Jump to content

Talk:Mimar Sinan/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Story true?

I read the following story and would like to know if someone as any information regardng that:

Let me tell you a tale of Sinan. He built many of the largest Turkish mosques in the 16th century. Recently, the keystone of an arch in one of those mosques fell out, leaving modern-day workers scratching their heads as to how to get it back into place. While they were peering at the cavity where the stone had been, a worker noticed a little glass bottle in a crevice. Inside was a note from Sinan whose first few lines can be paraphrased thus: "One day, this keystone will probably fall out. You will have your ways of putting it back, I doubt not, but just in case, here's how I did it."

The workers followed his instructions, and the keystone is back in place today.

Reply to David Latapie 15:57, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

The origin of Sinan

Albania: Eye of the Balkan Vortex by Lou Giaffo:

Architect Sinan is not the only Albanian who worked in Turkey.

213.100.205.149 15:48, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

I assume this is sv:Användare:L'Houngan on Swedish Wikipedia. He has recently been involved in several edit wars on sv, including [1] [2] and [3] and has been blocked at at least one occasion. /The Phoenix 18:02, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

He is assumed to have Albanian origin,not Greek neither Armenian.

No he wasn't; Both Ottoman and non Ottoman papers have him being Christian of Greek or Armenian origins. Your confusion him with Sinan Pasha, who was of Albanian origins.

The origins of Sinan the architect of Suleiman aren't Albanian!

Speaking about Sinan the architect we must be very carefull. In fact, in the history of architecture of the Ottoman Empire we found two architect named Sinan. The first, Atik Sinan, or Sinan the Ancient, lived in the period of Mehmet the Second, and probably was from Albanian origins; but the second Sinan, well known worldwide as Mimar Koca Sinan, The Great Architect Sinan, lived many years after the first, between 1490 and 1588, and become very famous in the period of Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent, who reigned from 1520 till 1566. About the 'second' Sinan we can discuss his origins, but probably he was from a Greek-ortodox family, and not from Albanian origins. Reply to orlandi.luca@gmail.com In 1934 Ataturk ordered his grave to be dug and skull to be measured and... voila he had a brakisephal skull which means he is Turkic .Even this is weird in Anatolia because of the mongolic invasions (especially in Kayseri today most of the population has monoglic properties) the turkic genes has been corrupt at those times. of course later mostly Armenian genes added to this pool in Kayseri(The Minister of Forign Affairs of Turkey(2006) is a good example of Armenian genes) Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.108.18.236 (talk) 20:47, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Test from Wiktionary

The following text was moved from Wiktionary. Portions of it might be useful to this article. The edit history was as follows: 

<nowiki>
19. jan 2006 kl.21:13 Dangherous ({{Move to Wikipedia}})
18. jan 2006 kl.21:09 85.102.101.109
18. jan 2006 kl.21:09 85.102.101.109

</nowiki>

The text

He is an architect who grew up in one of the most splendid periods of the Ottoman State, and who contributed to this era with his works. Various sources state that Sinan was the architect of around 360 structures which included 84 mosques, 51 small mosques ("mescit"), 57 schools of theology ("medrese") 7 schools for Koran reciters ("darülkurra"), 22 mausoleums ("türbe"), 17 Alm Houses ("imaret"), 3 hospitals ("darüşşifa"), 7 aquaducts and arches, 48 inns ("Caravansary"), 35 palaces and mansions, 8 vaults and 46 baths. Sinan, who held the position of chief architect of the palace, which meant being the top manager of construction works of the Ottoman Empire, for nearly 50 years, worked with a large team of assistants consisting of architects and master builders.

The development and maturing stages of Sinan can be marked with three major works. The first two of these are in İstanbul - Şehzade Mosque which he calls his apprenticeship period work, Süleymaniye Mosque which is the work of his qualification stage, and Selimiye Mosque in Edirne the product of his master stage. Şehzade Mosque is the first of the grand mosques Sinan has created. Mihriman Sultan Mosque which is also known as the Üsküdar Quay Mosque was completed in the same year and has an original design with its main dome supported by three half domes. When Sinan reached the age of 70, he had completed the Süleymaniye Mosque and the Complex. This building, situated on one of the hills of Istanbul facing the Golden horn, and built in the name of Süleyman the Magnificent, is one of the symbolic monuments of the period. The diameter of the dome which exceeds 31 meters at Selimiye Mosque which Sinan completed when he was 80, is the most significant example of the level of achievement Sinan reached in architecture. Mimar Sinan has reached his artistic summit with the design, architecture, tile decorations, land stone workmanship displayed at Selimiye.

Another area of architecture where Sinan delivered unique projects are the mausoleums. Mausoleum of Şehzade Mehmed gets attention with its exterior decorations and sliced dome. Rüstem Paşa mausoleum is a very attractive structure in classical style. The mausoleum of Süleyman the Magnificent which is one of his interesting experimentations has an octagonal body and flat dome. Selim II Mausoleum with has a square plan and is one of the best examples of Turkish mausoleum architecture. Sinan's own mausoleum which is located at the north - east part of the Süleymaniye complex on the other hand, is a very plain structure.

Sinan, in the bridges he built, has masterfully combined art with functionalism. The largest of his work in this group is the nearly 635 m. long Büyükçekmece Bridge. Other significant examples are Ailivri Bridge, Lüleburgaz (Sokollu Mehmet Pasha) Bridge on Lüleburgaz River, Sinanlı Bridge over Ergene River and Drina Bridge which has became the title of the famous novel of Yugoslav author İvo Andriç.

While Sinan was maintaining and improving the water supply system of İstanbul, he has built arched aqueducts at several locations within the city. Mağlova Arch over Alibey River, which is 257 meter long, 35 meters high and displaying two layers of arches is one of the best samples of its kind.

http://www.discoverturkey.com/english/kultursanat/tb-mimar.html Preceding unsigned comment added by Jon Harald Søby (talk) 21:17, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Categories

There are some problems with two of the categories in this article:

  • Category:Turkish architects: Yes, he lived in what is now Turkey, but we know for sure he wasn't a Turk. He was either Greek or Armenian, hence making this category problematic.
  • Category:Greek Turkish people: It is impossible to tell if he was Greek, as only religious information were recorded in Ottoman censuses. We have evidence to support this, but we cannot say for sure.

Thoughts? Khoikhoi 01:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Not exactly, even if he was born a Christian in a Greek-speaking village, he spent most of his life and all his career as a Turk and a Muslim. Turkified? Yes. But still a Turk. Nobody forced him to build all those mosques. Nearly all the sources out there will refer to him as a Turkish architect. Orthodox of that era would be considered as Greek today, and Muslims, as Turks. If that's the case, then we can say the same thing for nearly all the people who lived in the middle ages. I think that we should reinstate the categories. The test is, if he were alive today, as he is, would he be considered Turkish or not? And the answer is yes. If the sources point to his Greek origins, then the other cat can stay as well. Baristarim 00:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
"Turkified Greek" does not mean "still a Turk"... It means both "still a Greek" and "still a Turk". Being born in a Greek Orthodox family of a Greek-speaking village, means that he was born a Greek! (what else would be required to say if someone belongs/ed to an ethnic group?). Orthodox of that era would not be considered Greeks today (compare the Bulgarians and Serbs who were and are Orthodox, but were and are not considered Greeks). The peoples living in the middle ages did not all have the same perception of nationality and ethnicity that we have today... some of them gave credit to their religion (most of), others to their blood, while others to their language... And if Sinan was alive today, i bet that he would considered himself simply 'Muslim', since his religion, not a supposed "Turkishness" "forced" him to built all these mosques... Btw, the Selimiye Mosque is rather impressive:). PS: since this time both categories are removed (and not just one, as it happened before), i have no objections. Hectorian 02:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Why are we not inclusive rather than exclusive? These were the days when ethnic nationalism was not yet developed. The people at the time did not have the self-identification of Greek, Turkish or Armenian in the same sense that we would have today. Why try to apply today's narrower classifications (and singly) to a time when these classifications did not yet exist as we know them today?
Sinan was not of Turkish origins, however, he practiced his art within the Ottoman Turkish sphere and his architectural legacy continued in the Turkish world. I think that makes him a Turkish architect. By nature he was Greek or Armenian. By nurture he was Ottoman Turk. We can reflect all of this by listing him under multiple categories.
I read "Tezkiretü-l Bünyan" (Sinan's "autobiography") recently. He talks of his origins very briefly, gives two sentences to state that he is devshirme from Kayseri under Selim I's reign, and gives his name as Sinan, son of Abdulmennan (one of the place holder names such as Abdullah or Abdurrahman, used as father's name by devshirmes), the rest of the text being dedicated to his works, how and why he built them. I doubt very much that he would understand this discussion.
I support that he be listed under 3 categories: Turkish architects, Greek people, Armenian people. Otherwise, just the People of the OE is sufficient. --Free smyrnan 06:41, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sinan.jpg

Image:Sinan.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Meaning of "Sinan" - Sinan Name Page. (Not Mimar Sinan page).

Origin

User Marshall Bagramyan you asked me to share my views on the talk page, but I don't really have one to share. The article represents two views and that's OK by me. What is not OK is to remove fully referenced text to the last word together with its sources and then saying "please avoid blind reverts". I didn't removed your text neither your refs, you did that, so you have to go to the talk page explaining why you don't accept the sources and the related text, instead of reverting and then asking the other editor to explain. To explain what? He who mass-removes material has to explain why.--79.167.64.174 (talk) 07:43, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

The references you added to his Greek origins are superfluous. Most of those sources are not written by scholars who are specialists in that subject area and so literally adding a dozen sources to that line does not really make any difference when there already several several sources attesting to a Greek identity and only seems to belabor a point. We should be giving weight to specialist literature and to authors who actually have a background in the area, not the Theoretical Investigations in Architecture or Illustrated Encyclopedia of Architects or what have you. --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 17:42, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


  • And the Armenian Soviet Encyclopaedia is a reliable source? Seeing that you think so, I didn't remove it. Whether a source is or isn't reliable has to do with the author and the publisher. The quality of the USSR's regime established authors during the Soviet era, as well as the Soviet encyclopedias, are not widely known for their flawless academic reliability.
  • The references you removed were written by reliable and fully ΝPOV authors and were published by well known and credible publishers such as the Encyclopedia Britannica or the MIT Press which never had anything to do with the quality standards of the Soviet Encyclopedias. Whatever you say I am not going to exchange a MIT source with a Soviet encyclopedia. All I can accept is to allow both to be present, and leave the reader to evaluate the sources.
  • You say that the sources are not specializing on the object, but what kind of specializing has the "Fifteenth Century to the Twentieth Century" source?
  • Moreover the other ref connected to his Armenian origin is written by an Armenian author (Hovannisian) as is the case with the author of the Soviet source. But I also didn't remove it.
  • And something that impressed me enough, you referenced the favorable to Armenian origin argument which was present in the article while you deleted the contrary to his Armenian origin argument (due to his Janissary past) together with its reference which was also present in the article without saying a word.
  • Still waiting from you to add "the several reliable sources" you mentioned when you firstly removed the other sources.

For the above reasons and some more I believe that your edit is not NPOV and I am going to restore the previous text together with the removed sources.--79.166.151.128 (talk) 21:18, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

You are clearly showing a belligerent attitude and so I advise you heed WP:CIVIL. I do not understand your hostile reaction nor do I much care for it but it is clear that you are approaching this article with aggressive, pre-conceived ideas and, judging by your disparaging remarks in your arguments, it seems that you are not even reading attentively enough to who wrote what. Two of the sources cited supporting his Armenian origin are from authorities who specialize in that area: Armen Zaryan is a noted expert in the field of medieval architecture and is based in Italy; he was simply asked by the Armenian Academy of Sciences to write the article on Sinan and consequently has no connection to the Soviet government nor shows any tendency to abide by Marxist-Leninist ideology. The second author is not Hovannisian, who is simply an editor, but Dickran Kouyumjian, a noted and respected historian in the field of Near Eastern, Islamic, and Byzantine Studies, which is, in my opinion, far better than the anonymous entry provided by Britannica or an author whose specialty isn't even in Ottoman studies. And he is the author of a chapter dealing with the Ottoman-Safavid period.
The source contesting Sinan's Armenian origin seems to be wholly inadequate to meeting the definition of a reliable source. Not only have modern Turkish authors shown a tendency to deny the Armenian origin of certain cities, regions, churches, kings and architects after the Armenian Genocide but his argument is completely outdated. As Kouyumjian shows in his article, Armenian colophons and foreign travelers in the Ottoman Empire attest to the fact that Armenians were subject to devshirme from the fourteenth to seventeenth centuries, which makes it absolutely possible that Sinan was Armenian. If an opinion can be conclusively proven wrong, as Kouyumjian and numerous authors have shown, then we can consider the other source to be either outdated or just wrong. The belief that Armenians were not subject to the devshirme has only been recently overturned by scholars.
The other authors you have provided add nothing to the article and it can be said that even if they write "Greek Christian", that still does not mean that Sinan was not an Armenian, since many Armenians converted to Greek Orthodoxy (dating back to Byzantine times), some of whom were known as in Armenian as "Hayhrom" (Armenian Romans, or Armenians belonging to the Orthodox faith).
Your hostile reaction, ad hominem attacks and snide remarks, mendacious editing and revert wars only serve to imperil your own future editing privileges. And also, I do not know if you are simply jumping from one computer to another, or you have a dynamic IP, but please create an account so that you do not find yourself violating Wikipedia rules like WP:3RR. --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 22:22, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

One Race, the Human Race

For all sane people the question of Mimar Sinan's ethnicity (a dubious idea if ever I encountered one) is entirely irrelevant. We know where he was born so we know his broad cultural background which is what matters when discussing eg matters of influences on his architectural style, which nodody seems to be interested in.A bit of focus on what he actually did would be a deal more constructive. And I still do not believe that birthdate. Neither for tht matter do the people at Encylopedia Brittanica, because I emailed them about it and they took the trouble to email me back saying they also thought it was suspect. 1, people who live to be a hundred are thin on the ground 2) the given date is too precise for a birthdate of somebody obscre (as he obviously was when born), where even years let alone days/monthsare considered as conjectural without good sources (note plural) 3) the taking of an adult rather than an adolescent by the devshirme. I suspect a problem involvin thedifference between the Muslim & christioan calendars to be the initial sourc of error. This is a much more important matter than the shape of his skull or whatever, which is only of interest to narrow minded people who are only interested in promoting one or other pathetic nationalist or racist world view. TheLongTone (talk) 12:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Sinan was of Greek Origins

The son of Greek Orthodox Christian parents, Sinan entered his father's trade as a stone mason....

The above statement is from Encyclopædia Britannica and confirms that Sinan was indeed of Greek and not Armenian origins as Armenians are Armenian Orthodox and not Greek Orthodox, therefore I will edit the article accordingly.

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9067893?hook=33990

Well, not quite right, his town was mostly inhabitated by Armenians during his time, besides, the most relevant historical record is the letter Sinan wrote requesting his family to be spared when in 1573 the Sultan ordered the exile of the Armenians of Kesaria. The letter has been published in the June 5, 1930 edition of Turk Tarikhi Enjumeyi Mejmousas, there are also the series of petitions which Sinan signed. His Greek origin was mostly claimed during the period in Turkey when the word Armenian was a taboo. Fad (ix) 04:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Not to mention that one can be Armenian and Greek Orthodox.--Eupator 19:49, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Was there a period that the word 'Armenian' was a taboo, but the word 'Greek' was not...? btw, Britannica is up to date. it uses the term 'Greek Orthodox' for the Greeks and the terms 'Eastern Orthodox', 'Orthodox Christians' or just 'Orthodox' for the orthodox people collectively. --Hectorian 02:11, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
I added another work by Sinan[4], but i am not sure if i can list it as 'Cursum' or 'Koursoum'. i have chosen the second for the moment, cause this is how in greek is called (according to the (International Phonetic Alphabet). --Hectorian 02:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Hectorian, your Mosque of Sinan at your Picture and the only Mosque exists in Trikala of Sinan (there was two) named: Osman Shah Mosque. I never heared "Koursoum" as a work of Sinan. Please correct. Thanks, lynxxx (Germany)

There is not a single document in Ottoman archives which state that Sinan was Armenian or Greek, only "Orthodox Christian". Those who suggest that he could be Armenian do this with the mere fact that the largest Christian community living at the vicinity of Kayseri were Armenians, but there was also a considerably large Greek population (e.g. Elia Kazan) in Kayseri. Actually, in Ottoman records, Sinan's father is named "Hristo", which suggests Greek ancesty, and which is probably why Britannica states that he was of Greek origin. Even though this was probably the truth, we can never be 100% sure of it. 78.40.231.225 (talk) 12:42, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Since Britannica states he was of Greek origin, I suggest we change it to Greek, or at least Greek Orthodox. Britannica is always a good source for reference.--93.42.91.104 (talk) 07:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Moreover, this link states he was of Greek origin [5], and as a reference there is: Dennis Sharp. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Architects and Architecture. New York: Quatro Publishing, 1991. ISBN 0-8230-2539-X. NA40.I45. p141-142. We could add that too.--93.42.91.104 (talk) 07:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Is there other for his birthdate than Brittannica? I have a reputable-looking work which gives 1494-9. It makes his age when recruited as a trainee janissary more plausible.TheLongTone (talk) 19:27, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, my father's name Christopher or Christos in a Greek way, but both me and my father are armenians. I don't think that the name of father is enough argument to count him as a greek

[[User:vahan.hovh|Tvahan.hovh] 13:17, 1 july 2011

Whatever the tendency to put him rather on the Greek or Armenian side: the remark about Ottomans not caring for ethnicity is misleading here. The millet system did include a religious form of ethnicity as Armenians and Greeks were different millets. Or was that not yet the case at Sinan's time? Kipala (talk) 08:41, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
This is wrong: the millet system had a pure religious base, not ethnic. There was not a Greek millet, but an orthodox millet, and the Greeks converted to Islam did not belong to the orthodox millet anymore. Also the Greek-Turkish population exchange in 1922 was done on religious (millet) basis, not ethnic. The result is that if you go to Ayvalik, you can find still today Muslim Greeks - still speaking Greek - whose ancestors where deported there from Crete in 1922. Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 08:50, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Sinan was of Albanian origin.

My source frosina.org says that Sinan was an Albanian architect. --Tfts (talk) 15:50, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

With a name like that you just know that they are going to be absolutely objective on this contentious and largely irrelevant question.TheLongTone (talk) 09:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)


Yes, Mimar Sinan had probably Albanian origin. At least that's what several credible sources say about his probable origin (which is not known for sure anyway). Since not few offline sources are accepted as reliable ones regarding his presumed Greek or Armenian origin, as per WP:GOODFAITH, I don't see why when it comes to his probable Albanian origin sources (I do admit that the one presented in this talk page don't seem neutral enough and don't get through the point) are deprecated and the sources are argumented: "with a name like that"... while his ethnicity's questions now becomes, I cite: "largely irrelevant". Anyway, I believe Sinan gave so much to the world architecture, no matter his origin (he was an Ottoman citizen and was educated as such) and this page should be improved with more information and references regarding his works and contribution to architecture. I own a book of the Turkish professor and architect Reha Günay and will try to provide some references. And finally here are some of the authors who cite Mimar Sinan's Albanian origin:

  • Cragg, Kenneth (1991). The Arab Christian: A History in the Middle East. Westminster John Knox Press. p. 120. ISBN 0-664-22182-3. Retrieved 2012-04-05. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); More than one of |pages= and |page= specified (help)
  • Brown, Percy (1942). Indian architecture: (The Islamic period). Taraporevala Sons. p. 92. Retrieved 2012-04-05. … the fame of the leading Ottoman architect, Sinan, having reached his ears, he is reported to have invited certain pupils of this Albanian genius to India to carry out his architectural schemes. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); More than one of |pages= and |page= specified (help)
  • Sitwell, Sacheverell (1958). Arabesque and honeycomb. Random House. p. 190. Retrieved 2012-04-05. He was not Turkish, but Greek, or Albanian, or, possibly, from his name, Armenian by origin, except that it is unlikely an Armenian would be a Janissary and it was in the corps of Janissaries that Sinan started his career as a military engineer. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); More than one of |pages= and |page= specified (help)

I am filling these into the article. Empathictrust (talk) 21:11, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Two sources say Greek or Albanian. And in the case of Sitwell, possibly Armenian. As you say, it is actually entirely unimportant where his great-great grandparents came from. The man was born & raised in central Anatolia, of an Orthodox family. Cultural matters are important: where your genes come from is not.TheLongTone (talk) 21:42, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, as per WP:SOURCES. I agree and thanks for your understanding and fast reply! Empathictrust (talk) 22:09, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I was a bit snippy there, I read the header & above before I actually looked at your edits: there are so many people who edit articles from a narrow ethnocentric POV, obviously not what you are doing. To my mind the question of his birth date is much more interesting, but what this article really needs is some good analysis & descrption of his architecture. Clear writing about architecture is not easy...TheLongTone (talk) 22:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
No problem at all for that. I am bound to always stick to the sources and references for the new information I provide to an article, here and elsewhere. Anyway I have to give a short explanation regarding to the scholars' view about his probable origin, as well as two architectural works that are known to have been built by Sinan in Albania. As for his birthdate, I cited a new source from the book I told you before. Regarding this (birthdate) matter and others in his life and work, the author was based on:

1. the main first hand source on Sinan's life and works: Tezkiretü'l bünyan and most recent works such as:

  • Suphi Saatci - Mimar Sinan and Tezkiret-ul Bunyan (Istanbul, 1989)
  • Z. Sönmez - Mimar Sinan ile ilgili Tarihi Yazmalar-Belgeler (Istanbul, 1988)
  • A. Kuran - Mimar Sinan (1986) [6] etc., none of which I have access, but I added here anyways if sb. else can access these books, and to show that Reha Günay's book is probably more than credible (despite he, differently from others gives a birthdate btwn. 1494 and 1499). Clear architectural writing is like you said, but I'll try to contribute a bit. As for the new section you wrote about the use of the word "Architect", I'll give some written arguments that I read from the book I have: facts that somehow oppose your view. Then we can figure out how to include that part in the article of Mimar Sinan. Empathictrust (talk) 13:12, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
It's primarily the fact tht he in effect ran something very like a contemporary practise that is , imo, innovatory. In England (which s where I'm from & so know the most about) you dont get comparible figures until the middle of the nineteenth century, people like Gilbert Scott. Even a prolific architect like Wren would not surely have delegated work to theextent that Sinan must have, with his involvement in ome of the buildings attributed to him probably being little more than signing off drawings, or the equivalent. I don't have any pretension to specialist knowledgin this area, altho i did do a degree in art hitory a long time ago: I just like buildings, and those few I've seen by Sinan knock your socks off. Do you have Gunay's book, btw?TheLongTone (talk) 13:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I have his book. I understand your comparisons and he really was a great master. In terms of religious buildings, he was probably inspired by Haghia Sophia, as far as I've read and browsed about him and his architecture, I believe his works exceeded it in terms of architectural elegance, form and general composition. The Süleymaniye Mosque's complex is a very good example I think. As for me, I'm in my way of preparing the project for my Master Deg. as Architect-Urban planner, but no pretenses as far as Sinan's life and work is concerned :) Empathictrust (talk) 14:13, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Use of word 'architect'

...in the intro to 'work' section. In Sinan's day there were no such thing as professional architects. There were artists who were comissioned to build buildings, and there were master masons of varying degrees of skill & sensibility, and combinations thereof: but no 'trained architects' as the term is understood todat in The word's derivation is a 'builder of bridges': exactly what Sinan was. Sinan can possbly be thought of as the first modern architect is the sense that he is comparable to the head of a large modern practise, with varying degrees of involvement in the different projects. I think this needs a brief explanation in the article.TheLongTone (talk) 07:10, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


Actually, in Sinan's days there were really professional architects. I will cite from the book of Reha Günay, page 11 (the section The Imperial Body of Architects). The book is copyrighted so the material should be reformulated to be included in the article:

Ottoman documents show us that there was a special architectural institution attached to the Palace, called Hassa Mimarlar Ocağı (Imperial Body of Architects). When the institution is created is not clear but we know it already existed before 1525. It was linked to the Şehremini (the person then responsible for the financing, purchasing and administrative activities related to construction works). The Hassa (Imperial) Chief Architect was in charge of its administration. The first chief architect is believed to have been Acem Alisi (Alaüddin). The chief architect was assisted by the water supply director, the chief of apprentices, the chief lime-worker, the warehouse director, the first secretary of the warehouse, the first architect, the deputy architect, the director of repairs, and many aster architects, qualified builders and artisans, as well as stewards and foremen in charge of monitoring their activities. HIs institution was in charge of practically everything related to the Empire's civil engineering, architecture and urban development activities: water supply, sewer system, roads and pavements, building regulations, permits and control as well as fire prevention, the activities of architects, foremen and superintendents and their wages, the standardization of building materials and their quality and price control. It was also in charge of designing, erecting, maintaining and repairing buildings belonging to the Imperial family, high-ranking State officials, and of appointing architects, foremen and superintendents to those tasks. It was also responsible for the construction of bridges, forts and other military works in times of war. Finally it functioned as an educational institution, being in charge of further training the most promising youths among those recruited by the Devşirme (levy originally of Christian children for the Janissary Corp and other State services).
...(from page 23) Following the death of`the Chief Architect Acem Alisi, Sadrazam (Grandvizier or Prime Minister) Lütfi Pasha appointed Sinan, the a "Subaşı" (Super-intendent), to the post of "Mimarbaşı" (chief architect) in 1538. Sinan's previous successes in civil works played an important role in this promotion. When recalling this event, Sinan says he was sad to leave the army but happy to have the opportunity to accomplish other important thins such as building monumental mosques.<ref: Tezkiretü'l bünyan>

That was it for now. Now we have to include this into the article, I suppose it's quite important Empathictrust (talk) 13:56, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

There was a precedent, but the office Sinan took overwas, as above, a sort of 'ministry of public works' office: artictic abitilty din't come into it. My take on Sinanis that he probably got the job because h had a god reputatin or building things that didn't fall down, & was evdently a man who could organise: it just so happenenedthat he hadan inquring mind that led him to innovate, a gat problem-solving ability in mking seemingly awkward sites into advantage, and a fantasticappreciationof volumeand space. Its the combination that is. i not withoutprecedent.
I have actually donevirtually no editing on this article other than copyediting of stufput inby I wouldguess a non-native english spaker: I must read up on the man & have a go.TheLongTone (talk) 15:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Constantinople

Should the article not call it Istanbul?TheLongTone (talk) 10:14, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

The name Istanbul is mandatory for happenings occurred after 1930, while Constantinople describes the city before 29 May 1453. In between there is a gray zone, but as a matter of fact most of the western sources dealing with this period have been using the denomination "Constantinople" for the city. Alex2006 (talk) 12:11, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
And when does it get called Byzantium? TheLongTone (talk) 12:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Of course it will be called Byzantium: in this case (founding of the city until 330 AD) there is no problem. The problem is, that these two names bring with them several hundred years of hatred between two peoples, and the war continues until now, on wikipedia. :-) Alex2006 (talk) 12:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Quite. The article already has enough dreary nationalist bickering in the stuff on the ethnicity of his parents. But I think that the fall of the Byzantine empire is a reasonable reason to start using a different name.TheLongTone (talk) 16:00, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

"Constantinople describes the city before 29 May 1453" Not really. The city was officially renamed only in 1930. So it's more than normal to call it Constantinople if its about something that occurred before 1930. --Երևանցի talk 16:20, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

"Arrest of 300 princes"?

The article states that Sinan was "responsible for the arrest of more than 300 major princes ...."

Surely this is error, or deliberate vandalism.

Karl gregory jones (talk) 13:41, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Deliberate vandalism, shocking that it's been there for three weeks. Now fixed.TheLongTone (talk) 14:18, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Mimar Sinan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Mimar Sinan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:12, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Portrait of Sinan

Current/stable version image
Other image

From Commons: "a very similar drawing was first published in 1927 in an article by Tosyavizade Rifat Osman Bey. He claimed that it was drawn by the deceased artist Hazan Riza who had copied it from an Italian engraving made during Sinan's lifetime. According to the historian Gülru Necipoğlu, this forms part of the invented history of Sinan." In other words, Necipoğlu, who is an authority on the subject, says that it is an invented portrait. And we don't illustrate biographies with invented portraits. On the other side, according to Necipoğlu, the "messy" (!) miniature portraits Sinan (see "The Age of Sinan", p. 135, fig. 118), and dates 1579, so it is much more probable that it depicts the architect as he really was. Alex2006 (talk) 09:35, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

The current image is about contemporary, the other has the appearance of a modern drawing, just a generic man with a beard (though I'm guessing Sinan probably had a beard for most of his life, I think it was the style at the time). Current image clearly preferable WP:LEADIMAGE IMO. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:49, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
I apologise for not reading that description.
However, if the other image fails because it cannot be determined if it is Sinan or not, surely the other image fails as well, as it is only "possibly" Sinan? The Madras (talk) 10:54, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
IMO, if a WP:RS says "possibly" (and WP makes this clear), it's good enough for the purpose (I'm unaware of better alternatives). As I understand it, there is no doubt the scene is the construction of the mausoleum for Sultan Süleyman I, which he was involved in. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:02, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Noting that my general opinion is that if we can have something contemporary on a historical person, we should. "Maybe that person" is not unique on WP, see for example Xerxes I, Christopher Marlowe and William Shakespeare. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:13, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
According to Necipoğlu, the architect portrayed in the miniature is Sinan. Here her comment to the image: "Sinan oversees the construction of Süleyman's mausoleum while the funeral cortege in the foreground carries a royal coffin". 1579. Alex2006 (talk) 11:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Is that from Cicek Kemal: The Great Ottoman Turkish Civilisation. Ankara 2000. p. 450. or somewhere else? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:04, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
No, the citation is from "The Age of Sinan", a beautiful book whose English edition was printed in 2005. Alex2006 (talk) 14:56, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Then I assume the "maybe" is from the Kemal book, but I can't confirm it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:26, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mimar_Sinan/Archive_1&oldid=1255173172"