Maritime Cultural Engagement and Coastal Communities in Türkiye’s Eastern Black Sea

This paradox raises critical questions. Why do some coastal societies turn toward the sea, while others turn away? How do environmental conditions, infrastructural interventions, and cultural perceptions interact to shape maritime identities? What does the Eastern Black Sea case reveal about the broader variability of maritime cultural engagement?

This research also reflects my personal trajectory. Although I was born and raised in Istanbul, my father’s family is from Artvin, a province with an extensive Black Sea shoreline. Growing up, I frequently heard my grandmother’s stories about the mountains, highlands, and livestock. Yet I cannot recall a single tale, memory, or narrative involving the sea. This absence itself reflects the cultural orientation of Artvin’s coastal communities, where identity and storytelling are anchored inland rather than seaward.

Maritime Cultural Engagement: Global Perspectives

​

​Westerdahl’s (1992) concept of the “maritime cultural landscape” opened pathways for understanding the sea as a domain of human interaction, material, social, and symbolic. Subsequent scholarship has expanded this framework to incorporate intangible practices, perceptions of risk, and the social construction of coastal space (Ingold 2000; Flatman, 2003; Smith 2006; Ford, 2011; Harrison 2013). These perspectives collectively reframe maritime archaeology and heritage as fields concerned not only with physical remains but also with the meanings, memories, and identities embedded in seascapes. In European contexts, heritage initiatives increasingly valorize fishing communities, beach cultures, and maritime rituals as key components of cultural heritage (Westerdahl, 1992).

In heritage, absence itself has become a key analytical lens. As Harrison (2013) argues, what communities do not remember or narrate can be as significant as what they preserve. Connerton (1989) similarly highlights how collective memory is shaped by selective silences. Applying this perspective to the Black Sea allows us to interpret the lack of maritime stories or practices not simply as neglect but as a culturally meaningful orientation.

The Black Sea in Comparative Maritime Studies

​

Compared to the Mediterranean and North Atlantic, the Black Sea has received limited attention in maritime cultural studies. Research often emphasizes its geopolitical and ecological aspects, fishers, pollution, and blue economy prospects while overlooking the ways in which these factors intersect with social practices and cultural identities (Mee et al. 2005; Seyhan 2025). Ethnographic work by Knudsen (2009), however, reveals that Eastern Black Sea fishers possess detailed local ecological knowledge and adaptive practices that reflect long-standing inetactions with the marine environment. Yet such expertise remains largely confined to professional or subsistence context and rarely extends to broader community engagement with the sea. Studies on the Gergian coast, meanwhile, document a rapid transformation toward beach tourism and leisure industries (Inaishvili et al. 2020), suggesting that cultural engagement is not absent in the Black Sea but manifests unevenly.

While existing scholarship has paid limited attention to the cultural aspects of maritime life along Türkiye’s Black Sea coast, international initiatives have begun to address the social and economic significance of small-scale and recreational fisheries. The Handbook for Data Collection on Recreational Fisheries in the Mediterranean and Black Sea (Grati et. al. 2021), published by the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), provides one of the few systematic frameworks for assessing how local communities interact with the sea through non-commercial fishing practices. Although the handbook’s primary aim is to establish standardized methodologies for data collection, it implicitly recognizes recreational fishing as a form of maritime cultural engagement that shapes identities, livelihoods, and local economies. The Turkish Eastern Black Sea coast where recreational use of the sea remains marginal, fits uneasily within this framework, revealing not an absence of engagement but a different mode of interaction that elides quantitative assessment. By building on such methodological foundations, this study extends the conversation from data-oriented analyses toward the cultural and perceptual dimensions of maritime life in the region.

Empirical insights from regional studies further reinforce this observation. Tunca et al. (2018) conducted one of the few systematic surveys of recreational fishing along Türkiye’s Middle and Eastern Black Sea coasts, revealing a distinct pattern of limited maritime engagement. Although participants maintained regular fishing activities, these were primarily oriented toward subsistence or dietary needs rather than leisure or cultural expression. The study also highlighted structural barriers restricted shoreline access, pollution, and coastal engineering that discouraged recreational use of the sea, particularly in Trabzon and Rize. These findings resonate with the argument presented here: that the region's coastal communities engage with the sea in functional but not affective or symbolic ways, reflecting a broader disconnection between livelihood practices and maritime cultural identity.

Türkiye’s Black Sea Littoral: A Neglected Cultural Dimension

​

Within Türkiye, scholarship has largely focused on the economic and environmental challenges of the Black Sea coast. Reports emphasize coastal engineering projects, and the dominance of agriculture (Ordu-Giresun-Trabzon SEA Report, 2022; Süme and Yüksek 2019). Cultural aspects of maritime life are rarely central, though some studies note the historical presence of fishermen’s huts, small harbors, and localized maritime rituals. Recent work on coastal urbanization in Trabzon underlines how infrastructure interventions, roads, t-groins, and land reclamation, have further disconnected communities from the sea (Süme and Yüksek 2019).

Overall, the literature reveals a clear gap: while Türkiye has a strong research base in marine science and coastal management, systematic investigation of maritime cultural engagement in the Black Sea remains scarce. This gap positions the present study as a necessary contribution to both regional heritage discourse and comparative maritime cultural studies.

Trabzon and Rize: Coastal Urbanization and Infrastructural Barriers

​

Trabzon and Rize represent the most urbanized centers of Türkiye’s Eastern Black Sea coast. Despite their long maritime histories, these cities today exhibit a pronounced disconnection between the urban population and the sea. A critical factor is infrastructural development, most notably the Black Sea Coastal Highway completed in the early 2000s, which created a physical and symbolic barrier between residents and the shoreline (Süme and Yüksek 2019). Protective structures such as t-groins and seawalls, designed to mitigate erosion and storm surges, have further altered natural beaches and limited public access (Gökkurt Baki, 2024).

While fishing remains an important livelihood, particularly in the form of small-scale artisanal practices, recreational and cultural engagement with the sea is marginal. Surveys indicate that swimming and other beach uses are limited to small pockets of the coast, often distant from urban centers (Ordu-Giresun-Trabzon SEA Report, 2022). Thus, Trabzon and Rize illustrate how urban planning and coastal engineering have prioritized protection and mobility over cultural and communal maritime interaction.

Artvin: A Coastline Without Maritime Identity

Artvin offers an even more paradoxical case. The province has over 30 km of shoreline along the Black Sea, yet cultural and economic reliance on the sea is minimal. The majority of communities remain oriented inland, focusing on agriculture and livestock rather than maritime activities (Seyhan, 2025). Unlike Trabzon and Rize, Artvin lacks significant fishing ports or infrastructure, and its coastline is often perceived as unsafe due to rough currents and limited beach development (Gökkurt Baki, 2024). The absence of maritime tourism is particularly striking, given the proximity of the Georgian border and the contrasting developments across it.