Journals / Tasarım+Kuram / 2022 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 35

Antik Bir Kentin Günümüzdeki İzleri: Perinthos-Herakleia (Marmara Ereğlisi)

Pages
35–60
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

However, this is an assumption based on similar examples observed in Ancient Roman geography.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The cumulative structures of cities that are formed over time by different dynamics, different cultural influences, and various processes make it necessary to consider cities as multi-layered structures.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Cities, by their very nature, are a compilation of several layers.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, this is an assumption based on similar examples observed in Ancient Roman geography.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The cumulative structures of cities that are formed over time by different dynamics, different cultural influences, and various processes make it necessary to consider cities as multi-layered structures. Cities, by their very nature, are a compilation of several layers. Some of these layers that make up the physical environment of the city are visible concrete elements. Buildings, roads, technical infrastructure etc. relates to concrete items. Some others are related with a univers of meaning. Like properties and cadastre. Apart from the spatial structure of cities that have changed in different periods and cultures through historical process, some physical traces continue to exist unchanged or with little change and carry some spatial information of a past time. These traces may also not be easily noticeable in most cases. In many cases previous physical structure of cities such as buildings, urban elements can be found in layered forms to refer to the past of the city under current surface. The directions of some roads and streets, the shapes of some building blocks, or the traces of structures or uses of a past time that can be seen in the shapes of some parcels. This is a highly common case for many agglomerations in Turkey regardless of their sizes. Antique city of Perinthos-Herakleia, today Marmara Ereğlisi is situated on the northern coast of Marmara Sea to the west of İstanbul and actually has a small size harbour. The city was neverthless an important harbour in antiquity. Today some physical remnants of the antique city are still visible and some other traces of urban elements are perceptible in major urban elements such as direction and location of main streets or places and crossroads. This study is an inquiry aimed at revealing possible urban traces from the ancient city of Perinthos-Herakleia in today’s Marmara Ereğli, and understanding and discussing how ancient urban elements which have survived throughout the ages reflected and shaped today’s urban form. Through this work which is based upon results and assumptions of a research on the probable traces of antique city in todays city form will contribute to unveil how antique city shaped actual city form and how historic urban elements and city form survived through ages. This is a general spatial investigation to investigate the traces of the past in the physical form of an urban settlement area. Data from different sources were used in the study. In general, the study is based on field data as well as literature research. The work is based upon informations and datas gathered from historic texts such as travellers’ narratives and maps, satellite images archaeological excavations and survey reports and observations made on the site as they constitute main sources of the study. Historical texts such as period testimonies provide important information about the physical form of the settlement in the past. In addition to this, excavation reports in the region and more secondary written sources were also used. The field study data obtained from on-site observations and determinations were used especially in the confirmation of historical texts. Map and satellite images and analyzes made on maps constitute another important data source of the study. However, due to the absence of an important settlement in the long and recent periods of Marmara Ereğlisi’s history, maps, engravings, old photographic visual data related to the settlement were either never encountered or such data is very limited. The study is based on two basic initial propositions. The first of the propositions is that there is a spatial and cultural continuity of human activities. Depending on the first proposition, the second proposition is; The content and meaning do not change despite the change in form. Undoubtedly, both propositions are also generalizations. Considering paricularly that settlements of urban character, forms of the street texture and building blocks do not show great changes in general and they can continue to preserve their physical forms for centuries unless there is an intervention such as a disaster or urban plans. Some street traces and building blocks of today are considered to be the past of the city. It is a logical assumption to think that traces of the settlement structure of the past can and do continue to exist. Finally, in addition to concrete archaeological physical traces survived from Ancient Greek, Roman and Byzantine periods, traces of the Roman grid plan and the organic street texture of the Hellenistic period are partially preserved in different parts of the existing street texture of the city of Marmara Ereğlisi today. However, this is an assumption based on similar examples observed in Ancient Roman geography.

Özet

Doğaları gereği kentler pek çok katmandan oluşurlar. Bunların bir kısmı yapılar, yollar, teknik altyapı v.b. somut ögelerle ilgilidir. Bazıları ise, anlamla ilişkilidir. Birçok durumda kentin geçmişiyle ilgili bilgiler taşıyan yapılar ya da çeşitli fiziksel ögeleri gibi önceki yapısal unsurları mevcut zeminin altında katmanlı bir şekilde karşımıza çıkabilirler. Bu durum boyutlarından bağımsız olarak Türkiye’de hemen her yerleşmede karşılaşılabilen oldukça yaygın bir durumdur. Antik dönemde önemli bir liman kenti olan Perinthos’un günümüzdeki devamı olan Marmara Ereğlisi, Marmara Denizi’nin kuzey sahilinde, İstanbul’un batısında yer alan oldukça küçük bir limandır. Bugün antik kente ait kimi fiziksel ögeler hala görülebildiği gibi, ana cadde gibi kimi diğer kentsel unsurlar da yüzeyde izlenebilmektedir. Bu çalışma, günümüz Marmara Ereğlisi’nde antik Perinthos-Herakleia kentinden bugüne ulaşan muhtemel kentsel izleri ortaya çıkarmaya ve çağlar boyunca varlığını sürdürebilmiş antik kentsel ögelerin günümüz kent biçimine nasıl yansıyıp, onu nasıl şekillendirdiğini anlamaya ve tartışmaya yönelik bir sorgulamadır. Çalışmada tarihi metinler, arkeolojik veriler ve yerinde yapılan gözlem ve tespitlerden yararlanılmıştır

🔖

Cite This Article

AKBULUT, M. R., ŞENGÜLLÜ, A. (2022). Antik Bir Kentin Günümüzdeki İzleri: Perinthos-Herakleia (Marmara Ereğlisi). Tasarım+Kuram, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 35, 35–60. https://ajindex.com/articles/407320

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Anonim. (tarih belirtilmemiş). On the move, NATO’s homes. Brüksel: NATO. Anonim. (1957). La Turquie. Objectif 58: Bulltein officiel de l’exposition universelle et internationale de Bruxelles 1958, 32. Anonim. (1960a). NATO’nun Paris’de inşa edilen yeni merkez binası. Arkitekt, 299, 68-75. Anonim. (1960b, 23 Nisan). Turkish mosaic. Daily Telegraph, NATO Arşivleri, Brüksel. Anonim. (1967, 21 Ağustos). Danger, mosaic overhead. Daily Telegraph, NATO Arşivleri, Brüksel. Anonim. (2016). NATO’s art heritage: the National gifts for the first new NATO HQ. Exhibition Book. Brüksel: NATO. Arefi, M. (1999). Non-place and placelessness as narratives of loss: Rethinking the notion of place. Journal of Urban Design, 4 (2), 179-193.
  2. Auge, M. (1995). Non-places: Introduction to an anthropo- logy of supermodernity. Londra: Verso. Belge, M. (1998). Edebiyat üzerine yazılar. İstanbul:
  3. İletişim. Benjamin, W. (2008). Teknik olarak kopyalanabildiği çağda sanat yapıtı”. A. Artun. (Der.). Sanat siyaset: Kültür çağından sanat ve kültürel politika (ss. 91-130). İstanbul:
  4. İletişim. Bilsel, C. S. M. (2007). ‘Our Anatolia’: Organicism and the making of humanist culture in Turkey. Muqarnas, Harvard University Journal of Islamic Architecture, 24. Clark, T. (2004). Sanat ve propaganda: Kitle kültürü çağında politik imge. (E. Hoşsucu, Çev.). İstanbul:
  5. Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  6. Ersoy, A. (2008). Turkish plastic arts. Ankara: Ministry of Culture and Tourism. Eyüboğlu, B. R. (1943, I. Teşrin). Yapı ve Resim. Ülkü, 49, 1-3.
  7. Eyüboğlu, B. R. (1952, 13 Mart). Mozaik Hakkında. Cumhuriyet, 3. Germaner, S. (2008). Modernization of Turkish Art 1950-1990/ Türk sanatının modernleşme süreci 1950-1990.
  8. F. Erdemci, S. Germaner & O, Koçak. (Der.). Modern ve Ötesi: 1950-2000/Modern and Beyond: 1950-2000 (ss. 1-31). İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  9. Giedion, S. (1951). A Decade of new architecture. Zurich: Girsberger. Giray, K. (1998). Turkish plastic arts turkish painting and sculpture through 75 years of the Republic. İ. Çiftçioğlu & T. Kantürk (Der.). Türk plastik sa- natları/Turkish plastic arts (ss. 101-122). İstanbul:
  10. Bilim Sanat Galerisi. Golan, R. (2002). From monument to muralnomad: the Mural in modern European architecture. K. Koehler (Der.). The Built surface volume 2 (ss. 186-208).
  11. Aldershot, Hants; Burlington: Ashgate. Hall, S. (1993). The local and the global. A. King. (Der.). Culture, globalization and the world system. Londra: Macmillan. Heidegger, M. (2004). Sanat yapıtının kökeni. M