Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
H
ow many students of architectural history, as outweigh all other considerations.' Perhaps we should
they learn about the great domed churches of remember that Sir Banister belonged to the generation
Brunelleschi and Michelangelo, are aware that of Lloyd George who, with unspeakable results, urged
during the Renaissance an equally momentous the Greeks to invade Turkey after World War I. Nikolaus
architectural development took place in the south- Pevsner in An Outline of European Architecture simply
east corner of Europe? And how many of the historians ignored the Ottomans. And who paused to ask why he
who lecture to them make room for Ottoman included Constantinople, but not Istanbul, in Europe?
architecture in their courses? To judge by the textbooks Among other recent historians, H W Janson in his
that are sold by the thousands in university book- History of Art, Frederick Hartt in Art: A History of
stores, it is hardly worth the effort. Nevertheless, we Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, Richard Tansey and Fred
should acknowledge that in the European cities of Kleiner who revised Gardner's Art through the Ages, as
Istanbul and Edirne an astonishing architectural well as Hyman and Trachtenberg, the authors of
transformation took place. In the fifteenth century Architecture from Prehistory to Postmodernism, all deal with
the mosque evolved from a horizontally planned space almost a thousand years of Islamic architecture from
concealed behind walls, to a domed structure rising southern Spain to India in one brief chapter in the
dramatically into the sky, thus setting the scene for the medieval sections of their books. They tend to discuss
career of Mimar Sinan, the greatest Ottoman architect. the few Ottoman mosques they include only as
Sinan, the chief of architects to the Sultans from 1538 variations of Hagia Sophia. Neither Janson or Hartt
to 1588, experimented boldly with domed structure mentions Sinan. The only mosque they illustrate is the
and interior space in a vast array of mosques. His seventeenth-century mosque of Sultan Ahmet I,
design offers scope for study because of the vigorous whose architect, Mehmet Aga, they do not name.
spirit of experimentation in which he worked. Of all Tansey and Kleiner do no better. In a brief intro-
the architects of the Renaissance, he enjoyed the duction to Ottoman architecture, they present Sinan
greatest opportunity to push the boundaries in the as a contemporary of Michelangelo and develop a
creation of structure, space and light. While no Italian comparison between the interior of the SuÈleymaniye
architect built more than a few domes, Sinan and his mosque in Istanbul and that of Hagia Sophia. They
assistants are credited with over 100 domed mosques, aptly state that `where the architects of Hagia Sophia
including twenty-five in Istanbul alone. If we analyse a mask not only the aisles, but the four great piers that
select group of these, we will see that he not only support the dome, Sinan, by contrast looks not only
developed many alternative schemes, but also con- for clarity of space, and emphasises, rather than
tinued to pursue goals of structural and spatial clarity. conceals, all the structural elements of the building'.
He reached a peak with the creation of the Selimiye They touch on the evolution from his early mosques to
mosque at Edirne (1569±1575) whose dome, sup- the Selimiye at Edirne and illustrate the Selimiye with
ported on eight slender piers, floats gracefully above plan, exterior and interior, clearly establishing that it
the central space. is no mere variant of Hagia Sophia.
The available texts explain why general knowledge Spiro Kostof, in his A History of Architecture: Settings
of Ottoman architecture is generally scanty. The two and Rituals, goes much further to shed light on the
most influential architectural historians of the Ottoman achievement. He weaves non-western
twentieth century left us in the dark. Sir Banister architecture into the entire book, and introduces
Fletcher, in his History of Architecture on the Comparative Islamic architecture in several places. In a chapter
Method, relegated Islamic architecture, with other entitled `Istanbul and Venice' he offers a compelling
Eastern traditions, to a final chapter entitled `The juxtaposition of Italian and Ottoman architecture and
Non-Historical Styles.' He called all Muslims Saracens, speaks of a Turkish Renaissance. None of the other
thus invoking fearful images of the infidel who authors mentions the kuÈlliye, an essential element in
conquered the holy places of Christianity.1 He Ottoman town planning including schools, hospitals,
contended that if we found the forms of Eastern art hospices and kitchens, arranged in a harmonious
`unpleasing or bizarre,' it was because, unlike European manner around the mosque. But Kostof places the
styles `which have progressed by the successive mosque in its urban context and shows the kuÈlliye as a
solutions to structural problems, resolutely met and vital element of urban order. Helped by several plans,
overcome . . . their decorative schemes seem to he deals in comparative depth with Sinan's design,
discussing eloquently the architect's spatial and
1
structural experiments. In a comparison between St
Revised by Professor Cordingly, the chapter was renamed
`Eastern Architecture' in the eighteenth edition (1961) of Banister
Peter's and the SuÈleymaniye mosque, he writes: `Sinan
Fletcher, and Saracenic architecture became Islamic. does not compose with independently articulated
2 4
Godfrey Goodwin, A History of Ottoman Architecture, Thames Reha GuÈnay, Sinan: the architect and his works, Yapi-EnduÈstri
& Hudson, London, 1971. 511pp 521 mono illustrations, Merkesi Yayinlari, Istanbul, fax: 90 212 248 48 14. 263 colour
including 81 plans. isbn 0-500-27429-0. $40.00. photographs and 50 plans. isbn 975-7438-67-7. $25.00.
3 5
Aptullah Kuran, Sinan, the Grand Old Master of Ottoman DogÏan Kuban, Sinan and the Selimiye, The Economic and
Architecture, Institute of Turkish Studies, Washington DC. http:// Social History Foundation, Istanbul, 1997, fax: 90 212 227 37 32.
turkishstudies.org/ 164 mono photographs and 81 plans. isbn 0- isbn 975-7306-30-4. 110 colour/34 mono photographs and 70
941469-00-x. $35.00. plans and sections. $35.00.
manuscript he designed himself. Sinan's origin as a curriculum. I suggest that all three should be in every
Greek, born in central Anatolia, and his recruitment, university library, but for undergraduates I particular
in about 1512, to the Janissary Corps in which he served recommend GuÈnay. There is, however, the frustrating
as a master carpenter, makes a fascinating and often problem that none of them is listed in Books in Print.
embellished story. His rise from the status of slave to Kuran's volume is available from the Institute of
chief architect seems extraordinary. Kuban writes of Turkish Studies in Washington. The other two, though
Sinan's personality as `a symbol around which a they have good English editions, are published by
mythos was built' and attempts, through an organisations without distributors in England or the
understanding of his works, to penetrate the mythos USA. Information on how to obtain them is posted at
and to reconstruct Sinan and his philosophy. He states my website <http://www.arch.wsu. edu/slides/
that `Sinan created his works within the framework of ottoman.htm> which will be regularly updated. I hope
a world view inextricably bound with the Empire, the that readers will persevere in tracking them down.
Sultan and Islam', but he also speculates on Sinan's Meanwhile we can await the publication of a
knowledge of Italian architecture. In the penultimate monograph on Sinan by GuÈlruÈ NecipogÏlu, whose
chapter, `Confrontations: Where does Sinan Stand?' excellent study of Topkapi palace, Architecture Ceremonial
he discusses Sinan's place within Islamic traditions in and Power, was published by MIT Press in 1994. I would
comparison with Italian architects. In his conclusion like to think that in future history courses some of the
he dismisses the idea that Ottoman architecture issues of Renaissance architecture will be considered in
represented a Byzantine Renaissance; rather the an inclusive manner. Would it not be reasonable, for
Selimiye `transcends Medieval archaism.' He example, to bring Sinan's mosques into the debate on
characterises the Selimiye as `the most striking church facades? It is certainly worth noting that while
example in the field of architecture of the influence Alberti and Palladio wrestled intellectually with super-
of classical humanism in Turkish culture or, perhaps, imposed temple fronts, Sinan expressed the structure
of a humanism peculiar to Turkish culture itself.' and created a human scale entrance. What would Pugin
The three handsomely produced monographs differ have said if he had set his sights further east?
in their aims and scope, but they provide sufficient
information and analyses to allow Ottoman architecture Henry Matthews is Professor of Architectural History at Washington State
a worthwhile place in the architectural history University, Pullman, Washington, USA