ancient cities

tried to control them, especially during the politically
critical years. In the neighborhood, the inhabitants
also often had problems with the presence of
these establishments. There are cases where the
locals played an active role in the closure of coffeehouses.
But people continued to build them in the
city, even in the years they were banned.
Urban Houses
In sixteenth-century Istanbul, rich and poor shared
the same social and physical environment. Their
houses were of different sizes and standards, but
they were neighbors. It was not unusual for modest
houses to be built against the outer walls of a
palace or highly privileged houses in the nosiest
area of the neighborhood. However, the analysis
of three succeeding volumes of Istanbul vakif-
registers of 1546, 1578, and 1596 has shown that
the characteristics of houses and their future development
varied according to their particular locations
in the city. In predominantly commercial
areas, some lived in their shops or workshops. For
instance, there were many bakers living in their
mills or bakeries, and many grocers and gardeners
lodging in their shops and working areas; almost
all of them were recent immigrants who had left
their families in their hometowns.
At the neighborhood center were rows of oneroom
apartments. These were communal residences
usually built by wealthier individuals in proximity
to larger establishments. They were constructed
against the walls of a mosque, a public bath, or a
dervish lodge or above shops. Each apartment was
almost the size of a street shop. Few contained individually
used reception rooms, stables, and toilets.
These row-apartment buildings (known as bachelors’
rooms) generally accommodated working
bachelor immigrants and poorer families who probably
could not afford private houses in the city.
Some rows housed Jewish lodgers exclusively; these
were known as Jewish rooms and later Jewish
houses, Yahudhanes. Some bore names of the occupations
of their residents, such as fishermen’s rooms
and jewelers’ rooms. They accommodated Christian
and Muslim tenants of the same occupation. Many
of these rows of one-room apartments developed
through the construction of new apartment units in
addition to old ones over the period of time.
However, in sixteenth-century Istanbul, the
majority lived in simple houses of one or two
Istanbul, Turkey
409
rooms. These were generally two-story dwellings
incorporated into larger related structures. They
had no private kitchen or bath. The residents had to
share the basic facilities with the neighbors. Some
used the fireplaces in a shared courtyard for cooking
or water from a shared well. Few occupied large
houses with several rooms, private kitchen and
bath, and gardens or courtyards. And these houses
usually contained reception rooms (for male visitors
only), coffee rooms, rooms for only servants or
staff, and some stables and storage areas.
As the city grew and new inhabitants were added
to the numbers, the older dwellings experienced
some alterations and redevelopment. Some larger
houses, depending on where they were sited, were
converted into tenement blocks through subdivision,
whereas others acquired new construction.
The houses built in the commercial area of the
neighborhood usually possessed shops on the street
front. Those that had room for such development
acquired them later. It was also often the case that
the houses built on the main roads were turned into
rows of one-room apartments associated with commercial
units over the years. All these developments
were to be supervised through the Organization of
Imperial Architects. However, the control mechanism
does not seem to have been effective enough to
prevent illegal developments in early modern
Istanbul. For example, the construction of any buildings
against the city walls inside and outside was not
permitted, and those built had to be pulled down.
However, this was a common continuing practice,
especially in the congested areas alongside the Golden
Horn. In addition, although there were restrictions,
people extended their properties through the construction
of veranda-like structures, encroaching
directly on the street.
Of note is the importance of neighborhood in the
city’s urban social and economic organizations
across the early modern period. The neighborhood
housed diverse social, religious, and ethnic groups
even though some neighborhoods were dominated
by a particular group. People lived and worked in
the same area and they got together around neighborhood-based
socioreligious and commercial foundations.
Several occupations and productions also
took place within the neighborhood next to residential
life. Unlike our present time, they were parts of
the urban environment in the early modern era.
Selma Akyazıcı Özkoçak