Questioning an “icon of change”: The Nuruosmaniye complex and the writing of Ottoman architectural history

Nuruosmaniye külliyesinin Osmanlı mimarlık tarihi yazılımında bir ‘değişim simgesi’ olarak irdelenmesi

Özet

Onsekizinci yüzyılda İstanbul, önemli politik, sosyo-ekonomik ve kültürel değişikliklere sahne olmuş, halkın değişen zevkleri ve hayat tarzları ile devletin gücünü ve otoritesini yeniden kurma çabaları geniş ve yoğun bir mimari yapılaşmayı da beraberinde getirmiştir. Bu değişiklikler kentin genel görünümüne de yansımış, ithal edilen yabancı formlar ve yeniliklerin geleneksel Osmanlı unsurları ile birlikte kullanılması sonucu yeni ve karışık bir mimari dil ortaya çıkmaya başlamıştır. Bu çalışmanın konusu olan Nuruosmaniye Camisi ve külliyesi, Osmanlı mimarlık tarihinde ilk kez barok ve neo-klasik elemanların uygulandığı dini bir yapı olması ve bir daha tekrar edilmeyen at nalı şeklindeki avlusu ile büyük önem taşımaktadır. Bu yapının yenilikçi özelliklerinin, onsekizinci yüzyıl dinamikleri ışığında dönemin yerli ve yabancı yazarları tarafından nasıl algılandığının irdelenmesi amaçlanmakta, aynı zamanda ikincil kaynaklar ve sanat tarihi alanındaki çalışmalar araştırılarak modern tarih yazımında Nuruosmaniye’nin nasıl ele alındığı sorgulanırken Osmanlı mimarlık tarihinde bir “Değişim Simgesi” olarak algılanışı da incelenmektedir. Onsekizinci yüzyıl Osmanlı yazarları binanın mermer sütunları, aydınlık görünümü ve süslemelerinden övgü ile söz ederken, Batı etkisine işaret etmemektedirler. Buna karşılık dönemin yabancı yazarları yapının mimari unsurlarında Batı’ya gönderme yapmakta ve Nuruosmaniye’nin gerçek banisi olan I. Mahmud’un Avrupa’dan örnek kilise planları getirme çabalarını anlatmaktadırlar. Yirminci yüzyıl tarih ve sanat tarihi yazımlarında ise ilginç bir özellik göze çarpmaktadır. Yüzyılın ilk yarısındaki anlatımlar binanın Batı’dan esinlenen karışık uslubunu eleştirerek klasik Osmanlı mimarisini adeta “kirlettiğinden” söz etmekte, ikinci yarının modern yazarları ise Nuruosmaniye’yi cesur bir yaratıcılık örneği olarak görmektedirler.

Abstract

The eighteenth century began with the return of the court to İstanbul after the Edirne incident (1703) and some profound changes that took place in the political, economic, social, and cultural spheres . In the meantime, the Ottoman capital set the stage for an intensive architectural campaign; there was an upsurge in renovation, restoration, and building activities mainly for the purpose of reaffirming state presence and authority in İstanbul. These urban and architectural developments concomitant with the ongoing social transformations changed the built environment of the city, new building types emerged and there was an infiltration of foreign elements from outside cultures that was made visible in the gradual penetration of western neoclassical, baroque, and rococo forms. Hence a totally new architectural idiom started to appear in İstanbul, marked by the hybridity and co-existence of different styles that were incorporated into the traditional Ottoman canon. Cerasi (2001 b) emphasizes that the new architecture of the eighteenth century introduced variations and adaptations of old components, Ottoman and Byzantine, in combination with derived elements. It is important to note that “Western influence was not antithetic to tradition and to other influences”. According to Cerasi (1999) all this was more than mere change in style and ornament; it was indeed an evolution of urban design and artistic mentality in eighteenth century Ottoman culture. Hamadeh, pointing to the changing landscape of İstanbul in this period underlines social transformations, expansion in patronage patterns, and appearance of new building forms noting that the architectural campaign to beautify the city after long periods of neglect might also be attributed to an effort to reconstruct the image of İstanbul as the capital city of the former “glorious days” of the empire (2). The Nuruosmaniye Complex is the apogee of the stylistic transformations that began with the fountain of Ahmed III (1728) at the Bâb-ı Hűmâyûn. Started during the reign of Mahmud I (1748) and completed shortly after his death (1755), the Nuruosmaniye in Ottoman architectural history is considered to be the first royal religious complex displaying baroque and neo-classical elements such as shells, scrolls, molded cornices, and cartouches in its flamboyant surface decoration. Since it is the first sultanic complex built after the Yeni Valide mosque (completed in 1663), the Nuruosmaniye can also be considered as the visible expression of the dynasty’s efforts to reaffirm its power and potency in a period of political and economic hardship through the use of an innovative architectural vocabulary.The building has almost transparent façades with generous fenestration and elliptical windows (Figure 1); there are fluted capitals, round arches, placing of the mihrab inside a half-domed apsidal recess, an imposing imperial ramp, and a horse-shoe shaped polygonal courtyard which is unique in Ottoman mosque architecture (Figure 2, 3). We do not know the patron’s motives behind the unusual innovative character of the mosque, but he was known to have launched certain reformist attempts in the empire and invited European experts for that purpose. It is important to note here that the architect who was responsible for the building was Simeon Kalfa, a non-Muslim Greek (3). This study is devised to question whether the Nuruosmaniye, the prominent, imposing monument with all its unusual stylistic features, was perceived as a novelty by contemporaneous observers through a survey of local and foreign accounts as well as twentieth-century perceptions and art historical narratives with the aim of addressing the image and status of the Nuruosmaniye as it was established in modern historical writing.