Basilica Cistern. The Underground Palace of Constantinople

This will probably be my last post about Istanbul for a while. Another trip is already slowly approaching and more folders are waiting to be sorted through. Still this post is about one of the most extraordinary places to see not only in Istanbul, but possibly also on the European scale.

One scene from Inferno stayed with me long after I first watched the film. There is a moment inside Hagia Sophia when the protagonist presses his ear against the floor and realises there is water somewhere beneath him. The scene creates a very clear impression that the enormous underground cistern lies directly below the building itself. For a long time, that was exactly how I imagined it. Only once I arrived in Istanbul did I realise that it is not exactly true. Yerebatan Sarnıcı – the Basilica Cistern is not actually located directly underneath Hagia Sophia. It stands a short distance away. Above ground, everything feels entirely contemporary – traffic, crowds, cafés, tour groups and city noise. Yet only a few metres below street level lies a vast piece of Byzantine infrastructure that has survived for nearly fifteen hundred years.

At the same time, the film was not completely wrong. This entire part of ancient Constantinople is threaded with underground structures – cisterns, tunnels, channels and forgotten hydraulic systems built to collect, store and distribute water throughout the city. Even beneath Hagia Sophia itself there are underground chambers and water-related structures dating back centuries. So although the geography was simplified for cinematic effect, the film captured something real – the feeling that there is another hidden city beneath the streets of Istanbul.

You enter the cistern by descending a staircase. Above ground there is the ordinary rhythm of the city – traffic, voices, the sound of buses passing nearby – and then, step by step, you move down into darkness, cool air and silence broken only by echoes. It feels as though you are entering a vast hidden structure concealed beneath the city itself.

My first impression after entering was simply the scale of it all. Of course I had seen photographs beforehand, and I knew the location from the film, but images do not really prepare you for the actual size of the space. On screen it looks like an atmospheric underground hall. In reality, it feels far larger – more like entering an entire subterranean world than a single architectural space. And almost immediately, the cinematic version collides with reality. In Inferno, the cistern appears almost empty, silent and permanently drenched in deep red light. In real life, it is one of Istanbul’s most visited attractions, and there are people everywhere. Tourists are constantly taking photographs, conversations echo beneath the vaulted ceiling, footsteps bounce off the stone surfaces, and every now and then someone nearby uses flash photography. Rather than an abandoned underground chamber, it feels alive, busy and intensely visited.

To be honest, one of the first things I found myself doing was trying to work out how to photograph the space while avoiding people in the frame. Places like this are always a challenge, especially when the lighting changes constantly and somebody nearby suddenly fires a flash at exactly the wrong moment. Yet that constantly shifting illumination is also part of what gives the cistern its atmosphere. There are moments when the entire interior glows red, just as it does in the film. Then, only seconds later, the lighting shifts to green or blue. Spotlights positioned throughout the cistern – some low near the water, others higher among the columns – continually alter the mood of the space. Certain sections disappear into shadow before suddenly becoming illuminated again. Occasionally the lighting turns brighter and more neutral, allowing you to properly study the architecture itself.

And that is when you begin to notice what probably leaves the strongest impression of all – the columns. There are so many of them that eventually you stop trying to count. Looking ahead, it genuinely feels as though the forest of columns continues endlessly into the darkness. Reflections in the shallow water make the perspective feel even deeper, with rows of columns fading gradually into shadow. It is something that photographs capture surprisingly well. In several of my own images, the perspective seems almost endless, the lines of columns disappearing far beyond the visible space.

The water itself also looks very different from what many people might expect after watching the film. Today, only a relatively shallow layer remains across the floor of the cistern. But if you look carefully at the walls and columns, you can clearly see marks left by centuries of water erosion much higher up. It becomes obvious that the entire structure was once filled almost to the ceiling. And that is the moment when the scale of the undertaking truly begins to sink in. This was not a decorative underground chamber or a hidden cellar beneath a building. It was a gigantic piece of urban infrastructure designed to supply water to one of the greatest cities of the ancient world.

That was probably the aspect that fascinated me most. More than the mystery of the place, I found myself thinking about the engineering behind it. Of course the cistern is visually spectacular, and it is easy to understand why filmmakers are drawn to it. But standing among those endless rows of columns, the real questions become entirely different. Where did all this water come from? How was it transported here? How was it distributed throughout the city? What sort of system was required to keep Constantinople functioning?

The history of the Basilica Cistern is, in many ways, the history of Constantinople itself – a city that could never have survived without an enormous and highly sophisticated water system. Modern Istanbul is surrounded by water and closely associated with the Bosphorus, yet paradoxically the city struggled for centuries with access to reliable fresh drinking water. Constantinople was built across a series of hills, and its local water sources were far from sufficient for a metropolis that, at its height, may have approached a population of one million people. On top of that, the city lived under the constant threat of sieges. The Byzantines therefore needed a system capable not only of transporting water into the city, but also of storing vast quantities of it in case of crisis.

It was within this context that the Basilica Cistern was constructed. In Turkish, it is known as Yerebatan Sarnıcı, often translated as the Sunken Palace or Underground Palace – a surprisingly accurate name, because the interior feels far more like a monumental subterranean hall than a purely technical structure.

Construction began during the reign of Emperor Justinian I in the sixth century, most likely around 532 AD, shortly after the devastating Nika riots that destroyed large sections of Constantinople. Nika was the chant shouted by crowds during chariot races at the Hippodrome of Constantinople. At the time, the chariot racing factions were far more than sports supporters. They held enormous political, social and even religious influence within the city. Rivalries between them frequently turned violent. Growing public anger over taxation and Justinian’s policies eventually merged with tensions between the factions, leading to a massive revolt against the emperor himself. For several days, Constantinople was effectively in chaos. Crowds set fire to public buildings, street fighting spread across the city, and large parts of the imperial centre were destroyed. The earlier version of Hagia Sophia was among the buildings that burned during the riots. According to historical accounts, Justinian even considered fleeing the city. In the end, however, he chose to crush the uprising with extreme force. Imperial troops trapped large numbers of rebels inside the Hippodrome and carried out a massacre. Paradoxically, the destruction caused by the riots became the starting point for one of the greatest rebuilding programmes in Byzantine history. Justinian used the devastation as an opportunity to reconstruct Constantinople on an even more monumental scale. The present Hagia Sophia was built shortly afterwards, and the Basilica Cistern was also completed or significantly expanded as part of the city’s renewed infrastructure system.

The cistern was designed as a gigantic underground reservoir supplying water to the Great Palace of Constantinople and to the most important buildings in the imperial centre of the city. Even today, its scale is extraordinary. The structure measures roughly 138 metres in length and 65 metres in width, covering nearly 10,000 square metres in total. In practical terms, it is an underground space comparable in size to several modern industrial halls hidden beneath the streets of Istanbul.

Its most distinctive feature is, of course, the forest of columns. There are exactly 336 of them, arranged in twelve rows containing twenty-eight columns each. Most stand approximately nine metres tall. Interestingly, many were not carved specifically for the cistern itself. The Byzantines frequently reused architectural elements from older Roman structures, temples and public buildings, which explains why not all of the columns look identical. Some feature different capitals and decorative details, giving the impression that the entire structure was assembled from fragments of several different historical worlds layered on top of one another.

The cistern itself was constructed primarily from brick and coated with a waterproof mortar designed to withstand constant exposure to water. In some areas, the walls are several metres thick, built to resist the immense pressure created by tens of thousands of tonnes of stored water. When completely full, the reservoir could hold around 80,000 cubic metres of water – tens of millions of litres in total. Standing inside the cistern today and looking up at the visible water marks left high on the walls, it becomes much easier to understand the sheer scale of the undertaking.

The water, of course, did not simply appear there naturally. The Basilica Cistern formed part of the vast hydraulic network that supplied Constantinople. Water was transported into the city through aqueducts stretching for many kilometres from forests, springs and reservoirs located west of the urban centre. The most famous surviving element of this system is the Aqueduct of Valens, parts of which can still be seen in Istanbul today. In practice, the entire network functioned as a huge interconnected system – aqueducts carried water into the city, which was then stored in reservoirs such as the Basilica Cistern before being distributed further throughout Constantinople.

And that is perhaps what makes the cistern so fascinating once you stop seeing it simply as a tourist attraction and begin viewing it as infrastructure. The Byzantines created a system capable of sustaining one of the largest cities in the medieval world for centuries. And they achieved this nearly fifteen hundred years ago, without modern pumps, computers or contemporary construction technologies.

Interestingly, after the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople, the cistern gradually lost much of its original importance. Ottoman residents tended to rely more heavily on flowing water and fountains than on vast underground reservoirs. For a period of time, the structure was even partially forgotten. Historical accounts describe local residents lowering buckets through openings in their floors to draw water directly from the cistern below, and in some cases even catching fish there.

European travellers only began rediscovering the site during the sixteenth century, when Western visitors started writing about the extraordinary underground reservoir hidden beneath the streets of Istanbul. Over time, the cistern was cleaned, restored and eventually opened to the public. Today it remains one of the city’s most famous landmarks, yet despite the crowds of tourists it still retains something of the atmosphere of old Constantinople – a city that depended on a hidden underground world of water, tunnels and enormous reservoirs in order to survive.

You might be also interested in:

Basilica Cistern. The Underground Palace of Constantinople

Two ships

Gdynia is a port city located on the Baltic Sea coast in Northern Poland. It is one of the three cities that make up the Tricity metropolitan area, along with Gdańsk and Sopot. Gdynia’s history as a settlement dates back to the Middle Ages, but it began to grow significantly in the 20th century when it became a vital port and shipbuilding center. Gdynia was officially founded as a city in 1926, so … it has no historic city. But because of its significance for the Polish maritime industry, it hosts two historic ships on display on a pier close to the city beach.

ORP Błyskawica is a historic Polish Navy destroyer that has a significant place in Poland’s maritime history. It is renowned for its service during World War II and its role in defending Poland’s coastal areas.

ORP Błyskawica was built in the early 1930s in the J. Samuel White shipyard in Cowes, England. It was one of the first warships in the world to be designed and built with dual-purpose artillery, which means it could engage both surface targets (ships) and aircraft. It belonged to the Grom-class destroyers of the Polish Navy. When World War II broke out in 1939, ORP Błyskawica was one of the few modern and operational vessels in the Polish Navy. It played a vital role during the defense of the Polish coast against the German invasion. The ship was involved in various engagements and provided naval gunfire support to Polish defenders. After Poland fell to Nazi Germany, ORP Błyskawica managed to escape to the United Kingdom, where it joined the British Royal Navy as part of the Polish Navy in exile. It continued to serve during the war under the British flag, participating in various operations, including escorting convoys in the Atlantic and the Mediterranean. After the war, ORP Błyskawica returned to Poland and served in the Polish Navy once again. It underwent various modernizations and continued its service until 1976 when it was decommissioned.

In 1976, ORP Błyskawica was preserved as a museum ship in Gdynia, Poland, where it remains to this day. It is one of the few surviving Grom-class destroyers and is open to the public. Visitors can explore the ship’s interior, including its engine room, crew quarters, and armament.

Dar Pomorza is a historic Polish sailing ship that has a rich maritime history. It is one of the most iconic museum ships in Poland and serves as a symbol of the country’s seafaring heritage.

The Dar Pomorza was built in 1909 in the Blohm & Voss shipyard in Hamburg, Germany. It was originally named the Prinzess Eitel Friedrich and served as a training ship for the German merchant navy. The ship is a three-masted barque, which means it has three masts and square sails on the fore and main masts. After World War I, as part of war reparations, the ship was handed over to France and renamed the Colbert. However, in 1929, the ship was purchased by the Polish government and renamed the Dar Pomorza, which means “Gift of Pomerania” in English. It was intended to serve as a training ship for the Polish Maritime Academy and to promote Poland’s maritime traditions. The Dar Pomorza spent many years as a training ship, providing practical sailing experience to generations of Polish cadets and officers. It was an essential part of maritime education in Poland and helped train sailors and officers for the Polish merchant navy. During World War II, the ship was interned in Sweden to prevent it from falling into the hands of Nazi Germany. It was returned to Poland after the war.

Today, the Dar Pomorza is permanently moored in the city of Gdynia, Poland. It has been beautifully restored and transformed into a museum ship. Visitors can explore the ship’s decks, cabins, and various maritime exhibits to learn about the history of Polish seafaring, navigation, and life on board a sailing vessel.

Two ships

Down inside in a coal mine

Everyone knows that miners’ work is tough — but it’s rare to get a glimpse inside a real mine, hundreds of metres underground. Active mines are off-limits to outsiders due to dust, dangerous particles, and strict safety regulations. However, in a few places across Europe, visitors can explore underground tunnels in former mines that have been transformed into museums. Below are some photos from deep inside a black coal mine that’s now open to the public: the Guido Mine, located in Silesia, Poland, some 300–350 metres below the surface (>>>).

.

The idea behind creating the museum was to present the history of coal mining from the miners’ perspective – their working conditions, the tools they used, and the harsh reality underground. The tour begins in dimly lit corridors, with basic equipment and no conveyors for transporting coal. The areas where miners once broke through coal seams with nearly bare hands were incredibly cramped. To reach them, miners had to kneel or crawl through tight spaces. We learned that a major part of the job, beyond digging, was installing ceiling and wall supports in the emptied chambers and tunnels. Yet these supports were often too weak to ensure safety. When they collapsed under the pressure of the overlying rock, the miners stood no chance.

Due to the low light and strict safety regulations, taking proper long-exposure photos was nearly impossible. I realised this when I briefly fell behind the group and had to descend a staircase to a lower level – with only a small flashlight to guide me. Although all necessary safety precautions were in place, taking one or two photos wasn’t worth the risk of getting lost, even for a moment, or worse – breaking a leg. Fortunately, as we moved into more modern sections of the mine, with power cables and overhead lighting, the conditions improved significantly. The photos you see here were taken in those later, better-lit areas of the mine.

.

Over time, the equipment used to dig into coal deposits was modernised. However, it was still extremely loud and not particularly safe. The chains used to transmit power to the digging heads and to pull heavy loads along the early automatic conveyors had a tendency to snap. When they did, the force with which they lashed out at nearby workers was deadly – there were cases where miners were cut in half. As technology advanced, the machines became more efficient and safer, but they certainly didn’t become quieter. Methods for supporting ceilings and walls also improved, but the risk of rock and coal falls was never fully eliminated. So even today, when we hear about mining accidents, the cause may not only be natural gas explosions, but also the sheer weight and pressure of the earth, causing rockfalls and the collapse of ceiling supports.

.

When we returned to our hotel after visiting the Guido mine, I noticed black dust on my clothes. Our miner guide had activated some of the machines to show us how they worked – without even touching coal. He explained that if he had, we would have needed to take a long shower and put all our clothing straight into the washing machine. Beyond the risk of accidents, it’s the dust, particles, and constant noise from the tools that take a lasting toll on miners, often leading to lung diseases and hearing problems.

The machine at the front of the photo is a modern, highly efficient coal-cutting machine. It was designed to be pushed forward gradually as coal is broken off, cleared from the site, and transported to the surface. Though extremely costly – with a price tag of several million euros or dollars – it is also remarkably effective in increasing productivity deep underground.

In Poland, electricity production still relies heavily on coal – both hard coal and lignite (brown coal). While there is much discussion around energy transition, in practice, progress remains slow. It appears likely that coal dependency will continue for at least another decade. A major reason is that Poland has yet to build a single nuclear power plant, and constructing even one is a complex and lengthy process. Still, nuclear energy will be a crucial step if the country is to make any meaningful progress in cutting carbon emissions.

Renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, are also developing rather modestly in Poland. Despite significant potential, investments remain limited, often slowed by legal barriers or local opposition. It’s important to note that, unlike nuclear power, most renewables do not provide dispatchable energy – that is, energy that can be reliably produced regardless of weather conditions or time of day..

Down inside in a coal mine