Did Mehmet the Conqueror rebuild the walls of Constantinople after taking the city?

Question

Mehmet the Conqueror took Constantinople in 1453 after battering the walls with his cannon. Some books say that afterwards, he rebuilt the walls.
I used to live in Istanbul and work in the old city near where the successful assault was made. A guide book said that for that reason, the section of walls in that area are in the most ruinous condition. I had a look and it was true. In other stretches there were plenty of massive walls and towers, but in the assault area - just south of Edirne Kapi - just bits and pieces. So how could Mehmet have had them rebuilt?
I also know that about that time the style of fortification changed from high walls and towers because they were vulnerable to cannon - as shown by the Fall of Constantinople. So wouldn't it have been a bit stupid to builod them again in the same style?

Answer 1

Well from what i remember reading when i visited Istanbul, Mehmet took about 6 weeks to breach the walls, so i would say they were pretty effective, and the only way he did get into the city was because one of the gates was left open by accident one night.
so personally i would have rebuilt them in the same style, but had a better door man

Answer 2

According to Sir Steven Runciman's history, the walls were not repaired. But they fell only in one area and other parts of the city surendered to Mehmet before he managed to take them. Runciman's evidence for that is that, in those parts of the city, the churches were preserved, not sacked and not turned into mosques, according to custom. If you surrendered, you were allowed to continue with traditional forms of worship without forcible conversion. After the conquest, Mehment had no need of walls so there was no need to repair them.

Answer 3

He would have effected some temporary repairs but the walls of Nova Roma took decades to build and cost a fortune - he wpould have not wanted to waste all his money to restore them ton their previous condition.