book 8

Although Beyoğlu is undoubtedly the largest and best-known district in the city of Istanbul, its boundaries have always remained rather vague and ill-defined. Some regard only the busiest and most colourful quarter occupying the ridge to the east of the Golden Horn to be worthy of the name, limiting Beyoglu to the section between Tünel and Taksim. Others are more generous and include the Galata district within its confines, thus allowing Beyoğlu to begin at Karaköy and extend as far as Taksim. The most realistic approach to the problem, however, would be to define Beyoğlu as an urban area that played host to a historical development that was to produce an absolutely unique cultural environment. Such a view would inevitably place the eastern shores of the Golden Horn well within the confines of the district of Beyoğlu, an apparently rather generous delimitation of the Beyoğlu boundaries which is actually in strict conformity with 19^th century official practice, for in the first half of the century we find Şişli, Tatavala-Kurtuluş and Maçka all included within the Beyoğlu district.

All three different views are taken into consideration in various parts of this text, but care has been taken to give a clear indication of the different boundaries implied. Nineteenth century Beyoğlu possessed a culture markedly different from that of the other districts of Istanbul, being distinguished mainly by its European flavour and cosmopolitan character. The families of Italian extraction who had for centuries inhabited the Galata district combined with the numerous European residents clustered around the Beyoğlu Embassies to form the nucleus of the Western orientated community that was to give rise to this unique cultural phenomenon.

Once Beyoğlu had embarked on this process of development its population rapidly increased in both numbers and variety,

and the local non-Muslims, strongly influenced by the new culture that had grown up around them, soon came to constitute one of its main elements.

Two factors are of particular importance in Beyoğlu's development - water and political reform. Water, indeed, might well be compared to the mother that gave birth to Beyoğlu, while the reforms based on the Westernisation movement night be regarded as the foster-mother by whom the infant was nursed and reared.

Until the middle of the 18th century Beyoğlu had a quite inadequate water supply. The network then in existence served the districts of Galata, Tophane, Kabataş, Beşiktaş, Kasımpaşa and Hasköy, but Galata always suffered from a chronic scarcity of water, which had to be brought in barrels from Istanbul and Besiktas.

The construction by Sultan Mahmud I of the Bahçeköy water supply system in 1732 played an important role in solving Beyoğlu's water supply problems, and this first step was followed in 1750 by a number of additions to the system The Kasımpaşa district was ensured a more adequate supply of water when the dam originally constructed by Mahmud I was heightened by Kaptan-ı Derya (Admiral of the Fleet) Gazi Hasan Pasha in 1786, while an attempt to im- prove the supply of water to the Beyoğlu district was made by the construction in 1796-1797 of the Valde Bendi dam by Mihrisah Valde Sultan, the mother of Selim III. The last dam built for the supply of water to Beyoğlu was the Bend-i Cedid constructed in 1839. The importance given to Beyoğlu is demonstrated by the fact that although attention had been continually directed to the supply of water to the Beyoğlu district ever since 1732, only one dam, the Kirazlı Bend, had been constructed for the supply of water to the Istanbul side during the same period.

From the earliest times the water supply had always remained the most important part of the city's infrastructure. An adequate supply of water to any district would immediately lead to growth and development. This was particularly true for Beyoglu. The continual improvements made to Beyoglu's water supply system from 1732 onwards formed the basis of a very rapid development.

Until the middle of the 18^th century few showed any interest in settling on the high Beyoğlu ridge. There were a few small islands of Turkish settlement around Galata Sarayı, the Kulekapısı Mevlevihanesi (Galata Dervish Lodge) and Asmalı Mescid. The Venetians and the French had built their Embassies here in the second half of the 16^th century, to be followed at the end of that century by the English. The small islands of Turkish settlement were to show little development, but foreign colonies soon clustered around the three Embassies. The new Embassies built in the 17^th and 18^th centuries were usually sited in the vicinity of those built at an earlier date, thus increasing the concentration of European settlement in the Beyoğlu district. Foreigners arriving in Istanbul for trade or other reasons would naturally settle in the vicinity of their Embassies.

While significant numbers of foreigners gathered in the Beyoğlu district, the Levantines from Galata and the local non-Muslims tended to congregate around the Cadde-i Kebir or Grande Rue de Pera, now known as Istiklal Caddesi, and these were joined by large numbers of non-Muslims from other districts of Istanbul or migrants from the various towns and cities of the Ottoman Empire who preferred Beyoğlu as a site for their businesses and their homes.

The buildings connected with the reforms of the 19^th century were usually constructed outside the limits of the old historical Istanbul peninsula. The barracks for the soldiers of Selim III's Nizam-i Cedid (New Model Army) were built at Üsküdar and Levend, but the construction of barracks and schools at significant points in Beyoğlu showed that this district too was now ripe for development.

The first modern barracks to be constructed on the Beyoğlu side was the Kalyoncu Barracks built at Kasımpaşa in 1783 by Gazi Hasan Pasha of Algiers. This was followed by the Mühendishane (School of Engineering) and the Kumbaracı Barracks built by Selim III at Halıcıoğlu, a little way beyond Kasımpaşa. But the buildings of real importance for Beyoğlu were the Beyoğlu (Taksim) Barracks built in 1803-1806, the Mecidiye Barracks (Taşkışla) built in 1848- 1853, the Gümüşsuyu Hospital constructed in 1849 with the Gümüşsuyu Barracks immediately beside it, the Harbiye (Military School) at first housed in a building in Maçka but later transferred to Pangaltı, and finally the Askeri Tıbbiye (Military Medical School) which began operations in 1827 in a building in Kasımpaşa but was later transferred to Galata Sarayı at the beginning of the reign of Abdulmecid. All this shows that the buildings and institutions connected with the new movement of reform tended to be concentrated in the Beyoğlu district.

Urban development in Beyoğlu itself had been preceded by Turkish settlements along the shores of the Golden Horn and the Bosphorus on the skirts of the Beyoğlu heights. Kasımpaşa on the Golden Hom was a genuinely Turkish settlement, and similar Turkish settlements were to be found at Azapkapı and Halıcıoglu. Turks had also been settling in the Bosphorus districts of Tophane, Fındıklı, Kabataş and Beşiktaş from the 15th century onwards and their houses were to be found grouped around mescids, mosques, tekkes, türbes [tombs], çeşmes [fountains] and hamams [Turkish baths]. The number of Islamic buildings and institutions and the sites they occupy offer the most concrete evidence for the density of Turkish settlement and the areas covered.

From the 15th century onwards several churches in Galata were converted into mosques and a number of new mosques and mescids constructed, but the population was never predominantly Turkish and throughout the whole period of the development of Beyoğlu there was no increase in the number of Islamic institutions in Galata. As a matter of fact, both Galata and the district around the "Grand Rue de Pera" became more and more cosmopolitan in character. Part of Galata, together with the Turkicised districts surrounding the area that had come to be looked upon as the "real" Beyoğlu tended to be distinguished by various aspects characteristic of cosmopolitan culture.

Some of the churches in Galata were converted into mosques while the rest, most of them Catholic, continued in the service of the Christian faith. The development of Beyoğlu was accompanied by a steady increase in the number of churches in that quarter and two of the Galata churches that had been destroyed by fire were rebuilt in Beyoğlu. Thus the district between Tünel and Taksim came to possess far more churches than mosques, with places of worship belonging to the Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, Gregorian and other Christian sects, as well as a number of synagogues.

The large number of churches and synagogues shows that the district was quite densely inhabited by Christians and Jews, and it is obvious that in districts characterised by large numbers of churches and synagogues Christian and Jewish beliefs and customs must have exerted a strong influence on social life. In those predominantly non-Muslim areas, in the days before every other sound was drowned out by the roar of the traffic, the sound of church-bells began to take the place of the Muslim call to prayer, and the Sunday crowds on their way to church became a characteristic feature of the district.

Many of the Beyoğlu Levantines belonged to families that had lived there for generations, while others were later arrivals who had, however, spent the greater part of their lives there. Most of the foreigners were connected with the embassies and consulates, but there were others who had arrived on pleasure or business and had extended their stay for months or even years. For the foreign families of Beyoğlu, schools were an obvious necessity, and from 1861 onwards French, Italian, German and English schools were opened in the district. In founding these schools, foreign governments obviously had more than the education of their own nationals in view, and by welcoming the children of Muslim or non-Muslim Ottoman citizens they clearly hoped to disseminate their own cultures among the local population. These foreign language schools were attended by large numbers of non-Muslim children as well as by the children of foreign families, and played a very important role in fostering and sustaimng the cosmopolitan culture of Beyoglu.

The preferential treatment Beyoğlu received from the governments of the time was not confined to the construction of barracks, hospitals and modem schools. It was in Galata-Beyoğlu, as the Sixth Urban District, that a new model municipal administration was first applied.

The reason for the choice of this "Sixth District" for the application of this model administration and the functions of the new municipality were set forth in the Takvim-i Vekayi newspaper of 14 February 1858.

With the implementation of this new model administration the glimmer of light that had begun to shine on Beyoğlu at the beginning of the 19th century now rose to full brilliance. The steadily developing fabric of Beyoğlu, with its palaces and the colourful community so intimately connected with them, was capable of a much quicker adaptation to the innovations of the time and, indeed, seemed to be quite eagerly awaiting them.

The Sixth District Municipality of Beyoğlu continued to enjoy its privileged status until 1877. This period, which saw work carried out on widening and paving the streets, preparing a detailed survey of the whole area, keeping the streets clean and tidy and constructing a sewage system, also saw the opening in 1870 and 1871 of the Taksim and Tepebaşı parks, the first public parks to have been laid out within the municipal boundaries. In 1857, on the eve of the introduction of the new model municipality, the first street lighting was installed between Taksim and Galatasaray, and work on extending this was carried out in the years 1864-1865. The first district Town Hall in Istanbul was built by the Sixth District Municipal Council in 1868-1870.

Other activities of the Sixth District Municipal Council included the foundation of the Nisa Hospital for the treatment of venereal diseases in Zurafa Sokak in the Yüksek Kaldırım, and the Mecruhim Hospital for casualties and emergencies.

Communications between Istanbul and Beyoğlu were greatly improved by the construction of the first bridge over the Golden Horn in 1836. The ‘Tünel’, a funicular railway that might well be regarded as the first underground in Turkey, was opened in 1875. Construction work on the Galata embankment, the first proper wharf on the Beyoğlu side, was begun in 1892. It was not, of course, the Beyoğlu Municipality that was responsible for such undertakings as the funicular railway, the tramway system and the embankment, but it was Beyoğlu that profited most from such developments.

Indeed, Beyoğlu benefited very greatly from these twenty years of privileged treatment. Like an athlete who wins a head start at the beginning of a race, Beyoglu retained its lead over the municipalities long after its special privileges had been withdrawn.

Of even greater importance than the foundation of a new model municipal administration in the development of the Beyoğlu district was the transfer of the Ottoman court to the European side of the Bosphorus. Actually, if the barracks and military schools to which the reformers gave such importance had not been founded in the Beyoğlu district and if the court had not taken up its residence there it is unlikely that there would ever have been any question of a new model municipality.

The Sultans had always had palaces and pavilions on the Bosphorus, but until the period of reforms they had never taken up permanent residence in the district. Mahmud II was the first Sultan to embark on a plan to transfer the court from Topkapı Sarayı, in which the Sultans had resided for over three hundred years, to a new palace on the other side. In 1834 Sultan Mahmud II ordered work to begin on the construction of a new palace on the shore between Beşiktas and Ortaköy. The whole was planned to conform to a Western life-style, and the palace itself, as well as its various dependencies, was made for a way of life markedly different from that of the preceding centuries. In all these new buildings, from the imperial palaces and government offices to the military barracks and schools, cushions and divans and Koran reading-desks were replaced by chairs and tables, armchairs and settees.

Mahmud II died before Çırağan Sarayı had been completed and it was left to his successor, Sultan Abdulmecid, to take up residence there. From the year 1840 onwards the Sultans were to live permanently on the Beyoglu side.

But the young Sultan Abdulmecid, not content with the newly completed Çırağan Sarayı, embarked on the construction at Dolmabahçe of the most magnificent of all the Ottoman palaces.

The transfer of the court and government buildings to the Beyoğlu side encouraged private individuals to follow suit, and the palaces built along the Beyoğlu side of the Bosphorus were by no means confined to Çırağan and Dolmabahçe. A whole series of palaces and pavilions were to follow, transforming this part of Beyoğlu into a complex of palaces. The fact that the barracks and schools were thus joined by these private palaces showed clearly enough that Beyoğlu was to be favoured with the first taste of the blessings flowing from the improvements and innovations introduced as a result of the process of modernisation the Ottoman capital was now undergoing.

To occupy so favoured a position is always beneficial. Even in the case of catastrophes it means that the wounds are tended with greater care and solicitude. It was after the great Beyoğlu fire of 1870 that aid was given for the first time to the victims of a disaster. On this occasion financial aid was given to 28,689 people. It was also following this fire that the first community housing project was undertaken. These houses, known as the 'Akaretler buildings' were constructed on the Beyoğlu side not far from Dolmabahçe Palace. Istanbul had suffered many great conflagrations, but until that time no community projects to re-house the victims had been undertaken nor had financial aid been given to so great a number of people without any religious discrimination.

The palaces constructed on the Beyoğlu side during the period of Westernization blended much more intimately with the city around them. Topkapı Sarayı, situated on an isolated site surrounded by high walls, was like a closed box, completely cut off from the rest of the city. In the case of Dolmabahçe Palace, on the other hand, it was quite normal for this building, as the most imposing symbol of the period of Reform, to have the whole of its front facade opening on to the Bosphorus, while a road joining two important urban districts passed between the various dependencies forming part of the palace complex. Yıldız Sarayı, the palace occupied by Sultan Abdulhamid II, was, like Topkapı Sarayı, surrounded by high walls, but, unlike Topkapı Sarayı, was never isolated from the rest of the city. As a matter of fact, the various buildings erected here served to encourage urban development on the Yıldız heights. In any case, Dolmabahçe Palace was finally to be occupied once again by Sultan Abdul-hamid's successors.

Beyoğlu’s position as the most privileged and the most modem of the Istanbul districts also led to the transfer of the Ottoman Parliament to this part of town.

The first Ottoman Parliament had assembled on 14 December 1877 in a building at Ayasofya originally intended to house the University, and deliberations continued here until Parliament was dissolved by Sultan Abdulhamid II on 15 February 1878. When Parliament was re-opened on 17 December 1908 following the second Proclamation of the Constitution it assembled in the same old building at Ayasofya. But as a result of moves made by members attracted by the more privileged position of Beyoğlu and the possibility of meeting in a more imposing building, the Ottoman Parliament was transferred to the Çırağan Sarayı on the Beyoğlu side of town on 15 November 1909. It was destined to remain here for only two months. On 19 January 1910 the building was gutted by fire. Parliament did not, however, return to its former home at Ayasofya, preferring the Cemile Sultan Sarayı in Fındıklı. Although the building was essentially unsuitable for Parliamentary meetings members were willing to put up with its disadvantages for the sake of remaining on the Beyoğlu side, and the Ottoman Parliament was to continue to meet in this Saray until its final dissolution.

While the palaces of Dolmabahçe, Çırağan, Yıldız and their dependencies encouraged expansion towards the east, rapid urban development continued in the districts around Istiklal Caddesi and Mesrutiyet Caddesi. Beyoğlu was the first district in Istanbul to consist mainly of stone-built, multi-storey buildings. Beyoğlu could also boast the first theatre in the city and the first modern hotels. It was in Beyoğlu that we find the first apartment blocks, in which, for the first time in Istanbul, a number of different families would live together in the same building. Modern cafés were opened, together with modern shops, patisseries, cafés chantants and other places of entertainment. Beyoğlu retained its character as a district which not only encouraged the birth of such enterprises but also offered a milieu in which they could grow and flourish.

An important role in founding and developing these enterprises was played by the Levantines and the various foreign groups. The new theatres, hotels, cafés chantants and shops were generally opened or run by foreigners in collaboration with their local non-Muslim partners, and the Levantines and foreigners attracted to Istanbul by the higher profits to be made here and the more comfortable life style to be enjoyed usually settled in the Galata or Beyoğlu districts.

Foreigners of European extraction, from the diplomat to the merchant and from the traveller to the adventurer, all benefited from the Ottoman government’s attempts to implement a process of Westernization based on European models, but it was above all the system of capitulations that made it so easy for the Europeans to settle in Istanbul and amass wealth and property. Europeans flocked to Istanbul, set up businesses there, and often stayed for very long periods, establishing quite large foreign colonies in the city. The close business ties between these foreigners and the non-Muslim minorities led not only to the creation of considerable wealth on both sides but also to reciprocal cultural relations.

In the Ottoman Empire, particularly in the larger cities, the 19th century was characterised by the growing wealth and economic importance of the non-Muslim minorities. The most interesting examples of this are offered by the city of Istanbul itself. As most of the minorities lived in Galata or Beyoğlu it was in these districts that the new wealth was most in evidence. The non-Muslim minorities also played as important a role in the cosmopolitan culture of Beyoğlu as they did in its economic development, while the minorities joined with the foreigners and Levantines in skimming off the cream of Beyoğlu’s wealth.

Members of the foreign, Levantine and non-Muslim minority communities built large, imposing business premises, dwellings and apartment blocks in Galata and Beyoğlu. It was here that Western artistic trends found a favourable soil in which they could take root and develop, and it was the Levantine and non-Muslim minority groups inhabiting the district that were the main beneficiaries of the movement. With the opening of a theatre in Beyoğlu in the first half of the 19th century audiences were able to enjoy Western operas and plays performed in European languages.

The cosmopolitan Beyoğlu milieu created by the foreigners, Levantines, non-Muslim minorities and, finally, Turks who made up the population of the district gave rise to a quite distinctive type of culture in which the dominant role was undoubtedly played by foreigners. Although these foreigners were of many diverse ethnic origins the fact that most of the Levantines were of Latin extraction meant that the Beyoğlu cultural scene was dominated first and foremost by the French and Italians, followed by the Anglo-German group composed of English, Germans and Austrians.

On the other hand, the Beyoğlu foreigners, the bearers of Western culture, also came under a number of local influences. After all, Beyoğlu was part of Istanbul, the capital of an Islamic state dominated by Orientals. In spite of all the Westernization process, whatever came from the West immediately came under Eastern influence, with the result that the cultural environment thus created, though dominated by the West, had a strong oriental flavour. The result could well be defined as a "Levantine Cultural Milieu".

Of the foreigners who had arrived in Istanbul as representatives of foreign states or for purely personal reasons, there were several who distinguished themselves in artistic and cultural circles and even left a lasting mark on Beyoglu culture.

The predominance of foreigners and non-Muslim minorities in Galata and the districts around Istiklal Caddesi and Mesrutiyet Caddesi led to the construction of a number of churches and synagogues. The Turks had always shown respect and tolerance for the religious faiths of their subjects and had never interfered with the display of pictures and statues in the churches themselves. On the other hand, until the middle of the 19^th century, they had never tolerated the use of statues or sculptural decoration on any buildings apart from churches and foreign embassies. In 1871 Sultan Abdulaziz had a statue made of himself but never allowed it to be taken out of the palace precincts, and although the Academy of Fine Arts introduced sculpture into the curriculum in 1883 no examples were ever allowed beyond its walls. The second half of the 19^th century, however, was to see the rise of sculptural decoration on the new buildings in Galata and Beyoglu, and it is interesting to note that the sculptures deco-rating the buildings constructed by the Beyoğlu Christian minorities drew no protests either from the administrators or the city population. The reason for this tolerance was largely due to the new practice being confined to the Galata and Beyoglu districts, in both of which the composition of the population, a mixture of European and local elements, was predominantly Christian. No move to follow Beyoglu's example in the use of sculpture as architectural decoration was made in the last quarter of the 19^th and the first quarter of the 20^th century even by the various Christian communities in the other cities of the Empire nor, indeed, by the Christian groups in the other districts of Istanbul. 19^th century Beyoğlu could be regarded neither as just one of the many districts of a great metropolis nor as a quite separate European type quarter distinguished from other districts merely by the ethnic composition of its inhabitants. Beyoğlu differed from the other districts of Istanbul in the social and cultural make-up of the occupiers of its houses, offices and business premises, and in its role as representative of a modem, contemporary way of life.

The most striking feature of Beyoğlu's social fabric was the number of different ethnic strands. Its inhabitants might be divided into foreigners and Ottomans, but although the foreign community was distinguished by its ethnic variety, all its members were essentially representatives of Western culture, just as the Levantines whose families had lived in Turkey for several generations and who had picked up so many oriental traits that they sometimes felt some hesitation in deciding whether they were foreign or Ottoman, were still essentially European.

As for the non-Muslim Ottomans, their common religious faiths and their use of a common language allowed them to mix very comfortably with the foreigner. They quickly adopted the more progressive features of Western culture and prepared their children for life in a modem society by sending them to one of the many foreign schools that had been opened in Beyoğlu.

But it was impossible for the ethnic mosaic on which the cosmopolitan culture of Beyoğlu was based to be preserved indefinitely and a variety of political and social factors were finally to bring about its transformation.

The first factor in this transformation was the reduction in the number of foreigners and the consequent weakening of their influence, while the most important was undoubtedly the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the rise of a national, homogeneous Turkish Republic with its capital in Ankara. Such political developments resulted in the abandonment of Istanbul not only by the diplomats and foreign representatives but also by large numbers of merchants and other groups. Deprived of a source of easy profit as a result of the abolition of capitulations following the signing of the Lausanne Treaty, foreigners left Istanbul for places where larger and easier profits could be made.

This decrease in the number of foreigners and Levantines was accompanied by a similar decrease in the number of those belonging to the local minority groups, who tended to join in the general emigration.

Yet in spite of the reduction in the number of foreigners and non-Muslims, commerce and industry still remained in the hands of non-Muslims, who retained their domination of economic life not only in Istanbul but in Turkey as a whole until the imposition of the Varlık Vergisi (Property Tax) in 1942 marked the beginning of the end of non-Muslim superiority in the economic field. Although the Varlık Vergisi did not lead immediately to any sort of mass migration, it was something the non-Muslims could never forget.

The aftermath of the Second World War produced a new social and political balance accompanied by great changes in thought and attitude.

When the state of Israel, resurrected in 1948 after an interval of two thousand years, opened its doors to Jews from every comer of the world, the opportunity thus offered was seized by many of the Istanbul Jewish community, resulting m the emigration of a considerable proportion of what had been the most important minority group in Istanbul.

The events of 6/7 September 1955 connected with the Cyprus problem led to a gradual emigration on the part of many of the members of other non-Muslim groups, while the abolition of residence permits for Greek nationals in 1964 resulted in the migration of 8600 Istanbul minority citizens of Greek nationality, accompanied by large numbers of Istanbul Greeks of Turkish nationality linked to the former by family or business ties. All this led to a further reduction in the already reduced number of those belonging to the various non-Muslim minorities.

The years of peace following the Second World War were marked by great movements of population, by which Turkey was also affected. Many foreign nationals of Turkish extraction migrated to Turkey, while at the same time there was a great deal of emigration on the part of both Turks and non-Muslims. The non-Muslims, however, left Turkey never to return, while the Turks generally left in search of employment abroad. Most of the Turks who left Turkey for a long- term or permanent stay abroad came from the country towns and villages at a time when rapid population growth had combined with equally rapid urbanization to drive the inhabitants of small towns and villages either to the great cities or to countries abroad.

As a result of the migration from the country to the towns, the place once occupied by the non-Muslim city-dwellers in Istanbul, still by far the greatest city in Turkey, was now filled by peasants and villagers from Anatolia. It was Istanbul that bore the brunt of this migration from the countryside, which resulted in the transformation of its whole socio-cultural structure, and of all the various districts of Istanbul it was undoubtedly Beyoglu that was the most radically affected, for here the incoming elements took the place previously occupied by a cosmopolitan elite, thus completely erasing the old Beyoglu culture and replacing it by a new amalgam combining elements of the old urban culture with that of the migrants from the Anatolian towns and villages.

Beyoglu had woven, very slowly, strand by strand, a highly distinctive fabric which, after surviving intact for a very considerable length of time, was finally, as a result of the above-mentioned demographic movements and their concomitant social, cultural, communal, economic and technological developments, to disintegrate in far less time that it had taken to create.

Beyoğlu had built up an environment which fostered tolerance and breadth of outlook, in which bigotry and fanaticism had no place, and its ability to create such an environment was due partly to the existence of a cosmopolitan community most of whose members had received a sound, modern education, and partly to a superstructure composed of the court, the parliament, military schools and barracks, as well as schools employing foreign languages as the medium of instruction, theatres, cinemas, cafés, chantants, patisseries, coffee-houses, meyhanes [pubs], tourist hotels and luxury stores, all of which combined to create a general atmosphere of tolerance and free thought.

In the 19^th century the very privileged position held by Beyoğlu ensured that it was here that Western novelties and innovations first appeared. The district still occupies a privileged position, but for very different, wholly economic reasons. Beyoğlu is no longer graced by court or parliament, military schools or barracks, nor does it owe its peculiar atmosphere to the presence of a cosmopolitan community. Yet Beyoğlu is now much closer to the West than it was in the days when its streets were thronged with a cosmopolitan elite. Beyoğlu still has its theatres, cafes, chantants, meyhanes and luxury hotels, but the epoch of its peculiar privilege as the district of innovation and a modem life-style is now closed for ever.