Author(s): Uur TUZTAI
This article tends to analyze historiographically the traditional house research in Turkey where the subject matter has been dealt with under the usual captions of “Turkish House”, “Ottoman House” or “Anatolian House”, sometimes by combining two of those three adjectives. The primary question about the differentiation of the ideal Ottoman “Turkish House” type from the Anatolian house types should be directed toward the origin of such typological titles. It can be said that this attempt to differentiate, which obviously stems from a controversy, has originated from the Academic writings that searched for the answer for “what is the Turkish House?” Essentially, terms like “Turkish House”, “Ottoman House” or “Anatolian House” also explains the ideological windows framed to perceive a traditional housing culture, of which the major and minor aspects seem to create a common type in a large piece of geography, without the exception of widespread alterations and differences. For this reason, from the beginning until today, various theses about the subject have been based on either communalities or discripencies (geographical, historical, cultural, etc.) between the “Turkish House” and its Anatolian elements. Nevertheless, it can be argued that the major motive of diferentiation for the ideal “Turkish House” thesis lays in its claim to have the originative character that keeps it from being restricted to non-Turkish sources. In short, this article concerns with the fact that while the ideal “Turkish House” was made a concrete concept by romantically finding common spatial aspects between various Anatolian house types, the formal differences threatening the thesis was explained by positive data, such as climatological and material conditions.
The Journal of International Social Research received 7760 citations as per Google Scholar report
