ottoman stone acquisition: the süleymaniye complex 251

~LKNUR AKTUÅ KOLAY AND SERP~L ÇEL~K

OTTOMAN STONE ACQUISITION IN THE MID-SIXTEENTH CENTURY: THE SÜLEYMAN~YE COMPLEX IN ISTANBUL

In the light of both the vast archival documentation grade.7 No other mosque is adorned with so many (construction dates, texts on ceremonies, account precious columns that once stood in Roman temples books, construction correspondence, price-setting reg- and Byzantine churches. In this respect, the Süley- isters) and the intact structural evidence, the stone maniye constitutes a symbolically significant collec- used to build the Süleymaniye in Istanbul holds a tion of stone, in which ancient civilizations such as unique place in the history of Ottoman architectonic Roman and Byzantine and their sacred memories sur- science and technology. In this essay, this stone and its vive.8 The chief architect Sinan notes that each stone acquisition in the mid-sixteenth century are considered was famous worldwide and reminiscent of a land,9 and in micro-scale by making use of archival materials, that some came from Solomon’s palace.10 Not only recent research, and extant structural clues. A major did the Süleymaniye represent the common heritage problem has been interpreting the terminology in the of humanity, but it also translated the past into the archival materials, which are mainly building accounts future through Ottoman architectonic knowledge,11 and correspondence written by accountants and scribes synthesizing the legacies of Azerbaijan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, rather than by architects. Analogies between the Sül- Egypt, the Balkans, and Eastern Europe.12 eymaniye and other large imperial complexes with Preceded by the pioneer Fatih complex of Sultan account books shedding light on their structures have Mehmed II (r. 1451–81), the Süleymaniye assumed been used here to solve this problem. a substantial role in enhancing the Ottoman educa- Dominating the skyline of the historic Istanbul pen- tional system. It was commissioned by the imperial insula, with its minarets and hundreds of domes cas- council, and its construction was presided over by Sul- cading down to the Golden Horn like “bubbles on the tan Süleyman. Not counting the unrecorded cost of surface of the sea,”1 the Süleymaniye complex ({im¸ret-i its platform, 26,251,938 akçe (asper, an Ottoman sil- {¸mire, modern külliye), situated on the third hill of ver coin), of which 25,802,000 akçe were provided by the city, is the most ambitious Ottoman building ever the Sultan, were spent on its construction between built. Besides its spiritual and charitable functions, its 1553 and1559 (the period for which expense records basic purpose was education. Comprising a congrega- have been preserved).13 The total cost, according to tional mosque, an elementary school, a Qur}an school, the autobiographical essays that Sinan dictated to a Hadith college, four law colleges, a school of medi- his poet-and-painter friend Mustafa Sa{i Çelebi, was cine, a university hospital, a pharmacy, a hostel, a hos- 53,760,000 akçe.14 On September 18, 1547, the sultan pice, a caravanserai, a soup kitchen, a single hammam, had gained victory over the Austrian empire. With his rows of one-man shops and rooms, and the tombs of new annual budget increasing from four million duc- both Sultan Süleyman I (known in Ottoman histori- ats15 to about seven or eight million,16 he conceived ography as “the Lawgiver”), r. 1520–66,2 and his wife the idea of constructing a new complex, to be built Haseki Hürrem Sultan or Roxelana (Kadæn Efendi in after the completion of the complex (1543–48) of his the endowment deed of the Süleymaniye), the com- late son, Øehzade Mehmed. plex is almost entirely a university city.3 Land acquisition was not an issue for the Süley- As one of the preeminent enterprises of the Otto- maniye, which was to be sited on a plot removed man architecture that sprawls from Budapest to Cairo, from the burned-out Old Palace (the Saray-æ Atik or the Süleymaniye was considered to be as sacred as the Eski Saray) at Bayezid, damaged by a devastating fire Ka{ba4 and the al-Aqsa Mosque,5 as beautiful as the on February 7, 1540.17 One of the most prominent Seven Wonders of the World,6 and as large as Bel- spots on the peninsula’s skyline, this site was also

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd Sec2:251 10/18/2006 11:50:49 AM . . . 252 ilknur aktuÅ kolay and serpil çelik selected to reduce costs and avoid expropriation else- and wholesale purchases (müb¸ya{¸t) and were evidently where.18 Expropriation was the most crucial issue in presented to the sultan, and imperial correspondence this crowded and expensive commercial area of the such as edicts, decrees, and court orders (_av¸nºn, city, as would be documented in the later cases of the a¥k¸m ve ev¸mir-i hüm¸yün).35 These documents were Nuruosmaniye and Sultan Ahmed mosques. That the published by Ömer Lütfi Barkan36 in 1972 and uti- Süleymaniye, with its relatively larger program, could lized by J. M. Rogers37 in 1982 and more recently by be erected on such narrow, sloped terrain demon- Stephanos Yerasimos.38 Besides recording wages, sala- stated the genius of Sinan, architect-in-chief to the sul- ries, and wholesale purchases, the account books also tans for half a century (1538–88).19 Sinan knew how reflect the assignments of construction team members, to use the site adeptly and how to employ its build- their concentration in one or more different sections ing materials left in situ from the burned-out palace, of the building during the work, and ceremonies such which had itself been built on the ruins of a Francis- as the slaughtering of animals and the giving of alms, can monastery.20 gifts, and tips to teams in celebration of the comple- According to the foundation inscription of the tion of certain structures; this information allows us mosque,21 Sinan’s autobiographical treatises,22 and to deduce unknown dates and construction processes. the chronicle of the contemporary historian Mustafa One can also extract from the account books substan- b. Celâl,23 the cornerstone of the Süleymaniye was tial information on the organizing, managing, moni- consecrated and laid in the foundation of the mihrab toring, obtaining, and transporting of teams, and on by Shaykh al-Islam Ebussuud Efendi on Friday, June sixteenth-century building supplies: stone, iron, steel, 13, 1550. The architectural project24 and its model25 lead, brass, copper, logs, timber, brick, tile, terracotta must have been designed between September 18, pipes, powdered and crushed horasan (mortar of lime 1547 and March 29, 1548, before the sultan went on and powdered bricks), fine sand, lime, flax, and gyp- his second Persian campaign from March 29, 1548 to sum, along with mosque furnishings and ornaments December 21, 1549.26 (pendant globes, tile revetments, oil lamps, flat and Sinan first erected a great platform on vaults to level curved mirrors, pigments, gold leaf, ostrich eggs, car- the mosque, add to its height, and establish its qibla pets, and straw mats).39 orientation.27 In addition, the vaults could accommo- In addition to the the Süleymaniye records, archival date an array of one-man shops. Furthermore, to avoid documents related to other large imperial complexes, loss of space at the construction site and maximize such as the Sultan Ahmed,40 the Nuruosmaniye,41 and the ease of stone use, Sinan had the stone finished to the Ayazma,42 combined with recent research, consti- ready-to-use blocks in the mason yards of the quarries. tute a fairly concrete database for further analyses. Almost all the building supplies of the empire were commandeered for this project by order of the imperial council; during construction, even the prefect of the PROVISION OF STONE capital, who was charged with meeting the needs for imperial buildings such as palaces, hammams, kitch- There exist a considerable number of documents ens, bakeries, and military edifices, had to get per- on stone provision for the construction of the Süley- mission from the council to obtain any stone.28 The maniye, giving information on the search for appro- foundation was completed around December 1553,29 priate spolia, work at the quarries, transport of stone, and the last work was finished by January 15, 1560.30 stone ateliers, and costs. For the superstructure of the According to the copy of Tezkiretü’l-büny¸n from the complex, 7,905,910 akçe (30.1% of the total cost) were Revan Library, the mosque had already welcomed the spent on building supplies (müb¸ya{¸t).43 The building first Friday procession31 on Friday, July 30, 1557.32 stone used in the Süleymaniye included spolia from At its inauguration, the sultan honored Sinan with a private properties, which were purchased if owners golden key, paid for, according to an account book, permitted; otherwise, the harm caused by collection between August 28 and September 2, 1557.33 was determined and the owners compensated.44 The available archival documents34 related to the According to the registers, the collection of spo- Süleymaniye are account books (defter) and their sum- lia in the provinces was mainly commissioned by the maries (icm¸l), which record wages and salaries (ic¸r¸t) imperial council through the provincial courts and

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 252 10/20/2006 11:43:52 AM . ottoman stone acquisition: the süleymaniye complex 253 councils and their high-ranking officials such as gov- by the accountants of the local kadis in order to be ernors-general (beqlerbeqi), sub-governors (sancak beqi), considered legally valid.60 To avoid wasting money magistrates (suba×æ), and fief holders (sip¸hº). In the the court did not transport gigantic, costly blocks cases of Ivgadi, in ~ç-~l (present-day Mersin) prov- and columns without first considering their specifi- ince, and Bozcaada (Tenedos), the task involved for- cations and the details of their highly expensive and tress commanders (¥iª¸r dizd¸ræ, _ale dizd¸ræ) as well,45 difficult transportation: for example, 100 akçe were because hinterland fortresses contained stocks of pre- paid for a one-ton column to be transported a single cious building stone and architectural elements that kilometer.61 Shipping from a place such as Ereqli or elsewhere had been ruined or removed by attacking Kavak required the construction of a jetty.62 Later, crusaders.46 The beqlerbeqis of Anatolia and Egypt, for the construction of the Nuruosmaniye Mosque Ahmed Pasha, and {Ali Pasha,47 as well as their sancak (1748–55), the dragging of twelve columns from Per- beqis and kadis, were routinely and personally ordered gamon to Dikili required the construction of roads to collect and store stone in their domains.48 Whether and bridges, the hiring of about six hundred oxcart executive or judicial, those who ignored these duties drivers and workers, and the procurement of thirty-five would be permanently discharged from office ({azl ve yokes of oxen.63 With its architects and supplies, the redd-i ebedº).49 In gathering or quarrying, they worked naval corps significantly contributed to stone removal, with the assistance of a nucleus staff comprising the transportation, and placement. These made the Süley- imperial architects (either masters or journeymen in maniye a success. charge of technical matters), fiduciaries in charge Treadwheels and tripod hoists, mechanical marvels of financial affairs, and the suba×æs and yayaba×æs in of the time, lowered and raised the blocks by means charge of commanding the conscripts of local Janis- of systems of pulleys consisting mainly of iron or wood sary corps.50 The provincial kadis were the guarantors spools and organic or metal tackles. A capstan driven of harmonious cooperation between the high-ranking by slaves or animals helped turn the treadwheel, which soldiers and the nucleus staff.51 was a gigantic spool powered by numerous slaves who, According to the registers, in 1551–52 the beqler- hamster-like, tramped inside it. According to the regis- beqi, sancak beqis, and kadis of Anatolia, and in 1552 ters, for the removal of the Virgin’s Column (Kæzta×æ) the beqlerbeqi of Egypt, were ordered to search for in Istanbul the chief architect Sinan65 called for a tri- stone and sternly warned to do their best.52 In Ana- pod hoist (ªaban or ªapan), a treadwheel crane (dolab), tolia, emphasis was put on such Cilician cities as 2¼ tons of hawser (tel, resen-i yoma, or, in Sinan’s naval {Alaiye (present-day Alanya), ~ç-~l, Adana, Sis (pres- terminology, palamar), rope (urÚan, resen-i isparçina,66 ent-day Kozan), and Tarsus.53 The chief architect pre- isparçina urganæ, resen-i ªaban67), towrope (resen-i yedek), pared detailed request orders, which specified stone a ring (¥al_a) and hook (çengel) to attach the ends of types in terms of formal appearance, dimensions, and the ropes to the column, numerous iron and ninety- place of use.54 The comptroller (bin¸ emºni) submit- seven wooden spools (bekre), and ship timbers with ted the orders to the imperial council together with which to construct a frame to hang the spools and a decree.55 Issued in two days, the orders were deliv- scaffolding around the column. These materials were ered with funds through imperial messengers (çavu×), procured from the Galata shipyard through the grand fiduciaries, or architects to the pertinent provincial admiral (_aptan pa×a). The column, weighing more officials.56 The kadis were mainly responsible for the than 30 tons, was removed on April 1, 1551. At Thessa- tasks of searching for, gathering, and dispatching the loniki, for the removal of a column weighing 5½ tons stone.57 If they made the same mistake twice, they and lying in a pit 3 m deep, six ropes and ten spools would be not merely discharged but put to death.58 were requested.68 At the height of stone collection They were to let the dispatched royal architects know between January 28, 1552 and June 21, 1553, 30.000 about stone finds in their territories, submit a report akçe were spent on hawsers in coils weighing 4 _an«¸r on the distance to the nearest port and its condition, (225.798 kg) each;69 these included ropes from Sam- enclose samples of the stone along with their specifi- sun, which was the hemp production center of the cations, and finally, if the council found these appro- empire.70 Çubu_-æ ^aradeniz or çubu_-æ Ba¥r-i Siy¸h (tim- priate, send the stone itself.59 Stone to be delivered to ber of the Black Sea), a type of all-purpose timber 12 Istanbul was recorded at its original location by scribes zir¸{ (9.08 m) in length; süt¢n, or timber 6 zir¸{ (4.54 or bookkeepers, and the lists of stone were registered m) in length from the Thracian coasts of the Black

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 253 10/20/2006 11:43:54 AM . . . 254 ilknur aktuÅ kolay and serpil çelik Sea;71 and 9 m timber from Üsküdar72 were used for panæ (~skele-i Kapan-æ Dakæyk, ancient Porta Platea) on the wooden frame of the capstan. The wooden spool the south bank of the Golden Horn at the edge of the of hornbeam (gürgen) cost 7 akçe.73 historic Istanbul peninsula, whose third hill was being A wrapping of rags (paçavra) helped to protect the crowned by the Süleymaniye. Stone was first stored stone from getting damaged during removal, transpor- at the seaports and then, when needed, dragged or tation, and placement. Saddle blankets (teqeltü), felt carted from the seaports to the construction site.85 (keçe), nomadic felt (keçe-i yörük), cotton cloth (kirpas), The Unkapanæ seaport, which was closer to the con- and sailcloth (tente-i _adærÚa, b¸d-b¸n, yelken) are the struction site, was more popular than that of Eminönü; rag materials mentioned in the registers. 10,518 oxcarts of stone blocks were unloaded there, In the sophisticated and expensive task of procure- as opposed to 7,314 at Eminönü.86 ment, the kadi was expected to submit detailed pre- For sea transport, specially designed ships and liminary feasibility reports74 with affordable solutions, boats were used,87 classified as galleys for stone and to offer financial assistance supported by the tax (_adærÚa-i seng), vessels for stone (sefºne-i seng), wheel- farm (mu_¸ta{a) and sheep tax ({¸det-i aÚn¸m) incomes powered heavy vessels for stone (sefºne-i seng-i büzürg of the territory in his domain.75 For example, in the b¸-dolab), and wheel-powered light vessels for stone case of Aydæncæk (modern Edincik), the total quarry (sefºne-i seng-i küçek b¸-dolab).88 In addition, some flat- expenses for four and a half months in 1555 were bottomed barges belonging to the Ottoman navy, such 45,391 akçe.76 If cavalrymen could not find the money as cannon vessels (sefºne-i «op) and horse vessels (sefºne- locally, the comptroller, through his fiduciaries, would i esb-i Ò¸ªªa), were used.89 Correspondence from Alex- have it sent in.77 In the case of Gemlik, the gypsum andria,90 for instance, provides information that a cus- quarry had not been registered in the vil¸yet defteri tom-made vessel was built at the Galata navy base—then (provincial account book) by the local cavalryman and the center of the shipping industry, with 123 docks— for two years had illegally been run by local non-Mus- in a remarkably short time following two in situ inspec- lim quarrymen. It was appropriated by the state, and tions of the columns to be shipped. Ships with capac- the violators’ fine (the two-year income) was spent on ities of 250 çeki (62.5 tons), 700 çeki (175 tons), and quarrying the gypsum and dispatching it to Istanbul.78 1,100 çeki (275 tons)91 carried 191 shiploads of stone The kadi summoned either the local military guild of from the quarries of ~zmit and Kavak and 115 ship- oxcart drivers or private drivers. Provided with a lim- loads of stone from Aydæncæk and the Aegean Islands.92 ited budget, he was ordered by the council to prac- (A çeki is a unit of weight that equals four _an«¸r, or tice the established custom of paying government- 225.798 kg.) All three ships were well equipped with set prices to have the blocks dragged and carted to a weapons in case of a sea battle.93 nearby port.79 Such supplies as timber, nails, ropes, Apart from these imperial ships and boats (mºrº capstans, and drop hammers to construct a jetty and gemiler), private barges (navlun gemileri, rençber gemileri) a sledge track were procured either from imperial sea- were occasionally hired, at a cost of 41,774 akçe (0.16% port stores or directly from local sources.80 The kadi of the recorded construction costs).94 Transportation was also in charge of hiring private ships;81 whether costs were high: in the case of Eski ~stanbulluk, for private or official,82 ships weighed anchor under his instance, 157 blocks of pink granite gathered from authorization, following inspection by customs officers the ancient quarries of Ezine were shipped for 1600 who were present to prevent smuggling.83 By means akçe (4 akçe per _an«¸r), whereas the cost of collec- of sealed books handed in by the fiduciary, the kadi tion was only 666 akçe.95 As a comparison, 151 blocks informed the central accounting office about every of marble from Chios were shipped by private boat detail of the task.84 for 2820 akçe.96 On their round trips through the Marmara (Pro- The stone blocks brought to the construction site pontis) and Aegean seas, the ships and boats picked from various corners of the empire were kept in the up the stone blocks destined for Istanbul from the imperial storehouse (Ò¸ªªa anb¸ræ97 or Òæz¸ne-i {¸mire,98 quarries of ~zmit (Nicomedia), Kavak, Aydæncæk (Cyzi- literally, imperial treasury), which was also intended cus), Eski ~stanbulluk (Alexandria Troas), Bozcaada to hold such precious and rare spolia as columns, (Tenedos), and Sakæz (Chios) and delivered them to bases, capitals, entablatures, casings, steps, pavements, the main port districts of Istanbul, such as Eminönü slabs, veneers, and roundels originating from vari- (~skele-i Emin, the ancient port of Neorion) and Unka- ous Aegean, Anatolian, and Egyptian sites. It was in

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 254 10/20/2006 11:43:55 AM . ottoman stone acquisition: the süleymaniye complex 255 the Topkapæ Palace and had a temporary branch at (Midilli), Chios (Sakæz), Tenedos (Bozcaada), Thessa- the construction site on the plot of the Old Palace loniki (Selanik), Coracesion ({Alâiye, modern Alanya), at Bayezid.99 Other branches of the storehouse were Cilicia (~ç-~l, modern Mersin), Seleucia (Silifke), Dan- at the quarries, ancient sites, and ports—mainly the isanclus (Mud), Celendis (Selendi), Tarsus, Adana, Eminönü and Unkapanæ seaports of Istanbul.100 On Misis (Sis, modern Kozan), Alexandria (~skenderiye), August 8, 1552, a remarkable amount of timber, nails, Ascalon (Ashkelon), and Heliopolis (“city of the Sun and roofing material was dispatched to the construc- God,” Baalbek). tion site of the Süleymaniye to build the sheds where In Istanbul and its hinterland, a widespread and the quarried blocks would be stored and dressed, the arduous stone-gathering project was pursued in the barracks where the laborers would be housed, and ruins of Constantinople, Chrysopolis, and Chalcedon. the ateliers.101 The ateliers, which accommodated Thus, various sorts of stone from the Old Palace, the groups of workers from various professions and cor- Kæzta×æ (Virgin’s Column), the seventeen white col- ners of the empire brought together for the project, umns of the Peripatos of the Sphendone in the Hip- were located near or adjacent to the corresponding podrome, the sixteen columns and the pavements of storehouses in which the relevant building materials the former church of St. Irene, then the armory (cebe- were kept.102 hane), the marble plates recording Manuel I’s conciliar edict of 1166 in the Hagia Sophia Mosque, 154 cart- loads of stone of the Church of St. Peribleptos (the TYPES OF STONE Sulu Manastær) in Samatya, two or more columns of the Church of St. Euphemia, the pavements of the The three main types of building stone used in the Mosque of Mahmud Pasha, a red antique Egyptian serçe gözi complex were küfeki (limestone), od ta×æ (firestone),103 porphyry column ( ) in the courtyard of the and mermer (Proconnesian marble),104 which was pro- Kæssa Khan, opposite the fortress of Yoroz (ancient cured primarily from the Marmara region.105 Lime- Hieron) at the Black Sea entrance of the Bospho- stone and firestone were quarried, while the marble rus, and a red Aswan granite column from Çengelköy was simply gathered, in the manner practiced since (Çengar) on the Bosphorus were removed.

the Byzantine era,106 using the same equipment and The earliest work was carried out in Ezine and Eski- teams in an enormous effort to acquire appropriate ~stanbulluk, where pink Neandrian or Kestanbol gran- stone components. From 1549 to 1557, an abundant ite was procured between November 24, 1549 and July supply of rare and precious colored architectural 5, 1550,109 while the work of longest duration was in elements—columns, entablatures, voussoirs, facings, Aydæncæk, where Proconnesian marble was procured veneers, pavements, and jambs—were collected both from April 4, 1550 to July 7, 1554 (see fig. 3).110 from ancient cities and from contemporary buildings The stone specifications in the registers indicate in which ancient materials had been reused. Sources size, form, dimension, and color qualities. Terms included a mosque in Nicaea (~znik)107 and houses used include yek p¸re (monolithic), p¸re (piece, frag- in Istanbul,108 even ones belonging to statesmen. In ment), ¸{l¸ (first-rate), alaca (Turkish: colored), reng- Neandria (Ezine), columns abandoned in the ancient amiz (Persian: colored), and abla_ (Arabic: black and quarry were collected. white). Abla_ evidently refers here to both pink Nean- The present archival registers of the Süleymaniye drian granite111 and Tenedos marble.112 note the following ancient cities as sources of stone Siy¸hla a_ benek benek (black and white spotted) (see fig. 1): Constantinople (Kostantaniyye, ~stan- refers to gray Armutlu granite, notable for its black bul), Chrysopolis (Üsküdar), Chalcedon (Karye-i Kadæ, specks.113 SürÒ (red) is the name given to all red stone Kadæköy), Perinthos/Heraclea (Ereqli, modern Mar- including Aswan granite.114 SürÒ-i abla_ (red, black, mara Ereqlisi), Viza (Vize), Adrianople (Edirne), Nico- and white) designates the multicolored, veined Chios media (~znikmid, the capital of Bithynia, modern limestone called Portasanta.115 SürÒ-i alaca (with red Kocaeli), Nicea (~znik), Cius (Gemlik), Cape Tri- specks) evidently designates Kestanbol granite.116 ^æzæl ton (Bozburun), Myrlea (Mudanya), Miletopolis and kemer ta×æ (red voussoir) is evidently Hereke conglom- Lopadion (Mihaliç), Cyzicus (Aydæncæk, modern Edin- erate.117 Serçe gözi118 or _æzæl serçe gözi119 (literally, red cik), Alexandria Troas (Eski ~stanbulluk), Neandria sparrow-eye) designates red antique Egyptian porphyry, (Ezine), Pitane (Candarlu), Miletos (Balat), Mytilene or rosso antico, with reference to its solid red color.120

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 255 10/20/2006 11:43:55 AM . . . 256 ilknur aktuÅ kolay and serpil çelik leymaniye complex in Istanbul. Fig. 1. Location of the stone resources for S ü

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 256 10/20/2006 11:43:55 AM . ottoman stone acquisition: the süleymaniye complex 257

(a) A

(b)

(c)

(d) 0 50 700cm

Fig. 2. Relative sizes of the limestone blocks quarried at the Haznedar state quarry and sent to the construction site of the Süleymaniye complex: (a) seng-i büzürg; (b) seng-i _alæb; (c) seng-i zir¸{; (d) seng-i pehlü.

Stone Types Ancient Ruins 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 Kestanbol granite Neandria and Alexandria Troas Firestone Chalcedon Firestone Nicomedia Firestone, marble Perinthos C D Limestone Haznedar O E Marble Cyzicus R D Marble Viza N I Firestone, marble Adrianople E C Various Coracesion R A Aswan granite Alexandria T Various Seleucia, Celendis and Danisanclus I Aswan granite Virgin's Column S O Various Tenedos T N Various Nicea O Various Cius N Various Myrlea E Hereke conglomerate Lopadion and Miletopolis Aswan granite Baalbek Serpentine, Aswan granite Thessaloniki Various Pitane Red antique Ashkelon Various Cape Triton Various Lesbos Various Miletus

Fig. 3. Timetable of the stone acquisition for the Süleymaniye complex.

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 257 10/20/2006 11:43:56 AM . . . 258 ilknur aktuÅ kolay and serpil çelik Somaki121 or a_lu siy¸hlu serçe gözi122 (literally, sparrow- tion and upper structure was sent to Istanbul.130 In eye with white and black in it) is red Aswan granite. two of the registers, the word giru is used for stone. In Sebz123 or ye×il124 (green) is the name given to all green- one document, giru ta×131 (gray stone) is mentioned colored stone, including Greek porphyry and breccia. together with firestone as a foundation material; in L¸civerd ablaÚæ (literally, navy blue, black, and white another, there is mention of a giru k¸rheng132 (gray multicolored) evidently refers to green Greek serpen- quarry) at ~zmit. However, there is no giru ta× listed tine breccia containing large, dark bluish-green frag- among the stone dispatched from ~zmit between May ments.125 In 1551, the imperial architect Bali classified 8 and July 2, 1550.133 the Alexandrian stones he dispatched as bey¸¾ (white, probably white Halayeb granite), siy¸h (black, proba- 2. Firestone (od ta×æ, seng-i ¸te×) bly black Aswan granite), sebz (green, probably green Greek breccia or porphyry), fæstækº (pistachio-colored, Firestone, a coarse, heat-resistant sandstone, is the probably green Egyptian marble), zerd-çilli (yellow- earliest stone type to have been quarried for the Süley- maniye, and the second main building stone used spotted, presumably the Egyptian marble of Galala, od ta×æ seng-i ¸te× or giallo antico of Algeria), mersºnº (myrtle-colored), there. It is called or (literally, fire y¸semºnº (jasmine-colored, presumably the beige-col- stone) in the registers. Since it is not durable against z rzurº atmospheric effects, it was used mainly in the founda- ored Egyptian marble of Samah), ü (gray, pre- horasan sumably the magnificent gray Egyptian granite, granito tions, directly above the concrete layer, which del foro Úaz¸lº kohlº was a 20 cm-thick mixture of lime, crushed brick, and ), (Egyptian Ghazal granite), (navy ¥at«æl blue), muhazza (probably the world-famous Egyptian brick powder, reinforced by a (crosstimber). alabaster), and nevv¸rü’l-fu}¸d (literally, heart-rejoic- Firestone was both quarried and collected in Chal- ing; designation uncertain).126 Red or green stone was cedon from January 30, 1550 to May 23, 1553; in the most respected, since, in terms of ancient mean- Perinthos/He raclia from March 5, 1550 to February ing, red demonstrated the power of both the earth 21, 1552; and in Nicomedia from March 29, 1550 to and the emperor, and green represented both the May 17, 1554. In Nicomedia, the ruins of the ancient Garden of Eden and celestial power. city and the quarry of Kavak ~skelesi (modern Kara- mürsel) were used; the extraction there lasted from Individual stone blocks were defined by numeric 134 (_æ«{a), linear (zir¸{ and _or), and cubic (araba or acele, March 29 to July 2, 1550. Moreover, firestone was and ¥amil or yük) units of measurement. The zir¸{, collected from the ruins of the Old Palace and the or mason’s cubit, is a unit of length, 0.757 m, divis- Edirne Palace. The blocks gathered from the Edirne parmak Palace were 55 x 100 x 160 cm and 58 x 100 x 169 ible into twenty-four thumbs ( ) of 31.54 mm 135 each.127 The _or (masonry course)128 is another unit cm. of length, 7.5 zir¸{ (5.68 m),129 used by the builders The foundation of the Süleymaniye Mosque, 5.9 m araba high, rises atop three firestone courses, 2 m high in to measure the length of stone courses. The , or 136 oxcart, is a unit of cubic measure that refers to an total; on average, each course is 66 cm high. Kavak ¥amil firestone was cut from parent rock in two sizes: either oxcart load, while the (burden) refers to a two- _alæb-æ k çek zir¸{ pannier load on a packhorse. as ü (small blocks) 1 x 1.5 (75 x 113 cm), tooled for 20 akçe; or as _alæb-æ kebºr (large blocks) 1.5 x 2.5 zir¸{ (113 x 189 cm), tooled for 60 akçe.137 1. Black stone (karata×, seng-i siy¸h) The third dimension was left open. Tooling was to be Karata× or seng-i siy¸h, a type of black, calcareous stone, perfect so as to be approved by the chief architect. was used for the foundation blocks, which were placed Kadæköy firestone, notable for its red, yellow, and atop compacted soil. It was acquired both from the gray mineral deposits, was quarried from the ancient ruins of the Old Palace and from the foundation exca- Kadæköy firestone quarry, whose location is unknown vation of a mosque situated on the rock of the third today. The quarries that met the demand for fire- hill of Istanbul, thereby avoiding costly transporta- stone in the furnaces and foundations of imperial tion expenses. In addition, on September 27, 1550, and military buildings in Istanbul—foundries, palaces, during the foundation excavation of the hammam of kitchens, and hammams138—also provided the Süley- the Edirne Palace, an ancient edifice was unearthed, maniye with its early blocks of firestone. Stone called and an immense amount of karata× from its founda- seng-i ^arye-i ^¸¤æ (Kadæköy stone) and seng-i temel der

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 258 10/20/2006 11:43:57 AM . ottoman stone acquisition: the süleymaniye complex 259 ^arye-i K¸¤æ (foundation stone from Kadæköy) in the Kiriz Nikola),150 who is identified in one of the doc- registers was first dispatched on January 30, 1550, and uments as ist¸de (probably üstad, master),151 was an again, after the quarry had been enlarged, on Octo- architect who, as an assistant of Sinan, was assigned ber 6, 1550. About 2,700 blocks were ready for dis- to choose the appropriate stone for construction in patch on January 19, 1551.139 The shipments contin- the vicinity of Nicomedia, Mihaliç, ~znikmid, and ued until May 23, 1553.140 Aydæncæk. The firestone he had gathered was in gigan- The location of the Ereqli firestone quarry is tic blocks of two sizes:152 5 zir¸{ and 20 thumbs x 4 unknown today. According to the available registers, zir¸{ and 4 thumbs x 3 zir¸{ and 4 thumbs (438 x 315 its operations started on March 5, 1550; on May 8, x 240 cm), or 13 zir¸{ and 10 thumbs x 7 zir¸{ x 6 1550 the wooden structure at the foot of the quarry zir¸{ and 20 thumbs (1015 x 529 x 517 cm), the lat- was constructed with four pile drivers sent from Istan- ter being the largest block used in the construction bul, and labor and supplies were sent from June 6 to (fig. 2, A).153 Nikola’s blocks were shipped to Istan- July 16, 1550.141 Thus, after June 6, 1550, quarrying bul and carted to the construction site between Jan- and collection in the ruins of Perinthos were under- uary 20 and March 22, 1554.154 way. In June 1550, 1000 akçe were given by the kadi of Çorlu through the paymaster Hayrüddin to cart 3. Limestone (küfeki) quarried blocks to the foot.142 By February 21, 1552, eighty-three blocks of marble 1 to 3 zir¸{ x 1 to 3.5 Küfeki, or Bakærköy mactra (mollusk-shell) limestone, zir¸{ x 4 thumbs to 1 zir¸{ (75–265 x 75–265 x 12–75 the main building material of the Süleymaniye, varies cm), a shipload of firestone, three shiploads of col- in color from cream to gray and is used in various umns, and course stones (ar×un ta×laræ) had been sent parts of the building—walls, piers, buttresses, columns, to Istanbul.143 arches, pendentives, domes, finials, roof tiles, facings, The Kavak firestone quarry, called Kavak ~skelesinde veneers, pavements, steps, balustrades, window frames, od ta×æ k¸rhengi (firestone quarry in the Kavak quay) in jambs, and sills—as well as in the foundation.155 The the registers, was in Karamürsel.144 Its underground limestone used in the foundation was a kind of rubble galleries being operational until 1975, it is the only and therefore called p¸reh¸-yi seng-i bey¸z ber¸y-i temel one among the thirty ancient quarries in the Marmara (white stone pieces for the foundation).156 According region to have remained in continuous use since the to the registers, limestone was mainly quarried from Roman era.145 Kavak firestone is called seng-i Kavak the state limestone quarry at Haznedar (seng-i küfeki (Kavak stone), seng-i ¸te× {an Kavak (firestone from k¸rheng-i mºrº, karheng-i mºrº der _urb-æ _arye-i Ýazºned¸r) Kavak), and seng-i ¸te× {an iskele-i Kavak (firestone from that stretched from the farm of Mehmed Pasha in the Kavak quay) and can measure from 2 zir¸{ and 12 Davudpa×a to the farm of Lütfi Pasha in Haznedar.157 thumbs x 1 zir¸{ and 16 thumbs x 20 thumbs (190 x However, a small amount of limestone was also gath- 126 x 63 cm) to 3 zir¸{ x 1 zir¸{ and 11 thumbs x 18 ered from Perinthos, the Old Palace, and Edirne thumbs (227 x 110 x 57 cm).146 Extraction was ini- Palace. Extant since the Roman era, the Haznedar tiated in March 1550, continuing from March 29 to quarries are now covered by residential areas and are December 15, 1550; on February 8, 1551, and June no longer in use. Judging by both the soil profile of 7, 1553, laborers summoned from all over the empire Haznedar and the mounds formed by pit excavations, were dispatched to Kavak.147 In order to cart the visible until 1955,158 the limestone was quarried from blocks to the foot of the quarry, the quarry was pro- a depth of 6.5 m in order to obtain large, high-quality vided with 100 oxcarts on June 15, 1550 and with 2000 building stone without cracks. After quarrying (_a« akçe to rent oxen on January 28, 1551.148 According kerden), initiated on March 12, 1550, and preliminary to the registers, the Kavak firestone was shipped to dressing (Ò¸mtæra¸s kerden), the blocks were carted to Istanbul between May 17, 1553 and March 29, 1554 the construction site between December 30, 1553 and and carted to the construction site from January 27 April 12, 1554, for the subsequent phases of finer to May 17, 1554.149 dressing (tær¸sºden), laying (bin¸ kerden), and smoothing Among the documents there is a category of fire- and polishing (perdaÒt kerden), which took place from stone called seng-i ¸te× {an yed-i Körez Nikola (firestone March 17 to May 17, 1554.159 Some unfinished mold- bought by Körez Nikola). Körez Nikola (also known as ings on the facades give clues about the final tooling.

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 259 10/20/2006 11:43:57 AM . . . 260 ilknur aktuÅ kolay and serpil çelik Specified by the chief architect’s wooden templates,160 blocks were purchased between July 28 and August the blocks (see fig. 2) were hewn into nearly finished, 3, 1554.168 pre-shaped form (_alæb) at the quarry’s mason yards to Blocks of seng-i ç¸p (possibly stone dressed to a spe- avoid both unnecessary weight in transportation and cific dimension) totalling 417 zir¸{ (315.6 m) in length wasted space on the construction site, as had been were purchased from eighteen private stone ateliers customary since Roman times. The quarry was used between July 28 and August 3, 1554.169 for the second time on January 29, 1558, to provide Seng-i zir¸{ designates a block of ashlar course stone stone for the construction of the third and fourth defined by the zir¸{ unit. (During collecting and setting, madrasas; the only stone dispatched between August however, builders used _or instead of zir¸{.) Accord- 14 and 19, 1558 was seng-i helik, rubble stone.161 ing to the survey, these ashlar blocks are 42 to 190 Throughout the registers, limestone blocks are clas- cm long, 19 to 43 cm wide, and 29 to 63 cm high. sified as seng-i büzürg or derg¸h (free stone), seng-i _alæb The longest block, with a length of 244 cm, is in the (stone of large dimension), seng-i ç¸p, seng-i zir¸{ (ashlar south courtyard wall. After the blocks were removed course stone), seng-i helik (rubble stone), kemer tabanæ from the quarry between March 17 and May 17, 1554, (impost),162 seng-i pehl¢ (jamb stone), seng-i Òarpü×te additional blocks with a combined length of 2538 (capstone), seng-i min¸re (minaret stone), seng-i _aldæræm zir¸{ (1.9 km) were purchased between July 28 and (pavement stone), dö×eme-i yufka (thin pavement), and August 3, 1554.170 seng-i _apa_ (sewer-cover stone). While seng-i zir¸{, Seng-i helik (wet mortar stone)171 is rubble lime- seng-i helik, and seng-i _aldæræm were for the most part stone, a by-product obtained during quarrying. It was provided by the state quarry at Haznedar from July 28 used together with horasan mortar mix in the cores to August 3, 1554, blocks for sewer covers, minarets, of walls, confined between the two facings formed by and capstones were purchased in accordance with the course stone, seng-i zir¸{.172 In rubble walls, stone used chief architect’s templates and valorizations, and extra- for facing was cut to larger dimensions. For instance, dimension stone, jambs, ashlar course blocks, and pav- the only stone dispatched from the state quarry to ing stones were purchased by the contractors.163 In the third and fourth madrasas was seng-i helik, used terms of its shape and size, limestone was defined by with gallets (stone flakes used for filling the spaces piece (_æ«{a), length (zir¸{ and _or), and cubic mea- in the rubble core) in their body walls.173 According sure (araba or {acele and ¥amil or yük).164 to the survey, the facing stones are a maximum 50 Seng-i büzürg or derg¸h, approximately 5 zir¸{ (3.78 cm long, 20 to 23 cm wide, and 17 cm high. The dis- m) long, is freestone that was easily worked in each patch lasted from March 17 to April 26, 1554, and direction to extract an appropriate block of seng-i from August 14 to 19, 1557, and was accompanied _alæb.165 Voussoirs and blocks for the dome and pen- by fine sand (riyg), lime (kireç, gec), brick (tuqla), tile dentives were extracted from the seng-i büzürg in the (kiremid), and coal (engi×t) needed to construct lay- mason yards of the construction site. However, two ered brick-and-rubble walls.174 Because of its mass, large limestone voussoirs (kemer-i büzürg) were pro- seng-i helik was specified in units of cubic measure- cured from Cyzicus on August 26, 1550, along with ment such as araba and ¥amil. fourteen derg¸hs measuring 2 zir¸{ and 13 thumbs x 3 The seng-i Òarpü×te is the capstone block. According zir¸{ (192 x 227 cm) or 1 zir¸{ and 13 thumbs x 3 zir¸{ to the survey, in both the forecourt and the courtyard (116 x 227 cm); thirteen seng-i büzürgs measuring 6 of the mosque the capstone blocks are 28 to 120 cm zir¸{ x 2 zir¸{ x 15 thumbs (454 x 150 x 47 cm); and long, 89 cm or 98 cm wide, and 43 cm high. In one four large, square bases (kürsº-i büzürg çæh¸r kö×e).166 register, the width given for a certain block is 1 zir¸{ Like Kavak firestone, seng-i _alæb (large-dimension and 4 thumbs (88 cm, according to the standard cal- stone), was 1 zir¸{ wide and 18 thumbs thick (75 x 56 culation).175 This measurement must correspond to cm), with a length of 2 to 7.5 zir¸{ (151–568 cm).167 the width (98 cm) of the wider blocks, which would According to a comprehensive survey of the present have been cut down to make the narrower ones. Thus 4 intact structures of the complex, seng-i _alæp measur- (dividing 98 by 1 /24), the length of the zir¸{ in August ing 63 x 100 x 150 cm and 61 x 75 x 260 cm are the 1554 must have been approximately 84 cm. However, largest limestone blocks of the Süleymaniye; they were no other register allows a precise cross-check of this used for the main piers of the mosque. Thirty-three measurement. Dressed according to the specifications blocks plus six oxcarts of seng-i _alæb were quarried of a template produced in the quarry and dispatched between March 17 and May 17, 1554, while ninety-one to the construction site between March 17 and 22,

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 260 10/20/2006 11:43:58 AM . ottoman stone acquisition: the süleymaniye complex 261 1554, 144 capstones were paid for by piece (_æ«{a) of the ancient city of Cyzicus, on the southern shore between July 28 and August 3, 1554.176 of the Propontis (Marmara Sea), it was not quarried. Judging by the accounts of the Aynalækavak Kiosk, Within easy reach of the sea, Cyzicus was covered with the Ayazma Mosque, the Sultan Ahmed complex, monumental Roman edifices built of marble quarried and Sinan’s templates and valorizations in the regis- from the island of Proconnesus (modern Marmara ters of the Süleymaniye, the seng-i pehl¢ (side stone) Adasæ). No register refers to the use of any quarries is a flat, linear block used for window frames, door on Proconnesus for providing marble to the Süley- jambs, and pavements.177 The dimensions given in the maniye.185 Instead of quarrying, the Ottomans followed Sü leymaniye registers indicate that these stones were 1 the Byzantine practice outstandingly demonstrated in to 3 zir¸{ (75–227 cm) in length, 1 to 2 zir¸{ (75–151 the Hagia Sophia, simply collecting the Proconnesian cm) in width, and 4 to 8 thumbs (12.6–25.2 cm) in marble of Cyzicus.186 This practice was abandoned by thickness—dimensions compatible with those of the the time the Sultan Ahmed complex was being built; frames and jambs of the complex (fig. 2). In the case its marble was quarried from Proconnesus.187 of Cyzicus, a marble jamb is called söve (jamb) rather Cyzicus, a Mysian colony flourishing at the turn of than pehl¢, which is used for limestone jambs. Twenty- the seventh century BC, is south of Artakion (Erdek). one blocks of pehl¢ were carted from the quarry to In the registers, it is called Aydæncæk (modern Edincik). the construction site from March 17 to May 17, 1554, Its Tema×alæk district houses the ruins of the Hadrian while 139 blocks were purchased between July 28 and temple recorded in the late Roman period as one August 3, 1554, in accordance with the chief archi- of the Seven Wonders of the World.188 In 1431, the tect’s templates and valorizations.178 Italian antiquarian and traveler Cyriacus of Ancona The seng-i min¸re, 2 zir¸{ long and 16 thumbs high depicted the temple as having thirty-three mono- (150 x 50 cm), is the step-block of the spiral stairs in lithic columns; by 1444, there remained only twenty- the minarets.179 Like the superimposed drums of a col- nine, measuring 2.66 m in diameter and 21.35 m in umn, the newels of the minaret stairs were formed by height.189 Today, only the foundation and a column the projections of these steps.180 Like the seng-i zir¸{, drum remain in situ. the seng-i min¸re was specified in zir¸{. According to In the registers, Proconnesian marble gathered from two templates designed by the chief architect for the Cyzicus is called mermer-i Aydæncæk (Aydæncæk marble) two types of minarets in the complex, the blocks were and seng-i mermer-i Aydæncæk (Aydæncæk marble stone). carted from the quarry between March 24 and May 17, According to the documents, from April 4, 1550 to 1554 and dressed on the construction site.181 February 11, 1554, in order to obtain columns, jambs, The seng-i _aldæræm, a limestone pavement block, and pavements, 30,000 akçe plus labor and supplies was procured mainly from the state quarry in Istan- were dispatched to Tema×alæk.190 The first order, dated bul from May 12 to 17, 1554, and paid for between July 15, 1550, requested the collection of thirty jambs, March 4 and 9, 1559;182 like seng-i helik, it was defined 250 large voussoirs, and 600 small voussoirs. The sec- by araba due to its shape. In addition, some thin lime- ond order, dated three years later—July 13, 1553— stone slabs, dö×eme-i yufka, had already been collected requested columns, pavements, and jambs.191 These from Cyzicus on August 26, 1550.183 are recorded as having been shipped to Istanbul from Multiple seng-i _apa_, or sewer-cover blocks, with a June 28 to November 24, 1550 and from January 20 combined length of 383.5 zir¸{ (290.3 m) were pur- to July 7, 1554 and carted to the construction site chased between July 28 and August 3, 1554.184 It between January 27 and May 17, 1554.192 They were should be noted, however, that seng-i _apa_, in ref- used mainly for the interior elements of the mosque erence to Proconnesian marble, designates latrine and included capitals, bases, voussoirs, balustrades, blocks, which sit directly over the sewers as do the jambs, window frames, steps, facings, veneers, and limestone sewer covers. pavements. Astonishingly, no column was dispatched from Cyzicus. 4. Proconnesian Marble Cyzicus Proconnesian marble blocks and architec- tural elements are classified in the registers as süt¢n Proconnesian marble, the third main building stone or direk (column, shaft), ser-süt¢n or direk ba×æ (capital), of the Süleymaniye, was gathered from April 4, 1550 kürsº (base), kemer or mermer-i kemer (marble voussoir), to July 25, 1555. Due to the abundant marble supply kemer-i küçek (small voussoir), kemer-i vasa« (medium

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 261 10/20/2006 11:43:58 AM . . . 262 ilknur aktuÅ kolay and serpil çelik voussoir), kemer-i büzürg (large voussoir), kemer-i Òurde forecourt and in the courtyard of the hospice. The (damaged or unfinished voussoir), dö×eme (pavement), kemer-i küçek, or small voussoir, 23 x 23 x 37 or 45 cm, dö×eme-i büzürg (large pavement), dö×eme-i cedºd (new was used in the mosque galleries. The kemer-i büzürg, or pavement), _ademe (step block), _or (course block), large voussoir, 40 x 75 x 150 cm, was used for the lat- e×ik (sill), söve or mermer-i Aydæncæk söve (Aydæncæk mar- eral arches inside the mosque. On December 9, 1551, ble jamb), söve-i küçek (small jamb), söve-i büzürg (large thirty-eight medium voussoirs were shipped to Istan- jamb), söveh¸-yi küçek ma{a e×ik (small jambs with sill), bul. On January 29, 1554, forty large, forty small, and söveh¸-yi büzürk ma{a e×ik (large jambs with sill), söveh¸- twenty-one medium voussoirs were shipped; twenty- yi Òurde ber¸y-i pencereh¸-yi fevk¸ni (damaged jambs for three large and 381 medium ones followed between upper story windows), derg¸h (freestone), p¸re mermer March 17 and 24, 1554. Between June 23 and July 7, (marble fragment), and küçek p¸re mermer (small mar- 1554, nineteen large, three small (for the mosque), ble fragment). In addition, some are classified as and twenty-six hospice voussoirs were shipped. Seventy- kürsº-i t¸bÒ¸ne (hospice base), kemer-i t¸bÒ¸ne (hospice four large and thirty-one small voussoirs were shipped voussoir), söve-i c¸mi{-i ×erºf (mosque jamb), söveh¸- on November 23 and 24, 1554.201 These were then yi pencereh¸-yi c¸mi{-i ×erºf (mosque window frames), carted to the construction site.202 e×ik-i c¸mi{-i ×erºf (mosque sill), and söveh¸-yi e×ik-i pen- The word söve designates collectively such window cere-i c¸mi{-i ×erºf (mosque window frame sill). components as e×ik (sill) and söve (jamb).203 Söve-i Òurde Süt¢n or direk is literally “column” or “shaft.” How- (unfinished or damaged jamb), was used to make the ever, although there was a request order, no register smaller upper-story window frames of the mosque.204 mentions a column transported from Cyzicus. There- On June 28, 1550, two sills were shipped to Istanbul. fore, a widespread gathering task was pursued else- From January 20 to 25, 1554 some thirty-six jambs were where. In 1540, the seventeen columns of the Peripatos shipped; from March 3 to 17, 1554, eighteen large, of the Sphendone in the Hippodrome were collected;193 ten medium, and fourteen small jambs with sills, plus between March 5, 1550 and February 21, 1552 three thirty upper-story window frames with eight sills, were shiploads of columns were gathered from Perinthos shipped. Between March 17 and 24, 1554, 246 medium and Viza.194 Columns from Thessaloniki, sent between jambs were shipped; between June 23 and July 7, 1554, November 24, 1552 and March 12, 1553, included two two jambs with sixteen sills and three mosque window columns 3 zir¸{ (2.2 m) in height and five columns frames with twenty-three sills were shipped and then 6 zir¸{ (4.5 m) in height.195 Before May 7, 1552 six- carted to the construction site.205 teen columns from St. Irene in Istanbul, including at Dö×eme, or pavement, is classified in the registers least two large columns that were most likely reused as dö×eme-i büzürg (large pavement) and dö×eme-i cedºd in the north portico of the mosque, were gathered.196 (new pavement). Nine paving stones on June 28, 1550, In 1553, the columns of the St. Euphemia in Chalce- some twenty-two from May 12 to 17, 1554, and fifty- don,197 the second-largest church in the empire after four from June 23 to July 7, 1554 were shipped to the Hagia Sophia, were removed. Istanbul and then carted to the construction site.206 The ser-süt¢n or direk ba×æ (capital block), usually In addition, from July 27, 1551 to February 21, 1552, 1 zir¸{ x 16 thumbs x 16 thumbs (75 x 50 x 50 cm), eighty-three pavements were collected from Viza and was generally extracted from derg¸hs (see below) in Perinthos;207 from June to September 27, 1550, twenty- the mason yards of the construction site, except for seven were obtained from Adrianople;208 on January two taken from Cyzicus on January 29, 1554.198 3, 1553, thirty were collected from Mytilene;209 and The kürsº is the column base block. Fourteen such on May 15, 1552, some were gathered from the St. blocks, of which eleven were used for the hospice, Irene.210 arrived at the construction site between May 12 and Fifty-four _ademe, or step blocks, arrived at the con- 17, 1554.199 struction site between March 24 and May 17, 1554.211 The kemer or mermer-i kemer—literally voussoir—was In addition, the steps of the Hippodrome must have cut to sizes specified by the templates of the chief been removed when its columns were collected. architect as 4 zir¸{ x 11 thumbs x 8 thumbs (300 x ^or in the registers refers to blocks of ashlar course 35 x 25 cm) in Aydæncæk.200 According to the sur- stone. Between March 24 and May 17, 1554, approxi- vey, these dimensions refer to the kemer-i vasa«, or mately thirty-six blocks were brought to the construc- medium voussoir, 23 x 35 x 100 cm, used in the mosque tion site.212 In addition, on March 5, 1550 four ship-

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 262 10/20/2006 11:43:59 AM . ottoman stone acquisition: the süleymaniye complex 263 loads of these blocks were removed from Perinthos;213 Mihaliç kemer (voussoirs of Mihaliç marble) are further in June 1550, 200 blocks were taken from Adriano- classified by size: seng-i mermer-i Mihaliç kemer-i küçek, ple;214 and between May 8 and July 2, 1550, twenty- seng-i mermer-i Mihaliç kemer-i vasa«, or seng-i mermer-i eight blocks were collected from Nicomedia.215 Mihaliç kemer-i büzürg (respectively, small, medium, or The derg¸h, like the seng-i büzürg in Haznedar lime- large voussoir of Mihaliç marble). stone, is a gigantic, multipurpose stone. From May 12 Seng-i mermer-i Mihaliç kemer-i büzürg measuring 2 zir¸{ to 18, 1554, some twenty-two derg¸hs in four sizes—3 and 2 thumbs (156 cm) in length was used, according zir¸{ x 2 zir¸{ and 13 thumbs (227 x 192 cm); 3 zir¸{ x to the survey, for the lateral mosque arches measuring 1 zir¸{ and 13 thumbs (227 x 116 cm); 6 zir¸{ and 15 35 to 40 x 75 x 150 cm. On April 12, 1552, 468 large thumbs x zir¸{ nºm (half a zir¸{) (501 x 37 cm); and voussoirs were dispatched to Istanbul; from March 17 zir¸{ zir¸{ 6 x 2 x 15 thumbs (454 x 150 x 47 cm)— to 22, 1554, thirty-three more followed, and from May were brought to the construction site. On December 7 to 12, 1554, twenty-four more were sent.221 9, 1551, two blocks were dispatched from Cyzicus, Seng-i mermer-i Mihaliç kemer-i küçek measuring 18 and on January 29, 1554, twenty-five more blocks fol- thumbs (56 cm) in length was used in the mosque lowed; they were shipped to the stonecutting plant galleries in 23 x 23 x 45 cm pieces. On April 12, 1552, in ~zmit, which is described in detail by the German 387 small voussoirs were dispatched to Istanbul, fol- traveler Hans Dernschwam, who was there on March lowed by seventy-three between January 27 and Feb- 13, 1555. Along with the blocks collected from the ruary 2, 1554.222 derg¸h ruins of Nicomedia, these s were either sliced Seng-i mermer-i Mihaliç kemer-i vasa« measuring 1 zir¸{ into slabs for use as veneers, facings, pavements, and and 8 thumbs (100 cm) in length was used in 23 x 30 balustrades, or cut into blocks to make sills, steps, x 100 cm pieces in the mosque forecourt and the hos- 216 and capitals. pice courtyard. On April 12, 1552, 580 medium vous- In addition, the marble plates inscribed with Emperor soirs were dispatched to Istanbul; between January 27 Manuel I’s conciliar edict of 1166 were removed from and February 2, 1554, twenty-six more followed.223 the Hagia Sophia Mosque and used in the ceiling pan- Söve (window frame and jamb) were used in the els of the entrance to Sultan Süleyman’s tomb.217 twelve windows on the qibla wall. The window speci- söve Hereke conglomerate fications called for forty s (vertical elements) and 5. forty e×iks (horizontal elements) to be taken from In the registers, red Hereke conglomerate is called Mihaliç.224 According to the survey, the vertical ele- seng-i Mihaliç (Mihaliç stone), mermer-i Mihaliç (Mihaliç ments on the qibla window are 33 cm long, 24 cm marble), or seng-i mermer-i Mihaliç (Mihaliç marble wide, and 2.80 m high, and the horizontal elements stone), simply because it came from Mihaliç (modern are 2.15 m long, 24 cm wide, and 33 cm high. The Karacabey, west of Bursa), where the ancient cities of remainders of the collected elements were cut and Miletopolis and Lopadion had once stood. No quarry used for the borders of the forecourt floor. Some in Mihaliç provides appropriate building stone, how- chips, rectangular and hexagonal in shape, were used ever;218 the conglomerate quarries are located in to fill the hoisting holes of the Proconnesian marble nearby Hereke.219 Collected between April 12, 1552 floor slabs of the forecourt. and May 12, 1554, this stone was the only material The dö×eme, or pavement, consists of decorative floor used for the voussoirs of the mosque and the courtyard slabs. On April 12, 1552, eight slabs measuring 1 zir¸{ of the hospice; it was also used for the pavement of to 2 zir¸{ and nineteen thumbs (75–210 cm) by 1 zir¸{ the mosque forecourt and the window frames of the and 1 to 15 thumbs (78–122 cm) were shipped from qibla wall. The only columns of Hereke conglomerate, Mihaliç.225 They were used in the mosque forecourt, a pair 36 cm in diameter and 2.56 m tall, stand in as twenty floor plates of 50 to 102 x 146 to 202 cm, front of the entrance of the sultan’s tomb, although and as floor borders 25, 34, and 38 cm in width. Left- according to the registers no columns were removed over pieces of dö×eme were also used to fill the rectan- from Mihaliç. gular or hexagonal hoisting holes on the pavement The Hereke conglomerate procured from Mihaliç slabs. The southwestern corner of the forecourt lacks is also called _æzæl kemer ta×æ,220 or red voussoir stone, the slabs, voussoirs, and large Proconnesian marble since it was mainly used for voussoirs. Sengha-i mermer-i blocks.226

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 263 10/20/2006 11:43:59 AM . . . 264 ilknur aktuÅ kolay and serpil çelik 6. Aswan granite and rosso antico porphyry Said or Satæ, who double-checked the columns in Alex- andria before constructing the barge.236 Constructed Red Aswan granite (a_lu siy¸hlu serçe gözi, ªoma_º)—an in a very short time, the barge set sail for Alexandria eruptive rock consisting mainly of quartz and feldspar on June 9, 1552.237 The records related to the load- and usually containing hornblende or mica with large ing equipment that was stored in Alexandria after the orthoclase crystals 7.5 or 10 cm in diameter—and rosso columns had been transferred onto the barge show antico porphyry (serçe gözi or kæzæl serçe gözi)—porphyritic that the shipment was already on its way by August diorite—come from the quarries of Mons Claudianus 30, 1552.238 The columns arrived at the seaport of and Mons Porphyreticus (the Dokhan Mountains in Unkapanæ in Istanbul on November 19, 1552 and, Upper Egypt, near ancient Syene).227 According to according to Evliya Çelebi, were dragged to the con- Mustafa b. Celâl, the four main Aswan granite columns struction site via Vefa Square, up a steep slope.239 In of the Süleymaniye, 1.20 to 1.26 m in diameter and terms of their almost identical size, the southeastern 9.10 m tall, were gathered from various ancient sites in column, with a diameter of 1.229 m, and the north- Constantinople and Alexandria. Evliya Çelebi reports western column, measuring 1.238 m, are most likely that each one cost ten times the Egyptian Treasure 228 the pair removed from Alexandria. (i.e., the sultan’s annual income from Egypt). The fourth, northeastern, column is the thinnest of Erected by Emperor Justin II (r. 565–78) and topped 229 all, with a diameter of 1.203 m. Sinan records that it with a sculpture of Aphrodite, the Kæzta×æ, or Vir- was already on hand at the Saray-æ {Amire, the store- gin’s Column, situated on the fifth hill of Istanbul house of the Topkapæ Palace.240 It was probably used about 800 m to the northwest of the Holy Apos- in place of a column ordered from Baalbek, the last 230 tles church and, by the mid-sixteenth century, in column for the mosque to be delivered, which had the yard of a house, was moved to the Süleymaniye been intended as one of the four main columns. 231 between April 1, 1551 and December 30, 1551. In Distinguished by their huge diameters, the two addition to the Virgin’s Column, some of the por- columns at opposite ends of the north portico must 232 phyry columns buried in the yard of the Fatih com- be the “two”241 red granite columns recorded as hav- plex, where the Holy Apostles Church had once stood, ing been taken from the temple of Jupiter at Baal- may also have been gathered. (Since the removal of bek, one of the most stone-giving temples in history. the original Virgin’s Column, the Column of Marcia- Costing tremendous labor between July 18, 1552 and nus located in the same area has been called Kæzta×æ.) May 17, 1553, as well as the loss of an architect’s life, According to Tezkiretü’l-büny¸n, with the sultan’s per- these were shipped between November 7 and Decem- mission the Virgin’s Column was shortened to match ber 9, 1553.242 Considering that six three-drum col- the other three main columns of the mosque.233 Due umns approximately 2 m in diameter and 20 m tall to its larger diameter, 1.269 m at the bottom, it is easy remain in situ at the temple,243 it can be surmised to tell that it is the southwestern column; furthermore that just two drums of one column were removed. its greater top diameter makes the column incompat- Four yokes of oxen dragged the column, or rather ible with its capital, which matches the dimensions of two of its drums, on about 160 wooden rollers from the other three. the Eminönü seaport to the construction site between According to the registers and Mustafa b. Celâl, January 27 and February 1, 1554.244 The column, or two of the four main columns, each 2 ar×un (1.5 m) drum pair, was very late in arriving, however; the lat- in diameter and 17 ar×un (12.87 m) tall, were brought eral arches resting on the four main columns had from Alexandria between September 14, 1550 and already been erected when it was delivered.245 The August 30, 1552.234 Four columns, of which two later drums were presumably transformed into the north sank, were requested on September 14, 1550. Their portico end columns, which are thick (1.12 and 1.14 removal called for piercing a hole in the Alexandrian m in diameter) but short (4.25 m tall). city wall so that they might be dragged to the quay.235 Also in the north portico, flanking the main entrance On February 30, 1552, after acknowledging that there to the mosque, sits a pair of Aswan granite columns were just two columns remaining in Alexandria, the (87.8 cm and 88.4 cm in diameter and 6.2 m tall), imperial council ordered that a custom-made barge each cut to eliminate damaged ends and topped with be constructed in the Galata shipyard, the most tech- a drum 70 cm in height. Even though not monolithic, nically developed naval base, under a captain named these two columns were, in terms of their prominent

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 264 10/20/2006 11:44:00 AM . ottoman stone acquisition: the süleymaniye complex 265 position, most likely gathered from Ashkelon246 in the The Egyptian slabs were collected in Alexandria and aftermath of the imperial council’s correspondence of procured from the imperial building-material store- February 15, 1553. A second pair of columns in the house there, part of a lot of precious stone that had north portico is monolithic and constitutes the sec- been collected throughout the Egyptian dominions ond-largest red Aswan granite pair of the Süleymaniye before 1547, during the tenure of the beqlerbeqi (gov- (85.9 and 89.7 cm in diameter and 6.2 m tall). These ernor-general) of Egypt, Davud Pasha.255 One hun- two columns, recorded as 8 and 9 zir¸{ (6.05 and 6.81 dred ten chests and seventy-one bundles of precious m) tall, correspond to the ones taken from a church Egyptian stone, including four discs, twenty slabs, and ruin at Bozburun after July 19, 1553.247 eleven small and fifteen large blocks of red Aswan gran- The medium-sized Aswan granite columns of the ite and Egyptian porphyry, were dispatched to Istan- mosque forecourt (64 and 68 cm in diameter and 4.25 bul. In addition to the Egyptian shipments, between m tall) were either brought after January 11, 1551 1550 and 1551 a sarcophagus from Mudanya serving from Silifke, from which columns of 1 zir¸{ (75.7 cm) as a fountain reservoir (1.26 x 2.46 m, with a lid 1.50 diameter and 7 zir¸{ (5.29 m) height are recorded to x 2.77 m) was dispatched;256 on April 6, 1552, a pair have been taken, or between November 24, 1552 and of discs from Mihaliç (1.766 m in diameter and 12.6 March 12, 1553 from Sidrekapsi, 40 km east of Thes- cm thick) was sent;257 on May 15, 1552, the pavements saloniki, from which were taken columns recorded of the St. Irene were taken;258 on December 14, 1553, as 21 thumbs (66 cm) in diameter and 7.5 zir¸{ (5.67 one floor disc was removed from the Hayrüddin Pasha m) in height.248 mosque at Nicea;259 and finally, on January 11, 1556, Of the small Aswan granite columns (29 to 38 the 41 zir¸{ (31 sq. m) pavements from the Mahmud cm in diameter and 2.34 to 2.64 m tall) used in the Pasha complex in Istanbul260 were taken. mosque, six are in the side galleries, one under the The only pair of large floor discs (×emse) in the royal tribune, and two in the outer minaret cano- Süleymaniye (3.12 m and 2.65 m in diameter) is of pies. There are also four more (37 cm in diameter Egyptian rosso antico porphyry and is used in the geo- and 1.87 m tall) in the courtyards of the third and metric floor pattern of the main entrances of the fourth madrasas. mosque and its forecourt. These discs were most likely The Egyptian rosso antico porphyry columns of the procured from any of the places mentioned above Süleymaniye stand at the main entrances of both the excepting Mihaliç and Mudanya. mosque forecourt (a pair, 80 cm in diameter and 5.90 The sole pair of large floor slabs (1.24 x 2.08 m, m tall) and the courtyard of the hospice (another pair, and 1.41 x 2.38 m) is again in Egyptian red porphyry 53 cm in diameter and 3.62 m tall) as well as under and is used at the side entrances of the forecourt.261 the royal tribune (a third pair, 38 cm in diameter Their sizes suggest that the two slabs were parts of and 2.34 m tall). According to the survey, porphyry the sarcophagus taken from Mudanya. column fragments were sliced into roundels approx- imately 1.5 cm thick and inlaid in the Proconnesian 7. Kestanbol Granite marble facades and floors. The registers investigated heretofore show that small Ezine, 13 km east of Eski ~stanbulluk, is on a pink q q q 262 granite and porphyry columns 8 and 9 zir¸{ (6.05 m granite mountain, Ezine Da æ (modern Çæ ræ Da æ). and 6.81 m) tall were gathered from Bozburun after According to the registers, the pink Ezine granite col- zir¸{ umns used in the Süleymaniye were gathered from the January 11, 1551; others about 1 (75.7 cm) in q k¸rÒ¸nesi diameter and 5.5 to 7 zir¸{ (4.16–5.29 m) tall came ancient quarry on the mountain, Ezine Da æ from Silifke; and still others about 1 zir¸{ (75.7 cm) (the quarry of Ezine Mountain, modern Yedita×lar in diameter and 6 zir¸{ (4.54 m) tall were collected quarry), taking advantage of the countless abandoned 263 from Selendi.249 Before May 7, 1552, still more col- columns there. Abundantly used in Istanbul and in Eski Istanbul, umns came from Istanbul, having been removed from mermer-i s rÒ-i alaca the churches of St. Irene,250 St. Euphemia,251 and St. this pink Kestanbol granite is called ü s rÒ-i abla_ 264 Peribleptos,252 and also from the Kæssa Khan (1 ar×un (red marble) and ü in the registers. The and 3 thumbs [85 cm] in diameter and 7.5 zir¸{ [5.67 columns, 827 in total, were collected from November 253 24, 1549 to July 5, 1550, and their dispatch continued m] tall) and from Çengelköy (20 thumbs [63 cm] 265 in diameter and 7 zir¸{ [5.29 m] tall).254 until May 26, 1557. Six (62 to 79 cm in diameter

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 265 10/20/2006 11:44:00 AM . . . 266 ilknur aktuÅ kolay and serpil çelik and 4.25 m tall) were used in the forecourt; a pair (26 cm in diameter and 3.62 m tall) in the courtyard of cm in diameter and 1.50 m tall) was employed in the the hospice. upper side galleries and another pair (53 cm in diam- Serpentine breccia was also used in the voussoirs eter and 3.62 m tall) in the iwans of the hospice. A of the forecourt gateway and the Qur}an recitation few were left at the eastern corner of the outer pre- school at the far end of the qibla axis as well as in cinct for future restorations. the forecourt floor and façade borders (25 cm wide) and the floor discs (25 cm in diameter) at the main 8. Armutlu Granite entrance to the mosque. According to the registers, serpentine breccia and Notable for its large specks of dark green and black green porphyry were found in the ruins in Alexan- hornblende, pink Armutlu granite was substituted for dria, Cilicia, and Thessaloniki. Between September q Other Stone Kapæda granite (see 10. , below) because 14, 1550 and March 4, 1551, a pair of slabs and some 266 of its proximity. On January 3, 1553, a black-and- columns were sent from Alexandria; between January siy¸hla a_ benek benek white speckled, polished column ( 11, 1551 and October 19, 1552, ten columns from m cell¸ direk ü ) was found in Candarlu (modern Çandarlæ, Silifke and five from Mud almost 1 zir¸{ (75.7 cm) 267 ancient Pitane). The only Armutlu granite column in diameter and 6 zir¸{ (4.54 m) tall were sent. Two in the Süleymaniye, it stands at the western entrance columns, from the village of Isbid and the Meyhane to the forecourt; it measures 64 cm in diameter and Gate in Mud, were gathered between November 24, 4.25 m in height. 1552 and March 12, 1553; collected from Sidrekapsi was a pair of columns 14 thumbs (44 cm) in diameter 9. Serpentine breccia and verd antique porphyry and 4 zir¸{ (3.02 m) tall, along with ten column frag- ments of which five were 5 thumbs (19 cm) in diam- Serpentine breccia (verd antique marble), an altered eter and 2 zir¸{ (1.5 m) tall, and the rest 3 zir¸{ (2.27 rock consisting of a hydrous silicate of magnesia, and m) in diameter and 1.5 zir¸{ (1.13 m) tall.269 Accord- verd antique porphyry (marmor Lacedæmonium viride), ing to the registers and the survey, those column frag- a porphyritic diabase, are from Laconia in southern ments were cut up for the voussoirs,270 borders, and Greece.268 In the Süleymaniye, serpentine breccia was discs. In the case of columns themselves, however, it employed mainly as columns, but, sliced vertically has proved difficult to identify their provenance by or horizontally, it was also used in voussoirs, floor matching register with survey dimensions. discs, floor and facade borders, and the mosaics at the bottom of window cases. Green porphyry columns, 10. Other Stone probably all fragmentary, were gathered and used to make roundels approximately 45 cm in diameter that Some types of stone used in the Süleymaniye are not were inlaid into the Proconnesian marble facing of the mentioned in the registers. Kapædaq granite is found mosque facades. In the registers, although serpentine in a pair of columns (38 cm in diameter and 1.90 m breccia and green porphyry columns are generally tall) in front of the classrooms of the third and fourth called süt¢n-æ sebz or ye×il direk (green column), serpen- madrasas. A column of Vezirhan breccia (42.3 cm in tine breccia alone is called l¸civerd ablaqæ because of its diameter and 2.34 m tall) is situated under the royal large, dark bluish-green crushed gravel component. tribune. Bandærma breccia is used in the forecourt; Twenty-nine serpentine breccia columns were used in five arch voussoirs on the western side, and in the in the complex, including a pair (44 cm in diame- floor borders (38 and 51 cm wide), it is substituted ter and 2.16 m tall) placed before the main gateway for the Hereke conglomerate of Mihaliç. Red argil- of the outer precinct; four (51 cm in diameter and laceous limestone from Gebze is also found in the 2.64 m tall) before the public side entrances of the floor borders of the forecourt and in the mosaics at mosque; fourteen (29 and 38 cm in diameter and the bottom of mosque window cases. Gebze calcare- 2.34 and 2.64 m tall) in the outer lower galleries and ous stone with rudist (bivalve mollusk) fossils, used under the royal tribune, and five (26 cm in diame- since the Roman era, is found in a column (29 cm ter and 1.50 m tall) in the outer upper galleries. In in diameter and 2.34 m tall) in the western inner addition, a pair (36.9 cm in diameter and 2.56 m tall) gallery, in a pair of columns (43.6 cm in diameter stands before the Sultan’s tomb and another pair (53 and 3.42 m tall) at the entrance to the inner colon-

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 266 10/20/2006 11:44:01 AM . ottoman stone acquisition: the süleymaniye complex 267 nade of the Sultan’s tomb, and in the mosaics at the NOTES bottom of mosque window cases. A column (29.6 cm in diameter and 2.34 m tall) of calcareous stone from Authors’ note: The authors are indebted to Gülru Necipoqlu and Gülünbe is in the eastern inner gallery. And finally, Julia Bailey for their constructive comments and invaluable efforts regarding this paper. Ergani calcareous stone constitutes the six columns 1. S¸{º Muª«af¸ Çelebi, Yapælar kitabæ, Tezkiretü’l-bünyan ve Tezkiretü’l- (11.4 cm in diameter and 1.50 m tall) of the gallery ebniye [Treatise on Buildings], trans. H. Develi and S. Rifat at the eastern pier. (Istanbul: Koçbank, 2002): Tezkiretü’l-büny¸n, fol. 10b. For the domes, see Doqan Kuban, “The Style of Sinan’s Domed Structures,” Muqarnas 4 (1987): 72–97, 87, fig. 13. 2. Ömer Lütfi Barkan, Süleymaniye cami ve imareti in×aatæ (1550– CONCLUSION 1557) [Construction of the Süleymaniye Mosque and Imaret (1550–1557)], 2 vols. (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basæmevi, In its sophistication and grandeur, the Süleymaniye 1972 and 1979), vol. 2, doc. no. 16. For Süleyman’s relations with Europe, see Gülru Necipoqlu, “Süleyman the Magnificent complex in Istanbul, a 450-year-old structure, is a vivid and the Representation of Power in the Context of Ottoman- testimony to Ottoman endeavors in architectural sci- Hapsburg-Papal Rivalry,” The Art Bulletin 71, 3 (Sept. 1989): ence and technology. It has proved its technology 401–27. q S leymaniye vakfiyesi through the centuries, meeting the challenge of count- 3. K. E. Kürkçüo lu, ü [The Süleymaniye less disasters, including earthquakes. To guarantee its Endowment Deed] (Ankara, 1962), 22–47. 4. Muª«af¸ b. Cel¸l, Þaba_¸t’ül-mem¸lik ve derec¸t’ül-mes¸lik [Cat- durable structure, architectural engineers and building egories of Countries and Degrees of Professions], Topkapæ craftsmen knew how to choose and use stone as its Palace Museum Library, ms. no. 5997, completed between most significant building material. As imperial archi- 1555 and 1567, fol. 473b. Kostantiniye ve Ayasofya efsaneleri tect-in-chief, Sinan made considerable use of existing 5. Stefanos Yerasimos, [Istan- bul and Hagia Sophia Legends] (Istanbul: ~leti×im Yayænlaræ, building supplies in the Süleymaniye. Not only eternal- 1993), 248. izing Süleyman’s brilliant conquests but also adding 6. John Sanderson, The Travels of John Sanderson in the Levant Roman and Byzantine reminiscences, the Süleymaniye (1584–1602), ed. W. Foster (London: 1931), 70–71. ~stanbul ve Anadolu’ya seyahat g nl q is a tribute to Ottoman architectural practice. 7. Hans Dernschwam, ü ü ü (1553–1555) [Diary of a Voyage to Istanbul and Anatolia In the light of available account books, which pro- (1553–1555)], trans. Ya×ar Önen (Ankara: Kültür Bakanlæq æ, vide a scattered but cumulatively considerable body of 1992), 188. information, the complex allows scholars to explore 8. Gülru Necipoqlu-Kafadar, “The Süleymaniye Complex in the unknowns of architectural science and technol- Istanbul: An Interpretation,” Muqarnas 3 (1985): 92–117. Tezkiret ’l-b ny¸n ogy in the Ottoman period. 9. S¸{º, ü ü , fol. 10a. 10. Ibid. In this study, available archival data together with 11. Kuban, “Sinan’s Domed Structures,” 84; Jale Erzen, “Sinan a comprehensive survey of the Süleymaniye complex as Anti-Classicist,” Muqarnas 5 (1988): 70–86; Gülru Necipo- have revealed aspects of Ottoman stonebuilding prac- qlu, “Challenging the Past: Sinan and the Competitive Dis- Muqarnas tice of the mid-sixteenth century. Emphasis has been course of Early Modern Islamic Architecture,” 10 (1993): 169–80. put on the mosque, since the majority of documents 12. S¸{º, Tezkiretü’l-büny¸n, fol. 3a. concern that part of the complex, where most of the 13. Summary account book of the Süleymaniye, Topkapæ Palace precious stone was utilized. Museum Archive (henceforth TKSM Archive), D. 45/A; Bar- We hope that the tantalizing results of this study, kan, Süleymaniye, vol. 1, 15–30. Tezkiret ’l-b ny¸n reached by synthesizing scattered bits of information 14. S¸{º, ü ü , fol. 12a. 15. A. H. Lybyer, The Government of the Ottoman Empire in the Time in the sources, may encourage further research in of Suleiman the Magnificent (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univer- the field of Ottoman building history. Sinan’s Süley- sity Press, 1913), trans. into Turkish as Kanuni Sultan Süley- maniye remains a marvel of stunning wisdom, contain- man devrinde Osmanlæ ~mparatorluqunun yönetimi, trans. Seçkin q ing invaluable information in its every telltale stone. Cælæzo lu (Istanbul, 1987), 168–69. In 1527–28, the yearly income was 4,028,771 ducats: Omer Lütfi Barkan, “Osmanlæ q ü Istanbul Technical University ~mparatorlu u b tçelerine ait notlar” [Notes Relating to the Budgets of the Ottoman Empire], ~ktisat Fakültesi Mecmuasæ ~stanbul Üniversitesi 15 (1955): 193–224; idem, “The Price Revolution of the Sixteenth Century: A Turning Point in the Economic History of the Near East,” trans. J. McCarthy, Inter- national Journal of Middle East Studies 6 (1957): 3–28, 17. 16. Josef von Hammer-Purgstall, Osmanlæ tarihi [Ottoman His-

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 267 10/20/2006 11:44:01 AM . . . 268 ilknur aktuÅ kolay and serpil çelik

tory], trans. Mehmet Ata (Istanbul, 1991), 95. Part 1: The Stones of Süleymaniye,” and “Part 2: The Furni- 17. Mustafa Cezar, “Osmanlæ devrinde ~stanbul yapælarænda tah- ture and Decoration of Süleymaniye,” International Journal ribat yapan yangænlar ve tabii afetler” [Devastating Fires and of Middle East Studies 14 (1982): 71–86 and 283–313. Natural Disasters of the Ottoman Era That Caused Damage 38. Stefanos Yerasimos, Süleymaniye (Istanbul: Yapæ Kredi Yayæn- to Istanbul Buildings], Türk Sanatæ Tarihi Ara×tærma ve Ince- laræ, 2002). lemeleri 1 (1963): 331. The palace functions moved almost 39. Serpil Çelik, “Mevcut belgeler æ×æqænda Süleymaniye külliye- entirely to the Saray-æ Cedid (New Palace), i.e., the Top- sinin yapæm süreci” [The Construction Process of the Süley- kapæ Palace, an expansion of the Harem: see ~smail Hakkæ maniye Complex in the Light of Available Documents], (PhD Uzunçar×ælæ, Osmanlæ devletinin saray te×kilâtæ [Ottoman Court diss., Istanbul Technical University [ITU], Institute of Science Organization] (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basæmevi, 1988), and Technology, 2001), 93–200. 13; Kürkçüoqlu, Süleymaniye vakfiyesi, 6; Muª«af¸ b. Cel¸l, 40. Ca{fer Çelebi, Ris¸le-i mim¸riyye [Treatise on Architecture], Þaba_¸t’ül-mem¸lik, fol. 470b; S¸{º, Þezkiretü’l-büny¸n, fol. 9a; TKSM Archive, no. 339. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 23. 41. A¥med Efendi, T¸rºÒ-i c¸mi{-i ×erºf-i N¢r-u {Osm¸nº [History of 18. The only expropriation was for the hospital and took place the Nuruosmaniye Mosque], supplement to T¸riÒ-i {Osm¸nº between March 1, 1552 and November 4, 1552: Barkan, Encümeni Mecmu{asæ ~lavesi (Istanbul: Dersaadet, 1918). Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 535–38. 42. Seyyid ~shak, Ayazma camii in×aat defteri [Ayazma Mosque 19. The imperial architect-in-chief Sinan lived next to the Construction Book], TKSM Archive, no. 1137; Prime Minis- Sü leymaniye complex, where he is buried. try Archives, N.E.D.K. II, 5133. 20. H. Favolius, Hedoeporici Byzantini, 5 vols. (Louvain: S. Sas- 43. TKSM Archives, D. 45/A. senus, 1563), vol. 3, 214. 44. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 48, 61. 21. Cevdet Çulpan, “~stanbul Süleymaniye camii kitabesi” [Inscrip- 45. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 35, 54. tions of the Süleymaniye Mosque in Istanbul], in Kanuni 46. Cyril Mango and Ihor ³evõenko, “Some Churches and Mon- Armaqanæ (Ankara, 1970), 291–99, 291. asteries on the Southern Shore of the Sea of Marmara,” 22. S¸{º, Tezkiretü’l-büny¸n, fol. 12a. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 27 (1973): 235–81, 249. 23. 27 Jumada I 957: Muª«af¸ b. Cel¸l, Taba_¸t’ül-mem¸lik, fol. 47. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 13, 23, 33. 420b. 48. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 69. 24. The only paper purchase recorded in the existing documents 49. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 14. were the vara_-æ ~stanbul, folios for drawing, made between 50. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 14–17, 32, 33, 54, 92. July 13, 1555 and September 10, 1558: Barkan, Süleymaniye, 51. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 13, 14, 25, 26, 32–38. vol. 2, doc. nos. 444, 461–63, 465, 467–69. For architectural 52. Ibid. drawings at that time, see Gülru Necipoqlu-Kafadar, “Plans 53. Ibid. and Models in 15th and 16th Century Ottoman Architec- 54. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 77, 108. tural Practice,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 55. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 83, 490–91. 45, 3 (Sept. 1986): 224–43; and idem, “Geometric Design 56. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 77, 83, 490–91. in Timurid/Turkmen Architectural Practice: Thoughts on a 57. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 76. Recently Discovered Scroll and Its Late Gothic Parallels,” in 58. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 96. Timurid Art and Culture: Iran and Central Asia in the Fifteenth 59. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 35. Century, ed. Lisa Golombek and Maria Subtelny (Leiden: 60. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 72, 76, 79, 80. E. J. Brill, 1992), 48–66. 61. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 42. 25. The model of the mosque was depicted in a Nakka× Osman 62. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 91, 93, 98. miniature in the Sürn¸me-i Hüm¸y¢n, Topkapæ Palace Museum 63. A¥med Efendi, T¸rºÒ-i c¸mi{-i ×erºf-i N¢r-u {Osm¸nº, fols. 11a– Library, H. 1344, fols. 190b–191a. 14b. 26. Muª«af¸ b. Cel¸l, Þaba_¸t’ül-mem¸lik, fol. 471a. 64. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 43, 45. 27. Ibid., fol. 420b. 65. S¸{º, Tezkiretü’l-büny¸n, fol. 9b. 28. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 104. 66. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 87. 29. Ibid., vol. 1, 57 and 68. 67. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 91. 30. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 208. 68. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 42. 31. It was traditional to dedicate a mosque with a ritual Friday 69. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 77. procession; such a procession is described in F. André The- 70. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 490–93. vet, Cosmographie de Levant (Lyons, 1554), 59, cited in Necipo- 71. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 87. qlu-Kafadar, “Süleymaniye Complex,” 98. 72. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 42. 32. S¸{º, Tezkiretü’l-büny¸n, fol. 12a. 73. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 230, 251, 340. 33. Ibid.; Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 311. 74. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 42. 34. For more archival materials, see Muzaffer Erdoqan, “Osmanlæ 75. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 266. mimarlæk tarihinin ar×iv kaynaklaræ” [Archival Resources of 76. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 80. Ottoman Architectural History], Tarih Dergisi 3, 5–6 (1951– 77. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 95. 52): 111–21. 78. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 74, 75. 35. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 1, 1–45. 79. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 71, 76, 81–83, 95, 96, 106, 110, 124, 36. Ibid., vol. 1, 2. 124. 37. J. M. Rogers, “The State and the Arts in Ottoman Turkey, 80. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 91, 98.

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 268 10/20/2006 11:44:02 AM . ottoman stone acquisition: the süleymaniye complex 269

81. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 83. 110. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 77, 118. 82. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 71, 110. 111. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 191. 83. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 81. 112. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 109, 119. 84. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 31. 113. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 50/a. 85. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 114–19, 125–29, 221, 257, 350, 523. 114. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 191. 86. TKSM Archive, D. 45/A. 115. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 112. 87. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 110. 116. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 111. 88. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 113. 117. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 108. 89. Ibid. 118. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 47. 90. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 27–29. 119. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 59. 91. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 114–19. 120. Ca{fer Çelebi, Ris¸le-i mi{m¸riyye, fol. 57b. 92. Ibid. 121. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 37, 47; Muª«af¸ b. Cel¸l, 93. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 109. Þaba_¸t’ül-mem¸lik, fol. 473b. 94. TKSM Archive, D. 45/A. 122. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 59. 95. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 111. 123. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 16, 42, 191. 96. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 112. 124. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 15, 35, 40. 97. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 235. 125. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 35. 98. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 347. 126. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 16, 17, 24. 99. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 285, 288, 340–42. 127. The Ottoman unit of measurement zir¸{ has varied through 100. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 351. the centuries. An architectural zir¸{ is generally assumed to 101. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 235. be 0.71248 to 0.757 m. The earliest existing zir¸{ stick, from 102. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 340–42, and vol. 1, 66. the period of Selim III (r. 1789–1807), measures 0.757 m. 103. Z. Ahunbay, “Osmanlæ mimarlæqænda ‘od ta×æ’” [Firestone in 128. Ca{fer Çelebi, Ris¸le-i mi{m¸riyye, fol. 35r. Ottoman Architecture], in 9th International Congress of Turk- 129. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 194. ish Art, 3 vols. (Ankara, 1995), vol. 1, 27–34. 130. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 62, 63. 104. Nu×in Asgari, “Roman and Early Byzantine Marble Quarries 131. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 103. of Proconnesus,” in The Proceedings of the Xth International 132. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 52. Congress of Classical Archaeology (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 133. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 73. 1978), 467–80; idem, “Objets de marbre finis, semi-finis et 134. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 51–53, 70–73. inachevés de Proconnèse,” in Pierre éternelle du Nil au Rhin: 135. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 62, 63. Carrières et préfabrication, ed. M. Waelkens (Brussels, 1990), 136. Ibid., vol. 1, 49; ~stanbul Vakfæ Archives. 106–26; idem, “Prokonnesos 1993 Çalæ×malaræ” [Work at 137. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 88. Proconnesus in 1993], in XII Ara×tærma sonuçlaræ toplantæsæ 138. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 100, 104, 105. (Ankara, 1994), 99–121; idem, “The Proconnesian Produc- 139. Ibid. tion of Architectural Elements in Late Antiquity, Based on 140. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 113. Evidence from the Marble Quarries,” in Constantinople and Its 141. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 93, 98. Hinterland, ed. C. Mango and G. Dagron (Aldershot, 1995), 142. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 96. 263–88. 143. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 93, 95, 97, 110. 105. R. Gnoli, Marmora Romana (Rome, 1988); K. Erguvanlæ and 144. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 88. Z. Nayær-Ahunbay, “The Building Stones of Sinan’s Monu- 145. K. Erguvanlæ et al., “The Significance of Research on Old ments in Istanbul,” Mühendislik Jeolojisi Bülteni 11 (1989): Quarries for the Restoration of Historic Buildings with Spe- 109–14; J. B. Ward-Perkins, Marble in Antiquity: Collected Papers cial Reference to the Marmara Region of Turkey,” in The of J. B. Ward-Perkins, ed. H. Dodge and J. B. Ward-Perkins Engineering Geology of Ancient Works, Monuments and Histor- (London, 1992); G. Borghini, Marmi antichi (Rome, 1992); ical Sites: Preservation and Protection, ed. P. G. Marinos and M. Waelkens, N. Herz, and L. Moens, Ancient Stones: Quar- G. C. Koukis (Rotterdam: Balkema, 1988), 636; Ahunbay, rying, Trade and Provenance (Leuven, 1992). Osmanlæ mimarlæqænda, 28, 59. 106. Wolfgang Müller-Wiener, “Spoliennutzung in Istanbul,” in 146. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 113, 115, 126. Beiträge zur Altertumskunde Kleinasiens: Festschrift für Kurt Bit- 147. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 86, 106. tel, ed. R. M. Boehmer and H. Hauptman (Mainz, 1983); 148. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 106, 234. Uqur Tanyeli and Gülsün Tanyeli, “Osmanlæ mimarlæqænda 149. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 113–16, 125–27, 129. dev×irme malzeme kullanæmæ (16–18 yüzyæl)” [Secondhand 150. The Ottoman historian Mustafa Selânikî mentions that Kiriz Material Use in Ottoman Architecture (16–18 Centuries)], Nikola had worked on the restoration of the Kærkçe×me aque- Sanat tarihi ara×tærmalaræ dergisi 2, 4 (1989): 23–38, 369–82; ducts: see K. Çeçen, Mimar Sinan ve Kærkçe×me tesisleri [The C. Mango, “Ancient Spolia in the Great Palace of Constan- Architect Sinan and the Kærkçe×me Water Supply System] tinople,” in Byzantine East, Latin West: Art-Historical Studies (Istanbul, 1988), 44. in Honor of Kurt Weitzmann, ed. C. Moss and K. Kiefer (Prin- 151. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 1, 37. ceton, 1995), 645–49. 152. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 1, 37 ; vol. 2, doc. nos. 115, 570. 107. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 48, 49. 153. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 125, 126. 108. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 64–68. 154. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 113–16, 125–27, 129. 109. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 92. 155. Ibid., vol. 1, 49; H. Peynircioqlu et al., “~stanbul’da Osmanlæ

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 269 10/20/2006 11:44:02 AM . . . 270 ilknur aktuÅ kolay and serpil çelik

döneminde in×a edilen camilerin temelleri” [Foundations of 45 (1991): 87–96; Kemalpa×az¸de, Tevarih-i Âl-i Osman, the Mosques Constructed in Istanbul in the Ottoman Era], trans. Øerafettin Turan (Ankara, 1954), 80–89; Mango and Ist International Congress on the History of Turkish-Islamic Sci- ³evõenko, “Some Churches and Monasteries,” 235–81. ence and Technology, 5 vols. (Istanbul, 1981), vol. 3, 39–40. 187. TKSM Archive, D. 42, fol. 26. 156. TKSM Archive, D. 43, bk. 168; Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 1, 188. Mukerrem Anabolu, “Küçük Asya’da bulunan imparator 33–35. tapænaklaræ” [Emperor Temples in Asia Minor], Anadolu 157. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 100, 101, 127, 533. Sanatæ Ara×tærmalaræ 2 (1970): 31–54, 40, fig. 31; C. Ba×aran, 158. M. Sayar and K. Erguvanlæ, Türkiye mermerleri ve in×aat ta×laræ “Yeni topografik gözlemler æ×æqænda Kyzikos,” [Cyzicus in [Turkish Marbles and Building Stones] (Istanbul, 1955), 18– the Light of Recent Topographic Observations], Sanat Tar- 19. See the map of the territory between Hebdomon and ihi Ara×tærmalaræ Dergisi 9 (1990): 32; Ekrem Akurgal, Anadolu the Theodosian city walls in Alexander van Millingen, Byz- uygarlæklaræ [Anatolian Civilizations] (Istanbul, 1987), 238; antine Constantinople (London, 1899), 316. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 61. 159. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 100, 102, 121–23, 125, 189. G. Perrot and E. Guillaume, “Le Temple d’Hadrien à 127–33. For phases, see also doc. no. 576. Cyzique,” Revue Archéologique n.s. 9 (1864): 350; T. Rei nach, 160. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 544. “Lettre à M. le Commendeur J. B. Rossi au sujet du Temple 161. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 132, 336. d’Hadrien à Cyzique,” Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique 162. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 63, n. 1. 14 (1890): 517–45; Akurgal, Anadolu, 312. 163. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 125, 127, 139. 190. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 61, 77–79, 117. 164. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 128. 191. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 61, 77. 165. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 127. 192. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 76, 79, 84/a, 114–18, 125–29. Dis- 166. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 76, 84/a. crepancies in dates are likely due to the incompleteness of 167. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 125–27. construction documentation. 168. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 125, 127–29, 138. 193. For these columns, see Peter Coeck von Aelst, The Turks 169. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 139. in MDXXXIII: A Series of Drawings Made in That Year at Con- 170. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 125, 127–29, 139. stantinople (London, 1873), pl. IX. According to Clavijo, in 171. Helik is wet mortar; see Ca{fer Çelebi, Ris¸le-i mi{m¸riyye, fol. 1403–5 there were thirty-seven columns remaining in situ, 80v. 1.5 m diameter and 8 to 9 m tall: Kuban, Istanbul: An Urban 172. Doqan Hasol, “Helik,” Ansiklopedik mimarlæk sözlüqü [Diction- History (Istanbul, 1996), 84. In a Panvinius engraving of the ary of Architecture] (Istanbul, 1979), 222. fifteenth century there were seventeen columns: see Cyril 173. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 132, 336. Mango, Byzantine Architecture (London, 1979), 31. In 1529, 174. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 125, 130–33. according to Gyllius, there were seventeen columns, 1.2 m 175. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 125. in diameter and 8.5 m tall; they were removed in 1540 to 176. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 125, 139. be used in the Süleymaniye, and some of them, most likely 177. M. Z. Pakalæn, “Pehle,” Osmanlæ tarih deyimleri ve terimleri after March 23, 1555, were sliced up and used in the ham- sözlüqü (Dictionary of Ottoman Historical Idioms and Terms) mam as pavement: see Petrus Gyllius, The Antiquities of Con- (Istanbul: Milli Eqitim Basæmevi, 1993), vol. 2, 765; Prime stantinople, trans. J. Ball (London, 1729), 1, 42, 43, 110–12, E Ministry Archives, Cevdet Saray Katalog, no. 811; ~. Aktuq, 201; P. G. ~ncicyan, 18. asærda ~stanbul [Istanbul in the Eigh- “Ayazma Camii in×aat defteri” [Ayazma Mosque Construc- teenth Century] (Istanbul: Baha Matbaasæ, 1976), 63; W. tion Book], 9th International Congress of Turkish Art, 3 vols. Müller-Wiener, Bildlexikon zur Topographie Istanbuls (Tübin- (Ankara, 1995), vol. 1, 82; the account book of the Sultan gen, 1977), 68; a Matrakçæ Nasuh miniature of 1533 shows Ahmed Mosque, TKSM Archive, D. 42; Barkan, Süleymaniye, eight columns: see H. G. Yurdaydæn, Bey¸n-æ men¸zil-i sefer-i vol. 2, doc. nos. 125–29. {Ir¸keyn-i Sul«¸n Süleym¸n H¸n [Statement of Halting Places 178. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 125, 127–29, 137, 138/a. on the Iraq Campaign of Sultan Süleyman] (Ankara: Türk 179. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 129. Tarih Kurumu Basæmevi, 1976), fol. 8b. 180. Ülkü Kulaç, “Türk ta× minarelerinde döner merdiven ve metal 194. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 110. baqlantæ elemanlaræn yatay yükleri kar×ælamadaki i×levleri” 195. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 40–42. [Spiral Stairways in Turkish Masonry Minarets and the Func- 196. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 46; TKSM Archive, D. 43, bk. 168. After tions of Their Metal Tie Elements in Counteracting Lateral the Ottoman conquest, the church served as an armory (cebe- Forces], I. International Congress on the History of Turkish-Islamic hane): see Edwin A. Grosvenor, Constantinople, 2 vols. (Bos- Science and Technology, vol. 3, 235–40, figs. 1–3. ton: Little, Brown, and Company, 1900), vol. 2, 475; Robert 181. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 127, 129. Walsh, Constantinople and the Scenery of the Seven Churches of 182. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 125, 129, 142. Asia Minor (London and Paris, 1839), 35, 229. For the sec- 183. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 84/a. ond-story columns made during the first Justinianic phase 184. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 138. and collected for the Süleymaniye, see Thomas F. Mathews, 185. Asgari, “Roman and Early Byzantine,” 467–80. The Early Chuches of Constantinople: Architecture and Liturgy 186. R. M. Dawkins, “Antique Statuary in Medieval Constantino- (University Park and London: Pennsylvania State University ple,” Folklore 35 (1924): 209–408; Cyril Mango, “Antique Stat- Press, 1971), 82. Existing, clumsy column bases—rough blocks uary and the Byzantine Beholder,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers irregular in shape and dimension—were likely employed to 17 (1963): 55–77; Sarah G. Bassett, “The Antiquities in the fit replacement columns. See the column bases in Matthews, Hippodrome of Constantinople,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers Early Churches, pl. 64, and in Alexander van Millingen, Byz-

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 270 10/20/2006 11:44:02 AM . ottoman stone acquisition: the süleymaniye complex 271

antine Churches in Constantinople: Their History and Architec- in Gyllius, Antiquities of Constantinople, pl. 2, 219. ture (London: MacMillan and Co. Ltd., 1912), pl. 23. See 231. Ömer Lütfi Barkan and Ekrem Hakkæ Ayverdi, ~stanbul evkafæ also n. 250, below. tahrir defteri (Istanbul, 1970); Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 1, 344, 197. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 64; Walsh, Constanti- and vol. 2, doc. nos. 43–45. nople, 17; Grosvenor, Constantinople, vol. 1, 258–59; God- 232. Evliya Çelebi, Sey¸¥atn¸me, vol. 1, 10. frey Goodwin, A History of Ottoman Architecture (New York: 233. S¸{º, Tezkiretü’l-büny¸n, fol. 10a. Thames and Hudson, 1987), 231; Muller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, 234. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 15, 18, 20–24, 26–31, 466. In the Kadæköy-Üsküdar area, in a homestead recorded 232; Muª«af¸ b. Cel¸l, Þaba_¸t’ül-mem¸lik, fol. 422a. as belonging to a certain Yani and Toma, was the ruin of 235. Necipoqlu-Kafadar, “Süleymaniye,” 116, n. 57; Barkan, Sül- a gigantic edifice whose two remaining walls were 13.62 m eymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 15. long, 1.89 m thick, and 6.62 m high; and 9.46 m long, 1.82 236. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 27. m thick, and 6.81 m high: see Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, 237. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 28–29. doc. no. 64. Such monumental dimensions must be those 238. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 30–31. of the Byzantine Church of St. Euphemia, the second-larg- 239. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 31; Evliya, Sey¸¥atn¸me, vol. 1, 149. est church after the Hagia Sophia: see Walsh, Constantino- 240. Sar¸y-æ {¸mirede ¥¸¾ær bulundæ (“It was on hand in the royal ple, 17. Located on the site of a temple of Aphrodite, the palace”): S¸{º, Tezkiretü’l-büny¸n, fol. 10a. St. Euphemia in 451 housed the meeting of the Council of 241. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 36. Chalcedon, attended by 630 bishops and elders: see Gros- 242. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 36–39; S¸{º, Tezkiretü’l-büny¸n, fol. venor, Constantinople, 257. See also n. 251, below. 10a; summary account book 44, Nov. 7–Dec. 9, 1553, TKSM 198. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 76, 114. Archive, D. 43; Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 1, 37–40. 199. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 117, 129. 243. See photos in Engin Çizgen, Photography in the Ottoman Empire 200. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 77. (1839–1919) (Istanbul, 1987), 106, 167. 201. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 84/a, 114–16, 118. 244. TKSM Archive, D. 43, bk. 6, fol. 10a, 13b; Barkan, Süley- 202. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 125–27, 129. maniye, vol. 1, 342. 203. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 76. 245. TKSM Archive, D. 45/a, bk. 1; Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 1, 204. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 115. 80, chart no. 2. 205. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 76, 84/a, 114–16, 118, 125–29. 246. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 37. 206. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 84/a, 114, 117, 118, 127–29. 247. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 47. 207. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 95, 97. 248. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 34, 40–42. 208. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 62, 63. 249. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 33, 34. 209. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 60. 250. Two süt¢n-æ büzürg (large columns) were extracted from the 210. See n. 250, below. armory (cebehane), formerly the church of St. Irene: TKSM 211. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 127–29. Archive, D. 43, bk. 168. On May 7, 1552 (16 Jumada I 959), 212. Ibid. sixteen columns and the pavements of the former church of 213. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 93, 110. St. Irene church were extracted for the Süleymaniye: Bar- 214. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 63. kan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 46. See also n. 196 above. 215. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 51, 73. 251. Two red porphyry (serçegözi) columns were removed from 216. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 76, 114; Dernschwam, Istanbul ve Kadæköy: TKSM Archive, D. 43, bk. 168; see also n. 197, Anadolu’ya, 211–13. above. 217. Cyril Mango, “The Conciliar Edict of 1166,” Dumbarton Oaks 252. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 1, 28, and vol. 2, doc. no. 65. Now Papers 17 (1963): 317–30. the Sulumanastær: see Walsh, Constantinople, 19, 20, 240, 218. Erguvanlæ and Ahunbay, “The Building Stones,” 111. 264. 219. Sayar and Erguvanlæ, Türkiye Mermerleri, 56, 63, 64. 253. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 59. 220. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 82, 108, 270. 254. Ibid. 221. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 82, 108, 125, 128. 255. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 16, 17, 24. 222. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 82, 126. 256. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 58; and TKSM Archive, D. 43, cited in 223. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 82, 108, 126. vol. 1, 32. 224. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 82, 108. 257. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 82. 225. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 82. 258. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 46. 226. This corner was probably used to store supplies, including 259. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 48, 49. a crane for winching the columns of the forecourt. 260. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 209. 227. D. Peacock and V. Maxfield, The Roman Imperial Quarries: 261. According to the survey, the little porphyry discs are 45 cm Gebel Dokhan, Egypt (London, 1994). in diameter and 1.5 cm thick, and are set in fine horasan 228. Muª«af¸ b. Cel¸l, Þaba_¸t’ül-mem¸lik, fol. 323/a; Evliya Çelebi, mortar by means of a lead agent. Sey¸¥atn¸me [Book of Travels], 10 vols. (Istanbul, 1314/1896– 262. Akurgal, Anadolu, 322. 97), vol. 1, 149. 263. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 54, 56. 229. Celal Esad Arseven, Eski ~stanbul [Ancient Istanbul] (Istan- 264. Sayar and Erguvanlæ, Türkiye mermerleri, 85; Barkan, Süley- bul: Øefik Matbaasæ, 1989), 183–84. maniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 111, 191. 230. The column as it appeared between 1547 and 1551 is shown 265. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. nos. 54–56, 92, 111–12.

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 271 10/20/2006 11:44:03 AM . . . 272 ilknur aktuÅ kolay and serpil çelik

266. Sayar and Erguvanlæ, Türkiye mermerleri, 82, 84. per, “The Quarries of Mount Taygetos in the Peloponnesos, 267. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. no. 50/a. Greece,” in Classical Marble: Geochemistry, Technology, Trade, 268. A. Lambraki, “Les roches vertes: Étude sur les marbres de la ed. N. Herz and M. Waelkens (Dordrecht, 1988), 65–76. Grèce exploités aux époques romaine et paléochrétienne” 269. Barkan, Süleymaniye, vol. 2, doc. nos. 14–16, 32–35, 40–42. (thèse de 3e cycle, Université de Paris I, 1978); F. A. Coo- 270. Ibid., vol. 2, doc. no. 35.

muqarnas23-3_CS2.indd 272 10/20/2006 11:44:03 AM