Risale Mi'Mariyye

8/11/2019 Risale Mi'Mariyye

1/5

Risle-i Mi'mriyye: An Early Seventeenth-Century Ottoman Treatise on Architecture byCa'fer Efendi; Howard CraneReview by: Glru Necipolu

Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 49, No. 2 (Jun., 1990), pp. 210-213Published by: University of California Presson behalf of the Society of Architectural HistoriansStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/990479.

Accessed: 22/09/2014 05:43

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of California Pressand Society of Architectural Historiansare collaborating with JSTOR to

digitize, preserve and extend access toJournal of the Society of Architectural Historians.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucalhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sahhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/990479?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/990479?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sahhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal


2/5

210

JSAH, XLIX:2,

JUNE

1990

10

JSAH, XLIX:2,

JUNE

1990

the

systematic

plans

of Le

Muet,

Du Cerceau's

designs

are

a

collection of

citations and

collages, seeking

diversity

and

cre-

ating

models that could be recombined in

countless

ways.

Bou-

don's

premises

are best

conveyed

in

the

plates

depicting

the

50

ground

plans

of Book

I,

the roof

plans,

and the 38

plans

of

Book III.

Models,

including

perspective

views,

are

given

too.

Looking

at the formal

studies,

the road

to Durand's

Precis

of 1802 seems direct; nor are the latter's

goals

of

efficiency

and

economy

unrelated.

Around

the turn of the

17th

century,

architectural

theory

was

more

frequently conveyed

by image

than

by

word. Albums

of

drawings

permitted

clients to choose from a

host

of

architectural

components-details

for

facades,

portals,

windows,

attics,

chim-

neys-usually

copied

and

recopied

and

circulated

among

dif-

ferent

workshops.

Far

from

the

systematization

of the Renais-

sance,

which

formulated a

beauty

attendant

on

rules,

a

new

generation

operated

between science and

practice.

Filling

the

theoretical

void between

Delorme and

Chambray

is

Jacques

Gentilhatre's

drawing

album

and

architectural treatise

(1615-

1625).

L.

Chatelet-Lange

discusses this

practical

manual

for

architects and engineers which embracesvarious types of mil-

itary

architecture.

Serlio's

L'architettura

(1537-1551)

is

quite naturally

at

the

fulcrum of

Renaissance

architecture,

especially

in

terms of

its

impact

on France. With

the

appearance

of

Book

IV,

the

il-

lustrations

introduced a new

classical

language.

J. J.

Gloton

reviews

early

manifestations

of classicism

in

French

architecture

at

Fontainebleau,

La

Rochelle,

and

Toulouse. He notes

that

Book

V,

the Libro

straordinario,

ith its rustic

porticos,

had

little

impact

until

the

17th

century,

when it became

allied

to

the

architecture of Louis

XIII,

as

expounded

by

De Brosse

and

Francois

Mansart.

Shute's

The First and

Chief

Groundes

f

Architecture

1563)

is

the earliest

description

of

classical orders in

England, reflecting

the interest

of

patrons

at the

court of Edward

VI. In

The

Ideal

House

and

Healthy

Life;

the

Origins

of

Architectural

Theory

in

England,

M.

Howard identifies the

precedent

for such

a

house

in

a

medical

tract,

Andrew Boorde's

Compendyous

egy-

ment,

or

Dyetaryof

Health

(1542).

Both

works are

here

interpreted

as

consonant with new

professional

attitudes,

as

well as a

view

of

architecture that

emphasizes

a

healthy

prospect

rather than

aesthetic

delight,

namely,

the

health-giving

house.

Only

in

the last third of

the 16th

century

did

Renaissance

architectural

treatises

acquire

an

audience

in

England.

Among

the more

valuable

readings

of Vitruvius that

have come

down

to us is

that of

Inigo Jones.

J.

Newman

discusses

Jones's

An-

notations n

the

context of

his

working

library,

noting

those

books with the most glosses-Palladio's Quattro ibri,Barbaro's

Vitruvius,

Scamozzi's

L'idea,

and Serlio's

Books III

and IV.

Regarding

proportions

and

the

orders,

Jones

saw a

disparity

between

the

antique

remains and

the

Vitruvian

text but

also

noted that

Vitruvius

allowed

variations

based on

decorum.

Newman

points

out

that,

as

a

scenic

designer,

Jones

appreciated

Vitruvian

passages

on

optical

illusions and

objected

to

Sca-

mozzi's

stating

as a rule

what

should be

left to

the

discretion

of the

architect,

or

to what

Jones

himself

called

'his

sharpness

of

wit'

(p.

438).

Three

papers

deal

with

the

further

dissemination

of

archi-

tectural

treatises in

the Low

Countries and in

Eastern

Europe.

J.

Offerhaus

seeks to

determine

the

function

of

Coecke's

treatise

the

systematic

plans

of Le

Muet,

Du Cerceau's

designs

are

a

collection of

citations and

collages, seeking

diversity

and

cre-

ating

models that could be recombined in

countless

ways.

Bou-

don's

premises

are best

conveyed

in

the

plates

depicting

the

50

ground

plans

of Book

I,

the roof

plans,

and the 38

plans

of

Book III.

Models,

including

perspective

views,

are

given

too.

Looking

at the formal

studies,

the road

to Durand's

Precis

of 1802 seems direct; nor are the latter's

goals

of

efficiency

and

economy

unrelated.

Around

the turn of the

17th

century,

architectural

theory

was

more

frequently conveyed

by image

than

by

word. Albums

of

drawings

permitted

clients to choose from a

host

of

architectural

components-details

for

facades,

portals,

windows,

attics,

chim-

neys-usually

copied

and

recopied

and

circulated

among

dif-

ferent

workshops.

Far

from

the

systematization

of the Renais-

sance,

which

formulated a

beauty

attendant

on

rules,

a

new

generation

operated

between science and

practice.

Filling

the

theoretical

void between

Delorme and

Chambray

is

Jacques

Gentilhatre's

drawing

album

and

architectural treatise

(1615-

1625).

L.

Chatelet-Lange

discusses this

practical

manual

for

architects and engineers which embracesvarious types of mil-

itary

architecture.

Serlio's

L'architettura

(1537-1551)

is

quite naturally

at

the

fulcrum of

Renaissance

architecture,

especially

in

terms of

its

impact

on France. With

the

appearance

of

Book

IV,

the

il-

lustrations

introduced a new

classical

language.

J. J.

Gloton

reviews

early

manifestations

of classicism

in

French

architecture

at

Fontainebleau,

La

Rochelle,

and

Toulouse. He notes

that

Book

V,

the Libro

straordinario,

ith its rustic

porticos,

had

little

impact

until

the

17th

century,

when it became

allied

to

the

architecture of Louis

XIII,

as

expounded

by

De Brosse

and

Francois

Mansart.

Shute's

The First and

Chief

Groundes

f

Architecture

1563)

is

the earliest

description

of

classical orders in

England, reflecting

the interest

of

patrons

at the

court of Edward

VI. In

The

Ideal

House

and

Healthy

Life;

the

Origins

of

Architectural

Theory

in

England,

M.

Howard identifies the

precedent

for such

a

house

in

a

medical

tract,

Andrew Boorde's

Compendyous

egy-

ment,

or

Dyetaryof

Health

(1542).

Both

works are

here

interpreted

as

consonant with new

professional

attitudes,

as

well as a

view

of

architecture that

emphasizes

a

healthy

prospect

rather than

aesthetic

delight,

namely,

the

health-giving

house.

Only

in

the last third of

the 16th

century

did

Renaissance

architectural

treatises

acquire

an

audience

in

England.

Among

the more

valuable

readings

of Vitruvius that

have come

down

to us is

that of

Inigo Jones.

J.

Newman

discusses

Jones's

An-

notations n

the

context of

his

working

library,

noting

those

books with the most glosses-Palladio's Quattro ibri,Barbaro's

Vitruvius,

Scamozzi's

L'idea,

and Serlio's

Books III

and IV.

Regarding

proportions

and

the

orders,

Jones

saw a

disparity

between

the

antique

remains and

the

Vitruvian

text but

also

noted that

Vitruvius

allowed

variations

based on

decorum.

Newman

points

out

that,

as

a

scenic

designer,

Jones

appreciated

Vitruvian

passages

on

optical

illusions and

objected

to

Sca-

mozzi's

stating

as a rule

what

should be

left to

the

discretion

of the

architect,

or

to what

Jones

himself

called

'his

sharpness

of

wit'

(p.

438).

Three

papers

deal

with

the

further

dissemination

of

archi-

tectural

treatises in

the Low

Countries and in

Eastern

Europe.

J.

Offerhaus

seeks to

determine

the

function

of

Coecke's

treatise

and

stresseshis role as a

popularizer

rather than

as

innovator.

Coecke's

publications

influenced Hans

Vredeman de

Vries,

but

there is

evidence

that Italian

architecture was

already

known

in

Antwerp

before the

appearance

of his

treatise,

c.

1540. M. Van

de

Winckel

reviews the work

of

Vredeman de

Vries,

whose

garden

illustrationsand

treatiseson

perspective

and

architecture

(1577)

circulated

widely.

No

architectural

treatises were

pro-

duced in central

Europe,

but those of Vitruvius, Serlio, and

Palladio

gained

wide

popularity.

T.

Jakimowicz

and

J.

Kowal-

czyk

examine

the role of such

maecenas as

King

Corvin,

Sig-

ismond

I

(who

combined a

certain

eclectism with the

local

vernacular),

and Polish

chancellor

Jan Zamoyski

(who

founded

the

ideal

city

of

Zamosc in

1579,

built

by

Bernardo

Morando

of

Padua).

Admittedly,

treatiseson

fortifications are

of another and

more

practical

genre, actually

grouped

with the science

of

mechanics

and the

special

technical

vocabulary

that is

indigenous

to

the

military

art. C.

Wilkinson writes

about the

ambiguous

position

of

fortifications and the

relationship

between mechanics

and

architecture,

encompassing

the

classical

separation

of the

me-

chanical and the liberal arts. Treatises of French military ar-

chitecture around

the turn of the 17th

century

are

analyzed

by

Y. Bruand.

He focuses

on

military

engineer

Antoine

de

Ville's

Lesfortifications

1628),

which are

depicted

within fantastic

and-

scapes,

almost

reminiscentof

Callot. Certain

goals

of these

tracts

are similar to

architectural

treatises in

general:

the need

to

sys-

tematize

data,

the

aspiration

to

mathematical

order,

and the

introduction of ideal

forms. The aims

of the

military engineers

are

always

tied

to

know-how

and

application,

and never

to

intelligent

speculation.

J. Bury

adds

a coda to

the Actes

with a

bibliography

on

Ren-

aissanceArchitectural

Treatises

and Architectural

Books,

spe-

cifically

civil

and

military

publications

before 1640.

His

cate-

gories

include treatises

on the

orders,

llustratedworks on

ancient

and

contemporary

Renaissance

architecture,

architectural

de-

signs

for

buildings

and their

ornamentation,

and treatises

on

fortification.

We

may

follow the fortunes

of a treatise

by

the

listing

of different

printings,

translations,

critical

editions,

and

facsimiles.

Unfortunately,

the

long

gestation

period

for the birth

of

this

volume

has taken its

toll,

and some of

the most

stimulating

papers presented

at

the

conference are

not

reproduced

here.

Moreover,

like

the

treatises

themselves,

the

papers

are

addressed

to the initiated.

Still,

within

such

limitations,

this book

remains

a fundamental

source for future

studies on

the

Renaissance

trea-

tise.

NAOMI MILLER

Boston

University

CACFER

EFENDI,

Risdle-i

Micmdriyye:

n

Early

Seventeenth-

Century

Ottoman

Treatise

on

Architecture,

acsimile

with

trans-

lation

and

notes

by

Howard

Crane

(Studies

in

Islamic

Art

and

Architecture,

1),

Leiden

and

New

York:

E.

J.

Brill,

1987,

126

pp.,

with

facsimile of text

fols.

lr-87v in

b.

& w.

photos.

$60.00.

The

Risale-i

Micmdriyee,

n

early

17th-century

Ottoman

trea-

tise on

architecture

by

Cacfer

Efendi,

has for

a

long

time

attracted

the

interest of

scholars

because it is

one of

the

very

few

written

and

stresseshis role as a

popularizer

rather than

as

innovator.

Coecke's

publications

influenced Hans

Vredeman de

Vries,

but

there is

evidence

that Italian

architecture was

already

known

in

Antwerp

before the

appearance

of his

treatise,

c.

1540. M. Van

de

Winckel

reviews the work

of

Vredeman de

Vries,

whose

garden

illustrationsand

treatiseson

perspective

and

architecture

(1577)

circulated

widely.

No

architectural

treatises were

pro-

duced in central

Europe,

but those of Vitruvius, Serlio, and

Palladio

gained

wide

popularity.

T.

Jakimowicz

and

J.

Kowal-

czyk

examine

the role of such

maecenas as

King

Corvin,

Sig-

ismond

I

(who

combined a

certain

eclectism with the

local

vernacular),

and Polish

chancellor

Jan Zamoyski

(who

founded

the

ideal

city

of

Zamosc in

1579,

built

by

Bernardo

Morando

of

Padua).

Admittedly,

treatiseson

fortifications are

of another and

more

practical

genre, actually

grouped

with the science

of

mechanics

and the

special

technical

vocabulary

that is

indigenous

to

the

military

art. C.

Wilkinson writes

about the

ambiguous

position

of

fortifications and the

relationship

between mechanics

and

architecture,

encompassing

the

classical

separation

of the

me-

chanical and the liberal arts. Treatises of French military ar-

chitecture around

the turn of the 17th

century

are

analyzed

by

Y. Bruand.

He focuses

on

military

engineer

Antoine

de

Ville's

Lesfortifications

1628),

which are

depicted

within fantastic

and-

scapes,

almost

reminiscentof

Callot. Certain

goals

of these

tracts

are similar to

architectural

treatises in

general:

the need

to

sys-

tematize

data,

the

aspiration

to

mathematical

order,

and the

introduction of ideal

forms. The aims

of the

military engineers

are

always

tied

to

know-how

and

application,

and never

to

intelligent

speculation.

J. Bury

adds

a coda to

the Actes

with a

bibliography

on

Ren-

aissanceArchitectural

Treatises

and Architectural

Books,

spe-

cifically

civil

and

military

publications

before 1640.

His

cate-

gories

include treatises

on the

orders,

llustratedworks on

ancient

and

contemporary

Renaissance

architecture,

architectural

de-

signs

for

buildings

and their

ornamentation,

and treatises

on

fortification.

We

may

follow the fortunes

of a treatise

by

the

listing

of different

printings,

translations,

critical

editions,

and

facsimiles.

Unfortunately,

the

long

gestation

period

for the birth

of

this

volume

has taken its

toll,

and some of

the most

stimulating

papers presented

at

the

conference are

not

reproduced

here.

Moreover,

like

the

treatises

themselves,

the

papers

are

addressed

to the initiated.

Still,

within

such

limitations,

this book

remains

a fundamental

source for future

studies on

the

Renaissance

trea-

tise.

NAOMI MILLER

Boston

University

CACFER

EFENDI,

Risdle-i

Micmdriyye:

n

Early

Seventeenth-

Century

Ottoman

Treatise

on

Architecture,

acsimile

with

trans-

lation

and

notes

by

Howard

Crane

(Studies

in

Islamic

Art

and

Architecture,

1),

Leiden

and

New

York:

E.

J.

Brill,

1987,

126

pp.,

with

facsimile of text

fols.

lr-87v in

b.

& w.

photos.

$60.00.

The

Risale-i

Micmdriyee,

n

early

17th-century

Ottoman

trea-

tise on

architecture

by

Cacfer

Efendi,

has for

a

long

time

attracted

the

interest of

scholars

because it is

one of

the

very

few

written

This content downloaded from 203.135.190.8 on Mon, 22 Sep 2014 05:43:59 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/5

BOOK REVIEWS 211

sources we have for Islamic architecture. The

Risale has been

cited and

partially published

by

various

scholars,

but

Howard

Crane's new

English

translation,

provided

with valuable

notes

and a facsimile

of the

original

text,

makes the

complete

text

widely

accessible for the first time. This is a welcome

contri-

bution

not

only

to the

specialized

field

of Islamic

architecture,

but also to that of architectural

history

in

general.

Coupled

with

another

newly

published

18th-century

treatise

by

Ahmed Efendi

on

architecture

(Pia

Hochhut, ed.,

Die Moschee

Niruosmaniye

n

Istanbul.

Beitrdge

ur

Baugeschichte

ach

osmanischen

Quellen,

Ber-

lin,

1986),

Crane's

publication signals

a

growing

interest in

the

study, through

primary

sources,

of

Islamic architectural

practice.

Crane's introduction starts with a

systematic

survey

of

pre-

vious literature on the

Risale

and relates the

text to the

genre

of Islamic literature known

as tezkire

(biographical

memoir),

more

specifically

to the late

16th-century eulogistic

biographies

of the Ottoman

chief

imperial

architect

Sinan,

which

he

dictated

to the

painter-poet

Mustafa

Saci,

a

relationship

made

explicit

by

Cacfer

Efendi himself: .

.

. Before

this,

menakib-ndmes

books

of

deeds]

were written and

composed

about some of the

chief

architects. As menakib-names ere written down for them, it is

necessary

for us to write ... a

menakib-ndme

n our

generous

Aga

(p.

6).

As Crane

notes,

the

Risale

is not

simply

an

architect's

biog-

raphy.

Of its 15

chapters,

he

first our trace the career

of Mehmed

Aga

from the

ranks of a

Janissary

recruit,

through

a

military

career

involving

the

inspection

of

fortressesand

fighting

bandits,

to chief

imperial

architect.

They

contain substantial

sections on

the science of

geometry

as the common

basis for the

crafts of

music,

mother-of-pearl inlaying,

and

architecture,

n

which the

Aga

received his

training

while

he was a

member of the

corps

of

royal gardeners

in the

Topkapi

Palace.

These

biographical

chapters,

which also

enumerate,

through

various

episodes,

the

architect's

praiseworthy

deeds and

virtues,

are

comparable

to

Sinan's

biographies composed

by

Saci,

or to

Manetti's

Life

of

Brunelleschi,

ll

of which

stressthe

architect's

successful

struggle

in

a

slanderous environment full

of

rivalry

(pp.

37-38,

41).

Chapters

five and

six deal with

Mehmed

Aga's

major

architec-

tural

works,

including

his

repairs

of

the sacred

sanctuariesin

Mecca

and

Medina,

and his

construction

of the

mosque

of

Sultan

Ahmed

I

in

Istanbul,

which had

reached

dome level

when

the

manuscript

was

completed

in

1614-1615.

Chapters

seven

through

10

discuss

various units

of

measurement

and the

science

of

geometry

as used

by

architects

in

land

surveying.

Chapters

11

through

14

compile

a

trilingual (Arabic,

Persian,

and Turk-

ish)

glossary

of

terms

for

architecture,

the

building

trades,

and

music,

informed

by

the

author's

approximately

20-year-long

associationwith the Aga as a client. The last chapter,containing

a

benediction,

implies

that

the

finished

manuscript

was

presented

by

the

author to his

patron,

Mehmed

Aga, just

as the

latter

had

once

presented

mother-of-pearl

inlaid

objects

to

the sultan

to

advance

his

career:

This

[book]

was

betrothed to His Excel-

lency

the

Aga

....

It

is

completely

filled with

pearls

like

moth-

er-of-pearl./

Where is

there

another

such

chest of

rare

pearls?

(pp.

108-109).

Crane's

introduction

(pp.

1-15)

summarizes

the

information

found

in

the treatise

and

provides

the

basic facts

about

the

career

of Mehmed

Aga

in

the

context of

the

Ottoman

system

of

the

Corps

of

Imperial

Architects,

a

sort of

ministry

of

public

works

reflecting

the

bureaucratic

centralization of

the

construction

industry

y

the state.Craneconcludes

his brief ntroduction

y

drawing

attention

o the

importance

f the Risaleas a source

for

the

history

of Ottoman

architecture,

not

only

for the hu-

man contextbut

also forthe

technological

nvironment

which

produced

he

great

monuments

of the Ottoman

classical

ge

(p.

15).

The

subsequent

ections f the book

contain

translation

of

the text

(pp.

17-109),

an

appendix

n the units

and

equivalen-

ciesofweightsandmeasures,

ibliography,

n ndexoftechnical

terms,

a

general

ndex,

andthe

facsimile.

A

critical valuation f

the bookhas o take nto

consideration

problemsposed

by

translating

he difficult

ext,

which

is

ap-

pended

with a

trilingual lossary

f terms

with no direct

equiv-

alentsin

English.

Having

undertaken

his heroic

task,

Crane

runs

into inevitable

problems.

Alternative

ranslations

an

be

proposed

or some

parts

of his text.

For

example,

he

reference

to the architect s

a

man

withan oeuvre

s translated

y

Crane

as masterraftsman

p.

59),

implying

an unintended

rtisanal

status.

A

couplet

n a

poem

that

compares

he

mosque

of

Sultan

Ahmed

to a rose

garden

s translated

s: None

[but

the

Aga]

can

give

such

splendor

o the flowers

of the

rose-garden./

He

who seized hependrew the borderasthougha compasswere

in hand

(p.

75);

context

suggests,

however,

that

reference

s

made

not to the

Aga,

but

to

Cacfer,

he author

who

composed

with his

pen,

like a skillful

architect,

he

poem

describing

he

garden-like

mosque.

A few more

examples

resufficiento

give

an ideaof the nuances

f

meaning

between ranslated

ext

and

original: 1)

It describes

who the

patron

aints

of

architects

re

and how His

Excellency

he

Aga

with the

blessings

of

noble

shaikhsearned

he arts

of

mother-of-pearlnlaying

and

archi-

tecture

fol.

lr),

translated

y

Crane

as: Itdescribes

who

the

master rchitects

wereand rom

whom

His

Excellency

he

Aga,

with

the

blessing

of his noble

shaikh,

earned

he arts of

ar-

chitecture

and the

working

of

mother-of-pearl

p.

17);

(2)

How is it that

suchan

edifice was

artfullymade Without

drawings

plans]

without

geometry

and without

a

[three-di-

mensional]

model?

fol.

3v),

translated

y

Craneas:

What

s

this?

Who madesuch

an edifice

Without

drawings

nd

with-

out mathematics

nd without

analogy?

p.

20).

Despite

ts

problems,

Crane's

ranslation

emains n

thewhole

loyal

to the

original

ext

and

captures

ts

archaic

lavor.

While

thosewho can

read

Ottoman-Turkish

an

consult

he

original

text

published

n

facsimile,

he

translation

makes

available o

English

readers

n

important

ource

hat

raises

many

nteresting

questions.

Craneimits

the

scope

of

his

descriptive

ntroduction

to those

questions

oncerning

he

career f the

architect

Mehmed

Aga

in the

Ottoman

context,

without

analyzing

he

text's

fur-

ther

implications

rom

he

point

of

view

of

architectural

heory.

Sincethe text is not merelya collectionof facts,however,

but

a

complexideological

construct

with

various

subtexts,

t

needs o

be

analyzed

ritically.

What

general

nferences an

be

drawn

from the

Risale

aboutthe

principles

and

meanings

of

architecture

n Ottoman

society?

Does

it

throw

light

on

the

aesthetic

alues,

ymbolic

associations,

nd

heoriesof

architec-

tural

design

hat

once

informed

he

construction

nd

perception

of

Ottoman

buildings?

To

answer

hese

questions

ne

must irst

determine

he

scope

and

potential

imits of

the

source

at

hand.

Its

author,

Cacfer

Efendi,

the

son

of

an

ascetic

shaikh,

in

order

to

study

the

religious

sciences

had

come

to

Istanbul

where

he

became

a

client of

the

architect

Mehmed

Aga:

For

more than

twenty



4/5

212

JSAH,

XLIX:2,

JUNE

1990

years

the

Aga

has

always

been thus

generous

and benevolent

to

us ....

Every

time

we

go

to his

house,

great

quantities

of

food

appealing

to the senses

appear (pp.

42-43).

When

Cacfer's

intention to

compose

a

biography

of

the

Aga

became

public,

a

numerous

group

from the

community

of shaikhs and

upright

persons

and from the

assembly

of

poor

religious

students

locked

to

his door to

describe

how

the

generous

architect had

given

them

gifts,

and to

pressure

the author to include their stories

in the book

so that each

would

buy

a

copy (p.

44).

Clearly,

then,

neither

Cacfer's

acquaintances

nor the

potential

readers

of

his

book were

practitioners

or

patrons

of

architecture.

The

au-

thor,

who

had withdrawn into a hermit's

cell before he

began

to

compose

the

treatise,

occasionally

visited the

construction

site of the

Sultan Ahmed

mosque

to

see if

something

worth

including

in

his book of

deeds had

come to

light.

On one

of

these visits he read

the fortune of

Mehmed

Aga

(who

was

dejected by

the

heavy

burden

of

multiple building

projects

scat-

tered in

many

places)

from

a

holy

book

containing

the

Proph-

et's traditions

that he

was

carrying,

after

which the

architect

rewarded Cacfer with

money

and a ram

(pp.

68-69).

In the light of these circumstances, Crane's hypothesis that

Cacfer

may

have been

one

of

Mehmed

Aga's

assistants in

the

Corps

of

Imperial

Architects

is

highly unlikely

(p.

6).

In a

poem

commemorating

the foundation

ceremony

of the

Sultan Ahmed

mosque,

which

poem

he

composed

upon

seeing

the

complicated

plans

and

drawings

of the

architect,

Cacfer himself

disclaims

any

specialized knowledge

of

architecture:

Because it

is not

possible

to relate how vast

a

building

this noble

mosque

is,

how

solidly

its

foundations

and structure

were

made,

we have not

described these. In

truth,

one who

wishes

to

understand these

matters should first

become

greatly

skilled and

well

versed

in

the

science of

geometry.

After

that,

it

is

necessary

to

study

and

ponder

it

for

many

days

and

months and

years

and for

much

time in

order to

comprehend

in

what manner

and in

what

ways

its

various

designs

and

interlocking

decorations

were

put

to-

gether

(pp.

65-68).

Cacfer,

who

does not

seem

distinguished

in

architectural

literacy,

exhibits

an

obsession with

philology,

reflected in his

etymological

exercises

with Arabic

roots,

and

his

compilation

of a

glossary

of

terms

in

Arabic,

provided

with

Persian

and Turkish

equivalents.

His

knowledge

of Arabic

points

to

a

madrasa

training

in the

religious

sciences,

suggesting

that

he

might

have

been a

secretary

n

the

architect's service:

when

certain

subjects

concerning

the

science

of

geometry

were

being

discussed this

humble

servant took

down

everything

(pp.

22-

23).

Caafer's

religious

training

also manifests itself in

the

relative

absence of

technical

information on

architecture

in

the

Risale,

which instead focuses on the virtuous deeds of the architect and

on

the

divine

origins

of

architecture. Like

Sinan's

biography,

with

which

Cacfer

was no

doubt

acquainted,

the Risale

begins

with

a

description

of

the

creation

of

the universe

by

God,

the

divine

architect

(pp.

19-20),

implying

an

analogy

with

the

human

architect's

creation

of

the

Sultan

Ahmed

mosque,

de-

scribed as

a

microcosmic

representation

of the

universe

(pp.

65-

75).

Unlike

Sinan's

biography by

a

painter-poet,

however,

which

traces the

origin

of

architecture

to

man's

hatred of

caves and to

the

progress

of

civilization,

that of

Mehmed

Aga

aims to

raise

the status

of

architecture

by

reference to

Islamic

tradition,

a

concern

reflecting

the

growing

emphasis

on

religious

orthodoxy

in

the

reign

of

Ahmed I as a

result of

military

conflict with the

Safavid

Shah Abbas

(referred

to

as the

heretic shah

on

pp.

67,

75).

Cacfer

seeks to

provide

a

religious

legitimation

of ar-

chitecture,

whose

origin

he

tracesto the

heavenly

prototype

of

the Kacba

n

Mecca,

and whose

patron

saints

Seth

(the

son of

Adam),

Abraham,

and Noah

were all

pure

prophets (pp.

28-

29).

Sinan's

biography

recommends

that the architect

(usually

a

convert from

Christianity)

has to be

pious,

but

Cacfer's reatise

almost

exaggerates

the

religiosity

of

Mehmed

Aga,

whose der-

vish-like

modesty

never allowed him

to boast:

In his

right

hand

he held a

rosary

and in

his left

hand a

measuring

stick ...

on the one

hand so

scrupulous

with his

devotions and

on the

other at his

perseverance

and his

effortswith

the

craftsmen

(p.

68).

The

Aga

had

chosen to be

trained in

the

complementary

arts of

mother-of-pearl

inlaying

and

architecturewhen a

shaykh

advised him to

abandon the

study

of

music,

the art

of

gypsies:

My

son,

it is

necessary

for

you

to

renounce

that art. If

that art

were

a

good

art,

it would be

practiced by righteous

and

virtuous

persons

(p.

28).

The same

shaykh

blessed

his

subsequent

ar-

chitectural studies as orthodox: Son, this art and work were

seen fit and

worthy

for

you

because for the

most

part

it

is the

work of

architects to build

noble

Friday

mosques,

and fine small

mosques

... and

all sorts of

charitable and

pious

buildings

(p.

32).

Writing

in the

1630s,

the

Ottoman

traveler

Evliya

?(elebi

confirms

the

long-standing rivalry

between

musicians

and

ar-

chitects

who

disputed

in front

of Sultan Murad

IV

(1623-1640)

their

relative

rank in

guild

processions.

The

chief

architect ar-

gued

that architects

should

precede

the

musicians

since

they

built

holy

mosques,

palaces,

mausolea,

and

fortresses for

the

armies of

Islam.The chief of

musicians answered:

We are

most

necessary

to the

Emperor's

magnificence,

splendor

and

majesty,

because wherever he goes we accompany him with drums and

pipes,

and

inspire

with

courage

the

Islamic

troops

by

the noise

of

kettledrums

.... The

architect's

guilds

are

all

composed

of

Armenian,

Greek,

and

Albanese

infidels.

Do

not,

my gracious

Lord,

grant

them

the

precedency

over the

musicians. '

By

such

pleading

the musicians

won,

as

the

practitioners

of

a

more or-

thodox

profession,

a

victory

that was

perhaps

foreshadowed

by

Cacfer'sefforts

to

provide religious

legitimacy

for

architecture.

The architect's

relative loss

of status

by

the second

half

of the

17th

century

was,

in

fact,

paralleled by

a

general

shift of

Ot-

toman cultural

creativity

from

the

sphere

of

architecture

to the

flourishing

field

of

music,

a

noteworthy

transformation that

turned

the Sultan Ahmed

mosque

into

the

last

great

imperial

mosque

ever

built.

The

relationship

between music and architecture is a curious

leitmotif

in the Risale

that

Crane

might

have

explored

in

his

introductory

essay.

The

musical

qualities

of

harmony,

that

which

is

agreeable

in

nature,

and of

dissonance,

that

which

is

offensive

in nature

(p.

26),

found their

parallel

in

architec-

ture,

as a music

expert

noted

while

observing

the

mosque

of

SultanAhmed

(p.

68):

Now

we

have seen

the

science of

music

in its

entirety

in the

building

of

this

noble

mosque.

This

state-

1.

E.

(elebi,

Narrative

of

Travels n

Europe,

Asia,

and

Africa,

in the

Seventeenth

entury,

rans.

.

von

Hammer-Purgstall,

vols.,

London,

1834,

I,

225.

Idem,

Seydhatname,

0

vols.,

Istanbul, 1896,

I,

620-621.



5/5

BOOK REVIEWS

213

OOK REVIEWS

213

ment has

important

implications

for the use of musical

har-

monies as a basis for architectural

proportions,

but

Cacfer

is

apparently

ncapable

of

presenting

a coherent discussion

of

such

a

theory, just

as he

is

unable to formulate

forcefully

the

implied

idea

of

geometry

as the common basis

for

the arts. The

kinship

of

music and

architecture,

noted as

early

as the 10th

century by

the

Islamic

philosopher

al-Farabi,

and

the

all-pervasiveness

of

geometric

systems

in Islamic art andarchitectureendow Cacfer's

rather

nebulous statements with a

wide-reaching

significance.

His

poems

describing

the

mosque

of SultanAhmed

again

testify

to his

inability

to evaluate

architecture

formally,

even if

they

do

provide

clues about

contemporary

aesthetic values and

sym-

bolic associations.

After a

reading

of

Cacfer's

reatise,

the

question

of

what sort

of

theory

of architectural

design guided

Ottoman

architects

still

remains

open.

This seems

to be

largely

the result of

Cacfer's

own

limitations,

coupled

with the

mentality

of a

society

that

did not

generally regard

architectureas

a

prestigious

intellectual

activity.

Architecture in

the Ottoman

world neither

retained its

medieval

craft status nor

attained the

Renaissance status

of a

high intellectual pursuit worthy of the ruling elite's attention;

it

somehow

remained

suspended

between

those two

poles.

It

would be

hasty

to

conclude from the

Risale,

a treatise

written

neither to

present comprehensive

principles

of

architecture nor

to

instruct

the architect or

the educated

patron,

that

Ottoman

architects

were unable to

develop

coherent

principles

of

design.

The

Islamic

world did

not

possess

an

equivalent

of

Vitruvius's

treatise as

a

model for

learned

architectural

discourse;

instead,

information

on

architecture

often

appeared ndirectly

in

tradi-

tional

literary

genres

like

poetry

and

biography,

or in

technical

manuals of

geometry

and

mathematics.

The

reader,

therefore,

should not

be

disappointed

if

the

Risale-i

Micmdriyye

s not

truly

a treatise

on

architecture in

the Western

sense of the

term.

GULRU

NECIPOGLU

Harvard

University

JI

CHENG,

The

Craftof

Gardens,

ranslated

by

Alison

Hardie,

New

Haven,

Conn.:

Yale

University

Press,

1988,

144

pp.,

50

b.

&

w.

photos,

40 color

pls.,

1

map.

$35.00.

Yuan

Ye

(The

Craft

of

Gardens),

completed by

Ji

Cheng

in

1634,

is

the

earliest

major

Chinese

treatise

on

garden

design.

The author

was a

professional

painter

turned

landscapedesigner.

In

detailing

the

creation of

a

garden,

the

text

discusses the

ideas

that should be inspired by garden scenery and offers practical

(not

technical)

advice

concerning

the

fabrication of

garden

buildings,

pebbled

walkways,

and

rockeries

meant to

imitate

natural

mountains.

Ji

frequently

alludes to

ancient

literature

and

Daoist

thought

as

he

describes

gardens,

but for

all his

how-to-

do-it

counsel,

his

approach

is

laissez-faire

since,

according

to

him,

there

are no

fixed

rules

for

designing gardens

(p.

119).

The

only

universal is

that

a

garden

must

stir

deep

emotions

in

its

visitors

(p.

106).

Ji's

treatise

provides

a

glimpse

into

the

lives of

the

upper

echelon

during

the

Ming

dynasty

(1368-1644).

This class

held

that

semi-reclusion in

a

garden

was

a

lofty

ideal,

especially

when

patterned

after

the

poet

Tao

Qian

(365-427),

whom so

many

ment has

important

implications

for the use of musical

har-

monies as a basis for architectural

proportions,

but

Cacfer

is

apparently

ncapable

of

presenting

a coherent discussion

of

such

a

theory, just

as he

is

unable to formulate

forcefully

the

implied

idea

of

geometry

as the common basis

for

the arts. The

kinship

of

music and

architecture,

noted as

early

as the 10th

century by

the

Islamic

philosopher

al-Farabi,

and

the

all-pervasiveness

of

geometric

systems

in Islamic art andarchitectureendow Cacfer's

rather

nebulous statements with a

wide-reaching

significance.

His

poems

describing

the

mosque

of SultanAhmed

again

testify

to his

inability

to evaluate

architecture

formally,

even if

they

do

provide

clues about

contemporary

aesthetic values and

sym-

bolic associations.

After a

reading

of

Cacfer's

reatise,

the

question

of

what sort

of

theory

of architectural

design guided

Ottoman

architects

still

remains

open.

This seems

to be

largely

the result of

Cacfer's

own

limitations,

coupled

with the

mentality

of a

society

that

did not

generally regard

architectureas

a

prestigious

intellectual

activity.

Architecture in

the Ottoman

world neither

retained its

medieval

craft status nor

attained the

Renaissance status

of a

high intellectual pursuit worthy of the ruling elite's attention;

it

somehow

remained

suspended

between

those two

poles.

It

would be

hasty

to

conclude from the

Risale,

a treatise

written

neither to

present comprehensive

principles

of

architecture nor

to

instruct

the architect or

the educated

patron,

that

Ottoman

architects

were unable to

develop

coherent

principles

of

design.

The

Islamic

world did

not

possess

an

equivalent

of

Vitruvius's

treatise as

a

model for

learned

architectural

discourse;

instead,

information

on

architecture

often

appeared ndirectly

in

tradi-

tional

literary

genres

like

poetry

and

biography,

or in

technical

manuals of

geometry

and

mathematics.

The

reader,

therefore,

should not

be

disappointed

if

the

Risale-i

Micmdriyye

s not

truly

a treatise

on

architecture in

the Western

sense of the

term.

GULRU

NECIPOGLU

Harvard

University

JI

CHENG,

The

Craftof

Gardens,

ranslated

by

Alison

Hardie,

New

Haven,

Conn.:

Yale

University

Press,

1988,

144

pp.,

50

b.

&

w.

photos,

40 color

pls.,

1

map.

$35.00.

Yuan

Ye

(The

Craft

of

Gardens),

completed by

Ji

Cheng

in

1634,

is

the

earliest

major

Chinese

treatise

on

garden

design.

The author

was a

professional

painter

turned

landscapedesigner.

In

detailing

the

creation of

a

garden,

the

text

discusses the

ideas

that should be inspired by garden scenery and offers practical

(not

technical)

advice

concerning

the

fabrication of

garden

buildings,

pebbled

walkways,

and

rockeries

meant to

imitate

natural

mountains.

Ji

frequently

alludes to

ancient

literature

and

Daoist

thought

as

he

describes

gardens,

but for

all his

how-to-

do-it

counsel,

his

approach

is

laissez-faire

since,

according

to

him,

there

are no

fixed

rules

for

designing gardens

(p.

119).

The

only

universal is

that

a

garden

must

stir

deep

emotions

in

its

visitors

(p.

106).

Ji's

treatise

provides

a

glimpse

into

the

lives of

the

upper

echelon

during

the

Ming

dynasty

(1368-1644).

This class

held

that

semi-reclusion in

a

garden

was

a

lofty

ideal,

especially

when

patterned

after

the

poet

Tao

Qian

(365-427),

whom so

many

took as a model.

Tao was famous for

resigning

a secure

gov-

ernment

post

and

returning

home to his

garden

in

order to

maintain his moral

integrity. Although

Yuan Ye discusses the

ideals that were the

basis for a

scholar-official's

garden,

the

treatisewas in all

probability

meant more

for the use of a

wealthy

merchant class. Scholars

would have found

Ji

repetitive,

since

the literati

painting

and

poetry

of the

preceding

centuries had

intimated all that

Ji

spelled

out. A nascent

money economy

spawned

during

the

Ming

created a new

class of rich

that

was

eager

to

adopt

the cultured

patina

of the literati and their ex-

acting

expectations

of what a

garden

should be.

Yuan

Ye documents the aesthetics of the

garden

tradition

during

Ming

China,

when it reached an

acme,

but in

particular

the treatise records

the

17th-century

fashion.

Although

West-

erners

often think of Chinese

gardendesign

as

static,

Ji

showed

that

garden

design,

like

any

art,

is

subject

to

change

and

period

styles.

In a discussion

of window

shapes,

for

example,

he

men-

tions that in the

old

days

windows in the

shape

of a

...

water-

caltrop

flower were considered

most artistic

(p.

76),

but con-

temporary

taste called

for the

shape

of

willow

leaves.

Alison Hardie's translation is the first unabridged English

version

of Yuan

Ye,

and it reads

well,

at

times

even

poetically;

often

Hardie maintains

the cadence of the

original,

performing

linguistic

acrobatics n order to

followJi

Cheng's style

of

parallel

prose.

Hardie

wisely

based her translation on

the

excellent

1978

annotated

Chinese

version

by

Chen

Zhi,

Yang

Chaobo,

and

Chen

Congzhou.

Where Hardie

occasionally

differs

from

them,

however,

I find her

unconvincing.

Some

passages

n

the

original

are difficult

to

interpret,

especially

the

poetic

sections

that

Chen

Congzhou

has

pointed

out

were

ghost

written

by

a

down-at-

the-heels

literatus to

help

Ji,

who

lacked a classical

education.

Hardie,

curiously,

did not consult

the

earlier,

partial

translation

of Yuan Ye

by

Osvald

Siren,

which in

a few

passages

surpasses

her work

(The

Gardens

of China,

New

York, 1949). However,

Hardie corrects

a number of

Siren's

misinterpretations,

and in

general

her text is reliable.

The most

glaring

error is the

translation of

the

title

as The

Craft

of

Gardens.

The Chinese

literally

means

garden

and to

smelt or fuse

metal ;

therefore

Forging

a

Garden

would

have

been

appropriate.

Ji

Cheng

uses

the

verb

ye

to

suggest

the in-

nermost secret

of Chinese

garden

design-the

harmonious

fu-

sion of

disparate

elements of

water,

rocks,

plants,

and

architec-

ture into

an

indivisible

whole like

smelted ore.

Ye

also

means

fascinating

and seductive

beauty,

and the

character

is

some-

times substituted

for the word for

wild,

which

has

the same

pronounciation.

These

secondary

meanings

no

doubt

also struck

Ji

and

his audience

as

appropriate

connotations for a

garden.

Hardie's craft is not

very

close to the

original

meaning

and

it

inappropriately suggests

that

Chinese

gardens

are

not

high

art but handicraft.

Although

Ji

proclaims

the

need

for

a master

craftsman

(which

he was

himself)

as

a

consultant when

building

a

garden,

he

makes

it clear

that

garden

design

equals

painting

and

poetry.

Literati

garden

owners,

according

to

Ji,

designed

nine-tenths

of their

properties

by

themselves

(p.

39),

and

since

they

were

trained in

poetry

and

dabbled in

painting,

similar

attitudes

and

aesthetic

theories

came

to

apply

to all

three

arts.

The

Craft of

Gardens

ncludes an

informative

foreword

by

Maggie

Keswick,

who

summarizes he

major

features

of

Chinese

gardens

and

places

Yuan

Ye

in

a

historical

framework.

However,

the

essay

suffers from

oversimplification

and

from

errors in

the

took as a model.

Tao was famous for

resigning

a secure

gov-

ernment

post

and

returning

home to his

garden

in

order to

maintain his moral

integrity. Although

Yuan Ye discusses the

ideals that were the

basis for a

scholar-official's

garden,

the

treatisewas in all

probability

meant more

for the use of a

wealthy

merchant class. Scholars

would have found

Ji

repetitive,

since

the literati

painting

and

poetry

of the

preceding

centuries had

intimated all that

Ji

spelled

out. A nascent

money economy

spawned

during

the

Ming

created a new

class of rich

that

was

eager

to

adopt

the cultured

patina

of the literati and their ex-

acting

expectations

of what a

garden

should be.

Yuan

Ye documents the aesthetics of the

garden

tradition

during

Ming

China,

when it reached an

acme,

but in

particular

the treatise records

the

17th-century

fashion.

Although

West-

erners

often think of Chinese

gardendesign

as

static,

Ji

showed

that

garden

design,

like

any

art,

is

subject

to

change

and

period

styles.

In a discussion

of window

shapes,

for

example,

he

men-

tions that in the

old

days

windows in the

shape

of a

...

water-

caltrop

flower were considered

most artistic

(p.

76),

but con-

temporary

taste called

for the

shape

of

willow

leaves.

Alison Hardie's translation is the first unabridged English

version

of Yuan

Ye,

and it reads

well,

at

times

even

poetically;

often

Hardie maintains

the cadence of the

original,

performing

linguistic

acrobatics n order to

followJi

Cheng's style

of

parallel

prose.

Hardie

wisely

based her translation on

the

excellent

1978

annotated

Chinese

version

by

Chen

Zhi,

Yang

Chaobo,

and

Chen

Congzhou.

Where Hardie

occasionally

differs

from

them,

however,

I find her

unconvincing.

Some

passages

n

the

original

are difficult

to

interpret,

especially

the

poetic

sections

that

Chen

Congzhou

has

pointed

out

were

ghost

written

by

a

down-at-

the-heels

literatus to

help

Ji,

who

lacked a classical

education.

Hardie,

curiously,

did not consult

the

earlier,

partial

translation

of Yuan Ye

by

Osvald

Siren,

which in

a few

passages

surpasses

her work

(The

Gardens

of China,

New

York, 1949). However,

Hardie corrects

a number of

Siren's

misinterpretations,

and in

general

her text is reliable.

The most

glaring

error is the

translation of

the

title

as The

Craft

of

Gardens.

The Chinese

literally

means

garden

and to

smelt or fuse

metal ;

therefore

Forging

a

Garden

would

have

been

appropriate.

Ji

Cheng

uses

the

verb

ye

to

suggest

the in-

nermost secret

of Chinese

garden

design-the

harmonious

fu-

sion of

disparate

elements of

water,

rocks,

plants,

and

architec-

ture into

an

indivisible

whole like

smelted ore.

Ye

also

means

fascinating

and seductive

beauty,

and the

character

is

some-

times substituted

for the word for

wild,

which

has

the same

pronounciation.

These

secondary

meanings

no

doubt

also struck

Ji

and

his audience

as

appropriate

connotations for a

garden.

Hardie's craft is not

very

close to the

original

meaning

and

it

inappropriately suggests

that

Chinese

gardens

are

not

high

art but handicraft.

Although

Ji

proclaims

the

need

for

a master

craftsman

(which

he was

himself)

as

a

consultant when

building

a

garden,

he

makes

it clear

that

garden

design

equals

painting

and

poetry.

Literati

garden

owners,

according

to

Ji,

designed

nine-tenths

of their

properties

by

themselves

(p.

39),

and

since

they

were

trained in

poetry

and

dabbled in

painting,

similar

attitudes

and

aesthetic

theories

came

to

apply

to all

three

arts.

The

Craft of

Gardens

ncludes an

informative

foreword

by

Maggie

Keswick,

who

summarizes he

major

features

of

Chinese

gardens

and

places

Yuan

Ye

in

a

historical

framework.

However,

the

essay

suffers from

oversimplification

and

from

errors in

the


Documents

Risale Mi'Mariyye