ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 2 • July 2015 • 93-101 An English architect in the 19th century : William James Smith and Taşkışla1

Aygül AĞIR1, Affe BATUR2, V. Gül CEPHANECİGİL3, Seda KULA SAY4, Mine TOPÇUBAŞI ÇİLİNGİROĞLU5, A. Hilal UĞURLU6 1 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, 2 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey 3 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey 4 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Gebze Technical University, Kocaeli, Turkey 5 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Fatih Sultan Mehmet University, Istanbul, Turkey 6 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey

Received: January 2015 Final Acceptance: April 2015

Abstract An English architect William James Smith had worked in Istanbul from 1842 to 1856, a most politically infuential period for the British Empire. Smith, afer his appointment to the prestigious project for the new Istanbul Embassy Building of United Kingdom, whose conceptual design was probably by renowned architect Sir Charles Barry, had attained the interest and trust of Ottoman statesmen. Consequently he was assigned to realise a number of important architectural projects contributing to the modernization of . Some of the Smith’s important works for the Ottoman Porte are: A military hospital [Gümüşsuyu Askeri Hastanesi], a naval hospital, a school of medicine later known as Mecidiye Kışlası then Taşkışla, a part of the Selimiye Barracks, a Glass Pavilion in Dolmabahçe Palace and Imperial Kiosk [Tophane Kasrı] for Sultan Abdülmecid; a building for the Board of Trade, renovation of the Naum Teatre. His commissions for so many important buildings, in spite of the 1 Tis article presence of the notable architects, namely Balyan and Fossati, is a proof of Sultan’s is a product of appreciation of Smith’s works. TUBİTAK-SOBAG project (109 K 099) Smith worked for both the British Empire and the Ottoman Sultan for a con- titled “İstanbul siderable number of grand scale projects. Being Smith’s frst work of grand scale, Mimarlığında Taşkışla has had a major role in the history of the Ottoman Empire and Istanbul Mimar William in addition to its own interesting construction history. James Smith ve Taşkışla (Mecidiye Kışlası) – Mimarlık Tarihi Açısından Bir Değerlendirme” completed by autors Keywords in 2011. English architect, William James Smith, 19th century, Istanbul, Taşkışla. 94

1. Introduction appointment on 30 June 1840 as “as- 2 We thank to Dr. Te British architect William James sistant surveyor” to the “Metropolitan Massimo Sanacore, Director of ASLI for Smith (1807-1884) was sent to Istan- Improvements” department which was his valuable help. bul for the construction of the British in charge of urban projects and direct- Embassy in this city and enjoyed the ed by Tomas Chawer and James Pen- most productive period of his career nethorne. However, one year afer this 3 Cemetery as an architect in the Ottoman capital appointment, on 22 June 1841 he lef record number: 2PPsSGIVO1. We in the years between 1841 and 1858. for Istanbul (NA, CRES/1616.). thank to Matteo Tis period, in which Ottoman-Brit- As for the period when he again Giunti for his ish relations intensifed following the worked for the Ofce of Works afer valuable help on Baltalimanı Trade Agreement (1838), his return from Istanbul to England, he fnding the tomb coincides with intensive construction is known to have been recruited as an of William James activities in which important urban “architectural assistant” a post created Smith in Florence. planning was shaped by the moving especially for him. In the above men- of the palace to Dolmabahçe afer the tioned letter, Smith pointed out that (Reformation) and therefore during this period he prepared the pro- with various state investments on the jects of the reorganization of Burling- slopes of Dolmabahçe and particulary ton House for the new use of the state, in the area between and Nişan- the restoration of the Birmingham and taşı. It appears that during this period Bath post ofces, the transformation Smith worked on numerous prestig- of the Carisbrooke Castle into an ar- ious architectural projects in Istanbul, moury for the militia forces and the attracted great interest, and won the Bedford Lunatic Asylum into a facto- recognition of the Palace. At a period ry for arms (NA, T1/640 1A: 20465). when well-known architects such as However, in 1856 the Ofce retired the Balyans and Fossatis were mak- him against his will on the justifca- ing their presence felt, the content of tion that there was not enough work the projects commissioned to Smith is for the position he held. Smith’s career proof that the architect was also recog- afer this retirement is quite unusual nized by the Sultan. for an architect: “Due to his qualifca- tions and his devotion to the Ottoman 2. William James Smith State” he was appointed by order of the Knowledge about the professional de- Sultan frst as Headconsul of Livorno velopment of William James Smith (BOA, HH.d.17402; ASLI2, Prefettu- before he came to Istanbul is rather ra di Livorno, No: 440, date 1862), in limited. Smith’s death certifcate found 1879 as consul of Florence (BOA, İ. in the section of deaths in overseas HR. 153 /8129), and fnally was award- countries of the British General Re- ed a fourth class Mecidi Order while cords Ofce indicates that he died on 8 he was Headconsul of Toscana (BOA, December 1884 in Florence at the age İ.HR.176/ 9668). Smith died in Tos- of 77. Hence, it was postulated that he cana and his grave was found at the was born in 1807 (GRO, Death Certif- Cimitero Evangelico degli Allori in Flor- cate, F005942). ence3. His birth and death dates on his We know that in 1830 he start- tomb stone in Florence are recorded as ed working at the “Ofce of Works”, a 24th March 1807- 9th December 1884. government unit responsible for the maintenance, design and construction 3. Smith’s buildings in Istanbul for of the royal buildings (NA, T1/640 1A: the British Government 20465). In a letter he wrote before he Te new building considered to re- retired and in which he narrated his place the old embassy residence that professional life, Smith pointed out burned down in the fre of August 1831 that he was trained as an “architect was the starting point of William James and surveyor” and on completing his Smith’s long lasting relations with Is- professional training, began to work tanbul and the Ottoman State. Smith in public service with “very good rec- who came to Istanbul in 1841 on an ommendations” (NA, T1/640 1A: urgent request of the Foreign Afairs 20465). Te only information on the Ministry (NA, Work 10/1 (21-40): 38- position(s) he held in this service is his 40) for a “competent architect”, rapidly

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 2 • July 2015 • A. Ağır, A. Batur, V. G. Cephanecigil, S. Kula Say, M. Topçubaşı Çilingiroğlu, A. H. Uğurlu 95 rented a temporary residence in Pera for the ambassador and proceeded to do the necessary organization (NA, Work 10/1 (21-40): 30-34). Howev- er, the quest for a plot of land for the embassy that would meet the approval of both the British and Ottoman gov- ernments lasted four years, and it was fnally decided to build the new em- bassy on the existing plot (Crinson, 1996; Hamzaoğlu, 1996). During the Figure 1. British Embassy, Istanbul design process -the conceptual design (authors). was probably by renowned architect the time, Smith had prepared a pro- Sir Charles Barry (Barry, 1973) - that ject for the improvement of the exist- Smith started before the plot decision ing hospital in 1846. Afer the damage was made, he was reminded to design caused by the fre in 1847, he revised “A building not to decorate the Turkish his project so as to include the consu- capital or to attract the attention of pas- late, jail, and police station (NA, Work sengers going through the Bosphorus but 1/39:85). However, the approval of the to provide the necessary comfort for the project and budget was actualized in residence of Her Majesty’s ambassador” 1854 and this project was too material- (NA, Work 10/1 (81-100):94-95). Tis ized by Wood and Pulman (NA, Work point is worth noting not only because 1/44:92-97). it shows the expectations of the British government but also because it helps 4. Buildings by Smith for the Otto- to understand the long processes of man State and Dignitaries budget negotiations between the Brit- During this long and stagnant pe- ish government and Istanbul during riod when Smith was working for the the construction. Building operations British government, he established were directed from the Ofce of Works good relations with the Ottoman ad- in London although its site was quite ministration and presented projects to far from England and its execution was the palace as of 1845. Te frst among subject to diferent local conditions, these was the project prepared on the and the coincident construction of the request of the palace in collaboration Dolmabahçe Palace led to a shortage with the Fossatis for the burnt Gala- not to underestimate the shortage of ta Bridge and the surrounding quays. workers and materials. Because of these We know that the Fossati brothers, conditions, the ambassador’s residence with whom he was to cooperate, were could be completed only in 1851 (Fig- very popular and were commissioned ure 1). Te English government also at the time for the construction of the asked Smith to prepare a project for the Russian embassy and some Levantine St. Helena Chapel which was located in churches as well as important Ottoman the embassy garden but burned down state projects including the Darülfünûn in 1847 while Smith was in Istanbul [university], the restoration of Hagia (NA, Work 1/31: 409-410). As the ap- Sophia, and the state archive building proval procedures for the project pre- in Bâb-ı Âli []. Another pared by Smith in 1849 were not com- contemporary group of important ar- pleted until 1852 afer he was called chitects involved in dense construction back, the construction was realized ac- activity in Istanbul at the time was the cording to Smith’s project but by Wood . Te fact that the Balyans and Pulman, two architects sent from were concentrating on the construc- England (NA, Work 1/45:234-235 and tion of the Dolmabahçe Palace prob- NA, Work 1 /44-1(121-187):122-123). ably was to Smith’s advantage in being Te same situation was also true for the entrusted for the Ottoman state com- consular complex consisting of con- missions. sulate ofces in , the seamen’s Te construction of Mekteb-i Tıbbi- hospital, police station and jail. On the ye-i Şahâne (Imperial School of Med- request of Cumberbatch, the consul at icine) awarded to Smith towards the An English architect in the 19th century Istanbul: William James Smith and Taşkışla 96 end of 1846 was the longest-running radiator system, that there were many project that the architect was to design novelties in the hamam section, and and build for the Ottoman state. In that Smith won the recognition of the 1847, a year afer the beginning of the Sultan for his innovations (JC-Echo de construction of the building that was l’Orient, November 4, 1849). planned as the School of Medicine but Another hospital project assigned to completed as the Mecidiye Barracks, Smith was the Bahriye Hastanesi [Na- Smith was concurrently involved in val Hospital] in Kasımpaşa. In 1848, four diferent projects. No doubt the Sultan Abdülmecid assigned Smith to most important among these was the build a new hospital behind the Naval Tophane Imperial Kiosk, a small scale School. However, before the building project designed and built for Sultan was completed, it was decided to trans- Abdülmecid (Figure 2). It was com- form the new building into the high pleted in 1851, in plot neighboring to school for the Naval School and change Tophâne-i Âmire [Imperial Cannon the building with towers used as the Factory] Barracks which was the pri- Naval School into a Naval Hospital (JC, mary headquarters of the military re- 1848a, February 16.; 1848b, May 21). forms. Sultan Abdülmecid used this Tis project, completed in 1850 also pavilion for various receptions where exemplifes serious function changes he hosted foreign guests. during the construction phase. Smith’s second project, thought In 1847, Smith undertook the con- to have started in 1847, was the struction of a masonry pavilion, İbra- Gümüşsuyu Hospital. It was built as him Ethem Paşa Konağı for the Grand a part of the of the Gümüşsuyu Kış- Vizier Ibrahim Ethem Pasha on the la-i Hümâyûnu [Imperial Gümüşsuyu south shore of the in the Barracks] and was situated on the vicinity of Zindan Kapı as well as the road descending from Taksim to reconstruction of the Naum Teatre Dolmabahçe on the slope between the that had burned down in early 1846. Gümüşsuyu Barracks and the Ayaspaşa Even though we have no knowledge cemetery. It appears that the frst con- about the start and completion dates struction decision was made together of the frst building, we know that the with that of transforming the School of Naum Teatre was completed at the Medicine, into barracks for the infan- end of 1848 and that the Sultan attend- try (BOA, İ. DH.181/9936). Terefore, ed a performance there in February we may surmise that Smith, who had 1849. the ongoing project for the School of As a result of a fre that destroyed a Medicine (Taşkışla) that was not com- large portion of the Selimiye Barracks pleted yet, might have used this project in Üsküdar at the end of 1847, the (or its revised version to suit the plot) need arose to determine the damage; for the Gümüşsuyu Hospital. Tere is information that the construction was completed within one year and opened with a ceremony that included the participation of Abdülmecid, his ret- inue and Smith; and further that the building was heated with a hot water

Figure 2. Tophane Imperial Kiosk (authors). Figure 3. Selimiye Barracks (authors).

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 2 • July 2015 • A. Ağır, A. Batur, V. G. Cephanecigil, S. Kula Say, M. Topçubaşı Çilingiroğlu, A. H. Uğurlu 97 estimate the cost for the necessary re- pairs, demolition, and rebuilding; and prepare a project for the rebuilding and application. Following the com- pletion of the estimation and prepara- tions, the design and reconstruction of the northeast wing of the edifce that had burned down completely, includ- ing its imperial chamber and the main entrance gate were commissioned to Smith who had by then been assigned many state buildings (Figure 3). In 1849, the project of the Manège, riding school building considered for the Military College, was also as- signed to Smith. However, various correspondence among the Ofce of the Grand Vizier, Ministry of Com- merce and Ministry of Foreign Afairs shows that despite the Sultan’s order to Figure 4. Glass pavillion in Dolmabahçe complete the construction right away, Palace (authors). it was delayed because Smith did not send anyone to take delivery of con- court cases between its owner and the struction materials such as lime and architect. However, despite all these stones and made excuses to delay the events, Smith was recognized by the work. As a result, a letter was to be Sultan and his entourage, appreciated written to the British Embassy asking with numerous gifs. them to warn Smith (BOA, A.MKT. Smith’s last important and fnal MHM 22/86; HR.MKT 37/19; C.MF works in the capital were within the 144/7187). Moreover, it was observed complex of Dolmabahçe Palace. Te that surpassing the estimated cost had fact that as of 1852 he had helped pro- created discontent. Nonetheless, the cure materials from foreign countries construction of the Manège was com- for the palace, and had worked espe- pleted in August 1852 the latest. cially on the monumental staircase and Te reason for the British govern- its roofng can be traced in the docu- ment’s recalling Smith in March of ments. Finally, in the years 1853-1854, 1852 afer he completed the fnal as- he built the Dolmabahçe Palace Camlı pects of the embassy residence may Köşk (Glass Pavilion) and the Alay Pa- have been the discontent felt regard- vilion for Sultan Abdülmecid. Camlı ing the close relations between Smith Köşk was realized as a viewing pavilion and the Ottoman government or the that allowed the Sultan to see the street. above-mentioned complaints concern- Te winter garden that gave its name to ing Smith. It is known for a fact that this special pavilion must have been an although Smith’s projects for the Brit- annex suggested by Smith (Figure 4). ish government were continuing, they Although Smith’s relations with the had been seriously impeded and that Ottoman administration lasted until Smith was accused by his country of 1858, he is not known to have pursued neglecting his duties. In a similar man- any other projects in the Ottoman cap- ner, Smith was ofen criticized for the ital in the following three to four years. projects he did for the Ottoman state. For example, criticisms with regard to 5. Taşkışla – From Mekteb-i Fünûn-u his lack of interest in the construction Tıbbiye to the Mecidiye Kışla-i of the Mecidiye Barracks can be added Hümâyûnu to the above mentioned unfortunate Te Embassy Building and the Impe- events experienced during the Manège rial Mecidiye Barracks are Smith’s two construction. On the other hand, we best known projects in Istanbul. When know that following the construction the need arose to build a masonary of the Naum Teatre, there were long building with modern facilities and a

An English architect in the 19th century Istanbul: William James Smith and Taşkışla 98 new organization to replace the Med- ical School located in a wooden build- ing in Galatasaray, an imperial decree for the construction of a new Medical School building was announced by Sultan Abdülmecid. Following this an- nouncement, preparations were made for the construction of the present day Taşkışla building (Batur, 2013) (Fig- Figure 5. Taşkışla (authors). ure 5). As the aim was to design an to be made. Te reason for the change institution and building that would of function is not mentioned in these represent Ottoman Modernization, a documents; however, they include design program was prepared that in- the term “Hasbel-icâb” (as required) cluded a school for 300 students and (Batur, 1996). a teaching clinic for 200 patients, a pharmacy, laboratories, a morgue, and 5.2. Details regarding construction various service sections and a mosque, for transformation: Construction clock tower, two pools and an Imperial survey register Chamber. Te survey register with reference Following the design and prepara- number HH.d.17402 is in the Prime tion works that began with the partici- Ministry Ottoman Archive (BOA, pation of “Mr. William James Smith, an HH.d.17402) (Topçubaşı, 2013). Tis artictect from Europe who is perfect in leather bound rectangular register con- his profession” excavation began on 15 sists of 18 pages of text as well as a one January 1847 (1263, on Friday, the 27th page cover letter fled as belonging to of Muharrem), the date found appro- the register; that contains the answer priate by the Head Astrologer (BOA, given to the letter. İ. DH 138/7070). Te ceremony on Te f rst page of the register con- the occasion of the frst stone layed tains an introduction sentence and the was held on 24 February 1847 (1263, date 18 December 1853 (17 Rabiulevvel on Wednesday, the 8th of Rabiülevvel) 1270). Te last page has the conclusion with the participation of Sultan Ab- of the calculations and the date 1 Janu- dülmecid. Great care was devoted to ary 1854 (gurre –i Rabiulahir 1270). the ceremony for it to be sublime. Te According to the register, an applica- document informing that the budget tion for a survey permission was made was exceeded and that an additional on 4 August 1853 (28 Şevval 1269) and budget was prepared shows that no ex- the permission was received on 12 Au- penditure cuts were made for the con- gust 1853 (7 Zilkade 1269). Te regis- struction (Batur, 1996). ter was kept as of 18 December 1853 (17 Rabiulevvel 1270), was completed 5.1. Transformation to barracks on 1 January 1854 (gurre –i Rabiulahir While the construction was pro- 1270) and signed by the Minister of ceeding and the school’s rough con- Commerce on 6 January 1854 (6 Ra- struction was almost fnished, the deci- biulahir1270) for presentation to the sion was changed, almost abruptly and Sultan. for an unknown reason. Te document Te text in the cover letter contains dated 5 October 1848 (7 Zilkade 1264) some information regarding the build- announced the decision regarding the ing. Te letter written to apply for a school’s being changed to a barracks, survey permission signed by Es-Seyy- provides no explanation but lists the id Mehmed Hasib and dated 4 August things that had to be done (BOA, İ. DH 1853 (28 Şevval 1269) states that a 181/9936). person named Hoca Istefan Kalfa was Tere are also numerous documents assigned to the construction of the regarding the change in the Prime building, that he was totally respon- Ministry Ottoman Archives. Some sible of the solidity and expenses, and parts that were already built had to be that no ofcer assigned to the building torn down or transformed to ft the by the Hazine-i Hassa-i Şahâne [Im- new function and new additions had perial Treasury] was to make the pay- ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 2 • July 2015 • A. Ağır, A. Batur, V. G. Cephanecigil, S. Kula Say, M. Topçubaşı Çilingiroğlu, A. H. Uğurlu 99 ments. It also states that on completion also points out that upon Istefan Kalfa of the building, the expenses came to be stipulating the sum at the Meclis-i Vâlâ more than the estimated cost, that large [Great Council], the job as a whole was amounts of money had been given given to him, a contract was drawn and to Istefan Kalfa, and that although it a warrant prepared. Te report states was clear that the nearly completed that the building was fawless with re- building was going to be fnished with gard to solidity and that the expendi- little disbursement, the amount drawn ture must be accepted and paid by the from the Treasury since Istefan Kalfa, treasury. In addition, the report notes began to work on this project reached that the diference resulting from work forty-two thousand and someting keses done which was not included in the (a unit of money corresponding to 500 contract cannot be accepted due to kuruş). Te letter also states that the regulations and that Istefan Kalfa could Sultan ordered that Es-Seyyid Mehmed not claim a right to this efect. Hasib, author of the said text, the Min- Unlike the other document, the ister of Commerce, and ofcers of the document prepared by the Minister of building council inspect and examine Commerce and dated 6 January 1854 the cost to determine whether or not (6 Rabiulahir 1270) states that some the said amount was spent in vain; drawings explaining the form of the the letter also requests permission for building were given to Istefan Kalfa. inspection with the Minister of Com- Te calculations in the survey merce, Es-Seyyid Mehmed Hasib and register begin by identifying the build- the ofcers as well as the amicus curiae. ing to which the register belongs. Tis Te text at the end of the register, section is followed by a description of dated 1 January 1854 (gurre –i Rabiula- the works. Te calculations in the regis- hir 1270), is in the form of a report. Te ter are listed under two main headings: frst fact in the document is with regard expenditures of the original building to the commission. Te commission and expenditures of contruction pulled consisted of the Minister of the Imperi- down due to function change. al Treasury, the müfü of the council of In the explanation, works and ma- public works, Es-Seyyid Mehmed Ha- terials are designated by foors and sib, council members Tahir Efendi and spaces. However, work sequencing was Haydar Bey, the palace master-builder, not the same for each foor. Te main master-builders of the building coun- headings are expressed as lower foor, cil and the amicus curiae. Te record frst foor, second foor, and third foor. also contains information regarding Sub-headings are used as well. On the the result of the calculations. Accord- other hand, some work descriptions ing to this document, the construc- are explained and detailed within tion cost of the building was forty-one themselves. thousand three-hundred ninety-four Te said barracks building is also of keses, four hundred ninety-two and a importance as it is one of the frst ex- half kuruş. Te expenditure made for amples of many buildings by William tearing down some fnished parts due James Smith built in Istanbul. Data to change of function was three thou- concerning how long the architect sand one hundred seventy-eight keses was involved in the construction pro- one hundred twenty-seven and a half cess or whether he was at all involved kuruş. Hence the total expenditure was could not be found within the scope of forty-four thousand fve hundred sev- this study. However, the text analyzed enty-three keses, one hundred twenty shows that Istefan Kalfa, the contrac- kuruş. It also states that there was a tor, was given the project before the diference of two hundred sixty-seven construction began and that a model keses, one and a half kuruş compared to of the building was made during the the amount stipulated by Istefan Kalfa construction process. Te construction and that this diference was due to the accomplished by Istefan Kalfa is de- facts that Malta stone instead of bricks scribed as “fawless with regard to the was used for the dormitories and walk initial exploration and contract” and paths and that some parts of the roof praised in the report prepared by the were covered lead rather than tiles. It survey committee.

An English architect in the 19th century Istanbul: William James Smith and Taşkışla 100

6. Conclusion Ahunbay, D. Mazlum, K. Eyüpgiller, It seems that Smith’s Istanbul peri- Eren publ., İstanbul, pp. 117-124. od in the years 1842-1856 was over- Batur, A. (2013), A British architect shadowed by Fossati’s brilliant career at in Istanbul: William J. Smith and the approximately the same period. Com- Taşkışla Imperial Barracks of Mecidi- pared with Fossati’s Russian Embassy ye, 14th ınternational congress of Turkish or the Darülfünûn and his restoration Art, Proceedings, ed. Frederic Hitzel, of Hagia Sophia that caused great ex- College de France, Paris, pp.143- 152. citement in the world of architecture, BOA, A.MKT.MHM 22/86. or Garabed Balyan’s construction of BOA, C.MF 144/7187. the imperial labelled Dolmabahçe Pal- BOA, HH.d.17402. ace, Smith’s designs remained of sec- BOA, HH.d.17402. ondary importance even though they BOA, HR.MKT 37/19. were of monumental quality. Yet we BOA, İ. DH 138/7070. cannot overlook that Smith created a BOA, İ. DH.181/9936. group of buildings predominantly of BOA, İ. HR. 153 /8129. Neo-Renaissance character enriching BOA, İ. HR.176/ 9668. Istanbul’s architectural accumulation. Crinson, M. (1996), Empire Build- ing-Orientalism and Victorian Architec- Abbreviations ture, Routledge publ., London. A.MKT.MHM: Sadâret Mektubî GRO, Death Certifcate, F005942 Kalemi, Mühimme Kalemi Hamzaoğlu, C. (1996), İstanbul ASLI: Archivio di Stato di Livorno Mimarlığında Yabancı Bir Mimar [Livorno State Archive] William James Smith [A Foreign Ar- BOA: Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi chitect in Istanbul: Wil- [Ottoman Archive of Prime Ministry] liam James Smith], Master Tesis, C. MF: Cevdet Maarif İTÜ, İstanbul. CRES: Records of Te Crown Estate JC, 1848a, February 16. and predecessors JC, 1848b, May 21. DH.d: Dahiliye Nezâreti Deferleri JC-Echo de l’Orient, November 4, GRO: General Records Ofce 1849. HH. d: Hazine-i Hâssa Nezâreti NA, CRES/1616. Deferleri NA, T1/640 1A: 20465. HR. MKT: Hariciye Mektubî Kalemi NA, Work 1/31: 409-410. İ.HR: İrade, Hariciye NA, Work 1/39:85. İ.D: İrade, Dahiliye NA, Work 1 /44-1(121-187):122- JC: Journal de 123. NA: National Archives NA, Work 1/44:92-97. NA Works: National Archives, Re- NA, Work 1/45:234-235. cords of the successive Works depart- NA, Work 10/1 (21-40): 30-34. ments, and the Ancient Monuments NA, Work 10/1 (21-40): 38-40. Boards and Inspectorate NA, Work 10/1 (81-100):94-95. T1: Records created or inherited by Topçubaşı, M. (2013), İstan- Her Majesty’s Treasury Board Papers bul’daki Taşkışla Binasının 1853 and In-Letters Tarihli Keşif Deferi [A British ar- chitect’s work in progress: 1853 ac- References count book of Taşkışla in Istanbul], ASLI, Prefettura di Livorno, No: 440 th Barry, A. (1973), Te Life and Work 4 ınternational congress of Turkish Art, of Sir Charles Barry, Bloom Publ., New Proceedings, ed. Frederic Hitzel, Col- York. lege de France, Paris, pp.783-791. Batur, A. (1996), Taşkışla için küçük Worsley, G. (1985). Te First Greek bir tarih [A brief history of Taşkış- Revival Architecture, Te Burlington la], Doğan Kuban’a Armağan, eds. Z. Magazine, 127(985), April, 226-229.

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 2 • July 2015 • A. Ağır, A. Batur, V. G. Cephanecigil, S. Kula Say, M. Topçubaşı Çilingiroğlu, A. H. Uğurlu 101

19. yüzyıl İstanbul’unda bir İ ngiliz ların varlık gösterdiği bir dönemde mimar: William James Smith ve Taş- Smith’in çok önemli projeleri üstlen- kışla miş oluşu, Sultan tarafından takdir İngiliz Mimar William James Smith, edildiğini kanıtlamaktadır. Britanya İmparatorluğu’nun siyasi açı- Smith, hem Britanya İmparatorlu- dan en etkin olduğu 1842- 1856 yılları ğu, hem de Osmanlı Sultanı için çok arasında İstanbul’da çalışmıştır. Smith, sayıda büyük ölçekli projede çalışmış- tasarımı büyük olasılıkla ünlü mimar tır. Smith’in büyük ölçekli ilk işi olan Sir Charles Barry’e atfedilen Büyük Taşkışla, sadece kendi ilginç yapım Britanya İmparatorluğu’nun İstanbul tarihi açısından değil, Osmanlı İmpa- Elçiliği binasının yapım sürecinde gö- ratorluğu ve İstanbul tarihi açısından rev almıştır. Elçilik binasında çalışmış da önemli bir yapıdır. Sultan Abdül- olmanın sağladığı saygınlık sayesinde mecid’in isteği üzerine 1846 yılında Osmanlı devlet adamlarının ilgisini Tıp Okulu (Mekteb-i Fünûn-u Tıbbiye) ve güvenini kazanmış ve bu süreç, Os- olarak tasarlanmıştır. Üç yüz öğren- manlı mimarlığının çağdaşlaşmasına ciye eğitim verebilecek bir okul ile iki katkı sunan büyük projeler için ken- yüz hasta kapasiteli bir eğitim kliniği, disine teklif götürülmesinin yolunu ayrıca eczane, fizik, kimya ve botanik açmıştır. laboratuarları, morg, cami, saat kulesi, Gümüşsuyu Askeri Hastanesi, De- iki havuz ve bir Daire-i Hümayûn ya- nizcilik Hastanesi, daha sonra Meci- pım programını oluşturmuştur. Haf- diye Kışlası ve Taşkışla olarak anılacak riyata 15 Ocak 1847’de başlanmış, ilk olan Tıp Okulu, Selimiye Kışlası’nın taşı koyma töreni ise 24 Şubat 1847’de bir bölümü, Dolmabahçe Sarayı Camlı padişah Abdülmecid’in katılımı ile Köşk, Sultan Abdülmecid için Tophane gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmalar hızla Kasrı, Ticaret Borsası ve Naum Tiyat- sürdürülmüş ve yapı büyük ölçüde bi- rosu’nun yenileme projeleri, Smith’in tirilmişken 1849 yılında Tıp Okulu’nun Osmanlı Sarayı için gerçekleştirdiği kışlaya dönüştürülmesine karar veril- önemli çalışmalarından bazılarıdır. miştir. 1849 yılındaki karar değişikliği- Balyan ve Fossati’ler gibi ünlü mimar- nin gerekçeleri bilinmemektedir.

An English architect in the 19th century Istanbul: William James Smith and Taşkışla