From Ottoman to Habsburg Sarajevo

Context: The socio-political transition from Ottoman to AustroHungarian rule was accompanied by a short-lived, futile pursuit for the establishment of an autonomous Bosnia and Herzegovina. In 1878, following the Congress of Berlin, Sarajevo and Bosnia and Herzegovina became part of the Habsburg Monarchy. As it had been in Roman and Medieval times, Sarajevo again became the site of a genuine encounter of East and West. As a result, its urban population increased and the demographic structure of the city became more multi-ethnic and international. The administration

of Austro-Hungarian consul Benjamin Kallay ensured not only the maintenance of religious buildings from the Ottoman period, but also the construction of new ones, balancing the representation of all the city’s religions (Donia, 2006). During the Austro-Hungarian rule (1878 to 1918), development of the city started from the Ottoman downtown and, both literally and symbolically, continued towards the west and transformed vacant sites into a modern

European urban landscape. The distinction between the almost homogenous urban ensembles – one, with traces of Istanbul, from four centuries of Ottoman rule, juxtaposed with that of four decades of Austro-Hungarian rule, reminiscent of Vienna – is clearly visible, and symbolises Sarajevo’s architectural identity.

After a long period of oriental influence, the turn of the century and the new occidental monarchy introduced different urban and architectural forms and styles. The organic meander pattern and the intimate scale of Ottoman urbanism were replaced by the significantly larger orthogonal grid and medium- to large-scale city blocks. The new urban matrix contained blocks of residential and public buildings and a standardised street system more than twice the size of those in the mahalas and

Figure 3. The locations of some of the key public buildings in Sarajevo during the administration of Benjamin Kalay: 01. City Hall (Vijećnica); 02. Old Orthodox Church; 03. Gazi Husref Bey’s Mosque; 04. Hotel Evropa; 05. Sultan’s Mosque; 06. Konak; 07. Sephardic Synagogue; 08. Catholic Cathedral; 09. New Orthodox Church; 10. Ashkenazi Synagogue; 11. Evangelical Church; 12. Regional Government building.

Bascarsija, which were distinguishable by their small architectural scale and narrow streets. The Austro-Hungarian legacy in Sarajevo was one of general modernisation: the introduction of civil engineering codes, regulation of the Miljacka river bank, urban regulation and infrastructure planning and the intensive construction of all types of building (civic, administration, cultural, religious, industrial and residential). By the turn of the 20th century, the modernisation and westernisation of Sarajevo was realised by foreign architects8 and expressed in European architectural styles.

The development of residential blocks occurred alongside the construction of a wide typological variety of administrative, industrial and public buildings, including a museum, a theatre, a university, schools

8 Many of Sarajevo’s significant public buildings were designed by the most renowned architects of the Austro-Hungarian period, who were of international origin: Josip Vancas (Croatian), Karlo Parik (Czech), Ciril Ivekovic (Croatian), Karlo Panek (Czech), and Alexander Wittek (Czech).

and hospitals. These structures were rich in architectural eclecticism, and used neoclassical, neo-renaissance, secession, and pseudo-Moorish styles. Because of their potential as urban nuclei, these new public buildings were generators of social and cultural activities. The National Museum was one of the representative public buildings of the time, envisioned as the urban landmark of the district, which was Sarajevo’s western boundary. The museum’s architectural ensemble was designed by Karel Parik in the neo-renaissance style, and was built between 1908 and 1913. It consisted of four freestanding pavilions that encompassed an interior botanical garden, and was enveloped by green public spaces. As the city’s first public scientific and cultural institution of its kind, the National Museum encapsulates its social, cultural and scientific symbolism.

Sarajevo’s City Hall,9 another Austro-Hungarian landmark, marked the city’s eastern edge. It is distinct for its style and considerable size, which are in contrast with the dense, small-scale Ottoman urban structure that surrounds it. The importance of the City Hall’s micro location and overall architectural expression to Sarajevo’s urban image is undeniable, and the conspicuous lack of a corresponding public space, such as a square or plaza, alongside such a monumental building is surprising.10

The architectural developments and changes to the demographic structure at this time represented the secular ideology imported from the West, as well as a unique form of ethnic and religious pluralism, which became a hallmark of the city. This socio-cultural transition from oriental to western added a new dimension to the traditional Ottoman intimate

gatherings at homes and religious buildings, in the form of social activities, celebrations and other public events, which were held at the newly-built public buildings (Donia, 2006). The most significant socio-cultural aspect

9 The Sarajevo City Hall was built in 1894 and was designed by Alexander Wittek and Ciril Ivekovic in pseudo-Moorish style. 10 Due to the dimensional constraints of its location, the City Hall site is delineated by streets and the riverbank, and lacks an approach sequence or plaza.

of the Austro-Hungarian architectural legacy was the establishment of educational, cultural and scientific institutions, which met the Western European standards of the time. These constructions are characterised by prominent facades and accentuated exteriors in European eclectic styles, and can be identified as public architectural typologies. They were owned by either governmental or private stakeholders, and were designed for collective, public use. However, their public image was at odds with their introverted character and the limited accessibility of their interior spaces. The theatre, schools and hotels welcomed only the social elite, with their approachability for the wider population limited to the visual perception of their exteriors.

A distinguishing feature of the large Austro-Hungarian city blocks is their interior courtyards, which have the potential to be urban public areas of introverted character. Since interior courtyards within urban blocks are geometrically defined by the ground (or the base plane) and four facades as vertical planes, they can be described as semi-enclosed public spaces.

The development of open public spaces took place at a much slower pace than the construction of public buildings. The former mainly entailed the regulation of existing and new streets;11 the construction of small plazas and squares in front of significant public buildings12, and of residential blocks with interior courtyards; and environmental interventions such as the development of green avenues, promenades and parks in the city centre, and recreational zones on its outskirts. Unlike the City Hall, the Sacred Heart Cathedral13 has an accompanying square, but its form and size are not sufficient to stress the public significance of the cathedral and its location in the city. The pedestrian Strossmayer Street, which is

11 In 1880, the Austro-Hungarian urban regulation plan for the city of Sarajevo introduced a system of street classification according to tra c frequency and width (6.0 metres, 7.5 metres, 9.0 metres and 11.25 meters) (Bejtic, 1973). 12 The cathedral, churches, the National Museum and the National Theatre had plazas and squares, while administration and government buildings had parks. 13 Designed by Josip Vancas, and completed in 1889.

Figure 4. Transition of urban scales between the AustroHungarian and Ottoman urban grid in the old town of Sarajevo.

aligned with the main axis of the cathedral, enables a full perspective view of the representative entrance façade, and compensates for the absence of a potential main city square.

Although the majority of open public spaces such as streets, promenades, parks and squares were generally freely accessible to the public, the formal language of their neoclassical and secession facades was prioritised over the freedom and potential of their public use.