sempozyum_bildiri_kitabi

elevant illustrated books present a “touristic” picture centering on shopkeepers in certain historical
districts in Istanbul (Sakaoğlu and Akbayar, 1999; Işın, 1985). This presentation too reinforces the
common image of shopkeepers as an essentially anachronistic social group. 4 As Suraiya Faroqhi and
Randi Deguilhem point out, the number of the studies on the shopkeepers and craftspeople of the
Republican era is far much less than the studies on those of the Ottoman period. In fact, it will not be
an exaggeration to claim that almost all the relevant writings in this field are on Ottoman
shopkeepers and craftspeople (Faroqhi & Deguilhem, 2005). Moreover, most of these writings are
about those in Istanbul (Cumhuriyetin 50. Yılında Esnaf ve Sanatkâr, 1973: 55). Apparently,
shopkeepers and craftspeople of Turkey have been a focus of interest mostly for historians rather
than sociologists and anthropologists (Faroqhi & Deguilhem, 2005).
An important question in this context is how women figure in scholarly work on shopkeepers and
their common everyday images. The bulk of the literature presents us with a men’s world when they
speak of esnaf. We can see, however, a large number of women specialized in specific areas even in
the Ottoman past if we examine sources and illustrations carefully. Moreover, it is possible to find
about the relationships between women of various classes and esnaf in Istanbul, especially the
controversies over certain issues. We also learn about the presence of female shopkeepers outside
Istanbul too (Işın, 1985; Faroqhi, 1997; Faroqhi & Deguilhem, 2005; Toprak, 1994). Thus, the
historical research provides us important clues about the issues relevant to this paper, especially
demonstrating that social relationships between women and esnaf constitute a noteworthy aspect of
Ottoman urban life and its daily routines. We also learn that women worked not only in the textile
industry, but in a wide variety of areas as esnaf and craftspeople. We can draw parallels between
these observations about the Ottoman past and contemporary Istanbul. In addition, we know that a
large number of small shops or workshops are family businesses in which women play an active part
in it (Özsan 2011).
The common image in Turkey is that shopkeepers are all male. Definitions about esnaf
(shopkeepers) and zanaatkâr (craftspeople) assume that holders of these occupations are male, thus
tending to reinforce their gendered nature. 5 Perhaps this has something to do with the idea of public
sphere and guilds in the Ottoman Empire, the administrative organization still maintained and
developed in Republic era, and the gendered images and cultural codes of mahalle (the smallest
administrative unit in an urban area in both the Ottoman and Republican times) 6 . Thus, mahalle
appears to incorporate well‐defined and gendered social relationships organized by public
(masculine) power. Everyday expressions, words, and metaphors about mahalle reflect this image of
an orderly world whose public domain is controlled by men. “Craftsmen” and esnaf seem to be the
guardians of this public order and masculinity in the urban space. Today, the wide range of nuanced
behaviors of shopkeepers in a certain district (mahalle esnafı) towards women are related to all
these images—especially the differences in their treatment of poor (or single) women and well‐to‐do
(or married) women are meaningful in this respect.
Most studies on neighborhoods in Turkey have been made by scholars in the fields of architecture,
urban planning, and urban studies. In their writings, the neighborhood appears to represent the
traditional social structure organized around communal relationships. Therefore, changes occurring
in neighborhoods have been viewed as the loss of social support networks and the lowering of the
sense of community (Mills, 2004; Bayartan, 2005; Erkip, 2010; Mills, 2010). Hence, the
abovementioned perception of esnaf as essentially a group of the past representing traditional