When asked where the name Istanbul comes from, the traditional and widespread explanation goes as follows: Is-tan-bul is a deformation of the Greek phrase eis tèn polin, which means ‘to the city’. It is said to have been a colloquial expression used by both Greeks and non-Greeks who lived in and travelled to medieval Constantinople. This article aims to verify the traditional explanation and elucidate the true etymology of Istanbul.
For scholars, the origin of the Turkish city name Istanbul (Constantinople), located at the western end of the Silk Road, is one of the most fascinating etymological topics. Two different hypotheses are suggested amongst scholars: the Greek phrase eis tèn polin (‘to/in the city’) on the one hand, and the Greek variant of the city name Konstantinoupolis or Konstantinopolis (‘Constantinople’) on the other hand.
A folk-etymological explanation traces the name Istanbul back to the Turkish form Islambol, literally ‘lots of Islam, full of Islam’, or Islambul, literally ‘find Islam’. These are in reality corrupted variants of Istanbul, which only started appearing after the name Istanbul had become a commonplace term for the city. The name Istanbul, in fact, already existed long before the city became a Muslim capital in 1453 (Fall of Constantinople).
The traditional and most famous alleged origin is the Middle Greek phrase eis tèn polin, traditionally translated as ‘to the city’. However, the form of the Greek phrase in the apparently original source of this traditional etymology is given as the Demotic Greek (Dimotikí) form stin polin. This source is an 17th century Demotic Greek grammar by a certain Romanus Nicephorus, who was a teacher of Greek. The same author further remarks that polis (‘city’) was used by Greeks at that time only with reference to Constantinople, and not to Greek cities in general, the generic name for which was then the Venetian loanword kastron. This specific usage has been attested from the 5th century onwards and has remained commonplace for the Greek-speaking population to this day. Nonetheless, this usage was not fully restricted to referring solely to Constantinople, as Nicephorus claims. For instance, Alexandria on the Nile Delta was also referred to by the apparently obsolescent Greek appellative polis. The same word, however, appears in the Greek text of a Greek-Latin contract of 1299, associated in the Latin translation with Stinboli. Later, during the period 1868-1878, the city of Istanbul was also known as Stambólköj, with the Turkish suffix -köy meaning ‘village’.
All of the aforementioned forms of the modern name Istanbul seem to refute the alternative theory involving the name of the legendary Roman emperor Constantine (r. 306-337). Most of the scholars who espouse the alternative theory of corruption from some form of Constantinople do not even attempt to give any explanation, which indicates a lack of scrupulous investigation. Hansack (2008), however, tries to elucidate his point of view, but his explanation seems unfounded and linguistically unjustifiable. For example, Hansack argues that the name Konstantino(u)polis was too long for normal daily use, whereas he ignores the fact that Greeks, as already mentioned, continuously made use of the abbreviation polis for several centuries before and after the Turkish invasion of Anatolia.
In short, the most probable origin of Istanbul is stin polin. The translation ‘to the city’, however, appears to be quite inadequate for the Middle Greek phrase. The post-Classical Greek preposition eis does not only mean ‘(in)to’, but also ‘in’, just as its Demotic (and Modern Greek) descendant se/s- does. This double meaning of the preposition is attested as early as the New Testament. An expression meaning ‘in (a particular place)’ becoming the actual place name is much more likely than an expression meaning ‘to (a particular place)’, as in other languages, such as German, the same phenomenon has taken place. Therefore, the traditionally accepted translation ‘to the city’ seems inappropriate. Since polis literally meant ‘Constantinople’ in medieval times and eis, or Demotic se/s- as in stin polin, in this context probably corresponds to ‘in’ in English, the translation ‘in Constantinople’ would align better with the etymology.
Finally, the initial vowel of Istanbul is a so-called prosthesis, added to break up the consonant cluster -st-, as the Turkish language has a natural aversion to consonant clusters at the beginning of a word.
In summary, while the traditionally accepted etymology of ‘Istanbul’ may appear correct, its true origin is likely not the well-known Middle Greek phrase eis tèn polin, but rather the Demotic Greek stin polin, which carries a different meaning than traditionally believed: ‘in Constantinople’ instead of ‘to the city’.
Rik Verachtert
Sources:
- Hansack, E., “Zur Entstehung des Namens Istanbul”, Varia Slavica, eds. I. Janyšková & H. Karlíková, 2008, Prague, pp. 91-93.
- Rahn, M., Die Entstehung des armenischen Patriarchs von Konstantinopel, 2002, Münster-Hamburg-London.
- Room., A., Placenames of the world: origins and meanings of the names for 6,600 countries, cities, territories, natural features and historic sites, 2nd. ed., 2006, North Carolina-London.
- Stachowski, M. & Woodhouse, R., “The etymology of İstanbul: making optimal use of the evidence”, Studia Etymologica Cracoviensia (SEC), Vol. 4, 2015, pp. 221-245.
alongthesilkroad.com 
Leave a comment