DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.24719#0229
100
BYZANTINE AND TURKISH BATHS.
of the Greek words dig t^v ttoAiv. The use of the xenoclocMa, or hostelries for travellers, was
general at Constantinople before the Turks had established the khans; and the “ mansiones
veredariorum ” preceded the caravanserais, which border all the principal roads throughout
the country.
. Though this uncliangeableness is the striking characteristic of the people of Islam, they
have not failed to borrow numerous customs from nations more civilized than themselves: many
of these we find in use amongst them now.
For instance, the Koran itself borrowed from Christians the custom of ablutions before
prayer, a perpetuation of which we find in our own days in the holy water of the Latin church.
That the custom of ablution was of Christian origin, might be proved by many passages from
old writers; hut the inscription before quoted, as existing on one of the fountains in St. Sophia’s,
is a sufficient proof of the fact. History observes, says Banduri, that there was there a great vase
of water, in which the faithful usually washed their faces, or at least their eyes.1
We must render this justice to the Turks, that they have adopted with zeal all those
customs of the ancients that tended to the preservation of the purity of the body and of the
dwelling. Thus the usage of never entering either a place of worship or a house with the
shoes on that were worn out of doors, was general in times of antiquity amongst well-bred people
(Cteo autem, sump tin calceis, exiit e cubiculo et deambulavit in portion).2 It is only natural to
suppose that the beautiful mosaics of the Romans were not intended to be exposed to be soiled
by the impurities of the streets.
The legislator of the Arabs, born in a burning country, and having experienced from
his youth all the benefits there afforded by a fine spring of water, imposed ablution not only
for health’s sake, but also as a mark of gratitude to the Creator; following the principle of
Sedi Khrelil, that man should not disdain the benefits that Providence affords him.
When the Turks quitted Broussa, so celebrated for its waters, for Constantinople, they
found no reason to regret their first capital, for the Greeks had furnished the latter city with
everything that tended to make it a healthy and agreeable place of residence, — with baths
and fountains, and with aqueducts that conveyed a good supply of the purest water from the
environs. The Turks took possession of all these, and maintained them in a more or less
perfect condition up to the present day. They have preserved not only the buildings themselves,
but have also retained many details connected with the administration of the water supply.
When Mahomet II. arrived at Constantinople, many of the magnificent buildings that are
described in the Notice of Constantinople,3 no longer existed, or if they did, they were in a
lamentable state of ruin, through the effects of the numerous earthquakes from which the
city had suffered.
The mother church of Byzantium, St. Sophia’s, had suffered from these violent shocks, and
a part of the great dome had fallen. In the year 732, the primitive church of St. Irene had
been destroyed; and the statue of Arcadius, placed on a column in the Xerolophos, had fallen.
In the year 1041, the earth shook for forty days, and some thousands of people perished in
Constantinople by the falling of churches. Another earthquake, not less terrible, took place
A.D. 1038: it was at this period that the church of the Holy Apostles suffered the greatest
damage. The earthquake which took place A.D. 1296 shook the edifice to the foundation ; how-
ever, it was repaired, and service was performed there up to the time of the taking of the town.
The baths, which were not so large, and which had thicker walls than the churches, suffered
less; but many of them were rendered useless, and were afterwards demolished.
The Greeks of Byzantium had preserved in their baths all the arrangements and customs
of the ancients, but they had much simplified the buildings themselves. There were not then,
as formerly, to be found in them the xystci, the palcestra, the gymnasia, where the bathers,
before or after the bath, tried the suppleness of their limbs. People went to the baths less
for the purpose of bathing than for the pleasure of gossiping with the loungers who frequented
them: this fashion still prevails at Constantinople.
The Byzantine baths retained only those parts of the building that were absolutely neces-
sary ;—the waiting-room, or apodyterium ; the tepid chamber, or tepidarium ; and the hot chamber.
1 Banduri, vol. t. 2 Cicero, de RepublicA. Ang. Maii.
3 De quatuordecim regionibus urbis Constantinopolitanse.—Notice of the Empire, p. 258.
BYZANTINE AND TURKISH BATHS.
of the Greek words dig t^v ttoAiv. The use of the xenoclocMa, or hostelries for travellers, was
general at Constantinople before the Turks had established the khans; and the “ mansiones
veredariorum ” preceded the caravanserais, which border all the principal roads throughout
the country.
. Though this uncliangeableness is the striking characteristic of the people of Islam, they
have not failed to borrow numerous customs from nations more civilized than themselves: many
of these we find in use amongst them now.
For instance, the Koran itself borrowed from Christians the custom of ablutions before
prayer, a perpetuation of which we find in our own days in the holy water of the Latin church.
That the custom of ablution was of Christian origin, might be proved by many passages from
old writers; hut the inscription before quoted, as existing on one of the fountains in St. Sophia’s,
is a sufficient proof of the fact. History observes, says Banduri, that there was there a great vase
of water, in which the faithful usually washed their faces, or at least their eyes.1
We must render this justice to the Turks, that they have adopted with zeal all those
customs of the ancients that tended to the preservation of the purity of the body and of the
dwelling. Thus the usage of never entering either a place of worship or a house with the
shoes on that were worn out of doors, was general in times of antiquity amongst well-bred people
(Cteo autem, sump tin calceis, exiit e cubiculo et deambulavit in portion).2 It is only natural to
suppose that the beautiful mosaics of the Romans were not intended to be exposed to be soiled
by the impurities of the streets.
The legislator of the Arabs, born in a burning country, and having experienced from
his youth all the benefits there afforded by a fine spring of water, imposed ablution not only
for health’s sake, but also as a mark of gratitude to the Creator; following the principle of
Sedi Khrelil, that man should not disdain the benefits that Providence affords him.
When the Turks quitted Broussa, so celebrated for its waters, for Constantinople, they
found no reason to regret their first capital, for the Greeks had furnished the latter city with
everything that tended to make it a healthy and agreeable place of residence, — with baths
and fountains, and with aqueducts that conveyed a good supply of the purest water from the
environs. The Turks took possession of all these, and maintained them in a more or less
perfect condition up to the present day. They have preserved not only the buildings themselves,
but have also retained many details connected with the administration of the water supply.
When Mahomet II. arrived at Constantinople, many of the magnificent buildings that are
described in the Notice of Constantinople,3 no longer existed, or if they did, they were in a
lamentable state of ruin, through the effects of the numerous earthquakes from which the
city had suffered.
The mother church of Byzantium, St. Sophia’s, had suffered from these violent shocks, and
a part of the great dome had fallen. In the year 732, the primitive church of St. Irene had
been destroyed; and the statue of Arcadius, placed on a column in the Xerolophos, had fallen.
In the year 1041, the earth shook for forty days, and some thousands of people perished in
Constantinople by the falling of churches. Another earthquake, not less terrible, took place
A.D. 1038: it was at this period that the church of the Holy Apostles suffered the greatest
damage. The earthquake which took place A.D. 1296 shook the edifice to the foundation ; how-
ever, it was repaired, and service was performed there up to the time of the taking of the town.
The baths, which were not so large, and which had thicker walls than the churches, suffered
less; but many of them were rendered useless, and were afterwards demolished.
The Greeks of Byzantium had preserved in their baths all the arrangements and customs
of the ancients, but they had much simplified the buildings themselves. There were not then,
as formerly, to be found in them the xystci, the palcestra, the gymnasia, where the bathers,
before or after the bath, tried the suppleness of their limbs. People went to the baths less
for the purpose of bathing than for the pleasure of gossiping with the loungers who frequented
them: this fashion still prevails at Constantinople.
The Byzantine baths retained only those parts of the building that were absolutely neces-
sary ;—the waiting-room, or apodyterium ; the tepid chamber, or tepidarium ; and the hot chamber.
1 Banduri, vol. t. 2 Cicero, de RepublicA. Ang. Maii.
3 De quatuordecim regionibus urbis Constantinopolitanse.—Notice of the Empire, p. 258.