Synopses & Reviews
Today the Topkapi Palace in Istanbul seems a haphazard aggregate of modest buildings no longer capable of conveying imperial power. Yet it is at once the most celebrated of all Islamic palaces and the least understood. Ganduuml;lru Necipoglu brings together largely unpublished sources, both written and visual, along with information derived from the architectural remains to uncover the processes through which the meaning of the palace was once produced, before it came to represent a stereotyped microcosm of oriental despotism imbued with the exotic otherness of the East. She relocates the Topkapi in its historical context, a context that included not only the circumstances of its patronage, but the complex interaction of cultural practices, ideologies, and social codes of recognition.
Necipoglu focuses on the imperial iconograpy of palatial forms that lack monumentality, axiality, and rational-geometric planning principles to decipher codes of grandeur that are no longer obvious to the modern observer. She reconstructs the architectural and ceremonial impact of the palace through a step-by-step tour of its buildings, demonstrating how the palace was experienced as a processional sequence of separate courts and seemingly disjointed architectural elements that were nevertheless integrated into a coherent whole by passage through time and space.
Far more than an analysis of the architectural program of the palace, Architecture, Ceremonial, and Power raises questions and provides answers to fundamental concerns about the ideology of absolute sovereignty, the interplay between architecture and ritual, and the changing perceptions of a building through the centuries, a building that drew upon a wide range of Palatine traditions, mythical, Islamic, Turco-Mongol, Romano-Byzantine, and Italian Renaissance.
Ganduuml;lru Necipoglu is John L. Loeb Associate Professor of the Humanities in the Fine Arts Department at Harvard University.
Synopsis
Today the Topkapi Palace in Istanbul seems a haphazard aggregate of modest buildings no longer capable of conveying imperial power. Yet it is at once the most celebrated of all Islamic palaces and the least understood. Gülru Necipoglu brings together largely unpublished sources, both written and visual, along with information derived from the architectural remains to uncover the processes through which the meaning of the palace was once produced, before it came to represent a stereotyped microcosm of oriental despotism imbued with the exotic otherness of the East. She relocates the Topkapi in its historical context, a context that included not only the circumstances of its patronage, but the complex interaction of cultural practices, ideologies, and social codes of recognition.
Necipoglu focuses on the imperial iconograpy of palatial forms that lack monumentality, axiality, and rational-geometric planning principles to decipher codes of grandeur that are no longer obvious to the modern observer. She reconstructs the architectural and ceremonial impact of the palace through a step-by-step tour of its buildings, demonstrating how the palace was experienced as a processional sequence of separate courts and seemingly disjointed architectural elements that were nevertheless integrated into a coherent whole by passage through time and space.
Far more than an analysis of the architectural program of the palace, Architecture, Ceremonial, and Power raises questions and provides answers to fundamental concerns about the ideology of absolute sovereignty, the interplay between architecture and ritual, and the changing perceptions of a building through the centuries, a building that drew upon a wide range of Palatine traditions, mythical, Islamic, Turco-Mongol, Romano-Byzantine, and Italian Renaissance.
Synopsis
The fifteenth and sixteenth centuries marked the height of Ottoman rule in Istanbul. During this period, the Topkapi Palace served as both royal residence and the seat of imperial administration. By solving long-standing mysteries about this once most celebrated of all Islamic palaces, Gulru Necipoglu makes a substantial contribution to the history of Ottoman architecture and institutions. Using evidence provided by the existing buildings together with largely unpublished sources - including numerous descriptions and illustrations by European visitors, a wealth of Ottoman Turkish, Arabic, and Persian histories, documents, poems, inscriptions, books, and miniature paintings - Necipoglu demonstrates the palace's role as a vast stage for the enactment of a ceremonial that emphasized the sultan's absolute power and his aloofness from the outside world. In the absence of the monumentality, axiality, and rational geometric planning principles now usually associated with imperial architecture, the author's deciphering of the palace's iconography is all the more revealing. Leading the reader in a step-by-step tour of the Topkapi complex, the author addresses fundamental concerns about the ideology of absolute sovereignty, the interplay between architecture and ritual, and the changing perceptions of a building through time. She relocates the Topkapi in its original context - not simply the circumstances of its patronage, but the complex interaction of cultural practices, ideologies, and socially constructed codes of recognition from which it is now removed. Necipoglu concludes with striking parallels between the Topkapi Palace and other palatine prototypes, such as classical and post-MongolIslamic palaces and the Byzantine Great Palace of Constantinople. In addition, the author makes a compelling case for the possible participation of the great early Renaissance architect Filarete in the design of one part of the Topkapi, and of Gentile Bellini in its decoration.
Synopsis
Today the Topkapi Palace in Istanbul seems a haphazard aggregate of modest buildings no longer capable of conveying imperial power. Yet it is at once the most celebrated of all Islamic palaces and the least understood. Gulru Necipoglu brings together largely unpublished sources, both written and visual, along with information derived from the architectural remains to uncover the processes through which the meaning of the palace was once produced, before it came to represent a stereotyped microcosm of oriental despotism imbued with the exotic otherness of the East. She relocates the Topkapi in its historical context, a context that included not only the circumstances of its patronage, but the complex interaction of cultural practices, ideologies, and social codes of recognition.
Description
Includes bibliographical references (p. [305]-328) and index.
About the Author
Gülru Necipoglu is Aga Khan Professor of Islamic Art and Director of the Aga Khan Program, Department of History of Art and Architecture, Harvard University.