Ottoman Architecture - Paperback (2nd Edition)

YEM Yayın has published a new edition of "Ottoman Architecture," written by Prof. Doğan Kuban with the aim of "unveiling prejudices related to Ottoman history, culture, and art, and putting an end to the clichés created by foreigners and even Turks themselves since the 19th century."

This comprehensive reference work, featuring meticulously compiled academic data, includes nearly 1,000 specially taken photographs, architectural drawings, engravings, comparative tables, and maps, as well as an Ottoman-Turkish Architectural Dictionary.

DOĞAN KUBAN TALKS ABOUT "OTTOMAN ARCHITECTURE"

Doğan Kuban, who states that "the experience of establishing a relationship between social history and architectural history can also be evaluated as looking at Ottoman history through the mirror of architecture," shares his views on this unique work as follows:

"Ottoman architecture is the most internationally significant production and product of Ottoman culture. The Ottomans produced great works which, I believe, hold a special place in world architectural history; these have survived to this day and have influenced leading art historians and architects worldwide. I am a historian of this subject. I have been working in this field for over 60 years. As a master of this craft, I felt the need to explain architecture in a more detailed way, intertwined with Ottoman history and culture, with a different understanding than what has been done so far.

I prepared 'Ottoman Architecture' by bringing together ideas, studies, research, and comparisons from other works, which I compiled over many long years. In fact, I can say that I summarized in a single work a task that is encyclopedic in nature and could be done by many people. I say 'summarized' because it is not possible to fit all of Ottoman architecture into 720 pages. However, such works are not read encyclopedically. In my opinion, books prepared with an internally consistent approach are more illuminating because they have internal consistency. I tried to achieve this in a field where I spent 60 years, and I succeeded. That is why I am happy.

"Architectural history" can merely be the story of grand, rich, and beautiful buildings. It can also be the story of personal and societal demands related to a building, but this parameter has often not been given sufficient weight. Yet, structures do not materialize until these demands are transformed into a building program. Behind these demands and programs lie social functions, social values, personal tastes, manners, knowledge, and techniques. For example, the fact that the staircase, one of the most magnificent elements of architectural history, was not used as an important design element in Ottoman architecture before the 19th century, and that designs such as the Scala Reggia or the staircase hall of Würzburg Palace never developed in Turkey, is an architectural history problem that deserves contemplation. Similarly, seeking answers to questions about dimensions, symmetry, and ornamentation; examining the content of the desires and aspirations behind the wills that created houses, palaces, and mosques; is more important than merely displaying buildings as a cultural showcase. The fact that Sinan continued his research until he reached the Selimiye; the fact that Nuruosmaniye, built 20 years after the Hekimoğlu Ali Paşa Mosque, could be designed and implemented with such a bold interpretation at that time, are as important as the buildings themselves. Because it is these interpretations and tastes that make them unique and appealing. Understanding and explaining how much of these are tradition, how much thought, how much patron's command and taste, and how much the expression of the artist's will, are the efforts that make architectural history worth writing and reading. If written with a sufficiently developed intuition, this effort can better explain the true nature of historical production. I believe that architectural history can only have meaning if written this way, otherwise, it cannot go beyond a display of goods.

Readers of this work may reject the naming of structures they previously knew as mosques as zawiye or imaret here. This long-debated issue needed to reach a conclusion with clear evidence from documents. Because this issue is related to the structure of the state at the beginning of Ottoman history.

The information included in this narrative could not have been compiled without drawing upon the work of hundreds of experts who have been working on this subject for almost a century. Therefore, however much I may reject their judgments, I dedicate my book to the memory of researchers who have sincerely labored in this field..."