POSEBNI OTISAK / SEPARAT OFFPRINT

Transcription

1 PROSTOR 26 [2018] 1 [55] ZNANSTVENI ÈASOPIS ZA ARHITEKTURU I URBANIZAM A SCHOLARLY JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN PLANNING SVEUÈILIŠTE U ZAGREBU, ARHITEKTONSKI FAKULTET UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB, FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE ISSN CODEN PORREV UDK UDC 71/72 26 [2018] 1 [55] [2018] POSEBNI OTISAK / SEPARAT OFFPRINT Znnstveni prilozi Sientifi Ppers Ceren Ktipoğlu Özmen Chllenging the Cnon: Reding the 19 th Century Ottomn Arhiteture through Provinil s Sientifi Sujet Review UDC 72.01:726.2(560) 18 Propitivnje knon: interpretij osmnske rhitekture 19. stoljeæ n primjerim provinijskih džmij Pregledni znnstveni èlnk UDK 72.01:726.2(560) 18

2 116 Tle I Brief informtion on the mosques in the provines Tl. I. Krtk informij o džmijm u provinijm Nme of the Provine (Vilyet) Distrit (Liv) Su- Distrit (Kz) Çnkkle Ftih Hüdvendigr Big Kl -i Sultniye Kony Aziziye Smsun Gret (Hmidiye, Vlide) Küthy Gret Küthy Hmidiye İzmir Hmidiye Burhniye Gret (Ko) Adıymn Gret Ayvlık Hmidiye Aydın Rmzn Psh Thessloniki New Blıkesir Zğnos Psh Gzintep Alüddevle Pınrşı Aziziye Söğüt Çelei Sultn Mehmet Cmi Söğüt Hmidiye Tomrz Merkez Mlty Yeni Firzovik Gret (Merkez) Constrution Dte / restore in 1904 Reign Adülziz (restore Adülhmid II) Kony Adülziz Trzon Smsun (Cnik) _ Adülhmid II Hüdvendigr Küthy _ Adülhmid II Founder / Contriutor Big Governor Hkkı Psh (1862-6) Adülziz I nd Pertevniyl Vlide Sultn Adülziz I (?), Pertevniyl Vlide (?), Adülhmid II Adülmeid nd Adülziz II, Adülhmid II Cover System 9-units, one smll dome in the middle one dome supported y 4 semi-domes overed y one ig dome two domes supported y 6 semi domes Totl Are (m 2 ) Lst Pryer Hll (m 2 ) Gllery (m 2 ) Dome (Dimeter) (m) 432 m 2 none 90 m m. 483 m 2 72 m 2 26 m m. 530 m 2 90 m 2 90 m m m m m x2 m. Hüdvendigr Küthy _ 1905 Adülhmid II Adülhmid II one dome 260 m 2 none 60 m m. Aydın İzmir _ 1890 (1892?) Adülhmid II Adülhmid II one dome 138 m 2 27 m 2 14 m 2 9,70 m. no Hüdvendigr Mmuretü l Aziz (Elzığ) Hüdvendigr Krsi (Blıkesir) Burhniye (Kemer Edremid efore 1894) ? Adülhmid II not known Mlty Adıymn Adülhmid II Krsi (Blıkesir) (sine 1843) Kolğsı Mustf Ağ nd Hı Moll Ayvlık Adülhmid II Adülhmid II one dome, supported y 4 vults nd 4 smll rrel vults on the orners one dome, supported y 4 vults nd 4 smll domes on the orners one dome enlrged y 2 vulted struture on the south north xis 473 m 2 none 110 m m. 397 m 2 70 m 2 none 8.00 m. Construted on the site of n old mosque (restorted- -repired) (totlly reuilt) (totlly reuilt) (restorted- -repired) (totlly reuilt) (totlly reuilt) (totlly reuilt) 86 m 2 10 m 2 none 6,17 m. no Aydın Aydın _ 1899 Adülhmid II Adülhmid II one dome 307 m 2 80 m 2 42 m m. Selnik Adülhmid II Adülhmid II one dome 316 m 2 60 m 2 98 m m. no Hüdvendigr Krsi (Blıkesir) (sine 1864) _ Adülhmid II Adülhmid II nd Governor Ömer Ali Bey Hlep Hlep Ayınt Adülhmid II Adülhmid II Sivs Hüdvendigr Hüdvendigr Sivs Ertuğrul (Bileik) Ertuğrul (Bileik) Aziziye (Pınrşı) Adülhmid II Adülziz I, Adülhmid II one dome suported y three vults nd one smll dome, nd lso 4 smll domes on the orners 1059 m m m m. one dome rried y otgonl ldhin 300 m2 none none m. one dome, supported y 4 vults nd 4 smll domes on the orners (totlly reuilt) (totlly reuilt) (totlly reuilt) 218 m 2 34 m 2 none 6.11 m.? Söğüt 19 th entury? Adülhmid II Adülhmid II 12 domes 461 m 2 none 86 m m./3.10 m. Söğüt 1905 Adülhmid II Adülhmid II Ankr Kyseriye Develi 1906 Adülhmid II Adülhmid II Mmuretü l Aziz (Elzığ) Mlty _ Adülhmid II Adülhmid II one dome rried y otgonl ldhin one ig dome supported y semi dome on the north side one dome, supported y 4 vults nd 4 smll domes on the orners (restorted- -repired) 142 m 2 31 m 2 30 m m. no 200 m 2 40 m 2 15 m m. 596 m 2 68 m 2 88 m m. Kosovo Üsküp Firzovik 19 th entury? Adülhmid II Adülhmid II one ig dome 252 m 2 59 m 2 25 m 2 10,5 m.? (totlly reuilt) (totlly reuilt)

3 Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi 26[2018] 1[55] PROSTOR 117 Ceren Ktipoğlu Özmen Cnky University Deprtment of Arhiteture Ankr, Turkey Sientifi Sujet Review UDC 72.01:726.2(560) 18 Tehnil Sienes / Arhiteture nd Urn Plnning History nd Theory of Arhiteture nd Preservtion of the Built Heritge Artile Reeived / Aepted: / Sveuèilište Cnky Odsjek z rhitekturu Ankr, Tursk erenk@nky.edu.tr Pregledni znnstveni èlnk UDK 72.01:726.2(560) 18 Tehnièke znnosti / Arhitektur i urnizm Povijest i teorij rhitekture i zštit grditeljskog nslijeð Èlnk primljen / prihvæen: / Chllenging the Cnon: Reding the 19 th Century Ottomn Arhiteture through Provinil s Propitivnje knon: interpretij osmnske rhitekture 19. stoljeæ n primjerim provinijskih džmij rhiteturl historiogrphy s Ottomn provinil rhiteture 19 th entury rhitektonsk historiogrfij džmije osmnsk provinijsk rhitektur 19. stoljeæe The min ojetive of this rtile is to propose n lterntive historiogrphy to 19 th entury Ottomn rhiteture, without the Euroentri prdigms, y inluding the unseen tors of this history, nmely the disregrded provinil rhiteture. The provinil mosques onstituting the se studies of the rtile point to previously negleted prt of the historiogrphy y hnging the emphsis from the pitl to the provines. Glvni je ilj rd predložiti lterntivnu historiogrfiju u odnosu n osmnsku rhitekturu 19. stoljeæ, lišenu euroentriène prdigme, stvljnjem nglsk n nevidljive èimenike ove povijesti, tj. znemrenu rhitekturu u provinijm. Provinijske džmije koje su predmet nlize rd ukzuju n potreu d se istrživèki interes preusmjeri s glvnog grd n provinije kko i se ouhvtio i ovj znemreni dio historiogrfije.

4 118 PROSTOR 1[55] 26[2018] C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN Chllenging the Cnon Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi INTRODUCTION: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS IN THE HISTORIOGRAPHIC NARRATION 1 UVOD: ODREÐIVANJE PROBLEMATIKE U HISTORIOGRAFSKOJ ANALIZI There is strong tendeny mong Ottomn historins to desrie nd define the 19 th entury Ottomn Empire with the deline-dissolution prdigm. 2 A similr ttitude n lso e oserved in the Ottomn rhiteturl historiogrphy for the distint rhiteturl lnguges of the er. 3 For mny yers, with the prolmtion of the repuli, rhiteturl historins hve reted min strem historiogrphy for Ottomn rhiteture whih ws primrily shped y the solute supremy of Sinn s rhiteture. This kind of historiogrphy inevitly onsiders ny vrition from Sinn s rhiteturl lnguge s devition from the right pth; disintegrtion or degenertion of the pure. The intensity of the ritiism inreses when the 19 th entury s unorthodox rhiteturl nd rtisti tivities (with referene to the min strem historiogrphy) re onerned. Until reent dedes, the ide of westerniztion hs een used to explin this kind of devition within the rhiteture. The min rgument ehind the use of the term westerniztion for rhiteture my e interpreted s wy to emphsize the degenertion nd disintegrtion in the qulity y referring to it s worthless imittion of western modes. Also, the term eletiism is often used with similr onnottion to identify the plurlity in the use of stylisti fetures. The roots of the eletiism re found in the osmopolite milieu of Istnul nd in the rhitets who me from different Europen ountries in the 19 th entury. Arhiteturl historins were ompeting to define the rhiteturl styles of uildings nd to nswer how those styles hd penetrted into the Ottomn rhiteturl voulry. The detes on finding the right definition for the hnging rhiteturl modes ontinued with disussions on the terms orientlism nd historiism. It is noteworthy tht signifint proportion of these disussions foused on the stylisti fetures of the uildings. The sujet ws often limited to monumentl rhiteture, the 19 th entury s msterpiees, onstruted in the Ottomn pitl. These uildings, s notle s they my e, onstitute only frtion of the Ottomn rhiteturl prodution of this er. Additionlly, the ft tht disussions were minly onduted from stylisti point of view onstitutes defiieny in the nrrtion of Ottomn rhiteturl history. Three prinipl points, seemingly lking in urrent rhiteturl historiogrphy re identified s worthy of disussion in this rtile. While the first two points minly emphsize generl prolemti issues of the rhiteturl historiogrphy, the third one is speifilly onerned with 19 th entury Ottomn rhiteturl historiogrphy. Within this ontext, these three points re going to e highlighted with their interrelted sttements nd relevnt derivtions. The first prolem with the 19 th entury Ottomn rhiteturl historiogrphy is tht the other uildings not onsidered ig or monumentl enough or whih were not defined s msterpiees re exluded from the nrrtion. The existing rhiteturl historiogrphy for 19 th entury rhiteture is formulted solely long the prtiulr, known nd reognizle monumentl exmples in Istnul. Furthermore, the identities nd personl histories of the notle uilders of the 19 th entury suh s the fmous Blin fmily were often inorported into the historil nrrtion of these uildings. Thus, one of the questions this pper sks is whether it is pos- 1 This study is prt of the unpulished Ph.D. thesis of the uthor nmed Re-Thinking Historiogrphy on Ottomn Arhiteture: Nineteenth Century Provinil Sultn s sumitted to METU, Arhiteturl History Progrm in The ommon greement on the need for this kind of deline-dissolution prdigm n e tred k to the prinipl Ottomn history survey ooks suh s the works of Lewis, Gi-Bowen nd Shw [Lewis, 1968; Gi-Bowen, 1950; Shw, 1976]. The nrrtion on these ooks minly sed on periodiztion of the Ottomn history suh s the golden ge, pogee of power, or ge of deentrliztion. These titles nnot go eyond repetition of the epted periodiztion of the historil progression. Inevitly, the nrrtion sed on this periodiztion hs fored the disussion of the 19 th entury Ottomn history on the sis of the deline prdigm. 3 Most of the survey ooks lim tht the rhiteturl originlity of the empire, the lssil period, hs ended with the orruption of the Ottomn lssil forms. In his

5 Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi Chllenging the Cnon C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN [2018] 1[55] PROSTOR 119 ook Ottomn Arhiteture, Kun sttes tht the 19 th entury ws n er of Europen-imported rhiteture, ontrolled y the foreign nd non-muslim rhitets [Kun, 2007: ]. Similr to Kun, Aslnp nd Arseven hve lso similr oneption for 19 th entury Ottomn rhiteture. Aslnp lls the rhiteturl edifies of the period s poor nd worthless uildings in style lien to Turkish tste [Aslnp, 1971: ]. In the sme wy, Arseven ritiizes the period under the light of style dete y desriing the monuments with the words without style, tsteless nd rough [Arsevn, 1984: 180]. Goodwin, who hs lso written survey ook on Ottomn rhiteture, desries the rhiteturl fetures of the 19 th entury s monuments in very detiled mnner y fousing on the forms tht re used. Like the Turkish sholrs, he lso mentions the styles, yet he tries to understnd the im for using these lien forms [Goodwin, 1971]. 4 Tnzimt er ws the period of the dministrtive reforms in the Ottomn Empire whih strted in 1839 nd ended in sile to formulte n lterntive historiogrphi nrrtion to inlude uildings tht do not fit the definition of msterpiee nd the uildings of unknown rhitets whose identities re not s importnt s the uilding itself. Seondly, the uildings tht re srutinized to understnd the development of 19 th entury Ottomn rhiteture re often hosen from those loted in the pitl. All interprettions nd definitions re limited to the hrteristis of the uildings in İstnul; yet there ws signifint onstrution tivity in the provines prtiulrly during the Adülhmid II s er (ruled etween ), whih is often ignored. The provinil uildings, speifilly the mosques whih onstitute the min fous of this pper present vlule informtion to understnd the rhiteturl evolution in the 19 th entury. This pper ontriutes missing piee to the present nrrtion of 19 th entury Ottomn rhiteture y telling the history of provinil mosques onstruted during the sme period. Although the reltionship etween the pitl nd provines during the 19 th entury plys n importnt role, the rhiteture of the pitl is often fvored with respet to tht of the provines due to its undne of monumentl uildings nd its proximity to entrl uthority in the urrent rhiteturl historiogrphy. The im of this work is to reinterpret the rhiteture of the provine within the frmework of reiprol enterperiphery reltionship insted of hierrhil nd polrized one. The third prolem is relted with the stylisti nture of the existing detes on 19 th entury Ottomn rhiteture. The mjority of these detes fous on tegorizing the stylisti fetures of the mosques under known nd well estlished western rhiteturl styles, suh s the neo-lssil, neo-gothi or neoroque in order to explin the use of these lien styles in the Ottomn rhiteture. Beuse most of these detes on stylisti fetures onentrte solely on the fdes of the mosques, the mutul reltion of the fde with the sptil onfigurtion of the uilding remins lrgely unexplored. In ddition, the role the uilding plys within the surrounding urn ontext is lso overlooked. For this reson, this pper ims to srutinize the provinil mosques not only ording to their stylisti fetures, ut lso ording to their sptil onfigurtions, nd within the nery nd urn ontext. Ultimtely, the min ojetive of this pper is to show roder piture to develop n overll onsidertion nd to propose n lterntive historiogrphy for 19 th entury Ottomn rhiteture, speifilly mosque rhiteture, without the ised Euroentri prdigms, y inluding the unseen tors of this history, the disregrded provinil mosques of 19 th entury Ottomn rhiteture. The seletion of se studies (Tle I) ims to move the emphsis of the rhiteturl historiogrphy from the pitl to the provines to hieve thorough understnding of the Ottomn rhiteturl mentlity onerning mosque rhiteture nd imperil onstrution. The se studies re hosen mong the exmples loted in the former Antolin provines of the Empire inluding one se from the Blkns. The provinil mosques re seleted ording to their onstrution dtes nd founders. In this respet sultn mosques in the provines whih were onstruted or whih underwent omprehensive restortion fter the Tnzimt er 4 re tken into onsidertion. The following questions re inluded in this disussion: Cn 19 th entury mosque rhiteture e distinguished from estlished interprettions suh s tsteless or imittion of western modes? How do the sultn s mosques in the pitl nd in the provines differ from or resemle eh other? Wht kind of power reltions n e oserved etween the pitl nd its provines y studying the hrteristis of mosque rhiteture? How ws the sultn nd/or stte ideology represented in the Ottomn provines during the 19 th entury? CAPITAL AND PROVINCE RELATIONS IN THE OTTOMAN CASE ODNOSI IZMEÐU GLAVNOG GRADA I PROVINCIJE U OSMANSKOM CARSTVU An inquiry of the rhiteturl prodution in the Ottomn provines most ertinly requires survey on the hegemoni reltions etween the pitl nd its provines. The Ottomn Empire s politil history shows tht there ws lwys dynmi nd mivlent reltionship etween the pitl nd its provines. A generlly epted definition sttes tht the pitl, or enter, represents

6 120 PROSTOR 1[55] 26[2018] C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN Chllenging the Cnon Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi the hegemoni, defining, supervising nd formtive ody, while the provines, or periphery, represent the ruled, supervised nd strutured one. Even the origin of the word periphery is derived from -peri, mening round, to desrie the outer position of min ore, similr to the term s Turkish equivlent, tşr, from the Persin ffix -r, to refer lso to the outside of thing. 5 At the eginning of the 19 th entury, during the reign of Sultn Mhmud II (ruled etween ), the mening of the enter shifted from the solute uthority of the sultn to the exeutive orgns of the government, or in other words, to B-ı Ali. 6 Tnzimt reforms enhned this politil struture nd seprted the ody of the government nd the sultn whih were previously one nd the sme. The seprtion of those two powers ontinued until the reign of Adülhmid II ( ). After 1876, Adülhmid II s wellfounded entrliztion rules dismissed the uthority of the exeutive orgns, nd gin power ws onsolidted y the sultn one more time. Menwhile, the Ottomn Empire imed to protet the integrity of its lnds ginst the ims of the Europen Powers in Ottomn provines during the 19 th entury. The inresing demnd for rw mterils nd new mrkets for their produts mde the Ottomn provines vlule. However, Ottomn lnds were exposed to pitlism nd the thret of Europen ouption in the 19 th entury. 7 Between 1839 nd 1876, until the reign of Adülhmid II, oth the sultn nd the ureurts (B-ı Ali) shred ontrol over the Ottomn lnds. Thus, the word enter for these forty yers referred oth to the sultn nd the exeutive orgns of the stte. However, two yers fter the promulgtion of the First Constitution in 1876 (Knun-i Essi), Adülhmid II ( ) gined omplete ontrol. Ottomn historins would gree tht the thirty-three yers during the Hmidin Er ( ) represents the mening of entrlized stte. 8 The politil tmosphere of the lte 19 th entury, speifilly the thret of ntionlist movements, fored the Sultn to mintin unity in the Ottomn lnds ginst the frgmenttion of the Empire into ntionl sttes. Thus on one hnd, Adülhmid II ontinued the struturl trnsformtion of the system, whih strted with Sultn Mhmud II s (ruled etween ) reforms nd ontinued with Tnzimt, to use ll mens of the empire s institutions to strengthen the stte; on the other hnd, he plnted the seeds for very wellontrolled nd personlly ruled empire y regulting the responsiilities of the governors in the provines. 9 The oedient governors of Adülhmid II nd the new provinil system inresed the dihotomy etween B-ı Ali, whih wnted to e inluded in the ontrol mehnism of the stte, nd the Sultn who wnted ll uthority for himself. Both the vizier nd the ministries styed out of the entrl polity, nd the entrl uthority ws represented y the Sultn himself. MOSQUES RE-DEFINED IN THE PROVINCES; ISLAM AS A TOOL TO LEGITIMIZE THE CENTRAL AUTHORITY REDEFINIRANJE DŽAMIJA U PROVINCIJAMA; ISLAM KAO SREDSTVO LEGITIMIZACIJE CENTRALNE VLASTI The ide of Islmi unity or using Islm s legitimizing tool for the entrl uthority ws not n lien onept for Muslim rulers, speifilly for the Ottomns up to the Tnzimt er. Prtiulrly, fter the onquest of the Ar lnds of Asi nd Afri y Selim I in 1517 nd Süleymn I s susequent onquest of entrl Mesopotmi, the Ottomn stte ws trnsformed into n Islmi Empire. Selim I nd his followers eme the supreme liph of ll those Muslim lnds. Towrds the Tnzimt er, strong emphsis ws pled on the Sunni interprettion of the Islmi fith ontrry to the presene of other sets of Islm nd fiths, like Shiism, Yezidism or Zeyidism. However, the reform movements in the Tnzimt er fored the empire to onstrut more seulr stte system for ll its sujets. The Tnzimt edit grnted freedom of worship for ll forms of religion nd the 1856 Pris Trety onfirmed the rights of the Ottomn Christin sujets s ontinution of the moderniztion proess of the Ottomn Empire. The new odes on ommeril nd penl lws in ddition to the new edution system enhned the seulriztion of the stte etween the yers 1839 nd Ottomn ureurts imed to unite ll sujets under the ide of Ottomnism whih ws used y the stte ginst the ntionlist movements whih were propgndized y the Europen powers. 10 From this perspetive, Ottomnism eme n lterntive to the role of Sunni Islm for entrl uthority. Despite the promoted Ottomnist ide, the ntionlist nd seessionist movements used the repeted filures of Ottomn governors nd the loss of lrge Europen territories throughout the 19 th entury. 11 The loss of 5 Tnyeli, 2013: 97 6 The term B-ı Ali, lso known s Sulime Port, Ottomn Porte or High Porte, is used for define the entrl government of the Ottomn Empire whose memers were grnd vizier, viziers, ministers. [Kırmızı, 2007: 2] 7 Krpt, 2001: 3 8 Krpt, 2001; Deringil, 2004; Ortylı, Deringil, 1991: 345; Krpt, 2001: Somel, 1999: Deringil, 2004

7 Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi Chllenging the Cnon C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN [2018] 1[55] PROSTOR Krpt, 2001: Çetinsy, 2006: Deringil, 2004: 26-27; Krpt, 2001: Önl, Bekçi, Erkmen, Erkmen, 2011: Prmksız, Uluçm, 1989; Ekii, Ekii, 2006 the Blkn provines resulted in derese of over one-third of the popultion nd sustntil revenues. Susequent to this redution, the Muslim popultion in the Asin Ar lnds eme more signifint thn ever efore. At this junture, Adülhmid II ontinued the ntion-stte disourse to the Ar Lnds, nd if Muslims hd epted ethniity s foundtion for ntionhood, the result would hve een totl disintegrtion of the Ottomn stte. 12 Therefore, Adülhmid II s first gol ws to prevent the frgmenttion of the Ottomn lnds into territoril sttes. He emphsized the Ottomn Sultn s title Cliph of Islm s unifying motif for the integrtion of the Muslim popultion nd for the mintenne of the Empire s territoril integrity ginst the intervention of Europen powers. A Sunni orthodox interprettion of the Islmi fith ws used nd propgndized s the min ideologil tool of the Ottomn Stte. When the Ottomn geogrphy of tht time is onsidered, fer of n Ar Cliph originlly provoked this type of Islmi mnifesttion for the Ottomn Stte. 13 Under these irumstnes, Adülhmid II developed more powerful imperil symolism thn tht of his predeessors. He used it s propgnd tool to strengthen his uthority nd to mnifest nd spred his poliy over the whole territory. The ideologil nd the politil messges of the sultn were then spred to his sujets through this rih world of symolism demonstrted in mny different wys suh s the newly designed ot of rms, ommemortive medllions, even in militry mrh omposed y Europen omposers. 14 Among these tools of legitimy, rhiteturl endevors plyed signifint role. Both the wqf reords nd the other rhivl douments indite tht during Adülhmid s er ( ), there ws sustntil onstrution tivity in the whole of the empire. 15 Exmples of this onstrution tivity inlude lok towers in ity enters, fountins, ity grdens, shools, rilwy sttions, hospitls, government hlls nd mosques. In her study on Adülhmid II s juilee strutures, Alev Erkmen sttes tht there ws n inrese in this tivity throughout the empire ner the 25 th juilee of Adülhmid II s sension to the throne. 16 She onsiders tht sed on onstrution list prepred for his 25 th juilee, 1376 uildings were onstruted or renewed in Ottomn lnds, nd most of these were in the provines. 17 Even though it is unlikely tht ll of the uildings on tht list were onstruted, this list is signifint in understnding the importne of onstrution tivities for Adülhmid II. The new nd modern uildings in the ities reminded people of the existene of strong, entrl uthority in the pitl. Among the immense uilding tivities, two types of strutures drew prtiulr ttention in the ities; mosques nd shools. While shools (the high shools - idâdi, seondry shools - rüştiye nd primry shools - iptidâi) were onsidered s the new fe of the modernized stte 18, the onstrution of the mosques enhned the offiil stte messge whih ws sed on the Sunni Islmi fith of the empire. Aording to Uluçm, the rhivl douments nd susequent reserh prove tht during the Adülhmid II s er ( ), there ws onsiderly lrge numer of onstrution projets prepred for the Ottomn territories of the Middle Est, prtiulrly in Irq nd Antoli. 19 The mjority of the rhiteturl drwings found in the Ottomn rhives onsist of the projets for shools nd mosques. While the shool projets were new uildings, the projets prepred for the mosques were mostly for restortion. 20 Be- Fig. 1 Ayvlık Hmidiye, Sl. 1. Džmij Ayvlık Hmidiye, d

8 122 PROSTOR 1[55] 26[2018] C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN Chllenging the Cnon Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi Tle II Clssifition of the mosques sed on their pln sheme Tl. II. Klsifikij džmij n osnovu njihovih tlort A. Spe Strutured under Single Dome Kony Aziziye Selnik Yeni Smsun Gret (Hmidiye, Vlide) Gzintep Alüddevle Küthy Hmidiye Söğüt Hmidiye B. Spe Strutured under Dome Surrounded y Vults Çnkkle Ftih Burhniye Gret (Ko) Adıymn Gret C. Spe Strutured under Multiple Domes (Burs Type) Küthy Gret Söğüt Çelei Sultn Mehmet Cmi İzmir Hmidiye Tomrz Merkez Blıkseri Zğnos Pş Ayvlık Hmidiye Firzovik Gret Pınrşı Aziziye Aydın Rmzn Psh Mlty Yeni use the interests of the British regrding Irq fored Adülhmid II to tke tion ginst the seprtist ides in tody s Irq nd with the intervention of the Shi i Irn to the est, there ws signifint thret to the stte during these times. 21 Therefore, Adülhmid II imed to use the shools nd mosques s sign oth for his symoli representtion in those provines nd lso s the sign for Sunni Islm nd for the Cliph of ll Muslims. PROVINCIAL MOSQUES WITH RESPECT TO PLAN SCHEMES AND SPATIAL CONFIGURATIONS PROVINCIJSKE DŽAMIJE S OBZIROM NA TLOCRTNE SHEME I PROSTORNU KONFIGURACIJU The sptil orgniztion of n Ottomn mosque is tightly relted with the ground pln. The ground pln gives its generl forms to the mss nd over system, whih in turn defines the volume of the uilding. Bsilly, the ground pln nd the over define the mjor hrteristis of mosque nd the spe itself. Two of the written douments tht pro- vide guide to understnding the essene nd the logi of the Ottomn rhiteture in the lssil period re Tezkiret-ül Eniye nd Tezkiret-ül Bünyn whih were written y poet Si Mustf Çelei in the 17 th entury. 22 Bsed on these two reords, Sinn introdued the min tsk of Ottomn rhiteture whih ws to onstrut domes, hlf domes nd ind them with rhes in stisfying wy depending on the suffiieny or defiieny of pillrs, olumns nd uttresses. 23 This sttement lerly suggests tht the whole design minly originted from generlly modest pln sheme, nd the inorportion of over whih refers to the orgniztion of the domes, semi domes or in some ses vults in Ottomn rhiteture. The omintion of these two speifies the height nd width of the min spe nd lso the position nd numers of the vertil elements. From this perspetive, the sptil onfigurtions of the provinil mosques hve een tegorized into three min groups sed on their pln shemes nd overs (Tle II). The spe onfigurtions of these mosques re going to e evluted ording to their ground plns nd the oservtions mde y the uthor. In group A, single-domed mosques re gthered. Bsed on this pln sheme, the single dome overs the whole hrim prt (min pryer hll prt) of the mosque. This single dome is the most dominnt element of the whole mss. In lmost ll of the mosques of this tegory, the dome is elevted y n otgonl drum. While in the Hmidiye in Ayvlık (Fig. 1), the smll unique dome sits on ylindril drum, nd in the Aluddevle in Gzintep (Fig. 2) polygonl drum provides the trnsition etween the min ody nd the dome itself. Though the single-domed mosques were ommonly used in lssil Ottomn rhiteture, generlly the three or five-domed portio on the south fçde typilly ompnied this sheme. However, in the 19 th entury provinil mosques, the sene of the portios is noted s one of the signifint differenes. The lst pryer hll ws eliminted from the min struture, not only in single-domed mosques, ut lso in other types of mosques. Hmidiye in Küthy (Fig. 3), Aluddevle in Gzintep, Ftih in Çnkkle (Fig. 4), Gret in Burhniye (Fig. 5), Zgnos Psh in Blıkesir (Fig. 6) nd Hmidiye in Söğüt (Fig. 7) were onstruted without ny vestiule or preprtion spe. Differenes regrding the lst pryer hll highlight the ontrst in rhiteturl lnguge etween the pitl nd 21 Çetinsy, For the Turkish trnsltion of the ooks, see: Si Mustf Çelei, 2002

9 Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi Chllenging the Cnon C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN [2018] 1[55] PROSTOR 123 the provines. Compred with the lrge spes of the vestiule setions of the 19 th entury mosques in the pitl, the eliminted lst pryer hlls in the provines emphsize different design pproh. Furthermore, this kind of vrition is lso oserved in the sptil orgniztion of the sultn lodges (hünkr mhfili). In the pitl, the sultn s lodges re lmost igger thn the min pryer hlls nd gined slightly independent hrter from the rest of the struture. It is more suitle to designte these setions s pvilions sine they hve distint sptil orgniztion nd over system from the whole uilding. This seprtion is never oserved in the provinil rhiteture exept in the New in Thessloniki (Fig. 8); the rhiteturl funtion of whih showed some distintions from trditionl Sunni shrines. Sine it ws onstruted for the Dönme ommunity, it is elieved tht the different religious rituls rried influene from the Jewish rituls, Muslim rituls nd msoni rituls. 24 The funtion of the lrge two-storied setion of the uilding ould hve served for one of those prtiulr rituls. Nturlly, the need of n exggerted pvilion n e explined y the presene of the sultn, ut sine he lived in the pitl, there hd to e speifi setion for his worship in his own mosque. Yet, this ws unneessry for the provines. While the sptil orgniztion of the provinil mosques whih hve single-domed pln shemes n e interpreted s ontinution of the lssil period; the dome-vults pln sheme in group B n e onsidered novelty tht developed in the provines in the 19 th entury. In this group, the spe strutured under entrl dome is surrounded y vults. In this pln sheme, the orners re overed with smll domes or rrel vults. 23 Meriç, 1965: Ber, Elmes, 1826 Even though reting omprehensive spe for the ongregtion is the min gol in mosque s design, the dome nd the vults round it divide the min pryer hll. The high elevtion of the inner spe prevents the omprtmentliztion of the pryer hll like tht in the Gret in Burhniye (Fig. 5), Zgnos Psh in Blıkesir (Fig. 6), Aziziye in Pınrşı (Fig. 9) nd Yeni (New) in Mlty (Fig. 10). Here the entrl dome is muh more symoli nd minor thn the mosques onstruted in the lssil period of Ottomn rhiteture. The dominnt view of the single dome is repled y this new sheme in the 19 th entury provinil rhiteture presenting new spe onept s well s novel pproh to fde design. In ddition to the two different interprettions of the single-domed pln shemes in group A nd B, there re lso mosques with multiple-domed pln sheme in the provines. While in Gret in Küthy (Fig. 11), the two ig domes re supported y smll domes nd semi domes on its four sides, in the Celei Sultn Mehmet in Söğüt (Fig. 12) 16 domes over the min spe. It is elieved tht for these two exmples, the olumns of the former mosque were used without hnging their existing position in the uilding, whih my e the reson for using multiple-domed pln shemes in those mosques. PROVINCIAL MOSQUES WITH RESPECT TO FACADE DESIGNS PROVINCIJSKE DŽAMIJE S OBZIROM NA DIZAJN PROÈELJA The evlution of the fde rrngements of these mosques should egin with disussion on the mening nd onnottions of the term fde in reltion to the term elevtion. While the word elevtion s tehnil term minly refers to the geometril representtion of n edifie mesured vertilly 25, Fig. 2 Gzintep Alüddevle, Sl. 2. Džmij Gzintep Alüddevle, d

10 124 PROSTOR 1[55] 26[2018] C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN Chllenging the Cnon Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi Fig. 3 Küthy Hmidiye, 1905 Sl. 3. Džmij Küthy Hmidiye, Fig. 4 Çnkkle, Sl. 4. Džmij Çnkkle, the word fde derived from the Ltin word fies, synonymous with the fe nd pperne is desried s the front view or prtil elevtion of uilding tht is seen y the eye t single glne, mostly restrited to the prinipl front. 26 The two terms elevtion nd fçde re differentited from eh other y inditing the ltter s the puli fe of struture. It is importnt to point out the mening nd onnottions of these terms when disussing the fde designs of 19 th entury provinil mosques, espeilly in light of works suh s Krier s tht stte the fde is the most essentil rhiteturl element ple of ommuniting the funtion nd signifine of uilding. 27 He dds tht the fde never only fulfills the nturl requirements determined y the rrngement of the rooms ehind; it tlks out the ulturl sitution t the time when the uilding ws onstruted. 28 Krier s sttement hs signifine in interpreting the fde designs of the provinil mosques, euse these fdes my e onsidered s fe of the Sultn himself who wnted to expnd his pperne outside of the pitl nd lso s frme tht outlined the Sultn s ideology. For these resons, the word fde is deliertely used for the four sides of the provinil mosques in ple of elevtion throughout this rtile. In lssil Ottomn mosque rhiteture, the elevtions re minly determined y the over of the struture. The northern elevtion, whih onsists of the min entrne, is distinguished from the other elevtions with its more elorted pperne. 29 The southern elevtion in prtiulr is plin nd less deorted thn the others nd generlly ontins mihr projetion. However, in the 19 th entury provinil mosques, ll fdes were eqully enhned nd deorted inluding the mihr fdes. For instne, in the Aluddevle in Gzintep (Fig. 2), seond lyer of wll ws dded ehind the mihr setion y whih smll losure is reted in the inside of the mosque. From the outside, two lind windows were pled on the fçde ontining the mihr to ontinue the sme fde rrngement on ll sides of the mosque s exterior. A similr exmple is seen in the Gret in Burhniye (Fig. 5) whih hs three entrnes on its north, est nd west sides. The rhiteturl lnguge of those outer fdes is ontinued on ll sides inluding the mihr fde. Behind this osession for designing onsistent, uniform nd eqully elorte fdes tht even required reting lind windows is the ide tht the fdes of the provinil mosques were pereived s puli imge of the Sultn s legitimy during Adülhmid d

11 Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi Chllenging the Cnon C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN [2018] 1[55] PROSTOR 125 II s er ( ). Thus the fes of those mosques eme n imperil symol for dissemintion of the sultn s uthority s prt of his entrliztion poliy. The size nd the silhouette of the min dome nd lso the smll domes round it were regrded s n pprovl for the presene of the sultn s uthority in the provines during the lssil period of Ottomn rhiteture, ut in the 19 th entury, the dominne of the dome ws repled with the dominne of fdes. This novelty on the fde design rings new rhiteturl mentlity to the struturl system of the mosques. Even though the spe pereption of the min pryer hlls does not enounter signifint hnge, the new fde rrngement ffeted the exterior of the struture s oserved mosques suh s Gret in Burhniye (Fig. 5), Gret in Adıymn (Fig. 13), Zgnos Psh in Blıkesir (Fig. 6), Aziziye in Pınrşı (Fig. 9), nd Yeni (New) in Mlty (Fig. 10). While the min domes were eoming smller, the vults on the sides eme prt of the over for the min pryer hll. The rhes of those vults eme gle wlls t the top of eh fde in those mosques. In some mosques, the vults re hidden ehind nother pediment like the tringulr wll on the fdes nd seond pith roof over lose the vults on the top. This kind of tringulr pediment on four fdes n only e seen in the Pertevniyl Vlide in Istnul. The mosques in the provines re distinguished from the other mosques with their prtiulr fde rrngements. This new design onept on the fdes provides more dynmi pperne for the entire uilding with the dditionl pediment-wll whih n e evluted s development in Ottomn Arhiteture in the 19 th entury. The other reson for the need of fde orgniztion n e explined y the urn de- Fig. 5 Burhniye Gret, Sl. 5. Velik džmij Burhniye, Fig. 6 Blıkesir Zğnos Pş, Sl. 6. Džmij Blıkesir Zğnos Pş, d

12 126 PROSTOR 1[55] 26[2018] C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN Chllenging the Cnon Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi Fig. 7 Söğüt Hmidiye, 1905 Sl. 7. Džmij Söğüt Hmidiye, Fig. 8 Thessloniki New, Sl. 8. Nov džmij Thessloniki velopment in the ities. Some of the provinil mosques whih were onstruted in newly urnized prt of the ities hd to e tller to e seen mong the other three or four storied new government uildings suh s high shools, governor s offies, ity hlls, port offies, hospitls nery. The lrge nd high windows on the fdes nd the vertil elements surrounding the four sides of the mosque rete pereption tht there re severl stories in the mosque nd reflets this intention. CONCLUSION: AN ALTERNATIVE READING ON THE NINETEENTH CENTURY PROVINCIAL SULTAN MOSQUES ZAKLJUÈAK: ALTERNATIVNA INTERPRETACIJA PROVINCIJSKIH SULTANOVIH DŽAMIJA 19. STOLJEÆA This pper proposes n lterntive historiogrphy to the 19 th entury Ottomn mosque rhiteture y emphsizing existing dulities in the gret non suh s the notions of pitl versus provine nd the nrrtion of Ottomn rhiteture efore nd fter the 19 th entury. The kground informtion on the entrliztion gend of the Hmidin regime is signifint for the evlution of provinil rhiteture sine this type of strit entrliztion poliy reted its own imperil symolism within its own proteted domins. This pper, srutinizing 19 th entury provinil mosques lmost ll of whih were uilt during Adülhmid II s er ( ), demonstrtes tht mosques n e ounted s one of the most signifint prts of the Hmidin regime s legitimy strutures in the ities, s they represented the offiil symol for the Ottomn s Sunni-Islmi fith. Tle I lerly shows tht Adülhmid II emphsized the onstrution of mosques more thn ny of his predeessors, in oth uilding new ones nd lso restoring the old ones. Consequently, he used mosques s propgnd tool to strengthen his politil messge sed on the ideology of the unifying role of the Sunni Islm nd of the Cliphte of ll Muslims throughout the Ottomn territories. Within the light of these oservtions, one n spek of ertin non or rhetype onsiously determined y the enter. The mosques studied for this pper led to the onlusion tht the provinil rhetype differs distintly in ertin spets from the rhiteturl lnguge in the pitl. The rhiteturl nlysis for this pper ws onduted sed on two si tegories, nmely pln type nd fçde design. The nlysis onerning the pln types hs led to the following results: It is possile to identify three

13 Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi Chllenging the Cnon C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN [2018] 1[55] PROSTOR 127 distint groups in terms of pln type or sptil onfigurtion. In the first group, there re the mosques where single dome overs the hrim setion similr to the mosques in the pitl with the three or five-domed portio on the south fçde ompnying this sheme. A signifint differene is oserved in the sene of the portios. The lst pryer hll ws eliminted from the min struture, not only in single-domed mosques, ut lso in other types of mosques. The ontrst in rhiteturl lnguge regrding the eliminted lst pryer hll in ontrst with the lrge vestiule setions of the 19 th entury mosques in the pitl is signifint to note. Similrly, there re vritions in the sptil orgniztion of the sultn lodges whih re not oserved s seprte from the min uilding in the provines, unlike the sultn s lodges in the pitl whih re igger thn the min pryer hlls nd gined slightly independent hrter from the min uilding. In the seond group, the mosques were uilt ording to the dome-vults pln sheme, novelty whih developed in the provines in the 19 th entury. In this group, the spe strutured under entrl dome is surrounded y vults. Here, the entrl dome is more symoli nd minor thn tht in the mosques onstruted in the lssil period of Ottomn rhiteture. The dominnt view of the single dome is repled y this new sheme in the 19 th entury provines. This sheme presents new spe onept s well s novel pproh to fde design. In the third group, there re mosques with the multiple-domed pln sheme. Similr to those strutures in the previous tegory, mere forml similrity with the Burs Gret hs led to interprettions of return to the pst; however, the nlysis suggests more prtil reson where the olumns of the former mosques re used without hnging their existing position in the uilding. This prgmtist pproh in the use of former struturl onfigurtion hs led to the use of multipledomed pln shemes in those mosques. The nlysis onduted regrding fçde designs does not stritly follow the three tegories in terms of pln types. Insted it is possile to reh more generl onlusions onerning the rhiteturl priniples governing the fçde designs of the 19 th entury provinil mosques. One of the mjor distintions of this pper from the existing literture is in its serh for n lterntive reding of the fdes in ontrst with the trditionl stylisti nlyses of Ottomn mosques. This pper interprets the fdes of the mosques with respet to their reltion nd intertions with their surroundings nd the symoli menings nd messges propgted y these fdes towrds the ity. A signifint distintion in the fde design of the 19 th entury provinil mosques is in the eqully enhned nd deorted pproh to ll the fdes - inluding the mihr fçde - in ontrst with the elorted single fde tendeny of the pst. Fig. 9 Pınrşı Aziziye, Sl. 9. Džmij Pınrşı Aziziye, Fig. 10 Mlty Yeni, Sl. 10. Džmij Mlty Yeni, d

14 128 PROSTOR 1[55] 26[2018] C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN Chllenging the Cnon Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi d Fig. 11 Küthy Gret, Sl. 11. Džmij Küthy Gret, Fig. 12 Söğüt Çelei Sultn Mehmet, 1890(?) Sl. 12. Džmij Söğüt Çelei Sultn Mehmet, 1890.(?) There re two min resons for this new osession s designing onsistent, uniform nd eqully elorted fdes. The first is tht the fdes were onsidered to e puli mnifesttion of the Sultn in the ities. Thus the fes of those mosques eme n imperil symol for the dissemintion of the sultn s uthority. The dominne of the dome in the ity silhouette ws repled with the dominne of the high fdes. This emphsis on the exteriors ws hieved y the modifition of the struturl system of the mosques. The min domes got smller, the vults on the sides eme prt of the over nd the rhes of those vults eme gle wlls t the top of eh fde. In some mosques, pith roofs overed the vults nd those pith roofs re seen s pediment. These fde rrngements were the distinguishing spets of the mosques in the provines. They provided heightened pperne for the entire uilding through the dditionl pediment-wll whih n e evluted s new development in Ottomn Arhiteture in the 19 th entury. The seond reson for the need of tller nd emphsized fde orgniztion is the urn development in the ities. s onstruted in newly urnized prts of the ities, with three or four-story uildings nery hd to e tller nd visully more impressive thn ll of the surrounding uildings to hieve their symoli funtion. The lrge nd high windows on the fdes nd the vertil elements tht surrounded the four sides of the mosque reted pereption tht there re severl stories in the mosque nd n e evluted s refletion of this intention. If disussion of the historiogrphy of 19 th entury provinil mosques ws to e onduted ording to the frmework of the existing style prdigm in the gret non, then, inevitly, stylisti nlogy sed on the existing repertory of rhiteturl historiogrphy would interpret the rhiteturl fetures (suh s the engged olumns on the fdes, quoins, lustrde lines, ornies, high nd slim olumns in ertin lst pryer hlls, pediment-like tringulr gle wlls, olonnded entries) s mere imittions influened y the neo-lssi style in Europe. A further step in suh disussion would e to interpret these mosques s devition or reking point long the lssil trdition of Ottomn rhiteture. Suh line of thought would onlude y stting tht the hrteristis of the 19 th entury provinil mosques refleted the politil dey of the Ottomn Empire in the field of rhiteture within the frmework of the onepts of westerniztion nd deline. The lterntive proposed y this pper is to view the rhiteture of 19 th entury provinil mosques not s devition, ut s nturl step within the ontinuity of the hnging nd evolving pth of Ottomn r-

15 Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi Chllenging the Cnon C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN [2018] 1[55] PROSTOR 129 hiteture with its sptil hrteristis, the reltionships estlished with the ity, nd the symoli menings imposed y the politil gend of the dy. After ll, sed on the evlutions of this pper, it is not frfethed to sy tht rhiteturl fetures suh s the lyout of the hrim setion hs not hnged t ll ompred to 16 th entury exmples or tht there is similr sptil reltionship etween the spe overed y the min dome nd the surrounding hlf-domes nd vults when ompring these mosques nd Sinn s lter period works. On the other hnd, western modes used on the fdes with Europen origins should e onsidered s refletion of the estlished tste of the times nd the rhiteturl lnguge of the pitl. This is nturl result within the dynmis of n rhiteturl prodution mehnism dominted y the entrlist pproh of the pitl with strong politil gend. However, s demonstrted in the rtile, these rhiteturl elements with foreign origins re used within the ontinuity of Ottomn rhiteture in the provinil mosques, in ddition to the well-known mosques of the pitl. [Written in English y uthor; proof-red y Ctherine E. Boitt, Pennsville, New Jersey] Fig. 13 Adıymn Gret, Sl. 13. Velik džmij Adıymn, d 26 Elmes, Krier, 1983: Krier, 1983: Erzen, 2004

16 130 PROSTOR 1[55] 26[2018] C. KATIPOğLU ÖZMEN Chllenging the Cnon Sientifi Ppers Znnstveni prilozi Biliogrphy Litertur 1. Arseven, C.E. (1984), Türk Sntı, Cem Yyınevi, İstnul 2. Artn, T. (2006), Questions of Ottomn Identity nd Arhiteturl History, in: Rethinking Arhiteturl Historiogrphy [ed. Arnold, D. et l.], Routledge: , New York 3. Aslnp, O. (1971), Turkish Art nd Arhiteture, Preger Pulisher, New York 4. Ber, M.D. (2010), The Dönme: Jewish Converts, Muslim Revolutionries nd Seulr Turks, Stnford University Press, Cliforni 5. Btur, A. (1999), The Sujet of Style in Ottomn Arhiteture t the End of the 19 th Century, in: Foundtion Mx Vn Berhem: , Genev 6. Bein, A. (2006), Politis, Militry, Consription nd Religous Edution in the Lte Ottomn Empire, Interntionl Journl of Middle Est Studies, 38 (2): Cn, S. (2010), Bilinmeyen Aktörleri ve Olylrı ile Son Dönem Osmnlı Mimrlığı, Erzurum İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü, İstnul 8. Colons, V. (1990), Vitlino Poselli: An Itlin Arhitet in Thessloniki, Environmentl Design: Journl of the Islmi Environmentl Design Reserh, 8 (9-10): Çetinsy, G. (2006), Ottomn Administrtion of Irq, , Routledge, London nd New York 10. Denny, W.B. (1999), Provinil Ottomn Arhiteture nd the Metropolitn Style: Questions of Mening nd Originlity, in: Art Tur/Turkish Art- 10 th Interntionl Congress of Turkish Art, Genev Septemer 1995 [ed. Derohe, F.], Foundtion Mx Vn Berhem: , Genev 11. Deringil, S. (1990), The Struggle ginst Shiism in Hmidin Irq: A Study in Ottomn Counter-Propgnd, Die Welt des Islms, New Series, 30 (1-4): Dündr, A. (2000), Arşivlerdeki Pln ve Çizimler Işığı Altınd Osmnlı İmr Sistemi (XVIII. ve XIX. Yüzyıl), T.C. Kültür Bknlığı Milli Kütüphne, Ankr 13. Ekii, C. (2006), Osmnlı Döneminde Irk Pln, Fotoğrf ve Belgelerle, Bşknlık Devlet Arşivleri Genel Müdürlüğü, İstnul 14. Elmes, J. (1826), A Generl nd Biliogrphil Ditionry of the Fine Arts. s.n., London 15. Erkmen, A. (2011), Geç Osmnlı Dünysınd Mimrlık ve Hfız: Arşiv, Juile, Aide, Metis Yyınlrı, İstnul 16. Erzen, J.N. (2004), Sinn Ottomn Arhitet n Aestheti Anlysis, Metu Fulty of Arhiteture, Ankr 17. Gi, H.A.R.; Bowen, H. (1950), Islmi Soiety nd the West: A Study of the impt of Western Civiliztion on Moslem Culture in the Ner Est, Oxford University Press, New York 18. Goodwin, G. (1971), A History of Ottomn Arhiteture, The Johns Hopkins Press, Bltimore 19. Hrtmuth, M. (2010), The History of Centre-Periphery Reltions s History of Style in Ottomn Provinil Arhiteture, in: Centres nd peripheries in Ottomn rhiteture: rediso vering Blkn heritge [ed. Hrtmuth, M.] Culturl Heritge without Borders: 18-29, Srjevo/ Stokholm 20. Heper, M. (1980), Center nd Periphery in the Ottomn Empire: With Speil Referene to the Nineteenth Century, Interntionl Politil Siene Review, 1 (1): İnlık, H. (1973), The Ottomn Empire. The Clssil Age , Preger Pulisher, New York 22. Krpt, K. (2001), The Politiiztion of Islm: Reonstruting Identity, Stte, Fte nd Community in the Lte Ottomn Stte, Oxford University Press, New York 23. Kırmızı, A. (2007), Adülhmid in Vlileri; Osmnlı Vilyet İdresi , Klsik Yy, İstnul 24. Krier, R. (1983), Elements of Arhiteture, Arhiteturl Design, 53 (9/10): 1-87, London 25. Kun, D. (2007), Osmnlı Mimrisi, Yem Yyınlrı, İstnul 26. Kurn, A. (1988), Ottomn Clssil s in Istnul nd in the Provines, in: Theories nd Priniples of Design in the Arhiteture of Islmi Soieties [ed. Sevenko, B.] Ag Khn Progrm for Islmi Arhiteture: 3-22, Cmridge, Msshusetts 27. Lewis, B. (1968), The Emergene of Modern Turkey, Oxford University Press, New York 28. Meier, A. (2002), Wqf Only in Nme, Not in Essene; Erly Tnzimt Wqf Reorms in the Provines of Dmsus, in: The Empire in the City; Ar Provinil Empire in the Lte Ottomn Empire [ed. Hnssen, J. et l.], Ergon Verlg Würzurg in Kommission: , Beirut 29. Meriç, R.M. (1965), Mimr Sinn: Hytı, Eserleri, Türk Trih Kurumu Bsımevi, Ankr 30. Önl, E.F.; Bekçi, S. (2007), Sultn İkini Adülhmid Hn ın Hyır Eserleri. Çmlı, İstnul 31. Ortylı, İ. (2009), İmprtorluğun En Uzun Yüzyılı, Timş Yyınlrı, İstnul 32. Özgüven, Buru (2011), Constrution nd Reprtion Ativities in the Lte Ottomn Empire, in: 18 th Symposium of the Interntionl Committee of Pre-Ottomn nd Ottomn Studies 2008, Lit Verlg, , Berlin 33. Prmksız, Esm (2008), II. Adülhmid Dönemi ( ) Eğitim Sistemi, Eğitim Ypılrı ve rkeri Rüşdiyeler, unpulished PhD disserttion, Yıldız Tehnique University, Istnul 34. Si Mustf Çelei (2002), Ypılr Kitı. Tezkiretül Bünyn ve Tezkiretül Eniye, Mimr Sinn ın Anılrı ed. Develi, H.; Rift, S., Koçnk Yyınlrı, İstnul 35. Shw, S. (1976), History of the Ottomn Empire nd Modern Turkey, Cmridge University Press, New York 36. Şenyurt, O. (2011), Osmnlı Mimrlık Örgütlenmesinde Değişim ve Dönüşüm. Doğu Kitevi, İstnul 37. Somel, S.A. (1999), Osmnlı Modernleşme Döneminde Periferik Nüfus Gruplrı, Toplum ve Bilim, 83: Tnyeli, U. (2013), Bir Siysl-Meknsl Denetim ve Disiplin Arının Üç Görüntüsü: Merkez, Tşr, Çevre ve de Mimrlık, Arrndemento Mimrlık, Nisn: Uluçm, A. (1989), Irk tki Türk Mimri Eserleri, Kültür Bknlığı, Ankr 40. *** (1977), Centrliztion nd Deentrliztion in Ottomn Administrtion, Studies in the Eighteenth Century İslmi History, 1: *** (1991), Legitimy Strutures in the Ottomn Stte: The Reign of Adülhmid II ( ), Interntionl Journl of Middle Est Studies, 23: *** (2004), The Well Proteted Domins, I.B. Turis, London nd New York 43. *** (2005), Greek Arhitets in the Ottomn Empire, Olkos Pulishers, Athens Soures Izvori Arhive Soure Arhivski izvor Diretorte Generl of Foundtions [DGF] Arhive, Ankr - Ankr Vkıflr Genel Müdürlüğü Arşivi Internet Soure Internetski izvor Illustrtion Soures Izvori ilustrij Fig. 1.,; 2.,; 3.-; 4.,; 5., 6.,; 7.-; 10.-; 11.,; 12.-; 13., Author, Fig. 1.,d; 2.,d; 4.,d; 5.,; 6.,d; 9.-d; 11.,d; 13.,d DGF Arhive, retrieved in 2011 Fig. 8., retrieved in 2011 Fig. 8. Colons, 1990: 168 Tles I, II Author