Dimitriadis, Sotirios (2013) The making of an Ottoman port-city : the state, local elites and urban space in Salonika, 1870-1912. PhD Thesis. SOAS, University of London. http://eprints.soas.ac.uk/id/eprint/20300 Copyright © and Moral Rights for this PhD Thesis are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non‐commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This PhD Thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder/s. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. When referring to this PhD Thesis, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the PhD Thesis must be given e.g. AUTHOR (year of submission) "Full PhD Thesis title", name of the School or Department, PhD PhD Thesis, pagination. THE MAKING OF AN OTTOMAN PORT-CITY: THE STATE, LOCAL ELITES AND URBAN SPACE IN SALONICA, 1870-1912 Sotirios Dimitriadis Thesis submitted for the degree of Ph.D. in History, September 2013 Department of History School of Oriental and African Studies University of London Declaration for SOAS PhD thesis I have read and understood regulation 17.9 of the Regulations for students of the SOAS, University of London concerning plagiarism. I undertake that all the material presented for examination is my own work and has not been written for me, in whole or in part, by any other person. I also undertake that any quotation or paraphrase from the published or unpublished work of another person has been duly acknowledged in the work which I present for examination. Signed: Date: ____27/9/2013______ 2 to the memory of Maria Simou 3 Abstract My dissertation aims at giving an account of the late Ottoman city of Salonica and its establishment as a major urban and commercial centre in the period between 1870 and 1912. As such, it follows the growing debate on late Ottoman history, and in particular the role of the empire’s port-cities. My study focuses on the emergence of two distinct local elites: The Ottoman provincial officialdom, whose presence was being increasingly felt, as the Tanzimat, the nineteenth-century Ottoman reforms progressed; and a diverse local bourgeoisie that took advantage of the opportunities presented by the integration of the region within the commercial networks that crisscrossed the Mediterranean. Urban governance was grounded upon a consensus between these two groups. It was structured around a hegemonic discourse of modernisation, semi-representative structures of local administration, as well as the profits generated by a nascent real estate market - itself a product of urban expansion and renovation. This balance was placed into doubt in the beginning of the twentieth century. As tensions in Macedonia escalated into ethnic conflict, the Young Turk Revolution of 1908 promised to redraft the contract between the Ottoman state and society on a more equitable and inclusive basis. In the process, however, the social forces in the city were unable to manage the radical expansion of public space. The old elite arrangements were swept aside by the introduction of mass politics, and the sites that symbolised the modernisation of Salonica became sites of contestation. The defeat of the Ottoman army in the First Balkan War and the annexation of Salonica and part of its hinterland by Greece marked the final demise of the Ottoman city. 4 Table of Contents Notes on Languages, Place Names, Dates and Currencies...........................................6 Acknowledgements......................................................................................................9 Introduction................................................................................................................11 Chapter 1: The City of Salonica and its Elites: Ottoman Officialdom and the Local Bourgeoisie.................................................................................................................37 Chapter 2: Rebuilding the Ottoman City: The Transformation of Salonica’s Cityscape....................................................................................................................81 Chapter 3: Technical Modernisation and Grand Projects in Late Ottoman Salonica ..................................................................................................................................114 Chapter 4: Experiencing Urban Space: Association, Sociability, and Leisure .......154 Chapter 5: Salonica under the Young Turks: The End of an Ottoman City.............181 Conclusion................................................................................................................210 Bibliography.............................................................................................................216 5 Notes on Languages, Place Names, Dates and Currencies 1. Languages This study makes use of a number of languages, making translation and transliteration methodology necessary. All translations of primary and secondary sources are my own, unless stated otherwise. Greek words and phrases are transcribed in the Latin alphabet using the formulation of the Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies of the University of Birmingham. Ottoman Turkish words, terms and phrases are spelled as in modern Turkish, following the transliteration format of the Istanbul edition of the New Redhouse Turkish-English Dictionary.1 It must be noted that, while modern Turkish uses the Latin alphabet, some of the letters and the pronunciation ascribed to them differ from English: |c| sounds like |j| in jazz |ç| reads like |ch| in cherries |ğ| is silent, prolonging the preceding vowel |j| resembles the French |j| |ş| is the |sh| in shine |ö| and |ü| sound like the German |ö| and |ü| 2. Places The naming of settlements located in the Ottoman Empire presents the historian with certain difficulties. Such place names tend to appear in great variety, their form differing between the diverse languages used by locals and visitors, and often changing along with the state borders. Salonica was founded as Thessaloniki, but in its long history it has also been called (or had its name written) as Thessalonica, Saloniki, Selânik, Solun, Salonika, Salonique, Salonicco. The same can be observed in other cities of the area. For the purpose of this dissertation, I have chosen to use the Ottoman name of settlements, following up where necessary with the name used within the current political borders. Some examples would be Yanya [Ioannina], 1 U. Bahadir Alkım et al. (eds.), Yeni Redhouse Türkçe-İngilizce sözlük – New Redhouse Turkish-English dictionary (Istanbul: Redhouse Press, 1981). 6 Siroz [Serres], or Manastır [Bitola]. This reflects the language of formal Ottoman practice and will serve to better posit these places within the historical context of nineteenth century. Exemption to this rule will be made for cities, which are familiar enough to the reader of English to be given in their modern English spelling. So, I will use Beirut for Beyrut, Alexandria for İskenderiye, and Istanbul for Dersaadet, Konstantiniye or any of the other alternative names employed by the Ottomans to refer to their capital. In this vein, Salonica can be considered a valid name for the Ottoman city that forms the subject of this study, while Thessaloniki will be the form used, when translating from Greek or when referring to the city after its incorporation into the Greek state in 1912-1913. 3. Dates The linguistic and religious diversity of Salonica is reflected on to the simultaneous use of different calendars by the inhabitants of the city for their everyday transactions. The lunar Islamic calendar (takvim-i hıcrî), whose year count start with the migration (hicret) of the Prophet Mohammad from Mecca to Medina, was the liturgical calendar of the Muslim population, while the Greek Orthodox inhabitants used the Julian calendar. The Rumi, or ‘Roman,’ calendar was introduced in 1840 as part of the attempted Ottoman fiscal reforms; it was basically an adapted Julian calendar, its year count matching the Islamic calendar, and the start of the year set at March 1. The Hebrew calendar was widely used by the local Jewry. The Ottoman administration dated its archives using the Islamic and the Rumi calendars, often in combination. All dates in this dissertation will be given in the form in which they appear in the original source, then converted to the Gregorian calendar. Conversions will be based on the online tool developed by Ahmet Murat Aytaç and the University of Ankara.2 4. Currency The main unit of currency in the late Ottoman Empire was the golden lira, which was subdivided into 100 silver kuruş, and each kuruş into 40 paras. Despite its best efforts, the Ottoman state never managed to make the lira the only currency used in the Empire, and a great variety of foreign currencies continued to be accepted in 2 <http://193.255.138.2/takvim.asp?takvim>, accessed at September 12, 2013. 7 commercial transaction until the end of the period. When recording monetary sums, this dissertation will record them in the currency unit used in the original source, without converting them. Providing a full account of the exchange rate between the lira and the main foreign currencies lies beyond the scope of this study and is unnecessary for following it. While market prices tended to fluctuate, official exchange