Metric-Based Comparative Analysis of Seljuk and Byzantine Architectural Practices in Medieval Anatolia

Öz

The architectural landscape of medieval Anatolia represents a complex synthesis of Byzantine and Seljuk traditions, characterized by significant advancements in construction techniques and decorative methodologies. This study investigates the interplay between these two architectural traditions, analysing key elements such as stonework, tilework, and ornamental patterns. The Seljuks are renowned for their emphasis on intricate geometric motifs, calligraphy, and the innovative application of muqarnas, while Byzantine architecture is distinguished by its monumental scale, intricate masonry, and the extensive use of religious iconography, particularly mosaics. Despite their differing cultural and artistic ideologies, both traditions contributed profoundly to the evolution of Anatolian architecture. Through the comparative analysis of emblematic structures, including the Great Mosque of Divriği, the Green Mosque in Bursa, and the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, this research highlights mechanisms through which cultural exchange. Seljuk architects adopted and adapted Byzantine structural innovations, integrating them into Islamic artistic frameworks to develop a hybrid architectural style. Conversely, Byzantine structures, particularly in the post-Byzantine period, reflect Seljuk influences in their decorative schemes, including geometric patterns and muqarnas. Employing a methodical comparative framework, the study evaluates the aesthetic and structural principles underpinning these traditions, revealing the sociopolitical and cultural dynamics that shaped their innovations. This synthesis of Byzantine structural ingenuity and Seljuk ornamental creativity produced a distinctive architectural identity in Anatolia that profoundly influenced the subsequent development of Ottoman architecture and Islamic design throughout the Middle East and Mediterranean. These findings underscore the region’s role as a crossroads of artistic and technological exchange.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Byzantine Traditions
• Comparative Architectural Analysis
• Seljuk Architecture
• Cultural Exchange in Anatolia
• Geometric Patterns.

Etik Beyan

All necessary permissions were obtained from relevant participants and institutions during the research process.

Anadolu Selçuklu ve Bizans Mimari Uygulamalarının Metrik Tabanlı Karşılaştırmalı Analizi

Öz

Ortaçağ Anadolu’sunun mimari manzarası, Bizans ve Selçuklu geleneklerinin karmaşık bir sentezini temsil eder ve yapı teknikleri ile süsleme yöntemlerindeki önemli ilerlemelerle karakterize edilir. Bu çalışma, taş işçiliği, çini kaplamalar ve süsleme desenleri gibi temel unsurları analiz ederek bu iki mimari geleneğin etkileşimini incelemektedir. Selçuklular, karmaşık geometrik motifler, hat sanatı ve mukarnas uygulamalarıyla tanınırken, Bizans mimarisi anıtsal ölçek, karmaşık taş işçiliği ve özellikle mozaiklerde kullanılan dini ikonografi ile öne çıkmıştır. Kültürel ve sanatsal ideolojilerindeki farklılıklara rağmen, her iki gelenek de Anadolu mimarisinin evrimine derin katkılarda bulunmuştur. Divriği Ulu Camii, Bursa’daki Yeşil Cami ve İstanbul’daki Ayasofya gibi önemli yapılar üzerinden yapılan karşılaştırmalı analiz, kültürel etkileşim mekanizmalarını ortaya koymaktadır. Selçuklu mimarları, Bizans yapı tekniklerini benimseyerek İslami sanatsal çerçevelerle harmanlamış ve hibrit bir mimari üslup geliştirmiştir. Öte yandan, özellikle Bizans sonrası dönemde, Bizans yapılarında Selçuklu etkileri, geometrik desenler ve mukarnas gibi süsleme şemalarında görülmektedir. Yöntemsel bir karşılaştırma çerçevesi kullanan bu çalışma, bu geleneklerin estetik ve yapısal ilkelerini değerlendirerek yeniliklerini şekillendiren sosyopolitik ve kültürel dinamikleri açığa çıkarmaktadır. Bizans’ın yapısal ustalığı ile Selçuklu’nun süsleme yaratıcılığının birleşimi, Anadolu’da özgün bir mimari kimlik oluşturmuş ve bu kimlik, Osmanlı mimarisinin ve Ortadoğu ile Akdeniz'deki İslam tasarımının sonraki gelişimlerini derinden etkilemiştir. Bulgular, bölgenin sanatsal ve teknolojik değişimlerin bir kesişim noktası olarak önemini vurgulamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bizans Gelenekleri
• Karşılaştırmalı Mimari Analiz
• Selçuklu Mimarisi
• Anadolu
• Geometrik Desenler

Kaynakça

1. Ashkan, M., & Ahmad, Y. (2012). Significance of conical and polyhedral domes in Persia and surrounding are-as: Morphology, typologies, and geometric characteristics. Nexus Network Journal, 14(2), 275–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00004-012-0112-x
2. Azarpay, G. (1982). The Islamic tomb tower: A note on its genesis and significance. In A. Daneshvari (Ed.), Es-says in Islamic art and architecture in honor of Katharina Otto-Dorn (pp. 9–12). Undena Publications.
3. Blair, S. (2008). Islamic calligraphy. Edinburgh University Press.
4. Blair, S. S., & Bloom, J. M. (1994). The art and architecture of Islam, 1250–1800. Yale University Press.
5. Blessing, P. (2014). Rebuilding Anatolia after the Mongol conquest: Islamic architecture in the lands of Rūm, 1240–1330. Ashgate Publishing.
6. Ettinghausen, R., Grabar, O., & Madina, M. J. (2003). Islamic art & architecture, 650–1250. Yale University Press.
7. Grabar, A. (1967). The art of the Byzantine Empire: Byzantine art in the Middle Ages. Crown Publishers.
8. Grube, E. J., & Michell, G. (1995). Architecture of the Islamic world: Its history and social meaning. Thames & Hudson.

9. Gülru, N. (2008). The age of Sinan: Architectural culture in the Ottoman Empire. Reaktion Books.
10. Hill, D. R., & Al-Hassan, A. Y. (1992). Islamic technology: An illustrated history. Cambridge University Press.
11. Hillenbrand, R. (2004). Islamic architecture. Edinburgh University Press.
12. Hillenbrand, R. (2010). Islamic art and architecture. In F. B. Flood & G. Necipoğlu (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Islamic art and architecture (pp. 1–24). Oxford University Press.
13. Mainstone, R. J. (1997). Hagia Sophia: Architecture, structure, and liturgy of Justinian’s great church. Thames & Hudson.
14. Mango, C. (1985). Byzantine architecture. Electa Editrice Press.
15. Mosavi, Z. (2002). Mogharnas in architecture. Ketab-e Mah-e Honar, 348, 45–46.
16. Nazer, Z., Belali Oskoui, A., & Keynejad, M. A. (2016). A study of transparency behavior of domes in Islamic mosques with emphasis on the notion of the spiritual lighting. Journal of Research in Islamic Architecture, 4(3), 94–112. http://jria.iust.ac.ir/article-1-549-en.html
17. Nazer, Z., Kovács, G. M., & Rabb, P. (2020). Comprehensive revelation on the tomb towers architecture; Persia and Anatolia. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 8(2), 801–820. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2020.137
18. Necipoğlu, G. (1995). The Topkapi scroll: Geometry and ornament in Islamic architecture. Getty Publications.
19. Önkal, H. (1996). Anadolu Selçuklu Türbeleri. Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Yayınevi.
20. Ousterhout, R. G. (2019). Eastern medieval architecture: The building traditions of Byzantium and neighboring lands. Oxford University Press.
21. Pope, A. U., & Ackerman, P. (1981). A Survey of Persian art from prehistoric times to the present. Maxwell Aley Literary Associates.
22. Redford, S. (1993). The Seljuks of Rum and the antique. Muqarnas, 10, 148–156.
23. Schroeder, E. (1938). Islamic architecture: Seljuq period. In A. U. Pope & P. Ackerman (Eds.), A survey of Per-sian art (pp. 930–966). Oxford Press.
24. Tabbaa, Y. (1997). The transformation of Islamic art during the Sunni revival. University of Washington Press.