ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 2 • July 2015 • 119-129 German traces in Ottoman : The Kaiser Wilhelm Fountain

Ceren GÖĞÜŞ1, Zeynep KUBAN2 1 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul Kültür University, Istanbul, 2 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey

Received: January 2015 Final Acceptance: April 2015

Abstract In 1901 German Kaiser Wilhelm II commissioned a fountain in İstanbul as a gift for Sultan Abdülhamid II and his subjects. The fountain was not only a sym- bol of the amity between these rulers and their two nations, but also stood as an architectural embodiment of its creator. Wilhelm II was personally involved in the design phase; he chose the plan and the style, also supervised the entire cre- ation process. By the time it was completed, it had already become a monument to himself. German in construction and design, the fountain was representative of the re- vivalist style of its time. It belonged in the Ottoman capital with its Neo-Byzantine style. Besides being born out of Wilhelm II’s personal preferences, the choice of style conveyed fragments of İstanbul’s past as well. Thus, history of the site became one of the factors contributing to the fountain’s design. German Fountain, also known as Kaiser Wilhelm Fountain represented a mid- dle ground between the Ottoman and German cultures of the time. Furthermore, it was to become a souvenir from an era which left profound vestiges in both of these empires and their subsequent future.

Keywords German Fountain (Alman Çeşmesi), Wilhelm II, Neo-Byzantine. 120

1. Introduction chitectural styles than most of the large 1 The rapid growth In Sultanahmet Square, one of the buildings around it. of industry in the German Empire most significant and historical sites in 1880s created of İstanbul, stands a fountain easily 2. The history of the Fountain a demand for distinguishable from the monuments The fountain, originally named ‘Kai- natural resources around it by its style and workmanship. ser Wilhelm Brunnen’ or ‘Kaiserbrun- like metals and It is a small baldachin structure with nen’, is known to the Turkish public minerals. Adding to that the need a central octagonal plan and consists as the ‘German Fountain’. It was a gift for food resources of an elevated platform, eight columns from the German Kaiser Wilhelm II for the growing and a semi-circular dome. Its front following his ambitious second visit to population, The façade is on the southern side and is the in 1898. During German State demarcated by a gate and stairs. The this trip Wilhelm II did not only vis- found itself in need of a fertile rest of its façades have cast bronze fau- it İstanbul and the Sultan, but also “Hinterland”. In cets and marble basins to distribute the Holy Land and Damascus (Figure the time of Wilhelm water. Except for its columns, which 2). While consolidating his political II, prestigious are of green granite, the fountain is and economic relationship with the projects such as the predominantly made out of white mar- Ottoman Empire, he also intended to Baghdad Railways ble. The ripped dome is covered with strengthen his influence in this part of were put in action. 1 Building a railway copper and has a cast bronze gutter. the world and on the Christian, espe- to ensure easy The column capitals and bases are also cially Catholic community back in Eu- access to Anatolian cast in bronze and have floral engrav- rope2. The Kaiser himself was a devout and Middle Eastern ings. These columns situated on the Protestant and religion had an import- natural resources was an ambitious platform carry the dome by circular ant role in his political strategies. European dream. arches (Figure 1). Impressed by the meticulous prepa- British Empire was At first glance, the domed form of rations the Ottoman State undertook the first to start the structure reminds visitors of Otto- for this trip and the enthusiastic wel- the constructions. man architectural works. As it distrib- come the public gave him, he decided After the fallout between British utes water through faucets, it functions to commission a fountain as a sign and Ottoman like an Ottoman fountain rather than of his gratitude to the Sultan and the Empires following a European one. However, when the inhabitants of İstanbul (Figure 3). the annexation of architectural elements of the building, Reports concerning this decision ap- Cyprus in 1878 such as the ripped copper dome, the peared in German newspapers as early and invasion of Ottoman Egypt cube capitals and composition of its as 24 October 1898 while the Kaiser in 1882, French mosaics, are examined more closely, it was on his way to Jerusalem (Deutsche took over these becomes obvious that this tiny build- Tageszeitung, 1898.10.26). The state constructions, but ing has more references to different ar- correspondence regarding its con- the Franco-Russian struction, on the other hand, started defence treaty put an end to that in in 1899 after the Kaiser’s return to the 1894. German German Empire. Empire,

Figure 1. The German Fountain (Photo: Figure 2. Kaiser in the Encampment Site (Yıldız Albümleri, 779- Ceren Göğüş, 2013). 76--0018, İ.Ü. Nadir Eserler Kütüphanesi).

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 2 • July 2015 • C. Göğüş, Z. Kuban 121

with its lack of and even fidelity if the circumstances imperial tradition called for it. and geographic remoteness, replaced these 3. Placement of the Fountain countries as The location of a monument is al- “protector against most as important as its design. This the Russian threat” was also the case for the German Foun- and took over the railway project. The tain. advantages of this In correspondences with the Otto- collaboration for man officials, German officials empha- Ottoman Empire size the fact that the fountain was a gift were not only Figure 3. The Reception Ceremony for for the inhabitants of İstanbul and that restricted to this the Kaiser in İstanbul on 18th October protection, but also it had to be situated accordingly. Ad- the railways would 1898 (Yıldız Albumleri, 90548---0014, ditionally, its location had to coincide provide the Empire İ. Ü. Nadir Eserler Kutuphanesi). with the design without requiring any with a swift way changes. It was designed to be situated to deploy troops to The German Fountain’s existence on open space, such as a square (BOA. troubled areas like was outlined by two main aspects. Y.PRK. EȘA. 35/39). eastern Anatolian Primarily, it was a functional fountain (McMeekin, 2011). The German government preferred built to be used by the public. Second- the Nişantaşı neighborhood for con- ly, it was a monument symbolizing a 2 struction, but the Ottoman officials It was speculated sovereign’s presence. The latter was widely that the suggested Sultanahmet Square as there Kaiser aimed to established by the name given by the was not enough water in the Nişantaşı become the new German government: “Kaiser Wilhelm district (BOA. Y.A.HUS. 394/119). protector of the Brunnen” or “Kaiserbrunnen”. Taking Christians in Sultanahmet Square, the ancient Hip- the absence of monuments in Otto- podrome of the Roman era, had been the Jerusalem, man cultural life into consideration, Protestans and serving as an important gathering Catholics alike. one could even conclude that it was place throughout the city’s history. It This was one of the built primarily as a monument, but had functioned as a venue bringing reasons Wilhelm was cloaked as a fountain in order to II’s trip had caused the rulers and public together through ensure public approval. Building mon- hippodrome attractions or festivals. It unease in Europe uments under the disguise of function- and Russia, among had also been the place where public German Empire’s al structures such as fountains or clock gathered to let their voices be heard by enemies and allies towers was also the way Abdülhamid II their rulers. Notable riots in the histo- alike. In October preferred to build “monuments” under 1898 ‘Berliner ry of had taken place his name for the 25th anniversary of on this square adjacent to the imperial Blatt’ wrote that his reign (Erkmen, 2010). French and Vatican palace and the imperial church. Con- were worried that A massive monument movement, sequently, it remained public open German Empire or rather a ‘Monument-epidemic’ as space during the Ottoman era and was trying to take some contemporary critics called it, the protection of the was the stage for practice of equestri- was seen in Germany during this time an sports, demonstrations, meetings catholic community period (Dolgner, 1993). It started after in Jerusalem and religious festivals sponsored by from the French. the unification in 1871 and grew with the rulers (Grélois, 2010). The square Russians feared the death of its heroes Wilhelm I and was also designated as the site of “Ser- that it wanted to Bismarck (Bruchhausen, 1999). Dol- get a part of the gi-i Umumî-i Osmanî”, the first World gner explains this as the ‘war fervor’ of Exhibition organized in the Ottoman Ottoman land unification wars, procreating ‘mystical- and the British Empire in 1863 (Yazıcı, 2010). was anxious about ly blazoned person cults’ and bringing This square is the only place in İs- the talks between the Emperors and Chancellors to an el- tanbul with a historical continuity in the Kaiser and evation of God-like idolization, almost the Sultan about public memory and its monumentality. like the deification of the Roman Em- Like a chronological catalogue of mon- Syria which they perors (Dolgner, 1993). considered a part uments, the square demonstrates the of Egypt (Berliner Similar to the aforementioned history of İstanbul with obelisks from Blatt, 1898.10.26). monuments built for the ruling elite Egypt, columns from Ancient Greek and monarchy as a whole (Nipperd- and Roman times, Byzantine churches ey, 1968), the German Fountain in its and the Ottoman era mosques. essence was meant to be a symbol of Nişantaşı, on the other hand, was Wilhelm II’s presence in a land where a neighborhood with residences and he had hoped to provoke trust, loyalty German traces in Ottoman Istanbul: The Kaiser Wilhelm Fountain 122

silence the critics in Germany who were against constructing something modern on the Hippodrome (von Bülow, 31 October 1900). Theodor Wiegand, Director of the Department of the Antiquities at the Museums of Berlin, is mentioned in the letter ad- vising von Bülow on how to proceed. They were planning to see if such a dig would be fruitful with a preliminary Figure 4. The German Fountain and research leg during construction; they the Sultanahmet Square (Photo: Ceren must have deemed it meritless since Göğüş, 2013). a formal excavation had never taken palaces of İstanbul’s bourgeoisie of the place. We know that Wiegand super- time. It was not completely urbanized vised an excavation in greater scale yet and still had a rural atmosphere. in Sultanahmet Square later, between Considering the importance of nature 1918 and 1932, during which he estab- in German life and identity, this am- lished the exact dimensions of the Hip- biance might have influenced the Ger- podrome (Bardill, 2010). man government’s predilection. The The inauguration of the fountain green landscape and the relative high had initially been scheduled to take altitude of the Nişantaşı district, com- place on 1 September 1900, the 25th bined with its elite inhabitants, might Anniversary of Abdulhamid II’s acces- have made it seem like an ideal place sion to the throne, but due to construc- for a German monument. tion delays it had to be postponed to At the end, it was decided that the 27 January 1901, the birthday of the fountain would be built in Sultanahmet Kaiser. Although the structural work Square (Figure 4). Although it was not could be finished by the end of Sep- their first choice, the placement was tember, the work on the decorations of welcomed by the German papers and the fountain would continue until the government alike. Muenzer, while ex- end of the year (Berliner Lokal Anzei- plaining the idea of a monument, puts ger, 14 August 1900). emphasis on its placement by saying Even though the German papers that the monument ‘as an instrument had reported that the Sultan would at- of social organization and control’ had tend the inauguration, neither he nor to be placed at a location where every- the Kaiser were present at the ceremo- one could visit it with pleasure and a ny (Berliner Blatt, 19 December 1900). good part of citizens would assemble (Figure 5) After the death of his grand- every day (Muenzer, 2001). With this mother, Queen Victoria, on January placement the German Fountain defi- nitely fulfilled this pre-condition. It was on a place, where, as Berliner Lokal Anzeiger wrote “a lot of Muslims gath- er around [it] every day and voice their appreciation about the beautiful gift of the German Kaiser” (Berliner Lokal Anzeiger, 1900). The German govern- ment, on the other hand, was planning to take advantage of this momentum to create an opportunity for archaeo- logical research. German Kanzler Ber- nhard von Bülow writes in a letter to the Kaiser, that they could arrange an excavation along the spina during the construction of the fountain. Not only would such an excavation produce re- Figure 5. The Inauguration Ceremony on 27th January sults of great magnitude and add value 1901 (Yıldız Albümleri, 90548---0014, İ.Ü. Nadir Eserler to Kaiser’s endeavors, but would also Kütüphanesi).

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 2 • July 2015 • C. Göğüş, Z. Kuban 123

22 the Kaiser had travelled to England the monumentality expected from the and his absence from the ceremony gift of a European sovereign whose must have influenced Sultan’s decision name it carried, without impairing its not to attend. Even so, in its essence functionality. German Ambassador Adolf Marschall The German Fountain is, in its core, von Bieberstein’s speech at the inau- a simple octagonal baldachin structure. guration ceremony focused on the Although its style and details change friendship between the two sovereigns, throughout Spitta’s design process which was to endure like the fountain’s from Neo-Romanesque features with marble and to stay pure like its water 12-meter diameter to Neo-Byzantine (Königlich Preussischer Staats-Anzei- elements with 7.70-meter diameter, its ger, 28 January 1901). general form remains constant. Baldachin structures have been 4. The design and construction of the used in designs of religious buildings Fountain throughout history, such as baptister- The fountain was designed by Max ies and tombs, thus carried a certain Spitta in accordance with the Kaiser’s spiritual meaning. This made them a own preliminary sketches. Spitta, who suitable choice for monument designs. held an important position as the Ge- In this particular case though, this heimer Baurath (Building Councillor) preference must have been largely due in the German court, interestingly nev- to the importance Wilhelm II ascribed er came to İstanbul during the whole to baldachin structures. In the book design and construction process of the The Origin and the Use of the Balda- monument. (Figure 6) He appointed chin (Ursprung und die Anwendung Conrad Scheele to supervise the con- des Baldachins) transcribed from a struction (35. Spitta, 14 April 1900). All presentation he gave in the “Doorner the parts of the fountain, including the Arbeitsgemeinschaft” in 1938, he Ottoman inscriptions, were prepared tracks down the use of the baldachin in Germany and brought to İstanbul in structure throughout the history. He May, 1900 to be assembled by German believes that the baldachin structure and Italian workers like a prefabricated was not an example of a profane ob- building (Berliner Lokal Anzeiger, 14 ject gaining sanctity over time, but had August 1900; 71. von Wangenheim, 24 rather always been a symbol of the sky August 1900). connecting the human soul to the su- pernatural and to the divine (Wilhelm 4.1. The structure II, 1939). Derived from temporary cov- The fact that the fountain had to ers, like mantles or parasols with sky serve as two things, a monument and patterns used by holy personalities, it a functional fountain, determined its was a symbol of divine sovereignty. As form. Its design had to accommodate permanent structures like ciborium al- tars or covering sarcophagi, baldachin structures in churches carry out this tradition by protecting what is seen as sacred (Wilhelm II, 1939, 17/19). Since the building was supposed to represent him, Wilhelm II must have chosen a plan type he had associated with sovereignty. After the aspect of monumentality was accomplished through its plan, the integration of faucets on the façades added the aspect of functionality as it was also a fountain. This dual situation is apparent in its form: as a fountain, it was supposed to be used from outside, but as a baldachin structure the design Figure 6. The construction of the Fountain (Yıldız Albümleri, also had an inner space. 90548---0009, İ.Ü. Nadir Eserler Kütüphanesi). In the initial designs this inner space

German traces in Ottoman Istanbul: The Kaiser Wilhelm Fountain 124 was intended to be used for ritual experienced from the inside and this cleansing. There were supposed to inner space brought upon by the choice be faucets in the middle and bench- of the baldachin plan turned into a de- es along the column row, but Kaiser sign handicap (Rienaecker, 29.10.1901; Wilhelm vetoed the idea. He did not Berliner Lokal-Anzeiger, 1906.07.30; want the fountain to be used for ritu- 148; Scheele, 05.06.1912). al cleansing, but only for distributing drinkable water (21., Spitta, 18 July 4.2. The Fountain’s style 1899). During the construction phase, Wilhelm II played yet again a lead- there had been other suggestions like ing role in choosing the fountain’s placing the reservoir outside and re- architectural style. The fountain was placing it with a sprinkler or a vase, built at the height of the revivalist era but these were also rejected assuming and displayed the characteristics of that the Turks would not like the idea Neo-Byzantine architecture. Neo-Byz- of a sprinkler using clean water (57, antine was an essential component of Spitta, 20 June 1900). Once these ideas the German architectural style, “Rund- had been eliminated, the existence of bogenstyl”, a mash of architectural el- the seating banks became superflu- ements from different eras, like Byz- ous. From the correspondence of the antine, Romanesque or Renaissance, German state officials we learn that making use of the circular arch as a they were perceived as resting places. dominant structural component. Von Wangenheim from the German Rundbogenstyl was used commonly Consulate in İstanbul writes about his in monumental designs as a Neo-Ro- visit to the construction site at a time manesque form. The Romanesque style when the benches were being installed and the time associated with it was and states his wish that in a few weeks regarded as an era when the German “the countless Muslim spectators, who Empire was in its prime, hence mon- watch the construction under the sun uments, particularly national monu- would change their places on rubble ments, employed this association. masses with these comfortable bench- Nevertheless, although the Ottonian es” (von Wangenheim, 71, 1900.08.24). and Carolingian dynasties had cultural German monuments, especially the and political relations with the Byzan- ones in the city squares or parks, had tine Empire, Neo-Byzantine style did an important part in day-to-day life as places where citizens would spend time. So installing benches inside of the fountain was also a way to ensure that the fountain would have an ac- tive role in the lives of the citizens of İstanbul. Also, as the lavish dome mo- saic was the pinnacle of the fountain’s design, it became necessary in order to create some kind of arrangement that would bring visitors inside the structure. These benches gave visitors the chance to experience the mosaics from under the dome. In fact, this kind of use of a public monument was not common in the Ottoman culture and after all the changes the design had gone through, the space between the benches and the reservoir became too small to be a comfortable way. (Figure 7) Furthermore, the inner space of the fountain was closed to public a few years after its opening as people had been vandalizing the mosaics. There- Figure 7. The benches and the corridor as fore, the fountain could no longer be constructed (Photo: Ceren Göğüş, 2013).

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 2 • July 2015 • C. Göğüş, Z. Kuban 125 not have such a strong visual presence drich Wilhelm IV (1795-1861), who in the German cultural identity. They tried to establish a kingdom modeled mostly used Neo-Byzantine elements after the early Christian states and to in decorations, often in churches or on rebuild the Christian-German Empire monuments. by bringing “the crown and the altar” The Erlöserkirche in Bad Homburg, together, reviving the early Christian designed by Max Spitta, but finished af- architectures like the Byzantine was ter his death by Franz Schwechten, is a a political choice (Bullen, 2003; Dol- good example of this decoration prin- gner, 1993). Friedrich Wilhelm IV ciple. The architecture of the church is used Neo-Byzantine style because it Neo-Romanesque, but the inner space symbolized a strongly religious land is decorated with Byzantine elements, shaped by Christianity and ruled by like marble wall coverings and golden a monarch with divine privileges and mosaics. As the main nave is designed sacral qualities (Kroll, 2002). Wilhelm wider than a regular basilica’s, it creates II followed in his footsteps, but accord- the atmosphere of a domed Byzantine ing to Frank-Lothar Kroll during Wil- church’s inner space (Krüger, 2008). liam II’s time reminiscences of Middle There were other examples where a Ages had become some kind of a ‘play- building would be designed entirely in ful staffage’, ‘a fantasyland, which has Byzantine style, like the unbuilt palace atmospheric pictures suitable to almost projects of Ludwig II, but this was rath- all situations’ (Kroll, 2002, 79-83). er rare (Petzet, Neumeister, 2005). The relationship Wilhelm II had In his book Byzantium Rediscov- with Byzantine culture was also routed ered J.B. Bullen attributes the revival of in his admiration for Emperor Con- Byzantine style in 19th century to two stantine. contradictory driving forces. For a sovereign like Wilhelm, who “[Because it] came somewhere be- wanted to use religion to affirm his tween the Orient and the West; be- rule, Constantine was the perfect role cause it had affinities with both Chris- model. Under his rule, in the 4th cen- tian and Muslim cultures and thought tury A.D., Christianity had evolved to have maintained something of the from a persecuted community faith values of its Greek origins, yet partici- into a religion accepted and guarded by pated in the Western traditions, it pre- the empire. While this change affected sented an exotic, un-European image the way of life in the Roman Empire, to the world” (Bullen, 2003, 13). churches became its monuments in the Therefore, contrary to other revival- cities (Miles, 1993). Like Constantine’s ist styles, Byzantine architecture’s con- church constructions, which had led nection to Ancient Greek and Roman to the reformation of Roman life, Wil- architectural traditions and other East- helm II started to build churches to re- ern influences gave this style a more ex- form German city life, where religion otic and distant feel. It was also seen as had lost its influence through rapid a spiritual style, belonging to a period changes in economic and social condi- and geography with strong Christian tions brought on by industrialization. faith. Although the Byzantine Empire He aimed to strengthen piety to bring had obvious ties to the Roman Empire, the masses together and to deter ide- its culture had gone through drastic ologies like communism or socialism changes after the acceptance of Christi- threatening his rule. To accomplish anity. As Rosenthal writes, it had tried this, he even established the “Protes- to express the spirit of Christianity tant-Church Help-Union” (Evange- (Rosenthal, 1992). If Gothic architec- lisch-Kirchlichen Hilfsverein) in 1888 ture was seen as completely Christian, for entire Germany and “Protestant Byzantine architecture embodied the Church Construction Union for Ber- primitive and pure Christianity (Bul- lin” (Evangelische Kirchenbauverein len, 2003). für Berlin) in 1890 specifically for this The Prussian royal family Hohen- region (Krüger, 1995). zoller’s use of medieval images and We can follow Spitta’s design pro- styles was correlated to their reign cess for the fountain through his cor- (Kroll, 2002). For Prussian King Frie- respondence with the state officials and

German traces in Ottoman Istanbul: The Kaiser Wilhelm Fountain 126 his drawings. The first drawings display were chosen for the adornment of the obvious Neo-Romanesque influences. fountain out of respect for the Islamic Wilhelm himself steered it to its final tradition of non-figurative drawings, state in Neo-Byzantine style (21., Spit- but it is more likely a complementary ta, 18.07.1899). It looks like there were choice in a building of Byzantine style, two motives behind this choice: Firstly, as it was the preferred adornment of Wilhelm II’s admiration for Byzantine monumental buildings of the Byzan- history and art and secondly, Byzantine tine era (Fındıkgil-Doğuoğlu, 2001). Empire’s place in the history of İstan- The mosaics of the fountain are sit- bul. After all, Byzantine culture is an uated on the inside of the dome and inseparable part of İstanbul and Byz- the row of stars on the arches. They antine architecture and monuments consist of a central circular motive like Hagia Sophia had an undeniable on a golden background and Abdül- influence on Ottoman architecture af- hamid II’s tughra and Wilhelm II’s ter the conquest of the city. Rudolph initials around it. (Figure 8) This mo- Wiegmann wrote about the revival of saic pattern is an example of sky rep- Byzantine architecture in Germany resentations used frequently in dome during the debate on a nationalistic or vault decorations. The origin of this style, ‘Those who seek to revive the composition is derived from similar Byzantine style on the grounds that it examples of pre-Christian times and was a native style should bear in mind are seen as representations of tempo- that it originated in foreign lands and rary structures covered with fabrics flourished there as much as it did with with sky-themed patterns (Lehmann, us’ (Wiegmann, 1992, 108-109). What 1945). Looking back at Wilhelm’s ex- he saw as negative must have been seen amination of the baldachin structure, as an advantage by the designers of the we see a close correlation between the German Fountain and neo-Byzantine mosaics and the structural system of architecture must have appeared like the fountain. the perfect middle ground to bring the In these kinds of compositions we Empires together. generally see heavenly objects and Like in the German Neo-Byzantine creatures covering a part or the whole examples, the strongest Byzantine in- of the dome. In time, these composi- fluences on the fountain are in the de- tions became more and more central- tails of its decorations, namely the mo- ized and the motive with concentric saics and the adornments of its column circles in the dome of the fountain capitals or bases. emerged (Lehmann, 1945). This form Some sources explain that mosaics was a direct representation of the “can- opy of heaven”, basically a tent. It either represents the center of the tent from where the fabric falls down or an ocu- lus with fabric hanging loosely around it (Lehmann, 1945). The tughra of the Sultan and the initials of the Kaiser surround this central motive on a transcenden- tal golden background. The fountain symbolized the friendship between these sovereigns, this was even more strongly pronounced by their initials on the golden sky background. The backdrops of these symbols honor the sovereigns in their individual circum- stances. The tughra is on a green back- ground, which symbolizes the prophet and the initials are on a Prussian blue background (Batur, 1993). The line of Figure 8. The Dome Mosaics (Photo: Ceren stars on the arches can also be seen as a Göğüş, 2013). continuation of this sky representation.

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 2 • July 2015 • C. Göğüş, Z. Kuban 127

5. Conclusion References Max Spitta’s first designs for the Bardill, J. (2010). The Architecture fountain were Neo-Romanesque, a and the Archaelogy of the Hippodrome style he was familiar with. He was an in Costantinople. In Işın, E. (Ed), Hip- architect specializing in church designs podrom/Atmeydani – A Stage for İs- and Gothic and Romanesque were the tanbul’s History I. 91-148, Pera Müzesi popular choices for churches in the Yayını, İstanbul 19th century Germany. With Wil- Batur, A. (1993). Alman Çeşmesi helm II’s insistence these first designs [German Fountain], Dünden Bugüne evolved into a Neo-Byzantine project. İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, 1, 208-209 At this time, Wilhelm II himself had Berliner Blatt, 1898.10.26, Berlin been in İstanbul twice and had visited Berliner Blatt, 1900.12.19, Berlin many Byzantine architectural works in Berliner Lokal Anzeiger, 1900.08.14, İstanbul and in the Middle East. Un- Berlin doubtedly they used his experience, Berliner Lokal Anzeiger, 1906.07.30, but while designing the details of the Berlin fountain, anthologies of Byzantine ar- BOA.Y.PRK. EȘA. 35 / 39 chitecture must have been consulted as BOA. Y.A.HUS. 394 / 119 well. Especially the book by Wilhelm Von Bruchhausen, E.B. (1999). Das Salzenberg with the impressive archi- Zeichen im Kostümball – Marianne tectural drawings of Hagia Sophia is und Germania in der politischen Iko- known as an important source for Ger- nographie [The Sign in Masquerade man architects and sovereigns when - Marianne und Germania in politic they wanted to cite Byzantine Archi- Iconography] (Unpublished PhD Dis- tecture. sertation) Der Philosophische Fakultät The Alman Çeşmesi reveals the typ- der Martin-Luther Universität ical multi-layered character of archi- Bullen, J.B. (2003) Byzantium Redis- tecture we see in İstanbul by the end covered, London: Phaidon Press of the Ottoman Era. The fusion of Ot- Centralblatt der Bauverwaltung, toman and Byzantine forms, functions 27.06.1900 and decoration details, merged with Deutsche Tageszeitung, 1898.10.24 German monumental architectural Deutsche Warte, 1901.01.27 notions brought about a monument Dolgner, D. (1993). Historismus: that symbolized a long lasting political Deutsche Baukunst 1815-1900 [His- cooperation. Even though it is never torsizm: German Architecture 1815- explicitly described, the Kaiser Wil- 1900]. Leipzig: E. A. Seemann, Kunst- helm Fountain, along the lines of other verlagsgesellschaft mbH historical monuments of the Hippo- Erkmen, A. (2010). Geç Osmanlı drome’s spina, sets a historical point of Dünyasında Mimarlık ve Hafıza: Arşiv, reference as being part of the historical Jübile, Abide [Architecture and Mem- development of this most important ory in the Late Ottoman World]. İstan- public space of the city. Even though bul: Ofset Yapımevi the locals quickly forgot the name Fındıkgil-Doğuoğlu, M. M. (2001). “Kaiser Wilhelm” and only called it 19. Yüzyıl İstanbul’unda Alman Mi- the “German Fountain”, the spot of the mari Etkinliği. [German Architectur- fountain became so important for the al Activity in 19. Century İstanbul]. Germans in İstanbul that some 15 years (Unpublished PhD Dissertation) İTÜ, later the place of the German-Turkish İstanbul House of Friendship was chosen at a Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer nearby location. Kulturbesitz, Folder “Kaiserbrunnen in Konstantinopel”, Spitta, 1900.06.20, Abbrevations No: 20, Berlin BOA. Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivleri Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer [Prime Ministerial Ottoman Archives] Kulturbesitz, Folder “Kaiserbrunnen Y. A. HUS. Yıldız Hususi Maruzat in Konstantinopel”, Spitta, 1899, 07.18, Y.PRK.EŞA. Yıldız Perakende Evrakı No: 21, Berlin Elçilik ve Şehbenderlik Maruzatı Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Folder “Kaiserbrunnen

German traces in Ottoman Istanbul: The Kaiser Wilhelm Fountain 128 in Konstantinopel”, Spitta, 1900.04.14, Heaven, The Art Bulletin, 27(1), 1-27. No: 35, Berlin McMeekin, S. (2011). The Ber- Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer lin-Baghdad Express. London: Pen- Kulturbesitz, Folder “Kaiserbrunnen guin Books in Konstantinopel”, Spitta, 1900.06.20, Miles, M.R. (1993). Santa Maria no:57, Berlin Maggiore’s Fifth-Century Mosaics: Tri- Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer umphal Christianity and the Jews, The Kulturbesitz, Folder “Kaiserbrunnen Harward Theological Review, 86 (2), in Konstantinopel”, Von Wangenheim, 155-175. 1900.08.24, No:71, Berlin Muenzer, C.S., (2001). Wander- Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer ing among Obelisks: Goethe and the Kulturbesitz, Folder “Kaiserbrun- Idea of the Monument, Remembering nen in Konstantinopel”, Von Bülow, Goethe: Essays for the 250th Anniver- 1900.10.31, No: 76, Berlin sary, Modern Language Studies, 31(1), Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer 5-34. Kulturbesitz, Folder “Kaiserbrun- Nipperdey, T. (1968). Nationalidee nen in Konstantinopel”, Rienacker, und Nationaldenkmal in Deutschland 1901.10.29, No: 114, Berlin im 19. Jahrhundert [National Idea and Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer National Monument in Germany in 19. Kulturbesitz, Folder “Kaiserbrunnen in Century]. Historische Zeitschrift, 206, Konstantinopel”, Scheele, 1912.06.05, 529-585. No: 148, Berlin Petzet, M., Neumeister, W. (2005). Grélois, J-P. (2010). Western Trav- Ludwig II. und Seine Schlösser [Lud- elers’ Perspectives on the Hippodrome wig II. and His Castles]. München: / Atmeydanı, Realities and Legends Prestel Verlag (Fifteenth–Seventeenth Centuries). In Rosenthal, C.A. (1992). In What Işın, E. (Ed.) Hippodrom/Atmeydani Style Should We Build?, In Mallgrave, – A Stage for İstanbul’s History I. 213- H. F. (E.) In What Style Should We 240. İstanbul: Pera Müzesi Yayını, Build?, (pp.114-123). Santa Monica: Königlich Preussischer Staats-An- The Getty Center fort he History of Art zeiger, 1901.01.28, Berlin and the Humanities . Kroll, F. - L. (2002). Herrschaftslegit- Salzenberg, W. (1854). Alt-Christli- imierung durch Traditionsschöpfung – che Baudenkmale von Constantinopel Der Beitrag der Hohenzollern zur Mit- vom V. bis XII. Jahrhundert [Old telalter-Rezeption im 19. Jahrhundert. Christian Monuments of Constanti- [Rulership Legitimization through nople from V. to XII. Century]. Berlin: Tradition Creation – The Contribu- Verlag von Ernst und Korn tion of Hohenzollern to the Reception Yazıcı, N. (2010). The First Ottoman of Middle ages in 19. Century], His- Exhibition Building in Atmeydani and torische Zeitschrift, 274. 61-85 the Collaboration of Architects Bour- Krüger, J. (1995). Rom und Jerusa- geois – Parvillee - Montani, In Işın, lem – Kirchenbauvorstellungen der E. (Ed.) Hippodrom/Atmeydani – A Hohenzollern im 19. Jahrhundert Stage for İstanbul’s History II, 128-151, [Rome and Jerusalem – Church De- İstanbul :Pera Müzesi Yayını, signs of Hohenzollern in 19. Century]. Wiegmann, R. (1992). In What Style Berlin: Akademie Verlag GmbH Should We Build?, In Mallgrave, H. F. Krüger, J. (2008). Die Erlöserkirche (E.) In What Style Should We Build?, in Bad Homburg v.d.H. – Schlüssel 104-112. Santa Monica: The Getty zum Kirchbauprogramm Kaiser Wil- Center fort he History of Art and the helm II [The Erlöserkirche in Bad Humanities Homburg v.d.H. – The Key to Church Wilhelm II. (1939). Ursprung und Construction Program of Kaiser Wil- Anwendung des Baldachins [The Ori- helm II]. Königstein: Langewiesche gin and Application of Baldachin]. Verlag Amsterdam: Verlag Allert de Lange. Lehmann, K. (1945). The Dome of

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 2 • July 2015 • C. Göğüş, Z. Kuban 129

Kayzer Wilhelm Çeşmesi, Osmanlı sembolü oluşunun izlerini taşır. İstanbul’unda Alman izleri II. Wilhelm tasarım sürecinde aktif İstanbul’da Sultanahmet Meydanın- olarak rol oynamıştır. Tasarımın onun da yer alan Alman Çeşmesi dönemin eskizlerinden uyarlandığı dönemin Alman Kaiser’i II. Wilhelm’in Osmanlı gazetelerinde yer almaktadır. Bundan Padişah’ı II. Abdülhamid’e hediyesidir. sonra da çeşmenin mimarı olarak ge- Kaiser başarılı geçen ve sadece İstanbul çen Max Spitta’nın yazışmalarından değil Yakın Doğu’yu da kapsayan 1898 Kayser’in tasarımın gelişimi içinde yer Doğu Gezisi sonrası Osmanlı toprakla- aldığı ve üslup seçimi gibi birinci de- rında gördüğü misafirperverliğe teşek- receden öneme sahip konularda karar kür etmek istemiştir. verdiği görülmektedir. Çeşmenin, İstanbul tarihinde iz bı- Yapının tasarımı strüktür kararları- rakan olayların sahnesi olmuş, şehrin na yakından bağlıdır. Sekizgen planlı önemli anıtlarına ev sahipliği yapan bir baldaken strüktürü olan yapı bu Sultanahmet Meydanına yapılması ve yönüyle II. Wilhelm’in bu strüktü- II. Wilhelm’in doğum gününde halka re verdiği ve 1938 yılında yayınlanan açılması planlanmıştır. Çeşmenin ken- “Baldakenin Kökeni ve Kullanımı” tin merkezinde, tarih içinde önemli konuşmasında da görülen kavramsal yer tutmuş bir alanda yapılıyor olması önemin izlerini taşır. II. Wilhelm bal- ve açılışının Kaiser Wilhelm’in doğum daken strüktürünün tarih boyunca günü için bir kutlamaya dönüşmesi kullanımını araştırdığı konuşmasında hem çeşmenin iki ülke için de önemini bu strüktürün ilk kullanımından iti- gösterirken, hem de anıtsallığını kanıt- baren göğü sembolizmiyle kutsallık ve lamaktadır. hükümdarlığı ifade ettiğini iddia et- Alman İmparatorluğu 19. yüzyılın miştir. ikinci yarısında kurulduğunda Avrupa Çeşmenin Neo-Bizans üslubunda ülkelerinde büyük ekonomik ve poli- olması onun kararıdır. Max Spitta’nın tik değişimler nedeniyle halkın devlet ilk tasarımlarında gene Rundbogenstyl içindeki yerini sorgulayan bir değişim (Alman topraklarında 19. yüzyılda kul- yaşanıyordu. Bu ortamda muhafazakar lanılan dairesel kemer üslubu) sınırları yönetimini sürdürmek isteyen İmpa- içinde olsalar da Neo-Romanesk üs- ratorluğun korunabilmesi için halkın lubun ağırlığı hissedilir. Tasarımı son gözündeki meşruiyetini güçlendirmek haline getiren II. Wilhelm’in Bizans gerekiyordu. Bu amaca yönelik özellik- üslubuna duyduğu ilgi olmuştur. Wil- le II. Wilhelm’in 1888’de tahta çıkışı ile helm’in Bizans kültürüne, dinin Bizans beraber saltanatın ülkenin her yerinde hayatındaki ve yönetimindeki önemi- fiziksel olarak var olabilmesi için daha ne ve özellikle Bizans hükümdarları- önce görülmemiş bir anıt inşaatına gi- nın mutlak hakimiyetlerine duyduğu rişildi. ilgi biliniyor. Kendisini temsil eden Bu anıt inşaatları incelendiğinde bir yapı için bu üslubu seçmesinin ar- Alman Çeşmesi ile benzerlikler göster- kasında bu gerekçe olmalıdır. Yine de dikleri görülür. Çeşme Alman hükü- tarihinde Bizans kültürü önemli bir yer meti tarafından Kaiserbrunnen (Kaiser tutan bir şehir içinde inşa edilecek bir Çeşmesi) olarak adlandırılmıştır. Yer yapıda bu üslubun kullanılması sadece seçimi sırasında Osmanlı ve Alman buna bağlı olamaz. Yapının bir parçası tarafı arasındaki çatışma iki tarafın da olacağı şehrin ve alanın tarihsel mirası bu kararı hafife almadığını, Osmanlı ile uyum içinde olması da bu üslup se- tarafının Sultanahmet Meydanı konu- çimi ile sağlanmıştır. sundaki ısrarı ise çeşmeyi olabilecek en Sonuçta, ortaya çıkan yapı 19. yüzyıl merkezi yerlerden birinde görmek is- sonu Osmanlı ve Alman kültürlerinin tediğini gösterir. Açılış günü de gecik- kesişme noktasından doğan ve bu etki- meler olmasına rağmen adını taşıdığı leşim alanının ürünü olan bir yapıdır. hükümdarın doğum gününe denk geti- Sadece bu iki devlet ve hükümdarları rilmiş ve resmi tören ile gerçekleşmiş- arasındaki dostluğun değil, iki devle- tir. Tasarımının detayları seçilen plan tin de geleceğini belirleyecek olan bir tipi ve üslup da çeşmeye yüklenmeye dönemin İstanbul’da bıraktığı bir izdir. çalışılan kavramların, bir hükümdar

German traces in Ottoman Istanbul: The Kaiser Wilhelm Fountain