THE MOSQUE OF SULEYMAN I.
ITS SECULAR AND SACRED ICONOGRAPHY
AND THEIR POSSIBLE SOURCES

Thesis for the Degree of M. A.
WCHEGAN STATE UNIVERSHY
CAROL GARRETT FISHER
1975

, II 311/ WWII/l am 11L 1 , \/

‘ . v I
' U I\
15 y r. ~
I . “11%“?
. i‘: W"

\\\\\\\

 

 

 
 

g Neda/m6.“

HEEL-‘8. W-
BOOK BENUERY INC.
1mm :v BINDER-‘3
IS? m I'"“'!.‘!.

 
             

ABSTRACT
THE MOSQUE OF SULEYMAN I: ITS SECULAR AND

SACRED ICONOGRAPHY AND THEIR
POSSIBLE SOURCES

BY

Carol Garrett Fisher

The following thesis deals with the political
and sacred iconography of the mosque of Suleyman the
Magnificent in Istanbul. This mosque was built in 1550-
1557 by the greatest of all Ottoman architects, Sinan,
as the royal mosque for Suleyman the Magnificent whose
reign marks the apex of Ottoman power. The mosque embodies
the ideologies of these men and the temper of the times.
As such it is worth a close study.

Suleyman's rule represents a culmination of a
political ideology which can be traced to Fatih, the
conqueror of Constantinople. Fatih saw himself as the
leader of the Turks, as the Muslim religious leader, and
in addition, he saw himself as the conqueror of Byzantium
and its heir. “He saw in all three titles, the titles
of EEEE' §h33i_and Caesar, gates leading to dominion over
the whole world."1 Unlike the western world, the position
was an intermingling of sacred and secular. This particu-

lar combination of roles is what gives the classical mosques

9"- 4

{it}
a)
\g
(3.“

Carol Garrett Fisher

of Sinan their special Ottoman character. Suleymaniye
is a culminating point in classical Ottoman mosque
architecture and, in this thesis, its iconography is
examined and related to the Ottoman concept of political
rule.

From the fourth century Constantinople had been
a seat of great political power. When Fatih took the
city in 1453, he had already conquered the rest of
Byzantium, and was fully aware of the symbolic importance
of the capture of Constantinople. Furthermore, within
Constantinople, Hagia SOphia seems to act as an important
part of the symbolic whole. Tursun Bey, Fatih's secretary,
records that he went directly to Hagia Sophia upon entering
the city and converted it to a mosque. He writes that it
is "a sign of Paradise . . . If you seek Paradise, Oh
you Sufi/the topmost heaven is Hagia Sophia."2 Suleymaniye
reflects the importance of Hagia Sophia as Holy Wisdom.
It is a part of what Louis Massignon calls "The Byzantine

3 The influence of Hagia

mirage in the Arab mirror."
SoPhia's dome-in-square construction, the symbolic function
as a cosmic house, the use of light as symbolic of wisdom
and possibly the function of Mary as the Throne of Wisdom

in the apse mosaic are related to Suleymaniye in the

following thesis.

Carol Garrett Fisher

There are, however, important differences between
the two buildings. The differences are pointed out and
reflected in the fact that the mosque is symbolic of

Islam par excellance. They are concerned with the axial

 

orientation of the gate, doors and mihrab, the decorative
elements of calligraphy, tiles and stained glass, the
composition of the mihrab area, and the symbolic concept
of light.

Sinan, in his position of Janissary to the Sultan,
was a member of the Bektasi sect of Dervishes, a Sufi
order. He was thus acquainted with some of the Sufi or
mystical Islamic thought that was a strong current in
Ottoman Islamic thought. This mystical mode of thinking,
therefore, may have entered into some of Sinan's plans
for his mosques if only indirectly. In the last chapter
of the thesis, some of the mystical thought that Sinan
knew is set forth and examined. Further, this thesis
attempts to connect Sufi thought with the traditional
Turkish emphasis on astronomy, mathematics and geometry,
all of which were commonly taught within the same curric-
ulum in which Sufi thought was taught.

In short, the thesis is an attempt to show how

these elements mesh to form a coherent iconographical

Carol Garrett Fisher

program and an important architectural unit that embody

the philosophies of Suleyman and Sinan.

 

lH. Inalcik, "Rise of the Ottoman Empire,"
Cambridge History of Islam, Vol. I, Cambridge, 1970, p. 297.

2B. Lewis, Istanbul and the Civilization of the
Ottoman Empire, Oklahoma, 1963, p. 4.

3O. Grabar, "Islamic Art and Byzantium," Dumbarton
Oaks Papers, 18 (1964), p. 88.

 

 

 

 

 

THE MOSQUE OF sfiLEYMAN I: ITS SECULAR AND
SACRED ICONOGRAPHY AND THEIR

POSSIBLE SOURCES

BY

Carol Garrett Fisher

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ART

Department of Art

1975

For Alan

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am grateful to many people for the help and
encouragement given me in my work on this thesis. First,
I wish to thank Professor Molly Smith, my major professor,
for the sound and scholarly guidance she has given at
each point and Professor Webster Smith for his extensive
and helpful comments. Professors Sadayashi Omoto and
Alford Welch were also generous in the time they took to
read and comment on my manuscript. Professor Priscilla
Soucek of the University of Michigan kindly shared her
findings on Istanbul mihrab inscriptions with me, and
Mr. Robert Avery, associate editor of the Redhouse Publish-
ing Company, Istanbul, referred me to sources dealing
with Islamic prayers and rituals. In addition, I am grate-
ful to the staffs of the Michigan State University Art
library, the Bibliotheque Nationale reading room and the
Bibliotheque d'Art et Archeologie in Paris and most
especially to Mr. Heath Lowry, director of the American
Research Institute in Turkey for making available the
resources of the Istanbul center in the summer of 1973.
I give great credit to both Mathew Spiro and Isa Konvitz

not only for the photographs taken but for their unfailing

iii

good humor in handling far flung and disheveled sources.
My mother, Jessie Garrett, spent a long weekend in proof-
reading. Finally, most especially and long due, to my
husband, Alan, for his support and advice at each turn--

cok tessekerederim.

 

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

II. SITE DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
III. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE OTTOMAN TURKS . . . 35
IV. BYZANTINE INFLUENCE . . . . . . . . . . . 40

V. THE REFLECTION OF ISLAM . . . . . . . . . 60
VI. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

10.

ll.

12.

LIST OF PLATES

Exterior of Sfileymaniye Kfilliye from
woodcut by M. Lorich c. 1560.

U. V5gt-Goknil, Living Architecture:
Ottoman, Fribourg, 1955, p. 53. . . . . .

 

Side view of Sfileymaniye from Flandin,
L'Orient, Paris, n.d., Plate 31 . . . . .

Rear View of Sfileymaniye from Flandin,
L'Orient, Paris, n.d., Plate 32 . . . . .

Courtyard of Sfileymaniye, Anonymous 19th
century print . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Floor plan of Sfileymaniye from B. Unsal,
Turkish Islamic Architecture in Seljuk
and Ottoman Times, London, 1959, Fig. 11

 

 

Interior of Sfileymaniye Camii. Mihrab
area. Courtesy of Keskin Color,
Istanbul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Detail of tiles from Sfileymaniye.
Courtesy of Keskin Color, Istanbul . . .

Floor plan of Hagia Sophia from A. Grabar,
The Golden Age of Justinian, New York,

 

I967, Fig. 93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Interior of Hagia Sophia. Courtesy of
Keskin Color, Istanbul . . . . . . . . .

Universe of Cosmas Indicopleustae from
J. P. Migne, Patrologiae Graecae, Vol. 88,
1860' p. 463 O O O O O O C C C C C O O O

 

Central dome of Sfileymaniye. Courtesy of
Keskin Color, Istanbul . . . . . . . . .

Main gate of Sfileymaniye Camii from
U. Vagt-Goknil, Living Architecture:
Ottoman, Fribourg, 1955, p. 39 . . . . .

 

vi

Page

13

16

18

20

22

25

30

42

44

47

67

75

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

Beth-Alpha Mosaic from E. Goodenough,
Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period,
Vol. I, New York, 1953, p. 639 . . . . . .

 

Colossal Buddha from Bamiyan Caves,
4th-5th Century. From S. Lee, A History
of Far Eastern Art, New York, n.d.,

Figure 155 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

 

Plan of Kirsehir'de Cacabey Camii from

A. S. Ulgen, "Kirsehir‘de Tfirk Eserleri,"
Vakiflar Dergisi, Vol. II, Ankara, 1942,
Plate 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

Windowuof Kirsehir'de Cacabey Camii.
A. S. Ulgen, "Kirsehir'de Turk Eserleri,"
Vakiflar Dergisi, Vol. II, Ankara, 1942 .

 

Cordoba mosque with mihrab in background.

R. Castejon, La Mezauita Aljama de Cordoba,

 

Spain, 1973, p. 33 . . . . . . . . . . . .

Examples of other Greco-Roman Torah Shrine
designs. E. Goodenough, Jewish Symbols in

 

the Greco-Roman Period, Vol. I., New York,
1953' Figures 58-61. 0 o o o o a o o o o o

 

Roman honorific niches. From J. Beckwith,
The Art of Constantinople, London, 1968 .

 

Missorium of Theodosius from G. Mathews,
Byzantine Aesthetics, London, 1963,
Plate 8 O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O

 

Apse mosaic of Madonna Enthroned, Hagia
Sophia, Istanbul. Courtesy of Keskin
Color, Istanbul . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Persian tombstone of Mahmud 753/1352.
Courtesy of Metropolitan Museum of Art,
New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Detail of stalactites of Sfileymaniye from
U. Vogt-Goknil, Living Architecture:
Ottoman, Fribourg, 1955, p. 42 . . . . . .

 

Detail of stained glass from Sfileymaniye
Camii. Courtesy of Keskin Color,
Istanbul . . C C O O . C O O O O O C C . .

vii

78

81

83

85

88

91

94

96

98

103

106

114

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

When God's compassion closed the dome

with light all around, the decoration

was completed with great beauty.1

The question of Islamic art history and its

iconography is fascinating and largely unexamined. Al-
though generally regarded as a unified field by western-
ers, Islamic art is extraordinarily diverse.2 Geographi-
cally it covers the areas of Islamic conquest from Spain
to India with the inclusion of parts of Africa and possible
influences upon Buddhist and Hindu art in China and Japan.
Chronologically, it covers thirteen hundred years from
about 632 A.D. to the present, and stylistically it has
incorporated and been influenced by--as well as itself
influencing--the art of these areas and times. Research
has been difficult in many of these areas because of vary-
ing political situations and the unfamiliarity of documents
written in Middle Eastern languages such as Persian, Arabic
and Ottoman Turkish. The Eggan itself was, for years,
taught only in Arabic. In addition, as Grabar has pointed
out, for much of the history of Islamic art there is a
great need for more archaeological finds and information.3

1

In many cases the traditions from which forms of Islamic
art are derived are still unknown and, quite literally,
not uncovered.

There is one largely unexplored area of Islamic
architecture which has been widely described but little
discussed and for which there is a wealth of documenta-
tion and information: the classical mosques of Istanbul.
Built in the late fifteenth, the sixteenth and early
seventeenth centuries at the height of the glory of the
Ottoman Empire, they offer an interesting view of Ottoman
Islamic thought and architecture at the time Italy was
undergoing its Renaissance and Baroque eras, England was
under the rule of Henry VIII, and Charles V held his

empire.4

Many extant written records about these mosques
can serve as a basis for speculation on sources, styles
and ideas incorporated in these buildings.5

For the purposes of this thesis I prOpose to
study in depth only one mosque, that of Sfileymaniye
Camii built on the third hill of Istanbul in 1550-1557 A.D.
by Sinan for Sultan Sfileyman the Magnificent. Of the
classical mosques of Istanbul, Sfileymaniye is the culmin-

6 It was a royal mosque built for the great grand-

ation.
son of Mehmet Fatih, conqueror of ConstantinOple. This
thesis will focus on the mosque prOper rather than the

Kfilliye or surrounding complex of buildings. I am

particularly interested in the milieu from which the

iconography of secular and religious thought embodied

in the architecture and decoration of the mosque arose.
There are a number of reasons why several sources

of influence contributed to the mosque's style. First,

the Koran has "no statement which would define the physical

character of a masjid or which would attribute to it any

sort of architectural or symbolic characteristic.“7

Without an original "model,' the mosque was particularly
Open to outside influences. Grabar writes there is a
slowly building tradition of mosque architecture which
from the very beginning incorporated elements of surround-
ing civilizations.8 Second, elements from these sources
probably serve as both secular and sacred symbols. Halil
Inalcik says of Fatih that he saw himself as the leader

of the Turks (Khan), as a Muslim religious leader (95251)!

and as the conqueror of Byzantium and its heir (Caesar).

"He saw in all three titles, the titles of Khan, Ghazi.

 

and Caesar, gates leading to dominion over the whole
world . . . His conquests make it clear that his first
aim was to revive the Byzantine empire under his rule."9
His great grandson, Sfileyman, was trained in this tra-
dition. A man of exceptional talent, his reign was the
height of the Ottoman Empire.

Sfileymaniye took shape against this background

of traditions of Byzantium, Ottoman Turkey and its

imperial court, and Islam. This peculiar combination of
traditions is what gives the classical mosques of Sinan,
above all Sfileymaniye, their special character and

10

meaning.

Aside from works such as E. B. Smith's The Dome

 

and Architectural Symbolism of Imperial Rome and the

 

Middle Ages; l'Orange's study entitled Studies in the

 

 

Iconography of Cosmic Kingship in the Ancient World;

 

L. Hautecoeur's Mystique et Architecture: Symbolisme du

 

Cercle et de la Coupole; Lehman's article "The Dome of

 

Heaven"; SOper's "The 'Dome of Heaven' in Asia," and

Lethaby's Architecture, Nature and Magic, all of which

 

present sound reasons and a broad background for under-
taking an iconographical study, written materials per-
taining to this particular topic are sparse although
qualitatively often excellent.ll Literature falls into
several categories pertaining to Sfileymaniye. First,

in general discussions of Islamic art there are especially
important works by, among others, the late Louis Massignon.
Such articles as "Les methods de realisation artistique
des Peuples de l'Islam" are knowledgable and poetic dis-
cussions of the philOSOphy behind various Islamic decor-

12

ations. Oleg Grabar has written explanations of Islamic

art substantiating with care the early Islamic traditions

13

in art and suggesting their possible sources. Richard

Ettinghausen discusses Islamic art in relation to history,
literature, and religious traditions.14
More specifically in connection with Ottoman

Turkey, Oktay Aslanapa in his Turkish Art and Architecture

 

gives an overview of Ottoman Turkish art and its fore-
runners. The site description of Sfileymaniye within this
is brief but accurate and the floor plans are clear.15
The floorplans and site descriptions of A. Gabriel,
Mamboury, Walsh and Sumner-Boyd and Freely are correct

and important.16 Behcet Unsal, professor of the History

of Architecture of Istanbul University, and Ulya VOgt-
Gfiknil have published good surveys of Turkish architecture.
Unsel's work on Turkish Islamic architecture includes the
Seljuks, while VOgt-GOknil's is exclusively on Ottoman
architecture.17 Unsel writes (most importantly) from within
the traditions of the Turks and argues strongly for the
existence of Middle Eastern traditions within Turkish
architecture. VOgt-GOknil presents excellent site des-
criptions and, although touching only briefly on philo-
sophical and religious implications, does a fine job of
placing Suleymaniye's entire kfilliye in its context in
society. Goodwin, in the same vein, presents a lifetime

of scholarship on Ottoman architecture, placing a wealth

18

of information on iconography in the footnotes alone.

However, the enormity of their tasks have allowed none

of these three authors to go deeply into any one monument.
For the sixteenth century one may look forward to the
forthcoming volume of Ayverdi. He has to date, however,
only reached 1481 in his monumental discussion of Turkish
architecture.19 Thus a close study of the iconography

of Sfileymaniye is still to be done.

Among other works, three are of especial importance
to this thesis. Evliya Celebi, a Turkish gentleman and
traveler, has left a seventeenth century first-hand des-
cription of this mosque.20 Secondly, Edward Lane, writing
in the nineteenth century, has one of the best accounts

21 Finally, some of the

of Muslim religious practices.
building accounts are extant for the Sfileymaniye. Omer L.
Barkan, in a first volume, lists those concerned with the
erection of the building and promises a second volume
dealing with the decoration.22 He states that there are
ninety-nine such defters in the Topkapi Saray Library

in Istanbul, but he adds that any royal orders, or fermans
such as exist for the building of the Blue Mosque and

which may exist for Sfileymaniye have either been destroyed

or else not found at this writing.

FOOTNOTES

1Said of Sfileymaniye in Celél-Zade Mustafa-
Tabakatfil-memalik. ‘See 0. Barkan, Sfileymaniye Cami ve
imareti insaati. Cilt I, Ankara, 1971, p. 55.

 

 

2R. Ettinghausen, "Interaction and Integration
in Islamic Art," Unity and Variety in Muslim Civilization,
ed. Gustav E. von Grunebaum, Chicago, 1955, p. 5.

3O. Grabar, The Formation of Islamic Art, New
Haven, 1973, Chapters 1 and 7.

4It is interesting to see here that in 1571 accord-
ing to a study by Professor Charles Tilly, University of
Michigan, Statistics of the Urbanization of Eur0pe, un-
published, Istanbul's population was 300,000 while London
in 1569 registered 75,000; Venice in 1577 was 120,000,
Bruges in 1580 was 40,000 and Paris in 1600 was 200,000.

5The Basbakanlik Archives or Topkapi Saray Library,
both in Istanbul, might yield even more data in the form
of old Ottoman documents, i.e. payrolls, fermans issuing
specific orders, or manuscripts if a more extensive study
were undertaken.

6G. Goodwin, A History of Ottoman Architecture,
London, 1971, p. 215 ff.sees it as a culminating point
in Sinan's one line of investigation. After this, i.e.,
in Selimiye, he feels that he moves beyond and into new
lines of thought.

70. Grabar, "The Architecture of the Middle Eastern
City from Past to Present: The Case for the Mosque,"
Middle Eastern Cities, ed. Ira Lapidus, Berkeley, 1969,
p. 29.

 

 

 

 

 

8O. Grabar, The Formation of Islamic Art,
Chapter 5.

9H. Inalcik, "Rise of the Ottoman Empire,"
Cambridge History of Islam, Vol. I, Cambridge, 1970, p. 297.

 

 

10Ibid., Inalcik greatly stresses this mixture
of history and its effect on Ottoman character.

11E. B. Smith, Architectural Symbolism of
Imperial Rome and the Middle Ages. Princeton, 1956.

, The Dome: A Study in the History of Ideas,
N.J., 1971. H. P. l'Orange, Studies in the Iconography
of Cosmic Kingship in the Ancient World, Oslo, 1953.
Hautecoeur, op. cit. K. Lehman, “The Dome of Heaven,“
Art Bulletin, XXVIII (1945). A. SOper, "The 'Dome of
Heaven‘ in Asia," Art Bulletin, Dec., 1947.

12L. Massignon, "Les Methodes de Realisation
Artistique des Peuples de 1'Islam," Syria, II (1921),
pp. 47-53 and 149-160.

130. Grabar, "Islamic Art and Byzantium,"
Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 18 (1964). , "The
Architecture of the Middle Eastern City from Past to
Present: The Case of the Mosque," Middle Eastern Cities,
Ira. M. Lapidus, ed. Berkeley, 1969. , The
Formation of Islamic Art, Yale, 1973. ,_"’The
Islamic Dome,fi:Journal of the Society of Architectural
Historians, 22 (1963).

14R. Ettinghausen, op. cit. , and Grace D.
Guest, "The Iconography of a Kashan Luster Plate,“ firs
Orientalis: The Arts of Islam and theiEast, Vol. 4 (1961).
, 1rThe Spirit of Islamic Art," The Arab Heritage,
Nabeh A. Faies ed., Princeton, 1948.

15O. Aslanapa, Turkish Art and Architecture,
N.Y., 1971. A. GabrielT—“Les Mosquees de Constantin0p1e,“
Syria, VII (1926): pp. 353-419.

16E. Mamboury, The Tourists Istanbul, Istanbul,
1953. H. Sumner-Boyd and J. Freeley, Strolling Through
Istanbul, Istanbul, 1972. Walsh, Constantinople and the
Seven Churches of Asia Minor, London, n.d.

l7B. Unsal, Turkish Islamic Architecture, London,
1959. U. VOgt-GOknil, Living Architecture: Ottoman,
Fribourg, 1965.

18

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goodwin, op. cit.

19E. Ayverdi, Osmanli Mimarisinde: V91. IV:
Fatih Devri: 855-886 (1451-1481), Istanbul, 1974.

 

 

20Evliya Efendi, Narrative of Travels in Eur0pe,

 

Asia and Africa in the Seventeenth Century. Trans.
von Hammer, London, 1834.

21E. Lane, The Manners and Customs of the Modern
Egyptians, London, 1860.

226. Barkan, op. cit.

 

 

 

CHAPTER II

SITE DESCRIPTIONl

For the mosque of Sfileyman the Magnificent, Sinan

chose the third hill along the Golden Horn in Istanbul.
As VOgt-GOknil points out, this was "the most domianant
area of the city.“ She continues:

. . . the mosque rises in isolation, set in

gardens and surrounded by low walls. Sinan

placed the other buildings opposite, where

they run parallel to the gardens. The medical

school and alms kitchen are opposite the main

entrance of the mosque; the hospital and the

carvanseray are on the corner to the right of

the entrance. A medrese is placed on both

sides of the street. Only the mausoleums of the

Sultan and his wife, Hasseki-Hurem, are in the

immediate vincinity of the mosque in the back

garden.
The quibla wall has a south-east axis to place it in the
correct position toward Mecca. Thus the northwest entrance
is on the side Opposite the harbor, town, and the Sultan's
harem. Sinan erected a number of buildings around which
one must detour, thus creating an avenue and enhancing
the effect of the approach to the mosque. This is even
more true today as one approaches from the harbor, through
the streets of the Spice Bazaar and climbs a steep and
cobblestoned street to the summit of the hill upon which

Sfileymaniye is situated. If one approaches from the side

10

11

near what is today Istanbul University, one literally
bursts upon the grandeur of the mosque from a maze of
streets and old wooden buildings. These two basic
avenues are indicated by a woodcut by Melchoir Lorich
(Plate 1) done three years after the mosque's completion.
It reinforces the idea that Sinan must have taken into
account the effect of elevation and removal from the
tangle of ordinary life. The thin, pointed and soaring
minarets emphasize the elevation even more.
Of Sfileymaniye, Grosvenor says:

. . . towards the conclusion of his reign this

mosque was undertaken by Souleiman, not only

as a thank-offering to God, but to eternize the

recollection of his brillant conquests. It

specially commemorated the capture of Belgrade,

of Rhodes from the Knights of St. John and of

Bagdad, . . . three strongholds regarded as the

northwestern, central, and eastern bulwarks of

the Empire.3
He adds that it was built with materials from Egypt,
Asia, and Greece with a large part obtained from the
Church of St. Euphemia at Chalkedon and the ruins of the
Constantinople Hippodrome.4

The mosque is situated between two enclosed areas:

the one behind the mosque is a garden containing the
previously mentioned turbes (mausoleums) and the one in
front is a courtyard with an entrance on each side and
columns of porphyry, marble and granite, which is remi-

niscent of Justinian's atria. Grosvenor describes it in

the following way:

12

83 .0 £9.83 .2 3 £6683 m “33
HDQGMUmH 7.230 wmflcmgwawm

.2 mumam

13

H mpmam

 

r. .. . .7st ..r .
,.»mw..(a_ufl- ..L... .. . . . . .. . _ - 1%... . . .
I» ...............2....... .. . _ I . _ . . . 5ny... . .. 1 .... . .-. . . . ... ._
. .. . .33.... .mtn fan... 3%.. q. 1.3%... g.
.1: ...kd L 3.....- . £4-74!"

\

. .
v ,. . - . pl
1 o. . o . . _ . .
o .. n . .. .
U I ' . I O . u.-
0 ul .— c... e
. u o a I: . . . . . . _ . . .
n . n . l .... . . . .
. . c 4 u... . g
.. n. I .a Ico - . .. a u .6 . . . .0 ... I v
.. . n . u . . . ... . . ....... . . I .
. .... ..
‘ a I... n . . .I . . _ 1 . .... n
. . .. .. .. . . . . ..u. ...I .
u 1. u. . v. . u .. . . D
. . . I . ... . . . . .
\ a . I . o e V
. . s - . a r.
r\ .
A 0 . I .. o. v . Q l u. c. o. 1
, o , . a o . .
a . . c . I .. . .
. . _ . . . b
o

0. ~ I I

 

 

«.
ad

 

 

 

 

14

The harem, or court, is of unusual proportions.

Of recent years the central monumental door and
the hardly inferior lateral doors are commonly
kept closed . . . 24 columns of reddish granite
and porphyry in a colonnade support the domes

of the portico. Another dome, still higher,

rises over the ornate fountain in the middle.

All the pavement of the harem is of the whitest
marble except one slab of porphyry to which the
interest of legend attaches. This slab, because
of its unusual fineness, the sultan designed for

a place of honor before the mihrab. A zealous
Greek stone-cutter secretly carved the cross upon
it, hOping that the mystic sign would convert the
Moslem worshippers. The act having been discovered,
the workman was beheaded . . . his head in falling
struck the stone and bespattered it with blood.
The slab, defiled, and no longer fit for employment
in the sanctuary, was placed here with the cross
beneath . . .

Four minarets stand, one at each corner of th
harem. They differ in height-~though all are
lofty--and in their style of workmanship. The ten
galleries of the minarets by their number are in-
tended to indicate that Suleiman was the tenth
sovereign of his dynasty, and he was born in the
first year of the tenth century of the Hegira.5

The mosque proper (Plates 2-5) is nearly square
measuring 57.5 m. in length and 58.5 m. in width. The
central dome is 27.5 m. in diameter and 53 m. (or twice its
diameter) in height at the crown surpassing all others in
the city except Hagia Sophia. The square encompassed by
the four piers is 26.5 m. square or half of the total area
of the mosque.6 As with Hagia SOphia, the two half domes
on the central axis have identical radii. On the east and
west two great arches are exposed again reflecting the

sides of Hagia SOphia. The central dome is supported by

15

mmflcmfimoamm mo Bmflb OUHm

N manm

16

 

.. . - r‘ a“
..:;:. 9:33»

 

17

mmflcmammawm mo 3mH> Hmmm

m mumam

18

...r .8 (I... . ...7“. ,..
...u r.

. . A \ I“: .. J n V. .
. nmuxwvfluwhffimw a. W

..‘l

 

19

OMHGDE>Ome mo pummuusoo

v madam

 

 

'5.-
..2

-—
5

{23:1 "4"

s c ‘

..é

.‘n ' '
‘ .
I
..n‘h’kli-«f :to-“o'ig.

. . - ‘ . -~.‘m Q'4~‘u'..'..
DRAW .A.m-n>.fl5,.,m '

k”: ‘
p‘ 14...”. 6.1.“ .4.»me

.-*.-».-

 

 

 

21

Plate 5

Plan of Sfileymaniye

22

 

 

. :7... I. . . \ cl
.\ . .\ ... m.. ..

. 1
o R o —
.
o.
. . .. fl
I ..
.Intu. .
. .I‘IJoI

 

 

 

 

 

A—l-c~”-.--n-nn 0—. n -.n -
O

 

 

E3]

 

n

.

.u o
“I

D. u
a
u If uuc
l
“1

 

!
I

. . 1 u D ol..‘ofl.... .o '1'.‘ la. '. .
u

.v 3 .

. .. .. .._ .
.3. .. ..... .
o n

i . .. u

. o u . — A ,

.. . . . . . . a
D p .

 

III. 'I i'III'IIIIII'. III ill...

 

 

 

 

 

at.-.

(wmmiw .\ Ins/[mu [mm/1:43

I 1. Plan (3/512!

 

 

Plate 5

23

pendentives carried on four gigantic piers ninety feet
in circumference. Goodwin notes that the buttresses

. . . receive the thrust from the four major

piers inside, which carry the pendentives

that take the weight of the dome and part of

that of the semi-domes across the great arches

of the aisles and nave.7
Transitions from the surfaces of the domes to arches and
walls are in some areas covered with stalactites.

The eastern and western side “aisles consist of
five domed bays. These domes are of unequal diameters."8
In connection with the varying sizes of these domes, Unsal
noted that Sinan seemed to avoid perfect symmetry but
presented instead a “harmony of prOportions" within indi-
vidual units with domical proportions of 1:2; arches of
3:5 (width/height) and of 5:8.9

The mihrab or prayer niche is located in the
southern kiplg wall, in the direction of Mecca. The imap
or leader faces this during prayer. It is coaxial with
the main door, courtyard and entry gate. To the right of
the mihrab is the mimber, or pulpit, from which the pro-
fession of faith is read on Friday. The kfirsfi, or
preacher's chair, is to the left. From this the preacher
addresses the congregation.10 (See Plate 6)

Although a Muslim is called to prayer five times
a day, it is at noon Friday that the large community

prayer service takes place. At Sfileymaniye, the worshipper

goes to the mosque and performs his ablutions, according

24

mchmEMmem mo HOHHOUGH

m OUMHm

 

 

 

“‘.:‘.I.A.mmt

O '--‘D '.. ’4’»: O.

 

.-.
-OI..::... ..:.' .‘t

fi‘.‘
,‘§ §.......‘.

 

_ :5.ng- (:21? u’:'€£‘ #34336. 9.1-! 51-.” k ’48:.{5‘1'4 .'
{"14‘"! \‘

.l‘
.. -r‘p’- '3‘“

\ I
|
.

 

" I “ 4;“...

’&)7;'

 

. J'}‘i
-.'.‘.’ auifl’: £31.; ‘
g...

 

 

33mm M.W.;I.u:-I ...- '.

,WLA‘A. Co -.“a....“

sag... :anv. """ 1-

 

 

 

26

to the prescribed ritual, in the courtyard. Carrying his
shoes sole-to-sole in his left hand, he enters the mosque
to join others for prayer. The peOple align themselves
on the prayer mats in parallel rows facing the kible wall,
or Mecca. The Imam or leader then leads them in the
service. However, as Lane points out:

The condition of the Imams is very different,

in most respects, from that of Christian priests.

They have no authority above other persons, and

do not enjoy any respect but what their reputed

piety or learning may obtain for them: nor are

they a distinct order of men set apart for

religious offices, like our clergy, and composing

an indissoluble fraternity; for a man who has

acted as the Iman of a mosque may be displaced

by the warden of the mosque, and, with his employ-

ment and salary, loses the title of Imam . . .
In its plan and furniture, Sfileymaniye fulfills its
functional requirements for a Friday mosque service.

On the floor near the prayer area, i.e., Mihrab
area, there is a traditional one step elevation. The
side areas are also raised.

On the south side of the building two huge buttres-
ses have been fully exposed in order to keep the kible
wall flat. This pair brackets a pair half their size
which takes the thrust of the southern semi-dome. Further,
blocks of masonry rise two-thirds of the way up the southern
corners. The corresponding blocks on the north side are

incorporated into the bases of the minarets. The pattern

of buttressing is repeated on the north facade wall, but

27

this time brought within the mosque in order to allow
for an uninterrupted facade and portico. Many feel the
result is to cramp the entrance way.
On each side of the building, two buttresses

have been incorporated into the walls and project nearly
equally on the inner and outer sides. As Sumner-Boyd
and Freely note, the projections are masked

. . . on both sides by building galleries with

arcades of columns between the buttresses. On

the outside the gallery is double with twice

the number of columns in the upper story as in

the lower; on the inside this is a single gallery

only.12
The number of arches in the lower story is eight and
there are sixteen arches in the upper story. These Spring
from stalactite capitals. On the exterior between these
buttresses on the lowest level are twenty-one water taps
for ablutions.l3 The galleries thus protect the worshipper
while making his ablutions in bad weather.

Decoratively, the interior is "severely simple."

Three entrances give access from the front: the royal
entrance is to the southeast; the northern one Opens
from the courtyard, axially aligned with the main gate
and the mihrab. It originally gave access to a main route
from town as well as to the Sfileymaniye hospice. The
northwest side door acts as an entry from the shops and

tea houses across the street. In addition, there are two

entrances on either side of the kible wall.

28

Large windows stretch nearly to the floor. These
are often placed in sets of two or three. Additional
light comes from the side window screens within the east
and west arches and the thirty-two windows around the
base of the dome. In all, Mamboury counts 138 windows.l4
Thus, with the exception of the softened light of the
stained glass in the mihrab area (done by the glazier
Sarhos [the Drunkard] Ibrahim), the building is evenly
filled with natural and diffused light at all levels.
Large wheels of oil lights are suspended from the ceiling
and are lighted at Ramazan--the holy month of Islam--
during the night services.

The tiles near the mihrab area are from the
famous Iznik kilns and are of leaf and flower motifs in
turquoise, deep blue and red on a white ground (Plate 7).
There are also two tile inscription plaques in disk
shapes which may have been designed by Ahmet Karahisari.15
The mihrab and mimber are of Proconnesian marble and the
doors, window shutters and k§£§§_are of carved wood inlaid
with ivory and mother of pearl with an interlocked wheel
motif. The inscriptions throughout were probably originally
done by Ahmet Karahisari, one of the most famous of Ottoman
calligraphers, and his pupil, Hasan Celebi, and are in
Arabic, the language of the Kprap, Goodwin notes that

these were greatly restored after the earthquake of 1766.

29

HuncmumH .HOHOO :mewm mo Mmmuusoo
.mmawu m.wmflcmamwawm mo Hfimuma

h mumam

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

31

Evliya Celebi, writing in the seventeenth century, records
the inscription in the dome as “God is the light of heaven
and earth; the similitude of his light is as a niche in a
wall wherein a lamp is placed, and the lamp is enclosed in
a case of glass.“ Over the window to the right of the
mimber is the text “Verily, places of worship belong to
God; therefore, invoke not anyone together with God.“ On
the upper windows the "excellent names of God“ are written.
Above the mihrab appears the inscription: "Whenever
Zakariyya went into the chamber [mihrab] to her."16 The
significance of these inscriptions, as well as the decor-
ations, will be explored later in this thesis.

The texts in the pendentives "are transformed into
flowers of sixteen petals“ and record the "names of God,
Mohammed, the first four caliphs, and Hasan and Huseyin,

"17

sons of Ali . . . Above the main gate is the inscription:

"There is no God but God and Mohamet is his PrOphet."

FOOTNOTES

1I have used the following sources for this des-
cription of the mosque: (a) my own notes made in the
summer of 1973; (b) Sumner-Boyd and Freely, op. cit.,
pp. 220-233; (c) VOgt-GOknil, op. cit., PP. 51-54;

(d) Grosvenor, op, cit., pp. 666-672; and (e) Goodwin,
9p. cit., p. 53.

 

 

 

 

2V'Ogt-GOknil, op. cit., p. 53.

3Grosvenor, Op. cit., p. 666. This reasoning,
however, is not reiterated by any original sources and
should probably be further validated, although it could
well be true.

 

 

4Again, this is unvalidated by original sources
but is repeated by other authors. He further adds that
Suleyman gave Sinan the order to imitate Hagia SOphia.
Confirmation of this may finally be found in fermans in
the Turkish archives, but which I frankly doubt feeling
that although the floor plan resembles Hagia Sophia, it
was Sinan who played with this reflection of Byzantine
imperial grandeur. Further, his fascination with Justinian
architecture is reflected in his other Istanbul mosques
where In; uses cross in square plans, octagonals, and
variations on domes. His mosques of Sehzade, Mihrimah,
Rustem Pasa and Sokullu Memet Pasa could be examined in
relation to this. Most puzzling is his reversion to the
Anatolian-Seljuk type of multi-domed mosque in Piyale
Pa a Camii, an interesting mosque which is presently in
ba repair and which he completed at the end of his life.
All writers are aware of his interest in Justinian-like
plans. VBgt-Gaknil, Op. cit., p. 100 and Unsal seem to
see it as a working through of these with modifications
"to free himself from the patterns." I feel this doesn't
suffice; either there is less to it than this, i.e.,
different architectural forms interested him as forms
for experimentation, or more to it, i.e., the older types
were important for--perhaps symbolically--some ideas of
religious or political power which he was trying to express
or which were pOpular in Turkey at the time.

 

32

33

5Grosvenor, op. cit., p. 667. Sumner-Boyd and
Freely, op. cit., p. 222 also write:

The western portal of the court is flanked by a
great pylon containing two stories of chambers;
these, according to Evliya, were the muvakkithape,
the house and workshop of the mosque astronomer."

 

I could find no mention of this in Evliya. If it exists,
it would be of great interest in the theory that the domes
and stalactites reflect astronomical and geometric ideas
of the time and the Islamic tendency to tie these to
religious thought. de Boer also makes the point (T. J. de
Boer, The History of the PhilOSOphy of Islam, London,
1903, p. 7) that because of rapidly developed scientific
knowledge of astronomy, especially in Babylonia, there
existed for years the "discovery of the harmony of the

All in the unity and steadiness of the movement of the
heavens. This became paired with a detached observation
of nature, especially of the life and fate of man and the
feeling that where comprehension ceases, resignation (or
submission as the word, Islam literally means) takes over.
The ancient near east then provided many of the elements
found in Islam as reflected in Sfileymaniye."

 

6Goodwin, Op. cit., p. 231. He adds: “these
measurements conform absolutely to the symbol of the
perfect circle in the square and it is so satisfactory
a definition of space that it dominates the complexities
which modulate the rigid form of the rest of the mosque.
. . . The underlying formula based on sixteen units has
been noted as has the use of the half in order to intro-
duce a new rhythm based on three, a number for which, as
we have seen, the Renaissance had a deep respect.“

71bid., p. 225.

8Many see this as a Turkish adaptation of Byzantine
ideas. Unsal, Op. cit., p. 24, however, notes that "the
Byzantines had found the model for their half dome in the
buildings of ancient Rome and Syria, and the Turks, before
they had reached Byzantium had seen this form in Syria
and used it in their own buildings."

9Ibid., p. 91. G. Mathews, Byzantine Aesthetics,
London, 1963, p. 27 notes that the Byzantines preferred
working proportions of 6, 3, 2, or 1. This again may be
a difference from the basic "Hagia Sophia philOSOphy" in
Sfileymaniye. Sfileymaniye's are numbers which are given
Pythagorean im ortance and which Philo-Judeas, (Philo, Vol.
1: London, 193 ), among others, often refers to. Perhaps
Arabic translations of earlier Greek writings and an

 

34

examination of Judaic tradition will yield more meaningful
information.

loIbId., pp. 376-377.

llLane, Op. cit., p. 84.

12Sumner-Boyd and Freely, op. cit., pp. 222-223.

l3Goodwin, op. cit., p. 227.

14Mamboury, o . cit., p. 411. On the subject of
stained glass he adds: Ottoman stained glass does not
resemble the European. While the latter is set in grooved
lead [which] enclosed the pieces of glass, the former is
entirely set in plaster. This is worked in the form of
a sheet the dimensions of the window. After reducing it
to a thickness of 2 cm., on all parts to be decorated and
arranging a framework and the lines of division, thickened
to 4-5 cm., the craftsman sketches out his design on the
plaster, being very careful to give the walls of these
partitions a lepe from above below of about 30-40°.
This work finished, he adds to the outer face pieces of
coloured glass which he fixed with plaster. . . . Generally
windows with handsome stained glass have a second glass
outside, with hexagonal, circular or rectangular designs.
The decoration of the stained glass is always floral,
geometric or calligraphic; the glass is never painted."

15Goodwin, Op. cit., p. 237.

16Evliya Effendi, o . cit., pp. 75-77. He also
adds, rather confusingly, 'This mosque has five doors.
On the right, the Imam's; on the left the Vezir's, be-
neath the imperial gallery and two side doors. Over that
on the left is written (Kor. xiii.24), "Peace be upon you,
because ye have endured with patience! How excellent a
reward is Paradise!" Over the Opposite gate this text:
"Peace be upon you! Ye are righteous; enter in and dwell
in it forever!“ Beneath this inscription, on the left
hand is added: "This was written by the Fakir Karahisari."
He also states that above the "southern gate“ (the one
leading from the courtyard to the bazaar area?) is written
"I direct my face unto him who hath created the heavens

and earth: I am orthodox.“ Due to the lack of explication
of right and left, this is unclear.
l7

Goodwin, op. cit., p. 345.

CHAPTER III

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE OTTOMAN TURKS

Sfileyman, the patron of this mosque, was the great
grandson of Mehmet Fatih, Mehmet, the Conqueror of Constan-
tinople. He was the fourth Ottoman sultan to rule from
Istanbul. He controlled a territory which spread into
Europe through all of Greece, Bulgaria, Jugoslavia and
"to the gates of Vienna”; in the north his territory con-
tained the Crimea; it encircled most of the southern
Mediterranean areas including Egypt, and present-day
Algeria, and extended in the east as far as the Caspian
Sea, Tabriz, Azerbaijan and Kuweit.l It contained, in
other words, much of what had been Byzantium.2

Sfileyman was descended from Osman who is said to
have ruled from 1299-1326, and from whom the Ottoman Turks
took their name. In the years following Osman, the Otto-
mans moved out over Anatolia and rapidly conquered most
of the remains of the Byzantine Empire.

More than one hundred years later, early in the
morning of May 29, 1453, a "new and young Sultan," Mehmet,

known later as Fatih, or the Conqueror, launched the

35

36

final assault on the walls of Constantinople. Bernard
Lewis writes:

Of the once great and teeming city, only a
remnant survived, shrunken and depleted, with

a population of barely fifty thousand. . . .

but the mighty triple landwalls still stood,

and behind them, the last legions of the Roman
Empire prepared their defense. . . . in the
early light of dawn, the Sultan sent his elite
troops--his body guard, his archers and lancers,
and the twelve thousand men of the corps of
Janissaries.

The first of them to gain a foothold on the
wall was a giant Janissary called Hasan. He
was felled by a stone, overpowered, and killed;
but others followed him. Meanwhile, Turks had
entered the city through the neglected Circus
Gate and within fifteen minutes tens of thousands
of them had penetrated the defenses. Among the
anguished and exhausted Greeks, the cry arose,
'Healo he polis--the city is captured . . .'

Some hours later, the Sultan himself entered
the city, riding on horseback through the gate
now called Topkapi with an escort of high digni-
taries and a Janissary guard. He rode to the
great Church of the Holy Wisdom . . . where he
dismounted and entered. There he summoned an
Imam, who went up into the pulpit and intoned
the Muslim creed: 'I testify that there is no
God but God. I testify that our lord Muhammad
is the PrOphet of God.‘ The Greek cathedral had
become a Turkish mosque. A vivid picture . . .
is drawn by Tursun Beg, a veteran of the conquest,
secretary to the Sultan's council, and one of the
first Ottoman writers of literary prose . . .

'the Sultan, Mehemmed Gazi, with his scholars
and his commanders, deigned to enter . . . while
the congregation of angels in heaven uttered
praises, and caused the sound of the verse 'These
are the gardens of Eden; enter them endowed with
eternal life' to reach the ears of mortal men . . .
he then expressed a desire to see the church called
Aya Sofya, which is a sign from Paradise:

If you seek Paradise, Oh you Sufi,

The t0pmost heaven is Aya Sofya.'3

 

37

Halil Inalcik says of Fatih that he saw himself
as leader of the Turks, as a Muslim religious leader,
and as the conqueror of Byzantium and its heir. "He

saw in all three titles, the titles of Khan, Ghazi and

 

Caesar, gates leading to dominion over the whole world.

. . . His conquests make it clear that his first aim

was to revive the Byzantine empire under his rule."4

Taking into consideration Bernard Lewis' description of

the fall of ConstantinOple, it seems probable that Ottoman

rulers considered Constantinople and especially Hagia

Sophia a symbol of the Byzantine Empire.5 EXpansion of

the empire continued. In 1514, Sultan Selim I the Grim

extended the territory. He entered Tabriz and sent back

seven hundred artisan families to be installed at Iznik

(formerly Nicea), now about a half day's drive from

Istanbul.6
Against this background Sfileymaniye was begun.

As has been pointed out, there existed no "original"

model for it. It was a mosque which would gain in meaning

from the traditions surrounding the lives of those building

it.

FOOTNOTES

1For detailed maps see H. Inalcik, The Ottoman

Empire, trans. N. Itzkowitz and C. Imber, London, 1973,
Chapter 4, and Pritchard, A Historical Geography of the
Ottoman Empire, Leiden, 1973.

2The name Turk had been recorded for many centuries
before this. It is found recorded in 6th century A.D.
Chinese annals. (B. Lewis, Istanbul and the Civlization
of the Ottoman Empire, Oklahoma, 1963, Chapter II). Lewis
points out: "These early Central Asian Turks were no
mere barbarians. They already possessed a written language,
and important groups among them were affected by the
religions of the civilized world, including Buddhism,
Manichaeism, and Nestorian Christianity." After a variety
of invasions including ones by the Seljuks who conquered
Baghdad in 1055 and the Mongols who broke the Seljuk
power in Anatolia, one group of gazis, that of Osman,
appears in the thirteenth century in Anatolia.

3Ibid., p. 4. As will be noticed, various authors
use varying translations in the spelling of Mehmet. For
my own use, I have adOpted the accepted contemporary Turkish
transliteration.

4H. Inalcik, "Rise of the Ottoman Empire,"
Cambridge History_of Islam, Vol. 1, Cambridge, 1970,
p. 297.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5Evliya Efendi, Op. cit., p. 101. "One day at one
of these assemblies of learned divines and historians,
mention was made of the description of the old town of
Constantinople. Sultan Murad said: 'Though so many
countries and residences have been minutely described by
geographers and historians, yet this my residence of Con-
stantinOple remains undescribed.‘ The Mufti, Yahya Efendi,
the son of Sekeria Efendi, who was present, answered:
'My Emperor, in the Koran this noble town of ConstantinOple
is mentioned by the verse: 'Have the Greeks not been
vanquished in the lowest ground?‘ The builder of this
spot marked out in the Koran was first Sfileiman (Solomon),
then Alexander Zulkarnin, who lived 882 years before the

38

39

Prophet; it was then repaired by thy great ancestor
Mohammed II, and then at your own order, my Emperor, by
Lala Beiram Pasha, when you undertook the expedition of
Erivan. It is in order to glorify this town and its
inhabitants that the PrOphet delivered these words. 'They
shall conquer Constantinople, how good a Prince its Prince,

what good trOOps its trOOp.' Travellers call this great
capital, the Splendour, the power, the magnificence, the
excellent town, of which the Koran says: 'Have the Greeks

not been vanquished?‘ (Please note that he is also called
Evliya Celebi.)

6G. Migeon, “La Ceramique Ottomane de ConstantinOple
et d'Anatolie au XVI siécle," Manuel d'Art Musulman;
Arts Plastique et Industriels, Paris, 1927, p. 222.

 

 

CHAPTER IV

BYZANTINE INFLUENCE

Byzantine influence was historically present and
keenly felt. A quick perusal of Sfileymaniye's floor plan
(Plate 5), as well as references in every guide book,
reveal the similarity between Hagia Sophia (begun c. 527
A.D.) (Plate 8) and Sfileymaniye (begun 1550 A.D.).
Sfileymaniye seems to be based on the plan of Hagia SOphia
but without an apse.l It is close to Constantinian
centralized floor plans, being nearly square: 57.5 m. x
58.5 m. As in Hagia Sophia, there is a gigantic pendentive
dome supported by four huge piers and buttressed on the
main axis by two semi domes of the same radii as well as
a series of wall buttresses. As in Hagia Sophia a series
of windows ring the dome, although at Sfileymaniye the
number is thirty-two rather than forty. The walls on the
sides of the longitudinal axis also act as window screens
(Refer to Plates 6 and 9). Grosvenor notes:

The arrangement of larger and smaller semi-
domes, the ranges of triple windows with their
noble arches, the superimposed colonnaded

porticos, the receding segmental vaults, are 2
constant reminders of its grander prototype . . .

40

41

Plate 8

Floor plan of Hagia SOphia

 

42

 

 

           
             

 

 

 

 

 

 

.. I.

I
/.\

 

\

\
--.O.--..--O—

’ '

      

 

a

-3

.
\\. . llllll

 

-
"
-..—

-.-d

a.”

 

 

 

 

'0
I'.
o. 0
o'...'
\
§

\§

       

A

  

     

       

    

~

 

   

 

glfi
5111/1/14.

 

..yl' .

 

   

    

 

 

    

‘

-.--.—-'

 

     

 

 

 

 

43

HancmumH .HOHOU cflxmmm mo mmwuusou
.mflnmom mama: mo HOHHOUGH

a mumam

 

 

 

 

 

45

In addition, some of the iconography of Hagia

Sophia and, of Byzantine church architecture in general
is suggested. In this connection, it is important to
consider the symbolism of the dome and square in Byzantium.3
There is some evidence for the presence here of Judaic
elements. Cosmas IndiCOpleustes (Plate 10) provides
written evidence of a Torah Shrine-like, two storied,
and vaulted image of the Universe which was probably known
in Justinian's time at Constantinople. Wanda Wolska
points out:

Chaque representation de l'arch ou de la chasse

n'evoque pas necessairement, chez les Juifs,

l'idée du kosmos. Les formes examinees ici

étaient pour eux avant tout des symboles du

judaisme. Le sense cosmique, bien que latent,

ne prend du relief que dans des cas particuliers.

11 en va autrement pour Cosmas. La forme d'un

mur arrondi au sommet eveille pour lui, essentiel-

lement, 1'image du monde.

[Thus it is for him, reduced to a geometric

form; it is a sign] . . . enfermer sa pensée en

une figure concrete, il passe du symbole a l'il-

lustration et transforme 1'image sacreé en croquis

explicatif d'un livre de science alexandrin. Le

dessin étudié ici tient, a la fois, de l'icono-

graphie juive et des habitudes graphiques des

savants hellenes.
She then reiterates the schematization of form as Hellenis-
tic and feels it is probable that the basis for the ideas
rests with the Greeks, for Plato attributes to the earth
a cubic form.5 Hautecoeur says that for the Pythagoreans
"Le sphere est considereé 1e plus beau des solides par-

ceque 1a sphere est la figure la plus identique a elle-

. . . 6
méme et la movement Circulaire 1e movement parfait.“

46

Plate 10

Topographia Christiana of
Cosmae IndiCOpleustae

«ohyASKAn

A10; Dfrfi' If t o 0 [Inertial/u
”535 “”15 F. imt’rrtum Tr§6(“"°‘79

 

 

.\‘
m)“ '

,Ii

(1‘

IL

" - . _Jn1mx8,uy\
a]: ~ 73m. Mm.

//////'/

“I \\\
..x “)9. .— .
W. ‘A _. ‘ = 5),/'1 \\

‘5. \. .~\~.\ \\\\\‘\\ \\

é/,l

v

."‘V - --" '
=4» .- .-

w \\\\ ‘ ’ ' '
d‘ ‘ *‘r \.-' '\ \ -\‘ ‘ ‘\\““\ \\\\-‘-‘ \\“ ‘ \ 3‘ ‘\\\\ ‘ ' V 3 ' '— " ':
— ~ ' ‘ ; : .- _.—

 

”15.073747 lixtaug.‘ ev oxTTPo 1 xa‘rux u,» xarruxouv 3. [mm

.lbrrrx :"rra Ocrrm'I-fl v6. Orrindoluxum‘m habito. bant- honiru/
m J -_ .

.3

7119.

0" (I4 " hi"!

 

-_..-—. _--..._ .

"F

:1.- ,
w;-_ *1 ,-_-_ --.:;_ . « - - _ ' {3:5 :: ‘1' 2;??? d,_=—::_r1_,l.vr-
~94 '4: A. HIP. . -4 _ . _- ~- -' .. .. ‘ -‘.‘- ._ 4 ..j__77_‘_—_._;_’é:m_r.~_;: - ‘23:" 7".

    

 

   
   

Tum ulp1-'Occxnum' "w/mlmv romp. "9

 
 
  
  

k.

 

n.3,,

.‘_ .. V.
. .4 ‘ p
— -:' ;: ' _- . . .
v o \ '
3.. .A. _ -_ _ _. .
. . 'éfi- .L'TA’: ; .'
" ‘ ‘- ‘ ii ,",- ~.-, ,
"I -_< _ 7? 1 J "
..‘htt ‘. . .7 I-" -f -.
. ,.l w
L:
"F
-

'-
‘-

- '3‘).
. ‘.
L~r

- - . ---——-——- -0 -w—-———F————-—---
.2.
>€t
I
”.1
to.

_.
1.
A‘
_ L
‘ T—
‘51;
3
.-.~ L_ « .
.. . .
‘ .Hxi'eiiul ‘- "-
--mf VA ‘

I

 

1 ' ‘ 1v '. "'0

‘ I . 1' ‘1 1:. {at

. L“ ya 1 ”1:1.
" lm' '." ‘ J

H 17" ' 4"". 9-

n 1r . . .

c.—

vf" '
. (L
I
Y" I

3:-

 

48

Wolska writes that "Cosmas n'est pas le seul a faire du
symbole 1e fondement de la structure de l‘universe.
L'école syrienne represent, elle aussi, le monde en
forme d'edifice a deux etages."7 It seems probable that
this symbolism had continued throughout Byzantine times
and would have still existed and been understood at the
time ConstantinOple fell. Further, Sinan was a devsirme,
and although Goodwin and Stratton both point out that
he was only chosen on the second cut and was therefore
trained as a Janissary rather than a palace slave, he
could have conceivably become acquainted with the ideas
of Plato from either Byzantine or Arabic sources at one
of the palace schools.8
The Platonic concept of light is important to

both Byzantine and Ottoman structures. This concept was
clearly present in Byzantium until the conquest. John
Callahan records that St. Gregory of Nyssa in Cappodocia
wrote that "In the same way we can distinguish between
fire, which has the power of giving light, and a lamp, which
makes the light of the fire available to those who
need it."9 Gustave von Grunebaum wrote:

In the words of Nikolaos Kavasilas (d. 1370),

the sacraments are windows through which the

rays of justice enter into the dark room of

this world. . . . Dogmatic difficulties arose

when the monks insisted on the uncreatedness

of the light which they claimed to see and

participate in during their visions and which
they indentified with the light on Mount Tabor

49

in which Christ had been transfigured. This
uncreated light is strongly reminiscent of

the uncreated Word, the Koran, of the Muslims;
both doctrines are examples of 'emotional' or
experiential theology and both touch in their

own way, on the problem of oneness of the divine
essence . . . It is characteristic of the under-
lying attitudes of Western and Eastern piety that,
in Islam, the advocates of the uncreated Koran,
and, in the Byzantine Church, the advocates of 10
the uncreated Tabor light carried the day . . .

In sum, it seems that the concept of the light
as a symbol of God and the dome-in-square as the symbol
of the heavenly cosmic house would have been known in
connection with Hagia SOphia in 1453. Perhaps the presence
of light and the cosmic symbolism in both Byzantium and
Ottoman Islam occur as a result of a common ancient source,
but the question is unimportant in this case since the
famous building of Hagia SOphia was close at hand and

to a degree Sinan clearly refers to it and uses it.11

 

What are his reasons for this reference? There
seem to be two main ones: First, Sinan, a Janissary or

member of the Sultan's elite praetorian guard, and there-

 

fore part of what could roughly be called the corps of
engineers, was intending to put up a royal mosque of a
grandeur equal to that of his sultan. Although there was
a ready tradition of mosque architecture of the dome-in-
square type in the Middle East (including Bayazit Camii
in Istanbul), as well as the presence of other well—known
centralized structures such as the Holy Sepulchre in

Jerusalem, Hagia SOphia was by far the largest example,

50
was intact, and the nearest at hand.12 It was a building
which reflected imperial patronage and embodied the
imperial and religious power of a great empire. These
were the very ideas which Sinan wished to convey.
Secondly, this political or secular significance

could offer another explanation. Grabar has said:

Byzantium was the one world Early Islam most

wanted, and failed to conquer . . . But above

all, it was so because, to the Islamic and

especially to the Arab Middle Ages . . .

Byzantium, . . . partook of that mysterious aura

which at given periods of history has endowed

certain cultures and countries with a prestige

or artistic genius . . . Therein, more than in

any precise artistic motif, lies what the late

Louis Massignon, in an eloquent article, has 3

called the 'Byzantine mirage in the Arab mirror.‘
For the Byzantines, ConstantinOple and within it Hagia
SOphia, acted as a model of both Imperial power, a second
Rome, and symbolically of the Holy City Jerusalem. Later,
as the previously mentioned details of Fatih's conquest
show, ConstantinOple and Hagia SOphia, were of extreme
importance to the first Sultans of Istanbul. Sinan quite
probably prOposed the plan for the mosque based on Hagia
Sophia, but it seems equally certain that it was greeted
warmly by Suleyman as a symbol of Byzantine days of glory,

perhaps even symbolic of ConstantinOple. As has been

noted, Fatih saw himself as Khan, Ghazi, and Caesar, and

 

his "conquests make it clear that his first aim was to

revive the Byzantine empire under his rule." Suleyman

51

followed in this tradition and the tradition provides
support for his acceptance of a plan based on Hagia Sophia.
Suleyman's interest in the implications of Hagia SOphia
might be compared, roughly, to Charlemagne's interest in
the Palatine Chapel at Aachen. Its sources are in Byzantine
centralized church plans and the desired inference was that
Charlemagne was the equal of Constantine and Justinian.

Finally, the idea of the “Holy Wisdom" as the
highest truth was a common element in both Byzantine
Christianity and Islam.

The mosque, however, differed from Hagia SOphia
in several important ways. Hilary Sumner-Boyd and John
Freely note:

Up to this point the plan follows that of Hagia
Sophia, but beyond this . . . all is different.
Between the piers to the north-northwest and the
south southeast triple arcades on two enormous
monolithic columns support the tympana of the
arches. There are no galleries here, nor can
there prOperly be said to be aisles, since the
great columns are so high and so far apart as
not really to form a barrier between the central
area and the walls; thus the immense space is
not cut up into sections . . . but is centralized
and continuous. The method Sinan used to mask
the huge buttresses required to support the four
central piers is very ingenious--he has turned
what is generally a liability . . . into an
asset . . . On the north northwest and south
southeast he incorporated the buttresses into
the walls of the building, allowing them to pro-
ject about equally within and without. He then
proceeded to mask this projection on both sides
by building galleries with arcades of columns be-
tween the buttresses.l4

52

The site descriptions note the construction of outer
galleries as well as the inner ones between the buttresses
which are placed on the east and west. It seems important,
however, that, with the exception of the Sultan's box,
these galleries are not specifically intended for worship—
pers as they may have been in Hagia SOphia. At Sfileymaniye,
the worshippers would first fill the main floor area in
parallel rows facing the kible wall, or Mecca. The women
remain for the most part on the side or in the rear, and
the latecomers can make use of the porch.
In addition, Sfileymaniye lacked a clergy and thus
a clerical hierarchy and was only a place, according to
Islam, for each individual to meditate on God. There
were no formal processions and thus no orientation toward
them as might be found in basilical naves, of which Hagia
Sophia is a variation. There is no intercessor for any
man, and thus the only orientation at Sfileymaniye is to
the _k_i_13_1_g wall.15
The plans (Plates 5 and 8) indicate the lack of
(l) a narthex as in Hagia SOphia, (2) the column screens
or aisle veils as well as (3) the two rooms flanking the
apse. The absence of these elements eliminates the sense
of hidden recesses, mystery and the play of light against
shadow and open against closed areas. It opens up the

entire floor area. Some feel this was a result of a less

53

refined scheme; others see it as a purposeful revolt
against Byzantine style. The latter seems unlikely in
light of the floor plan. An answer may be found, rather,
in the long-standing traditions derived from Zoroastrian—
ism where light and dark are forever locked in mortal
combat and therefore cannot be conceived of as working
tOgether harmoniously.16 This avoidance of complexity
may also be seen as a positive adjustment of the structure
to its function as a mosque, a point to be discussed in
the next chapter.

Another difference between the mosque and Hagia
SOphia is found in the extension beyond the wall of the
apse area in the church. Only a vestige of this remains
in the placement of the semi-circular mihrab niche within
the kibl§_wall.

The roofing of the side areas to the east and
west is also different. Whereas both buildings use the
square and pendentive dome for the central construction
as well as the two half domes of equal radii, Sinan chose
to substitute the dome-in-square construction (which
Grabar sees as a long-standing tradition in Middle Eastern
mosque architecture) for the vaulting of Hagia SOphia's
side aisles.

The decoration is vastly different. The reasons

for this will become apparent later, but for the moment

54

suffice it to say that Hagia Sophia's mosaics and acanthus
leaf column capitals are replaced by ceramic tile, painted
calligraphy and stalactite capitals. Where marble is
used it tends to be predominately white rather than the
multi-colored marble of Hagia SOphia.

In sum, Sfileymaniye is, for the most part, a uni-
fied and open area which is filled with a neutral light
as contrasted to the play of light and shadow and closed
recesses against open as found in Hagia SOphia. Its
floor space acts as a seating area for the Muslim worship-
pers who are led in prayer by the Imam who faces the empty
mihrab at the head of the worshippers and in full view of
them. In contrast, in Hagia SOphia, the aisles and galler-
ies acted as spaces for the worshippers, whose viewing of
ceremonies was almost always partially obstructed. The
central area functioned here as a place for the processions
and ceremonies of the patriarch and the emperor--ceremonies,

again, which were often obscured from the viewer.

FOOTNOTES

lA. Fevret, "Les tatars de Crimée," Revue du monde

musulman III (1907), pp. 94-95, states that the mosque in
Eupatoria in the Crimea, the Ceima Camii was constructed
in 1550 after a model of Hagia Sophia. It should be
remembered that Suleyman's land stretched into the Crimea.
O. Aslanapa, o . cit., p. 75, sees the Turks of Anatolia
as the first Within Turkish architecture to "attack the
problem of the dome" with "complete mastery in all its
various aspects and to develop it to its fullest extent."
It seems possible that their geographic proximity to the
domed solutions in some of Byzantium's greatest buildings
could have been of help in solving this problem. On

the other hand, he notes the construction of the Blue
Mosque in Tabriz by the Karakoyunlu Jihanshah (1436-67)

in 870/1465. This is a large-scale domed building on a
centralized plan and built in an area for which the Otto-
mans had great artistic respect and from which they took
many artisans as well as ideas (see the section on.tiles).
He further details the 1970 excavation of the Great Mosque
at Van which dates from roughly the same time or possibly
the late fourteenth century “3. 1380-1400) and was completely
destroyed in 1913. Although a centralized plan, this dome
rested on stalactite squinches and was supported by the
mihrab wall and five piers. Finally, the presence of .
smaller centralized mosque plans as well as Bayazit II Caml
in Istanbul cannot be ignored. However, Bayazitkicentral
dome was sma11-—l7.5 m. in diameter--which would have
created a very different effect from that of either
Sfileymaniye or Hagia SOphia. (See G. Goodwin, op. cit;,
pp. 112-131 and p. 169). Thus while these stand as
possible precursors, the basic centralized floor plans of
Justinian seem to remain closest in type to Sfileymaniye.

2

 

Grosvenor, Op. cit., pp. 667-668

3While I feel that Hagia Sophia and the Byzantines
and, more removed, the Greeks were the most immediate
source of this idea of a cosmic house with a dome of
heaven, the Turks in their vast history in Central Asia
cannot have helped having this idea in their heritage.
There is always a close tie with the far east and certainly

55

56

there is a clear one from the time the Ghaznevid sultans
make their conquest of the Punjab. It was from these

same Ghaznevid dynasties that the Seljuks, and via the
Seljuks, the Ottomans were to take building techniques,
vocabulary and iconography. This and the fact that before
the Ghaznevides, Buddhism was the religion of the Uighar
Turks before their conversion to Islam (c. 870) and that
"Buddhist religious literature had a brilliant deve10pment
in Uighur language" (0. Aslanapa, 0p. cit., p. 40), make
it possible to accept E. Diez's proposal that "Uighur
stupas of the Buddhist period influenced the considerable
heightening of the domes of Islamic monuments." (Ibid.,
p. 74). One further suSpects that these eastern influ—
ences can be seen at times in Seljuk and Ottoman building
iconography. The use of a domed central court with a four
part eyyan certainly was significant to Buddhist and Hindu
rulers as a symbol of the ruler seated at the center of
the world and under the Wheel of the Law. This reappears
in Istanbul. G. Goodwin, op. cit., p. 137 writes: "The
Cinili Kiosk at Topkapi Saray . . . is a plan which recurs
at Fatihpur Skiri where Akbar‘s throne was placed in the
center of the four cardinal points--to symbolize his being
the Viceregent of Vishnu--under an eight-ribbed dome which
represented the Wheel of the Law. The square plan repre-
sented the four corners of the world. . . . Mehmet II
Fatih clearly respected the work of Timur and was in com—
munication with Central Asia." Hautecoeur points out the
imperial and religious use of the umbrella in Dionysiac
rites as they enter Asia; in its use also in Assournazirpal,
Assourbanipal and India (Hautecoeur, o . cit., p. 20). He
further notes that in Egypt “1e temple est Ie symbole de
monde; comme l'a montre Moret, le sol de l'edifice est la
Terre, les colonnes sont les vegetaux, la plafond 1e ciel"
(p. 61); "Les peuples nomades comparaient 1e ciel a une
tente" (p. 64); "Les psaume 103 dit que Dieu etend le ciel
comme une tente" (p. 64). It is interesting here to note
also a "person connected“ use of this image when Omar
Khayyam, a Muslim mystic writes concerning himself and his
poetical name which means Tentmaker, “the shears of Fate
have cut the tent ropes of his life.“ Thus the poetical
device of person as sort of micro-cosmic house could be
inferred (Omar Khyyam, Rubiyat, p. xi). "Les Hebreux
designent le tabernacle comme la ténte sous laquelle
l'arche fut placeé" (p. 64); Hittites "attribuent 1e méme
nom a l'interieur du temple." He speaks of the Zodiac,

of Dendera, dating from the Ptolemies as a circle "celeste
s'inscrit dans un rectangle et porte sur les diagonales

et sur les axes par les genies et les divinites" (p. 62).
Tesit Atabinen, Les Characteristics de l'architecture
Turc, Paris, 1938, p. 17, goes so far as to say that the

57

dome of Hagia Sophia derives along with the Istanbul
mosques from early Anatolian or Altaic types and not

from Byzantium at all. C. E. Arseven, Turk Sanati Tarihi,
Istanbul, n.d., pp. 335-336, says that Sfileymaniye was in
no way influenced by Hagia Sophia but rather from an
earlier Turkish tradition. Lehmann, op. cit., also ex-
presses many of the above views and cites the Dome of
Heaven in Quseir Amra as an early Islamic example.

4W. Wolska, La Tgpggraphie Chretienne de Cosmas
Indicgpleustes: Theologie et Science au VI siecle, Paris,
1962, p. 128.

5

 

 

 

Ibid., p. 133.

6Hautecoeur, 0p. cit., p. 65.

7Wolska, op. cit., p. 136. She also adds that
some knew of this in Persian doctrines but feels it goes
too far to identify it with Chaldean doctrines although
she sees the interdependence of Babylonian, Biblical and
Egyptian cosomologies in it.

8Goodwin, 0p. cit., p. 199, and A. Stratton, Sinan,
N.Y., 1972, pp. 13-18. On the other hand, this imagery
occurs elsewhere. The Encyclopedia of Art in talking of
Irano-Buddhist schools writes that Zoroastrian fire temples
led to the development of "kiosk types" of mosques where
domed space was preceded by an anteroom known as the
lewan. In their section on Greco—Buddhist Style they
discuss the fire temple of Surkh Kotal in Bactria where
the "roof is supported on four columns placed in the
corner of the fire altar.“ Lethaby, op. cit., p. 114
writes: "to the old Chinese, Heaven is round, the earth
is square."

9J. Callahan, “Greek PhiloSOphy and the Cappa-
docian Cosmology,“ Dumbarton Oaks Papers 12 (1958), p. 39.
This lamp idea is important later in the discussion of
mosque niches and light symbolism.

10G. von Grunebaum, "Parallelism, Convergence and
Influence in the Relations of Arab and Byzantine Philosophy,
Literature, and Piety," Dumbarton Oaks Papers 18 (1964),
pp. 109-110. He too goes on to comment on the strong
Platonic elements in both.

11Grabar among others, sees influences of Sassanian
fire temple construction: again everyone seems to refer
to Syriac Church sources. Ettinghausen, "Interaction and

 

 

 

58

Integration in Islamic Art," Op. cit., p. 118 says that
when 'Abd al'Malik built the Dome of the Rock "he used
the traditional plans of certain Syriac churches," and
refers the reader to Creswell's Earlpruslim Arch., I,

pp. 70-78. Finally there is the search for other types
of centralized structures specifically in the Roman tra-
dition which may have served as original models. Goodwin,
Op. cit., p. 216 compares Sinan's and Alberti's view-
points and draws some interesting parallels.

12Grabar, Op. cit., p. 117 ff., proves this con-
struction and its tradition in early mosque architecture
as early as the late seventh century and suggests a basis
in earlier Sassanian fire temples. Ettinghausen, O . cit.,
p. 108 writes that "the earliest standing building in
Iran, the Mosque Of Damghan, dating from the second half
of the eighth century, still uses Sassanid construction
forms and techniques, though the concept and purposes Of
the building and its plan are Arabic and Muslim."

l3Grabar, "The Architecture of the Middle Eastern
City from Past to Present: The Case Of the Mosque," pp;
gi£,, p. 29. Grabar, "Islamic Art and Byzantium," Op. cit.,
p. 88. Here he goes on to say that the documentation Of
the growth Of Islamic iconography and precise Byzantine
sources are woefully lacking.

14

 

Sumner-Boyd and Freely, op. cit., pp. 222-223.

15Interestingly, this quibla wall and mihrab may
be long in a tradition which derived from the Torah
Shrines in the Galilean type of Synagogues. G. Goodenough,
Jewish Symbols in the Greco—Roman Period, Vol. I., N.Y.,
1953, p. 209, writes: fiThat type is the basilica, oriented
with its facade and its worship toward Jerusalem. The
orientation was quite unlike the orientation of a Christian
Church, however, where the main front with its three doors
is at the Opposite end Of the sanctuary . . . In the
synagogue the main entrance with its usual three doors
itself was on the end Of the building toward Jerusalem,
and the sacred enclosure was directly in front of these
doors, or Of the central door . . . Worship was thus
directed simultaneously toward the sanctuary, the main
front with its three doors and toward Jerusalem. . . .
The structural 'front' then was normally blocked Off by
a screen to make what has all the appearance of a adyton,
a chamber inaccessible to any but those Officiating.

 

59

16S. Cammann, "Cosmic Symbolism on Carpets from
the Sanguszko Group," Studies in Art and Literature Of
the Near East in Honor of Richard Ettinghausen, N.Y.,
1974, p. 187.

 

 

 

CHAPTER V

THE REFLECTION OF ISLAMl

In order to fully assess the ideas discussed so
far, it becomes necessary to consider Sfileymaniye in
terms of its function: its use as a house Of worship
for Islam. Louis Massignon, one of the greatest Of the
writers on Islam, has referred to the "Byzantine mirage
in the Arab mirror" and this seems true Of Sfileymaniye
encased in its Byzantine shell. Islam, the Word Of Allah,
as revealed through Mohammed and explicated in the Koran,
is influenced by Judaism and Christianity.2 It includes
their teachings and respects the Old Testament prophets
and finally recognizes Christ, as the last and greatest
prophet in the line before Mohammed. Mohammed, living
in the early seventh century, received the last and purest
word Of God. Louis Massignon has said that underlying
Islam is the idea that:

Dieu tire les ficelles comme dans le spectacle

du Guignol. C'est pour cela que, par example,

i1 n'y a pas des drames chez eux. La drame, pour
nous, est dans le coeur-meme des personnages,
dans leur liberte, mais cette liberte, pour les
musulmans, est conditionnee par la volonte divine
et il ne sont que des instruments. 11 y a bien
du drame chez eux, mais c'est au theatre de

marionettes.3

60

61

Sinan, in his position Of Janissary to the Sultan,
was a member of the Bektasi sect of Dervishes, a Sufi
order. He was thus acquainted with some of the Sufi or
mystical Islamic thought that was a strong current in
Ottoman Islamic thought.4 Fatih's councilor-scribe--
an establishment person if ever there was one--makes a
specific reference to the Sufis in his description of
the entry into Constantinople and the taking of Hagia
SOphia. Further, in writing of Sufi orders, Hamilton
Gibb writes:

Among the Ottoman Turks in Anatolia and Europe
the most characteristic order was another 'rustic
order,' that of the Bektashis. This which was
said to be an offshoot of the Yesevis and was
fully established by the end Of the fifteenth
century, was a peculiar syncretism apparently
connected on the one side with esoteric Shi'ism
and on the other with a good deal Of popular
Christianity and Gnosticism. The Bektashis went
much farther than other orders in regarding the
outer ceremonies of Islam as unimportant and
negligible; and in their rituals there were some
remarkable analogies to those Of Christianity.

. . . The Bektashi order acquired enormous
prestige through its association with the Ottoman
janissaries. . . .5

Therefore, the mystical element which incorporates the
idea of estatic revelation was always an attractive one
and seems to play a part in Ottoman Islam.
The mystics emphasize the idea of light. Tritton
wrote:
Closely connected with mysticism is the doctrine
of illumination; it is neo-Platonism eXpressed

in terms borrowed from the dualism Of light and
darkness . . . There is a greater east, the

62

world of intelligences or pure lights, and a
lesser east, the world Of souls. The intel-
ligences rise in the eastern horizon of God
and the souls in that Of the intelligences.
Finally it [the souls and intelligences] meets
at 'the gate of gates' the first intelligence,
the giver from which souls emanate, Gabriel.

. . . The Light Of Lights is at once the source
of all being and all knowledge, both Of which
irradiate from it and the high, sees the high
which lights it. The highest light is lighted
by the rays of the Light Of Lights.‘6

The mystics placed an emphasis on the macrocosm for which
man serves as a microcosm. They used not only metaphors
of light, but also of the veil, the Way and the Throne

as well as number symbolism to express their ideas:

Traditional man in Islamic society lives accord-
ing to Divine Law; in addition, the man with a
special vocation seeks the Truth through the Way
that exists as the inner dimension of the Law.

The relationship between the Truth, the Way, and
the Law is best expressed through the symbol of the
circle. The Law is the circumference, the Way is
the radii leading to the center, the center is

the Truth. . . . The central postulate of the Way
is that there is a hidden meaning in all things.
Each thing has an outer form as well as an inner
meaning.

This was a philosophy, as Gibb points out, that was per-
petually attractive to Turkish rulers.8
Both de Boer, and Massignon see the doctrine of

atoms as another element which is important to Islam.
This was derived from Greek natural philosophy to explain
the transient existence of the world:

What we perceive Of the sensible world,--say

these Atomists--is made up of passing 'accidents'

which every moment come and gO. The substratum

of this 'change' is constituted by the (bodily)

substances; and because of changes occuring in or
on these substances, they cannot be thought of as

63

themselves unchangeable. If then they are
changable, they cannot be permanent, for

that which is eternal does not change . . .
Matter, as possibility, exists only in thought:
Time is nothing other than the coexistence Of
different Objects, or simultaneity in pre-
sentation; and Space and Size may be attributed
to bodies indeed, but not to individual parts
(Atoms), Of which bodies are composed. . . .

In themselves they are non spatial but they

have their position and by means of this position
of theirs they fill space. It is thus unities
not possessing extension, but conceived as
points,--Out Of which the spatial world Of body
is constructed. Between these unities there
must be a void, for were it not otherwise any
motion would be impossible, since the atoms

do not press upon one another. All chance, how-
ever, is referged to Union and Separation, Move-
ment and Rest.

This, then is the background for the rest Of the
discussion. If Coomaraswamy is accepted when he states
that "all traditional architecture . . . follows a cosmic

10

pattern," then Nasr's proposition also seems plausible,

i.e., that the "finite cosmos“ (as perceived by the Muslim)
"served as an icon to be contemplated and transcended,"

and that "Islamic art seeks to relate the multiplicity of
forms, shapes and colours to the One, to the Center . . .11
In a similar vein, Massignon points out that the Islamic
artist is not Pygmalion, he compares him rather to a
"muscien qui serait algebriste, . . .[whO believes] simple-
ment au passage d'un certain nombre de notes pour aboutir

«12

5 des silences. He says Of architecture that "ce n'est

qu'un fond, un fond pour la pensée, et l'art pour eux,

l3

passe dessus comme une espece de reflet." Combining

64

these ideas and those already considered in the history
Of architectural symbolism as well as the aforementioned
close connection of geometry, astronomy and astrology in

Islamic traditional education,14 it is now possible to

15

view Suleymaniye in its Islamic context. This Islamic

context is one which is essentially Neo-Platonic in its
idea that there is an underlying order or harmony--a
mathematical structure to the universe.16 Therefore,
with Suleymaniye's plan of the square, four gigantic
piers and dome in mind, it is important not only to
accept its similarity to Hagia SOphia, but also to con-
sider Burckhardt's statement:

In speaking Of his ascent to heaven (miraj)

the PrOphet describes an immense dome made Of
white mother Of pearl and resting on four corner
pillars, on which are written the four parts Of
the Koranic formula: 'In the name--Of God--the
Compassionate--the Merciful,‘ and from which flow
four rivers Of beatitude, one Of water, one Of
milk, one of honey and one Of wine. This parable
represents the Spiritual model Of every building
with a dome. Mother-Of-pearl or white pearl is
the symbol of the Spirit (ar-ruh), the "dome“

of which encloses the whole creation.l7

Nasr also believes that the concentric spheres act as a

most powerful and efficient symbol for the states of being
which man must traverse to reach Being Itself . . ."18
Within Sfileymaniye it is interesting to remember the
squareness--or earth--symbolized by the number four

surmounted by domes of various sizes. That these domes

indicate states of being seems quite possible when one

65

takes into account these words Of the mystic Shihab Al-Din
Abu Hafs Al-Suhrawardi (632/1234):

The hearts of those who seek to draw near to
God come nearer and nearer and ascend through
the heavenly spheres, and with each sphere to
which they ascend, they leave behind them
something of the darkness Of self, until they
pass beyond the heavens and stand before the
Throne of God, and then all thought Of self
passes away in the radiant light of the Divine
Majesty and the darkness of the self disappears
in the light of the heart.1

In the center of the building rises the largest dome of
all (Plate 11). This dome symbolically stands for the
idea of the Reality beyond all, the Breath or the Word.
It is reinforced here by the Surah or Verse of Light
written (and probably restored) in its tOp:
God is the Light of the heavens and the earth,
the likeness of His Light is as a Niche
wherein is a lamp
(the lamp is a glass . . 20
the glass as it were a glittering star).
Therefore, it seems clearly established that Sfileymaniye
functions as a cosmic house, a symbol which has evolved
from a long tradition, but which has specific Islamic
reference. In view Of this and Of Grabar's statement
that the earliest type of mosque architecture was a
hypostyle-square bay type which could be enlarged at will
by adding a unit, one could suggest that Sfileymaniye is

21 Sinan could have used the

a variation Of this type.
technical knowledge gained from a study of Hagia Sophia

and perhaps of early Istanbul mosques such as Fatih to

66

mmflGMEMOme mo OEOU Hmuucmu

AH madam

 

 

-.
1.0 l‘..~-' N
g , ._ . .‘uau

'7‘

 

 

‘ ./ :% 9‘2," '3, '3
g. a 1 t . /
. .’ “fr-I
.> .5 ,. ~. . 3k.

- ~J

 

v D .. . ‘ O . ‘ .
. x
3 k1 '— ..'".-'! V“ 2.
.5 - 5|-.. . ‘. (L. l. | 7...: .,
. U" V' o .. ,_
.- .. M?-
... ‘_\ . -_~ . . .
. ‘» ‘ 2’: ‘.‘ ' ‘_
.r "1 . .

2'
‘ I
5 Q
o“: . ,»
v .
. ' if‘,‘ - -
_ find-.0-“ a... h. -,,. P

. ‘ .. .4" ‘ Iu’ -.
‘ ' ”a? -
- {Ii-fig“? ‘ 7.: _
'0. m a” c ' ‘ r—w-o
_‘r r I? Le?"
.. {.Jf ‘- . ‘... a”:

 

Bi“
4".—

I, . . , '7‘ - “' '
mi: Mm... . ~
’ . . ,. 'L‘uffl‘l- 126.234,}. '.
a": " ' ' A I I
Q

 

 

 

68

enlarge the central bay for emphasis. If so, the building
of Piayale Pasha Camii in his later years--a nine bay,
and domed, yet non—centralized construction would seem
more understandable than if one merely states that he
followed the influence of Hagia SOphia.
Related to the structure of Sfileymaniye and the

Surah Of Light is the system of lighting. Light was im-
portant also to the early Christians, but here it is pre-
sented differently since it comes into the building, not
only from above, but also from the ground level. This
less elevated light source is perhaps meant to suggest
that light from God comes from within oneself as well as
from without; for God is in the microcosm Of man as well
as in the macrocosm, and revelation is from both within
and without.22 Abu Talib Al-Makki (c. 386/996), a Sufi
mystic, prays:

Oh God, give me light in my heart and light in

my tomb, and light in my hearing and light in

my sight, and light in my feeling, and light

in all my body, and light before me and light

behind me. Give me, I pray Thee, light on my

right hand and light on my left hand and light

above me and light beneath me. O Lord, increase

light within me and give me light and illuminate

me. These are the lights which the Prophet

asked for: verily to possess such light means

to be contemplated by the Light of Light.23
SO logically, in Sfileymaniye, as contrasted to the apsid-

ially and domically lit Hagia SOphia, the light is an

overall light starting from the ground, where men stand,

69

as well as from above. This light is more or less even
and diffused, since the "veils are removed," indicating
the light with which one may be filled as Opposed to the
complex interactions Of light and shadow of the Christian
mystery in Hagia SOphia. In addition, there are no
curtains or screens to establish a tension Of Open and
closed areas; this absence of curtains or screens seems
analogous to the Often reiterated Koranic idea of a lack
of "veil" or direct access to God through Islam. As with
the Byzantines, however, the light is also a light of

God the Logos, and the light Of Divine Justice and Truth.

It is interesting to see in Sfileymaniye the
association of the color white with light. At the ablution,
a Muslim prays: "O God, whiten my face with thy light, on
the day thou shalt whiten the faces Of thy favorites.“24
The ground of the tiles incorporated by the mihrab is
white. The ground is furthermore Opaque and the rugs were
probably woolen, as Opposed to the Byzantine use Of re-
fracted light in their mosaics, brocades and marble.

There is the sense of being thrown back once more upon
the light within; the unreality and surface quality of
the visible world is reinforced.

The mosque is oriented in the direction of Mecca.
The great central gate, the front portal, and the mihrab

are all aligned on this central axis and are identical

70

with one another in design. Thus a straight line is
formed from the street to the mihrab. Grabar has noted
an axial nave cutting across other naves as one of the
five Oldest symbolic parts in mosque architecture. He
suggests a source in palace architecture. The nave
suggests:

. . . a throne room with an aisle for atten-

dants and a place for the throne in a niche

preceded by a dome. Existing texts do indi-

cate that, on some occasions, royal guards

lined up on the axial nave while the prince

performed his function as imam.
He feels it is reminiscent Of Early Christian basilicas.
Perhaps this is another place where Sfileymaniye acts as
a culmination of a tradition for Sinan has kept this
axial orientation while Opening his space to a greater
and more effective degree than probably was possible in
the Cordoba or Damascus mosques.

In this century, the Gestalt psychologist Koffka

pointed out that "every line Splits singularity into

"26 tO the human eye. On man's level in Sfileymaniye

plurality
the world or mosque is divided by this axis into a plurality
Of parts within the square form. This is resolved into
unity above in the 360° circumference of the dome--the
circle symbolic Of unity.

The suggestion of the central axis as the Path or

Way Spoken Of by the Sufi should not be overlooked. Abu

Sa'id B. Abi‘l Khayr (c. 440/1048) wrote that "Thy Path,

71
wherein we walk, in every step is fair . . .27 and the
opening chapter of the Koran reads "Lead us 0 Lord, in

the right path."28 In the chapter of the Koran called

Apigm, Allah says: "This is the true path, follow it."29
Lastly, the axial orientation with the gate, door
and mihrab could be regarded as a miniature of Hail, the
pilgrimage to Mecca required of every good Muslim. One
moves from the outer world into the model Of the cosmos
and toward the niche which acts both as the Throne of the
Word and as the gateway or door to God or Revelation.30
Evidently Sinan intended the worshipper to connect

the gate, the door and the mihrab together in his mind
as stations along the Path to Reality. The same kind of
symbolism is found in certain contemporary Persian rugs,
known as the Sangusko Group of Carpets. In an extremely
interesting article, Schuyler von R. Cammann, points out
the symbolism contained in these rugs.31 He says that
they were produced in the first two and one half reigns
after the Safavid Dynasty came to the throne in 1502
(this makes them almost contemporaneous with Sfileymaniye).
It was a dynasty which encouraged the Sufi thinkers. In
describing the first rug, he writes:

In the middle Of all this, we find a large

central medallion, set Off from the background,

and distinguished as being situated on a higher

level, by a narrow, serrated band of white.
At the center of this medallion there is an

72

open void in white, one of the brighest
elements on the whole carpet, which Obviously
stands for the traditional 'Sun Gate,‘ that
entry into tOpmost Heaven, which also marked
the path of the Cosmic Axis. In Old Asian
thinking, the Axis Of the Universe was con-
ceived to be an imaginary pillar or post ex-
tending through the 'Three Worlds.' It had
its base at the bottom of the Underworld,
extended up through the World of Men (Often
passing through some sacred mountain, such as
Mt. Demavent) and on through the Dome of the
Sky, 'up into the various layers of Paradise,
to the very top Of Heaven, where stands the
throne of God.'32

Continuing on to another rug in this group, Schuyler von R..
Cammann notes the displacement Of entwined dragons from
the center Of one carpet tO the border of another and
says:

There was a habit of transferring symbols
associated with the inner Sun Gate to the
Outer borders of a rug, with the express pur-
pose Of identifying the latter more precisely
as being the outer Sky Door, the first entrance
to Heaven. In their new location, the Old
symbols seem to have retained their former
powers Of protection and defense, because they
were placed so as to face in and out, usually
in a regular alternation. Those facing in
were believed to be restraining the good,
spiritual forces that might otherwise slip out
and become dissipated; while those facing out
were considered to be guarding any peOple who
might be seated on the Paradise pattern, pro-
tecting them against evil . . .3

Finally he notes the continual presence of the multiple
door idea: the Sky Door, the Sun Gate and "beyond that
was the Throne."34

It is important for our interpretation of the

doorways at Sfileymaniye that the vertical concept Of the

73

earth and heavens is read horizontally in this rug. Thus
one can well consider whether these related gate designs
might not be read as the Sky Door, or the outer gate
separating the worshipper from the material world, the
Sun Gate or portal which leads to the Cosmic House, and
"beyond that, the throne" or the mihrab which, as will
presently be seen, does in fact carry throne connotations.
Within the mosque, the vertical symbolism is also present
if one proceeds from the prayer rugs, through the assorted
sizes of domes, "the various layers of Paradise" to the
top-most central dome, whose calligraphy presents an inter-
locked pattern with a central abstract pattern. This is
very similar to the Sanguzsko carpets' interlocked dragons
or Sun Gate through with “stands the throne of God."35
NO precise historical link between the carpets'
symbolism and that of the mosque can be proved, but the
analogy between them is clear. More exact information
about the original rugs found in Sfileymaniye would be of
great value here; but given the information available,
this horizontal and vertical interpretation of the Way
seems quite 1ikely.3§
The gate design (Plate 12) may well have its
origin in the ancient Near East. Goldman, in connection
with Judaic architecture, notes the slow "transformation

of a building with altars on its roof into an altar."32

74

Plate 12

Main gate Of Sfileymaniye

75

 

{um

I

   

W"

}}'~7

no‘
Hf:
.‘ ‘_. -&

.J

 

 

s

_- ”0mm:mmmmm v

04*
‘-

 

 

I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. b . 1 . 0’
.... 1..A..4..~.... ..
A, .. \ .

 

 

 

 

 

 

76

In speaking of the Beth-Alpha mosaic (Plate 13), he says
that:

To return, finally, to the portal depicted

in the Beth-Alpha mosaic, we find that the
oversize, hornlike acroteria closely resemble
those Of the altar shrines under discussion,
suggesting that the altar motif may well form
a significant part of the iconographical back-
ground for the synagogue 'shrine.'38

 

At the gate to Sfileymaniye, it is interesting to
see again the door surmounted by what could be an abstract
set of horns. Could this gate then not act as a sort of
symbol of the altar-like quality Of the whole? The gate
concept has been known to function this way in the Ottoman
secular world where the symbolic concept of the door-
pgrte-kapi as the symbol Of the whole is one embedded in

the culture Of Ottoman Turkey.39 At Sfileymaniye the gate

 

connotes the holiness of the building and its total symbolic
function as an entry to Paradise.

It is interesting to see how the Ottomans have
taken ideas from past religious traditions for their struc-
tures. This is something for which they undoubtedly felt
a need because the KQEEE did not furnish them with a ready-
made model. Nowhere does the borrowing seem more true
than in the case Of the mihrab. The mihrab does not seem
to have played a particularly important role in early
Islam and is really not necessary since the kiplg wall

already indicates the direction Of Mecca. As Grabar

77

OHOmOE mamamlsumm

ma mumam

78

 

 

 

 

 

.I :“i I’ [‘1 ‘
”Win“

.vl"'

? ‘ w’
wu‘lflff 1,210.

,
-' fl . I.
. f. '1.‘ W17"
‘ ..I‘ .l'...
L A f ”

:fv“~
9..

 

I.’ ‘

m

32:» mfim‘tmovym . T I I 1;:

..- '

...; .-
.‘pi’é’ “I.
r. '.

f

u)-

..-
. .‘1'
...{d’

 

 

 

 

 

 

79

pointed out, it was many times, as at Cordoba, not readily

visible from the entire mosque.4O

It is simply an empty
niche which one could characterize as a sort of stylized
shell shape or design. Interestingly, a shell shape as
in Roman statuary niches (Plate 11) is found in the
Cordoba Mosque (plate 12) and in Cosmas‘ diagram of the
universe (Plate 10) based on decorations in a Torah shrine.
Stylistically, Suleymaniye's shell shape is much closer
to the Torah shrine of the Beth-Alpha mosaic (Plate 13)
and to the niche for the Colossal Buddha in the Bamiyan
Caves, Afghanistan (Plate 14), both honorific niches for
a religiously important object or symbol. Although it
seems probable that the symbolic meaning as some type Of
honorific niche remains the same, stylistically, Sfileyman-
iye's niche is closer in design to those of the Middle
East than to the ones belonging to the Hellenistic area.41
Again perhaps similarity of design indicates Sinan's
tendency to turn to Anatolian or Middle Eastern traditions.
Perhaps the closest traceable ancestor for this design in
Sfileymaniye could be suggested in the Seljuk tomb and
mosque portals and niches found in Anatolia (Plates 15-16).
The symbolism Of the mihrab is a puzzle. No clear
cut symbolism or source emerges. Rather it seems to be
a blending Of Hellenistic design and related meanings in

the shell motif, and of Eastern Christian, Judaic, and

Islamic thought and style. Burckhardt writes that he

80

Plate 14

Colossal Buddha Bamiyan Caves

81

 

 

. I d.» ‘W
.- .. ...s/V" 0' ..

II. n l

a
.M l.’ -‘.. ~ I

I

 

Plate 14

82

a
.HEOU Monmomu OU.uHSOmHHM mo swam

ma mumam

 

 

.‘o/ét
)
(.7
<1
3

-~.

 

 

 

 

 

84

Plate 16

Window detail of Kirsehir‘de
Cacabey Camii

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
   

  

£2521 -“’

V“,“
.. I ~

  
 

.1, ~. ,1 ‘
> _ ,A-. “
‘ "%-;-H.“'A.,l - f-
"..5‘ "4:43 V ' ')' 1‘»:
o t. > ‘_ .. r
.A '- ‘ (‘:‘““ ‘tz‘u’\ 1”.$~‘ .
..Alv‘fi‘ ‘ 'I' ' ‘.’p‘~‘A.‘. ._ v _
V . . . m 6 ~ \‘~
‘ ‘-~..~o
30A. .2 ‘
.‘ s ‘0 .

    
   

 

 

86

feels the primary function of the mihrab is acoustic, to
re-echo the words Of prayer directed toward it by

virtue of its reverberation of Divine Word

during Prayer . . . the mihrab is a symbol

of the Presence of God . . . the miracle of

Islam is the Divine Word directly revealed

in the Koran and 'actualized' by ritual

recitation.42 (See Plate 17)
While this may be true in such places as Cordoba where the
niche is virtually another small room, it seems question-
able in Sfileymaniye where the niche is relatively so small
that a significant echo is quite improbable. Thus, while

finding this point interesting, I tend rather to see the

mihrab as a pot:pourri Of symbolism which becomes truly

 

Islamic but which gains depth of meaning by the accumulation
Of traditions attached to it. First Goitein notes the
close relationship Of Judaism and Islam.43 Goldman writes
Of how the synagogue differed from other religious struc-
tures of the ancient world since (1) the building housed
no cult statue, (2) the building did not act as a divine
residence, and (3) it incorporated no ritual based on
sacrifice. “Here YWWH could have no earthly form and the
writings of the Pentateuch (the Torah) took the place of
the cult image."44 This Judaic tradition would be a
sympathetic one for the Muslims who saw the beginning as
the Breath Of the Compassionate, the Word, the Divine

Essence. Goodenough, in writing Of Old Jewish coins notes

a Torah shrine:

87

Plate 17

Detail of Cordoba mihrab

ssfluww . \ 1.. T\\ \,.\
I . . \ . I. \
«I .. so“ «\wa . n \.\W t.

f

k \ “a. 4
Cu a». k .\ ,
\ ‘

bu
1.4.

l
.

 

 

..
‘01

 

89

Standing within the facade, the design seems
to me to represent not the Temple, but the
sanctuary of Judaism, the Law itself. As the
Torah shrine was put within the sanctifying
facade in synagogues, so it stands here within
the facade. In the early synagogues that we
know the facade was turned toward Jerusalem,
and worship was directed through it and the
Torah to Jerusalem and God. As the facade was
put upon the synagogue, so it was put on the
coins to represent, with the shrine, what the
Jews were madly revolting to protect, the Torah
and the Covenant and the Jewish life the Torah
epitomised.4

The similarity in design Of several Torah shrines and
mihrabs has already been noted (Plates l3 & 18). As with
the Torah shrine, the mihrab functions as a niche for the
Word and a niche which Often occurs on prayer rugs and in
Sfileymaniye contains a lamp in an abstracted form. The
lamp is the vessel by which symbolically the light or word
becomes known just as it does through the writings of the
Pentateuch. The mihrab is different from a Judiac shrine,
however, for it does not contain a holy writ or a veil.

It cannot, for in Islam it is the unseeable Word, the

Divine Intellect46

for which one searches. The mihrab
does not contain veils for the same reason that it is
fully lighted;
Unlike the rulers Of the world. He [God] Opens
the door and lifts the veil and gives His servants
to enter into confidential intercourse with him
through prayer.
Grabar also admits that the mihrab may have a possible

Jewish prototype but turns to Rome:

9O

mMHuOE mafiunm smuoe smEOmloomuU mo mmamfimxm

ma. mumHm

92

But a more general explanation seems to me

preferable, for the concave niche or the

simple arch on two columns were one of the

ubiquitous settings for an honored image

throughout the classical world. Early

Islam itself used the theme on some of its

coins.
While this statement may be quite true, the connection of
Suleymaniye's mihrab and the honorific niche Of the kind
used in Roman palaces, which I have mentioned earlier, is
more complex (Plates 19 & 20). Commonly accepted among
Byzantine scholars is the fact that this Imperial imagery
is Often inherently religious or else transferred to
religious symbolism, and that in the apses--"an honorific
niche" Of the Byzantine churches, Mary is often portrayed
with Christ on her lap (Plate 21) and given the epithet
of the Throne of Wisdom-—the passive element who received
the Word incarnate in Christ. The throne-honorific niche
symbol can be applied also to the Koranic Throne idea.49
Mystics such as Abu Yazid Tayfur Al-Bistami called Bayazid
Bistami (c. 261/875) had written:

I thought that I had arrived at the very Throne

Of God and I said to it: '0 Throne, they tell

us that God rests upon thee.‘ 'O Bayazid,‘ re-

plied the Throne, 'we are told here that he dwells

in the humble heart.‘50
Most interestingly for the present discussion, a link be-
tween Byzantine Christianity and Islam would seem suggested

in Suleymaniye. Evliya Celebi records that in Sfileymaniye

the inscription "over the semi-dome of the mihrab . . .

93

Left: St. Michael. Leaf of an ivory
diptych. Constantinople, 519-27.

Right: Leaf of the Consular diptych Of
Flavius Anastasius. Constantinople,
517.

94

 

 
  
 

5 ‘13.: RCA 1: atom} 3.411»
k .1 tuzgscggx‘rmgim11.x; s

  

 
 

      
 

- . _.-.._ -—-

_ .. -_.-_-EIC 9N5;0RI\L.-.A

   

--o.* ..-- M’s--.

 

 

 

*3

      
      

:w H"? -

 

"b ‘3‘
a K . -

<-
\ f - ‘_
AK}: ‘9'. . ' . _ _ ‘
a; .9.- w

  
  
        

-
\~ -‘ I‘ I
“3‘
.
fl . —‘ --

*.
.Vt.‘
. 'u-

.4' f.- 4." r._‘?-‘v
,' 9

‘3‘?“ 3“:

 

 

.0. ""

 

 

 

 

 

9 . . - .
4 ~ '_ ‘ ‘ '5. . .
— I.‘ 9 » ‘ - 7" ‘ ‘Q .6. u
‘ ’ , ‘ ’ Raw-fix.‘ 4! '
I ’ L
'1 o ‘ ' v t
‘ ‘ ‘ . ‘ \ Q u.5

| M

 
 

1

 

L .. AI.—

 

 

‘A K i‘ '0‘» o“ ‘.~\"¢1"’:?fi' ..

.F’

 

 

 

 

95

mSHmOUOOSB MO EDHHOmmHE

om mumam

96

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

97

Plate 21

Madonna Enthroned mosaic,
Apse Hagia Sophia

 

 

 

 

 

 

99

(reads) ‘Whenever Zakariyya went into the Chamber (mihrab)

...51

to her. This refers to the third Surah of the Koran,

verse thirty-two, which tells of the immaculate conception
of Mary and following this the conception and birth of
Jesus. It is an inscription which only appears in six-
teenth century Ottoman mosques. F. Schuon points out, in
discussing similarities in religions, that:

In a certain respect the Virgin and the Prophet
'incarnate' the passive or 'feminime' aspect--
or pole--Of universal Existence . . . On the
other hand, there is also an important connection
between the invocation of the Divine Name and
the birth Of Christ: in the first case the Word
issues from the mouth Of man; in the second case
it issues from the Virgin. This comparison
brings to light the symbolical analogy between
speech and childbirth. It results from this
analogy that the mouth Of one who invokes God

is identical with the Virgin (Virgo genetrix)
'virginity' is therefore an indispensablg attri-
bute of the mouth of the spiritual man.5

 

Here the Virgin is paralleled by Mohammed who is also a
virgin in that he was illiterate, pure of human knowledge
and passive in that he "receives“ the word Of God. At

the same time he is the lamp through which the light of
God shines just as on a lower scale each human being is

a lamp to transmit the Word. Mohammed acts in the passive
role, which is the Virgin‘s in Eastern Christianity, as
well as in the role Of Christ's humanity. This appears

to be an instance where an architectural motif embodies

a particular and specific Islamic meaning, i.e., the

honorific niche or recepticle Of the Word as received by

100

the prophet; at the same time this motif continues to
Operate in a similar and related way for the Christians
with whom it originated, i.e., as the honorific niche for

53 The

the Word incarnate in Christ through the Virgin.
connection seems particularly Significant as one more
aspect of the “Byzantine mirage in the Arab mirror" in
Sfileymaniye.

The mihrab also functions symbolically as a door
or portal. This idea seems plausible when one remembers
the identical designs of the gate, portal and mihrab.

On this subject, A1 Ghazali (d. 1111) writes, l‘that the
heart has two gates, one Opening outwards, which is that
Of the senses, and one Opening inwards towards the divine
world, which is the heart and which is the gate whereby
the heart receives inspiration and revelation."S4 Here,
as well as in the dome's calligraphy, is the suggestion
of the sky door through which the believer reaches the
Throne. TO be taken into account here is Mahmud 'Ali-
Ghul's statement that etymologically midhgan was almost
identical to mihrab, which can mean masjid (teaching
place), musala, or even "burial place in the shape Of a
portico, place for prayers and services for the dead."55
In an excellent article by Geza Fehervari, the point is
made that mihrab designs Often appear on tombstones and
were perhaps transmitted to them by means of flat

56

mihrabs. In the Persian marble tombstone of Mahmud

101

dated 753/1352 in the Metropolitan Museum (Plate 22),
Surah three again appears around the arch as well as
Surah 112:
In the name of God, the Merciful, the
Compassionate
Say: 'He is God, One
God the Everlasting Refuge
Who has not begotten and has not been
begotten . . 57
and equal to him is not anyone.
Here then it seems even clearer that the idea of the
revelation of the Word through Mohammed and his Way is
suggested, again with the overtones of a Byzantine
Christian tradition signified by the presence of Surah
three. But it could also be suggested that both function
as doorways. It is through physical death that good
Muslims go to one Of their heavens; it is by the death
of things worldly and turning to things spiritual, i.e.,
in the direction of the mihrab and God that a Muslim
passes to the greater reality and knows God.58
Finally, in speaking Of the decoration of the
mihrab, one element remains unexplained; the shell design.
While there are early Christian, Byzantine and Judaic
forerunners all deriving ultimately from classical anti-
quity, the exact meaning of the shell is unclear. One
suggestion is that the shell shape is connected with the
birth of the Goddess Venus, and symbolizes birth or re-

generation. How this motif was later adopted iconographi-

cally is an interesting question which remains unanswered.

102

Plate 22

Persian tombstone c. 753/1352

103

J1...- .

J- If J,‘

.h.. J... . .. J vanDUS. JJ .‘F? '1.
. . (‘70.! 3JILP7’I’11J‘ ‘ In

_ .,. ..S iaihwé

{frgtilwglii .

1‘

_._ JMJFIJ; a... ..,..... M. 1..

.L o-‘.‘_:".":. ‘9‘

._.‘~ \'
‘» . L‘-

. I r J
I . I D. J,
I .
. .. .
., a i. l .
A .I I I
u. . . . a . I J . I .
1 I . v J"
r . J
I o J .. \ I I? .
u .
a I. .J . . J .. 4 p
I o v. . t
I . . . ..l I. a. . .1 . . . _
, I. ... J
. \ . .- I . b. r . . .
o O . .. . I ..
I. .J . . . . . .,
J . . . . .
. J a . . . . . .
J J .J . . . .J .4 n _ .
| .

M7 L171. rverofdcm Jam. «.1. a. ..J.......-

J. :5.” ..JJ.

“‘1’? r
«481.1.

A.
.
.J

'u G
a ,
1 Q

0 \. .

.

. 94....
\ ,J
.1.
. .4: . .
’. ..‘f...
.n v
N
.. c1

 

 

104

The mosque furniture and decoration in Sfileymaniye
follow a Muslim tradition. One of the most interesting
elements of the decoration is the stalactites (Plate 23)
on which a deeper study might yield very interesting results.
This motif has many forerunners in early Ottoman and Seljuk
mosques, particularly those of Bursa. They appear at many
points in Sfileymaniye in the area of transition on penden-
tives between square and dome, and some scholars have felt
that they mask this transition. They are outlined by black
lines. Scholars, VOgt-GOknil among them, regard these

59 These stalactites do not

lines as a later restoration.
seem to serve as a mask to hide transitions but instead

they act more positively. The Middle East was quite capable
of making the dome to square transition smoothly. If they
had not yet known how to make a smooth transition, they
could have found out easily enough from the countless
Byzantine churches in Istanbul. Thus, VOgt-GOknil's more
positive theory, that the stalactites aid the crystalline
and static feeling of the building, rendering the feeling

of a frozen moment outside Of time, seems closer to an
explanation. In Sfileymaniye, it is interesting to note
their triangular shape echoing the threes of the windows.
Their composite form is built by the addition Of lines

into a crystalline shape.60

105

whacmEmmem Eoum mmuwuomamum mo Hamumo

mm mumam

106

 

 

 

107

The stalactites are a man-made geometric system.
Here the close historical connections of the sciences
of astronomy, theology: and geometry in Islam come into

play. In an interesting study entitled The Language of

 

Pattern, Albarn et a1. point out, as many others have, the

61

Islamic interest in number symbolism. They illustrate the

generation of star patterns, and investigate the relation-

ships Of these patterns to "their polygons, three sided

62

to nine sided.“ A continuous line is drawn from any

point on the polygon which touches all of the points be-
fore returning tO the original one. They note there is

a "pattern of movement by the developing stars which

63

interrelates unlike polygons." It is quite possible

to see for oneself that these, as they further note, are
present in the stalactites Of Sfileymaniye:

We see . . . a stalactite formation from the
Mosque of Suleyman I, Istanbul, showing how
from a simple hexagonal grid successive pro-
jection of elements have given a complex
three-dimensional structure which acts as a
zone of transition between the earthly cube
and the heavenly sphere of the dome. This
symbolic representation did not originate in
Islam: it was develOped from Eastern and
Western sources, including Byzantine and Hindu,
and in this is representative of the synthetic
character of Islamic culture.

Thus, in this function of symbolic transition, there is
again a confluence Of sources and models within Sfileymaniye.
Again, the confluence takes a form here which provides
imagery to fit the Islamic purposes. Albarn gp_§l, write

that:

108

The characteristics Of nature Ibn Sina
described as the hot and moist and the cold
and dry. He constructed a model of concentric
spherical deve10pment away from the amalgam
(the source, the whole, the center), and noted
the gradual lessening of the hot and moist (as
the movement became less) and the increasing of
the cold and dry. He saw natural forms echoing
this model. The essence, thinly disposed in
stones and crystals (being cold and dry and
therefore substantially inanimate) developed
intensity towards the organic (which is hot and
moist, and therefore animate, i.e. generating
life) the nearer to the original source it be-
comes. The Earth he saw as having fallen through
successive levels, away from the source and
having cooled down in the process, until the
mineral solids coalesced at the lower level.
Unfortunately when we read astrological
symbols or see early diagrams of the humours we
may fail to reach the underlying deduction, which
at that time could only be expressed in such terms.
When Ibn Sina uses the circle or square it is a
key to his vision of the cosmos: the Circle ex-
presses a continuum Of movement and is therefore
the most perfect of forms; the square is rigid,
earthbound and therefore cold, but could neverthe-
less return through the layers Of deve10pment back
to the circle via the pentagon and expanding
polygons . . .55

This information would seem then to return to the
original point Of similarity Of these stalactites to
crystalline forms. Now the idea must expand to an added
sense Of depth and the realization that the triangles
formed by these line extensions are the transitory shapes
between a square and a circle. As a final point in support
of the idea, the mathematician H. S. M. Coxeter has re-
marked that the Moors had I‘already made use of all 17
crystallographic groups of symmetrical structures sub-

Sequently established by E. S. Fedorov in 1891."66

109

In short, these seem to be significant and mean-
ingful patterns which would be worthy of further study
and suggest that the meaning of the stalactites at
Sfileymaniye is symbolically a transition between earthly
and heavenly thoughts and, conversely, they are indicative
Of the transmission Of heavenly truths to earth.

But perhaps the most important of all the decor-
ation Of the mosque is the calligraphy. Ettinghausen
has gone so far as to say that: "Writing was the vehicle
Of the Koran, the basis of the whole religion and civiliza—

«67

tion. While the exact translation Of several Of the

inscriptions has already been mentioned, the other aspects
of the calligraphy should also be kept in mind.

Sir Thomas Arnold refers his readers to the four-
teenth century writer Muhammad ibn Mahmud al-Amuli whose
two-volume work on modern Islamic sciences (literary,
legal, mystic and conversational) and ancient sciences
(philosophy, mathematics and physics) contains this
section on calligraphy:

The art Of writing is an honourable one and a
soul-nourishing accomplishment; as a manual
attainment it is always elegant . . . it is re-
spected in every land; . . . being always held
to be of a high rank and dignity . . . The
PrOphet (peace be upon him!) said: ‘Beauty of
handwriting is incumbent upon you, for it is
one Of the keys Of man‘s daily bread.‘ A wise
man has said: ‘Writing is a spiritual geometry,
wrought by a material instrument.‘ And another
has said: ‘Writing is the Offspring Of thought,
the lamp of remembrance, the tongue Of him that

110

is far Off, and the life of him whose age has
been blotted out.‘53

The characteristics of "spiritual geometry," the "lamp Of
remembrance" and "the Offspring Of thought" are important
to the motifs and meanings suggested in this mosque. As
Goodwin notes in the pendentives of Sfileymaniye, the texts
seem "transformed into flowers with sixteen petals and

the letters spring and cavort with great vitality." In
the dome they "radiate like rays from a sun disc trans-

formed into Arabesques."69

Here the number of petals
could interestingly be reduced by cabalistic reduction,
as detailed by Albarn ep_al.,7o from sixteen to seven,
which is the center of the Vedic square, a multiplication
square that acts as a cosmogram. It had been integrated
into Muslim thought from North India c. 770 A.D. It is
also the number Of the heavens and spheres in Muslim
thought and of the number Of the “mother" verses of the
§9532_(Refer to Footnote 20 in this chapter). The flower
pattern is echoed in the flowers Of the tiles which sur-
round the mihrab area.

Turning to the tiles, it is quite clear that they
were influenced by Persian art and in many cases made by
Persian hands. The wholesale resettlement of the people
from Tabriz in the time of Selim I has been mentioned

earlier; kilns in Iznik provided the tiles for Siileymaniye,71

the first mosque in which Sinan used tiles to a great degree

111

(he would later turn Rustem Pasha Camii into a veritable
tile museum). Sfileymaniye tiles are confined, however,
to the mihrab area, they act as an aid to meditation.
The subject matter of the tiles is presented in
an Open--not closed--pattern (Plate 7) with a curious
asymmetry. Massignon has noted that this pattern en-
courages one to move beyond the Pythagorean-Greek view
of completeness in the contemplation Of beauty to a sense
of incompleteness or multiplicity of the present leading
to a completeness of the whole, of Allah the eternal.
It is tempting to read in the flowers the symbolism not
only of a Paradise garden always associated with mosques
and found on prayer rugs,72 but also as the symbol of
the souls Of men73--a symbolism already recorded as used
by Cappodician monks whose churches in Byzantine times
seem to have been architecturally closely connected with

74 It is known that by the seventeenth

ConstantinOple.
century, when Sufism was driven underground in Persia,
sunbirds and other symbols were reduced to flowers on
the carpets.75 TO my knowledge there is no proof to link
these associations to Islamic thought at this time or to
the precise symbolism current at that time. The likeli-
hood nevertheless Of such a connection seems strong.

The arabesque patterns of these flowers suggest

yet again the multiplicity Of that which is below, and

as Adalan and Bakthiar see them, the rhythm "manifest

112

time--time in the sense that the motifs are given in
temporal succession as waves, or as a combination Of flux
and cycle.".76

The stained glass by Sarhos Ibrahim, appears,
like the tiles, only in the mihrab area. Goodwin cites,
and also questions, a legend that the two rose windows
came from Baghdad. The windows today (Plate 24) follow
the original pattern although the plaster ribs have de-
cayed and have been replaced. They are sheltered by
bull‘s eye lights set in lead on the exterior.77 Precise
reasons for this lighting are not clear. Whether the
placement of this glass was influenced in any way by the
Turks turning to western art of stained glass--as they
certainly did at times--and thus to Gothic is unproven.

It seems doubtful that there was direct influence from
Gothic rose windows, for not only is the plaster setting
technique different, but the Gothic windows appear on the
facades Of the churches rather than over the “apse" as

at Sfileymaniye.

The stained glass serves functionally to emphasize
the mihrab area in an emotionally appealing way. The
softened and colored light alleviates some of the severity
of the stark white Proconnesian marble Of the mimber and
mihrab. Also, it seems to add another aspect to the
already complex light iconography by carrying a paradisi-

acal suggestion when considered in conjunction with the

113

Plate 24

Detail Of stained glass from Sfileymaniye

 

115

tiles and one may surmise, prayer rugs which were probably
originally planned for the floor. The Arabesque floral
designs certainly seem tO suggest a multiplicity of time,
here penetrated by the light of the Word Of God as it
emanates from the highest Paradise. Historically, the
glass could serve once again as a mirror of the Byzantine
tradition. It has been suggested that several Of Justin-
ian‘s churches had stained glass which was restricted to
the apse area. With this in mind, the theory of the
relationship Of the Byzantine apse to the mihrab, suggested
earlier, finds additional support.

Two other quite specific suggestions can be made
for these stained glass windows. Both are derived from
Joseph Campbell‘s suggestion that:

The roots Of the Sufi movement do not rest in the
Koran, where Mohammed comes out clearly against
the monastic way Of life, but in the Christian
Monophysite and Nestorian monk communities of the
desert and, beyond those, their Buddhist, Hindu,
and Jain models farther east. For Islam, like
Judaism, is oriented principally to the further-
ance Of a sanctified secular consensus . . .79
The first possibility is that these windows could be con-
nected in some way with the angels of Islam who act as
intecessors for man with Allah. The Byzantine Christian
tradition had adopted similar teachings about angels.

These teachings appear in the works Of Pseudo Dionysius

the AerOpagite (ca. 500 A.D.) who writes of the angels:

116

The Celestial Intelligences are constituted
in three triads, forming nine orders, whose
names represent the Divine Attributes which
they manifest to all below them.

They have also an inner relation with
every human soul, for through their ministra-
tions the aspiring soul becomes liberated from
material bondage, receives a knowledge of its
own purpose and is enabled to live its true
life and ultimately to attain to the full its
Divine Likeness.

The first triad, the Seraphim, Cherubim and
Thrones, are nearest to the Godhead, ‘ever
dwelling in the vestibule of Divinity‘ . . .

The Thrones, ‘Divine Seats,‘ make manifest
the purifying power of Providence which wholly
penetrates the consciousness. Through them
the soul is uplifted to the Divine and becomes 80
established in the constancy Of divine service.

Dionysius goes on to speak Of the angels and says Of them
that it is by means of their powers that the Word of God
"shows . . . forth to us in the measure Of the mystical

receptivity Of each one who is inspired by the divine

Illumination."81 He further notes their modes of depiction:

The Scriptures also depict them as a cloud,
showing by this that these holy Intelligences
are filled in a supermundane manner with the
hidden Light, receiving the first revelation
without undue glorying, and transmitting it
with abundant brightness to the lower Orders
as a secondary, proportionate illumination;
and further, that they possess generating, life
giving, increasing and perfecting powers by
reason of their intelligible out-pourings, as
of showers quickening the receptive womb of
earth by fertilizing rains for life-giving
travail. .

The Scriptures also liken the Celestial
Beings to brass and electron an alloy Of silver
and gold, and many coloured jewels. . . .

Again Of the many coloured varieties of stones,
the white represents that which is luminous,
and the red corresponds to fire, yellow to
gold, and green to youth and vigour. Thus

117

corresponding to each figure you will find a
mystical interpretation which relates these
symbolical images to the things above.

Dionysius then cites their symbolic connections with
wheels:

We must now consider the representations Of
the Celestial Beings in connection with rivers
and wheels and chariots. . . .

The chariots symbolize the conjoined fellow-
ship Of those of the same (angelic) order; the
winged wheels, ever moving onward, never turning
back or going aside, denote the power of their
progressive energy on a straight and direct path
in which all their intellectual revolutions are
supermundanely guided upon that straight and un-
swerving course.

The figure of the spiritual wheels can also
have another mystical meaning . . . Gel is the
name given to them which in the Hebrew tongue
means revolutions and revelations . . .83

These meanings seem to appear again in Islam
where the angels are also important as intercessors.
Lane quite Specifically notes that at certain parts in
his prayers, a believer, looking over his right shoulder
says, "Peace be on you and the mercy of God" and then
repeats this over his left shoulder. These are his
salutations to his guardian angels who are said to watch

84 These angels

over each believer and note his actions.
are closer to God than man, containing more light and
acting as intercessors for man. Therefore a parallel to
the symbolic Christian connection Of angels within wheels
of light and the Muslim angels and light seems possible.

This is reinforced when one considers the placement of

the mosque windows by the mihrab, the wheel-like Shape of

118

the two rose windows, and the presence of the calligraphy--
the revelation Of the Word of GOd--which exists within

the pattern and through which the light passes to the
worshipper.

More interesting, however, is the possibility Of
a connection between the entire area--mihrab, tiles and
windows--and the Byzantine symbolism of Mary as the Throne
of Wisdom, the holder of the Word Incarnate. This area
could well serve as a reflection of the Byzantine symbolism
of the Enthroned Madonna in apse mosaics.

As has been stated, it seems probable that the
mihrab area reflects the passive element, i.e., Mohammed
as the vessel which transmits the Word of God. It is Of
interest to note Campbell's comment that the Islamic
world revered Fatima, Mohammed‘s daughter and that, in
certain areas:

. . . her veneration goes to such lengths that
she is even termed the 'Mother of her Father,‘
‘Source of the Sun,‘ and given a masculine name,
Fatir, signifying ‘Creator,‘ the numerical value
of the letters of which--290--is the same as that
of Maryam, Mary, the mother of Jesus. For as
daughter, wife, and mother, she personifies the
center Of the genealogical mystery; and at least
one Shi‘a poet has compared her to the Burning
Bush of Moses; tO the Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem,
where the PrOphet is supposed to have experienced
his Heavenly Journey; and to the Night of Power,
when the Angel of Destiny, Gabriel, descending to
earth, brought forgiveness to mankind.35

He further notes that in at least one Shi‘ite Persian text,

the Omm-al-Kitab, there is the following narration:

 

119

When God concluded with men a covenant at the

time Of his creation of the material world,

they prayed him to Show them Paradise. He

showed them, thereupon, a being ornamented with

a million varicolored shimmering lights, who

sat upon a throne, head crowned, rings in the

ears, and a drawn sword at the girdle. The

radiating rays illuminated the whole garden;

and when the men then asked who this was, they

were told it was the form Of Fatima as she

appears in Paradise: the crown was Mohammed;

the earrings, Hasan and Husain; the sword was

Ali; and her throne, the Seat Of Dominion, was

the resting place of God, the Most High.86
The presence of some Shi‘ite thought in the Bektasi orders
has already been noted by Hamilton Gibb. If this particular
idea of Fatima could be connected with Ottoman Muslim
thought at the time Of Sfileymaniye--built for the son Of
Selim who had brought to Istanbul the relics of the
Prophet--it would be a good explanation for not only the
"Enthroned Madonna" elements within the prayer niche and
the paradisiacal elements of the tiles but especially for
the presence of the stained glass in this "throne area"
where the "varicolored shimmering lights" of the "being
enthroned" literally "illumined the whole garden"--the
garden Of Paradise, "the throne," the resting place of
"God the Most High." The Fatima-Mary image would function
as a unifying symbol, drawing together several strands
of thought consistent with Muslim iconography and with
historically understood symbols.

Lastly, the exact role Of the prayer rugs is un-

clear. Sfileymaniye has only red carpeting today, and

120

precise information about the sixteenth century is lacking.
Assuming prayer rugs were present (Goodwin states they

are in the adjoining museum), their role in this cosmic
imagery is not clear. Some probably bore zodiacal signs,
as do later rugs, but it is unclear as to whether the
signs symbolize the earth in its position on the floor,

or as Lehmann suggests with floor mosaics, they mirror

the heavenly symbolism above--a concept in keeping with
the light on all levels discussed earlier and the Islamic
vision of the world Of "reality“ acting as a mirror for
the greater reality of Allah. Again, some contain a
mihrab, with a lamp woven in the place where one‘s head
touches during the prostration. This would seem to mirror
the Gate Of the Word, the Sun Gate, the Way to Paradise
directly Open to each man through the Word Of the prophet
and Islam (whose meaning is literally submission). The
symbolic possibilities are intriguing but unsolved.
Originally, Goodwin notes, rush tiles simply covered the

red, herringbone pattern tiled floor of Sinan.87

FOOTNOTES

1Since it seems important to this discussion but
perhaps too long to include in this thesis, I refer the
reader to a description of a Muslim‘s ablutions and the
prayer service to be found in Lane, Op. cit.

2H. A. R. Gibb, Mohammedanism, New York, 1962,

 

p. 37.

3Massignon, Op. cit., p. 50.

4K. Burrill, "From Gazi State to Republic: A
Changing Scene for Turkish Artists and Men Of Letters,"
Studies in Art and Literature Of the Near East in Honor
of Richard Ettinghausen, ed. P. Chelkowski, N.Y., 1974,

p. 263: 1‘In spite Of the Official establishment of Sunni
orthodoxy as the state religion, the inclination Of a
large prOportion Of Turks has been toward the less austere,
and to them more satisfying beliefs and ritual of the
mystic orders (some of which had very strong Shiite in-
fluences). At the same time within Turkish orthodoxy it-
self there has been considerable compromise in order to
hold the allegiance Of the greatest possible number of
Muslims. Throughout the course Of Ottoman history there
has existed this religious dichotomy--Official and pOpular
Islam--reflections of which are very pronounced in art and
literature."

5

 

H. A. R. Gibb, Op. cit., pp. 159-160.

6A. s. Tritton, Islam, London, 1966, pp. 106-107.

7N. Ardalan and L. Bakhtiar, The Sense of Unit :
The Sufi Tradition in Persian Architecture, Chicago, 1 73,
p. 5.

 

H. A. R. Gibb, op. cit., p. 144.

9T. J. de Boer, The History Of the Philosophy of

10O. A. K. Coomaraswamy, Christian and Oriental
Philosgphy Of Art, N.Y., 1956, p. 32.

 

 

 

121

122

115. H. Nasr, Sufi Essays, Albany, 1972, pp. 31, 43.

 

12Massignon, Op. cit., p. 49.

13Ibid., p. 149. On the arabesque he also says
that "L‘arabesque est une espece de negation indefinie
des formes goemetrique fermée, pour nous empécher de
contempler, comme le faisait 1e geometre grec, la beauté
du cercle en lui-méme, la beauté du polygone en lui-méme."

14S. H. Nasr, Science and Civilization in Islam,
Cambridge, Mass., pp. 90-91. "After the Mongol invasion,
however, the Sufi centers became in an ever more outward
manner, institutions of learning. (Here) in addition to
the esoteric sciences and gnosis, the branches Of the
arts and sciences . . . now found refuge."

15M. G. S. Hodgson, "Islam and Image," History of
Religions, vol. 3, no. 1-2, p. 222. "But it is the most
intimate realm of religion which is the life Of symbolism
at its fullest, just as symbolism is generally felt to be
the most adequate outer expression Of relation.“ Here
he further notes the extreme richness of symbolism in
Sufi literature.

16

 

 

 

Adralan and Bakhtiar, op. cit., p. 9.

17T. Burckhardt, Sacred Art in East and West: Its
Principles and Methods, London, 1967, p. 112. Ardalan
and Bakhtiar also would add to this with an extensive
discussion Of the mandala or cosmogram form as derived
from this pattern. They see it as the "reflection of the
cosmos and the cosmic processes within all things, the
mandala works through numbers and geometry . . . so man
begins his intellectual search by relating to space. This
relationship must Of necessity be structured so that the
intellect may function and not dissipate," op. cit., p. 31.
WOlska, Op. cit., pp. 114,134—135 refers to the number four
which "designe les quatre extremités du monde," which is
mentioned in the Bible. She also refers to the Holy of
Holies in a Jewish Temple "celle qui est a l‘interieur
des quatre colonnes, était interdite au pretres, tel 1e
ciel reserve a Dieu," Philo-Judeas, Philo, vol. I,
London, 1939, p. xvii, insists on the significance Of
particular numbers, four being among them as a sort of
inheritance of the Pythagoreans. It is noted, "He owes
something to Aristotle, notably the four fold nature of
causation . . ." He goes farther and says “coming now
to the fourth day, Philo brings out the significance of

 

 

 

123

the number four, and points to the boons conferred on

body and mind by Light, which has given rise to philOSOphy
by drawing man‘s vision upward to the heavenly bodies.

He sees the purposes of these in their giving light fore-
shadowing coming events, marking the seasons, and measuring
time." Ibid., p. 3. Finally, John P. Brown, The Darvishes
or Orientgl Spiritualism, London, 1968, p. 47 states that
the four "great elements are fire, air, earth and water

. . . which are supposed to compose the body and consti-
tute the inner faculty Of comprehension." This seems
equally plausible as a second level of meaning in the
piers, for the Sufi saw God both without the person and
within the center of the person. The piers Operate as

a part "model" Of heaven beyond and the microcosm within
carrying also the hOpe of understanding or revelation.

As has been noted, Brown further states (p. 186) "The

hall Of a convent of lakia Of the Bektashi Order is always
a square." It will be remembered that this is the order

to which Sinan belonged.

18

 

 

S. R. Nasr, Sufi Essays, Op. cit., p. 31.

19M. Smith, Readipgs from the Mystics of Islam,
London, 1950, pp. 91-93. J. P. Brown, Op. cit., p. 177
adds that the Shaikh instructs the Bektasi: . . . there
are 40 magams, or seats, 360 degrees, 28 manzils (places
of rest), 12 spheres [my underlining], 24 hours, 4 fasls,
or chapters, 7 climes, 4 urars, 13,000 worlds, 7 subul-i-
masawi or ayats (verses called the Mother Of the Koran),
7 letters, 7 fatihas, (first chapters or Openings) of the
Quran; all of these are called hal (dispositions) and not
ggl (sayings). There is but one—Tight . . ." Interesting-
ly, if the two half domes are counted here as one whole
dome the total number of domes is twelve. Later, the
temporal time, or 24-hour motif is reinforced by the
presence of a clock tolling a mortal hour in each mosque.
Both would seem to underline the idea Of temporal multi-
plicity which resolves itself in the Unity Of Allah.
Finally, Ibn Sina's doctrine reads: "It is for the heavenly
spheres, which possess no translational motion, to specify
the high and low directions in an absolute sense. The
center of the sphere of the cosmos is the downward direc-
tion, and its circumference the upward. Moreover, the
heavens possess an east-west direction corresponding to
the places Of the rising and setting Of the stars, and an
up-and-down direction correSponding to the place Of the
noon day sun and the horizon Of the earth, a forward and
backward direction corresponding to the direction Of the
motion of the heavens and its Opposite . . ." S. H. Nasr,
Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines. Cambridge,
Mass, 1964.

 

 

124

20Koran 24:35. The relationship of this as it
forms a circle with a hole seems to relate strongly to
such oriental forms as the Chinese jade Pig which also
comes to carry connotations of heaven and to the Middle
Eastern Sun Gate.

21Grabar, The Formation of Islamic Art, Op. cit.,
p. 115 ff.
22

M. Smith, O . cit., p. 89. Here Farid Al-Din
Attar (c. 626/1229) writes: "The heart is the dwelling
place of that which is the Essence Of the universe, within
the heart and soul is the very Essence of God. Like the
saints, make a journey into yourself; . . . be unveiled
within and behold the Essence. . . . By union, I have
merged in the Unity, I am become altogether apart from all
else. I am Thou and Thou art I . . ."

231bid., p. 46.

24Lane, Op. cit., p. 71.

25Grabar, Op. cit., pp. 115 ff.

26M. L. Teuber, "Sources of Ambiguity in the
Prints of Maurits C. Escher," Scientific American, (July,
1974), vol. 231, no. 1, p. 102.

27

 

M. Smith, Op. cit., p. 53, verse 55.

28Koran, 1:153.

29Koran, 5.

30This concept may be an eastern one predating
the Romans. Most directly POpe notes in Persia the gate
is the entrance to the right and wrong ways, A. Pope,
Persian Architecture: The Triumph of Form and Color,
N.Y., 1965, p. 13. In Gilgamesh: A Verse Narrative,
trans. Herbert Mason, N.Y., 1970, p. 34:

When Enkidu touched the gate his hand felt numb,

he enters

 

 

They stood in aw at the foot/Of the green mountain.
Pleasure/Seemed to grow from fear of Gilgamesh./As when one
comes upon a path in woods/Unvisited by men, one is drawn
near/The lost and undiscovered in himself;/He was revital-
ized by danger./ They knew it was the path Humbaba made./
Some called the forest “hell," and others "Paradise."

125

This connection seems even closer to the gate concept
in relation to the cosmic house. The Koran 22:25 reads:
". . . and proclaim among men the Pilgrimage,/and they
shall come unto thee on foot . . ." Koran 3:90, "It

is the duty Of all men towards God to come to the House
a pilgrim . . ."

31Cammann, op. cit.

321bid., p. 183.

33Ibid., p. 188.

34Ibid., p. 209.

35There seems to be a strongly connected tradition
here also between royal and sacred imagery. Grabar,
o . cit., p. 169, gives a description based on al-Khatib's
History Of Baghdad of the arrival of the Byzantine ambassa-
dors at the Abbasid capital in A.D. 917. The writer tells
the “number of carpets and mats of the kinds made at
Jahram and Darabgird and at Ad-Dawrak was twenty-two
thousand pieces; these were laid in the corridors and
courts, being spread under the feet of the nobles, and
the Greek Envoys walked over such carpets all the way
from the limit of the new Official Gate, right to the
presence of the Caliph . . ." The exact iconographical
link remains unclear but seems worth deeper scrutiny
since those seeking audience of the All High, Allah, in
a mosque also walk on the rugs in the same way. The Sun
Door idea is also recognized in connection with Asiatic
art in A. POpe, "An early Ming Porcelain in Muslim Style,"
Aus Der Welt Der Islamischen Kunst, Berlin, 1959, pp. 356-
375.

 

 

36Stratton, Op. cit., mentions Sinan commissioned

Ushak rugs which are similar in pattern to this group.
He does not however give a source for this information.
Goodwin, op. cit., p. 235, mentions the "Old rugs" but
gives no further information.

37B. Goldman. The Sacred Portal: A Primagy
Symbol in Ancient Judaic Art, Detroit, 1966, p. 133.

38

 

 

Ibid., p. 140.

39The physical gate known as the Sublime Porte
was the entry to the foreign Ministry Offices: it was
through this that foreign ambassadors must pass to present
their papers and it was by this name that the empire was

126

known. TOpkapi Saray is literally Cannon Gate Palace

and is still the palace‘s name, and within the palace

it was through the Gate of Felicity that the sultan passed
to his private quarters. The Porte du Cheikh-al-Islam

was the Department of Religious Law, and so on ad infinitum.
For documentation see R. Attabinen, Les caractefistigues

de l'architecture Turque, Paris, 1938, pp. 74-75. I am
also aware of E. B. Smith's writing on the subject which
stresses the symbolic importance of the gate to the Romans.
In this case, however, I feel a more direct link can be
proven with the above.

40

 

Grabar, Op. cit., pp. 120-121.

41Burckhardt, Op. cit., p. 119, footnote 20.

42Ibid., p. 117.

43S. D. Goitein, Jews and Arabs: Their Contacts
Through the Ages, N.Y., 1972.

44

 

B. Goldman, Op. cit., p. 133.

45Goodenough, Op. cit., p. 277.

6Koran 3:5, "He sent down upon thee the Book/
wherein are verses clear that are the Essence of the
Book . . .“

47M. Smith, Op. cit., p. 61. A paraphrase from
Al-Ghazali, one of the most famous of all Muslim writers
who wrote many treatises on Sufism.

48Grabar, Op. cit., pp. 122-123.

49M. Smith, Op. cit., p. 27. Koran 32:5, "God
is He that created the heavens and the earth,/and what
between them is, in six days/then seated Himself upon the
Throne.“ Koran 40:15, "Exalter of the ranks is He,
Possessor of the Throne." Koran 56:90, "Then if he be of
those brought nigh the Throne,/there shall be repose and
ease . . ."

50Fehervari, "Tombstone or Mihrab? A Speculation,"
Islamic Art in the MetrOpglitan Museum, R. Ettinghausen,
'ed., N.Y., 1972, p. 249. The etymology of mihrab is

*given by Rhodokanakis as a part of a palace, a "throne
:recess." In addition, Evliya, O . cit., p. 76 notes the

"spirally twisted columns“ to the right and left of the
Inihrab. These are paralleled in Old Saint Peters and
<zouId carry the insinuation of Solomon's Throne.

127

51The writer is also much in debt to Professor
Priscilla Soucek Of the University of Michigan who notes
that this inscription occurs only in Istanbul mosques of
the sixteenth century. She continues that the Arabic may
be rendered as either “mihrab" or "room.“

52F. Schuon, The Transcendent Unity of Religions.
Trans. P. Townsend, N.Y., 1953, pp. 140, 188. A further
relationship is made with this and the "beneficent and
merciful aspect of Prakriti, namely Lakshmi (the Kwan Yin
of Far Eastern tradition) . . ."

53The connection appears stronger when one re-
considers the Surah of Light which says "his light is
as a niche wherein there is a lamp" (note the stylized
lamp-like projection in Suleymaniye's niche) and Christ's
"I am the light of the world." Light in both tends to
take the image of transmitting light or revelation. A
further tie could be suggested in Judaism. Goodenough,
O . cit., p. 28 writes: "The Patriarchs advanced to the
spiritual stage where they assumed the garment of light,
and became the 'saviors' of Judaism, the figures through
whom the divine light of the Logos revealed itself, made
itself available to men. I came to see that for Philo no
one Patriarch was transcendently important: Philo ex-
pressed himself in superlative terms about each.“ (He
refers to this as "His study of ‘incarnate laws-'“)

54

 

Ardalan and Bakhtiar, Op. cit., p. 136.

SSFehervari, op. cit., p. 249.

56Ibid. Lethaby, op. cit., p. 113 says of Old
Chinese and Japanese Sun Gates: "They are the means of
communication between living and dead, and symbolically,
the portal by which the dead acquired a re-birth in'a
new form Of existence."

S7Fehervari, Op. cit., Hannah McAlister's analysis
of this stone indicates it is in the Mongol style from
Iran and compares it with the portal of Masjid-i Jami
of Veramin. The similarity in style to Suleymaniye's
mihrab should be noted.

58I am indebted to Professor Molly Smith for
pointing out a possible parallel in the Byzantine canon
tables which she feels act as a "gateway" to the revelations
found in the gospels.

59

 

vagt-Gaknil' OE. Cit. p p. 19.

128

60Paul Weiss, "One Plus One Does Not Equal Two,"
The Neurosciences: a Study Program Planned and Edited by
Gradner C. Quarton, et al., n.d., writes in this study
which links self replicating geometries to a would be
cybernetic philOSOphy of life: ". . . whenever one is
faced with static geometric regularities of patterns, he
ought to look beyond them--or, rather, behind them-~for
the rules in the play of forces that have shaped them.
In thus raising the sights from statics to dynamics,
static interrelations become dynamic interactions.“ A
sidelight to this problem is also seen in Teuber, Op. cit.,
pp. 90-105. Here is noted, not only Escher's interest
in visual perception and alternating figure and ground,
but his studies of the tiles of the Alahambra. These
ideas are connected to experiments on figure and ground
of the Danish psychologist Edgar Rubin, Kurt Koffka's
Principles of Gestalt Psychology, 1935, and the later
experiments of MOlly R. Harrower, a student of Koffka's.
It is further noted that "Escher himself recognized the
similarities of his regular subdivisions of the plane
to principles of crystallography. They had been pointed
out to him by his brother, B. G. Escher, Professor Of
geology of the University of Leyden. By that time, however,
the artist had created his own figure ground patterns
based on Rubin's visual analyses and the Moorish tiles
of the Alhambra.“

Escher notes that "the act of tracing a line is
a complicated business. On either side of it, simul-
taneously, a recognizability takes shape. But the human
eye and mind cannot be busy with two things at the same
moment, and so there must be a quick and continual jumping
from one side to the other . . .“ Lastly, in Gerald
Holton's article “On Trying to Understand Scientific
Genius," The Graduate Journal, Austin, Texas, (1973),
supplement, pp. 366-367, it is noted that Einstein's
"desire to remove an unncessary assymetry was not frivolous
or accidental, but deep and important. At stake is nothing
less than finding the most economical, simple, formal
principles, the barest bones of nature's frame, cleansed
of everything that is ad hoc, redundant, unnecessary . . .
I am indebeted to Professor Paul Robert Duggan for calling
this information to my attention, and feel that it would
be an interesting alley of investigation in connection
with the stalactites.

61This point could be develOped more in view of
the Muslim tendency to toy with geometric means of
symbolism which is surely a human need recognized by
psychologists today. K. Albarn, et al., Language of Pattern,
London, 1974, p. 8.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

129

621bid., p. 58.

63Ibid., p. 58.

64Ibid., p. 68.

65Ibid., p. 78.

66Teuber, Op. cit., p. 96.

67Ettinghausen, Op. cit., p. 122.

68T. W. Arnold, Painting in Islam: A Studygof
the Place of Pictorial Art in Muslim Culture, N.Y.,
1965. (Originally published in 19281) P. 2.

69Goodwin, o . cit., p. 235. It is important
also to keep in mind MaSSignon's comment on the use of
the arabesque. Also see Ardalan and Bakhtiar, Op. cit.,
p. 43.

 

 

7OAlbarn, et al., Op. cit., Chapter 1.

71Interestingly, Maria G. Lukens, The Metropolitan
Museum of Art Guidggto the Collections: Islamic Art,
N.Y., 1965 writes "Iznik ware produced from about 1550
to 1700 and once erroneously assigned to the island of
Rhodes, received its impetus from the restorations to the
shrine of the Dome Of the Rock in Jerusalem, with the
resulting need for large-scale manufacture." These were
the years when Sinan was using massive amounts Of tiles
in his Istanbul mosques as well as in the royal palace
and one can justifiably question whether this didn't
provide as great an “impetus" for this factory located
geographically much closer to Istanbul than Jerusalem.

72A. POpe, Op. cit., p. 365. He records an in-
scription on a Pers1an mosque, "The Mosques are the gardens
of Paradise." In addition, one could consider again the
previously mentioned quote by Tursun Beg on Fatih's entry
into ConstantinOple.

73Callahan, Op. cit., p. 49. (Cited from the
Hexaemeron of St. Basil of Caesarea.)

74Philo, Op. cit., I, p. 184. He would disagree.
He sees flowers and plants as symbolic of the virtues
“planted in the soul."

 

 

 

130

75Camman, Op. cit., p. 199, makes it clear that

other plant symbolism was certainly present in the Middle
East. There is a connection of the bird and vase with
resurrected souls and the tree so Often used in tiles is
more than likely the Muslim tree Of life which Lane records
as shaken once a year during Ramazan on the Night of Lights.
On this tree each man has a leaf, and if his leaf falls,
his death is predicted for the coming year. A Gulistan,
the Rose Garden, is a famous moralistic writing. G. Lechler,
"The Tree of Life in Indo—EurOpean and Islamic Cultures,"
Ars Islamica IV (1968), p. 380 states "In Assyrian and
Hittite the tree of life is nothing but a synonym for the
year . . . In Babylonia the tree of life was called the
tree of Ea, the father of the gods; . . . Those who ate
its fruit were supposed to receive eternal life. From

his belief is derived the tree of life of the Old Testa-
ment, growing in the midst of Paradise. In the religion

of Zoroaster the tree of life is called the white haoma
(homa), and its fruit is used to nourish the blessed
spirits in heaven . . . Very similar tO this is the some
Of the Old Indian Veda . . . The Muhammadan tradition
leads back to the Jewish, thus it does not support the
theory of the priority of the tree of knowledge . . .

In addition, Mohammed' 5 Night Journey to Heaven is some-
times seen as accomplished by means Of a tree. See

Arnold, Op; cit., p. 117.

76It seems even more likely if one accepts the
clouds to the plate's right as a part Of a Chinese in-
fluence and further infers a Lotus pattern in certain
flowers. Again, a cross and eight-pointed flower were
a cuneiform ideogram for ilu which translates "god-sun-
year." See Ibid., p. 370. In Gilgamesh, Op. cit., p. 84,
a plant- -flower symbolism appears which could be connected
to the flowers rendered in the new and famous Iznik red:

"There is a plant in the river. Its thorns

Will prick your hands as a rose thorn pricks

But it will give you new life . . .

When he saw the plant

Of rich rose color and ambrosial

Shimmering in the water like a prism

Of the sunlight (note well proximity Of tiles

to stained glass) he seized it, and it cut
Into his palms. He saw his blood flow in the
water.

He cut the stones loose from his feet and rose

Up sharply to the surface and swam to shore.

He was calling out I have it! I have it!"

 

 

 

 

 

131

The Anthology Of Islamic Literature, ed. James Kritzek,
N.Y., 1964, pp. 168, 169, 269 records:

1. Omar Khhayam:

"I sometimes think that never blows so red

The Rose as where some buried Caesar bled;
That every Hyacinth the Garden wears

Dropt in her Lap from some once lovely Head.

For some we loved, the loveliest and the best
That from his Vintage rolling Time hath prest

Have drunk their Cup a Round or two before,
And one by one crept silently to rest.

2. Hafiz (c.1390)

"A rose blooms within me, wine is in my hand,

And my beloved embraced.

This day the world's king is my slave.

Bring us no candlelight at dark . . .

The red rose is Open and the nightingale is drunk:
An invitation, Sufiyan, wine-worshippers,

To the pleasures of intoxication . . .

77Goodwin, op. cit., pp. 336-337.

78Excavations of St. Vitale at Ravenna indicate
stained galss in the apse area as early as the 6th century.
Information given to Professor Molly Smith by Professor
G. Bovini. See also: Guda d'Italia del Touring Club
Italiano, Emilia e Romagna, Milan, 1957, p. 673.

79Campbell, The Masks of God: Occidental Mythology,
N.Y., 1972, p. 447.

80Dionysius the AerOpagite. Mystical Theology
and the Celestial Hierarchies. Trans. The Editors Of
the Shrine of Wisdom, Surrey, 1965, pp. 17-18.

81Ibid., p. 46.

 

 

 

82Ibid., p. 65. The symbolism Of Chinese cloud
patterns in the tiles would become more precise with this
interpretation.

83

 

Ibid., p. 67.

84Lane, Op. cit., p. 80. Hanging lamps of glass
were also suspended from wheel like structures throughout

132

the mosque. The significance of the glass and oil may
become clearer in the discussion of the mihrab. As for
the wheel itself, a parallel in the cosmic or heavenly
symbolism of Gothic rose windows in the west is suggested.
H. Dow, "The Rose Window," Journal of the Warburg and
Courtauld Institutes 20 (1957), p. 266 and P1. 14b,
discusses a source in the Byzantine Polycandelon for the
rose window-wheel imagery. Again, Hagia SOphia is cited:
"In view of the wheel's significance, is it not possible
that a related meaning could at some point have become
attached to the very similar wheel-shaped chandelier?
Would not the sun, a ball of light, and traditionally
represented as a wheel, naturally spring to mind . . .
Christianity, Of course, makes abundant use of light-
symbols. A number Of biblical passages refer symbolically
not only to the sun but even to lamps. . . . 'Thy Word,

0 Lord, is a lantern unto my feet, and a light unto my
paths'. . ." One Of the closed references to the actual
use of polycandela, however, occurs in Paul the Silentiary's
poem on Santa SOphia, written in 563, where the description
of the church is precise . . . "The cosmic significance
implied in his light- symbolism seems to correlate with
that already mentioned . . .

85

 

 

Campbell, Op. cit., p. 446.

86Ibid., p. 445.

87Goodwin, Op. cit., p. 237.

CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSION

Sfileymaniye is a blending of several traditions
which were at hand and sympathetic to the needs of Sinan
and his Sultan Suleyman. That these elements do not
appear fragmented but act as a whole seems due to their
adaptability to the needs and ideas of the time. The
imagery was one which the worshippers readily understood
and identified with. Sfileymaniye stands not only as a
tribute to the greatness of Suleyman the Magnificent but
as a tribute to Sinan who, by means of his artistic genius
unites these traditions to reflect a universal theme that:

We are no other than a moving row of
Magic Shadow-shapes that come and go
Round the Sun illumined Lantern held.
In Midnight by the Master of the Show.1
For in the end, Suleymaniye functions as a whole. It
transcends the years and specific images in its effect
of enormous and timeless emptiness flooded with light.

There is a sense of being literally overwhelmed with this

light, the Logos and its silence.

133

FOOTNOTES

lRubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, Op. cit., Stanza 68.

 

134

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aga-Oglu, Mehmet. "The Fatih Mosque at Constantinople,"
Art Bulletin, XII (1930).

 

Albran, Keith, et al. The Language Of Pattern: An
Enquigy Inspired py Islamic Decoration. London,
1974.

 

 

 

Ardalan, Nader and Laleh Bakhtiar. The Sense of Unity:
The Sufi Tradition in Persian Architecture.
Chicago, 1973.

 

 

Arnold, Sir Thomas W. Painting in Islam: A Study of the
Place of Pictorial Art in Muslim Culture. New
York, 1965.

 

 

Arseven, C. E. L'art Turc. Istanbul, 1939.

 

Aslanapa, Oktay. Turkish Art and Architecture. New York,
1971.

 

Atabinen, Resit Saffet. Les caracteristiques de l'architec-

 

ture Turgue. Paris, 1938.

 

Ayverdi, Ekrem Hakki. Osmanli Mimarisinde: Fatih Devri:
855-886 (1451-1481). Istanbul, 1974.

 

 

Barkan, Omer. Sfileymaniye Cami ve Imareti insaat. Cilt I.
Ankara, 1971.

 

Beckwith, John. The Art of ConstantinOple. London, 1961.

 

Brown, John P. The Darvishes or Oriental Spiritualism.
London, 1968 (First edition, 1868).

 

Burckhardt, Titus. Sacred Art in East and West: Its
Principles and Methods. Lord Northbourn, trans.
London, 1967.

 

 

Burrill, Kathleen. "From Gazi State to Republic: A
Changing Scene for Turkish Artists and Men of
Letters," Studies in Art and Literature of the
Near East in Honor of Richard Ettinghausen.
Peter Chelkowski, ed. New York, 1974.

 

 

135

136

Cammann, Schuyler van R. "Cosmic Symbolism on Carpets
from the Sanguszko Group," Studies in Art and
Literature of the Near East in Honor of Richard
Ettinghausen. Peter Chelkowski, ed., New York,
1974.

 

 

 

Campbell, Joseph. The Masks of God: Occidental Mythology.
New York, 1964.

 

Canard, Marius. "Les Relations Politiques et Sociales
Entre Byzance et Les Arabes,“ Dumbarton Oaks

Papers, 18 (1964).

 

Castejon, Rafael. La Mezquita Aljama de Cordoba. Spain,
1973.

 

Chandler, Richard. Travels in Asia Minor. Oxford, 1776.

 

Coomaraswamy, A. K. Christian and Oriental Philosophy of
Art. New York, 1956.

 

de Boer, Dr. T. J. The History Of the Philosophy of
Islam. Trans. Edward R. Jones, London, 1903.

 

Dimand, Maurice S. "Studies in Islamic Ornament,“
Ars Islamica, Vol. IV. Ann Arbor, 1968.

 

. "Studies in Islamic Ornament II: The Origin
Of the Second Style of Samarra Decoration,"
Archaeologica Orientalia in Memorium Ernst
Herzfeld. New York, 1952.

 

 

 

Dionysus the AerOpagite. Mystical Theology and the
Celestial Hierarchies. The Shrine of Wisdom,
ed. Surrey, 1965.

 

 

Dow, Helen. "The Rose Window," Journal of Warburg and
Courtauld Institute. NO. 20 (1957), PP. 248-297.

 

 

Eliade, Mircea. “Centre du Monde, Temple, Maison,"
Symbolisme Cosmique et Monuments religieux.
Paris, 1953.

 

Ettinghausen, Richard. "Interaction and Integration in
Islamic Art," Unity and Variepy in Muslim Civiliza-
tion. Edited by Gustav E. von Grunebaum. Chicago,
195 , PP. 107-131.

 

Ettinghausen, Richard, ed. Islamic Art in the Metropolitan
Museum of Art. New York, 1972.

 

 

137

, and Grace D. Guest. "The Iconography of a
Kashan Luster Plate,“ Ars Orientalis: The Arts
of Islam and the East, Vol. 4 (1961).

 

. “The Spirit of Islamic Art," The Arab Heritage.
Nabeh A. Faies, ed. Princeton, 1948.

 

Evliya Efendi. Narrative of Travels in Europe, Asia and
Africa in the Seventeenth Century. Trans. von

Hammer. London, 1834.

Fares, B. Essai sur l'Esprit de la Decoration Islamique.
Cairo, 1952.

. "Figures Magique," Aus Der Welt Der Islamischen
Kunst. Berlin, 1957.

 

Fehervari, Geza. “Tombstone or Mihrab? A Speculation,"
Islamic Art in the Metropolitan Museum, R. Etting-
hausen, ed. New York, 1972.

Fevret, A. "Les tatars de Crimée,“ Revue du monde musulman,
III, No. 3 (1907) pp. 94-95.

Flandin, Eugene. L'Orient. Paris, n.d.

 

Gabriel, A. "Les Mosquees de Constantinople," Syria,
VII (1926), pp. 353-419.

Gibb, Hamilton. "Arab-Byzantine Relations Under the
Umayyad Caliphate," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 12
(1958).

. Mohammedanism. N.Y., 1962.

 

 

Gilgamesh: A Verse Narrative. Herbert Mason, trans.,
N.Y., 19700

Goitein, S. D. Jews and Arabs: Their Contacts Through
the Ages. N.Y., 1972

 

Goldman, Bernard. The Sacred Portal: A Primary Symbol
in Ancient Judaic Art. Detroit, 1966.

Goodenough, Erwin R. Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman
Period, Vol. I, New York, 1953.

Goodwin, Godfrey. A History of Ottoman Architecture.
Baltimore, 1971.

138

Grabar, Oleg. “Islamic Art and Byzantium," Dumbarton
Oaks Papers, 18 (1964).

 

 

. "The Architecture of the Middle Eastern City
from Past to Present: The Case Of the Mosque,"
Middle Eastern Cities. Ira M. Lapidus, ed.,
Berkeley, 1969.

 

. The Formation of Islamic Art. Yale, 1973.

. "The Islamic Dome," Journal Of the Society
of Architectural Historians, 22 (1963).

 

 

Grosvenor, Edwin A. Constantinople, Vol. II, Boston,
1895.

 

Guillaume, Alfred. Islam. Middlesex, England, 1971.

Gutmann, Joseph. NO Graven Images: Sppdies in Art
and the Hebrew Bible. N.Y., 1971.

von Grunebaum, G. E. "Byzantine Iconoclasm and the
Influence of the Islamic Environment," History
Of Religions, Vol. 2, NO. 1.

 

. Medieval Islam: A Study in Cultural Orientation.
Chicago, 1946.

 

"Parallelism, Convergence, and Influence in
the Relations of Arab and Byzantine Philosophy,
Literature, and Piety," Dumbarton Oaks Papers,
18 (1964).

 

 

Hautecoeur, Louis. Mystiqge et Architecture: Symbolisme
du Cercle et de la Coupole. Paris, 1954.

 

Henderson, Arthur E. “The Mosque of Sultan Suleiman at
Constantinople Erected 1550-1556," The Builder,
CIV (1913).

 

Herzfeld, E. Zoroaster and His World. Princeton, 1947.

 

Hodgson, Marshall G. S. "Islam and Image," History of
Religions, Vol. 3, No. 1-2, pp. 220-260.

 

 

Kritzeck, James. Anthology of Islamic Literature.
N.Y., 1964.

 

Kuran, Aptullah. "Thirteenth and Fourteenth Century
Mosques in Turkey," Archaeology, Vol. 24, NO. 3
(June, 1971).

 

139

Inalcik, Halil. The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age
1300-1600. London, 1973.

 

 

. "The Rise Of the Ottoman Empire," Cambridgg
History Of Islam, Vol. I, London, 1970.

 

 

 

Lane, Edward William. The Manners and Customs of the
Modern Egyptians. London, 1860 (Reprint in
Everyman's Library.)

 

 

Lechler, George. "The Tree of Life in Indo-EurOpean and
Islamic Cultures,“ Ars Islamica, Vol. IV (1968).

 

Lehman, K. "The Dome of Heaven," Art Bulletin, XXVIII
(1945).

 

Lethaby, W. R. Architecture, Nature and Magic, N.Y.,
1956.

 

Lewis, Bernard. Istanbul and the Civilization of the
Ottoman Empire. Oklahoma, 1963.

 

 

l'Orange, H. P. Studies in the Iconogrgphy_of Cosmic
Kingship in the Ancient World. Oslo, 1953.

 

 

Marcais, George. “La Question des Images dans l'Art
Musulman,“ Byzantion, t. VII, pp. 161-183.

 

Massignon, Louis. "Les Methodes de Realisation Artistique
des Peuples de 1'Islam,“ Syria, II (1921), pp. 47-
53 and 149-160.

Mathew, Gervase. Byzantine Aesthetics. London, 1963.

 

Mayer, L. A. Islamic Architects and Their Works.
Geneve, 1956.

 

. “Islamic Astrolabists: Some New Material,"
Aus Der Welt Der Islamischen Kunst. Berlin, 1957.

 

 

MetrOpolitan Museum of Art Guide to the Collections:
Medieval Art. N.Y., 1962.

 

 

Migeon, Gaston. "La Ceramique Ottomane de ConstantinOple
et d'Anatolie au XVI Siecle," Manuel d'Art
Musulman: Arts Plastiqpe et Industriels. Paris,
1927.

 

 

Migne, J. P., ed. Patrologiae Graecae, Vol. 88, 1860.

 

140

von Millingen, Alexander. Constaninople. London, 1906.

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. An Introduction to Islamic Cosmo-
logical Doctrine. Cambridge, Mass., 1964.

 

. Ideals and Realities of Islam. N.Y., 1967.

. Science and Civilization in Islam. Cambridge,
Mass., 1968.

. Sufi Essays. Albany, 1972.

 

Peters, F. E. Aristotle and the Arabs: The Aristotelian
Tradition in Islam. N.Y., 1968.

Philo. Trans. F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker, London,
Vols. 1, IV, V, VI, 1929.

Pope, John. "An Early Ming Porcelain in Muslim Style,"
Aus Der Welt Der Islamischen Kunst. Berlin, 1957.

Pope, Arthur. Persian Architecture: The Triumph of Form
and Color. N.Y., 1965.

 

Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. Trans. Edward Fitzgerald.
N.Y., 1946.

Sauvaget, Jean. La Mosguée Omeyyade de Medine: Etude
sur les Architecturalepde la Mosquée et de la
Basilique. Paris, 1947.

 

Schuon, Frithjof. The Transcendent Unipy of Religions.
Trans. Peter Townsend. N.Y., 1953.

Smith, E. Baldwin. Architectural Symbolism Of Imperial
Rome and the Middle Ages. Princeton, 1956.

. The Dome: A Stugy in the History of Ideas.
N.J., 1971.

Smith, Margaret. Readings from the Mystics Of Islam.
London, 1950.

SOper, A. "The 'Dome of Heaven' in Asia,“ Art Bulletin.
December, 1947.

Staude, W. “Le Caractere Turc dans l'Ornementation des
Faiences Osmanlies,“ Syrie, Paris, 1934.

141

Stratton, Arthur. Sinan. N.Y., 1972.

Sumner-Boyd, Hilary and John Freely. Strolling Through
Istanbul. Istanbul, 1972.

 

 

Teuber, Marianne L. "Sources of Ambiguity in the Prints
of Maurits C. Escher," Scientific American,
Vol. 231, No. 1 (July 1974), pp. 90-105.

 

Tritton, A. S. Islam. London, 1966.

Ulgen, Ali Salim. "Kirsehir'de Turk Eserleri," Vakiflar
Dergisi, Vol. II, Ankara, 1942.

Unsal, Behcet. Turkish Islamic Architecture. London,
1959.

 

VOgt-GOknil, Ulya. Living Architecture: Ottoman.
Fribourg, 1965.

 

Vryonis, Speros Jr. "The Byzantine Legacy and Ottoman
Forms," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 23 (1969-1970),
pp. 251-309.

 

Walsh, ConstantinOple and the Seven Churches Of Asia Minor.
London, n.d.

White, Charles, Esq. Three Years in Constantinople or
Domestic Manners of the Turks in 1844. 3 Vols.,
London, 1845.

 

 

Wolska, Wanda. La Topographie Chretienne de Cosmas
Indicopleustes: Theologie et Science au VI
Siécle. Paris, 1962.

 

 

Yetkin, Sunt Kemal. "The Evolution of Architectural
Form in Turkish Mosques (1300-1700)," Ars
Islamica, XI (1959), pp. 73-91.

 

. et al. Turkish Architecture. Trans. Ahmet

Uysal. Ankara, 1965.

 

 

IES

"111 7,771,11111111 1