Comparing Domes of Architect Sinan to Renaissance Architect Palladio - Essay Example

Outline Introduction a) General ideas on architecture and the use of domes;\ b) Thesis ment. 2. Main body a) Architect Sinan i) Sehzade Mosque; ii) Selimiye Mosque b) Architect Andrea Palladio i) Villa Capra “La Rotonda”; ii) Villa Barbaro. c) Overall comparison 3. Conclusion a) Thesis restatement; b) Overall peculiarities. The dome is one of the best and most marvellous inventions in the world of architecture. It is like a manifestation of a man’s vision of how the limitless thoughts on the place you are in unite under the spherical form of the building. On the other hand, one of the associations coming to one’s mind with a dome is the centrepiece symmetry. It serves for the harmony of the building and the place where it is located. Following in keeping with the best traditions of Vitruvius and Alberti, two architects are highlighted so that to point out the use of the dome in their works. The comparison of the works by both architects is not a mere attempt to find out who was the best, but to show off where the edge between different cultures went through the aesthetic sensitivity of a man’s feeling and vision of what he/she feels. A slight connection in the use of dome in the architectural ensemble by Sinan and Palladio re-unites Eastern and Western culture and religion in a peculiar way. First off, it should be mentioned that the medieval architecture was full of the slight overlapping of new styles which layered the old ones in a peculiar and sophisticated way. In this respect it is necessary to mention that the Romanesque style was followed by the Gothic style and then appeared so-called Mannerism. In this gradual follow-up, there were plenty of the architects able to add something new to the development of the overall look of the architectural ensemble in its connection to the place, epoch, people, and religion (one of the most important constituents underlined in the paper). Thus, the works of Sinan as the one of the most famous architect of his time across the Ottoman Empire go first in this enthusiastic analysis on the world’s architectural heritage. The mosques made by Sinan cannot but inspire to the deepest strings of a man’s soul. Creating his magnificent mosques during the time of more than 50 years, the 16th century Turkish architect felt a huge desire to never stop on using dome as the core idea of Islam, so to speak (Roose, 2009). The perfection seen on the example of Sehzade Mehmet Mosque outlines the uniqueness in how Sinan approached toward the glory of God seen on the example of patterned fornications. With the greatness of the Sinan’s creations, the classical architecture of the Ottoman Empire “reached its pinnacle” (Çelik, 1993). Nevertheless, being Sinan’s first major work built in 1545-1548, it was well appreciated by the contemporaries for the articulated geometry and the arrangement of the domed hall (Moffett, Fazio, & Wodehouse, 2003). Apparently, the link between the central dome and half-domes illustrates the Islamic multifaceted implementation of the gorgeous ornaments. To say more, the dome was inserted with a huge passion of Sinan who tried to engrave the memory of the sultan Suleyman’s son Mehmet (Foster, 2004). What is more important, the construction of the columns supporting the dome in the mosque is also done in a symmetrical proportion, so that to shed light on the logic of the architectural form. Coloured stones and the mosaics incremented in the interior part of the dome of the Sehzade Mosque are done with the pure genius of Sinan. It means that the glory of the Ottoman classical architecture is rooted to the picturesque and full-of-wealth representation of the religious tradition throughout the Empire. Admittedly, Sinan felt his responsibility for praising Islam in terms of the architecture. Hence, his first mosque proved this idea right. Another Example of Sinan’s talent, as an architect is Selimiye Mosque. Built by Sinan in 1575 in Edirne, Turkey, the mosque is full of the architect’s idea of symmetry and geometrical concept of sphere-plus-square representation. Looking at this mosque, an expert would see that Sinan viewed the use of the half-domes as obsolete for the whole embrace of the symmetrical bizarrerie of the building. Robinson (1996, p. 277) illustrates the peculiarity of the Selimiye Mosque by analyzing what came new to the Sinan’s idea of dome in the framework of the whole architectural environment around it, namely: “The dome, the largest in Ottoman architecture (102 feet in diameter), is carried on eight massive piers, which made the large half-domes of earlier mosques unnecessary.” Thus, the mosque in Edirne magnifies the use of the octagonal support for the spherical continuation of the building implemented in the use of the dome. Both examples of the dome in the architecture by Sinan take notice of the evolution in the creative work by the architect. That is to say, one admits the improvement of Sinan’s talent developed at a frantic pace. With no step back from his ideal of the dome as an illustration of the divine design of God’s mind, Sinan puts emphasis on the core idea of his architectural style as a huge contribution into the world’s architectural heritage. On the other hand, it is high time one drew parallel to the works by another 16th century architect from Italy. Needless to say, it is all about Andrea Palladio. He was well accurate in approaching the architecture by means of both theoretical and practical constituents. Starting from his famous treatise on architecture, also known as The Four Books on Architecture, Palladio reinvented and revisited the way in which European architectural thought should develop. Of course, it touched upon the use of the antique representations into the new environment. The most explicable masterpieces of the Palladian style are the so-called villas of the Veneto with such works, as Villa Capra “La Rotonda”, Villa Barbaro, etc. The use of the dome by Andrea Palladio was not spontaneous. The antique shapes and the antique culture influenced the architect much. Thereupon, the use of the dome by Palladio did not fail to have its original prescription as it was seen in the works by Sinan. Definitely, it turns observers to the mythological impression engraved in the architectural forms of the columns arranged so that the domes are inserted in their never-ending complex of the architectural grandeur. One of the most peculiar things to be highlighted in the architectural tendencies used in the works of both architects is that the domes were supported by the eight piers so that the symmetry of the form could match with the harmony of the place (Simonis, 2008). It means that the trend was overtly popular among the eastern as well as western architects. However, Palladian style regarding the use of the dome is quite different. First of all, Andrea Palladio was likely to implement oval domes in his villas and churches across Italy (Palladio, 2002). Pantheon-like villas inspire by the fact that the dome is hidden at a glance, but disclosed once being inside the building. Such a transformation is especially seen on the example of Villa Capra “La Rotonda.” With a square plan, it has much to do with the symmetrical rule imposed by Palladio. In other words, the core idea of the dome is that it serves to maintain and hyperbolize the magnificence of the ancient invention of the symmetrical form. It goes without saying that the architect tried to reflect on the antique vision of rotunda and its meaning for the people at the time. Hence, four facades of the building justify the overall idea of the antique distinctiveness. Ruchti (2008, p. 78) writes in her study about the following peculiarity of this building: “Villa Rotonda resembles a Greek Temple with four porches, one on each side.” In sum, the base for the dome in the building is structured on the octagonal construction best applicable for better sustainability and, of course, for more aesthetics throughout the building itself. However, the originality of Palladio lies in his feeling of the proportion across the building so as to make an alleged reflection of each part thereof. Furthermore, as Bing (2010, p. 245) gives another evaluation for the uniqueness of the villa itself, namely: “No matter how you look at it, this villa is a show-stopper: the namesake dome caps a square base, with colonnaded facades on all four sides.” Thus, the octagonal form with the “doubled” square base By contrast, Villa Barbaro is amazing due to a new way of the overall construction and the place of the dome in it. The structure of the villa is quite complex, as it has perpendicular horizontal plan running into the central block where the dome is fixed at the centre of the main façade (tempietto) (Weissmüller, 2005). In the complexity of the forms by Palladio, one can see the divinity of the Ionic columns at the forefront of the dome manifestation. This temple-like construction of the building leads one to have the vision of a rectangular base slightly changed into a spherical multiplicity of the designer’s inner world. Classical portico by Palladio is also present in Villa Barbaro, as an inseparable part of his addiction to the antique culture. On the other hand, one should bear it in mind that the plan of the building comprises four main parts, namely: courtyard, main residence, service wings, and nymphaeum (Paoletti & Radke, 2005). Once again the four constituents of the building are well implied into the sense of the domes located at the courtyard and nymphaeum parts of the villa. Figure 4. Villa Barbaro At the first sight, the domes are not visible. However, their use in the building is not just to have a widely apparent representation of the dome, but its functional importance, therefore. In this respect the functional accommodation of the villa is well provided by the equidistant arrangement of the side wings which is new compared to the Villa Capra “La Rotonda.” Nonetheless, it was done by Andrea Palladio as a bellwether of his time so that to lay more emphasis on the brand called Villas de Veneto, so to speak. All in all, the oeuvres by Sinan and Palladio have huge significance for the world’s architectural heritage. The use of the domes by both architects served for different purposes. Mainly, it touched upon the religious subtle sides connected to lofty matters felt by both Palladio and Sinan. The former felt close to the antique representation of the dome on a square base. Strange as it may seem, the latter felt the same dedication to the square symmetry shaped by the huge and well observed domes at the centre of each building (mosque). This similarity proved the idea of a correlated trend in the late medieval age in the Western and in the Eastern civilizations. The four pillars of Sinan’s ideal form patterned by the dome at the centre were the minarets. Conversely, for Palladio, it was all about the facades and rectangular components of the building forming the symmetrical unity and harmony on the whole. Thus, the paramount place of the dome was well related to the divine character of each architect’s vision of the building accompanied by its initial prescription. In this vein, Sinan’s attention was grabbed mostly by the urban environments across the Ottoman Empire, whereas Palladio was devoted to the suburban landscapes. For both sceneries, the dome itself manifests the logic of the symmetrical implementation for the material as well as immaterial firmness of the building itself. To conclude, the invention of the dome in ancient times served as a continuation of the common tradition for rediscovering new forms and styles in the architecture. Given that, a slight connection in the use of dome in the architectural ensemble by Sinan and Palladio re-unites Eastern and Western culture and religion in a peculiar way. Sehzade Mehmet Mosque and Selimiye Mosque by Sinan highlight the Islamic inspiration carved by the architectural diversity in the exterior and interior peculiarity of the dome implementation. Andrea Palladio and his Villa Capra “La Rotonda” and Villa Barbaro present one with a fait accompli that suburban environment should also fall prey of the divine design seen on the example of the dome insertion. This tendency stays quite firm until now, as it is full of power to touch a man’s aesthetic sensitivity. Reference List Bing, A 2010б Venice & the Veneto: city guide, Lonely Planet, New York, NY. Çelik, Z 1993б The remaking of Istanbul: portrait of an Ottoman city in the nineteenth century, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. Foster, S 2004, Islam + architecture, Vol. 74 No. 6, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. Moffett, M, Fazio, MW & Wodehouse, L 2003, A world history of architecture, Laurence King Publishing, London. Palladio, A 2002, The Four Books on Architecture, MIT Press, Boston, MA. Paoletti, JT & Radke, GM 2005, Art in Renaissance Italy (3 ed.), Laurence King Publishing, London. Robinson, F 1996, The Cambridge illustrated history of the Islamic world, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Roose, E 2009, The architectural representation of Islam: Muslim-commissioned mosque design in the Netherlands, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam. Ruchti, H 2008, La Bella Vita: Daily Inspiration from Italy, Xyzzy Press, Brentwood, TN. Simonis, D 2008, Venice, Lonely Planet, New York, NY. Weissmüller, A 2005, Palladio in Venice, Grafiche Vianello srl, Berlin. Annexes Figure 5. Sehzade Mehmet Mosque Plan Figure 6. Selimiye Mosque Plan Figure 7. Villa Capra “La Rotonda” Plan Figure 8. Villa Barbaro Plan Table of Figures Figure 1 Sehzade Mehmet Mosque 4 Figure 2. Selimiye Mosque, built by Sinan in 1575. Edirne, Turkey 5 Figure 3. Villa Capra “La Rotonda” 7 Figure 4. Villa Barbaro 9 Figure 5. Sehzade Mehmet Mosque Plan 13 Figure 6. Selimiye Mosque Plan 13 Figure 7. Villa Capra “La Rotonda” Plan 14 Figure 8. Villa Barbaro Plan 14 Read More