Beranda  ›  Is Perhaps the Most Turkishlooking Form of Art and Reflects the Ottoman

Is Perhaps the Most Turkishlooking Form of Art and Reflects the Ottoman

Ditulis Selasa, 26 April 2022 Tulis Komentar Edit
Ottoman Baroque architecture

Nuruosmaniye Camii.jpg

Laleli Mosque tomb exterior DSCF5984.jpg

Mihrisah Sultan Complex Eyup DSCF7830.jpg

Clockwise from top: Nuruosmaniye Mosque (1748–1755); Sebil of the Mihrişah Sultan Complex (1792–1796); Mausoleum of Mustafa III at the Laleli Mosque (1760–1764)
Years active 1740s to 1820s

Ottoman architectural mode in the 18th and early on 19th centuries

Ottoman Baroque architecture was a period in Ottoman architecture in the 18th century and early 19th century which was influenced by European Bizarre architecture. Preceded by the changes of the Tulip Period, the style marked a significant deviation from the classical style of Ottoman architecture and introduced new decorative forms to mostly traditional Ottoman edifice types. The fashion emerged in the 1740s during the reign of Mahmud I (1730–1754) and its nearly important early monument was the Nuruosmaniye Mosque completed in 1755. Afterwards in the 18th century new building types were also introduced based on European influences. The last fully Baroque monuments, such as the Nusretiye Mosque, were built by Mahmud Ii (r. 1808–1839) in the early 19th century, but during this period new European-influenced styles were introduced and supplanted the Baroque.

Background [edit]

From the 18th century onward European influences were introduced into Ottoman compages as the Ottoman Empire itself became more open to outside influences. The term "Bizarre" is sometimes applied more than widely to Ottoman art and architecture across the 18th century including the Tulip Menses.[ane] [2] In more specific terms, however, the period afterward the 17th century is marked by several different styles.[3] [4] The Ottoman or Turkish "Baroque" manner emerged in its full expression during the 1740s and chop-chop replaced the mode of the Tulip Catamenia.[v] [three] This shift signaled the final end to the previous classical way which had dominated Ottoman compages in the 16th and 17th centuries.[6] The political and cultural conditions which led to the Ottoman Baroque trace their origins in part to the Tulip Menstruum, during the reign of Ahmed Three, when the Ottoman ruling class opened itself to Western influence.[three] [seven] After the Tulip Period, Ottoman architecture openly imitated European compages, and so that architectural and decorative trends in Europe were mirrored in the Ottoman Empire at the aforementioned time or after a short filibuster.[8] Changes were specially axiomatic in the ornament and details of new buildings rather than in their overall forms, though new edifice types were somewhen introduced from European influences also.[2] The term "Turkish Rococo", or simply "Rococo",[6] [9] is also used to draw the Ottoman Baroque, or parts of information technology, due to the similarities and influences from the French Rococo style in detail, but this terminology varies from author to writer.[ten]

Developments [edit]

First Bizarre monuments (1740s) [edit]

The first structures to exhibit the new Baroque mode are several fountains and sebils congenital by elite patrons in Istanbul in 1741–1742: the fountain of Nisançı Ahmed Pasha added to the southwest wall of the Fatih Mosque cemetery, the Hacı Mehmet Emin Ağa Sebil nearly Dolmabahçe, and the Sa'deddin Efendi Sebil at the Karaca Ahmet Cemetery in Üsküdar.[11] The Bizarre-style Cağaloğlu Hamam in Istanbul was also built in the same year and was sponsored by Mahmud I, demonstrating that even the sultan promoted the style.[12] The revenues of this hammam were earmarked for the Hagia Sophia (Ayasofya) Mosque, where Mahmud I congenital several new annexes and additions. These additions included a domed ablutions fountain in 1740–41 that is busy with Baroque motifs but still maintains a traditional Ottoman form overall.[xiii] [14] More indicative of the new way is the imaret that Mahmud I added in the northeastern corner of Hagia Sophia's precinct in 1743. The imaret has an extravagantly Baroque gate which is carved with high-relief vegetal scrolls and a spiralling "swan-neck" pediment, flanked by marble columns with Corinthian-like capitals, and surmounted by broad eaves.[15]

Godfrey Goodwin, a scholar of Ottoman architecture history, suggests that the külliye which most clearly demonstrates the transition between the one-time and new styles was the Beşir Ağa Mosque and its sebil, built in 1745 nearly the western perimeter of Topkapı Palace.[sixteen] Ünver Rüstem argues that the rapidity with which the way appeared across Istanbul afterward 1740 and the fact that the first Baroque structures were all deputed by high-ranking elites should be interpreted every bit a deliberate try past the sultan and his court to promote the new style.[17] Scholar Doğan Kuban states that Bizarre motifs spread gradually from one architectural element to another, progressively replacing the sharper geometric decoration of the classical era with more dynamic curved forms such as the "S" and "C" curves and eventually with fifty-fifty more flamboyant European Baroque elements.[18]

  • Early Bizarre monuments

  • Archway to the Fatih Mosque'south cemetery, with the Fountain of Nisançı Ahmed Pasha (1741–42) on the far left

  • Hacı Mehmet Emin Ağa Sebil, Istanbul (1741–42)

  • Fountain of Mahmud I at Hagia Sophia, Istanbul (1740–41)

  • Gate to the imaret of Hagia Sophia, Istanbul (1743)

  • Sebil of the Seyyid Hasan Pasha complex, Istanbul (1745)[xix]

The Nuruosmaniye complex [edit]

The most important monument heralding the new Ottoman Baroque fashion is the Nuruosmaniye Mosque complex, begun by Mahmud I in October 1748 and completed past his successor, Osman Three (to whom it is defended), in December 1755.[20] Kuban describes it as the "most of import monumental construction afterward the Selimiye Mosque in Edirne", marking the integration of European culture into Ottoman compages and the rejection of the Classical Ottoman style.[xix] It also marked the offset time since the Sultan Ahmed I Mosque (early 17th century) that an Ottoman sultan built his ain majestic mosque complex in Istanbul, thus inaugurating the return of this tradition.[21] Historical sources attest that the builder in charge was a Christian master carpenter named Simeon or Simon.[22] [23] [24] Simeon's chief assistant was a Christian human being named Kozma and the majority of the stonemasons nether him were Christians as well. Both Simeon and Kozma were given robes of honour by the grand vizier at the mosque'southward opening ceremony. Ünver Rüstem notes this may have been the start fourth dimension Christian architects were officially honoured in this mode at the inauguration of a mosque and that it reflected the growing status of Christian craftsmen during this era.[24]

Elevation and floor plan of the Nuruosmaniye Mosque (from drawings by Cornelius Gurlitt)

The mosque consists of a square prayer hall surmounted by a large unmarried dome with large pendentives. The dome is 1 of the largest in Istanbul,[25] measuring 25.75 meters in diameter.[26] From the outside, the dome sits higher up 4 huge arches (one for each side of the square) pierced with many windows that provide low-cal to the interior. The closest precedent to this design in Classical Ottoman architecture is the Mihrimah Sultan Mosque in the Edirnekapi neighbourhood.[27] [28] The projecting alcove which contains the mihrab is also comparable to the Selimiye Mosque in Edirne.[27] The details and ornamentation of the mosque are firmly Bizarre. For example, the curving pediments above the exterior arches have concave flourishes at their edges, while the windows, doorways, and arches of the mosque have mixtilinear (i.e. combination of different curves) or round profiles instead of pointed arch profiles.[29] [30] The central doorway of the courtyard is topped by an unusual radiating dominicus motif carved in stone while the other doorways have pyramidal semi-vaults which, instead of the traditional muqarnas, are carved with many rows of acanthus-like friezes and other motifs – a composition that is neither Ottoman nor European in style.[31] Even more unusual is the form of the mosque'south courtyard, which is semielliptical instead of the traditional rectangular form.[32] Inside, the mosque'south prayer hall is flanked by symmetrical two-story galleries that extend exterior the main perimeter of the hall. The corners of these galleries, on either side of the mihrab area, include space for the muezzins on one side and for the sultan'southward loge on the other, thus dispensing with the traditional müezzin mahfili platform in the centre of the mosque. This gallery organization leaves the fundamental space unencumbered while even so dissimulating the supporting piers of the dome.[33] The most exuberant Baroque carvings, such as flutes and scroll forms, are found on the minbar.[34] The hood of the mihrab, like the semi-vaults above the exterior doorways, is carved with a mix of eclectic friezes that replace the traditional muqarnas.[35] The mosque's stone ornament also establishes a new style of capitals that distinguishes the Ottoman Baroque: a vase or inverse bell shape, either plain or busy, usually with minor but prominent volutes at its corners, similar to Ionic capitals.[36] [37]

Similar earlier imperial foundations, the mosque formed the heart of a complex consisting of several buildings including a madrasa, an imaret, a library, a royal tomb, a sebil and fountain, and an imperial pavilion (Hünkâr Kasır), most of which are every bit Baroque.[38] [39] The sebil and fountain that flank the western gate of the complex accept curved and flamboyant forms balanced by the plain walls around them, which Goodwin calls the "epitome of the baroque" manner for these features.[40] The library in the northeastern corner is distinguished past undulating curves and a roughly elliptical interior. The tomb, which houses the remains of Şehsuvar Sultan, has ornate moldings and concave cornices.[41] At the eastern corner of the mosque is an Fifty-shaped structured which consists of a covered ramp leading to an regal pavilion. This kind of feature first appeared in the 17th century with the Sultan Ahmed I Mosque and was further exemplified by the Hünkâr Kasrı of the New Mosque in Eminönü. At the Nuruosmaniye, however, this pavilion is more detailed, more prominent, and more deliberately integrated into the rest of the circuitous.[41] [42] It was used as a private lounge or reception area (selamlık) for the sultan when visiting the mosque and gave him direct access to the sultan's loge inside the mosque.[43] Because such imperial pavilions were closer to the public centre than the regal palace, they played a role in enhancing the sultan's public presence and in staging some public ceremonies.[44] Appropriately, the structure of imperial pavilions as part of royal mosques aligned itself with the cultural shift taking place in the 18th century around the sultan's official displays of power, and such imperial pavilions became ever more than prominent in later regal mosques.[45]

  • Details of the Nuruosmaniye circuitous

  • Mixtilinear arches in the lateral portico and windows of the mosque

  • Semi-vault to a higher place ane of the mosque entrances, with Bizarre friezes replacing muqarnas

  • Courtyard of the mosque

  • Interior of the mosque

  • Bizarre details of the minbar inside the mosque

  • Sebil of the circuitous

  • Imperial pavilion: a ramp on the right leads to a private lounge connected to the mosque on the left

  • The tomb (left) and library (correct) of the complex

Reign of Mustafa III [edit]

Mustafa III (r. 1757–1774), successor of Osman Ii and a son of Ahmed Three, engaged in many edifice activities during his long reign.[46] His offset foundation was the Ayazma Mosque in Üsküdar in honour of his mother. Construction began in 1757–1758 and finished in 1760–1761.[47] [48] It is essentially a smaller version of the Nuruosmaniye Mosque, signalling the importance of the Nuruosmaniye as a new model to emulate.[49] It is richly decorated with Baroque carved stonework, especially in the mihrab and minbar.[50] While the mosque is smaller than the Nuruosmaniye, it is relatively tall for its proportions, enhancing its sense of height. This trend towards height was pursued in later mosques such every bit the Nusretiye Mosque.[51] The Ayazma Mosque differs from others mainly in the unique arrangement of its front end façade, which consists of a five-arched portico reached past a wide semi-round staircase.[52] [49] This arrangement is similar to another contemporary mosque built in Aydın in 1756, the Cihanoğlu Mosque.[47] The latter is also an example of Baroque elements appearing exterior Istanbul in the mid century.[53] One minor detail of the Ayazma Mosque that was recurrent in the 18th century is the minor birdhouse carved in stone on the exterior. Such birdhouses were made in the preceding century but in the Baroque menses they become more ornate and are commonly attached to the exteriors of both religious and civil buildings.[54]

Mustafa III'southward own regal mosque was built in the center of Istanbul and is known equally the Laleli Mosque. Its construction began in 1760 and finished in 1764.[55] [56] Its architect was Mehmed Tahir Agha.[56] Due to the sultan's personal wishes, its class is based on that of the Selimiye Mosque in Edirne, consisting of a master dome supported by eight piers and 4 corner semi-domes, thus differing significantly from the Nuruosmaniye's pattern.[57] [58] However, unlike the Selimiye Mosque, the piers are more slender and are mostly integrated direct into the walls. The mosque'southward courtyard is rectangular once again, leaving the Nuruosmaniye's semi-elliptical courtyard as an experiment that was not repeated. The decoration is too firmly Baroque, with Ionic-like capitals, round and mixtilinear arches, a mihrab similar to the Nuruosmaniye's, and other Bizarre motifs.[59] [37] [60] The outcome is a mosque that incorporates the visual style of the Nuruosmaniye in a more restrained fashion and integrates it more closely with traditional Ottoman architecture.[61]

The Laleli Mosque is surrounded by the usual annexes: imperial pavilion, sebil, madrasa, imaret and the tomb of Mustafa III. More unique, though, is the big artificial platform on which the mosque stands. The substructure of this platform was originally used as a storehouse and is now occupied by a market.[62] [59] The complex besides includes a caravanserai, the Çukurçeşme Han or Taş Han, which contributed to the mosque's revenues.[63] [64] Mustafa III too built another caravanserai, the Büyük Yeni Han, at around the aforementioned time (in 1764) in the urban center's central commercial commune. It is Istanbul's second-largest caravanserai.[65] Both caravanserais are centred around long rectangular courtyards, which was a trend for these type of buildings in this menses.[63]

The Laleli Mosque is as well notable for its apparent Byzantine influences. The walls of the mosque's exterior and the walls of its courtyard are constructed in alternating layers of white stone and scarlet brick. This technique was used in early Ottoman constructions but information technology was largely absent in the later regal mosques of Istanbul. Along with the use of coloured marble decoration inside the mosque, this characteristic may have been a deliberate callback to the city'due south aboriginal Byzantine monuments.[66] This "Byzantinising" trend was not commonplace just did occur in other monuments during the Bizarre period. For example, the Mosque of Zeyneb Sultan (Mustafa III'due south sister), congenital in 1769, exhibits an fifty-fifty stronger Byzantine appearance.[67] According to Ünver Rüstem, this miracle may reflect a certain introspection among Ottoman architects of the time about the city'south past and about the connection between Ottoman architecture and Byzantine architecture.[68] This was abetted past the fact that some Baroque motifs evoked forms and motifs that are besides found in Byzantine architecture, including the Hagia Sophia.[69]

A sense of historical consciousness or historicism in Ottoman architecture of the fourth dimension may be besides evident in Mustafa Iii'south reconstruction of the Fatih Mosque later the 1766 earthquake that partially destroyed it. The new Fatih Mosque was completed in 1771 and it neither reproduced the appearance of the original 15th-century edifice nor followed the gimmicky Baroque style. It was instead built in a Classical Ottoman style modelled on the 16th-century Şehzade Mosque built by Sinan – whose design had in turn been repeated in major 17th-century mosques like the Sultan Ahmed I Mosque and the New Mosque. This probably indicates that contemporary builders saw the new Baroque fashion as inappropriate for the appearance of an ancient mosque embedded in the mythology of the metropolis'due south 1453 conquest. At the same time, it showed that Sinan'due south architecture was associated with the Ottoman gold age and thus appeared as an advisable model to imitate, despite the anachronism.[70] By contrast, still, the nearby tomb of Mehmed II, which was rebuilt at the aforementioned time, is in a fully Baroque style.[71]

  • Compages nether Mustafa III

  • Cihanoğlu Mosque in Aydın (1756)

  • Ayazma Mosque in Üsküdar (1757–1761)

  • Example of 18th-century birdhouse on the exterior of the Ayazma Mosque

  • Tomb and Sebil of the Laleli Mosque complex

  • Zeynep Sultan Mosque, Istanbul (1769)

  • Fatih Mosque in Istanbul, rebuilt by Mustafa 3 (completed in 1771)

  • Reconstructed tomb of Mehmed Ii backside the Fatih Mosque (circa 1771)

Reign of Abdülhamid I [edit]

During the reign of Abdulhamid I (r. 1774–1789) more strange architects and artists arrived in Istanbul and the Bizarre style was further consolidated.[72] Abdulhamid I built the Beylerbeyi Mosque (1777–1778) and Emirgan Mosque (1781–82), both located in suburbs of Istanbul on the shores of the Bosphorus, though both were modified past Mahmud II (r. 1808–1839).[73] [74] The Beylerbeyi Mosque is notable for being oriented towards the water: while some Istanbul mosques had been built along the waterside before, the Beylerbeyi Mosque is the start i which was clearly designed to present its main façade towards the shoreline.[75] [76] The mosque was intended to serve as the sultan's prayer space when he was residing in i of his palaces along the Bosphorus.[77] The prayer hall is a traditional unmarried-domed space, simply the mosque'due south most innovative and influential feature is the broad two-story pavilion structure that occupies its front façade, replacing the traditional courtyard or entrance portico. This is an evolution of the imperial pavilions which were attached to the side or back of earlier mosques, taking on a more residential function equally a royal apartment and forming an integrated part of the mosque'southward appearance. This new configuration was repeated in the design of afterward imperial mosques.[78] [79]

Abdülhamid congenital his tomb as part of a charitable complex, the Hamidiye Complex, constructed between 1775 and 1780 in the Eminönü neighbourhood.[eighty] The chief court architect at the time was notwithstanding Mehmed Tahir Agha (equally it was under Mustafa III), but his role in the design of the Hamidiye complex is non confirmed.[81] The circuitous lacks a awe-inspiring congregational mosque and includes only a minor mosque (mescit). Its master components were instead a madrasa and an imaret, forth with the tomb itself and other minor structures. The design of the complex was notable for beingness completely integrated into the pre-existing urban fabric instead of existence set apart in its own enclosure.[81] The sultan's tomb is in Baroque style and 1 of its notable details is a large Qur'anic inscription band in thuluth script that curves around the interior.[82] Across the street from the tomb was an ornate sebil, but this was relocated near the Zeynep Sultan Mosque later 1911 when the complex was partly demolished to widen the street.[80] The sebil is considered one of the finest examples of Baroque sebils.[46] [72] Its surface shows a greater degree of three-dimensional sculpting, being profusely carved with scrolls, shells, foliage, and other Bizarre moldings. The decoration also demonstrates a greater Rococo tendency, such equally asymmetries in the details of the motifs. These trends came to characterize Ottoman Baroque architecture in the terminal quarter of the 18th century.[83] Another example of the elegant Baroque way in this flow is the decorated façade and sebil of the Recai Mehmet Efendi School (1775) most the Şehzade Mosque.[77]

  • Compages nether Abdülhamid I

  • Recai Mehmet Efendi School and sebil, Istanbul (1775)

  • Beylerbeyi Mosque on the Bosphorus, near Istanbul (circa 1778, with after renovations)

  • Sebil of Abdülhamid I, Istanbul (circa 1780)

Reign of Selim III [edit]

Selim III (r. 1789–1807) was responsible for rebuilding the Eyüp Sultan Mosque between 1798 and 1800.[84] [85] This mosque is located next to the tomb of Abu Ayyub al-Ansari, an important Islamic religious site in the expanse of Istanbul originally built past Mehmed Ii. The new mosque made apply of the Classical Ottoman tradition past following the octagonal baldaquin design, similar to the Sokollu Mehmed Pasha Mosque in the Azapkapı neighbourhood, just much of its decoration is in the contemporary Bizarre style.[84] [86] [87] But the minarets, dating from the reign of Ahmet III, remain from the previous mosque.[88] [84] In 1804 Selim 3 likewise rebuilt the Emir Sultan Mosque in Bursa subsequently it was damaged by an convulsion (though the new mosque was in turn damaged during the 1855 earthquake). The previous Emir Sultan Mosque'southward foundations and some of its materials were reused in construction, resulting in a work that mixes primitive and Baroque elements.[89]

Other of import Baroque monuments were also built in the Eyüp neighbourhood effectually this time by Selim Iii's family. Earlier the reconstruction of the mosque, Mihrişah Sultan (Selim Iii's mother), built a charitable complex nearby in a vibrant Baroque style. Its structure took place between 1792 and 1796.[90] It consists of a large imaret (still functioning today) and a mektep (primary school), merely from the street its nearly visible elements are the tomb and sebil.[91] This urban configuration is similar to the earlier Hamidiye Complex.[92] The façade of the complex, with its vibrantly Baroque sebil and tomb, is i of the most notable exterior façade designs in Ottoman Baroque architecture.[93] Further south, near the 16th-century Zal Mahmud Pasha Mosque, the Tomb of Şah Sultan (Selim III's sister) is another important example of a Bizarre tomb from this era, congenital in 1800–1801. One notable detail is its use of elliptical windows above its basis-flooring windows.[94]

Tophane Barracks of Selim III (right), seen in a 1819 engraving by Melling

Selim III established a new Western-inspired building type in Ottoman compages: the barracks. The first barracks of this new tradition, the Kalyoncu Barracks in Kasımpaşa, was congenital to house sailors and included an accompanying mosque. It was commissioned by admiral Cezayirli Hasan Pasha in 1783–1784, under Abdülhamid I.[95] [96] However, it was under Selim III that awe-inspiring barracks proliferated and became highly visible elements of the urban landscape.[97] Most of these early barracks were wooden buildings that were later rebuilt in the 19th century.[98] This new building type arose in conjunction with Selim Three's reform attempts, the Nizam-I Cedid ("New Order"), which amongst other things created a new Western-style army. Selim III congenital a billet edifice for his "New Artillery" regiment in Tophane, near the after site of the Nusretiye Mosque. This was destroyed by burn down in 1823 and rebuilt by Mahmud II in 1824.[99] Another barracks for artillerymen was congenital by Mihrişah Sultan in 1792[99] or 1793–1794[100] in Hasköy. Information technology featured a mosque, the Humbarahane Mosque, at the centre of it.[99] [100] The edifice has merely partially survived to the nowadays twenty-four hour period.[99] The largest barracks of the fourth dimension, the Selimiye Barracks, was built in southern Üsküdar between 1800 and 1803,[101] simply were burned down past revolting Janissaries in 1812.[102] [99] They were rebuilt in stone by Mahmud Two between 1825 and 1828 and further expanded to their current form by Abdulmecid between 1842 and 1853.[103] [104]

The structure of the Selimiye Barracks was soon accompanied by the construction of the nearby Selimiye Mosque complex between 1801 and 1805.[105] [103] Iii men served as chief court architects during this period but the master builder may take been Foti Kalfa, a Christian principal carpenter.[105] The complex included a mosque and its usual dependencies like a mektep and a hammam. More innovatively, it also included an array of factories, shops, and modern facilities such as a printing house, all bundled to form the nucleus of a new neighbourhood with a regular filigree of streets.[105] The mosque is built in loftier-quality rock and in a fully Baroque style.[106] Its blueprint illustrates the caste of influence exerted by the earlier Beylerbeyi Mosque, as it incorporates a wide imperial pavilion that stretches beyond its front façade. However, the design of the regal pavilion was further refined: the two wings of the pavilion are raised on a marble arcade and there is space in the middle, between the two wings, where a staircase and entrance portico leads into the mosque, assuasive for a more monumental entrance to be retained.[107] The prayer hall is once once again a single-domed infinite but the side galleries that are normally nowadays inside earlier mosques accept in this example been moved completely outside the prayer hall, forth the building's exterior. The building is likewise notable for high-quality stone ornamentation, with the outside marked past stone moldings along its many edges and sculpted keystones for its arches.[108] [109]

  • Architecture nether Selim Iii

  • Sebil of the Mihrişah Sultan Complex, with side fountains

  • Eyüp Sultan Mosque interior

  • Tomb and courtyard of the Emir Sultan complex in Bursa

  • Selimiye Mosque in Üsküdar, Istanbul (1801–1805): view of the front façade and entrance portico

  • Selimiye Mosque: side view with external gallery and role of the purple pavilion (correct)

  • Interior of Selimiye Mosque

  • Mihrab of the Selimiye Mosque

  • Selimiye Barracks in Üsküdar, originally built by Selim III (circa 1803) but rebuilt by Mahmud 2

Palace architecture in the Bizarre period [edit]

Bizarre ornament on the exterior of the Royal Council (Divan) Hall in Topkapı Palace

In Topkapı Palace the Ottoman sultans and their family continued to build new rooms or remodel former ones throughout the 18th century, introducing Baroque and Rococo decoration in the procedure. The main baths of the Harem section, which served the sultan and the valide sultan (queen mother), were probably renovated past Mahmud I around 1744, providing them with their electric current Bizarre ornament.[110] [111] In 1752 Mahmud I restored the Sofa Kiosk (Sofa Köşkü) in Rococo style. This kiosk is a garden pavilion in the Fourth Court that was first begun in the tardily 17th century past Mustafa Pasha and then either completed or restored past Ahmet III in 1704.[112] [113] [114] [115] Inside the Harem section, either Osman III or Abdulhamid I renovated the Imperial Hall (Hünkâr Sofası), adding among other things a Baroque wall fountain and Dutch blue-and-white tiles (although the decoration of the dome has since been restored to its late 16th-century country).[116] [117] The Kiosk of Osman Three, completed in 1754-55, is one of the most notable additions of this era. It was congenital over a masonry substructure that extends behind the Imperial Hall, with a marble terrace filling the infinite betwixt them. The terrace includes flowerbeds and a central water bowl, while a private passage on the west side grants access between the kiosk and the palace. The terrace façade of the kiosk includes a wide undulating eave. The kiosk itself is made of forest and consists of several rooms, with the main room in the centre projecting out over the edge of the palace walls to provide wider views. Its interior is heavily busy with Baroque and Rococo ornament, including gilt carvings and trompe-50'oeil paintings of architectural scenes.[118] [119] [120] [114] [117] Abdulhamid I and Selim Iii later added lavishly-decorated Rococo apartments in this area also, along with a rich apartment upstairs for Mihrişah Sultan, the mother of Selim III.[121] [117] Osman III also renovated the prayer room of the women'due south section in the Harem, providing it with a stone-carved Baroque mihrab.[122] The School of Princes was also redecorated in the mid 18th century.[123] Amongst the most elaborately-decorated elements in the School'south classroom and in the many individual apartments are the fireplaces.[124] The Imperial Council (Divan) Hall in the 2d Court of the palace was redecorated in flamboyant Bizarre style by Selim III in 1792 and past Mahmud Two in 1819.[125]

Every bit in the preceding centuries, other palaces were built effectually Istanbul by the sultan and his family. Previously, the traditional Ottoman palace configuration consisted of different buildings or pavilions arranged in a group, as was the case at Topkapı Palace, the Edirne Palace, the Kavak or Üsküdar Palace (at Salacak), the Tersane Palace, and others.[126] Still, at some time during the 18th century there was a transition to palaces consisting of a single block or a single large building. This trend may take been popularized by the sisters of Selim III in the belatedly 18th century.[127] One of his sisters, Hadice Sultan (d. 1822), had a thousand shoreline palace at Defterdarburnu (about Ortaköy) on the Bopshorus. In the 1790s she deputed Antoine Ignace Melling to add a European Neo-Classical pavilion to the palace.[128] Along with the palace of Beyhan and Esma Sultan on the Gilded Horn, her palace may have been ane of the first Ottoman palaces to consist of a single block stretching along the shoreline.[129] Most of these palaces accept not survived to the present day. Amid the rare surviving examples, Baroque decoration from this period can still be seen in the Aynalıkavak Pavilion (mentioned above), which was restored by Selim Iii and Mahmud Two.[130]

Across Istanbul the greatest palaces were built by powerful local families, but they were oft built in regional styles that did not follow the trends of the Ottoman capital.[131] The Azm Palace in Damascus, for example, was built around 1750 in a largely Damascene style.[131] [132] The Azm family also had a major palace in Hama.[131] In eastern Anatolia, about present-24-hour interval Doğubayazıt, the Ishak Pasha Palace is an exceptional and flamboyant piece of architecture that mixes various local traditions including Seljuk Turkish, Armenian, and Georgian. It was begun in the 17th century and mostly completed by 1784.[133] [134] [135]

  • Baroque compages in Topkapı Palace

  • Baths of the Sultan and Queen Mother, Topkapı Palace, renovated circa 1744 by Mahmud I

  • Sofa Kiosk, Topkapı Palace, restored by Mahmud I in 1752

  • Interior of Sofa Kiosk restored by Mahmud I in 1752

  • Bizarre ornamentation in the Imperial Hall in the Harem of Topkapı Palace (18th century)

  • Partial view of the Kiosk of Osman III in the Harem of Topkapı Palace (1754–1755)

  • Mihrab of the prayer room in the Harem of Topkapı Palace, added in Osman III's restoration (1754–1757)

Late Bizarre monuments under Mahmud II [edit]

The Tomb of Nakşidil Sultan (mother of Mahmud 2), built in 1818 virtually the Fatih Mosque circuitous in Istanbul, is ane of the finest Ottoman Baroque tombs and 1 of the best examples of late Baroque monuments.[136] [137] Some details recollect the earlier Şah Sultan Tomb, such as the elliptical windows higher up.[136] It also incorporates some influence from the Empire mode, which was existence introduced in Istanbul around this time.[138] The tomb was designed by the Ottoman Armenian architect Krikor Balian.[139] Some of the Bizarre mosques from this menstruation feature elliptical domes, such as the small unmarried-domed Küçük Efendi (or Fevziye) Mosque in Istanbul (1825) and the multi-domed Kapı Mosque in Konya (1812).[140]

The Nusretiye Mosque, Mahmud 2's purple mosque, was built betwixt 1822 and 1826 at Tophane. Its proper noun commemorates the "victory" which Mahmud 2 won past destroying the Janissaries in 1826, the yr of the mosque'southward completion.[141] [142] Mahmud II as well congenital a new artillery barracks and parade ground near the mosque at the same time, replacing the barracks of Selim III which had been destroyed by the Janissaries, thus continuing Tophane'southward clan with the historic period of reforms initiated by Selim Iii.[99] [141] The mosque is the first major purple piece of work past Krikor Balian.[141] [143] It is sometimes described as belonging to the Empire style, but is considered by Godfrey Goodwin and Doğan Kuban as ane of the last Baroque mosques.[141] [144] John Freely describes it as a mix of Baroque and Empire styles,[145] while Ünver Rüstem describes the manner equally moving abroad from the Bizarre and towards an Ottoman interpretation of Neoclassicism.[143] Goodwin also describes it as the last in a line of imperial mosques that started with the Nuruosmaniye.[141] The mosque follows the model of Selim III'south imperial mosque in Üsküdar, as seen in some of its details and in the portico and double-winged majestic pavilion fronting the mosque.[142] [146] [144] The mosque was innovative in other details such as the greater employ of vaults and stairways, the apply of wood instead of stone for elements like stairs, and in the decoration of the dome where the traditional circular Arabic inscription is replaced with a vegetal foliate motif.[147] Despite its relatively small size the mosque'southward tall proportions creates a sense of height, which may the culmination of a trend that began with the Ayazma Mosque.[148] From the outside, the mosque'southward near notable details are the extreme slenderness of its minarets[149] [148] and its two Rococo sebils which have flamboyantly undulating surfaces.[148]

  • Baroque monuments under Mahmud 2

  • Kapı Mosque in Konya (1812)

  • Interior of the Nusretiye Mosque

  • Decoration of the dome of the Nusretiye Mosque (earlier most recent restoration)

  • 1 of the sebils of the Nusretiye Mosque

  • 1830s illustration of the Tophane Barracks congenital by Mahmud Ii (with the Nusretiye Mosque behind)

Bizarre and local compages in the provinces [edit]

It was just in the 1750s that the Ottoman Baroque style began to appear outside Istanbul.[53] The Cihanoğlu Mosque in Aydın (1756), mentioned above, is amid the early examples.[53] During the reign of Abdülhamid I two notable provincial mosques were built in Baroque style in Anatolia: the Kurşunlu Mosque in Gülşehir (1779) and the Çapanoğlu Mosque in Yozgat (1778, expanded in 1795).[150] Another example during the reign of Selim III is the Izzet Pasha Mosque in Safranbolu (1796).[151]

In Athens, one pocket-size mosque survives from this flow: the Dizdar Mustafa Mosque or Mosque of Tzistarakis from 1763–1764.[152] [153] On the isle of Rhodes, the Sultan Mustafa Mosque, built in 1764 for Mustafa III, has a tall single-dome pattern that reflects the trends of 18th-century mosques in Istanbul.[154] In Shumen, nowadays-mean solar day Bulgaria, the Sherif Halil Pasha Mosque Circuitous (or Tombul Mosque), built in 1744–1745, is one of the few notable constructions in the Balkan region during this menstruation. In addition to the mosque, the complex includes a madrasa, a library, and a primary schoolhouse. Its manner, withal, resembles more strongly that of the earlier Damat Ibrahim Pasha Mosque in Nevşehir and its decoration recalls that of the Tulip Catamenia.[155] [156]

In more than distant provinces in the Middle East and North Africa, local styles continued to be employed with greater independence, equally they already were in the 16th and 17th centuries.[157] In Syria, internecine conflicts caused nifty harm to the country during the 18th century, just the cities of Damascus and Aleppo remained prosperous commercial centers.[158] [159] Damascus, the provincial capital letter, benefitted from the long and relatively capable governance of the 'Azm family. New palaces, caravanserais, hammams, and madrasas were built. In dissimilarity with earlier caravanserais, which were centered effectually the traditional open courtyard, the multiple new caravanserais congenital in Damascus during this century embraced the Ottoman predilection for domes and featured domed central spaces.[158] The most spectacular and admired edifice of this kind is the Khan As'advertizement Pasha (1753), whose main hall consists of nine domes supported by four key pillars.[158] [160]

In Cairo, several rare monuments sponsored by Ottoman sultans were built in the mid-18th century, demonstrating a certain level of renewed imperial interest in this provincial capital letter.[161] The Takiyya Mahmudiyya, sponsored by Mahmud I and dated to 1750, was the beginning Ottoman complex in Cairo to exist founded past a sultan, over two and a half centuries subsequently the conquest of the metropolis. Information technology consists of a madrasa and a sabil-kuttab (a combination of sebil and primary school). The way and decoration of the complex is a fusion of Ottoman and local Cairene (Mamluk) styles, only it does not include any elements of the new Baroque fashion Mahmud I was employing in Istanbul.[161] [162] A slightly later imperial foundation, the Sabil-kuttab of Mustafa Three in Cairo (located beyond from the Mosque of Sayyida Zeinab) in 1758–1760, still demonstrates local Cairene influences but this time information technology incorporates some new Baroque details.[161] [163] (Some other sabil-kuttab founded past Mustafa III almost the Mosque of Sayyida Nafisa in 1756–1757 has not been preserved.[161]) Other 18th-century buildings sponsored by local elites were by and large congenital in an Ottoman-Mamluk hybrid style, such as the Sabil-kuttab of Abd ar-Rahman Katkhuda (1744). While Mamluk-era configurations remained predominant, Ottoman ornamentation was applied in highly visible ways in some local monuments, near notably in the use of Ottoman blue and white tiles, including re-used 16th-century Iznik tiles imported from Istanbul.[161] The most influential innovation of Mahmud I's complex was the curved façade of its sabil-kuttab, a local interpretation of the curved sebil facades in Istanbul, which was repeated in subsequent sabil-kuttab designs in Cairo.[161] In the 19th century, under the de facto independent dominion of Muhammad Ali and his successors, Ottoman Baroque and contemporary tardily Ottoman Westernizing decoration was conspicuously employed in new buildings, including the Mosque of Muhammad Ali (1830–1848) in the Citadel and several sabil-kuttabs throughout the city.[164] [165]

Beyond Istanbul the greatest palaces were built by powerful local families, merely they were often built in regional styles that did non follow the trends of the Ottoman capital.[131] The Azm Palace in Damascus, for instance, was built around 1750 in a largely Damascene style.[131] [132] The Azm family unit also had a major palace in Hama.[131] In eastern Anatolia, near present-day Doğubayazıt, the Ishak Pasha Palace is an infrequent and flamboyant slice of architecture that mixes various local traditions including Seljuk Turkish, Armenian, and Georgian. Information technology was begun in the 17th century and mostly completed by 1784.[133] [134] [135]

  • 18th-century compages in the provinces

  • Sabil-kuttab of Mustafa III (1758–1760), featuring some of the beginning Ottoman Baroque details in Cairo

  • Remains of the Sultan Mustafa Three Mosque in Rhodes (1764)

  • Sabil of Isma'il Pasha (1828) with Bizarre and late Ottoman decoration typical of 19th-century Cairo

Ottoman architecture later the Baroque [edit]

The after reign of Mahmud II also saw the introduction of the Empire style, a Neoclassical style which originated in France nether Napoleon, into Ottoman architecture.[166] This marked a trend towards increasingly directly imitation of Western styles, particularly from France.[138] Ottoman Baroque motifs and forms continued to be used during the 19th century, but they were ofttimes employed aslope other styles.[4] The Tanzimat reforms that began in 1839 under Abdülmecid I sought to modernize the Ottoman Empire with Western-way reforms. In the architectural realm this period resulted in the authorization of European architects and Ottoman architects with European grooming.[167] Among these, the Balians, an Ottoman Armenian family unit, succeeded in dominating purple compages for much of the century. They were joined by European architects such as the Fossati brothers, William James Smith, and Alexandre Vallaury.[168] [169] After the early on 19th century Ottoman architecture was characterized by an eclectic architecture which mixed or borrowed from multiple styles. The Balians, for case, usually combined Neoclassical or Beaux-arts architecture with highly eclectic ornamentation.[170] Later trends involving Orientalist designs and Ottoman revivalism, initially encouraged by European architects similar Vallaury, eventually led to the First National Compages movement which, alongside Art Nouveau, dominated architecture in the final years of the Ottoman Empire in the early 20th century.[171]

Scholarly views on the Ottoman Baroque [edit]

Scholarly attitudes towards the Ottoman Baroque and towards later Ottoman architecture have varied over fourth dimension and from one author to another. Many scholars accept traditionally framed post-Classical Ottoman compages every bit a symbol of Ottoman decline and cultural insecurity vis-à-vis Europe, defective merit in comparison with earlier Ottoman architecture.[172] This attitude has been progressively revised since the later twentieth century.[173] Turkish scholar Doğan Kuban has argued that even though information technology was directly influenced past the European Bizarre the Ottoman Baroque reflects a local estimation of the style that became its own distinctive indigenous style.[8] [174] More contempo scholars similar Tulay Artan and Shirine Hamadeh have argued for a more positive evaluation of the style and for a lesser emphasis on the role of Western influence.[175] In a 2019 book Ünver Rüstem argues that 18th-century Ottoman culture and compages should be contextualized inside the attitudes of Ottoman elites at the time, who saw their empire as an integral office of Europe and adapted ideas from the West insofar as they were deemed useful, every bit well as contextualized within the Early Mod trends that were taking place on a more global scale.[176]

References [edit]

  1. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 21.
  2. ^ a b M. Blossom, Jonathan; S. Blair, Sheila, eds. (2009). "Architecture; 7. c. 1500–c. 1900". The Grove Encyclopedia of Islamic Fine art and Architecture. Oxford University Press. ISBN9780195309911.
  3. ^ a b c Rüstem 2019, pp. 21–22.
  4. ^ a b Kuban 2010.
  5. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 517–518.
  6. ^ a b Kuban 2010, p. 517.
  7. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 507.
  8. ^ a b Kuban 2010, p. 505.
  9. ^ Goodwin 1971.
  10. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 260.
  11. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 64–65.
  12. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 68.
  13. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 70.
  14. ^ Goodwin 1971, pp. 375–376.
  15. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. lxx–73.
  16. ^ Goodwin 1971, pp. 377–379.
  17. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 64.
  18. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 518.
  19. ^ a b Kuban 2010, p. 526.
  20. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 111.
  21. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 115.
  22. ^ Goodwin 1971, p. 386.
  23. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 527.
  24. ^ a b Rüstem 2019, p. 147.
  25. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 122, 138.
  26. ^ "Nuruosmaniye Mosque - Detect Islamic Fine art - Virtual Museum". islamicart.museumwnf.org . Retrieved 2021-08-28 .
  27. ^ a b Kuban 2010, p. 532.
  28. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 137.
  29. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 138–145.
  30. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 532, 536.
  31. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 139–140.
  32. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 138.
  33. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 141–144.
  34. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 144–145.
  35. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 145.
  36. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 146.
  37. ^ a b Goodwin 1971, p. 388.
  38. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 528–529.
  39. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 112–113.
  40. ^ Goodwin 1971, p. 382.
  41. ^ a b Kuban 2010, p. 536.
  42. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 128–130.
  43. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 125.
  44. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 125–128.
  45. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 126–130.
  46. ^ a b Kuban 2010, p. 537.
  47. ^ a b Goodwin 1971, p. 387.
  48. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 172.
  49. ^ a b Rüstem 2019, p. 174.
  50. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 176.
  51. ^ Goodwin 1971, pp. 387, 418.
  52. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 543.
  53. ^ a b c Rüstem 2019, p. 180.
  54. ^ Ekinci, Ekrem Buğra (2016-10-21). "Birdhouses: Miniature mansions of Istanbul". Daily Sabah . Retrieved 2021-09-21 .
  55. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 182.
  56. ^ a b Kuban 2010, p. 540.
  57. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 540–541.
  58. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 186.
  59. ^ a b Kuban 2010, p. 541.
  60. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 190–191.
  61. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 194–195.
  62. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 185.
  63. ^ a b Goodwin 1971, p. 391.
  64. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 184.
  65. ^ Sumner-Boyd & Freely 2010, p. 166.
  66. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 195–196, 198–200.
  67. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 199–200.
  68. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 200.
  69. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 198–200.
  70. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 212–214.
  71. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 215.
  72. ^ a b Goodwin 1971, p. 396.
  73. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 537, 544.
  74. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 234–235.
  75. ^ Goodwin 1971, pp. 397–398.
  76. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 236.
  77. ^ a b Goodwin 1971, p. 397.
  78. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 236–237.
  79. ^ Goodwin 1971, pp. 398–399.
  80. ^ a b Rüstem 2019, p. 223.
  81. ^ a b Rüstem 2019, p. 225.
  82. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 226.
  83. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 230.
  84. ^ a b c Goodwin 1971, p. 411.
  85. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 546.
  86. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 546–548.
  87. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 252.
  88. ^ Sumner-Boyd & Freely 2010, p. 365.
  89. ^ Goodwin 1971, p. 412.
  90. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 254.
  91. ^ Sumner-Boyd & Freely 2010, p. 366.
  92. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 253.
  93. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 520.
  94. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 548–550.
  95. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 552.
  96. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 247, 254.
  97. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 254–255.
  98. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 255.
  99. ^ a b c d e f Kuban 2010, p. 554.
  100. ^ a b Rüstem 2019, p. 248.
  101. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 257.
  102. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 264.
  103. ^ a b Kuban 2010, p. 555.
  104. ^ Goodwin 1971, p. 420.
  105. ^ a b c Rüstem 2019, p. 256.
  106. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 258–260.
  107. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 259–260.
  108. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 545.
  109. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 258–259.
  110. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 98–99.
  111. ^ Sumner-Boyd & Freely 2010, p. 79.
  112. ^ Sumner-Boyd & Freely 2010, p. 76.
  113. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 99.
  114. ^ a b Goodwin 1971, p. 393.
  115. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 430, 435.
  116. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 238.
  117. ^ a b c Freely 2011, p. 177. sfn fault: no target: CITEREFFreely2011 (help)
  118. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 158–159.
  119. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 435–436.
  120. ^ Atasoy 2011, p. 58.
  121. ^ Atasoy 2011, pp. 64, 71.
  122. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 159.
  123. ^ Freely 2011, p. 173. sfn error: no target: CITEREFFreely2011 (help)
  124. ^ Goodwin 1971, pp. 392–393.
  125. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 242–243, 261.
  126. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 437.
  127. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 437–438.
  128. ^ Rüstem 2019, pp. 255–256.
  129. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 438.
  130. ^ Sumner-Boyd & Freely 2010, p. 363.
  131. ^ a b c d eastward f Goodwin 1971, p. 404.
  132. ^ a b "Qasr al-Azm - Find Islamic Art - Virtual Museum". islamicart.museumwnf.org . Retrieved 2021-08-28 .
  133. ^ a b Goodwin 1971, pp. 404–407.
  134. ^ a b Kuban 2010, pp. 583–584.
  135. ^ a b "İshak Paşa Palace - Detect Islamic Art - Virtual Museum". islamicart.museumwnf.org . Retrieved 2021-08-28 .
  136. ^ a b Goodwin 1971, p. 416.
  137. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 550.
  138. ^ a b Kuban 2010, p. 605.
  139. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 610.
  140. ^ Goodwin 1971, pp. 414–415.
  141. ^ a b c d e Goodwin 1971, p. 417.
  142. ^ a b Rüstem 2019, p. 269.
  143. ^ a b Rüstem 2019, p. 270.
  144. ^ a b Kuban 2010, p. 631.
  145. ^ Freely 2011, p. 399. sfn error: no target: CITEREFFreely2011 (help)
  146. ^ Goodwin 1971, pp. 417–418.
  147. ^ Goodwin 1971, pp. 418–419.
  148. ^ a b c Goodwin 1971, p. 418.
  149. ^ Sumner-Boyd & Freely 2010, p. 417.
  150. ^ Goodwin 1971, pp. 400–401.
  151. ^ Goodwin 1971, p. 402.
  152. ^ Kiel, Machiel. "Athens". In Fleet, Kate; Krämer, Gudrun; Matringe, Denis; Nawas, John; Rowson, Everett (eds.). Encyclopaedia of Islam, Three. Brill. ISSN 1873-9830.
  153. ^ "ATİNA - TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi". TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi (in Turkish). Retrieved 2022-03-08 .
  154. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 594.
  155. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 592–593.
  156. ^ "ŞERİF HALİL PAŞA KÜLLİYESİ - TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi". TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi (in Turkish). Retrieved 2022-03-07 .
  157. ^ Blair & Bloom 1995, p. 251-255.
  158. ^ a b c Degeorge, Gérard (2004). Damascus. Flammarion. pp. 192–198. ISBN2080304569.
  159. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 586.
  160. ^ Burns, Ross (2007). Damascus: A History. Routledge. p. 244. ISBN978-one-134-48850-half-dozen.
  161. ^ a b c d due east f Behrens-Abouseif, Doris (2011). "The Complex of Sultan Mahmud I in Cairo". Muqarnas. 28: 195–220. doi:10.1163/22118993-90000178.
  162. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 288 (note xviii).
  163. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 180-181.
  164. ^ Behrens-Abouseif, Doris (1989). Islamic Architecture in Cairo: An Introduction. Leiden, the netherlands: E.J. Brill. pp. 167–170. ISBN9789004096264.
  165. ^ Williams, Caroline (2018). Islamic Monuments in Cairo: The Practical Guide (7th ed.). Cairo: The American University in Cairo Printing. pp. 138, 194, 226, 240.
  166. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 505–506, 605.
  167. ^ Kuban 2010, p. 605 and subsequently.
  168. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 609–612.
  169. ^ Goodwin 1971, p. 419.
  170. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 605–606.
  171. ^ Kuban 2010, pp. 606, 614, 673–676.
  172. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. meet "Introduction".
  173. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 5 and subsequently.
  174. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 6-7.
  175. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. eight-ix.
  176. ^ Rüstem 2019, p. 9 and afterward.

Bibliography [edit]

  • Acun, Hakkı (2011). Osmanlı İmparatorluğu Saat Kuleleri. Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Yayınları. ISBN9789751623706.
  • Atasoy, Nurhan (2011). Harem. Bilkent Kültür Girişimi Publications. ISBN9786055495060.
  • Blair, Sheila Due south.; Bloom, Jonathan M. (1995). The Art and Architecture of Islam 1250-1800. Yale University Press. ISBN9780300064650.
  • Freely, John (2011). A History of Ottoman Compages. WIT Press. ISBN978-1-84564-506-9.
  • Goodwin, Godfrey (1971). A History of Ottoman Architecture. Thames & Hudson. ISBN0-500-27429-0.
  • Kuban, Doğan (2010). Ottoman Architecture. Translated by Mill, Adair. Antique Collectors' Club. ISBN9781851496044.
  • Rüstem, Ünver (2019). Ottoman Baroque: The Architectural Refashioning of Eighteenth-Century Istanbul. Princeton University Press. ISBN9780691181875.
  • Sumner-Boyd, Hilary; Freely, John (2010). Strolling Through Istanbul: The Classic Guide to the Urban center (Revised ed.). Tauris Parke Paperbacks.

hoganfroving.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Baroque_architecture

Belum ada Komentar untuk "Is Perhaps the Most Turkishlooking Form of Art and Reflects the Ottoman"

Posting Komentar

Langganan: Posting Komentar (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel