TY - JOUR T1 - Synthesis of Art in Greek and Turkish Cultures: A Comparative Analysis of Mycenaean and Tile Art TT - Yunan ve Türk Kültürlerinde Sanatın Sentezi: Miken ve Çini Sanatının Karşılaştırmalı Analizi AU - Sarıhan, Savaş AU - Akoğlu, Eren AU - Aydoğan Kaymaz, Ayça PY - 2025 DA - June Y2 - 2025 DO - 10.26650/iuturkiyat.1628622 JF - Journal of Turkology PB - Istanbul University WT - DergiPark SN - 2651-3188 SP - 259 EP - 277 VL - 35 IS - 1 LA - en AB - This study examines Mycenaean and tile art from a comparative perspective, exploring the cultural, aesthetic, and functional features of both artistic forms. While Mycenaean art holds a significant place in the Late Bronze Age Aegean with its geometric abstractions and masculine architectural designs. Tile art emerges as an expression deeply rooted in Anatolia’s rich cultural heritage, blending religious and aesthetic elements. The shared characteristics of Mycenaean and tile art, such as the use of ceramics, symbolism, and functionality, are highlighted, while their differences are analyzed within historical and geographical contexts. The historical interaction between art, technology, and culture is further enriched by the opportunities provided by today’s digital technologies. Artificial intelligence technologies like Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) and Variational Autoencoders (VAEs) play a transformative role in analyzing and reproducing these traditional art forms. In this context, the similarities and differences between the two arts were revealed using a Venn diagram based on the parameters of material, aesthetic, and religious influence. This study discusses how digital technologies contribute to the understanding of traditional art forms and shape modern artistic approaches. The findings present an innovative perspective that bridges the artistic expressions of the past and the future. KW - Mycenaean Art KW - Tile Art KW - Venn Diagram KW - Artificial Intelligence N2 - Bu çalışma, Miken ve Çini sanatlarını karşılaştırmalı bir perspektifle ele alarak, her iki sanat biçiminin kültürel, estetik ve işlevsel özelliklerini incelemektedir. Miken sanatı, geometrik düzenlemelere dayalı soyut estetiği ve maskülen mimarisiyle Ege Geç Tunç Çağı’nda önemli bir yer tutarken, Çini sanatı Anadolu’nun zengin kültürel mirasından etkilenerek daha çok dinî ve estetik unsurları bir araya getiren bir ifade biçimi sunmuştur. Çalışmada, Miken ve Çini sanatlarının ortak paydaları arasında seramik kullanımı, sembolizm ve işlevsellik ön plana çıkarılmış, ayrıştıkları noktalar ise tarihî ve coğrafi bağlamlar çerçevesinde analiz edilmiştir. Sanatın tarihsel bağlamda teknoloji ve kültürle olan etkileşimi, günümüz dijital teknolojilerinin sunduğu olanaklarla daha kapsamlı bir şekilde değerlendirilmek tedir. Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) ve Variational Autoencoders (VAEs) gibi yapay zekâ teknolojileri, bu geleneksel sanat biçimlerinin hem analizinde hem de yeniden üretiminde etkili bir rol oynamaktadır. Bu bağlamda, Venn diyagramı kullanılarak her iki sanatın benzerlik ve farklılıkları materyal, estetik ve dinî etki parametreleri baz alınarak ortaya konulmuştur. Çalışma, dijital teknolojilerin geleneksel sanat formlarının anlaşılmasına ve modern sanatsal yaklaşımların şekillenmesine nasıl katkıda bulunduğunu tartışmaktadır. Elde edilen bulgular, geçmiş ve geleceğin sanatsal ifade biçimlerini birleştiren yenilikçi bir yaklaşım sunmaktadır. CR - Bayazit Murat ve İskender Işık. “Geçmişten Günümüze Çini Sanatı ve Kütahya Çiniciliği”, Batman Üniversitesi Yaşam Bilimleri Dergisi, 1/1 (2012): 891-894. google scholar CR - Cetinic Eva and James She. “Understanding and Creating Art with AI: Review and Outlook”, (2021): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv. 2102.09109 . google scholar CR - Darvishi Neda and Sara Narimani. “The Symbolic Role of Tulip and Pomegranate Flowers in the Tiling Art of Iran and Ottoman Turkey”, Journal of Art & Civilization of the Orient, 10/35 (2022): 23-28. https://doi.org/10.22034/jaco.2022.329920.1234. google scholar CR - Dawood Mina and Mayssa Elfa. “Using Artificial Intelligence for Enhancing Human Creativity”, Journal of Art, Design and Music, 2/2 (2023): 106-120. https://doi.org/10.55554/2785-9649.1017. google scholar CR - Erman, Deniz Onur. “Türk Seramik Sanatının Gelişimi: Toprağın Ateşle Dansı”, Acta Turcica, 4/1 (2012): 18-33. google scholar CR - Fletcher Alexandra, Baird, D., Spataro, M. and Fairbairn, A. “Early Ceramics in Anatolia: Implications for the Production and Use of the Earliest Pottery. The Evidence from Boncuklu Höyük” Archaeological Journal, 27/2 (2017): 351–369. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0959774316000767. google scholar CR - Flower Jean and Howse, J. “Euler Diagram Generation” Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 19/6 (2008). 675-694. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jvlc.2008.01.004. google scholar CR - Gökçe, Ezgi. “Iznik Ceramics: History And Present-Day”, Athens Journal of Humanities & Arts, 5/2 (2018): 225-242. https://doi.org/10.30958/ ajha.5.2.5. google scholar CR - Gökçe Can ve Emre Feyzoğlu. “A General Overview of Portrait Works on Ceramic Surfaces” The Turkish Online Journal of Design Art and Communication, 14/3 (2024): 763-784. https://doi.org/10.7456/tojdac.1464181. google scholar CR - Harris, Robert L. Information Graphics: A Comprehensive Illustrated Reference. New York: Oxford University Press,1999. google scholar CR - Hunt, Earl. “The Design Of Ballantines. Behavior Research Methods” Instruments, & Computers, 18/3 (1986). 277-284. google scholar CR - Hutson James, Jason Lively, Bryan Robertson, Peter Cotroneo and Martin Lang. Creative Convergence the AI Renaissance in Art and Design, New York: Springer, 2024. google scholar CR - Kacar, Vedat. “Cumhuriyet’in 100. Yılında Türk Çini Sanatı”, Yedi: Sanat, Tasarım ve Bilim Dergisi, (Özel Sayı) (2023): 32. google scholar CR - Kahveci, Mücella. “21. Yüzyıla Girerken Geleneksel Türk Sanatları”, Folkloristik: Prof. Dr. Dursun Yıldırım Armağanı, 387-397. Ankara: Turkiye Diyanet Vakfi Matbaası, 1998. google scholar CR - Kotsonas, Antonis. “Ceramics, Ancient Greek”, Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, New York, 2014. google scholar CR - Lis, Bartłomiej, Hans Mommsen and Joseph Maran, Susanne Prillwitz. “Investigating Pottery Production and Consumption Patterns at the Late Mycenaean Cemetery of Perati”, Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 32/102453 (2020): 2 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102453. google scholar CR - Manovich Lev and Emanuele Arielli. “Artificial Aesthetics: Generative AI, Art and Visual Media.” Access December of 10, 2024. https:// manovich.net/index.php/projects/artificial-aesthetics. google scholar CR - Mansel, Arif Müfid. Ege ve Yunan Tarihi. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1995. google scholar CR - Moktefi Amirouche and Lemanski, J. “On The Origin Of Venn Diagrams” Axiomathes, 32/3 (2022): 887-900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516- 022-09642-2. google scholar CR - Nagapushpa B. M., Kanchana P, Monish. “Revolutionizing Art and Design through AI: Balancing Innovation, Ethics, and Future Prepared- ness”, International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management, 8/11 (2024): 1. google scholar CR - Öney, Gönül. “Anadolu Selçuklu Çini ve Seramik Sanatı”, Osmanlıda Çini ve Seramik Öyküsü, editör Ara Altun, 11-14. İstanbul: Creative Yayıncılık ve Tanıtım Ltd, 2000. google scholar CR - Özgünel, Coşkun. “Batı Anadolu ve İçerlerinde Miken Etkinlikleri”, Belleten, 47/187 (1983): 697-744. https://doi.org/10.37879/belleten. 1983.697. google scholar CR - Postman, Neil. Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology. New York: Vintage Books, 1993. google scholar CR - Rutter, Jeremy B. “Mycenaean pottery”. The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze Age Aegean in, editor E. H. Cline,415, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. google scholar CR - Samkoff, Aneta. “From Central Asia To Anatolia: The Transmission Of The Black-Line Technique And The Development Of Pre-Ottoman Tilework”, Anatolian Studies, 64/2 (2014): 199-215. google scholar CR - Sanghvi, Tanish M, Ricky, Shivani Rajkumar and Tirishaant Kartik, Sonia Maria D’Souza. “Brushstrokes of Tomorrow: Exploring the Art of AI”, International Journal of Scientific Research in Science Engineering and Technology, 11/3 (2024): 356-362. https://doi.org/10. 32628/IJSRSET24113140. google scholar CR - Satır, Seçil. “A Current Evaluation of Traditional Iznik Tiles and Ceramics”, Design Discourse, 2/3 (2007): 1-12. google scholar CR - Sherratt, E. Susan, and Crouwel, Joost H. “Mycenaean pottery from Cilicia in Oxford”, Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 6/3 (1987): 325-352. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0092.1987.tb00160.x. google scholar CR - Tekin, Oğuz. Eski Yunan Tarihi. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1995. google scholar CR - Turani, Adnan. Dünya Sanat Tarihi. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1992. google scholar CR - Van Wijngaarden, Gert Jan. Use and Appreciation of Mycenaean Pottery in the Levant, Cyprus and Italy:(ca. 1600-1200 BC). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2002. google scholar CR - Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A). “Plate, Fritware Decorated With Red Carnations and Green Cypress Trees; Turkey, 1600 to 1650.” Access November of 28, 2024. https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O114554/plate/. google scholar CR - Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A). “Bulbous vase decorated with tulips and carnations, Turkey (probably Iznik), ca. 1575.” Access December of 2, 2024. https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O86656/vase-unknown/. google scholar CR - Yılmaz, Seyhan. “Traditional Objects That Sources to Contemporary Turkish Ceramic Art”, Art-Sanat Dergisi, 0/13 (2020): 417-441. https:// doi.org/10.26650/artsanat.2020.13.0017. google scholar UR - https://doi.org/10.26650/iuturkiyat.1628622 L1 - https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/4559445 ER -