QUESTIONING AN “ICON OF CHANGE”: THE NURUOSMANİYE COMPLEX AND THE WRITING OF OTTOMAN ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY
Journal Name:
- Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi
Keywords (Original Language):
| Author Name | University of Author |
|---|---|
Abstract (2. Language):
The eighteenth century began with the return of the court to İstanbul after
the Edirne incident (1703) and some profound changes that took place in
the political, economic, social, and cultural spheres . In the meantime, the
Ottoman capital set the stage for an intensive architectural campaign; there
was an upsurge in renovation, restoration, and building activities mainly
for the purpose of reaffirming state presence and authority in İstanbul.
These urban and architectural developments concomitant with the ongoing
social transformations changed the built environment of the city, new
building types emerged and there was an infiltration of foreign elements
from outside cultures that was made visible in the gradual penetration
of western neoclassical, baroque, and rococo forms. Hence a totally new
architectural idiom started to appear in İstanbul, marked by the hybridity
and co-existence of different styles that were incorporated into the
traditional Ottoman canon.
Cerasi (2001 b) emphasizes that the new architecture of the eighteenth
century introduced variations and adaptations of old components,
Ottoman and Byzantine, in combination with derived elements. It is
important to note that “Western influence was not antithetic to tradition
and to other influences”. According to Cerasi (1999) all this was more
than mere change in style and ornament; it was indeed an evolution of
urban design and artistic mentality in eighteenth century Ottoman culture.
Hamadeh, pointing to the changing landscape of İstanbul in this period
underlines social transformations, expansion in patronage patterns, and
appearance of new building forms noting that the architectural campaign
to beautify the city after long periods of neglect might also be attributed
to an effort to reconstruct the image of İstanbul as the capital city of the
former “glorious days” of the empire (2).
The Nuruosmaniye Complex is the apogee of the stylistic transformations
that began with the fountain of Ahmed III (1728) at the Bâb-ı Hűmâyûn.
Started during the reign of Mahmud I (1748) and completed shortly after
his death (1755), the Nuruosmaniye in Ottoman architectural history is
considered to be the first royal religious complex displaying baroque
and neo-classical elements such as shells, scrolls, molded cornices, and
cartouches in its flamboyant surface decoration. Since it is the first sultanic
complex built after the Yeni Valide mosque (completed in 1663), the
Nuruosmaniye can also be considered as the visible expression of the
dynasty’s efforts to reaffirm its power and potency in a period of political
and economic hardship through the use of an innovative architectural
vocabulary.
The building has almost transparent façades with generous fenestration
and elliptical windows (Figure 1); there are fluted capitals, round arches,
placing of the mihrab inside a half-domed apsidal recess, an imposing
imperial ramp, and a horse-shoe shaped polygonal courtyard which is
unique in Ottoman mosque architecture (Figure 2, 3). We do not know the
patron’s motives behind the unusual innovative character of the mosque,
but he was known to have launched certain reformist attempts in the
empire and invited European experts for that purpose. It is important
to note here that the architect who was responsible for the building was
Simeon Kalfa, a non-Muslim Greek (3).
This study is devised to question whether the Nuruosmaniye, the
prominent, imposing monument with all its unusual stylistic features, was
perceived as a novelty by contemporaneous observers through a survey of
local and foreign accounts as well as twentieth-century perceptions and art
historical narratives with the aim of addressing the image and status of the
Nuruosmaniye as it was established in modern historical writing.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language):
Onsekizinci yüzyılda İstanbul, önemli politik, sosyo-ekonomik ve kültürel
değişikliklere sahne olmuş, halkın değişen zevkleri ve hayat tarzları ile
devletin gücünü ve otoritesini yeniden kurma çabaları geniş ve yoğun bir
mimari yapılaşmayı da beraberinde getirmiştir. Bu değişiklikler kentin
genel görünümüne de yansımış, ithal edilen yabancı formlar ve yeniliklerin
geleneksel Osmanlı unsurları ile birlikte kullanılması sonucu yeni ve
karışık bir mimari dil ortaya çıkmaya başlamıştır.
Bu çalışmanın konusu olan Nuruosmaniye Camisi ve külliyesi, Osmanlı
mimarlık tarihinde ilk kez barok ve neo-klasik elemanların uygulandığı
dini bir yapı olması ve bir daha tekrar edilmeyen at nalı şeklindeki
avlusu ile büyük önem taşımaktadır. Bu yapının yenilikçi özelliklerinin,
onsekizinci yüzyıl dinamikleri ışığında dönemin yerli ve yabancı yazarları
tarafından nasıl algılandığının irdelenmesi amaçlanmakta, aynı zamanda
ikincil kaynaklar ve sanat tarihi alanındaki çalışmalar araştırılarak modern
tarih yazımında Nuruosmaniye’nin nasıl ele alındığı sorgulanırken
Osmanlı mimarlık tarihinde bir “Değişim Simgesi” olarak algılanışı da
incelenmektedir.
Onsekizinci yüzyıl Osmanlı yazarları binanın mermer sütunları, aydınlık
görünümü ve süslemelerinden övgü ile söz ederken, Batı etkisine işaret
etmemektedirler. Buna karşılık dönemin yabancı yazarları yapının
mimari unsurlarında Batı’ya gönderme yapmakta ve Nuruosmaniye’nin
gerçek banisi olan I. Mahmud’un Avrupa’dan örnek kilise planları
getirme çabalarını anlatmaktadırlar. Yirminci yüzyıl tarih ve sanat
tarihi yazımlarında ise ilginç bir özellik göze çarpmaktadır. Yüzyılın
ilk yarısındaki anlatımlar binanın Batı’dan esinlenen karışık uslubunu
eleştirerek klasik Osmanlı mimarisini adeta “kirlettiğinden” söz etmekte,
ikinci yarının modern yazarları ise Nuruosmaniye’yi cesur bir yaratıcılık
örneği olarak görmektedirler.
FULL TEXT (PDF):
- 2
145-166