Courtyards in the Traditional Anatolian

Urban Pattern and Their Contribution to

Planning
Assoc.Prof.Dr.Aysun ZKSE
Karabuk University,Turkey

Abstract
The aim of any planning and design venture for the restoration, redevelopment and
rehabilitation of traditional urban textures should involve not only the refurbishment
of streets and buildings, but also aim to tackle the components forming the city and
the interpretation of historic sites. Courtyards, as one of these components, are
urban fragments that function as a connection between private dwelling units and
their environments.

Courtyards, which are important architectural elements that are shaped based on
climatic considerations, form places for family gatherings and provide spatial
distribution. As in most Arabic cities, they are built to protect against sand and wind,
and as they are not covered, they can collect the cooler air in the evening and
sustain it until morning. Besides their functional use, they bring tranquillity and
harmony to cities as well as joining beauty and practically in urban planning.

Introduction
Courtyards have been continuously used since:
Prehistory:
o Anatolia-Haclar (7500-6000 BC)
o Anatolia-Can Hasan (7500-6000 BC)
o Anatolia-atalhyk (6250-5400 BC)
o Iran (7000 BC)
Ancient Oriental Civilization
o Egypt, Iran, Near East, Mesopotamia
o China-Yellow River
Classical Antiquity (Greece, Rome and Byzantine)
Medieval Europe as an early model of urban structure

It can be observed that, Islamic people have adapted the courtyard model according
to their local needs. In the case of other types of architecture, Islamic society has
reinterpreted and readapted houses over the centuries, with certain refinements
added in time. Careful analysis shows that, Islamic courtyard houses are totally
different from their Roman predecessors and also exhibit strong variation among
themselves and are distinct from one country (or sometimes from one city) to
another, which again demonstrates better adaptation to local conditions.

A quick glance at drawings of facades, plans and sections (prepared to the same
scale) illustrates how courtyard dimensions as well as their horizontal and vertical

1
proportions may differ from place to place, such as in Iran, Anatolia, East Africa,
North Africa etc.

Closely related to the concept of a Hidden Architecture is the striking and almost
total absence of a specific architectural form in the urban tissues for a specific
function: there are very few forms in Islamic architecture that cannot be adapted for a
variety of purposes; conversely a Muslim building serving a specific function can
assume a variety forms.

The paramount example of this phenomenon is the four-iwan (courtyard) structure

of central Asia and Iran, which is also found in other parts of the Muslim world. These
structures function equally well as a palace, mosque, madrasa, caravanserai, bath or
private dwelling at different times and in different places; in fact they are built to
serve all of these functions.

Historically, however, the Islamic town evolved gradually within fortified walls, with
the camii (mosque) and madrasa (university) acting as the religious and political
centre of the community, while the suq/bazaar (market place) formed the
commercial and social centre. The structure of this urban pattern was based on a
controlled hierarchy of roads, spaces and buildings.

The open central courtyards (avlu / wakalah) surrounding groups of houses

entered through covered passages constitute an important part of this pattern.

It can be seen that courtyards suggest privacy and, as a typical component, they
characterize the Islamic city. The street is a characteristic of European cities, which
often consists of layers of superimposed patterns: modern over baroque, baroque
over medieval, medieval over Roman; and sometimes over Greek. The two elements
also point to a fundamental difference between the Islamic and European city.

Islam accepted two basic ancient courtyard house types of the Middle Eastern and
Mediterranean periphery: The interior courtyard house, where the houses enclose a
courtyard, which is a characteristic of urban areas; and the exterior courtyard
house, where the courtyard borders on the house, providing a protected area
contiguous with dwelling units but not enclosed by them. This latter type tends to be
associated with rural areas, where there is less pressure on building space and less
need for the protective introversion the interior courtyard house provides. But also
interior and exterior courtyard houses are from widely separated areas of the Islamic
world; nevertheless they share common principles of planning, which reflect patterns
of social organization.

The later development of the courtyard model can be seen in the south of Europe
(south of Italy, France, and Spain) and South America - a result of the presence of
Islamic societies there.

The holistic study of the importance of the courtyards in the traditional fabric,
including their demographic, economic, functional, hygienic and aesthetic, socio
cultural and anthropologic aspects, constitute a relatively new approach where it is
necessary to examine both intellectual and subconscious patterns of thought in order

2
to grasp the interaction between man and his perception and representation of the
world.

The redevelopment of historic environments should take into accounts all

alternatives and reveal every latent issue.

The problem has:

A demographic aspect, because it would reduce the excessive of the
population,
An economic aspect; as it would considerably reduce the revenue of the
areas,
A functional aspect, because the liberation of these places should permit
automobile parking, which now occupies the street, reducing traffic lanes,
A hygienic and aesthetic aspect, because it would markedly increase the
percentage of green space per inhabitant.

It is obvious that this process of reactivation of what we could call respiration of the
building fabric of historic centres would require financial intervention on the part of
public enterprises; but it would also call for strong commitments and responsibilities
as the main condition for the conservation and restoration of historic centres.

What emerges from this discussion is that, the problem cannot be pinned to the
same buildings or quarters but requires the analysis of the entire historic centre and
the selection of clear methodological lines.

The Psychological Importance of Courtyards

Outer spaces in urban textures are not necessarily empty places and cities do not
consist of buildings that only provide shelter for their inhabitants.

Environment determines the psychological states of people: it has an effect on both

the psychology of the city and the psychological states of people. Therefore the
psychological state that will be created through the environment is as important as
the physical state. This is as important as the others for a healthy living. Individual
health, healthy social relations, a healthy working environment, productivity of the
employees and having a good mood are all related with the environment. This is why
in urban planning, spatial design should not disturb the psychology of the city: it
should not be in contrast with or unfamiliar to the city, but should create attractive
places to live happily.

Courtyards are the best architectural design unit and urban solution to maintain
these conditions. Away from places of high density of commercial activities, trade
facilities, and public activities, they are, in a sense, shelters that protect and develop
the values produced in the inner space. Courtyards are places that one can find a
chance to discover oneself and to turn inwards. They also exude secureness.

Oscar Newman pointed out that the most liveable places in a city are those that are
protected. In these places, secureness is not maintained by a police force, but
through a force that is the outcome of the support of the urban pattern. Courtyards,
as semi-public spaces, are such spaces.(Wicherrlay,1986)

3
The Socio-Politic Importance of Courtyards
The forum in the Byzantine city, which reflects the extroversion of urban life, was
transformed to mosques in the Islamic city, reflecting the introversion of urban life.
Doan Kuban, agreeing with this statement points out that, old Turkish cities did not
have public squares (plaza). This is because there was not a thought of a public
square. When further analysed, it can be seen that the courtyards of mosques were
used as public squares. Courtyards in Ottoman-Turkish cities are places that gather
people and form an active space in the house. (Kuban,1968 )

The Socio-Cultural Importance of Courtyards

Buildings with courtyards, regardless of whether they are considered in terms of
space, building or landscape, go beyond providing vital needs to become tangible
and intangible sources for the idea of mutual life within privacy.

Courtyards, different from culture to culture in their typology, have been used by all
civilizations since Mesopotamian civilizations; however, they have been used more
often in cultures where introversion is dominant.

For example, the Hilani of the Hittites and the Megaron of the Greeks that the
Turks encountered upon their arrival in Anatolia consisted of a double columned
frontal courtyard and a main space located behind it. This was accepted as the
typical dwelling unit of the settled farmer society. Turks, being nomads, did not have
an original dwelling unit except the oba, but they had a very strong sense of space
and a strong feeling of principle of introversion. They achieved this sense of
closeness by developing the existing scheme in a simple and natural way: by placing
a storage or other service area opposite the elevated frontal courtyard, they
transformed the frontal garden into an inner courtyard. In other words, they
dissolved the frontal courtyard within the tranquil and introvert world of the middle
courtyard.

The Importance of Courtyards in Relation to Philosophy and Belief

System
Former religions of the Turks are believed to have had an impact on the introverted
architecture in Anatolia. Indeed, courtyards were seen in other societies that
converted to Islam which were affected from Old Asian belief systems. Buddhism-
Mani disciplines, Shaman religions, Chinese and Indian cultures undoubtedly
affected the emergence of Anatolian Turkish house plan type.

The introversion of Buda and Mani disciplines were an important factor in the
creation of an inner world in architecture. Turks created the Madrasa form in Islam
as a reflection of the Vihara form of the Buddhist Monastery, demonstrating the fact
that the reflections of Asian spiritual world played an important role in the
development of Ottoman-Turkish culture in Anatolia.

Turks who converted to Buddhism did not have to live in unfamiliar forms of
dwellings; on the contrary, the courtyard forms of the viharas reminded them of
tents, in yurt, oba and adr, their characteristic living environment.

4
Turks have done more than just adopting the courtyard form of Asia and bringing an
architectural solution in the form of Madrasa . They applied the courtyard form, which
they developed during their nomadic period, as a place that enables the person to
turn to their inner world as part of the Muslim environment, through which they
created a bond between the two belief systems.

The Factors Affecting the Use of Courtyards in the Anatolian Urban

Pattern

The formation of the traditional Anatolian urban pattern, which has survived although
partially, and the factors affecting the use of courtyards within this pattern can be
listed under the following themes:

a) The urban pattern that was formed through different climatic and geographic
circumstances as well as cultures that the Turks took over in Anatolia;
b) The traditions brought by different cultures that migrated to Anatolia.
c) The living traditions during the Turkization-Islamization of Anatolia.

a) Urban Heritage in Anatolia

In the Pre-Turkish era, urban settlements had spread out all over Anatolia since the
Neolithic and Bronze Ages. The courtyard became to be used in different civilizations
in different ways depending on climate and geography. The form and use of the
courtyard varied according to the location of settlements -whether they were in
coastal or inner regions- as well as the characteristics of the people.

The excavations conducted in Anatolia have shown that before the Turks, the oldest
settlements in central Anatolia belonged to the Hittites. It is known that urban
architecture was developed during this period through the megaron type houses
with frontal courtyards. Aksoy states that there were similarities between the Hitti
tes and the Turks of the Middle East origin, in their nomadic and military traditions.
(Aksoy, 1963)

The traces of this old culture in central, eastern and southeastern Anatolia dating
back to 4500 BC can still be observed in the traditional houses that have survived.
The housing type of ancient settlements like Alacahyk, atalhyk and Haclar are
very similar to the houses of surrounding villages of today.

In the Hellenistic Era, population increased rapidly with the rising number of
settlements in both coastal and inner regions of western Anatolia. As new
settlements were founded, the expanding political sovereignty in these settlements
enhanced the relations between different cultures in Anatolia. Different ethnic groups
mixed in time forming the people of Anatolia.

In western Anatolia, specific housing types developed, starting from the Classical Era
to the Roman Era. Houses with prostas, which were formed of an entrance, a
courtyard, a corridor opening to this courtyard, a passage, and rooms, of the
Northern Aegean Region spread in 4th and 3rd centuries BC. The peristyle houses
that became common in the Hellenistic Era were formed of a courtyard surrounded
with wide porticos and rooms. These houses are very significant in the development

5
of Anatolian houses. Houses with atriums are still being used since Roman and
Byzantine period.

Southeastern Anatolia is where the effect of northern Mesopotamian tradition and

early Islamic culture was most prominent. Excavation results reveal the presence of
houses with rooms lined in an L-shape around a courtyard. It is interesting to note
the resemblance of this plan type to those traditional houses that have reached to
our times.

Information regarding the houses and palaces of the Seljukid and Principalities
periods reveal that the main scheme used in buildings such as houses, palaces,
caravanserais and madrasas involve a courtyard surrounded with iwans and rooms,
which can be observed especially in Diyarbakr at the Artukid Palace.

Eastern Anatolia was under the influence of Mesopotamian, Iranian and Khorasanian
civilisations. Eastern Anatolia, as the first region that the Turks arrived to, had an
important role in the evolution of the Turkish Houses. For example, Erzurum and
Divrii, where houses have courtyards that are entered through big gates within the
surrounding high walls, with stairs in the open that climb upstairs from the courtyards
and the ground floor used as a barn, are settlements with characteristic Turkish
houses.

In Northern Anatolia and to the east of Trabzon, the culture of ethnic groups of
Caucasian origin affected the region before the Turks. To the west of Trabzon,
Byzantine culture was influential. Although both of the regions introduced different
solutions to their house plans in order to overcome climatic and geographic
conditions, in none of them was the courtyard used, the preference being the sofa.

b) Traditions Introduced to Anatolia through the Migration of

Different Cultural Groups
The Asian culture that the Turks brought with them from China, India, Caucasia, Iran
and Khorasan had an important role in the evolution of Turkish houses with
courtyards and sofas, as well as the already existing architectural forms in Anatolia.

In the latest studies about the origin of the Turkish houses, the following are cited as
factors affecting the sense of closedness and centrality of Anatolian houses:

The nomadic lifestyle in Middle Asia

The effects of Shamanism, Buddha and Mani beliefs
The Islamic-Theocratic order of the state and society

It is known that the Turkish tribes that came to Anatolia from central Asia had the
characteristics of nomads, farmers and urbanites. Nomads adapted the tent and
the related lifestyle, which is considered as the origin of Turkish house plan type, to
Anatolian architecture. Yurt, a type of tent, and earthen house showed almost no
change since ancient times, and was transformed into the yayla house by farmers
and villagers in Anatolia. The open space in front of the tent left its place to the
courtyard and later the sofa in the village and yayla houses.

6
The inward-oriented and central form of the yurt played an important role in the
forms of the buildings the Turks constructed when they settled down. It is agreed that
the yurt influenced the spatial sense of the Turks.

E. Dies mentions that nomads lived in tents surrounded by an area in which they
protected their animals, while settled farmers lived in huts surrounded by fences or
walls. He adds that for nomads, inner-courtyard houses of nomads and the free open
houses of settled farmer population is transformed into a common square or
courtyard that is surrounded on all sides by the use of tents, which are the origins of
inner-courtyard houses, as an ensemble. (Akn, 1990)

Another explanation regarding the relation between the courtyard and nomadic
traditions concerns the migration of the Ouz tribe. The Ouz tribe, looking for
centuries for a suitable location to settle, continuously had to change places due to
the harsh and insecure conditions in Asia. As a result, they developed a
consciousness of abstract space. The abstract space transformed into the inner
courtyard of the southeastern Anatolian House, to the hayat houses of the
Mediterranean coast and to closed sofa houses of Istanbul.

Turks who became Buddhists in Asia did not live in buildings unfamiliar to them. On
the contrary, the vihara form resembled the tent-like settlement form of Turks.
(Vihara was of an inner courtyard surrounded by cells in the Indian Monastery.) For
this reason, it can be said that Turks introduced the madrasah form to Islamic
Architecture with the influence of the vihara, which they had internalised in middle
Asia.

In Shaman, Buddha and Mani disciplines, the belief that in order to maintain the
sovereignty over the ego one should shut oneself had an important role in the
Turkish Anatolian House. Naturally, these are not primary factors; however, all of
these viewpoints or cultures affected architecture.

We know that, before coming to Anatolia, Turks had lived in Iran for 200 years,
where they had sovereignty over Iran, and were in relation with Iranian culture and
arts. Turks, with the effects of Islam and the state order that they encountered in
Iran, continued to use the courtyard in Anatolia but its use was based on a different
understanding: instead of the sense of introversion in Buddha and Mani cultures, its
basis was privacy.

The use of courtyards in mosques was also different in terms of secrecy. They were
used as a gathering place, like a forum. As the religion consisted of a theocratic
state and a social order, the social life occurred only in the courtyards of mosques.

c) The Effect of Traditional Life on the Courtyards in the Urban

Texture of Anatolia After the Arrival of the Turks
Following the settlement of the Turks in Anatolia, they tried to develop the forms
used before them and adapted them to their natural and social conditions. Similarly,
they adapted the courtyard to climatic conditions and developed relevant solutions.
In central and eastern Anatolia, they included a passage or a sofa between the
courtyard and the garden and rooms. In later stages, we see that the courtyard
leaves its place to the sofa, as in Mediterranean region and southeastern Anatolia.

7
The continuous movement of Turks from east to west and their spread throughout
Anatolia and Thrace caused the Turkish house to develop in different dimensions.

The flexibility of the Turkish House to provide for the needs of a people on the move,
together with permanent solutions devised by rooted cultures to overcome problems
arising from living in one place for too long, have resulted with completely new
formations. As sofa type houses, which enable flexible use of place, local cultures
also influenced dwelling types.

Problems and Suggestions

Planning for rehabilitation or redevelopment of traditional towns does not take
courtyards into consideration even though they are a significant feature. Planning
decisions are made as if they concern an empty land, as in the case of Kayseri
Preservation Plan. Consequently, the courtyard houses get demolished, making way
for tower buildings, big parks, stadia etc. Some of the problems are mentioned
below:

The increase in traffic meant opening new wide roads that invaded courtyards
and gardens.
Unmaintained courtyards turned into rubbish or storage area.
The ones that are under protection are not used for their original purpose but
as stores, woodsheds etc, with their gardens used as spaces to build annexes
to existing buildings.
The complementary elements of courtyards, such as pools, fountains, flower
beds, walls, iwans, ardak etc. are neglected, demolished, closed or no longer
function.
The rarely restored ones lost their values due to incompetent restoration or
erroneous interpretations.
They are viewed as a source of income for the local people and
administration.

The alternative to the traditional urban texture incorporating courtyards was the
newly formed town based on construction regulations that disregarded the traditional
green spaces of courtyards, resulting in the loss of healthy lifestyle.

Today, most of the factors that caused the formation of courtyards, such as
geography, climate, physiological and social functions, are still valid. People still
enjoy wandering, watching the flow of water and the sight of flowers. It is still
important to enjoy all the elements that make a courtyard through seeing, smelling,
hearing and touching. But some things have changed, the most important being the
increasing value of land due to pressures of economy and increasing population.
Although social privacy still exists, it is no longer a religious privacy.

8
Bibliography

1) Naumann, R., Eski Anadolu Mimarl, TTK Basmevi, Ankara, 1985

2) Akture,S.,Anadoluda Bronz a Kentleri, stanbul,1988
3) Aksoy, Orta MekanTrk Sivil Mimarisinde Temel Kurulu Prensibi ,Mimarlk
ve Sanat, Say 7-10, 1963
4) Szen, M., Eruzun,C., Anadoluda Ev ve nsan, Emlak Bankas Yay., stanbul
1992
5) Cezzar,M., Anadolu ncesi Trklerde ehir ve Mimarlk, stanbul,1997
6) Karpuz, H., Trk slam Mimarisinde Erzurum Evleri, Kltr Bak.
Yay.,Ankara,1993
7) Akn, G., Asya Merkezi Mekan Gelenei, Kltr Bak.Yay., no:38, Ankara 1990
8) Hammad,A., Hammat,M.,Arap slam Mimarisi ve Bunlarn evreleriyle Birlikte
Korunmas, slam Mimari Mirasn Koruma Konferans, stanbul, 1985
9) Kkerman,A., Anadoludaki Geleneksel Trk Evinde Mekan
Organizasyonu Asndan Odalar, stanbul,1993
10) zkse,A.,Avlularn Tarihsel Sre indeki Evrimi ,Gazi niversitesi Fen
Bilimleri Enstits ,1995,Unpublished Doctorate Thesis.
11) Wichherlay,R.E.,Antik alarda Kentler Nasl Kuruldu,stanbul,1986
12) Kuban,D.,Anadolu Trk ehri Tarihi Geliimi Sosyal ve Fiziki zellikleri
zerine Baz Gzlemler ,Vakflar Dergisi VII,1968
13) Aktre,S.,19.yy Sonunda Anadolu Kenti Mekansal Yap
zmlemesi,ODT Mim.Fak. Ankara,1981
14) Cezzar,M.,Anadolu ncesi Trklerde ehir ve Mimarlk,stanbul,1977
15) Danby,M.,The slamic Architectural Tradition and The House with Special
Reference to the Middle East , slamic Architecture and Urbanism Symposium,
Edited by Aydn Germen,Damman,1983
16) Akurgal,E.,Ancient Civilizations and Ruins of Turkey, TTK Basimevi,
Ankara,1973

9
Figures

Figure 1-3: Ozkose,A.,Courtyards of Old Houses in Kayseri

10
Figure 4: Ozkose,A.,Courtyard of Old House in Urfa Figure 5: Ozkose,A.,Courtyard of Old House in Diyarbakr

Figure 6: Ozkose,A.,Courtyard Texture of Old Mardin City

11
Figure 7: Ozkose,A.,Courtyard Texture of Greme Figure 8: Ozkose,A.,Courtyard of Safranbolu Arasta

Figure 9: Ozkose,A.,Courtyard Texture of Old Kayser City

Figure 10: Ozkose,A.,Courtyard of Ataturk Mosole (Antkabir ) in Ankara

12