Ponte Sisto: From the Trastevere side
I first noticed the Ponte Sisto the first time I walked to class: a darling, but old foot bridge. It quickly soon became a regular assistant in crossing the Tiber from Trastevere to get to Campo de Fiori. I thought it was just a regular old bridge, until the della Rovere presentations where I learned about its history. It was built by Pope Sixtus IV in the 1470s to replace the Pons Aurelius and later added to it was a plaque to commemorate Sixtus IV.
Bosphorus Bridge (1 of 2 Europe/Asia Bridges in Istanbul)
As for the Bosphorus bridge, it was simply hard to miss on the drive from the airport and even from our walks back to Bogazici University. It is a lengthy steel suspension bridge connecting the European and Asian sides of Istanbul. At night, it becomes a wonder for night festivities as its LED lights led a slow chase of colors across the water. Relatively young, it was completed in 1973.
It’s difficult to show the cultural identity in only a photo, but the symbolism found in the construction of these bridges shows the contrasts between these two cities’ identity. In one, you find a city’s pride in its ancient history and desire to resist the ever changing world, whereas the other shot shows another city’s desire to change and its openness to the world.
With such a long and glorious past, Rome’s history has become inherently intertwined with Italian culture and thus its identity. The Ponte Sisto’s age and architecture, to me, symbolizes that history. People come to see the Colosseum, the Pantheon, the Ponte Sisto, the Vatican and many more, all standing remnants of the past but a past that continues to influence Rome today. The city is restoring the old to their original glory and is averse to having “new” buildings put up. This identity even affects their economy: they want to maintain the family based and local shops and produce as demonstrated by the lack of international advertisements and infiltration of outsider companies and the numerous small family shops. Additionally, the way the bridge (as with many of the others) connects the many different sections of the city to itself as another illustration of how centered Rome is on its “own” identity. The immigration issue revealed by the migrations class also revealed this refusal to accepting change: accepting and welcoming immigrants. Roma wants to maintain the status quo and its ties to the past.
On the other hand, Istanbul is a growing center of change and modernization. Once known as Neo Rome from its time as Constantinople, it was and continues to be a gateway between the East and the West. The Bosphorus Bridge’s spanning of Europe and Asia and its modern architecture testifies to Istanbul’s identity: change and openness to the world. Urban and metropolitan are descriptions that would not suit Rome like they fit this city. Istanbul has welcomed and thrived in the modernization. Its history is still apparent, but it is nothing compared to the modern city that now constitutes Istanbul, with its ever growing population and economy (both aided by this linking bridge). There were so many shops and people from many places and the level of growth in construction of apartments and business is astronomical.
It makes me wonder where will these two countries be in the future? Will Rome be forced to change with the coming times and how will Istanbul look and deal with the changes it so welcomes now? I love the history that is so embraced by the Romans. I’m simply awed by the age of the buildings: I’m especially overwhelmed by the fact that in the ruins of the Roman Forum, you can see cities built upon cities all from thousands of years ago. In contrast, Istanbul impressed me with its growth and modernization. It felt like the U.S. while we were there. However, despite that welcoming feeling, it’s depressing to think about the generations in the future who will not get to enjoy the history that is being sacrificed now. It distresses me to think that the mosaics in the Hagia Sophia are being covered by paint; while it is a religious reason for being covered, a part of Istanbul’s past is being masked away. A better example of this loss would be the Theodosian Forums just found off the side of a street, not even marked, just a pile of marble columns. Much like the issue of integration in our Islam and migrations class, is there a middle ground between the past and future? Can pride in history and change mix? Whatever does happen to these two cities I hope that I can return and see what time has wrought.
