364

 THE FOUNDING OF THE İZMIR MUSEUM: A PRELIMINARY NARRATIVE
BASED ON AZİZ OGAN’S ARCHIVE



Museums are always very significant elements in construction of identity. During the
formation of the nation-states after World War I museums were used very
functionally in making of national identity. During the early years of the Republican
Turkey museum had a significant role in the state’s agenda of homogenizing and
nationalizing the society.
İzmir was one of the cosmopolitan centers of Ottoman Empire. The war and
the following fire transformed both the demographic and urban character of the city.
İzmir Archeology Museum was constituted in this transformed city.
This study aims to explore the founding of İzmir Archeology Museum, the
relation between museum’s role and significance and the transformation and
nationalization of the city.
iv"

Müzeler her zaman için kimlik inşasının önemli bir parçası olmuştur. Birinci Dünya
Savaşı sonrasında, ulus devletlerin inşası sırasında müzeler milli kimliğin inşasında
fonksiyonel olarak kullanılmıştır. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nin ilk yıllarında müzeler
devletin toplumu millileştirme ve homojenleştirme gündeminde önemli bir role sahip
olmuştur.
İzmir Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nun önemli kozmopolit merkezlerinden biriydi.
Savaş ve takip eden yangın şehrin hem demografik hem de kentsel karakterini
dönüştürdü. İzmir Arkeoloji Müzesi bu dönüştürülen şehirde oluşturuldu.
Bu çalışma İzmir Arkeoloji Müzesi’nin kuruluşunu, şehrin dönüşmesi ve
millileşmesiyle müzenin rolünün ilişkisini açıklamayı amaçlamaktadır
v"
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all I would like express my gratitude to my advisor Associate Prof. Ahmet
Ersoy for being so patient, encouring and motivating during this very stressful
process. It has been a very tough and long journey and at the beginning I felt
completely lost in terms of deciding on a thesis title. He proposed to study on Aziz
Ogan’s archive and directed my attention to this archive. Reading an uncatalogued
archive and trying to constitute an outline out of all these documents were quite
confusing. However he willingly companied all these brainstorming processes and
helped me for giving a direction to my study and progress it. I should thank for his
patience specifically because he had to read numbers of drafts for some chapters and
always helped me to find my way through rough drafts with his guiding feedbacks.
Another specific thank should be expressed for his editorial contribution and for
being so patient again.
I should thank to the family of Aziz Ogan and especially to his grandson
Hüseyin İnan for sharing this precious archive with Boğaziçi University, Department
of History. Their generous attitude gave me the opportunity to support my arguments
with the original documents and studying in a familiar and comfortable environment,
which is the Cultural Heritage Museum of Boğaziçi University. I should thank to
Hüseyin İnan for also being so kind to offer his help for anything he can do.
My parents Selamet Kurt and Bahriye Kurt, my sisters Rukiye Sarı, Neslihan
Kurt and Aslıhan Kurt and finally my brother Emir Kurt deserve the appreciation for
being so supporting, warmhearted and considerate during all the depressive periods I
have gone through. They all had their own struggles in their own lives but treated me
like I am the only person who needs the support and understanding of our family.
Their constant support and love are priceless for me. Even though sometimes I made
living with me really hard during this period, they have always tried their best to
support me. I wish I could keep this tough process shorter but I could not but still
they all did their best to help and comfort me.
My friend Hümeyra Seren Zeyrek deserves a special thank for helping me to
read and transliterate the documents in Ottoman Turkish. She also mediated between
me, and the kind personnel of the State Archive whom I should be very grateful for
reading some document that I cannot. Another friend of mine Zehra Nur Canpolat is
another person I should thank for helping me to transliterate the documents
My mother absolutely deserves her own acknowledgment section. My
mother’s love and support had and always have a healing effect on me. Her quick wit
and enthusiasm for learning always inspire me very much. I do and will always feel
obliged to achieve my potential because I’m sure she would have done much better
than I did if she had been given the same opportunities. These reasons made me
dedicate to this humble study to her.
vi"
To my mother Bahriye KURT, who would have
done much better if she had been given the chance.
vii"
CONTENTS
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 1
Studies on the Late Ottoman and the Republican Museology ................................. 8
Aziz Ogan and the Archive .................................................................................... 14
CHAPTER II: FOUNDING (TEESSÜS) STAGE ..................................................... 22
Institutionalization of Museums Under the Ministry of Education ....................... 22
The Reasons and Motivations for the Founding of a Museum in İzmir ................ 50
The First Museum Building ................................................................................... 65
The Second Museum Building ............................................................................... 84
Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 103
CHAPTER III: COLLECTING (İDDİHAR) STAGE .............................................. 106
Collecting Objects for the Museum Setting ......................................................... 106
Abandoned Properties .......................................................................................... 111
Tombstones .......................................................................................................... 136
Donations and Gifts .............................................................................................. 138
Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 139
CHAPTER IV: CLASSIFICATION (TASNİF) STAGE ......................................... 142
The Role of Classification in the Museum Narrative ........................................... 142
Classification in the Ottoman/Turkish Museums ................................................. 146
Classification in the İzmir Museums .................................................................... 150
Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 167
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION ................................................................................ 173
APPENDIX A: TRANSLITERATION OF THE CRUCIAL DOCUMENTS ........ 179
APPENDIX B: THE LIST OF THE PUBLICATION OF AZIZ OGAN AND ASAR-I
ATIKA MUHIPLERİ CEMİYETİ (THE SOCIETY OF ENTHUSIASTS OF
ANTIQUITIES) ....................................................................................................... 194
APPENDIX C: THE DOCUMENTS FROM AZİZ OGAN’S ARCHIVE ............. 196
APPENDIX D: MAPS AND IMAGES ................................................................... 249
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................... 261
"
1"
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A letter from Aziz Ogan’s archive written in June 16, 19231 gives the clues for the
motivations and reasons for founding the İzmir Archeology Museum. It is an
unsigned letter so it is not clear whether it was sent to Ogan or whether he wrote it
himself and did not send it. The author congratulates his friend, the addressee for
planning an ethnography museum for İzmir and agrees with him on the necessity of
this museum. Since this was Aziz Ogan’s plan, the letter was most likely sent to him.
The author expresses his appreciation of the plan with such words: “I applaud your
personal thought for instituting an ethnography museum in İzmir.”2 After some
suggestions for the funding of this necessary institution, he emphasizes the
significance of having such an institution. He strictly pinpoints “ It is such a
remarkable lack not having a museum in İzmir….I guess, one cannot dismiss the
necessity of having such institution on learning (müessese-i irfan).” He feels the
necessity of mentioning the efforts of the Greek troops to build local museums
during the invasion, which he defines this as “the vanity of the Greek bandits “ and
focuses on the war damages on the excavation site during the following lines through
the words “During the invasion Greek bandits (murdar pelikaryalar) started
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
1 See Appendix A, figure 1 for the full transliteration of the letter.
2 Unsigned letter to Aziz Ogan (16.6.1923), Appendix C, figure 8.
2"
excavations to constitute local museums as a showoff, while they were vandalizing
and butchering people.” While he judges this effort of founding museums as a
“show”, still he credits this effort and poses it as an example of what can be done.
The author makes his point as such: “These kinds of institutions can be constituted
maliciously but my point is to underline their utter necessity.”3 The rest of the letter
is mostly about the problem of unguarded archeological sites due to the budget cuts,
the finance of founding a museum and the effective use of the determined budget.
The antiquities, which were stored in the gardens of the state offices were
specifically mentioned probably in order to emphasize the urgency of covering them.
In the letter the author states that: “In order to build a museum building in our
country that can compete with its western counterparts, I propose to go beyond the
basic need of sheltering the findings”. In the letter, the author’s main concern was to
found an institution that can compete with the western counterparts. Since even the
“Greek bandits” were aware of the significance of storing and exhibiting the
antiquities, İzmir definitely needed to have a museum institution to fulfill the
intellectual requirements of the civilized world. The original ambition was obviously
to found an ethnography museum but this intention evolved into an archeology
museum project embedded in the gentrified part of the city center following the
Great Fire (1922). The letter indicates that the amount of the findings from all over
the Aegean region reached a point that made people argue about strategies for
dealing with them. The general opinion considered to be the most convenient move
was to exhibit these cumulated findings to within the context of a museum. The
ultimate consequence of bringing to surface these numerous antiquities was to settle
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
3 Ibid.
3"
them down in a museum that needed to be founded in İzmir under the supervision of
Aziz Ogan.
İzmir (Archeology) Museum was founded in the building of a former Greek-
Orthodox church, Aya Vukla in 1927. The building was left unclaimed after the
departure of the Greek-Orthodox community. The museum, especially in this first
building, proposed a complex institution rather than an archeology museum building.
Aziz Ogan tried to found a cultural center rather than a mere museum by adjoining
an art gallery to the museum. This aspect of the museum gave an original character
but it was not its only aspect that made the museum a worthy case study. The way of
appropriating some of the museum objects and pieces in the art gallery and Ogan’s
efforts to form a parallelism between the İzmir Archeology Museum and the İstanbul
Archeology Museum and finally the transformation of the museum’s dynamics
(classification system for instance) up to the leading intellectual debates are all
elements that need to be studied and understood. Because these points are quite
elaborating on the Ogan’s practicing modern museology and adopting the modern
museology in a provincial museum. In this study the steps in the process of the
founding of the İzmir (Archeology) Museum under the guidance of of Aziz Ogan
have been examined. In other words the founding process is schematized in
accordance with the methodological understanding of Aziz Ogan in order to provide
a deeper understanding of practicing modern museology in a province, which had its
own dynamics.
The birth and rise of archeology as a modern academic field in the nineteenth
century in Europe was not a coincidence in itself and it correlated with the general
ideological tendencies of the period. The rise of nations, trends of modernization and
its effect on the search for identity, interest in construction of the past, consciousness
4"
in the field of history were all rising tendencies and concepts of the nineteenth
century and their combined effect informed the field of archeology.4 The nineteenth
century was the century of defining homogeneous new self-identities. It was essential
for the Ottoman Empire to manifest itself through Western patterns and challenge
orientalist statements that discredited the intellectual and artistic capacity of the state
while searching for sources of a new and modern form of self-identity. Museums
were very useful tools for underlining this process of identity description. They were
the indicators of the new projection of the Empire as a Westernized and modernized
entity. However they should not be considered as mere buildings that housed
exhibitions of aesthetically appealing historical objects. The role of the museums in
the modernization was not just standing as a unit of cultural life of a country, a
dedication to art and artifact. They were also assigned to narrate and construct the
identity of the country. Wendy Shaw describes museums as “ also temples dedicated
to the celebration of these works [archeological artifacts and artworks] within the
modern narratives and collective patriotic pride.”5 Shaw pinpoints here to the
functional role of museums in narrating ideologies and identities, which was the case
in both the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Turkey. Museology in the
nineteenth century Ottoman Empire and Turkey were elements and products of the
recently constructed Westernized identity of the country. They stood as signs of the
appreciation of history and archeology and of a modernized entity defining its
identity by itself. Archeological activities that supplied the museum collections
indicated the level of a country’s development and civilizing potential. In the
opening speech of the İstanbul Archeology Museum, the Minister of Education
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
4 Ibid., p.111.
5 Wendy Shaw, “From Mausoleum to Museum: Resurrecting Antiquity for Ottoman Modernity,”
Scramble for the Past: a Story of Archaeology in the Ottoman Empire, ed. Zainab Bahrani, Zeynep
Çelik, Edhem Eldem (Istanbul: SALT, 2011), p.425.
5"
Münif Paşa elaborated the meaning of the institution of the museum. The very first
point he made is the desire to catch up with the west by opening an archeology
museum. He stated that “Establishing a museum as in the other civilized countries
expressed the desires of our developing country. Proliferation of such civilizing
institutions as a result of the efforts of our sultan, meeting the essential needs that are
beneficial to all of us."6 The presence of foreign archeologist and their looting of the
antiquities were the other points that he emphasized. He admits that the ignorance of
the Ottoman Empire enabled them adorn their museums with the antiquities of the
Ottoman Empire. However he considers the opening of such a museum is the sign of
an empire that finally became aware of the significance of its antiquities.7
The interest of foreign orientalists and archeologists on the archeological
resources of Anatolia and especially the Aegean continued through the nineteenth
century. Even during the World War I their expeditions, excavations and smuggling
activities continued. The Aegean region was one of the most valuable regions of the
imperial lands as the locus of archeological activities. Until the second half of the
nineteenth century it is hard to talk about any effort to bring archeological items of
the region to the surface by the state’s apparatus. It was the foreigners who benefited
from the rich archeological reserve of the Ottoman Empire. Until the Ottoman State
directed its interest to the field of archeology and antiquities, the Europeans
benefited from the antiques of the Aegean and the Anatolian region to nourish their
museums. After the Tanzimat period with the rise a Western-style educated
generation and their modern consciousness of history and self-identity there emerged
a group of qualified people who could deal with all the procedures of the making of
conservation policies the most prominent name among them being Osman Hamdi
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
6Mustafa Cezar, Sanatta Batı'ya Açılış ve Osman Hamdi (İstanbul: Erol Kerim Aksoy Kültür, Eğitim,
Spor ve Sağlık Vakfı Yayını, 1995), p. 241.
7 Ibid., p. 242.
6"
Bey. These matters of losing cultural and archeological heritage were opened to
discussion. These discussions were mostly circulating in the newspaper pages mainly
in the foreign language newspapers that were published and circulated in Istanbul
and İzmir. For instance in La Turqie of April 24, 1872, two years before the first
regulation concerning the conservation of the antiquities, it was sadly mentioned how
all the beautiful artifacts found in Ephesus excavations were taken abroad and that
there were no Ottoman supervisors in these excavation sites who could seek the
interests of the State and held the appropriate and valuable items. This article also
addressed Osman Hamdi as a “pasha” who was much interested in archeology.8
The museums and archeological activities in the late Ottoman period
functioned to project the Westernized and modernized image and identity of the
state. In the Republican era these concepts were still on the state’s agenda and
important elements of the making of identity, but this time with more overt
nationalist connotations. For Republican Turkey archeological studies functioned to
strengthen the nationalist claims of the Republic. The archeological activities in the
Republican era co-operated with the functional role of history studies. For Enver
Ziya Karal the main issues that had to dominate the study of history in the
Republican era was refuting and correcting the Western misconception about
Turkey, demonstrating the capacity of the Turkish people for civilization, and
refuting the foreign territorial claims on the Anatolian peninsula.9 The ethno-racial
claims on the territories of Turkey (such as claims over the Pontus region in Northern
Anatolia) concerned the state especially on the eve of the Lausanne Treaty in 1922.
The earlier inhabitants of the Anatolia were considered to be the rightful owners of
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
8 Nur Akın, ”Osman Hamdi Bey, Âsâr-ı Atika Nizamnamesi ve Dönemin Koruma Anlayışı Üzerine,”
Osman Hamdi Bey ve Dönemi, edited by Zeynep Rona (İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 1993),
p. 234.
9 Enver Ziya Karal, “Atatürk’ün Tarih Tezi,” Atatürk Hakkında Konferanslar, ed. Enver Ziya Karal
and Afet İnan (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1946), p. 57.
7"
the land. Inventing ethno-racial links with such civilizations seemed the best and
rational way of strengthening state’s claim for the ownership of Anatolia. In addition,
the possibility of international support for other ethnic groups’ claims of ownership
was perceived as a threat by the state to the ownership of Anatolia. So these ethnoracial
links between the Turkish people and ancient inhabitants are to be invented.
The state policy in the field of history was geared to producing “scientific” claims to
counter contemporary possible threats.10 The studies sometimes reached the level of
absurdity with theories such as the Thesis of History and the Sun Language Theory.
But all these efforts, which were sometimes supported by pseudo-scientific methods,
designed to meet the requirement for constructing a valid history narrative, which
was capable of refuting the Western claim that denigrated the Turkish race and its
claims to territorial heritage.11 Mustafa Kemal was personally very interested in
archeology and highly engaged in the subject. He believed it necessary to have
trained archeologists and bring to the surface the cultural heritage of the territories
and their links with modern conceptions of national identity.12 His keen interest and
motivation for excavation, preservation and restoration were stated in a telegram he
sent to İsmet Paşa as such:
The works of ancient civilizations that lie as the treasure beyond value in
every part of our nation acutely need museum directorates to bring them to light and
to preserve and classify them in a scientific fashion and to protect the monuments of
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
10 Murat Ergin, “Archeology and the Perception of Greek, Roman and Byzantine Eras in Early
Republican Turkey,” Perceptions of the Past in the Turkish Republic: Classical and Byzantine
Periods, ed. Scott Redford and Nina Ergin (Leuven; Walpole, Mass.: Peeters, 2010), p. 21.
11 Ibid., p. 15.
12 Suna Güven, “Constructing Past in Ankara: From Augustus to Atatürk,” Perceptions of the Past in
the Turkish Republic: Classical and Byzantine Periods, ed. Scott Redford and Nina Ergin (Leuven;
Walpole, Mass.: Peeters, 2010), p. 35.
8"
past ages that have been neglected and are now in ruins, as well as specialist in
archeology to be employed in excavations.13
The endeavor of the state for constituting historical and archeological science during
the early years of the Republic was the effort to redefine the cultural heritage of the
country. Such studies were expected to constitute that formed the basis of a
nationalized historical narrative, “along and sustainable chronology”. 14
Archeological findings of the country, the Greco-Roman pieces for instance,
were the reference point for the territorial claims but it was also the compartment of
the field of art history through which the Turkish Republic could attach itself to the
grand narrative and Western civilization. The attitude of embracing and reconnecting
the Greco-Roman heritage of the region also meant the total ownership of the land
and its heritage and the cultivation of a new sense of territorial pride.15 Bringing the
archeological richness of the country, and especially of the Aegean region, to the
surface was credited in the Republican Turkey as highly as it was in the late Ottoman
era.
Studies on the Late Ottoman and the Republican Museology
Archeological excavations, their managements, the management of the findings and
the arrival of the findings to the museums are issues highly related to museum
policy. As was discussed above the motivation of founding a museum and its role in
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
13 Arkeoloji ve Sanat, 120 (2005), front page (translated in Suna Güven, “Constructing Past in Ankara:
From Augustus to Atatürk,” Perceptions of the Past in the Turkish Republic: Classical and Byzantine
Periods, ed. Scott Redford and Nina Ergin [Leuven; Walpole, Mass.: Peeters, 2010]).
14 Güven, “Constructing Past,” p. 37.
15 Ergin, “Archeology and the Perception,” p. 29.
9"
the cultural environment of the country are the results of the political environment
and under these circumstances museum and archeology studies cannot be separated
from the political environment of their period. The museology activities in the
Ottoman Empire and early Republican era are the subjects that attracted for instance
Wendy Shaw. In her book Possessors and Possessed: Museums, Archaeology, and
the Visualization of History in the Late Ottoman Empire16 she explores the founding
of the Istanbul Archeology Museum and the issues related to antiquities and
museums in the late Ottoman Empire. She elaborated the founding of the İstanbul
Archeology Museum and paid specific attention to the classification of the objects
and various collections. Like the museum studies, archeology during the late
Ottoman and early Republican period is explored and elaborated in numerous
studies. The essay collection Scramble for the Past: A Story of Archeology in the
Ottoman Empire, 1753-191417 surveys the Ottoman archeology and the Ottoman
modernity in relation to archeological activities. Especially archeology as a tool for
modernity and the imperial museum that emerged as an extension of the relation
between archeology and modernity were discussed in detail in Zeynep Çelik’s essay
“Interlude: the Museum as a Civic Tool” and Wendy Shaw’s essay “Defining
Empire’s Patrimony: Late Ottoman Perception of Antiquities”. The essay collection
Perception of the Past in the Turkish Republic: Classical and Byzantine Period was
one of these studies that explore the archeological activities in the early republican
periods with references to their motivations and notions related to nationalism. 18
Especially David Shankland’s essay “Heritage, Nationalism, and Archeology in the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
16 Wendy Shaw, Possessors and Possessed: Museums, Archaeology, and the Visualization of History
in the Late Ottoman Empire (Berkeley, Calif: University of California Press, 2003).
17 Scramble for the Past: a Story of Archaeology in the Ottoman Empire, ed. Zainab Bahrani, Zeynep
Çelik, Edhem Eldem (Istanbul: SALT, 2011).
18 Perceptions of the Past in the Turkish Republic: Classical and Byzantine Periods, ed. Scott Redford
and Nina Ergin (Leuven; Walpole, Mass.: Peeters, 2010).
10"
Republic of Turkey” and Nina Ergin’s essay “Archeology and the Perception of
Greek, Roman and Byzantine Eras in Early Republican Turkey” directly focus on the
meaning and function of archeology in the early Republic. Museum in the early
Republican period is the subject of Shaw’s essay “National Museums in the Republic
of Turkey: Palimpsests within a Centralized State” which focuses on the role of the
Republican museums in creating national identity, chronological survey of the
development of museums and the changing concept of museum through the various
stages of Turkish history.19 Mehmet Özdoğan, in his article “Ideology and
Archeology in Turkey”,20 proposes a broader glance toward the functional usage of
archeology and museums in Turkey by both the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish
Republic. Generally museology activities in Turkey are considered as a way of
building a new heritage understanding on the demolishment of dynastic and Islamic
tradition and illustrating the nationalizing of the country over the cosmopolite
heritage. The secularization and nationalizing mission of museums are studied in the
case of the Istanbul museums with the writings of Nilay Özlü.21 Ankara as the new
capital and Istanbul as the former dynastic capital have become subjected to the
some studies such as Shaw’s and Özlü’s work in case of museology and
transformation of the space and urban topography in relation to the leading ideology.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
19 Wendy Shaw, “National Museums in the Republic of Turkey: Palimpsests within a Centralized
State,” Building National Museums in Europe 1750-2010. Conference proceedings from EuNaMus,
European National Museums: Identity Politics, the Uses of the Past and the European Citizen,
Bologna 28-30 April 2011, EuNaMus Report No 1, ed. Peter Aronsson and Gabriella Elgenius,
(Published by Linköping University Electronic Press:
http://www.ep.liu.se/ecp_home/index.en.aspx?issue=064), p. 925.
20 Mehmet Özdoğan, “Ideology and Archeology in Turkey,” Archaeology under Fire: Nationalism,
Politics and Heritage in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East, ed. Lynn.Meskell (London;
New York: Routledge, 1998).
21 Nilay Özlü, "Single P(a)lace, Multiple Narratives: The Topkapı Palace in Western Travel Accounts
from the Eighteenth to the Twentieth Century,” The City in the Muslim World: Depictions by Western
Travel Writing,ed. Mohammad Gharipour and Nilay Özlü, (London: Routledge, Forthcoming 2014)
Nilay Özlü, “Hagia Sophia and the Demise of the Sacred”, Design Philosophy Papers - Collection
Six, ed. Anne-Marie Willis, Ravensbourne, (Australia: Team D/E/S Publications, 2011).
11"
The provinces of the country, on the other hand, have never been the focus of
interest as the case of the Ottoman and Republican capitals. İzmir as a provincial
center, on the other hand, with the prominent position it hold in the social, economic
and cultural life of the Aegean region, in my opinion, must occupy a special spot in
the history of archeology, urban history, culture studies and museum studies. The
urban character of İzmir experienced a drastic change after the Great Fire (1922) and
the redevelopment of the city in the affirmation of the fire is studied by Biray Kırlı in
her PhD thesis entitled “From Ottoman Empire to Turkish Nation-State:
Reconfiguring Spaces and Geo-bodies”.22 Kırlı’s thesis proposes a detailed account
of the urban character of the city and its transformation after the Great Fire. The
İzmir Museum is an important compartment in the transformation and
homogenization of İzmir and needs to be explored with regard its role. On the other
hand there are no specific studies concentrating on İzmir’s place in museum studies
in terms of observing the transformation of a cosmopolitan environment and
exploring museology activities in terms of their transformative effect on the
cosmopolitan heritage. In a few studies the İzmir Archeology Museum has been
briefly mentioned. In Melania Savino’s Ph.d. dissertation entitled “Archaeology and
its Representation in the Turkish Republic, 1923-1960”23, she explores the
classification of the first museum building in the Aya Vukla church. She specifically
pinpoints the role the classification of the museum in the creating an alternative
Turkish art narrative in accordance with the Republican history narrative. Erkan
Serçe is another scholar who published volumes of studies on İzmir and its urban
transformation during the early republican period. In his article “İzmir Havalisi ve
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
22 Biray Kırlı, “From Ottoman Empire to Turkish Nation-State: Reconfiguring Spaces and Geobodies”,
(Ph.d diss., Binghamton University, 2002).
23 Melanie Savino, “Archaeology and its Representation in the Turkish Republic, 1923-1960” (PhD
diss., SOAS, University of London, 2012).
12"
Âsar-ı Atika Muhipleri Cemiyeti ve İzmir Arkeoloji Müzesi’nin Kuruluşu” he
provides a brief account on Âsar-ı Atika Muhipleri Cemiyeti (the Society of
Enthusiast Antiquities) 24 and the founding of the museum. This article does not
reveal the details about the sections of the museum, appropriation of the objects or
the relation of the museum with urban transformation of İzmir. The mentioned
publications contributed to understand archeology and museology in the early
republican periods and prominent cases like the İstanbul Archeology Museum and
museology activities in the new capital, Ankara were subjected to some valuable
studies. On the other hand provincial museums are not subjected to museum studies
and it is possible to reach limited accounts on them in some articles about the
museology in Turkey in general such as Wendy Shaw’s article “National Museums
in the Republic of Turkey: Palimpsests within a Centralized State” or Wolfgang
Radt’s article “The Museum in Bergama as an Example of Turkish Politics of
Culture and of German-Turkish Collaboration.”25 In addition to the need for
surveying the İzmir Museum as a case study for provincial museums, İzmir position
as “the center of Aegean region”, which was subjected to most drastic changes in the
process of nationalization as a cosmopolite region, is another remarkable motivation
for researching it.
The museum and the urban history studies on Istanbul and Ankara shed light
on some aspects of the function of museology and urban transformation in the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
24 Erkan Serçe, “İzmir Havalisi ve Âsar-ı Atika Muhipleri Cemiyeti ve İzmir Arkeoloji Müzesi’nin
Kuruluşu”, İzmir Kent Kültürü Dergisi, 5 (2002), p. 167. This association was formed to fulfill the mission of
informing public about the antiquities and ancient buildings that are considered as the indicators of the
national pride and producing publications (the museum guides for instance) on these antiquities and
antique sites. Aziz Ogan personally managed the team as the president of the association until he was
called back to Istanbul and the association contributed through publication under the supervision of
Ogan.
25 Wolfgang Radt, “The Museum in Bergama as an Example of Turkish Politics of Culture and of
German-Turkish Collaboration,” Perceptions of the Past in the Turkish Republic: Classical and
Byzantine Periods, ed. Scott Redford and Nina Ergin [Leuven; Walpole, Mass.: Peeters, 2010]).
13"
republican policies, but they more likely to focus on the transformation of dynastic
tradition in Istanbul and the construction of a highly symbolically charged new
capital out of a small town in Ankara.
This study explores the significance of archeological activities in İzmir,
during the early Republican era and also investigates their relation with the
transformation of İzmir from a cosmopolitan center to a city that is conceived as part
of the nation-state. The İzmir museum is considered as a remarkable case here
because it was a symbolic figure in the nationalization of the city. The antiques of the
museum were the findings from the excavations and antique sites in the İzmir’
hinterland and it was quite usual and expected to nourish the museum with such
findings. However the art gallery and the library of the museum followed an irregular
and characteristic pattern. It was such a pattern that allowed the museum to nourish
its art gallery and library with temporarily entrusted pieces of Turkish artists and
more importantly the abandoned properties of departed communities. The acquisition
of the abandoned properties by the museum, which appropriated and attached them
to the broader agenda of the state was a significant example of early republican
collecting policy. The museum housed various collections, which were basically the
Greco-Roman collection, the Islamic collection and the Hittite collection. The art
gallery of the museum functioned to exhibit temporary exhibitions and permanent
pieces, which were basically brought from the Abandoned Properties Depots. The
library of the museum was not open to public and it consisted reference books for the
museum staff. The museum was constituted in a fashion that was expected to
contribute in the cultural life of the city with an art gallery. In 1951 the museum
moved to Kültürpark and stayed there until 1984. This second museum functioned as
an archeology museum because the new museum was a single large gallery that
14"
exhibits ancient pieces. Through such unconventional collecting policy a public
museum was constituted out of confiscated properties of the communities, which
permanently left the imperial lands. The radical demographic transformation and the
handover of the city and its wealth become a strong vein to nourish the museum
collection. The buildings that were chosen to house the İzmir Archeology Museum
were also important figures in the process of emphasizing the nationalization of the
city through the museum institutions. These circumstances in addition to İzmir
central position on the Aegean region make the İzmir archeology Museum a unique
case among both the central and provincial museums of Turkey. Exploring these
mentioned circumstances and the museum as an end product of these post-war
dynamics is quite promising for understanding the functional role of the museum in
such an environment of rapid changed nationalization. This study attempts to explore
the founding of the İzmir museum and its relation with the transformation of the city
with the guidance of Aziz Ogan’s personal archive. The role of the museum in the
urban transformation of İzmir, the way it appropriated its collections and the relation
between the collecting policy of the museum and the policies of early republican
policies, its importance as a provincial museum, the impact of shift in perceiving
history on the museum policies (classification system for instance) are all issues that
have been investigated in this study in detail.
Aziz$Ogan$and$the$Archive
Aziz Ogan was born in 1888 as the only son of an upper class family in Istanbul. His
career as an archeologist started even before 1910 (the date when he graduated from
15"
the School of Fine Arts [Sanayî-i Nefîse Mektebi]). As a student he spent time at
Istanbul Archeology Museum thanks to his summerhouse neighbor Osman Hamdi
Bey the director of the museum. After his graduation Ogan was sent to the Aegean
region to supervise various excavations in Aydın, Manisa and İzmir. He was then
appointed Inspectorship of Antiquities in İzmir (İzmir Asar-ı Atika Müfettişliği) in
1914 until the advent World War I.26 During the war he joined the army and served
as the antique inspector of Syria and Western Arabia troops (Garbi Arabistan Umum
Komutanlığı). Between 1914 and 1918, he served as the director of School of Fine
Arts in Damascus, supervised the projects of removing residential building around
the historical buildings in Damascus, joined the restoration project of the Jupiter
Sanctuary in Baalbak, Lebanon.27 In 1918 he was discharged from the army but
İzmir was under the Greek invasion and worked in the İstanbul Archeology Museum
until 1922. In 1922, he could finally return to İzmir and this time he was specifically
appointed to the İzmir Archeology Museum for supervising the founding and
direction of the museum until he was appointed as the antique inspector of İzmir
region in 1926. Between 1922 and 1926 he played a formative role in establishing
not only the İzmir Museum of Antiquities (1927) but also the local museums in
Ephesus and Pergamum. In addition to his services as a civil servant he led the
foundation of Asar-ı Atikata Muhipleri Cemiyeti (the Society of Enthusiasts of
Antiquities) 28 an association that provided policy suggestions to the local governor
Kazım Paşa. He was also deputised as the chief executive of the Directorship of
Museums and Antiquities of Ministry of Education from 1929 to 1930. During 1931
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
26 Jale İnan, “Aziz Ogan,” İstanbul Enstitüsü Dergisi 3(1957), p. 167-168.
27 Mustafa İnan, “Aziz Ogan, ”Arkitekt, 263-264-265-266 (1953), p. 217.
28 Erkan Serçe, “İzmir ve Havalisi Âsar-ı Atika Muhibleri Cemiyeti ve İzmir Arkeoloji Müzesi’nin Kuruluşu”, İzmir
Kent Kültürü Dergisi, 5 (2002), p. 167. This association was formed to fulfill the mission of informing
public about the antiquities and ancient buildings that are considered as the indicators of the national
pride and producing publications (the museum guides for instance) on these antiquities and antique
sites. Aziz Ogan personally managed the team as the president of the association until he was called
back to Istanbul and the association contributed through publication under the supervision of Ogan.
16"
Aziz Ogan traveled to Europe various times to study European museums in France,
Netherland, Germany and England. He supervised the founding of pavilions of
antiquities in various world fairs such as the New York World Fair of 1939. He
supervised many significant restoration and conservation projects during his
Directorship of the Istanbul archeology Museum such as the museumification of
Hagia Sophia, restoration of the Tabhane Madrasa and constituting a section of the
Turkish and Islamic Arts Museum in this madrasa. He held the directorship position
of Istanbul Archeology Museum till his retirement in 1954 after which he continued
his academic studies and field work in various excavation sites until his death in
1956.29
The personal archive of Aziz Ogan contains abundant documents as the
indicators of his long and intense career. Among these documents it is possible to
come across correspondences related to the various positions he held as a civil
servant and to the additional responsibilities he undertook such as being the president
of the Artists Association (Ressamlar Cemiyeti).30 The official in the archive are
accompanied by documents his rare personal letters, invitation cards (to exhibitions
and weddings), business cards. Aziz Ogan’s career started in İzmir as the antiquities
inspector, which meant that he was the responsible person for inspecting
archeological sites and excavations and any reported incidence related to the antiques
in the Aegean region. He worked in various positions as restoration supervisor,
museum director and inspector. He also worked in the Eastern provinces of the
Empire where he worked during the war in similar positions. The archive of such a
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
29 İnan J., “Aziz Ogan,” p, 169-170.
30Seyfi Başkan, Osmanlı Ressamlar Cemiyeti [Ankara: Çardaş, 1994], p. 7,30. It was an association
that brought the Turkish artists together and provided the opportunity of cooperating and supporting
each other. It was founded in 1909.The association also published a newspaper entitled Osmanlı
Ressamlar Cemiyeti Gazetesi. The first name of the association was Ottoman Artists Association and
it was terminated in 1919. In 1921, a similar organization Turkish Artists Association was founded.
17"
person inevitably has very diverse documents. The documents on the İzmir phase of
his career vary from the inspections reports to excavations, or to correspondence
with various state offices (Ministry of Education, Directorship of Culture etc.),
budget planning, inventories of donated collections or appropriated pieces. The
founding of the İzmir (Archeology) Museum (1927) through its every stage from the
transportation of the items to arranging the museum building as an exhibition hall, or
to collecting the various items from various sources are all documented in Ogan’s
archive. Considering Ogan’s career in İzmir as the antiquities inspector, museum
director and later as the head of all archeological and museological activities in
İzmir, it is quite predictable all the documents related to the museum and the
collecting of antiques in İzmir end up in Ogan’s archive. It is not certain whether he
was allowed to have a copy of these documents for himself or he was personally
responsible for keeping the related documents that were sent to him. However, he
had the access to these mentioned documents that he received or sent. The archive
was donated to Boğaziçi University, Department of History and temporarily located
in Cultural Heritage Museum.
Aziz Ogan initiated his career on archeology and museology as a kind of
assistant to Osman Hamdi Bey who introduced modern museology practices to the
Ottoman Empire. Ogan’s career in İzmir as an antiquities inspector before the war
and as the director of the museum after the war gave him the opportunity to practice
his theoretical knowledge on museology. When Ogan became the director of the
Istanbul Archeology Museum, he was already acquainted with circulating ideas on
modern museology practices and had the experience of practicing his museology
notion and constituting a museum foundation since its inception. As a result of all
these experiences, Ogan had a definite conception of museological practices in his
18"
mind and schematized this vision in a report he wrote in 1937. The report was
written by Aziz Ogan and addressed the Directorship of Antiques in Istanbul to the
inspectors of the “Ministry of Culture”31 who were Salih Zeki, Reşat Nuri and
Burhan Ümid. He, in this report, went through his achievement in the Istanbul
Archeology Museum and outlined the four stages he regarded essential for the
founding of a museum. These were: the founding (teessüs) stage, the collecting
(iddihar) stage, the classification (tasnif) stage and the academic publishing (ilmi
tekamül ve neşriyat) stage. In his report, he explains in detail how these outlined
stages are executed in museology practices in Turkey in his report.
Aziz Ogan dates back the beginning of the founding (teessüs) stage to seven
or eight years after his “honorable predecessor Osman Hamdi Bey” took over the
directorship of the İstanbul Archeology Museum and transferred of the Sidon
sarcophagi to Istanbul while constructing new archeology museum opposite the Tiled
Pavilion in 1888. According to Ogan, the Istanbul Museum founding (teessüs) was
not followed by the collecting (iddihar) stage because they developed concurrently.
While the new building was being constructed, new findings from various regions of
the empire were also being transported to the museum. In addition to the process in
the Istanbul Museum, archeological museums in provinces such as İzmir, Konya,
Adana were initiated in the 1920s when the Istanbul Museum continued to be a
center of attraction for appropriate findings. Ogan underlines the richness of
archeological sites as the main reason for the ongoing collecting stage. The records
of the ongoing transportation of antiquities were even in the yearbook of 1934. In his
report, Ogan points out the Istanbul Museum as the richest establishment and the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
31 Untill 1970s there was not a separate ministry fort he cultural affairs and cultural affairs were
managed by a sub-unit of Ministry of Education under the name of Directorship of Culture which will
be all elaborately examined in the 1st chapter. Aziz Ogan must be addressing to Directorship of
Culture when he used the title of “Ministry of Culture”.
19"
only one that had the capacity to compete with the famous European museums (the
Louvre Museum for instance).32 The classification (tasnif) stage in the Istanbul
Museum was still in progress during the years Ogan held the director’s position. He
reported the new clusters and collections that he classified and stated the importance
of classification as a stage of the museum program. For Ogan museums should be
managed with the guidance of the museum program that was determined in the very
beginning of the founding of the museum. Classification is another stage in the
museum program and Ogan specifically points out that the objects in Istanbul
Museum were classified according to the most recent methods that were also used in
Western museums. The last stage: academic publishing was also emphasized in the
report and he proudly mentions his own catalogue and publications (the catalogues of
Greco-Roman and Byzantine sculptures, the catalogues of Latin books brought from
the Arab Mosque).33 The first three stages of the museum foundation process are the
stages that constituted the essential components of the museum and the final stage is
an academic manifestation of what has been done to constitute that foundation.
The report was specifically written for the Istanbul Museum and Ogan’s
experience as a contributor to these various stages in the development of the Istanbul
Museum. Even though the report was dedicated to a specific museum, the outline of
the museum foundation provided is quite relevant and reflects Ogan’s notion on the
methodology of museum administration that he found a chance to practice in İzmir.
In this study the steps in process of the founding of the İzmir (Archeology)
Museum is examined with reference to the methodological outline provided by Aziz
Ogan in the referred report. In other words the founding process is schematized in
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
32 Report by Aziz Ogan (Director of the İstanbul Archeology Museum) to the inspectors of the
Ministry of Culture (he must refer to the Directorship of Culture), (1937), Appendix C, figure 2.
33 Aziz Ogan does not mention the dates of these publications in his report. However he indicates that
he achieved these when he worked in the İstanbul Archeology Museum. He must publish these during
1940s and 1950s.
20"
accordance with the methodological understanding of Aziz Ogan that he explained in
the mentioned report. Three of the four stages of Ogan’s museology method are
explored in the constituting of the İzmir Museum. The academic publishing stage is
not considered as a fundamental component of the founding stages but considered as
a final report that documents the founding. Therefore this aspect is not included in
the outlining of the founding of the İzmir (Archeology) Museum.
The first chapter “The Founding (Teessüs) Stage”, departs form documents in
Ogan’s archive and examines the founding of the İzmir Museum as an institution
(and its building complex) in relation to both the developments in museology of the
country and the post-war circumstances of the. First of all the motivations and the
reasons for founding a museum institution in the İzmir area are questioned with
particular reference to the development of museology in the Ottoman Empire. After
the examination of the museum foundation as an institution, the spatial aspect of the
institution is closely examined. The buildings of the İzmir Museum which are the
Ayavukla Church building (1927-1951) and the next museum building in Kültürpark
(1951-1984) in terms of their location, significance of the their location, architectural
properties and museum sections are accounted as the spatial aspect of the founding
stage. The urban configuration of post-war İzmir, The Great Fire (1922), and the role
of the redevelopment of the fire zone in the transformation of the city are elaborated
in detail in relation to the locations of the two successive museum buildings. The
locations of the buildings, the significance of the configuration of the museum
building in terms of their contribution and significance in the collective and
constructed memory of the city are explored in relation to the significant incidences
in the history of the city which are the Great Fire and the permanent departure of the
non-Muslim communities.
21"
The second chapter focuses on the act of collecting. It elaborates how and
from which sources the collections of the İzmir Museum were appropriated. It
explores the meaning of composing objects as a collection and their role in museum
setting. The largest portion of the collections of the İzmir Museum is the abandoned
properties of the departed non-Muslims residents of the city. These abandoned
properties varying from personal belongings to church properties are introduced with
regard to their significance in the overall museum program. Acquisition of the
Turkish artists for the art gallery and the role of the gallery in the cultural life of the
city are accounted as the elements affecting the collecting policy of the museum.
In the third chapter the specific methods for the classification of the museum
objects in accordance with the museum program is examined. In this chapter the role
of classification in the museum setting is discussed with references to theoretical
debates on modes and hierarchies of museological classification. The displaying
methodologies employed in various museums in Turkey (specifically the Istanbul
Museum as the center of these peripheries) are examined as examples that had a
possible impact on the İzmir Museum. The different classification systems in the two
different museum buildings are separately examined. The classification system in the
first museum building was discussed regarding its parallelism with the Istanbul
Archeology Museum and its relation with state’s ambition for linking itself to the
grand art narrative and for constituting a national art discourse. The classification
system of the second museum building was elaborated with regard to shift in the
museum institutions (which transformed to an archeological museum rather than a
culture center) and the shift in the perception of history.
22"
CHAPTER II
FOUNDING (TEESSÜS) STAGE
Institutionalization of Museums Under the Ministry of Education
Prof. Remzi Oğuz Arık in his very brief book Türk Müzeciliğine Bir Bakış34 (A
Glance on Turkish Museology) divides Turkish museology in three phases: Osman
Hamdi Bey’s era, Halil Edhem Bey’s era, and the period afterward. The two earlier
stages were marked with reference to the particular museum administrators. The
beginning of Osman Hamdi Bey’s era is considered as the starting of modern
museology in Ottoman Empire and the construction of a real archeological museum
due to the inadequacy of arsenal/museum to shelter numerous archeological findings
that were transported from all over the Aegean, Anatolian, Mesopotamian, and
Levantine regions. In 1910 after the death of Osman Hamdi Bey, Halil Eldem took
over his brother’s position and kept it until the beginning of the independence war
(approximately 1919). Arık’s book on museology in Turkey covers the period from
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
34 Remzi Oğuz Arık, Türk Müzeciliğine Bir Bakış, (İstanbul: Millî Eğitim Basımevi, 1953).
23"
1883 to 1953 and the end of Halil Eldem era with the end of the independence
struggle that opens the third era within which the book was completed. For Arık,
Osman Hamdi Bey’s phase was the time of the very first baby steps of modern
museology in Turkey and all of his struggles were about introducing the new
concepts, museology, and museums, to the Ottoman state, constituting a museum not
out of nothing but out of scattered items and a building that was not fully capable of
being used as a museum. Halil Eldem seems a little bit luckier compared to his
brother. He continued to supervise all the archeological activities ranging from
excavations, transportation of items to museums, and the exhibition of items and had
the legacy of his brother to work on. Even though Halil Eldem at least had the
opportunity to work on an already founded museum and organization, he was having
trouble preventing the smuggling of antiques by foreign excavators. The budget cuts
more over were making it very difficult for him to transport archeological items to
the center in time, before someone else would smuggled them to Europe.
According to Remzi Arık, these two brothers who were the pioneers of
Ottoman museology had their own troubles on their way to run and organize the
museum. But Arık especially focuses on a point that is common to both phases:
“coincidence” (tesadüf). 35 Arık recognizes the very early attempts for the founding
of museums in this period, but identifies them purely as the personal endeavors of
Osman Hamdi and Halil Eldem. Even though they were the end product of the
modernizing educational projects of the Empire (ranging from establishing Western
type schools to sending youngsters to Europe for education), having some people
that could spend personal attention and effort for museums was in itself a lucky
coincidence. Through focusing on the term “coincidence”, that is the coincidence of
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
35 Ibid., p. 5,6.
24"
having these men, their unique personal interest in museology, Arık actually intends
to pinpoint the lack of the institutionalization of museums and conservation policies.
He emphasizes the dependence of conservation efforts, excavations, the founding of
museums on the determination, personal will and struggle of few pioneers rather than
on well organized bureaucratic mechanisms and institutions. The third phase is
defined as the time after Halil Eldem’s directorship and including the year 1953,
when this book was published, so this final phase was still going on when Arık was
writing his book. Considering that the history of museology in the Ottoman Empire
was initiated with the attempts of Fethi Ahmed Pasha who was appointed in 1845 for
storing antiques in the former church building of St. Irine and that further efforts
were made by directors Goold and P. A. Dethier for the development of the museum
institution, characterizing the pre Osman Hamdi Bey era as one “lack of complete
institutionalization” would be erroneous. On the other hand Arık’s attitude of
pointing to this era in this dismissive and generalizing manner cannot be a simple
overgeneralization or false interpretation. It should be noted that he viewed Osman
Hamdi Bey, through his contemporary perspective as the director who introduced the
modern understanding to museum and conservation practices in the Empire,
introducing to the field new classification protocols and preparing up to date
regulations to prevent smuggling.
Beginning of the Institutionalization of the Museums
Fethi Ahmed Pasha who was appointed as the marshal of the arsenal in 1845 started
to store the antiques in St. Irini, which was used as an arsenal on that time. Aziz
25"
Ogan, based on his survey on the objects, states that the dates of storing the items of
the collections in St. Irine vary between 1846-1850 and these were basically stored
without classifying and were left to the responsibility of the janitors.36 Philipp Anton
Dethier, the director of the museum in the 1870s, dates the first efforts to put the
antiques together “22 years ago” but when he wrote this statement was unknown and
makes it impossible to determine the date.37 The collection in St. Irine was simply
divided in two groups as Mecma’-ı Esliba-i Atika (considered as the basis of the
Military Museum) and Mecma’-ı Asar-ı Atika (considered as the basis of the Müze-i
Humayun). 1869 was the date when one of the professors of Galatasaray Lycée
(Galata Sultanisi), Mr. Goold, was appointed as the director of Nümunehane-i
Osmani for newspapers or Müze-i Hümayun. 1869 might be considered the founding
year of the museum because its name “Müze-i Hümayun” was given in 1886 with the
appointment announcement of Mr. Goold. However, if the criteria for dating the
opening date of the museum was determining the foundation date of a fully
institutionalized museum, even 1869 cannot be the date because classifying of the
objects and giving the collections a museum shape was started with Osman Hamdi
Bey. If the criteria was determining the first year of very first steps, it must be traced
back to the 1840s when Fethi Ahmed Pasha started to store the collections St. Irine
church. In any case, Mr. Goold’s appointment was declared with the name “Müze-i
Hümayun” and the name of the museum institution was circulated in the
newspapers.38 The death of Fethi Ahmed Pasha in 1858 caused an obligatory break
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
36 Aziz Ogan, Türk Müzeciliginin 100üncü Yıldönümü : A Historical Survey of the Museum of
Antiquities at Istanbul (İstanbul : Türkiye Turing ve Otomobil Kurumu, 1947), p. 4.
37 Edhem Eldem, Osman Hamdi Bey Sözlüğü (Ankara : Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, 2010), p. 391
38 Mustafa Cezar, Sanatta Batı'ya, p. 231.
26"
and the directorship of the Müze-i Hümayun was removed and an Austrian artist,
Trentzio was appointed to guard the collection by Mahmud Nedim Pasha. 39
After Ahmed Vefik Pasha took the grand vizier position and also the Minister
of Education position in 1872, the directorship of the Müze-i Hümayun was
reactivated and a German, Dr. Anton Dethier was appointed by Ahmed Vefik Paşa as
the museum director and held the position until his death in 1881. This was also the
year Osman Hamdi, who contributed a great deal to the Istanbul Museum and
Ottoman museology in general, took over the position. Dethier was sometimes
accused of contributing to the collections of his own country or spending his time
mostly in exploring the city rather than working for the museum, but he also
contributed to the museum in some sense. 40 First, he improved the number of the
items, constituted a small catalogue, moved the collections to Tiled Kiosk (officially
opened in1880) and a regulation to prevent the smuggling incidence, which could
never been executed and planned, to found an archeology school to raise a generation
to handle archeological excavations and protect antiques. Osman Hamdi Bey finally
took the position in 1881 and contributed especially to classify the items that Dethier
was mostly criticized for failing to organize with “scientific classification”41 and
form a new regulation to replace the largely ineffective 1874 legislation.
The museum institution in Istanbul (along with the appointment of the staff
and regulations related to antiques) was initiated as the personal endeavor of Fethi
Ahmed Paşa who was the marshal of arsenal the directorship of the museum seems
to be constituted as an independent institution. However Ahmet Vefik Paşa as the
Minister of Education took the crucial steps like the reactivation of the Directorship
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
39 Ibid., p. 233.
40 Semavi İyice, “İstanbul Arkeoloji Müzelerinin İlk Müdürlerinden Dr. Anton Dethier Hakkında
Notlar” (İstanbul Arkeoloji Müzeleri Yıllığı No:9, İstanbul: Pulhan Matbaası, 1960), p. 45.
41 Mustafe Cezar, Sanatta Batı'ya, p. 242.
27"
of the MusuemHowever, preparing the first legislation of antiquities and its
declaration to the provinces. It seems since Ahmed Vefik Paşa’s taking the position
of Minister of Education, the museum and conservation policies have became the
responsibilities of the Ministry of Education and in the Republican era the Ministry
of Education continued to oversee museum and conservation policies.42
During the early years of Republican Turkey re-institutionalization of state apparatus
was initiated but it is quite hard to talk about well-defined and specified ministries
under which related institutions or bureaucratic apparatus were sheltered. Most
institutions, which were loosely related to each other or to their head ministerial
bodies, were defined as sub-units of a few very basic ministries. The Ministry of
Education was one of those few ministries and its job description was highly
comprehensive. Antique items and museums, physical education, military education,
libraries, school museums, bodies related to health: sanitation, statistics, legal
consultancy were all lumped together as the responsibilities of the Ministry of
Education. Museums and conservation policies were assigned to this Ministry among
other items that were hardly related to education.43 The Directorship of Culture was
identified as a sub-unit of the Ministry of Education in 1920 and “collecting items
related to Turkish art, folklore, ethnography, determining national emblems and the
anthem, supervising and inspecting the foreigners’ excavations” were all assigned to
this unit among the other various responsibilities. Museums and all archeological
activities from excavations to the transportation of the findings, the conserving,
identifying of objects, to the supervising of the staff and the staff that dealt with these
operations”44 were all responsibilities of the Directorship of Culture, which was a
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
42 Enver Behnan Şapolya, Müzeler Tarihi (İstanbul: Rezmi Kitapevi, 1936), p. 33.
43 Nevzad Ayas, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Milli Eğitimi: Kuruluşlar ve Tarihçeler (Ankara : Milli Eğitim,
1948) p. 501.
44 Arık, Türk Müzeciliğine, p. 9.
28"
sub-unit of the Ministry of Education. There are numerous kinds of documents in the
Aziz Ogan archive that were sent from the İzmir Museum (Antique Inspectorship in
İzmir, Directorship of Culture in İzmir in some cases) to the Ministry of Education
(Maarif Vekaleti) or the Directorship of Culture (Hars Müdüriyeti) as the responsible
institutions and it appears that as the various documents demonstrate he had to report
directly to these two authorities. This broad and sometimes ambiguous job
description of the Directorship of Culture continued until 1925 when a new law
annulled the Directorship of Culture and identified three new sub-unit under the
Ministry of Education, in order to deal with conservation policies, issues related to
antiques and with conservation policies in a more effective and well organized way.
The three units were the Directorship of Antiques and Museums (Âsar-ı Atika ve
Müzeler Müdürlüğü), the Directorship of School of Art (Sanayî Nefîse Müdürlüğü),
and the Directorship of Libraries (Kütüphaneler Müdürlüğü).45 After dividing the
Directorship of Culture into sub-units and assigning them with much more specific
and related responsibilities, the Directorship of Antiques and Museums had became
responsible for and covered anything related to museum and antiques. Its very basic
responsibility was “managing, sustaining and founding museums that contained
historically and aesthetically valuable items, conserving and restoring historical
monuments, managing applications for the excavation of archeological sites and
supervising and inspecting these excavations”.46 The Directorship of Antiques and
Museums was institutionalized in itself and three branch offices were initialized to
assign corresponding issues, which were museums, excavations and academic
publications, and conservation monuments. In addition to these branch offices,
consultants in the area of ethnography were recruited. The two consultant
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
45 Ayas, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Milli Eğitimi, p. 528, 529.
46 Ibid., p. 503.
29"
commissions should be added to the apparatus of the Directorship of Antiques and
Museums, which were the consultant commissions for the museums and monuments
and the commission for conserving monuments directly affiliated to the Directorship
of Antiques and Museums. In conclusion, the Directorship of Antiques and Museums
organized branch offices, consultants in the field of ethnography and also consultant
commissions47 Any archeological item was the subject of reports either directly to
the Ministry of Education, the Directorship of Culture or later, the Directorship of
Antiques and Museums, during all the phases from being unearthed to the transport
to the exhibition halls of the museums. Starting the excavations and determination of
the budget for excavations and number of workers, and the supervisor of the
excavation were all under the control of the Ministry of Education or the
Directorship of Culture/later Directorship of Antiques and Museums. After the
excavation the objects were sheltered until the transporting them to a center. The
responsible person for the excavated and transported items, the expenses of the
transportation and finally arrival of the items to the final destination (a central
warehouse in many cases) were all reported the Ministry or the Directorship. All this
labor was not possible without a staff, who had to spend serious time and energy
under the directorship of the Ministry of Education. Even if a sub-department, such
as the Directorship of Culture or Antiques and Museums was assigned to manage
these and cover logistic and bureaucracy, it did not have its own roster of supervisors
or managers. During the 1920s and the 1930s and even into the 1940s due to
financial troubles and crises, it is not surprising to see the Ministry of Education was
utilizing and mobilizing the same roster for both educational issues and the works of
the Directorship of Culture/Antiques and Museums. This, of course, created some
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
47 Ibid., p. 504.
30"
trouble in assigning available staff. The state must have suffered from a restricted
number of personal during the 1920s. In 1928, a friend of Aziz Ogan (no name
indicated on the document) wrote a letter to him and discussed Ogan’s proposal of
constituting an album of the antiques’ photographs. Ogan’s friend was very
impressed with the idea, but could not help Ogan to recruit an assistant. He expressed
his sorrow for his inability to help him and continued by stating that he ” would
desire to send one of our architects. It is not possible for the moment because they
are so busy with new school plans”.48 In conclusion during its first decades of this
slow and troubled process of institutionalization, hampered by staff shortages and
financial crises, any function related to museums was heavily dependent on the
policies and decisions of the Ministry of Education. Until the founding of a separate
new ministry, the Ministry of Culture between 1971 and 1973, the Counsellorship of
Culture (Kültür Müsteşarlığı) as a sub-unit of the Ministry of Education continued to
manage conservation issues and museums under the Directorship of Antiques and
Museums.49 It is clear that the institutionalization of museums and conservation
policies could not be fully realized for at least the first decades of the Republican era.
Funds and proper institutionalization were not problems specific to museums and
related organizations. Institutionalization was incomplete during the first decades of
the Republican era for all senses. Considering both the financial and institutionally
poor conditions, even organizing the very fundamental needs and administrative
units as the first steps of bureaucratization is quite an accomplishment. The
Directorship of Culture was one of the very fundamental directorships, which were
formed as sub-units of few main ministries.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
48 Unsigned letter to Aziz Ogan (November or December 1928), Appendix C, figure 3 and figure 12
49 Cumhuriyet Döneminde Türk Milli Eğitim Sistemindeki Gelişmeler (1910-1920) (Ankara: Milli
Eğitim Bakanlığı Strateji Geliştirme Başkanlığı), 2010, p. 17-18, 22.
31"
Education and History of Education in Nation Building Process
The educational system in the Republican Turkey’s context did not merely establish
the necessary institutions and schools for school education, but also carried out the
mission of the nation, teaching them how to become a nation, setting an
environment where people became acquainted with values of the Republic and
disseminating basic concepts of the nation-state. This broad mission of education
assigned many responsibilities to the Ministry of Education. The very slow
institutionalization process of the state’s offices was surely one of the reasons why
the loosely related institutions/directorships were bound together but even the
“irrelevances” within these entities, each of which had its own order and agenda for
“educating the nation”. Until 1925, when a new law inserted much more specific
sub-units to the organizational scheme of the Ministry of Education, antiquities and
museums, physical education, military education, libraries, school museums,
sanitation, statistics, legal consultancy were all under the responsibility of the
Ministry of Education. Schools and libraries were dependencies on the education
system.50 Military education, physical education, and sanitation were branches
related to the body politics of the nation as the state expected to see a healthy and fit
generation who would all always be ready to defend their country. 51
Determining the national anthem and flag were very direct issues of nation
building, therefore they are the most visible symbols of a nation. All of these
seemingly irrelevant items were actually highly consonant with each other because
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
50 Ayas, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Milli Eğitimi, p. 501, 528-529.
51 Yiğit Akın, "Gürbüz ve Yavuz Evlatlar": Erken Cumhuriyet'te Beden Terbiyesi ve Spor (İstanbul:
İletişim, 2004), p. 41-42.
32"
they all formed significant elements of the nation building process. Museums and the
collection and preservation of antiques were fundamental and inseparable subjects in
the official narration of history as already discussed, creating a history discourse was
a major instrument for nurturing the concept of “nation” in new citizens’minds. The
members of a nation must be educated in the field of history, which is one of the
paths to transmit the message of “nation”. The variety of branches, which the
Ministry of Education was responsible for constituted quite a large task for the
Ministry in addition to museums and antiques. Museums are component of the
history narration and also a nation’s education. Considering Mustafa Kemal’s
approach that projects ignorance is not only illiteracy, but also lack of national
consciousness, the broader mission of Ministry of Education became teaching the
people the conditions of being a nation.
The two conditions proposed by Ernest Renan for forming a nation which
were “the possession in common of a rich legacy of memories, … and the desire to
live together”52 These common memories and the motivations that produce the desire
of living together are introduced to the nation in school education and more
specifically in history education.53 The formation of a nation-state as a piece of land
and its abstract concepts is a sophisticated process that must be founded on multiple
pillars of chained connections such as (for Hroch) the past (national history or
history of nation), culture (ethnic, linguistic, religious), modernization and
communication, the creation of nationally relevant conflicts and interests (social,
political and professional), and finally agitation (emotional symbols, factors,
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
52 Ernest Renan, “What is a Nation” translated by Martin Thom, Nation and Narration, ed. Homi K.
Bhabha, (London; New York: Routledge, 1990), p. 19.
53 For a closer account of how the early Republic reconstituted the role of theTurkish people in World
history see p. 40.
33"
festivities).54 Education must be integrated to these pillars as a concept that make all
these chained connections possible since it is in the schools where all these concepts
were taught to the generations.
Implications of the Western-oriented views on education and the competition
between the Westernist and Islamist approach in terms of educational reform have an
older history than the Republican education reform. The first remarkable secularizing
and reformist step for education was taken with the formation of the Ministry of
Public Education (Maarif-i Umumiye Nezareti). The ministry was supposed to deal
with the issues of education and administration of the schools, which were divided
according to the grade-level in the same period. This new organization did not only
divide the schools to grade-levels and introduce pedagogy, but also and more
importantly it structured a central school system. According to Fortna during
Abdulhamid II’s period the school network was created in the manner of a
government institution. Alongside this network also the governmental bureaus
proliferated with their charge of “Istanbul influence” reaching to the provinces with
this school network and bureau. The state’s apparatus reached to the provinces such
as railroads, telegraph lines, and the state’s offices had the ability of reshaping the
social and economic life of people where they reached, but the school network had a
big opportunity of shaping the young generation. In Fortna’s words, “In an age prone
to ideology, education was in many ways the best investment the government could
make in its future.”55 The overthrow of Abdulhamid II in 1909 with a coup led by the
Young Turks took over (the title of Sultanate was not abolished until 1922). The
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
54 Miraslov Hroch, “Modernization and Communication as Factor of Nation Formation”, The
Sage Handbook of Nations and Nationalism, ed. Gerard Delanty and Krishan Kumar, (London:
Sage Publications, 2006), p. 21.
55 Benjamin Carl Fortna, “Education for the Empire: Ottoman State’s Secondary Schools During the
Reign of Sultan Abdulhamid II (1876-1909)” (Ph.D diss. University of Chicago, 1997), p. 102.
34"
educational reform and pedagogic formation of education during era of the
Committee of Union and Progress (CUP, Ittihat ve Terakki Partisi) was developed
out of the diverse ideas of contributors of members of intelligentsia such as Ziya
Gökalp, Halide Edip Adıvar, and Prince Sabahattin. Adıvar and Prince Sabahattin
were in favor of individualist and secular education in opposition to Gökalp who
proposed to secularize the curricula but balance it with the allegiance to religious
instruction. In accordance with Gökalp’s pedagogic thoughts, in the CUP era the
education system was formed in a manner that maintained the balance between
secularized curricula and an amount of religious instruction. The Young Turks’
attitude of reforming and maintaining the country56 was reflected in their educational
policy as well and the current establishments were reformed. The mission of
education in this reformist era was “to educate people who would able to serve the
Turkish nation both mentally and physically,”57 Gökalp’s pedagogic philosophy fit
very well to their seeking harmony between “secularism and controlled amount of
religious influence.”58
The Republican period in education started with the critique of the CUP era
that it lacked a national educational agenda, lacked an adequate number of staff, and
an inadequate level of professionalization in the profession of teaching. The Ministry
of Education of Republic did not have a new regulation and it was still founded on
basis of 1914 regulation that organized the Ministry of Education in the CUP period.
Founding the Ministry of Education (Maarif Vekaleti) in Ankara in 1920 proposed an
institution working simultaneously with the same ministry of the Ottoman Empire in
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
56 Andreas M. Kazamias, Education and the Quest of Modernity in Turkey (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1966), p. 106.
57 Faith J. Childress, “Republican Lessons: Education and Making of Modern Turkey,” PhD diss., The
University of Utah, 200,1p. 30.
58 Ibid., p. 30.
35"
shape of the same comprehensive ministry.59 For two years (Untill the resignation of
Istanbul Government in 1922) both İstanbul and Ankara had their Ministries of
Education. The Republican perception of education aimed not only to continue to
develop the current institutions but also structure a system based on the principle of
science, rationalism, and practicality in order to produce the “type of citizens” that
would strengthen the nation.60 The formation of the new educational system was
defined as “national, secular, scientific, and democratic.”61 In the CUP are
educational policy was formed in harmony with the society and the importance of the
religion in society. The CUP’s understanding of education tried to impose secularism
but also tired to balance it with introduction of religion. Differentiating the
Republican era from the CUP era in terms of education with bold lines would be
erroneous and their faith in education and the instrumental usage of education were
some points they shared. On the other hand in the Republican educational system,
the desire of creating a secular and national system was strictly underlined in contrast
to the desire of the CUP’s educational system for creating a balanced system with
instruction of religion.62 The governmental program on education aimed not to create
a system that was geared towards the need of society,63 but rather to create their a
society with the assistance of an educational program. Ziya Gökalp’s moderate
pedagogic philosophy, which sought the balance with the adaptation to the Western
ideas and religious instruction was not credited in the new Republican system until
the 1940s. The system reflected Mustafa Kemal’s view of adapting the Western style
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
59 Necdet Sakaoğlu, “Milli Eğitim Merkez Örgütü”, 75 Yılda Eğitim, ed. Fatma Gök, (İstanbul:
Türkiye Ekonomik ve Toplumsal Tarih Vakfı, 1999), p. 111.
60 Childress, “Republican Lessons,” p. 31.
61 Zekiye Süleyman, “A Study on the History and Development of Education in Turkey with Special
Emphasis upon the Influence of Professor Dewey’s Theories of Education” (master’s thesis, Smith
College, 1934), p. 53.
62 For further reading on the continuity and change between the Young Turk generation and the
Republican generation see Şerif Mardin, Continuity and Change in the Ideas of Young Turks
(İstanbul: Robert College, 1969).
63 Childress, “Republican Lessons,” p. 34.
36"
completely with the motto of “total transformation of all aspect of Turkish society
along modern lines.”64 In 1924 the unification of the entire educational system under
the roof of the Ministry of Education with the law of “unification” (Tevhid-i Tedrisat
Kanunu) aimed to erase not only the duality (religious and modern education) in
education but also the duality of society. Since the Tanzimat period the duality
between the traditional education and newly inserted Western style schools, between
the traditional society and the new generation that was trained in these western style
schools and adopted a more scientific, positivist, reformist worldview. This shift in
the educational system aimed to unite the individuals in “their patriotism and
emotive outlook.”65 This new law was supposed to pave the way to educate and train
people with the united ideal of patriotism.66 This highly transformed system was
supposed to fulfill the demand of good and faithful Turks rather than good faithful
Muslims through pumping “the spirit of social cooperation” and “patriotism”67 in
school education.
In the case of Turkish Republic, the mission of education and teaching
history as a sub-branch of it were designed to embed the mentioned mission of
creating a rational and progressive society through the secular, scientific, rational
educational model. Education was projected as way of coping with the backwardness
of the country. The preferable way that must be follow to overcome the
backwardness of the country and to catch up with the West meant also to decide
between the Islamist path and leading the traditional manner or the Westernizing of
education. The discussions for the preferable way finalized as investing to the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
64 Joseph Szyliowicz, Education and Modernization in the Middle East, (Ithaca [N.Y.]: Cornell
University Press, 1973), p. 216.
65 Ömer Faruk Gençkaya, Ankara: Capital of Education (Ankara: VEKAM, 2011), p.47.
66 Ibid.
67Henry Elisha Allen, The Turkish transformation: A Study in Social and Religious Development
(New York: Greenwood Press, 1968), p. 101.
37"
generation that will compete with the West in terms of all the senses that caused
backwardness of the country and Westernize the educational system. The history of
reading the relevant history of the educational agenda of the Turkish Republic is a
history of pinpointing the contrast between Ottoman past and consciously
modernizing recent Turkish Republic and it is much more the same for the many
cases of newly independent states (in the Balkans and Middle East).68 The education
issue and the missions assigned to it were the concern of Mustafa Kemal even before
the War of Liberation ended and he constantly emphasized the need to overcome the
ignorance of the people, the need for education, and the spreading education to even
the most provincial corners of the country. Education as a tool to “awaken people”
was adapted by the intelligentsia since the second generation of the reformists, the
Young Turks returned their country with a baggage of positivist ideas and
enthusiasm for implementation of scientific method for the enlightenment of people
inspired by their experience in the Western positivist education system.69 Triggering
the advancement of people and the country through the channels of education was
the common sense in the ideology of both the CUP and Republican elites but in the
Republican period preservation of the Empire was not the concern anymore. The
positivist attitude was carried also to the Republican generation. The ignorance of
people caused by the enslavement of the people by the former rulers was pointed as
the basic barrier in front of the country’s development. This ignorance was defined
as not just by illiteracy or lack of basic elementary education but also being unaware
of their own identity. Mustafa Kemal always stated the need of nation to leave
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
68Benjamin Fortna, Learning to Read in the Late Ottoman Empire and the Early Turkish
Republic (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan), p. 21-22.
69 Mardin, Continuity and Change, p. 5-7.
38"
behind its ignorance and never fall back into darkness again.70 A citation from him,
“our national character in harmony with our history and completely liberated from
the superstition of the past, freed from all foreign influence” summarizes this view.
Mustafa Kemal imagined an education system that draws the contrast between
history and the past very explicitly and stating his expectation from the citizens was
the qualifying of a self-conscious citizens. This quality is very exclusively
summarized as being aware of the self and the identity serviced by the Republican
agenda. This educational and pedagogic agenda is based on pinpointing the contrast
between the old Ottoman regime and the modernizing Turkish Republic was very
basically attempting to design an almost monolithic nation through its education
policies.71
Simplifying the Ottoman language, focusing on the patriotic messages and
enduring itself to melt all the diverse groups such as Kurds, Greeks, Laz in the pot of
Turkish Republic etc. were all cooperated and supported by the educational agenda
of the state.72 The Ottoman heritage in newly imagined nation history was defined as
“superstition” and a conscious distinction between the superstitious “past” and “the
history” of new nation was made. Christopher K. Neumann defined the teaching of
Ottoman history in the Turkish Republic as “monumental” to persuade people for the
glory of their state and its past and in order to create an ideal form of a state the
citizens live for, on the other hand for the Republican elites it is quite important to
invent their own tradition and break ties with the imperial traditions. The desire for a
glorious past and inventing a Republican tradition were contradictory sometimes
when it was the matter of teaching the Ottoman past and driving the state to prepare a
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
70 Jessica Selma Tiregöl, “The Role of Primary Education in Nation-state Building: The Case of
Early Turkish Republic (1023-1938)” (Ph.D. diss., The Princeton University, 1998), p. 41.
71 Fortna, “Education for the Empire,” p. 34-35.
72 Ibid., p. 25-26.
39"
selective curriculum. This selective attitude through Ottoman past of the state
attempted to emphasize the backwardness of the former state and the development
provided by Republican state but at the same time glorifying the victories of the
imperial past.73 74
The Role of Museums in History Narration and Education
The role of museum in the history narrative and the education of the nation makes it
highly significant to configure the place of material in the relation of material and
identity and the configuration of material and identity especially in the museum
context. Donald Preziosi in his book underlines people’s pursuit of the objects Brain
of the Earth’s Body: Art, Museum, and the Phantasms of Modernity. He argues that,
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
73 Neumann, Christopher K., “ Tarihin Yararı ve Zararı Olarak Türk Kimliği: Bir Akedemik
Deneme”, Tarih Öğretimi ve Ders Kitapları: Buca Sempozyumu 29 Eylül-1 Ekim 1994, ed. Salih
Özbaran, (İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınlar, 1995), p.43-4.
74 Kolluoğlu Kırlı, “Forgetting the Smyrna Fire”, History Workshop Journal, Issue 60, Autumn 2005,
p.33-35. Atatürk Söylev ve Demeçleri II (1906-1938), İstanbul: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1989,
p. 82. Biray Kırlı, From Ottoman Empire to Turkish Nation-State: Reconfiguring Spaces and Geobodies,
Binghamton University, 2002, p. 3. The case of the Great Fire of İzmir is one of the cases that
explore how historic incidences were bended in accordance with the ruling ideology and a functional
discourse was produced through a remarkable historical incidence for the history of İzmir and its
hinterland. The perpetrator of the incidence is debatable and no solid evidence to relate it to the Greek
Orthodox that might want to leave no valid property behind or Turkish population and army that
might want to erase all the residence of the departing community to prevent them from heading back
to city. Independently from whomever conducted to set the city in fire, the fire consumed the city
especially Frank, Greek and Armenian districts and consumed the very cosmopolite landscape of the
Ottoman Smyrna. What is so interesting about the fire and its place in the official history of Republic
of Turkey is the agreed silence about it. The history of İzmir and its liberation from Greek invasion
was narrated as one of the glorious incidence of Republican history/liberation war and storied as a
happy victory of a very struggling war without mentioning the fire as one of tragic the result of this
long struggle. It is no need to say the artistic representation of the fire through films, plays or
academic studies were also not present. When it is impossible to ignore it since it was a huge, visible
scar on the landscape of the city it was associated with joy, liberation, and gain rather than mourning,
destruction and loss. Mustafa Kemal during his visit to İzmir in 1923 refers to fire as an inefficient
incidence and underestimates it by talking about it as: “This fire and its destruction did not have any
influence on them. Their eyes were filled with tears from happiness of witnessing our victorious army
liberating them”. Marking the fire for “the end of Ottoman Smyrna and the dawn of Turkish İzmir”
was one of the incidence that has a very symbolic spot in history narration of Republican Turkey and
integration of a museum building to this very symbolic fire zone was illustrating the penetration of the
museum to the history narration and education of the nation.
40"
“Objects pursue us in our pursuit of objects to sustain and focus our pursuit of
ourselves.”75 In Preziosi’s claim, people in modern societies are in pursuit of the
objects in order to build an identity with the assistance of these objects surrounding
them. Because there is “a fundamental belief about the nature of time, history,
memory and identity and an imagined relationship between ourselves and social
subject and object worlds we build ourselves into, that is the world of objects (art and
artifacts in the museum context) not only resonates but also embodies, maintains and
naturalizes the individual and collective identity.”76 Wendy Shaw takes this relation
between the material world and individual and collective identity a step further and
examines their state in the museum. Her examination makes it possible to set the
correspondence between collective identity and patriotic pride. Shaw defines
museums as “not only sepulchers of archeological artifacts and artworks that often
deprived their aesthetic principles through a relationship with these artifacts, but also
temples dedicated to the celebration of these works within modern narratives of
collective patriotic pride.” 77 “Celebration” and “temples” as the keywords of this
citation imply the selectively highlighting/glorifying of some objects or periods in
order to contribute the national discourse and patriotic pride. In order to construct
today’s collective and individual beings the collective memory, which Preziosi
closely identifies with the subject-world and object-world is constituted in these
dedicated temples. For Preziosi “cumulative formation of series of cultural
institution” enables people to imagine “myth of nation”. Nation-states deeply need
“the apparatus of cultural fictions” (in that case this fiction is the link people develop
between themselves and the material world). In such institutions “the stage-
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
75 Donald Preziosi, Brain of the Earth’s Body: Art, Museum, and the Phantasms of Modernity
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2003), p. 1.
76 Ibid., p. 3.
77 Wendy Shaw, “From Mausoleum,” p. 425.
41"
machinery of display recomposes and transforms the material of all sorts.”78
Celebrating and founding these temples are also related to the power relation
between the state and the populace. The development of the museum separately from
the private collections and their becoming available to the wider populace might be
easily and comfortably presented as the democratization of the collection. On the
other hand, the visitors of the museums have more likely operated as the objects that
took their share in this discourse and one can argue that they have been spectating
the power rather than sharing.79 The transformation of the private or royal collections
to public museums and the founding of exhibition halls have provided a ground on
which the wider populace could encounter the collections and thus the power relation
between the state and its “subject” could be comfortably invented. The state is the
eventual controller of the museum settings where the visitor performs the ritual of
seeing the objects. These settings coordinate the values of the visitor and society in
general and generate self-awareness because the art museum is a type of “public site
that publicly represents beliefs about the order of the world, its past and present, and
the individual’s place within it.”80 For Carol Duncan controlling the museum and the
setting should be considered as controlling the representation of the community and
its values. The final question of “who constitutes the community and who defines its
identity” controls what we see or what we do not see in the museum settings.81
Organizing the museum setting or setting the classification of the objects are
subjects related to the question of “who constitutes the community and who defines
it identity”. In the Ottoman, later Turkish context, museology constitutes a much
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
78 Donald Preziosi, “The Art of Art History”, The Art of Art History: A Critical Anthology, ed. Donald
Preziosi, (Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, 1998), p. 508-509.
79 Jennifer Barrett, Museums and the Public Sphere, Chichester (West Sussex, UK; Malden, MA,
USA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011), p. 47-49.
80 Carol Duncan, Civilizing Rituals: Inside Public Museums (London, New York: Routledge, 1995), p.
8.
81 Ibid.
42"
bolder strategy that was followed in order to fix the visitor to a predetermined
interpretation of the collections. In the case of European museums, the institutions
developed concurrently with the discipline of art history. This concurrent
development drove them to develop a setting in accordance with the grand narrative
of artistic progress which is “the spirit of the civilization, moving forward in time
from the East to the West, contributes to the development of history, a process that
ends with the capacity of the art-historical narrative.”82 In other words an
evolutionary order of the objects was provided through constituting the taxonomic
system of chronological order that foresaw a place for each object in the historical
time.83 The art and artifact and their settings in the European museology are the
elements of a grand narrative of artistic progress that was narrated in an evolutionary
manner. Europe’s acquisition of the colonial pieces from its colonies in the
nineteenth century carved new rooms in the evolutional taxonomy of the museums
and regional and religious sections were inserted too.
In Turkish museology, a much straighter relation between the object and
identity was inscribed through taxonomy as well as the regional and religious
categories that have shaped the collections since the beginning.84 Especially the
Republican museums, in order to fulfill their assignment of narrating a linear
development that ends with the declaration of the Republic as the legitimate
expression of Turkish identity, narrating history and a chronological order was
essential. However the Republican museums directly chronicled the narration of the
specific nation rather than the grand narrative of art history. In Turkey the
development of museology apart form that field of art history (and its close and
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
82 Wendy Shaw, “Museums and Narratives of Display from the Late Ottoman Empire to the Turkish
Republic ”, Muqarnas 24 (2007), p. 253.
83 Preziosi, Brain of the Earth’s Body, p. 19.
84 Shaw, “Museums and Narratives,” p. 253-254.
43"
concurrent development with the nation formation process) gave way to centralize
the narration of the nation rather than that of art history. Thus, the pure visual
narrative replaced by a dominant national narrative for organizing objects. This
characteristic of Turkish museology gives it also a local character that focuses on the
narration of the nation rather than linking itself to the broader art history discourse
and inventing its own ordering scheme that will be broadly examined in
classification section.85
The new museums of the Republican era are very concrete examples of
iconized history narrative. In the capital, the newly founded Ankara Civilization
Museum played the major role of illustrating history narration and the
decontextualizing of objects through detaching them from their geography and
resituating in the timeline of epistemological scheme of archeological collections on
the basis of Western museology tradition. In Ankara the very first collection of
antiques were stored in a citadel, the White Castle (Akkale), in 1921 in order to
protect the pieces from the damages of the ongoing war. Since the major aim was
storing them in a safe shelter, this was a hybrid collection that consisted of various
objects such, as coins, jewelry, lacework, and printed fabric from various periods
(Roman, Greek, Seljuk, and Byzantine). This very first collection was classified
according to whether it was Islamic or non-Islamic.86 In 1926 the ethnographic
objects and religious objects were transferred to the newly founded Ethnography
museum. This new museum was dedicated to the ethnographic objects but a few
rooms were separated for the Hittite, Classical, and Byzantine objects. The
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
85 Turkish History Thesis and Hittite archeology were some inventions for lining this localized
narrative with the broader and universal grand narrative. For further reading see Enver Ziya Karal,
“Tanzimattan Bugüne Kadar Tarihçiliğimiz”, Felsefe Kurumu Semineri (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu
Basımevi, 1977).
86 Melanio Savino, “Narrating the “New” History: Museums in the Construction of the Turkish
Republic, Great Narratives of the Past. Traditions and Revisions in National Museums,” (paper
presented at EuNaMus, European National Museums: Identity Politics, the Uses of the Past and the
European Citizen, Paris, 29 June – 1 July & 25-26 November 2011), p. 260.
44"
archeological findings that accumulated during the 1930s drove the government to
found a Hittite Museum and its collection was organized by the German Hittitologist
Hans Güterbock. The Anatolian Civilization Museum took its final form and name in
1968.87 In Ankara these detached objects were situated to compose a nation narration
rather than universal art narration.88 Even though the Hittite collection was still the
locus of the entire collection, the new Anatolian Civilizations Museum suggested a
narrated genealogy of national unity, based on the historical continuity of
civilizations that lived in Anatolia from prehistoric to modern times. Various
civilizations embedded in the collection formed the image of a “cohesive
civilization” rather than representing different episodes in the history of the region.89
Conceiving the museum collection as a whole composition of very unrelated groups
such as Greco Roman and Hittite collection justifies their presence in the museum
and embeds them in the narration. The classification in these museums seems to
constitute a very local narrative and concentrated around the pieces of the region and
creates a genecology for Anatolia. This narrative is created on the basis of continuity
of civilization on the region (geographical continuity) and sometimes race theories. It
is possible to read their Crediting the items from Classical and Byzantine periods as
an sign of the effort to link themselves to grand narrative. However, creating the
genealogy that construct the continuity between Classical, Byzantine period and the
Hittite periods, which is an invention of nationalist Turkish history thesis is a proof
of internalizing and localizing these period in the local narrative.
In Istanbul post-Republican museology activities took place through
transformation of the Topkapı Palace (1924) and the Hagia Sophia Mosque (1931) to
museums. These two buildings, as the first grand palace in the imperial capital and
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
87 Ibid., p. 261.
88 Shaw, “From Mausoleum”, p. 268.
89 Savino, “Narrating the “New”,” p. 262.
45"
its highly symbolic congregational mosque, were full of imperial connotations. The
buildings were transformed to museums and the objects in them were re-organized
through de-contextualization and neutralization.
Nilay Özlü in her book chapter “Single P(a)lace, Multiple Narratives: The
Topkapı Palace in Western Travel Accounts from the Eighteenth to the Twentieth
Century,” considers this museum state of the palace complex as a lieux de mémoire
(an instrument for bridging the distance between history and memory)90 and argues
that with the finalization of the museumification process, “the Topkapı Palace itself
was officially transformed into a museum. Stripped of its imperial and sacred
connotations, the Palace was positioned as a cultural heritage, an architectural
edifice, and as a historic monument, a lieux de mémoire.”91 The creation of a
museum in the Topkapı Palace was triggered with its gaining the status of abandoned
palace after Mahmud II’s reign a period in which Ottoman authorities offered tours
to European orientalists to reveal this oriental mystery. After the palace lost its
residential function and the growing numbers of European tourists visiting the city,
the palace complex become a touristic spot and one of the regular spots of
Constantinople tourist tours. The building complex was neither easily available nor a
public space especially for the foreigners. The visits to the palace complex were
allowed with a special firman and became one of the destinations that was subjected
to the orientalist gaze of the Grand Tour of European bourgeoisie. While the first
step of forming the imperial complex as a museum were being taken with the reorganization
of Hagia Irini, Western interest in the palace was still alive and
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
90 For further reading on the concept of lieux de mémoire see Pierre Nora and Lawrence D. Kritzman,
Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996).
91 Nilay Özlü, "Single P(a)lace, Multiple Narratives: The Topkapı Palace in Western Travel Accounts
from the Eighteenth to the Twentieth Century,” Depicting the City in the Muslim World: The Role of
Western Travel Writing,ed. Mohammad Gharipour and Nilay Özlü, (London: Routledge. Forthcoming
2014), p. 172.
46"
especially in the late nineteenth century the palace complex become an available
tourist attraction center.92 In the late nineteenth century, Sultan Abdulhamid II
resided in Yıldız Palace and the other coastal palaces were turned into tourist
spectacles as well as tours to the Topkapı Palace took an “arranged” form which
oriented the visitors in a certain visiting order that started at Bab-ı Selam gate and
follows Audience hall (Divan), the Throne Room (Arz Odası), the library of Ahmed
III, the Bagdad Kiosk, and the Mecidiye Kiosk.93 A self-orientalizing attribute
towards the Ottoman past (not necessarily the distant past) underlined this endeavor
and architectural indicators of a glorious past were served to the tourists’ gaze for
self-affirmation. The museumification of the palace complex was completed after
1908 when the relation with dynastic tradition and sultanate was irreversibly broken.
1908 was a signification turning point in both Ottoman and Republican history,
considering the continuity between the Constitutional movement and the new
national regime. Replacing Abdulhamid II’s despotic regime with constitutional
monarchy also implied a shift in vision of the Ottoman past.
Hagia Sophia’s symbolic meaning in the dynastic heritage of the city was as
remarkable as Topkapı Palace’s, because the Hagia Sophia was the very first
congregational mosque of the city. The church was converted to a mosque right after
fall of the city and symbolized the Islamification of city and the victory of the
Mehmed II. The conversion of the building was carried out without damaging any
piece of its mosaics depicting Christian subjects and those were all covered with
large pieces of marble.94 The precious mosaics of Hagia Sophia has already attracted
interest of Western academia even in the nineteenth century and during its restoration
(undertaken by Gaspare and Giuseppe Fossati) in 1847-1848, the mosaics were
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
92 Ibid., p. 174.
93 Edwin Grosvenor, Constantinople (Boston: Little, Brown, 1900), p. 318-348.
94 Fatih Cimok, Hagia Sophia (Istanbul: A Turizm Yayınları), p. 43.
47"
cleared, recorded, and then covered up again.95 The building was constructed as a
Christian sanctuary, and later this significant landmark of Christian Constantinople
was converted into a mosque in order to monumentalize the fall of Christendom and
the Islamification of the city. The building’s last transformation was again executed
to symbolize the political transformation of the country into a secularized entity and
it was museumified. All the marble that was situated to cover the Christian identity
of building were removed and the ancient past of the building was put on display.
Through museumificaiton process, the building was not only secularized but also all
connotations related to its sacred past in the Ottoman context was blurred. Nilay
Özlü in her paper “Hagia Sophia and the Demise of the Sacred” interprets this action
of converting the mosque into a museum such as “detaching the building from its
religious context signifies a stylistic and politic break from the Ottoman past.”96 The
building was a sanctuary where people experienced the glory of conquest and Islam
over Christian Constantinople and appraise the glory of the dynast. But the building
was re-conceptualized as “something to see rather than to use.”97
Clearing the imperial palace from its dynastic settings and secularizing the
largest congregational mosque of the Empire were projected the relationship between
the imperial dynasty and nation-state through the lens of the secular Republic.98
Wendy Shaw evaluates the shifting of the capital and converting the monuments to
museums as a move of re-contextualizing the monuments of Istanbul as the heritage
and representative of nation and shared culture rather than the dynasty.99 The tie
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
95 Ahmet Akgündüz, Said Öztürk, Yaşar Baş, Üç Devirde Bir Mabed: Ayasofya (İstanbul: Osmanlı
Araştırmaları Vakfı, 2005), p. 487-488.
96 Nilay Özlü, “Hagia Sophia and the Demise of the Sacred”, Design Philosophy Papers - Collection
Six, ed. Anne-Marie Willis, Ravensbourne, (Australia: Team D/E/S Publications, 2011), p. 20-26.
97 Robert S. Nelson, Hagia Sophia, 1850-1950: Holy Wisdom Modern Monument (University of
Chicago Press, 2004), p. xvii.
98 Wendy Shaw, Ottoman Painting Reflections of Western Art from the Ottoman Empire to the
Turkish Republic (London; New York: I. B. Tauris, 2011), p. 269.
99 Ibid., p. 269.
48"
between the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republic was dramatically cut off and
the dynastic tradition and its reminders must be removed as well. In such a period
when the young Republic flourished and erased the traces of dynastic tradition,
dynastic tradition could not be something to hold or something which people
remember. On the other hand the classic age and conquest of Istanbul were some
selected episodes of the Ottoman past that can help to construct a glorious past. The
two monuments, the Topkapı Palace and the Hagia Sophia Mosque were the
landmarks and monuments of conquest and the classic age and their conservation
was quite instrumental for building the shared glorious past of the nation and the
Empire. Considering the position of the museum in the history narration agenda of
the Republic of Turkey as one of the tools for construction of national identity, it is
not surprising to locate it under the roof of the Ministry of Education, which also
controlled other issues related to national identity. The meaning of education in the
Turkish Republic has always been associated with drawing the contrast between the
backward Ottoman past and the modern Turkish Republic and also imposing an
awareness for national identity. The history narration of the pre-Republican era was
shaped around the Young Turk’s leading ideology of preserving and modernizing the
state. The nationalists’ discourses, which found support among the leading
intelligentsia, Ziya Gökalp for instance, sometimes renovated and re-conceptualized
around the ideal of preserving the state. Gökalp and his counterparts imagined and
imposed a nationalist discourse in harmony with the sovereignty and Islam. The
declaration of the Republic and the founding of the nation-state had no room for this
ambiguous nationalist discourse and history narrations supporting this discourse.100
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
100 Halil Berktay, Cumhuriyet ideolojisi ve Fuat Köprülü (İstanbul: Kaynak Yayınları, 1983), p.50.
49"
The new Republic constituted a “defensive history” (savunma tarihçiliği)101 that
aimed to form the nation-state’s on the basis of a geographic entity. The Republican
history narrative was a designed to project the Republic as the cohesive end product
of the civilizations that lived in Anatolia, which Berktay evaluates as extremist as the
nationalist discourses of the CUP period.102 The geographical nationalist
understanding of the Republican era ended with the claiming of the Turkic origins
for the former civilizations who lived in Anatolia. Another problem in Republican
history narratives was that they had to deal with the deprecating visions about
Turkey in European history narratives. Afet İnan, a member of the first generation of
Turkish historians and the adopted daughter of Mustafa Kemal mentions the
assignment of working on refuting the European history thesis that projected the
Turkish nation as an inferior civilization. Directly Mustafa Kemal who charged her
to study on this, right after she showed him some pages supporting that thesis.103 The
Republican history narrative had to deal with the deprecating counter narratives and
also produce a geographical thesis on the basis of continuity of civilization. The
Ottoman past was an uncontainable tradition, which the Republic strictly cut its ties
with. However, the Ottoman past was suitable to produce the pride for the nation
using some selected episodes. Conciseness for history or the past has always been
also considered as developing a negative attitude for Ottoman past and being adapted
to national history narration. During the early decades of the Republic different
views and scholarly discussions were expressed among the historians but Turkish
history thesis, which was mostly Atatürk’s thoughts on national history had the
major impact on national education and museum narratives. Museums became a
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
101 Enver Ziya Karal, “Tanzimattan Bugüne Kadar Tarihçiliğimiz”, Felsefe Kurumu Semineri
(Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1977), p. 258.
102 Berktay, p. 50.
103 Afet İnan, “Atatürk ve Tarih Tezi”, Belleten Cilt III 10 (1939), p. 244.
50"
place where Republican history education was made visually and they were
controlled by the Ministry of Education.
The Reasons and Motivations for the Founding of a Museum in İzmir
The accumulation of archeological objects of the Aegean region since the beginning
of the nineteenth century and onward made it necessary to take some measures to
conserve these items deeply important for Osman Hamdi Bey and some warehouses
and later during 1930s local museums were built to shelter archeological findings for
instance in Ephesus (1930), Pergamon (1936), and Thyaira (1936) ancient sites.104
The warehouses were necessary for keeping safe both the worthy antiques
temporarily until their transportation to the imperial museum in Istanbul and keeping
the rest that were not considered worthy enough to send to the capital. Only the
findings evaluated as worthy enough could have a place in the imperial museum and
the rest were left in the ancient site105 as the İzmir Museum became one of the
centers that could house the valuable pieces. ıt was sometimes the archeologists and
sometimes the state apparatus that arranged the construction of sheds to shelter the
findings. For instance in Pergamon the team of German archeologists (who worked
with the superintendent appointed by the state) constructed a barrack in 1901 that
functioned as both a storage and mini exhibition hall.106 Until World War I these
warehouses could manage the mission of conserving the archeological items that
were left behind by the excavators and smugglers. During the war, the Greek side
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
104 Arık, Türk Müzeciliğine, p. 20-21; Wendy Shaw, “National Museums,” p. 947-949.
105 Wendy Shaw, Possessors and Possessed, p. 17.
106 Wolfgang Radt, “The Museum in Bergama,” p. 165-166.
51"
also complained about the ignorant and reckless attitudes of the Turkish side that
used some antique marbles and stones as building material for public buildings.107
Ephesus, Sardis, and Pergamum were the ancient sites where the Greek side
constructed warehouses to store and protect the findings, which were the rest of the
worthy pieces that were transported to İzmir.108 Even though the loopholes of
conservation regulations and sometime complete lack of a proper law or legislation
made the looting of items very common a significant amount of pieces was
accumulated. Arık mentions the presence of a the worthy collections when the İzmir
Museum was constituted between 1924 and 1927 and according to him there had
been many items that can nourish İzmir Archeology Museum on its own and he dates
this collection to before 1904.109 He credits these collections in terms of both
qualification and quantity, but there were certain problems with these warehouses
and the conservation of the items that made it almost vital to found and build a
museum in order to shelter archeological items left behind after the war. It is known
that the excavation history of the region can be traced back to the nineteenth century
through the pioneer footsteps of Osman Hamdi and his contemporaries and the
foreigners before them but it is not possible to talk about an uncut linear
development of excavation history of Aegean region from the nineteenth century to
the Republican era due to the break caused by World War I. The extraordinary
circumstances of the war was the valid reason for an obligatory break to all of
excavations and transportation of the findings which were mostly left in the barracks
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
107 J ack L. Davis, “Warriors for the Fatherland: National Consciousness and Archaeology in
‘Barbarian’ Epirus and ‘Verdant’ Ionia, 1912-22”. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 13.1
(2000), p.85.
108Ibid.
109İzmir Rehberi / Âsarıatika Muhipleri Cemiyetinin Salâhiyetli Heyetî Tarafından Tertip Edilmiştir,
İstanbul: Resimli Ay Matbaası T.L. Şirketi, 1934, p. 186.
52"
and warehouses in antique cities such as Ephesus. These warehouses had been
housing the archeological findings of the Aegean region. The devastating effects of
the war were quite remarkable on these warehouses and there have been many
factors that made these shelters unqualified to keep archeological items and the
damage on them was just inevitable. The early years of the 1920s, about three years
after the war ended, can be identified as the period of damage assessment from the
war on the archeological heritage, which were findings that had already been brought
to surface before the war and were stocked in warehouses.
The Ministry of Education and its sub-unit, the Directorship of Culture (it is
named as the Directorship of Antiques and Museums later), managed the appointing
of the inspectors and civil servants who were responsible for determining damage on
both historical buildings such as mosques and the sheltering warehouses and the
findings they housed. During the period between 1923 and 1925, the main focus of
the damage assessment efforts was to determine and identify the historical buildings
(mosques, tombs, fountains, public baths, and madrasas). There were detailed and
various points for each type of building as the proof of the effort to catalogue and
determine historical buildings in İzmir’s hinterland. In Aziz Ogan’a archive there are
some charts and correspondences that testifies the efforts spent for damage
assessment and inventorying the historical buildings. On 26 December 1923 a
correspondence was written to the Directorship of Pious Endowments (by whom or
which institution is unknown) and in this correspondence. It addresses to the local
administration of Side, Bornova, the directorships in the province Torbalı. It is
stated in the document110 “the submission of the charts of mosques, masjid,
madrasah, dervish convents, and tombs that were ordered by the Ministry of
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
110 See Appendix A, figure 2 for the full transliteration of the document.
53"
Education and Directorship of Culture in the correspondence dated to 10 December
1923 until the end of the month was ordered.”111 An investigation chart probably as a
sample document was attached to the correspondence. The investigation chart,112
categorizes the historical building as mosques, masjids, madrasahs, tombs, and
dervish convent, inactive inns, public baths and inscriptions of public fountains. In
each category the location of the architectural unit were demanded.113 The mosques
were catalogued through their location, benefactors, date of construction, the
architectural style of the building, the exact copy of the inscription (if the building
had one) with mentioning the font of the inscription and detailed information about
the historically valuable items in the mosques (carpets, panel etc.). The masjids were
catalogued more basic fashion (compared to mosques). Their locations, benefactors,
construction dates and the historically valuable items contained in them were
demanded. In the inventory the madrasas’ locations, construction dates, their
benefactors and the items that they housed were noted. In addition to these which
mosque or masjid they linked to was also demanded. The dervish convents were
catalogued through their location, construction date, benefactors, and the historical
objects housed in them. What differs from the previous ones in the cataloguing chart
is the indicator of which religious path (order) this dervish convent followed,
whether there was any tomb dependent on it or not, whether it had an inscription.
The tombs were mentioned through their location, date of construction, the date of
the deceased’s death and information about him (if he was a well known, famous
person), information about the inscription (if it had one). The last category, inactive
inns, public baths and public fountains were catalogued through location,
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
111 Unsigned correspondence to the Directorship of Pious Endowments (11.10.1923), Appendix C,
figure 4.
112 See Appendix A, figure 3 for the full transliteration of the document.
113 Undated investigation/inventorying chart, Appendix C, figure 5.
54"
construction/inscription date, the copy of inscription. In another chart dated 1
January 1924114 items such as inscriptions, reliefs, and column capitals were
tabulated in an inventory. Here, the inventory number of the item, its size (with
detailed measurements), its location (the building where it is contained) and date and
place of discovery and its description were all mentioned. Antique sites that needed
to be inspected were also documented in a chart115 according to its ancient name,
current name and location (the provinces and the center it was related to). In these
inventories these religious building like mosques, masjids were listed according to
very basic categories. The buildings were defined and listed as “historic” objects and
reduced to mere architectural units or artistic objects. In the inventories, the value of
the historic mosques, masjids, and especially dervish convents and tombs with their
dependencies were the matters that made them object of war assessment and they
were considered as historic or antique relics rather than daily sites where people
pray, lived or inhabited. On the other hand in an undated newspaper interview, Aziz
Ogan’s answer to the question, “What is your predictions for the future of İzmir
Archeology Museum” is “It has the potential of being a very rich museum with the
pieces that had already been brought to surface and being excavated in the
archeological sites like Bergama, Ayasolug etc. Among them, specific effort will be
spent for collecting Islamic pieces which are considered to be the monuments of our
praiseworthy nation.”116 Ogan’s attitude toward the Islamic items is situating these
secularized pieces in the narrative or invented tradition of the nation and it can be
defined as interpreting it rather than completely denying it. This is completely in tune
with the post-Tanzimat effort to “nationalize” the dynastic heritage made up of
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
114 Investigation/inventorying chart (1.1.1924), Appendix C, figure 6.
115 Undated, unsigned investigation/inventorying chart, Appendix C, figure 7.
116 Undated interview with Aziz Ogan from an anonymous newspaper, Appendix C, figure 8
See Appendix A, figure 4 for the full transliteration of the document.
55"
religious buildings. So the effort of art historical secularization starts with Ottoman
modernization before of totalizing vision of the secular Republican state. During the
formation of the nation-state and narrating a national history for it sometimes to
Central Asia or the previous civilizations that lived on the Anatolia lands were
referred. However the religious and imperial aspects of the history of country
obviously were not very acceptable components of the history narrative for the
Republican and secular state. Ogan’s statement reveals that the religious component
is appropriated within a national narrative.
The inspection reports for damage assessment after the war or determining
the findings of archeological excavations were written to the Directorships of
Education, local administrations, and the Directorship of Culture. For instance in the
case of Aydın, Saruhan, Denizli, and Menteşe the Directorships of Education of
these provinces or the Directorship of Education in İzmir were the authorities where
these reports had to be sent.117 Another instance is the case of ancient sites like
Didyma and Miletus. As it was reported in 1925, they were photographed and
delivered to the Directorship of Education (it is not mentioned which Directorship of
Education specifically) and a report sent to the local administration of Söke, which
also demanded photographs. The Directorship of Education as the sub-unit and the
representative of the Ministry of Education must be the most authorized unit in the
provinces in terms of antiques and related issues (damage assessment for instance)
and the Directorship of Culture was a sub-unit of the Directorship of Education. Aziz
Ogan was appointed as the antique inspector of İzmir by the Ministry of Education
between 1922 and 1926, after which he was appointed the director of Istanbul
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
117 Unsigned (erased) correspondence to the Directorships of Education in Aydın, Saruhan, Denizli,
Menteşe, Appendix C, figure 9.
56"
Archeology Museum.118 119 The correspondence in Ogan’s archieve cocnsists of
documents submitted to him as the antique inspector. Local administrations were not
the responsible bodies for the antiques (at least in terms of cataloging them) neither
were they parts of the organization scheme of the Ministry of Education but such
assistance of state offices to each other is not surprising. Ogan and other officials of
the Directorship of Culture or Directorship of Education must have been cooperating
with these local administrations. The Ministry of Education had its sub-unit of the
Directorship of Culture for issues related to conservation but the Directorship of
Education might also demand these reports, inventories etc. as the representative of
the Ministry of Education. The Directorship of Culture and its sub-units (museums
sometimes) managed reporting the damage with the co-operation of education offices
of the provinces and other local bodies.
The target monuments and items were not just the ones in the provinces but
also the monuments located in centers such as churches in İzmir, Kadifekale were
catalogued and inspected. On 9 October 1925 a report was demanded from the
Directorship of the İzmir Museum of Antiquities (it was unknown by whom because
the letterhead is also the museum’s). In the report “photographs of antique fortress,
ancient buildings are demanded and benefiting from assistance of Süleyman Efendi
[must be a local civil servant] was suggested. …sending a list of buildings which was
required to be photographed was immediately demanded.” In addition to the photos
and list of the buildings a plan of Kadıfekale was demanded in the ending note.120
Another report again from 9 October 1925 written by the İzmir Museum of
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
118 İnan M., “Aziz Ogan,” p. 217-218.
119 Ibid. Even though Ogan took the position in Istanbul in 1926, he occasionally substituted director
of museums and antiques between 1929 and 1930. It is quite understandable to coincide the related
documents dated to after 1926 in his achieve.
120 Unsigned report demanded from the İzmir Museum of Antiques (9.10.1925), Appendix C, figure
10.
57"
Antiquities to the administration of İzmir demands the photographs and plans of
Kadıfekale and similar antique structures such as the city walls.121 It seems these
inspections targeted any monument or item that was considered historically valuable
and the dates of the monuments and objects extended over a wide timescale. The
very basic data necessary for identifying a building such as its location, construction
were all written in inventories or inspection charts and in addition this very basic
documentation (such as the building plan and photographs of items and buildings)
were demanded. Additional funds were required for the expenses for photographing.
For instance in 1925 an allowment for this photographing assignment is demanded
from the Directorship of Museums through mentioning each type of the material they
needed to buy in detail. In such a post war period when budget cuts and poverty
were blocking many things in the area of culture policies (conservation and
museums) photographing expenses were another burden on the shoulders of the
Ministry of Education. Demanding to catalogue and inspecting the monuments
through photographs should be considered the proof of the state’s concern for the
archeological heritage and its documentation. In the previous investigation charts
that we analyzed lamps, carpets, and reliefs were the subjects of catalogs. In another
chart ancient reliefs were catalogued in addition to a Seljuk (exact period unknown)
relief was reported to the Antique Museum on 1 December 1924.122 The remarkable
point is a variety of objects such as carpets, lamps, reliefs, and inscriptions crediting
both Muslim and non-Muslim monuments as historically valuable and the effort and
ambition to determine select pieces among all of these objects. Counting the
churches as historical monuments, crediting them as a worth to take into the
inventory, determining their building character and items in them, and in addition to
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
121 Report written by the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the administration of İzmir (9.10.1925),
Appendix C, figure 11.
122 Appendix C, figure 6.
58"
churches inspecting the archeological sites123 during these damage assessment years
were very remarkable clues to observe the state’s ambition for the claim on the
antique and Greco Roman archeological heritage of the region in addition to its
ambition for recruiting the Islamic building and objects to nation-state’s architectural
and cultural heritage. The churches of İzmir and the items in them were the
fragments of Christian daily life in Smyrna but the fire consumed some of the
churches and the others were suddenly turned into abandoned buildings after
departure of the Greek-Orthodox community and other Christian populations.
Churches are not merely holy sanctuaries but also the public places where the
members of communities meet and interact. Presence of a church in the city meant
also presence of a community in city, which is rooted and influential enough to leave
their traces on the landscape of the city. Presence of a church building in the city is
also a testimony for presence of a community in the city and sometimes their claim
on the city. The Christian environment that surrounded the churches of Smyrna had
already been destroyed and in addition the Turkish Republic had secularized them
and charged with historical and archeological meaning, at same time it had
discharged these architectural units from the religious meaning as the state had been
doing to the dervish convents and the dependencies around them. The claim on the
Christian past of the city and treatment of the Christian architectural heritage was in
a way denying the cosmopolitan socio-cultural past of the city but at the same time
melting it and finding a room for it in the history narrative of İzmir. The state was
converting the religious objects from both dervish convents and churches to
displaying items and both non-Muslim and Muslim heritage was taking their share
from the homogenizing policies of the nation-state. Evacuating the belongings of
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
123 Appendix C, figure 7.
59"
these building and later situating them in the museums, inventorying them as the
historical objects and in some cases converting them for various functions striped
them from their religious connotations. The first half of the 1920s is the period, when
the Republic cut its ties with the past very strictly in terms of the continuity of both
cosmopolitan heritage and the Islamic tradition. The end of the war and the liberation
of the country ended up with the population exchange that attempted to homogenize
the demographic character of the country. In addition to that, the abolishment of the
dervish convents and dervish orders, and the abolishment of the Caliphate prepared
the ground for the settling of a secular rule. The process of disconnecting the
Republic from the cosmopolitan and Islamic traditions was not completed with just
simply cutting ties with the past also the cosmopolitan and religious elements were
melted into the new invented Republican narrative. In the second half of the 1920s
and the 1930s, the reconfiguring of these heritages in the national narration, the
continuation of the melting and molding process according to national narration were
carried out. The long history of Hagia Sophia and the processes and policies it had to
encounter throughout history and various rulings can be a revealing case to
understand the attitudes of Republic toward the religious and cosmopolitan heritage.
Converting the imperial church to the first congregational mosque of the new capital
was the attitude of the Ottoman Empire and this move made the construction one of
the most remarkable symbols of the “conquest” and Islamization of Constantinople.
Gülru Necipoğlu underlines the cosmopolite character of leading style in the
reorganization of the city during reign of Mehmed II but his grand projects like the
palatial complex (the Topakapi Palace and its surroundings) were constructed to
stress the “conquest” of the city by the sultan.124 The Ottoman regime created a
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
124 Gülru Necipoğlu, “From Byzantine Constantinople to Ottoman Konstantiniyye: Creation of a
Cosmopolitan Capital and Visual Culture under Sultan Mehmed II.” From Byzantion to Istanbul:
60"
traumatic break on this monumental construction and dressed it with Ottoman-
Muslim identity. In the Republican period, the congregational mosque was this time
converted to a museum and supposedly secularized. However through the years it
has always been inclined as a landmark of Muslim Istanbul and continued to
symbolize the Islamization of the city and become object of discussions concentrated
around the conservative policies. Whoever takes over the ruling, whether the Muslim
Empire, the secular Republic or conservative governments, the Greco Roman
heritage of the building has never been the matter of emphasis and it has always been
referred as a dedication to Mehmet the Conqueror’s victory over Justinian. The
Christian past of the monument had already been erased. The conversion and
modification of the building was designed to symbolize “to invent a recognition of
the Ottoman sultan as the successors of the Byzantine emperors and the triumph of
Islam over Christianity”125 and its history as a Muslim sanctuary was forced back
and forward according to the secular or conservative policies of the ruling
governments.126 As the Hagia Sophia case illustrates the state’s policy of cutting the
ties dramatically with the former context İzmir had to encounter with its own version
of this policy through redevelopment of city and constituting the museum.
The results of the damage assessment reports displayed the tragic effects of
war on archeological sites and findings. First budget cuts during the war left the
guards of the warehouses unpaid for months and many of them left the barracks for
which they were responsible. Even in the post-war era the state was having
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
8000 Years of a Capital: June 5 - September 4, 2010, Sabancı University Sakıp Sabancı Museum
From Byzantine Constantinople to Ottoman Konstantiniyye: Creation of a Cosmopolitan Capital and
Visual Culture under Sultan Mehmed II, ed. Cağatay Anadol (Istanbul: Sakip Sabanci Museum,
2010), p. 266.
125 Gülru Necipoğlu, “The life of an Imperial Monument: Hagia Sophia after Byzantium,” Hagia
Sophia: From the Age of Justinian to the Present, ed. Robert Mark and Ahmet Cakmak (London:
Cambridge University Press, 1992), p. 198.
126 Çiğdem Kafescioğlu, “İstanbul’un Tarihi ve Ayasofya”, Toplumsal Tarih, no.241 (January 2014),
p. 4-5.
61"
problems to pay the wages of its staffs. In one of the cases in 28 May 1926 an
official document sent to the Aydın Directorship of Education from the İzmir
Museum of Antiquities asks for the unpaid wages of warehouse guards in Soke.127 In
another case one staff member wrote personally to Aziz Ogan to request his unpaid
wages again in 1926.128 In such an environment it was quite predictable to lose some
staff due to the economic circumstances of war. Sometimes these people were
probably just escaping from war and death to safer places or sometimes some Greek
Orthodox-Ottoman guards who were associated with the enemy side were escaping.
For instance in a damage assessment report written to the Inspectorship of İzmir
Region on September 6, 1923 it was reported that “In the Ak Köy provinces of Soke
two guards (who were Greek Orthodox) of a total of three escaped to Samos during
the Greek invasion.”129 At the end almost all of the warehouses sheltering the
antiques were left unprotected and open to damage. The reports mostly indicate the
current situation of of the archeological sites with warehouses, findings and even the
residences of archeologists and underlines the tragic damage was certainly made
intentionally. In one of the reports reported by a civil servant who accompanied to
Wiegand, he reports their excursion day by day. They went to the Ak Köy province
probably for war assessment and he wrote some of the damages they witnessed. They
first visited the building constructed by Wiegand and was probably abandoned due to
the war. He talks about the archeological items broken in pieces and scattered on the
floor of the building. He defines that construction as köşk (mansion) but it is not
certain that whether it was some kind of museum or the personal residence of
Wiegand. Since these were archeological items in this construction, it is quite
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
127 Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to Aydın Directorship of Education
(28.5.926), Appendix C, figure 12.
128 Letter from a staff member to Aziz Ogan (18.8.1926), Appendix C, figure 13.
129 Damage assessment report (with an erased letter head) written to the Inspectorship of İzmir Region
(6.9.1923), Appendix C, figure 14.
62"
reasonable to consider it as a kind of local museum (but why he prefers to use the
word of köşk rather than the word of museum is unclear.) Eventually he reports the
intentional damage of the Greeks (he is pretty sure about who made this).130 Under
these circumstances and considering the very precious and valuable objects in these
barracks, turning of these sites to an open-air booty site for the Greek troops and
smugglers were quite possible. Even the findings already transported to the center or
museum were not fully secured. On 20 September 1923 a civil servant from the
Inspectorship of Antiquities reports to the Directorship of Culture his examination of
a stolen piece. He states, “Today I did fulfill the assignment of examining the pieces
that were caught by civil servant right before it was stolen from İzmir hall (it must be
the museum’s hall) to send abroad” After a detailed account of the piece he reports
“It was returned to the storage of the İzmir Museum and a photograph of it was
taken.” 131 The war circumstances were of course quite devastating and in addition to
that, the unawareness of people who live around the sites and warehouses was also
harmful for the antiques. In 1926 it was reported to the Director of Education in
Aydın the doors of warehouses in the Ak Köy province were broken and it must be
investigated.132 There are numerous other cases of children playing on archeological
sites, villagers that feed their animals on excavation sites. These cases were all the
matters of local officers’ complaints and requests for assistance to take some
measures for protection of archeological sites and warehouses. Years after the war
people were still not fully cognizant of the value of antiques and their random or
sometime intentional actions were damaging the antique sites.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
130 Undated report of the civil servants of the Directorship of Pious Endowments, Appendix C, figure
15.
131 Examination report from a civil servant of the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Directorship of
Culture (20.9.1923), Appendix C, figure 16.
132 Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Directorship of Education in Aydin
(26.9.1926), Appendix C, figure 17.
63"
The poor conditions of antique sites and depots, the desire for exhibiting the
antiquities that were cumulated haphazardly in various state offices were very valid
and convincing reasons for founding a museum institution in İzmir. In addition to
these reason there was also a strong motivation for inserting a museum building in
the urban topography, which was the desire of using the museum building
instrumentally in the urban transformation of the city.
Turkish İzmir was constructed after 1922 on the ashes of Ottoman Smyrna
and the city was detached from its Ottoman past and attached to the broader
nationalist Turkish agenda. Ottoman Smyrna’s landscape was differed from the
standard Muslim city’s landscape that was dominated by a congregational mosque
and its dependencies surrounding it such as madrasas or a bazaar.133 The difference
from the classical Muslim cities was the Frank district that was the center of the city
as the non-Muslim population of the city (Franks especially) was so in social and
economic life of the city. The city lacked an “Ottoman signature” which was a
congregational mosque concentrated alongside the shore.134 As it was a shared urban
character in the Mediterranean port cities the commercial revolution of the late
nineteenth century shaped the urban character of Smyrna. The integration of steam
engines in the sea trade made the ports extremely important and seriously shaped the
development character of the port cities. The port sections were mostly redeveloped
and connected to the land, in other words the shores were pointed as the city center
and the cities were developed from the shore to the inner parts. This steam engine
based transportation pointed the shore as the center. In addition it made the cities
encounter with the cosmopolite character, people and diverse tastes that influenced
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
133 Çiğdem Kafescioğlu, Constantinopolis/Istanbul: Cultural Encounter, Imperial Vision, and the
Construction of the Ottoman Capital (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2009), p.
70.
134 Biray Kırlı, “From Ottoman Empire,” p. 11.
64"
the cities urban taste, social life and the urban character shaped by these. İzmir was
one of Mediterranean port cities shaped by the economic and technologic
circumstances of the nineteenth century along with Salonica and Alexandria.135 The
urban character of the city affected by the environment of the nineteenth century
reflects well on the cosmopolitan heritage of the Empire and the treatment of the
nation-state towards this cosmopolitan urban character, which started to erase and
reshape with the opportunities that the Great Fire provided. Biray Kırlı pronounces
the term “creative destruction”136 for the Great Fire of 1922, because The Great Fire,
which had consumed the most vibrant and economically and culturally active part of
the city had also provided an empty ground on which one of the most ideologically
charged and systematic urban project of the Turkish Republic could be executed. The
fire was not just “a spatial break”137 but it was also a break from the collective
memory of the city and the fire was turning over the page of the cosmopolite
Ottoman past, while it was opening a clean page for Turkish Republic and also
ignoring the connection between those as it was reflected on the agreed silence about
the Great Fire. Charging new roles to the urban topography of Turkish İzmir must fit
best with a museum considering the functions of museums in the nationalist agenda
of Turkish Republic especially regarding its history narration with its spatial and
archeological references
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
135 Cristina Pallini, “Geographic Theatres, Port Landscape and Architecture in Eastern
Mediterranean:Salonica, Alexandria, İzmir”, Cities of the Mediterranean: From the Ottomans to the
Present Day, ed. Biray Kolluoğlu and Meltem Toksöz, (London ; New York : I.B. Tauris, 2010),p.
61-62.
136 Kırlı, “From Ottoman Empire,” p. 23.
137 Ibid., p. 207.
65"
The First Museum Building
The Aya Vukla Church or the beginning of museology in İzmir might be considered a
parallel to the beginning of the museology in Istanbul or the Ottoman State in general
in some respects. The base and the first steps of a museum in Istanbul were storing
some royal collections in the building of the former church St. Irine. The church was
an exception in terms of surviving without being converted to a mosque like the
other churches of Constantinople but it lost its sanctuary character and was
functioning as storage space.138 The church building functioned as an arsenal until
the mid-eighteenth century and during the reign of Ahmed III it was used as an
armory museum. Even though this armory museum was one of the private sections of
the imperial family and not a classical museum, the very first building where ancient
objects were collected and stored as a church building that had already lost its
sanctuary function.
Istanbul’s instant need for a museum building was met through an available
and suitable church that had already lost its function as sanctuary and later the
Istanbul Archeology Museum flourished around it. The foundation process of the
İzmir Archeology Museum more or less follows the path of Istanbul Archeology
Museum’s foundation in terms of being sheltered in a unused church and spreading
around it. In the case of İzmir the sanctuary was first turned into a refugee shelter.
The central position of İzmir with reference to archeological and hundreds of pieces
of archeological items that were left unprotected in the warehouse due to post-war
circumstances were quite significant motivations to arrange a museum building to
contain them. A report discusses the museum issue of İzmir in many respects. It was
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
138 Şapolya, Müzeler Tarihi, p. 43.
66"
dated 31 May 1924 and addressed to the Directorship of Culture, but the lack of a
signature on the document makes it impossible to determine which institution or civil
servant wrote it. Its author describes himself as a museum employee. The report139
specifically pinpoints that “İzmir’s aspiration for enlightenment, culture, wisdom
(ilim and irfan) made it necessary to found a becoming museum but previous
attempts were postponed for several reasons so far.” The motivation for founding a
museum is associated with the aspiration for ilim and irfan.140 Being converted from
an unused building to a museum (when such a need arose) is the shared feature of
museum buildings of both Turkey and Europe because this reduces expenses. 141
Since these converted buildings were not built to function as museums, they did not
fulfill the requirements of the modern museum.142 It was exactly the case at least for
the first museum building of İzmir. In the report lack of a proper museum building in
İzmir and the struggle of suiting an ordinary building to function as a museum were
underlined.143 What I see is that there is a correspondence between Aya Irini and Aya
Vukla merely in form of their logistical use. Otherwise the significance of the Aya
Irini (its being in palace ground, housing royal collections) is radically different from
Aya Vukla, which was a functioning church. In May 14, 1926, an inspection report
written by the İzmir Museum of Antiques to Ministry of Education examines the
current situation of museum (which has not been opened to public yet) and the
prestige of Istanbul Archeology Museum among the other top class museums all over
Europe and the rapid development process of Istanbul Archeology Museum was
storied. What a lucky coincidence that the development of the İzmir Archeology
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
139 See Appendix A, figure 5 for the full transliteration of the document.
140 Undated report to the Directorship of Culture (31.5.1924), Appendix C, figure 18 and 19.
141 Nezihe Eldem, “Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Müze Mimarlığı”, Müzeler İçin Düş Bilançosu: Tutkular
ve Nesneler, ed. Şennur Aydın, (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Kültür Yayınları, 1993), p. 90.
142 Ibid.
143 Appendix C, figure 18 and 19.
67"
Museum and Istanbul Archeology Museum had some similar aspect was
emphasized. It was wished for the İzmir Museum to reach the level of Istanbul
Museum.144 Since the very first day of the İzmir Museum in Aya Vukla Church, the
church had been treated as a temporary dwelling for the archeological items. In a
document written by the İzmir Museum of Antiques to the Ministry of Education,
even before the official opening of the museum its inadequacy to cover the
archeological objects for long term was emphasized. It is reported by the Museum of
Antiquities that the İzmir Museum was prepared and ready for its visitors but that the
building can function as a museum effectively only for a few years because of the
extremely rich archeological hinterland of İzmir which cannot be stored and
exhibited in such a limited building for a long time.145
The İzmir Archeology Museum followed the footsteps of the Istanbul
Museum in terms of flourishing in a similar type of construction and obviously there
were many logistical motivations for choosing this deserted church as the museum
building. The center and the largest parcel of the non-Muslim quarters had already
been burned down and carved up by the Great Fire without leaving residential
remnants in these quarters. The city had lost the economically and socially most
dense and active quarters. In addition its non-Muslim population was forced to
migrate or run away during the war. Even though the city lost a significant amount of
its residents, the ongoing war in the Balkan territories and defeats were pumping
influxes of refugees to the city and remnants of fire were barely fulfilling the
residential need if the partially burned out buildings and sanctuaries were included
too. In this harsh post-fire environment it is quite understandable to pick a building
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
144 Report from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Ministry of Education (14.3.1926), Appendix
C figure 20 and 21.
145 Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Ministry of Education (Teşrin-i
evvel, 1926), Appendix C, figure 22.
68"
from the fire zone instead of wasting one of the limited construction of the other
quarters that can barely shelter city residents. The undeniable circumstances drove
the state to arrange the Aya Vukla Church as the İzmir Museum but the founding of
the museum in an abandoned property that was left behind the former dwellers of the
city says a lot about the function of the museum in the re-formation of the city after
the war and the fire.
The destiny ofNew Mosque in Salonica gives the clues for choosing Aya
Vukla as the museum building. New Mosque in Salonica could serve as a mosque
only for a decade and after the Greek’s taking over Salonica (1912) it served in many
functions and finally as an archeological museum.146 Between 1915 and 1922 it
served as a lookout post for the soldiers until the arrival of the refugees to the city
from Smyrna. Some of the human crowd that arrived to Salonica after the population
exchange were hosted in former mosque building just like Smyrna did so in the
former church building. Finally in 1925 an archeology museum was established in
the former mosque building. Choosing a church building for the museum institution
in nationalized Smyrna could be judged as a counter move to the same action in its
counterpart on the opposite shore.
In a the draft of the museum guide147 the church building housing the İzmir
Museum was described as “ruined and incomplete.”148 It was stated in the draft that
“even though a significant amount of money was already spent for the restoration
and conversion of the church, the result is not satisfying and the space is not
qualified enough still it is the most suitable among the others. There is also an
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
146 Marc Baer, "Globalization, Cosmopolitanism, and the Dönme in Ottoman Salonica and Turkish
Istanbul," Journal of World History 18/2 (June 2007), p. 166-167.
147 See Appendix A, figure 6 for the full transliteration of the document.
148 Undated draft of museum guide (handwriting), Appendix C, figure 23.
69"
immediate need for the construction of a new museum building.”149 The inadequacy
of the church building to shelter the museum institution was definitely noticed
because the museum had to fulfilling some architectural prerequisites that were
stated in a report from the Directorship of Antiques of İzmir to the Directorship of
Culture dated 31 May 1924 as “Being suitable to be a museum corresponds to be
built for only for that purpose. It cannot contain the requirements for a museum. First
of all the robustness of the hall arranged for the pieces is the very first quality to look
for. The significance of the suitability of arrangement in building for the
classification of the pieces is known. In that case the most convenient and suitable
museums are the ones that were built for only that purpose.”150 However the
following lines in the same report states the impossibility of building a museum in
İzmir under existing economic circumstances: “Since the construction of such a
building depends on the expense of 100,000 liras and maybe even more, this desire
(of building a museum) was postponed to an unknown date. ….not even a single
corner was left unlooked to find such a construction.”151 The poor financial
conditions made it obligatory to manage it temporarily through arranging a suitable
large building as the museum and constructing of a full functioning one as soon as it
could be accomplished and settling temporarily in the church building for a couple of
years. In the same report the writer (name or title unknown but he must be an expert,
member of the museum staff) states the function of the church with these words: “
From the eye of museum employee I can say it can fulfill the need for ten years.”152
In the report the church building was treated as any empty, available building in the
post-fire conditions of İzmir without referring its link to Greek community and
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
149 Appendix C, figure 23.
150 Appendix C, figure 18.
151 Appendix C, figure 18 and 19.
152 Appendix C, figure 19.
70"
connotations of the Greek Orthodox heritage of the city. But of course this kind of
treatment does not erase the ideological charge of initiating the process of rewriting
of the region’s history through the conversion of one of the landmarks of the former
residences of the city.
The Great Fire of İzmir did consume half of the city and almost all of the
buildings (large and small size) did take their share from the devastation. As a result
finding a building that was still utilizable after the fire and large enough to host the
museum institution was quite challenging. The Aya Vukla Church was a Greek
Orthodox church that lost its frightened community who fled after the Great Fire and
were forced to migrate through the population exchange so the building could be
counted as abandoned.
The architectural properties of Aya Vukla is displayed between image 1 and
image 6. According to the original Greek inscription on the north door, the Aya
Vukla Church, (which is the church of the sacred Voukolus and the wise man called
Polycarp) was built in 1887 with “the solid pious foundations of the patrons of
Smyrna.”153 The church building is a two-storied building located in a courtyard.154
An entrance gate at the northern end provides the entrance to the courtyard.155 The
main entrance door of the building is on the Western façade, but there are two
additional entrances on both the southern and northern facades of the church.156 The
portico was covered with the arches rising on marble columns.157 The building has a
glass dome at the center rising on Corinthian columns ( (the centrality of the dome
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
153 “Aya Vukla”, Levantine Heritage The Story of a Community, 2014,
levantineheritage.com/ayavukla.htm, Appendix D, image 1.
154 Appendix D, image 2.
155 Appendix D, image 3.
156 Appendix D, image 4.
157 Appendix D, image 5.
71"
was completely ignored after the renovations for the museum) and an apse on the
eastern end.158
The İzmir episode of the liberation war ended with the Great Fire of İzmir
and obligatory population exchange irreversibly transformed not only the landscape
of the city but also its population’s character. While the non-Muslim population of
the city was being systematically disposed, refugees from the Balkans replaced them
and settled in their properties. The church was in the status of abandoned property,
which was left as unclaimed and confiscated by the state. Churches and their
dependencies were taken over by the Ministry of Finance because the non-Muslim
religious buildings could not be inserted in the pious endowments and the state
offices took the priority of using these abandoned buildings.159 The rise of İzmir as a
cosmopolitan harbor city that attracts people and encourages them to migrate to this
rising center also gave birth to a homeless crowds that migrated to the city seeking
jobs since the second half of eighteenth century.160 The homeless crowd of the city in
addition to the crowds of the Balkan refugees was another group of people seeking
shelter in the abandoned churches and the limited dwellings saved from the fire. The
Aya Vukla Church must have lost its function as a sanctuary completely and become
a common place for homeless, refugees and even street animals. The decision of
converting Aya Vukla Church made it obligatory to transfer its dwellers and in the
report to the Directorship of Culture the evacuation of Balkan refugees sheltered in
the church to some other places was stated in a correspondence in 6 September 1923
through these words: “Settling (iskan) the refugees that dwell in the Aya Vukla
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
158 “Aya Vukla”, Levantine Heritage The Story of a Community, levantineheritage.com/ayavukla.htm,
Appendix D, image 6.
159 Nevzat Onara, Emvâl-i Metrûke Olayı: Osmanlı'da ve Cumhuriyet'te Ermeni ve Rum Mallarının
Türkleştirilmesi (İstanbul: Belge Yayınları, 2010), p. 200.
160 Sibel Zandi-Sayek, Ottoman İzmir: the Rise of a Cosmopolitan Port, 1840-1880
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2012) p.76.
72"
Church which was converted to the museum…”161 The word of “settling (iskan)”
implies the state’s policy rather than an individual choice for settling the refugees in
this former sanctuary. Later on their settling in some other locations was decided by
the state again. In another report that was written to the İzmir Directorship of
Education in 3 June , 1924 the evacuation of the refugees is reported again and the
entailment to take some precaution to prevent the homeless of İzmir that can easily
step in and spend their nights in the church building from damaging the church’s
windows and doors.162 Even in 1924 responsible authorities complained about the
homeless people damaging the building. So the evacuation of the refugees could not
solve the problem.
The museum building had gone through some renovations in order to
disconnect it from its past as a sanctuary and arrange it spatially to function as a
museum institution. The walls of the church building were painted in varying colors
as the upper walls in the darker and the lower walls in lighter tones. The apse, which
was one of the indicators of the church’s sacred function, was not taken into account
and ignored through these arrangements. The white marble statutes and artifacts
impressively contrasted with the darkly painted background, which was the lower
walls of the church building. In order to modify the religious architecture, at the
entrance, the porch of the church was completely altered through large full-length
windows made of glass and wood that were put in place between the columns. After
these arrangements any kind of association between the former the Greek Orthodox
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
161 Unsigned correspondence to the İzmir Directorship of Education (6.9.1923), Appendix C, figure
24.
162 Unsigned correspondence to the Directorship of Culture (3.6.1924) Appendix C, figure 25.
73"
sanctuary and the building was blocked and its conversion into a museum building
was completed.163
The Location of the Museum
Choosing the deserted church as the museum building might have made things a
little bit harder due to its neglected situation, but in return its location definitely have
provided some advantages. Museums as one of the components of a city’s cultural
life are mostly located at the city centers. In the case of the İzmir Museum’s location,
the church building could survive and host the museum because to its distant location
to the Frank district (which was destroyed by the Great Fire) to the city protected it
partially. The urban topography of İzmir might be defined best as fragmented
considering its structure that contains a composition of segregated neighborhoods of
various communities. In such a city model it is hard to determine a locus for the
fragmented units of the city, but the Frank quarter and its Frank Street lying parallel
to the shore might be designated as the heart of the city. Image 7 depicts the quarter
and the street. Rauf Beyru defines this fragmented character of the city as a mosaic
and underlines the isolated nature of each of its segment.164 Each neighborhood was
named according to the dominant population living in it and the general character of
these neighborhoods can be defined as isolated and segregated, still defining them as
segregated and isolated should not mean the total absence of another community or
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
163 Melania Savino, “Archaeology and its Representation in the Turkish Republic, 1923-1960” (PhD
diss., SOAS, University of London, 2012), p. 72.
164 Rauf Beyru, "Social Life in İzmir in the First half of the Nineteenth Century", Three Ages of İzmir:
Palimpsest of Cultures, ed. Virginia Taylor-Saglioğlu, (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları), p. 145.
74"
group of residence in a neighborhood dominated by a community.165 The Armenian
quarter, for instance, was situated between the Greek and Muslim neighborhoods.
The Frank quarter, which can be traced back to the seventeenth century was on the
northern stretches along the seaside where the Levantine merchants built their
residential quarters, commercial buildings, and consulates. Frank Street was the
street that ran through the city’s most lively segment especially in the seventeenth
century. The street was expanded twice in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries
toward to the shoreline. On the southeast the Greek quarter that encircles the Frank
quarter was located and restricted by the Armenian quarter to its south. These three
neighborhoods, which belonged to the communities who would take the most
destructive share from the war and fire, were surrounded by the railways connecting
İzmir with its eastern and southern hinterland and sea in a triangle shape as it is seen
in map 1 which is the map of railroad system in İzmir.166 Even though the railways
and the sea circumscribed these districts, there were residences and public buildings
of the Greek community that overflowed from the triangle and were scattered around
it. The Aya Vukla Church was located on the north of the city where the non-Muslim
quarters were located but it was one of the constructions that was located beyond the
triangle parcel that took the most destructive share from the fire. The distance of the
church from the center of the non-Muslim neighborhoods left it partially consumed
by fire and made the building available to be reinstituted as a museum.
The significant aspect of the church building’s location was not its proximity
to the city center but its short distance to the Basmahane train station (approximately
four minutes). The construction of the railway network of İzmir in the nineteenth
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
165 Kırlı, “From Ottoman Empire,” p.109, Appendix D, image 7.
166 Appendix D, map 1.
75"
century significantly affected the social, economic life, and transportation network of
the city. But the Frank quarter that already settled very densely on the coastline
blocked the railway from reaching the shore and kept it out of the center.167 The
Basmahane Train Station was left outside of the city center because of the densely
urbanized non-Muslim quarters. This proximity made this area a good museum
location. Map 2 shows both the fire zone and the proximity of Aya Vukla and the
train station.168 Settling down on a parcel that was four minutes to the train station
economized the transportation budget, considering that many findings from the
excavations of Aydın region were transported to the İzmir Museum through the
Basmahane Train Station. The location was defined as not very distinguished
(mutena)169 but it was the most economic and logistically sound parcel of the city at
the time.
Sections of the Museum
The first building of the İzmir Archeology Museum was an archeological unit that
consisted several different fragments due to both its original spatial body as well as
to the requirements of the organization of the institution and exhibition hall. In a list,
from Ogan’s archive, under the title of “explanations of number on the plan”
museum sections were listed such: “offices, library hall, janitor’s room and storage,
the space for the courtyard, an art gallery upstairs (its wooden curtains will be erased
and surrounded by brick walls, glass display cases will be situated in it), the dwelling
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
167 Cana Bilsel, “19. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında İzmir’de Büyük Ölçekli Kentsel Projeler ve Kent
Mekanının Başkalaşımı”, Ege Mimarlık, 36 (2000/4), p. 35.
168 Appendix D, map 2.
169 Appendix C, figure 19.
76"
of the museum guard.”170 Even though the plan in question is missing, from the
document the list implies the multifunctional and fragmented use envisioned for the
building. The building’s front yard was to be used as an outdoor museum as it is seen
in image 9.171 This outdoor section was the place where sculptures of larger
dimension (which were impossible to locate inside the building) were housed.172 The
dwellings of the janitors must have also been linked to this building complex.173
These several sections make it obligatory to name the museum’s building as a
complex rather than a single building. In addition to being composed of a few
segments spatially, the organization scheme of the exhibitions in the museum reflects
a composition of several functions. The İzmir Archeology Museum had three basic
sections or functions: exhibition halls for historically valuable items, the library, and
art gallery.
The exhibition halls are the prerequisite for a museum building, but the
library and the art gallery of the İzmir Museum were the additional sections that had
their own particular agenda. The library cannot be labeled a public library since it
was initiated as a reference section for the staff, but the art gallery was composed as
a public space that was supposed to contribute directly to the cultural life of the city.
Founding a museum has always been considered a result of “İzmir’s aspiration for
enlightenment and culture (ilim and irfan)”174 and since the beginning, the
relationship between the museum and the cultural life of the city was underlined. The
concept of art museum was one of the components of the Western model that was
inserted to the Empire in all senses especially in the nineteenth century. Painting,
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
170 Undated, unsigned list for the museum sections, Appendix C, figure 26.
171 Appendix D, image 9.
172 Undated draft of museum guide (handwriting), Appendix C, figure 27.
173 Appendix C, figure 26.
174 Appendix C, figure 17.
77"
taste for art, and introducing art to a younger generation in schools are the subjects of
discussion in the periodicals during the Young Turk administration. Painting and its
culture was projected as the necessary components to give the ferment of the
civilization to the Ottoman people, in other words inserting the culture of painting to
Ottoman people’s mind was highly associated with civilizing them. The art culture
and paintings become the visual material that forces people to encounter with
“civilizing” actions. Even though it could not properly be executed, as a result of the
perception of art and the civilization installation of art museums were planned and
even its law (1917) was passed that intended to disseminate them in other cities.175
Painting exhibitions and their integration into the city’s daily life were considered
crucial as much as museums and Aziz Ogan as the antique inspector and head of the
Artist Association specifically endeavored to organize painting exhibitions by
cooperating with other associations. In June 1927 (a few months after its official
opening) the İzmir Museum organized an exhibition in cooperation with the Turkish
Hearth (Türk Ocağı), which was one of the clubs in the city that desired to contribute
to the cultural life in the city by opening a painting exhibition. The lottery building
hosted this occasion.176 The paintings of Turkish artists from Istanbul and Ankara
were demanded to be exhibited along with paintings of artists from İzmir whose
number of paintings were not sufficient to constitute a full exhibition177 Aziz Ogan
lead the organization committee.178 The museum’s projection of the exhibition was
stated in a correspondence dating to 7 July 1927 from the Museum of Antiques to the
Ministry of Education with the words, “The exhibition which has been for the first
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
175 Wendy Shaw, Ottoman Painting, p. 114-115.
176 The guideline of the painting exhibition organized by the İzmir Museum (June, 1927) Appendix C,
figure 28.
177 Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to Ministry of Education (7.7.1927),
Appendix C, figure 29.
178 A letter from the president of Turkish Heart in İzmir to Aziz Ogan (30.4.1927), Appendix C, figure
30.
78"
time organized in İzmir has a modest constitution and is even destitute. People’s
interest even before the opening is proof of popular demand. It would be wonderful
to repeat this organization every year in order to contribute to the art life in the city.”
The Directorship of the Museum had already been involved in the organization of
such kind of occasions so the integration of an art gallery to the museum complex
automatically linked the occasions to the broader agenda of the museum. Providing a
ground for the people of İzmir where they can encounter and get accustomed to
pieces of art was regarded as a remarkable achievement and people’s interest in the
exhibition was on a satisfactory level. The ambition of the integration of the painting
exhibition into the cultural life of the city supported the ambition of founding a
museum as an indicator of the capacity of the state to have a self-conscious identity
and history and appreciate the pieces of art. The museum complex was designed to
encompass various indicators of the state’s appreciation of and ambition for
invigorating intellectual and cultural life.
Arranging the spatial entity of the museum as a building complex (with its
dependencies, library, and art gallery) instead of a single museum building meant
organizing a cultural center to cover the history and also the actual cultural activities
of the city at the same time. The three diverse sections of the museum labeled the
building as a culture center. Acquiring the abandoned properties of the departed
Christians (which will be comprehensively covered in Collecting Stage section) to all
of these sections symbolically strengthened the museum’s claims and control over
the heritage of the region.
The Exhibition Hall of the İzmir Museum
79"
The exhibition hall for the historically valuable items must be the largest section of
the museum. Because the other sections are treated as the dependencies of this main
section which was showed in image 10.179 This main section actually could be traced
to the front yard housing the extremely large sized items and there are many other
sections inside the building in addition to the Islamic items collection that is showed
in image 12 such as the other antique collections, which were the findings of the
excavation in the antique sites of İzmir’s hinterland.180
The Library Section
The library of the museum was defined as a minor library consisting of reference
books for the museum staff (mesleki kitaplar).181 Only a library hall was mentioned
without specifically referring to where it was located in the building complex in a list
of the rooms in the museum from Ogan’s archive.182 But according to the plan in
image 11 in the 1932 edition of the museum guide the library was located on the
western end of the courtyard as a separate construction, right next to the director’s
office.183 The foundation of the library in the museum complex was meant to be a
reference section in the book collection was expected to gain some books that had
historical value. A report dated September 1929 is about the books left behind by the
exiled or émigré populations and their transfer to the museum building. As it will be
elaborately examined in the Ittihar (Collecting) Stage section, these are books on
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
179 Appendix D, image 10.
180 Appendix C, figure 27, Appendix D, image 12.
181 Appendix C, figure 23.
182 Appendix C, figure 26.
183 Appendix D, image 11.
80"
history and related fields and some of them must be rare books. It is quite certain that
the library was built in-house functions and might have turned into a rare books
exhibition. But it was never opened to public at least as a common reading hall.
Another report from September 1929 written by the Inspectorship of Antiquities to
the Directorship of Culture reporting on the current situation of İzmir’s libraries
counted the National Library as the only library in İzmir in addition to a high school
library,184 and there is not even a single sentence referring to the library of the
museum among İzmir’s libraries. The museum library was constituted as a reference
section with its limited collection and later some rare books were configured among
these limited pieces but the library section of the museum could never gain a public
library status.
The Art Gallery Section
The art gallery or picture museum was located in the second floor of the church
building and was furnished with display cases. Image 13 shows a general view of the
art gallery. 185 How this section functioned and whether it was a real art gallery
(where temporary exhibitions of modern art pieces took place) or whether it housed
historically valuable pictures is unclear. Several reports to the Directorship of
Education and the directorship of monuments underline the necessity of founding a
picture museum (Asar-ı Nakş Museum), and elaborate on the effort and attempt to
begin the process and about the positive response of the directorship to these efforts.
In several reports a few pieces from the abandoned properties (emval-i metruke) were
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
184Report about the current situation of libraries in İzmir from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the
Directorship of Culture (9.19.192), Appendix C, figure 31.
185 Appendix C, figure 26, Appendix D, image 13.
81"
demanded from the Directorship of the Abandoned Properties. On May 11, 1925 the
Inspectorship of Antiquities reported to the Ministry of Education about the arrival of
fifteen paintings and the expenses of transportation of the paintings, (packing and
framing were paid by Asar- Atika Muhipleri Cemiyeti [the Society of Enthusiast
Antiquities].)186 In addition to the ideological and political motivations the İzmir
Museum was also a natural consequence of all the archeological excavations in the
region in response to the necessity to shelter the findings, yet the art gallery section
did not fulfill such logistical need. In the case of the art gallery, first the venue was
invented and than nourished by the abandoned properties and modern art pieces.
Perhaps the desire to benefit from the rich array of artistic object in the abandoned
properties became the motivation for constituting an art gallery. The demand for the
transfer of pieces of Turkish artists to İzmir must be driven from the lack of paintings
to furnish the gallery.187 The worthy pictures were submitted to the admiration of
İzmir’s residents in the art gallery section and later sold to the state offices like
schools and directorships. These were certainly contemporary paintings of Turkish
artist not the historic pieces claimed from the abandoned properties collection. The
museum was in the position of one of the demanders of the abandoned properties and
was not involved in the marketing of them because brand new state offices were
constituted for selling and distributing the abandoned properties. The museum was
certainly not one of their components. These pictures were specifically the pieces of
“Turkish” artists and sometimes transferred from Ankara to İzmir. In this reciprocal
relationship the museum had the opportunity to keep its art gallery actual and lively,
supporting its claim of contributing to and vitalizing İzmir’s cultural life and the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
186 Report from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to Ministry of Education (1.5.1925), Appendix C,
figure 32.
187 Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Ministry of Education (7.9.1926),
Appendix C, figure 33.
82"
artists had the opportunity to commercialize their art, marketing them through the
museum’s channels. The pieces taken from the abandoned properties must have
become permanent objects of the gallery collection because they were unclaimed and
in the reports there is no sign of transferring them to the museum temporarily.188 The
case of the modern art pieces were much more complicated since they are
temporarily displayed and sold through the channels of the museum and a reciprocal
interest relation must have be developed between the artists and museum. It is clearly
stated in the report that picking the artistically valuable pictures was assigned to a
commission on behalf of the state or museum with such word “The purchasing of the
Turkish artists’ pictures on the approval of the commission on the behalf of the İzmir
Archeology Museum was undertaken by us in the report”.189 The Turkish Artists
Association190 was also mediating between the artists and the buyers of their pictures
who were mostly the public offices. Aziz Ogan personally himself as the president of
the Turkish Artists Association was following the debts of the clients (state offices
mostly) until he quit the position in 1930 because of his very busy business trip
schedule and other occupations keeping him from the responsibilities of
association.191There is an inventory that lists the pictures sent to Ödemiş, which were
delivered directly by the governor of İzmir (no date on the document).192 In another
undated document the president (presumably Aziz Ogan, entitled the “inspector”)
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
188Appendix C, figure 32, Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Ministry of
Education (7.3.1926), Appendix C, figure 34.
189 Appendix C, figure 34.
190 It was an association that brought the Turkish artists together and provided the opportunity of
cooperating and supporting each other. It was founded in 1909.The association also published a
newspaper entitled Osmanlı Ressamlar Cemiyeti Gazetesi. The first name of the association was
Ottoman Artists Association and it was terminated in 1919. In 1921, a similar organization Turkish
Artists Association was founded. (Seyfi Başkan, Osmanlı Ressamlar Cemiyeti [Ankara: Çardaş,
1994], p. 7,30).
191 Aziz Ogan’s resignation letter to the Association of Turkish Artists in İzmir (24.2.1939), Appendix
C, figure 35.
192 Undated, unsigned list of sold paintings, Appendix C, figure 36.
83"
directly demands the price (77.5 kurus) from the local government of Ödemis.193
Ogan as the inspector and the president of the Artists Association mediated between
the artists and the museum for recruiting some pieces exhibited in the museum hall to
the picture collection of the museum. For instance on 4 August 1929,194 Ogan wrote
to the Management of the İzmir Museum about some paintings: “If your allowance is
sufficient, I will leave it to your decision that you purchase the exhibited paintings
named Independence Struggle by Lieutenant Nazmi Bey and Inciraltı Public
Bathhouses by Afet Bey. A significant amount of discount should be demanded from
the artists”.195 The museum as an institution and a public space was assisting the
artists to reach a market and helping them to commercialize their pieces of art. Aziz
Ogan was a leading figure in the process of forming an art gallery and confiscating
the abandoned paintings. He was celebrated by the Director of Culture for his
endeavor of constituting the art gallery and for selecting the paintings from the
abandoned property storages.196 The museum institution and specifically Aziz Ogan
often mediated between the artists and buyers and sometimes directly supported
them through by recruiting some pieces from exhibitions to the museum collection.
The buyers other than the İzmir Museum were mostly the public offices of nearby
provinces that supported and patronized the Turkish artists. At the end this was a
move to support national art and artists highlighting Turkish art through the networks
of the museum. The art gallery both spatially and functionally completed the task of
vitalizing the city’s cultural environment. The joining of the art gallery to museum
halls made the complex a cultural center rather than a mere museum building where
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
193 Undated note from the Inspector of Antiquities (presumable Aziz Ogan) to the local administration
of Ödemiş, Appendix C, figure 37.
194 The date of the document is written as 4.9.9.
195 Correspondence from the Inspector (of Antiquities) to the Management of the İzmir Museum
(4.9.9), Appendix C, figure 38.
196 Correspondence from the Ministry of Education to the Inspectorship of Antiquities and Culture in
İzmir (14.6.1924), Appendix C, figure 39.
84"
historical art and artifacts were exhibited. The channels that the museum provided to
the artists and the impetus it provided to the daily life of the city support the claim
that the museum space was conceived as a cultural center.
The Second Museum Building
The very first building of İzmir Archeology Museum, Aya Vukla Church, was the
most convenient option among the limited range of constructions left untouched by
the fire yet since the very first day of the foundation of the museum constructing a
full functioning, larger building was planned and the inadequacy of the church
building for housing the archeological findings of İzmir and its hinterland was very
well known. For the next museum building two different locations were considered
and planned, but only one of them could be built. Constructing a new building on the
Bahribaba Park (former Jewish cemetery) and developing the museum as a part of
Kültürpark were both considered but the latter option was executed.
Constructing a museum in the Jewish cemetery was part of the ambitious
urbanization projects around the Jewish cemetery, which were initiated with the
appointment of Rahmi Bey as the province governor (vali) in 1913 and continued
until the Greek army arrived to the city in 1919.197 The museum construction
supposedly was an extension of this project but could not be executed due to the
arrival of war to İzmir in 1919. The obligatory break due to World War I and the
invasion of the city by the Greek Troops inevitably postponed the project. After
Turkish troops reclaimed the city, the inclusion of the museum plan in the broader
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
197 Ahmet Mehmetefendioğlu, “Rahmi Bey'in İzmir ValiliğI,” Çağdaş Türkiye Tarihi Araştırmaları
Dergisi 1/3 (1993), p. 347.
85"
reconstruction project of the fire zone totally abolished the former project. The
cemeteries in İzmir were always a remarkable and colorful element of the city’s
urban fabric. The Jewish and Muslim cemeteries which can be observed in image 8
drew the boundaries of the Western side of the city and functioned as a barrier in
front of the city’s haphazard extension to the West.198 Also they were remarkable
green spots in pictures of the city, which always caught the attention of the foreign
visitors being told in many travel writings.199 Until the second half of the nineteenth
century only Muslim and Jewish communities had separate burial sites and the
Christian communities buried their deceased in the yards of their community
churches (except the British cemetery where the Crimean War causalities were
buried and it was located on the upper sides of the Jewish cemetery). The Christian
cemeteries had penetrated the urban topography and the Jewish and Muslim
cemeteries were lying on the Western edges of the city. In the nineteenth century the
over-urbanization of the city and the threat of epidemics drove the local governors to
take some sanitary measures and with a legislation (1865) new burials in the
churchyards were forbidden and later those cemeteries were completely relocated
outside the city.200
The Jewish cemetery had been on the Western outskirts of the city for a long
time but the construction of the railroad and the extension of the city to the western
were the developments that foretold the beginning of the end for the Jewish
cemetery. Still the reorganization of this parcel was more likely the reflection of the
daily politics on the urban landscape rather than an inevitable consequence of the
rapid urbanization of the city. İzmir with its cosmopolitan social landscape was a
concern of the CUP. The execution of their national agenda on this cosmopolitan
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
198 Appendix D, image 8.
199 Rauf Beyru, 19. Yüzyılda İzmir Kenti (İstanbul: Literatür, 2011), p. 251-252.
200 Ibid., p. 252-254.
86"
environment and urban project as the makers of a modernized city became possible
with the appointment of Rahmi Bey as the local governor of İzmir who was an
influential figure of the CUP.201 Rahmi Bey was very eager to reorganize the urban
topography of İzmir through the construction of new roads, maintenance of current
roads and waterworks, erasing of the cemeteries from urban sites and building parks
and public spaces and these were all projected as the prerequisites of modern
urbanization. Parks and public gardens and the their dependencies such as public
buildings like libraries as the very remarkable signifiers of the modernized urban
picturesque. These were the elements that Rahmi Bey very enthusiastically tried to
configure in the city plan for both achieving a more modernized city panorama and
inventing some revenue sources for the municipality through the facilities (a casino
for instance) that he planned to include in these mass gentrification projects.202 After
a short period of discussing options for the reorganization of the municipality
campus as a public garden, it was noticed that the restricted economic facilities of the
municipality and the difficulty of reorganizing an already urbanized area would not
allow the execution of this project properly. Rahmi Bey’s attention was directed to
the area that was restricted by Bahribaba Park on the West side and the city center on
the east side to execute his vast building program that consisted a high school
building, a library and a museum.203 Yet the religious resistance of the local
population toward the decision of relocating the cemeteries and the ongoing
economic struggles were still standing challenges.204 Despite all the resistance and
economic constrains, reconstruction of the burial site was initiated and the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
201 Erkan Serçe, Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e İzmir’de Belediye (1868-1945) (İzmir: Dokuz Eylül
Yayınları, 1998), p. 140.
202 Efendioğlu, “Rahmi Bey'in,” p. 356-358.
203 Erkan Serçe, “Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e İzmir’de Kütüphanecilik”, Erdem-Atatürk Kültür
Merkezi Dergisi 7 (January 1991), p. 744-745.
204 Efendioğlu, “Rahmi Bey'in,” p. 357.
87"
construction of a National Library building in addition to a high school building
(Ittihat ve Terakki Mektebi) could be completed before the arrival of the war but the
museum building plan on the Jewish cemetery have never been achieved.
Constituting a library as an institution and building were deeply symbolic for the
CUP because constituting such institutions, mediating for the enlightenment of the
people, the spreading literacy through libraries were already in the program of the
CUP. The CUP was very ambitious for nationalizing İzmir’s economy and it was not
possible without the assistance of a qualified and educated Turkish generation. The
National Library, which already had an implication of the national mission of the
CUP in its name, was a perfect center for educating and organizing this new
generation.205 Planning the library, the high school, and the museum on the same site
also underlines the coded role of the museum in the enlightenment and intellectual
development of the society. The dismissal of Rahmi Bey in 1918 raised some hopes
for the Jewish community to reacquire the burial site, but they could not and they had
already arranged another site in the Kemer region that was registered to some
members of the community who had migrated to USA.206 The project of an
archeology museum is one of the few public sphere projects that could occupy a spot
on a former burial site, but it was never achieved due to the arrival of a destructive
war to the city and replacement of Ottoman rule with Greek rule on 15 May 1919.
After the Turkish side‘s taking over the city the museum plan on the former cemetery
was brought to the state’s agenda again but no action was taken until the inclusion of
the plan in the reconstruction of the fire zone project. The museum project on the
state’s agenda was ambiguous at this stage because whether a new building should
be constructed or one of the lavish buildings on that ground should be converted was
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
205 Serçe, “Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e İzmir’de Kütüphanecilik,” p. 744-745.
206 Beyru, 19. Yüzyılda İzmir'de Yaşam, p. 254.
88"
not decided. In 1923 judging by several correspondences written to the Directorship
of Culture, the Ministry of Education, and personally to Aziz Ogan a construction
plan for the museum on the former Jewish cemetery was still on the agenda. In a
document to the Directorship of Culture in 1923 it summarizes the pre-war plan of
the municipality as such: “When it was desired to construct parks and boulevards on
the abandoned Jewish cemetery, it was also decided to allocate an adequate parcel
for the construction of a museum building which the pride of the Municipality of
İzmir, and also the Union and Progress School (Ittihat ve Terakki Mektebi) and the
National Library could be completed in the same area.”207 With the end of the war,
the urbanization plans could be restarted and the foreseen site for the museum
building was still to be in the cemetery. In an unsigned letter to Aziz Ogan various
expenses for transportation of antiques antiques to was discussed. The author
demands a serious reconsideration of “the cost of for the construction of a museum
building on the deserted Jewish cemetery and in what portion the state will cover the
expenses.”208 These construction plans could never carried out but it was always
known that it was a matter of time and money to build a new museum. This drove the
state to consider converting one of the recent buildings on the site like, the high
school building even though it is unknown whether this is considered as a temporary
solution like the Aya Vukla Church or the final destination for the antiquities. The
decision about the museum building was conveyed to the Directorship of Culture in
İzmir in 29 March 1923 in an unsigned document as such: “as it was verbally agreed
to convert a portion of the former school building (Ittihat ve Terakki Mektebi) to the
museum [but] the building has still being used as a hospital and transforming the
antiques to another place [a temporary shelter] until its evacuation would cost a
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
207 Unsigned correspondence to the Directorship of Culture (1.29.1923), Appendix C, figure 40.
208 Unsigned letter to Aziz Ogan (16.6.1923), Appendix C, figure 1.
89"
lot.”209 The high school building was one of the completed buildings of the ambitious
urban project of Rahmi and during the war it served as a shelter for the homeless the
Jews. The Jews of İzmir could gain the protection of Ottoman authorities during the
war and their neighborhood was one of the rare sections of the city unconsumed by
the fire, still in nearby provinces the community took its share from the destruction
that forced them to seek refuge in İzmir.210 Education in the high school building
must come to halt with the war and Jewish refugees were sheltered in that building
until a Greek commander forcefully evacuated them in order to found a university.
He benefited from the old tombstones to extend the building for this purpose.211
After the Turkish army drove back the Greek troops, the building temporarily
functioned as a hospital until the reopening of the former British Hospital.212
Thus, the final decision for the museum building was to start a new
construction. This never happened, however the urban plans for re-development of
burned down city designated a new space for the museum building and the first plan
was abandoned.
Post-War Urban Re-Development of İzmir
Daily and commercial life in Smyrna was continuing in its usual path until the very
last days until the arrival of news reporting that the Greek army collapsed at Afyon
front. When they were heard the foreign communities such as the British community
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
209 Correspondence from the Directorship of Culture to İzmir Directorship of Culture (1.1.1929),
Appendix C, figure 41.
210 Henri Nahum, İzmir Yahudileri 19.-20. Yüzyıl, trans. Estreya Seval Vali (İstanbul: İletişim
Yayınları, 2000), p. 187, 191,192.
211 Beyru, 19. Yüzyılda İzmir Kenti, p.254, Nahum, İzmir Yahudileri, p. 187.
212 “The Smyrna Fire And The Smyrna Hospitals”, The British Medical Journal, 2, No. 3222 (Sep. 30,
1922), p. 607.
90"
informed its citizens who lived on the outskirts of the city (26 August).213 The
Greeks leaving the city left both foreigners and other non-Muslim communities in
panic and eventually the İzmir episode of World War I’s closure became the Great
Fire in 1922 that consumed the heart of the city. The perpetrators were never known
and there are contradicting testimonies for the incident still no matter who
masterminded the plan, the most active (in every sense; economic, cultural, etc.) part
of the city, the Frank district, was consumed in addition to the Armenian and Greek
districts. Only the Muslim and Jewish districts survived. Captain Hepburn (chief of
Staff of the American naval squadron) in his notes dated15 September 1922
describes the fire scene as “The fires beginning to burn themselves out; there was, in
fact, virtually nothing left to ignite.”214 According to the Directorship of Statistic’s
examinations, 14,005 of 42,945 residences could have been saved from the
destruction and only 9,696 shops were left (the majority of which belonged to the
Muslims), and the whole sewer system vanished. What was left from the one of the
commercially and culturally most improved cities of the Empire was a burned out
hole at the center, with rare undamaged sections on its edges.215 In the post-war
circumstances, the sanitary situation was completely inadequate, the lack of
dwellings was causing inflation in the real estate market and the fire zone still stood
at the locus of the city as a major sanitary threat for the city. İzmir was desperately in
need of reconstruction like many other Western Anatolian cities that took their share
from the destruction of the war. The reconstruction of these war causalities and
forming Ankara as the new capital were the priorities of the urban and municipal
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
213 Marjorie Housepian Dobkin, Smyrna 1922: The Destruction of a City (Kent: Kent State University
Press, 1988), p. 107.
214 Ibid., p. 177.
215 Serçe, Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e İzmir’de Belediye, p. 173.
91"
program of the new nation-state.216 İzmir, since the sixteenth century and more
densely during second half of the eighteenth century was the mediating point
between its Western Asia Minor hinterland and Europe, between the relatively smallscaled
tradesmen and producers and European tradesmen with assistance from
Greek-Orthodox entrepreneurs that had disappeared after the war.217 İzmir had the
remarkable and privileged position among these western cities for both its symbolic
transformation from cosmopolitan Ottoman Smyrna to Turkish İzmir and the
commercial and economic position it held in the country’s economy for centuries.
Initiating its reconstruction plan simultaneously with Ankara’s verified its
significance for the state.218
The reconstruction of İzmir could not be initiated until 1925 when finally a
stable municipal administration took over after plenty of political rivalry and power
struggles. The very first reconstruction plan for the consumed city was the Danger-
Prost plan that was submitted to the municipality in 1924, which was revised by the
city planners of the municipality and partially executed until 1930. The plan was
prepared by René Danger and Raymond Danger with the consultancy support of
Henri Prost it categorized İzmir’s issues and a plan based on these issues as as 1.
Residential districts, 2. Harbor, custom, warehouses, and other dependencies of the
harbor, 3. Coastal road and centers, 4. Commercial district, 5. Industrial district, 6.
Sewer system, 7. Cemeteries, 8. State’s offices, wholesale market hall, packing
houses etc.219 In the plan, the very first concern was the hygiene of the city and the
location of the harbor and industrial district that were situated in accordance with the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
216 İlhanTekeli and İlber Ortaylı, Türkiye’de Belediyeciliğin Evrimi, ed. Ergun Türkcan (Ankara: Türk
İdareciler Derneği, 1978) p. 27.
217 Vangelis Kechriotis, “Educating the Nation: Migration and Acculturation on the Two Shores of the
Aegean at the Turn of the Twentieth Century,” Cities of the Mediterranean: From the Ottomans to the
Present Day, ed. Biray Kolluoğlu and Meltem Toksöz (London ; New York : I.B. Tauris), p. 142.
218 Cana Bilsel, “İzmir’de Cumhuriyet Dönemi Planlaması (1923-1965): 20. Yüzyıl Kentsel Mirası”,
Ege Mimarlık 71(2009/4), p. 12.
219 Serçe, Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e İzmir’de Belediye, p. 251.
92"
direction of prevailing wind. The residential quarters were combined with greenery
and the houses were planned with green yards. Danger brothers were not intending to
build any residential or commercial quarters on the seaside parcel of the fire zone
because these quarters had to be higher than sea level. But the revision of the plan by
the city planners of the municipality allotted this parcel as the residential and
commercial districts.220 The plan proposed to connect Basmahane station directly to
the new harbor and canalize commercial traffic out of the city center, making the
Basmahane as the central station of the city. In addition to the commercial and
residential regulations on the urban topography, park zones were also planned. Their
execution was started through constructers’ private enterprises, who purchased plots
from the fire zone and commercial units. Occasionally minor tradesmen constructed
their own commercial buildings as collective enterprise. The very dynamic
environment of the building trade in the second half of the 1920s was a remarkable
element for the execution of at least some part of the plan. But from 1929 the
financial crisis, the lack of cash and rise of inflation in the building material sector
diminished all building activities.221 The Danger-Prost plan fulfilled the expectations
of the municipality, but its full execution was a matter or time and financial capacity.
Haydar Rüştü (He was one of the members of the city council. He resigned in 1923
after being elected as a parliamentarian) 222 was described the requirements for the
execution of the plan as such “lots of money, a very long period, and patience [and in
return] the city will develop very much, the roads will be remarkably widened, a park
will be formed, for which the city is most desperate.”223 The financial situation of the
municipality obligatorily left the reconstruction job to private enterprise and only a
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
220 Bilsel, “İzmir’de Cumhuriyet,” p. 12-13.
221 Serçe, Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e İzmir’de Belediye, p. 251-262.
222 Ibid., p. 175.
223 Ibid., p. 253.
93"
few buildings could be built by the municipality. After 1929, due to the conditions
private enterprise had to slow down and Behcet Uz’s taking over the mayor position
in 1930 gave a new direction to the reconstruction process leading the municipality
to construct the Kültürpark at the center of the fire zone.
Behcet Uz held the mayoral position between 1931 and 1941 and he had
remarkably contributed to create a hygienic environment in the city and execute the
reconstruction plans. In 1930 a new municipality law was passed by the government
that abolished the former fifty three year old regulation. This new law attempted to
restructure the municipalities in order to adapt the imagined Republican model to the
cities and assumed the municipalities as the main responsible authority for post war
reconstruction in many cities of the country. The new law was based on five
principles: equality of all municipalities (this emphasized the aim of improving inner
cities in contrast to Ottoman state’s policy of prioritizing the development of the
coastal cities in a commercial, economic and urban sense), giving liberty to
municipalities in their operations, supervising the municipalities by powerful central
administration mechanisms, the establishment of single step municipal elections and
the extension of the municipal responsibility areas.224 Behcet Uz’s period coincides
with the beginning of a new era in the general understanding of the municipal
services and İzmir was marked as an archetype for the ideal city in the Turkish
Republic. Thus it would achieve with the sanitary solutions to the post-fire and
environmental health issues and by introducing the Kültürpark as a model for the
reconstruction of cities in the Turkish Republic.225
The municipality’s inability to provide proper cleaning services, its lack of
adequate staff, its ailment by budget cuts and finally presence of the fire zone which
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
224 Tekeli, Türkiye’de Belediyeciliğin, p. 50-55.
225 Yüksel Pöğün, “The Reflection of Modernization in Turkey on the Architectural Artifact of İzmir
Culturpark Between 1930-1950”, (master’s thesis. İzmir Institute of Technology , 2000), p. 81.
94"
was situated at the center of the city (as a mass hole full of fire detritus garbage)
were the very first sanitary issues that Uz had to manage. In addition to many
regulations that aimed to keep the streets clean and make people acquire ‘civilized
manners’ appropriate for the proposed modern conditions, he filled the city’s
swamps with the rubble of the fire remnants to control the epidemics. He described
these materials, a very cheap solution he provided as solution to the swamps, as “the
most valuable product of the city”.226 The filling material of the fire hole
symbolically reflected the general post-war politics in İzmir. The destroyed remnants
of the departed communities were collected as bulk, melted and used as materials to
construct the redeveloping city, endowing it with a brand new character.
Kültürpark and The Museum Building
In 1951 the İzmir Archeology Museum was finally moved to the regenerated urban
zone of the Kültürpark and situated among its other permanent sections. With this
move the archeological ambitions of the state were adjoined to the park site that was
a huge ground constructed to advertise the self-pride of the state. As early as 1923 an
unsigned document written to the Directorship of Culture concerned the proposal for
the construction of a new museum building. An allocated plot was mentioned but as
the zone in question was re-planned (probably as an extension of the Danger-Prost
plan that was in progress) a share from “the most prestigious parcel” was promised
for the museum site in addition to providing the necessary expenses for the new
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
226 Ülker Baykan Seymen, “Tek Parti Dönemi Belediyeciliğinde Behcet Uz Örneği”, Üç İzmir, ed.
Enis Batur (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 1992) p. 304.
95"
museum.227 The prodigiousness of the plot was underlined but there is not any clue
for a specific spot that was considered for the museum plot. Even though a
prestigious parcel was promised for a new museum, the promised was not
constructed. The museum building was moved to the Ministry of Education pavilion
in the Kültürpark. The amount of the findings that were transferred to İzmir
throughout years were beyond the capacity of the second museum as well. As a
result of the logistic needs the museum building could stay in Kültürpark until
1984.228 The final destination of the museum became the Bahribaba park where the
very first plan for a museum building was supposed to be built.229 Since the museum
building was converted form a fair pavilion, it was more like a gallery that provided
a very large, single exhibition hall.230
The projects of the spatial modernization of the city and the improvement of
its infrastructure were sanitarily significant to improve the hygienic conditions in the
street. They were also important for restructuring people’s lifestyle and make them
acquainted with the current urban advancement (and more later in Kültürpark) of the
Turkish Republic. İzmir was not the only city, which was being adapted to the urban
improvements that Uz tried to introduce to the city. Rapid urbanization and the
integration of new forms of urbanization to the cities was the urban policy of the
Turkish Republic. This policy was most conspicuously suited to the urban
topography of re-developed İzmir as well as Ankara, which was a city that was
constituted out of a small town. Paving the roads, carving squares and dotting them
with huge Mustafa Kemal statues, constructing sample municipal buildings,
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
227 Unsigned correspondence to the Directorship of Culture (2.7.1923), Appendix C, figure 42.
228 “İzmir Arkeoleji Müzesi,” İzmir Müzesi, http://www.İzmirmuzesi.gov.tr/İzmir-muze-mudurluguİzmir-
arkeoloji-muzesi.aspx.
229 Ibid.
230 İzmir Arkeoloji Müzesi (brochure), Ankara:Maarif Vekaleti Eski Eserler ve Müzeler Umum
Müdürlüğü, 1953.
96"
lightening the streets, constructing parks, linking the dead ends to the central road
networks of cities, moving the cemeteries to the outskirts of the cities were the
general improvements brought by Republican municipalities and primary elements
of the program of modern city making.231
The encounter of modernity with urbanization had never been respectful to
the traditional patterns of the cities either for the Ottoman or Republican
modernization models. The formation of a new city center as the alternative and
successor to the former one was a very common tradition in Ottoman urban
modernization and in a similar move the Republican era the capital was moved to
Ankara. A nation-state had already been politically constituted, but in people’s mind
there was not any vivid image or exact concepts that it corresponded. In order to
illustrate the politically formed nation-state, urban designs, and managing the spatial
environment was significantly important for the state.232 Formation of new cities
(Ankara) or reconstructing a damaged one in Republican fashion (İzmir) were all
very conspicuous instances of management of urban designs and city planning. In the
Republican era, in contrast to the Ottoman urban tradition of gentrifying a certain
section of a city, planning the city as a whole composition became the standard
practice. Uz’s İzmir was a micro success of the imagined city model of the Turkish
Republic, especially with respect to the reconstruction of the city and the Kültürpark,
which was the most sophisticated chapter of his reconstruction project. The park
transcended the local character of the city and adapted the general imagined idea of
the Republican cities to İzmir.
During the reconstruction of İzmir, Behcet Uz’s mostly continued to execute
the Danger-Prost plan. Only the Kültürpark project made a very bold modification to
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
231 Tekeli, Türkiye’de Belediyeciliğin, p. 91-93.
232 İlhan Tekeli, “Bir Modernite Projesi Olarak Türkiyede Kent Planlaması”, Ege Mimarlık 16
(1995/2), p. 53.
97"
the plan. Kültürpark and the other minor parks were the most remarkable
contributions that Uz made in to the creation of a scenic city. The transformation of
the cemeteries to parks was first started in the 1910s with the urban projects of the
local governor Rahmi Bey. In Uz’s period this policy was widely executed and the
landscape turned to greened in many parcels. Behcet Uz carried out the Danger-Prost
plan mostly but in Uz’s view for a city was in need of residential quarters and had a
very limited budget. It was an unaffordable luxury to furnish the city with extremely
wide streets, monumental statues adorning the squares and dotting the star shaped
landscape withwide plazas. Uz did not support the idea of creating squares on which
the city roads would cross each other (as proposed in the Danger-Prost
plan).Building monumental structures on these squares was a luxury that the city
could not have afforded, Still, if a historically valuable monument was within the
planning zone any measure would be taken to conserve it.233 The most remarkable
revision of the Danger-Prost plan was the main character of the fire zone, which the
Danger brothers were planning to furnish with green spaces and university campuses.
The plantation of a 60,000 square meter area as part of the September 9 Fair in 1934
on the fire zone was the first step to construct a park zone. The idea came from vicemayor
Suat Yurdkoru who was impressed by a similar park in Moscow that he saw
during his visit to the city with the Olympic committee. Yurdkoru’s idea of
constructing a similar park in İzmir on the fire zone caused the extension of the park
zone to 360,000 square meters. He defined the park he indented to contribute to the
city as the “Kültürpark”, which “ must be designed in a way that it will fulfill the
needs of İzmir’s people for fresh air and sunshine, health. It will and also be useful in
serving the aims of revolution and developing culture.”234 The intention of Yurdkoru
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
233 Seymen, “Tek Parti Dönemi,” p. 312.
234 Ibid., p. 315.
98"
and Uz was to contribute to the green and sanitary environment of the city, construct
a site on which people could socialize, join sport activities and certain exhibitions, a
place where the public would be lured by various museums. Behcet Uz evaluates the
current situation of Kültürpark with the following words
As a result of the inspiration taken from fairs and culture parks in Moscow,
which I observed during my visit in the period of Ismet Inonu’s Prime Ministry,
today the Kültürpark is a site that both our elderlies and children can benefit from in
all senses, including health, sport and entertainment. As aesthetically with it botanic
gardens were established that function as folk universities like in foreign countries.
All these serve through education and beauty addresses people’s aesthetic feelings.235
Yurdkoru who come up with the idea of constituting a kind of replica of a culture
park in Moscow stated that situating the İzmir International Fair on Kültürpark
grounds also provide economic benefit. The site provided a chance of exhibiting
Republican achievements and programs to the eyes of foreign spectators. Thus, the
main motivations behinf the founding of the Kültürpark were: the urgent need to
reconstruct the fire zone and remove all detritus of the fire, to provide public
gardens, sports and recreation facilities, and to establish the ground for an
international fair.
The transformation of İzmir to a national showcase both spatially and
economically was illustrated in the International Fair organization of Kültürpark,
which was inspired by Mustafa Kemal’s following statement. When he visited İzmir
in 1923, Mustafa Kemal specifically underlined the economic and political
importance of the city through these words:
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
235 Behcet Uz, Atatürk’ün İzmir’i: Bir Kentin Yeniden Doğuşu, ed. L. Ece Sakar, (İstanbul: Türkiye İş
Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2007), p. 69.
99"
İzmir has been the homeland of tour ancestor for forty centuries. In addition
to having such an old history, it has a remarkable economic and political significance
due to its geographical location. Because of that the glances of the enemies that
desire to destroy Turkey were very primarily directed at this historical and significant
region…. İzmir, which was highly important in all regards could not be left in the
hands of the enemies.236
The history of the economic fairs in İzmir dates back to 1923, when a domestic
exhibition was attached to The First Congress of Economics which was a forum
organized to discuss the economic future and strategic moves to improve the warridden
economy of Turkey. İzmir’s share from the economic destruction of the war
was very substantial, considering the departed populations which was mostly
engaged in commercial businesses and the destruction of the economic heart of the
city, the Frank district. The economic fair tradition in İzmir was invented to
revitalize the economy of the city, and until 1930 they were conducted as local fairs.
In fact, until 1940 this was an organization of the Ministry of Economy, not the İzmir
Municipality. Improving the local fair to the international level and extending its
content compelled the organizers to find a wider site. In this way, the emerged
concept of an International Fair situated on the grounds of Kültürpark. Thus the two
immense projects of İzmir, as the reflection of Republican policies for selfaffirmation
and promotion in international level, could be integrated. Kültürpark was
a construction that stood on the fire zone, where the heart of cosmopolitan İzmir used
to beat commercially and culturally. It became one of the landmarks of nationalized
İzmir. Reconstructing the consumed parcel was inevitable but at the same time it was
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
236 Atatürk Söylev ve Demeçleri II (1906-1938), (İstanbul: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1989), p. 88.
100"
an act of sweeping away entirely the cosmopolitan urban heritage of the city, and
replacing the multi-faceted character of the urban landscape with a distinctly national
one. In terms of the economy, after the city lost a significant amount of its population
taking action to revitalize city’s economy was inevitable. This organization was of
course connected to the effort to form the national economy of the city. Süleyman
Ferit Eczacıbaşı, as a local bourgeois, recounts the economic stagnation of İzmir in
the years following the war as such: “The ongoing trade restriction of the Western
countries on Turkey and the irreversible departure of some foreigners and minority
groups that dominated the economy of the city for centuries caused a great economic
stagnation at the beginning.”237 For Eczacıbaşı, this stagnation was still preferable to
the previous more cosmopolitan environment. Since it brought forward a more
“liberal and fair atmosphere that was to the advantage of the Turkish people.”238
The park site plan, which is showed in image 14, was conceived as a walled
area that had four main gates on the north, south, west and east with additional
pedestrian doors and car doors (if motor vehicles were to be allowed).239 Yurdkoru
planed basically three groups of building complexes one of these comprised service
buildings (a main storage, the administration building, parking spot for bicycles and
motor vehicles, an information office, a newsstand, phone and telegraph boxes, a
photography booth, a power station, toilets, a fire fighting station, police and
municipality stations, residential quarters, restaurants and cafes), The other group
housed public buildings for meetings, entertainment and sports (a square for
displays, a music district equipped with radio and speaker devices, an open theater, a
circus spot, two squares for two thousands people for demonstrations and military
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
237 Yaşar Aksoy, Bir Kent Bir İnsan: İzmir’in Son Yüzyılı, S. Ferit Eczacıbaşı’nın Yaşamı ve Anıları,
(İstanbul: Dr. Nejat F. Eczacıbaşı Yayınları, 1986), p. 216.
238 Ibid., p. 216.
239 Appendix D, image 14.
101"
trainings, an open-air sports facility for school kids, an open-air swimming pool, a
children’s theater and cinema, several playgrounds, several ornamental pools with
plantings surrounding them, a diving tower and tennis court, a separate area on
which kids can play on the ground and have a sunbath and infants can be driven in
their baby strollers). The third cluster was a site dedicated to reforms and warfare (on
Atatürk kiosk that contains the illustration of his life and works, sections
commemorating some of his comrades, revolution and culture museums, geology
and geography, anthropology museums, museums dedicated to the struggle against
fatal diseases, a permanent exhibition for the advancement of İzmir in heavy and
light industry and industrial products, as well as boards that inform the visitor about
the architectural setup and style of the pavilions of park).240 In 1936 the international
fair was moved to the Kültürpark which was hardly completed but still offered a
much more adequate wide space for the fair and forty eight firms from Greece,
Egypt, and the Soviet Union participated in addition to the exhibition pavilions of
local production. The fair was composed of permanent and temporary buildings. The
museum buildings (the revolution museum, health museum agriculture museum) and
the pavilions of state financial enterprises (Eti Bank, Sümer Bank) as well as
pavilions of various provinces that functioned to exhibit their local products were the
permanent elements of all fairs.241
During the 1940s, the war climate that clouded the world economy shadowed
also the international fair. In 1942 the yearly fair was cancelled but to recover its
absence an entrainment festival was organized that hosted many celebrities from all
over the country. During 1940s the fair gained a much more entertaining character in
addition a touristic function was attached to it. Groups of guest artists or celebrities
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
240 Enver Feyzioğlu, Büyük Bir Halk Okulu: İzmir Fuarı (İzmir: İzmir Fuarcılık Hizmetleri Kültür ve
Sanat İşleri Tic. A.Ş. (İZFAŞ) Kültür Yayını, 2006), p. 33-36.
241 Necmettin Emre, “İzmir Fuarı Başarılmış Bir Eserdir”, İktisadi Yürüyüş, 17(1940), p. 3.
102"
visited the fair each year and it was transformed to a yearly festival more and more.
The museum was inserted in this more “touristic” ground because it was designed as
a spatial environment where the state’s appreciation for antique heritage and state’s
narrated history were served to the eyes of both the nation and foreigners
The Kültürpark was a project that united the ambitions of a nation-state in the
fields of restructuring the urban topography of the city and the nationalization of its
economy. This project was actually a projection of the Republican ideals for the
whole country, just as İzmir was a micro case of all of these. The fair and park
ground became the stage for producing, exhibiting, and marketing the national pride
and advancement of the Republic. Ottoman Smyrna (its counterpart Salonica)
comprised the residential zones of various communities, which had their own
memories and distinctive character and life patterns. In order to achieve a nationhood
conflicting memories had to be forgotten and a shared past had to be created.242
Configuring the İzmir Museum among the other elements of this stage served the
mission of exhibiting the cultural advancement of the Republic and declaring the
cultural development of the state and nation, which was advanced enough to
appreciate the architectural heritage of the city and its hinterland. In addition to this
mission, museums, where the cosmopolitan heritage of the city was melted and
molded in national shape were inserted to the bigger picture of the redeveloped
national city on the ashes of the former cosmopolitan city.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
242 Renan, “What is a Nation,” p. 11,19.
103"
Conclusion
Spiro Kostof offers two options dynasties that take over the former ones’ cities: “It
will either identify itself with the passing regime to establish legitimacy and
continuity, or it will dramatize the break with the past by abandoning the dynastic
city for one of its own.”243 Kostof discusses the topic of taking over a city and
establishing the legitimacy of the new ruling in that city in a section named “Utopias
and Idealized” cities. What was done in those kinds of cities was to idealize them
mostly as an archetype for the rest of the country. In the periods of nation-state
formation observing the destruction of a cosmopolitan environment and the
redevelopment of its urban remains was not a unique case to Turkish Republic. In
Greece, as a counterpart of Turkey, a nation-state period was experienced and the
breaking of spatial ties with the Ottoman past in the former Ottoman city of Salonica
became possible with another great fire (1917). The rebuilding of the city was
designed as a “showpiece of business and commerce, commanding the foreigners’
respect”. A commercial district was constructed, former Ottoman pleasure gardens
were covered by industrial zones, Salonica’s cemeteries were turned into university
campuses and park sites just like the case in İzmir.244 While Salonica was being
transformed by imposing a homogenous national identity and cleaned up from its
cosmopolitan elements, the Muslims of Salonica were resettled in Aegean cities like
İzmir and Manisa. Those cities were becoming Turkish while the hometowns of
incoming populations were becoming dominantly Greek.245 In the case of the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
243 Spiro Kostof, The City Shaped: Urban Patterns and Meanings Through History, (Boston: Little,
Brown, 1991) p. 165.
244 Mark Mazower, Salonica, City of Ghosts: Christians, Muslims and Jews, 1430-1950, (London:
Harper Perennial, 2005), p. 324, 325.
245 Ibid., p. 355.
104"
Turkish Republic the former capital, Istanbul, was largely ignored and later reconceptualized
as a national heritage site rather than a dynastic one and constituted
as a nostalgic city that served as a museum. Ankara was fabricated out of a small
town as a brand new capital that was full of new architectural reflections of
Republican modernization. The way that Republic managed the situation in İzmir
was in-between establishing continuity and breaking its ties radically with the past.
Neither was Ottoman Smyrna a dynastic city nor was the Turkish Republic a foreign
ruler that conquered the city. However the dynastic tradition and a city, which was
rich in complex political connotations in its spatial environment was replaced by
Republican ruling and a new urban regime. Smyrna, with its unique Frank urban
topography among the other cities of the Empire did not fit the architectural and
national agenda of the nation-state. Dismissing the cosmopolitan demographic
character of Smyrna was followed and accompanied by the reconstruction of İzmir
on the ashes of Smyrna. The reconstruction of İzmir broke ties with the urban
tradition and continuity very drastically by imposing the Republican urbanization
model to the city with interventions such as the Kültürpark and other mass urban
projects, re-conceptualizing the Christian sanctuaries (like the Aya Vukla) the
Republican authorities ignored the Ottoman cosmopolitan past and replaced it with
new and sterilized history narrative. The İzmir Archeology Museum illustrated this
instrumental history narrative. The abandoned properties of departed non-Muslim
communities and dismissed dervish convents were detached by the museum from
their cultural and ideological connotations that conflicted with the secular,
modernized, Republican ideal of new nation-state. Locations of both first and the
second archeology museums (first a Christian landmark and second a dependency of
a huge urban project of exhibiting national pride) demonstrate the role that museums
105"
played in imposing the new Republican ideals to the site of İzmir which was
recreated out of the ashes of Smyrna.
106"
CHAPTER III
COLLECTING (İDDİHAR) STAGE
Collecting Objects for the Museum Setting
The stage of collecting is the second step following the founding stage that
constitutes for Ogan an essential function of the museum that comes after the
founding. The process consists of a process of re-representing ourselves and is
basically about narrating a story through the objects detached from their context,
inserting them into a coherent narrative. The nature of collecting or the very basic
definition of “collection” suggests breaking the relation between the object and its
use value and installing a new set of values through the sequence/order of the
collected objects. This sequence is constituted by the objects that are held, not for
their use value, but for their aesthetically pleasing qualities or other values imputed
to the objects.246 Once the use-value of the objects is replaced by aesthetic or other
values, the objects form a collection; the collection (the objects in the collection)
forms a separate meaning that transcends the original meaning of the single objects.
The collection’s meaning “has a greater sum up than its parts”,247 which construct a
different collective meaning for the collection from their single/individual meanings.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
246 Susan M. Pearce, “The Urge to Collect”, Interpreting the Objects and Collections, ed. Susan M.
Pearce (London; New York: Routledge, 1994), p. 157.
247 Ibid., p. 159.
107"
Acquiring objects to insert them into a collection or bringing them together to
constitute a collection is to turn them from being “things” to “signs” constituting the
narration of the collection. The moment an object takes its place in a collection, for
Bal, it is “turned away, abducted, from itself, its inherent value, and denuded of its
defining function so as to be available for use of a sign.”248
Mieke Bal attributes her arguments generally to collecting for personal
collections, but what museums and individual collectors do in the collecting process
is more or less the same. In museums the objects are detached from their original
contexts and these fragments are re-conceptualized according to artificial/invented
classifications, denuded from their single meanings or use values, and the finally
constitute the collection with a new overarching meaning. Once an object is
configured in a museum, this configuration cuts its ties from the original meaning
and practical use, makes it an element of a broad visual narration. Pomian attributes
decorative value to the museum objects, but on the other hand defines decoration as
the art of ornamenting the walls and spatial entities. For the art of decoration objects,
paintings are instrumental. According to Pomian, in a museum these objects are no
longer the elements or the figurants of decoration, but the very main foci of the
spatial environment. Bringing these objects together aims to show them to others. 249
However they are not presented as the ornament and the elements of the spatial
environment Apparently the museum objects lose their relation with their practical
function (in case of decorative objects, they lose their function of simply
ornamenting). Even the decorative objects do not function to ornament the spatial
entity of the museum, but constitute a visual narration.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
248 Mieke Bal, “Telling Objects: A Narrative Perspective on Collecting”, The Cultures of Collecting,
ed. John Elsner and Roger Cardinal, Cambridge (Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1994), p. 111.
249 Krzysztof Pomian, “ The Collection: Between the Visible and the Invisible”, Interpreting Objects
and Collections, ed. Susan M. Pearce (London; New York: Routledge, 1994), p. 160-161.
108"
The ability of museums to converse the meaning of the object or denude the
object from its original context is also an opportunity for museums to benefit from
various sources to acquire the museum collections. Variety of sources from the
findings of the excavations to the belongings of the departed populations can offer
objects to museum. Because museums conversion ability can bring various objects
together in a proper setting regardless of how different contexts they were brought
from. For Arık, in the case of Turkish museums, there are four types of sources
constituting collections of the Turkish museums: findings from the excavations
within the national borders, the properties of the liquidated institutions (for instance
the institutions of the fled populations or diminished dervish convents), gifts and
purchased items, and finally the purchased collections of individual collectors.250 In
the case of the İzmir Museum, there are many pieces acquired through diverse ways,
which might fit some of the methods of Turkish museums’ collecting policy as
defined by Arık. Whether or not the general collecting policy of Turkish museums
and specifically that of the İzmir Archeology Museum correspond, through its
collecting policy the İzmir Archeology museum acquired large numbers of artifacts
in adequate numbers to constitute a rich museum collection. The museum collection
was constituted from mostly the findings from the excavations in İzmir’s hinterland
in addition to the abandoned objects, which were left behind by the forcefully
departed communities and the properties.
The archeological findings in need of being sheltered by İzmir and its
hinterland are the base of the İzmir Museum’s collection, but there are also some
other elements that helped to nurture the museum. The qualities of the archeological
findings fits quite well to constitute a proper antiquities collection for the museum,
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
250 Arık, Türk Müzeciliğine, p. 9-10.
109"
but other collections (such as the Islamic, the Hittite) or other sections (such as the
art gallery and the library) required the museum to acquire objects in the other ways
as well. In addition to the archeological findings transported to the İzmir Museum,
which was the central museum among the little museums dispersed around Western
Anatolian archeological sites, there existed a large body of confiscated and
abandoned properties and other items transported to the museum due to damage risk
and gifts (Muslim tombstones for instance). Abandoned properties fit into the
category of the acquisition of the properties of liquidated institutions, which were
types of appropriation the İzmir Museum benefited from. The institutions of the
departed Christian communities, such as churches, schools, and their dependencies
as well as the dervish convents were bodies that clashed with the updated national
and secular identity of the new nation state. This clash between the nation state and
the institutions made them also a booty site for museums where any object, already
stored and de-contextualized, could be easily detached, denuded from their use-value
abstracted, and situated in accordance with the isolated visual aesthetic relation
between the spectator and the collections. The abandoned properties of the departed
non-Muslim communities and the objects from the dissolved and outlawed dervish
convents are the groups of objects that can be counted under the category of the
objects of the liquidated institutions. There are some cases of appropriating items
from the dervish convents for an Islamic collection such as the collection of the
Konya Museum, which is located in the Mevlana Convent.251 In the Konya Museum
the Islamic collection was constituted by manuscripts (such as ornamented Qurans,
illustrated albums, panels), textiles (such as carpets, rugs, and clothing), engraved
wooden pieces (such as detahced windows or doors), glass works, guns, inscriptions,
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
251 The inventory and investigation report of Konya Mevlana Dervish Convent (Museum) written to
Ministry of Education, (4.5.1929), Appendix C, figure 43.
110"
Seljuk tiles (from the historical buildings of Konya and its provinces), and Seljuk and
Ottoman coins.252 In the case of Bursa items from the Seyid Gazi Tomb, Battal Gazi
Tomb, and Şülaattin Dervish Lodge were transferred,253 but there is only one list that
is for the items sent to the museum from the Seyid Gazi Tomb, which were bronze
chandeliers (verses written on some of them), candle holders, and incensory.254 (It is
not clear which museum it is. The document was written by the Directorship of
Education and addressed to Aziz Ogan the inspector that “… items that were sent to
the museum of Ministry of education”). The İzmir museum made a significant
collection out of the abandoned properties, but there is no sign here of objects
transported from dervish convents.
In conclusion the sources of the collections of İzmir Archeology Museum
are: First the abandoned properties, which can basically be classified as such
properties of departed people, which were confiscated and collected from the
dwellings, the museum collection of the burned down Evangelical School, and the
properties of the churches that were transported to the museum. Second the
transported items, which were the tombstones from relocated cemeteries or some
items from the mosques. Finally donations by the individuals, which were sometimes
an entire collection or single items were also a source for the museum.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
252 The inventory and investigation report of Konya Mevlana Dervish Convent (Museum) written to
Ministry of Education, (4.5.1929), Appendix C, figure 44.
253 The report on the Seyid Gazi and Battal Gazi Tombs by Director of Education Talat to Inspector of
Ministry of Education Aziz Ogan, (6.9.1929), Appendix C, figure 45.
254 Appendix C, figure 45.
111"
Abandoned Properties
The Definition of Abandoned Properties (Emval-i Metruke) and Their Acquisition by
the State
The term “abandoned property” basically refers to the properties of the non-Muslim
communities who left their belongings unclaimed as a result of exile, escape, or
simply disappearance. The term was introduced firstly in the 1915 regulation for the
properties of the departed Armenian community and expanded in time for the
properties of other communities during and after World War I.
The first regulation for the properties of the exiled people came in 1915 and it
remained effective until 1920 when a provisional law was passed. In 1915, the issue
of this law was how to deal with (or how to nationalize) the abandoned properties of
the disappeared/exiled Armenian communities. After the exile of the Armenian
population in Anatolia, liquidation commissions were constituted for the specific
issue of abandoned Armenian properties. The liquidation commissions were in
charge for all financial matters of the exiled people and finally trusting the wealth of
the exiled people to the treasury. The real estate and other properties of this
population were confiscated and sold, their receivables were encashed, their debts
were paid to the payees. The surplus after the all financial matters solved was trusted
112"
to state offices (mal sandığı). The immense revenue that accrued from the sell of by
these properties’ was a strong motivation their confiscation, but the main objective of
the state was to leave no room for the exiled communities to return to their homes.255
After the removal of the CUP in 1918, the Istanbul Government was formed and
ruled until 1920 when the new Turkish Parliament declared itself in Ankara and
disclaimed the Istanbul Government. Shortly before its denouncement of the Istanbul
Government, it abolished the provisional law of abandoned properties. A system was
proposed by the İstanbul Government that offered to continue to sell abandoned real
estate properties and trusting the revenue to the state offices. However the returned
people’s properties was supposed to be paid back.256 This softened version of the
abandoned properties law was not realistic at all in terms of paying back the wealth
of the returned people and it was abolished in 20 April 1922. In 1920 the abandoned
properties law was softened, but with the final form it took in 15 April 1923, the
status of the abandoned properties was redefined and in many ways the new state
adapted the 1915 abandoned properties regulation of the CUP.
The Turkish Parliament’s regulation of the law in 1923 simply constituted a
more comprehensive form of the CUP regulation of 1915. The nation state was
establishing its own legitimacy through declaring the Turkish Parliament as the
legitimate power over the Istanbul government, abolishing the sultanate, negotiating
in Lausanne on behalf of Turkey, undertaking the İzmir Economy Congress, but at
the same time imposing the old CUP legislation and executions on the abandoned
properties.257
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
255 Nevzat Onaran, Emvâl-i Metrûke Olayı: Osmanlı'da ve Cumhuriyet'te Ermeni ve Rum Mallarının
Türkleştirilmesi (İstanbul: Belge Yayınları, 2010), p. 176.
256 Ibid., p. 132-133.
257 Ibid., p. 200
113"
In the 1915 regulation the term “abandoned properties” had been restricted to
the properties of people who were exiled, ran away or disappeared,258 but in the new
1923 regulation, the term was extended to the properties of the people who ran away,
left, went away, and were exiled, or lost.259 The new additions to the definition gave
reason for the claim of the state on the properties of which owners were not around
for any reason. In 1915 the main target had been the properties of the departed
Armenian community, but the new regulation comprised both the Armenian and the
Greek Orthodox properties. The properties acquired by the liquidation commissions
were trusted to the treasury. The permission to sell was under the treasury’s
responsibility and the abandoned churches and their dependencies and revenue
sources were also given over to the treasury. The updated definition of abandoned
properties seemingly referred to the properties that were somehow left as unclaimed
and their acquisition by the state was considered a natural consequence of this
process. The final form of the abandoned properties law was identified and carries a
less a discriminative tone, but in fact it directly targeted the non-Muslim fortunes.
The confiscating process aimed directly the wealth of the non-Muslim communities
rather than focusing on unclaimed properties. On 12 April 1923 a debt paying law
was passed in order to regulate the process of state’s paying back the debt to the
citizens originating from money the state barrowed during the war with the Law of
National Liabilities (Tekalif-i Milliye).260 During the parliamentary session
concerning this issue, the debts to the Armenian and Greek Orthodox communities
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
258 Salahaddin Kardeş, Tehcir ve Emval-i Metruke Mevzuatı (Ankara: T.C. Maliye Bakanlığı, 2008), p.
4.
259 Onaran, Emvâl-i Metrûke, p. 182. “nakledilen ya da firâr veya tagayyüb etmiş, müfârekat eşhâs.”
260 The Law of National Liabilities (Tekalif-i Milliye) was a law aimed to support the state financially
with the resources of the citizens in the war circumstances and obliged the citizens to lend their
money or other resources (gun, mount etc.). The debts were collected from all subjects regardless of
Muslim or non-Muslim. These debts were collected with the promise of “paying back after the
victory” and paid. (Cihan Duru, Kemal Turan, Abdurrahman Öngeoğlu, Atatürk Dönemi Maliye
Politikası, Ankara: TİSA Matbaacılık Sanayii, [1982], p. 270, 298).
114"
were discussed as well. In one of the speeches (by Hasan Fehmi (Ataç) of
Gumushane) during the parliamentary session, the Armenian community was blamed
for the discomfort in the eastern regions and the Greek Orthodox community was
also blamed for their disruption role in the western regions. He was not in favor of
paying their receivables back and supporting his argument in way that reflected the
general attitude during the war. Hasan Fehmi also specifically underlined there was
no Muslim whose properties were confiscated.261
The abandoned property law simply handled the confiscation of properties,
their distribution and selling were regulated later with additional laws. In 1923 a
regulation was made for the use of these properties. Real estate properties were
mostly converted to state offices when a state office needed a building such as the
Aya Vukla Church that functioned as a museum for a while. Some abandoned real
estate was demolished for urban gentrification projects or new state offices. Some
estates were sold in order to distribute the revenue to war victims whose houses or
real estate were burned down or damaged during the war.262 The regulation foresaw
the collecting of properties by the heads of liquidation commissions and the
submission of the revenue from their sale to the treasury offices after the debts of the
owners were paid.263 The properties were mostly distributed to refugees from the
Balkans and other Turkish populations that came as a result of population exchange
with Greece. The rest of the properties left over from state and refugees’ use were
labeled as abandoned properties. In his study on abandoned properties, Nevzat
Onaran compares the 1915 and 1923 abandoned property regulations, and draw
attentions the official ambiguity about how many commissions were constituted after
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
261 Onaran, Emvâl-i Metrûke, p. 188.
262 Ibid., p. 215-220.
263 Ibid., p. 176.
115"
the 1923 regulation.264 The number of commissions was not exactly known, but it is
quite certain that the abandoned residential areas were parceled and numbers of
commissions were constituted for different regions. For instance İzmir had to be
parceled between multiple commissions because in many correspondences the
Karşıyaka Commission was mentioned rather than the İzmir commission. İzmir
would have been parceled according to Levantine and non-Muslim residential
quarters.
Abandoned Properties as a Source for the İzmir Museum
The liquidation commissions were created to register and collect the valuable
portable items and make an inventory of the abandoned real estate. The first step was
storing the abandoned property and pricing, but the issue of selling (or sometimes
distributing) were regulated later. The fled communities of İzmir were mostly
wealthy merchants and many abandoned items associated with bourgeois luxury such
as valuable pictures and antique books caught the attention of the İzmir Museum.
Since the İzmir Museum’s collecting stage started in the early 1920s, both the
liquidation commission and the museum were highly interested in abandoned
properties.
The treasury offices were entrusted with the sale of abandoned properties and
obviously they would first evaluate and price the pieces. The İzmir Museum, on the
other hand, could not afford to buy immense numbers of objects and was already
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
264 Ibid., p. 181.
116"
dealing with financial problems. In an undated correspondence from the Director of
Culture to the antiques inspector of İzmir, Aziz Ogan, the director answers the
request Ogan made in May. The director states that he already “written to the
Directorship of education allocating the reliefs and pictures from abandoned
properties and securing and storing them at least in a school building.” The director
thanks Ogan for his concern for the books he planned to obtain for the library of the
museum. In August 1923, storing the pieces in question (both books and pictures)
could still not be completed in the region of İzmir. In a telegram sent from the
Directorship of Culture to the İzmir Directorship of Education stated that the
handover of the pieces between the liquidation commission and the Directorship of
Education, the allocation of the pieces from the storages and sending them to a
central abandoned property storage was ordered. The commissions could still not
collect the pieces from the abandoned houses completely and that was an obstacle for
completing the handover of the pieces.265 The museum had an interest in the
abandoned pieces, but they were looking for a way to acquire them for free. In a
correspondence dated 8 September 1923 written by the Inspectorship of Antiquities
to the Liquidation Commission, books in both western and eastern languages for the
museum library and pictures for the art gallery of the museum were mentioned but a
personal note was added to the bottom of the page to discuss a way to acquire these
pieces without spending from the budget of the museum. It was noted, “It was heard
here that the pictures will be classified and priced. My intention is to recruit these
pieces to the museum for free before they are to be priced. The museum will have to
spend too much money to buy them. Actually it will not be able to afford them.”266
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
265 Telegram from the Directorship of Culture to the İzmir Directorship of Education, (7.8.1929),
Appendix C, figure 46.
266 Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Liquidation Commission, (8.9.1923),
Appendix C, figure 49.
117"
Abandoned Personal Properties
The personal abandoned properties were mainly objects collected from dwellings as
entire collections or as single items. These items varied from books to statutes or
jugs or paintings, but more likely books and paintings were acquired by the museum
to foster the museum library and constitute the art gallery in the museum. These
properties were confiscated by the state and stored in the warehouses of the
Directorship of Abandoned Properties until their sale.
The confiscated abandoned properties that the museum took were mostly
books (manuscripts or reference books) and paintings together with other visual
materials such as maps and photographs. These two main groups of objects
constituted the core of both the museum library and the art gallery and there were
few types of object. On 15 January 1930 Aziz Ogan, as the inspector of antiquities,
wrote to the İzmir Education Office about some of the examined pieces in the
abandoned properties storage. The variety of the pieces here is quite interesting.
They ranged from everyday household objects to more unique artistic pieces like
statues and paintings Ogan reported, “The pieces in the fire zone storages were
examined. It appeared seven earthenware oil lamp and one small earthenware water
jug, seven pieces of statutes, basalt and marble stone that are suitable to stand on the
ground (perhaps suitable to be used as pedestals) were proper to acquire to the
museum.”267 In another correspondence written by the Inspectorship of Antiquities to
the İzmir Directorship of Education on 5 June 1923 it was demanded, “Upon your
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
267 Report on the investigated abandoned properties by the inspector of antiquities Aziz Ogan to the
İzmir Education Office, (15.1.1930) Appendix C, figure 47.
118"
orders, the broken marble women portrait statue was examined in the abandoned
properties storage to İzmir Museum.” In the storages, mostly paintings and books
were stored and transferred to the museum but in rare cases statues and some other
objects were transferred to museum as well.268
Books and Visual Materials
The museum library was designed as a reference book section for the museum staff
and later it would gain some rare books from the abandoned properties. According to
a report sent on 16 April 1930 from the Directorship of Abandoned Properties to the
İzmir Museum and the Inspectorship The number of books confiscated by the
liquidation commissions amounted to 44,000.269 These collections of books could
have been of any regular type or from any field, and a commission from the museum
or the Directorship/Inspectorate of Antiquities was responsible for choosing only
some of the books defined as “appropriate for the museum”. This commission was
composed of museum staff members and antique inspectors. In one correspondence
from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Directorship of Culture dated 21
June1923, Aziz Ogan with his title of inspector of antiquities in İzmir, describes the
members of the commissions as such “a commission composed of antique inspectors
and civil servants of the museum was constituted under my direction”.270 These
abandoned items must have been very important for forming the collections of both
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
268 Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the İzmir Directorship of Education
(5.6.1923), Appendix C, figure 48.
269 Correspondence from the Directorship of Abandoned Properties to the İzmir Museum of
Antiquities (16.5.1930), Appendix C, figure 50.
270 Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Directorship of Culture, (21.6.1923)
Appendix C, figure 51.
119"
the museum library and the art gallery of the museum. The gratefulness of the
museum staff for these sources was expressed to the Directorship of Abandoned
Properties. The inspector of antiquities (there is no name or signature, on the
document but the inspector was Ogan at that date) wrote a special letter dated 19
April 1930 to the İzmir Directorship of Abandoned Properties. He wrote, “I did
delightedly receive your note dated 16 April 1930 which ordered the allocation of the
books and I also thank you also for the pedestal given by the İzmir Directorship of
Abandoned Properties. I invite you to explore the museum where I completed the
academic classification process.”271
The items labeled as “proper for the museum” were various types and in
various fields and languages. I prefer the term “item” rather than just “book” because
in addition to books visual materials such as photographs and maps were also labeled
as “proper for the museum”. There were various printed materials or handwritten
manuscript in the warehouses that could contribute to the museum library’s reference
collection. They could also be displayed as antique materials or simply rare books.
As it was written from the Antique Inspectorship to the Directorship of Culture on 21
June 1923, the commission under the direction of Aziz Ogan was composed in order
to select basically “history books in eastern languages and Turkish, geography
books, travel books, ancient manuscripts, antique maps, photos of antique sites, and
archeology books.”272 The rare books in eastern languages and antique maps were
items that could constitute a rare books collection in the library. The photos of
antique sites be used any kind of museum publications in guides for the antique sites.
The geography and travel books were suitable for the reference section and
promotion this section continued with the arrival of other books from other storage
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
271 Letter from the inspector of antiquities to the Directorship of Culture (19.4.1930), Appendix C,
figure 52.
272 Appendix C, figure 51.
120"
units. In 1925 a civil servant wrote to the Directorship of Culture from the İzmir
Education Office that he allocated 283 books and listed the books he allocated as in
the fields of history, geography, travel book, and encyclopedia,273 which all fit to
locate in the reference section of the library. The museum library collected books in
both eastern and western languages. It was reported by the Education Office of İzmir
to the Directorship of Culture on 14 September 1924, “From the Karşıyaka
warehouses of abandoned properties 268 valuable books in languages of English,
French, German, and Turkish were allocated. Submitting a list of the books and the
photographs of the pedestals that were transferred with the books to the district
governorship were demanded from the museum.”274
The limited budget of the museum was driving the management to search
some ways to gain the book collection without paying its price. However, it seems at
the end the museum had to pay an amount. There are two book lists in the archive for
the books that were bought by the museum. The first list was dated 26 March 1925
and sent to the Directorship of Culture. In the list 390 books was listed in the fields
of history, geography, science of architecture, science of archeology, and fine arts.
These books were submitted with the order of the Directorship of Education and the
prices of books were determined by a board of directors (which must be the board of
directorship of abandoned properties) and the payment was made from the culture
budget (of the Ministry of Education).275 The second list was sent to the Directorship
of Culture and dated 1 March 1925. 263 listed books were submitted to the museum
library in return for 3,000 kurus and this price was going to be paid from the museum
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
273 Correspondence form the İzmir education Office to the Directorship of Culture (30.9.1925),
Appendix C, figure 53.
274 Report from İzmir Education Office to the Directorship of Culture (14.10.1924), Appendix C,
figure 54.
275 List of confiscated books from the İzmir Education Office to the İzmir Directorship of Education
(26.1.1925), Appendix C, figure 55.
121"
budget of the İzmir Education Office. The books in the list varied from the fields of
history, geography, and also some rare books.276 The books were sometimes
damaged in the storage where they were stocked with other items such as statues and
jugs, or they might be damaged during the war and chaos in the city. The library
repaired and binded these damaged books after their arrival to the museum.277
The correspondences prove that at least 921 of the 44,000 abandoned books
were submitted to the museum library by the Directorship of Abandoned Properties
in return for a determined price. The museum accepted or bought only appropriate
books and their relevance was decided by the commission. composed of antique
inspectors and civil servants of the museum.
Paintings
Paintings from the abandoned properties were another item that contributed to the
museum. Actually the art gallery of the museum was completely composed of
abandoned paintings alongside modern paintings by Turkish artists that had
temporary exhibitions in the art gallery. Some artist sold their works to the museum
as a result of the patronage relationship between the artist and museum and the effort
of vitalizing national art. In 1923 a correspondence between the Inspectorship of
Antiquities to the İzmir Directorship mentions paintings by western painters that
were situated within the abandoned properties collection and these were considered
as a functional tool in constituting an art gallery in the future museum, designed in
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
276 List of Confiscated books from the İzmir Education Office to the Directorship of Culture,
(1.3.1925), Appendix C, figure 56.
277 Correspondence from the İzmir Education Office to the Directorship of Culture, (30.9.1925),
Appendix C, figure 53.
122"
order to foster an appreciation of art among the people of İzmir. Taking an inventory
was the very first step to determine the suitable.278 The number of paintings
examined and appraised by the commissions was unclear. A number of paintings
were mentioned in both regional reports and in a final report. According to Nevzat
Onaran it is impossible to determine how many commissions were composed or how
many district İzmir was divided into. In the archive, reports of the seventh district
and the second district are available and give the number of the painting collected
from these districts. However there is no available report about the other districts.
The report of the seventh district was written to the Directorship of Education and
dated 9 October 1923. The report states, “Referring to the correspondence from the
liquidation commission, the abandoned property warehouses in the seventh district
were visited and oil and water color paintings and engravings were classified. The
[registration] books were submitted.”279 In the same report the number of the
paintings considered by the commission were reported with these words, “As seen in
the books, the number of the appraised paintings in the registration document is 32
and the number of the paintings in the warehouses range around 700-800.”280 During
their mission of appraising these paintings the commission did not deem it
worthwhile to appraise “personal portraits, some artistically insignificant paintings
and some engravings”.281 The paintings evaluated and priced by the commission
must have been allocated for the museum because in the report it was stated, “there is
no obstacle to put the other pieces on public sale.”282 The report of the abandoned
paintings in the second district’s warehouses that were located on Kemer Street was
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
278 Correspondence form the Inspector of Antiquities of İzmir and its hinterland Aziz Ogan to the
Directorship of Culture, (19.6.1923), Appendix C, figure 57.
279 Unsigned report to the Directorship of Education (9.10.1823), Appendix C, figure 58.
280 İbid.
281 İbid.
282 İbid.
123"
dated 1 November 1923. It was sent (probably from the commission) to the İzmir
Directorship of Education and it reported the number of inspected and allocated
paintings. Again “referring to the memorandum of the liquidation commission, 600
oil and water color paintings, engravings, and reliefs were inspected. These are all
portraits, and panels that are not worthed to [be included in the museum].”283 In the
second district warehouses “only one painting (numbered as 321) that was historic
was separated for the İzmir Painting Museum.” As was the case for the seventh
district, the pieces evaluated as appropriate for exhibition were allocated to the
museum and never put on public sale. A note on the bottom of the report stated that
“another 10 pieces of oil paintings were registered on the chart and they were all
inspected by the commission. There is no obstacle to sell all paintings except the
number 321.”284 The last correspondence informing about the number of the
paintings differs from the previous two because it was sent to the Directorship of
Culture and sums up the final number of paintings. This final correspondence
classifies the inspection made in the warehouses with respect to their number (first,
second, and third classification) rather than districts. The document was sent from
the İzmir Education Office to the Directorship of Culture and dated 26 November
1923. It was noted that, “as part of the classification of historically and artistically
significant pieces, more than 1,500 paintings were examined so far.”285 The accounts
of the three different sessions of classification were written in details. In the first
classification session “58 paintings were allocated in return for 513 liras. However,
14 of these paintings were allocated on behalf of the inspectors of the Ministry of
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
283 Unsigned report to the İzmir Directorship of education (1.11.1923), Appendix C, figure 59.
284 İbid.
285 Correspondence from İzmir Education Office to the Directorship of Culture (26.11.1923),
Appendix C, figure 60.
124"
Finance were sent to Ankara.”286 In the second session “only one painting that is
presumed to belong to the seventeenth century was evaluated as suitable to be
exhibited in the museum and in return 20 liras was given.”287 The third session was
“carried out in the Club Building. In that building 7 paintings, works of the
eighteenth century artists, out of 64 paintings were allocated.”288 The total number
of the allocated paintings except the paintings separated for the Ministry of Finance
was counted as 51 and their cost was 897 liras.
Two different types of correspondence verify the museum’s acquisition of at
least 51 paintings. The first two were reported according to the districts and provide
clues of the acquisition of 33 paintings, (but as Onaran stated, how many districts
were coordinated and the number of paintings registered in the other districts cannot
be counted). On the other hand whether the final report written to the Directorship of
Culture follows the numbers in the previous two or whether there were two different
groups of paintings is unknown. This method of inspecting the items before bidding
and protecting the interest of the museum from rivals in the bidding process must
have been conceived due to the limited economic resources of the museum. Of
course eventually it was the state offices that were privileged to benefit from the
abandoned properties.
The paintings allocated for the İzmir Museum were very specifically
described in the inventory charts. There are eight charts that were formed in order to
give a detailed account of the recruitment for the museum. Each chart was divided in
columns for the number, the material of the painting, description of the painted
scene, material of its frame, detailed measurements of its size, its artist, and its price
in the currency of Turkish lira. These charts are the documents that provide the final
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
286 Ibid.
287 Ibid.
288 Ibid.
125"
account of the recruited paintings as inventories, but still it is unclear whether all
paintings the museum bought are on these lists. The dates of these charts vary
between 1923 and 1925 as a total number of 547 paintings were registered in the
inventories.
The number of confiscated paintings cannot be accurately counted, but the
available reports indicates at least a few thousands stored paintings in the warehouses
of the Directorship of Abandoned Properties. The museum obviously was not
inserting random pieces into its painting collection and following the same process it
did with the books. Painting teachers, artists, and sometimes a photography instructor
were asked to determine the value and price of the paintings in storage. This
assignment was important for both the liquidation commission and the museum. The
liquidation commission eventually sold these pieces to the museum and determined
their price. Thus the museum was in need of distinguishing artistically and
historically worthy paintings. It is not possible to determine whether the staff was
working for the museum or the liquidation commission. On 18 September 1929 the
Ministry of Education informed the Inspector of Antiquities Aziz Ogan that it would
provide to help the commission in distinguishing worthy pieces for the museum. He
was informed “It was considered appropriate to benefit from the expertise of Tahsin
Bey who was a professor at the School Fine Art and artist Nazım Bey.”289 Aziz Ogan
was further informed that the liquidation commission was going to cover the staff’s
expenses, but they would also determined the pieces on behalf of the museum.
Another correspondence between the Inspectorship of Antiquities and the Ministry of
Education dated 1923 states, “the paintings which were evaluated according to the
order of the Ministry of Finance will be submitted to the museum in return for the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
289 Correspondence from the Ministry of Education to the Inspector of Antiquities Aziz Ogan
(18.9.1929), Appendix C, figure 61.
126"
determined price. It was also stated that “the Antique Inspector Aziz Bey and the
Director of the Museum Ali Tevfik Bey would take them from the warehouses.
These paintings which were 56 pieces were priced by the İzmir artists.”290 In this
document the artists were again addressed as the experts who assisted the pricing of
the paintings, but it is unclear in what portion they were involved in choosing the
pieces for the museum. Sometimes the job description of a member of the committee
was directly defined as pricing the confiscated paintings. For instance in an undated
document the lieutenant and photograph teacher Nazım Bey from the Air Force was
requested to join the committee to price the paintings in the Kemer Street
warehouses of the second district.291
The Antiquities Collection of the Evangelical School Museum
The collections of the İzmir Museum was constituted by the precious and artistic
pieces among the confiscated abandoned properties of İzmir, such as books,
paintings, or, rarely, statutes. The scattered objects that had belonged to various
individuals or institutions were brought together by the museum staff and inspectors
to constitute the museum collections. This makes it impossible to talk about an
already conceived of a collection as heritage, or as the basis on which the İzmir
Archeology Museum could be founded. The remain of the Evangelical School
Museum’s collections, on the other hand, was the only collection of museum objects
as opposed to personal collections or scattered items. There were some other mass
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
290 Correspondence form the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Ministry of Education, (7.10.1923),
Appendix C, figure 62.
291 Undated correspondence from the İzmir Education Office to the Lieutenant and Photographing
Teacher Nazım Bey, Appendix C, figure 63.
127"
collections and they were sometimes brought to museum as a whole, but these were
personal collections rather than a systematically constituted museum ensemble.
The Evangelical School of Smyrna was one of the prominent institutions of
the Greek-Orthodox world in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and it was an
Orthodox Church approved institution. The mission of founding such a school was to
educate the nation’s own children and the needy individuals with the ideals of
Greekness. This deep rooted and notable institution was active even during the
eighteenth century, but took the name of the “Evangelical School” in 1808 and it
protected its significant spot in the Greek-Orthodox world until the Great Fire in
1922 and the following events.292 What made this prominent institution a remarkable
figure in the collecting stage of the İzmir Museum was its rich antiquie collection
that partially survived in the fire. As a deep-rooted institution it was reported that the
school had a significant natural science collection, a very rich library possessing
about 50,000 volumes and 180 manuscripts, and finally the most helpful section for
the İzmir Museum: an archeological museum.293 The core of this collection
antiquities was the collection of a Swiss merchant whose collection of antiquities
was bought by a Greek consortium at auction. Before the taking over of the city by
the Turkish army, the Greek administration was planning to found a major Asia
Minor Museum around this collection by the brining together pieces that they pick of
up from excavation sites, public buildings (some antique findings were used as
building material), and some donations. In 1922 a future collection of Asia Minor
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
292 Gerasimos Augustinos, Küçük Asya Rumları: Ondokuzuncu Yüzyılda İnanç, Cemaat ve Etnisite,
trans. Devrim Evci (Ankara: Ayraç Yayınevi, 1997), p. 260, 261.
293 Maria Georgiadou, Constantin Carathéodory: Mathematics and Politics in Turbulent Times
(Berlin; New York: Springer, 2004), p. 145.
128"
Museum that was stored in the school museum had 15,000 coins and approximately
3,000 various objects.294
The Evangelical school was one of the places that could not get away from
the destruction of the fire and the museum collection was buried in the fire debris
when the museum section (second floor) collapsed. The museum must not have
completely collapsed because in some correspondence a spot “in front of the
museum”295 was mentioned and in order to define such a spot there must have
remained some standing units. The Istanbul Museum, the Inspectorship of Antiques
were already aware of the presence of such a significant book and antiquities
collection in the abandoned school, and they warned the authorities in İzmir to take
measures to salvage pieces from the collection. On 28 June 1923 the Directorship of
Antiques (with the signature of the Director of Culture) wrote to the Inspector of
Antiquities in İzmir, Aziz Ogan, about the situation of the fire ruined collections in
the school. They informed Ogan that they learned about, “the presence of a book
collection and a significant antiquities collection in the Greek-Orthodox school in
İzmir with the name of the Evangelical School, and about their partially buried
situation in the debris of the fire as the result of the collapse of the floor. They
requested (from Ogan), to execute an investigation probing and if these collections
remained there, to excavate and transfer them to a safer place.”296 In addition to the
Antique Inspectorships, the Istanbul Museum was also directly involved in the case
of exploration of the school museum’s collection. In correspondence from the
Museums of Antiques Substitutes to the Inspector of Antiquities in İzmir, Aziz Ogan,
with the signature of the Director of the Istanbul Museum of Antiques on 20 June
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
294 Davis, “Warriors for the Fatherland,” p. 85.
295 Correspondence from the Director of the District (probably abandoned property district),
(9.4.1923), Appendix C, figure 64.
296 Correspondence from the Ministry of Education to the Inspector of Antiquities in İzmir Aziz Ogan,
(28.6.1923), Appendix C, figure 65.
129"
1923, mentions the collection and its excavation and the budget that the Directorship
of Culture arranged for this collection.297 The Evangelical School museum had
already had its own collection and in addition to it during the invasion the Greek
army also stored some additional pieces in the building. On 26 June 1923 a report
about the valuable pieces in the Evangelical School Museum was written to the
Directorship of Culture of Ministry of Education. Even though there is no indication
of who wrote it, it was attached to some other documents written by the Ministry of
Education and the Inspectorship of Antiquities. The report states that, during the
survey of the inspectors of antiquities, “It appeared that on the upstairs of the
museum of the abandoned Greek-Orthodox school and church near the Aya Fotini
church, there remained some valuable pieces and some of them were transported
there by the Greeks during the invasion.”298 The report warned this was not a place to
leave these valuable remnants. 30,000 kurus was demanded for transporting these
objects because “it is not possible to leave these antiques in this ruin for long time, it
is needed to transfer them to somewhere they can be safe.”299 Both the collection of
the museum and the other pieces carried to that place during the war were covered
with fire remnants and the results of the excavation verify the serious damage of the
fire on the collections. On 13 September 1923, the Inspectorship of Antiques wrote
to the Directorship of Museums about the harmed antique coins excavated in the fire
remnants with these words: “During the excavation, 185 pieces of copper coins were
found in the ruin. These objects were inventoried in five lists in addition to the lists
of other antique findings. Even the less damaged coins cannot be read and they all
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
297 Correspondence from the İstanbul Museum of Antiquities to the Inspectorship of Antiquities in
İzmir Aziz Ogan, (20.6.1923), Appendix C, figure 66.
298 Unsigned correspondence to the Directorship of Culture, (29.4.1929), Appendix C, figure 67.
299 İbid.
130"
had to be sieved to clean from the earth.”300 The presence of a valuable collection of
antiquities lying inside the ruins was known and certain arrangements were made to
explore and bring those pieces to the surface, but the museum staff was not much
familiar with the content of the collection. This collection was already known among
the antiques and museum circle. The Istanbul Museum had a catalogue of the
collection was very instrumental in recognizing and evaluating the precious findings
in the ruins. On 21 August 1923 a correspondence was sent from the Inspectorship of
Antiques to the Istanbul Museum to request the catalogue of the Evangelical School
Museum. The document informs Istanbul as such:
The excavation of bringing the antiques of the abandoned Greek-Orthodox
museum to surface has been being carried on for two days and an allowance of (50
liras) for the excavation expenses was also sent by the Directorship of Culture. In
order to recognize and classify the possible findings, to distinguish more
comprehensively and carefully, having the current catalogue in the museum library
will be helpful. The catalogue is requested for a month. 301
The Evangelical School Museum’s collection could finally be brought to the surface
and still included some valuable objects. This was the very first collection that the
İzmir Museum acquired. Aziz Ogan302 underlines this aspect in one of his letters
written to General Kazım Dirlik, the province governor of İzmir in August 1923: “As
a result of my application to excavate the site of the burned down Greek-Orthodox
school, the ministry sent 50 liras for excavation expenses. The late Ali Tevfik Bey,
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
300 Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Directorship of Museums,
(13.9.1923), Appendix C, figure 68.
301 Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the İstanbul Museum, (21.8.1923),
Appendix C, figure 69.
302 The writer of the letter who must have been Aziz Ogan because he mentions the excavation as,
“under my supervision” and at that date he was the Antique Inspector of İzmir informs the governor.
131"
who was the director of the museum at that date, executed the excavations with that
allowance under my supervision and he transported thousands of pieces to the
museum building. These were the very first items to be placed in the museum
building.”303 Obviously the findings from the school ruins were located in the
museum in 1923, probably while the refurbishment of the church building was still in
process. At the beginning even this very first collection must have rested in the
storage in the garden of the courthouse. In an earlier written from the Inspectorship
of Antiques to the Directorship of Education the Inspector of Antiquities İzmir, Aziz
Ogan states that, “...the excavation of the antiquities in the building [school] building
and carrying them to the rooms in garden of courthouse depends on the arrival of the
allowance that was demanded from the Directorship of Culture.”304
According to Ogan’s statement, “thousand of pieces”305 were transferred to
the museum even though some of them such as coins must have been sieved to clean
them from the earth. In addition to coins, some vases and books surprisingly
survived the fire became the subjects of a correspondence written on 9 April 1923 by
the Director of the Region (who must be related to the regions of abandoned
properties) wrote to the Directorship of Education and demands an allowance for
“evaluating the antique books and vases that stand in front of the museum and for
transporting them to a proper place.”306
The remnants of the Evangelical School museum were remarkable in the
founding and constituting of a permanent collection for the İzmir museum. They
differed from the other acquisition of the museum in being inherited from an already
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
303 Letter from Aziz Ogan to General and Local Governor of İzmir Kazım Dirlik, (1.8.1923),
Appendix C, figure 70.
304 Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Inspector of Antiquities in İzmir Aziz
Ogan, (12.4.1923), Appendix C, figure 71.
305 Appendix C, figure 70.
306 Appendix C, figure 64.
132"
established museum collection. Many pieces of the collection took their share from
the fire, but still thousands of pieces were adopted by the museum with the assistance
of the Evangelical School museum catalogue. The İzmir Museum appropriated coins,
books, and objects (like vases) from the burned collection.
After the fire the İzmir Museum was founded as an indicator and instrument
of the national mission of the republic. It also served the redevelopment of the city,
which acted as an archetype of the republican city model, and thus the Christian
heritage of the city was claimed and appropriated by the new museum. Acquiring the
collection of this nationalist Greek school in order to situate it in an adverse
nationalist setting is indicative of how and in which way İzmir was redeveloped as a
city and the İzmir Museum was founded.
Properties of Churches
The Christian communities of Ottoman Smyrna left behind not only their personal
dwellings and properties, but also the public buildings of the communities such as
schools, hospitals, and most importantly churches. Since most of the churches were
concentrated around the triangular district around the Frank district, the center, a
significant number of the churches were destroyed by fire partially or completely
burned down. The churches of the departed communities were confiscated by the
liquidation commission along with their properties and revenue sources (estates for
instance), and later passed on to the treasury offices.307 The burned down church
buildings were mostly used by the state offices because they were privileged in terms
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
307 Onaran, Emvâl-i Metrûke, p. 183.
133"
of benefiting from these transactions. The İzmir Museum was one of the institutions
that took its share from liquidation and appropriation of the properties of the
abandoned churches
There are traces of items from three churches, which are Aya Yani (Saint
Giovanni), Aya Fotini (Agias Fotini), and Aya Yorgi (Saint George) churches. Aya
Vukla could become available to be converted to a museum building because of its
distance from the locus of the fire zone such was the case for the above-mentioned
churches as well. These relatively distant buildings were partially damaged by the
fire and that made it possible for some objects to survive. The emerging museum
selected the valuable objects among the remnants of the great fire.
The Aya Yani church was the church around whicg the Aya Yani
neighborhood (situated between the Turkish and Jewish quarters) was established.
The history of the church can be traced back to the Byzantine period. It must be one
of the oldest churches in the city.308 Even though Serçe dates back the history of the
church to the Byzantine period, the İzmir Directorship of Culture and Tourism points
Aya Yani (Saint Giovanni in the website) as one of the destroyed churches due to the
Great Fire and states its construction date as 1818.309 It is possible to have two
separate churches for a neighborhood or perhaps latter one was built on the spot of
the ancient church. Whether the burned down church building could be traced back
to the Byzantine period or not obviously it must have partially survived the fire,
considering that it contained a wooden screen that was salvaged from the fire
catastrophe. Its location indicates that it was one of the constructions situated far
away from the fire center triangle and the survival of the wooden screen that was
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
308 Erkan Serçe, “İzmir’de Muhtarlık Teşkilatının Kurulması ve İzmir Mahalleleri,” Kebikeç İnsan
Bilimleri İçin Kaynak Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7-8, (Summer 1999), p. 160.
309 “İzmir’in Büyük Yangında Kaybedilen Kiliseleri”, İzmir İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü,
http://www.İzmirkulturturizm.gov.tr/TR,90986/İzmirin-buyuk-yanginda-kaybedilen-kiliseleri.html.
134"
appropriated by the museum verifies this. As the rest of the buildings that survived
from the fire and were left as unclaimed, the Aya Yani Church was one of the limited
number of large space in the city that could shelter the refugees of war and fire. Just
like the other church buildings where refugees sought shelter (such as the Aya Vukla
church), the items in the Aya Yani church were under the threat of harm. In a
correspondence (of unclear origin and no indefinite signature) written to the
administration of Ikiçeşmelik neighborhood in January 1924 it is stated that, “There
are many valuable objects in the abandoned Aya Yani church. The presence of five or
six refugees that reside there threatens these antique pieces and the necessity of their
transportation to another place was submitted to the authorities.”310 The concern for
protecting and transporting abandoned objects f historical value reappears in a copy
of the document of the Ministry of Treasury written in January 1925. It reports the
antiquities collected from the churches as “a wooden screen and an armorial bearing
which supposedly belonged to a former Pergamon ruler.”311 As in the case of other
appropriations, the suitability of the objects were examined before their insertion into
the museum collection. In July 1923 it was asked (author or institution is unknown)
to the Inspectorship of Antiques, “Whether the wooden screen from the Aya Yani
Church [was] suitable for the museum or not? Is it allowed to be sold? What is the
valuable of this piece.”312 In the same document contains answers to these questions.
The request for the examination was written on the bottom and the result of the
examination was written on the top of the document page with a description of the
wooden screen. It is written (to whom and by whom is unknown), “The piece was
examined and it appears that the wooden screen that has engraved reliefs on it which
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
310 Correspondence with an indefinite signature to the Administration of İkiçeşmelik, (?.6.1923),
Appendix C, figure 72.
311 Official communication of Ministry of Education, (16.2.1926), Appendix C, figure 73.
312 Unsigned correspondence to the Inspectorship of Antiquities, (3.7.1923), Appendix C, figure 74.
135"
depicts every worthy thing (her şayanı havi) is appropriate for the museum.”313
Removing the wooden screen from the church was pointed out as an important
protection measure, but its size was a barrier to relocate it in the museum, another
church building that lacked the requirements and measures of a proper museum
building. On 7 July 1929, it was reported by Aziz Ogan to the Ministry of Education
and to the Directorship of Museums that “The size of the wooden screen made of
walnut makes it impossible to be located in the existing museum. It would have to
wait until the construction of the new museum building. The wooden screen was
cleaned and the key of the church was delivered to the directorship of the museum.
The protection of the screen should be assigned to Ismet Pasha School”,314 which
surrounded the remnants of the church with its yard walls.
Aya Fotini was a Dutch Protestant church and presumably erected by the
Dutch merchants in the city in the seventeenth century. It was affected by a major
fire in 1796 and restored through the commission of Dutch consul Jacop van Lennep
in 1827. In 1922 the Great Fire destroyed the Dutch Hospital and the Consulate, but
the sanctuary survived. It is not sure whether the current building was this restored
building or whether another one was built at the end of the nineteenth century.315 The
church bell of the Aya Fotini church was the object that the museum appropriated
from this surviving church. The church bell was mentioned in two different
documents. It was mentioned in a copy of the document of the Ministry of Treasury
written in January 1925 that summarizes the collected church objects and mentions it
as “the great church bell of the Aya Fotini church that was presumably made of
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
313 Appendix C, figure 74.
314 Report by the Inspector (of Antiquities) Aziz Ogan to Ministry of Education, (7.7.1929), Appendix
C, figure 75, Report by the Inspector (of Antiquities) Aziz Ogan to the Directorship of Culture,
(7.7.1929), Appendix C, figure 76.
315 Onur İnal, “Levant Heritage in İzmir” (master’s thesis, Koc University, 2006), p. 98.
136"
gold.”316 In the other undated document a more detailed account of the church bell is
provided. The document was written by the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to
Directorship (of Antiquities) without a date. In the correspondence the church bell
was defined as “presumably made of gold and bronze, its scale is one meter and ten
centimeters. According to the inscription on it, it was a gift to the church and casted
in 1906.”317
Aya Yorgi was located in the neighborhood, which was one of the Greek
neighborhoods that existed while the system of regulating the districts (muhtarlık
teşkilatı) was being established in 1885.318 The church was near by of the
Evangelical School buildings.319 Just like the school building it must have been
partially damaged in the fire and some surviving pieces could be recruited by the
museum. A copy of the document of the Ministry of Treasury written in January
1925 summarizes the antique items collected from the churches. It mentions a marble
statue that stood of the door of the Aya Yorgi church as an object transported to the
museum.
Tombstones
The tombstones that were joined to the museum collections were picked from either
the dependent cemetery of a mosque or the remnants from a relocated cemetery. The
museum did received 27 tombstones from the remnants of the abandoned Sulu
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
316 Appendix C, figure 73
317 Undated correspondence from the İzmir Museum of the Antiquities to the Directorship (of
Antiquities), Appendix C, figure 77
318 Serçe, “İzmir’de Muhtarlık,” p. 161
319 “General Views of Smyrna”, Levantine Heritage the Story of a Community,
http://levantineheritage.com/smyrna.htm
137"
Mezarlık that was replaced by an endowment building.320 On 11 May 1926, it was
reported by the (İzmir) Museum of Antiquities to both the Ministry of Education and
the İzmir Directorship of Endowments that “The 500 liras allowance for the
transportation of the gravestones (in the shape of ancient head gear), after the
relocation of the abandoned cemetery Sulu Mezarlık was received. Their photos will
be taken soon.”321 These tombstones were inserted in the Islamic collection of the
museum with the intention of “giving a glance to the headgear trends of certain
professional groups in the past.”322
The tombstones from the Aydınoğlu Mehmed Bey Mosque in Birgi were
examples for the second group, tombstones from the mosques. Since these were
Muslim tombstones most probably with religious inscriptions and some of them were
in the shape of headgears, the Islamic Collection was thought appropriate to shelter
the new recruitments. On 3 April 1929 the deputy from the Ministry of Education
informed the Inspectorship of Antiques, “Your note that informs us that the
tombstones from Aydınoğlu Mehmed Bey Mosque in Bergi were received by the
museum. Enriching the Islamic collection with these pieces will please us.”323 These
tombstones were recruited as the examples of the Seljuk Beylik period.324
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
320 Aziz Ogan, İzmir Müzesi Rehberi (İstanbul: Resimli Ay Matbaasi, 1932), p. 22.
321 Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Ministry of Education (11.5.1926),
Appendix C, figure 78.
322 Ogan, İzmir Müzesi Rehberi, p. 22.
323 Correspondence form the substitute of the Ministry of Education to the Inspectorship of
Antiquities, (3.4.1929), Appendix C, figure 80.
324 Ogan, İzmir Müzesi Rehberi, p. 22.
138"
Donations and Gifts
Gifts/donations as complete collections from collectors are one of the ways by which
the museums expand their collections. The İzmir Museum acquired most of its
collection through confiscation of abandoned properties, but in some rare cases
donations and gifts also contributed to the museum collection. The personal
antiquities collection of the deceased Tahir Kenan Bey was an example of the
donated pieces. Tahir Kenan Bey was a member of the Asar-ı Atika Muhipleri
Cemiyeti (the Society of Enthusiast Antiquities) and his contribution continued even
after his death as his wife donated his personal collection to the museum in March
1928. According to the reports the collection constituted 91 pieces of antiques and
some of these were extremely valuable pieces.325 The museum staff, who explored
the collection at the deceased’s house also provided a detailed account in the
inventory.326 A detailed description was provided for each object, including their
material and sizes. The collection contains items composed of statues, portraits, some
plates, and a few jugs that were earthen.
In another case the Asar-ı Atika Muhibleri Association functioned as the
mediator between the museum and the donator. In July 1929 the president of the
association (Ogan was the president at this date) wrote to the provincial
administration of Torbalı Dagkızılca and demanded the name of the donator of a jug
that was gifted to the association to be exhibited in the museum.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
325 Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of the Antiquities to the İzmir Directorship of Education,
(1928), Appendix C, figure 81 , Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of the Antiquities to the
İzmir Directorship of Education, (5.5.1928), Appendix C, figure 82.
326 See Appandix B for the detailed inventory of the collection.
139"
Conclusion
Collections are the end product of the process of detaching the objects from their
original context, striping them from their use value, charging them with new
meaning, and finally forming a story through narrating them. This is the case for both
personal and museum collections. In the museums, objects detached from their
context serve to narrate mostly a national discourse and the complex past of objects
is ignored and abstracted. In the case of the İzmir Museum, the cumulated and reordered
exhibition objects were mostly those that had already been de-contextualized
as a result leaving their owners and being ravaged by the fire. The museum
collection corresponded to the general environment of post-war İzmir and covered
the heritage of the departed non-Muslim communities. The museum formed the most
bountiful source for the museum. The donated and transported items were another
area that also contributed. The finding from the excavation sites, non-Muslim
properties, detached objects (tombstones mostly) constituted the base of the İzmir
museum at the collecting stage. In some rare cases Ogan or other staff coincided
some pieces in state offices or the recent dwellers settled in the houses of the fled
people, which were considered as valuable for the museum were inserted in the
collections as well.
The reconstruction of post-war İzmir was a spatial announcement of how the
cosmopolitan Smyrna was replaced by a national town. The locations of the museum
buildings (the former in a former non-Muslim quarter and the latter on the fair
grounds) were instrumental in homogenization of the region and its memory. For
Taner Akçam, “national character develops within a close relationship with each
nation’s process of nation-state building…. National identity is defined as ‘a way of
140"
behaving’…[it] actually takes shape within the process of nation-state building.”327
The state’s attitudes towards the cosmopolitan heritage of the empire was shaped by
the dynamic of nation-state building process, which carried the tendency of
forgetting and suppressing the cosmopolitan or imperial heritage.328 The formation of
the nation-state gave birth of homogenizing policies, which were reflected in both
the transformation of the cosmopolitan urban landscapes and the changing hand of
the ownership of non-Muslim population’s properties. The nationalizing of the
economy as an element of homogenization was provided through the transformation
of the non-Muslim subjects’ properties to the newly migrated refugees and
sometimes other Muslim subjects. In the territories that were formerly dominated by
the non-Muslim population, the new national economy was planted as the general
politic of the Republic and personally by Mustafa Kemal. In Adana, for instance,
both Balkan immigrants and wealthy locals from the neighboring provinces took
over the non-Muslim capital and in the process their signs were carefully erased.329
In the Adana context the prevalent non-Muslim capital was land and factories and
they became the indicator of transformed capital owners. In the case of İzmir, the
non-Muslims population constituted the upper class of the city and they built a
culturally rich environment in addition to accumulating capital. This capital was
confiscated and transferred to the national subjects and their spatial heritage was
reconstructed in a national sense. The last and maybe the most conspicuous indicator
of the cultural environment that they built was their cultural properties,330 which
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
327 Taner Akçam, From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide
(London; New York: Zed Books, 2004), p. 48.
328 Ibid., p. 211.
329 Aslı Emine Çomu, “The Impact of the exchange of Populations on the Social and Economic Life
of the city of Adana”, (master’s thesis, Boğaziçi University, 2005), p. 96-97.
330 “Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with
Regulations for the Execution of the Convention 1954”, United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO),
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.phpURL_ID=13637&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.ht
141"
were confiscated and resituated in first a reconstructed spatial environment, the Aya
Vukla Church and later in a fair environment that was invented to produce pride for
the national character of İzmir that rose from the ashes of Ottoman Smyrna. The
move of situating the cultural heritage of the departed communities resonated very
well with the state policies of erasing the traces of the non-Muslim population. The
museum, full of the cultural properties of departed communities, meant not only
erasing the traces of the cosmopolitan past by redeploying with new meaning, but
also attaching the nation state’s museology to the great narrative of art history.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
ml. Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with
Regulations for the Execution of the Convention 1954 describes cultural property as “
(a) movable or immovable property of great importance to the cultural heritage of every people, such
as monuments of architecture, art or history, whether religious or secular; archaeological sites; groups
of buildings which, as a whole, are of historical or artistic interest; works of art; manuscripts, books
and other objects of artistic, historical or archaeological interest; as well as scientific collections and
important collections of books or archives or of reproductions of the property defined above;
(b) buildings whose main and effective purpose is to preserve or exhibit the movable cultural property
defined in sub-paragraph (a) such as museums, large libraries and depositories of archives, and
refuges intended to shelter, in the event of armed conflict, the movable cultural property defined in
sub-paragraph (a);
(c) centers containing a large amount of cultural property as defined in sub-paragraphs (a) and (b), to
be known as `centers containing monuments'.”
The buildings and the centers that contain large amount of cultural properties (residential districts for
instance) have been already counted while the location of museums and museum buildings was being
discussed. The term of “cultural property” in this section refers only to portable cultural properties
acquired by the museum, which were all listed in detail in related sections.
142"
CHAPTER IV
CLASSIFICATION (TASNİF) STAGE
The Role of Classification in the Museum Narrative
The relation between the objects and the collection and transformation of the
meaning of the objects through the forming of collections has been already discussed
in the collecting chapter. Svetlana Alpers defines this relation as the “museum
effect” and states that an object situated in the museum setting acquires a “crafted
visibility”.331 Through crafting these objects in a new form of visibility, objects of
another culture are converted into art objects that we can view. In the museum we
encounter both new and unexpected objects, but at the same time they are converted
into a form the curator or organizer expects us to see when they are converted and
transformed in a museum setting.332 Exhibiting the objects in the museum setting is
impossible without placing them in a narrative framework333 or in other words
narrating them.334 This construction which charges the objects with meaning in order
to situate them in the museum setting and converts them into something new we can
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
331 Svetlana Alpers, “The Museum as a Way of Seeing”, Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetic and Politic
of Museum Display, ed. Ivan Karp and Steven D. Lavine (Bucknell University Press; London;
Cranbury, NJ: Associated University Presses, 2001) p. 27.
332 Ibid., p. 31-32.
333 Michael Baxandall, “Exhibiting Intention: Some Preconditions of the Visual Display of Culturally
Purposeful Objects”, Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetic and Politic of Museum Display, ed. Ivan Karp
and Steven D. Lavine (Bucknell University Press; London; Cranbury, NJ: Associated University
Presses, 2001), p. 34.
334 Mieke Bal, “Telling Objects: A Narrative Perspective on Collecting”, The Cultures of Collecting,
ed. John Elsner and Roger Cardinal, Cambridge (Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1994), p. 100.
143"
look at is provided by labels and catalogues. The labels on the objects or the other
identifiers do not merely identify the objects, their origins or history, but more likely
identify the thinking of the exhibitor, curator, or the general policy of the museum.335
The curator, as the person who arranges the labels, the catalogues, or maybe the most
important one, classification, has a significant role in the creating a structure around
the objects and narrating them in the museum setting. The details of history reflected
in the museum are mainly under the responsibility of the curator as his/her attitude
might be the most distinctive criteria to determine the reflected details. Anthony D.
Buckley underlines the role of curator in the representation of the public in the
museum settings. History is the concern of a small parcel of society and he calls it a
“minority pursuit”. 336 The curator’s role is taking care of history and culture on
behalf of the rest. In the museum “objects are transformed from one temporal
continuity of use to another, their meaning is entirely reconstructed.”337 The original
role of the object is not an issue in its location in the museum and it does not have
determining role on the constructed narratives. Their placement or their story is more
likely dependent on authority, and it is the people who have the authority not the
objects.338 The museum settings and classification of the objects as an element of the
meaning construction or narration are highly dependent on the preferences of the
curator who should not be coded as an individual but rather an executer of the
general policy of the museum. For Philip Fisher Museums are the fundamental
outcomes of a systematic culture that entails complex modes of storage and
arrangement where results are set together from widely different times and
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
335 Baxandall, “Exhibiting Intention,” p. 34-35.
336 Anthony D. Buckley, “ Why Not Invent the Past We Display in Museums”, Making Histories in
the Museums, ed. Gaynor Kavanagh (London; New York: Leicester University Press, 1996), p. 49.
337 Spencer R. Crew and James E. Sims, “Locating Authenticity: Fragments of a Dialogue”,
Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetics and Politics of Museum Display, ed. Ivan Karp and Steven D.
Lavine (Bucknell University Press; London; Cranbury, NJ: Associated University Presses, 2001), p.
163.
338 Ibid., p. 163.
144"
experiential situations.339 The matter of setting them together is actually a matter of
classification and this determines how the final outcome looks like or what it
explains. The museum visitors follow a line during the museum visit that begins at a
specific spot, they follow a path and end up at a determined position. This line is a
juxtaposition of various clusters that drive us to think mostly by dynamic and
progressive terms through the rhetoric of contrasts. Through the components of the
line, which are determined through the classification of objects and the clusters,
objects are grouped together, seen in relation, and organized in the mind.340 The
clusters and organization of the objects are determined by a proper/functional
classification. In the broader view, an explanation for the object, a meaning for the
museum, and the narration that the museum tries to express are provided through
such classification. Contrasts, similarities, sequence, and clusters all organize the
final form of the story that the museum tells us. The clusters that consist of the body
of the museum collection, their sizes, that classification typology, and their roles in
the narration are all highly dependent on the curator.
All the items that are evaluated as worth exhibiting and configured in the
museum setting have already been detached from their original contexts. Attaching
the items to the clusters and classifying them for the purpose of the museum makes it
possible to re-contextualize them. The classification of objects has its crucial role in
this re-contextualizing stage and the preferences of the curator at this point form the
narration in the museum. Mutlu Erbay proposes seven types of categorization for the
resettling of the detached objects in the museums, which are: chronological
classification, material based classification, classification based on the features of the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
339 Philip Fisher, “Local Meanings and Portable Objects: National Collections, Literatures, Music, and
Architecture”, The Formation of National Collections of Art and Archeology, ed. Gwendolyn Wright,
(Washington, D.C.: National Gallery of Art; Hanover, N.H.: Distributed by the University Press of
New England, 1996), p. 18.
340 Ibid., p. 20.
145"
collection, regional classification, classification based on the field of use, periodical
classification, stylistic classification, and finally artist based classification.341 The
chronological order takes dating the objects as the reference. In that type of
classification the visitor has the comfort of following a chronological line. The
material of the objects and what this material was turned into such as furniture,
weapons etc. are references of the material based classification system. In that
system, the objects are grouped according to the mutual features, which can be the
material that the objects are made of, or type of the objects such as medical
equipment, manuscript, leather stuffs, and armory collections. The disciplinary
framework of collection is another criteria to determine a classification system. In
this type of classification, the field the collection is formed determines the grouping
and archeology, ethnography, or folklore might be the categories used to put the
objects together. In regional classification, the location of the site where the findings
were located is sometimes the determiner of the classification criteria. The location
mostly also implies the civilization it belongs to and therefore classification
according to the location mostly means drawing the boundaries of civilizations as
well. Sometimes the field or sector or the collection are constituted from the personal
belongings of someone (an artist for instance) and are classified according to the
fields or modes in which they are used. For instance medical collections, costumes of
a certain group, the furniture of a palace are all classified according. The artistic
period the work of art belongs to sometimes also determines the clusters.
Renaissance, Baroque, or Classic periods are the examples for groups of periodical
classification. The artistic style of the object also constitutes a classification criteria.
Items are grouped according to broader stylistic categories such as Orientalist,
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
341 Mutlu Erbay, Müzelerde Sergileme ve Sunum Tekniklerinin Planlanması (İstanbul: Beta: 2011), p.
116-118.
146"
Cubist, or Impressionist and so on. Sometimes the artist, scientist or a person who
remarkably contributed to his/her area might be a criteria for grouping and the work
is brought together under one name such as Picasso or Dali collections.342
Classification in the Ottoman/Turkish Museums
In the case of displaying the method of the Ottoman and Turkish museology, it is
hard to point one of these categories as the leading and common method, because a
combination of a few methods are used for display. The case of the Istanbul
Archeology Museum, which was the first museum of the empire and the final
destination of the artifacts from all over the country until the founding of local
museums (İzmir and Ankara museums for instance), is a significant case. At the
beginning, the Istanbul Museum as the main institution at the capital functioned as
the central storehouse for all the antiques transported from all over the empire’s
lands. For Wendy Shaw, the transportation of the antiques directly to the Istanbul
Museum set the relationship between the capital and the provinces symbolically as
the European museum tradition was doing so through transporting the antiques of its
colonies to the metropolis.343 However, classifying the materials purposely and
setting a functional sequence with “scientific methods”344 between objects coincides
with Osman Hamdi Bey’s era. Osman Hamdi Bey was the first person, who managed
the spatial arrangement for the objects in the tiled pavilion and provided a mixed
classification system. The entrance of the tiled pavilion was ornamented with pieces
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
342 Ibid.
343 Shaw, Possessors and Possessed: Museums, Archaeology, and the Visualization of History in the
Late Ottoman Empire (Berkeley, Calif: University of California Press, 2003), p. 87.
344 Arık, Türk Müzeciliğine.
147"
brought from Halicarnassus as the pointer of the competition between C.S. Darwin
and the Ottoman State for acquiring these objects and of the measurements that the
state took for the protection of its antiquities. The portico of the building became the
section with regional implications, where significant pieces from Cyprus and Gaza
were located. Cyprus and Gaza were not the boundaries or indicators of a certain
geographic district, but these regions implied the territories that the state had
authority for the collecting of pieces. In the vestibule of the building, an example of
chronological classification was provided as Assyrian, Egyptian, Kufic, and Hittite
collections were located in chronologically.345 However it is hardly possible to talk
about a consistent system of classification in the tiled pavilion. The vestibule of the
building was the only chronologically ordered section and the objects located in the
central halls of the building were ordered in a manner that emphasized the territorial
and imperial claims of the state. The center of these halls were occupied by the
Hellenistic objects and three rooms were allocated for different regions. Wendy
Shaw argues that through exhibiting conspicuously Hellenistic objects in the center
of the halls, the empire manifested its victory over foreign archeologists who were
competing with the Ottomans for acquiring the Hellenistic archeological heritage of
the region. The bronze objects also had their own exhibition room where a display
case for the objects (which were found by Schliemann) stood at the center. A room
for the findings from Cyprus was also important because the territory was recently
taken over by the British administration and this room was dedicated to the memory
of or ongoing claims over a former territory.346 In the categorization of the Istanbul
Archeology Museum’s objects, they were organized in a sense that differs from the
evolutionary classification pattern suggested by the European museology tradition.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
345 Shaw, Possessors and Possessed, p. 153.
346 Ibid., p. 152-154.
148"
The museum adapted a partially chronological, partially regional classification and
some remarkable objects were used as implication of political and archeological
rivalry between the European Orientalists and the Ottoman state. The Istanbul
museum formed a characteristic epistemology for itself. It did not exactly follow the
traces of the evolutionary pattern of European tradition and ordered its objects
around strategically important pieces. The strategic ordering of the objects that
emphasized the archeological victories of the empire was preferred, but at the end the
whole idea of an archeological museum and the state’s ambition for covering the
findings from the popular sites and civilizations was the consequence of the attempt
of attaching itself to the grand art history narrative.347
The archeological museums proliferated during the 1920s in order to
propagate the national ideology of the state and support the state’s claim on the
different regions. The archeological museums were scattered all over the country and
did not adapt to the evolutionary pattern exactly but still a Hittite collection became
one of the clusters in the museums in addition to Islamic and non-Islamic collections.
The presence of the Hittite collection is significant, because it should be considered
as an attempt to invent a root for the recently constituted nation, where the state was
in a position of breaking its ties traumatically with its Islamic and imperial past.
Three basic categories of Hittite, Islamic, and non-Islamic were suggested in all
museums except the ones that had a lack of a Hittite collection. On the other end
denying the continuity between the nation state and the dynastic tradition and the
Islamic state does not mean excluding the Islamic pieces from the museum settings.
Thus the main categorizations of the objects were made as Islamic and non-Islamic.
Different categories Erbay suggested as sub-categories of these major collections
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
347 Ibid., p. 156.
149"
were provided and it is hard to point a single categorization. In that way the Islamic
pieces were excluded from the evolutionary pattern that leads the chronology to the
nation state as the final form. Clustering the Islamic pieces as a separate group means
undermining their meaning as a phase in the history or as a determiner of previous
phases and restricting their meaning to some artistic objects that reflects decorations,
patterns of Islamic culture. In a history narrative that supposed to cut its ties with the
dynastic and Islamic tradition constituting Islamic collections or clustering some
objects as Islamic does not contradicts with the attempt of constructing non-Islamic
or secular genealogy. Actually this attitude assists to restrict its meaning to just a
artistic pattern.
The reports of the inspections ordered by Ministry of Education and
executed by the inspectors of antiquities (Aziz Ogan for instance) during 1929 at
various museums reveal the mentioned three categories: Islamic, non-Islamic, and
Hittite were used in Anatolian museums. Sometimes under these three categories
regional and periodical sub-categories are mentioned. In the case of the Adana
Museum, the Hittite Collection covers the antiquities of ancient Cerablus, (reliefs
and larger stone pieces), the Islamic Collection covers reliefs, tombstones and the
non-Islamic Collection covers Roman sculptures, portraits and column bases.348 In
the Konya Mevlana Convent a different categorization under the Islamic and non-
Islamic was organized since there is no Hittite collection. The subcategories of the
Islamic Collection were determined according to the features of the objects and the
categories of manuscripts, textiles, metal items, glassware items, weapons, reliefs,
tiles, and coins (Ottoman and Seljuk).349 The non-Islamic collection covers the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
348 Report on Adana Museum 1929, Appendix C, figure 83.
349 Report on Konya (Museum Mevlana Dervish Convent) (10.6.1929), Appendix C, figure 84.
150"
antique sculptures such as busts, statues, reliefs to tombstones, and sarcophagi’s.350
The Ankara Museum was later divided in Ethnography Museum and the Hittite
Museum, but at the beginning (the first half of the 1920s) various objects it contained
(coins, jewels, inscriptions) from various periods (Roman, Greek, Seljuk, Byzantine)
were simply divided in two rooms for the Islamic and non-Islamic items.351
Classification in the İzmir Museums
Classification in the First Museum (Aya Vukla Church) Building
The inconsistency of the prevailing classification system in the Turkish museums
was observed in İzmir Archeology Museum as well. Both the first building of the
İzmir Museum the Aya Vukla Church (1927) and the second museum building built
in Kültürpark (1951) had their own typical categorization system and did not
correspond with each other.
In the first museum building of İzmir, the two-storied building had a different
category for each floor. The two editions of the museum guide that were published in
1927 and 1932 respectively can assist us to understand the development of
classification in the museum and the configuration of the additional collections
through out the years. The different editions of the museum guide suggest some
renovations, but essentially they try to provide a written museum tour and describe
the most prominent pieces and collections to the visitors. The description of specific
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
350 Ibid.
351 Melanio Savino, “Narrating the “New”,” p. 256.
151"
objects and their location in the museum were cited rather than the clusters and the
criteria according to which they had been grouped.
The first edition of the museum guide was printed in 1927 and published
under the name of İzmir Asar-ı Atika Müzesi (the İzmir Museum of Antiques). It was
the first museum guide in Turkey after the Istanbul Museum’s guide.352 This was the
year the museum was officially opened and this first edition was printed when all
aspects of the museum were still in progress. It is clear in this first edition, that the
order of the items was decoratively or logistically configured in the building. The
guide orders the sections one by one and moves to the next one during the tour that
starts in the garden and continues around the building. The reference point is the
object itself and which period, century, or geography it belongs to. The İzmir
Museum was formed in a former Greek-Orthodox church, as the Istanbul Museum
was. This coincidence was considered also as a wish to follow in the footsteps of the
Istanbul Museum and reach its level among the famous European museums. The
İzmir Museum followed the sample of its model in terms of arrangement of the
objects as well, and situated a glass case in the middle of the main hall of the
museum (the ground floor). Here the statue of an important person (governor or king,
probably the Sardis statue), a statute from the Roman period, a bust and a relief were
located. In the guide the tour starts in the courtyard and continues to other sections,
and it seems in all sections model of the glass case was executed and many items
from different periods were scattered in the sections. It is not possible to point to any
section allocated for any group that was classified according to period, location, etc..
The only type of such groups were the “Islamic items” located in one of the divisions
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
352 Melania Savino, “Archaeology and its Representation,” p. 70.
152"
(with the Seljuk tombstones, items from the second, seventh, and eighth century and
the Roman items.)353
Between 1927 and 1932 the museum organization must have been improved,
and the management and classification of the items were carried a few steps further.
As it was the case for also the Istanbul Museum, the İzmir Museum lacked a
consistent classificatory order and constituted it own style of display through a
combination of several classification systems. The 1932 edition of the museum guide
was published with the name İzmir Müzesi (The İzmir Museum). The development
of the museum into a whole complex from a single exhibition hall for the antiquities
was also observable in the titles of the two guides. The very first criteria for locating
any piece was its dimension. The larger dimension sculptures were situated in the
garden among with sarcophagi, tombstones, pieces from architectural units, and large
reliefs. The classification method used for organizing the objects of the outdoor
section was a combination of the chronological and regional classification schemes.
This typical classification system concerned the collections of Hellenistic and Roman
reliefs, and architectural elements, Roman sculptures, sarcophagi, pieces from
architectural units, and Byzantine antiquities. The only collection in the outdoor
section named for its region was the Didyma collection that stands right next to
another collection named for its period, the Phrygian collection.354 The last category
in the outdoor section was the “Turkish tombstones”, which consisted of the historic
Seljuk tombstones transported from the Aydınoglu Mehmed Bey Mosque in Manisa,
or the tombstones of Sulu Mezarlık (Cemetery), which was the relocated former
cemetery at the center of İzmir.355
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
353 Aziz Ogan, İzmir Asar-ı Atika Müzesi Rehberi (İzmir: Hafız Ali Matbaası, 1927), p. 10.
354 Ogan, İzmir Müzesi Rehberi, p. 31-54.
355 Ibid., p. 22.
153"
It appears the outdoor section basically sheltered the larger dimension
objects, which were mostly sarcophagi, tombstones, pieces removed from
architectural edifices. Then these were categorized according to their period, type,
rare location, or an artificial category such as “Turkish” (In my opinion simply it
refers to “Muslim” in the case of the tombstones).
The indoor section of the İzmir Museum lacked a distinct classification
system and similar to the Istanbul Archeological Museum, the strategic importance
of the objects was the determinant factor in their location in the building. The center
of the İzmir Museum was intentionally occupied by a symbol of the archeological
rivalries of the state: the sarcophagus from Sardis. This strategic significance of the
sarcophagus stems from the tension it caused between the Turkish and American
states356 and its symbolic value suggesting the termination of former Greek authority
over the objects from Sardis. Sardis was one of very fertile excavation sites of the
empire and was excavated by an American team between the years 1910 and 1914
under the supervision of professor Howard Crosby Butler from Princeton University.
The good relationship that Prof. Butler developed with Ottoman authorities provided
the permission for excavating the Sardis region and some other territories for Butler.
The Antiquities Law of 1906 forbid the exportation of the antique findings and Prof.
Butler obeyed and respected that rule in addition to taking the Ottoman State’s side
and its Antique Law through his writings.357 The outbreak of World War I in 1914
reversed the situation for the Sardis team and they could not arrive at the region until
the temporary Greek government took over the control of İzmir. When the Sardis
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
356 James F. Goode, Negotiating for the Past: Archaeology, Nationalism, and Diplomacy in the
Middle East, 1919-1941 (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2007), p. 31-42.
357 Fikret K. Yegül, “From the Lofty Halls of Academia to the Dusty Hills of Anatolia: Howard
Crosby Butler and the First Sardis Expedition through Peace and War”, Perceptions of the Past in the
Turkish Republic: Classical and Byzantine Periods, ed. by Scott Redford and Nina Ergi, (Leuven;
Walpole, Mass.: Peeters, 2010), p. 70.
154"
team came back to the region this time they acquired the permission of the Greek
government for shipping the findings to US.358 In 1924 the Treaty of Lausanne
provided the opportunity to the Turkish state to ask for the return of their antiquities
from the US, but only a limited portion of the findings that Butler and his team
shipped could be reacquired.359 The sarcophagus was one of these pieces and
probably the most ostentatious one among these reacquired pieces because it was
positioned as the centerpiece of the main exhibition hall. The reacquisition of the
sarcophagus was interpreted as a diplomatic and international success and the
symbolic denial of the Greek authority that once decided on the fate of the
archeological findings of the region. Giving the central position to this strategic piece
was a tool to underline the national pride of possession it and regaining the authority
on the fate of the archeological findings around the region.360 The sarcophagus was
surrounded with Roman busts or statues, such as a Roman bust from the second
century B.C. and Hellenistic pieces, such as a statue brought from the Eskihisar
region. The core (the sarcophagus) was surrounded with objects that were grouped
according to historical period.361 The right side of the sarcophagus was one of the
sections that contained pieces from the Roman period, such as statues and a vase, in
addition to some Hellenistic reliefs that were transported to the museum from
Ephesus in 1926. In the windows (the window niches were inclined) Roman busts
were located and Hellenistic tombstones stood right below them. At the niche of the
door (one of the additional entrance of the church building was blocked), a showcase
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
358 Ibid., p. 82.
359Savino, “Archaeology and its Representation”, p. 70.
360 Ibid., p. 73.
361 Aziz Ogan, İzmir Müzesi Rehberi, (İstanbul: Resimli Ay Matbaasi, 1932), p. 44-45.
155"
was dedicated to pieces brought from Cyprus and Rhodes dating back to the second
century B.C. as well as some Byzantine pieces excavated in Istanbul.362
The apse of the building sheltered three showcases in which various small
pieces such as vases, jugs, and candles were displayed. The two display cases were
dedicated to Roman pieces excavated in Miletus and found in a construction site by
coincidence in Manisa. The last showcase was dedicated to Egyptian items such as
tiny sculptures and remarkable candleholders. The window niches of the apse were
arranged to situate the Roman and Hellenistic busts and statues, formerly displayed
in the Istanbul Museum. The other busts, broken pieces, and heads were displayed on
the shelves of the apse and the objects on those shelves varied from the Greco-
Roman to the Roman excavated from various sites like Miletus and Ephesus. The
statues from Ephesus and Miletus excavation sites, which dated back to the second
Century B.C., were also situated on a pedestal in the apse section.363 Finally, the
Islamic objects were also located in a section of the ground floor (it was referred as
the “first section” in the draft of the museum guide located in the archive).364
Tombstones and wooden minbars were mentioned as examples of the Islamic
antiquities.365 The figures, provided by the Directorship of Statistic in İzmir in the
yearbook of 1934 show the increase or decrease of the items in the museum.
According to this source (which gives the numbers for years 1930, 1931, and 1932,
in the year of 1930 there was not any Islamic items), there were 109 pieces in 1931,
and 74 in 1932.366 The decrease between 1931 and 1932 must have stemmed from
the transportation of some items to Ankara or Istanbul. The mobility of objects
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
362 Ibid., p. 48.
363 Ibid., p. 51-57.
364 Undated draft of museum guide (handwriting), Appendix C, figure 85.
365 İbid.
366 Erkan Serçe, “İzmir ve Havalisi Azar-ı Atika Muhipleri Cemiyeti ve İzmir Arkeoloji Müzesinin
Kuruluşu,” İzmir Kent Kültürü Dergisi, 5 (2002), p. 315.
156"
between İzmir, Ankara and İstanbul must be resulted from the center-periphery
relation between İzmir and the others. Ankara as the capital and İstanbul Museum as
the central museum must be centers that sometimes gain such objects from İzmir. In
the case of the relation between regional museums and İzmir, İzmir was the center
where the important pieces were transferred.
The main hall of the museum building (on the ground floor) seems to have
been dedicated to the archeological findings from İzmir’s hinterland. It appears that
their period was the issue here rather than the region they had been excavated, except
for a showcase that displayed the objects from Cyprus and Rhodes. The claim of the
state on the archeological heritage of the region (which motivated the state for
seeking ways of reclaiming the shipped objects like the sarcophagus) was supported
by the wealth of Hellenistic and Roman collections that literally surrounded the
sarcophagus.
The Islamic collection was considered an integral element of the heritage and
located on the ground floor among the other items. In an undated newspaper,
interview with the director Aziz Ogan replies to the question “What is your
prediction for the future of İzmir Archeology Museum” as such: “It has the potential
of being a very rich museum with the pieces that had already been brought to surface
and being excavated in archeological sites like Bergama, Ayasolug etc. Among them,
specific effort will be spent for collecting Islamic pieces which are considered the
monuments of our praiseworthy nation.”367 The attitude of the museum toward the
Islamic items from several Beyliks (principalities) and the Ottoman Empire was to
bring them together under the title of “Islamic collection” and project them more
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
367 Appendix C, figure 8.
157"
likely as ethnographic objects.368 The ground floor that seemed to cover the very
basic frame of the “past” through exhibiting the archeological findings of the region
carves a room for the Islamic objects also. These objects were part of an already
vanished past, but also as heritage they were secularized in the museum setting by
treating them as ethnographic objects. The ethnographic objects belong to a lower
layer in the hierarchy because “Ethnographic objects…which according to the
opinion of the creators of the museum belonged among ethnographic objects…could
not have possibly played an equal role in creating traditions and (country’s) identity
as the symbols of the country.”369 Perceiving the Islamic collections as ethnographic
and labeling them with this title made secondary degree references in identity
making and lowered their rank in the hierarchy of museum objects.
The second floor of the building had much more complicated and varied
collections, which were, for Savino, proposed as “alternative Turkish art”.370 The
second floor of the museum was categorized in the museum guide under the title of
“Pictures, Coins, Turkish Carpets and Hittite Antiquities Section.” This section of the
museum guide starts with the art gallery and fifty paintings that belong to “painters
of our country and some of the famous Western painters” were defined as
“ornamenting this section.”371 Sheltering the paintings in this section must have been
a temporary situation because it was stated that in the museum guide these paintings
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
368 These “Islamic” objects were transferred to the ethnographic museums after the emergence of
ethnographic museums. The first museum buildings (such as the İzmir Museum) later gained the
character of archeological museum and only “archeological” items were exhibited in them. This
transformation from “museums” to “ archeological museums” caused to perceive the Islamic objects
as the ethnographic objects and they were sheltered and exhibited in ethnographic museums.
369 Joze Hudales, “Ethnographic Objects as Material Culture and as Cultural Heritage: Ethnographic
Collections and Exhibitions in Slovenia Until the First Half of 20th Century,” Croatian Journal of
Ethnology & Folklore Research, 47 (2010), p.76.
370 Savino, “Archaeology and its Representation,” p. 75.
371 Ogan, İzmir Müzesi Rehberi, p. 63.
158"
would be transported to a convenient place when a wide gallery would be found for
the coinage section (the whole section was abbreviated as the “coinage section”).372
The coinage collection of the museum had 2,204 pieces in 1932. The coinage
cannot be considered as a collection but the worthy pieces in the collection gave the
hope of a valuable future collection. The coinage was classified even though (for
Ogan) they hardly constituted a collection. The museum guide categorized them
mainly as Islamic (94 golden, 1,278 silver, 547 cupric coinage) and non-Islamic (54
golden, 320 silver, 21 copper coinage). The coinage was exhibited in four showcases
and a consistent classification for the showcases did not exist. In the first showcase
the coinage of Alexander the Great belongs to 324-335 B.C. and next to it the
coinage of kings and Anatolian cities that belonged to the 7th B.C. were located next.
The second showcase was dedicated to the Roman emperors’ coinage that dated back
between 1 B.C and 3 A.D. The third show case similarly displayed the coinage of
Roman emperors and empresses. The forth showcase was the place where Islamic
coinage was kept and it was stated that they were not yet classified properly. In
addition, some small jewelry such as rings and earrings were also exhibited in this
showcase in addition to Venetian golden coinage. The carpets and prayer rugs were
located right opposite the windows, which were the pieces brought from the
Aydınoğlu Mehmet Bey Mosque in Birgi from İzmir Fettah Mosque and some
provinces such as Uşak, Ladik, Kula.373
As Savino proposed, the spatial division of the museum’s objects in two
floors was arranged to differentiate the ancient past and from the modern “true”
narrative of Turkish past and Turkish art. On the first floor the visitors had the
chance of seeing the Greek and Roman pieces in addition to the Islamic tombstones.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
372 İbid .,
373 Ibid., p. 65-66.
159"
These episodes of the region’s history were the narrative the Turkish Republic tried
to position as a distant past and melt in the recent narrative in order to promote the
secular and nationalist ideology of the Republic. The second floor was held for the
new trendy period in Turkish history, which was the Hittite narrative integrated into
modern art pieces (even though they were temporally located in the museum
building) and the ethnographic pieces. Considering the limited space and
opportunities of the museum building location of the Hittite collection might be a
choice motivated by logistic reasons. On the other hand, both this Hittite collection,
modern art gallery and the others were the favorites of the state which all had a role
in the recently constructed narrative.
Classification in the Second (Kültürpark) Museum Building
The first İzmir Museum in the church of Aya Vukla was designed as a culture
complex that sheltered not only the exhibition halls for the antiques but also an art
gallery (even though it was temporarily located in the building) and a library that
consisted of both reference books and rare books as later additions. The moving of
the museum to the Kültürpark in 1951 was a radical transformation in many senses
starting with the structure of the foundation. First, the museum building that used to
be a former church was transformed to a single large gallery. The structure of the
museum that functioned more like a cultural center was transformed as well, and
only the antiquities were transferred to the building in the Kültürpark. The church
building after 1951 was used as a depot for some objects and the remaining objects
were supposed to be moved to the İzmir Regional Museum (ethnography museum),
160"
which construction started on the Bahribaba Park (the former Jewish Cemetery).374
The remaining items in the church must have been the ethnographic objects, because
only an ethnographic museum was established in the lands of the Bahribaba Park in
the former school (initiated by the local governor Rahmi Bey initiated). The
ethnographic objects must have been allocated for the ethnographic museum instead
of combining antiques and ethnographic objects all together in the new museum. The
fate of the library materials is unknown, but for sure they were not been moved to the
Kültürpark museum, which had no room for such a collection. The pieces from the
art collection, on the other hand, were located in their own gallery in the Kültürpark
in 1952 a year after the moving of the museum.375 The pieces from the art gallery
must have been sheltered in the Kültürpark gallery until the opening of the İzmir Art
and Sculpture Museum in 1973.376 At end of the moving process, the cultural
complex was turned into a large exhibition hall reserved only for antiquities.
The Kültürpark, already discussed in the first chapter in detail, was born out
of the international economic fair and later became a permanent zone of greenery
and socialization for the city’s residents. The international fairs, due to which the
Kültürpark witnessed its most dynamic and crowded days, were designed to
revitalize the economy of the city in the post war period. But these fairs were also
remarkable organizations that bonded people with the Republic. They displayed what
the Republic had achieved in the country and the capacity of the Turkish people with
its profound and exceptional abilities.377 This yearly gathering was designed to create
a market and advertising ground, but since the beginning the pavilions for
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
374 Mehmet Önder, The Museums of Turkey and Examples of the Masterpieces in the Museums, trans.
Priscilla Mary Butler (Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası, 1983), p. 121.
375 “İzmir Heykel Müzesi Hakkında”, T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı İzmir Resim Heykel Müzesi
ve Galerisi, http://www.İzmirresimheykelmuzesi.gov.tr/hakkinda.html.
376 Önder, p. 124.
377 Aslan Tufan Yazman, “ İzmir Fuarının Manası”, İktisadi Yürüyüş, 18 (1940), p. 1.
161"
governmental organizations and other state enterprises were located in the fair
ground as well in order to achieve the state’s goal of self-affirmation. There were not
commercial goods in these pavilions that made them commercially functional, but
various objects that enhanced the self-pride of the state and exhibited the
advancement of the Turkish Republic in various fields. State enterprise banks such as
Sümerbank in the fair of 1948 had its own pavilion and it was a permanent building
rather than a temporary fair structure. In this vast building the products of Sümerbank
and charts and statistics which demonstrated the achievement of the bank, were
exhibited to the visitors.378 These products and documents were presented as the
proof of the advancement of the state’s enterprises rather than as purchasable
offerings. The Emlakbank / Emlak Kredi Bankası (Real Estate Loan Bank) was
another state enterprise whose pavilion in the 1951 fair was supposed to exhibit to
the visitor the contribution of the bank to the extensive reconstruction of the
country.379 There was also a private bank in the fair grounds, Garanti Bankası, but its
mission in the fair was more likely to present itself to potential clients and marketing
the Renault cars that it represented in Turkey.380 The state enterprises had the
mission of underlining the advancement of the Republic in addition to marketing
their goods. The state-funded pavilions did not just house the economic enterprises
of the state. Also included were state charitable foundations such as Child Protection
Agency’s (Çocuk Esirgeme Kurumu) pavilion in which the role and power of the
state in terms of providing protective social services was underlined. How this
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
378 Affan Kırımlı, Muhlis Türkmen, Muhteşem Giray, “1948 İzmir Fuarında Sümerbank Paviyonu”,
Akitekt, 1948, Sayı: 1948-07-08 (199-200), p. 158.
379 Tuğrul Devres, “İzmir Enternasyonal Fuarında Tükiye Emlâk Kredi Bankası Pavyonu”, Arkitekt,
237-238 (1951-09-10), p. 159.
380 Muhlis Türkmen, Abidin Zarif, “1948 İzmir Enternasyonal Fuarı T. Garanti Bankası A. O.
Paviyonu”, Arkitekt: 199-200 (1948-07-08), p. 153-154.
162"
agency handles the matters of protection and raising of the children were exhibited to
the visitors.381
The İzmir Archeological Museum in the Kültürpark was established in the
former pavilion of the Ministry of Education. The reason for arranging a pavilion for
the Ministry of Education was the state’s enthusiasm for self-representation to the
foreigners and the common people who had the chance of observing the recent
developments of Turkish Republic. Since the museum establishment was
administered as a sub-branch of the cultural affairs division of the Ministry of
Education, it was located in this ground where the major aim was boosting national
pride. Before the museum was moved to this location, the objects exhibited in the
pavilion were students’ handcrafts produced in technical schools.382
In the beginning, the international fair at Kültürpark was a very local affair
with particular economic aims. It had separate sections for the local products of
various provinces, and the regions where these products came from constituted the
criteria for grouping them. İzmir was the eventual destination and the center of the
peripheries where these goods could be gathered to present to the international
market. Interestingly, after its transfer to the Kültürpark, the İzmir Archeology
Museum, acquired a similar classification system and its objects were grouped
according to the region from where they were brought.
The dates of the museum objects varied from the Chalcolithic period to the
Byzantine, and both regional and chronological classification systems were used
instead of abolishing the periodic classification entirely.383 The pavilion was in the
shape of a single large gallery rather than a multi-sectional building divided into
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
381 Nihal Sanlı, “İzmir Fuarında Çocuk Esirgeme Kurumu Paviyonu”, Arkitekt, 153-154 (1944-09-10),
p. 198.
382 See the image newspaper in Appendix D, image 15, 1944 İzmir Fuarında, p. 10.
383 Mehmet İ. Tunay, “Kültürpark Arkeoloji Müzesi,” Arkitekt, 336 (1969-04), p. 161.
163"
sections with walls. This large gallery was in shape of a rectangle with engaged
corners. Actually it was engaged with the corners and more than twenty corners were
inserted to its walls. As it is seen in image 16 these corners also separated the
sections from each other.384 In a similar way with the former museum building where
there was an outdoor section (the courtyard) for the display of large dimension
sculptures, also in the new museum building tombstones and sarcophagi were located
in the outdoor sections. In the new museum, Pergamum, Bayraklı, Denizli, Sardis,
Ephesus, Muğla, and Miletus, had their own sections. The region of the objects was
not the only criteria for arranging their spots in the building but also they were
divided in categories according to types of the objects. According to the museum
plan provided in a brochure of the museum published in 1953, there are five
categories for the objects in the museum. These were sculptures, pieces from
architectural edifices, tombstones, sarcophagi and little pieces displayed in
showcases. The corners drew the borders of the sections and each three corners
constituted individual sections toward the edges of the walls. The majority of the
pieces displayed were sculptures. The edges of the walls were dotted with those
sculptures except sections of the gallery to the extreme left and right (taking the
entrance gate as the reference). The sculptures were not scattered randomly but a
form of regional categorization was preferred to order them. İzmir and Miletus had
two sections for the sculptures. The objects from Pergamum, Sardis, Bayraklı,
Denizli, Muğla and Aydın were all limited to one section for each location. Ephesus
had the largest share from the space with three sections and a more central spot
considering the other wall edges. The space between these sections and the entrance
gate was almost empty and this made it easy to orient the gazes of the visitors
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
384 Appendix D, image 16.
164"
directly to these sections. The museum objects were mostly situated in the wall edges
and in the two sections on the extreme left and the right edges of the building. At the
center of the exhibiting hall, there were only rows of sculptures that stood opposite to
each other which were the sculptures from Ephesus and Pergamum. The tombstones,
pieces from architectural units were situated on the leftist section of the hall and they
were categorized under the name of “archaic age”. So in this section, the regional
classification was replaced by a single chronological category. Tunay’s article385
clearly states that both regional and chronological classification were preferred in the
museum. However chronological category was not preferred in any other sections as
we can gather from the brochure.
In the former museum building, the priority of the newly emerged museum’s
classification system was to emphasize the state’s gains vis-à-vis the archeological
rivalries with foreign powers. It was also important to form the genealogy of the
newly emerged nation state through the construction of object-based narratives.
Kemalist history narrative was the product of a nationalist process, which has its
origins in the 1870s emerging as a result of Russia’s colonist acts toward the Turkic
societies and it was adapted after 60 years of processing.386 At the beginning of
1920s and the emergence of Turkish Republic the European territories were almost
completely lost. Anti-Turkish statements in Europe and the negative history
discourse on Turkish identity, which Afet İnan personally dealt with was another
motivation for searching for a new praisable identity that discredited the negative
attitudes of European oriented views. In addition, the historical territorial claims of
the Armenians and the Greeks whose presence on the Anatolian land was removed
during and after World War I were challenged with a Republican counter narrative.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
385 Tunay, “Kültürpark Arkeoloji Müzesi,” p. 161.
386 Etienne Copeaux, Türk Tarih Tezinden Türk-İslam Sentezine: Tarih Ders Kitaplarında, 1931-1993,
trans. Ali Berktay (İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 1998), p. 20.
165"
This counter narrative projected the Hittites as the ancestries of the Turkish people in
order to support the claim to autochthonous existence in Anatolia.387 The aim of
refuting such claims and inventing an origin were in accordance with a planned
future, which foresaw a nationalist and secular state. A new future had to have a new
past on which it was to be built.388 The Asiatic origins and the invented Hittite links
became the base of a new history narrative for the Turkish republic and sometimes it
reached absurd levels like the Sun Language Theory. This nationalist history
narrative was invented in 1920s and reached its peak during 1930s with the
emergence of Turkish History Survey Association (Türk Tarih Tetkik Cemiyeti).
However Mustafa Kemal died in 1938 and afterwards more critical historians could
find a ground to express themselves. The first and strongest waves for Kemalist
nationalism lost its enthusiasm and intellectual power. The critiques of this
nationalist discourse were not expressed loudly and it also did not gained full
recognition in the circle of Turkish historians and intelligentsia. 1940s and
afterwards were the years that the narrow historical view, which suggested a history
writing around the Turkish people mostly with invented phases, was abandoned. A
new trend, which Etienne Copeaux calls “humanism” re-credited the Western
civilization and Greco-Latin roots as the real source for Anatolian civilization.
During the same era many Greek, Latin and Western classic books were translated
and published. 389
The move of the museum to Kültürpark coincides with two important shift
which were perception of history and the character of the economic fair. The credited
historical were diversified during 1940s and this fractured the “Turkish centered”
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
387 Ibid., p. 32.
388 Bernard Lewis, History: Remembered, Recovered, Invented (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1975), p. 71.
389 Copeaux, Türk Tarih Tezinden, p. 55.
166"
history perception. During 1940s with the economic impact of World War II the fair
gained a touristic character. A museum building where small portions from the
praise-worth excavations sites could be exhibited fitted very well to this touristic site.
The new museum building (1951) in the Kültürpark was more adapted to the
pavilion system of an international fair. The international fairs were the grounds
where countries exhibit their goods to foreign eyes. In many cases the countries
exhibited also the goods from their colonies and peripheries through marking
themselves as the center of those peripheries. Since the idea of fair was based on the
motivation of gaining affirmation by foreign eyes and advertise itself, the museum
building advertised the capacity of the state for crediting the antique heritage of
antique world of Aegean region. In addition, the peripheral antique sites of İzmir
were represented and İzmir was marked as the center of antique world of Aegean
region.
In many aspects, the İzmir museum followed in the footsteps of the Istanbul
Archeology Museum and was designed as a representative of the same vision of
history and museology. Especially in the displaying method and classification of the
museum objects, the İzmir Museum followed its grand counterpart. Its inner
organization was arranged according to the strategic importance of various pieces.
The most conspicuous victory symbols were located at the center as the locus of the
whole museum building. The first museum building in the Aya Vukla church had not
entirely abandoned the antique heritage in the nationalist historical environment of
its era. Actually the antique heritage was credited in very strongly with the motive of
linking itself to the grand narrative of world art history. This claim of being a part of
modern art and art history was strengthened with underlining modern art through
establishing a gallery in the museum building. When the museum institution was
167"
moved to the Kültürpark area, a narrative conspicuously set the relation of center and
periphery through organizing the objects regionally. In this new museum building, in
addition to transforming the former cultural center to an archeology museum,
humanistic bias was observed in the bold attempt of underlining ancient civilizations.
Among those archeological sites that were represented in the new museum building
in Kültürpark, Ephesus had a significant position. The sculptures from Ephesus were
situated right opposite the entrance door. Ephesus sculptures also constituted one of
the two rows of sculptures that stood at the very center. In the second building, the
İzmir Museum could gain the character of archeology museum with the impact of
dominating historical view of 1940s and 1950s, which criticized the Turkish-centric
national narrative and proposed a more global or “humanist” view. The reason for
pointing Ephesus among the other antique sites might be its bigger international fame
and richer archeological reserves.
Conclusion
The museum setting is always an environment for meaning making, and in this
artificial environment museum objects are the elements of a greater narration,
beyond their meaning as single objects. The ordering of the museum objects with a
certain classification system mostly determines this great narration, or in other words
the general policy of a museum, the motivations of the background of the museum
determines the classification of the museum objects.
In the European museological tradition, a genealogy of making the modern
world was traced from its very beginnings in Mesopotamia to modern Europe with a
clear evolutionary view. Here a chronological order is followed closely where the
168"
current European civilization is situated the ultimate destination where the most
improved form of human kind can be found. In this colonizing and hegemonic
museology discourse, art and artifacts of the non-western world can carve their
places only as the previous stages of development or as exotic and ethnographic
pieces from far away lands.
In Ottoman/Turkish museology, this strict chronological order was replaced
by a special combination of various types of classification. The museum objects of
the Ottoman domain were composed around certain symbolic pieces chosen to
represent the archeological victories of the state over European rivals. The main
objects of this rivalry were the Greco-Roman and Latin pieces. These were projected
as the pieces belonging to antique heritage, and owning them was quite important to
demonstrate the claim of being civilized enough to shelter pieces of world’s heritage.
In the İstanbul Archeology Museum the main focus of the museum setting was the
rivalry, but later with the total nationalization of history narrative, the museums were
nuanced with the elements, which were situated in the museum to support the local
narratives coexisting with this grand narrative of linking itself to the global story art.
The İzmir Museum was a case of in which classification was nuanced with a
combination of local and national claims.
The classification systems in the archeology museums of İzmir followed were
in accordance with museum policy. In the first museum building the two-storied
building was divided in two sections, one section for the distant past, which was the
combination of the Roman and the Greek, as well as the Islamic past. The word
“distant” does not simply refer to the chronology but to the relevance of these phases
to the focus of the history narrative, which is the continuity of presence of Turkish
people on Anatolia. A separate section for the modern narrative that comprised of the
169"
newly invented phases of “Turkish” history such as Hittite history and pieces of
modern art was constituted. Its distance in the chronological order was not the matter
but its proximity to the focus of the narrative was the matter. The nationalist history
narrative supported by such phases became the base on which the nation state was
constructed. The nation state’s claim of being linked to the modern world and its
ambition for appreciating modern art (and also introducing it to the people in order to
contribute to their encounter with the concepts of the modern world) and art were
illustrated in the art gallery section of the museum. Pieces of these two ambitious
attempts of the nation state, which were narrating a nationalist history discourse and
internalization of modern art, were situated in the same section of the museum. In the
second museum building the institution adapted itself to the fair environment, which
was founded to bring together the various pieces from various regions and industries
to produce and present pride for the nation state. In the new museum building, the
regional categorization of the objects was preferred in order to create a mini
archeological fairground on which each site could display its findings. The İzmir
Museum, especially in the first museum building, had some similar aspects with the
İstanbul Archeology Museum in terms of crediting the archeological victories of the
state. But local nuances that were supposed to differentiate the nation state from
Ottoman Empire made it difficult to track an identical pattern. The second museum
building was organized around a center-periphery relation but still it was not same
center-periphery relation that the İstanbul Museum set through ordering its objects.
In the Kültürpark museum İzmir was marked as the final destination of the
archeological findings of the Aegean region but the İstanbul Museum’s collecting
pieces from Eastern provinces (mostly) had more likely a political character and
marked İstanbul as the capital of the Empire. In the first museum building the
170"
museum setting was purposely arranged to create an “alternative Turkish art.” 390
This alternative art was differentiated from the classical age and Islamic art, but the
museum and Turkish art in general was attached to the general greater narrative of
art history through allocating a significant space for the classical age on the first
ground. In order to define this alternative Turkish art, the Hittite collection had its
significant place among others considering the ambitious emphasize on Hittite
history in the Republican history narrative for tracing back the Turkish nation. The
Republican ideology had a tendency of defining and differentiating itself from the
dynastic and Islamic tradition in every sense in accordance with the invented history
narrative, which suggests a unifying narrative for former and current civilizations
living in Anatolia (see Chapter I). In the museology practices of such an ideology,
the national museum must express the new type of nationalism and cut the ties with
the other sources of its heritage at least with classical and Islamic ones. For Etienne
Copeaux the over protective attitude toward Anatolia as the only one left in the hands
of Turkish people after losing European lands and the unexpected attitude of Arap
provinces during the war which was defined as betrayal drove the nation state invent
and discover new roots for Turkishness. Islam was considered as the “glaze” on the
“true” Turkish culture, which was defined with references to Asiatic roots and
Turkish’s ancestors in Anatolia (which was Hittites in this conceptualization).
Copeaux does not elaborate the meaning of being the “glaze”. However my
observation in the İzmir Museum’s setting suggests that Islamic collection in the
museum was situated in the museum as a marker of its ethnographic value (later
Islamic pieces were moved to the ethnographic museums). As it is observed in Celal
Esad Arseven study, Islamic pieces were not merely the products of Arab or Iranian
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
390 Savino, “Archaeology and its Representation,” p. 75.
171"
cultures as Muslim canons but Turkish art had a formative effect on them. These
pieces were exhibited as something that the Turkish art impacted. Turkish art was the
local grand art (other than the European canon) whose veins could be traced back to
both Asian and Islamic roots. Various veins that Arseven tried to elaborate created
(for Arseven and leading intelligentsia of the early Republic) something
characteristic and different than Byzantine or Muslim canon. In order to achieve this
differentiation the disparities from Islamic art and the other sources of Turkish art
(Asia and other Turkic sources) were studied for instance by Celal Esad Arseven in
his book Türk Sanatı (Turkish Art).391 For Arseven the reason for why it took so long
to define “Turkish art” is the European attitude of not designating Turkish pieces of
art, but more likely attaching them to the Byzantine or the Iranian canon.392 He
studied and illustrated many examples in his book in order to distinguish Turkish art
from Islamic and Byzantine art, but at the same time to construct its veins, which
was Asia, in Arseven’s book. Arseven’s aim was to illustrate a progressive pattern in
Turkish art. He differentiated it from Byzantine, Islamic art but demonstrated the
Ottoman-Turkish art as the one that benefited from these sources and created an
artistic style above them. For instance he acknowledges the effect of Islamic canon
but suggest that the over ornamental and ostentatious taste was not adapted by the
Turkish art. In Turkish art it took a simpler form. In the museum Turkish art was
differentiated from the classical and Islamic past and with the addition of the Hittite
collection and other ethnographic objects, in addition to modern paintings, Turkish
art was defined in the museum. The enthusiasm for defining Turkish art did not hold
anybody back from crediting the classical age pieces and Islamic pieces, because the
ambition of inserting themselves also into the grand art history narrative still existed
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
391 Celal Esad Arseven, Türk Sanatı (İstanbul: Cem Yayınevi, 1970).
392 Doğan Kuban, “Celal Esad Arseven ve Türk Sanatı Kavramı”, Mimarlık, 7 (1969), p. 18.
172"
among the motivations for founding the museum. For Wendy Shaw the early
museums cannot be defined as national museums and if the term of “national
museum “ refers to “a single or limited network of institutions designated for and
underwritten by the state for the express purpose of expressing issues of national
identity, values, and ideals,” then, “the Republic of Turkey has no national
museums.”393 For Shaw the separation of the ethnographic collections and the
founding of the ethnographic museums (initiated in 1922, first in Ankara)394 gave
birth of the closest form to a national museum, which is the ethnographic museum. In
the case of İzmir, the first steps were taken for constituting an ethnographic museum
with the separation of ethnographic objects before the moving the museum to the
Kültürpark, but in the Kültürpark museum the center-periphery relation still
prevailed. In both two museum building the ambition of linking Turkish history to
the recently invented periods and the ambition for linking to the grand art history
narrative through crediting the classical heritage were represented in bold form.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
393 Wendy Shaw, “National Museums,” p. 927.
394 Ibid., p. 926.
173"
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION
The concept of museum became a rising trend during the nineteenth century due to
the general environment during this turbulent period. Nineteenth century is a
turbulent time for the empires and the disintegration of empires as a result of the rise
of nationalism. Eric Hobsbawm’s term “the long nineteenth century”395 covers a time
frame that started in 1789 with the French Revolutions, which was pointed as the
beginning of nationalist trends and ended in 1914 with World War I, which was the
final destruction for the unity of the empires. Both the disintegrating empires and
recently formed nation-states had to invent some methods for strengthening their
identity, whether it was in process of disintegrating or being formed. Museums with
the opportunities they suggested for the creating references for identities and history
narratives became the rising trend during nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in
for empires and nation-states.
The Ottoman Empire’s experiencing the nineteenth century and onwards was
not very distinctive from the other empires. In this period Ottoman Empire’s
westernizing and raising a western-minded generation projects started to give their
fruits. Modernization of the country in political sense and constitutional reform were
executed by the efforts of this invested generation. İlber Ortaylı identifies the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
395 Hobsbawm explain this term through out his trilogy; The Age of Revolution: 1789-1848, The Age
of Capital: 1848-1875, The Age of Empire: 1875-1914.
174"
nineteenth century of the Ottoman Empire and the early twentieth century as “the
longest century of the empire” 396 in a similar sense with Hobsbawm. Disintegration
thread to the Ottoman Empire was received in nineteenth century and ended up with
the declaration of the Turkish Republic, which means the emergence of Turkish
nation-state.
The concept of museum was introduced to the empire in the nineteenth
century and served in many ways. Through this new concept the Empire found a way
to carve a room for itself in the cultural circulation and the grand art narrative. The
artifacts from the territories and archeological findings from an extensively large
excavation geography from Mesopotamia to Aegean regions were accumulated in the
central museum: İstanbul Archeology Museum. In the eve of disintegration the
Empire was broadcasting the message of being the center of all peripheries. The
museum was the showcase of how the Empire could go further in the science of
archeology and could protect its antiquities from the foreign archeologists who were
highly involved in bringing the Empire’s antiquities to surface. The classification of
the objects in İstanbul Archeology Museum demonstrated the claim of the empire on
the archeological heritage on its land.
İstanbul Archeology Museum was founded at the end of the nineteenth
century in such an environment. The museum was an outcome of the concern for
constructing a unifying identity for the subjects of the Empire. İstanbul was still the
center, and the artifacts from peripheries were stored in this central museum as the
pieces glorifying the sultanate. İzmir Archeology Museum, on the other hand, was a
project of the Republic and the nation-state. It was emerged as one of the provincial
museum that proliferated all over Anatolia (Konya, Adana, and Bursa for instance).
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
396 İlber Ortaylı, İmparatorluğun En Uzun Yüzyılı (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2002), p. 31.
175"
The political environments, which around the museums in İstanbul and İzmir
flourished might seem contradicting to each other but the parallelism between them
propose a more complicated relation between the two museums.
One of the reasons that persuade the Ottoman Empire for the necessity of an
archeological museum was the desire for demonstration of the Empire’s adequacy
and capacity to appreciate the archeological findings. This desire and claim was
exhibited through the arrangement of the museum around the pieces that were seen
as a sign of the archeological victories. The foreign archeologists and countries had
been digging and taking the archeological findings of the empire abroad for centuries
until a functioning regulation was constituted in 1884. In the İzmir Archeology
Museum the main concerns of İstanbul Archeology Museum, which were linking
itself to the grand art narrative and demonstrating state’s victory of keeping its
antiquities were still on the agenda. The identity policies of the Ottoman Empire and
the Republic might be contradicting. However İstanbul Archeology Museum was
still considered as the center of the peripheries and an archetype for the İzmir
Archeology Museum. On the other hand some institution of the Ottoman Empire
including the Ministry of Education, which was the responsible body for managing
the conservation and museum affairs were sustained in almost the same structure.
Using the archeological items functionally as the demonstrators of the territorial
claims was another shared aspects of the İstanbul and the İzmir museums. The items
which were subject of the rivalry between the state and foreign archeologists were
situated at the centers of both the İstanbul Museum and the İzmir Museum. The
continuity in some of the institutions of the Empire and the Republic and in the
perception of antiquities were valid and effective reasons for the parallelism between
the İstanbul and İzmir Archeology Museums but the impact of the personalities
176"
should not be ignored. Aziz Ogan, the founder of the İzmir Archeology Museum was
trained by Osman Hamdi Bey who was the most important figure for transformation
of the İstanbul Archeology Museum with his scientific classifications methods. It is
quite understandable to see Ogan practicing in İzmir what he learned from his
mentor.
İzmir archeology Museum was an institution that emphasized the universal
messages of the Republic, which were the link to the grand art narrative through
housing the Greco Roman heritage. The museum demonstrated the right of the
Republic on the antique sites and antiquities through pointing the center of the
museum with significant and symbolic pieces. On the other hand, the museum
institution was a local museum, which had a very local agenda (which is
nationalization of the city) combined with its broader agenda.
The role of the museum in the nationalization of the city and removing the
traces of the cosmopolitan past was significant with its two aspects: the location of
the museum buildings and the sources it acquired most of its collections from. The
first museum building situated in one of the rare undamaged church buildings which
was the Aya Vukla church. It meant the radical conversion of one the rare remnants
of the Greek architectural heritage. The second museum building’s location was a
pavilion in Kültürpark and this park site was an invention for the re-development and
transformation of the fire zone and at the same time producing national pride through
advertising the advancement of the Republic to local and foreign eyes
The collecting policy of the museum was another issue that gave a
differentiating character to the museum. İzmir Archeology Museum gained a
significant amount of books and painting from the abandoned properties of the
departed communities, which were confiscated by the state. The base of the museum
177"
as all the locations it was situated on and the materials that the museum constituted
its collection from were the properties of the departed non-Muslim population of the
city. The museum utilized from and nationalized the heritage of the departed non-
Muslim communities. In my opinion this aspect of the museum and the role of the
abandoned properties in this foundation makes it a special case among the other
Republican provincial museums in addition to the central position of İzmir
Archeology Museum on the Aegean cost.
Aziz Ogan took the matter of founding a museum in İzmir as a serious
academic study and constituted the first archeology museum of the city out of a
damaged church building. As he was schematized his methodology of founding
museum in one of the reports he wrote later, he executed all the stages of founding in
İzmir Archeology Museum. Ogan first of all arranged a proper building for the
museum and officially initiated the process. He brought the objects to constitute the
museum collections from the excavation sites of İzmir’s hinterland and the
abandoned properties depots in addition to some donated collections and gifts. The
classification of these objects was the final phase to shape the museum. Founding a
museum was an academic process for Ogan, which could not be completed without
publishing academic writings on them. In the cases of founding of İzmir Archeology
Museum and excavations around İzmir, Ogan finalized these academic processes
with the publications he prepared with the contributions of İzmir Asar-ı Atika
Muhipleri Cemiyeti (the Society of Enthusiast Antiquities). Their most important
publication is the museum guide, which has two editions in 1927 and 1932 and
consists of 300 pages and 200 photographs.397 The translation of the museum guide
in French was also published. Aziz Ogan and the Association considered the
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
397 Erkan Serçe, “İzmir Havalisi,” p. 170.
178"
excavation and conservation work as their academic studies and in addition to the
museum guide they published various academic papers and some other museum
guides for the local antique sites (Ephesus for instance).398
İzmir Archeology Museum was emerged as an institution, which had both
local and universal agendas generated within the context of the post-World War I
environment. The museum and other conservational issues surrounding it were
executed by a highly conscious team under the supervision of Aziz Ogan who should
be named as the founder of the museum. These processes should be considered as
serious academic processes of which outputs are the academic publications on
excavation sites and local museums of İzmir and its hinterland. This master thesis
attempted to explore and elaborate the process of founding İzmir Archeology
Museum in details under the guidance of Aziz Ogan’s personal archive and its
relation with the dynamics of post-war environment, which is a time of both political
and demographic vitality.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
398 See Appendix B for the complete list of Âsar-ı Atika Muhibleri Cemiyeti and Aziz Ogan’s publications.
179"
APPENDIX A
TRANSLITERATION OF THE CRUCIAL DOCUMENTS
180"
Figure 1. Unsigned letter to Aziz Ogan (16.06.1923)
Transliteration of Figure 1
İzmir
16 Haziran 1339
Azizim muhterem beyim efendim,
Beni pek sevindiren 5 Haziran 39 tarihli bir kıta iltifatnamenizi aldım. İzmirde bir
Etnografik müze ihdâsı hakkındaki samîmi fikrinizi tehâlükle alkışlarım. İzmirde
ufak kıtʻada zarif bir müze binâsı inşâsı hakkındaki teşebbüs fikr-i âcizâneme kalırsa
şöyle olmalıdır: Vilâyet bu masrafın bir kısmını gerek kendi bütçesinden ve gerek
müsâmereler tertîbiyle ve suver-i sâire ile temin edebilir. Kısm-ı diğerini ise Maârif
Vekâleti deruhde eder. Fi'l-hakika vaktiyle Konya ve Bursa'da müze şubeleri inşâsına
taʻalluku cihetiyle İstanbul Müzesi yardım etmiş idi. Tabiî İstanbul müzesinin umûr
ve muâmelatı hars bütçesine inkılâb etmiştir. Müdîriyet-i aliyyelerinin vâsiʻ bir
bütçesi olmak îcâb etmektedir. Binaen aleyh evvel emirde makam-ı vilâyete bir
tahrîrât yazılarak İzmir'de Bahribaba (?) Musevi kabristanında bir müze inşâsı için ne
mikdar para sarfına lüzum olacağı ve bu paranın ne kadarının vilayetçe temin
buyurulacağı istifsâr olunmalıdır. Sarfiyât mikdârı tayin edilince meselenin çetin
kısımları hal olunmuş olur.
Bey Efendi İzmir’de bir müze olmaması en büyük bir noksanlıktır. Bunun lüzumu
gerek vekâlet-i celîle ve gerek vilâyetçe de takdîr buyurularak îcâbına tevessül
etmelidir. Her halde İzmir’de serîʻan böyle bir müessese-i irfanın tesîsinde müctenib
181"
kalınmamalıdır. Şurasını da arz edeyim ki, işgal-i menhûsda murdar palikaryaların
her tarafı yakıp yıkarken, insanları boğazlarken mahzâ bir gösteriş olmak için
mahallî müze inşâsı için temel hafriyâtına başlamış oldukları da zikredilebilir. Her ne
hâl ise fi'l-hakîka bu gibi ilmi müesseseler baʻde's-sulh yapılabilir. Maksad bu
lüzumu takdîr etmekdir. Harabelerdeki tahrîbât vâsiʻ bir mikyasda ilerlemekdedir.
Bu da henüz bekçiler ikâme edilememesinden ileri geliyor. Bergama'daki harâbe
bekçisi resmen de arz ettiğim vechile çokdan istiʻfâsını vermişdir. Ve harâbe
bekçisizdir. Fi'l-hakîka istirdâddan Şubat'a kadar kaza kaymakamı iâne ile bekçinin
muvakkat bir zaman için maaşını temin etmiştir. Hatta tedârikinden âciz kaldığı otuz
lirayı da hâk-i pâyinize göndermiş idi. Öteden beri gerek müze memurlarının ve
gerek harâbe bekçilerinin maâşı müzeden yani muvâzene-i umûmiyeden veriliyor idi.
Muhâsebe-i vilâyet üzerine almamış idi. Bu sene sâbık maârif müdürü, Vasıf Bey
ısrârım üzerine bekçilerin maâşlarının muhâsebe-i husûsiye-i vilâyetden teʼdiyesi
için meclis-i umûmiye-i vilâyetde çok çalıştı, gayret etti. Fakat kabul ettiremedi.
Binâenaleyh bunun vekâlet bütçesinden (hars idaresinin) tesviyesinden başka çare
yokdur.
Acaba 39 bütçesinin kabul ve tasdiki daha ne zamana kadar sürecektir.
Tahsisatsızlıkla burada bir iş yapabilmek imkanı görülmüyor. Hatta kırtasiyem bile
yoktur. Tahsisat olsa: adliye bahçesinde perişan bir halde duran heykellere kaideler
imali, muhterik Evangelikî Müzesi'ndeki âsârın adliye bahçesine celbi gibi husûsat
yapılabilir. Fakat para olmadıkça bir şey yapılamaz ki. Memleketimizde garb
müzeleriyle rekâbet edebilecek müzeyi vücûda getiren muhterem bir aile efrâdından
bulunmanız dolayısıyla âsâr-ı atîka işlerine fazlaca ehemmiyet verilmesini îcâb
idenler nezdinde teşebbüsâtda bulunmanızı hâssaten rica ederim. Sulhu müteâkib
182"
birçok heyet-i ilmiyeler buraya gelmeye başlayacaklar. Îcâb-ı hâl onlara refâkatim
îcâb edecek. Halbuki Teos'a gitmek bile müyesser olamıyor. Berây-ı tedkîkât-ı
Teos'a kadar ne mikdar harcırâha ihtiyaç bulunduğu soruluyor. Buraya henüz
gitmedim ve mevkii bilmiyorum. Fakat bugün bilenlerden öğrendiğime göre kırk beş
elli liraya kadar ihtiyaç varmış. Uzunca yazdım, tasdî’ ettim, afvedersiniz bâkî
teveccühât kıymetdârânelerinin istibkâsını rica ve hürmetlerimi takdîm ederim beyim
efendim.
Figure 2. Unsigned correspondence to the Directorship of Pious Endowments
(11.10.1923)
183"
Transliteration of Figure 2
Evkaf Müdiriyetine,
Seydhîköy, Bornova, Değirmendere, Dağkızılca, Torbâlı Nâhiye
müdiriyyetlerine,
Kazâ kâymakâmlıklarına;
Câmî‘, mescid, medrese, tekye, türbe ve merkad, ‘atik han, çeşme, hamâm ve
sebillerin ma‘lûmâ’t-ı tarihiyyeleri ve bunlarda mevcûd olan asâr-ı kadime-i milliyye
hakkında Ma‘ârif Vekâleti Hars Müdiriyetinin 10 Kânûn-ı Evvel 39 târih ve 92
numaralı tahrirât-ı ‘umûmiyesiyle ma‘lûmât taleb edilmekte olduğundan asâr-ı ‘atîka
müfettişliğince bu babda müretteb cedvel numûneleri leffen irsâl kılındı. Ma‘lûmât-ı
matlûbeyi mübeyyin olmak üzere işbu numûneye göre tanzîm kılınacak cedvellerin
Kanunısani 40 gayesine kadar irsali matlubdur efendim. Fi 26 Kânûn-ı Evvel 339.
Tahşiye:
[Kâymakâmlarla nâhiye müdiriyetlerine]
Merkez kazâ veya nahiye ile karyelerde mü’esses mekteb mu‘allimlerinden bu
husûsda istifâde edilebileceği ‘ilâveten beyân olunur efendi
184"
Figure 3. Undated investigation/inventorying chart
!
185!
Transliteration of Figure 3
Numara 2
Mescidler
Sıra
Numara
sı
Kazası Nahiyesi Karye veya
Mahallesi
Bânisi Tarih-i
İnşası
Derununda mevcud asar-ı kadimiyye-i
milliyye hakkında izahat
Numara 3
Medreseler
Sıra
Numara
sı
Kazası Nahiyesi Karye veya
Mahallesi
Banisi Tarih-i
İnşası
Hangi cami‘ veya mescidle alakası olduğu
Derununda asar-ı kadimiyye-i milliyyeden
ma‘dud ne gibi eserler mevcud olduğu
Camiler
Sıra
Numaras
Kazası Nahiyesi Karye
veya
mahallesi
Bânisi Tarih-i
inşâsı
Minaresinin Kitabesi
mevcud ise
‘aynen
sureti
Kitabenin nesih, rik‘a, sülüs,
divani, kufi gibi kava‘id-i hattan
hangisine tabi bulunduğu
Cami‘ derununda mevcud
asar-ı kadimiyye-i milliyye
hakkında izahat
(Halı, sırça ve çini, renkli
camlar, şamdanlar, localar
ve hattatî gibi hususata
mütedâir)
‘Adedi Tarz-ı İnşası
(Tuğla veya
mermerden)
1
2
3
!
186!
Numara 4
Merkad ve Türbeler
Sıra
Numara
sı
Kazası Nahiyesi Karye veya
Mahallesi
Medfun olan
zatın isim ve
şöhreti
Tarih-i
vefatı
Şöhret-i tarihiyyeyi haiz ise bu
babda izahat i‘tası
Kitabe mevcud ise sureti
Numara 5
Dergah
Sıra
Numaras
ı
Kazası Karye veya
Mahallesi
Mensub olduğu
tarikat
Banisi Tarih-i inşası Mevcud ise
kitabesi
Derununda mevcud olan merkad
ve türbelere aid izahat
Âsâr-ı kadimiyye-i
milliyyemizden ma‘dud ne gibi
eserlerin mevcud olduğu
Numara 6
Atik han, çeşme ve sebillerle hamamlar
Sıra
Numarası
Kazası Karye veya
Mahallesi
Banisi Tarih-i inşası Kitabesinin aynen sureti Kitabenin kava‘id-i hattan hangisine tabi olduğu Mülahazat
!
187!
Figure 4. Undated interview with Aziz Ogan from an anonymous newspape
!
188!
Transliteration of Figure 4
Asar-ı ‘Atika ve Müze:
Mülakat
İzmir ve muhiti asar-ı ‘atika i‘tibariyle pek zengindir. Buralarda mütemeddid hükümetler
gelip gitmiş, mütemeddid medeniyetler münkarız olmuştur. Bina’en‘aleyh bu nokta-i nazardan
ehemmiyet-i ‘azimeyi haiz bulunuyor. İstirdaddan sonra ise bir müze teşkili mevzu‘-bahs olmağa
başladı. Bu bahis ..(kavlde) kalmadı gün geçdikçe fi‘liyata yakalandı. Buna mebni
muharrirlerimizden biri gerek asar-ı ‘atika ve gerek müze etrafında salahiyetdar bir zata
müraca‘atla ma‘lumat istihsal etmek ve kari’lerimizi tenvir etmek lüzumunu …(hiss) ettik.
Bunun üzerine İzmir ve hevalisi asar-ı ‘atika müfettişi ‘Aziz Bey’i ziyaret ettirerek bir mülakat
yaptırdık. Mülakata başlamazdan evvel şurasını ‘arz edelim ki: ‘Aziz Bey bilhassa müze teşkili
ve asar-ı ‘atika müfettişliği gibi pek mühim iki vazife ile İstanbul müzesinden alınarak şehrimize
getirilmiş pek kıymetdar gençlerimizdendir. Bina’en‘aleyh muvaffak olacaklarını şüphesiz ….(
Mülakatı..) kari’lerimize ‘arz ediyoruz.
1- İzmir’de Asar-ı ‘Atika müzesi te’sisinden bahsediliyor. Ma‘lumat lütfeder misiniz?
‘Alel‘umum müzelerin tarihe, ma‘arife, sanayi‘e pek büyük hizmetleri olduğunu, bilhassa
asar-ı ‘atika müzesinin tarih-i kadimin birçok karanlık sahifelerini tenvir etiği çoktan beri takdir
olunarak cihan-ı medeniyette bunlara layık olduğu derecede ehemmiyet verilmektedir. Memalik-i
müterakkiyenin hemen her kasabasında büyük küçük birer ve büyük şehirlerinde ise sunuf-ı
muhtelifeye mahsus müte‘addid müzeler tesisiyle memleketin ‘irfanına hizmet edilmektedir.
Yabancı bir memlekete gelen münevver kimseler en evvel oranın müzelerini ziyaret ve tedkik
ederler. İzmir ve hevalisi gibi akvam-ı kadimiyye-i medeniyyete uzun müddet sahne olmuş bir
mıntıkada böyle bir mü’essese-i ‘irfanın vücuda getirilmesi tabi‘dir.
2- İzmir Müzesinin istikbali hakkındaki tahminleriniz ne merkezdedir?
İzmir müzesi merkezi bir müze olacaktır. İzmir’in asar-ı ‘atika müzesi gerek merkezde gerek
Bergama, Ayasuluğ vesaire gibi hafriyat mahallerinde hal-i hâzırda mevcud asar-ı mekşufe ile
cidden zengin bir müze olmağa müsta‘iddir. Bunlar meyanında hassaten mefahir-i milliyyemizin
âbidâtı hükmünde olan asar-ı İslamiyyenin toplanmasına pek fazla gayret sarf edilecektir.
Bunlardan ma‘ada müzenin bir resim galerisiyle beraber elsine-i şarkıyye ve garbiyye üzerine
muharrer tarih, coğrafya, seyahatname, kadim atlaslar ve elyevm Berlin, Paris, New York ve
Londra’da da intişar etmekte olan mesa’il-i mevkutelerden müretteb müzenin bir de ‘ilmi
kütüphanesi olacaktır. İzmir belde-i mu‘azzamasının şerefiyle mütenasip yeni bir daire inşası
tabi‘dir. Ancak bu arzunun husulüne değin Basmahane istasyonu civarındaki metruk Ayavukla
kilisesinin müze ittihazı takarrür etmiştir. Ancak cüz’i ta‘mirata ihtiyaç vardır. Ta‘mirat için
iktiza eden keşifnamesi muhasebe-i hususiyye mi‘marlarınca ihzar olunmaktadır. Tahsisat
i‘tasıyla ta‘miratı müte‘akib der‘akap nakliyyata başlanılacaktır.
!
189!
3- Tahsisatı verecek hangi makamdır?
Ma‘arif vekaletidir. Fakat müzeler mensub oldukları beldelerin medar ve fahr ve şerefi
oldukları için ibtidai masarıf-ı te’sisiyyelerini bütçelerine göre o beldelerin ya tamamen veya
kısmen deru‘hde ettikleri de vakidir. Misal olarak Konya ve Bursa müzelerinin bu suretle vücuda
getirildiğini zikredebiliriz.
4- Vilayette başlıca asar-ı ‘atika menatıkı hangileridir?
Vilayetin teşkilat-ı mülkiyesine nazaran belli başlı harabeleri Bergama, Değirmendere
nahiyesinde Nevtiyon (?)ve Kolofon, Seferihisar’da Teos’dan ‘ibarettir. Bunlardan ma‘ada birer
medeniyyet-i münkarizeyi gösteren harabeler az değildir. Selçuk nahiyesindeki harab Aydınoğlu
‘İsa Bey Cami‘yle Selçuki zamanından kalma hamam vesa’ir mebani-i mi‘mariyye bugün pek
harab bir halde bulunmalarına rağmen şayan-ı temaşa ve tedkik asar-ı bedi‘adandır.
Verdikleri bu izahat-ı müfide üzerine ‘Aziz Beye teşekkürle ayrıldıktan sonra kendi kendime
diyordum ki kariben gelecek ecnebilere medar-ı fahriyemiz olacak bir mü’esseseyi gösterebilecek
ve bu suretle İzmir’i müzesiyle de yad ettirebileceğiz
!
190!
Figure 5. Undated report to the Directorship of Culture (31.5.1924)
!
191!
Transliteration of Figure 5
Numara: 318 31 Mayıs 1340
Hars Müdiriyeti ‘Aliyyesine
11 Mayıs 340 târih ve 310 numaralı tahrirat-ı ‘âcizâneme zeyldir:
İzmir muhitinin ‘ilim ve ‘irfâna karşı beslediği harâretli iştiyâk çokdan beri burada bir
müze şu‘besi küşâdını iltizâm etmekte bulunmuş ve mukaddemâ tafsîlen ‘arz edildiği
vecihle her teşebbüs birer vesile ile ‘akâmete ma‘ruz kalmış idi. Bir binânın ez her canib
müzeye elverîşlî olması, onun sırf bu maksadla inşâ edilmiş bulunmasına tevakkuf eder.
Yoksa herhangi bir binâ müze yapılmasında aranılan şeraiti tamamen ihtivâ edemez.
Evvel emirde (Monuman arşitektoral) kısmına ayırılacak bir sâlônun metânet ve salâbeti
aranılan en birinci şartlardandır. Bundan başka asârın orada tevfikan tasnîfi husûsunda
binânın tertibât-ı dâhiliyesinin ne mühim bir ‘âmil teşkîl ettiği bedîhîdir. Şu hâlde
müzelerin en pratik ve en elverîşlî olanları sırf bu maksadla yapılmış olanlarıdır. İzmir
şehrinin âtî-i istikbâli pek parlakdır. ‘Aynı zamanda memleket dahilindeki medeniyyet-i
kadîme izlerinin elyevm bâkî ve birçok Cemiyyât-ı ‘âliyyenin hafriyât icrâsına tâlib
olmaları İzmir müzesinin dahi parlak bir âtîye mazhar olacağına burhân-ı kât‘idir. Me‘ahazâ,
müte‘addid hafriyât mahâllerindeki asâr-ı mekşûfenin celbi bile bâşlı bâşına bir
müze vücûd bulmasına kâfî gelebilir. Şu nokta-i nazardan İzmir’de beldenin şeref ve
‘azametine
!
192!
Figure 6. Undated draft of museum guide (handwriting)
!
193!
Transliteration of Figure 6
İzmir Asâr-ı ‘Atîka Müzesi
İzmir Asâr-ı ‘Atîka Müzesi, Basmahâne civârında ve Kemer Caddesi üzerinde Hürriyet
Sokağındadır.
İzmir’in yângın mahallerinde ve ‘asrî bir sûretde açılan geniş caddelerin müntehâsında
ve etrâfı parkla muhâtten mu‘tena bir yerinde târihî mıntıkanın icâbâtından olmak üzere
parlak bir âtîye nâmzed olan İzmir Müzesi için cesim bir binâ inşâsı musammemdir.
Binâ’en‘aleyh şimdiki müze binâsı; harâb ve nâtamâm bir suretde metrûk bir kilise iken
haylî masraf ihtiyâriyle ta‘mîr ve bütün nevâkısı ikmâl olunarak Bergama, Ayasuluğ,
…., Kolofon, Teos, Milet, Didim, Periyen (?) vesa’ire gibi birçok mevâki‘den bir haylî
asâr ve masnû‘ât-ı ‘atîka celb ve bunlar ‘ilmî bir suretde tasnîfe tâbi’ kılınarak teşhîr
olunmuştur.
Muhtevîyâtı, temâşâgirânınca da takdîr ve teslîm buyurulacağı vechle içlerinde pek
nâdîde ve kıymetdâr asâr ile ‘adedleri yüzlerce parçalara bâliğ olan İzmir Müzesi, henüz
pek genç olmağla beraber şimdiden zengîn bir çehre ‘arz etmektedir. Bahusûs bugünki
mevcûdâtı arasında târihin tenvîrine medâr olabilecek mahkûkât ve tahsîs (Lidya)
kitâbeleri gibi cihân müzelerinde bile mevcûd olmayan eserler, İzmir Müzesi’ne istisnâ’î
ve mahallî bir vaziyyet bahş etmektedir.
Müze, meslek kitâplarından ‘ibâret küçük bir kütüphânesi, ufâk bir asâr-ı nakşiyye
koleksiyônuyla, Türkiye Cumhûrîyeti’nin mâzîye bıraktığı mefsûh tekyelerin eşyâsından
vücuda getirilmiş (İnkılâb Müzesi) şu‘besini ihtivâ etmektedir. Son zamânlarda Türk
etnografisi nokta-i nazarından eşyâ cem‘ ve iddihârına başlanılmıştır.
Velhâsıl İzmir Müzesi’nin terakki ve tekâmülü emrinde pek ciddî çalışılmakta olup,
bahusûs asâr-ı ‘atîka hafriyâtında zuhûr eden eserlerin de peyderpey cem‘ ve teşhîr
edilmekte olması ‘itibârıyla İzmir Müzesi’nin yakîn bir âtîde Türkiye Cumhûriyeti’nin
en zengin bir müzesi olacağı muhakkaktır.
!
194!
APPENDIX B
THE LIST OF THE PUBLICATION OF AZIZ OGAN AND ASAR-I ATIKA
MUHIPLERİ CEMİYETİ (THE SOCIETY OF ENTHUSIASTS OF ANTIQUITIES)
1. Aziz Ogan İzmir Âsar-ı Atika Müzesi Rehberi. İzmir: Hafız Ali Matbaası, 1927.
2. Aziz Ogan. Efezos-Ayasulug Rehberi. İzmir: Hafız Ali Matbaası. 1927.
3. Aziz Ogan. Guide du Musée de Smyrne. İstanbul: Imprimerie Resimli Ay. 1933.
4. Bernard Hausoulier, Bergama Tarihi ve Rehberi. Translated by M. Rahmi and A.
Aziz. İzmir: Hafız Ali Matbaası, 1929.
5. Félix Sartiaux. Küçük Asyada Ölmüş Şehirler,Priyen-Mile-Didim-Hierapolis.
Translated by M.Rahmi Balaban. İzmir: Hafız Ali Matbaası, 1931.
6. Bonavantür F. Slars ve Ikonomos. İzmir Hakkında Tetkikat. Translated by Arapzade
Cevdet. İzmir: Marifet Matbaası, 1932.
7. H. C. Butler. Sart Harabeleri.Translated by M. Rahmi Balaban and Cezmi Tahir. İzmir: Marifet
Matbaası, 1932.
8. Aziz Ogan. İzmir Müzesi Rehberi. Istanbul: Resimli Ay Matbaası T. L. Şirketi,1932.
9. Selahaddin Kandemir. Turova Harabeleri ve Akalar, Hitit Imparatorluğu
Konferansı. İzmir: Nefaset Matbbası, 1933.
10. İzmir Rehberi. Istanbul: Resimli Ay Matbaası T. L. Şirketi, 1934.
11. Les Ruines Efes. İzmir: Nefaset Matbaası, 1934.
12. Efes Harabeleri Rehberi. İzmir: Nefaset Matbaası, 1934.
13. Bergama Harabeleri. İzmir Nefaset Matbaası: 1934.
14. İzmir Panoraması. İzmir: Nefaset Matbaası, 1934.
15. The Antiquities of Ephesus. İzmir: 1934.
!
195!
16. Les Ruines Bergama. İzmir: Nefaset Matbaası, 1934.
17. Bergama Harabeleri (İngilizce)
18. Guide Panaromique d’İzmir. İzmir: Nefaset Matbaası, 1934.
19. Helene Miltner - Y. Bahlan. Eski İzmir, Navluhan - Tantalis ve Larisa
Şehirleri Harabeleri. İzmir: Nefaset Matbaası, 1934.
20. Guide d’İzmir. Istanbul: Resimli Ay Matbaası T. L. Şirketi, 1934
!
196!
APPENDIX C
THE DOCUMENTS FROM AZİZ OGAN’S ARCHIVE
Figure 1. Unsigned letter to Aziz Ogan (16.6.1923)
!
197!
Figure 2. Report by Aziz Ogan (Director of İstanbul Archeology Museum) to the
inspectors of the Ministry of Culture (he must refer to the Directorship of
Culture), (1937)
!
198!
2. Report by Aziz Ogan (Director of the İstanbul Archeology Museum) to the
inspectors of the Ministry of Culture (he must refer to the Directorship of
Culture), (1937)
!
199!
Figure 3. Unsigned letter to Aziz Ogan (November or December 1928)
!
200!
Figure 4. Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Ministry of
Education (Teşrin-i evvel, 1926)
Figure 5. Undated investigation/inventorying chart
!
201!
Figure 6. Investigation/inventorying chart (1.1.1924)
Figure 7. Undated, unsigned investigation/inventorying chart
!
202!
Figure 8. Undated interview with Aziz Ogan from an anonymous newspaper
!
203!
Figure 9. Unsigned (erased) correspondence to the Directorships of Education in
Aydın, Saruhan, Denizli, Menteşe
Figure 10. Unsigned report demanded from the İzmir Museum of Antiques
(9.10.1925)
!
204!
Figure 11. Report written by the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the administration
of İzmir (9.10.1925)
Figure 12. Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to Aydın
Directorship of Education (28.5.926)
!
205!
Figure 13. Letter from a staff member to Aziz Ogan (18.8.1926)
!
206!
Figure 14. Damage assessment report (with an erased letter head) written to the
Inspectorship of İzmir Region (6.9.1923)
!
207!
Figure 15. Undated report of the civil servants of the Directorship of Pious
Endowments,
Figure 16. Examination report from a civil servant of the Inspectorship of
Antiquities to the Directorship of Culture (20.9.1923)
!
208!
Figure 17. Correspondence from the of Antiquities to the Directorship of Education
in Aydin (26.9.1926)
Figure 18. Undated report to the Directorship of Culture (31.5.1924)
!
209!
Figure 19. Undated report to the Directorship of Culture (31.5.1924)
!
210!
Figure 20. Report from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Ministry of
Education (14.3.1926)
Figure 21. Report from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Ministry of
Education (14.3.1926)
!
211!
Figure 22. Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Ministry of
Education (Teşrin-i evvel, 1926)
!
212!
Figure 23. Undated draft of museum guide (handwriting)
!
213!
Figure 24. Unsigned correspondence to the İzmir Directorship of Education
(6.9.1923),
Figure 25. Unsigned correspondence to the Directorship of Culture (3.6.1924)
!
214!
Figure 26. Undated, unsigned list for the museum sections,
Figure 27. Undated draft of museum guide (handwriting)
!
215!
Figure 28. The guideline of the painting exhibition organized by the İzmir Museum
(June, 1927)
!
216!
Figure 29. Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to Ministry of
Education (7.7.1927)
Figure 30. A letter from the president of Turkish Heart in İzmir to Aziz Ogan
(30.4.1927)
!
217!
Figure 31. Report about the current situation of libraries in İzmir from the
Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Directorship of Culture (9.19.192)
!
218!
Figure 32. Report from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to Ministry of Education
(1.5.1925
!
219!
Figure 33. Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Ministry of
Education (7.9.1926)
Figure 34. Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Ministry of
Education (7.3.1926)
!
220!
Figure 35. Aziz Ogan’s resignation letter to the Association of Turkish Artists in
İzmir (24.2.1939)
Figure 36. Undated, unsigned list of sold paintings
!
221!
Figure 37. Undated note from the Inspector of Antiquities (presumable Aziz Ogan)
to the local administration of Ödemiş
Figure 38. Correspondence from the Inspector (of Antiquities) to the Management of
the İzmir Museum (4.9.9)
!
222!
Figure 39. Correspondence from the Ministry of Education to the Inspectorship of
Antiquities and Culture in İzmir (14.6.1924)
Figure 40. Unsigned correspondence to the Directorship of Culture (1.29.1923)
!
223!
Figure 41. Correspondence from the Directorship of Culture to İzmir Directorship of
Culture (1.1.1929)
Figure 42. Unsigned correspondence to the Directorship of Culture (2.7.1923)
!
224!
Figure 43. The inventory and investigation report of Konya Mevlana Dervish
Convent (Museum) written to Ministry of Education, (4.5.1929)
!
225!
Figure 44. The inventory and investigation report of Konya Mevlana Dervish
Convent (Museum) written to Ministry of Education, (4.5.1929)
!
226!
Figure 45. The report on the Seyid Gazi and Battal Gazi Tombs by Director of
Education Talat to Inspector of Ministry of Education Aziz Ogan, (6.9.1929)
!
227!
Figure 46. Telegram from the Directorship of Culture to the İzmir Directorship of
Education, (7.8.1929)
Figure 47. Report on the investigated abandoned properties by the inspector of
antiquities Aziz Ogan to the İzmir Education Office, (15.1.1930)
!
228!
Figure 48. Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the İzmir
Directorship of Education (5.6.1923)
Figure 49. Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Liquidation
Commission, (8.9.1923)
!
229!
Figure 50. Correspondence from the Directorship of Abandoned Properties to the
İzmir Museum of Antiquities (16.5.1930)
!
230!
Figure 51. Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Directorship
of Culture, (21.6.1923)
!
231!
Figure 52. Letter from the inspector of antiquities to the Directorship of Culture
(19.4.1930)
!
232!
! !
Figure 53. Correspondence form the İzmir education Office to the Directorship of
Culture (30.9.1925)
Figure 54. Report from İzmir Education Office to the Directorship of Culture
(14.10.1924)
!
233!
Figure 55. List of confiscated books from the İzmir Education Office to the İzmir
Directorship of Education (26.1.1925)
Figure 56. List of Confiscated books from the İzmir Education Office to the
Directorship of Culture, (1.3.1925)
!
234!
Figure 57. Correspondence form the Inspector of Antiquities of İzmir and its
hinterland Aziz Ogan to the Directorship of Culture, (19.6.1923)
Figure 58. Unsigned report to the Directorship of Education (9.10.1823)
!
235!
Figure 59. Unsigned report to the İzmir Directorship of education (1.11.1923)
Figure 60. Correspondence from İzmir Education Office to the Directorship of
Culture (26.11.1923)
!
236!
Figure 61. Correspondence from the Ministry of Education to the Inspector of
Antiquities Aziz Ogan (18.9.1929)
Figure 62. Correspondence form the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Ministry of
Education, (7.10.1923)
!
237!
Figure 63. Undated correspondence from the İzmir Education Office to the
Lieutenant and Photographing Teacher Nazım Bey
Figure 64. Correspondence from the Director of the District (probably abandoned
property district), (9.4.1923)
!
238!
Figure 65. Correspondence from the Ministry of Education to the Inspector of
Antiquities in İzmir Aziz Ogan, (28.6.1923)
Figure 66. Correspondence from the İstanbul Museum of Antiquities to the
Inspectorship of Antiquities in İzmir Aziz Ogan, (20.6.1923)
!
239!
Figure 67. Unsigned correspondence to the Directorship of Culture, (29.4.1929)
Figure 68. Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Directorship
of Museums, (13.9.1923)
!
240!
Figure 69. Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the İstanbul
Museum, (21.8.1923)
Figure 70. Letter from Aziz Ogan to General and Local Governor of İzmir Kazım
Dirlik, (1.8.1923)
!
241!
Figure 71. Correspondence from the Inspectorship of Antiquities to the Inspector of
Antiquities in İzmir Aziz Ogan, (12.4.1923)
Figure 72. Correspondence with an indefinite signature to the Administration of
İkiçeşmelik, (?.6.1923)
!
242!
Figure 73. Official communication of Ministry of Education, (16.2.1926)
Figure 74. Unsigned correspondence to the Inspectorship of Antiquities, (3.7.1923)
!
243!
Figure 75. Report by the Inspector (of Antiquities) Aziz Ogan to Ministry of
Education, (7.7.1929)
Figure 76. Report by the Inspector (of Antiquities) Aziz Ogan to the Directorship of
Culture, (7.7.1929)
!
244!
Figure 77. Undated correspondence from the İzmir Museum of the Antiquities to the
Directorship (of Antiquities)
Figure 78. Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Ministry of
Education (11.5.1926)
!
245!
Figure 79. Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of Antiquities to the Ministry of
Education (11.5.1926)
Figure 80. Correspondence form the substitute of the Ministry of Education to the
Inspectorship of Antiquities, (3.4.1929)
!
246!
Figure 81. Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of the Antiquities to the İzmir
Directorship of Education, (1928)
Figure 82. Correspondence from the İzmir Museum of the Antiquities to the İzmir
Directorship of Education, (5.5.1928)
!
247!
Figure 83. Report on Adana Museum 1929
!
248!
Figure 84. Report on Konya (Museum Mevlana Dervish Convent) (10.6.1929)
Figure 85. Undated draft of museum guide (handwriting)
!
249!
APPENDIX D
MAPS AND IMAGES
!!!!
Map 1. The Frank districts encapsulated by the railroad networks of İzmir and
sea.
Sibel Zandi-Sayek, Ottoman İzmir: the Rise of the Cosmopolitan Port, 1840-1880
(Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press, 2012), p. 26
!
250!
Map 2. The fire zone and the locations of the AyaVukla Church (43) and the train
statio (42) in the former and current churches of Smyrna map.
“Former and Current Churches of Smyrna/İzmir”, Levantine Heritage History of a
Community”, http://levantineheritage.com/data10.htm!
!
251!
Image 1. The inscription on the north door of the Aya Vukla
“The Ayavukla Church of Basmane, İzmir”, Levantine Heritage History of a
Community”, http://levantineheritage.com/ayavukla.htm
Image 2. The church during its construction
“The Ayavukla Church of Basmane, İzmir”, Levantine Heritage History of a
Community”, http://levantineheritage.com/ayavukla.htm
!
252!
Image 3. The main entrance gate of the courtyard, which still has the name of the
museum on top.
“The Ayavukla Church of Basmane, İzmir”, Levantine Heritage History of a
Community”, http://levantineheritage.com/ayavukla.htm
Image 4. The north door (left) and the south door (right).
“The Ayavukla Church of Basmane, İzmir”, Levantine Heritage History of a
Community”, http://levantineheritage.com/ayavukla.htm
!
253!
Image 5. The portico of the building
“The Ayavukla Church of Basmane, İzmir”, Levantine Heritage History of a
Community”, http://levantineheritage.com/ayavukla.htm
Image 6. The dome of the building and the Corinthian columns that it rises on.
“The Ayavukla Church of Basmane, İzmir”, Levantine Heritage History of a
Community”, http://levantineheritage.com/ayavukla.htm
!
254!
Image 7. The districts of İzmir
Sibel Zandi-Sayek, Ottoman İzmir: the Rise of the Cosmopolitan Port, 1840-1880
(Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press, 2012), p. 12-13
Image 8. The districts of İzmir
Sibel Zandi-Sayek, Ottoman İzmir: the Rise of the Cosmopolitan Port, 1840-1880
(Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press, 2012), p. 12-13
!
255!
Image 9. The exhibition hall of the museum
Aziz Ogan, İzmir Müzesi Rehberi (İstanbul: Resimli Ay Matbaasi, 1932)
Image 10. The open-air section of the museum.
Aziz Ogan, İzmir Müzesi Rehberi (İstanbul: Resimli Ay Matbaasi, 1932)
!
256!
Image 11. The plan of the museum in 1932 edition of the museum guide.
Aziz Ogan, İzmir Müzesi Rehberi (İstanbul: Resimli Ay Matbaasi, 1932)
!
257!
Image 12. The pieces from the Islamic Art Collection
1927-1928 İzmir Fotoğraf Albümü (İzmir: İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi, 2001)
Image 13. The Art Gallery Section
Aziz Ogan, İzmir Müzesi Rehberi (İstanbul: Resimli Ay Matbaasi, 1932)
!
258!
Image 14. The plan of Kültürpark.
“Kültürpark”, Ege Mimarlık 1 (1991), p.12
!
259!
Image 15. Undated, anonymous newspaper
!
260!
Image 16. The plan of the second museum building in the Kültürpark
İzmir Arkeoloji Müzesi (brochure), Ankara:Maarif Vekaleti Eski Eserler ve Müzeler
Umum Müdürlüğü, 1953
!
261!
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1927-1928 İzmir Fotoğraf Albümü. İzmir: İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi, 2001.
Allen, Henry Elisha. The Turkish transformation: A Study in Social and Religious Development.
New York: Greenwood Press, 1968.
Akçam, Taner. From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide.
London; New York: Zed Books, 2004.
Akgündüz, Ahmet and Said Öztürk, Yaşar Baş. Üç Devirde Bir Mabed: Ayasofya. İstanbul:
Osmanlı Araştırmaları Vakfı, 2005.
Akın, Nur. ”Osman Hamdi Bey, Âsâr-ı Atika Nizamnamesi ve Dönemin Koruma Anlayışı
Üzerine”. Osman Hamdi Bey ve Dönemi, edited by Zeynep Rona, 233-239. İstanbul:
Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 1993.
Akın, Yiğit. "Gürbüz ve Yavuz Evlatlar": Erken Cumhuriyet'te Beden Terbiyesi ve Spor.
İstanbul: İletişim, 2004.
Aksoy, Yaşar. Bir Kent Bir İnsan: İzmir’in Son Yüzyılı, S. Ferit Eczacıbaşı’nın Yaşamı ve
Anıları. İstanbul: Dr. Nejat F. Eczacıbaşı Vakfı Yayınları, 1986.
Alpers, Svetlana. “The Museum as a Way of Seeing.” Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetic and
Politic of Museum Display, edited by Ivan Karp and Steven D. Lavine, 25-32.
Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1991.
Arık, Remzi Oğuz. Türk Müzeciliğine Bir Bakış. İstanbul: Millî Eğitim Basımevi, 1953.
Arseven, Celal Esad. Türk Sanatı. İstanbul : Cem Yayınevi, 1970.
Arkeoloji ve Sanat. 120 (2005).
Atatürk Söylev ve Demeçleri II (1906-1938), İstanbul: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1989
Augustinos, Gerasimos. Küçük Asya Rumları: Ondokuzuncu Yüzyılda İnanç, Cemaat ve
Etnisite. Translated by Devrim Evci. Ankara: Ayraç Yayınevi, 1997.
Ayas, Nevzad. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Milli Eğitimi: Kuruluşlar ve Tarihçeler. Ankara: Milli
Eğitim, 1948.
!
262!
Baer, Marc. "Globalization, Cosmopolitanism, and the Dönme in Ottoman Salonica and Turkish
Istanbul." Journal of World History 18/2 (June 2007): pp 141-170.
Bal, Mieke. “Telling Objects: A Narrative Perspective on Collecting”. The Cultures of
Collecting, edited by John Elsner and Roger Cardinal, 97-115. Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press, 1994.
Barrett, Jennifer. Museums and the Public Sphere. Chichester, West Sussex, UK; Malden, MA,
USA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.
Başkan, Seyfi. Osmanlı Ressamlar Cemiyeti. Ankara: Çardaş, 1994.
Baxandall, Michael. “Exhibiting Intention: Some Preconditions of the Visual Display of
Culturally Purposeful Objects”. Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetic and Politic of Museum
Display, edited by Ivan Karp and Steven D. Lavine, 33-41. Bucknell University Press;
London; Cranbury, NJ: Associated University Presses, 2001.
Berktay, Halil. Cumhuriyet ideolojisi ve Fuat Köprülü. İstanbul: Kaynak Yayınları, 1983.
Beyru, Rauf. 19. Yüzyılda İzmir Kenti. İstanbul: Literatür, 2011.
Beyru, Rauf. 19. Yüzyılda İzmir'de Yaşam. İstanbul: Güsev, Güzel Sanatlar Eğitim ve Kültür
Vakfı, 2000.
Beyru, Rauf, "Social Life in İzmir in the First half of the Nineteenth Century", Three Ages of
İzmir: Palimpsest of Cultures, edited by Virginia Taylor-Saglioğlu, PP. İstanbul: Yapı
Kredi Yayınları, 1993.
Bilsel, Cana, “19. Yüzyılın İkinci Yarısında İzmir’de Büyük Ölçekli Kentsel Projeler ve Kent
Mekanının Başkalaşımı.” Ege Mimarlık. 36 (2000/4): 34-37.
Bilsel, Cana. “İzmir’de Cumhuriyet Dönemi Planlaması (1923-1965): 20. Yüzyıl Kentsel
Mirası.” Ege Mimarlık. 71(2009/4): 12-17.
Buckley, Anthony D.. “ Why Not Invent the Past We Display in Museums”. Making Histories
in the Museums, edited by Gaynor Kavanagh, 42-53. London; New York: Leicester
University Press, 1996.
Cezar, Mustafa. Sanatta Batı'ya Açılış ve Osman Hamdi I. İstanbul: Erol Kerim Aksoy Kültür,
Eğitim, Spor ve Sağlık Vakfı Yayını, 1995.
Cimok, Faruk. Hagia Sophia. Istanbul:, A Turizm Yayınları.
Childress, Faith J.. “Republican Lessons: Education and Making of Modern Turkey.” PhD diss.,
The University of Utah, 2001.
!
263!
Copeaux, Etienne. Türk Tarih Tezinden Türk-İslam Sentezine: Tarih Ders Kitaplarında, 1931-
1993. Translated by Ali Berktay. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 1998.
Crew, Spencer R.. and James E. Sims. “Locating Authenticity: Fragments of a Dialogue.”
Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetics and Politics of Museum Display, edited by Ivan Karp
and Steven D. Lavine, 159-175. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1991.
Cumhuriyet Döneminde Türk Milli Eğitim Sistemindeki Gelişmeler (1910-1920), Ankara: Milli
Eğitim Bakanlığı Strateji Geliştirme Başkanlığı, 2010.
Çomu, Aslı Emine. “The Impact of the exchange of Populations on the Social and Economic
Life of the city of Adana.” Master’s Thesis, Boğaziçi University, 2005.
Davis, Jack L..”Warriors for the Fatherland: National Consciousness and Archaeology in
‘Barbarian’ Epirus and ‘Verdant’ Ionia, 1912-22”. Journal of Mediterranean
Archaeology 13.1 (2000): 76-98.
Devres, Tuğrul. “İzmir Enternasyonal Fuarında Tükiye Emlâk Kredi Bankası Pavyonu.”
Arkitekt. 237-238 (1951): 158-162.
Dobkin, Marjorie Housepian. Smyrna 1922: The Destruction of a City. Kent: Kent State
University Press, 1988.
Duncan, Carol. Civilizing Rituals: Inside Public Museums. London, New York: Routledge,
1995.
Duru, Cihan and Kemal Turan and Abdurrahman Öngeoğlu. Atatürk Dönemi Maliye Politikası.
Ankara: TİSA Matbaacılık Sanayii, 1982.
Eldem, Edhem. Osman Hamdi Bey Sözlüğü. Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı. 2010.
Eldem, Nezihe. “Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Müze Mimarlığı.” Müzeler İçin Düş Bilançosu:
Tütkular ve Nesneler, edited by Şennur Aydın, 21-39. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Kültür
Yayınları, 1993.
Emre, Necmettin. “İzmir Fuarı Başarılmış Bir Eserdir.” İktisadi Yürüyüş. 17(1940). 3
Erbay, Mutlu. Müzelerde Sergileme ve Sunum Tekniklerinin Planlanması. İstanbul: Beta, 2011.
Eyice, Semavi. “İstanbul Arkeoloji Müzelerinin İlk Müdürlerinden Dr. Anton Dethier Hakkında
Notlar”, İstanbul Arkeoloji Müzeleri Yıllığı V.9, İstanbul: Pulhan Matbaası
Fevzioğlu, Elvan. Büyük Bir Halk Okulu: İzmir Fuarı. İzmir: İzmir Fuarcılık Hizmetleri Kültür
ve Sanat İşleri Tic. A.Ş. (İZFAŞ) Kültür Yayını, 2006.
Fisher, Philip. “Local Meanings and Portable Objects: National Collections, Literatures, Music,
and Architecture.” The Formation of National Collections of Art and Archeology, edited
!
264!
by Gwendolyn Wright, 15-28. Washington, D.C.: National Gallery of Art; Hanover,
N.H.: Distributed by the University Press of New England, 1996.
Fortna, Benjamin Carr. “Education for the Empire: Ottoman State’s Secondary Schools During
the Reign of Sultan Abdulhamid II (1876-1909).” PhD diss., University of Chicago,
1997.
___. Learning to Read in the Late Ottoman Empire and the Early Turkish Republic.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.
Gençkaya, Ömer Faruk. Ankara: Capital of Education. Ankara: VEKAM, 2011.
Georgiadou, Maria. Constantin Carathéodory: Mathematics and Politics in Turbulent Times.
Berlin; New York: Springer, 2004.
Goode, James F.. Negotiating for the Past: Archaeology, Nationalism, and Diplomacy in the
Middle East, 1919-1941. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2007.
Grosvenor, Edwin. Constantinople. Boston: Little, Brown, 1900.
Gürol Öngören, Pelin, “Displaying Cultural Heritage, Defining Collective Identity: Museums
from the Late Ottoman Empire to the Early Turkish Republic.” PhD diss., Middle East
Technical University, 2012.
Güven, Suna. “Constructing Past in Ankara: From Augustus to Atatürk.” Perceptions of the
Past in the Turkish Republic: Classical and Byzantine Periods, edited by Scott Redford
and Nina Ergi, 35-56. Leuven; Walpole, Mass.: Peeters, 2010.
Hroch, Miroslav. “Modernization and Communication as Factor of Nation Formation.” The
Sage Handbook of Nations and Nationalism, edited by Gerard Delanty and Krishan
Kumar, 21-32. London: Sage Publications, 2006.
Hudales, Joze. “Ethnographic Objects as Material Culture and as Cultural Heritage:
Ethnographic Collections and Exhibitions in Slovenia Until the First Half of 20th
Century.” Croatian Journal of Ethnology & Folklore Research. 47 (2010): 69-88.
İnal, Onur. “Levant Heritage in İzmir.” Master’s thesis, Koc University, 2006.
İnan, Afet. “Atatürk ve Tarih Tezi.” Belleten Cilt III, 10 (1939): 243-246.
İnan, Jale. “Aziz Ogan.” İstanbul Enstitüsü Dergisi. 3 (1957): 167-168.
İnan, Mustafa. “Aziz Ogan.” Arkitekt. 263-264-265-266 (1953): 217-218.
İzmir Arkeoloji Müzesi (brochure). Ankara: Maarif Vekaleti Eski Eserler ve Müzeler Umum
Müdürlüğü, 1953.
!
265!
İzmir İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü. “İzmir’in Büyük Yangında Kaybedilen Kiliseleri.”
http://www.İzmirkulturturizm.gov.tr/TR,90986/İzmirin-buyuk-yanginda-kaybedilenkiliseleri.
html
İzmir Müzesi. “İzmir Arkeoloji Müzesi”. http://www.İzmirmuzesi.gov.tr/İzmir-muzemudurlugu-
İzmir-arkeoloji-muzesi.aspx
Kafescioğlu, Çiğdem. Constantinopolis/Istanbul: Cultural Encounter, Imperial Vision, and the
Construction of the Ottoman Capital. University Park: Pennsylvania State University
Press, 2009.
İzmir Rehberi / Âsarıatika Muhipleri Cemiyetinin Salâhiyetli Heyetî Tarafından Tertip
Edilmiştir, stanbul : Resimli Ay Matbaası T.L. Şirketi, 1934
Kafescioğlu, Çiğdem. Constantinopolis/Istanbul: Cultural Encounter, Imperial Vision, and the
Construction of the Ottoman Capital. University Park: Pennsylvania State University
Press, 2009.
___. “İstanbul’un Tarihi ve Ayasofya.” Toplumsal Tarih. 241 (Ocak 2014). 4-8.
Karal, Enver Ziya. “Atatürk’ün Tarih Tezi”. Atatürk Hakkında Konferanslar, edited by Enver
Ziya Karal and Afet İnan,56-65. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1946.
___. “Tanzimattan Bugüne Kadar Tarihçiliğimiz”. Felsefe Kurumu Seminerleri, 255-268.
Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1977
Kardeş, Salahaddin. Tehcir ve Emval-i Metruke Mevzuatı. Ankara: T.C. Maliye Bakanlığı.
2008.
Kazamias, Andreas M.. Education and the Quest of Modernity in Turkey. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1966.
Kechriotis, Vangelis. “Educating the Nation: Migration and Acculturation on the Two Shores of
the Aegean at the Turn of the Twentieth Century.” Cities of the Mediterranean: From
the Ottomans to the Present Day, edited by Biray Kolluoğlu and Meltem Toksöz, 139-
156. London; New York: I.B. Tauris, 2010.
Kırımlı, Affan and Muhlis Türkmen, Muhteşem Giray, “1948 İzmir Fuarında Sümerbank
Paviyonu”, Arkitekt, Sayı: 1948-07-08 (1948): 199-200
Kırlı, Biray. “From Ottoman Empire to Turkish Nation-State: Reconfiguring Spaces and Geobodies.”
PhD diss., Binghamton University, 2002.
Kolluoğlu Kırlı, Biray. “Forgetting the Smyrna Fire.” History Workshop Journal. 60 (Autumn
2005): 25-44.
Kostof, Spiro. The City Shaped: Urban Patterns and Meanings Through History. Boston: Little,
Brown, 1991.
!
266!
Kuban, Doğan. “Celal Esad Arseven ve Türk Sanatı Kavramı”, Mimarlık. 7 (1969): 18-20.
“Kültürpark.” Ege Mimarlık.. 1 (1991): 10-12.
Levantine Heritage The Story of a Community. “Aya Vukla.”
levantineheritage.com/ayavukla.htm
Levantine Heritage History of a Community.“Former and Current Churches of Smyrna/İzmir.”
http://levantineheritage.com/data10.htm
Levantine Heritage the Story of a Community. “General Views of Smyrna.”
http://levantineheritage.com/smyrna.htm
Lewis, Bernard. History: Remembered, Recovered, Invented. Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1975.
Mardin, Şerif. Continuity and Change in the Ideas of Young Turks. İstanbul: Robert College,
1969.
Mazower, Mark. Salonica, City of Ghosts: Christians, Muslims and Jews, 1430-1950. London:
Harper Perennial, 2005.
Mehmetefendioğlu, Ahmet. “Rahmi Bey'in İzmir Valiliği.” Çağdaş Türkiye Tarihi
Araştırmaları Dergisi. 1/3(1993): 347-370
Nahum, Henri. İzmir Yahudileri 19.-20. Yüzyıl. Translated by Estreya Seval Vali. İstanbul:
İletişim Yayınları, 2000.
Necipoğlu, Gülru. “From Byzantine Constantinople to Ottoman Konstantiniyye: Creation of a
Cosmopolitan Capital and Visual Culture under Sultan Mehmed II..” From Byzantion to
Istanbul: 8000 Years of a Capital: June 5 - September 4, 2010, Sabancı University Sakıp
Sabancı Museum From Byzantine Constantinople to Ottoman Konstantiniyye: Creation
of a Cosmopolitan Capital and Visual Culture under Sultan Mehmed II, edited by,
Cağatay Anadol, 262-277. Istanbul: Sakip Sabanci Museum, 2010
___. “The life of an Imperial Monument: Hagia Sophia after Byzantium.” Hagia Sophia: From
the Age of Justinian to the Present, edited by Robert Mark and Ahmet Cakmak, 195-
225. London: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
Nelson, Robert S.. Hagia Sophia, 1850-1950: Holy Wisdom Modern Monument.
Chicafgo:University of Chicago Press, 2004.
Neumann, Christopher K.. “ Tarihin Yararı ve Zararı Olarak Türk Kimliği: Bir Akedemik
Deneme.” Tarih Öğretimi ve Ders Kitapları: Buca Sempozyumu 29 Eylül-1 Ekim 1994,
edited by Salih Özbaran, PP. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınlar, 1995.
!
267!
Nora, Pierre, and Lawrence D. Kritzman, Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past. New
York: Columbia University Press, 1996-1998.
Ogan, Aziz. İzmir Müzesi Rehberi. İstanbul: Resimli Ay Matbaasi, 1932.
___. Türk Müzeciliginin 100üncü Yıldönümü: A Historical Survey of the Museum of Antiquities
at Istanbul. İstanbul: Türkiye Turing ve Otomobil Kurumu, 1947.
Onaran, Nevzat. Emvâl-i Metrûke Olayı: Osmanlı'da ve Cumhuriyet'te Ermeni ve Rum
Mallarının Türkleştirilmesi. İstanbul: Belge Yayınları, 2010.
Ortaylı, İlber. İmparatorluğun En Uzun Yüzyılı. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2002.
Oygar, İsmail Hakkı. “İzmir Enternasyonal Fuarı”, İktisadi Yürüyüş, 17(1940). 7-10.
Önder, Mehmet. The Museums of Turkey and Examples of the Masterpieces in the Museums.
Translated by Priscilla Mary Butler. Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası, 1983.
Özdoğan, Mehmet. “Ideology and Archeology in Turkey.” Archaeology under Fire:
Nationalism, Politics and Heritage in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East.
edited by Lynn Meskell, 111-123. London; New York: Routledge, 1998.
Özlü, Nilay. “Hagia Sophia and the Demise of the Sacred”, Design Philosophy Papers-
Collection Six, edited by Anne-Marie Willis. Ravensbourne, Australia: Team D/E/S
Publications, 2011.
___. "Single P(a)lace, Multiple Narratives: The Topkapı Palace in Western travel accounts from
the eighteenth to the twentieth century.” The City in the Muslim World: Depictions by
Western Travel Writing. Edited by Mohammad Gharipour and Nilay Özlü, 168-188
London: Routledge. Forthcoming 2014.
Pallini, Cristina. “Geographic Theatres, Port Landscape and Architecture in Eastern
Mediterranean: Salonica, Alexandria, İzmir.” Cities of the Mediterranean: From the
Ottomans to the Present Day, ed. Biray Kolluoğlu and Meltem Toksöz, 61-77. London;
New York: I.B. Tauris, 2010.
Pearce, Susan M. “The Urge to Collect.” Interpreting the Objects and Collections, edited by
Susan M. Pearce, 157-159. London; New York: Routledge, 1994.
Poian, Krzysztof. “ The Collection: Between the Visible and the Invisible.” Interpreting Objects
and Collecitons, edited by Susan M. Pearce, 160-174. London; New York: Routledge,
1994.
Pöğün, Yüksel. “The Reflection of Modernization in Turkey on the Architectural Artifact of
İzmir Culturpark Between 1930-1950.” Master’s thesis, İzmir Institute of Technology,
2000.
!
268!
Preziosi, Donald. “The Art of Art History.” The Art of Art History: A Critical Anthology, edited
by Donald Preziosi, 507-525. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
___. Brain of the Earth’s Body: Art, Museum, and the Phantasms of Modernity. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 2003.
Radt, Wolfgang. “The Museum in Bergama as an Example of Turkish Politics of Culture and of
German-Turkish Collaboration.” Perceptions of The Past in the Turkish Republic:
Classical and Byzantine Periods, edited by S. Redford and N. Ergin, 161-186. Leuven:
Peeters, 2010.
Renan, Ernest. “What is a Nation, (translated by Martin Thom).” Nation and Narration, edited
by Homi K. Bhabha, 8-22. London; New York: Routledge, 1990.
Sakaoğlu, Necdet.“Milli Eğitim Merkez Örgütü.” 75 Yılda Eğitim, edited by Fatma Gök, 111-
117. İstanbul: Türkiye Ekonomik ve Toplumsal Tarih Vakfı, 1999.
Savino, Melanio. “Narrating the “New” History: Museums in the Construction of the Turkish
Republic, Great Narratives of the Past. Traditions and Revisions in National Museums”
Paper presented at EuNaMus, European National Museums: Identity Politics, the Uses
of the Past and the European Citizen, Paris 29 June – 1 July & 25-26 November 2011.
___. “Archaeology and its Representation in the Turkish Republic, 1923-1960.”PhD diss.,
SOAS, University of London, 2012.
Serçe, Erkan. “İzmir Havalisi ve Âsar-ı Atika Muhipleri Cemiyeti ve İzmir Arkeoloji
Müzesi’nin Kuruluşu,” İzmir Kent Kültürü Dergisi, 5 (2002): 318-328.
Serçe, Erkan. “İzmir’de Muhtarlık Teşkilatının Kurulması ve İzmir Mahalleleri.” Kebikeç İnsan
Bilimleri İçin Kaynak Araştırmaları Dergisi. 7-8 (Summer 1999): 155-170.
___. Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e İzmir’de Belediye (1868-1945). İzmir: Dokuz Eylül Yayınları,
1998.
___. “Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e İzmir’de Kütüphanecilik.” Erdem-Atatürk Kültür Merkezi
Dergisi. 7 (Ocak 1991): 735-751.
Seymen, Ülker Baykan. “Tek Parti Dönemi Belediyeciliğinde Behcet Uz Örneği.” Üç İzmir,
edited by Enis Batur, 297-322. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 1992.
Shaw, Wendy. “From Mausoleum to Museum: Resurrecting Antiquity for Ottoman Modernity.”
Scramble for the Past: a Story of Archaeology in the Ottoman Empire, edited by Zainab
Bahrani, Zeynep Çelik, Edhem Eldem, 423-442. Istanbul : SALT, 2011.
___. “Museums and Narratives of Display from the Late Ottoman Empire to the Turkish
Republic.” Muqarnas. 24 (2007): 253-279.
!
269!
___. “National Museums in the Republic of Turkey: Palimpsests within a Centralized State.”
Building National Museums in Europe 1750-2010. Conference proceedings from
EuNaMus, European National Museums: Identity Politics, the Uses of the Past and the
European Citizen, Bologna 28-30 April 2011. EuNaMus Report No 1, edited by Peter
Aronsson and Gabriella Elgenius. Published by Linköping University Electronic Press:
http://www.ep.liu.se/ecp_home/index.en.aspx?issue=064.
___. Ottoman Painting: Reflections of Western Art from the Ottoman Empire to the Turkish
Republic. London; New York: I. B. Tauris, 2011.
___. Possessors and Possessed: Museums, Archaeology, and the Visualization of History in the
Late Ottoman Empire. Berkeley, Calif: University of California Press, 2003.
Süleyman, Zekiye. “A Study on the History and Development of Education in Turkey with
Special Emphasis upon the Influence of Professor Dewey’s Theories of Education.”
Master’s thesis, Smith College, 1934.
Szyliowicz, Joseph. Education and Modernization in the Middle East. Ithaca [N.Y.]: Cornell
University Press, 1973.
Şapolya ,Enver Behnan. Müzeler Tarihi. İstanbul: Remzi Kitapevi, 1936.
T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı İzmir Resim Heykel Müzesi ve Galerisi. “İzmir Heykel
Müzesi Hakkında.” http://www.İzmirresimheykelmuzesi.gov.tr/hakkinda.html
Tekeli, İlhan. “Bir Modernite Projesi Olarak Türkiyede Kent Planlaması.” Ege Mimarlık, 16
(1995/2): 51-55.
Tekeli, İlhan and İlber Ortaylı. Türkiye’de Belediyeciliğin Evrimi. ed. Ergun Türkcan, (Ankara:
Türk İdareciler Derneği, 1978)
“The Smyrna Fire And The Smyrna Hospitals.” The British Medical Journal. 2 (Sep. 30, 1922):
607-608
Tiregöl, Jessica Selma. “The Role of Primary Education in Nation State Building: The Case of
Early Turkish Republic (1023-1938).” PhD diss., The Princton University, 1998.
Tunay, Mehmet İ.. “Kültürpark Arkeoloji Müzesi.” Arkitekt. 336 (1969): 161-162.
Türkmen, Muhlis and Abidin Zarif. “1948 İzmir Enternasyonal Fuarı T. Garanti Bankası A. O.
Paviyonu.” Arkitekt. 199-200 (1948): 153-154.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).“Convention for
the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with Regulations for
the Execution of the Convention 1954.”
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.phpURL_ID=13637&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SEC
TION=201.html
!
270!
Uz, Behcet. Atatürk’ün İzmir’i: Bir Kentin Yeniden Doğuşu, edited by L. Ece Sakar. İstanbul:
Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2007.
Yazman, Aslan Tufan. “ İzmir Fuarının Manası”, İktisadi Yürüyüş, 18(1940),
Yegül, Fikret K.. “From the Lofty Halls of Academia to the Dusty Hills of Anatolia: Howard
Crosby Butler and the First Sardis Expedition through Peace and War.” Perceptions of
the Past in the Turkish Republic: Classical and Byzantine Periods, edited by Scott
Redford and Nina Ergi, 57-100. Leuven; Walpole, Mass.: Peeters, 2010.
Zandi-Sayek, Sibel. Ottoman İzmir: the Rise of a Cosmopolitan Port, 1840-1880. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 2012.