The Problem of Reading Later Interventions: Reintegration of the Missing Parts for Providing the Survival of Medieval Architecture in Central Anatolia in 20th Century (original) (raw)

The status of the lacunae in a work of architecture is more complex than that in artistic objects such as paintings. The missing parts of buildings are not only visual problems; they could affect structure and functionality. The lack of structural and architectural elements, therefore, presents a serious physical problem beyond the concept of mere artistic unity. The history of architectural restoration provides us with many examples as well as thinkers who theorized on the subject of reintegration: Brandi’s concepts of “intuitive unity” and “logical unity”, and the equilibrium he seeks between the two present us with the basis of modern theory, which is reflected in Articles 9-13 of the Venice Charter as general guidelines. Riegl’s system of values reveals similar oppositions between age value and historic value on the one hand and newness, relative art and use values on the other. The mid-20th century restorations carried on the medieval monuments in Central Anatolia constitutes a good series of examples to discuss the problems of architectural lacunae and reintegration. During this period many Antolian Seljukid, Moghul and Principalities monuments, originating from the 11th-13th centuries were restored by the General Directorate of Pious Foundations, the central authority in charge. Most of these interventions could be justified in terms of providing the survival of the buildings. However, it is also true that they have changed their physical and architectural characteristics forever, providing an incorrect image of unity and completeness while making future architectural, structural, technical and material research into certain details impossible. They have also caused damage to the buildings in the long run as a result of the inappropriate introduction of Portland cement and heavy reinforced concrete structural elements in many cases. Furthermore, they have become irreversible and after 40-80 years completely unreadable even to the educated eye. Aksaray Sultanhanı, commissioned by the Anatolian Seljukid Sultan Alaeddin Keykubat I in 1229 and enlarged by Sultan Giyaseddin Keyhusrev II in 1278, illustrates this case very well. The ruinous state of the building at the beginning of the 20th century proven by period photographs contradicts with the present state of the building in many ways (figure). Although the building is complete today, most of this completeness is artificial and superficial. The completeness serves the survival of the building, but the interventions are not recognizable or reversible and neither are they sustainable as the lack of maintenance and the heavy restoration disturb the structural integrity of the building while causing material problems. This paper proposed to discuss the various conceptual aspects of the problem of reintegration based on 20th century restorations of medieval monuments in Central Anatolia.