ONTOLOJİ, EPİSTEMOLOJİ VE ESTETİK EKSENİNDE MİMARLIK TARİHİ: ÇOK BOYUTLU MİMARLIK TARİHİ ANALİZ MODELİ (ÇMTAM)

Öz

Mimarlık tarihi araştırmaları geleneksel olarak kronolojik dönemler, üslup sınıflandırmaları, yapı tipolojileri ve teknolojik gelişmeler üzerinden ele alınmaktadır. Bu yaklaşım, mimari düşünceyi şekillendiren ontolojik kabuller, bilgi üretim süreçleri ve estetik anlayışlar arasındaki etkileşimi bütüncül biçimde açıklamakta yetersiz kalmaktadır. Bu çalışma, mimarlık tarihini ontoloji, epistemoloji ve estetik eksenlerinde birlikte değerlendiren Çok Boyutlu Mimarlık Tarihi Analiz Modeli'ni (ÇMTAM) geliştirmeyi ve modelin açıklayıcılığını Antik Çağ, Orta Çağ, Modern Dönem ve Çağdaş Dönem üzerinden incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmada nitel araştırma yaklaşımı benimsenmiş; kavramsal operasyonalizasyon, tarihsel katmanlama ve kesişim analizinden oluşan üç aşamalı bir analiz süreci uygulanmıştır. Bulgular, mimarlık tarihindeki dönüşümlerin yalnızca biçimsel ya da teknolojik değişimlerle açıklanamayacağını göstermektedir. Antik Çağ'da kozmolojik düzen, Orta Çağ'da teosentrik dünya görüşü, Modern Dönem'de bilimsel-rasyonel bilgi anlayışı, Çağdaş Dönem'de ise ilişkisel paradigma ontoloji, epistemoloji ve estetik arasındaki etkileşimi farklı biçimlerde yapılandırmaktadır. ÇMTAM, bu boyutlar arasındaki süreklilikleri, kırılmaları ve karşılıklı etkileşimleri görünür kılan bütünleşik bir analiz modeli sunmaktadır. Model, mimarlık tarihi araştırmaları, mimarlık kuramı, koruma çalışmaları ve mimarlık eğitimi için uygulanabilir bir kuramsal ve yöntemsel çerçeve önermekte; farklı coğrafi ve kültürel bağlamlarda geliştirilecek karşılaştırmalı araştırmalar için de analitik bir temel oluşturmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Mimarlık tarihi
• Çok Boyutlu Mimarlık Tarihi Analiz Modeli (ÇMTAM)
• Ontoloji
• Epistemoloji
• Estetik

ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY THROUGH THE LENS OF ONTOLOGY, EPISTEMOLOGY, AND AESTHETICS: THE MULTIDIMENSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY ANALYSIS MODEL (MAHAM)

Öz

Architectural history research has traditionally been organized around chronological periods, stylistic classifications, building typologies, and technological developments. However, this approach remains insufficient for explaining the interaction among the ontological assumptions, knowledge-production processes, and aesthetic values that shape architectural thought. This study aims to develop the Multidimensional Architectural History Analysis Model (MAHAM) and to examine its explanatory capacity across the Ancient, Medieval, Modern, and Contemporary periods. The research adopts a qualitative approach and employs a three-stage analytical process consisting of conceptual operationalization, historical layering, and intersection analysis. The findings demonstrate that transformations in architectural history cannot be explained solely through formal or technological developments. In the Ancient period, architectural thought was grounded in a cosmological worldview; in the Medieval period, it was shaped by a theocentric paradigm; in the Modern period, by scientific-rational knowledge; and in the Contemporary period, by a relational paradigm integrating ontology, epistemology, and aesthetics. MAHAM provides an integrated analytical framework that reveals the continuities, ruptures, and reciprocal interactions among these three dimensions. The model offers an applicable theoretical and methodological framework for architectural history research, architectural theory, conservation studies, and architectural education, while providing an analytical basis for future comparative studies across different cultural and geographical contexts.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Architectural history
• Multidimensional Architectural History Analysis Model (MAHAM)
• Ontology
• Epistemology
• Aesthetics

Kaynakça

1. Alberti, L. B. (1988). On the art of building in ten books (J. Rykwert, N. Leach, & R. Tavernor, Trans.). MIT Press.
2. Benjamin, A. (2023). Architecture as the housing of life: Notes on Heidegger and Agamben. Philosophy and Society, 34(1), 100–119. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7905193
3. Bonicco-Donato, C. (2025). In pursuit of the aesthetics of atmospheres: With and beyond Böhme. In J.-P. Thibaud, N. Tixier, & D. Zerbib (Eds.), Ambiances: A sensitivity to ordinary situations (pp. 274–284). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032655307-27
4. Borkowski, A. S. (2023). Evolution of BIM: epistemology, genesis and division into periods. Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), 28, 646–661. https://doi.org/10.36680/j.itcon.2023.034
5. Böhme, G. (2017). Atmospheric architectures: The aesthetics of felt spaces. Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474258111
6. Breuer, I. (2020). Husserl and Merleau Ponty: The affective bodily experience of architectural space. Gestalt Theory, 42, 287–302. https://doi.org/10.2478/gth-2020-0024
7. Christenson, M. (2025). Parametric analysis as a tool for hypothesis generation: A case study of the Federal Archive Building in New York City. Infrastructures, 10(4), 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures10040071
8. Dahabreh, S. M. (2014). 4F_C: A conceptual framework for understanding architectural works. Scientific Research and Essays, 9(8), 269–279. https://doi.org/10.5897/SRE2014.5825

9. Daugėlaitė, A., Doğan, H., & Gražulevičiūtė-Vileniškė, I. (2022). Characterizing sustainability aesthetics of buildings and environments: Methodological frame and pilot application to the hybrid environments. Landscape Architecture and Art, 19, 61–72. https://doi.org/10.22616/j.landarchart.2021.19.06
10. Derin, O. E., & Baytaş, B. (2025). The architecture of relational materialism: A categorial formation of onto-epistemological premises. Foundations of Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-025-09977-0
11. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977. Pantheon Books.
12. Foucault, M. (2002). Archaeology of knowledge. Psychology Press.
13. Frampton, K. (2020). Modern architecture: A critical history (5th ed.). Thames & Hudson.
14. Giedion, S. (2008). Space, time and architecture: The growth of a new tradition (5th ed.). Harvard University Press.
15. Haddad, E. (2010). Christian Norberg-Schulz’s phenomenological project in architecture. Architectural Theory Review, 15(1), 88–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/13264821003629279
16. Heidegger, M. (1971). Building dwelling thinking. In Poetry, language, thought (A. Hofstadter, Trans., pp. 143–161). Harper & Row.
17. Heynen, H. (2024). Architectural history today: Where do we stand? Where do we go? Perspectives in Architecture and Urbanism, 1(1), 100005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pau.2024.100005
18. Hochhäusl, S., Lange, T., Adams, R., Barber, D. A., Bierig, A., Cupers, K., Doucet, I., Ferng, J., Fischer, S., Förster, K., Krivý, M., Kurg, A., Levin, A., Nolan, G., & Vronskaya, A. (2018). Architecture and the environment. Architectural Histories, 6(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5334/ah.259
19. Kaymaz, S., & Gleiter, J. H. (2025). An onto-epistemic inquiry regarding memory and counter-memory of modernist architecture: Defects and futility against norms and causality. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 42(1), 257–274. https://doi.org/10.4305/metu.jfa.2025.1.10
20. Kostof, S. (1995). A history of architecture: Settings and rituals (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
21. Latour, B. (2021). Toplumsalı yeniden toplama: Aktör-ağ teorisine bir giriş (N. Bingöl, Çev.). Tellekt. (Özgün eser 2005 yılında yayımlanmıştır.)
22. Malpas, J. (2021). Rethinking dwelling. Bloomsbury Publishing. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350172944
23. Martin, R. (2025). A world of ideas: Selected encounters in architectural history and philosophical aesthetics, 1940–80. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 84(1), 105–120. https://doi.org/10.1525/jsah.2025.84.1.105
24. Medina, J. M., Rodríguez Sánchez, A., Medina Sánchez, E., & Cassinello, M. J. (2017). Factors defining Gothic lighting: Relationship between volume, structure and luminous result in Spanish cathedrals. Revista de la Construcción, 16(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.7764/RDLC.16.1.9
25. Merleau-Ponty, M. (2012). Phenomenology of perception. Routledge. (Original work published 1945)
26. Meyer, E. (2016). Architectural history in the Anthropocene: Towards methodology. The Journal of Architecture, 21(8), 1203–1225. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602365.2016.1254270
27. Milivojević, D. (2024). Phenomenology, space, architecture. In On Architecture (2024) Conference Proceedings (pp. 131–138). https://doi.org/10.60152/f3y/zrix
28. Nieuwenhuis, M., & Strausz, E. (2023). Atmospheric pedagogies: Everyday ethnographies of the (post)pandemic classroom. Theory & Event, 26(3), 597–625. https://doi.org/10.1353/tae.2023.a901580
29. Norberg-Schulz, C. (1980). Genius loci: Towards a phenomenology of architecture. Rizzoli.
30. Oxman, R. (2009). Performative design: A performance-based model of digital architectural design. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 36(6), 1026–1037. https://doi.org/10.1068/b34149
31. Pallasmaa, J. (2011). Tenin gözleri: Mimarlık ve duyular (A. U. Kılıç, Çev.). YEM Yayın.
32. Panofsky, E. (1991). Perspective as symbolic form (C. S. Wood, Trans.). Zone Books.
33. Popescu, C. (2022). A genealogy of architectural history's flattening: A perspective from post-history. Architectural Histories, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.16995/ah.8283
34. Silva, G. C., & Almeida, M. (2023). Reflections on Heideggerian dwelling in contemporary times. ENSUS Proceedings, 11(3), 473–480. https://doi.org/10.29183/2596-237X.ensus2023.v11.n3.p473-480
35. Simmons, C. T., & Mysak, L. A. (2010). Transmissive properties of Medieval and Renaissance stained glass in European churches. Architectural Science Review, 53(2), 251–274. https://doi.org/10.3763/asre.2009.0073
36. Soulikias, A., Cucuzzella, C., Nizar, F., Hazbei, M., & Goubran, S. (2021). We gain a lot…but what are we losing? A critical reflection on the implications of digital design technologies. Open House International, 46(3), 444–458. https://doi.org/10.1108/OHI-02-2021-0041
37. Turnbull, D. (1993). The ad hoc collective work of building Gothic cathedrals with templates, string, and geometry. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 18(3), 315–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399301800304
38. Vitruvius. (1999). Ten books on architecture (I. D. Rowland, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.
39. Walton, S. A., & Boothby, T. E. (2014). What is straight cannot fall: Gothic architecture, Scholasticism, and dynamics. History of Science, 52(4), 347–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/0073275314559329
40. Wittkower, R. (1949). Architectural principles in the age of humanism. Alec Tiranti.