"Visits must be further restricted for Hagia Sophia to survive"

Discussions regarding Hagia Sophia, which has been one of the primary sacred centers in Istanbul for hundreds of years, continue. Hagia Sophia, which was converted from a museum into a mosque, is simultaneously trying to resist both the passage of time and the attacks it has been subjected to. 

Art historian Burhan Kurtulmuş Aytoslu emphasized that Hagia Sophia needs to be almost constantly restored in order to remain standing. Aytoslu's article is as follows:

The Hagia Sophia Grand Mosque in Istanbul manages to enter my agenda in one way or another. In fact, it is not Hagia Sophia itself that manages to enter the agenda, but rather it is talked about so much because of the decisions made regarding it. 

We always mythologize the past. We love to make flowery statements about how magnificent a work our ancestors created, what a great architectural marvel it is, how it has remained sturdy for centuries, or that such-and-such structure has a secret. In fact, this also applies to the ancient period. We see a similar approach in this social attitude, especially to the lost superior art and technical emulation of the past by Nazi Germany. In the USSR, on the contrary, certain movements directed toward the future had occurred. 

The bottom line is that very successful structures have been built in an architectural sense throughout history. Very successful structures were also built during the Ottoman Empire. However, seeing all these successful works as flawless, magnificent structures is, as I have stated, nothing more than creating a myth of the past. The Bursa Grand Mosque, which is accepted as the fifth rank in Islam, or the Imaret-i Sultaniye (Green Complex), which is the pinnacle of early period architectural works, or most of our structures that come to mind or not, are not that sturdy or flawless. Most have been seriously damaged by earthquakes and the climate. At this point, Hagia Sophia is not a structure built by our ancestors. However, this structure, which is problematic from an architectural standpoint, underwent serious interventions during the Ottoman period to prevent it from collapsing. 

Everyone needs to understand that, like a bucket with a hole in the bottom, restoration on Hagia Sophia will never end. For an apartment building, a foundation pit is dug, forms are nailed and concrete is poured, walls are plastered, plumbing is installed, and then movers carry the new owners' belongings into the house and it is finished. Then you can sit there comfortably for years. However, you cannot expect this from Hagia Sophia. Hagia Sophia is a very old structure. Because of its dome, it constantly wants to fall apart.

Structures do not have architectural secrets. Methods have been developed to keep structures standing with today's technology. In short, for Hagia Sophia to remain standing along with its decorations, it needs to be almost constantly restored. You sit and think about what will happen to the historical cultural assets in Istanbul in a possible earthquake due to the fault lines in the Sea of Marmara. For this reason, everyone needs to view the temporary closures due to restoration with understanding. 

I have had the opportunity to visit Hagia Sophia many times as both a museum and a mosque. As an art historian, living in Turkey is a great stroke of luck. We live in a country that is both a museum inventory and practically an open-air museum. There are many reasons why Hagia Sophia is flooded with visitors. However, is this structure in a condition to handle this influx? 

As an art historian, I can clearly say this: today, Hagia Sophia, with all its historical heritage, does indeed deserve to be a mosque. Regardless of the reason it was converted into a mosque, the structure was built as a place of worship. Using it as a place of worship has restored the soul of the structure. If hymns and prayers of any religion do not echo in that dome, the dome has no meaning. If a sermon is not read from that mihrab, it has no meaning. 

However, as I stated, Hagia Sophia is not in a condition to handle this crowd. You respect a very old and sick person, but if all their loved ones crowd into the patient's room, that visit now harms the patient. For this reason, the use of the gallery as a paid tourist area has restricted the number of visitors. I must say that the mosque section should also be restricted, and if possible, a worship schedule should be drawn up to be used on certain days of the year. It is necessary to understand that Hagia Sophia is valuable as a mosque for a certain part of society, to a greater or lesser extent. Perhaps we can also understand the attempt to include it among today's symbols of independence along with historical references. However, independence is not the conversion of Hagia Sophia from a museum to a mosque. If we are not taking a concrete step for a nation living under Western hegemony to be independent in economic, cultural, and perhaps religious terms, no matter what you do with Hagia Sophia, the reality will not change. 

Thus, there is a need for practices that will reduce the number of visitors to Hagia Sophia. If a distinction is to be made here between foreigners and Turks, the interests of our own nation should of course be considered. Keeping tourist visits limited to the gallery is the right practice under today's conditions. While I am at it, I should say that this practice has been carried out in Hagia Sophia for a long time. The Iznik Hagia Sophia was converted from a ruin into a mosque many years ago without following boards and procedures. Today, it still welcomes its visitors as a bad example in terms of restoration. You can visit other parts via a tourist ramp outside the prayer section. Admission is free for everyone. As can be seen, there are examples of tourist visits being made outside the prayer area in the Istanbul Hagia Sophia as well. 

Unfortunately, the concepts of historical environmental protection and restoration must seem quite simple, as everyone on social media has an opinion on the subject. One needs to understand that this is a job done with serious and scientific techniques and express an opinion accordingly. The temporary entrance gate created for the safety of tourists entering Hagia Sophia is being blatantly distorted. Similar practices are carried out in every restoration project. It is not correct to say, "A garage door was built for Hagia Sophia." There is no harm in using temporary modern elements. Moreover, it is correct for this temporary door to be modern. Otherwise, which century's art would be taken as a precedent? 

As a result, for every member of the history, art history, and architecture disciplines, entry to these and similar structures should be free and open with a simple application. Students of these professions should also be included in this. Visits for tourists and citizens should be further restricted. The absurd idea that citizens can enter wherever they want is being voiced for political purposes. No one can enter an intensive care unit, a palace, administrative offices, etc., as they please. This has nothing to do with citizenship. If we value Hagia Sophia and want it to remain standing, we must steel ourselves and tighten the measures. Perhaps there will be a backlash today, but a century from now, this structure will survive thanks to the measures taken. Buildings are inanimate objects made of stone and concrete. It is people who give them their soul. Of course, everyone can see a structure with universal value as we do, but not more than us. The reason Hagia Sophia is a social agenda is that the structure is a tool for populist rhetoric. Otherwise, Muslims have no need for either Hagia Sophia or the Blue Mosque. It must be remembered that Islam has formal differences from other religions. When places of worship are decorated with expensive, large, and gold embroidery just like other religions, the difference between them is erased. No mosque, even if it were made of solid gold, could provide the spirituality of the first mosque built from palm branches. Therefore, buildings bring neither a plus nor a minus to religion.