WALL PAINTINGS OF NECİP ÖZALP HOUSE IN GESİ METU JFA 2009/2 91
Central Anatolia is a land with a long history of wall paintings dating
back to the Roman period. Many sites in Cappadocia and central Anatolia
accommodate quite a number of spaces adorned with such paintings. They
are generally two-dimensional, descriptive and usually of religious content.
We also see wall paintings in the 18th and 19th century in large Ottoman
mansions in the same region, just like the ones in İstanbul. In this paper,
wall paintings of a room in a house in Gesi will be reported.
Gesi is a village in Central Anatolia, on the northeast part of the city of
Kayseri, which, in part, also has a Roman heritage. It is a sub-center in
the vicinity, with a population of over 1500, well known for its beautiful
surroundings and rich cultural background. Gesi is located within dense
vineyards and orchards, with bird towers (İmamoğlu, Korumaz and
İmamoğlu, 2005) and underground rock-hewn spaces (2). Its history goes
back at least to the Hittites, who ruled the Central Anatolia between 2800
and 800 BC. Like other villages nearby, Gesi accommodated various ethnic
and religious groups for centuries. Turks, Armenians and Greeks lived side
by side in the vicinity for centuries and shared a colorful and productive
social and cultural life. Churches are still standing near mosques, row
houses, street fountains and bridges.
The paintings examined here represent in a sense the continuation of a
long tradition that survived in that vicinity. Some wall paintings still exist
in volcanic-rock-hewn spaces in the region, near the village of Darsiyak
(Figure 1). They are from the middle ages and are quite similar to those
we come across in underground spaces in Cappadocia. After examining
the still life and landscape paintings of the walls of a house built in 1825
in Göreme (in Cappadocia), Renda (1985) pointed out that those paintings
were the products of a talented artist. Renda (1976) also examined wall
paintings and decorations on the timber wall panels of the “başoda” (major
room) of a house built in 1808 in Büyükbürüngüz (which is near Gesi). She
stated that these paintings also reflected a high level of understanding of
WALL PAINTINGS OF NECİP ÖZALP HOUSE IN GESİ (1)
Vacit İMAMOĞLU and Çağrı İMAMOĞLU
Received: 17.02.2009
Key Words: wall paintings; integrated social
groups; Central Anatolia; Gesi; perspective.
1. A presentation referring to some of the
paintings of this house was made at the
13th International Congress of Turkish Art
meeting held on 3-8 September 2007 in
Budapest (İmamoğlu and İmamoğlu, 2007).
2. Pigeon or dove cotes are spectacular
elements of this region. These interesting
structures have two parts; a large
underground cell and a tower on the ground.
The towers are made of stone and look like
huge chimneys in various forms. About one
thousand of them are dispersed within the
Gesi landscape.
METU JFA 2009/2
(26:2) 91-102
DOI: 10.4305/METU.JFA.2009.2.5

VACİT İMAMOĞLU and ÇAĞRI İMAMOĞLU92 METU JFA 2009/2
art and were at an advanced level that we may come across only in such
cultural centers as Istanbul. The first author has also reported two- and
three-dimensional wall paintings employed in the harem section of a konak
in Darsiyak village, which is a few kilometers north of Gesi, as well as
many in the town of Kayseri (İmamoğlu, 2002).
Western-type paintings or paintings as “a new art form” representing
a three-dimensional world, came onto stage in the 18th century in the
late Ottoman period in Turkey. Arık and Renda, in their discussions of
Ottoman paintings, linked (the art of) miniature paintings of Ottomans
with the early wall paintings in buildings, and referred to the probable
influences of the western paintings mainly on Ottoman miniature artists
who might have passed through a transformation stage, and thereby have
moved from two-dimensional to three-dimensional representation (Arık,
1976; Renda, 1977). Accordingly, the walls of palaces and mansions in
the capital city were painted first by such European painters, who then
influenced the local artists. Others, also, support this opinion in Turkey.
For example, Orhan Pamuk, in his novel titled My Name is Red referred to
a fierce struggle between the conservative and novelty seeker miniature
painters in Istanbul approximately during the same period.
Miniature paintings and abstracted decorations have, of course, a long
history and were accepted by the Ottoman Muslim society. However,
due to the conservative interpretation of the Muslim religion, Ottomans,
after the Seljuk rule, somehow reduced or el,minated the representation of
human figures in paintings and most of the art forms except miniatures.
As a continuation of the same idea, the artists gradually were forced
or required to paint only flowers and still life, or various abstractions
of nature, which may be seen in palaces and some of the 16th and 17th
century buildings in many parts of the empire, as well as in Kayseri
(Eldem, 1984, 1982; Tomsu, 1950). For example, Güpgüpoğulları and
Zennecioğulları konaks in Kayseri had examples of such wall paintings
(İmamoğlu, 2006). Below, we examine the wall paintings of Necip Özalp
Figure 1. “A bull,” wall painting from a rock-
hewn church in Değirmenderesi Valley near
Darsiyak village.

WALL PAINTINGS OF NECİP ÖZALP HOUSE IN GESİ METU JFA 2009/2 93
House in the village of Gesi, which was selected because it was the only
remaining one as discovered during a recent survey in the vicinity.
NECİP ÖZALP HOUSE
This house is located in the ‘south neighborhood’ of Gesi. It is a late 19th
or early 20th century building (Figure 2, 3). Its ground floor was allocated
to a courtyard and service spaces, and upper level to living. The largest
room on the first floor, most probably the reception or selamlık room
for male guests, is an elongated rectangular space, parallel to the street
(Figure 4). Its three windows are oriented towards Üç Havuzlar Street, in
the south. It is entered from the east side. Its west wall houses a fireplace
and flanking cupboards, while the north wall is solid. Rectangular frames
of different sizes (ranging from 80x80 cm to 80x110 cm), covered with
various paintings, were cemented on the wall surfaces using a 4.0 cm thick
mud plaster all along the north wall and between the windows in the
south. There are four of these frames on the north wall, and three on the
south wall. The large frames have straight lines and they are decorated
with floral motives on each corner. Each of these frames further had an
inner frame either in ellipsoidal or circular form, in which a picture was
painted. These paintings have different themes and compositions. Three
paintings depict nature (forests, mountains, rivers and the sea, sometimes
including houses), another three portray townscapes or buildings (houses,
churches, a mosque, and a bridge), and one painting is a still life. Below,
each painting in the room is briefly described, in a counterclockwise order,
starting from the east end of the north wall.
PAINTINGS ON THE NORTH WALL
Originally, there were four wall paintings along this wall. Paintings were
located above the lower 120 cm, which was covered with decoratively
molded traditional timber paneling. Four lime-plastered surfaces were
allocated for paintings.
Painting 1 (Figure 5)
The first wall painting on this wall depicts a townscape scene, a European
kind of cityscape with churches, towers and flags. A square-shaped outer
frame holds a horizontal ellipsoidal frame of brown and black lines infilled
with blue, which houses the painting. The foreground of the painting
Figure 2. South elevation of Necip Özalp
House, Gesi.
Figure 3. Interior view of the başoda.
Figure 4. First floor plan of the house.

VACİT İMAMOĞLU and ÇAĞRI İMAMOĞLU94 METU JFA 2009/2
includes a single-storey building with four windows on its right side, a
symmetrically arranged (probably) central door, flanking windows on
the triangular facade with a hipped roof in blue (Figure 5). On the upper
portion of the roof, there is a tall, cylindrical tower, which is located in the
center of the painting and positioned just behind the roofline. Its relation
with the building, however, is not clear. It has two tall windows and a
conical cap. On the right hand side of the painting, there is the entrance
door of a stone building (most probably a church) with a steep triangular
roof, an elegant gate and a circular window on top of this gate. The red
colored roof of this building ends just before the hip of the single storey
building mentioned above. The left hand side of the painting includes one
or two house facades that may be two adjacent houses or two facades of
the same building meeting in the corner. These facades indicate that the
building(s) is (are) two-storey high. The first facade has a white surface
and three windows on its upper level. The facade of the lower level, on
the other hand, is painted with red and only one of its windows enters the
scene. The lines here indicate that it was built of stone. Two lines separating
these two levels might be an indication of the projection of the upper level
towards the street. The second facade is also a two-storey one, painted in
gray on both levels. It has two windows on the upper level and one on
the lower. Two continuous lines that probably indicate a parapet, end the
rooflines of these two facades. Above the upper line, one comes across a
red band, including approximately six chimneys. These elements however,
give an ambiguous impression to the onlooker because they may very well
be towers of a city wall in the far distance.
The background of the painting includes a building with a hipped roof on
the right side and a flag near its rooftop. Then come the tower (probably a
cylindrical one) and the roof of a large building, which are seen just above
the church. The tower has two windows, (probably) a door symmetrically
located on its facade and a large dark colored flag waving on a pole located
in the center of its conical roof. The next element on the scene is on the
left side of the large cylindrical tower; it is a yellowish slender tower with
a square or elliptical plan. This latter one may be a clock tower, but since
this portion of the painting is partly destroyed, it is difficult to tell. The
last element on the left side of the painting is a pole, probably holding a
triangular flag. However, the directions of flags on the painting are not
consistent: While the flag in the central position waves toward the right,
Figure 5. Painting 1, on the north wall.
Figure 6. Painting 2, on the north wall.

WALL PAINTINGS OF NECİP ÖZALP HOUSE IN GESİ METU JFA 2009/2 95
the other two wave towards the left side. The upper part of the painting
was painted mainly in blue, representing the sky, however, it also includes
some black, red and white patches.
Painting 2 (Figure 6)
The second painting was painted inside an ellipsoid frame, which is
horizontally placed in the center of a horizontally laid rectangular outer
frame. It is a landscape with houses. The picture plane is divided into
two sections by a centrally located water stream at the center (Figure 6).
The stream starts from the left hand side: it falls down from a cliff, and
flows down towards the foreground of the painting by a smooth turn in
the middle. The portion on the right side of the stream is divided into two
parts: A bulky, steep mountain covers most of the surface. It is painted in
yellow, brown and red. A diagonal black line indicates a path or a road
climbing up towards the middle hip of the mountain. On its skirts, one
can see a large tree and (probably) a house; then comes a plain in their
front side including a variety of landscape elements painted in red, brown,
green, blue and black. The left side of the stream is allocated to a large two-
storey house complex. A pathway from the stream leads to an arched door
of a building on the ground level. Its beige facade has a door on the right
side and has three rectangular windows on the left side of this door. The
lines on the facade indicate that the walls of this level are made of stone. A
ladder (or a wooden staircase), supported by three slender columns, leads
up to the upper level of the building. These stairs, however, do not have
any balustrades. They end up in a landing in front of a two-storey entrance
tower which seems somehow connected to other buildings located on its
left side. The entrance tower has a symmetrical facade; it has an arched
door on the lower level and two arched windows on the upper. There is
some indication of reddish curtains on these windows. The entrance tower
block is covered with a steep polygonal (or conical) roof, painted in brown.
The pole erected in the center of the roof of the tower carries a flag with a
crescent and a star.
On the left side of this tower, there is a large mass of a building, the front
of which has a continuous line of balustrades. The building mass here is
divided into two; the one next to the tower has a brown facade and four
rectangular windows. The adjacent building facade on the other hand, is
painted in beige. It has a door on its right side at the entrance level and two
windows on its upper level. These two facades -although the first building
is a one-storey, and the latter one is two-storey- are connected with a single
roofline and a cornice. The roof is sloped and painted in red; it has a large
chimney with a smoke. The chimney is located on the right (side), just at
the very end of the gable. The triangular space left between the two main
parts of the painting is depicted as sky and painted in blue, shades of
purple, green and beige.
Paintings 3 and 4
The third and the fourth painting frames and the paintings within
them were demolished when we first visited the house in July 2006, but
fortunately they were photographed earlier by Işık and Asaf Özkul as well
as by Cemalettin Erdoğan (3). Some of the remnants of these paintings
however, were lying on the floor of the room. We picked up a small sample
from the remnants and had it analyzed as explained later in the paper. The
examination of the photographs of the above-mentioned two paintings
indicated the following information:
3. The authors thank Cemalettin Erdoğan,
Işık and Asaf Özkul for enabling them to
see the images. Because the quality of these
photographs were poor, they only included
the description of their contents in this paper.

VACİT İMAMOĞLU and ÇAĞRI İMAMOĞLU96 METU JFA 2009/2
The third painting depicts part of a tower bridge over a river. On the right
hand side, there are three arches over three legs supporting the bridge
crossing the river. A square tower is located on the left side, on top of
the last leg of the structure. This tower has two openings, one looking
towards the entrance of the bridge and the other towards the river and has
a pyramidal (or a conical) roof. A parapet protects the edge of the bridge
all along, over which there are three vertical elements, like lampposts or
sculptures. The sky and the river were painted in blue, white and dark
blue; the legs of the bridge and the tower in brown, red and white; the
parapets and the roof of the tower on the other hand were painted in
shades of purple, red and black. This painting of a bridge crossing a river
resembles the ones depicting such scenes in some central European cities.
The fourth painting looks like an architectural drawing, with some color
patches. It depicts the facade of a large mosque with a hemispherical dome
located at the center and two flanking slender minarets. It is a symmetrical
composition that is divided into four horizontal bands: at the bottom, there
is the base of the structure made of stone, including a staircase in the center
and long walls on two sides. The second band represents a tall flat facade
with a centrally placed arched gate, which has a circular window at its
upper part and flanking tall windows. This gate seems to be designed as
an independent unit together with its upper part. There are three arched
windows on each side of this door, located on a high level. The third band
is split into two in the middle to give way to the vertical continuation of the
entrance area that seems to include a balcony, defined by a raised roof and
two centrally located columns. This third band is narrower compared to
the lower one and cantilevered out on both sides of the central part. These
cantilevered volumes include five windows on the left and five on the right
side (however, the ones on the right hand side are not very legible). The top
band of the building includes a hemispherical ribbed dome (and perhaps
windows or slits around) in the center, and one minaret and one cylindrical
tower on both sides. These cylindrical towers have conical roofs and
though they look like weight towers, they seem to have windows on their
peripheries. Hence they may perhaps be depicting two small domes. On
top of the large central dome, on top of these towers and at the pinnacles
of each of the two minarets there are crescent figures (or alem). Each of
the minarets seems to have one or perhaps two balconies (şerefe). Colors
employed in the painting are red, blue, black and yellow. This painting
may be considered as a yearning for a large classical mosque, similar to the
ones in Istanbul.
PAINTINGS ON THE SOUTH WALL
There were three wall paintings along this wall, just like in the north wall,
and three surfaces were reserved for paintings. This time, they were located
between the three windows of the room.
Painting 5 (Figure 7)
The fifth picture was painted on the surface near the cupboard of the
fireplace of the room. It is a landscape scene with a forest (Figure 7). The
painting has a rectangular framed placed upright, and a circle surrounding
the composition. Five tall pine or cypress trees and (probably two)
deciduous trees are densely planted near a lake or seashore. On the right
hand side there is a small bay, and in the center and the left side of the
painting plane -in front of the trees- there is a piece of empty land. Trees
and land are painted in green, dark green, red-brown and blue. Behind and

WALL PAINTINGS OF NECİP ÖZALP HOUSE IN GESİ METU JFA 2009/2 97
above the trees, a blue-gray color was used to
indicate the sky or perhaps, the continuation of the water body behind the
group of trees.
Painting 6 (Figure 8)
The sixth painting is a still life, composed of flowers in a vase. A horizontal
ellipsoid frame surrounds it (Figure 8). The flowers are arranged almost in
a symmetrical fashion on a yellow-gold background. Though most of the
colors faded away and turned into yellow, we can still see patches of blues
and reds on the flowers. The vase has a classical appearance; it stands on
a base, has a leg and a fluted body giving the impression that it is made of
glass.
Painting 7 (Figure 9)
The seventh painting has an outer square and a circular inner frame. It is
a sea-view depicting various natural and human-made elements (Figure
9). In its center there are one or two islands with an active volcano on the
left side. If it is a single island, on its right side is a high plateau where
a building is located. The volcano has a sharp conical shape that comes
down towards the seaside on the left and front sides and its skirts seem to
be covered with plants. Its smoke starts from two different points on its
summit. The right side of the island (or perhaps the second island) has a
single-storey building, which is surrounded by hedges. The building has
a sloped roof, and a tall slender tower behind its roof. One of the facades
of the building has two, while the other one has three windows. The roof
of the house is painted red and has a chimney on the left end, from which
a cloud of black smoke comes out toward the left. The above-mentioned
tower has two openings, a triangular roof and a big pole on which a flag
weaves.
In the sea, there are two ships in the front right and on the far right hand
sides of the island with their sails down. The ship on the far right is a larger
one. The sea is painted in blue and white, yellow, black and brown patches
of color depicting waves. The sky, on the other hand, is painted in yellow,
green and terra cotta colors with some white clouds. This sky, covering
more than half of the picture plane, includes an orange colored sun on its
right hand side, just between the building and the larger ship. The lower
part of the sun is masked with a cloud, while the upper part protrudes
orange sunrays towards the top of the sky.
Figure 7. Painting 5, on the south wall.
Figure 8. Painting 6, on the south wall.
Figure 9. Painting 7, on the south wall

VACİT İMAMOĞLU and ÇAĞRI İMAMOĞLU98 METU JFA 2009/2
EXAMINATION OF THE MATERIALS AND TECHNIQUES USED FOR
THE PAINTINGS
As noted above, in order to see the chemical composition of the
components and production techniques of these paintings, a sample
was taken from the “painting with a mosque” and was examined in the
materials Conservation Laboratory of Middle East Technical University,
Faculty of Architecture, Ankara. The results indicated that a 4 cm thick
mud plaster was applied on the stone walls of the room. Then a 2.5 mm
thick lime plaster layer was applied on it, followed by a 0.4 mm. thick
lime-painting layer. The painting was applied on dry lime plaster with
earth pigments mixed with limewater. Main mineral composition of lime
painting layer is calcite with approximately 20% gypsum (4).
DISCUSSION
As noted in the Introduction, related studies indicate that wall paintings
were often used in central Anatolia since antiquity (Imamoğlu, 2002;
Renda, 1996, 1985, 1976). This trend is not only true for cities and towns,
but also for small settlements and villages as considered here. In this paper
we examined Necip Özalp House in Gesi, which has paintings in only
one of its rooms. Due to the damaged state of the house, we do not know
whether there were paintings in other rooms as well.
The wall paintings of the reception room of Özalp House exhibit a uniform,
straightforward style and seem to have a kind of sketchy or graphical
characteristic. The seven paintings we examined here cover various
subjects and illustrate landscapes as well as various types of buildings
depicted with regard to principles of perspective. Although rich in subject,
these paintings were produced with materials (and perhaps technique)
that were not good enough to create a colorful, lively and impressive
atmosphere within the space they were in. This may be mainly due to
the use of earth-based pigments mixed with limewater, which usually
have low color values and look diluted or grayish/whitish in each hue.
Additionally, depending on their chemical compositions, their values
might have faded in time.
Renda’s (1976) work on Büyükbürüngüz indicates that, at the beginning
of the 19th century, inscriptions in Arabic script and two-dimensional
decorations were used together with three-dimensional wall paintings
with an elaborate understanding of decoration. A similar artistic attitude
was also seen in the harem section of Hacı Mahmut Efendi (Molu) Konak
built in 1876 in Darsiyak, few kilometers away from the former village. In
this building traditional as well as more contemporary type of paintings
were used together (İmamoğlu and İmamoğlu, 2007). In the latter example,
landscape paintings appear to be more influenced by western type of
paintings. On the other hand, paintings in Özalp House in Gesi, appear to
have a less decorative effect, but rather, seem to be more descriptive and
topic oriented, as compared to the two former house examples.
Özalp family in Gesi was probably an upper-middle class Muslim family
and the decoration utilized in their house was compatible with their social
status and religion. The reception room examined here gives an impression
of a straightforward and simple interpretation of space decoration. The
paintings on its walls are well scaled and carefully handled; additionally
they are rich in subject matter and image, describing a colorful, if not a
fantastic outer world. Their subject matters are quite wide: A bridge over
4. An XRD analysis carried out by M. Cemre
Üstünkaya and Dr. Emine N. Caner-Saltık
in Materials Conservation Laboratory of the
Faculty of Architecture, METU indicated two
layers of lime: (a) Lime plaster layer: Lime
was mixed with ~%25 gypsum, probably as
plaster of Paris, before its application. Main
mineral composition of lime plaster layer is
calcite with ~%25 gypsum and anhydrite. (b)
Lime painting layer: Painting was applied on
dry lime plaster with earth pigments mixed
with lime water. Main mineral composition
of lime painting layer is calcite with ~%20
gypsum. The authors are grateful to M.
Cemre Üstünkaya and Dr. Emine N. Caner-
Saltık for this analysis.

WALL PAINTINGS OF NECİP ÖZALP HOUSE IN GESİ METU JFA 2009/2 99
a river, a large classical mosque with two minarets, a forest, an island
with an active volcano including sailing ships; additionally, large houses,
churches, towers, flags, water falls, etc. Most of them seem to be fantasies
or yearnings of people living in the middle of Anatolian peninsula, for a
more complex and spectacular world. These scenes may also be described
as snap shots, or photographs on post cards taken from central Europe,
İstanbul, forest lands or overseas, all exhibited on the walls of a room
for the visitors and members of Özalp family. The pictures may also be
interpreted as a kind of demonstration of the painter, who has traveled a
lot and seen different parts of the world, who seems to have many things to
say about Europe, overseas and a fantastic world about which people talk
or dream. Still however, most of the paintings seem to lack the depth, color
and warmth of the real world with which our emotions get activated. They,
in general appear to give a kind of schematic and rather dull representation
of the physical world. Based on such an evaluation, one may think that
the painter of Özalp House probably was not an artist but a technician,
producing paintings according to the principles of perspective in different
subject matters. For this particular painter, conveying a basic and realistic
description of these imaginary environments, but missing emotional sides,
probably seemed to be sufficient and good enough.
Wall paintings of the house were generally produced according to the rules
of perspective. However, there are some minor inconsistencies in some of
the details, like a single and a double-storey building having equal heights
(painting No: 2), and the over-scaled house on the island (painting No:
7). Two of the seven paintings, on the other hand, seem to have a two-
dimensional character. These are the mosque (painting No: 4) and still life
paintings (painting No: 6).
Another important aspect of these paintings is related to their social and
religious contents and symbolic representations. Since the house belonged
to a Muslim Turkish family, a large mosque, minarets, crescents on
their pinnacles, Turkish flags with a crescent and a star were employed
in various scenes. Beside these Turkish-Muslim symbols, temples of
Christianity were also portrayed in one of the townscape depictions
(painting No: 1). Hence, one may take paintings of this house as a kind of
reflection of a multi-religious, multi-ethnic integrated society of its time.
As mentioned above, Muslim Turks of Gesi lived together with Christian
Greeks and Christian Armenians smoothly for centuries. Their interaction
helped to produce a colorful society and a fertile, impressive civilization
that seem to have paved the way to a liberal attitude of people towards art
forms, as exemplified by the wall paintings.
In light of the above discussion we may say that, wall paintings of the
three houses, built in Büyükbürüngüz in 1808, Hacı Mahmut Efendi Konak
built in Darsiyak (Kayabağ) in 1976 and Necdet Özalp House built in Gesi,
at the end of the 19th or at the beginning of the 20th century, may shed
some light on wall paintings in this vicinity. Although our sample is very
limited, we may speculate on the characteristics of wall paintings in these
villages, which are located in a 10-kilometer circumference and about 17-25
kilometers away from the town of Kayseri. Thus we may summarize our
observations as follows:
1. Wall paintings seem to be used to decorate rooms of houses in Central
Anatolia all through the 19th century, not only in cities, but also in villages.
2. There seems to be a developmental trend in this art: In earlier 19th
century, inscriptions in Arabic script, still lives and landscape paintings

VACİT İMAMOĞLU and ÇAĞRI İMAMOĞLU100 METU JFA 2009/2
were used together. However, they were somewhat missing the third
dimensionality. In the later period, a new trend was observed, where, in
addition to traditional two-dimensional paintings, there were imaginary
landscape scenes produced similar to the works of European artists of the
time. Though affected by western style, we do not see a rigorous use of
perspectives in this period. At the end of the 19th century, on the other
hand, calligraphy and inscriptions were totally eliminated from wall
paintings; instead, imaginary and realistic landscapes, townscapes as well
as various topics were depicted by using rules of perspective.
3. Through the 19th century, we may also say that subject matter was
continuously developed from being simple and limited in number to
having more complex, and rich content. Early in the century, landscape
scenes were rather simple in nature and few in number; they were
combined with inscriptions of religious messages. Later, the number of
natural scenes increased and these scenes were more varied in content.
Towards the end of the century, however, we see richness in subject matter;
paintings depict more complex natural scenes, buildings, bridges and
towns.
4. Wall paintings were generally applied on gypsum-covered surfaces
in earlier examples, like the ones all over the world. In the Özalp house
example, however, we came across a different composition, where lime
was used as the major component to form the wall surfaces. Limewater
was also used as a component of the paint.
5. In the three examples referred to in the present paper (i.e., house in
Büyükbürüngüz, Hacı Mahmut Efendi Konak, and Necdet Özalp House),
we also observed some differences between the attitudes of painters. To us,
painters of the house in Büyükbürüngüz and Hacı Mahmut Efendi Konak
seem to be more of an artistic-type, who appear to have created a holistic
and aesthetically appealing atmosphere within the rooms; while the painter
of the Necdet Özalp House appears to have been more of a technician who
was not able to create an atmosphere of that quality.
6. Finally we may say a few words about the religious content of the wall
paintings. While religion seemed to be an important issue in the earlier
and mid-periods of the 19th century, it became less important toward the
end of the century. Although we see few signs of religion and nationality
in paintings, there are both Muslim and Christian elements, which may be
considered products of a secular outlook. Due to the multi-ethnic, multi-
religious composition of the population of Gesi, perhaps also accentuated
by the effects of Tanzimat reforms in Ottoman Empire, the paintings
seem to reflect acceptance, tolerance and respect for the other religions (as
exemplified by the depiction of mosques, crescents, Turkish flags together
with churches, on the wall paintings of Özalp House). This, we believe, is
not an extra ordinary situation at all because the inhabitants of Gesi were
quite representative of the well-integrated Ottoman population.
REFERENCES
ARIK, R. (1976) Batılılaşma Dönemi Anadolu Tasvir Sanatı, Türkiye İş Bankası
Kültür Yayınları, 168, Ankara.
ELDEM, S.H., AKOZAN, F. (1982) Topkapı Sarayı, Kültür ve Turizm
Bakanlığı, Eski Eserler ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü, İstanbul.
ELDEM, S.H. (1984) Türk Evi- Osmanlı Dönemi I, TAÇ Vakfı, İstanbul.

WALL PAINTINGS OF NECİP ÖZALP HOUSE IN GESİ METU JFA 2009/2 101
İMAMOĞLU, V. (2002) Kayseri Evlerinde Duvar ve Tavan Resimleri, VI.
Ortaçağ ve TürkDönemi Kazı Sonuçları ve Sanat Tarihi Sempozyumu,
Bildiriler, Erciyes Üniversitesi, Sanat Tarihi Bölümü, Kayseri; 417-26.
İMAMOĞLU, V. (2006) Traditional Dwellings in Kayseri, extended second
edition, Kayseri Büyükşehir Belediyesi Kültür Yayınları No: 49;
Ankara.
IMAMOĞLU, V. and İMAMOĞLU, Ç. (2007) Wall Paintings of Necip
Özalp House in Gesi and Molu Konak in Kayabağ (Darsiyak), Paper
presented at the 13th International Congress of Turkish Art, Budapest,
3-8 September.
İMAMOĞLU, V., KORUMAZ, M. and İMAMOĞLU, Ç. (2005) A Fantasy in
Central Anatolian Architectural Heritage: Dove Cotes and Towers in
Kayseri, METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, (22/2) 79-90.
RENDA, G. (1976) Büyükbürüngüz’de eski bir ev, Türkiyemiz, Sayı 20, 14-9.
RENDA, G. (1977) Batılılaşma Döneminde Türk Resim Sanatı 1700-1850,
Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Yayınları, C-17.
RENDA, G. (1985) Göreme’de korunması gereken bir ev, Kültür Bakanlığı
Eski Eserler ve Müzeler Müdürlüğü 3. Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı;
103-32.
RENDA, G. (1996) Westernisms in Ottoman Art: Wall paintings in 19th
century houses. In S. Ireland and W. Bechhoefer, eds., The Ottoman
House, Proceedings of the Amasya Symposium. Ankara: The British
Institute of Archeology at Ankara; 103-9.
TOMSU, L. (1950) Bursa Evleri, İTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi, İstanbul.
GESİ NECİP ÖZALP EVİNDEKİ DUVAR RESİMLERİ
Orta Anadolu’daki duvar resimleri Roma dönemine kadar gider. Kayseri
civarındaki Gesi köyü yakınlarındaki mağaraların çeper ve tavanları da,
tıpkı Ürgüp yöresinde görüldüğü gibi fresklerle süslenmiştir. Bunlar
çoğunlukla dini içerikli yapıtlardır ve perspektif kuralları kullanılmadan,
iki boyutlu olarak üretilmişlerdir. Orta Anadolu’da yaşanan mekanların bu
şekilde süslenmesi, şu veya bu şekilde günümüze kadar sürmüştür.
Onsekizinci yüzyılda, başta İstanbul olmak üzere, bazı kentlerimizin
saray ve konaklarının duvarlarında resimler görülmektedir. Bunlar
çoğunlukla, iki boyutlu bitkisel motifler, zaman zaman da manzara
resimleridir. Sözkonusu resimler Avrupa’dan gelen ressamlar, daha
sonra da onların yetiştirdiği veya onlardan esinlenen Osmanlı ressamları
tarafından üretilmiştir. İki boyutlu resim geleneğinin önemli bir türü olan
minyatür sanatı da o dönemde batı resminden etkilenmiş, minyatür yapan
sanatçıların bazıları bilişsel bir evreden geçtikten sonra, yeni oluşmakta
olan ressamlar grubuna katılmışlar ve üç boyutlu resimler yapmaya
başlamışlardır.
Bu makalede 19. yüzyıl sonu veya 20. yüzyıl başında Kayseri
yakınlarındaki Gesi köyünde inşa edilmiş bir evin başodasının
duvarlarında bulunan yedi resim incelenmektedir. Resimler, konu ve
Alındı: 17.02.2009
Anahtar Sözcükler: duvar resimleri;
kaynaşmış sosyal gruplar; İç Anadolu; Gesi;
perspektif.

VACİT İMAMOĞLU and ÇAĞRI İMAMOĞLU102 METU JFA 2009/2
içerik olarak geniş bir yelpaze içinde yer alır. Bunlar yoğun kent içi
görünüşlerinden, kır görüntülerine; evlerden, cami ve kiliselere; dumanı
çıkan bir volkandan, deniz ve orman manzaralarına kadar çeşitli fiziki
çevreleri betimlerler. Bütün resimler, dışta köşelerinde bitki motifleri olan
dikdörtgen bir çerçeve, içte ise daha küçük boyutları olan elips veya daire
biçiminde ikinci bir çerçeve içine boyanmıştır. Resimlerin çoğu temel
perspektif kurallarına uyularak yapılmıştır. Bazıları zamanla solmuş,
kullanılan renklerin çoğu canlılığını kaybetmiştir.
Yapılan kimyasal analizler, resimlerin kireç suyuyla karıştırılan toprak
boyalarla üretildiğini göstermiştir. Bu analiz, adı geçen dönemde İç
Anadolu’da yapılan duvar resimlerinde kullanılan tekniklerden birine ışık
tuttuğu için önemlidir. Makalede sözkonusu resimlerin incelenmesinin
İç Anadolu süsleme sanatına ilişkin anlayışımıza yaptığı katkılar
tartışılmaktadır.