A key question now arises in the study of the Basilike Pyle, or Imperial Gate. Do Byzantine writers describe this gate in ways that cannot fit either the Gate of Eugenius or the Gate of St. Barbara? If so, these descriptions may suggest that there was another gate which also carried the name Basilike Pyle.
To answer this question, we must carefully examine the historical statements that refer specifically to the Imperial Gate and compare them with the physical features and known positions of the gates near the Seraglio Point Difficulty of Reaching a Final Decision.
Problems with Identifying the Basilike Pyle as the Gate of St. Barbara
Several serious difficulties arise when the Gate of St. Barbara (Top Kapoussi) is identified as the Basilike Pyle. These difficulties are based on clear statements found in Byzantine historical sources.
First, the space outside Top Kapoussi is extremely limited. The quay in front of this gate is narrow and confined. Yet Byzantine writers describe the area outside the Basilike Pyle as containing important structures. Among these were the Church of St. John, a hospitium or guesthouse for travelers, and other public buildings. Such a group of structures would have required a wide and open shoreline. The narrow quay outside the Gate of St. Barbara could not have accommodated them.
The Question of Mooring Ships
A second problem concerns the mooring of ships. Historical sources tell us that the ship of the Catalan leader Berenger was moored directly in front of the Imperial Gate. This detail is important, because it implies the presence of a harbour space deep and wide enough for large vessels to anchor safely Guided Istanbul Tour.
The waters in front of Top Kapoussi do not meet this requirement. The shoreline there drops steeply, and the currents are strong. These conditions make it unsuitable for mooring ships. Therefore, the description of Berenger’s ship cannot reasonably be applied to the Gate of St. Barbara.
The Role of the Chain Across the Golden Horn
A third and very strong argument comes from military history. According to Critobulus, before the Basilike Pyle could be attacked by the Turkish fleet, it was necessary to force the chain that closed the entrance of the Golden Horn. This statement clearly places the Imperial Gate behind the protection of that chain.
However, the Gate of St. Barbara lay inside the harbour, beyond the chain’s defensive line. The Turkish fleet did not need to break the chain in order to threaten this gate. Therefore, the account given by Critobulus cannot refer to Top Kapoussi.
The Implication of These Differences
Taken together, these facts strongly suggest that the Basilike Pyle described in these sources cannot be the Gate of St. Barbara. The physical conditions, the maritime activity, and the military descriptions simply do not match.
As a result, anyone who insists that the Gate of St. Barbara was an Imperial Gate must also accept the conclusion that there were two Imperial Gates along the Harbour Walls. One would have stood near the Seraglio Point, while another, more spacious and strategically important gate must have existed elsewhere.
A Strong Case for Another Imperial Gate
The evidence, therefore, points toward the existence of another Basilike Pyle, distinct from the Gate of St. Barbara. This conclusion helps explain the historical descriptions without forcing them to fit locations where they do not belong. It also allows the accounts of Byzantine writers to remain consistent with the geography and defensive system of Constantinople.