This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
, Vol. 5, No. 1, Patronage (1982), pp. 3-8 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1360098 Accessed: 04/05/2009 11:33
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Oxford Art Journal.
In the fifteenth century there were various attempts. in particular. extended the Ottomans' cultural horizons. and Mehmed's long-standing Grand THE OXFORD ARTJOURNAL5:1 1982 Vizier. this is not the Ottoman only instance in the fifteenth-century heterodox clashed. had a brother who was his opposite number . and the conquest of Constantinople.and had to be beaten . 1) are not a romantic artist's fanciful image of 'The Oriental Potentate'. while their mother was granted a monastery in Istanbul. Costanzada Ferrara:Bronzemedalof Mehmedthe Conqueror. he has left a scrap-book of pen and ink drawings which include. (right). Despite.A Sultan of Paradox: Mehmed the Conqueror as a patron of the arts JULIAN RABY first state.Grand Voivode . and premature. who were spreading heterodox ideas about the divine Logos and the divinity of man. on the one hand. he was slow . As an adolescent Mehmed's behaviour had caused his elders considerable concern.Obverse (left) and reverse The aquiline.3 cm. apart from his 3 .to memorise the Koran. Yet what prompted a Muslim potentate to invite an Italian medallist to his court in the renascent city of Constantinople. these missionaries were bloodily suppressed. earned him at the age of 21 the awesome sobriquet of Fatih. or as Mehmed himself punned "Islambul". In this period of transition we find members of the Palaeologan house serving as commanders of the Sultan.diam. to become a naval power with extensive maritime contacts. National GalleryofArt. to minimise the differences between Islam and Christianity. but two aspects of his education are significant for us. encouraging them. signed. the city that became known as Istanbul. but an ad vivum likeness of Mehmed II. "Full of Islam"? Was there not a paradox in a Muslim prince patronising an Italian medallist? If there was. wished to promote. this was not the only paradox surrounding Mehmed the Conqueror. he consorted with Hurufi dervish missionaries from Iran.in Serbia. the Conqueror. or perhaps because of. beturbaned features that glare out from this Quattrocento bronze medallion (Fig. retirement from the throne. Kress Collection. in their clash with the heterodox Shiite Safavids. 12. bringing them. Washington. 1. the Ottoman Sultan whose conquest of Constantinople in 1453 and destruction of the millenium-old Byzantine Empire. Acculturation could not keep pace with the rapid march of Ottoman arms. and when orthodox Empire Mehmed earned a reputation as a somewhat wayward child. face to face with metropolitan Byzantine culture. on the other. First.SamuelH. Mahmud Pasha. Mehmed was heir to an empire that was far from the homogeneous orthodox Sunni state that his sixteenth-century successors. undated. Fig. and even when he assumed the reins of power on his father's first. the young Sultan's interest. most notably Shaykh Badreddin Simavna's popular movement.
agreeing to Matteo's mission. The image served.N /' - l( f / f. this interest in European pictorial methods was matched by an interest in European history and historiography. but the claim was based on a manuscript misreading. the Kings of France and the Lombards. Matteo de' Pasti. Istanbul(H. as he had Matteo. as the model for Bertoldo's medal. for the services of his artistic factotum. and a bronze sculptor "the same or even better than the first". who just prior to the fall of Byzantium read to him daily from "Laertius. In 1461. . Portraiture was not entirely unknown in the Islamic world. whether in Italy or Germany. no other Renaissance prince. who in the end was prevented by illness from leaving. although it is unclear whether he specified Costanzo by name. however. In fact.5 cm. but it cannot alter the fact of the ancient history lessons. for the lector was not Cyriacus but one of his companions. and regrettably Matteo de' Pasti. Quintus Curtius. whose visit has hitherto been questioned. Emperors. 2324). A page from Mehmed's "school book". Departure was in September. by Lorenzo de' Medici following Mehmed's seizure of the Pazzi conspirator and assassin of Giuliano de' Medici. little known though he is. but by October Mehmed was asking the Venetians for a master-builder. but nothing is known of the artists or the circumstances of their commission. Costanzo da Ferrara." It has long been maintained that the Latin tutor was that ardent and influential Hellenophile. Pisanello's most noted pupil. must have been known in the Levant and Costanzo. The change of players may rob the scene of some of its glamour. Secondly. for the Sultan. the initiative was Mehmed's.. Lord of Rimini. that medal. These boyhood drawings are proof of an observant eye and a certain taste for caricature. Costanzo was sent to Istanbul at an unknown date by Ferdinand of Naples. The mission was aborted when Matteo was arrested as a spy by the Venetian authorities in Crete. The sculptor the Serenissima sent with Bellini was the Paduan Bartolommeo Bellano.I Fig. but it was uncommon and tended to be stereotypic and symbolic.. in turn produced one of the finest portrait medals of the Renaissance (Fig. As a young man he had twice figured in Renaissance medals. The reference must surely be to Bellano since no other sculptors are known to have been sent at this time. commissioned. Aside from Muslim teachers. Chronicles of the Popes. and Hill's Corpus devotes an appendix to the anonymous medals of the Sultan. because it may well have been Pisanello's medal of the Byzantine Emperor John VIII Palaeologus which stimulated Mehmed's medallic passion.. in addition to painted portraits. Livy. 28.sculptural interests once again to the fore. approaches to drawing and form which were unknown in the Islamic world (Fig. 2). one schooled in Latin. unidentified. Again. The Sultan was more fortunate with another follower of Pisanello.5 21. Better documented is the visit of Gentile Bellini in 1479 and 1480. Bernardo Bandini. however. but here again there is no evidence that Mehmed insisted on Gentile. The importance of this connection to Mehmed is borne out by the fact that he demanded. at least. Cyriacus of Ancona. 4 Interests in portraiture and history were combined in Mehmed's first documented invitation to an Italian artist. Herodotus. The implied criticism of Bellano took the Serenissima by surprise.1 \A''\^ . The quality of the medals is variable. a bronze portrait medallion from Gentile Bellini even though he was a tyro at the craft and produced a feeble image. The Pisanello connection is perhaps significant.. and they wrote back with the defensive plea THE OXFORD ARTJOURNAL 5:1 1982 . 1). 2. had such a number of artists sculpt medallions of him. between sculpted and graphic portraiture. it would seem. The only official record mentions a request for a "sculptor and bronzefounder" . failed to reach Istanbul. the other in Greek. Sigismondo refers to Mehmed's interest in historical portrait sculptures and to his request that Matteo be sent to "paint and sculpt him". In spirit they evince a European influence which is also evident in the use of cross-hatching and in their format. I I. In his letter of reply. profile and three-quarter face portrait busts. the correspondence confirms Mehmed's historical bias and the intimate connection. Mehmed had two tutors. Mehmed asked Sigismondo Malatesta. Nevertheless. x imperial cypher and studies of animals and arabesques. at present. TopkapiSarayMuseum.
Bayezid II. to judge from circumstantial evidence. Bellini was able to supply his fellow artists with single studies of oriental figures. in worsening health. but what is intriguing about the Coron invitation is that Mehmed is said to have whiled away his idle hours fashioning archer's thumbrings. he sent an envoy to Florence seeking "maestri di squlture di bronzo" and "maestri d'intaglio e di legname. THE OXFORD ARTJOURNAL 5:1 1982 His patronage was not without its limitations.for sale to the King of France. Mehmed seems to have viewed Bellano's talents differently. the late father of the [sultan] placed them when he took Constantinople" .one was for erotica. Bellini's art does not reflect this development until the independent arrival of the Mamluk mode. records two conflicting opinions that were current. and his judgement concurs with that of the contemporary critic Gaurico. one was that it was a pragmatic collection. Molla Lutfi. or the heirs of Raimondo Solimani who accused Bellano in court of producing a funerary monument for Solimani of shameful quality . Alongside the numerous foreign invitees. from the Venetian colony of Coron a scabbard maker. even though architecturescapes and processions were to become characteristic of Ottoman miniature painting in the sixteenth century. to the private realm of the Sultan. the rival dynasty which reigned in Syria and Egypt. The purpose of the collection is less certain.and scabbards. he had had to rest due to illness. who condemned Bellano as an "ineptus artifex". Two independent Italian sources claim that Mehmed commissioned Gentile to paint a Virgin and Child to accompany his collection of Christian relics. and in January 1480 the Sultan asked the Venetians for the services of a painter by the name of Bernardo. either from documentary evidence or the evidence of Bellini's known works. Italianising style. but Mamluk. There is no record of how many Florentines made the visit. even his librarian. Gentile Bellini was commissioned to paint portraits of the Sultan and his favourites. and on that occasion too he concentrated. The claim is misleading. therefore. seized the opportunity to rest from campaigning and to devote himself to cultural pursuits. Previously. that is. We have seen how he asked the Venetians for a master-builder and the Florentines for intarsia artists and other craftsmen. from Venice he sought christallini craftsmen and makers of chiming-clocks. Two documented commissions reflect the very private character of this patronage . More unusual invitations were also extended at this time. Both claim Gentile as their authority. though. Bellini's limited contribution to the oriental mode must surely be linked to the restricted character of Mehmed's patronage. but it is evident that in the last two and a half years of his life the Sultan established a sizeable European atelier in Istanbul. Mehmed does not appear. and the artist was in a good position to know what commissions he had received. to have encouraged Gentile to express his vedutistatalents. Sagundino."in the palace of the Grand Signor in which the Grand Turk. but he failed to provide panoramic views of Ottoman architecture or contextual studies of Muslims in a Muslim habitat.that "the first bronze founder we sent there is very famous in these parts of ours for this sort of work". of the oriental mode at the end of the fifteenth century. This burst of patronage in the last years of Mehmed's life was facilitated by the declaration of peace with Venice. offering the relics . the source and inspiration. and who. Even before Mehmed received a reply from Venice about his second request. because the major expression of Venetian orientalism at this period was not Ottoman in inspiration. In the same year a painter from Ragusa was also in Istanbul. which ended a sixteen-year war which had precluded all cultural contact. but his activities seem to have been confined behind the high walls of the imperial Saray. destined for barter or sale to a European power. Bellini never visited Egypt or Syria. e di tarsie". incidentally. he formed as gifts from the Florentine merchants of Pera. the other that it expressed Mehmed's "sincera divotione". This claim may be surprising in view of the frequent claim that Gentile was the father of Venetian orientalism. beltbuckles . however. The Sultan. What emerges is his openness to the latest artistic developments. these included Italian engravings. was exe5 ."such an inept and deformed work and a tomb with such deformed and utterly vile figures". then. By 1480 Sinan was the Sultan's head painter. a collection of which. and according to official Venetian correspondence he and his relatives wielded considerable influence at court. was a group of Ottoman artists practising a foreign. in whose charge some of the relics were kept. How many of his subjects knew of the collection or understood its significance for the Sultan is doubtful. as we shall see. and it is tempting to see these as complementary invitations for a planned building which would have been both tectonically and decoratively European. He was in no position therefore to be the source of Mamluk motifs. Ottoman sources credit him with training Sinan Bey in portraiture. Furthermore it is only with the advent of what we might term the Mamluk mode that Venetian orientalism attempts to make the eastern figure an actor rather than a mere onlooker. Painting and medallic sculpture were not the limits of Mehmed's European horizon. the other for a painting of the Madonna and Child. Bellini and Bellano were both accompanied by two assistants. on cultural activities. Several outstanding swords attest to Mehmed's discrimination in this field. Patronage found its pendant in the Sultan's own handiwork. however. On his return to Italy. The importance of the Madonna commission is that it confirms the personal relevance of the collection to Mehmed. The Sultan too was no blind advocate of Italian art. and a contemporary. during the mid 1460s. The existence of the relic collection is proven beyond all question of doubt by a list drawn up in Italian on the orders of Mehmed's son and successor.
For the Turks it was a maleficent object. the Turci. but this is unfounded. and they raise the question of Mehmed's response to Byzantium. And it must have been from Gennadios that Mehmed or one of his circle acquired the fragments of the Laws by the fifteenth-century neoPlatonist. On one occasion. there is little evidence that he patronised Greek artists. as well as the personal character of much of his patronage. or the parlous state of late Byzantine crafts. but this was on the advice of his astrologers who warned him the rider was a talisman of the city. which include a hymn to Zeus. an as apocalyptic depicted historians the conquest had meant the end if not of the world. at least of their world. life with Mehmed's decision to reconstitute it with spiritual and temporal leadership over the Greek community. prepare a wall-map of the world from the discrete maps in Amirutzes and one of his sons Ptolemy's Geography. and both Greeks and Italians at his court flattered him with the title of Roman Emperor. whereas the patriarchate found new. which Pope Pius II made efforts to refute. the standard classical source on the life of Alexander the Great. During his enforced rest in 1465 Mehmed studied peripatetic philosophy with Amirutzes. The episode is cited in sixteenth-century Patriarchal sources as evidence of Mehmed's open-mindedness to Greeks as well as Turks. * * * This breathless retailing of facts should have served to demonstrate Mehmed's voracious and eclectic mentality. and most importantly. legend claims that he broke one of the serpent's jaws with his mace.5:1 1982 . yet aspects of Mehmed's architectural patronage are revealing. thirdly. on the other hand. heroes fortunate. he stood in the plain of Ilium "shaking his head a little" and asking to see the tombs of Ajax and Achilles. However. Others. the Teucri. although this may reflect more on the sources. they illustrate the rewards and penalties he meted out to his artists and testify. and unexpected. Several Turkish and Persian versions are recorded from the late 1470s. and following an imperial request Gennadios wrote a tract on the Christian faith. to have had Homer as their eulogist. cauterised to its roots. that the Turks. Nevertheless. including almost all the porphyry sarcophagi from the imperial necropolis at the Church of the Holy Apostles. to the diversity of Mehmed's cultural borrowings. A collection of Greek manuscripts still in the Topkapi Saray is believed also to have been rescued from the sack. the snakepreventing Serpent Column in the Hippodrome. however. were descendants of the Trojans. Thus far we have almost entirely avoided the topic of architecture. Kritobulos. but the most telling expression of this interest 6 came during the mid-1460s when he had the leading expert on Ptolemy. George Amirutzes. Other items such as the imperial regalia were rescued on the Sultan's orders. it is a companion volume to a history of Mehmed the Conqueror written by a Greek courtier. questioning Greek priests and ordering translations of Greek works on its construction and the founding of Constantinople. and he gathered a large collection of Byzantine marble statuary. Another of the Greek manuscripts in the Saray is a copy. bear directly on the Sultan's interests.cuted as a heretic after Mehmed's death. Other manuscripts catered to his interest in geography. and his image in the Patriarchal contrasts with his chronicles as an enlightened tyrannos where he is aulic histories in the Byzantine image For the aulic monster. Georgios Gemistos Plethon. seventeen manuscripts have now been identified which represent the library not of the last Byzantine Emperor of Constantinople. He even referred to himself as a Trojan come to avenge the East for all the injustice they had received from the West. were commissioned to translate the work into Arabic. shortly after Mehmed's visit to Troy in 1462 when. It is true that he had the great bronze equestrian statue of the Augustaeon pulled down from its hundred-foot-high column outside Hagia Sophia. some commissioned and/or dedicated to the Sultan. Mehmed's response to Constantinople and its culture went far beyond physical salvage. Some were probably intended for the training of Mehmed's Greek chancellery staff. and its demolition is no proof of a general iconoclastic campaign. which includes an account of Santa Sophia. Mehmed conversed about Christianity with the monk Gennadios whom he had instated as the first patriarch of Istanbul. but the first Ottoman Sultan of Istanbul. Finally. he stood on the 'Stone of the Nativity'! These Christian relics were salvaged during the sack of Constantinople. which was growing dangerously close to the column. in order to fetch down a book. was preserved by Mehmed. One is a copy of Arrian's Anabasis. which was duly translated. than on Mehmed himself. Mehmed's collections of sacred relics and secular marbles reflected Byzantium in its twin guise as the New Jerusalem and the New Rome. secondly. according to Kritobulos. the reference echoes a wellknown conceit. for Greek continued as a language of diplomatic exchange into the first decades of the sixteenth century. and the "miraculous" marble toad of Leo the Wise which was in the habit of waking up at night and scouring the streets of the city for garbage. it appears. Viceversa. whereas there is good evidence that he had a mulberry tree. survive in Arabic translation in an imperial manuscript attributable to his reign. the leitmotiv of whose work was Mehmed's image as the neo-Alexander. In the first place they confirm his contacts with Italy and his taste for innovation. he organised a competition between two Greeks and a Persian musician. for these fragments. aimed at testing the Byzantine system of musical notation. There is a copy of the Iliad produced. Mehmed is known to have collected oral and written records of the building's history. dated 1474.a beneficent talisman. THE OXFORD ARTJOURNAL. they reveal the divide between his public and his private patronage. angered the Sultan when. he said. of the Antiquities of Constantinople.
writes the author of the AnonymousChronicles. survives. (Artillery was another of Mehmed's interests. The same cannot be said. is misleading. on the one hand. one of which was larger than any in Europe except for the now obliterated Donjon of Coucy. These pavilions seem to be the material expression of Mehmed's intellectual eclecticism. "was his sin so great that he deserved to die in this way?" One wonders too. it was a low enceinte in which the role of artillery was fully integrated. now in the Louvre but still in the Saray in the seventeenth century. anticipating the rest of the world by decades. the golden armour of Doge Dandolo. so that on his death the initiative passed.a coherent intellectual or aesthetic programme. Bellini receiving a gold medal and chain which must have been meant to correspond to the collana of the European equestrian orders. another in the Greek. or more exactly to the idealised plan in his architectural treatise. This integration enabled the mosque and its dependencies to play an important role in the development of Ottoman architecture. musicians and craftsmen. a sufficiently broad base of interest at court. In the visual arts his love of painted and medallic portraiture was modish. Mehmed also converted Filarete's theoretical musings about star-shaped fortresses into reality. Christian sources identify him as Christodoulos. as well as the Venetian envoy who negotiated the peace of 1479.if indeed he wanted to . by involvement or delegation. the Qinili K6sk. among other things. "I wonder". This bears out the success of the mosque in integrating the influence of the Justinianic church . as his siege guns at Constantinople conclusively proved). Sinan died "after repeated beatings". who left the Sultan one of his father Jacopo's treasured sketchbooks. the huge Fatih mosque complex in Istanbul. however. it had three great towers. however. prefaced the development of sixteenth-century fortification. Whatever the racial origins of the architect of MehTHE OXFORD ARTJOURNAL 5:1 1982 med's Fatih mosque. By its position and size alone it invited comparison with Santa Sophia. We have concentrated here on the private sphere. Built in less than five months. in architecture he could be innovatory not only in an Ottoman but in a European context also. and in a Muslim context innovatory. and the involvement of Europeans. and those who disapproved could eradicate different facets of patronage as they 7 . It was a legacy that served the Ottoman court for some 400 years. because that is where his contacts with Europe and Byzantium were centred. as we have seen. not least because both claim that the architect was executed on the Sultan's orders. Aristotile Fieravante. Mehmed's private patronage was. for much of the palace known today as the Topkapi Saray. and it is perhaps no coincidence that its symmetrical layout was a departure in Ottoman architecture and bore a similarity to Filarete's Ospedale Maggiore in Milan. A dark side of Mehmed's patronage emerges from his treatment of the architect of the Fatih mosque. He failed to create. his lasting contribution to the Ottoman heritage was in the public rather than private realm. One of the later castles. the result was a monumental testament to Islam. he was active in so many different spheres and directions that it seems he failed to develop . Mehmed was responsible. were all "knighted" by the Sultan. And Bellini. was rewarded with. within little more than twelve years he built four major fortresses in or around Istanbul. In fact. Given this rapid sequence of construction. At the time Mehmed was building his most important religious structure. it is an anomaly in Ottoman architecture. Ottoman sources as Sinan-i Atik. Gentile and Costanzo. In the building of the later castles he sought the advice of the leaders of the Florentine community in Pera. the newly converted mosque of Ayasofya.into a by now well-established Ottoman architectural tradition. poets. In better days Sinan had been generously rewarded with property. they may refer to one and the same person. the third in the Turkish style. The first was entirely mediaeval in its empirical plan and emphasis on vertical defence. of all Mehmed's palace architecture. On the other hand. building three pavilions a stone's throw one from another. The result. and his death was seen in popular circles as a shameful incident that blackened the reputation of a Sultan already resented for financing his grandiose schemes by harsh exactions on the provinces. But the lack of coherence attendant on eclecticism made his example difficult to follow. one in the Persian-Karaman. splendid though it is. where his contact was the influential Amirutzes. the other two have disappeared without trace. by contrast. Second. The first. and whatever the displeasure of the Sultan. As a patron. but its scale alone was remarkable. his private patronage remained just that overdependent on his own person. however.His interest in Italian architectural innovations is borne out by his invitation to the Bolognese architect and engineer. if by the West we include Byzantium.in scale and the use of the semi-dome . The contrast between Mehmed's religious architecture and his pleasure pavilions illustrates the dichotomy between what we may broadly call his "public" and "private" patronage. he indulged in eclectic fantasy. Certainly. First. the growing conceptual character of the architecture. and. it comes as no surprise that Mehmed's military buildings had little influence on the long-term evolution of Ottoman fortification. he was a generous patron of Muslim intellectuals. eclectic with a strong interest in both historical and contemporary Western culture. while Fieravante's associate Filarete certainly planned a visit in 1465 to Istanbul. A courtier of Mehmed's described the Fatih mosque as fashioned on the design of Ayasofya but in a new and modern style. Sinan's fate contrasts with Bellini's rewards.
F. I can here only refer the reader to my book. Fatihin focukluk defteri. 185-212. By his repopulation he established the multi-racial and multi-sectarian character of the Ottoman city for more than 400 years. a city depopulated and ruinous even before the Sack. Inalcik. G. J. Raby. 38/40. Abendldndische Kinstler zu Konstantinopel im XV. which is an English edition of a work that first came out in 1953. his demographic decision was controversial. 1980. Thuasne. Journalof the War- Italian medalsof the Renaissancebefore Cellini. Bayezid did not repudiate Mehmed's public patronage. Bollinger series. just as it was among the Greeks. von Karabacek. and no attempt was made to foist his private interests on the populace. or a Frank.J. Conqueror 1978. Like some of Alexander the Great's Macedonian followers. Istan- Papers 1). military and mercantile sites. for Mehmed's patronage had religious and political implications. The influence of Mehmed's private patronage. pp. 1981. And he built its major palace. The process cannot be detailed here. 1 Abhandlung. then. in the form of his finest achievement . J. And there were the disapproving. 1961. You must be a Jew. pp. The facts.little more than thirty years. between his different pavilions. Denkschriften 62 Band. entirely aniconic. Institutes. It is hardly surprising. Gentile Mohammed II. but the rebuilding he achieved with traditional methods: the modules of urban development were characteristic of Islamic cities. J. pp. On the Greek Konstantinopel'. Bayezid on his accession sold Mehmed's paintings and disposed of his relics. 1969-70. Gli anni a Vols. were difficult for his contemporaries to reconcile. perhaps nearer the mark. For the "schoolbook". El Gran Turco:Mehmedthe Conqueror as a Patronof theArts of Christen- dom.Direr and the OrientalMode (Hans Huth Memorial bul. Storiadell'Arte. Is that an accusation too? BibliographicNote the The standard biography of Mehmed is F. even if figural painting was an established feature of many Muslim courts. London. 'Mehmed the Conqueror's Greek Scriptorium'. 1930. others. Paris. Dumbarton OaksPapers. all one can do is to emphasise that he laid the foundations for Istanbul's demographic. However. Delegation played a vital role in Mehmed's urban plan.. indeed he hated them". and J. burgand Courtauld Kaiserliche Akademie der Wiss. Princeton.the city of Istanbul. moreover. From the ashes of Constantinople. Un cahier d'Enfance du Sultan MehemmedLe Conquerant"Fatih". Babinger. Hamidid. therefore. 1980. or a Persian. Some of Mehmed's invitations to European artists. manuscripts. Bayezid took "no delight in figures of any sort. 229-249. are detailed in L. Pantheon. Filarete in 39. in partiBelliniet le Sultan cular Bellini. Kabil. and each inhabited by a princess of a different realm. 43.-hist. in Wien. For the medals. as the cultural mood took him. 1888. S. 'Cyriacus of Ancona and the Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II'. You must choose the name Habil. including unpublished Venetian documents. Mehmed had created one of the great capitals of the world. Costantinopoli alla corte di Maometto II'. 1983 (forthcoming). Raby. These public works were. voicing the complaint: If you wish to stand in high honour on the Sultan's threshold. I. 'The policy of Mehmed II towards the Greek population of Istanbul and the Byzantine buildings of the city'. 37. For some of the other topics. let alone the rumours.Phil. Andaloro.23-24. and he was well supported by his courtiers. Unver.pleased. 'Costanzo da Ferrara. XCVI. pp. Mehmed's portrait initiative. N. 'Bauplanung und Baugesinnung unter Mehmed II Fatih. topographic and architectural future. Admittedly. Raby. Mehmed was accused by his son Bayezid of "not believing in Muhammad". 242-246. Klasse. und XVI. And behave like Zorzi: show no knowledge. which is scheduled for publication by Alexandria Press in Spring 1984. A corpus of For aspects of Mehmed's urban policy and architecture. Others must have found the European figural influence objectionable. H. DumbartonOaksPapers. Vol. that his image in Europe was ambivalent. 2 vols. M. The question of Bellini's influence on Venetian orientalism is the subject of a monograph due to be published Autumn 1982. Mehmed could move. accused him of not believing in any one faith. while with his Fatih mosque he set the pattern for the imperial edifices that grace the city skyline. it was anathema in religious circles and there were those who looked for an absolute interdiction. 8 THE OXFORD ARTJOURNAL - 5:1 1982 . * * * Like Bahram Gur who had seven pavilions each of a different colour. On the ancient history lessons. Among the disapproving was Mehmed's son Bayezid who was backed by powerful religious and Turkish factions. Hill. many resented Mehmed's advancement of foreign talent. the repercussions of his public patronage can still be sensed today. Mehmed and his time. suffered a peremptory fate. As Tomaso di Tolfo wrote to Michelangelo from Turkey in 1519. was short-lived . Vienna 1918. 361-367. JahrhundertsVol. We might add the rider that he did not believe in any one culture. Restle. the building schemes were characteristically Ottoman. The most recent study is M. Venice.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.