Muslim and Christian Communities in Bilecik in 1843: A Comparative Analysis through Demography, Naming, and Anthropometric Characteristics

Abstract

This article conducts a thorough examination of the demographic structure, naming conventions, and anthropometric characteristics of the Muslim and Christian communities in Bilecik in 1843. The study utilizes qualitative content analysis methods, employing population registers from the Ottoman Archives and other contemporary documents. The findings reveal that Muslims predominantly opted for names of Arabic origin, while Armenian and Greek Christian communities enhanced regional diversity through names reflecting their religious and cultural identities. Anthropometric analyses demonstrate that both communities exhibited similar average heights. Furthermore, the use of beards and mustaches reflects cultural differences; among Muslim men, these features were significant symbols of religious identity and social status, whereas among Christian men, they signified age-related esthetic choices and cultural diversity. Ultimately, this research illuminates the social and cultural framework of 19th-century Anatolia, providing detailed documentation of Bilecik’s religious and ethnic diversity.

1. Introduction

Located at the intersection of Turkey’s Marmara, Black Sea, Aegean, and Central Anatolia regions and strategically positioned in the southeast of the Marmara region, Bilecik was historically known by various names such as Melançiya, Agrilion, Justiniano Polis Mela, Justiniano Polis Gordi, and Belekome (Demiryürek 2015, p. 1). Archeological findings indicate that Bilecik has a deep history dating back to around 7000 BC (Fidan 2020, p. 29). The existing literature reveals that the region served as a significant bronze production center during the Bronze Age, playing a critical role in tin supply thanks to the tin resources provided by the Sakarya River (Komisyon 1982, p. 1252).

In 74 BC, Bilecik came under the control of the Roman Empire, quickly developing as a key transit point between Thrace and Anatolia due to its mineral trade and geographical advantages. During this period, the settlement known as “Agrilion”, located north of the city, emerged as a significant reference point in terms of regional historical dynamics (Özükan 2017, VIII/2).

Under the Byzantine Empire, the significance of Bilecik increased with the construction of “Belekome Castle” on a rocky outcrop between the Hamsu and Debbağhane valleys (Tuğlacı 1985, p. 54). This castle played a central role in shaping the historical identity and name of the city, which was known as “Belekome” during that era (Darkot 1979, p. 611). Linguistic analyses indicate that the word “Bele” evolved in the Turkish language over time, transforming into “Belecik” and eventually becoming “Bilecik” (Umar 1993, p. 162).

Conquered by Osman Gazi in 1299, Bilecik played an important role as the center of the Ottoman Beylik (Uzunçarşılı 1998, p. 108). The city underwent a significant transformation with the appointment of Osman Gazi’s father-in-law, Sheik Edebali, as judge, and the allocation of Bilecik and its surroundings for his family’s livelihood (Âşıkpaşazâde Tarihi 2013, pp. 25–28; Neşrî 2013, pp. 46–49). The construction initiatives led by Edebali resulted in the building of numerous homes and shops in Bilecik; Osman Gazi also built a house and a mosque in the city. Over time, the urban development of Bilecik concentrated northwest around the hill where Sheik Edebali’s Tomb is located and the area below it, encompassing the Orhan Gazi Mosque and madrasa. As the city expanded, new residential areas like the Imaret and Tabakhane neighborhoods emerged. The narrow streets, reflecting Turkish architectural styles, mosques on street corners, protruding and wide eaves, and latticed windows symbolize the esthetic and functional transformation of Bilecik. After the conquest, Muslims and non-Muslims began living together in the city, although physical boundaries between ethnic and religious groups gradually formed as the city developed. Muslim neighborhoods formed around the areas of Osman Gazi, Orhan Gazi, and Lower Mosque (Aşağı Cami), while some non-Muslims settled in villages, and others settled in the area now known as central Bilecik. Over time, socioeconomic relationships between the two communities evolved, with new homes and public buildings constructed in the Upper neighborhood (Yukarı Mahalle) (Demiryürek and Arıkan 2023, p. 91).

Despite its historical depth, Bilecik has not shown significant development in terms of urbanization and population growth due to its rugged terrain and limited agricultural lands. By the early 16th century, it could be described as a small town consisting of six Muslim neighborhoods—Emir, Dere, Pazar, Kadı, Hisar, and Börkçüler—and a small Armenian community. While Pazar and Kadı were the most populous neighborhoods, the number of neighborhoods increased to eight by the second half of the 16th century with the addition of the Hacı Şüca and Orhan Gazi Mosque neighborhoods. By 1649, under the administration of the Ertuğrul Gazi endowments, Bilecik had ten neighborhoods comprising Gazi, Cami-i Kebir, Debbağ, Pazar, Osman Gazi, Nalband İlyas, Hisar, Akmescid, Emirler, and one Christian neighborhood (Emecen 1992, p. 154).

By the early 18th century, the number of neighborhoods in Bilecik had risen to fourteen. During this period, Armenians who established their own neighborhoods contributed to the city’s economic life through activities such as jewelry making, fabric dyeing, and marketing (Turğut 2015, pp. 175–77). Bilecik remained a small Anatolian town under the administration of Sultanönü Sanjak until the 19th century and largely retained its classical settlement pattern following the Tanzimat reforms, integrating into the Eskişehir Province of Hüdavendigar Vilayet (Öztürk 1996, p. 31).

Since no modern census was conducted in the Ottoman Empire until the 19th century, it is challenging to clearly delineate Bilecik’s demographic composition. However, the census conducted in 1831 under the reformist policies of Sultan Mahmud II addressed this deficiency. This census supported the military and financial needs of the Ottoman Empire as well as efforts to modernize its social and administrative structure. Census officers were thoroughly briefed by the Sublime Porte before starting their duties, allowing the census to be conducted more effectively (Evci 2021, pp. 209–10).

During the census process, the data collected by officers were recorded in population registers. However, due to this being the first such study, the information in these registers sometimes varied, especially when comparing data from central areas like Istanbul to those from the provinces. The registers contained a wide range of information, from social strata to occupational groups, and some even included details about individuals’ physical characteristics. Indeed, these registers offer unique data on the anthropological and typological diversity of Ottoman society (Çavuş 2018, pp. 54–55).

These censuses were repeated at regular intervals, leading to the establishment of a standard format in the population registers over time. These registers have become indispensable resources for studies of Ottoman history from the early 19th century onwards, providing long-term insights into the country’s demographic structure. The population registers enabled scientifically grounded population studies, allowing for the analysis of the socioeconomic structuring of the population based on variables such as age, gender, occupation, and ethnic origin. Additionally, these registers provide information on naming practices within Ottoman society, offering the opportunity to compare naming differences between Muslims and Christians and revealing how religious and cultural differences were reflected in the social structure (BOA, NFS.d. 01527, 01528)1. These data illuminate previously unknown aspects of Ottoman society, adding new dimensions to historical demographic studies. Indeed, the 19th-century population registers have secured a solid place in historical studies as valuable sources of information, shedding light on the demographic, social, and cultural structure of the Ottoman Empire.

This article is based on two primary population registers preserved in the Presidential Ottoman Archive. The first register, cataloged under “NFS.d” and numbered “01527”, contains the Muslim population of Bilecik. This unbound register, protected by a plain cover without marbling, measures 19 × 55 cm and consists of 159 pages. The first 16 pages cover the eight Muslim neighborhoods2 in the city center, while the remaining pages contain the population records of villages connected to the city center. The records in the register document the census conducted on 29 Zilhicce 1258 (31 January 1843 in the Gregorian calendar) and include only the male Muslim population, with records systematically made per household; first the head of the household, followed by other individuals in the household listed in order of age (BOA, NFS.d. 01527).

The second register, containing the Christian population of Bilecik and cataloged under the code “NFS.d” with number “01528”, is also unbound and lacks marbling, measuring 19 × 52 cm with a total of 191 pages. The last three pages of the register are left blank and contain no information. The date of the records is stated on the first page as Gurre-i Muharrem 1259 in the Hijri calendar, corresponding to February 1843 in the Gregorian calendar. The explanations in the register indicate that the census was conducted as part of the Tanzimat reforms and targeted the Christian population living in the city center and surrounding villages of Bilecik. The census initially detailed the eight Christian Armenian neighborhoods in the city center before moving on to the connected villages (BOA, NFS.d. 01528).

This study focuses on the city center of Bilecik, conducting a detailed examination of the population register records of Muslim and Christian communities from the year 1843. However, since only the Armenian Christian population was present in the city center, the Greek communities living in the surrounding villages of Küplü, Aşağıköy, and Pelitözü are also included in the comparative analyses.

This article utilizes data extracted from the aforementioned population registers to examine the interactions and divergences between Muslim and Christian communities in Bilecik in 1843, based on population dynamics, naming conventions, and anthropometric features. It also aims to elucidate how these processes were integrated into the broader Ottoman societal structure. The paper thoroughly addresses a period often overlooked in historical demography, revealing the social fabric and cultural diversity of the era. Scientifically, this study introduces a new perspective to the literature on the social and demographic history of the Ottoman Empire, enhancing our understanding of intercommunity dynamics through analyses of naming conventions and physical characteristics. Moreover, this research contributes significantly to the methodology of historical demographic studies by demonstrating how archival materials can be more comprehensively evaluated and by expanding our methods of understanding and interpreting the social and cultural diversity of Ottoman history. The details of this study will be discussed in the following sections.

2. Analysis of the Demographic Structure

In the 19th century, Bilecik had a city structure divided along religious lines. Muslim communities were concentrated around the Edebali Valley and its surroundings, while non-Muslim communities resided in the city’s higher regions. The main transportation axis of the city, which predates the modern Atatürk Boulevard, consisted of Tevfik Bey Street and its connecting streets. These streets extended from the Clock Tower to Emirler neighborhood and Orhan Gazi Mosque, following the historical route known as the “Silk Road”, which was an important connection between Bilecik and Söğüt. Another significant artery, connecting the upper and lower neighborhoods of the city, started from İnas School, moved towards the slopes opposite Osman Gazi Mosque, and extended towards Edebali Tomb—an area known as ‘Yukarı Çarşı’ (Demiryürek and Arıkan 2023, p. 92).

In the early 19th century, Bilecik comprised sixteen neighborhoods, with all Muslim neighborhoods, except Akmescit neighborhood, located around Edebali Valley. Akmescit neighborhood was situated in the upper parts of the city and served as a point of contact between Muslims and non-Muslims. The area around Şerif Paşa Mosque, including the houses to the south, was within the boundaries of this neighborhood. The second largest neighborhood in Bilecik was Cami-i Kebir neighborhood, which hosted Friday prayers and was named after Orhangazi Mosque. This mosque and its surrounding area met the Ottoman city criteria of ‘a place where Friday prayers are held, and a bazaar is established.’ Important institutions of the city, including the bazaar located just south of the mosque and Süleyman Paşa Bath, were concentrated in this area (Demiryürek and Arıkan 2023, p. 92).

Bazaar neighborhood (Pazar Mahallesi) extended from the area below the current Historical Stripe to Karacalar Mosque, and was known as “Lower Bazaar (Aşağı Çarşı)” in old Bilecik due to the bazaar established there. Shops of tradespeople were also located in this neighborhood. Emirler neighborhood, a medium-sized neighborhood, was established around a mosque bearing its name and was located on the right side of the Edebali Valley. Osmangazi neighborhood, also medium-sized, included houses extending from Osmangazi Mosque towards Upper Bazaar (Yukarı Çarşı). Nalband İlyas neighborhood, known as a relatively small neighborhood, started west of Orhangazi Mosque and stretched along the slope. Another small neighborhood, Hisar neighborhood, took its name from Belekome Castle. When the castle was conquered, the urban structure began to organize around it, and Hisar neighborhood was formed below the castle. This neighborhood was geographically confined to a limited area not suitable for expansion. Debbağhane neighborhood, situated on the narrow land between Şeyh Edebali Tomb and Hamsu Stream, was shaped by the increasing Muslim population and intensifying tannery activities following the city’s capture. Due to geographical constraints, this neighborhood remained underdeveloped and became the smallest neighborhood in Bilecik (Demiryürek and Arıkan 2023, p. 92).

In the 19th century, there were also eight non-Muslim neighborhoods in the city center of Bilecik. Historical records initially show the existence of only one Armenian neighborhood alongside Muslim neighborhoods. Over time, the growing Armenian community expanded from the current location of Atatürk Boulevard at Tepebaşı southward over a broad area. However, during the construction of Atatürk Boulevard in the 1950s, Armenian houses stretching along the road from the area where Tepebaşı Mosque is located were demolished, and these structures have not survived to the present day. One of the areas where Armenians lived densely in Bilecik was the south of present-day Dedeoğlu Street and Hamam Street, which runs parallel to Atatürk Boulevard. At the entrance of this street, there are some houses built by Armenians that are still standing and are currently in use (Arıkan 2019, p. 66). Greek communities settled in villages near Bilecik.

This historical and sociocultural diversity necessitates an examination of Bilecik’s demographic structure. In this context, the population census conducted by the Ottoman Empire in 1831 provides valuable information about the city’s ethnic and demographic structure. According to the census, including associated villages and other administrative units, the total male population of Bilecik was determined to be 8755. Out of this population, 3266 belonged to the Greek and Armenian Christian communities, with Christians comprising 37% of the general population in Bilecik (Demiryürek 2015, p. 107). These data are critical for understanding Bilecik’s demographic structure and ethnic composition.

After the 1831 census, population censuses began to be conducted systematically in the Ottoman Empire. This process enabled the acquisition of comprehensive demographic data for Bilecik. As shown in

Table 1. Numerical distribution of Muslim and Christian populations by age groups in the city center of Bilecik in 1843.

Nationality	Age Distribution								Total
	0–10	11–20	21–30	31–40	41–50	51–60	61–70	71 and Older
Muslim Turkish	249	168	177	123	98	121	41	10	987
Christian Armenian	296	208	169	104	103	62	37	13	992
Total	545	376	346	227	201	183	78	23	1979

Reference: (BOA, NFS.d. 01527, pp. 1–28; 01528, pp. 1–52).

, analysis of the population registers indicates that the male population in the city center was approximately 2000, with the total city population, including the estimated female population, reaching around 4000. A particularly notable aspect of this period is the dramatic change in the Muslim–Christian population ratio. Whereas Christians accounted for 10% of the general population in previous centuries, by the mid-19th century, this ratio had risen to 50%. Records show that the Christian population in the city center outnumbered the Muslim population, with a minimal difference between the two. The proportion of Christians in the city center was found to be higher than that in rural areas, indicating that the Christian community in the city center had a greater population density compared to those living in the countryside.

The increase in silk production activities in the city during the 19th century significantly contributed to the growth of the Armenian population, linked to regional economic dynamics (Öztürk 1996, p. 43). The majority of silk factories being owned by Armenians is considered a clear indicator of the demographic and economic relationship. However, the decisions related to Armenian migration and war conditions in 1915 severely restricted the operations of these factories, resulting in a significant decrease in their number (Demiryürek 2015, pp. 196–99).

A neighborhood-based examination of Bilecik’s population distribution reveals that half of the city’s 16 neighborhoods hosted Muslim populations (see

Table A1. Numerical distribution of Muslim population in Bilecik by neighborhoods and age groups in 1843.

Neighborhoods	Age Distribution								Total
	0–10	11–20	21–30	31–40	41–50	51–60	61–70	71 and Older
Emirler	24	20	16	18	8	14	5	-	105
Nalband İlyas	18	4	13	7	9	3	2	-	56
Pazar	35	25	28	15	14	21	3	1	142
Hisar	13	11	9	2	5	6	1	-	47
Debbağhane	6	4	1	4	1	4	-	-	20
Osmangazi	15	13	14	11	7	12	3	2	77
Ak Mescid	83	59	62	34	32	39	16	1	326
Cami-i Kebir	55	32	34	32	22	22	11	6	214
Total	249	168	177	123	98	121	41	10	987

Reference: (BOA, NFS.d. 01527, pp. 1–28).

), while the other half accommodated Christian populations (see

Table A2. Numerical distribution of Christian Armenian population in Bilecik by neighborhoods and age groups in 1843.

Neighborhoods	Age Distribution								Total
	0–10	11–20	21–30	31–40	41–50	51–60	61–70	71 and Older
Zakaroğlu	28	23	21	16	11	12	4	-	115
Ermiyelioğlu	30	23	28	13	12	8	6	1	121
Enderyas	32	30	16	13	12	6	5	1	115
Kadayıfçıoğlu	30	16	20	8	9	6	5	2	96
Hatapoğlu	51	34	23	16	15	13	6	3	161
Hekimoğlu	40	18	16	16	11	1	1	4	107
Gregosoğlu	34	23	22	10	9	6	2	2	108
Sandalcı	51	41	23	12	24	10	8	-	169
Total	296	208	169	104	103	62	37	13	992

Reference: (BOA, NFS.d. 01528, pp. 1–52).

and

Table A3. Numerical distribution of the Greek Christian population in Bilecik by neighborhoods and age groups in 1843.

Neighborhoods	Age Distribution								Total
	0–10	11–20	21–30	31–40	41–50	51–60	61–70	71 and Older
Küre Aydınlı	51	43	30	24	22	11	1	1	183
Aşağıköy Yukarı	40	38	25	24	19	6	-	-	152
Pelitözü Köyü	67	46	54	30	20	13	5	4	239
Total	158	127	109	78	61	30	6	5	574

Reference: (BOA, NFS.d. 01528, pp. 53–64, 135–44, 174–87).

). Muslim populations were concentrated in eight neighborhoods in the Edebali Valley, while the Christian community was located in eight neighborhoods in geographically higher areas of the city. Akmescid neighborhood, serving as the intersection point for the two communities, was identified as the most populous Muslim neighborhood with 326 male residents (BOA, NFS.d. 01527, pp. 16–22). Debbağhane neighborhood, the least populous Muslim neighborhood, had only 20 male residents (BOA, NFS.d. 01527, pp. 11–12). Among the Christian neighborhoods, Sandalcı neighborhood was the most populous with 169 male residents (BOA, NFS.d. 01528, pp. 44–52), while Kadayıfçıoğlu neighborhood, with 96 male residents, was the least dense (BOA, NFS.d. 01528, pp. 20–24).

Population registers also provide the opportunity to analyze the population distribution by age. The examined data show evident declines in the number of individuals across different age groups. In particular, the difference between the number of individuals recorded in the 0–10 age range and those in the 11–20 age range is striking, indicating high child mortality rates.

In the comparison of population distribution by age groups between Muslims and Christians, similar trends were observed in both communities. While 25% of the Muslim population was in the 0–10 age range, this rate dropped to 17% in the 11–20 age group. In the Christian population, the 0–10 age group constituted 30%, which fell to 21% in the 11–20 age group. The approximately 8% decrease observed in both groups indicates a general demographic trend of high child mortality rates.

In the distribution of the city’s population by age groups, the 50–60 age range is particularly noteworthy. While this age group accounted for 12% of the Muslim population, it comprised only 6% among Christians. This difference, when compared to the general population, indicates that individuals over 50 constituted 17% of the Muslim community, whereas this rate is 11% among the Armenian Christian community. Considering that the average lifespan is around 75 years today, it is apparent that life expectancy in Bilecik during the 19th century was shorter compared to modern times. Meanwhile, the proportion of individuals over 60 did not exceed 5%, and those over 70 comprised only 1% of the total population. Factors such as working in physically demanding jobs like agriculture and livestock, experiencing inadequate and unbalanced nutrition, and the limited impact of modern medicine during that period were decisive factors in the short average lifespan.

In the Greek Christian community residing in villages near Bilecik, the difference between the 0–10 and 11–20 age groups is smaller, around 5%, indicating relatively lower child mortality rates compared to the Muslim and Armenian communities. However, the survival rates of Greek individuals over the age of 50 are notably low. This age group constituted about 7% of the total population, which suggests a scarcity of elderly individuals within the community.

During the period focused on in this study, although the average lifespan was generally short and the elderly population was limited, there are some exceptional examples. According to the population registers, one of the oldest recorded individuals is the 98-year-old Great Priest Arakil, who resided in household number 51 in Hattaboğlu neighborhood (BOA, NFS.d. 01528, p. 31). In addition to Priest Arakil, the registers also document a few other individuals who were over the age of 80, indicating life spans that were rare for that time.

Up until the last quarter of the 19th century, Bilecik exhibited a relatively stable demographic structure. However, during this period, there was a substantial influx of immigrants from the Balkans to Anatolia, which significantly altered regional population dynamics. This migration was particularly pronounced following the 1877–1878 Russo-Turkish War, leading to substantial changes in the religious and ethnic composition of Bilecik (Demiryürek 2015, pp. 121–25). These immigrants were predominantly settled in rural areas, thus maintaining controlled population growth in the city center.

The year 1915 marks one of the pivotal moments in the demographic composition of Bilecik. The Ottoman Empire’s deportation policy towards Armenians, viewed as a security threat, had enduring impacts on the city’s demographic structure (Bilgin 2015, p. 25). This policy led to a reduction in the Armenian population and a proportionally greater dominance of the Muslim population. During the Greek occupation following World War I, Muslim settlements along the Edebali Valley sustained significant damage. However, following the National Struggle, Turks moved into the neighborhoods previously inhabited by Armenians.

The population exchange conducted between 1923 and 1930 under the Treaty of Lausanne, which involved relocating Christian Greeks from Anatolia to Greece and Muslim Turks from Greece to Turkey, resulted in the evacuation of Greek villages in Bilecik and the resettlement of Muslim immigrants from Greece in these areas. Additionally, Muslims from the Tikveş region in Greece relocated to the city center of Bilecik, helping to rejuvenate the city’s population, which had diminished during the war years and subsequent migrations.

In conclusion, the process initiated by Osman Gazi’s conquest of Bilecik in 1299 set the stage for the solidification of Islamic identity in the city. Furthermore, the Ottoman population census conducted in 1831, along with subsequent population registers, documented the ethnic structure and religious demographics of the city. Data from these registers indicate that the proportion of the Christian population in the city center increased from 10% to 50%, and numerically this group surpassed the Muslim population. Analyses of population distribution by neighborhood reveal that although there were an equal number of Muslim and Christian neighborhoods, the Christian population was denser, particularly in the city center. Additionally, significant declines in younger age groups highlight high child mortality rates and the challenging health conditions of the era, while the low proportion of elderly individuals offers crucial insights into the difficult living conditions. The deportation policies of 1915 and the population exchange following the Treaty of Lausanne have left enduring marks on Bilecik’s ethnic and religious structure. These events have significantly shaped the city’s current demographic composition.

3. Naming Tradition: Naming Practices of Muslim and Christian Communities in Bilecik

In classical societies, birth rituals and naming processes play a pivotal role in defining an individual’s social existence. These practices not only distinguish individuals by shaping personal and social identities but are also influenced by social, cultural, and economic factors, alongside religious and belief systems. These rituals play central roles not just in individual identity formation but also in influencing societal transformations, senses of belonging, and worldviews. Naming processes are essential tools for understanding the social structures and historical shifts within societies. They offer insights into the transmission and reproduction of cultural codes among individuals, thereby holding significant importance in the disciplines of history, sociology, and anthropology (Herdağdelen 2016, pp. 18–25).

Over time, analyzing names provides valuable insights into social structures and transformations. The variety of names, which was limited during classical periods, has evolved with the transition to the modern era. Prominent figures in society, such as political leaders, athletes, and artists, have profoundly influenced naming traditions. This transformation reflects the meanings and expectations parents attribute to their children. Particularly in Turkic-Islamic societies, the rising popularity of names like ‘Yiğit’ and ‘Efe’ serves as a bridge between traditional and modern values. Understanding the motivations behind the spread of these names aids in comprehending the interplay between cultural identity and societal values

In this broad historical and cultural framework, the population registers enable the analysis of naming practices among the communities in Bilecik. Utilizing these registers, individual names are scrutinized on a neighborhood basis in this section. The motivations behind the naming practices of Muslim Turks and Christian Armenians residing in the center of Bilecik are examined comparatively. Additionally, the study is expanded to include the nearby Greek villages, which serve as case studies

Analyses are supported by detailed tables that display the frequencies of names, along with a comprehensive examination of their origins and the reasons behind their selection. This assessment highlights how the naming preferences of Muslim and Christian communities vary according to their religious, cultural, and ethnic backgrounds.

3.1. Naming Practices among Muslim Turks

In Turkish culture, naming practices are closely tied to religious and cultural transitions. During periods influenced by Shamanism and the belief in ‘Gök Tengri’ (Sky God), the Turks adhered to belief systems connected to spirits and nature. Names common in this era, which represented animals and natural elements, were primarily of Turkish origin. With the adoption of Islam, a noticeable shift began in Turkish naming traditions. The acceptance of Islam led to the Arabization of names among the Turks, a process that deepened and increased in influence over time. Given that the Turks started to embrace Islam by the mid-8th century, it is quite notable that by the 11th century, approximately 20% of the names in the work Dîvânü Lugâti’t-Türk were of Arabic origin (Güzelderen et al. 2023, p. 3).

To more clearly observe the manifestations of these historical changes within a specific era, analyzing Muslim Turkish names in Bilecik provides tangible examples of this transformation. Data from the population registers indicate that 90% of the names among Muslims in Bilecik were of Arabic or religious origin. As shown in

Table 2. Most-common names in Bilecik in 1843 and their ethnic distribution.

Frequency of Use	Distribution of Names by Ethnic Group
	Turks	Armenians	Greeks
1	Mehmed	Karabet	Konstantin
2	Ahmed	Agop	Dimitri
3	Mustafa	Artin	Yorgi
4	Hüseyin	Avanis	Anestaş
5	Ali	Serkis	İlya
6	İbrahim	Kirkor	Nikoli
7	Hasan	Toros	Mihael
8	Osman	Panos	Simon
9	Halil	Bedros	Yani
10	İsmail	Kevork	Vasil

Reference: (BOA, NFS.d. 01527, pp. 1–28; 01528, pp. 1–64, 135–44, 174–87).

, the most commonly chosen names such as Mehmed, Ahmed, Mustafa, Hüseyin, Ali, İbrahim, Hasan, Osman, Halil, and İsmail (BOA, NFS.d. 01527, pp. 1–28), all have Arabic origins and carry religious significance, vividly illustrating the extent of cultural transformation.

The widespread adoption of Arab-Islamic names in Turkic-Islamic societies is largely due to the respect these names command and the influence of Islamic teachings (Çerçi 2015, p. 15). In particulars, the hadith of Prophet Muhammad, stating that ‘On the Day of Judgment, you will be called by your names and those of your fathers, so give yourselves good names’ (Aras 1988, p. 333), serves as a religious motivator that shapes naming practices in Turkish society. In this context, there is an expectation in Turkish society that names should align with personal characters. The names of Prophet Muhammad, his family, and his companions are frequently chosen due to their spiritual values and exemplary societal roles, indicating that the naming process extends beyond traditional preferences to include spiritual and exemplary qualities.

Among the names frequently used by Muslims in Bilecik, Mehmed stands out. This name is the Turkish adaptation of Muhammad, meaning ‘the one who embodies all praiseworthy beauty and goodness’ (Kandemir 2020, p. 421). Historically, while Turks have used the name ‘Muhammad,’ they generally preferred ‘Mehmed.’ This preference is partly due to their profound respect for the Prophet’s name. Additionally, the varied pronunciations of ‘Muhammad’ in different regions may have influenced its Turkish form as ‘Mehmed.’ In recent years, the interest in the name ‘Muhammad’ has increased; it ranked 86th in popularity in 1986 but rose into the top ten most used names in Turkey by 2018. Conversely, ‘Mehmed,’ which was among the most popular names and ranked first until 2002, declined to 12th place by 2019 (Kalkışım 2020, pp. 237–38).

The name “Ahmed” has also been frequently chosen among Muslims in Bilecik due to their devotion to the Prophet. This name, derived from the Arabic root “Hamd”, means “the one who praises Allah more and better than anyone else” and “the most praised”. “Ahmed”, with this deep spiritual meaning, is also recognized as another name of Prophet Muhammad and represents his praiseworthy qualities (Kandemir 2020, p. 421).

“Mustafa”, the third most popular name among Muslim communities in Bilecik (Şemseddin Sami 2015, pp. 133–57; Mutçalı 1995, p. 485), means “chosen” and “elite”. This name is considered one of the titles of Prophet Muhammad and is revered in the Islamic world. “Mustafa” emphasizes the special quality of Prophet Muhammad, namely being the messenger chosen by Allah for humanity (Redhouse 1987, p. 1879).

“Hüseyin” is also among the most preferred names by Muslims in Bilecik. Hussein, the son of Prophet Muhammad’s daughter Fatima and the fourth Islamic caliph Ali, is a significant figure in Islamic history. His martyrdom at Karbala has made him a respected and beloved figure among Muslims (Üzüm 1998, p. 521). The choice of the name “Hussein” reflects the love and respect for him and also represents the symbolic meaning of his martyrdom and its impact on the Islamic community.

“Ali” is another name frequently chosen among Muslims in Bilecik. Ali, the cousin and son-in-law of Prophet Muhammad, was also the fourth Islamic caliph and one of the first Muslims. The major schism in Islam, the Shia tradition, is attributed to him (Fığlalı 1989, pp. 371–72). This historical and religious distinction has not affected the usage of Ali’s name; rather, Ali remains widely respected in the Islamic world, and his name is commonly given to newborns.

The name “Ibrahim” is also one of the most popular names given to children by Muslims in Bilecik. Meaning “great father” or “father of nations”, Ibrahim is recognized as an important prophet in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Known as “Avram” or “Abraham” in the Islamic literature, this name has become widespread as “Ibrahim”. Prophet Muhammad’s descent from the lineage of Ibrahim (Harman 2000a, pp. 266–69) has increased the respect for this name, making it a common choice for naming children.

The name “Hasan”, which means “beautiful”, “good”, and “pleasant” in Arabic, is also a popular choice among Muslims in Bilecik. The great respect for Prophet Muhammad, his family, and his companions has made their names a priority choice for newborns. Hasan, the grandson of Prophet Muhammad and the eldest son of Fatima and Ali, is highly respected, which has led to his name being widely used (Fığlalı 1997, pp. 282–84).

The name “Osman” has had a significant political and cultural impact in Turkish and Islamic history. Among the Muslim communities in Bilecik, this name is frequently given to children, aiming to transmit historical and cultural heritage to new generations. Osman, the son-in-law of Prophet Muhammad and the third Islamic caliph, is considered one of the significant figures in the Islamic world (Yiğit 2007, pp. 438–39). The name means “wise” and “the strongest”, and it is also historically significant as the dynastic name of the Ottoman Empire founded by the Turks.

“Halil (Khalil)” is the ninth most preferred name among Muslims in Bilecik. This name is often extended to “Halil Ibrahim”, reflecting its meaning as “friend of Allah”. The origin of the name “Halil” derives from the Arabic term “Khalil”, meaning “devoted friend”, attributed to Ibrahim al-Khalil due to his unwavering devotion to God (Bilge 1997, p. 306).

Lastly, one of the common names used in Bilecik is “Ismail”. Derived from the Hebrew “Yeşmael”, it means “God hears”. Ismail’s role in building the Kaaba with Ibrahim, the incident of the sacrifice, and his and his mother Hagar’s discovery of the Zamzam water (Harman 2001, pp. 76–78) have elevated Ismail to a respected position among Muslims, and his name has been widely used as a token of this love and respect.

In conclusion, the acceptance of Islam led to a sharp change in Turkish naming practices. This transformation, deepened by the hadiths and teachings of Prophet Muhammad, has placed spiritual and religious values at the center of naming practices in Turkish society. The fact that 90% of the names used by Muslims in the Bilecik population registers of 1843 are of Arabic origin clearly demonstrates the lasting and strong influence of Islam in this area.

3.2. Naming Practices among Christian Armenians

The naming practices among the Christian Armenian community in Bilecik clearly reflect the deep traces of Christianity’s influence on this process. Among Armenians in Bilecik, the most preferred names are Karabet, Agop, Artin, Avanis, Serkis, Kirkor, Toros, Panos, Bedros, and Kevork (see

Table A4. Ten most commonly used first names and their frequencies in Armenian neighborhoods of Bilecik in 1843.

Names	Neighborhoods
	Zakaroğlu	Ermiyelioğlu	Enderyas	Kadayıfçıoğlu	Hatapoğlu	Hekimoğlu	Gregosoğlu	Sandalcı	Total
Karabet	19	15	17	16	22	17	18	15	139
Agop	15	20	15	14	26	22	18	13	130
Artin	6	14	13	10	19	8	15	15	100
Avanis	8	13	10	5	13	8	15	14	86
Serkis	10	9	8	9	12	12	10	6	76
Kirkor	9	9	12	4	6	5	4	6	55
Toros	8	4	3	3	10	6	3	2	39
Panos	5	4	5	5	5	8	6	1	39
Bedros	3	4	6	2	4	1	3	12	35
Kevork	4	3	1	5	2	-	2	5	22

Reference: (BOA, NFS.d. 01528, pp. 1–52).

). Like Muslims, Armenians generally attribute their most frequently used names to religious figures. However, notable differences between Armenians in Anatolia and those in Armenia reveal how cultural and geographical interactions can significantly influence naming traditions. For instance, the adoption of “Hagop” as “Agop” in Anatolia reflects regional pronunciation and adaptation differences.

Comparative studies on the origins of Armenian naming traditions illuminate significant contrasts in the use of prophet names between Muslims and Armenians. While the names of Prophet Muhammad—Mehmed, Ahmed, and Mustafa—are among the top three most used within Muslim communities, direct use of Jesus’s name is not observed in the Armenian community. This scenario vividly demonstrates how religious and cultural differences between the two communities are reflected in their naming practices. In the Armenian community, religious figures are often referred to indirectly, whereas in Muslim communities, these names are directly and widely used.

The commonly used name in the Armenian community, “Karabet”, is derived from the Armenian word ‘garabed’ (կարապետ), meaning “pioneer” or “forerunner.” This name is often attributed to John the Baptist, known in Christianity as the herald of Jesus’s coming. John the Baptist, recognized as Jesus’s cousin, is a significant figure in Christian tradition, heralding the advent of Jesus (Miller 1993, pp. 195–97; Baham 2020, pp. 13–14). His role as a “forerunner” is reflected in the meaning of the name in Armenian naming conventions (M. Aydın 2013, pp. 232–33).

Another name preferred among Armenians is “Kirkor.” This name is the Armenian equivalent of the Greek name “Grigorios”, which means “shepherd.” “Kirkor” is particularly popular due to its association with Saint Gregory the Illuminator, who founded the Armenian Church in Echmiadzin and under whose leadership Christianity became the state religion (Tchilingirian 2019, pp. 11–12). The significance of this historical figure echoes in the name of the Armenian Gregorian denomination. The Armenian community honors this pivotal historical figure by naming their children after him, thereby preserving his legacy.

“Agop” is another name frequently encountered within the Armenian community of Bilecik. Known as “Hagop” in Armenian, this name became “Agop” in Ottoman geographical areas due to the lesser use of the letter ‘H.’ This name is a localized pronunciation of Jacob, considered a patriarch of the Israelites and son of Isaac. It is also adopted by Jews and Western Christians as “Jacob.” The Biblical origin of this name includes the term “Heel Holder”, which refers to Jacob being born immediately after his twin brother Esau, hence also meaning “He who follows” (Harman 2013, p. 274).

In Bilecik, the name “Artin”, derived from the Armenian word for “resurrection”, “Haratyun” (արութիւն), is prevalent. The belief in Jesus’s crucifixion and subsequent resurrection holds critical importance in Christian history. This religious belief is commemorated during Easter, one of the most significant celebrations in Christian communities (Katar 2007, p. 181; M. Aydın 2007, pp. 93–94). In the Armenian community, this historical and religious event reinforces the popularity of names like “Artin.”

Another popular name within the Armenian community is “Avanis.” This name was adapted from the name Johannes in Ottoman geographical regions and, like the frequently chosen name “Karabet”, is based on John the Baptist. John the Baptist’s role as the herald and baptizer of Jesus has influenced the choice of this name (Miller 1993, pp. 195–97; Baham 2020, pp. 13–14).

In Bilecik, the name “Serkis” is also commonly chosen. This name is derived from Saint Sergius, believed to have been martyred for his faith in Christian tradition. “Serkis”, along with regional variations like “Sarkis”, “Serkiz”, and “Sarkiz”, reflects the respect accorded to this figure (A. Aydın 2009, p. 64). Saint Sergius is a notable character, and the Little Hagia Sophia Mosque in Istanbul was built in his memory by Emperor Justinian (Erdoğan 2012, p. 2). The esteem in which Saint Sergius is held within the Armenian community ensures his name is frequently used.

The name ‘Toros’ holds significant importance among the Armenian community in Bilecik, and its origins can be traced back to Saint Theotoros, a religious figure in Anatolia. Known as Theodoros in Greek, he was a saint who lived around Erzincan and its surrounding areas. The Surp Toros Churches, located in the Hafik district of Sivas (Surp Toros Ermeni Kilisesi, Hafik n.d.), the Melikgazi region of Kayseri (Surp Toros Kilisesi n.d.), and in Kütahya (Surp Toros Ermeni Kilisesi, Kütahya n.d.), exemplify the religious roots of this name. Moreover, the name was adopted by Turks, inspired by the Toros Mountains. This reflects the cultural diversity and interaction within Anatolia.

The name “Panos” is also widely used within the Armenian community of Bilecik, originating from the Greek name “Panayot”, a diminutive form of “Pano” and “Panus.” This name means “belonging to Mary” and is typically given to children born on feast days. The use of this name by Armenians indicates the influence of religious naming traditions. Additionally, the use of this name by Armenians suggests potential influence from the local Greek population.

Among the commonly used names in the Armenian community of Bilecik, “Bedros” stands out. This name appears in various forms, such as “Bediros”, “Betros”, and “Patrus”, and originates from Saint Peter, a significant figure in Christianity (Cilacı 1997, p. 513; Ulutürk 2006, pp. 146–48; Eraslan 2021, pp. 12–13). “Bedros” corresponds to “Peter” and “Pierre” in Western languages and enjoys broad cultural dissemination. The numerous churches dedicated to Saint Peter in Anatolia, the most notable being the Saint Pierre Church in Antakya, regarded as sacred by Christians (Ulutürk 2006, p. 160), highlight the cultural and religious significance of this name.

The tenth most popular name among the Armenian community in Bilecik is “Kevork”, also known regionally as “Kivork”, “Kigork”, and “Kegork.” Commonly known as “George” in the Greek community and the Western world, these names are attributed to Saint George, a respected disciple and martyr of Jesus in Christian tradition (Tümer 1993, p. 26). Saint George, also referred to as “Circîs” among Muslims, is recognized as a righteous person or prophet, and this multicultural context underscores his universal respect (Vasilopulos 1975; Yelseli 2024; A. Aydın 2011, pp. 374–76).

In conclusion, the naming practices of the Armenian community in Bilecik form a rich mosaic that deeply reflects the religious and cultural wealth of Anatolia. These names, inspired by religious leaders, saints, and prophets, play a central role in conveying the cultural and religious identity of the Armenian community. Within the broad cultural spectrum of Anatolia, the names adopted by the Armenians of Bilecik represent not only the diverse religious traditions of Christianity and Islam but also the evolving religious diversity resulting from geographical and ethnic interactions. In particular, the etymological transformation of names like “Agop” highlights regional pronunciation differences and historical continuity, showcasing religious interactions. The naming practices of the Armenian community in Bilecik are significant elements symbolizing this community’s religious and cultural heritage and reflect some of the prominent dynamics in the region’s historical and cultural fabric.

3.3. Naming Practices among Christian Greeks

This research encompasses the Küplü, Aşağıköy, and Pelitözü villages in Bilecik (BOA, NFS.d. 01528, pp. 53–64, 135–44, 174–87), offering a comprehensive approach that allows for a comparative perspective on the naming practices among Christian groups with diverse sectarian and ethnic backgrounds. This broader approach provides an opportunity to evaluate naming practices within a wider framework. The naming trends observed among Greek communities in these villages create a rich database reflecting both the religious and cultural identities of these communities. The most commonly encountered names among Christian Greeks in the Küplü, Aşağıköy, and Pelitözü villages are Konstantin, Dimitri, Yorgi, Anestaş, İlya, Nikoli, Mihael, Simon, Yani, and Vasil, respectively (see

Table A5. Ten most commonly used first names and their frequencies in Greek neighborhoods of Bilecik in 1843.

Names	Settlements
	Aydınlı Neighborhood of Küplü	Yukarı Neighborhood of Aşağıköy	Pelitözü Village	Total
Konstantin	27	13	32	72
Dimitri	17	20	27	63
Yorgo	22	18	31	61
Anistas	14	18	20	52
İlya	16	15	14	45
Nikoli	10	16	18	44
Mihael	20	4	12	36
Simon	8	5	7	20
Yani	1	7	8	16
Vasil	2	-	12	14

Reference: (BOA, NFS.d. 01528, pp. 53–64, 135–44, 174–87).

).

In our analysis, the name ‘Konstantin’ is particularly notable, deriving from Emperor Constantine, who pioneered the official recognition of Christianity as the state religion during the Roman Empire (Eroğlan 2019, pp. 57–63; Kassa 2020, pp. 64–65). Emperor Constantine’s pivotal role in the Orthodox Christian world is one of the main reasons for the widespread adoption of his name. The use of this name highlights Constantine’s enduring significance as both a cultural and religious icon. The name ‘Constantine’ has remained popular in various forms, including ‘Kostas’ and ‘Konstantino’, reflecting the extensive reach of his influence

Additionally, the name ‘Dimitri’ is frequently encountered among the Greek communities in Bilecik. The popularity of this name is largely attributed to religious factors. It is inspired by Saint Demetrios of Thessaloniki, the patron saint of the city, who was martyred by Roman Emperor Maximianus for his efforts to spread Christianity. Saint Demetrios is profoundly revered in the Orthodox Christian world and is honored by numerous churches dedicated to him (Zenbilci 2020, p. 363).

Another name frequently used among the Greek communities is ‘Yorgi’. As previously discussed in the context of the name ‘Kevork’, this name originates from Saint George. Known historically as the ‘Green Man’, an archetype of a nature deity and a symbol of fertility before Christianity, Saint George is associated with this figure. This connection laid the foundation for the ‘Green George’ cult, which notably reflects the cultural and religious interactions between Christian and Turkish communities. The name ‘Yorgi’, related to ‘Hızır’ in Arabic, which translates to ‘green’, plays a central role in the fertility rituals celebrated by both communities on May 6th. The Aya Yorgi Monastery on Büyükada in Istanbul becomes a place of joint pilgrimage for both cultures annually on this date, thus symbolizing a meeting point of Christianity and Islam, where cultural and religious intersections emerge (Aykıt 2013, pp. 120, 125–30).

The name ‘Anestaş’ is also widely favored among the Greek communities in Bilecik. It is likely derived from ‘Anastas’, a name that evolved into various pronunciations such as ‘Anastasios’ and ‘Anastasi’ in Anatolia. These variations are commonly encountered in the region, reflecting the diverse cultural influences. The name means ‘resurrection’, symbolizing Jesus’s resurrection in Christian belief, which is a central event commemorated during Easter (Katar 2007, p. 181). This naming tradition, evident in the usage of ‘Anastaş’ and its variations, like ‘Anastasios’ and ‘Anastasi’, highlights the phonetic adaptations that took place over time. ‘Anastaş’ is also popular among women, where it is used in the form ‘Anastasia’, further demonstrating the adaptability and continued relevance of this name across different cultures and genders.

The name ‘İlya’ is extensively used for personal naming. Attributed to Prophet Elijah, it originates from the Hebrew ‘Eliyah’ or ‘Eliyahu’. The name was adopted into Greek and Latin as ‘Elias’ (Harman 2000b, pp. 160–61), influencing its pronunciation in Anatolian Greek as ‘İlya’. Variants such as ‘İliya’, ‘İlyana’, and ‘İlias’ also emerge, reflecting the rich intercultural exchanges within Anatolia.

Among the Rum people of Bilecik, the name ‘Nikoli’ is a regional variation of ‘Niko’ or ‘Nikola’, ranking sixth among the most popular names. The origin of this name is tied to Saint Nicholas of Myra, who is widely known for his association with Christmas in Western culture. Saint Nicholas is revered as the patron saint of sailors, merchants, travelers, and children, earning him significant respect within the Christian community (Şenay 2007, pp. 201–2). This veneration has ensured that his name continues to be celebrated through the centuries.

The name ‘Mihael’ stands out as another prominent choice. This name is linked to the archangel Michael, who appears under various names such as ‘Mikail’, ‘Mükail’, ‘Mikayil’, ‘Mikael’, ‘Michael’, and ‘Mişel’. Recognized universally in religions such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, this archangel is widely revered across diverse cultures. In the Christian realm, known specifically as Saint Michael, he is celebrated for his protective qualities (Cebeci 2020, p. 45).

The name ‘Simon’ is also noteworthy among the Greek communities in Bilecik. This name originates from Simeon, the second of Jacob’s twelve sons (Harman 2013, p. 276), and appears in Jewish and Christian traditions in various forms such as ‘Şemun’, ‘Şimon’, and ‘Simeon’. In Bilecik’s Greek communities, it plays a significant role in reflecting the religious identities and cultural heritage of individuals.

The name ‘Yani’ is widely used among the Greek communities in Bilecik. This name, which holds significant symbolism in Christianity, is derived from John the Baptist, originating from the Greek ‘Ιωάννης’ (Ioannis). Known in Latin as ‘Joannes’ (M. Aydın 2013, p. 232), it is pronounced as ‘Yannis’ and became popular among Anatolian Greeks in the form of ‘Yani’. The pivotal role of John the Baptist in Christianity has led to his name being preserved across various languages and cultures

One of the most favored names among the Greek communities in Bilecik is ‘Vasil’. This name derives from Saint Basil of Caesarea, who is highly revered in the Christian world. Saint Basil is known for his significant contributions to Christian theology, and his influence has been perpetuated through various forms of the name, such as ‘Vasil’, ‘Vasili’, ‘Vasilios’, and ‘Vasilis’. Particularly in Eastern Christianity, Saint Basil plays a crucial role in shaping religious practices and theological thought (Temiztürk 2016, pp. 39–40). The popularity of this name within Bilecik’s Greek communities illustrates how the figure of Saint Basil and his religious legacy resonate regionally.

In conclusion, the naming practices of the Greek communities in Bilecik reflect not only individual identities but also broad historical and cultural contexts. These names are intricately linked with the sociocultural dynamics and the historical transformations that these communities have undergone. Names such as ‘Konstantin’, ‘Dimitri’, and ‘Yorgi’ exhibit a rich identity structure that has evolved through the interactions between Christianity and local cultural elements. In this context, the names used by the Greeks of Bilecik function to convey their beliefs, history, and cultural heritage, vividly showcasing the cultural diversity of Anatolia.

4. Anthropometric Characteristics of Muslim and Christian Communities in Bilecik

This section focuses on a detailed analysis of anthropometric data obtained from the 1843 population registers of Bilecik. Following the abolition of the Janissary Corps in 1826, the restructuring of the Ottoman Army, initiated in 1831 during the population censuses, served a particularly vital function in terms of military personnel recruitment. With the implementation of the mandatory conscription system, the physical characteristics of male individuals living in settlements across Anatolia and Rumelia were systematically recorded. These records provide a comprehensive dataset of anthropometric data, from individuals’ heights to their health conditions and even their mustache and beard styles (Yıldız 2009, pp. 143–44). Our analysis aims to elucidate the anthropometric characteristics of Muslim and non-Muslim communities, examining the sociocultural and historical implications of these differences.

4.1. Analysis of Height Records

The analysis of height records in population registers is critically important for the fields of history and anthropology. A fundamental aspect of this research is determining how these records were compiled. Existing studies indicate that the officials conducting the surveys predominantly relied on visual estimation rather than precise metric measurements for height, highlighting the subjective nature of these assessments and the potential for significant errors. Furthermore, the measurement units used during the period differ from today’s standards, complicating direct comparisons of the recorded data with contemporary measurements. In the Ottoman Empire, the units of length varied regionally, adding a significant layer of complexity to the interpretation of historical data.

A primary challenge encountered in height assessment is considering the socioeconomic conditions of the period when classifying individuals as “short” or “tall”. In modern times, factors like reduced physical labor, improved nutritional conditions, and overall higher living standards have increased average heights in populations. For instance, data from the Turkish Statistical Institute (TÜİK) shows that in 2008, the average height of young men in Turkey was 171.3 cm, which increased to 173.3 cm by 2014. Such current data provide insights while allowing for estimations regarding height ratios from about 150 years ago. In this context, individuals recorded in the population registers are classified based on the living conditions and health standards of the time; those under 160 cm are classified as “Short Stature”, those between 160 cm and 170 cm are classified as “Medium Stature”, those between 170 cm and 175 cm are classified as “Tallish Stature”, and those over 175 cm are classified as “Tall Stature” (Arıkan and Demiryürek 2019, p. 48).

As shown in

Table 3. Numerical distribution by height categories of ethnic groups in Bilecik in 1843.

Nationality	Height Distribution
	Short Stature	Medium Stature	Tallish Stature	Tall Stature
Muslim Turk	12	368	36	8
Christian Armenian	42	487	40	4
Christian Greek	8	297	22	13

Reference: (BOA, NFS.d. 01527, pp. 1–28; 01528, pp. 1–64, 135–44, 174–87).

, according to the population registers, a large majority of both the Muslim and Christian populations in Bilecik fall within the ‘Medium Stature’ category (85% and above). This suggests that the effects of living conditions and genetic factors on height are similar across both communities. However, a more detailed analysis shows notable differences in the ratios of short and tall individuals between the communities. While the proportion of short individuals in the general population is about 2.5% for Muslims and Christian Greeks, it exceeds 7% for Christian Armenians. This variation points to the potential influences of environmental conditions and dietary habits on height. The proportion of tall individuals is highest among the Christian Greeks at nearly 4%, with Muslims approaching 2%, and Christian Armenians below 1%.

In conclusion, the analyses highlight distinct differences in height characteristics between the Muslim and Christian communities residing in Bilecik. Although the majority of individuals in both communities are of medium height, significant disparities are observed among the short and tall individuals. Notably, Christian Armenians have a higher prevalence of short individuals, while Christian Greeks generally tend to be taller. These demographic variations reflect the interplay of genetic heritage, environmental conditions, and dietary habits in shaping physical differences.

4.2. Analysis of Beard and Mustache Records

Beards and mustaches have historically shaped the visages of men, adding an esthetic dimension to their personal identities. The styles of beards and mustaches in various cultures not only serve as an indicator of esthetic preferences but also carry symbolic meanings intertwined with religious beliefs and national identities. For instance, in Jewish culture, cutting one’s beard with a razor is prohibited; this prohibition is seen as a way to maintain the beard’s natural form and respect the human form created by God. Conversely, in the West within Christianity and in Asia within Buddhism, the complete shaving of beards and mustaches symbolizes religious purity and an intention to renounce worldly concerns. Christian priests and Buddhist monks often prefer a shaven face to better focus on their spiritual goals, reflecting their desire to distance themselves from worldly worries (Yalçın 2009, p. 1).

In the Western world, beard habits have shown great variety across historical periods and cultural contexts. In the Archaic period, pointed beards were common, but by the Classical period, shaving had become the norm. In the Roman Empire, while the ruling elites were typically shaven, beards were more common among the general populace. During the Carolingian era, men were typically beardless but mustached, indicating that mustaches were fashionable in Early Medieval Europe. The length and style of beards in the Middle Ages were closely associated with religious identities. Jewish communities often preferred long beards, while Christian clergy also adopted the use of beards. Although beards were generally not preferred among the ruling classes, among the common people, a beard was widely adopted as a symbol of manhood and maturity.

Cultural and religious dynamics have played a decisive role in the preferences for beards and mustaches among individuals. In the pre-Islamic Turkish community, the habit of growing beards was limited, as supported by the presence of upward-pointing mustaches that covered the cheeks in ancient Turkish statues. However, the adoption of Islam marked a significant shift in cultural practices. In Muslim communities, the practice of growing a beard is closely linked to religious references. The importance of growing a beard in Islam is largely based on the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad. The Hadith literature describes Prophet Muhammad’s full beard as indicative that growing a beard is natural for men and should be considered a normal practice. Islamic scholars generally regard keeping a beard as a religious recommendation, and some hadiths suggest letting one’s beard grow long and trimming one’s mustache. These recommendations integrate themes of naturalness and fidelity to God’s creation in Islamic teachings. While religious texts do not explicitly prohibit shaving one’s beard, scholars suggest that cutting one’s beard could be seen as tampering with divine creation and, thus, is potentially objectionable. In Islamic societies, beards also serve as a symbol of distinction to ensure Muslims do not resemble followers of other faiths, particularly “Magians” or “polytheists”. In this context, growing a beard serves both as a means of expressing religious identity and as a tool for distinguishing oneself from other faith groups (Yalçın 2009, pp. 1–2).

In the Ottoman era, particularly among high-ranking individuals such as state officials, lords, and viziers, possessing a neat hairstyle and beard was considered essential. In Turkish culture, the phrase ‘Ak Sakallı’, associated with experience and wisdom, was attributed to highly respected individuals in society. This understanding continued strongly in Ottoman societal structures, especially among religious leaders for whom a beard was considered an indispensable feature (Düzlü 2020, pp. 347–49). Historically, beards have held a significant place as a symbol of honor and authority (Neşrî 2008, p. 74; Yüksel 2018, p. 89).

The widespread acceptance of beard-growing practices due to religious motivations and the additional values acquired by individuals across many cultures demonstrate that beards function not only as a physical characteristic but also as a societal and cultural phenomenon. The Turkish saying “we have no beard, so our word is not heeded” strongly indicates that beards are perceived as a symbol of authority and respect. This expression highlights how beards can enhance the weight of a person’s words and the impact of their personal expression, thus revealing their effects on societal perception. Such cultural codifications show that beards, beyond being a mere esthetic choice, play a critical role in shaping how individuals are perceived in societal contexts.

As can be seen in

Table 4. Numerical distribution of beard colors among ethnic groups in Bilecik in 1843.

Nationality	Beard Distribution
	Chestnut Beard	Black Beard	Grizzled Beard	Lightly Bearded	White Beard	Gray Beard
Muslim Turk	125	41	92	27	31	39
Christian Armenian	5	2	1	8	10	31
Christian Greek	-	2	3	3	5	14

Reference: (BOA, NFS.d. 01527, pp. 1–28; 01528, pp. 1–64, 135–44, 174–87).

, the data on beard habits from the population registers of Bilecik reveal clear differences between the Muslim and Christian populations. Considering that the population ratios of Muslims and Christians living in the city center are nearly equal, the differences in beard-growing practices are particularly notable. Investigations show that the number of bearded individuals among Muslim men is determined to be 355, while this number is 57 for Christian men. These figures indicate a significant divergence in the tendency to grow beards between the two communities. In particular, the prevalence of beard-growing among Muslim men aged 30 and above is evident from the numbers of individuals with chestnut and black beards. Interestingly, the absence of gray or grizzled mustached Muslim men in this age group suggests that the inclination to grow beards increases with age among Muslim men.

Among the Christian communities in Bilecik, beard-growing habits vary according to demographic and cultural factors. Especially in older age groups, beards are more commonly observed. According to the analysis, while the number of Christian men with chestnut and black beards totals only 7, the number of those with grizzled and white beards is 41. These data indicate that beards are relatively less preferred among younger Christians. Additionally, approximately 30% of the Christian male population over 50 years old is bearded. This rate suggests that among the Christian communities, beard-growing is not a general habit but rather increases with age as a choice of esthetic preference. Comparisons between Christian Greeks and Christian Armenians show similar frequencies of beard-growing in older age groups, but the proportion of bearded individuals remains low in the general population.

Like beards, mustaches also play a significant role in expressing individual identity and personality traits. The shape and style of a mustache can reflect a person’s nationality or ideological stance in historical and cultural contexts. In the Ottoman Empire, the Janissaries were known for their distinctive crescent mustaches, serving to standardize the appearance of military units and reinforce group identity. Adolf Hitler’s unique mustache style emerged as a prominent political symbol in the early 20th century and became an integral part of his ideological identity. In modern Turkey, mustache styles can imply political and cultural inclinations; distinctions such as nationalist or socialist can be reflected in mustache shapes. These examples illustrate that mustaches can carry social and ideological meanings beyond personal preference and be used to shape individuals’ social identities.

While fully deciphering the ideological implications of beards and mustaches in the 19th century is challenging, significant differences in the approaches of the Christian and Muslim communities are evident. As can be seen in

Table 5. Numerical distribution of mustache colors among ethnic groups in Bilecik in 1843.

Nationality	Mustache Distribution
	Chestnut Mustache	Black Mustache	Grizzled Mustache	Blonde Mustache	Lightly Mustached	Gray Mustache
Muslim Turk	89	26	-	31	123	-
Christian Armenian	213	37	1	50	89	37
Christian Greek	108	23	-	52	53	11

Reference: (BOA, NFS.d. 01527, pp. 1–28; 01528, pp. 1–64, 135–44, 174–87).

, in the population registers of Bilecik, classifications of mustaches and beards are generally based on color. Notably, the term ‘lightly mustached (ter bıyıklı)’, indicating a very light or newly growing mustache, is used to describe younger individuals. The use of mustache and beard colors to define physical characteristics is significant. Although chestnut is a common mustache color among both Muslim and Christian men, there are notable disparities in the prevalence of blonde mustaches. The number of blonde-mustached men in the Christian community is approximately 55% higher than that among Muslims, suggesting that while the majority of Muslims have chestnut or brown mustaches, there is also a significant blonde population within the Christian community.

When evaluating mustache data numerically, it becomes clear that preferences regarding mustache-growing practices vary among religious groups in Bilecik. Christian men have a notably high rate of mustache-wearing, whereas beard-wearing is more prevalent among Muslim men. Data from the population registers indicate that Christian men predominantly have chestnut, black, and blonde mustaches, and this habit becomes widespread from the age of 25 onwards. In contrast, about 65% of the Muslim male population sport either a beard or a mustache. Considering that a significant portion of the remaining population comprises children, it can be inferred that nearly all adult Muslim men choose to wear a beard and mustache. Among the Christian community, over half of the adult men wear mustaches, though beard-wearing is comparatively rare. Furthermore, around 20% of Christians choose not to wear either beards or mustaches.

In conclusion, anthropometric data reveal distinctions in beard- and mustache-growing practices between the Muslim and Christian communities in Bilecik. The prevalent practice of beard-growing among Muslim men signifies its perception as an integral part of their religious and cultural identities. Within the Muslim community, beards serve as a concrete symbol of religious beliefs and a tool for social cohesion, enhancing individuals’ social status and authority. Conversely, in Bilecik’s Christian community, it is generally the older men who prefer to grow beards, while the younger individuals show less inclination, indicating differing approaches to religious and cultural norms. The less frequent adoption of beards by Christian men suggests that they do not associate their religious identity with their outward appearance as closely as Muslims do. However, the widespread practice of beard-growing among older Christian men indicates that this is not entirely foreign to Christian culture and is viewed as an esthetic choice within a certain age group. Additionally, anthropometric data indicate a high rate of mustache-growing among Christian men in Bilecik. This reflects that within the Christian community, mustaches are particularly valued as an esthetic element, and personal preferences may evolve with age.

5. Conclusions

This article provides a detailed examination of the demographic structure, naming conventions, and anthropometric characteristics of the Muslim and Christian communities in Bilecik in the year 1843. Osman Gazi’s conquest of Bilecik in 1299 significantly contributed to the embedding of Islamic identity in the city. The Ottoman census conducted in 1831 meticulously documented the ethnic and religious demographics of the period. Data derived from the population registers of 1843 clearly show that the Christian population in the city center outnumbered the Muslim population. In terms of naming practices, the adoption of Islam led to significant changes within the Turkish naming tradition. A large part of the Muslim community in Bilecik preferred to use names of Arab origin, showcasing the profound and lasting impact of Islamic teachings on naming practices. On the other hand, the Christian Armenian community made significant contributions to Bilecik’s religious and cultural diversity with names reflecting their religious and cultural identities. Moreover, the naming practices of the Greek community in Bilecik exhibit a rich identity structure resulting from the interaction of local culture with Christianity within a broad historical and cultural context. Anthropometric characteristics highlight distinct differences between the Muslim and Christian communities in Bilecik. Although most individuals in both communities are of Medium Stature, the differences between short and tall individuals are particularly striking. A Short Stature is more common among Christian Armenians, while Greek Christians tend to be taller, reflecting the interplay of genetic and environmental factors. The prevalent practice of beard-wearing among Muslim men is regarded as an integral part of their religious and cultural identities, playing a significant role in reinforcing social status and authority. Conversely, in the Christian community, beard- and mustache-wearing are seen as esthetic choices that vary with age, highlighting cultural diversity and individual identities. In conclusion, this study comprehensively analyzes the historical and cultural dynamics of the Muslim and Christian communities in Bilecik, shedding light on the social and cultural fabric of 19th-century Anatolia. This in-depth examination of the communities’ demographic structures, naming traditions, and physical characteristics not only elucidates Bilecik’s religious and ethnic diversity but also details its social and cultural evolution over time. These findings contribute to the fields of regional history and cultural anthropology while also facilitating a better understanding of the broader history of Anatolia.