329

 i

Accessing the Sultan through Ceremony and Photography: Dissemination of a New Imperial Image during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s Reign (1909-1918)

This study aims to examine the photographs of imperial ceremonies during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign and their role in the creation of a new, more accessible public image of the sultan. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad ascended the throne in 1909 during a particularly turbulent era of the Empire when it was troubled with internal and external conflict. In a time of hardship, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s ceremonies created feelings of solidarity within the audience along with a feeling of reverence for the sultan and the Ottoman dynasty. Ceremonies are a tool for those in power to define and describe themselves. For governments, the political use of ceremonies is to display and reinforce legitimacy. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad and the Committee of Union and Progress were direly in need to legitimize their power, and ceremonies were an excellent opportunity for this. Mehmed V Reşad was very much unlike his predecessor in that he wanted to create a more accessible image, lifting Sultan Abdülhamid II’s restrictions imposed on printing photographs of the sultan and appearing in many public ceremonies. Therefore, photojournalism became a very important tool for the propagation of the sultan’s image which mainly focused on the numerous ceremonies the sultan attended, ranging from religious Islamic ceremonies to diplomatic visits of foreign heads of state. This study compiles photographs from three Ottoman periodicals depicting Sultan Mehmed V Reşad attending ceremonies. Overall, this thesis argues that ceremonies and their photographs were used to disseminate Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s imperial image which relied on visibility and accessibility to sway public opinion in his favor.

Keywords: Sultan Mehmed V Reşad, Ceremonies, Imperial Image, Ottoman Photography, Visibility, Second Constitutional Era, Photojournalism, Committee of Union and Progress

iv

ÖZET

Seremoni ve Fotoğraf ile Sultana Erişebilmek: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad (1909-1918) Döneminde Yeni Bir İmparatorluk İmajının Yayılması

Bu çalışmanın amacı Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad dönemindeki imparatorluk seremonilerinin fotoğraflarını incelemek, ve bu fotoğrafların sultanın daha erişilebilir ve halka açık bir imaj yaratmasındaki rolünü açıklamaktır. Sultan V Mehmed Reşad tahta 1909 yılında, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nun iç ve dış çatışmalarla dolu özellikle karmaşık bir döneminde tahta geçti. Bu yıllarda Sultan V Mehmed Reşad’ın seremonileri izleyenleri arasında beraberlik duyguları ile birlikte sultan ve Osmanlı hanedanına saygı yarattı. Seremoniler güç sahiplerinin kendilerini istedikleri biçimde tasvir etmeleri için bir araçtır. Devletler seremonileri meşruiyetlerini pekiştirmek için kullanmışlardır. Hem Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad hem de İttihat ve Terakki Cemiyeti politik güçlerini meşrulaştırmak istemişlerdir ve seremoniler de bunun için fırsat yaratmıştır. Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad selefine göre daha açık, görünür, ve erişilebilir bir görüntü yaratmak istemiştir. Reşad, Sultan II. Abdülhamid’in gazetelerde padişahın fotoğrafının basılması yasağını kaldırdığı gibi saray dışına ve İstanbul dışına birçok tören ve gezi yapmıştır. Bunların sayesinde resimli gazetecilik, padişahın dini törenler ve diplomatik ziyaretçilerini ağırlamak gibi vesilelerle yaptığı seremonileri fotoğraflayarak yeni imajının yayılmasında çok önemli olmuştur. Bu çalışma Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad döneminin üç yayınında basılmış seremoni fotoğraflarını derlemiştir. Bu fotoğraflar halkın padişaha bağını güçlendirmek amacıyla Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın yeni ve erişilebilir imajını Osmanlı’da yaymıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad, Seremoniler, İmparatorluk İmgeleri, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Fotoğraf, Görünürlük, İkinci Meşrutiyet Dönemi, Resimli Gazetecilik, İttihat ve Terakki Cemiyeti

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis would not have been possible without the guidance and support of many people. First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my advisor Günsel Renda for her constant support, encouragement and unfailing patience. I am grateful to her for giving this project a chance and her invaluable advice throughout the years. I would like to thank my jury member Filiz Yenişehirlioğlu for her advice on how to construct my thoughts and research into this thesis. Special thanks to Ahmet Ersoy for introducing me to Ottoman photography and guiding me through the process of putting my research into context. I also would like to thank Deniz Türker and Ünver Rüstem whose comments have greatly helped shape this research.

I am very grateful to have had the support of Koç University, for its financial support in addition to its intellectual environment which made the research possible. I wish to thank the Graduate of School of Social Sciences and Humanities (GSSSH) and its staff whose incredible support and patience have made this process much easier to navigate.

I want to also thank my friends who supported me in many ways; especially Cansu İşbilir for her intellectual and emotional support, and Merve Uca, Mısra Kaya, and Seda Sicimoğlu Yenikler for our many discussions which were very appreciated.

Finally, I am eternally grateful to my parents for their infinite emotional support and for their faith in me. I want to thank my father, Erol Aran, for inspiring my love for photography and art; and my mother, Gül Aran, for instilling in me a persevering work ethic.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... iii

ÖZET ............................................................................................................................... iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................. v

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. vi

LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS .............................................................................. viii

ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................................... ix

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1

Objectives and Methodology ........................................................................................ 1

Literature Review ......................................................................................................... 7

1. IMPERIAL IMAGE-MAKING IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE ............................... 14

1.1. Journalism, Censorship and the Imperial Image .................................................. 15

1.2. The Tradition of Ceremonies in the Ottoman Empire, Visibility, and Imagery .. 24

2. PHOTOGRAPHY IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE .................................................... 32

2.1. Introduction of Photography into the Ottoman Empire and its Development ..... 32

2.2. Photographers of the Ceremonies ........................................................................ 43

3. CEREMONIES IN PHOTOGRAPHS DURING SULTAN MEHMED V REŞAD’S REIGN (1909-1918) ....................................................................................................... 49

3.1. Accession Ceremony ........................................................................................... 50

3.2. Religious Ceremonies .......................................................................................... 58

3.3. Political Ceremonies ............................................................................................ 64

vii

3.4. Province Tours ..................................................................................................... 68

3.5. Diplomatic Ceremonies ....................................................................................... 81

3.6. Funeral Ceremony ................................................................................................ 88

3.7. Statistics and Analysis ......................................................................................... 92

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 98

FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... 104

BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................... 202

APPENDIX ................................................................................................................... 211

viii

LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS

Table 1. Number of photographs by ceremony types, newspapers, and photographers… ........................................................................................................................................ 49

Table 2. Number of photographs in Servet-i Fünun, Şehbal, and Resimli Kitab by photographers .................................................................................................................. 92

Table 3. Categories of ceremonies and photographers ................................................... 95

Chart 1. Distribution of the number of photographs by photographers in each publication ...................................................................................................................... 93

Chart 2. The ratios of known photographers' work in the publications .......................... 94

Chart 3. Number of published photographs of ceremonies throughout Sultan Mehmed V Reşad's reign ................................................................................................................... 96

ix

INTRODUCTION

Objectives and Methodology

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad (r. 1909-1918) was the penultimate Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. He became the Sultan in 1909 when the Committee of Union and Progress deposed Sultan Abdülhamid II. This happened shortly after the reinstatement of the Ottoman constitution in 1908, which started the Second Constitutional Era (İkinci Meşrutiyet Dönemi). Sultan Mehmed V Reşad is largely known as a Sultan with little political effect with the rise of the Committee of Union and Progress during his reign. There was a new imperial image created during this time that was the result of not only the Committee’s efforts but also the Sultan’s as well. For this effort, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad had numerous ceremonies throughout his reign, which were photographed extensively. Furthermore, many of these photographs appear in periodicals of the era.

Documenting political events has always been a subject of art throughout the world. Different mediums, such as illuminated manuscripts and paintings, were used to commemorate these events. With the invention of photography, the new medium was also utilized to continue this long-standing tradition. It became quicker to produce images with photography. Furthermore it was relatively cheaper and easier to access than painting, which meant that it was not only available to the higher classes and the wealthy. Therefore, with photography, it became more widespread and easier to portray and document political events. This change was not immediately reflected in the Ottoman Empire because of the restrictions on photography during Sultan Abdülhamid II’s era. During Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign, however, these restrictions were lifted, and photography became a very important political tool to disseminate images.

2

Photographs of imperial ceremonies remained untapped sources of information regarding the political and cultural environment in Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign as they have not been studied before. In fact, photography during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign is very much understudied. Scholarship on the history of photography in the Ottoman Empire has been very focused on the era of Sultan Abdülhamid II, while his successor’s era has been overlooked. Photographs of World War I (1914-1918) also garnered some interest. Ceremony photographs, however, have never been the subject of an academic study.

This study aims to put photographs of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s ceremonies in a political, cultural, and artistic context by examining their role in the creation of a new, more accessible public image of the sultan. To do this, I approach the photographs from the following angles: depictions of ceremonies, images of the Sultan, printed material in magazines, and historical documentation. My main argument is, ceremonies and their photographs were used to disseminate Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s imperial image which, relied on visibility and accessibility to sway public opinion in his favor during a turbulent time for the Ottoman Empire.

The first chapter chronicles the history of imperial image-making in the Ottoman Empire in two sections. The first section is the history of press in the Ottoman Empire, starting in Sultan Mahmud II’s reign up to and including Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign. In the Ottoman Empire, the history of press is intertwined with political history. Many prominent political figures emerged as journalists. Newspapers were used by opponents of the Sultan and the Ottoman state to share and publicize their ideas. On the other side, the Ottoman state used newspapers to promote their own ideology. Furthermore, the state used censorship to prevent the dissemination of the ideas of the dissidents. In this section,

3

I aim to provide information on the environment in which the photographs and magazines were produced.

The second section of the first chapter examines the relationship between imperial image-making and sultanic visibility through ceremonies and visual media. As the photographs depict imperial ceremonies the history of such ceremonies in the history of the Ottoman Empire is important. Ceremonies could either be used in excess to increase the visibility of the sultan or used sporadically to limit access to the sultan. This section shows that although the use of ceremonies to increase visibility during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign differs greatly from the previous Sultan Abdülhamid II’s, it has its roots in an older effort of imperial image making by increasing visibility.

This section also includes an overview of the visual history of imperial-image making through increasing visibility. Visual depictions of ceremonies were not used for such an imperial agenda until Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign. Visual depictions of the sultans themselves, however, have been used extensively. Starting with Sultan Selim III and further established by Sultan Mahmud II, an overview of imperial portraiture is provided. With this information, I aim to root the propagation of these photographs in an older practice of using visual imagery to increase visibility with innovation on the subject matter.

The second chapter provides an overview of the history of photography in the Ottoman Empire. Introduced to the Empire by travelers, photography was embraced quickly and became localized. It was also used according to the imperial agenda of the sultan. Sultan Abdülaziz used the new medium to increase his visibility and commissioned portraits, whereas Sultan Abdülhamid II used it to catalog the Ottoman Empire and limited its use to decrease his visibility.

4

The third chapter categorizes the photographs according to types of ceremonies and gives information on the specific ceremonies shown in each photograph. The categorization is as follows: the accession ceremonies (biat, cülus, and sword girding), religious ceremonies, political ceremonies, province tours, diplomatic ceremonies for visiting foreign heads of states, and the funeral ceremony. The accession ceremonies do have religious and political characteristics, but this category is held separate because these ceremonies uniquely mark the starting point of a sultan’s reign. The religious ceremonies are ones that are linked with Islamic rituals and highlight the Sultan’s identity as a religious leader, the caliph, as well as his role as a pious Muslim following religious duties. The political ceremonies show the Sultan’s role as the head of the Ottoman state. Rather than the religious aspects, these ceremonies focus on the Sultan’s relationship with the parliament and the military. The province tours consist of the Sultan’s trips to provinces with the intent of connecting to Ottoman people living outside of Istanbul. The diplomatic ceremonies were conducted to receive foreign heads of states to further relationships with other countries. The funeral ceremony marks the end of the reign of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad. Photographs from this ceremony were collected in an album for the Ottoman court, but they do not appear in periodicals. Photographs from previous ceremonies were reprinted; however, to announce the death of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad. The last section of this chapter includes a statistical analysis of the photographs regarding their publications, photographers, and dates to see the network of image-making and the press.

There are numerous photographs of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad. For this thesis, I focused solely on the photographs of ceremonies. Photographs of these ceremonies can be found in various archives and collections in Turkey and abroad; but, to examine the social context in the Ottoman Empire, this thesis only includes photographs that were

5

printed in Ottoman newspapers of the era. Photographs of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s ceremonies were printed in three Ottoman periodicals: Servet-i Fünun, Şehbal, and Resimli Kitab. Even though there are numerous photographs of ceremonies printed in these publications, to narrow the scope of the thesis, I only looked at photographs where Sultan Mehmed V Reşad is visible.

To achieve my goals, I examined Şehbal and Resimli Kitab’s entire publication history. For Resimli Kitab I looked at fifty-one issues from September 1908 to February 1914. For Şehbal, I covered its one hundred issues from March 14, 1909 to July 14, 1915. Servet-i Fünun had the longest publication life among them. It had started during Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reign and continued into the Republican Era. To see the change in attitude towards printing photography I started with its first issue from March 17, 1891. The photographs included in this thesis were printed between 1909 and 1918. To my knowledge, these three were the only publications that printed photographs of ceremonies even though portrait photographs of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad appear in other publications as well.

The first step in my analysis was a formalist methodology to gather more information on the photographs. I cross-referenced photographs from different publications to identify photographers who were not credited in the newspapers. This also determined which photographs were reprinted in multiple publications. Identifying photographers also included looking for the photographers’ signatures or stamps on the photographs.

I examined the backgrounds, especially architectural elements and landscapes, to pinpoint the locations. Because the photographs were printed with a delay of sometimes days and even months, I referred to primary sources to attribute photographs to specific

6

ceremonies and dates. When the relevant information in the primary sources was insufficient, I used supplementary material from other researchers. I consulted the French and Ottoman Turkish captions under the photographs if provided. To ascertain the reliability of the captions, I cross-referenced these with the primary and secondary sources.

In light of this research, this thesis fits the theoretical framework of ruler visibility for imperial image-making provided by Darin Stephanov in his book Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908. Stephanov takes ruler visibility as an important concept to define the relationship between the ruler and the ruled.1 He describes visibility as the sum of direct and indirect, literal and figurative, and intended and unintended influences of the one (the ruler) on the other (the ruled) and vice versa.2 Imperial ceremonies act as direct ruler visibility while photography is an indirect channel. Photographs of ceremonies combine these two elements. This study situates the photographs of ceremonies as tools for imperial image making by Sultan Mehmed V Reşad and the Committee of Union and Progress, through increasing the visibility of the Sultan to the Ottoman public.

1 Darin N. Stephanov, Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2019), 2.

2 Stephanov, 2.

7

Literature Review

In 2017, TBMM Milli Saraylar (National Palaces) prepared an exhibition focusing on Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign at the Dolmabahçe Palace. Three books published in conjunction with this exhibition were excellent starting points for my research. This first, titled Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü was an exhibition catalog for photographs from this era.3 The book includes photographs of ceremonies, portraits, landscapes, and architectural photographs. They are not limited to the National Palaces collection also including photographs from the Ömer M. Koç Collection and the Deniz Müzesi (Naval Museum). This book includes photographs printed in newspapers but only a few were selected. Furthermore, an in-depth analysis of the political and cultural context of the photographs was not deemed necessary for an exhibition catalog. Nevertheless, the book was an introduction to the subject matter and a gateway to further research.

Another exhibition catalog from the same event titled Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Sergisi brings the photographs together with other exhibited objects such as paintings, furniture, porcelain tableware, and medals.4 The section on photography is limited to an article on the funeral album of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad. The third book is titled Osmanlı Arşiv Belgelerinde Sultan Mehmed V Reşad ve Dönemi.5 Published as a companion to the exhibition, this is a compilation of all Ottoman state documentation from this era. Original documents in Ottoman Turkish are reprinted alongside their Turkish translations. I used these translations for documents regarding state protocol during ceremonies and processions.

Within the scope of this thesis, I surveyed three periodicals from Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s era for photographs of ceremonies. I accessed Servet-i Fünun through Milli

3 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü (Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017).

4 Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Sergisi (Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017).

5 Osmanlı Arşiv Belgelerinde Sultan Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi (Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017).

8

Kütüphane (Turkish National Library) and examined issues from 1909 to 1918. Şehbal was accessed through the digital collection of Universität Bonn. Lastly, I accessed Resimli Kitab through the Hakkı Tarık Us library’s digitalized periodicals. For these last two periodicals, I surveyed all of their issues throughout their publication lives.

Two more primary sources were used to contextualize the photographs. These are both memoirs of state officials. The first is Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, written by Lütfi Simavi.6 Simavi was the head chamberlain to Sultan Mehmed V Reşad in the first years of his reign. His memoirs are translated and collected in three volumes by the National Palaces. The second is Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar by Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil.7 Uşaklıgil served as the first secretary to the Sultan. Simavi and Uşaklıgil were perhaps the two closest officials to Sultan Mehmed V Reşad in the Ottoman court. Their memoirs provide insight into the mood and thoughts of the Sultan in a way that could not be recorded in court documents.

In addition to the primary sources, I used supplementary material to enhance my understanding of the political and cultural climate of the Ottoman Empire. These pertained not just to the era of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad, but also his predecessors to identify any continuance or divergences. The subjects of the supplementary sources can be categorized as the ceremonies, political developments, journalism, illuminated manuscripts and paintings, and photography.

I used two works on ceremonies in the last century of the Ottoman Empire to understand their impact: Hakan T. Karateke’s Padişahım Çok Yaşa: Osmanlı Devleti'nin

6 Lütfi Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, vol. I, III vols. (Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017); Lütfi Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, vol. II, III vols. (Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017); Lütfi Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, vol. III, III vols. (Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017).

7 Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar (İstanbul: İnkılap Kitabevi, 1981).

9

Son Yüzyılında Merasimler and Darin N. Stephanov’s Ruler Visibility, Modernity, and Ethnonationalism in the Late Ottoman Empire.8 Karateke focuses on the repeating imperial ceremonies including the accession ceremonies for the cülus and biat, the sword girding ceremonies, Friday prayers processions, and imperial receptions from Sultan Mahmud II to Sultan Mehmed VI Vahdeddin. Through this Karateke outlines an Ottoman canon of ceremonies and traces how the protocol changed. The reflections of these ceremonies in art take a backseat as paintings and photographs are only used as documentation. Stephanov also studies Ottoman ceremonies in the last century but limits his scope to end in 1908 and looks at ceremonies through the lens of sultanic visibility. As mentioned in my introduction, Stephanov created a lexicon to ascertain the various elements that constitute sultanic visibility, including ceremonies and imagery. For the tradition of earlier ceremonies in the Ottoman Empire, I referred to Dündar Alikılıç’s book İmparatorluk Seremonisi: Osmanlı'da Devlet Protokolü ve Törenler.9

The works I used to understand the political-historical background of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s era can be separated into two: more general books for political context, in addition to works specifically on the formation and growth of the Committee of Union and Progress and state ideology in the Ottoman Empire. For a more general overview, I used Erik Jan Zürcher’s Turkey: A Modern History, Şükrü Hanioğlu’s A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire, and Niyazi Berkes’ Türkiye’de Çağdaşlaşma.10 To understand the Young Turks, the Committee of Union and Progress, and their role in the

8 Hakan T. Karateke, Padişahım Çok Yaşa: Osmanlı Devleti’nin Son Yüzyılında Merasimler (İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2004); Stephanov, Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908.

9 Dündar Alikılıç, İmparatorluk Seremonisi: Osmanlı’da Devlet Protokolü ve Törenler, 1. baskı, 2 (Cağaloğlu, İstanbul: Tarih Düşünce Kitapları, 2004).

10 Erik Jan Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 3rd ed. (London: I. B. Tauris, 2004); M. Şükrü Hanioğlu, A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008); Niyazi Berkes, Türkiyeʾde Çağdaşlaşma, 7., Yapı Kredi yayınları Cogito, 1713 117 (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2005).

10

Ottoman government in this era I referred to Şükrü Hanioğlu’s following works: Bir Siyasal Örgüt Olarak Osmanlı İttihad ve Terakki Cemiyeti ve Jön Türklük (1889-1902), The Young Turks in Opposition, and Preparation for a Revolution: the Young Turks, 1902-1908.11

Moreover, Kemal Karpat’s The Politicization of Islam: Reconstructing Identity, State, Faith, and Community in the Late Ottoman State and The Evolution of the Turkish Political System and the Changing Meaning of Modernity, Secularism and Islam provided insight into state ideology in the Ottoman Empire, Nationalism, Ottomanism, and Turkism.12 For state ideology before Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s era, Selim Deringil’s seminal work The Well-Protected Domains: Ideology and the Legitimation of Power in the Ottoman Empire 1876-1909 not only gives political background but interweaves Sultan Abdülhamid II’s state ideology with the cultural developments of the era such as journalism and photography.13 On the topic of journalism, İpek K. Yosmaoğlu also links state ideology and the press in her article “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913.”14

Photography in the Ottoman Empire constituted a very important part of the research. Works by two researchers, Engin Özendes and Bahattin Öztuncay, lay the documentary foundation for the history of photography in the Ottoman Empire.

11 M. Şükrü Hanioğlu, Bir Siyasal Örgüt Olarak Osmanlı İttihad ve Terakki Cemiyeti ve Jön Türklük (1889-1902) (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1986); M. Şükrü Hanioğlu, The Young Turks in Opposition, Studies in Middle Eastern History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995); M. Şükrü Hanioğlu, Preparation for a Revolution: The Young Turks, 1902-1908, Studies in Middle Eastern History (Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, 2001).

12 Kemal Karpat, The Politicization of Islam: Reconstructing Identity, State, Faith, and Community in the Late Ottoman State, Studies in Middle Eastern History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001); Kemal H. Karpat, “The Evolution of the Turkish Political System and the Changing Meaning of Modernity, Secularism and Islam,” in Studies on Turkish Politics and Society: Selected Articles and Essays, Social, Economic, and Political Studies of the Middle East, v. 94 (Boston, MA: Brill, 2004), 201–31.

13 Selim Deringil, The Well-Protected Domains: Ideology and the Legitimation of Power in the Ottoman Empire 1876-1909, Paperback ed (London: Tauris, 1999).

14 İpek K. Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” The Turkish Studies Association Journal 27, no. 1/2 (2003): 15–49.

11

Özendes’s book Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nda Fotoğrafçılık, 1839-1923 outlines the introduction and growth of the medium with entries for prominent photographers.15 Özendes takes a deeper look into two of these photography studios in her two books Sébah & Joaillier'den Foto Sabah'a Fotoğrafta Oryantalizm and Abdullah Frères: Osmanlı Sarayının Fotoğrafçıları.16 Both were official court photographers during Sultan Abdülaziz and Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reigns and Özendes’s books underline the close relationship between the Ottoman sultans and photography. This relationship was further analyzed through portrait photography in Bahattin Öztuncay’s book Dynasty and Camera: Portraits from the Ottoman Court.17 Öztuncay takes a more general look into portrait photography in Hatıra-i Uhuvvet - Portre Fotoğraflarının Cazibesi: 1846-1950.18 Finally, Öztuncay’s Dersaadet'in Fotoğrafçıları - 19. Yüzyıl İstanbulunda Fotoğraf: Öncüler, Stüdyolar, Sanatçılar is another detailed look into the history of the medium.19 The two-volume book also includes biographical information on the photographers and studios in its first volume, with the second one dedicated to a selection of photographs presented in various categories. Although the book focuses on the nineteenth century this book was useful for my research because some of the studios mentioned did continue to operate in the twentieth century.

In addition to the aforementioned books that take a more documentary approach, I used two books published as companions to photography exhibitions by Koç University. These are not strictly exhibition catalogs as the articles provide a more analytical

15 Engin Özendes, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Fotoğrafçılık, 1839-1923 (İstanbul: YEM Yayın, 2013).

16 Engin Özendes, Sébah & Joaillier’den Foto Sabah’a Fotoğrafta Oryantalizm (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2004); Engin Özendes, Abdullah Frères: Osmanlı Sarayının Fotoğrafçıları (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2006).

17 Bahattin Öztuncay, Dynasty and Camera: Portraits from the Ottoman Court (İstanbul: Sadberk Hanım Müzesi, 2010).

18 Bahattin Öztuncay, Hatıra-i Uhuvvet - Portre Fotoğraflarının Cazibesi: 1846-1950 (İstanbul: Aygaz, 2008).

19 Bahattin Öztuncay, Dersaadet’in Fotoğrafçıları - 19. Yüzyıl İstanbulunda Fotoğraf: Öncüler, Stüdyolar, Sanatçılar (İstanbul: Aygaz, 2003).

12

approach to the history of photography. The first book is Camera Ottomana: Photography and Modernity in the Ottoman Empire, 1840-1914. Bahattin Öztuncay’s article “The Origins and Development of Photography in Istanbul” is a condensed version of his books.20 Edhem Eldem’s “Powerful Images – The Dissemination and Impact of Photography in the Ottoman Empire” is a more critical look into the relationship between imperial ideology and the dissemination of photography. It is notable for its inclusion of the reign of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad, highlighting the changing attitude towards photography and propagation of imagery.21 The second exhibition book is Ottoman Arcadia: The Hamidian Expedition to the Land of Tribal Roots (1886). In this book Ahmet Ersoy’s article “The Sultan and His Tribe: Documenting Ottoman Roots in the Abdülhamid II Photographic Albums” is an excellent companion to Selim Deringil’s Well-Protected Domains, further examining the influence of Sultan Abdülhamid II’s image-making policies on photography.22

Finally, I used the following sources to help me contextualize the photographs in light of previous modes of visual representation. For this research, I focused on the visual representation of ceremonies in illuminated manuscripts and imperial image-making through sultanic portraiture. For the former, I referred to 40 Gün 40 Gece: Osmanlı Düğünleri, Şenlikleri, Geçit Alayları by Metin And, Ottoman Painting by Serpil Bağcı, Filiz Çağman, Günsel Renda, and Zeren Tanındı, and The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman.23 For the latter, I consulted two book chapters by Günsel Renda:

20 Bahattin Öztuncay, “The Origins and Development of Photography in Istanbul,” in Camera Ottomana: Photography and Modernity in the Ottoman Empire, 1840-1914, ed. Zeynep Çelik and Edhem Eldem (İstanbul: Koç University Publications, 2015), 66–105.

21 Edhem Eldem, “Powerful Images – The Dissemination and Impact of Photography in the Ottoman Empire,” in Camera Ottomana (İstanbul: Koç University Publications, 2015), 106–53.

22 Ahmet Ersoy, “The Sultan and His Tribe: Documenting Ottoman Roots in the Abdülhamid II Photographic Albums,” in Ottoman Arcadia: The Hamidian Expedition to the Land of Tribal Roots (1886) (İstanbul: Koç University Center for Anatolian Civilizations, 2018), 31–64.

23 Metin And, 40 Gün 40 Gece: Osmanlı Düğünleri, Şenlikleri, Geçit Alayları (İstanbul: Toprakbank, 2000); Serpil Bağcı et al., Ottoman Painting (Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Culture and Tourism

13

“Propagating the Imperial Image: Tasvir-i Hümayun (1800-1922)” from The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman, and “European Artists at the Ottoman Court: Propagating New Dynastic Image in the Nineteenth Century” from The Poetics and Politics of Place: Ottoman Istanbul and British Orientalism.24 These sources assisted in placing the photographs of ceremonies within the larger scope of Ottoman art history.

Publications, 2010); Günsel Renda et al., eds., The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman (İstanbul: İşbank, 2000).

24 Renda et al., The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman; Günsel Renda, “European Artists at the Ottoman Court: Propagating New Dynastic Image in the Nineteenth Century,” in The Poetics and Politics of Place: Ottoman Istanbul and British Orientalism, ed. Zeynep İnankur, Reina Lewis, and Mary Roberts (İstanbul: Pera Museum, 2011), 221–232.

14

1. IMPERIAL IMAGE-MAKING IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad (Figure 1.1) was born on November 2, 1844. After spending the majority of his life as a şehzade,25 he became the 35th Ottoman Sultan on April 27, 1909 and died on July 3, 1918. The twentieth century continued processes of change and transformation in the Ottoman Empire that had begun in the nineteenth century and earlier. Territorial losses continued and frontiers shrank. Statesmen at the center and in the provinces continued their contestations for power. The idea of nationalism was the driving force behind civil unrest. The forces triggering these territorial losses now involved domestic rebellions as well as imperial wars.26

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad was put on the Ottoman throne by the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP). He had little control over state matters and Ottoman politics during his reign was controlled by the Committee. There, imperial image-making between 1908 and 1918 was not only through the Sultan’s efforts, but also through the CUP’s machinations. This chapter is divided into two sections to give a historical background on the imperial image-making efforts of the Ottoman Empire. The first section is on journalism, which was introduced to the Ottoman Empire in the nineteenth century. It quickly became a political tool used both by the state and its opposition to propagate their views. The second section is on the tradition of imperial ceremonies in the Ottoman Empire. This tradition was changed according to the imperial agenda throughout the centuries.

25 Şehzade was the title given to the Ottoman princes. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad became the Sultan at 65, the oldest Ottoman Sultan to accede to the throne.

26 Donald Quataert, The Ottoman Empire 1700-1922 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 54.

15

1.1. Journalism, Censorship and the Imperial Image

The history of the press and journalism in the Ottoman Empire is closely linked to the Empire’s political history. One of the first Ottoman newspapers in Ottoman Turkish was not published in Istanbul but Cairo. In 1828, the governor of Egypt published Vekayi-i Mısriyye to inform his staff of the modernization process that had begun in the Ottoman Empire.27 In 1831 Takvim-i Vekayi, the official newspaper of the Ottoman State, begun publication during the reign of Sultan Mahmud II. Although its target audience was the government officials, it was sold to the general public as well.28

The first privately-owned newspaper was Ceride-i Havadis in 1840 which included cultural and technological news in addition to politics. The public interest was low and it only survived through government support and eventually became a semi-official newspaper.29 All the writers of Ceride-i Havadis were members of the translation bureau of the Sublime Porte.30 In the first decades journalism as a profession did not exist; journalists were people who had jobs in the government or worked in the private sector.31

Until 1860 there was very little interest in the newspapers, and they did not reach more than 300 people per day.32 Disinterest on the public’s part can be traced back to the late introduction of the printing press into the Ottoman Empire.33 The literary habits already present in the Western cultures for several centuries had only been cultivating since the eighteenth century.34 However, readership rapidly grew throughout the

27 Orhan Koloğlu, “Newspapers,” in Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire (New York: Facts on File, 2009), 431.

28 Kenan Demir, “Osmanlı’da Basının Doğuşu ve Gazeteler,” Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2014, 61.

29 Koloğlu, “Newspapers,” 431; Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 17.

30 Koloğlu, “Newspapers,” 431.

31 Orhan Koloğlu, “Basın,” in Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi (İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993), 69.

32 Koloğlu, 69.

33 Koloğlu, “Basın.”

34 Olcay Özkaya Duman, “Osmanlı’dan Cumhuriyet’e Ulusal’dan Yerel’e Basın ve Yayıncılık Faaliyetlerinin Gelişimi Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme,” Turkish Studies 8 (2013): 1031–41.

16

nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Readership was not limited to the circulation numbers.35 People had access to newspapers in coffee-houses and could read the publications.36

In 1862 Şinasi started publishing Tasvir-i Efkar, a newspaper that would become an apparatus for the Young Ottomans. It promoted ideas of freedom and democracy.37 Ali Suavi’s Muhbir was a Young Ottoman publication that advocated for a constitutional system.38 The Young Ottomans who brought their ideas into the Empire through journalism supported the cause of the people to weed out elitism.39 They promoted the idea of a “loyal citizen” instead of a “loyal subject.”40 The criticism towards the state increased with the number of newspapers and in response, the government created laws governing the press. These were case and need based laws.41 Permission to publish a newspaper in the Ottoman Empire was subject to inspection by the Ministry of Education for the locals or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for foreigners per the 1857 law.42 Matbuat Müdürlüğü (Administration of Press Affairs) was established in 1862 and this started the era of censorship that would last until 1909.43 Penalties for publishing against the state agenda included fines, imprisonment, and exile for journalists, editors, and publishers in addition to the publication being shut down.44 The government closed Muhbir and exiled

35 Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 78.

36 Murat Gül, The Emergence of Modern Istanbul: Transformation and Modernisation of a City (London: I. B. Tauris, 2009), 34.

37 Koloğlu, “Newspapers,” 431.

38 Banu Dağtaş, “Contested Modernities: ‘Diverse Voices’ of the Pioneering Journalists in the Ottoman Empire,” Journal of Media Critiques 3, no. 12 (December 31, 2017): 147.

39 Şerif Mardin, “Power, Civil Society and Culture in the Ottoman Empire,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 11, no. 3 (1969): 275.

40 Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 34.

41 Yosmaoğlu, 17.

42 Fatmagül Demirel, “Censorship of Newspapers,” in Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire (New York: Facts on File, 2009), 131; Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 17.

43 Demirel, “Censorship of Newspapers,” 131.

44 Demirel, 131; Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 18.

17

the editor-in-chief Ali Suavi.45 He and other journalists fled the Ottoman Empire and continued their efforts in Europe.46

Despite the oppression by the government, the presence of the press continued to grow within the Ottoman Empire. In Istanbul, there were 17 new publications between 1860 and 1866, and 113 more between 1867 and 1878.47 Namık Kemal’s new publication, İbret sold a never-before-seen 25.000 copies which showed that the public was becoming opinionated.48 But the government redoubled its efforts to control the media. In 1876, despite protests from newspapers, a new law was announced that all newspapers had to be reviewed by the Administration of Press Affairs before they could be published.49

In the same year, Sultan Abdülaziz was dethroned by a military coup and replaced by Sultan Abdülhamid II.50 Sultan Abdülhamid II gradually proved to be stricter and stricter regarding the press even though he had promised to uphold the freedom of press when he had vowed to protect the first Ottoman constitution upon taking the throne in 1876.51 With the strict censorship during the Hamidian period, the number of new publications per year dropped from nine or ten to only one per year.52 Bribery for publications in favor, and censorship through the press bureau was meant to ensure no dissenting opinions would be shared.53

45 Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 18.

46 Koloğlu, “Newspapers,” 431.

47 Koloğlu, 432.

48 Koloğlu, 432.

49 Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 19.

50 First, Sultan Abdülaziz was replaced by Sultan Murad V who was quickly dethroned three months later due to being mentally unfit to rule. .

51 Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 19–21.

52 Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 78.

53 Koloğlu, “Newspapers,” 432; Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 22–24.

18

The Administration of Press Affairs reviewed each and every issue of a newspaper before it could be published.54 Sultan Abdülhamid II tried to promote the religious identity of the Ottoman Empire and put emphasis on Muslim solidarity to combat the ideas of liberalism, nationalism, and constitutionalism.55 The newspapers were forbidden to publish anything that would damage the reputation of the Sultan, the Empire, the military, or the state in addition to being forbidden to use words such as “strike,” “assassination,” “revolution,” “anarchy,” “republic,” or “freedom.”56 In fact any political content was looked down upon and the papers that abstained from it got preferential treatment at the Administration of Press Affairs; although the vague yet strict nature of censorship meant that even nonpolitical publications which had content about science, technology, literature, and arts had to act cautiously and were found harmful in the later years of Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reign.57 The vagueness in the law was intended as it gave the government more discretionary capacity to veto subjects.58 For an Ottoman newspaper to survive during the Hamidian period, it had to become a mouthpiece of the regime.59 Furthermore, it had been stripped of its main purpose of reporting news.60

Censorship for Ottoman newspapers applied to foreign publications as well. A preliminary process to eliminate content could not be utilized for these; therefore, Sultan Abdülhamid II resorted to bribing the publications to print favorable content which not only was ineffective, oftentimes had the opposite of the intended effect with the newspapers openly making fun of the “despot” Sultan.61 Customs and post offices were

54 Demirel, “Censorship of Newspapers,” 131.

55 Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 79.

56 Demirel, “Censorship of Newspapers,” 432.

57 Demirel, 132; Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 19.

58 Demirel, “Censorship of Newspapers,” 18.

59 Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 26.

60 Yosmaoğlu, 31.

61 Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913.”

19

put under strict surveillance so that foreign publications deemed unsuitable would not enter the Empire. Some still found their way in, as the Ottoman authorities had no control over embassies and foreign-run post offices.62

An opposition group, called the Ottoman Unity Society (İttihad-i Osmani Cemiyeti) had formed in the Empire in 1895. Some of its members were arrested which forced the remaining members to flee to Paris, where they published opposition newspapers and called themselves the Young Turks.63 The Paris group and the Istanbul group collectively decided on the name Committee of Union and Progress (İttihat ve Terakki Cemiyeti) for their organization, continuing the unionist ideas of the Young Ottomans.64 Their main point of criticism was that the system of governance had primarily relied upon unconditional loyalty to the Sultan.65 A split within the group happened in 1902 when members disagreed on whether the use of violence to dethrone Sultan Abdülhamid II was justified; however, by 1907 both groups had agreed on the necessity of aggressive means to seize control.66

An important factor the revolution was the news that the Russian and British Empires had met to discuss the Balkans and fearing the partitioning of the Empires the CUP decided to act.67 The Unionist officers in Macedonia revolted to demand the reinstatement of the constitution. The Sultan gave in to their demands, fearing doing

62 Demirel, “Censorship of Newspapers,” 132.

63 Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 86.

64 Şerif Mardin, Jön Türklerin Siyasi Fikirleri (1895 - 1908) (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2008), 34; Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 86.

65 Hanioğlu, Bir Siyasal Örgüt Olarak Osmanlı İttihad ve Terakki Cemiyeti ve Jön Türklük (1889-1902), 62.

66 Hanioğlu, Preparation for a Revolution, 130; Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 86–90.

67 Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 90.

20

otherwise would result in dethronement;68 but used the censorship of media to present it as he had decided to reinstate the constitution of his own accord.69

Politically, the CUP did not want to take drastic steps so decided not to dethrone Sultan Abdülhamid II nor to change the cabinet.70 The Sultan’s propaganda process had worked, he was beloved within the Empire and his control over the press meant that he was seen as the hero of the situation.71 The Young Turk Revolution of 1908 also brought an end to the Hamidian restrictions on the press. This was achieved not by the CUP, but by the journalists themselves. By refusing to submit their publications to preliminary censorship on the day after the coup, they created a de facto abolition of censorship unrecognized by an official law.72 This also resulted in an unprecedented new publication craze. In the seven months following the reinstatement of the constitution, the number of publications in the Ottoman Empire rose from 120 to 730.73 Circulation rose from two thousand to average more than twenty thousand per day.74

Opposition to the CUP grew within the Empire and this culminated in the countercoup attempt of 1909, known as the 31 March Incident (31 Mart Olayı).75 The attempt was suppressed by the Action Army (Hareket Ordusu) moving to Istanbul from Macedonia.76 This time the CUP dethroned Sultan Abdülhamid II and put his brother Sultan Mehmed V Reşad on the throne. The Sultan’s role in the government was further limited to minimize his role.77 The countercoup also gave the Committee of Union and Progress the reason it needed to put stricter regulation on the press. From then on, during

68 Hanioğlu, The Young Turks in Opposition, 401.

69 Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 93.

70 Zürcher, 94.

71 Zürcher, 85–94.

72 Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 32.

73 Koloğlu, “Newspapers,” 432.

74 Koloğlu, “Basın,” 72.

75 Hanioğlu, A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire, 154.

76 Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 97.

77 Hanioğlu, A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire, 150–53.

21

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign, the Ottoman press came under the control of the Committee of Union and Progress until 1918.78 Although initially, in 1909, additions to the constitution by the CUP protected the freedom of press, the modifications to the Press Law in 1913 added more restrictions.79 Now, in addition to being able to shut down newspapers, the government could also bar journalists who were previously convicted from founding new publications.80

The opposition to the CUP continued however due to ethnic, religious and social conflicts.81 The CUP used violence to ensure its continuation; from murdering dissident journalists to intimidating voters and politicians to ensure their majority in the 1912 election known as the Sopalı Seçim or the Election of Clubs.82 In 1912 another uprising in Albania forced the closure of the cabinet and the entirety of the CUP-backed government resigning which gave way to a brief period of the opposition party forming a new government.83 However, the new government dissolved the Chamber of Deputies which not reconvene again until 1914 and by then the CUP would ensure their presence.84 The CUP retook the control in 1913 with a coup d’état called Bab-ı Ali Baskını and started controlling full executive power.85 They again jumped at the opportunity to use a crisis, the Balkan Wars, to gain support for the Committee.86

Meanwhile, censorship continued between Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reign and the Second Constitutional Era, but its nature changed. Sultan Abdülhamid II’s censorship

78 Koloğlu, “Newspapers,” 432.

79 Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 35–36.

80 Yosmaoğlu, 36.

81 Karpat, “The Evolution of the Turkish Political System and the Changing Meaning of Modernity, Secularism and Islam,” 206.

82 Hanioğlu, A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire, 156.

83 Hanioğlu, 156.

84 Hanioğlu, 156.

85 Karpat, “The Evolution of the Turkish Political System and the Changing Meaning of Modernity, Secularism and Islam,” 204.

86 Hanioğlu, A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire, 157.

22

was more personal, relying on self-censorship, rewarding informants and sanctioned behavior, and preliminary censorship; whereas the CUP’s censorship was an impersonal centralized control of the state.87 CUP’s outward ideology was Ottomanism but there was also a growing tendency towards Turkism.88 Similar to what happened during Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reign, publications without political content again had a relatively easier time surviving in this climate. Photographs of imperial ceremonies during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign were printed in three journals: Resimli Kitab, Servet-i Fünun, and Şehbal. These had three things in common. Firstly, they were among the rare publications that printed photographs. Secondly, they printed the photographs among unrelated articles, with only the captions giving the photographs’ context. Lastly, they did not include political content and therefore were able to avoid being shut down by the CUP due to political reasons.

Resimli Kitab was published monthly between September 1908 and February 1914, in fifty-one issues. It focused on culture, art, and education. Its editor-in-chief was Ubeydullah Esad. It published many photographs of current events. Their mission statement was to preserve the artistic spirit in every aspect of the magazine. It is the longest amongst the three publications, with one hundred pages per issue. It was a high-quality publication that featured Art Nouveau frames and decorations.

Şehbal ran from March 14, 1909 to July 14, 1915 in one hundred issues. Its director was Hüseyin Saadet Arel. Every issue included a section oriented towards women. It was printed with high-quality materials. It has elegant Art Nouveau ornamentations decorating its pages. Its production quality and layout design won

87 Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913,” 47–49.

88 Karpat, “The Evolution of the Turkish Political System and the Changing Meaning of Modernity, Secularism and Islam,” 206.

23

awards.89 Like Resimli Kitab, it printed numerous photographs including images of the Italo-Turkish and Balkan Wars but never commented on them in the text. The articles focused on literature, arts, culture, and philosophy. It also published translations of poems and stories from English and French.90

Servet-i Fünun ran from March 17, 1891 until May 26, 1944 for 2464 issues. The longest-running publication among the three. It had one of the most technologically advanced printing presses of the era owing to a donation from Sultan Abdülhamid II. With editor in chief Tevfik Fikret, it was home to many prominent writers of the era such as Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil, Recaizade Ekrem, and Ahmed Rasim. First known for its politically thought-provoking articles, which continued even after Tevfik Fikret left the publication, Servet-i Fünun became largely a tabloid after 1901. This was partially due to its editor Hüseyin Cahit and director Ahmed İhsan being prosecuted and going to trial over an article on the French Revolution. It continued as a weekly magazine in the Second Constitutional Era.

89 Nazım H. Polat, “Şehbal,” in TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi (İstanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 2010).

90 Kenan Demir, “Osmanlı’da Dergiciliğin Doğuşu ve Gelişimi (1849- 1923),” Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2016, 91.

24

1.2. The Tradition of Ceremonies in the Ottoman Empire, Visibility, and Imagery

Ceremonies are assemblies to commemorate the days and events important in the socio-cultural course of a society. Ceremonies and processions play very significant roles in analyzing and understanding the culture of states and individuals. Ceremonies are a tool for those in power to define and describe themselves.91 For governments, the political use of ceremonies is to display and reinforce legitimacy.92 If used wisely, ceremonies provide governments and institutions a way to sway the public opinion. In the Ottoman Empire, ceremonies allowed for direct ruler visibility, a rare chance for the public to personally see the sultan. Ceremonies and processions were important features in Ottoman culture, and they were part of the Empire’s effort of framing the public’s gaze to create a desired image according to imperial politics.

After the conquest of Constantinople, the Ottoman sultans cultivated an omnipotent and powerful image through the control of the gaze and limiting their visibility.93 That the ceremonies and protocol were very important instruments in the Ottoman socio-political life is evidenced by their meticulous records of their regulations.94 In the Ottoman Empire, ceremonies were regulated by rules which determined the participants, their placements, and their duties. These rules called “Teşrifat Usulleri” were noted in the laws (Kanunnames) and official books (Teşrifat Defterleri). The first Ottoman sultan to compile the protocol rules in writing was Sultan Mehmed II the Conqueror (r. 1444-1446, 1451-1481).95 Sultan Mehmed II set precedent

91 Karateke, Padişahım Çok Yaşa: Osmanlı Devleti’nin Son Yüzyılında Merasimler, 210.

92 Hakan T. Karateke, “Legitimizing the Ottoman Sultanate: A Framework for Historical Analysis,” in Legitimizing the Order: The Ottoman Rhetoric of State Power, ed. Maurus Reinkowski and Hakan Karateke, The Ottoman Empire and Its Heritage, v. 34 (Leiden ; Boston: Brill, 2005), 49–50.

93 Gülru Necipoğlu, Architecture, Ceremonial, and Power: The Topkapı Palace in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries (New York: The Architectural History Foundation, 1991), 16.

94 Alikılıç, Imparatorluk seremonisi, 37.

95 Alikılıç, 26.

25

for the imperial ceremonies and the imperial image which were codified in the late 1470s as such according to Gülru Necipoğlu:

“This rule book stipulated that the monarch remain aloof; he would no longer sit at banquets or appear regularly in public audiences as he used to do. Except for the two religious holidays in which he agreed to give public audiences, he would remain in seclusion, only receiving privileged dignitaries and ambassadors in his private audience hall four times a week.”96

There were changes and additions to these rules in the following centuries and the protocol rules became increasingly more important. These rules aimed to regulate the internal and external affairs of the court. During Sultan Süleyman the Magnificent’s reign (r. 1520-1566), the prestige of the Ottoman court increased. This brought along an increase in the protocol and etiquette rules.97 The seclusion was continued into the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. In addition to the omnipotent and sacred aura they created, their status as a military leader was also emphasized.98 Military campaigns were the most important means of public visibility for the sultans up until the late sixteenth century.99

In the seventeenth century, the sultans ceased personally going on military campaigns. In addition to hunting trips outside Istanbul, there were processions for Friday prayers, visits to the mantle of prophet Mohammed (Hırka-i Şerif), and the sword girding ceremony for the accession of a new sultan in the capital.100 However, these were rare

96 Gülru Necipoğlu, “Framing the Gaze in Ottoman, Safavid and Mughal Palaces,” Ars Orientalis, no. 23 (1993): 303.

97 Alikılıç, Imparatorluk seremonisi, 33–36.

98 Stephanov, Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908, 10.

99 Cengiz Kırlı, “Surveillance and Constituting the Public in the Ottoman Empires,” in Public, Politics, and Participation: Locating the Public Sphere in the Middle East and North Africa, ed. Seteney Shami (New York: Social Science Research Council, 2010), 291.

100 Kırlı, 291.

26

occasions whose extraordinary circumstance was highlighted and the sultan’s visibility remained low. For most of the ceremonies, the audience was limited to the elite who shared the ceremonial space and interactivity with the audience was nonexistent with the Sultan engaging only in restrained and strongly ritualized behavior.101

The seclusion and privacy established in the Ottoman Empire dissipated especially in the Tulip Period102 when Sultan Ahmed III aimed to create a new imperial image. Spectacles, ceremonies, and processions were a big part of this new image that relied on visibility.103 The Tulip Period did not suddenly start the trend of public ceremonies and festivities, they had been in the Ottoman tradition previously,104 but the sultans manipulated the gaze this time to create a more accessible image. The Ottoman rulers used a host of legitimizing instruments to enhance their position, ranging from public celebrations of stages in the lifecycle of the dynasty to good works.105 Festivals were also utilized when the empire was troubled by war and economic difficulties, as a way for the Empire to assert its dominance, display its power and artistic prowess, and provide entertainment for Ottoman people from all strata. These festivities continued later in the eighteenth century and into the nineteenth century during Sultan Selim III’s reign (r. 1789-1807). They increased the visibility of the Sultan but only within the capital. Further reaching visibility through ceremonies was not achieved until Sultan Mahmud II (r. 1808-1839).

101 Stephanov, Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908, 13.

102 The period roughly between 1718-1730 was retroactively named the Tulip Period (Lale Devri). It was the later half of Sultan Ahmed III’s (r. 1703-1730) reign and was marked by artistic and cultural innovation.

103 Esin Atıl, “The Story of an Eighteenth-Century Ottoman Festival,” Muqarnas 10 (1993): 190.

104 For more information on ceremonies in Ottoman illuminated manuscripts see And, 40 Gün 40 Gece: Osmanlı Düğünleri, Şenlikleri, Geçit Alayları. For the analysis of a sixteenth century Ottoman festival through illuminated manuscripts see Derin Terzioğlu, “The Imperial Circumcision Festival of 1582: An Interpretation,” Muqarnas, no. 12 (1995): 84–100; Nurhan Atasoy, Surname-i Humayun 1582: An Imperial Celebration (İstanbul: Koçbank, 1997).

105 Quataert, The Ottoman Empire 1700-1922, 93.

27

In this first shift in ruler visibility in the nineteenth century, he created a more directly visible persona of the Sultan while the Empire was going through an imperial crisis .106 Within Istanbul, he participated in ceremonies frequently, going to the openings of news buildings, military parades, and Friday prayers.107 He emphasized his Muslim identity for the Muslim population; and emphasized his universal kingly identity for the non-Muslim subjects.108 He had five country trips between 1830 and 1837 to various provinces of the Ottoman Empire so that he could see his subjects and be seen by them.109 He created the tropes of love for and by the ruler through a father-children metaphor in relation to his subjects.110 Furthermore, he used the domestic press, which had been introduced to the Ottoman Empire during his reign, to promote his public image.111 The efforts of Sultan Mahmud II set a precedent for his successors by employing ceremonies for public visibility.

Sultan Abdülmecid (r. 1839–1861) continued Sultan Mahmud II’s image-making policies to become a more accessible ruler and to increase his visibility directly. He advanced the trope of love for the ruler that Sultan Mahmud II had created.112 In 1846 he went on a tour of Rumelia and tours to other provinces followed where he established the image of the ruler in the minds of the locals when it had not existed before.113 Sultan Abdülmecid interacted with the public in his province tours. He did not wave but turned

106 Stephanov, Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908, 199–200.

107 Kırlı, “Surveillance and Constituting the Public in the Ottoman Empires,” 293.

108 Stephanov, Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908, 200.

109 Kırlı, “Surveillance and Constituting the Public in the Ottoman Empires,” 291.

110 Stephanov, Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908, 23.

111 Darin N. Stephanov, “Ruler Visibility, Modernity, and Ethnonationalism in the Late Ottoman Empire,” in Living in the Ottoman Realm: Empire and Identity, 13th to 20th Centuries, ed. Christine Isom-Verhaaren and Kent F. Schull (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2016), 261.

112 Stephanov, Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908, 84–85.

113 Stephanov, 201.

28

his head to observe the crowds, which was unlike his predecessors’ restrained movements and fixed gaze in ceremonies.114

Sultan Abdülaziz (r. 1861-76) once again continued to increase the direct visibility of the Ottoman Sultan. He continued the tradition of going to province tours, visiting Thessaloniki and Egypt.115 The first Sultan to visit European cities, his direct visibility outside the Empire was increased greatly through this trip. Until the end of his reign, there was remarkable continuity throughout the nineteenth century regarding imperial image making by direct visibility to the public.116

The era of Sultan Abdülhamid II (r. 1876-1909) marks the second shift in ruler visibility. This shift was not a sudden break from previously established norms for the imperial image in the nineteenth century but a gradual shift from direct to indirect sultanic visibility throughout his reign.117 Fearing dethronement, Sultan Abdülhamid II lived almost as a recluse, which decreased direct visibility through ceremonies considerably.118 Although limited, direct visibility was utilized once again as a ceremonious occasion to highlight its extraordinary occasion. There was a split regarding direct sultanic visibility in this era. To royal peers, for example to Kaiser Wilhelm II during his visits to Istanbul in 1889 and 1898, the Sultan remained accessible, but his visibility was carefully staged; whereas to the domestic public, he was inaccessible and invisible.119 This dichotomy was

114 Stephanov, “Ruler Visibility, Modernity, and Ethnonationalism in the Late Ottoman Empire,” 263.

115 Yunus Özger, “Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Edirne Seyahati,” Çanakkale Araştırmaları Türk Yıllığı, no. 22 (2017): 135–62; Kemalettin Kuzucu, “Balkanlar’da Son Osmanlı Padişahı: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın 1911 Yılındaki Rumeli Seyahati,” Uluslarası Türk Kültür Coğrafyasında Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, no. 2 (2011): 1–39.

116 Stephanov, Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908, 120–21.

117 Stephanov, 205.

118 Karpat, The Politicization of Islam, 167.

119 Stephanov, Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908, 183–86.

29

used by the Sultan to present himself as a pious Muslim to Muslims, and a Western ruler to non-Muslims.120

This new imperial ideology regarding visibility changed when Sultan Mehmed V Reşad (r. 1909-1918) took the throne. There was a return to heightened visibility through ceremonies within Istanbul and in the provinces. However, Sultan Abdülhamid II’s precedent set for diplomatic visits from foreign sovereigns continued. The most important difference during this era was that the deciding force behind the visibility or invisibility was not just the Sultan himself, but also the Committee of Union and Progress.

While ceremonies were opportunities for direct visibility, their visual depictions provided very limited indirect visibility until the twentieth century, during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign. Between the fourteenth and eighteenth centuries illuminated manuscripts were the visual medium where ceremonies were recorded (Figures 1.2.1-1.2.3.). 121 These albums were commissioned by the sultan or court officials. Although they were carefully constructed according to convey an imperial ideology, they were prized possessions kept in the court and their audience was minimal.122 In the eighteenth century individual and larger scale paintings, such as Kostantin Kapıdağlı’s painting of a ceremony of Sultan Selim III, were also commissioned (Figure 1.2.4).123 Paintings of ceremonies and processions continued in the nineteenth century but the visibility remained low.124 Although depictions of ceremonies were not propagated, in the

120 Stephanov, 205.

121 Bağcı et al., Ottoman Painting, 139–45; Zeynep Tarım-Ertuğ, “Osmanlı İstanbul’unda Merasim ve Teşrifata Dair Kaynaklar,” Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi 8, no. 16 (2010): 140–42.

122 Zeynep Tarım-Ertuğ, “The Depiction of Ceremonies in Ottoman Miniatures: Historical Record or a Matter of Protocol?,” Muqarnas 2 (2010): 270.

123 Günsel Renda, “Propagating the Imperial Image: Tasvir-i Hümayun (1800-1922),” in The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman (İstanbul: İşbank, 2000), 470.

124 Gülsen Sevinç Kaya, “Padişahın Ressam Kulları,” in İhtişam ve Tevazu: Padişahın Ressam Kulları (İstanbul: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2012), 47.

30

eighteenth and nineteenth centuries a new trend of indirect visibility was attained through sultanic portraiture.

Sultan Selim III was the first ruler to have his portrait distributed amongst Ottoman dignitaries, foreign ambassadors and rulers, notably having a gift exchange of medallions with Napoleon I.125 While sultanic portraiture had been prevalent in the Ottoman Empire, propagation of the images were limited, and propagation as such was not for an imperial agenda Sultan Mahmud II was a revolutionary who followed in the path of Selim and changed the iconography of Ottoman portraiture with his modernization process.126 It was a tradition for monarchs in Europe to have portraits made to be hung in state offices and given as presents to other monarchs. This tradition was carried over to the Ottoman Empire by Sultan Mahmud II as the Order of the Imperial Portrait (Tasvir-i Hümayun). He had his portraits made as medallions to be given to prominent statesmen (Figures 1.2.5 and 1.2.6). He gifted this medal to foreign sovereigns and their families. He commissioned European artists to paint his portraits in oil, which was a new medium for sultanic portraiture. Sultan Mahmud II was also the first Sultan to have his oil portraits hung in government offices. In 1836 his portrait was hung in the Selimiye Barracks with a ceremony. His portrait decorated other buildings such as the Taksim Barracks, the Military Academy (Mekteb-i Harbiye) and the Sublime Porte (Bab-ı Ali).127

There were changes to the painted portraits of the sultans in the nineteenth century. Previously, the sultans’ portraits had been greatly influenced by Eastern traditions. In the nineteenth century, there was a shift towards Western concepts. The iconography changed from traditional kaftans and kavuks to a more European style of clothing during Sultan Mahmud II’s reign (Figure 1.2.7). The Sultan’s image was also

125 Renda et al., The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman, 448–49.

126 Renda et al., 443.

127 Renda et al., 451–52.

31

accompanied by heretofore unseen props such as European furniture. The overall visual change emphasizes the image of the Sultan as a reformist in administration and his efforts to modernize the image of the state.128

Sultan Abdülmecid and Sultan Abdülaziz continued the tradition of propagating the sultan’s image through both small medals and larger portraiture.129 During Sultan Abdülaziz’s reign, a new technique, photography was integrated, into the tradition of the tasvir-i hümayun in addition to medallions and small portraiture. As with ceremonies, this new form of visibility shifted with the accession of Sultan Abdülhamid II. Propagation of the sultan’s visual image came to a stop during Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reign who shifted to a more indirect form of visibility. He prohibited the circulation of his portraits, whether in government buildings or newspapers, replacing the visual propagation with banners reading “Long Live the Sultan!”130

After Sultan Abdülhamid II was deposed in 1909, propagation of the Sultan’s portrait was back in full force. The new Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s image became one of the most popular icons of the Second Constitutional Era, and his photographs were printed in every medium possible, including magazines and postcards.131 There was an ideological reason behind this as Edhem Eldem explains “the paternal appearance of the aging monarch provided a comforting image of unity and stability in the troubled years of revolution and war that preceded the final conflagration of the Great War.”132

128 Günsel Renda, “European Artists at the Ottoman Court: Propagating a New Dynastic Image in the Nineteenth Century,” in The Poetics and Politics of Place: Ottoman Istanbul and British Orientalism, ed. Zeynep İnankur, Reina Lewis, and Mary Roberts (Istanbul: Pera Museum Publication, 2011), 221–31. p. 229

129 Renda, “European Artists at the Ottoman Court: Propagating New Dynastic Image in the Nineteenth Century,” 225.

130 Deringil, The Well-Protected Domains, 22.

131 Edhem Eldem, “Powerful Images – The Dissemination and Impact of Photography in the Ottoman Empire,” in Camera Ottomana (Istanbul: Koç University Publications, 2015), 147.

132 Eldem, 147.

32

2. PHOTOGRAPHY IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

2.1. Introduction of Photography into the Ottoman Empire and its Development

The nineteenth century saw new developments in philosophy, psychology, science, and technology. As Michelle Woodward points out, “the nineteenth century's passion for cataloging, collecting and explaining the world in scientific, empirical terms was manifested in the formation of new disciplines such as anthropology and sociology, new theories like Darwin's evolution, as well as in the ways society used the new technology of photography.”133

The photographic process was concurrently developed in France and England. In France, Louis Daguerre announced his invention of the Daguerreotype in 1839. Meanwhile, Henry Fox Talbot had been working on the Calotype process in England. The Daguerreotype was imprinted on a metal surface and could not be reproduced. In contrast, the Calotype process was printed on a paper, which was a negative, so reproductions were possible.134

By the time Daguerre’s photographic process was announced in Paris, European popular interest in the Middle East had also been already firmly established. Orientalism had been a trend in painting, music, fashion, and decoration.135 Middle Eastern motifs had been appropriated for use in clothing fashions, literature, music, furniture, drawings, and paintings since the sixteenth century. French scientist and politician François Arago demonstrated the interest in archeology and documenting the Middle East:

133 Michelle L. Woodward, “Between Orientalist Clichés and Images of Modernization: Photographic Practice in the Late Ottoman Era,” History of Photography 27, no. 4 (Winter 2003): 364.

134 Naomi Rosenblum, A World History of Photography, 4th ed. (New York: Abbeville Press, 2007), 14–37.

135 Semra Germaner and Zeynep İnankur, “Orientalism in the 19th Century and Turkey,” in Orientalists at the Ottoman Palace (TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2006), 11.

33

“How archeology is going to benefit from this new process! It would require twenty years and legions of draftsmen to copy the millions and millions of hieroglyphics covering just the outside of the great monuments of Thebes, Memphis, Karnak, etc. A single man can accomplish this same enormous task with the daguerreotype” 136

Therefore, since its conception, photography became an integral part of the colonial project, documenting the foreignness of the colonial ‘other’, while simultaneously placing it within the confines of imperial surveillance.137 As soon as photographers developed ways to photograph the world they immediately headed to Egypt, Palestine, and Istanbul.

In 1839 Gaspard-Pierre-Gustave Joly de Lotbinière (1798-1865) was in Paris at the time when Louis Daguerre unveiled his early photographic process. Embarking on a trip to the Middle East in the same year, Lotbinière acquired one of the first daguerreotype cameras in order to make photographic records of the ancient monuments he was about to see on his journey.138 He traveled via Malta to Greece, and then carried on to Alexandria. He photographed Athens, Egypt, Palestine, Syria and Turkey. Lotbinière was a French businessman and amateur daguerreotypist. He was the first to photograph the Acropolis of Athens and ancient Egyptian monuments.139

Joseph-Philibert Girault de Prangey (1804 – 1892) was a French photographer who was active in the Middle East. His daguerreotypes are the earliest surviving photographs of Greece, Palestine, Egypt, Syria, and Turkey. Girault de Prangey studied

136 See Gisèle Freund, Photography & Society (Boston: D. R. Godine, 1980); Paul E. Chevedden, “Making Light of Everything: Early Photography of the Middle East and Current Photomania,” Middle East Studies Association Bulletin 18, no. 2 (1984): 151–74.

137 Wendy M. K. Shaw, “Ottoman Photography of the Late Nineteenth Century: An ‘Innocent’ Modernism?,” History of Photography 33, no. 1 (February 2009): 82.

138 Öztuncay, 70

139 Bahattin Öztuncay, “The Origins and Development of Photography in Istanbul,” in Camera Ottomana: Photography and Modernity in the Ottoman Empire, 1840-1914, ed. Zeynep Çelik and Edhem Eldem (Istanbul: Koç University Publications, 2015), 68–71.

34

painting in Paris at the École des Beaux-Arts and in 1841 he learned the daguerreotype process, possibly from Louis Daguerre himself. Girault de Prangey was keenly interested in the architecture of the Middle East, and he toured the eastern Mediterranean between 1841 and 1844, producing over 900 daguerreotypes of architectural views, landscapes, and portraits.140

The earliest photographers who traveled to the Middle East did not photograph for commercial purposes but were primarily wealthy tourists or explorers of archeological ruins, often working for government sponsors. By the late 1850s, the wet collodion process of making glass negatives allowed for the creation of multiple, more affordable prints for broader distribution. Photographers like Francis Frith (1822-1898) and Félix Bonfils (1831-1885) found commercial success with a European public fascinated by the “East” as well as with tourists traveling in the region seeking mementos to take home.141

Commercial, missionary, and official photographs of ‘anthropological interest’ were occasionally shown and discussed at the Ethnological Society’s Ordinary Meetings.142 Photography provided a degree of accuracy that was not possible with paintings or etchings. This ability led to its use as a tool for accumulating visual surveys of urban space, historical monuments, colonial possessions, and people as ethnic or occupational 'types'. With easy reproducibility in addition to its accuracy, photography satiated the need to see and explore the world. Commercially produced images were avidly collected and displayed.143

Photography provided a degree of accuracy that was not possible before with paintings or engravings. This ability led to its use as a tool for accumulating visual surveys

140 Öztuncay, 90.

141 Öztuncay, 68–72.

142 Christopher Pinney, Photography and Anthropology (London: Reaktion Books, 2011), 22.

143 Pinney, 23.

35

of urban space, historical monuments, colonial possessions, and people as ethnic or occupational 'types'. Commercial, missionary, and official photographs of ‘anthropological interest’ were occasionally shown and discussed at the Ethnological Society’s Ordinary Meetings.144 Photography was relatively cheaper and easier to access than painting, which meant that it was not only available to the higher classes and the wealthy. It is possible to find photographs of people from every stratum. In this sense, photography was an equalizer.

The cultural environment of the Ottoman Empire was changing in the nineteenth century, increasingly becoming influenced by Europe. Photography in the West developed as part of modernity, as such, its introduction into the Ottoman Empire was integral to the Empire’s modernization process. Photography was introduced to the Ottoman Empire very soon after its invention. The invention was introduced in the newspaper Takvim-i Vekayi on 28 October 1839.145 Precursors to the photographic medium had been introduced to the Empire by then, however. In 1805 a camera obscura had been purchased for the engineering school Mühendishane-i Berri Hümayun and from then on photography lessons were offered in the school.146

While the first photographers in the Ottoman Empire were visitors from Europe, photography studios began to make their appearance in the Ottoman Empire starting with the 1840s. Most local photographers in the Ottoman Empire were members of ethnic minority communities, particularly Armenian, Greek, and Levantine Christians; these

144 Pinney, 22.

145 Engin Özendes, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Fotoğrafçılık, 1839-1923 (Istanbul: YEM Yayın, 2013), 15.

146 Engin Çizgen, “Fotoğrafçılık,” in Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi (İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993), 330.

36

communities had long cultivated business and intellectual relationships with Europe, and thus were the first to learn the new technology and its commercial applications.147

Photography was also very popular amongst the public in the Ottoman Empire. As photography became more popular, collecting photographs became more widespread. Photographs were printed on postcards and sold as souvenirs. Photographs of family members and loved ones were displayed in bookcase, on console and pianos, on walls along with photographs of famous figures and prominent statesmen. Memory rooms full of photographs were very popular in the nineteenth century.148

Photography was popular within court circles in addition to private homes. Portrait photographs placed in elaborately decorated frames or collected within albums were exchanged as gifts among monarchs and dignitaries. Portraits of monarchs and sultans were also sold in photography studios to the public. The customers became very interested in these portraits and it became a major source of income for photography studios. Taking the photographs of royalty was a privilege and photographers competed to have the title of official “court photographer” to be able to take these.149

Sultan Abdülaziz, who took the throne in 1861, was very interested in photography, especially portrait photography. He sat for portrait photographs during his trip to Europe. This trip was a very important event politically and culturally. For the first time in the history of the Ottoman Empire, a sultan was visiting Europe. After leaving Paris, Sultan Abdülaziz moved on to the United Kingdom as a guest of Queen Victoria.

147 Kathryn A Ebel, “Visual Sources for Urban History of the Ottoman Empire,” Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi 3, no. 6 (2005): 479.

148 Öztuncay, “The Origins and Development of Photography in Istanbul,” 90.

149 Öztuncay, 86–101.

37

His portrait photograph was taken on July 13, 1867 at Balmoral Castle by William Downey who was commissioned by Queen Victoria (Figure 2.1.1).150

In 1863 Sultan Abdülaziz invited Abdullah Frères to his hunting lodge in Izmit to take his photograph. The result (Figure 2.1.2) pleased the Sultan, and he declared, "My countenance and true likeness is as in the photograph taken by the Abdullah brothers. I command that henceforth only the photographs taken by them shall be recognised as official photographs to be distributed throughout the land." and subsequently the sultan made them his official court photographers.151 Abdullah Frères was a studio made up of brothers Viçen (1820-1902), Hovsep (1830-1908) and Kevork (1839-1918) Abdullahyan. With Sultan Abdülaziz’s approval, they were able to print the Sultan’s tuğra on their portraits.152 Abdullah Frères lost their favor with Sultan Abdülhamid when they photographed the Russian army in 1878 after the Ottomans had just lost a war against the Russians.153 In 1886 they opened another studio in Egypt by the request of Khedive Tevfik Pasha. Tevfik Pasha requested Kevork to take photographs during his trip to visit the historical sites of Egypt. Photographs of Egypt were sold to tourists in their studios.154

For photography during Sultan Abdülaziz’s era, portrait photography can be said to be the most important form as it was utilized to propagate the sultan’s image. Portraiture as a political tool had been present in the Ottoman Empire Portraiture is the peak of biographical records. Pictorial traditions of the time greatly influenced portrait photography. The aim of portrait photography in the nineteenth century was to relay the social identity, economic and political status, and character of the subject.155 To

150 Öztuncay, Hatıra-i Uhuvvet - Portre Fotoğraflarının Cazibesi: 1846-1950, 88.

151 Engin Özendes, Abdullah Frères: Osmanlı Sarayının Fotoğrafçıları (Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2006), 39.

152 Öztuncay, “The Origins and Development of Photography in Istanbul,” 92.

153 Öztuncay, 83.

154 Özendes, Abdullah Frères: Osmanlı Sarayının Fotoğrafçıları, 102–10.

155 Öztuncay, “The Origins and Development of Photography in Istanbul,” 86.

38

communicate these qualities, the photographer carefully arranged the scenery. The background, the pose, and the decoration were all purposefully chosen by the collaboration of the photographer and the subject. Photography in that era required a lot of light to form an image and it could take up to twenty or thirty minutes to take one photograph. The subject needed to be motionless during this time otherwise the image would be blurry. Therefore, subjects of portrait photography most often posed sitting to minimalize movement during the process.

While portrait photography of the sultan was immensely popular during Sultan Abdülaziz’s reign, this changed with his dethronement and the accession of Sultan Abdülhamid II. Sultan Abdülaziz had brought along his nephew, future Sultan Abdülhamid II to Europe. William Downey also took photographs of future Sultan Abdülhamid II during this trip (Figure 2.1.3).156 Despite his interest in photography, Sultan Abdülhamid II did not like to pose for portraits himself, which included photographs. He did not want his portraits to be distributed to the public either.157 Sultan Abdülhamid II believed that photography was too close and personal. He didn’t like his portrait to be taken so as not to show any signs of weakness. There are very few photographs of him. One was taken in 1867 by English photographer William Downey in Balmoral when he was a prince visiting Queen Victoria in Balmoral Castle. Another one was taken by Abdullah Frères in 1869. Because of the scarcity of the Sultan’s photographs, these two that were taken before he became the Sultan were reused later during his reign.158

156 Öztuncay, Hatıra-i Uhuvvet - Portre Fotoğraflarının Cazibesi: 1846-1950, 92.

157 Eldem, “Powerful Images – The Dissemination and Impact of Photography in the Ottoman Empire,” 119.

158 Öztuncay, Hatıra-i Uhuvvet - Portre Fotoğraflarının Cazibesi: 1846-1950, 92.

39

The interest in portrait photography continued into Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reign.159 Sultan Abdülhamid II commissioned portraits of statesmen, military personnel and his family. He was very interested in photography and he collected photographs.160 He had a studio built in the palace161 and he took photographs himself.162 He commissioned artists to take photographs of the Ottoman Empire’s army, navy, factories, schools, new buildings, and Ottoman provinces to document the modernization of the Empire. Sultan Abdülhamid II’s interest in photography was not just an artistic fascination. He saw great potential in this new media to be used to further his imperial ambitions. He commissioned a project to document the Ottoman Empire. Between 1880 and 1893 over fifty albums were produced. These albums were designed to take control of the image of the empire, to take back the power of the gaze, and to represent the empire from an imperial perspective.163 Instead of portraying the empire as a romantic, historic, ethnographically different place, the Abdülhamid Albums controlled the gaze by using the modern medium to focus upon aspects of the empire that displayed modernity.164 The symbols of modernity in these photographs include schools, military buildings and personnel, factories, hospitals, government buildings, and monuments. Sultan Abdülhamid II gifted one album documenting the Empire to British Museum and one to the United States Library of Congress.165

159 Öztuncay, Dynasty and Camera: Portraits from the Ottoman Court, 26.

160 Eldem, “Powerful Images – The Dissemination and Impact of Photography in the Ottoman Empire,” 120.

161 Özendes, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Fotoğrafçılık, 1839-1923, 32.

162 Özendes, Abdullah Frères: Osmanlı Sarayının Fotoğrafçıları, 175.

163 Özendes, 83; Deringil, The Well-Protected Domains, 151–52.

164 Shaw, “Ottoman Photography of the Late Nineteenth Century,” 83.

165 Muhammad Isa Waley, “Images of the Ottoman Empire: The Photograph Albums Presented by Sultan Abdülhamid II,” The British Library Journal 17, no. 2 (1991): 111. For an in-depth analysis of the album sent to the United States see William James Harper, “Backward and Forward: Photographic Gifts between the Ottoman Empire and the United States in the Late Nineteenth-Century” (Koç University, 2013).

40

Sultan Abdülhamid II’s stance towards photography is in defiance of how the Ottoman Empire had been depicted so far – through an orientalist, romantic, colonially-driven gaze. Sultan Abdülhamid remarked that:

‘Most of the photographs taken for sale in Europe vilify and mock Our Well-Protected Domains. It is imperative that the photographs to be taken in this instance do not insult Islamic peoples by showing them in a vulgar and demeaning light’.166

The attempt to portray modernity was a response to the European tendency towards Orientalist depictions. Instead of portraying the empire as a romantic, historic, ethnographically different place, the Abdülhamid Albums controlled the gaze by using the modern medium to focus upon aspects of the empire that displayed modernity such as the modern military, institutions, monuments, and buildings.167 Sultan Abdülhamid gifted one album documenting the Empire to the United Kingdom and one to the United States.168

The vast documentation was not only done to present a new image to the West, but also because Sultan Abdülhamid II wanted to see the Ottoman Empire himself. His predilection towards collecting and cataloging information also extended to photography, and he collected over 36,000 thousand photographs in the Yıldız Palace.169 This was the inwards use of photography for imperial ideology, and the outwards was the control of what was disseminated. From the Yıldız Palace Sultan Abdülhamid II carefully controlled

166 Deringil, The Well-Protected Domains, 156.

167 Shaw, “Ottoman Photography of the Late Nineteenth Century,” 82–83.

168 Waley, “Images of the Ottoman Empire: The Photograph Albums Presented by Sultan Abdülhamid II,” 111.

169 Ersoy, “The Sultan and His Tribe: Documenting Ottoman Roots in the Abdülhamid II Photographic Albums,” 32.

41

what photographs would be permitted to printed in periodicals.170 The strict press censorship applied to images as well.

Sultan Abdülhamid II was forced to leave the throne after a coup in 1909, and Sultan Mehmed V Reşad took his place. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad did not have his brother Sultan Abdülhamid II’s interest in photography.171 Although Sultan Mehmed V Reşad did not officially restrict the dissemination of his image, some limitations applied on an individual basis. Lütfi Simavi notes one occasion that the court photographer Phébus was asked to destroy negatives of a photograph taken at court picturing the Sultan with Niyazi Bey who had been part of the Action Army (Hareket Ordusu).172 Niyazi Bey’s rank was deemed not high enough to be portrayed next to the Sultan. It is important to note that the order did not come from the Sultan, but two high-ranking military officers Hasan Rıza Pasha and Ali Rıza Pasha. When the problem was brought to his attention through Lütfi Bey, the Sultan agreed with the request and ordered the photographs to be destroyed.

A development during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign was that photographers had more opportunities to photograph the Sultan outside. Mehmed V Reşad was very much unlike his predecessor in that he left the court a lot more to increase his visibility to the public. This created an opportunity for artists who were not official court photographers to access the Sultan and photograph him. The propagation of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s photographs created a more accessible imperial image. Many photographs of the Sultan were disseminated through books, newspapers, and postcards; often accompanied by the Ottoman flag.173 With no restrictions on printing the sultan’s image, newspapers were free to photograph this new sultan who frequently made public

170 Ersoy, 32–33.

171 Öztuncay, Hatıra-i Uhuvvet - Portre Fotoğraflarının Cazibesi: 1846-1950, 27.

172 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:67.

173 Öztuncay, Dynasty and Camera: Portraits from the Ottoman Court, 67.

42

appearances. Therefore, photojournalism became a very important tool for imperial visibility. Photojournalism did not suddenly start as its seeds had been sown during Sultan Abdülhamid II’s era.174 Photojournalism continued growing during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign, especially in the first years before the Committee of Union and Progress’s stricter press laws came into effect.

The technological advances by this era meant a quicker shutter speed and faster exposure time. Photography no longer required minutes of waiting to capture an image. Furthermore, it was possible to capture scenes in action with minimal blurring. As Edhem Eldem explains:

“The arrival of the snapshot – fast, casual, and unstaged – had brought a sense that reality could be recorded – an idea that photojournalism exploited to the full during the troubles to give readers a totally new feeling of immediacy.”175

In the first years of its introduction, photography was in the domain of the elite. By the end of the nineteenth century, it had become an object of mass consumption.176 The beginning of the twentieth century saw photography become even more widespread. Therefore, many photographers and studios were working in the Ottoman Empire during this time. Within the scope of this thesis, the ones I want to elaborate on in this chapter are those who have taken photographs of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad attending his ceremonies.

174 For photojournalism during this time see Ahmet Ersoy, “Ottomans and the Kodak Galaxy: Archiving Everyday Life and Historical Space in Ottoman Illustrated Journals,” History of Photography 40, no. 3 (July 2, 2016): 330–57.

175 Eldem, “Powerful Images – The Dissemination and Impact of Photography in the Ottoman Empire,” 147.

176 Eldem, 149.

43

2.2. Photographers of the Ceremonies

Aşil Samancı, owner of the studio Apollon, was born in 1870 in Istanbul as the son of painter and decorator Jacob Samancı. His years working with his father had given him knowledge about painting and interior decoration.177 He also worked with Abdullah Frères where he learned about photography as well. This also gave him the opportunity to access the court. He gave the şehzades photography lessons.178 Sadrazam Cevad Pasha, who was interested in photography, took Samancı as an apprentice.179 He cataloged Istanbul’s cultural heritage through photography. In 1890 Samancı bought all the photographic equipment and negatives of the Gülmez Frères photography studio. He joined Sultan Mehmed V Reşad in his Hereke, Bursa, and Rumeli tours and photographed the journey. He photographed Kaiser Wilhelm II in Ottoman military uniform during his third visit to Istanbul in 1917.180 He worked in Istanbul until 1925 when he moved to Athens. He died there in October 27, 1942.181

Asaf Muammer Bey was a photographer in addition to being a writer, having written fiction and newspaper articles. He was exiled in 1911/1912 because he had opposed the Committee of Union and Progress.182 He returned to the Ottoman Empire in 1918. He was the director of the Ottoman magazine Mahasin between 1908-1909 until its 9th edition.

177 Behzat Üsdiken, Pera’dan Beyoğlu’na 1840-1955 (Istanbul: Akbank Kültür ve Sanat Müdürlüğü, 1999), 320.

178 Üsdiken, 320.

179 See his entry in Dünden Bugüne Istanbul Ansiklopedisi v.8.

180 Özendes, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Fotoğrafçılık, 1839-1923, 284–85.

181 Üsdiken, Pera’dan Beyoğlu’na 1840-1955, 320.

182 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 42.

44

Studio Hilal or “Hilal Fotoğrafhanesi” was located in Thessaloniki and run by Ahmed Kemal Bey. 183 Therefore, it was appropriately located to photograph Sultan Mehmed V Reşad on his Thessaloniki trip in 1911.

Kenan Reşid Bey was the son of Reşid Bey who worked as a government official at the customs. His exact date of birth is unknown, but it is thought to be in the 1880s.184 He was a photographer with a military background.185 He worked as a photojournalist in the newspaper “Resimli Kitab” between 1909 and 1910. In 1909 they printed his photograph of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad at Bursa during one of his trips. Like Sigmund Weinberg, he was involved in cinema as well, having worked as a cameraman.186 After the start of World War I, he was charged with photographing the Dardanelles. Among those whom he photographed were Enver Pasha at Çanakkale and şehzade Ömer Faruk Efendi. He shot a documentary movie of the resistance organization Müdafaa-i Milliye Cemiyeti during the war.187 His involvement with Turkish cinema continued after the formation of the Republic of Turkey.

Studio Phébus was owned by Armenian Ottoman Bogos Tarkulyan. He was especially known for his portrait photographs. He was a fisherman’s son from Kumkapı. He started in the business by working for the Karakaş studio.188 He also worked as an assistant in Abdullah Frères’s studio.189 After his first studio190 burned down, he moved

183 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 42.

184 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 43.

185 Öztuncay, Hatıra-i Uhuvvet - Portre Fotoğraflarının Cazibesi: 1846-1950, 274.

186 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 43.

187 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 43.

188 Engin Özendes, “Bogos Tarkulyan,” in Dünden Bugüne Istanbul Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993), 217.

189 Bahattin Öztuncay, Dersaadet’in Fotoğrafçıları - 19. Yüzyıl Istanbulunda Fotoğraf: Öncüler, Stüdyolar, Sanatçılar (Istanbul: Aygaz, 2003), 282.

190 There are conflicting dates regarding this studio. The date is given as 1882 in Öztuncay, 282. with its location as Pangaltı. However the date is 1890 in Üsdiken, Pera’dan Beyoğlu’na 1840-1955, 320.

45

to another location next to the old Saint Antoine Church on le Grand Rue de Péra (now İstiklal Street) and named his studio “Phébus.”191

His proficiency in portrait photography made him the first choice of the Ottoman elite to have their photographs taken. He had taken painting lessons and painted over some of his photographs.192 Although known for his portrait photography, he also took landscape photographs of Istanbul for which he asked for permission from the court to present them to the sultan.193 In the Abdülhamid Albums sent to the United States Library of Congress, fifty-one belonged to Tarkulyan.194

Tarkulyan became an official court photographer and received a medal for his work. His close relationship with the court continued during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign. He was invited to the court to take portrait photographs. He also photographed Kaiser Wilhelm II, King Ferdinand of Bulgaria, Emperor Karl I of Austria, and King Peter of Serbia.195 He photographed Kaiser Wilhelm II’s second visit to Istanbul in 1893.196 This album of photographs was later presented to Sultan Abdülhamid II. In 1900 Shah Muzafereddin of Iran was invited to visit Istanbul by Sultan Abdülhamid II. Tarkulyan was tasked with photographing the Shah and he was awarded with his first imperial medal for his efforts.197 In the same year his studio burned down in the Beyoğlu Fire and was forced to relocate.

He continued to be an important photographer for the Ottoman court after Sultan Mehmed V Reşad took the throne as well. During this time, he photographed two

191 Özendes, “Bogos Tarkulyan,” 217.

192 Özendes, 217.

193 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 45.

194 Öztuncay, Dersaadet’in Fotoğrafçıları - 19. Yüzyıl Istanbulunda Fotoğraf: Öncüler, Stüdyolar, Sanatçılar, 286.

195 Özendes, “Bogos Tarkulyan,” 217.

196 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 45.

197 Öztuncay, Dersaadet’in Fotoğrafçıları - 19. Yüzyıl Istanbulunda Fotoğraf: Öncüler, Stüdyolar, Sanatçılar, 286.

46

additional diplomatic visits, those of King Ferdinand of Bulgaria and King Petro of Serbia. He also helped another photographer, Bahriyeli Ali Sami Bey in photographing visiting foreign military officials.198 He shut down his studio in 1937 and died in 1940.

The studio of Sébah & Joaillier was founded by Ottoman photographer Pascal Sébah, and later his son Jean Pascal Sébah who took over the studio. Pascal Sébah was born in 1823, in Constantinople. His father was a Syrian Catholic and his mother Armenian. He opened his first photography studio named “El Chark Société Photographic” in 1857, in Pera.199 Later the studio moved to the Grand Rue de Péra next to the Russian Embassy.200 The studio’s named changed to Sébah & Joaillier in 1885 when Policarpe Joaillier joined the firm. Joaillier left the firm in 1902 and returned to Paris but photographs after this date sometimes are still attributed to the studio as Sébah & Joaillier.

In 1873, Pascal Sébah collaborated with Osman Hamdi Bey to photograph models that led to him being commissioned to photograph folk costumes of the Empire's provinces for the Ottoman Exhibition in Vienna, bringing him acclaim from both Europe and the Ottoman court.201 The studio was awarded with medals for their participation in the Paris (1870 and 1878), Vienna (1873), and Philadelphia (1877) exhibitions.202 In 1873, Sébah was successful enough to open another studio in Cairo. His studio in Cairo was also named El Chark.203

Kaiser Wilhelm II’s first visit to Istanbul took place in 1889 and Sébah & Joaillier were tasked with photographing the visit. The photographs were a success and they were

198 Öztuncay, 286.

199 Üsdiken, Pera’dan Beyoğlu’na 1840-1955, 328.

200 Engin Özendes, Sébah & Joaillier’den Foto Sabah’a Fotoğrafta Oryantalizm (Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2004), 175.

201 Özendes, 180.

202 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 46.

203 Üsdiken, Pera’dan Beyoğlu’na 1840-1955, 328.

47

awarded the titles “Photographes de la Cour Royale de Prusse,”204 a title which they proudly displayed on their cards.205 Pascal Sébah died in 1886 and his son Jean Pascal Sébah took over the studio in 1888. Jean Pascal took on a partner, Polycarpe Joaillier and the studio became Sébah & Joaillier. Sébah & Joaillier took over the title of official court photographers of the Ottoman court in 1880. Polycarpe Joaillier died in Paris in 1904 and his son Gustave replaced him, but he left the studio to return to Paris.206 In 1910 Jean Pascal took on a new partner, Agop İskender and this partnership continued until 1934.207

In 1908 Pascal Sébah retired and left the studio to Agop İskender.208 Agop İskender was born in Istanbul in 1871. İskender added the archive of Abdullah Frères’s negatives to the Sébah collection. They did not change the name of the studio and continued using the banner and logo design from the 1800s. Only in the Republican era was the studio’s name changed to Sabah to better cater to the Turkish clientele.

Sigmund Weinberg was born in Poland with Romanian Jewish origins. He moved to Istanbul in 1889 and opened a store selling photographic and film equipment.209 His shop was located in Grande Rue de Péra. He was interested not just in photography, but also in technological innovations and commerce. He is credited as bringing cinema to the Ottoman Empire by opening the first movie theatre, bringing the first phonograph and gramophone, and importing the first automobile.210 In 1899 he informed Sultan Abdülhamid II of the new technologies and being able to film his ceremonies should the sultan wish but the sultan, being suspicious, had his spies follow Weinberg.211 During

204 Photographers of the Royal Court of Prussia

205 Özendes, Sébah & Joaillier’den Foto Sabah’a Fotoğrafta Oryantalizm, 219.

206 Öztuncay, Dersaadet’in Fotoğrafçıları - 19. Yüzyıl Istanbulunda Fotoğraf: Öncüler, Stüdyolar, Sanatçılar, 279–80.

207 Öztuncay, 280; Özendes, Sébah & Joaillier’den Foto Sabah’a Fotoğrafta Oryantalizm, 243.

208 Üsdiken, Pera’dan Beyoğlu’na 1840-1955, 328.

209 Burçak Evren, “Sigmund Weinberg,” in Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi (İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993), 393.

210 Evren, 393.

211 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 47.

48

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign, he was allowed to photograph many of the sultan’s ceremonies and these were printed in the newspaper Servet-i Fünun for which Weinberg worked. A photograph of him with his camera following Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s Rumelia trip was printed in Servet-i Fünun’s 1045th issue (Figure 2.2.1).

49

3. CEREMONIES IN PHOTOGRAPHS DURING SULTAN MEHMED V REŞAD’S REIGN (1909-1918)

Table 1. Number of photographs by ceremony types, newspapers, and photographers…

CeremonyNewspapersSigmund WeinbergSébah & JoaillierPhébusApollonKenan Reşid BeyAsaf Muammer BeyHilalUnknownTotalCeremony totalServet-i Fünun167AccessionŞehbal13413Resimli Kitab112Servet-i Fünun718ReligiousŞehbal2217Resimli Kitab347Servet-i Fünun63110PoliticalŞehbal51622Resimli Kitab1326Servet-i Fünun9124521TripsŞehbal16181655Resimli Kitab4111218Servet-i Fünun81312DiplomaticŞehbal2221Resimli Kitab527Total342410464145128

50

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad participated in many ceremonies throughout his reign, and this chapter aims to categorize and explain the ceremonies whose photographs were printed in newspapers. Before delving into the photographs, definitions of these ceremonies in the Ottoman context are provided. The categorization is as follows: the accession ceremony, religious ceremonies, political ceremonies, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s tours of the Ottoman provinces, diplomatic ceremonies where heads of foreign states visited, and finally the funeral ceremony.

3.1. Accession Ceremony

The Ottoman accession ceremony is comprised of two ceremonies; biat, and sword girding ceremonies. The biat ceremony was the complement of cülus and they were held on the same day. Cülus is the act of the new ruler taking the throne. The term cülus means “to sit” in Arabic, which referred to a sultan’s accession to the throne.212 The accession ceremony was conducted as soon as possible to prevent conflict resulting from a fight for the throne. Biat, in Islamic states, is the socio-political contract between the ruled and the ruler. Through this contract, the people acknowledged the authority of their ruler and pledged their loyalty. The ruler, in turn, pledged commitment to the responsibility of governing the people in accordance with Islamic law. The rulership of the sultan was legitimized by the biat ceremony. In the Ottoman Empire, biat was expressed as kissing the hand or skirt of the sultan or touching one’s face to the throne.213 In the nineteenth century, this was changed to the participants bowing in front of the throne.214 As the entirety of the population could not be present during the ceremony, they were represented by religious, military, and bureaucratic officials. The cülus and biat

212 Zeynep Tarım-Ertuğ, “Enthronement and Accession Ceremony,” in Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire (New York: Facts on File, 2009), 207–9.

213 Alikılıç, Imparatorluk seremonisi, 40–41.

214 Karateke, Padişahım Çok Yaşa: Osmanlı Devleti’nin Son Yüzyılında Merasimler, 51.

51

were announced to the public by firing cannons after the ceremonies. Couriers were sent to villages to make the announcement. Beginning with the nineteenth century, newspapers and telegrams were also utilized to make the announcements.

After the conquest of Constantinople, the accession ceremony was held in the Topkapı Palace in front of the Babüssaade,215 in accordance with the law. There firstly was a private biat ceremony in the Hırka-i Saadet room of the Topkapı Palace. The public ceremony was held in front of the Babüssaade, where a throne was placed. If the previous sultan was dead, his casket was brought in front of Babüssaade and his funeral prayers were held after the biat ceremony. Although holding the biat ceremony in the Topkapı Palace was the norm, there were exceptions. In the last century of the Ottoman Empire, the immediacy of the ceremony was more important than its location. If the previous sultan died, the ceremony was held before the funeral and if the sultan was deposed, the ceremony was held within hours because the enthronement ceremony was always completed as soon as possible to ensure that a sultan reigned at all times.216

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s biat ceremony was held at the Harbiye Nezareti217 in Beyazıt, on April 27, 1909. There was a rush to conduct the biat ceremony as soon as possible to legitimize the new sultan as soon as possible after Sultan Abdülhamid II was dethroned due to a coup. Because most of the parliament members could not attend this hasty biat ceremony, a second one was held in Meclis-i Milli on May 20, 1909. One photograph from the first biat ceremony was printed in the 935th issue of Servet-i Fünun on May 6, 1909 (Figure 3.1.1). Sultan Mehmed V Reşad visited the Hırka-i Saadet218

215 The gate of the Topkapı Palace connecting the second courtyard where many state ceremonies were conducted and the third courtyard which was more private.

216 Tarım-Ertuğ, “Enthronement and Accession Ceremony,” 207–9.

217 The Ottoman Ministry of Defense.

218 The Hırka-i Şerif alsonamed the Hırka-i Saadet is the mantle of the prophet Mohammed preserved in the Topkapı Palace as a religious relic.

52

room at the Topkapı Palace after the ceremony at Harbiye Nezareti. In this photograph he is in his carriage in front of Hagia Sophia, on the way to the Topkapı Palace. This was the first Selamlık ceremony for the Sultan.219 This photograph was printed again in the publication’s 1401st issue on July 11, 1918 (Figure 3.1.2).

After the biat ceremony, a ceremony for girding of the dynastic sword was later held. It was done in the first week of the sultan’s accession. The sword girding consisted of two ceremonies: the sultan girding the sword of Osman at the tomb of Abu-Ayyub al-Ansari and a procession named “Kılıç Alayı” visiting the mausoleum of Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror.220 The sword girding ceremony was a much more public one than the cülus and biat. It was the equivalent of the coronation ceremonies of Europe.221 Although the sword girding ceremony can be seen as the counterpart of the European rulers’ coronation ceremonies, it has elements from Byzantine, Arabic and İslamic traditions of accession.222

The rules of this ceremony were not defined in any official court documents until the seventeenth century. These rules were revised after the Tanzimat in 1839 and Sultan Abdülmecid was the first sultan to wear westernized clothing in the procession.223 It is rumored that this ritual was founded by Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror. Afterward, twenty-seven sultans, including the last Sultan Mehmed VI Vahdeddin had their sword girding ceremonies in Istanbul. The exceptions were Sultan Ahmed II and Sultan Mustafa II who had their processions in Edirne and Sultan Murad V who never had a sword girding procession due to his ill health in the first week of his brief reign.

219 The Selamlık does not necessarily refer to a procession for a Friday Prayer. Processions where the Sultan went in public to greet them, hence the name Selamlık from “to greet,” were named Selamlık.

220 Necdet Sakaoğlu, “Kılıç Alayları,” in Dünden Bugüne Istanbul Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993), 555–57.

221 Alikılıç, Imparatorluk seremonisi, 52.. For more on the sword as a power symbol see Karateke, 63-70.

222 Sakaoğlu, “Kılıç Alayları,” 555–57.

223 Sakaoğlu, 555–57.

53

One or two swords were chosen to symbolize the political and religious ideology of the sultan. The person who girded the sultan the sword varied, but they were selected from those with religious affiliations.224 Although it was generally the Şeyhülislam225 or the Nakibüleşraf,226 for Sultan Mehmed V Reşad it was Abdülhalim Çelebi, the last Postnişin of the Konya Mevlana Dervish Lodge. This choice was possibly due to Çelebi’s negative sentiments towards Sultan Abdülhamid II.227 The sword that was girded was said to be Hz. Ömer’s. This claim is highly contested by historians228 but its presence signifies the importance of religious symbolism in legitimizing the sultan in public consciousness. Starting with the fifteenth century, the sword girding was held in the tomb of Abu Ayyub Al-Ansari in Eyüp built by Sultan Mehmed II. The route from Topkapı Palace to Eyüp, known as Divanyolu, thus became an important route for Ottoman processions. The new sultan did not directly go from the Topkapı Palace to Eyüp, but he also visited the previous sultans’ mausoleums along Divanyolu.

The first text to refer to this route with the name Divanyolu is Vehbi’s Surname, where the 1720 circumcision procession was recounted and was illustrated by Levni.229 The word Divan does not refer to the weekly meetings of the governing pashas under the sultan's supervision, but to all that concerned the state and power in the Ottoman system.230 In addition to the sword girding ceremony, this route was used for stately royal

224 Karateke, Padişahım Çok Yaşa, 75.

225 In the Ottoman Empire, Şeyhülislam (transliterated as Shaykh al-Islam) was the title given to the leader of the clergymen (ulemas). They had political roles in addition to their religious duties. Mehmet İpşirli, “Şeyhülislam,” in TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi (İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 2010), 91.

226 Nakibüleşraf were the clergymen who were tasked with taking care of those who descended from the line of prophet Mohammed. Ş. Tufan Buzpınar, “Nakibüleşraf,” in TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi (İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 2006).

227 Karateke, Padişahım Çok Yaşa: Osmanlı Devleti’nin Son Yüzyılında Merasimler., 73;76.

228 Karateke., 72.

229 Maurice Cerasi, “The Urban and Architectural Evolution of the Istanbul Divanyolu: Urban Aesthetics and Ideology in Ottoman Town Building,” Muqarnas 2 (2005): 189–232.

230 Cerasi. 189.

54

processions that included military parades, the sultan’s weekly trips to one of the Friday mosques, weddings, and circumcisions.231

After the conquest of Constantinople, the Divanyolu was the axis upon which most sultanic tombs and mosques were built. These tombs built by the successors of deceased sultans proclaimed Ottoman dynastic legitimacy both architecturally and ceremonially by highlighting the uninterrupted continuity of a proud lineage. These tombs built by reigning sons to commemorate dead fathers served to accentuate a continuous chain of dynastic succession; as did the ritual visitation of ancestral tombs by a new sultan following his accession, which was a ritual that aimed to legitimate the successor by stressing his noble royal lineage. The route of the sword girding procession on Divanyolu was made to be longer than other ceremonies and more people were in attendance.232 Read serially, the collective message of the mosque complexes and tombs alongside Divanyolu is the power of the Ottoman Empire, highlighted with the warrior-saint Abu Ayyub al-Ansari’s tomb complex.

Ayyub’s tomb and mosque complex were used by the Ottomans to legitimize the conquest of Constantinople through Islamic associations. The tomb was made in a distinctly Ottoman style which linked Abu Ayyub al-Ansari to the succession of Ottoman rulers buried in similar funerary structures.233 The tomb became an important center for many Ottoman ceremonies including funerary and accession processions.234 It is not clear when royal visits to the tomb started and when they gained their ceremonial nature235 but

231 Cerasi. 201.

232 Sakaoğlu, “Kılıç Alayları,” 555-557.

233 Çiğdem Kafesçioğlu, Constantinopolis/Istanbul: Cultural Encounter, Imperial Vision, and the Construction of the Ottoman Capital (University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2009), 48.

234 Gülru Necipoğlu, “Dynastic Imprints on the Cityscape: The Collective Message of Imperial Funerary Mosque Complexes in Istanbul,” in Cimetières et Traditions Funéraires Dans Le Monde Islamique (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1996), 25.

235 Kafesçioğlu, Constantinopolis/Istanbul: Cultural Encounter, Imperial Vision, and the Construction of the Ottoman Capital, 50.

55

it is reported that the tradition of the girding ceremony in Ayyub’s tomb started with Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror.236 He initiated courtly visits to the Abu Ayyub tomb.237

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s procession for his sword girding did not start from the Topkapı Palace on account of him not residing there. On May 10, 1909, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad started the procession for his sword girding ceremony from the Dolmabahçe Palace. He went to Eyüp by sea, with the Boat Söğütlü. After the girding, he went to visit the mausoleum of Sultan Mehmed II the Conqueror at Fatih by land. According to tradition, the sultan could go to Eyüp either by sea or land. The return procession on land allowed people to see the new sultan.238 It also allowed the sultan to walk through Divanyolu which was historically an important route for accession processions. Necdet Sakaoğlu remarks that the ceremony caused previously unseen levels of excitement throughout the city because the people of Istanbul for the first time saw a sultan greeting them with a cheerful attitude.239 Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s head chamberlain Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil and first secretary Lütfi Simavi both note that the attempted grandeur of the ceremony clashed with the dilapidated streets of Istanbul.240 An article from The New York Times on the sword-girding ceremony points out that for the first time in Ottoman history, non-Muslims were allowed in the Eyüp Mosque to watch the ceremonies.241

There are eleven photographs of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s sword girding ceremony that includes the sultan printed in the magazines. There is none of the sword

236 Necipoğlu, “Dynastic Imprints on the Cityscape: The Collective Message of Imperial Funerary Mosque Complexes in Istanbul,” 25.

237 Kafesçioğlu, Constantinopolis/Istanbul: Cultural Encounter, Imperial Vision, and the Construction of the Ottoman Capital, 67.

238 Alikılıç, Imparatorluk Seremonisi, 55.

239 Necdet Sakaoğlu, “Mehmed V,” in Dünden Bugüne Istanbul Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993), 344-349.

240 Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar (Istanbul: İnkılap Kitabevi, 1981), 116 and Lütfi Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, vol. I, III vols. (Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017), 63.

241 “New Sultan Breaks Moslem Traditions,” The New York Times, May 11, 1909.

56

girding itself, but the procession through Divanyolu was photographed. Five of these printed photographs are from Servet-i Fünun, four from Şehbal and two from Resimli Kitab. The Sultan leaving the palace was shown in all three of these publications. Although unidentified under the photographs, it can be seen from the backgrounds that he is leaving the Dolmabahçe Palace. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad is dressed in his formal attire sporting many medals. All of these photographs are the same shot (Figures 3.1.3, 3.1.4 and 3.1.5). The photographs depict the soldiers in two lines at right and left standing at attention. The second and third ones cropped out the name of the photographer, Phébus which appears on the one printed in Servet-i Fünun. The two soldiers at the end of the line on the left are in the middle of a curtsy on the first two photographs. The third, in Şehbal, cropped out this too, zooming in on the Sultan walking away from the palace. Although the ones in Resimli Kitab and Şehbal do not attribute the photographs to a photographer, it can be concluded that it was Phébus.

This was not a part of the ceremony that was usually visible to the general public because they only were able to view the procession through Divanyolu and the palace grounds were not open to the public. Therefore, these photographs showed the viewers a never before seen part of the ceremony. Servet-i Fünun’s caption of the photograph only notes that the Sultan was leaving the palace whereas Şehbal specified further by writing that the Sultan was going to Eyüp. Resimli Kitab interestingly refers to this image as the Sultan after visiting the Hırka-i Şerif, which is not part of the sword girding ceremonies. Hırka-i Şerif is a religious relic, a mantle that is believed to have belonged to the prophet Muhammad. Visiting this relic was a part of the cülus and biat, but neither of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s two biat ceremonies were held in Topkapı. It is possible that this was an error on the part of Resimli Kitab.

57

The rest of the photographs of the sword girding ceremony show the procession. Servet-i Fünun produced a supplement to its 936th issue on May 13, 1909. This enabled them to print these pictures before any other publication. Two photographs from this supplement (Figures 3.1.6 and 3.1.8) were reprinted on August 29, 1918 in Servet-i Fünun’s 1401st issue (Figures 3.1.7 and 3.1.9). The first photograph shows the sultan in Eyüp, on the way to the sword girding ceremony (Figure 3.1.6). There is a large carpet on the street placed for the procession. We can see that the Sultan walked the way from the Eyüp Pier to the Eyüp Sultan Mosque. This route today is still referred to as the “Cülus Yolu” meaning “Cülus Road.” It was also named after Sultan Mehmed V Reşad as its official name today is “Sultan Reşat Caddesi.”

For the next photograph, the photographer could get close up to the Sultan in his carriage (Figure 3.1.8). Also in the carriage is Gazi Ahmed Muhtar Pasha who was selected by the Committee of Union and Progress to accompany the Sultan as he was a revered military figure.242 The people of Istanbul are seen in the background cheering and raising their hats, saluting the Sultan. The Sultan is aware of the photographer and looking directly at the camera.

The following photographs were taken after the sword girding ceremony, as the Sultan takes the land route back to the Dolmabahçe Palace. One in Resimli Kitab’s 8th issue closely shows the Sultan in his carriage (Figure 3.1.10). His hand gesture suggests that he was greeting the public. The public is seen in the background, some clapping, in close proximity to the Sultan. Next three photographs were taken from one spot as the procession went through in Edirnekapı, printed in Şehbal’s 6th issue (Figures 3.1.11,

242 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 7-8

58

3.1.12 and 3.1.13). The Sultan is again seen greeting the public from his carriage as the people watch on from the background.

The photographs of the accession ceremony do not show a great many attendees, but those who were attending were able to get close to the procession. They also a Sultan who was interacting with the public. The Sultan is looking around, acknowledging and greeting them in many photographs, with the public cheering him on which corroborates Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil’s observations of a Sultan happy to be amongst his people after many years of confinement.243

3.2. Religious Ceremonies

Religious ceremonies for the Ottoman Empire consist of ceremonies in the Islamic tradition. The Sultan also was the Caliph, the religious head of the religion, therefore the Sultan used these ceremonies to reinforce that identity. While the accession ceremony had many religious elements, it was not included in this section because of its eclectic nature of blending Islamic and Ottoman, religious and political rituals. The photographs of ceremonies included in this section are; ten of the Selamlık ceremonies for Friday Prayers, three of the Bayram ceremonies and processions, and four from a visit to Setre-i Nebevi for a total of seventeen.

The Friday Prayer is the religious duty of all Muslims to congregate on Fridays to pray. In a ceremonial sense, the Friday Prayers, or Cuma Selamlığı was the sultan’s weekly visitation of one of the mosque complexes in Istanbul. This ceremony, which is a

243 Uşaklıgil, 8

59

procession from the palatial residence of the sultan to one of the city’s mosques and a procession back to the palace, continued until the end of the empire.244

The name Cuma Selamlığı does not solely refer to religious prayers. Any ceremony where the sultan went out and greeted the public was named Selamlık.245 The mosque had to be public one according to Islamic guidelines. The sultan chose the mosque for the ceremony. In the earlier centuries, mosques closer to the Topkapı Palace such as the Hagia Sophia, Sultanahmed or Beyazid mosques by land. In the eighteenth century visiting Eyüp Sultan, Yeni Valide, and Arap mosques by boat through Haliç. With the construction of new palaces outside the historic peninsula mosques in Beşiktaş such as Kılıç Ali Pasha, Nusretiye, Dolmabahçe, and Ortaköy mosques were frequented by the sultans.

This ceremony had political and social importance in addition to its religious significance as it was an opportunity for the sultan to leave the palace and be visible to the public; and thus, for the public to feel closer to him. Until the eighteenth century, they were especially grandiose because they also marked a sultan’s return to Istanbul from campaigns. Although the Fridays Prayers were tradition, they were mostly absent from protocol books predating the nineteenth century. They were recognized as an official state ceremony in the latter half of the nineteenth century.246 The Friday Prayer processions became official in his reign and their protocols were designated.247

The sultan went to the designated mosque with a procession. The procession was the same as a Bayram procession until Sultan Abdülhamid II changed it at which point

244 Necdet Sakaoğlu, “Cuma Selamlığı,” in Dünden Bugüne Istanbul Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993), 443-444.

245 Karateke, Padişahım Çok Yaşa: Osmanlı Devleti’nin Son Yüzyılında Merasimler, 124-125.

246 Karateke, 123 and Necdet Sakaoğlu, “Cuma Selamlığı,” in Dünden Bugüne Istanbul Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993), 443-444.

247 Sakaoğlu, “Cuma Selamlığı,” 443-444.

60

these processions became more intricate and important. They became shows of the empire and the sultan’s power with the inclusion of the most important units of the military.248 This show of power was not only for the eyes of the citizens but also for foreign visitors. Sultan Abdülhamid II’s processions became tourist attractions and by taking the reins of his carriage himself the Sultan symbolically took in hand the reins of the state.249 Mixing of this political power imagery with the concept of going to Friday Prayers made the Cuma Selamlığı a ritual symbol of the caliphate.250 The higher visibility brought about by these public ceremonies also had its drawbacks. There was an assassination attempt in 1905 from which Sultan Abdülhamid II escaped unscathed.251 Although grandeur of the Cuma Selamlığı decreased after the dethronement of Sultan Abdülhamid II, the tradition continued to be important.

New guidelines made during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign designated the Cuma Selamlığı processions as the best way for senior officials to meet with the sultan.252 Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s processions were much less impressive than Sultan Abdülhamid II’s. Cuma Selamlığı was also an opportunity to access the sultan not just for the people, for also for government officials for whom otherwise reaching the sultan would be impossible.253

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s first Selamlık procession took place on May 9, 1909. This was the first-ever ceremony of the Sultan, even before his sword girding ceremony but after the biat ceremony in April. Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil writes that the Committee of Union and Progress wished to present as magnificent a spectacle as possible despite the

248 Karateke, 127.

249 Selim Deringil, The Well-Protected Domains: Ideology and the Legitimation of Power in the Ottoman Empire 1876-1909, Paperback ed (London: Tauris, 1999), 23.

250 Karateke, 129.

251 Deringil, The Well-Protected Domains, 24.

252 Karateke, 129.

253 Karateke, 129

61

difficult times that had passed. He finds this attempt clumsy but overall observes a public happy to see its Sultan and a Sultan happy to see the public.254

A photograph from this first official ceremony of the new Sultan was printed in Servet-i Fünun’s cover of its 936th issue on May 13, 1909 (Figure Figure 3.2.1). Photographer Sigmund Weinberg’s signature is visible in the bottom right corner. The same photograph was published in Resimli Kitab’s May 1909 issue but with Weinberg’s signature cropped out (Figure 3.2.2). For all of the photographs of the Selamlık ceremonies, there are none from inside the mosques. Only the processions before and after are shown.

Two years later Sigmund Weinberg photographed another Selamlık ceremony on May 5, 1911. One of which, the Sultan leaving the Üsküdar Yeni Camii Mosque, was on Servet-i Fünun’s cover on May 18, 1911 (Figure 3.2.3). Sultan Mehmed V Reşad is wearing his official regalia and carrying a sword as a symbol of power. Other photographs show the Sultan arriving at Üsküdar by boat and greeting the people (Figure 3.2.4), in his carriage (Figure 3.2.5) and at the Selimiye Barracks (Figure 3.2.6). This ceremony included more than a trip to the mosque, as the sultan went on to visit the nearby Selimiye Barracks afterward.255 Two of these photographs were also used for Resimli Kitab for its May-June issue (Figure 3.2.7 and Figure 3.2.8). This time they did not crop Weinberg’s signature. A third outing for the Friday Prayers was photographed for Şehbal and published on March 28, 1911 (Figure 3.2.9 and 3.2.10). The Sultan can be seen entering and leaving an unknown mosque.

254 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 7-8

255 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 307.

62

The processions and protocol for Bayram ceremonies were similar to Selamlık ceremonies.256 There were two Bayram ceremonies per year and the Sultan chose a mosque for prayers. Sultan Abdülhamid II used the Sultanahmet Mosque and the Sinan Pasha Mosque for Bayram prayers, and before his reign, the mosques chosen were generally Sultanahmet or Hagia Sophia mosques.257 The Bayram ceremonies after the processions were one of the rare occasions when Sultan Abdülhamid II allowed statesmen to approach him.258 Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s Bayram processions were not as grand as his predecessor’s.259 The Bayram ceremony consisted of the processions going to and coming back from the mosque. One photograph of a Bayram procession of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad can be found on the cover of Servet-i Fünun’s 1019th issue dated December 15, 1910 (Figure 3.2.11). It shows Sultan Mehmed V Reşad in his carriage after praying at the Nusretiye Mosque.

Two other photographs of Bayram ceremonies from Servet-i Fünun taken by Sigmund Weinberg do not depict a procession, but rather a ceremony at the Dolmabahçe Palace. These two photographs, again by Sigmund Weinberg, shows a ceremony for the Eid al-Adha or the Feast of the Sacrifice. Eid al-Adha is one of two Bayrams observed by Muslims. It is celebrated on the tenth of the month zilhicce of the Islamic calendar. Muslims offer an animal sacrifice to god on this Bayram. The meat is either eaten or given to others as a charity. Sacrifice ceremonies continued throughout the lifespan of the Ottoman Empire. Sultan Abdülhamid II used the court of the Dolmabahçe Palace for sacrifice ceremony and had twenty-one sheep sacrificed. 260 Sultan Mehmed V Reşad can be seen using the same location for a sacrifice ceremony on December 2, 1911 after a

256 Sakaoğlu, “Cuma Selamlığı,” 443-444.

257 Karateke, Padişahım Çok Yaşa: Osmanlı Devleti’nin Son Yüzyılında Merasimler, 102-103.

258 Deringil, The Well-Protected Domains, 25.

259 Karateke, 111-112.

260 Karateke, 105.

63

Bayram procession from the Nusretiye Mosque in Tophane.261 The animals are alive in the first photograph on the cover of the 1071st issue, white against a backdrop of black clothing (Figure 3.2.11). The Sultan is overseeing the ceremony. The second photograph is the aftermath, showing the dead sheep on the ground with the Sultan in the background (Figure 3.2.13).

On July 15, 1909 Sultan Mehmed V Reşad visited the Topkapı Palace for a new religious ceremony. He was to visit the Setre-i Nebevi in the Hırka-i Saadet chamber. Setre-i Nebevi is the name of the shroud that covers prophet Muhammed’s tomb; Setre meaning to cover in Arabic and Nebevi meaning all regarding the prophet Muhammad. The cover would is changed every year and in 1909 one was brought to Istanbul for public viewing.262 Resimli Kitab published three photographs from this trip and all three are attributed to photographer Kenan Reşid Bey. These show the Sultan in his carriage on the way to the Topkapı Palace from Sarayburnu accompanied by the Khedive of Egypt Abbas Hilmi Pasha (Figures 3.2.14, 3.2.15 and 3.2.16). A group of people watching his arrival can be seen in the background of the last photograph. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s visit to the Topkapı Palace to see the shroud marked the first time a sultan had done so.263 Previously this visit was considered as appropriate only for the lower classes. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s participation brought him closer to the public.

The last religious ceremony photographed was when Sultan Mehmed V Reşad attended a Selamlık for Mevlid-i Nebevi on March 24, 1910. This mevlid coincided with a diplomatic visit from King Ferdiand I of Bulgaria. Mevlid referred to celebrations in the name of the prophet Muhammad on the occasion of his birthday. This photograph by Kenan Reşid Bey was published on the 18th issue of Resimli Kitab (Figure 3.2.17). The

261 Simavi, 402.

262 Gün, 26.

263 Gün, 26.

64

Sultan is in his carriage going to the Sultanahmet Mosque. Kind Ferdinand watched the procession as well.264

3.3. Political Ceremonies

This section covers photographs portraying a variety of ceremonies which are political, but not religious in nature. Eleven from Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s four visits to the Ottoman parliament Meclis-i Mebusan, two from a visit to the military school Harbiye Mektebi, four from a banquet at the Beylerbeyi Palace, and three from a naval parade make up this category photographs.

Meclis-i Mebusan was a part of the Ottoman parliament that consisted of deputies elected by the Ottoman public. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s first visit to the Meclis-i Mebusan took place on May 21, 1909. At this time the Meclis-i Mebusan met at the old Darülfunun building near Hagia Sophia.265 There are two photographs of this visit, both from Servet-i Fünun in its 938th issue on May 28, 1909. The first, printed on the cover, shows the Sultan in his carriage outside the Darülfunun building (Figure 3.3.1). For the second shot, the photographer Sigmund Weinberg was allowed inside the building and photographed the Sultan in his box (Figure 3.3.2). Here the Sultan listened to a speech by Sadrazam Hilmi Pasha.266

The meeting place of the Meclis-i Mebusan was moved to the Çırağan Palace in November 1909. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad attended the second convention of the parliament on November 15, 1909. His arrival was photographed by Sébah & Joaillier and the photograph was printed in Şehbal’s 16th issue on November 28, 1909. (Figure

264 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 32.

265 The name Darülfunun referred to the building’s roots as a university. It was given to governmental use in the 1860s and the first Meclis-i Mebusan congregated here in 1877.

266 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:69–70.

65

3.3.3). The same photograph was printed also in Resimli Kitab’s 15th issue in the same month (Figure 3.3.4). There are no photographs of him inside the building but his departure was also photographed. Phébus’s image was published in Servet-i Fünun’s 963rd issue on November 18th, 1909 (Figure 3.3.5). Resimli Kitab printed a very similar photograph in its 15th issue (Figure 3.3.6). Unlike their photograph of the Sultan’s arrival, this one is not attributed to a photographer. These two pictures both show the Sultan on the stairs of the Çırağan Palace taken from similar vantage points. Notably, it can be seen that the Sultan is carrying his sword as a symbol of power.

After a fire at the Çırağan Palace in January 1910, the parliament meetings were moved to the Cemlia Sultan Palace in Fındıklı.267 November 14, 1910 marked the third convention of the parliament and the Sultan was present for the occasion. There are two photographs of this, one from inside the building and one outside. Phébus took a photograph of the Sultan in his box that was printed in two publications. A larger one appeared in Resimli Kitab’s 26th issue (Figure 3.3.7). Servet-i Fünun printed a cropped version of the photograph that focused on the Sultan in its 1016th issue on November 24, 1910 (Figure 3.3.8). Phébus also photographed the Sultan leaving the parliament building in his carriage. This photograph again appears both in Resimli Kitab (Figure 3.3.9) and on Servet-i Fünun’s cover (Figure 3.3.10).

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s last trip to the parliament was on May 14, 1914. This commencement of the Meclis-i Mebusan came after several years of uncertainty for the Meclis-i Mebusan; of note are its termination in 1912, the Raid on the Sublime Porte (Bab-ı Ali Baskını) in 1913, and a new election in 1914. One photograph was published in Servet-i Fünun’s 1198th issue on May 21, 1914 (Figure 3.3.11). The Sultan is once

267 This palace, along with the Münire Sultan Palace was one of the two small palaces called Çifte Saraylar.

66

more in front of the Cemile Sultan Palace. Another photograph of the Sultan leaving the palace was printed in Şehbal’s 97th issue on May 28, 1914.

These photographs showed the Sultan and the Meclis-i Mebusan as allies working together. Furthermore, the photographs by Sigmund Weinberg and Phébus portraying the inside of the buildings provided the readers with a rare glimpse into the inner workings of the parliament. These were less public ceremonies than the processions. Photographs of these ceremonies increased formerly limited visibility. For the religious ceremonies and the accession ceremony, photographs of the Sultan mostly are the processions outside from and to a destination. The parliament photographs were more intimate, putting the viewer and the Sultan in the same enclosed space.

In addition to the visit to the parliament, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad attended other political ceremonies. One of these was the Sultan going to the military school on August 27, 1909. The school was the Mekteb-i Harbiye. The sultan visited the school for an award ceremony and gave gifts to accomplished students.268 Two photographs of this visit were printed in Resimli Kitab’s 12th issue in September/October 1909. These photographs are attributed to Kenan Bey underneath. One shows the Sultan leaving the school building (Figure 3.3.13) and the other is the Sultan in his carriage on the way back to the palace (Figure 3.3.14). He is not wearing any medals but he is in military uniform and is carrying a sword symbolizing power.

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad organized a banquet for the members of the parliament at the Beylerbeyi Palace on June 10, 1910. There was a Bosphorus tour by sea after the banquet. Those invited included the mebus, the ayans, 269 the grand vizier, the ulema, and

268 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:139.

269 The mebus were the publically elected members of the Meclis-i Mebusan and the ayans were the members of the Meclis-i Ayan appointed to their positions by the Sultan.

67

ambassadors.270 The organization of the banquet, including the music, was done in the European style.271 The Şehbal published four photographs of this occasion in its 22nd issue on June 28, 1910. In the first, the Sultan is photographed walking to the Beylerbeyi Palace with a procession of court officials and soldiers (Figure 3.3.15). The second shows them having stopped and posing for the camera (Figure 3.3.16). Şehbal’s caption for this photograph tells that the Sultan asked for this photograph. Two more photographs of the Sultan leaving the palace also appear in Şehbal (Figures 3.3.17 and 3.3.18). Şehbal notes that the Sultan was greeting the attendees as he was leaving. Şehbal’s captions for the photographs do not just describe the event but emphasize the Sultan’s interactions with others. This was a political event as the guests included members of the parliament but its informal nature was reflected in the Sultan’s choice of clothing, a plain redingote instead of a military uniform.

The last kind of ceremony for this section was the naval parades. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad was photographed attending two of these parades. The first took place on July 4, 1909. The Sultan went to the Battleship Mesudiye, from where he watched the parade with his imperial caique.272 Sigmund Weinberg’s photograph of the Sultan in a white naval uniform was the cover of Servet-i Fünun’s 946th issue on July 22, 1909 (Figure 3.3.19).

A year later, on July 23, 1910 there was another naval parade. The date fell on the 10th of July or 10 Temmuz in the Rumi calendar. This date had been declared a holiday by the parliament to celebrate the declaration of the Second Constitutional Era. This was a politically important holiday for the Committee of Union and Progress because it celebrated the anniversary of their rise to power in 1908. The Sultan watched the parade

270 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:231.,

271 Sakaoğlu, “Mehmed V,” 345.

272 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 26.

68

aboard the Yacht Ertuğrul. Lütfi Simavi remarks that this parade was lackluster compared to the previous year’s.273 Sigmund Weinberg again was the photographer for the three photographs published in Servet-i Fünun’s 999th issue on July 28, 1910. The first of these shows the Sultan in the imperial caique, in a black uniform (Figure 3.3.20). This time Weinberg also photographed the Sultan aboard the Yacht Ertuğrul (Figures 3.3.21 and 3.3.22). Similar to the photographs inside the parliament buildings, these two photographs evoke a feeling of closeness through the confined space of the yacht.

3.4. Province Tours

Visiting provinces was not a tradition in the Ottoman Empire before the nineteenth century. The Sultan was only visible to the residents of the capital.274 Until Sultan Mahmud II, who was the first sultan to take a trip within the Ottoman realm to see closely how the public lived and to communicate with the people, Ottoman sultans did not leave Istanbul for purposes other than conquest.275 However, Sultan Mahmud II’s main objective was to be seen rather than to just see the provinces.276

Sultan Mahmud II’s successors continued this tradition as his son Sultan Abdülmecid had accompanied Sultan Mahmud II in several of his trips.277 Sultan Abdülmecid participated in three provincial trips of his own including cities such as Hereke, Izmit, Bursa, Thessaloniki in addition to a tour of the Mediterranean islands.278 His son Sultan Mehmed V Reşad, then a şehzade, accompanied Sultan Abdülmecid to

273 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:241.

274 Erik Jan Zürcher, “Sultan Reşad’ın Haziran 1911’deki Makedonya Seyahati,” in Savaş, Devrim ve Uluslaşma: Türkiye Tarihinde Geçiş Dönemi: 1908-1928 (Istanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2005), 121–37.

275 Haluk Selvı̇, “Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Izmit Seyahati (27-28 Ekim 1909),” Ululararası Kocaeli Tarihi Sempozyumu Bildirileri, 2016, 925–46.

276 Kırlı, “Surveillance and Constituting the Public in the Ottoman Empires,” 291.

277 Kuzucu, “Balkanlar’da Son Osmanlı Padişahı: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın 1911 Yılındaki Rumeli Seyahati.”

278 Özger, “Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Edirne Seyahati.”

69

Thessaloniki.279 Sultan Abdülaziz also continued the tradition by visiting Thessaloniki and Egypt, problematic provinces of the Empire at the time.280 Furthermore, Sultan Abdülaziz was the first Sultan to visit European cities.

There was a pause in the province trips during Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reign as he rarely left the Yıldız Palace.281 His only trip outside the city of Istanbul was the European voyage when he was a şehzade during Sultan Abdülaziz’s reign. Instead of province trips, he asserted his authority remotely by relying on a network of spies, propaganda through newspapers, and sermons in mosques.282 Therefore a Sultan leaving the palace to connect with his people was not an occurrence in recent memory during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign.283

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad went on several trips to many Ottoman provinces in the early years of his reign. There were five trips and they started as small day-long excursions and gradually became tours that lasted weeks. The Committee of Union and Progress wanted to capitalize on the successes of the first trips and increase the visibility of the Sultan to create unity within the public. The Sultan visited Hereke, Bursa, and Izmit in the first year of his reign. A trip to Edirne took place in 1910 and lastly a long Rumeli trip that included Thessaloniki, Skopje, Pristina, and Manastir in 1911.

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s first trip outside Istanbul was to Hereke on June 18, 1909. He visited the Hereke fabric factory that was built during Sultan Abdülmecid’s reign. He traveled by boat because he preferred sea travel. A photograph showing him leaving the factory was printed in Servet-i Fünun’s cover of its 942nd issue on June 24,

279 Zürcher, 124.

280 Özger, “Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Edirne Seyahati”; Kuzucu, “Balkanlar’da Son Osmanlı Padişahı: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın 1911 Yılındaki Rumeli Seyahati.”

281 Selvı̇, “Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Izmit Seyahati (27-28 Ekim 1909).”

282 Zürcher, “Sultan Reşad’ın Haziran 1911’deki Makedonya Seyahati,” 124.

283 Zürcher, 124.

70

1909 (Figure 3.4.1). The same photograph was also published cropped in Şehbal’s 7th issue on July 14, 1909 (Figure 3.4.2). A third version, again cropped, appears in Resimli Kitab’s 9th issue in June/July 1909 (Figure 3.4.3). Resimli Kitab had two more images of this trip. One showing the Sultan walking in Hereke (Figure 3.4.3) and one of him returning from the factory (Figure 3.4.4). The Sultan is not wearing a uniform or medals, instead of wearing his redingote. The people of Hereke, especially children, can be seen watching the Sultan.

A longer trip to Bursa took place between September 2-6, 1909. As with the trip to Hereke, there are no records of the Committee of Union and Progress organizing this trip and asking the Sultan to participate. Lütfi Simavi attributes the reason for this trip to the Sultan wanting to see the Ottoman lands.284 The Sultan already liked daily trips within Istanbul and had enjoyed going to the Beylerbeyi or Göksu palaces.285 For the Bursa trip the cortege traveled to Mudanya with the Yacht Ertuğrul and from there moved on to Bursa by train (Figure 3.4.6).286 He was accompanied by şehzades Yusuf İzzeddin and Vahdeddin in addition to the sadrazam.287 The Bursa trip had special significance as the city was a former capital of the Ottoman Empire. Visiting the city strengthened the imperial legacy of the Sultan in addition to connecting with the public. The success of this trip prompted the Committee of Union and Progress to seize the opportunity of province tours and they viewed this one as a template.288 Sultan Mehmed V Reşad himself was very pleased with the trip as well.289

284 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:143.

285 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 37.

286 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:142–43.

287 Simavi, I:143.

288 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 38.

289 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:145.

71

Photographers for this trip were Asaf Muammer Bey and Sigmund Weinberg, and their work was printed in Servet-i Fünun. The publication used two images by Asaf Muammer Bey for their cover of its 954th issue on September 3, 1909 (Figure 3.4.7). First shows the Sultan being greeted by the people of Bursa and the second shows the Sultan in his carriage in front of the Grand Mosque of Bursa for the Friday Prayers. These two photographs were printed again, in the same layout, in the magazine’s 1401st issue on July 11, 1918 (Figure 3.4.8).

Three more photographs of the trip by Sigmund Weinberg are also present in Servet-i Fünun. One shows the Sultan in his imperial tent (Figure 3.4.9).290 Similar to the Hereke trip, he is not wearing an official uniform. In another, the Sultan is leaving the Bursa train station in his carriage (Figure 3.4.10). Lastly, a second photograph of the Sultan at the Grand Mosque of Bursa for the Friday Prayers (Figure 3.4.10).

The trip to Izmit on October 27-28 was Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s last province trip in 1909. Izmit was a politically important destination because it had a multi-ethnic and multi-religious population which included ethnically Greek and Armenian Ottomans.291 Furthermore, it had a high crime rate at the beginning of the Second Constitutional Era292 and the local tradesmen complained of high taxes.293 Şehzades Yusuf İzzeddin and Vahdeddin were again accompanying the Sultan.294 The Sultan traveled first to Haydapaşa train station with the Yacht Ertuğrul, then travelled to Izmit by train (Figure 3.4.6).295 The train stopped at several stations along the way so that the

290 Ottoman tents were reflective of their era’s imperial ideology as well, see Ashley Dimmig, “Fabricating a New Image: Imperial Tents in the Late Ottoman Period,” International Journal of Islamic Architecture 3, no. 2 (July 1, 2014): 341–72.

291 Bülent Cirik, “İkinci Meşrutiyet’in İlk Yıllarında Izmit Sancağı (1908-1910),” Ululararası Kocaeli Tarihi Sempozyumu Bildirileri, 2016, 893.

292 Kurtuluş Demı̇rkol, “II. Meşrutiyet Dönemi Başlarında Izmit Sancağı’nda Asayiş,” Ululararası Kocaeli Tarihi Sempozyumu Bildirileri, 2016, 910.

293 Cirik, “İkinci Meşrutiyet’in İlk Yıllarında Izmit Sancağı (1908-1910),” 898.

294 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:159.

295 Simavi, I:159.

72

Sultan could greet the cheering public which included people from different ethnic and religious backgrounds.296 İn Izmit the locals had the opportunity to relay their grievances to the Sultan. The Sultan also presented a united government and sovereign through his visit to the local Committee of Union and Progress chapter.297

The press wrote articles on the success of the trip, remarking that the Sultan acted as a unifying force among the people and cemented constitutionalism without glossing over the problems of the province.298 Sultan Mehmed V Reşad appreciated this opportunity to be closer to his public, a sentiment he disclosed to the Meclis-i Mebusan in his speech for the parliament’s second commencement on November 13, 1909. 299

A photograph of the procession through Izmit by Sigmund Weinberg was printed in Servet-i Fünun’s 961st issue on November 4, 1909 (Figure 3.4.12). The sultan can be seen waving to the onlookers in his redingote. This was the last province trip of the Sultan where he wore civil clothing. Servet-i Fünun reprinted the photograph nine years later in its 1401st issue on July 11, 1918 (3.4.13). Şehbal also printed Weinberg’s photograph without attribution in its 15th issue on November 14th, 1909. Şehbaş printed two additional photographs. One more of the procession showing the schoolchildren holding flags (Figure 3.4.15) and one of the Sultan in front of the Izmit Kiosque (Figure 3.4.16).

In 1910 Sultan Mehmed V Reşad had his penultimate province trip. This trip to Seyyidler and Edirne took place between October 27 and November 1, 1910. The Committee of Union and Progress conceived of and organized this trip. They wanted to present the image of a powerful sultan to the people of the Balkan peninsula and the

296 Simavi, I:159.

297 Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü, 29.

298 Selvı̇, “Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Izmit Seyahati (27-28 Ekim 1909),” 932.

299 Selvı̇, 932–33.

73

world.300 Similar to Bursa, Edirne was a symbolically important city because it was another former capital of the Ottoman Empire. This visit bolstered Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s links to the Ottoman dynasty. Furthermore, the trip combined the military show of power and boost of morale at Seyyidler with the religious symbolism of a Friday Prayer procession at Edirne. The trip was planned so that it would coincide with a Friday Prayer by the CUP.301

Şehzades Yusuf İzzeddin and Vahdeddin once more joined Sultan Mehmed V Reşad along with ministers for foreign and internal affairs and many other government officials.302 Sultan Mehmed V Reşad traveled to Seyyidler by train (Figure 3.4.17). He rested a while in his imperial tent then went on to join a military parade in his carriage. It was proposed to Sultan Mehmed V Reşad that there were automobiles available should he wish to use one for the ceremony but the Sultan refused, citing that it was tradition that the public would be able to see the Sultan during these ceremonies and an automobile would not allow that.303 People living in surrounding villages traveled as long as a day to see the Sultan.304

While head chamberlain Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil refers to the military parade and procession as chaotic and failures, first secretary Lütfi Simavi remarks that they were excellent.305 After the parade the Sultan moved on to Edirne by train (Figure 3.4.17). The next day he went to the Edirne Selimiye Mosque for Friday Prayers. In his last two days, he went to inspect the redoubts in Edirne and went to the Üç Şerefeli Mosque for afternoon prayers. In his speech to the governor and people of Edirne Sultan Mehmed V

300 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 65.

301 Özger, “Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Edirne Seyahati.”

302 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:127.

303 Simavi, I:128.

304 Özger, “Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Edirne Seyahati,” 140.

305 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 65; Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:128.

74

Reşad expressed that it was his wish to see the Ottoman provinces and connect with their people.306 Although the trip was the brainchild of the Committee of Union and Progress, the Sultan was excited about the trip and tried as much as he could to dutifully portray the powerful and tenacious Sultan he was expected to be.307

Fourteen photographs of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad in Seyyidler and Edirne were printed in newspapers, eleven from Seyyidler and three from the Friday Selamlık in Edirne. Sébah & Joaillier, sometimes only accredited as Sébah, followed and photographed the Sultan. A photograph of the studio showing the Sultan getting off the train at Seyyidler was printed both in Resimli Kitab’s 25th issue of September/October 1910 (Figure 3.4.18), and in Servet-i Fünun’s 1013th issue on November 3, 1910 (3.4.19). This marks the first ceremony that the Sultan is photographed wearing a military uniform and medals. In his trips to Hereke, Bursa, and Izmit he wore plain clothes. As the province trips increasingly became more important political tools the formality of the clothing also increased to make use of their symbolism.

In the next photograph, again Sultan Mehmed V Reşad is leaving the train station to enter the procession field. The photograph by Sébah appears both in Resimli Kitab (Figure 3.4.20) and in the 30th issue of Şehbal dated November 28, 1910 but is not attributed to a photographer in Şehbal (Figure 3.4.21). A closer photograph of the Sultan also was printed in Şehbal (Figure 3.4.22). In these photographs, the Sultan is seen carrying a sword to complete his imperial regalia. A photograph of the Sultan in the field also was printed in Servet-i Fünun’s cover of their 1013th issue on November 3, 1910 (Figure 3.4.23). The same photograph was reprinted for the 1401st issue of Servet-i Fünun on July 11, 1918 (Figure 3.4.24).

306 Özger, “Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Edirne Seyahati.”

307 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 65–66.

75

Before the military parade, the Sultan rested a while in his imperial tent. This striped ten can be seen in a photograph in Şehbal (Figure 3.4.25). Although a photographer is not given by the publication, it can be surmised from the following two photographs that it was the studio Sébah. A photograph by Sébah in Resimli Kitab shows the tent from another angle (Figure 3.4.26). This photograph can also be found in, again with no attribution, in Şehbal (Figure 3.4.27). Şehbal does attribute a last photograph of the Sultan in his carriage in the military parade to the studio Sébah & Joaillier (Figure 3.4.28.)

The last three photographs are of the Sultan attending the Friday Prayer at Selimiye Mosque. One photograph showing the Sultan in his carriage outside the mosque was published in Resimli Kitab (Figure 3.4.29), without citing a photographer, but the same photograph was also printed in Şehbal with Sébah & Joaillier’s name (Figure 3.4.30). Şehbal published one more photograph of the Selamlık, of the Sultan in his carriage leaving the mosque.

All of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s province trips culminated in one grand trip of Rumeli. The Committee of Union and Progress was very worried about the Balkans.308 With the rise of Nationalism, there was growing unrest in the Balkan peninsula. For a united Ottoman Empire, the Committee of Union and Progress aimed to unite different nationalities under one ruler. Therefore Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s appearance in the region was very important, and one last trip was organized by the CUP.309 CUP’s concern for the Rumeli trip was to ensure the territorial integrity of the Empire and to prevent the people of the Balkan peninsula from following in the steps of the Greeks, who seceded in 1829. It was also meant as a deterrent to European states who wished to exploit the

308 Zürcher, “Sultan Reşad’ın Haziran 1911’deki Makedonya Seyahati,” 123.

309 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 124.

76

instability of the region to their benefits by presenting a unified Ottoman Empire.310 Thessaloniki was also especially important to the CUP. This was where the revolt against Sultan Abdülhamid II started in 1908 which led to the reinstitution of the liberal constitution and resulted in the Second Constitutional Era.

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad was again happy to be undertaking this responsibility and leaving Istanbul.311 Despite his old age, he was uncharacteristically energetic during the trip.312 First planned for April 1911, the trip had to be delayed because of the instabilities in the region due to nationalist revolts and the complexity of the preparations needed.313 The trip’s announcement created excitement within the Empire even before it began. In Istanbul the Sultan personally met with groups of envoys from Lebanon and Beirut who proclaimed their loyalty and gratitude.314 Military troops from Amasya, Trabzon, Sivas, and Ankara were moved to Kosovo anticipating a possible threat to the Sultan.315

Macedonia did not consist of one Ottoman administrative unit; the region included the provinces of Thessaloniki, Kosovo, and Manastir.316 Although it was one trip, it spanned many cities within the region. Thessaloniki was the main hub. First there was one trip to Skopje, Pristina, and Kosovo; after returning to Thessaloniki another to Manastir; final return to Thessaloniki and back to Istanbul (Figure 3.4.32).

310 Kuzucu, “Balkanlar’da Son Osmanlı Padişahı: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın 1911 Yılındaki Rumeli Seyahati,” 15.

311 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 124.

312 Zürcher, “Sultan Reşad’ın Haziran 1911’deki Makedonya Seyahati,” 126.

313 Zürcher, 125. The decision was made during a dinner party at Minister of Interior Talat Bey’s house Kuzucu, “Balkanlar’da Son Osmanlı Padişahı: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın 1911 Yılındaki Rumeli Seyahati.”

314 Kuzucu, “Balkanlar’da Son Osmanlı Padişahı: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın 1911 Yılındaki Rumeli Seyahati,” 5.

315 Kuzucu, 5.

316 Zürcher, “Sultan Reşad’ın Haziran 1911’deki Makedonya Seyahati,” 121. Skopje was the capital of the province of Kosovo in the Ottoman Empire.

77

The Sultan went to Thessaloniki by sea, with several ships and the Battleship Barbaros Hayreddin.317 The fleet left Istanbul on June 5 and people gathered on either side of the Bosphorus to see them off.318 The first stop was Çanakkale where the Sultan landed and received people of Gelibolu.319 The fleet arrived at Thessaloniki on June 7 where a ship from İzmir had come as well to welcome to Sultan.320 After spending the night in the ship the Sultan landed on June 8. The Sultan spent four days in Thessaloniki in this first leg of the tour. On June 9 he went to the Hagia Sophia Mosque with a procession for the Friday Prayers. The next day he visited the barracks and had a groundbreaking ceremony for the commemorative monument.

On June 11 the Sultan left Thessaloniki to go to Skopje by train. After spending four days in Skopje he left for Pristina on June 15. On June 16 he attended a Friday Selamlık, a groundbreaking ceremony for a medrese. On the same day, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad visited the mausoleum of Sultan Murad I321 who was killed in Kosovo. This was a symbolically heavy part of the trip. Similar to ritual visits to ancestral tombs on Divanyolu, this visit strengthened the dynastic legacy of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad. The setting of Kosovo also worked to evoke memories of the glorious Ottoman past of conquests.

He went back to Thessaloniki on June 17. He spent three more days in the city and had a public procession.322 On June 20 he went to Manastir by train. On June 23 he went to the İshakiye Mosque for Friday Prayers and there was another public

317 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, II:319.

318 Zürcher, “Sultan Reşad’ın Haziran 1911’deki Makedonya Seyahati,” 126.

319 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, II:321.

320 Kuzucu, “Balkanlar’da Son Osmanlı Padişahı: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın 1911 Yılındaki Rumeli Seyahati,” 9.

321 The mausoleum was for the internal organs of the Sultan. His body was brought back to Bursa to be interred.

322 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, II:337.

78

procession.323 He once more returned to Thessaloniki on June 24 thus the voyage back to Istanbul started and they arrived on June 26.

Similar to previous trips, the Committee of Union and Progress closely monitored the voyage through its members in both Istanbul and Thessaloniki who participated with speeches to the public at times.324 The Committee of Union and Progress wanted to promote the Sultan as a popular figure who is close to the public; therefore, the Sultan sought to communicate with the locals as much as possible325 In all destinations the Sultan took special care to communicate with the public as much as possible.326 The Sultan met with the group of people from İzmir in Thessaloniki. Two official envoys from Bulgaria and Serbia came to Kosovo to meet the Sultan.327 The kings of these countries would come to Istanbul shortly after. Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil recounts that the reception by the public was remarkably positive. He writes that people from all nationalities and religions came together to rejoice with celebrations lasting day and night.328

This visit had been announced to the villages and newspapers in advance.329 Journalists from foreign newspapers in addition to Ottoman publications were allowed to join the trip.330 Resimli Kitab’s director Ubeydullah Esad also went to Thessaloniki.331 Aşil Samancı (Studio Apollon) who was the imperial photographer of the era also officially joined the trip.332 The success of the trip was recounted in the newspapers,

323 Simavi, II:341.

324 Zürcher, “Sultan Reşad’ın Haziran 1911’deki Makedonya Seyahati,” 128.

325 Feroz Ahmad, The Young Turks and the Ottoman Nationalities: Armenians, Greeks, Albanians, Jews, and Arabs, 1908-1918 (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2014), 59–60.

326 Zürcher, “Sultan Reşad’ın Haziran 1911’deki Makedonya Seyahati,” 132.

327 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 136.

328 Uşaklıgil, 137–38.

329 Zürcher, “Sultan Reşad’ın Haziran 1911’deki Makedonya Seyahati,” 133.

330 Kuzucu, “Balkanlar’da Son Osmanlı Padişahı: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın 1911 Yılındaki Rumeli Seyahati,” 7.

331 Kuzucu, 21.

332 Kuzucu, 7.

79

whether they were partisan to or opposition to the CUP.333 The newspapers reported that the trip was a success in uniting the people of Rumeli in their love and respect for the Sultan.334 Erik Jan Zürcher states that the trip failed to fulfill the following political purposes; bolstering the bonds between the government and the Muslim Albanian population, creating bonds between ethnic groups through Ottomanism, and politically strengthening CUP who had lost public support in the previous years. However, he concludes that it succeeded in creating the image of a likable and approachable Sultan.335

This trip was photographed extensively. There are twenty-four images of the Sultan published in the magazines, eighteen of which are of the first days at Thessaloniki. A photograph of the Sultan landing at Thessaloniki was printed in Resimli Kitab’s 30th issue in May/June 1911 (Figure 3.4.33). The Sultan is wearing a military uniform. Şehbal published a photograph with more religious imagery, showing the Sultan and the people of Thessaloniki at prayer in its 41st issue on July 28, 1911 (Figure 3.4.34). Servet-i Fünun’s photograph in its 1045th issue on June 16, 1911 by Sigmund Weinberg shows the Sultan walking through at the same square with the carpets (Figure 3.4.35). Servet-i Fünun republished this photograph in its 1401st issue on July 11, 1918 (Figure 3.4.36).

Photographs from the procession for the Friday Selamlık on June 9 were also printed in all three publications. Sigmund Weinberg photographed the Sultan leaving the Hagia Sophia Mosque for Servet-i Fünun’s cover of its 1046th issue on June 22, 1911 (Figure 3.4.37). Resimli Kitab used an image from the local studio Hilal (Figure 3.4.38) in addition to a photograph by an unknown photographer, possibly also Hilal (Figure

333 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, II:345.

334 Zürcher, “Sultan Reşad’ın Haziran 1911’deki Makedonya Seyahati,” 135.

335 Zürcher, 136–37.

80

3.4.39). Şehbal published a photograph from the procession, showing lined up soldiers saluting the Sultan (Figure 3.4.40).

Resimli Kitab published two photographs of the Sultan at the ceremony for the groundbreaking of the commemorative monument in front of a tent (Figures 3.4.41 and 3.4.43). One is attributed to Apollon (Figure 3.4.43), and although the other (Figure 3.4.41) one does not name a photographer it is possible that it is by the same studio. Cropped versions of these two photographs were also published in Şehbal (Figures 3.4.42 and 3.4.44). Two photographs of the procession returning from the barracks can be found in Resimli Kitab as well. One shows the Sultan in his carriage with soldiers standing at attention on the sides (Figure 3.4.45). The second one shows a closer view of the Sultan greeting the soldiers (Figure 3.4.46). Şehbal printed one image from this procession too (Figure 3.4.47). Although he wore a uniform for the Friday Selamlık at the Hagia Sophia mosque, here the Sultan is seen wearing plain clothes.

As the Sultan left Thessaloniki to go to Skopje by train on June 11, he was photographed again. One photograph from Resimli Kitab shows the Sultan walking from the carriage to train in a uniform and carrying a sword (Figure 3.4.48). There are two more photographs of the Sultan in Resimli Kitab, inside the train speaking to the people of Thessaloniki who had come to see him off (Figures 3.4.49 and 3.4.50).

Apollon followed the Sultan to Skopje and one of his photographs of the Sultan in his carriage in Kosovo was printed in Servet-i Fünun’s 1047th issue on June 29, 1911 (Figure 3.4.51). The same photograph was reprinted in the magazine’s 1401st issue on July 11, 1918 (Figure 3.4.52). A second photograph of the same scene was published in Resimli Kitab as well (Figure 3.4.53). The Sultan then moved on to Pristina. A photograph of him at the groundbreaking for the planned medrese was published in Servet-i Fünun’s

81

1048th issue on July 6, 1911 (Figure 3.4.54). This photograph again was reprinted in the magazine’s 1401st issue on July 11, 1918 (Figure 3.4.55). The last photograph of the trip is from Istanbul, of the welcoming committee for the Sultan’s return (Figure 3.4.56). This photograph by Sigmund Weinberg was published in Servet-i Fünun’s cover of its 1048th issue on July 6, 1911. The photograph shows the Sultan at the Dolmabahçe Palace, praying. Although more provincial trips were planned both by the Committee of Union and Progress and by Sultan Mehmed V Reşad, the Sultan’s ill health and the ensuing wars prevented them from happening.336

3.5. Diplomatic Ceremonies

The nineteenth century saw a new tradition take root for diplomatic visits in the Ottoman Empire. Previously, ambassadors conducted diplomatic relations between states, and it was rare that a sovereign personally met the Sultan. Visits from heads of states started in the late nineteenth century in the Ottoman Empire during Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reign and became more frequent in the twentieth century during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign. International relations becoming more intricate due to the looming World War I was one reason for this, in addition to new advances in transportation technologies. During Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign, four visits from foreign sovereigns were photographed and published in newspapers. Two of these, King Ferdinand I of Bulgaria and King Peter I of Serbia’s visits in 1910 were more prominently features in the press.

King Ferdinand I of Bulgaria and his wife Queen Eleonor visited the Ottoman Empire between March 21 and 29, 1910. Previously in Ottoman territory, Bulgaria had

336 Kuzucu, “Balkanlar’da Son Osmanlı Padişahı: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın 1911 Yılındaki Rumeli Seyahati,” 32.

82

recently become a sovereign nation in 1908. According to Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil, the Bulgarians wanted to see the Ottoman system of a constitutional monarchy in Istanbul.337 Both sides wanted to trip to strengthen the relationship between two neighbors.338 The Sultan and the imperial court had been informed that the King and Queen of Bulgaria were to visit.339 Uşaklıgil notes that the responsibility of discussing politics fell to the government of the Committee of Union and Progress, and the Sultan’s responsibility was only to be a good host.340 This was the first time that Sultan Mehmed V Reşad was hosting a sovereign.341 Although Sultan V Mehmed Reşad aimed to be a good host, he did not think good relations would be guaranteed with Bulgaria because he did not like the King’s inquisitive questions.342

King Ferdinand and Queen Eleonor arrived at Istanbul by train on March 21, 1910. They were welcomed by the Sultan at the Sirkeci station. Sultan Reşad accompanied the Queen to the imperial tent from Sirkeci. From Sirkeci, the King and Queen went to the Yıldız Palace where they would reside for the duration of their visit.343 The people of Istanbul had gathered on the sides of the streets to watch the procession.344 There was a reception and feast at the Dolmabahçe Palace on the same evening.345 The attire of the guests and music was in European fashion.

337 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 96.

338 Zeynep Alanoğlu, “Meşruti Sistemde Bir Padişah Portresi: Sultan Mehmed Reşad (1909-1918)” (Istanbul Üniversitesi, 2019), 90.

339 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:203.

340 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 97.

341 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:205.

342 Simavi, I:215.

343 The Yıldız Şale Kiosk had become the official guest house for visiting sovereigns during Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reign. He had made additions to the kiosk for the visits of Kaiser Wilhelm II. “Yıldız Şale Köşkü,” Milli Saraylar, n.d., https://www.millisaraylar.gov.tr/blog/yildiz-sale-kosku.

344 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 98.

345 Uşaklıgil, 102.

83

King Ferdinand visited şehzade Yusuf İzzeddin and Sadrazam Hakkı Pasha on March 22.346 For lunch, the King and Queen went to the Dolmabahçe Palace where the Queen visited the harem.347 The king and queen visited the Bulgarian Church on the next day, then visited the Meclis-i Mebusan to watch the proceedings. Another reception at the Yıldız Şale Kiosk was held for lunch. After lunch, there was a military procession at the Hürriyet Tepesi. Hürriyet Tepesi (Liberty Hill) in Şişli was where the Abide-i Hürriyet (Monument of Liberty) was located. As a memorial monument to those killed in the 31 March incident, it served as a visual reaffirmation of the Second Constitutional Period.348 An imperial tent was erected on the hill. Many troops had been sent away from Istanbul after the 31 March incident so there was difficulty to put together a military parade.349 In addition to the official personnel, many people from Istanbul had gathered at Liberty Hill to watch the parade. Lack of set protocol rules for such an occasion had created a chaotic environment.350 After the military parade the Sultan presented the King and Queen with Ottoman medals.351 The Sultan then went to the Teşvikiye Mosque for Friday prayers, the King and the Queen joined him at the mosque.352 In the following four days, the King and Queen visited several churches and mosques in Istanbul in addition to visits to Hereke and Bilecik.353

There are five photographs of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad during this visit. The first three were taken at the Sirkeci station when the King and Queen arrived. The first one, published in Servet-i Fünun’s 981st issue on March 24, shows the Sultan and the King side by side, walking to the Yacht Ertuğrul (Figure 3.5.1). Sultan Mehmed V Reşad is

346 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:207.

347 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 99.

348 Alanoğlu, “Meşruti Sistemde Bir Padişah Portresi: Sultan Mehmed Reşad (1909-1918),” 92.

349 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 100.

350 Uşaklıgil, 101.

351 Alanoğlu, “Meşruti Sistemde Bir Padişah Portresi: Sultan Mehmed Reşad (1909-1918),” 92.

352 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 101.

353 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:211.

84

seen wearing a military uniform adorned with medals, as is the King. The Sultan was also carrying a sword. An imperial tent can be seen in the background. The next photograph from Servet-i Fünun’s 982nd issue from March 30, 1910 shows the Sultan walking to the yacht, and Queen Eleonor had taken his arm (Figure 3.5.2). This portrays the Sultan’s European influenced demeanor during the trip. This is the only photograph of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad with a woman, and the only known instance that an Ottoman Sultan had shown this manner of closeness with a European Queen. The third photograph from the same issue shows the Sultan leaving the train station (Figure 3.5.3). From the skirts visible behind him it can be seen that it was the Queen accompanying him.

Two more photographs from this trip are from the military parade. In the first photograph by Sigmund Weinberg published in Servet-i Fünun, the imperial tent from the previous photographs makes a reappearance (Figure 3.4.6). Another view of the tent can be seen in a photograph published in Resimli Kitab’s 18th issue (Figure 3.4.7). The Sultan can be seen speaking to the King and the Bulgarian Minister of War.354

King Petro I of Serbia had planned on a visit to the Ottoman Empire before King Ferdinand I of Bulgaria, claiming to Lütfi Simavi that King Ferdinand had heard of this intention and planned his trip sooner due to competition.355 The ceremonies and protocol during King Ferdinand’s visit provided the precedent for King Petro’s visit. The same banquets and processions were used.356 The trip took place between April 3 and 9, 1910.

The King arrived on April 3, 1910 at the Sirkeci train station. In addition to the Sultan şehzade Yusuf İzzeddin and Sadrazam Hakkı Pasha were among those who welcomed the King. The next day he visited the Ecumenical Patriarchate of

354 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 101.

355 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:215.

356 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 105.

85

Constantinople and visited the military of Harbiye.357 On April 5, after a banquet at the Yıldız Şale Kiosk the King and the Sultan went to the Hürriyet Tepesi (Liberty Hill) for a military parade. Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil found this military procession to be a success after the trial of the previous one.358 The attire during these parades was important. Lütfi Simavi writes that Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s sons were not in uniform during the military parade because they were not in the military, a fact that the King drew attention to which embarrassed Lütfi Simavi.359 The King then visited the Meclis-i Mebusan on June 6 before returning on June 9.360 Unlike the King Ferdinand I of Bulgaria, the Sultan had liked the modest and sincere looking King Petro I of Serbia.361

There are thirteen photographs of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad during this diplomatic visit. Six of those of the King’s arrival and welcoming ceremony at Sirkeci. Sigmund Weinberg’s photograph of the Sultan arriving at the Sirkeci station was published in Servet-i Fünun’s 983rd issue on April 7, 1910 (Figure 3.5.6). The Sultan is seen in front of the imperial yacht, in military uniform and carrying a sword. The King’s arrival was published in Resimli Kitab’s 19th issue (Figure 3.5.7). The Sultan and his retinue are leaving for the imperial tent. A photograph by Sébah & Joaillier shows that a different imperial tent was used this time (Figure 3.5.8). Published in Resimli Kitab, this photograph shows the Sultan and şehzade Yusuf İzzeddin who is also in military uniform. Another photograph from Resimli Kitab shows the Sultan and the King on the way to board the Yacht Söğütlü (Figure 3.5.9). The same photograph was also published in Şehbal’s 21st issue on June 14 (Figure 3.5.10). A photograph of the same scene with a

357 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:210.

358 Uşaklıgil, Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar, 105.

359 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, I:213.

360 Simavi, I:211.

361 Simavi, I:215.

86

wider angle was taken by Sigmund Weinberg for Servet-i Fünun’s 983rd issue (Figure 3.5.11).

The next four photographs show the Sultan and the King going to the Yıldız Şale Kiosk for a banquet. Photographed again by Sébah & Joaillier, the Sultan and the King are seen leaving the Dolmabahçe Palace in a photograph from Resimli Kitab (Figure 3.5.12). The same photograph was used by Şehbal although without Sébah & Joaillier’s name for its 21st issue (Figure 3.5.13). A photograph by Phébus from Servet-i Fünun’s 983rd issue shows the sovereigns in the imperial car (Figure 3.5.14). Resimli Kitab also published a photograph of the Sultan and the King in the car, with the Sultan waving (Figure 3.5.15). Because of sharing a car, these photographs show the sovereigns in close proximity, sitting side by side, symbolizing recognition of legitimacy and friendship between the states.

After the banquet at Yıldız Şale Kiosk they moved on to Hürriyet Tepesi. Their arrival was photographed by Sébah Joaillier for Resimli Kitab (Figure 3.5.16). Again side by side in the car, this time with a military backdrop this photograph was a show their military power. The same imperial tent from the welcoming ceremonies was used for the military parade, as can be seen in Sigmund Weinberg’s photograph from Servet-i Fünun’s 985th issue (Figure 3.5.17). Here the foreign military attachés being presented to the King in front of the imperial tent. Another photograph by Weinberg showing the Sultan, the King, and the attendees posing was also published (Figure 3.5.18).

Later during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany visited the Empire. This was the Kaiser’s third visit after two made during Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reign. This visit took place in October 1917, while the First World War was ongoing. Therefore, the visit of the allied Kaiser was a very important political event.

87

During this four-day visit, the Kaiser not only visited Istanbul but also went to the battlefields in Çanakkale.362 This trip was not publicly announced because the Committee of Union and Progress feared an assassination attempt, but the preparations started two days earlier.363

The Kaiser’s trip also included another ally for World War I, Bulgaria. After a trip in Bulgaria that was celebrated widely by the public and the newspapers, the Kaiser moved on to Istanbul by train.364 Sultan Mehmed V Reşad, with his sons and şehzade Vahdeddin, greeted the Kaiser at the Sirkeci train station. Notably absent was şehzade Yusuf İzzeddin who had committed suicide in 1916 due to stress. Afterward, the Kaiser, accompanied by the Sultan and Enver Pasha in the imperial carriage, went on a procession through Istanbul.

The trip’s reflection in the press through photographs, however, was small. By then, Resimli Kitab and Şehbal, two magazines printing photographs, had ceased publication. Moreover, the secrecy surrounding the event may have impeded the photographers from attending the ceremonies. Only one photograph from this visit was published in Servet-i Fünun’s 1323rd issue on October 17, 1917 (Figure 3.5.19). It is from the personal archive of Ahmed İhsan, the director of the newspaper. The photograph shows the Sultan welcoming the Kaiser at Sirkeci. Enver Pasha can be seen on the right. The photograph, or its printing technique, is of a lower quality than the photographs of the King of Bulgaria and Serbia in 1910 (Figures 3.5.1-3.5.18). The contrast is low in the background and detail of the soldiers is lost to only show a black area. Two more images of this visit appear in Servet-i Fünun’s 1367th and 1400th issues too, but the thick outlines,

362 Alanoğlu, “Meşruti Sistemde Bir Padişah Portresi: Sultan Mehmed Reşad (1909-1918),” 95.

363 Ö. Kürşad Karacagil, “Alman İmparatoru Istanbul’da (1917),” Gazi Akademik Bakış 6, no. 12 (2013): 117.

364 Karacagil, 115.

88

and roundly granulated grey areas suggest these are engravings fashioned after photographs (Figures 3.5.20 and 3.5.21).

Although there are photographs of Kaiser Wilhelm II’s visit in various archives, such as the Deniz Müzesi (Naval Museum), the Ömer M. Koç Collection, the Imperial War Museum, and Das Bundesarchiv (German Federal Archives), the scope of this chapter only includes photographs printed in Ottoman publications. Similarly, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad hosted other foreign sovereigns, such as Emperor Karl I of Austria in 1918, but photographs of these were not published in newspapers.

3.6. Funeral Ceremony

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad was already an old man when he became the Sultan and he was suffering from problems with his bladder all his life. Especially the last state visits from Kaiser Wilhelm I and Emperor Karl I’s visits had taken a toll on his health.365 Sultan Mehmed Reşad died on July 3, 1918. The burial ceremony was held on July 4, one day after his death. Accompanied by şehzades and members of the court, his casket was brought through Ortaköy Street and put on a ferry from Çırağan Pier which traveled to the Topkapı Palace complex.

Sultan Mehmed V Resad’s death caused sorrow among the public and thousands of people attended his funeral ceremony. People at the Hagia Sophia square and on the Haliç shore sadly watched the procession carrying Sultan Mehmed V Resad’s coffin with

365 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, II:571.

89

prayers and eulogies.366 The local newspapers published in favor of the dynasty and tried to create a feeling of “national mourning.”367

Sultan Mehmed V Reşad died nearly six months after Sultan Abdülhamid II, therefore the statesmen who attended his funeral were almost the same men. Those who would attend the ceremony and where they would stay was arranged by the Protocol Department. In “The regulations book on the rules that should be obeyed during the funeral ceremonies of the dead people from the Sultanate Dynasty,” which had been prepared with Sultan Mehmed V Resad’s instructions on February 22, 1914, all the details about who would attend Sultan Abdülhamid II’s funeral ceremony, under which title, and in which row they would be, were considered.368 The difference between the two funeral ceremonies was that the public’s participation and respect were much more in Sultan Abdülhamid II’s funeral because he had ruled much longer than Sultan Mehmed V Reşad.369

Since the early periods of the state, until Sultan Selim II, the sultans had attended their predecessors’ funerals. This custom changed after Sultan Selim II and the Ottoman sultans did not attend their predecessors’ funerals with the exception of Sultan Selim III attending Sultan Abdülhamid I’s funeral prayer.370 The important part in Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s funeral was that his successor Sultan Mehmed VI Vahdeddin also attended. He attended the funeral ceremony in Topkapı Palace. While the casket was taken to Eyüp by sea, Sultan Vahdeddin did not attend the procession. He traveled to Eyüp by land,

366 Servet Yanatma, “The Deaths and Funeral Ceremonies of Ottoman Sultans (from Sultan Mahmud II to Sultan Mehmed VI Vahideddin)” (Boğaziçi University, 2007), 83–84.. 83-84, 116.

367 Nevim Tüzün, “Osmanlı Sultanı V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Vefatının İkdam, Sabah, Tani ve Vakit Gazetelerine Yansımaları,” Journal of International Social Research 12, no. 65 (2019): 156.,

368 Yanatma, “The Deaths and Funeral Ceremonies of Ottoman Sultans (from Sultan Mahmud II to Sultan Mehmed VI Vahideddin),” 134–35..

369 Yanatma, 141..

370 Yanatma, 136–37.

90

through the Divanyolu route.371 Lütfi Simavi writes that a sultan not attending the funeral of his predecessor is an act of disrespect that is unheard of in Europe yet is considered custom in the Ottoman Empire and congratulates Sultan Vahdeddin on his decision.372

Sultan Mehmed VI Vahdeddin disobeyed a dynastic tradition by attending his brother Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s funeral rites. His decision to attend may have been the result of a will to use the opportunity of the ceremony to create a public image that portrayed his power and legitimacy as a sultan. A ceremony through Divanyolu stressed the holy warfare ideology of the state and the sanction of Ottoman rule by the warrior-saint Ayyub.373 It strengthened Sultan Vahdeddin’s legitimacy as the caliph by reviving an old tradition.374

Funeral ceremonies in the Ottoman Empire are linked to accession ceremonies. Ottoman funerary rituals served simultaneously to associate the new sultan’s reign with a dynastic past, and the final transfer sovereignty did not occur during the accession ceremony but after the funeral rituals.375 The death of the Ottoman sultans and the ensuing funeral ceremonies are an important segment of the Ottoman dynastic culture. A semblance of continuity between the accession of the new ruler and the burial of the old one ritually concealed the temporary disruption of the imperial order during chaotic periods. The smooth sequence of accession and funeral rites thus helped to bridge the dangerous hiatus in the order of things brought about by a sultan’s death.376 The Ottoman accession and burial rituals stressed the perpetuity of the ruling dynasty. By going through

371 Yanatma, 126..

372 Simavi, Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim, 2017, III:577.

373 Necipoğlu, “Dynastic Imprints on the Cityscape: The Collective Message of Imperial Funerary Mosque Complexes in Istanbul,” 25.

374 Ahmad, The Young Turks and the Ottoman Nationalities, 138.

375 Necipoğlu, “Dynastic Imprints on the Cityscape: The Collective Message of Imperial Funerary Mosque Complexes in Istanbul,” 34.

376 Necipoğlu, 34.

91

Divanyolu to Eyüp, the sultan strengthened his dynastic link in the eyes of the audience through the ritual itself and the monuments he passed by and visited. Architecture and the ritual of the ceremony joined together to highlight the prestige of the ruling house.377

There are eleven photographs in the funeral albums of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad, and their photographer is unknown (Figures 3.6.1-3.6.11). Unlike other photographs which were examined so far in this thesis, these photographs were not taken to be printed in a newspaper. The photographs for newspapers are singular, focusing on one moment of a particular event. The funeral album, on the other hand shows the continuous story of the procession from Topkapı to Sirkeci. Furthermore, the photographs were not printed in a newspaper and their serial nature indicates that publication was never the intention. This reflects the nature of the funeral ceremony which was more private and somber affair than the previous ones. Similarly, illustrated manuscripts in the Ottoman Empire were not made for the masses and their viewings were reserved for the elite and prestigious guests. One notable absence in the photographs is the new Sultan Vahdeddin’s. Although he attended parts of the funeral ceremony, he does not appear in the photographs. This may be a result of his reverence for the tradition of Ottoman sultans not attending their predecessor’s funerals. Although he used this opportunity to heighten his visibility, the official visual documentation pays respect to the deceased sultan and Ottoman traditions.

Rather than printing photographs of the funeral procession, Servet-i Fünun chose to print photographs from Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s previous ceremonies (Figures 3.1.2, 3.1.7, 3.1.9, 3.4.8, 3.4.13, 3.4.24, 3.4.36, 3.4.52, and 3.4.55). These were printed in Servet-i Fünun’s 1401st issue on July 11, 1918. These are photographs from his sword girding ceremony, and province trips. All of them were reprints of photographs previous

377 Necipoğlu, 35.

92

published in Servet-i Fünun. This attests to how much Sultan Mehmed V Reşad had come to be identified with his ceremonies.

3.7. Statistics and Analysis

Newspapers Sigmund Weinberg Sébah & Joaillier Phébus Kenan Reşid Bey Apollon Asaf Muammer Bey Hilal Unknown Total

Servet-i Fünun

30

1

5

0

2

4

0

16

58 Şehbal 1 13 1 0 1 0 0 14 30

Resimli Kitab

3

10

4

6

1

0

1

15

40 Total 34 24 10 6 4 4 1 45 128

Table 2. Number of photographs in Servet-i Fünun, Şehbal, and Resimli Kitab by photographers

Looking at Table 2, it can be seen that Sigmund Weinberg has the highest number of published photographs with 34. This can be attributed to the prolificacy of the photographer, but it should be kept in mind that his signature is the most easily recognizable of the group. Weinberg chose areas of plain white or black in his photographs to sign his name in the opposite color, regardless of whether it would disrupt the framing or the focal point of the picture. Other photographers are harder to identify unless the newspaper has given them credit. Unknown photographers make up the biggest group. It is difficult to identify these unless the publication has credited them. The first reason for this is that although the publications had official photographers this did not exclude them from printing photographs by other photographers. Second is that even if the photographs from the same ceremony or scene appear in multiple publications, unless the shot is exactly the same it cannot be assumed that the same photographer was the originator because many photographers could be at one scene at a time. For the same reason, even if several photographs of one ceremony is printed in one publication, and

93

only one is credited, it cannot be assumed that the photographs in the same issue are from the same photographer.

The table also shows that Servet-i Fünun had most of the photographs, 56 out of 126. Resimli Kitab followed with 40 and lastly Şehbal with 30. The last two publications had a much shorter lifespan than Servet-i Fünun, which continued publishing during the First World War.

Chart 1. Distribution of the number of photographs by photographers in each publication

Chart 1 shows the relationship between the photographers and the newspapers by showing the distribution of the photographers. Sigmund Weinberg had almost all of his work published in Servet-i Fünun. Sébah & Joaillier had their work mostly in Şehbal and Resimli Kitab. Similarly, Phébus’s work was mostly in Sevet-i Fünun and Resimli Kitab. Sigmund Weinberg, Sébah & Joaillier, Phébus, and Apollon’s work appeared in all three of the newspapers. On the other hand, Kenan Reşid Bey, Asaf Muammer Bey and Hilal had their photographs in only one publication.

0

0

5

5

10

10

15

15

20

20

25

25

30

30

35

35

Sigmund

SigmundWeinbergWeinberg

Sébah &

Sébah &JoaillierJoaillier

Phébus

Phébus

Kenan Reşid

Kenan ReşidBeyBey

Apollon

Apollon

Asaf

AsafMuammerMuammerBeyBey

Hilal

Hilal

Unknown

Unknown

Servet-i Fünun

Servet-i Fünun

Şehbal

Şehbal

Resimli Kitab

Resimli Kitab

94

Chart 2. The ratios of known photographers' work in the publications

Sigmund

Sigmund WeinbergWeinberg

Sébah &

Sébah & JoaillierJoaillier

Phébus

Phébus

Apollon

Apollon

Asaf Muammer Bey

Asaf Muammer Bey

Servet

Servet--i Fünuni Fünun

Sigmund

Sigmund WeinbergWeinberg

Sébah &

Sébah & JoaillierJoaillier

Phébus

Phébus

Apollon

Apollon

Şehbal

Şehbal

Sigmund

Sigmund WeinbergWeinberg

Sébah &

Sébah & JoaillierJoaillier

Phébus

Phébus

Kenan Reşid

Kenan Reşid BeyBey

Apollon

Apollon

Hilal

Hilal

Resimli Kitab

Resimli Kitab

95

Charts 2-5 allow for individually looking at each publication, focusing on the known photographers. Sigmund Weinberg had the highest number of photographs from Servet-i Fünun. For both Şehbal and Resimli Kitab the leader is Sébah & Joaillier. Resimli Kitab had the widest range of photographers with six, followed by Servet-i Fünun with five, and Şehbal with four. Şehbal’s homogeneity could be attributed to its lack of credit to photographers. Many of the identifications from Şehbal came by cross referencing the other two magazines. If no exact match was found attribution was impossible due to aforementioned reasons.

Ceremony Sigmund Weinberg Sébah & Joaillier Phébus Kenan Reşid Bey Apollon Asaf Muammer Bey Hilal Unknown Total

Accession

3

10

13 Religious 10 4 3 17

Political

6

6

6

2

2

22 Trips 10 11 4 4 1 25 55

Diplomatic

8

7

1

5

21 Total 34 24 10 6 4 4 1 45 128

Table 3. Categories of ceremonies and photographers

Table 3 shows the number of photographs by each photographer according to categories of ceremonies. The accession ceremony was only photographed by Phébus. Sigmund Weinberg photographed every ceremony except the accession. Sébah & Joaillier did not photograph any of the religious ceremonies. Hilal, being a studio located at Thessaloniki, only photographed the trip to Rumeli. Asaf Muammer Bey also only photographed the province trips. Phébus and Kenan Reşid Bey did not photograph the province trips and their photographs are all of ceremonies within Istanbul. The province trips were the most photographed ceremonies and their photographs have the widest variety of photographers. This can be attributed to the fact that these trips were the first imperial trips outside Istanbul in more than thirty years. They were a novelty which

96

generated interest. More importantly, for the Rumelia trip in particular, the Committee of Union and Progress asked photographers to join the trip and advertised it in the press.

Chart 3. Number of published photographs of ceremonies throughout Sultan Mehmed V Reşad's reign

The photographs start off very strong with Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s accession ceremony in 1909, owing to the freedom to publish and propagate the Sultan’s image that came with the coup of 1908. They taper off during 1911 and there none from 1912. A small spike happens in 1914 when Sultan Mehmed V Reşad visited the parliament but the photographs disappear again. This was before Resimli Kitab and Şehbal shut down in 1914 and 1915 respectively, so that was not the reason for their discontinuation.

There are several possible reasons. One is that the Italo-Turkish Wars, the First Balkan War, and the First World War made the trips more difficult and dangerous. The second is that the Sultan was old and sick, so he was not able to participate in many ceremonies. As many of these ceremonies had been the Committee of Union and Progress’s efforts for uniting the Ottoman people under one figurehead, they may have

0

0

5

5

10

10

15

15

20

20

25

25

30

30

35

35

40

40

45

45

50

50

1909

1909

1910

1910

1911

1911

1912

1912

1913

1913

1914

1914

1915

1915

1916

1916

1917

1917

1918

1918

97

come to the realization that these efforts were not giving the political results they had hoped for and therefore abandoned this plan. However, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad and his ceremonies had been so inseparable in the public consciousness that to commemorate him after his death Servet-i Fünun once more published photographs of the Sultan’s old ceremonies.

98

CONCLUSION

This study compiles photographs from three Ottoman publications depicting Sultan Mehmed V Reşad attending ceremonies to show how the image-making efforts during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign were reflected in the media. There was a shift towards a more visible image for the Sultan through direct and indirect means. Photographs of ceremonies blended these two efforts together.

Beginning with its introduction into the Ottoman Empire in Sultan Mahmud II’s reign, the press was a political tool both for the Ottoman sultans and the government, and their opponents. The Committee of Union and Progress was on the opposition side and when they came to power in 1908, they exerted control over the press through laws because they were aware of the importance of the newspapers in controlling the narrative and creating an imperial image. The Committee did not abolish the position of the sultan completely, but instead tried to use it for their own purpose, which was the continuation of the Ottoman Empire with the Sultan acting as a unifying figure. Surveillance and censorship were used extensively to control the press in the nineteenth century. They continued censorship even though the methods were changed after Sultan Abdülhamid II was deposed. Neither Sultan Mehmed V Reşad nor the CUP had the preliminary press restrictions of Sultan Abdülhamid II. The press was not required to print certain topics. The newspapers also did not have to be approved by a government body prior to publication. Sometimes, such as the province tours, the press was invited specifically to join; but that was not always the case. The role of newspapers in creating a new sultanic image was the culmination of both intended and unintended visibility. Furthermore, there was a limit to the extent of the propagation of this new image for the Sultan. The three periodicals which printed the photographs of ceremonies operated in Istanbul; thus, the photographs’ visibility was limited to the Ottoman capital.

99

I also examined the relationship between imperial-image making and sultanic visibility firstly through ceremonies and secondly visual media. Ceremonies and processions were a way for the sultan to project a desired public image. They were an opportunity for the sultan to directly interact with the public. The public appearance of the Ottoman sultans helped build their public image. Sharing the same thoughts and emotions amplified feelings of fraternity and created a spiritual bond amongst the audience. Increasing visibility through ceremonies to build the Sultan’s public image became very important during Sultan Mahmud II’s reign and continued to be the imperial strategy until Sultan Abdülhamid II, whose policy relied on invisibility. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s ceremonies can be seen as a revival of the nineteenth century tradition. In a time of hardship, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s ceremonies created feelings of solidarity within the audience along with a feeling of reverence for the Sultan and the Ottoman dynasty. Imperial ideology in the nineteenth century included both tradition and modernity, which was reflected in the visual representations of the sultan. Ottoman sultans disseminated their image with large-scale portraits, medals, and photography. This tradition briefly stopped during Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reign but was revived in the twentieth century. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s photographs are the continuation of practices of tasvir-i hümayun and imperial portraiture from the nineteenth century.

In the nineteenth century, photography was also used for imperial ideology during Sultan Abdülaziz and Sultan Abdülhamid II’s reigns. While Sultan Abdülaziz embraced the new media and utilized it along with traditional painting to disseminate his image, Sultan Abdülhamid II controlled its use to decrease his visibility. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign again marked a deviation from the practices of Sultan Abdülhamid II and a return to previous traditions. Photojournalism became a very important tool for the propagation of the Sultan’s image which mainly focused on the numerous ceremonies the

100

Sultan attended, ranging from religious Islamic ceremonies to diplomatic visits of foreign heads of state.

In this thesis, I categorized the photographs according to the types of ceremonies with information on the specific ceremonies. The same photographs appearing in several periodicals show that there was a network of photographers and newspapers who collaborated. The photographer/publication relationships were not always dyadic. This section also reveals common elements of photographs according to their categories. The religious ceremonies are more private than the political ones. For the religious ceremonies, we do not see the Sultan inside a mosque or the Topkapı Palace. But for the political ceremonies, there are photographs of the Sultan inside the parliament buildings.

The accession ceremony photographs show that increasing visibility was the policy for imperial image-making from the start of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign. The press quickly went into action to photograph the ceremonies and do not show hesitation to publish the image of the Sultan. This shows that the press was not concerned that Sultan Abdülhamid II’s restrictions towards the dissemination of his image would carry over to the news Sultan’s reign. The religious ceremonies show Sultan Mehmed V Reşad as a pious Muslim following Islamic traditions. Political ceremonies show that the Sultan supported the parliament, and by extension, the Committee of Union and Progress. These photographs present a unified Ottoman government and sultanate. Photographs of the province tours show a Sultan eager to connect with Ottoman people from all social and religious backgrounds while upholding Islamic rituals and paying respects to the Ottoman dynastic past. Photographs of diplomatic visits from foreign heads of states portray the Ottoman Empire as an important player in the international arena both with hospitality and with the show of military power. The funeral ceremony’s photographs’ exclusion from the press highlights Servet-i Fünun’s choice to commemorate Sultan Mehmed V

101

Reşad by reprinting photographs of his previous ceremonies. Although these ceremonies were from the first years of his reign and many years had since passed, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad was identified with his ceremonies.

The majority of the ceremony photographs date before 1912. 1912 onwards were difficult years for the CUP. The opposition party briefly came to power only to be overthrown by the CUP. The Ottoman parliament was closed until 1914. This occasion is the only ceremony photographed and published until 1917. The time when the CUP struggled to hold the central power in the Ottoman Empire coincides with the decline of photographs of ceremonies. The decline also coincides with the change of the CUP’s ideology from Ottomanism to Turkism. Although the Committee was a deciding factor behind the ceremonies, the only agency cannot be attributed to the Committee. Sultan Mehmed V Reşad had restarted the nineteenth century tradition of increasing visibility through imperial ceremonies.

The Committee of Union and Progress wanted to use the figure of the Sultan as a unifying force for the Ottoman people to create a sense of unity within the people and prevent territorial losses. They wanted to promote the Sultan as a popular figure who is close to the public. Some ceremonies within Istanbul, such as the accession ceremony and diplomatic ceremonies, were conducted under the guidance of the Committee, but some others, like Friday prayer processions, were the result of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s will. The province trips gradually became longer and went further away from the capital to culminate in the Rumelia trip in an attempt to allay the discontent growing in the Balkans with the influence of the Committee, but they were started by Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s small trip to Hereke. The driving forces behind the ceremonies worked together. The two parties did not necessarily decide on this agenda together, but their inclinations were compatible. Primary sources note that Sultan Mehmed V Reşad was happy to be attending

102

these ceremonies and these made him feel closer to the public. Although he was not completely in control of the image-making process, the portrayal of a kind, down-to-earth Sultan who respected the rituals and traditions of the Ottoman Empire was one that harmonized well with his personality. The Sultan’s personality during the ceremonies is apparent in his photographs. Unlike previous sultans who maintained a rigid demeanor during ceremonies, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s photographs show him greeting the public. Not only was the visibility increased, but Sultan Mehmed V Reşad also presented a more approachable and friendly appearance as evidence by his gestures.

The use of photography to represent the ceremonies of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad continue the trend of manipulating the gaze through media in the Ottoman Empire. The audience of the ceremonies of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad was not just the people who physically witnessed it. The photographs brought the ceremonies to a wider audience. The photographs heightened the increased direct visibility of the ceremonies through increased indirect visibility. Previously, representations of ceremonies in images remained private and almost invisible. Photography changed this and enabled many viewers to access the Sultan’s ceremonies indirectly. The subject matter of ceremonies meant that these were different from tasvir-i hümayun. The “snapshot” aspect inferred a more natural and personal quality to these photographs compared to the formally posed imperial portraiture. The ritual of the ceremony and photography joined together to highlight the prestige of the ruling house. The photographs symbolically reclaimed power and legitimacy through the act of representation; and disseminated a new visible imperial image to a new audience.

This study only examines photographs of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s ceremonies printed in Ottoman newspapers within the context of sultanic visibility. There are additional photographs of these ceremonies in various archives, collections, museums,

103

and libraries in Turkey and abroad. Further studies on these photographs should be conducted for a fuller understanding of the importance and impact of photographs of ceremonies. Moreover, the scholarship on Ottoman photography during this era is severely lacking and a more general study of photography during Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s reign can yield important information to better contextualize ceremony photographs.

104

FIGURES

Figure 1.1. Apollon, Sultan Mehmed V Reşad, watercolor on photograph, 1909, from Dynasty and Camera: Portraits from the Ottoman Court, p.31.

105

Figure 1.2.1. Seyyid Lokman, The enthronement ceremony of Sultan Süleyman I, Hünername vol. 2, ca. 1587-88, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, Ms. H. 1524, fol. 25b-26a. from “The Depiction of Ceremonies in Ottoman Miniatures: Historical Record or a Matter of Protocol?,” p.257

106

Figure 1.2.2. Seyyid Lokman, A Bayram ceremony at the Topkapı Palace, Şehinşahname vol. 2, ca. 1592, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, Ms. B. 200, fols. 159b-160a, from “The Depiction of Ceremonies in Ottoman Miniatures: Historical Record or a Matter of Protocol?,” p.264

107

Figure 1.2.3. Levni, Parade of cooks, tanners, butchers, and livestock traders, Surname-i Vehbi, 1727, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, A. 3593, fols. 73b-74a, from 40 Gün 40 Gece: Osmanlı Düğünleri, Şenlikleri, Geçit Alayları, p. 272-73.

108

Figure 1.2.4. Attributed to Kostantin Kapıdağlı, Selim III in audience, Topkapı Palace Museum 17/163, ca. 1789, from The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman, p.470.

109

Figure 1.2.5. Anonymous, Medal with the portrait of Sultan Mahmud II (tasvir-i hümayun nişanı), Topkapı Palace Museum 2/1023, from The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman, p.508.

Figure 1.2.6. Marras, Medal with the portrait of Sultan Mahmud II (tasvir-i hümayun nişanı), Topkapı Palace Museum 17/208, 1832, from The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman, p.509.

110

Figure 1.2.7. Anonymous, Sultan Mahmud II, oil on canvas, TSM 17/115, from The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman, p.505

111

Figure 2.1.1. William Downey, Sultan Abdülaziz, 1867, from Hatıra-i Uhuvvet - Portre Fotoğraflarının Cazibesi: 1846-1950, p.89.

112

Figure 2.1.2. Abdullah Frères, Sultan Abdülaziz, 1865, from Dynasty and Camera: Portraits from the Ottoman Court, p.79.

113

Figure 2.1.3. William Downey, Abdülhamid Efendi, 1867, from Hatıra-i Uhuvvet - Portre Fotoğraflarının Cazibesi: 1846-1950, p.93.

114

Figure 2.2.1 Unknown Photographer, Our photographer at Thessaloniki, Servet-i Fünun, n.1045 p.108, 3 Haziran 1327 (16 June 1911), MK

115

Figure 3.1.1. Unknown Photographer, His Majesty Mehmed V in front of Hagia Sophia on the way to the Topkapı Palace, Servet-i Fünun, n.935 p.385, 23 Nisan 1325 (6 May 1909), MK

Figure 3.1.2. Unknown Photographer, The first Selamlık of Mehmed V at Hagia Sophia, Servet-i Fünun, n.1401 p.368, 11 Temmuz 1334 (11 July 1918), SALT

116

Figure 3.1.3. Phébus, The sultan leaving his palace, Servet-i Fünun, n.937 p.5, 7 Mayıs 1325 (20 May 1909), MK

Figure 3.1.4. Phébus, The inauguration ceremony - at the moment of leaving his palace to go to Eyüp, Şehbal, n.6 p.105, 1 Haziran 1325 (14 June 1909), UBDC

117

Figure 3.1.5. Phébus, His Imperial Majesty after visiting the Hırka-i Şerif, Resimli Kitab, n. 8 p.799, Mayıs 1325 (May-June 1909), HTU

118

Figure 3.1.6. Unknown Photographer, At the Eyüp Mosque, Servet-i Fünun, n.936 supplement between p.408-409, 30 Nisan 1325 (13 May 1909), MK

Figure 3.1.7. Unknown Photographer, The sword girding ceremony of Mehmed V in Eyüp, Servet-i Fünun, n.1401 p.368, 11 Temmuz 1334 (11 July 1918), SALT

119

Figure 3.1.8. Unknown Photographer, Sultan Mehmed in his carriage, Servet-i Fünun, n.936 supplement between p.408-409, 30 Nisan 1325 (13 May 1909), MK

Figure 3.1.9. Unknown Photographer, Mehmed V’s inauguration procession in Edirnekapı, Servet-i Fünun, n. 1408 p. 52, 29 Ağustos 1334 (29 August 1918), SALT

120

Figure 3.1.10. Unknown Photographer, The Sword Girding: His Imperial Majesty Mehmed V in his car, Resimli Kitab, n.8 p.795, Mayıs 1325 (May-June 1909), HTU

Figure 3.1.11. Unknown Photographer, The inauguration ceremony - The imperial procession near Edirnekapı, Şehbal, n.6 p.106, 1 Haziran 1325 (14 June 1909), UBDC

121

Figure 3.1.12. Unknown Photographer, The inauguration ceremony - The sultan

saluting the diplomatic corps, back from the procession, Şehbal, n.6 p.108, 1 Haziran

1325 (14 June 1909), UBDC

Figure 3.1.13. Unknown Photographer, The inauguration ceremony - The imperial

procession, seen from the place reserved for the diplomatic corps, Şehbal, n.6 p.108, 1

Haziran 1325 (14 June 1909), UBDC

122

Figure 3.2.1. Sigmund Weinberg, His Majesty Mehmed V leaving his palace to attend the Selamlık, Servet-i Fünun, n.936 cover, 30 Nisan 1325 (13 May 1909), MK

Figure 3.2.2. Sigmund Weinberg, The Selamlık: The departure of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan for the Dolmabahçe Mosque, Resimli Kitab, n.8 p.782, Mayıs 1325 (May-June 1909), HTU

123

Figure 3.2.3. Sigmund Weinberg, His Majesty the Sultan exiting the Yeni Cami Mosque in Üsküdar after the Selamlık, Servet-i Fünun, n.1041 cover, 5 Mayıs 1327 (18 May 1911), MK

124

Figure 3.2.4. Sigmund Weinberg, His Majesty the Sultan landing at Üsküdar, Servet-i Fünun, n.1041 p.5, 5 Mayıs 1327 (18 May 1911), MK

Figure 3.2.5. Sigmund Weinberg, His Majesty the Sultan in his car in Üsküdar, Servet-i Fünun, n.1041 p.5, 5 Mayıs 1327 (18 May 1911), MK

125

Figure 3.2.6. Sigmund Weinberg, His Majesty the Sultan visiting the Selimiye Barracks, Servet-i Fünun, n.1041 p.9, 5 Mayıs 1327 (18 May 1911), MK

Figure 3.2.7. Sigmund Weinberg, Arrival of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan at Üsküdar for the first time for the Selamlık, Resimli Kitab, n.29 p.371, Nisan 1325 (April-May 1911), HTU

126

Figure 3.2.8. Sigmund Weinberg, His Imperial Majesty the Sultan passing through Üsküdar for the Selamlık , Resimli Kitab, n. 29 p. 371, Nisan 1325 (April-May 1911), HTU

127

Figure 3.2.9. Unknown Photographer, His Majesty entering the mosque, Şehbal, n.36

p.220, 15 Mart 1327 (28 March 1911), UBDC

Figure 3.2.10. Unknown Photographer, After the religious ceremony the Sultan returns

to the palace, Şehbal, n.36 p.220, 15 Mart 1327 (28 March 1911), UBDC

128

Figure 3.2.11. Unknown Photographer, Ceremony of the Kurban Bayramı - His Majesty leaving the Nusretiye Mosque, Servet-i Fünun, n.1019 cover, 2 Kanunuevvel 1326 (15 December 1910), MK

129

Figure 3.2.11. Sigmund Weinberg, The celebration of Kurban Bayramı - sacrifice of the sheep in front of H. I M. the sultan, Servet-i Fünun, n.1071 cover, 1 Kanunuevvel 1327 (14 December 1911), MK

Figure 3.2.13. Sigmund Weinberg, The celebration of Kurban Bayramı; sacrificied sheep at the Imperial Palace, Servet-i Fünun, n.1071 p.100, 1 Kanunuevvel 1327 (14 December 1911), MK

130

Figure 3.2.14. Kenan Reşid Bey, His Imperial Majesty the Sultan and Khedive Abbas Hilmi Pasha in a car in Sarayburnu to visit the Topkapı Palace, Resimli Kitab, n.11 p.1113, Ağustos 1325 (August-September 1909), HTU

Figure 3.2.15 Kenan Reşid Bey, Arrival of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan and the Khedive at the Topkapı Palace, Resimli Kitab, n.11 p.1113, Ağustos 1325 (August-September 1909), HTU

131

Figure 3.2.16. Kenan Reşid Bey, Return of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan after visiting the cover of the tomb of the prophet, Resimli Kitab, n.11 p.1110, Ağustos 1325 (August-September 1909), HTU

3.2.17. Kenan Reşid Bey, His Imperial Majesty the Sultan going to the Sultanahmet Mosque for the ceremony of “Mevlüd,” Resimli Kitab, n.18 p.474, Mart 1326 (March-April 1910), HTU

132

Figure 3.3.1. Sigmund Weinberg, Arrival of H. I. M. the Sultan Mehmed V at the Parliament, Servet-i Fünun, n.938 cover, 15 Mayıs 1325 (28 May 1909), MK

Figure 3.3.2. Sigmund Weinberg, H. I. M. the Sultan Mehmed V in his box at the Parliament, Servet-i Fünun, n.938 p. 21, 15 Mayıs 1325 (28 May 1909), MK

133

Figure 3.3.3. Sébah & Joaillier, His Majesty in front of the parliament in Çırağan,

Şehbal, n.16 p.310, 15 Teşrinisani 1325 (28 November 1909), UBDC

Figure 3.3.4. Sébah & Joaillier, His Imperial Majesty the Sultan arriving at the Çırağan

Palace’s new Chamber of the Deputees to assist in the reopening of the Parliament,

Resimli Kitab, n.15 p.190, Kanunuevvel 1325 (December 1909-January 1910), HTU

134

Figure 3.3.5. Phébus, H. I. M. the Sultan Mehmed V leaving the palace of the parliament after the imperial speech, Servet-i Fünun, n.963 p.5, 5 Teşrinisani 1325 (18 November 1909), MK

Figure 3.3.6. Phébus, The opening of the new Parliament: the return of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan to the Parliament, Resimli Kitab, n.15 p.202, Kanunuevvel 1325 (December 1909-January 1910), HTU

135

Figure 3.3.7. Phébus, The reading of the Imperial Speech during the third commencement of the Parliament, Resimli Kitab, n.26 p.92, Kanunuevvel 1326 (December 1910-January 1911), HTU

136

Figure 3.3.8. Phébus, Commencement of the Parliament: H. M. the Sultan in his box, Servet-i Fünun, n.1016 p.28, 11 Teşrinisani 1326 (24 November 1910), MK

137

Figure 3.3.9. Phébus, The return of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan after the opening of the Parliament, Resimli Kitab, n.26 p.93, Kanunuevvel 1326 (December 1910-January 1911), HTU

Figure 3.3.10. Phébus, Commencement of the third session of the Ottoman Parliament - H. M. the Sultan exiting the parliament building, Servet-i Fünun, n.1016 cover, 11 Teşrinisani 1326 (24 November 1910), MK

138

Figure 3.3.11. Unknown Photographer, Arrival of H. I. M. the Sultan at the Palace of Fındıklı for the commencement of the parliament, Servet-i Fünun, n.1198 p.21, 8 Mayıs 1330 (21 May 1914), MK

Figure 3.3.12. Unknown Photographer, The imperial procession leaving the parliament, Şehbal, n.97 p.2, 15 Mayıs 1330 (28 May 1914), UBDC

139

Figure 3.3.13. Kenan Bey, the return of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan from the military school, Resimli Kitab, n.12 p.1192, Eylül 1325 (September-October 1909), HTU

140

Figure 3.3.14. Kenan Bey, The return of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan from the military school, Resimli Kitab, n.12 p.1197, Eylül 1325 (September-October 1909), HTU

141

Figure 3.3.15. Sébah & Joaillier, His Imperial Majesty the Sultan entering the grounds

of the Beylerbeyi Palace, Şehbal, n.22 p.430, 15 Haziran 1326 (28 June 1910), UBDC

Figure 3.3.16. Sébah & Joaillier, His Majesty stops and orders the photographer of

Şehbal to capture another shot, Şehbal, n.22 p.430, 15 Haziran 1326 (28 June 1910),

UBDC

142

Figure 3.3.17. Sébah & Joaillier, The departure - His majesty leaving the palace, Şehbal,

n.22 p.432, 15 Haziran 1326 (28 June 1910), UBDC

Figure 3.3.18. Sébah & Joaillier, The departure - His Majesty makes a turn to greet his

guests one last time, Şehbal, n.22 p.432, 15 Haziran 1326 (28 June 1910), UBDC

143

Figure 3.3.19. Sigmund Weinberg, The departure of the sovereign for the naval parade

of July 4, 1909, Servet-i Fünun, n.946 cover, 9 Temmuz 1325 (22 July 1909), MK

Figure 3.3.20. Sigmund Weinberg, National celebration in İstanbul: H. M. the Sultan

arrives aboard the Yacht Ertuğrul, Servet-i Fünun, n.999 cover, 15 Temmuz 1326 (28

July 1910), MK

144

Figure 3.3.21. Sigmund Weinberg, H. M. the Sultan on the bridge of Ertuğrul, Servet-i Fünun, n.999 p. 168, 15 Temmuz 1326 (28 July 1910), MK

145

Figure 3.3.22. Sigmund Weinberg, H. M. the Sultan in the corridor of the Yacht Ertuğrul, Servet-i Fünun, n.999 p. 169, 15 Temmuz 1326 (28 July 1910), MK

146

Figure 3.4.1. Unknown Photographer, The Imperial voyage to Hereke – the Sultan and

the imperial princes exiting the factory, Servet-i Fünun, n.942 cover, 11 Haziran 1325

(24 June 1909), MK

Figure 3.4.2. Unknown Photographer, The Sultan’s visit to Hereke - His Majesty

visiting the factories, Şehbal, n.7 p.130, 1 Temmuz 1325 (14 July 1909), UBDC

147

Figure 3.4.3. Unknown Photographer, The return of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan from Hereke, Resimli Kitab, n.9 p.943, Haziran 1325 (June-July 1909), HTU

Figure 3.4.4. Unknown Photographer, The Imperial voyage to Hereke, Resimli Kitab, n.9 p.943, Haziran 1325 (June-July 1909), HTU

148

Figure 3.4.5. Unknown Photographer, The return of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan from Hereke, Resimli Kitab, n.9 p.946, Haziran 1325 (June-July 1909), HTU

149

Figure 3.4.6. Map showing the routes of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s trips to Bursa and İzmit, Map by H. R. Thuillier, Environs de Constantinople (Hachette, 1916), BnF, https: //catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb40746766t.public.

150

7

Figure 3.4.7. Asaf Muammer Bey, The Bursa trip of Sultan Mehmed V, Servet-i Fünun, n.954 cover, 3 Eylül 1325 (16 September 1909), MK

151

Figure 3.4.8. Asaf Muammer Bey, Mehmed V in Bursa, Servet-i Fünun, n.1401 p.371, 11 Temmuz 1334 (11 July 1918), SALT

152

Figure 3.4.9. Sigmund Weinberg, Sultan Mehmed V at Bursa: the sovereign in his imperial suite, Servet-i Fünun, n.954 p.276, 3 Eylül 1325 (16 September 1909), MK

Figure 3.4.10. Sigmund Weinberg, The Sultan leaving the Bursa train station, Servet-i Fünun, n.954 p.284, 3 Eylül 1325 (16 September 1909), MK

153

Figure 3.4.11. Sigmund Weinberg, The Sultan in front of the Grand Mosque of Bursa, Servet-i Fünun, n.954 p.285, 3 Eylül 1325 (16 September 1909), MK

154

Figure 3.4.12. Sigmund Weinberg, Sultan Mehmet V in İzmit, Servet-i Fünun, n.961 p.392, 22 Teşrinievvel 1325 (4 November 1909), MK

Figure 3.4.13. Sigmund Weinberg Photographer, Mehmed V in İzmit, Servet-i Fünun, n.1401 p.371, 11 Temmuz 1334 (11 July 1918), SALT

155

Figure 3.4.14. Sigmund Weinberg, The Imperial procession in İzmit, Şehbal, n.15

p.293, 1 Teşrinisani 1325 (14 November 1909), UBDC

Figure 3.4.15. Unknown Photographer, In İzmit - The Imperial carriage enters the city,

Şehbal, n.15 p.293, 1 Teşrinisani 1325 (14 November 1909), UBDC

156

Figure 3.4.16. Unknown Photographer, His majesty getting into a car in front of the İzmit Kiosk, Şehbal, n.15 p.293, 1 Teşrinisani 1325 (14 November 1909), UBDC

157

Figure 3.4.17. Map showing the route of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s trip to Seyyidler and Edirne, Turkey in Europe and the Balkans, The Harmsworth Atlas and Gazetteer (London: Carmelite House, 1910), University of Alabama Maps, http://alabamamaps.ua.edu.

158

Figure 3.4.18. Sébah, H. I. M. the Sultan getting off the train at Seyyidler, Resimli Kitab, n.25 p.5, Teşrinievvel 1326 (September-October 1910), HTU

Figure 3.4.19. Sébah, H. I. M. exiting the imperial vagon in Seyyidler, Servet-i Fünun, n.1013 p.416, 21 Teşrinievvel 1326 (3 November 1910), MK

159

Figure 3.4.20. Sébah, H. I. M. the Sultan leaving the station to go his tent, Resimli Kitab, n.25 p.6, Teşrinievvel 1326 (September-October 1910), HTU

Figure 3.4.21. Sébah, The Sultan on the maneuver field, Şehbal, n.30 p.109, 15 Teşrinisani 1326 (28 November 1910), UBDC

160

Figure 3.4.22. Unknown Photographer, The Sultan at Seyyidler leaving the train, Şehbal, n.30 p.109, 15 Teşrinisani 1326 (28 November 1910), UBDC

161

Figure 3.4.23. Unknown Photographer, The grand maneuvres of the Ottomans in Rumeli – H. I. M. the Sultan arrives at the parade, Servet-i Fünun, n.1013 cover, 21 Teşrinievvel 1326 (3 November 1910), MK

Figure 3.4.24. Unknown Photographer, Sultan Mehmed V in Edirne, Servet-i Fünun, n.1401 p.364, 11 Temmuz 1334 (11 July 1918, SALT

162

Figure 3.4.25. Sébah, The Sultan entering the Imperial tent, Şehbal, n.30 p.109, 15 Teşrinisani 1326 (28 November 1910), UBDC

163

Figure 3.4.26. Sébah, The Imperial tent at Seyyidler, Resimli Kitab, n.25 p.7, Teşrinievvel 1326 (September-October 1910), HTU

Figure 3.4.27. Sébah, His Majesty leaving the tent to return on the field, Şehbal, n.30 p.111, 15 Teşrinisani 1326 (28 November 1910), UBDC

164

Figure 3.4.28. Sébah & Joaillier, His Majesty on the procession field, Şehbal, n.30 p.111, 15 Teşrinisani 1326 (28 November 1910), UBDC

165

Figure 3.4.29. Sébah & Joaillier, Arrival of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan at the Selimiye Mosque in Edirne for the Selamlık ceremony, Resimli Kitab, n.25 p.17, Teşrinievvel 1326 (September-October 1910), HTU

Figure 3.4.30. Sébah & Joaillier, Arrival of His Majesty at the mosque, Şehbal, n.30 p.117, 15 Teşrinisani 1326 (28 November 1910), UBDC

166

Figure 3.4.31. Sébah & Joaillier, The departure, Şehbal, n.30 p.118, 15 Teşrinisani 1326 (28 November 1910), UBDC

167

Figure 3.4.32. Map showing the routes of Sultan Mehmed V Reşad’s Rumelia trip, Map by E. G. Ravenstein, Roumania, Servia, Bulgaria, Montenegro and European Turkey, The New Census Atlas of the World (Chicago: The Reilly and Britton Company, 1911), University of Alabama Maps, http://alabamamaps.ua.edu

168

Figure 3.4.33. Unknown Photographer, The Imperial Voyage to Rumelia - Arrival of the Sultan at the selanik docks, Resimli Kitab, n. 30 p. 445, Mayıs 1327 (May-June 1911), HTU

169

Figure 3.4.34. Unknown Photographer, Welcoming the Sultan to Thessaloniki and prayer, Şehbal, n. 41 p. 336, 15 Temmuz 1327 (28 July 1911), UBDC

170

Figure 3.4.35. Sigmund Weinberg, The Sultan landing at Thessaloniki, Servet-i Fünun, n.1045 p.105, 3 Haziran 1327 (16 June 1911), MK

Figure 3.4.36. Sigmund Weinberg, Mehmed V in Thessaloniki, Servet-i Fünun, n.1401 p.369, 11 Temmuz 1334 (11 July 1918), SALT

171

Figure 3.4.37. Sigmund Weinberg, The Sultan leaving the Hagia Sophia Mosque of Thessaloniki, Servet-i Fünun, n.1046 cover, 9 Haziran 1327 (22 June 1911), MK

Figure 3.4.38. Hilal-Selanik, H. I. M. the Sultan returning from the Hagia Sophia Mosque, Resimli Kitab, n.30 p.468, Mayıs 1327 (May-June 1911), HTU

172

Figure 3.4.39. Unknown Photographer, H. I. M. the Sultan returning from the Hagia Sophia Mosque, Resimli Kitab, n.30 p.469, Mayıs 1327 (May-June 1911), HTU

Figure 3.4.40. Unknown Photographer, His Majesty in Thessaloniki – Friday prayers at the Hagia Sophia Mosque, Şehbal, n.41 p.335, 15 Temmuz 1327 (28 July 1911), UBDC

173

Figure 3.4.41. Unknown Photographer, H. I. M. the Sultan in the imperial tent after the ceremony for the foundation of the commemorative monument, Resimli Kitab, n.30 p.473, Mayıs 1327 (May-June 1911), HTU

174

Figure 3.4.42. Unknown Photographer, His Majesty receiving the senior officers of the province, Şehbal, n.41 p.336, 15 Temmuz 1327 (28 July 1911), UBDC

175

Figure 3.4.43. Apollon, The Sultan’s arrival at the Barracks to place the first stone of the commemorative monument of the imperial visit, Resimli Kitab, n.30 p.472, Mayıs 1327 (May-June 1911), HTU

176

Figure 3.4.44. Apollon, His Majesty going on an outing with the senior officers of the

province, Şehbal, n.41 p.337, 15 Temmuz 1327 (28 July 1911), UBDC

Figure 3.4.45. Unknown Photographer, Visit of the Sultan to the Barracks, Resimli

Kitab, n.30 p.470, Mayıs 1327 (May-June 1911), HTU

177

Figure 3.4.46. Unknown Photographer, Return of the imperial ceremony from the barracks, Resimli Kitab, n.30 p.471, Mayıs 1327 (May-June 1911), HTU

Figure 3.4.47. Unknown Photographer, The procession in Thessaloniki – His Majesty resturning from the barracks, Şehbal, n.41 p.335, 15 Temmuz 1327 (28 July 1911), UBDC

178

Figure 3.4.48. Unknown Photographer, H. I. M. the Sultan gets off his car in the Selanik train station to go to Skopje, Resimli Kitab, n.30 p.497, Mayıs 1327 (May-June 1911), HTU

Figure 3.4.49. Unknown Photographer, H. I. M. the Sultan leaves Thessaloniki, Resimli Kitab, n.30 p.498, Mayıs 1327 (May-June 1911), HTU

179

Figure 3.4.50. Unknown Photographer, H. I. M. the Sultan greets the crowd assembled at the station on the date of imperial departure, Resimli Kitab, n.30 p.499, Mayıs 1327 (May-June 1911), HTU

180

Figure 3.4.51. Apollon, H. I. M. the Sultan at Kosovo, Servet-i Fünun, n.1047 p.153, 16 Haziran 1327 (29 June 1911), MK

Figure 3.4.52. Apollon, Mehmed V in Kosovo, Servet-i Fünun, n.1401 p.369, 11 Temmuz 1334 (11 July 1918), SALT

181

Figure 3.4.53. Unknown Photographer, Arrival of H. I. M. the Sultan at Kosovo to attend the friday prayers and visit where his august ancestor Sultan Murad was killed, Resimli Kitab, n.30 p.517, Mayıs 1327 (May-June 1911), HTU

182

Figure 3.4.54. Unknown Photographer, Setting of the first stone of the Medrese at Pristina, Servet-i Fünun, n.1048 p.177, 23 Haziran 1327 (6 July 1911), MK

Figure 3.4.55. Unknown Photographer, Sultan Mehmed V in Pristina, Servet-i Fünun, n.1401 p.365, 11 Temmuz 1334 (11 July 1918), SALT

183

Figure 3.4.56. Sigmund Weinberg, The return of Sultan Mehmed V from his Rumelia trip on the pier of the Dolmabahçe, Servet-i Fünun, n.1048 cover, 23 Haziran 1327 (6 July 1911), MK

184

3.5.1. Sigmund Weinberg, The Sultan and King Ferdinand going to the Imperial Yacht, Servet-i Fünun, n.981 p.296, 11 Mart 1326 (24 March 1910), MK

3.5.2. Sigmund Weinberg, The Queen of Bulgaria taking the arm of H. M. the Sultan, Servet-i Fünun, n.982 p.308, 17 Mart 1326 (30 March 1910), MK

185

3.5.3. Sigmund Weinberg, H. M. the Sultan leaving the station, Servet-i Fünun, n.982 p.308, 17 Mart 1326 (30 March 1910), MK

186

3.5.4. Sigmund Weinberg, The military parade: The imperial tent where H. I. M. the Sultan and the King of Bulgaria are, Servet-i Fünun, n.982 cover, 17 Mart 1326 (30 March 1910), MK

3.5.5. Unknown Photographer, An meeting between the Sultan and the King of Bulgaria with a parade of the Ottoman army, Resimli Kitab, n.18 p.468, Mart 1326 (March-April 1910), HTU

187

3.5.6 Sigmund Weinberg, Arrival of the Sultan at the Sirkeci train station, Servet-i Fünun, n.983 p.328, 25 Mart 1326 (7 April 1910), MK

z

3.5.7. Unknown Photographer, Arrival of King Peter at Sirkeci, Resimli Kitab, n.19 p.539, Nisan 1326 (April-May 1910), HTU

188

3.5.8. Sébah & Joaillier, H. I. M. the Sultan and the Crown Prince in their tent in Sirkeci with the King of Serbia, Resimli Kitab, n.19 p.538, Nisan 1326 (April-May 1910), HTU

3.5.9. Sébah & Joaillier, The King of Serbia and His Imperial Majesty the Sultan leaving the tent to board the Yach “Söğütlü” to the Dolmabahçe Palace, Resimli Kitab, n.19 p.540, Nisan 1326 (April-May 1910), HTU

189

3.5.10. Sébah & Joaillier, Their majesties side by side, Şehbal, n.21 p.411, 1 Haziran

1326 (14 June 1910), UBDC

3.5.11. Sigmund Weinberg, H. M. the Sultan and the king walking from the train station

to the pier to take a boat, Servet-i Fünun, n.983 p.329, 25 Mart 1326 (7 April 1910),

MK

190

3.5.12. Sébah & Joaillier, His Imperial Majesty the Sultan and the King of Serbia getting into a car to go to the palace of “Merasim,” Resimli Kitab, n.19 p.541, Nisan 1326 (April-May 1910), HTU

3.5.13. Sébah & Joaillier, King Peter of Serbia and His Majesty the Sultan, Şehbal, n.21 p.411, 1 Haziran 1326 (14 June 1910), UBDC

191

3.5.14. Phébus, H. M. Sultan Mehmed V and his imperial guest the King of Serbia, Servet-i Fünun, n.983 cover, 20 Mart 1326 (2 April 1910), MK

3.5.15. Sébah & Joaillier, His Imperial Majesty the Sultan and the King of Serbia in the car, Resimli Kitab, n.19 p.542, Nisan 1326 (April-May 1910), HTU

192

3.5.16. Sébah & Joaillier, The arrival of the Sultan and the King at Hürriyet-i Ebediye Tepesi, Resimli Kitab, n.19 p.545, Nisan 1326 (April-May 1910), HTU

3.5.17. Sigmund Weinberg, The foreign military attachés presented to the King of Serbia, Servet-i Fünun, n.985 p.307, 8 Nisan 1326 (21 April 1910), MK

193

3.5.18. Sigmund Weinberg, H. M. the Sultan and the King of Serbia at the military maneuvers, Servet-i Fünun, n.985 p.306, 8 Nisan 1326 (21 April 1910), MK

194

3.5.19. Unknown Photographer, Arrival of the Kaiser in İstanbul: the two sovereigns on the train platform, Servet-i Fünun, n.1323 p.126, 17 Teşrin-i Evvel 1333 (17 October 1917), SALT

3.5.20. Unknown Artist, The arrival of H. M. Wilhelm II at İstanbul - the meeting at the Sirkeci train station, Servet-i Fünun, n.1367 p.236, 15 Teşrinisani 1333 (15 November 1917), SALT

195

3.5.21. Unknown Artist, The arrival of H. M. Wilhelm II at İstanbul - the meeting at the Sirkeci train station, Servet-i Fünun, n.1400 p.348, 5 Temmuz 1334 (5 July 1918), SALT

196

3.6.1. Unknown Photographer, Funeral Ceremony Album, 4 Temmuz 1334 (4 July 1918), National Palaces Collection, from Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü

3.6.2. Unknown Photographer, Funeral Ceremony Album, 4 Temmuz 1334 (4 July 1918), National Palaces Collection, from Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü

197

3.6.3. Unknown Photographer, Funeral Ceremony Album, 4 Temmuz 1334 (4 July 1918), National Palaces Collection, from Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü

3.6.4. Unknown Photographer, Funeral Ceremony Album, 4 Temmuz 1334 (4 July 1918), National Palaces Collection, from Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü

198

3.6.5. Unknown Photographer, Funeral Ceremony Album, 4 Temmuz 1334 (4 July 1918), National Palaces Collection, from Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü

3.6.6. Unknown Photographer, Funeral Ceremony Album, 4 Temmuz 1334 (4 July 1918), National Palaces Collection, Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü

199

3.6.7. Unknown Photographer, Funeral Ceremony Album, 4 Temmuz 1334 (4 July 1918), National Palaces Collection, from Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü

3.6.8. Unknown Photographer, Funeral Ceremony Album, 4 Temmuz 1334 (4 July 1918), National Palaces Collection, from Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü

200

3.6.9. Unknown Photographer, Funeral Ceremony Album, 4 Temmuz 1334 (4 July 1918), National Palaces Collection, from Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü

3.6.10. Unknown Photographer, Funeral Ceremony Album, 4 Temmuz 1334 (4 July 1918), National Palaces Collection, from Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü

201

3.6.11. Unknown Photographer, Funeral Ceremony Album, 4 Temmuz 1334 (4 July 1918), National Palaces Collection, from Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü

202

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ahmad, Feroz. The Young Turks and the Ottoman Nationalities: Armenians, Greeks, Albanians, Jews, and Arabs, 1908-1918. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2014.

Alanoğlu, Zeynep. “Meşruti Sistemde Bir Padişah Portresi: Sultan Mehmed Reşad (1909-1918).” İstanbul Üniversitesi, 2019.

Alikılıç, Dündar. İmparatorluk Seremonisi: Osmanlı’da Devlet Protokolü ve Törenler. 1. baskı. 2. Cağaloğlu, İstanbul: Tarih Düşünce Kitapları, 2004.

And, Metin. 40 Gün 40 Gece: Osmanlı Düğünleri, Şenlikleri, Geçit Alayları. İstanbul: Toprakbank, 2000.

Atasoy, Nurhan. Surname-i Humayun 1582: An Imperial Celebration. İstanbul: Koçbank, 1997.

Atıl, Esin. “The Story of an Eighteenth-Century Ottoman Festival.” Muqarnas 10 (1993): 181–200.

Bağcı, Serpil, Filiz Çağman, Günsel Renda, and Zeren Tanındı. Ottoman Painting. Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Culture and Tourism Publications, 2010.

Berkes, Niyazi. Türkiyeʾde Çağdaşlaşma. 7. Yapı Kredi yayınları Cogito, 1713 117. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2005.

Buzpınar, Ş. Tufan. “Nakibüleşraf.” In TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, 32:322–24. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 2006.

Cerasi, Maurice. “The Urban and Architectural Evolution of the Istanbul Divanyolu: Urban Aesthetics and Ideology in Ottoman Town Building.” Muqarnas 2 (2005): 189–232.

203

Chevedden, Paul E. “Making Light of Everything: Early Photography of the Middle East and Current Photomania.” Middle East Studies Association Bulletin 18, no. 2 (1984): 151–74.

Cirik, Bülent. “İkinci Meşrutiyet’in İlk Yıllarında İzmit Sancağı (1908-1910).” Ululararası Kocaeli Tarihi Sempozyumu Bildirileri, 2016, 893–902.

Çizgen, Engin. “Fotoğrafçılık.” In Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, 3:329–31. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993.

Dağtaş, Banu. “Contested Modernities: ‘Diverse Voices’ of the Pioneering Journalists in the Ottoman Empire.” Journal of Media Critiques 3, no. 12 (December 31, 2017): 139–56.

Demir, Kenan. “Osmanlı’da Basının Doğuşu ve Gazeteler.” Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2014, 57–88.

———. “Osmanlı’da Dergiciliğin Doğuşu ve Gelişimi (1849- 1923).” Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2016, 71–112.

Demirel, Fatmagül. “Censorship of Newspapers.” In Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire, 131–32. New York: Facts on File, 2009.

Demı̇rkol, Kurtuluş. “II. Meşrutiyet Dönemi Başlarında İzmit Sancağı’nda Asayiş.” Ululararası Kocaeli Tarihi Sempozyumu Bildirileri, 2016, 903–11.

Deringil, Selim. The Well-Protected Domains: Ideology and the Legitimation of Power in the Ottoman Empire 1876-1909. Paperback ed. London: Tauris, 1999.

Dimmig, Ashley. “Fabricating a New Image: Imperial Tents in the Late Ottoman Period.” International Journal of Islamic Architecture 3, no. 2 (July 1, 2014): 341–72.

Ebel, Kathryn A. “Visual Sources for Urban History of the Ottoman Empire.” Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi 3, no. 6 (2005): 457–86.

204

Eldem, Edhem. “Powerful Images – The Dissemination and Impact of Photography in the Ottoman Empire.” In Camera Ottomana, 106–53. İstanbul: Koç University Publications, 2015.

Ersoy, Ahmet. “Ottomans and the Kodak Galaxy: Archiving Everyday Life and Historical Space in Ottoman Illustrated Journals.” History of Photography 40, no. 3 (July 2, 2016): 330–57.

———. “The Sultan and His Tribe: Documenting Ottoman Roots in the Abdülhamid II Photographic Albums.” In Ottoman Arcadia: The Hamidian Expedition to the Land of Tribal Roots (1886), 31–64. İstanbul: Koç University Center for Anatolian Civilizations, 2018.

Evren, Burçak. “Sigmund Weinberg.” In Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, 6:393. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993.

Freund, Gisèle. Photography & Society. Boston: D. R. Godine, 1980.

Germaner, Semra, and Zeynep İnankur. “Orientalism in the 19th Century and Turkey.” In Orientalists at the Ottoman Palace, 9–32. TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2006.

Gül, Murat. The Emergence of Modern Istanbul: Transformation and Modernisation of a City. London: I. B. Tauris, 2009.

Hanioğlu, M. Şükrü. A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008.

———. Bir Siyasal Örgüt Olarak Osmanlı İttihad ve Terakki Cemiyeti ve Jön Türklük (1889-1902). İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1986.

———. Preparation for a Revolution: The Young Turks, 1902-1908. Studies in Middle Eastern History. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.

———. The Young Turks in Opposition. Studies in Middle Eastern History. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.

205

Harper, William James. “Backward and Forward: Photographic Gifts between the Ottoman Empire and the United States in the Late Nineteenth-Century.” Koç University, 2013.

İpşirli, Mehmet. “Şeyhülislam.” In TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, 39:91–96. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 2010.

Kafesçioğlu, Çiğdem. Constantinopolis/İstanbul: Cultural Encounter, Imperial Vision, and the Construction of the Ottoman Capital. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2009.

Karacagil, Ö. Kürşad. “Alman İmparatoru İstanbul’da (1917).” Gazi Akademik Bakış 6, no. 12 (2013): 111–33.

Karateke, Hakan T. “Legitimizing the Ottoman Sultanate: A Framework for Historical Analysis.” In Legitimizing the Order: The Ottoman Rhetoric of State Power, edited by Maurus Reinkowski and Hakan Karateke, 13–52. The Ottoman Empire and Its Heritage, v. 34. Leiden ; Boston: Brill, 2005.

———. Padişahım Çok Yaşa: Osmanlı Devleti’nin Son Yüzyılında Merasimler. İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2004.

Karpat, Kemal. The Politicization of Islam: Reconstructing Identity, State, Faith, and Community in the Late Ottoman State. Studies in Middle Eastern History. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Karpat, Kemal H. “The Evolution of the Turkish Political System and the Changing Meaning of Modernity, Secularism and Islam.” In Studies on Turkish Politics and Society: Selected Articles and Essays, 201–31. Social, Economic, and Political Studies of the Middle East, v. 94. Boston, MA: Brill, 2004.

Kaya, Gülsen Sevinç. “Padişahın Ressam Kulları.” In İhtişam ve Tevazu: Padişahın Ressam Kulları, 41–88. İstanbul: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2012.

206

Kırlı, Cengiz. “Surveillance and Constituting the Public in the Ottoman Empires.” In Public, Politics, and Participation: Locating the Public Sphere in the Middle East and North Africa, edited by Seteney Shami. New York: Social Science Research Council, 2010.

Koloğlu, Orhan. “Basın.” In Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, 2:69–73. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993.

———. “Newspapers.” In Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire, 431–32. New York: Facts on File, 2009.

Kuzucu, Kemalettin. “Balkanlar’da Son Osmanlı Padişahı: Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın 1911 Yılındaki Rumeli Seyahati.” Uluslarası Türk Kültür Coğrafyasında Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, no. 2 (2011): 1–39.

Mardin, Şerif. Jön Türklerin Siyasi Fikirleri (1895 - 1908). İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2008.

———. “Power, Civil Society and Culture in the Ottoman Empire.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 11, no. 3 (1969): 258–81.

Necipoğlu, Gülru. Architecture, Ceremonial, and Power: The Topkapı Palace in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries. New York: The Architectural History Foundation, 1991.

———. “Dynastic Imprints on the Cityscape: The Collective Message of Imperial Funerary Mosque Complexes in İstanbul.” In Cimetières et Traditions Funéraires Dans Le Monde Islamique, 23–36. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1996.

———. “Framing the Gaze in Ottoman, Safavid and Mughal Palaces.” Ars Orientalis, no. 23 (1993): 303–42.

“New Sultan Breaks Moslem Traditions.” The New York Times. May 11, 1909.

207

Osmanlı Arşiv Belgelerinde Sultan Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi. Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017.

Özendes, Engin. Abdullah Frères: Osmanlı Sarayının Fotoğrafçıları. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2006.

———. “Bogos Tarkulyan.” In Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, 1:217. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993.

———. Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Fotoğrafçılık, 1839-1923. İstanbul: YEM Yayın, 2013.

———. Sébah & Joaillier’den Foto Sabah’a Fotoğrafta Oryantalizm. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2004.

Özger, Yunus. “Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Edirne Seyahati.” Çanakkale Araştırmaları Türk Yıllığı, no. 22 (2017): 135–62.

Özkaya Duman, Olcay. “Osmanlı’dan Cumhuriyet’e Ulusal’dan Yerel’e Basın ve Yayıncılık Faaliyetlerinin Gelişimi Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme.” Turkish Studies 8 (2013): 1031–41.

Öztuncay, Bahattin. Dersaadet’in Fotoğrafçıları - 19. Yüzyıl İstanbulunda Fotoğraf: Öncüler, Stüdyolar, Sanatçılar. İstanbul: Aygaz, 2003.

———. Dynasty and Camera: Portraits from the Ottoman Court. İstanbul: Sadberk Hanım Müzesi, 2010.

———. Hatıra-i Uhuvvet - Portre Fotoğraflarının Cazibesi: 1846-1950. İstanbul: Aygaz, 2008.

———. “The Origins and Development of Photography in Istanbul.” In Camera Ottomana: Photography and Modernity in the Ottoman Empire, 1840-1914, edited by Zeynep Çelik and Edhem Eldem, 66–105. İstanbul: Koç University Publications, 2015.

208

Pinney, Christopher. Photography and Anthropology. London: Reaktion Books, 2011.

Polat, Nazım H. “Şehbal.” In TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, 38:423–24. İstanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 2010.

Quataert, Donald. The Ottoman Empire 1700-1922. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Renda, Günsel. “European Artists at the Ottoman Court: Propagating New Dynastic Image in the Nineteenth Century.” In The Poetics and Politics of Place: Ottoman Istanbul and British Orientalism, edited by Zeynep İnankur, Reina Lewis, and Mary Roberts, 221–232. İstanbul: Pera Museum, 2011.

———. “Propagating the Imperial Image: Tasvir-i Hümayun (1800-1922).” In The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman. İstanbul: İşbank, 2000.

Renda, Günsel, Gülru Necipoğlu, Filiz Çağman, Serpil Bağcı, Hans Georg Mayer, Julian Raby, and Jurg Meyer zur Capellen, eds. The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman. İstanbul: İşbank, 2000.

Rosenblum, Naomi. A World History of Photography. 4th ed. New York: Abbeville Press, 2007.

Sakaoğlu, Necdet. “Kılıç Alayları.” In Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, 4:555–57. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993.

———. “Mehmed V.” In Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, 5:344–49. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1993.

Selvı̇, Haluk. “Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad’ın İzmit Seyahati (27-28 Ekim 1909).” Ululararası Kocaeli Tarihi Sempozyumu Bildirileri, 2016, 925–46.

Shaw, Wendy M. K. “Ottoman Photography of the Late Nineteenth Century: An ‘Innocent’ Modernism?” History of Photography 33, no. 1 (February 2009): 80–93.

209

Simavi, Lütfi. Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim. Vol. I. III vols. Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017.

———. Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim. Vol. II. III vols. Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017.

———. Sultan Mehmed Reşad Han’ın ve Halefinin Sarayında Gördüklerim. Vol. III. III vols. Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017.

Stephanov, Darin N. Ruler Visibility and Popular Belonging in the Ottoman Empire, 1808-1908. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2019.

———. “Ruler Visibility, Modernity, and Ethnonationalism in the Late Ottoman Empire.” In Living in the Ottoman Realm: Empire and Identity, 13th to 20th Centuries, edited by Christine Isom-Verhaaren and Kent F. Schull, 259–71. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2016.

Sultan Mehmed V. Reşad ve Dönemi Fotoğraf Albümü. Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017.

Sultan V. Mehmed Reşad ve Dönemi Sergisi. Ankara: TBMM Milli Saraylar, 2017.

Tarım-Ertuğ, Zeynep. “Enthronement and Accession Ceremony.” In Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire, 207–9. New York: Facts on File, 2009.

———. “Osmanlı İstanbul’unda Merasim ve Teşrifata Dair Kaynaklar.” Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi 8, no. 16 (2010): 131–48.

———. “The Depiction of Ceremonies in Ottoman Miniatures: Historical Record or a Matter of Protocol?” Muqarnas 2 (2010): 251–75.

Terzioğlu, Derin. “The Imperial Circumcision Festival of 1582: An Interpretation.” Muqarnas, no. 12 (1995): 84–100.

210

Tüzün, Nevim. “Osmanlı Sultanı V. Mehmed Reşad’ın Vefatının İkdam, Sabah, Tani ve Vakit Gazetelerine Yansımaları.” Journal of International Social Research 12, no. 65 (2019): 300–311.

Uşaklıgil, Halid Ziya. Saray ve Ötesi: Son Hatıralar. İstanbul: İnkılap Kitabevi, 1981.

Üsdiken, Behzat. Pera’dan Beyoğlu’na 1840-1955. İstanbul: Akbank Kültür ve Sanat Müdürlüğü, 1999.

Waley, Muhammad Isa. “Images of the Ottoman Empire: The Photograph Albums Presented by Sultan Abdülhamid II.” The British Library Journal 17, no. 2 (1991): 111–27.

Woodward, Michelle L. “Between Orientalist Clichés and Images of Modernization: Photographic Practice in the Late Ottoman Era.” History of Photography 27, no. 4 (Winter 2003): 363–74.

Yanatma, Servet. “The Deaths and Funeral Ceremonies of Ottoman Sultans (from Sultan Mahmud II to Sultan Mehmed VI Vahideddin).” Boğaziçi University, 2007.

Milli Saraylar. “Yıldız Şale Köşkü,” n.d. https://www.millisaraylar.gov.tr/blog/yildiz-sale-kosku.

Yosmaoğlu, İpek K. “Chasing the Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1913.” The Turkish Studies Association Journal 27, no. 1/2 (2003): 15–49.

Zürcher, Erik Jan. “Sultan Reşad’ın Haziran 1911’deki Makedonya Seyahati.” In Savaş, Devrim ve Uluslaşma: Türkiye Tarihinde Geçiş Dönemi: 1908-1928, 121–37. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2005.

———. Turkey: A Modern History. 3rd ed. London: I. B. Tauris, 2004.

211

APPENDIX

H. R. Thuillier, Environs de Constantinople, Paris: Hachette, 1909, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, https://catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb40746766t.public

212

Unknown Cartographer, Turkey in Europe and the Balkans, from The Harmsworth Atlas and Gazetteer, London: Carmelite House, 1910, University of Alabama Maps, http://alabamamaps.ua.edu

213

E. G. Ravenstein, Roumania, Servia, Bulgaria, Montenegro and European Turkey, from The New Census Atlas of the World, Chicago: The Reilly and Britton Company, 1911, University of Alabama Maps, http://alabamamaps.ua.edu