The Maritime Neighborhoods of Constantinople: Commercial and Residential Functions, Sixth to Twelfth Centuries

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Mon, C onstantinople, like New York, is a city not only by the sea, but also, to a large extent, in the sea. The effect of the sea on the fabric of the city is strongly pervasive, and it makes sense to start from the sea when investigating urban neighborhoods. By far the best evidence for the texture of urban neighborhoods comes from twelfth-century documents concerning the real estate conceded to the Italian maritime republics of Venice, Pisa, and Genoa-real estate that lay close to the shores of the Golden Horn.Since the sea is not far from any part of the city or its suburbs, and is indeed visible from almost anywhere within the Theodosian walls, it may well be asked what is meant by a maritime neighborhood. What distinguishes it from an inland neighborhood? Where does the one end and the other begin? Eleven of the twelve urban regions of the fifth-century Notitia urbis Constantinopolitanae bordered on the sea, but only Regions I and IX had a long coastline.' Most of the other regions extended from a narrow stretch of coast to a narrow bloc of the city center. However, the regions were administrative rather than social or economic units. If we take into account the topography, the layout of public spaces, and the location of public monuments, we can draw a broad working distinction between those parts of the city that looked primarily toward the sea and those orientated toward the central avenue (Mese), the fora, and the great public buildings. Only in rare cases was a focal point such as the Strategion or the Leomakellon situated so close to the sea as to constitute a rival attraction.2 In this paper, I shall be concerned with those neighborhoods whose proximity to the sea may be assumed to have been decisive, whether directly or indirectly, for the location of houses and businesses. The assumption is that a seaside location was desirable, first, for the loading, unloading, storage, and marketing of seaborne merchandise, and second, for the recreation afforded by a view of the sea. The commercial importance of proximity to the sea is self-evident, although, given the low status of commerce in Byzantine society and culture, it is almost never

Dendroarchaeology of the mid-first millennium AD in Constantinople

“…A major fire in AD 465 destroyed the neighboring Port of Julianus (Mango, 1986), which might have increased the use of Yenikapı, but this data set provides no obvious construction phases associated with this datedthe first building phase represented in the chronology is AD 527. Similarly none of the dock phases (or hiatuses) reported here (with the exception of one sample in Marmaray _ Iskele 1) are associated with the years AD 541e542 when the Justinianic plague killed approximately 40% of Constantinople's population (Magdalino, 2000).…”

EightByzantine Shipwrecks from theTheodosianHarbour Excavations atYenikapı inIstanbul,Turkey: an introduction

“…Half of an Archaic‐period two‐armed wooden hook anchor was also found in the excavation area (Gökçay, : 149). In the 4th century AD, the Theodosian Harbour, as well as the Julian Harbour farther to the east, were constructed as part of the programme begun by Constantine I and continued by his successors to expand the city into an imperial capital (Magdalino, : 211). Several descriptions of the city by authors in the Late Roman period mention the use of pilings and in‐filling to increase the city's area along the shores.…”

“…Along with the Harbour of Julian (r. 361–363), located farther east on the Marmara shore and built in approximately the same period, the Theodosian Harbour was intended for importing commercial goods and supplies necessary for the expanding city (Müller‐Wiener, : 8–10; Magdalino, : 210–11). As part of the annona , the state‐administrated system of food allotments, massive quantities of grain and other provisions were shipped to Constantinople to sustain the growing population of the capital (Mango, : 190).…”

Houses, streets and shops in Byzantine Constantinople from the fifth to the twelfth centuries

“…The main harbourside districts along the Golden Horn and Marmara, recently discussed by Magdalino, would have bounded this zone to the north and south, linking high-density low-status occupation to the availability of commercial and maritime work. 14 Upper class residential districts may also be discerned from written evidence. Mango has noted that the private foundation of religious houses near high-status residences indicates the approximate position of these residences.…”