Anatolian Seljuk architecture

Anatolian Seljuk architecture, or simplySeljuk architecture,refers to building activity that took place under theSultanate of Rum(late 11th to 13th centuries), ruled by an offshoot of theSeljuk dynastythat emerged from theGreat Seljuk Empire(11th–12th centuries) alongside various other local dynasties. The Anatolian Seljuks patronized their own tradition of architecture whose surviving examples are generally found in present-dayTurkey. Anatolian Seljuk architecture was eclectic and influenced by multiple traditions includingArmenian,Byzantine,Iranian, and Syrian architecture. Unlike earlierGreat Seljuk architectureto the east, their buildings were generally constructed in stone and featured significantstone-carveddecoration as well astiledecoration. While the Seljuk Sultanate declined and ended in the late 13th century, architecture continued to flourish and diversify under the smallerBeylik statesin Anatolia, which included the earlyOttomans.
TheSeljuk Turkscreated theSeljuk Empirein the 11th century, conquering all ofIranand other extensive territories from theHindu Kushto eastern Anatolia and fromCentral Asiato thePersian Gulf.In 1071, following the Seljuk victory over theByzantine Empireat theBattle of Manzikert, Anatolia was opened up toTurkicsettlers.The center ofSeljuk architectural patronagewas Iran, where the first permanent Seljuk edifices were constructed.
After the decline of the Great Seljuks in the late 12th century, various Turkic dynasties formed smaller states and empires. A branch of the Seljuk dynasty ruled aSultanate in Anatolia(also known as the Anatolian Seljuks or Seljuks ofRum), theZengidsandArtuqidsruled inNorthern Mesopotomia(known as theJazira) and nearby regions, and theKhwarazmian Empireruled over Iran and Central Asia until theMongol invasionsof the 13th century.In addition to the Anatolian Seljuks, with their capital atKonya, other local dynasties and principalities existed across Anatolia such as theDanishmendidsatKayseriandSivas, theSaltuqidsatErzurum, and theMengujekidsinDivriğiandErzincan. During the second half of the 12th century and the beginning of the 13th century these other principalities were progressively conquered or assimilated by the Seljuks of Konya.The Danishmendid realm was annexed in 1178,the Saltuqid realm was annexed in 1202,and the Menjukids became an allied local dynasty related to the Konya Seljuks by marriage.
The golden age of the Anatolian Seljuk empire followed in the early 13th century.During the first half of their rule, the Anatolian Seljuks did not engage in much construction activity as they contended with military conflicts and were trying to establish themselves. After they attained political stability, they directed more of their energy towards building and developing a unique architectural style.Under the patronage of the Anatolian Seljuks, the Artuqids, and other local dynasties, both indigenous Christian architectural traditions – such asByzantine,Armenian, andGeorgian– and regional Islamic architectural traditions – such as those of Syria, Iraq,Iran, and Central Asia – were synthesized into a highly inventive and original style, with further local variations under some dynasties.
Anatolian Seljuk architecture is concentrated in major cities of the period such as Konya (their main capital), Kayseri, Sivas,Niğde, and Erzurum, but Seljuk works can be found in almost any major Anatolian town in Central and Eastern Anatolia.Along the coasts, the Seljuks occupiedAntalyaandSinopand built a new fortified port atAlanya.Smaller Turkish principalities in Anatolia, such as the Danishmendids and the Saltuqids who were conquered by the Seljuks, nonetheless also contributed to the architecture of Anatolia during this era.The Zengids and Artuqids, who had initially served the Great Seljuks before controlling their own realms, also turned cities likeMosul,Diyarbakir,Hasankeyf, andMardininto important centers of architectural development that had a long-term influence in the wider regions of Anatolia and Syria.
Anatolian Seljuk authority declined after their defeat at the hands of theMongolsin theBattle of Köse Dağin 1243. In eastern Anatolia the MongolIlkhanidsruled indirectly through Seljuk vassals at first, before taking direct control after 1308.Smaller principalities and emirates emerged locally again, known collectively as theBeyliks. Even as the Seljuk empire was weakening in the thirteenth century, their intense building activity did not stop.Despite the decline of Seljuk power, the Seljuk tradition of architecture largely persisted and continued to evolve under new rulers and patrons. The attachment of a large part of Anatolia to the Ilkhanid Empire may have also renewed artistic connections with Iran, the center of that empire.For example, the construction of monumental portals flanked by two minarets is attested in earlier Iranian Seljuk monuments but did not appear in Anatolian Seljuk monuments until after the Mongol conquest.In central and eastern Anatolia, under dynasties like theKaramanidsand theEretnids, architecture remained fairly traditional.In western Anatolia, Turkish principalities such asSaruhanids, theBeylik of Aydın, and theMenteşe Beylikall existed on the Byzantine frontier in a region with many ancient Greek and Roman monuments. As a result, architecture here experimented with both Seljuk elements and Byzantine and Mediterranean traditions.One of the local Turkish dynasties, theOttomans, eventually went on to establish theOttoman Empireand developed a style ofOttoman architecture.
The Anatolian Seljuks ruled a territory that was multi-ethnic and only newly-settled by Muslims. As a result, their architecture was eclectic and incorporated influences from other cultures.The fluidity of society on the frontier of the Islamic world, along with the fact that the Seljuks enjoyed only a short period of stable rule before the Mongol invasion, prevented them from developing a unified "imperial" style of architecture.While Konya was a vibrant center of patronage in the early 13th century, it did not necessarily impose its own artistic styles on other cities. Instead, architecture across Anatolia was strongly influenced by the creativity of local craftsmen and by mobile workshops of artisans who travelled the region in search of patrons.
Seljuk architecture was influenced by Armenian architecture due to the employ of Muslim architects originating fromhistorical Armeniaand of Armenian architects and masons.Persian influences also continued to have a strong effect.In general, Seljuk architecture combined forms and techniques from Byzantine, Armenian, andGeorgianarchitecture with those of Iran, Syria, Iraq and Central Asia.The influence of other cultures on the Anatolian Seljuks can also be seen by the use ofspoliain their architecture.There are examples of Anatolian Seljuk architecture using spolia material in visible places in public buildings located at the centers and entrances of cities, such as at the Atabey Ertokuş Madrasa inAtabey(Isparta Province). The high quality of spolia in certain cases, combined with prevalent laws that prevented important public buildings from being demolished, contributed to preserving elements of ancient architectural traditions.
Most Anatolian Seljuk works are of dressed stone, with brick reserved for minarets. The use of stone in Anatolia is the biggest difference with the Seljuk buildings in Iran, which are made of bricks. This also resulted in more of their monuments being preserved up to modern times.In their construction of caravanserais, madrasas and mosques, the Anatolian Seljuks translated the Iranian Seljuk architecture of bricks and plaster into the use of stone.Decoration in Anatolian Seljuk architecture was concentrated on certain elements like entrance portals, windows, and themihrabsof mosques. Stone-carving was one of the most accomplished mediums of decoration, with motifs ranging from earlier Iranianstucco motifsto local Byzantine and Armenian motifs. Muqarnas was also used. The madrasas of Sivas and theInce Minareli Medresein Konya are among the most notable examples, while theGreat Mosque and Hospital complex of Divriğiis distinguished by the most extravagant and eclectichigh-reliefstone decoration around its entrance portals and its mihrab. Syrian-styleablaqstriped marble also appears on the entrance portal of theKaratay Medreseand theAlaeddin Mosquein Konya. Althoughtileworkwas commonly used in Iran, Anatolian architecture innovated in the use of tile revetments to cover entire surfaces independently of other forms of decoration, as seen in the Karatay Medrese.
The Anatolian Seljuks heavily emphasized hospitality combined with rituals of devotion. These beliefs pushed forth the development of buildings such as caravanserais,Sufi lodges, and other complexes that focused on providing shelter and food to travelers. These buildings showcase the social and political significance of hospitality in the Seljuk countryside.Ibn Battuta, a 14th-century traveler, wrote about this phenomenon in his travelogues.Madrasas were not just used for teaching but also were meant to host various rituals and to provide lodging for guests.  The similar layouts of Sufi lodges and madrasas suggest that both types of structure were used in similar ways for rituals and hospitality. These buildings had to be adaptable to the changing political and social demands during this time. The multiple orientations of the madrasa show their adaptability to changing religious situations.There were also rituals when offering hospitality to guests. The ritual involved first presenting the visitor a meal, then taking the guests to bathe, and later being offered fruit and sweetmeats before listening to the Quran recitation. Sufi lodges served as lively community centers that were connected to the wider world. They showcased the social mobility in Seljuk and the emphasis on comfort and generosity.
Anatolian Seljuk mosque architecture was a combination of Turkish-Islamic culture and Anatolian traditions.Thefour-iwan plan, developed under the earlier Seljuks in Iran, did not appear in Anatolian Seljuk mosques.Thecongregational mosques(also known as anUlu Camior "great mosque") built by the Anatolian Seljuks included more conservativehypostyleconstructions alongside less traditional floor plans. Hypostyle structures had wide halls with rows of columns or pillars supporting the ceiling. Major examples of this include theGreat Mosque of Sivas(1197) and theAlaeddin Mosqueof Konya (built over multiple periods between 1156 and 1235, with later additions).Most of the twelfth-century great mosques in both the southeastern and northeastern regions of the Seljuq empire place a dome in front of the mihrab.The minarets of Seljuk mosques were built of stone or brick, usually resting on a stone base, and typically had a cylindrical or polygonal shaft that is less slender than later Ottoman minarets. They were sometimes embellished with decorativebrickworkor glazed ceramic decoration up the level of their balconies.
The smallest type of mosque is themescid(fromArabicmasjid). It was developed during the thirteenth century in central Anatolia and was composed of a square chamber topped by a dome.This type of mosque could be a freestanding structure or it could be integrated into a larger building.Another type of small mosque is the citadel mosque, orkale mescidi, which was developed in eastern Turkey during the twelfth century.These citadel mosques had more involved plans compared to other small mosques, with an interior divided into several aisles that were covered withbarrel vaultsand cross-vaults.Examples of this type are the citadel mosques in Divriği (1180–1181) and Erzurum (12th century).
"Basilical"-type mosques were also built, so-called because they have a more linear layout with their long axis aligned with the mihrab and theqibla(direction of prayer). This type has its antecedents in the citadel mosques of the 12th century and may have been influenced by local church architecture.More developed examples occur in the 13th century, such as theAlaeddin Mosqueof Niğde (1223), which has three "naves" running length-wise towards theqiblawall and three domes covering thebaysin front of this wall.TheBurmali Minare Mosqueand Gök Madrasa Mosque, both built inAmasyain the 13th century, also have basilical plans but in these cases the three domes are placed in a line over the central nave perpendicular to theqiblawall.The placement of domes in this fashion accentuated the existing tradition of placing a dome in front of the mihrab.
The Great Mosque of Divriği (1228–1229) has a layout that can be described as either hypostyleor basilical.It consists of three naves, with the central nave in front of the mihrab being wider than the others. A dome covers a square bay in front of the mihrab and another dome pierced with anoculuscovers the bay in the middle of the mosque.Similar features can be found in theMosque of Hunat Hatun (or Huand Hatun)in Kayseri, which is part of a larger complex dating to 1237–1238. This mosque has a central nave which is emphasized by two domes (one in front of the mihrab and another in the middle of the mosque) but has a larger number of naves or aisles. The side naves run parallel to the qibla wall and perpendicular to the central nave. The dome in the middle of the mosque is a 19th-century construction covering what was originally small court open to the sky.The same arrangement with two domes, one of which was originally a small open court, is found in the Great Mosque (Ulu Cami) of Kayseri, which was founded in 1135 by theDanishmendidsbut restored and modified multiple times in later centuries, including by the Seljuks in 1205–1206.
The"wooden" mosque, a variation of the hypostyle mosque with wooden columns and ceilings, emerged in western central Anatolia in the 13th century. The earliest example is theGreat Mosque of Sivrihisar(1232), while other examples are the Great Mosque ofAfyonkarahisar(1272) and theArslanhane Mosquein Ankara (c. 1290). The most accomplished example is theEşrefoğlu MosqueinBeyşehir, built in 1297 by theEshrefids, a short-lived Beylik dynasty.The wooden columns in some of these mosques are ornately-carved. These timber posts might have been influenced by the past of Central Asiatic Turks and their large tents held up by similarly carved wooden posts.
In southeastern Anatolia, under the control ofArtuqiddynasties, the influence of existing Syrian architecture and mosques was more dominant.One of the most notable monuments here is theGreat Mosque of Diyarbakir. It was originally founded in the 7th century but rebuilt in its current form under the Great Seljuks in the late 11th and 12th centuries,to which the Artuqids continued to add and expand in the late 12th and 13th centuries.It is similar in form to theUmayyad MosqueofDamascusand its ornate courtyard façades reuseClassical Roman elementsalongside Islamic motifs. Another important Artuqid mosque in the region is the congregational mosque begun in 1204 inKızıltepe(also known as Dunaysir or Koçhisar), which has a similar layout and is notable for the ornate stone-carving of its mihrab.
Later on, under the Beyliks, mosque architecture was more diverse, with examples like the Saruhanid congregational mosque (Ulu Cami) inManisa(1371), theIsa Bey Mosquein Selçuk (1374), and theİlyas Bey MosqueinMiletus(1404).As the years went on, there was increasing emphasis on the domed area in front of the mihrab, eventually culminating in the domed mosques of Ottoman architecture.
Numerous madrasas were built. Architecturally, they consisted mainly of two types. One type, similar to those of Iran and Mesopotamia, was centered around an open courtyard which was bordered by a varying number of iwans (with at least one iwan situated along the axis of the entrance). In these madrasas the decoration was concentrated around a monumental entrance portal. TheÇifte Minareli Medrese(c. 1250 or 1253) inErzurumis one of the earliest examples of an entrance portal surmounted by twin minarets. TheGök Medrese(1271–1272) in Sivas is another rich monument in a similar form, which was erected the same year as two other open-court madrasas in the same city, theÇifte Minareli Medrese(only partly preserved) and theBuruciye Medrese. The Ak Medrese in Niğde (1404) is a very late example of this form built by theKaramanids, an emirate contemporary with the earlyOttomans, although it is distinguished by aloggiaofogive archesalong the second story of its façade.
The second type of madrasa, which was particular to Anatolia, was a smaller madrasa with a central court covered by a dome orvault. These were especially characteristic of Konya, exemplified by theKaratay MedreseandInce Minareli Medrese.The Yakutiye Medrese in Erzurum is also a later example of this type, built in 1310 under the Ilkhanids. Its interior is roofed with multiple vaults and at the center of the hall is a square muqarnas vault culminating in a small lantern.
Hospitals(also known as adarüşşifa) were also built in many cities and usually followed the layout of madrasas. The Çifte or "Double" Madrasa in Kayseri (c. 1205) was co-founded byKaykhusraw Iand his sister Gevher Nesibe Hatun and consists of two open-air courtyard buildings, a medical school (madrasa) and a hospital, which are joined together. TheŞifaiye Medresebuilt byIzz al-Din Kayka'us Iin Sivas (1217–1218) was a hospital and consists of an open courtyard building with an integrated tomb for the founder. The Divriği Hospital, part of a larger mosque complex, resembles a madrasa with roofed courtyard.
Tombs, which often accompanied madrasas or mosques, were most commonly of the polygonal (often octagonal) or circular type with a dome on the inside and a conical roof on the outside, although there were variations.This type of free-standing mausoleum, known in Turkish as akümbet, had precedents in the tower-tombs built earlier in Iran. In Anatolia, they acquired a particular style that included rich stone-carved decoration.
The tomb of SultanKiliç Arslan II, located in the courtyard of the Alaeddin Mosque and built around 1190, is decagonal rather than octagonal. The Tomb of Emir Saltuq in Erzurum, built around the same time (late 12th century), has an octagonal lower and a cylindrical upper section.The Döner Kümbet, a dodecagonal tomb in Kayseri (c. 1275), and the laterHudavend Hatun Tombin Niğde (1312) are richly decorated with stone-carved motifs including muqarnas and figurative images.The Mausoleum of Mama Hatun inTercan(early 13th century) is an exceptional example in which the tomb structure is surrounded by a circular enclosing wall, which has its own decorated entrance portal.The Tomb of Sitte Melik (or of Shahin Shah) inDivriği, built before 1197, has one of the oldest muqarnas-decorated entrance portals in Anatolian Islamic architecture.The Tomb of Izz al-Din Kayka'us I, which is integrated into the Şifaiye Medrese he commissioned in Sivas, is notable for its façade of brick and tile decoration facing the building's courtyard and its octagonal pointed cupola that rises above the surrounding structure.
Some of the most impressive Seljuk monuments werecaravanseraisbuilt along many trade routes between cities. Hundreds of them were built in the 13th century.Only about a hundred of them exist today in varying states of preservation. Several are mostly intact or have been restored. Enough remains of these caravanserais to establish both plan and superstructure. Unfortunately, the majority of caravanserais had no founding inscription or it has since been destroyed.The majority of Seljuk caravanserais were built between 1220 and 1250, which was the height of the Seljuk empire.
These buildings were meant to encourage trade in the Seljuq empire. They were constructed on the principal trade lines and catered to travelers from around the world. They also served other purposes such as military uses, government houses for the sultan and his retinue, royal guesthouses for visiting monarchs, prisons, and places of refuge.They offered meals, shelter, medical care, bathing, and other such services to all types of travelers. Most of these structures also included a mosque or at least a space to perform religious rituals.
Seljuk caravanserais are unique in plan and design, although with influences from earlier Iranian and Armenian architecture.Their exact layout and details varied but certain features were commonly shared. Providing safety and shelter were the basic function, demonstrated by the thick stone masonry walls with a single entrance and slit windows. This single entrance controlled access and was closed at night. The roofs of caravanserais were also occasionally used for defense, accessible by stairs and sometimes equipped with platforms for guards to monitor the roads. The walls typically havebuttressesand were topped withcrenellations.The buildings are constructed with large stone ashlars. Domes were covered by conical roofs on talldrums. On the outside, Seljuk caravanserais had little decoration, except for the main entrance portal, which was the most prominent feature and could be richly ornamented. Carved decoration could included floral andgeometric motifs, amuqarnascanopy, and inscriptions.The buildings were usually arranged around a central courtyard, sometimes with a large covered hall on one side, both rectangular in shape. The entrance portal leads into the courtyard. On the far side of the courtyard, another entrance led to the covered hall, which typically consists of several aisles of pillars covered by vaulted ceilings and a lantern dome at the center.Befitting their role as shelter for travelers, the caravanserais had stables for animals, places for packing and unpacking goods, and lodging for guests. The sheltered galleries were composed of two levels: the ground level housed the stables and the upper level was a platform that housed goods and people. These different levels maintained differing degrees of cleanliness, as they separated the animals and people. Many caravanserais also had water systems, including drainage and sewage.
Some caravanserais were simple rectangular buildings with no courtyard, consisting of a hall with vaulted aisles.One example, the Alayhan caravanserai, possibly built by Kiliç Arslan II around 1190, features one of the oldest muqarnas-decorated portals in Anatolian Islamic architecture.Another example is the Susuz Han (c. 1246) on the road betweenAntalyaandBurdur, although its lack of a courtyard may be due to an unfinished construction or to a later demolition.Others caravanserais consist of a large courtyard surrounded by roofed arcades but without a large roofed hall. There are relatively few examples of this type, including the Evdir Han (1215–1219) and the Kırkgöz Han (possibly built between 1237 and 1246), both also located on the Antalya–Burdur road.
The most monumental caravanserais combined both of these types, with major examples including theSultan Hanon the Konya–Aksarayroad (1229), theSultan Han near Kayseri(1236–1237),theAğzıkara Hannortheast of Aksaray (completed in 1240),and the Karatay Han east of Kayseri (completed c. 1240).They have a fortress-like exterior appearance with semi-round bastions and an entrance portal of decorated carved stone leading to an open-air inner courtyard. In the center of these courtyards there is sometimes a small cubic prayer room raised above the ground on four pillars. On the opposite side of the entrance another portal led to a covered hall with many aisles running perpendicular to a central aisle with a central dome.
Among the Seljuk military fortifications, one of the best preserved examples is anensemble of 13th-century structuresin the coastal town ofAlanya, which includes walls, a seaside tower or bastion (Kızıl Kule), and a naval arsenal orshipyard(tersane).In southeastern Anatolia, the city of Diyarbakir has preserved significant parts of its defensive walls. The walls date from various periods but they feature several towers built by the Artuqids, which are decorated with a mix of calligraphic inscriptions and figurative images of animals and mythological creatures carved in stone.
Little has survived of Seljuk palaces, which in some cases were built inside citadels. In Konya, the Seljuk royal palace and citadel once stood next to the Alaeddin Mosque on the hill overlooking the centre of the city. Only parts of one of its pavilions, theAlaeddin Köşküor Alaeddin Kiosk, have been preserved. This pavilion was built by Kiliç Arslan II (r. 1156–1192) on top of one of the citadel's towers. Other palaces are no longer standing but in some cases have been excavated and documented. TheKaykubadiye or Kayqubadiyyawas a summer palace built near Kayseri byAla' al-Din Kayqubadh(r. 1220–1237). It consisted of three small buildings built around an artificial lake, including a mosque, a boathouse, and another structure with two rooms and tile decoration. TheKubadabad Palacewas another summer palace built by the same sultan on the shores ofLake Beyşehir. It consisted of 16 small buildings enclosed by a fortified wall, including residential units decorated with tiles.
In Anatolia, both the Seljuks and Artuqids built numerous bridges across rivers. The most common type of bridge was the single-span bridge with a pointed arch shape, or one in which the mainspanwas a large pointed arch. An early example of this is theMalabadi Bridge(1147) built by the Artuqids over theBatman Rivereast ofSilvan. This form of bridge existed already in Roman and Byzantine times and it continued to be employed in the laterOttoman period(e.g. the famousMostar bridge). For shallower rivers with weaker currents, flatter multi-arch bridges could be more practical. An example of this is theDicle Bridge, the oldest Islamic-era bridge in Anatolia, which was built over theTigris Riverin 1065–1067. This type of bridge became common during the Beylik period and also continued to be built under the Ottomans. Another notable bridge and early Turkish/Islamic-era bridge in Anatolia is the ruinedOld BridgeinHasankeyf, built by the Artuqids between 1155 and 1175, notable for its tall massive piers and instances of figurative decoration.
Islamic cultures used figural representations in their art but less commonly in religious contexts. The Anatolaian Seljuks and the neighbouring Artuqids were unprecedented in their prolific use of these motifs and employed them even in their religious art and architecture.One key way in which figures were represented in Seljuk architecture is through stone reliefs. The Seljuks displayed these artforms on their doorways, the most noticeable of places. This practice can be traced to the Christian-Armenian tradition and was adopted by the Seljuks with their conquest of the region. This type of stonework was used on profane and religious buildings and on fortifications like city walls, often on doorways, gates and entrances.This tradition of figural imagery eventually declined after the region came under Ilkhanid domination.
Human motifs were rarely used in Seljuk architecture. When they were used, they were often displayed in groups or pairs using a mirrored arrangement. Examples of this include the Alaeddin Mosque in Niğde and on the gate of the hospital in the Great Mosque complex of Divriği. This type of imagery was  related to the Seljuks belief inastrologyand depicted astrological and planetary symbols on the stonework. Infrequently, they would depict specific human figures, as seen in another on the gate of the Divriği hospital. This example is thought to be a portrait of a specific person rather than of planetary figures.
Animal motifs were the most utilized type of imagery in the Seljuk Empire and a favorite included the lion. They were typically depicted in full relief, were used as gargoyles, and had a similar style to traditional Armenian lion sculptures. Like the human motifs, the use of the lion imagery is often associated with the zodiac symbol for the sun. Examples include the lion reliefs on the Çifte Medrese of Kayseri, two reliefs of a lion fighting a bull at the Great Mosque of Diyarbakir, and reliefs of lions with the tree of life and a crescent moon shape at the Döner Kümbet tomb in Kayseri.
Often linked to tombs, bird of prey reliefs had varied uses and meanings to the Seljuks. The eagle was originally a symbol of theOghuz, a Turkish tribe that the Seljuks originated from, thus linking the usage and tradition of this symbol to pre-Islamic Central Asia. This symbol was most often used on tombs and mausoleums, showing the belief that birds were a type of heavenly guide. Examples of eagle reliefs are found on the Tomb of Emir Saltuq in Erzurum and the Tomb of Hudavend Hatun in Niğde.
While the eagle is typically shown on structures relating to death, the double-headed eagle had a more complex meaning and is traditionally shown on more sacred architecture. They are depicted as fierce animals, like the lions, and are thought to be a protective motif (this is especially felt when they are displayed on non-sacred structures, like city walls and palaces). Sometimes these birds were hybridized with other threatening animals, like dragons. When used on mausoleums and tombs, double-headed birds are connected to the single bird of prey meaning and are thought of as soul-birds. Examples of the double-headed eagle motif as a symbol of power are found on the Artuqid towers of the Diyarbakir city walls. They also appear in the western entrance portal of the Great Mosque of Divriği against a background of arabesques, and on the Döner Kümbet in Kayseri above the tree of life.
Showing up rarely in sacred Seljuk architecture, the dragon motif is more commonly used on profane buildings, like city walls and palaces. No matter where the dragons were shown, they were almost always arranged in pairs and facing each other, as if to fight. The Seljuk dragons had vicious heads with open mouths, and a twisted, knotted, or snake-like body and tail. Sometimes they had wings and sometimes they were shown with horns. This type of imagery is closely linked to earlyChinese dragons, where similarly twisted and ferocious dragons were displayed above tomb doorways. The dragon was often hybridized with other animals to give those symbols a fierce and protective appearance. When used in sacred structures, the dragon is also linked to the zodiac and the pseudo-planet Jawzahar; its head and tail are thought to represent the ascending and descending nodes of the moon. Examples of carved dragon reliefs include a pair of mirrored dragons on the entrance façade of the Çifte Minareli Medrese in Erzurum and another pair confronting each other on the arches of the kiosk mosque in the center of the Sultan Han near Kayseri.
A mythical female creature,sirensare thought to ward off evil and were often displayed with crowns, fish tails, and occasionally wings. They were often depicted in hybridized forms. Sirens were also significant to the zodiac themes the Seljuks often portrayed, with sirens frequently representing theGemini. The use of sirens in the Anatolian region dates to pre-Seljuk eras, with influence from Egyptian textiles and art from the 7th and 8th centuries andTurfantextiles from the 6th and 7th centuries. Examples of siren images can be found on the Tomb of Hudavend Hatun and on the tiles of the Kubadabad Palace.
Common in profane Seljuk architecture but rare in sacred buildings, thesphinxis another mythical creature the Seljuks utilized on their structures and art objects. An example of a sphinx relief on a structure, although deteriorated, can be found on the Döner Kümbet. The sphinx was thought to ward off evil and had protective characteristics, thus was most commonly used on city walls and palaces. This function is also evident in the image of a sphinx protecting a hero in battle carved on a tombstone housed at the Archaeological Museum of Afyonkarahisar. The sphinx also has a zodiac and planetary implication as well; the "Sphinx Wheel" motif, which appears on the "Wade cup" from Seljuk Iran (kept at theCleveland Museum of Art), shows the creature symbolizing the sun in its rising position, peak, and setting position. The Sphinx, already and hybrid creature, was also frequently hybridized with the various other animal motifs in Seljuk architecture.
In conjunction with the 12-month zodiac, the Seljuks were also interested in theChinese Zodiac, a 12-year cycle where each year is assigned an animal (Rat, Ox, Tiger, Rabbit, Dragon, Snake, Horse, Goat, Monkey, Rooster, Dog, and Pig). The Seljuks adopted these motifs and utilized them through relief work on several mausoleums, and, during the later Seljuk period under Mongol domination, this type of work was produced even more. Examples of it are seen on the Tomb of Emir Saltuq, on a tomb belonging to the Sultan Han near Kayseri, and on the Gök Medrese in Sivas.
Theminbar(often translated as "pulpit") is one of the only consistently present furnishings in mosques. They consisted of a short straight staircase, usually with a set of doors at the bottom and a small kiosk-like structure at the top. Anatolian minbars during the Seljuk era, as well as up to early Ottoman times, were made of wood and were decorated with deeply-carved arabesque motifs and geometric patterns. In overall form and style they resembled contemporary minbars in Syria and the Levant, although they lacked the muqarnas at the top of Syrian minbars.
The most accomplished Turkish minbars of this period were made with thekündekâritechnique, in which many interlocking pieces of wood were held together without the use of nails, pins, or glue. These pieces were fitted together like a mosaic and supported by an internal wooden frame.Examples of such minbars include the minbar of the Alaeddin Mosque in Konya (dated to 1155–6, before the mosque's many later restorations), the minbars of the congregational mosques (Ulu Camis) ofMalatyaandSiirt(both from the 13th century and both now housed at theEthnography Museum of Ankara), the minbar of the Great Mosque ofSivrihisar(1275), and the minbar of the Eşrefoğlu Mosque (1297–9).This style of minbar continued to be used in Anatolian mosques during the Beyliks period and up to the early Ottoman period. In this later period the carvings became shallower, the geometric mosaic arrangement of wooden pieces became more intricate, and projectingbosseswere sometimes added to the decoration. Examples of this later period include the minbar of the Saruhanid Great Mosque of Manisa (1376) and the minbar of the OttomanGreat Mosque of Bursa(1499).
As thekündekârimethod required great skill and labour, some minbars were made with simpler wooden boards which were carved with decoration made to imitate thekündekâristyle and then mounted on a frame. The disadvantage of this method was that over time the wooden boards could warp and shrink, resulting in the motifs being interrupted or misaligned from one board to another. Examples of such minbars include the minbar of the Great Mosque of Divriği (1228–9) and the minbar of the Arslanhane Mosque at Ankara (1289–90).The simpler technique notwithstanding, they are still considered fine examples of Seljuk Anatolian woodwork and craftsmanship.