CIAO DATE: 07/2014
A publication of:
SETA Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research
Sibel Zandi-Sayek’s Ottoman Izmir: The Rise of a Cosmopolitan Port, 1840-1880 makes a major contribution to the fields of urban history, Ottoman studies, and modernization. As shown in this rich and meticulously researched work, Izmir, a city of commerce, fluid alliances, and “cross-national encounters” (p. 1), was also a microcosm of a larger world in flux. Izmir—Smyrna, Smyrne, Smirni, Ismeer—was an arena of debates and multivalent experiences, a city that eluded “a standard nomenclature” (p. 9). Izmir’s pre-1922 history has received limited attention, as most scholars have focused on the demise of the Ottoman city, the 1922 fire, and the expulsion of its Christian-Greek population. Ottoman Izmir helps address this lacuna, making a significant contribution to our understanding of modernization through the prism of urban and architectural developments. The study begins with a comprehensive introduction, “A World in Flux,” followed by four chapters: “Defining Citizenship: Property, Taxation, and Sovereignty”; “Ordering the Streets: Public Space and Urban Governance”; “Shaping the Waterfront: Public Works and the Public Good”; and “Performing Community: Rituals and Identity.” Zandi-Sayek captures the continuous tension between the familiar and the new, as the state and the municipality attempt to consolidate earlier disparate practices into a new centralized system. We follow the gradual ordering of public space in a city where different groups of citizens enjoyed unique sets of privileges. These differences among the city’s many groups are reflected most clearly in the discussion of the waterfront development (1869-75), the city’s most ambitious infrastructure project. As Zandi-Sayek demonstrates, the city’s inhabitants were continuously “dodging conventional communal boundaries and forming coalitions of shared interest across communal lines when it suited their needs” (p. 2). By depicting the rituals of religious and national ceremonies, she captures the fluid use of space and social groups, pulled together but also divided within the city’s multiethnic society. Similarly, the lines between religious and national holidays began to blur, as allegiance to one brought allegiance to the other as well. Articulate and engaging, Zandi-Sayek’s narrative captures the panorama of inter-communal relations in broad brushstrokes, while also carefully constructing the details of everyday life, as the various socio-ethnic groups converged and diverged, reflecting the region’s mercurial political climate. “Izmir,” as she points on page 3, “offers an excellent site to investigate the complex interrelatedness of urban space, institutional practices and civic culture in the context of multiethnic and multinational imperial policies.” By the 1880s, the city had “passed the two hundred thousand mark, firmly securing its position as the largest city in the Ottoman Empire next to Istanbul,” with Muslim Turks numbering 45-55 percent of the population, Orthodox Greeks 25-35 percent, and Jews, Armenians and foreign subjects each between 4-10 percent (p. 24). Even as she describes the city’s multilingual population, she is careful not to romanticize it. “They speak Greek, Turkish, English, and French,” she notes, “but fall far from agreeing” (p. 109). What is not as clear is the set of historical and demographic conditions that created this unique environment within the Ottoman Empire. Certainly, the story of Izmir is not a typical story of continuous urban development and modernization. The historian’s challenge here is to resist an analysis that foreshadows the city’s destruction in 1922. Criticizing this tendency of “adopting and extending the fault lines used in forging nation-states onto the peoples of the past” (p. 8), Zandi-Sayek describes the common history of the city’s inhabitants. She demonstrates how the multilingual press cultivated a common consciousness among its readership, that of a modern Smyrniot citizen. This male Smyrniot took responsibility for the city, composed petitions to the government, and reflected on the changing world politics. Modernity was further enhanced by new public architectural and urban projects that made evident the presence of the modern Ottoman state in Izmir and throughout the empire.
Sibel Zandi-Sayek’s Ottoman Izmir: The Rise of a Cosmopolitan Port, 1840-1880 makes a major contribution to the fields of urban history, Ottoman studies, and modernization. As shown in this rich and meticulously researched work, Izmir, a city of commerce, fluid alliances, and “cross-national encounters” (p. 1), was also a microcosm of a larger world in flux. Izmir—Smyrna, Smyrne, Smirni, Ismeer—was an arena of debates and multivalent experiences, a city that eluded “a standard nomenclature” (p. 9). Izmir’s pre-1922 history has received limited attention, as most scholars have focused on the demise of the Ottoman city, the 1922 fire, and the expulsion of its Christian-Greek population. Ottoman Izmir helps address this lacuna, making a significant contribution to our understanding of modernization through the prism of urban and architectural developments. The study begins with a comprehensive introduction, “A World in Flux,” followed by four chapters: “Defining Citizenship: Property, Taxation, and Sovereignty”; “Ordering the Streets: Public Space and Urban Governance”; “Shaping the Waterfront: Public Works and the Public Good”; and “Performing Community: Rituals and Identity.” Zandi-Sayek captures the continuous tension between the familiar and the new, as the state and the municipality attempt to consolidate earlier disparate practices into a new centralized system. We follow the gradual ordering of public space in a city where different groups of citizens enjoyed unique sets of privileges. These differences among the city’s many groups are reflected most clearly in the discussion of the waterfront development (1869-75), the city’s most ambitious infrastructure project. As Zandi-Sayek demonstrates, the city’s inhabitants were continuously “dodging conventional communal boundaries and forming coalitions of shared interest across communal lines when it suited their needs” (p. 2). By depicting the rituals of religious and national ceremonies, she captures the fluid use of space and social groups, pulled together but also divided within the city’s multiethnic society. Similarly, the lines between religious and national holidays began to blur, as allegiance to one brought allegiance to the other as well. Articulate and engaging, Zandi-Sayek’s narrative captures the panorama of inter-communal relations in broad brushstrokes, while also carefully constructing the details of everyday life, as the various socio-ethnic groups converged and diverged, reflecting the region’s mercurial political climate. “Izmir,” as she points on page 3, “offers an excellent site to investigate the complex interrelatedness of urban space, institutional practices and civic culture in the context of multiethnic and multinational imperial policies.” By the 1880s, the city had “passed the two hundred thousand mark, firmly securing its position as the largest city in the Ottoman Empire next to Istanbul,” with Muslim Turks numbering 45-55 percent of the population, Orthodox Greeks 25-35 percent, and Jews, Armenians and foreign subjects each between 4-10 percent (p. 24). Even as she describes the city’s multilingual population, she is careful not to romanticize it. “They speak Greek, Turkish, English, and French,” she notes, “but fall far from agreeing” (p. 109). What is not as clear is the set of historical and demographic conditions that created this unique environment within the Ottoman Empire. Certainly, the story of Izmir is not a typical story of continuous urban development and modernization. The historian’s challenge here is to resist an analysis that foreshadows the city’s destruction in 1922. Criticizing this tendency of “adopting and extending the fault lines used in forging nation-states onto the peoples of the past” (p. 8), Zandi-Sayek describes the common history of the city’s inhabitants. She demonstrates how the multilingual press cultivated a common consciousness among its readership, that of a modern Smyrniot citizen. This male Smyrniot took responsibility for the city, composed petitions to the government, and reflected on the changing world politics. Modernity was further enhanced by new public architectural and urban projects that made evident the presence of the modern Ottoman state in Izmir and throughout the empire. Through the contemporary press, Izmir emerges as a city of contrasts. Descriptions of new, stylish buildings in unkempt surroundings (p. 75) and accusations of preferential treatment in road design and street lights (p. 100) echo contemporary complaints by residents of Athens, Belgrade, Paris and London. Fires and epidemics plagued all urban centers, as the increased population strained existing infrastructure and building traditions. Ottoman Izmir joins a number of other 19th century urban histories that challenge the earlier assumption that modernity was always imposed from above. Instead, what becomes apparent is the dynamic interplay of varied and competing forces, all vying for control of the public good in newly-imagined urban places. The struggle to define what constitutes the public good—as evident in the building of Izmir’s quay—is actually an integral part of the discourse of modernity. As Zandi-Sayek underscores, the fact that “Izmir was changing simultaneously with its better-studied Western counterparts … makes it hard to speak of one being a derivative of the other or an import of a fully formed model. Rather, this synchronism firmly positions Izmir as a comparable site, albeit with its own peculiarities, for examining key issues central to cities across the modernizing world (pp. 45-46).” As the last chapter demonstrates, control and ownership of the city was also played out through the paths and territories defined by the various rituals that brought each religion into the public sphere, temporally organizing public life, and gradually becoming identified, also, with national feasts. And maybe there lies the elusive definition of a “cosmopolitan city,” a term that is associated with Izmir both in the general literature and in this study. Did the people of 19th-century Izmir know that they were cosmopolitan? And, if so, what was their definition of cosmopolitanism? This, still, remains an open question. Ottoman Izmir: The Rise of a Cosmopolitan Port, 1840-1880 makes a singular contribution to the larger narrative of 19th-century urban transformations at the sunset of empires. And if Smyrna—the city of my paternal grandparents—became the canary in the coal mine of nationalism, modern-day Izmir, bursting with life and energy, still awaits its own urban study.