The Spaces of Finance in Iran and Turkey at the beginning of the 20th Century: The Cases of Melli Bank, the Sepah Bank, Turkish Central Bank, and the Ziraat Bank (original) (raw)
Related papers
AN ARCHITECTURAL EXAMINATION OF EARLY BANK BUILDINGS IN TURKEY
Humanities and Social Sciences Review, 2016
The emergence of modern banking practice in the 17th century generated a new type of building for banks especially in Europe, and starting with the first half of the 19th century several bank branches throughout the world have been built. This paper focusing on the early examples of bank buildings in Turkey, examines the architectural characteristics of the first bank buildings that were designed by the Italian architect Giulio Mongeri, in order to understand design criteria of the buildings and define whether they represented European approach of bank architecture. Giulio Mongeri was the leader of the First National Movement in Turkey and the bank buildings examined for this paper are the finest examples. The examination of Mongeri's bank buildings revealed that the buildings were designed according to the functional needs and the spatial organization had similarities representing contemporary requirements, although façades were heavily ornamented in a way that was unique to nationalist architecture in Turkey. As a result of the examination it can be suggested that while bank branches throughout the world have common architectural characteristics and that they were adopted by Giulio Mongeri in early Turkish examples, local and traditional features were also added to represent the period they were built.
Architecture developments and urbanization in each territory reflects the social, political and cultural background of that country. On the other hand, achieving an understanding of the position of contemporary architecture in each territory in the global arena without understanding the developments of contemporary architecture of the countries with cultural, religious, regional and political similarities would not be possible. While the second Pahlavi era in Iran is the source of extensive developments, in the Middle East and in the contemporary years of this period (1940 to 1980) the political and social currents and therefore architecture in Turkey was formed with the same backgrounds with Iran. Thus, this study seeks to identify factors affecting architecture in Iran and Turkey, and compares the contemporary architectural developments in the two countries. In this study, differences and similarities in the contributing factors and also the architectural developments in the two countries have been questioned. It has also been tried the contemporary architectural developments in the two countries be possible through the field of comparative study. To facilitate the comparisons, the same time periods in Iran and Turkey have been introduced based on social and political developments and consequently the architecture, in the two countries. In this study, historical interpretation methods along with field study are used. The results of the study analyses the comparisons of various aspects of architecture developments and urbanization based on the mentioned periods and shows the overall similarity in compliance with the international currents and the other currents in the above-mentioned three periods, contemporary architectural rends in these two countries do not meet the objective.
THE TURKISH ONLINE JOURNAL OF DESIGN, ART AND COMMUNICATION, 2016
There are a lot of similarities in contrast between tradition and modernity in contemporary architecture of Islamic countries in twentieth century affected by internal factors and international influences. In mentioned years which coincided years after Atatürk's death till the most important contemporary military coup in Turkey, governmental supports of each one of tradition demander and modernist have been accompanied with some internal and external factors in some periods and the contrast of mentioned tendencies forms the contemporary architecture in Turkey. In addition to the identification and classification of Turkey contemporary architecture tendencies and their social and political backgrounds, through investigating each one of tendencies' outstanding architectural monuments, this article is sought to investigate how these works are affected by traditional or international architecture. The ideas of architecture and urban planning famous experts of Turkey have been used for studying and classifying the works or mentioned tendencies and in order to analyze the samples, reliable and diverse sources and field observations have been used. In addition to classifying Turkey contemporary architecture tendencies in mentioned year in three general sub-categories and introducing indicator works of each one of mentioned tendencies, the results of research compare their effectiveness of traditional and international architecture.
Identity and ideology in 20 th Century of Turkish Architecture
IJSER International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research , 2017
Examining the architectural actions, Turks that have founded many states throughout the history are observed to have maintained the transfer of their culture, which has been shaped with different dynamics such as regime, ethnic diversity, geography, religion and has followed a natural flow even though factors has changed from time to time, to the early 20 th century. The 20 th century of Turkish architecture has come to a point where it serves to the efforts of creating a new identity that has strayed from its natural line as a result of an ideological movement worldwide. Even though the movement that was expressed as the National Renaissance of Turkish architecture and demonstrated its impact on public buildings during its period has later been called National Style, given its starting point, architectural components and references, how accurate it is to be called national is open to debate. In this study, the First National Architectural Movement and the Second National Architectural Movement that have impact on the early 20 th century particularly is dealt with in terms of identity issues and ideological approaches of Neo-Classical Architecture in Turkey.
The historical structure designed for the use of Ottoman Bank and the Regie Company is located in Galata; one of the old districts of Istanbul. The building is an impressive structure standing on an important commercial street of the 19 th century today named as " Bankalar Caddesi ". The street name can be translated as " Banks Street " which may reference its commercial identity. The building has also become one of the significant elements of the silhouette of Galata by the Golden Horn after its construction. The masonry structure is one singular rectangular building designed for the use of two offices by architect Aléxandre Vallaury and historical sources indicate the opening date of the building as 1892. The building has two identical entrances for two companies. The eastern half of the building, served as Ottoman Bank for long years, has been owned by another bank company (Garanti Bank) since 1996. After the building changed hands, the usage of this part was replanned dominantly for cultural purposes such as Museum of Ottoman Bank, library, conference and movie halls etc. giving the visitors the opportunity to observe the historical installations of the building for instance; big metal bank safes. The eastern part has undergone an intensive restoration in 2009 and is now being used as a cultural center. The western part has owned and been used as the Istanbul Branch of Central Bank of Turkey since 1934. The restoration of this part is still in progress. The restoration works related to both parts of the building has been conducted with a universal understanding of conservation and scientific approach. The detailed surveys are prepared using advanced instrumental techniques and methods. The materials and deteriorations are determined by analytical surveys on elevations and sections. The structural condition of the structure is investigated by a scientific team. The original building materials are analyzed in the conservation laboratory for their characterization in order to design the repair materials. Archival research was conducted for the restitution and chronological analysis. The decisions for the conservation of the building are then determined. This paper aims to identify the building techniques and building materials of the facades in detail by the support of all the research completed above.
Exporting the Architecture: Projects of Hungarian Architects in Turkey in the 1950s.
The study examines the background of two, non-realised projects planned by Hungarian architects in Turkey as an example of the Turkish-Hungarian architectural relationship in the recent past. In the context of the Turkish architecture in 1950s which was resulted by the different movements of early-republican period and the Hungarian architecture after the 2nd World War based on the knowledge of European modernist schools. The essay examines the process of the attempt to export the architectural knowledge of Hungary: the uniformised state architectural offices with their individual genii like István Janáky worked by the modern spirit of BAUHAUS. The study analyses the locales of the plans in Turkey and their historical architectural and sociological differences. The location of the Kavala Oteli is Fenerbahçe, Istanbul. The location of the İşhane-project (Ulus, Ankara) is the main field of the early-republican architecture of Turkey with the significant ’neighbours’ like Ankara Palas or İş Bankası. How can a new hotel building behave in the historical urban texture in Istanbul? And how can a business building behave in the new capital, Ankara? The design methods and the new technical and functional aspects will also be examined. Finally, the result of the two projects will be presented. Firstly, what has happened with the plots and their surroundings and what was the effect of the published and the exhibited plans on the public opinion and the Hungarian architecture. Secondly, which are the common ways of the two countries by defining their modernist behaviours.
Cities in Evolution Diachronic Transformations of Urban and Rural Settlements, VIII AACCP Symposium, 2021
At the beginning of the 20th century, the revivalist movement seen in the architecture of the Ottoman State, mainly in the beginning of the 20th century, with today's terminology "First National Architectural Style", showed itself with using the background of neo-classical movements within the context of 16th century classical Ottoman Empire architecture or using the "magnificence, beauty and technology” of Seljuk architecture. Since the proclamation of the Republic in 1923, the various reforms introduced by the bureaucratic elite, new historical and social constructions in the nation state, aim to adapt the society to a Western lifestyle and not to adhere to the cultural elements that refer to the Ottoman State. Western reforms in fields such as education and social life did not affect architecture until the 1930s and the First National Architectural Style continued to show itself in the first 10 years of the Republic. Starting from the 1930s, the modern style, which has simpler and clearer elements, begins to find its place in the public sphere by European architects. Although this period, which we can say between 1923 and 1930, is generally seen as a "contradiction" in the history of the republic, it allows the republic to construct the "Turkish" identity inherited from the Ottoman Empire through the discourse of "Turkish architecture" together with nationalist policies. The Ottoman-Turkish identity of the revivalist style, whose effects we can see in public buildings intensely, becomes the "Turkish architecture" in the efforts of "purifying Turkish history from Ottoman history" during the republican period. Until the 1950s, various researches, periodicals and monuments are also constructed in the same way, apart from the structures built on the Turkish identity in public areas. Although the contexts mentioned are designed together with the elements that symbolize the republican regime in particular, the research also aims to discuss that they reiterate the magnificence and success of various well-known Ottoman figures in history by associating them with the “Turkish” identity. In this study, the application of this revivalist approach, which we can say that it continued from 1923 to 1950, over the "Turkish" identity and what kind of context it had in the political tendencies of the period will be discussed.
International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 2014
During the early 1920s, Iran and Turkey underwent a rapid modernization process under Reza Shah and Atatürk. Opened a new era in modern Iran's social, political and cultural histories, Reza Shah's objectives were compared to his contemporary Atatürk's in their inventory projects of modernization, centralization and nationalism. In this context, architecture as a "concrete" product of the states' modernization process became an instrument to consolidate the leader's political conduct. Through a comparative analysis of the Persian and Ottoman Empire's transformations into modern states, this study gives an overview on the socio-political and cultural-political histories of the early 20 th century Turkish and Iranian modernity. It argues that despite the parallelism in the political strategies of Reza Shah and Atatürk, modern architecture as an outcome of the political agenda, revealed differently in Iran and Turkey during this period. It is believed that, the paradoxes of "other" modernities in the case of Iran and Turkey were indeed not so much related with the Western canonic definition of modernity as it was with the states' political ideologies. Questioning the paradoxical characteristics of modern architecture in the new established capitals, this research indicates the interaction between architecture and politics.