According to the scholar Gyllius, the gate that was known in ancient times as the Gate of the Neorion had different names in the sixteenth century. In his own day, the Turks commonly called it Tchifout Kapoussi, which means “Hebrew Gate.” At the same time, the Greek population referred to the same entrance as the Horaia Pyle. Gyllius presents this information as a matter of everyday usage rather than as a special or rare form of speech.
Gyllius also explains that this gate stood close to the Neorion harbor. He suggests that the name Neorion may have been confused or altered over time, especially in spoken language. In his view, the later names of the gate developed naturally from older ones, even if their original meanings were no longer clearly understood Strategic Importance of the Gate of Eugenius.
Evidence from Gerlach
The traveler Gerlach provides additional support for this interpretation. He briefly states that the second gate west of Seraglio Point was known at the same time as both the Beautiful Gate and the Jewish Gate. Although his comment is short, it is important. It shows that more than one name could be used for the same gate without causing confusion among local people.
Gerlach’s observation suggests that the names were not formal titles preserved in official records. Instead, they were practical names used by residents, travelers, and officials in daily life. This strengthens the idea that the Gate of the Neorion carried several names during the Ottoman period.
Leunclavius and a Different Interpretation
Leunclavius presents the situation in a slightly different way. According to him, the gate was commonly known as Huraea or Ebraia, meaning “Hebrew Gate.” He claims that the name Horaia was used mainly by Greeks who wished to show greater learning or historical knowledge. In this view, Horaia was not the popular name but a more scholarly or corrected form Daily Tours Istanbul.
This statement raises an important question. It suggests that the use of the name Horaia in the sixteenth century may have been influenced by the gate’s association with the Jewish community. The similarity between the words Horaia and Ebraia may have caused confusion or encouraged a mistaken interpretation.
Assessing the Meaning of “Horaia”
This possibility may lead to suspicion that the name Horaia was wrongly applied to the Gate of the Neorion during the sixteenth century. It could be argued that people adopted the name because of linguistic similarity rather than historical accuracy.
However, this explanation is not fully convincing. When all the evidence is considered, the more likely conclusion is that the name Horaia was correctly applied. It appears to have been a genuine historical name rather than a simple misunderstanding.
Final Conclusion on Ducas
If the name Horaia was correctly attached to the Gate of the Neorion, then an important conclusion follows. Ducas, who did not witness the siege of Constantinople personally, was probably mistaken when he associated the great defensive chain with the Beautiful Gate. His error would then fit a broader pattern of inaccuracies in his descriptions of gates and locations.
In this case, the evidence from later scholars and common usage in the sixteenth century carries greater weight. It helps clarify the true identity of the gate and strengthens the argument that Ducas confused the names and positions of important entrances along the Golden Horn.