Chapter 5 – The Case Studies
Mesire [Meadow] Typology:
[Figure 8] - Mesires
Mesires were lands located amongst Bosporus, mostly between two hills due to being protected green lands, or on top of the hills for better scenery. They were located around the rivers that poured into the Bosphorus or on the hills of Istanbul observing the landscape with oak and ash trees, orchards, and the sea. They were mostly preferred for their fresh air, beautiful scenery and the clean water resources.41 They were free, green lands activated with leisure activities as they were visited in spring-summer times.42 Except for the temporarily built pavilions or summer mansions (such as the ones in Kağıthane 43), they were mostly unoccupied landscapes that can be called described as urban only for a certain period of time.
Although each mesire was popular in different times of the year due to the weather and topography conditions and social parameters affecting their popularity, they were actively used when the seasons turned to spring or summer and the weather allowed spending time out in the nature. For a long period of time, especially when the land was under the Ottoman control, mesires developed their own culture via the appropriations and negotiations of their users. Since they were natural landscapes without significant artificial design interventions, they were occupied and manipulated based on the possibilities the topography proposed, the creative limits of the public and the social contracts between the society provided.
While they opened space for being present in the nature and engaging with the ‘virgin’ landscape; they also introduced interesting urban circumstances by being the stages for creative, spontaneous, instinctive ways to occupy the space. Consequently, they also hosted equally unpredictable, sometimes whimsical, social encounters and dialogues. In this sense, they appear as unique settings to observe the social relations; political, economic, cultural, and trivial discussions within the society that may reflect on the spatial practices. Through this perspective, they can be considered as social structures that have the ability to portray the organic development of a society through silent negotiations and impulsive reactions without predetermined agendas except for the ones that had already been openly or secretly discussed, accepted, and internalized by the participants of the community.
They also have the ability to reflect the extents of the cultural identity of a society by including the bad memories that Sennett mentions44, the traumas, silenced communities, prejudices, inequalities, lies and many more controversial aspects in its collective memory which can be realized at less controlled, less organized experiences of a space. By focusing on the information that is circulated outside the organized, narrated resources; this study aims to capture these trivial and disregarded aspects that construct the space together with other constructive information. It aims to capture the collective memory that constitutes the space identity and the cultural identity that can be realized by overlapping the multiple experiences of multiple visits to the mesire.
As aforementioned, each mesire had its own attributes. Below you may find the significant aspects of some mesires listed based on the information collected mainly from Uğur Göktaş’s “Kartpostallarda Mesireler” [Mesires in Postcards]45 and the podcast Kültür & Tarih Sohhbetleri [Conversations of Culture and History] that hosts Prof. Dr. Ali Şükrü Çoruk46:
Kağıthane Meadow: it was popular in spring for six weeks before it gets too hot in the summer.47 It also hosted official ceremonies and festivities beside casual visits of the public. The entertainments here included the activities on the way to and from here.
Göksu Meadow: It became public in the era of Sultan II. Abdülhamit. It was surrounded by tall trees. It was popular in summers, until the autumn. It was famous for its corn, pottery and helva.It was also famous for the shadow puppet shows and theatre in the round that presented by Kavuklu Hamdi, Funny Şevki, Little İsmail and Şeyh Hakkı. The shabby coffee house called ‘ Dörtkardeşler’ [Four Siblings] was also famous.48
Küçüksu Meadow: It was very close to Göksu and hosted the same crowd coming from there. It was famous for welcoming important figures from the literature circles. 49
Beykoz Meadow: It was famous for hunting activities. Artisan guilds had their ceremonies here.
Çırpıcı Meadow: It hosted the Arab communities herb-picking festivals and famous for its artisan and rascal visitors. The black communities also had their ceremonies here and these were known for excluding the people that are not from the community.50 This meadow had their own ways of flirting between men and women.
Büyüdere Meadow: The foreign travellers visited and mentioned this meadow in their journals very often. Many mansions and buildings were constructed here later.51
Beşiktaş Meadow: It was very crowded and popular due to being in the city centre. It had a dense vegetation of willow, ash and mastic trees.52
Sarıyer Meadow: It was famous for its water springs -Çırçır, Kestane, Fındık, Hünkar, Şifa- due to the beliefs that they will provide health and good luck.53
Çamlıca Meadow: It was visited on Sundays. The municipality gardens nearby was famous for its lighting. People from places called Alemdağ, Taşdelen, and Üsküdar were very interested in this mesire and convoys at early hours operated for bringing people here for day-long activities.54
Haydarpaşa Meadow: It was famous for the tents and wood shelters that hosted wrestling contests, shows, theatre-in-the-round and puppet shows, live music activities. It was crowded with venders.
Kuşdili Meadow: It was reached by boats and oxcarts. It was popular between young people coming to find spouses. According to Mehmet Selahattin, it had a very popular swing and it was popular to walk towards Fikir Tepe [Fikir Hill] promenade.55
Going back to the definition of the mesires, it is important to point out that the word “mesire” did not directly describe a physical space but a state and the perception of a physical space.56 In this sense, the definition of mesire stand in line with the approach this research takes while acknowledging the space as the sum of the physical space, elements and interactions taking place in relation with it and the meanings and interpretations derived from these multi-layered structures. Although in terms of physical landscape they were basically meadows, these places were named as “mesires” when they were occupied by the people for practicing leisure activities. These activities had varied from sports activities to flirting, festivals to long walks.
Some of them that are repeated often in the open-access resources, photos, songs lyrics, oral histories and movies. The ones that are identified within the scope of this research can be listed as follows:
o Watching the scenery
o Smoking pipe
o Drinking coffee
o Picnics
o “Tespih çekmek” [counting beeds]
o “Tenezzüh” [promenade]
o “Seyre çıkmak” [sailing for watching the scenery, cruising]
o “Mehtaba Çıkmak” [sailing, cruising or walking at night in the full-moon]
o Sports activities – wrestling, cirit, football
o Games – running with a stone, throwing stone, swing
o “Fasıl” [live music]
o Chatting
o Snacking
o Shows and story-telling – meddah, theatre in a round, shadow puppet
o Acrobats
o Animal trainers’ shows
o Feists
o Celebrations – Hıdrellez
o Sitting in the tree shades
The listed activities indicate the interactions between the elements which temporarily became present in the mesires. These elements occupied the meadows which were previously described as free landscapes open for manipulation. They then activated the physical space via appropriations of the landscape and interactions between each other. In this context elements were loaded with metaphores and each colour had a meaning as Ünal explains.57 Some of these elements can be listed mentioned in open-access resources as follows:
o Row boats
o Oxcarts
o İhram [floor blankets]
o Carpet
o Food çıkıns [bundles] and baskets
o Musical Instruments – ney, zurna, rebab, def, mandoline…
o Candles put on turtoise – in the Tulip Era specifically, at the nights with full-moon, candles were put on the trained turtoises’ shells and strolled around the mesires
o Handkerchief
o Flower bundles or single flowers
o Venders – muhallebici, sherbet vender, helva vender, macun vender, icecream vender...
o Venders’ folding stools, carts, pots…
o Music
o Laughter
o Venders’ yellings
o Water Sound
o Wind
o Trees’ sounds
o Smell of spring flowers and trees
As observed in many stories and resources that tell about the typology, the listed elements and many more interacted in mesires. These objects, people, animals, rituals, activities, and the landscape itself describe an idea, an identity, of mesire. Although these landscapes are mostly long gone, as does some of the elements and rituals mentioned; it is possible to observe reminiscents of mesire culture today in varying spatial constructs. Such as picnics by the water or in the parks, bringing in prepared food, venders or motorcycle couirers bringing food and more.
What is embedded in the collective memory from these typologies that is still significant in the contemporary context is found to be the culture of appropriating the landscape through mediating the boundaries between private and public. While this appears as a continued ritualistic practice, it also appears to be a necessity that provides social interaction and an organic system for negotiating the social boundaries and experiment encounters other aspects of the same community. This practice can be recognized as critical to form a homogenous community that builds a collective memory together. By bringing in their knowledge, emotions, and tangible and intangible baggages to the stage that provides a chance to perform as themselves, they actually become visible to other participants of the community, get in relation with other elements of the space-time and take role in the formation of the abstract layer defined as the tertiary aspect of space in this research. As a result, they take their place in the collective memory of the space as they also introduce their own ways of practically occupying the space, their ways of interacting with the other elements of the space and their physical and non-physical tools to be present in the space. By doing so, they reshape and contribute to the creation of a cumulative identity.
In this research mesires are studied in line with the adopted theoretical framework. Firstly, they are described based on the attributes of mesires as a physical space: the topography, the landscape, the reason of occupying them are explained. Secondly, the elements and interactions taken place on these lands are presented. Finally, the meaning and significance of these lands in the collective memory of Istanbul are described and their function in terms of providing social cohesion through unauthorized leisure activities are discussed. The archival material that better demonstrates the multisensory, multi-layered structure of mesires’ collective identity, can be found on the website produced as the result of this research, which conveys the information more in line with the nature of spatial experience.
41 Ertan, Ünal. ‘İstanbul’un Mesireleri’. fotokart (blog), 13 October 2020. https://www.fotokart.shop/blog/istanbulun-mesireleri/.
42 Karay, Refik Halid. ‘Hafta Konuşması - İstanbul’un Çayırları’, n.d. Istanbul Sehir Universitesi Repository. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/38305823.pdf.
43 Gürbey, Hiz. ‘[Ç]: Çayır’. Manifold. Accessed 19 June 2022. https://manifold.press/c-cayir.
44 Sennett, Richard, op. cit.
45 Göktaş, Uğur. ‘Kartpostallarda Mesireler’. Https://Openaccess.Marmara.Edu.Tr/Server/Api/Core/Bitstreams/Aa3261f9-B82d-4079-A55b-Bacda958a09f/Content, n.d. Kişisel Arşivlerde İstanbul Belleği Taha Toros Arşivi.
46 Kültür & Tarih Sohbetleri. ‘Dr Ali Şürü Çoruk Ile Osmanlı İstanbulun’da Eğlence Kültürü’, n.d. https://open.spotify.com/episode/1LvWQ6rNoSHmVfymQ34Axv?si=489882cf96b04db3.
47 Göktaş, op. cit.
48 ibid.
49 ibid.
50 Mehmet Selahattin. ‘Küçüksu’da Birkaç Saat’. Milliyet Gazetesi, 13 August 1932, sec. İstanbul Cuma Günleri Nasıl Eğleniyor. İstanbul Üniversitesi Gazeteden Tarihe Bakış Projesi. http://nek.istanbul.edu.tr:4444/ekos/GAZETE/milliyet//milliyet_1932/milliyet_1932_agustos_/milliyet_1932_agustos_13_.pdf.
51 Halûk Şehsuvaroğlu. ‘Büyükdere Mesiresi’, n.d. Istanbul Sehir Universitesi Repository. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/38303316.pdf.
52 Göktaş, op. cit.
53 ibid.
54 ibid
55 Mehmet Selahattin. ‘Kurbağalıdere’de Bir Pelikan Olmak #31 - Kurbağalıdere Fikir Tepesi’. Aposto. Accessed 3 September 2022. https://www.apos.to/i/62864495a9837a0007abd38e.
56 Karay, Refik Halid, op. cit.
57 Ünal, op. cit.
Plaj[Beach] Typology:
[Figure 9] - Plajs
Istanbul’s relationship with the sea had been very restricted for long centuries. Although the city can be described physically by two peninsulas reaching towards each other from Asia and Europe, the urban life in the city had not been in relation with the sea surrounding it, although it carried the potential to do so. One significant aspect from Istanbul’s collective memory which proves an intimate interaction between the urban context and the sea, is the almost lost beach typology. Unfortunately, the culture of occupying the shores for leisure activities and interaction with the water in such a way was only popular for a restricted time and space in the city’s past. At those instances, on the areas where the land merged with the sea typology called ‘plaj’ were produced.
The culture of using beaches started with the arrival of White Russians as they ran away from Russia and settled in Istanbul after.58 Before that the culture of getting into the sea was restricted with structures called sea baths.59 Contradicting with the open and welcoming beach typology, sea baths were closed, introversive structures that were used for dipping in the sea for cooling down using the ‘court-yard’, the pool created in the centre of these structure. They were separate for men and women it was forbidden to get out of these structures by swimming.
As Feza Kürkçüoğlu mentions in the “İstanbul’un Sayfiyeleri ve Plajları [Istanbul’s Vacation Places and Beaches] episode of the podcast Istanbul Ansiklopedisi [Istanbul Encyclopedia], in 1920s after the arrival of white Russians, the first beach was established as Florya beach by Big Alexander and Small Alexander.60 After Solaryum and Haylayf Beaches many others followed these.61 In 1930s, beaches were formed by placing facilities on the already existing topographies to fullfill the needs: they were adopting a very different manner than the previous sea baths. As Akçura explains, in this period, the ferries operated by Şirket-i Hayriye (one of the rare private establishments left from Ottoman Empire) increases the frequenct of round-trips and this results in an icreased interest in beaches.62
Just for a limited time before the coastal road was built in 1960 by filling the sea to connect the villages located on the shores of the Bosphorus, the beaches around Istanbul were used extensively. Quoting Kürkçüoğlu: “When it is 1980s; with the Marmara Sea getting dirty and the shores becoming zoned for construction, the plaj culture gets interrupted.”.63 Similar to mesires, they were accessible for many and were occupied temporarily by the people living in Istanbul without leaving much of a trace after leaving.
The beaches, in terms of a physical space, could be described as sandy landscapes that descend into the sea, with temporary cabins and jumping/diving towers and “gazinos” on them. Gazinos on the beaches were structures that included facilities from bathrooms, snack bars, restaurants, to spaces for entertainment such as a stage, a dance ring and a night club.64 These places staged many concerts and shows in the summers, hosting renowned artists.65 People living nearby sometimes rowed with boats to the shores of the beaches to listen, drink, and sing along to the songs. Beside the shows, they hosted beauty pageants, games, and competitions. They were multipurpose entertainment and leisure spaces like the sandy topographies they compliment.
Each beach had its unique attributes beyond these shared aspects. These can be stated as follows based mostly on Gökhan Akçura’s article “Bir foto öykü: İstanbul’un ilk plajları” [A photo-narrative: İstanbul’s First Beaches]66, the podcast episode “İstanbul’un Sayfiyeleri ve Plajları” [Istanbul’s Vacation Places and Beaches]67 and “Eski İstanbul Plajları: Caddebostan’dan Florya’ya Nostalji” [Istanbul’s Old Beaches: Nostalgia from Caddesbostan to Florya]68:
Florya Beach: It initiates the beach culture by being the first established beach operated by Big Alexander and Small Alexander, after the arrival of White Russians and their use of the sea here. With the visits of political figures, its popularity increases.69
Caddebostan Beach: According to İstanbul Encyclopedia by Reşat Ekrem Koçu it was previously named as “Cadıbostanı”.70 It was established as a coffee house by Dimitri and his partner. The sandy shore next to thhe coffeehouse was in the service of the ones that preferred swimming. A characteristic feature of the beach is the magnolia tree that stands in the middle of the beach that people lied in its shade. 71
Altınkum Plajı: It starts operating in 1930s, and becomes popular when Şiret-i Hayriye starts running it.72 Special shows and programmes are organized here and on the ferries travelling there and back. The most characteristic attribute of it is having a small sandy beach and a seperate gazino up on the hill. This way as Mehmet Selahattin praises, it provides a feeling of privacy.73
Büyükdere Beyaz Park Beach: it starts aoperating as two sea baths (one for women one for men) and a gazino in between facing the sea. Then it turns in a mixed beach by the support of political figures.74 The most characteristic element on this beach is its 3-storey, diving-deck tower.
Fenerbahçe Beach: It is renowned for being the “most democract” beach of the republican history since the entrance was free. Besides this, It includes a section seperated for women called “harem” due to the discussion lasting after the republican transformations.75
Salacak Beach: As Mehmet Selahattin describes, Salacak is considered to be the beach with the best view and best live music.76 Although there were complaints about the service, it was cherished fort he view, the music and the colorful bulbs illuminating the shore at night.
Moda Beach: according to Akçura the first sea bath in İstanbul is assumed to be constructed here.77 The beach here lasts until the last quarted of the 20th century. It includes a section seperated for women. It is famous for obtaining a very long deck and a tall diving tower. It is also famous for its part taken on the 1st of July – The Cabotage Celebrations.78
Yörükali Beach: The history of this beach goes back to 19th century. While it was named as “Yorgoli” with the law of changing names into Turkish, it becomes Yorgo Ali.79 In 1934, with the contribution ot “Beautifying the Islands Community”, the beach was refurbished and with the deck built in this renovation, the ferries begin stopping by the beach.80
Küçüksu Beach: Şirket-i Hayriye builds the beach and the gazino in the scope of improving the Bosphorus. There was a sandy beach, a hardwood dance ring, a very much appreciated landscape design with various flowers.81 Şirket-i Hayriye also tries to maket he nightlife livelier and organize events. The beach is preferred due to its closeness to the city centre.
Suadiye Beach: It is easily accessed by train, ferry and bus trips. The reliefs on its walls were famous. The road leading to the beach was asphalt and surrounded by lines of trees. The entrance fee was 35 Kuruş in 1940s.82 The most significant aspect of it was the stairs descending into the sea and being illuminated at night for night swims. It always had boats and motors close by of people coming to see or listen to the shows without paying.
The beaches staged different ways of occupying the place like mesires. Especially free topographies were redesigned everyday by each visitor laying their towels on the grounds, children spreading their toys and buckets around and young people throwing beach balls to each other. The elements constructing the space had changed each day and they recreated the space while building on the collectibve memory of the İstanbul beaches. With changing fashion preferences, technologies and music styles, the aspects forming the beach identity transformed but they equally too their place in the memory shared based on these typologies. Some elements that are detetcted in resources such as photographs, magazines, videos, movies and posters can be found listed below:
o Changing cabins
o Umbrellas
o Boats
o Swimsuits
o Towels
o Straw mats
o Showers
o Buckets and showels
o Rackets
o Balls
o Music
o Magazines and books
o Sunglasses
o Venders – corn venders, simit venders
o Venders’ stools and carts
o Photographers and their cameras
o Ice cream stands
o Lifeguards
o Lifeguards’ towers and boats
o Jumping towers
o Diving decks
o Decks
o Fruits and other summer food
o Venders’ shouts
These aspects get in touch with each other on the beaches creating the stories that are repeatedly told while describing the experience of beaches as a lost leisure space. The ritual repeated and gained significance in the collective memory of İstanbul. Some of which are listed below:
o Beauty Pageants
o Swimming races
o Jumping Races
o Beach games
o Sports such as beachvolley
o Dancing
o Concerts and shows
o Eating snacks
o Queueing in front of venders
o Building sandcastles, playing with the sand
o Swimming
o Diving
o Jumping
o Reading magazines and books
o Listening to the music
o Sunbathing
o Fishing
These rituals and the people, elements, and the sandy landscapes perform them together by interacting with each other in different times and unique ways. What is spotted as significant in these rituals is the feeling of freedom provided by the combination of elements creating the space in a unique way. Some of the aspects that are realized as contributing to this feeling of freedom and safety begin with the texture of the topography that provides a mostly physically safe landscape that allows more challenging physical activities to be performed. Adding on this, the comfortable conditions provided by the options the physical environment suggests -such as cooling off by getting into the sea and drying easily under the warm sun- suggests a certain level of comfort, ease, and therefore safety.
When it comes to the temporary elements creating the space, the freedom to organize the space that is going to ‘owned’ for the length of the visit answers the need of creating a marking a safe territory in an open and public space. Dwelling on this idea and feeling, similar to the mesires, appropriation of space becomes a tool for presenting one’s self within a public context and with a level expectancy of acceptance and acknowledgement implicitely imposed on others. When the vulnerability accepted added to this spatial context (by exposing one’s body relatively more than it is done in many other public spaces) the perception of space becomes affected by many pre-negotiated and accepted social contracts between the participants of the space even before the physical experience of the space begins.
Finally with the activities considered to be a part of the culture of occupying space being mostly physical and game-like, the participants of the space start engaging with each other in a way to quickly learn about each other, build memories and solutions together and familiarize with one another. As a result an environment of safety and inclusivity is build via sharing the experience of space and the physical space itself. These aspects can be implemented in future designs and investigations on spatial studies beyond the restrictions of time or a certain space. The aspects providing an inclusive experience within these spaces and within the scope of leisure activities indicate the ways that the participants of a space can build bonds with each other, construct a collective memory together and agree on the terms of a shared social/cumulative identity while being present with individual identities that the boundaries within the public space is being negotiated thorugh an experience. The silent or actual dialogue started in this context can possible provide a solution between different individuals or result in an organic conflict or disagreement which will keep reiteration in further encounters.
Further information on Istanbul’s lost beach culture can be discovered in the archival website complimenting this study. There, the elements of space and the stories they produced are presented in a non-hierarchal way. They are gathered from open access resources and picked based on the higher possibility of being reached by anyone that may get in touch with these spatial typologies. It aims to gather the collective memory surrounding Istanbul’s lost beaches and portray its cultural identity in a multisensorial way.
58 Pera Museum. ‘Seaside Leisure’, 12 April 2018. https://www.peramuseum.org/blog/seaside-leisure/1324.
59 ‘Eski İstanbul Plajlarının Öyküleri’. Accessed 19 June 2022. http://aykiriakademi.com/ayrkiri-akademi-yasam/aykiri-akademi-yasam-kent-kulturu/eski-istanbul-plajlarinin-oykuleri.
60 Kürkçüoğlu, Feza, Kansu Şarman, and Cem Erciyes. ‘“İstanbul’un Sayfiyeleri ve Plajları [Istanbul’s Vacation Places and Beaches]’. Istanbul Ansiklopedisi [Istanbul Encyclopedia], n.d. https://open.spotify.com/episode/1LvWQ6rNoSHmVfymQ34Axv?si=489882cf96b04db3.
61 İçer, Tuğba. ‘Ortak Dil Oluşturma Mekanı Olarak İstanbul’un Plajları’. Mikroscope (blog), 14 September 2021. https://www.mikro-scope.com/laboratuvar/ortak-dil-olusturma-mekani-olarak-istanbulun-plajlari/.
62 Akçura, Gökhan. ‘Bir foto öykü: İstanbul’un ilk plajları’. İST Dergi. İBB - Kültür A.Ş., 4 June 2021. https://www.istdergi.com/tarih-belge/bir-foto-oyku-istanbulun-ilk-plajlari.
63 Kürkçüoğlu, Feza. ‘Selam olsun bir zamanların “hürriyet diyarı”na’. 1+1 Express, 10 August 2019. https://birartibir.org/selam-olsun-bir-zamanlarin-hurriyet-diyarina/.
64 Toprak, Zafer. ‘Deniz Hamamından Plaja Bir Nostaljinin Öyküsü / From Sea Baths to Beaches - A Story of Nostalgia’. Accessed 18 June 2022. https://www.academia.edu/36359783/Deniz_Hamam%C4%B1ndan_Plaja_Bir_Nostaljinin_%C3%96yk%C3%BCs%C3%BC_From_Sea_Baths_to_Beaches_A_Story_of_Nostalgia.
65 ibid.
66 Akçura, op. cit.
67 Feza Kürkçüoğlu, et al. Op.cit.
68 theMagger. ‘Eski İstanbul Plajları: Caddebostan’dan Florya’ya Nostalji • theMagger’, 3 May 2018. https://www.themagger.com/istanbul-eski-plajlari/.
69 Akçura, op. cit.
70 Koçu, Reşat Ekrem. İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, 1958. http://archive.org/details/istansiklopedisi_201912.
71 Akçura, op.cit.
72 ibid.
73 Selahattin, Mehmet. ‘Altınkum’da Yüzenler ve Eğlenenler’. Milliyet Gazetesi, 27 June 1929, sec. İstanbul Cuma Günleri Nasıl Eğleniyor. İstanbul Üniversitesi Gazeteden Tarihe Bakış Projesi. http://nek.istanbul.edu.tr:4444/ekos/GAZETE/milliyet//milliyet_1929/milliyet_1929_temmuz_/milliyet_1929_temmuz_27_.pdf?utm_source=aposto.
74 Akçura, op.cit.
75 ibid.
76 Mehmet Selahattin. ‘Salacak Sahillerinde Bir Saat’. Milliyet Gazetesi, 27 June 1931, http://nek.istanbul.edu.tr:4444/ekos/GAZETE/milliyet//milliyet_1931/milliyet_1931_haziran_/milliyet_1931_haziran_27_.pdf?utm_source=aposto. İstanbul Üniversitesi Gazeteden Tarihe Bakış Projesi.
77 Akçura, op.cit.
78 Eski İstanbul Plajlarının Öyküleri. http://aykiriakademi.com/ayrkiri-akademi-yasam/aykiri-akademi-yasam-kent-kulturu/eski-istanbul-plajlarinin-oykuleri. Accessed 19 June 2022.
79 Göktuğ İpek. ‘Eşekten Inip Ata Bindik #41 - Yorgoli’den Yörükali’ye’. Aposto, https://www.apos.to/i/62e782fce8bfc200061a650c. Accessed 3 Sept. 2022.
80 Akçura, op.cit.
81 ibid.
82 ibid.