo Beyond the main gate of the palace or Bab al-Sa'ada is where the ad e Istu bisje acnts elliavbeo, rtahtee psatrluaccetu grea tteo pthpeerde fowrieth m aa gnoifledsetns tdhoem reu,l esry'sm bauoltihco orifty t.h3e4 d from heavens or the universe, under which the ruler sat enthroned to receive jis people in a most elaborate court ceremony. The spot where the throne .ox fo was placed was the quasi-sacred centre of the realm, around which the rd whole Empire revolved. jou rn All Ottoman terminology connected with the Sultan's authority was a ls based on this concept. The government was the Sublime Porte, the city .o itself Der-i Sacadet, the 'Gate of the Good Fortune'. Proximity to the arg Sultan's person determined the degree of authority and fortune enjoy- t C o ed—for example, the pages of the privy chamber were candidates for the ve n highest positions in the Empire.35 The state officials in the capital try represented the highest ranks in each class—the qadl of Istanbul, for U n example, was the supreme qadl in the Empire. In sum, the world-view, ive with its basic notion of a divinely sanctioned and supported centre of rsity power, gave rise to the hierarchical and centralized structure of the o n Ottoman Empire. It was no mere mystical theory. In the mid-seven- S e p teenth century, Evliya Celebi observed that security and wealth dimin- te m ished in the provinces in proportion to the distance from the 'Gate of b e Good Fortune'. r 1 9 Apart from these 'political' formative elements of the Ottoman- , 2 Islamic city, the main urban zones, including the bedestan—farsi or 01 0 central market place, were brought into existence under the waqf- 'imaret system. 33 Tursun Beg, The History of Mehmed the Conqueror, eds. H. Inalcik and R. Murphey (Bibliotheca Islamica, Minneapolis and Chicago, 1978), Text: 52b. 14 H. Inalcik, The Ottoman Empire: the Classical Age 1300-1600, trans. N. Itzkowitz and C. Imber (A. D. Caratzas: New Rochelle, repr. 1989), 76 and 89-100. 35 ibid., 76-88. IO HALIL INALCIK The waqf—limaret system In large metropolises such as Bursa and Istanbul the city developed not around a single nucleus but around several, variously located, each constructed as a well-planned complex of religious buildings (mosque, madrasa, hospice, etc.), and supported by a waqf. In Istanbul, around such nuclei built by the Sultan or vizirs, developed new divisions [ndhiye), each under the jurisdiction of a surrogate judge appointed by the cadi of Istanbul. Each complex, as it answered the basic spiritual and material needs of a Muslim community in religion and education, as well as in water supply and even (through the hospice 'imaret or hospice D kitchen) in food, became the centre of a settlement which grew over time o w into a full-fledged nahiye. Through such a system Muslim Istanbul n lo developed in the second half of the 15th century into Europe's largest ad e city. d Through the waqfs, with sources of revenue such as shops rented to fro m the merchants, traders, and artisans in the city, or villages and farms in jis rural areas, an immense amount of wealth constantly flowed into the .ox fo city for the maintenance of such complexes. For example, the Fatih rd complex built by Mehmed the Conqueror had an annual revenue of 1.5 jou million akca or thirty thousand gold ducats which was spent as rna follows:36 ls.o rg Stipends for personnel and others 869,280 akca a Food for the Hospice 461,417 t C o Expenses of the Hospital 72,000 ve n Repairs 18,522 try U The total number of the personnel in various units was 383. At least n iv 1,117 persons received two meals each day. ers In the location and construction of the mosque, hierarchical consider- ity o ations were given priority. It was forbidden to build a mosque larger or n S more stately than the Sultan's, a rule respected by all. The second largest e p mosque was built by the Grand Vizir or other vizirs. In the provinces, te m the governor-general or frontier beg was entitled to build a large mosque be in the provincial centre. The founder was required to seek the written r 1 9 permission of the Sultan, while for the small district mosque (mesjid) , 2 0 the local qadl was able to grant permission for construction and to 10 approve location. For the location of a mosque a prominent site in the city's landscape or a crowded centre such as the bazaar area were preferred—that is, the criterion was either aesthetic or functional. The actual construction had to be in durable materials, mostly stone and such metals as iron and " H. Inalcik, 'Istanbul' (n.21), 229.