Journals / Gazi University Journal of Science / 2014 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 2

Courtyards in Ancient Anatolia: a Discussion of the Architectural Features of Open Spaces from the Neolithic Age to the End of the Bronze Age

Pages
823–837
Publication Date
2014-06-27
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Courtyards and other open spaces are discussed in this study, and a new classification is suggested to frame the use of courtyards in Ancient Anatolian architecture better.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study applies a method that evaluates the use of an architectural element in a specific place and time by referring to a discussion begun by other scholars.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In accordance with the definition and classification advanced by this study, the article proposes a re-evaluation of spaces previously identified as courtyards in research and publications regarding the development of Anatolian architecture from the Neolithic Age to historic ages.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Courtyards and other open spaces are discussed in this study, and a new classification is suggested to frame the use of courtyards in Ancient Anatolian architecture better.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Ancient Anatolia · Anatolian Architecture · Courtyard.

Abstract

This study applies a method that evaluates the use of an architectural element in a specific place and time by referring to a discussion begun by other scholars. In accordance with the definition and classification advanced by this study, the article proposes a re-evaluation of spaces previously identified as courtyards in research and publications regarding the development of Anatolian architecture from the Neolithic Age to historic ages. Courtyards and other open spaces are discussed in this study, and a new classification is suggested to frame the use of courtyards in Ancient Anatolian architecture better.

🔖

Cite This Article

AYDIN, Ö., GASCO, G., ÇETİNTÜRK, N. (2014). Courtyards in Ancient Anatolia: a Discussion of the Architectural Features of Open Spaces from the Neolithic Age to the End of the Bronze Age. Gazi University Journal of Science, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 2, 823–837. https://ajindex.com/articles/254830

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (24)

  1. Jones, F. H., “The Concise Dictionary of Architecture”, Crisp Publications, Los Angeles, 90, (1990).
  2. Curl, J. S., “Oxford Dictionary of Architecture”, University Press, Oxford, 175, (1999).
  3. Sözen, M., Tanyeli, U., “Sanat Kavram ve Terimleri Sözlüğü”, Remzi Kitabevi, İstanbul, 31, (1999).
  4. Keister, D., “Courtyards – Intimate Outdoor Spaces”, Gibbs Smith, Salt Lake City, 3, (2005).
  5. Arseven, C. E., “Sanat Ansiklopedisi”, MEB Yayınları, 131-132, (1983).
  6. Mellaart, J., “Excavations at Hacılar”, The British Institute of Archacology at Ankara, Edinburgh, 11, 34, 35, 77, fig.9, fig.19, fig.35, (1970).
  7. Duru, R., “Kuruçay Höyük I”, Türk Tarih Kurumu, Ankara, 9, 16, 22, pl.32, (1994).
  8. Naumann, R., “Eski Anadolu Mimarlığı”, Türk Tarih Kurumu, Ankara, 363, 371, 380-384, 398, 399, 406- 413, fig.438, fig.503, (1985).
  9. Korfmann, M., “Demircihüyük”, Band I, Philipp von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein, 190, 193, 217, 222-241, (1985).
  10. Koşay, H.Z., “Keban Project Pulur Excavations 1968-1970” Middle East Technical Univesity Keban Project, Ankara, 36, (1976).
  11. Duru, R., “Bademağacı 1999”, 22. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, Kültür Bakanlığı Anıtlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara, 97-104, (2000).
  12. Özgüç, T., “Kültepe-Kaniş I”, Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, Ankara, 7, 42, 43, fig.14-16, (1959). Esin,U., Harmankaya, S., “Aşıklı”, Neolithic in Turkey, Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları, İstanbul, 115- 132, fig.3, (1999).
  13. Esin, U., “Akeramik Neolitik Evrede Aşıklı Höyük”, XI. Türk Tarih Kongresi, Ankara, 29-38, (1994).
  14. Esin, U., “1998 Aşıklı Höyük Kurtarma Kazısı Raporu”, 21. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, Ankara, 71- 80, (2000).
  15. Mellaart, J., “Çatal Hüyük: A Neolithic Town in Anatolia”, Thames and Hudson, London, 61, 68, fig.11, (1967).
  16. Hodder, I., Cessford, C., “Daily Practice and Social Memory at Çatalhöyük”, American Antiquity, 69(1): 17-40, (2004).
  17. Düring, B., “Social Dimensions in the Architecture of Çatalhöyük”, Anatolian Studies, 51: 1-18, (2001).
  18. Hodder, I., “Çatalhöyük”, Arkeoatlas, 1: 97, (2002).
  19. Esin, U., “Tepecik Kazısı 1974”,
  20. Türk Tarih Kurumu, Ankara, 85, pl.69, (1982).
  21. Lloyd, S., Mellaart, J., “Beycesultan”, Vol I, The British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara, London, 24-26, (1962).
  22. Korfmann, M., Mannesperger, D., “Troia – Homer, Ilias und die Folgen”, Band A, Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları, İstanbul, 30, 33, 39, (1992).
  23. Efe, T., “Küllüoba 1998 Yılı Kazısı”, 21. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı, Kültür Bakanlığı Anıtlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara, 117-128, (2000).
  24. Aktüre, S., “Anadolu’da Bron