Frontiers of Architectural Research (]]]]) ], ]]]–]]]

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

www.elsevier.com/locate/foar

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Mosque layout design: An analytical study

of mosque layouts in the early Ottoman period
Faris Ali Mustafaa,n, Ahmad Sanusi Hassanb

a
Architectural Engineering Department, Salahaddin University, Erbil, Kurdistan, Iraq
b
School of Housing, Building and Planning, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang 11800, Malaysia

Received 3 June 2013; received in revised form 22 August 2013; accepted 27 August 2013

KEYWORDS Abstract
Mosque layout; This study attempts to quantify the influence of spatial configuration on the functional
Pendentive dome; efficiency of mosque layouts in the early Ottoman period. The literature review consists of
Space syntax; two parts. The first part is a theoretical study of the relationship between spatial configuration
Gamma analysis; and functional efficiency of mosque layouts. This part highlights the key syntactical character-
Spatial configuration;
istics and effect of spatial configuration on the level of functional efficiency using space syntax
Functional efficiency
theory. The second part is an analytical comparative description of the changes and transfor-
mations in the configurations of mosque layouts. The architectural styles are classified into six
types based on layout designs. The main benchmarks and indicators involved in measuring the
functional efficiency of mosque layouts are analyzed using the A-graph 2009 software program,
which provides numerical results. This analysis compares entire samples of mosque layout
designs for each category. The numerical results indicate the effect of spatial configurations
and the functions of mosque layouts. This study shows that mosques with courtyard layouts are
accessible, efficient, and flexible in terms of function because of their distinct syntactical and
morphological spatial structures.
& 2013. Higher Education Press Limited Company. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All
rights reserved.

1. Introduction
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: +964 7504524659. The expansion of territories by the Ottoman Empire
E-mail addresses: farisyali@yahoo.com (F.A. Mustafa), resulted in the development of the Ottoman architecture.
Sanusi@usm.my (A.S. Hassan). The Ottomans constructed several public buildings and
Peer review under responsibility of Southeast University. edifices in various sizes and forms because of the growing
needs of the changing Ottoman community (i.e., from an
immigrant tribe to an empire). The annexation of new
lands to territories that were ruled by the Ottomans
enabled Ottoman architects to promote and enhance their

2095-2635 & 2013. Higher Education Press Limited Company. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005
2 F.A. Mustafa, A.S. Hassan

construction techniques by working with architects from Pendentive dome construction was applied in designing mos-
newly acquired regions. This practice satisfied the increas- ques in this region. A pendentive dome refers to the construc-
ing demands of a flourishing community. According to the tion of a “dome above a dome,” that is, a dome that seems to
Ottoman regulation, settlers should be accommodated in be “hanging in the air” over four giant arched supports. The
newly occupied regions. With regard to building architec- uniqueness of this type of dome construction enables the
ture, this regulation influenced the construction of several creation of a large multivolume space in the mosque interior
new mosques because the Ottomans practiced Islam. The (Mango, 1976; Figure 1).
size and form of the mosques were influenced by a number The functional efficiency of mosque layouts in the early
of factors, such as the Muslim population in a region. The Ottoman period was affected by the process of spatial
increase in Muslim population required the construction of configuration over time. This paper applies space syntax
Jami Mosques, which are known as Cami in the Turkish theory on the architecture of pendentive dome mosques in
language. Believers congregate in these mosques every the Balkans with respect to the layout design. The mosque is
Friday (Crane, 1993; Pasic, 2004). A thriving economy can an embodiment of spatial and temporal Islamic laws that
also be another factor in the construction of large mosques directly come from the Quran and Sunnah of the Prophet
because an increase in wealth increases the status of a Muhammad. The primary spatial laws indicate the orienta-
town. The Ottomans were also conscious of the ability of tion of the mosque to the Kaabah in Makah and the
architecture to immortalize power and wealth. They arrangement of the worshipers in parallel rows behind the
constructed public buildings with luxurious architectures imam facing the Qiblah wall. Temporal laws dictate the five
because mosques had always been an important compo- ritual performances that are to be performed during specific
nent of such buildings. The luxurious interiors of these times of the day according to the movement of the sun.
buildings are shown by fenestrations spreading over the These spatial and temporal laws are uniform throughout the
façades and shaft of the dome. These fenestrations reflect Islamic world regardless of cultural and traditional varia-
the grandeur exterior of the building, attract the attention tions. However, the rules or codes of practice are subject to
of passersby, and kindle the virtuosity of esthetes. This various interpretations of Islamic schools of thought and
construction method can be attributed to the Ottomans Muslim scholars. Such rules may evolve into various tradi-
(Saoud, 2004). tions influenced by regional cultures.
This construction method is a blend of indigenous archi- Nonetheless, the core traditions indicated by the Quran
tecture that was inherited by Ottoman culture. It includes and the Sunnah are intact. To understand the mosque as a
the combination of original Ottoman architecture and building type, formal analysis of the mosque as a constitu-
Islamic regulations called Shariah. Issues such as climate ent of physical/symbolic architectural elements or as an
and material concerns in recognized architecture were object of events and social process is insufficient. Given the
settled by the indigenous architecture of the area. The theoretical and methodological tools of space syntax,
indigenous architecture was used by the Ottomans as the analysis should focus on the genotype of mosques, that is,
foundation in integrating Ottoman culture, bylaws, and configurational regularities that show spatial categories and
religious stances in indigenous culture. The adoption and social practices (Aazam, 2005, 2007). This analysis com-
transformation process defined the architectural generation pares six categories and samples of pendentive dome
between the 13th and 15th centuries and resulted in the mosque layouts. Each mosque category was established
formation of buildings known today as early Ottoman during different periods and evolved from previous cate-
architecture. gories (Kuran, 1968; Unsal, 1973; Mango, 1976; Flon et al.,
The Ottomans gradually disseminated this architectural 1984; Bernardini, 1987; Marshall and Rossman, 1999;
tenet during their territorial expansion from Asia Minor to Goodwin, 1993; 2003; Pasic and Siravo, 2004; Guba and
Europe, where Ottoman prints could be easily seen, particularly Lincoln, 2005; Gulru, 2005; Omer, 2008). These categories
in the Balkans (Flon et al., 1984; Pasic, 2004; Saoud, 2004). are presented as follows.

Figure 1 Pendentive dome construction: Hagia Sophia (left); types of pendentive dome construction (right).

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005
Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early Ottoman period 3

1.1. Single dome layout (nuclear dome layout) surmounts the prayer hall. The remaining spaces can be
covered by smaller domes, although the pendent areas are
The single dome layout is the origin and most basic type of not always covered with domes. A semi-dome can be
pendentive dome mosque. Subsequent developments of the applied when the prayer hall is elongated. The semi-dome
mosque layout design were derived from this category. The is usually used once on the prayer hall and is placed on the
Orhan Gazi Mosque in Gebze, Turkey, is a good example of opposite side of the porch.
this layout (Figure 2). This category has the simplest form
among all categories; that is, this layout adopts a square as 1.3. Multiple dome layout
the main hall and a surmounting dome as the roof. The main
hall can be oblong or nearly square. If the planned layout is The third category is a double dome layout design. This
nearly rectangular, other roofing methods, such as a semi- category is a combination of the single dome and earring
dome or flat roof, can be used. The presence of a porch on layout designs with additional primary and secondary
the entrance side of the mosque is a possible variety of this domes. An example of this category is the Murat Pasa
type. The dome of the single dome layout is located at the Mosque (Figure 4) in Istanbul, Turkey. Although this category
center of the prayer hall and is called a nuclear dome, is a development of the pendentive layout, the general
which is the most distinct characteristic of this type of forms of both layouts are similar. In the multiple dome
mosque layout. This mosque layout gives the impression layout, the prayer hall or all three covered spaces (i.e., the
that the mosque is dominated by the dome. The dome is prayer hall and both pendent areas) are rectangular.
surmounted on walls by squelches or rectangular structures. A porch is often used in this category, and a row of columns
Semi-domes in couple form or roofing methods such as a flat
roof surrounding the single dome are other methods of
covering the prayer hall.

1.2. Earring layout (pendentive layout)

The earring layout is the second mosque layout category

designed during the early Ottoman period. The design of
this layout was derived from the single dome layout.
The name of this category (pendentive) is borrowed from
the pendent shape of the layout plan. The Hatuniye Mosque
in Tokat, Turkey, (Figure 3) is a good example of this
category. The mosque layout was developed from the single
dome layout (nuclear layout) by adding smaller spaces to
each side of the main hall. From the perspective of the
layout plan, these spaces appear like pendents; thus, the
shape of the layout is not a pure Plato's, form but rather a
compound thereof. The layout may have a porch on the Figure 3 Earring layout (pendentive layout); Hatuniye Mosque.
entrance side. The entire porch is attached to the building,
thus making the square shape of the interior appear rectan-
gular. A series of columns is placed in the absence of a porch.
In this category, the number of domes can vary from
one to three. A large dome, which is the dominant one,

Figure 2 Single dome layout (nuclear dome layout); Orhan Gazi

Mosque. Figure 4 Multiple dome layout; Murat Pasa Mosque.

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005
4 F.A. Mustafa, A.S. Hassan

can be used in the absence of a porch. The pendent areas of

most mosques have deep inner spaces. Therefore, the
crown part of the main hall is the only part of the layout
that exceeds the single pendentive. As the name of this
category suggests, this layout consists of several domes. The
prayer hall or pendentive areas can have multiple domes,
with the number of domes doubled in some cases. The
pendentive dome is widely used on grounds that cover
rectangular spaces by increasing the number of domes.
Similar to other categories, semi-domes and roofing meth-
ods can be applied to this category.

1.4. Duplication dome layout (rectangular layout)

The fourth category is the duplication dome layout design,

which is a development of the multiple dome layout design.
The Ulu Cami Mosque in Bursa, Turkey, (Figure 5) is
representative of the characteristics of this category. The
form of the layout in this category is rectangular in both the
horizontal axis and the transverse axis. This form is similar
to the Islamic architecture of mosques in other regions. The
entire layout is divided into spaces by columns or walls. Figure 6 Courtyard dome layout; Guzelce Hassan Bey Mosque.
A porch can also be observed in a few cases. The main
characteristic of this category is the perfect rectangular
form of its layout. More than one dome can be found in this
category, and finding the dominant dome is difficult but not (Figure 6). The layout of this category is characterized by
impossible. The spans yielded by the columns and walls used the rectangular layout, which enables for a square-shaped
to support the vast area of the roof are surmounted by interior. The remarkable characteristic of this category is
domes. The domes are arranged in rows and columns in the addition of a discernible courtyard to the rectangular
proportion to the dimensions of the plan. Aside from other layout. Therefore, any mosque characterized by a rectan-
roofing methods, two semi-domes also flank the dome(s) of gular layout and a courtyard belongs to this category.
the prayer hall. Similar to the rectangular layout, semi-domes and other
methods of roofing can also be applied to this category.
Semi-domes that come in pairs are used to surround the
1.5. Courtyard dome layout
main dome. The main dome is also pendentive, and
the surrounding domes cover the corners not covered by
The courtyard layout design is the fifth category of the
the main dome or semi-domes.
pendentive dome mosque. A good example of this category
is the Guzelce Hassan Bey Mosque in Hayrabolu, Turkey

1.6. Earring dome courtyard layout

The earring courtyard layout design is the sixth category

under the pendentive dome mosque. This design is the most
complex pendentive dome layout design during the early
period of Ottoman architecture. The design is characterized
by the earrings, multiple domes, and courtyard layout
designs. A good example of this category is the Sultan
Bayezid Mosque in Edirne, Turkey (Figure 7). The layout of
this category integrates the multiple dome layout with the
courtyard layout. The interior layout is similar to the
interior layout of the multiple dome layout with an added
courtyard, which comes from the courtyard layout.
The courtyard has four riwaqs (i.e., an element in traditional
buildings in the form of corridors or galleries) along the walls
and a pond at the center. The dome in this category
resembles the dome of the multiple dome layout. The roof
of the prayer hall can be singular and dominant or can be
surrounded by semi-domes and smaller domes. The penden-
Figure 5 Duplication dome layout (rectangular layout); Ulu tive areas are surmounted by an array of domes similar to
Cami Mosque. those in the rectangular layout with all possible varieties.

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005
Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early Ottoman period 5

research and application have demonstrated that the spatial

arrangements in any building layout (e.g., mosque layouts)
have a discernible and measurable influence on human
(worshiper) behavior. Considering that these effects can be
modeled, predicted, and improved prior to construction,
designers must understand the relationship between layout
design and human behavior (Bafna, 2003; Aazam, 2007).

3. Functional efficiency of mosque layouts

One of the most important approaches that epitomize the

distinct traits of society is the manner by which space is
organized for human purposes; this approach achieves the
appropriate and efficient functions of building layouts
(Aspinall, 1993; Voordt et al., 1997). A product or process
is considered functional when the product or process used is
suitable for its purpose. For buildings, functionality may be
defined as the degree to which activities are supported by
Figure 7 Earring dome courtyard layout; Sultan Bayezid Mosque. the built environment. Functionality is related to the
amount and form of space, the spatial relationship between
spaces (functional zoning), and the routing through the
2. Space syntax and mosque layouts building for the distribution of people (Voordt et al., 1997).
In architectural design, function is approached mainly as a
Space syntax is a theory of space and contains a set of sequence of human actions coupled with equipment to
analytical, quantitative, and descriptive tools that can be satisfy specific practical requirements on a daily basis inside
used to analyze the spatial formations of building layouts, a given spatial unit (Reverson, 2009). Hillier (2007) defines
cities, and landscapes (Hillier and Hanson, 1988; Hillier, functionality “as the ability of a complex to accommodate
2007). Space syntax reveals the relationship between human functions in general and therefore potentially a range of
beings and their inhabited spaces. The distinctive character- different functions, rather than any specific function.”
istics of societies exist within spatial systems and are Functional factors, such as the relationships between spaces
conveyed through space and the organization of spaces and activities, appropriate axes of movement, flexibility,
(Osman and Suliman, 1993; Dursun and Saglamer, 2003). suitability, and safety, are the key aspects of a building
Space syntax refers to this relational characteristic of space layout design. These factors are closely related to the
as a configuration; this characteristic forms human behavior activities and organizational performances of the occu-
and contains social knowledge (Aazam, 2007; Dursun, 2007). pants. Functional considerations play an important role in
Space syntax research aims to develop strategies for the success of a building; thus, incorrect configuration will
describing the configurations of occupied/inhabited spaces result in inefficient and unacceptable functions (Al-Nijaidi,
to articulate underlying social meanings. This process 1985; Karlen, 2009). Therefore, functionality is the over-
enables the development of secondary theories or practical all viability of a building in accommodating functions
explanations on the effects of spatial configuration on (e.g., multifunctionality and diversity) and achieving a
various social or cultural variables. A related theme in range of different functions rather than a specific function
space syntax research is the comprehension of configured/ (Bustard, 1999; Hanson, 2003).
functioned space itself, particularly the formative process A built space is considered efficient when everyday users,
and social meaning of space (Bafna, 2003). Space syntax worshippers, and visitors can participate in various activ-
attempts to formulate a configurational theory in architec- ities without experiencing difficulties. The spatial–func-
ture by generating a theoretical understanding of how tional features that are relevant to efficiency include the
people create and use spatial configurations (e.g., mosque spatial clustering of functionally related activities, short
layouts). Therefore, space syntax attempts to identify how distances (spatial depth), and prevention of physical bar-
spatial configurations express a social or cultural meaning riers between frequently used spaces in mosque layouts.
and how spatial configurations generate the social interac- The degree of efficiency achieved by building layouts can be
tions in built environments. A considerable number of determined by indicators, such as the availability of interior
research and publications have shown that previous space spaces for individual and communal use and the openness or
syntax studies focus on real environments and identify the closeness of physical partitions. Therefore, the two follow-
intrinsic nature of man-made environments. ing components are important:
By developing consistent techniques to represent and
analyze spatial patterns, recent space syntax studies have (1) Psychological efficiency refers to the extent in which a
attempted to simulate spatial designs in mosque layout building “invites” the potential user or visitor to enter
proposals and predict how these designs will work (Hillier by using the appearance of and activities in a building.
et al., 1983, 1984, 1987a, 1987b, 1987c; Steadman, 1983; The relevant spatial aspects include a recognizable
Hillier and Hanson, 1988; Peponis and Wineman, 2002; Ratti, entrance; clear transitions and circulation from the
2004; Hillier and Tzortzi, 2006; Hillier, 2007). Space syntax public to private sectors; syntactical characteristics

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005
6 F.A. Mustafa, A.S. Hassan

that facilitate spatial–functional orientations, such as a syntactic characteristics, namely, symmetry–asymmetry and
clear outline of a building layout, visual axes, points of distributedness–non-distributedness, which are directly
recognition, and differentiation in the use of spaces. linked to the functionality of the mosque layout.
(2) Physical efficiency refers to the ease in which users and The symmetry–asymmetry property expresses the kinetic-
visitors can reach, enter, and move through a building to visual depth of various spaces within the spatial system
use various spaces. A particular focal point is integral (i.e., mosque layout) in terms of the main space (i.e., main
accessibility; that is, people with physical disabilities gate/entrance). If the depth of the space within the mosque
can also enter and move through the building indepen- layout is lower than the depth of the other spaces in the
dently. “Access for all” can be determined from the system, the space is more symmetric and vice versa. Space
floor plans based on indicators, such as the type of segregation increases when the number of kinetic-visual
space, degree of integration of each space within the steps between the spaces in the mosque layout increases,
spatial layout, depth of space, manner of distribution of thus resulting in the weakening of the functional relation-
functional spaces into zones, and variety of internal ship (i.e., efficiency). This phenomenon is caused by the
arrangements of spaces in terms of flexibility, freedom, inverse relationship between segregation and functional
inclusiveness, and other design devices. These indica- efficiency. This relationship refers to the degree of symme-
tors provide opportunities to improve the physical try of any space in the spatial system (i.e., mosque layout).
efficiency of a building (Hamdi, 1991; Voordt et al., Therefore, if any space in the mosque layout moves away
1997; Habraken, 1998; Friedman, 2002). Spaces are from the main space (e.g., the entrance) by one kinetic-
usually connected in ways that modify the distribution visual step, space separation will not occur. However, the
of integration throughout a structure, thus causing a link will be direct, and the space will be symmetrical.
number of areas to become more accessible than the Increasing the space symmetry decreases the space segre-
rest. This sequence of integration regulates the inter- gation, resulting in an efficient functional relationship.
actions between users/worshippers and causes spatial– When the space moves away by more than one kinetic-
functional relationships to become efficient and flexible visual step from the main space, the space will become
(Dawson, 2002). asymmetrical (Hillier and Hanson, 1988; Hillier, 2007).
The distributedness–non-distributedness property reflects
the available options for accessing all spaces in the system
4. Space syntax method for interpreting (i.e., mosque layout). By increasing the number of methods
of accessing a particular space, the distributedness of a
mosque layouts
space in a system will increase, suggesting that the kinetic
permeability of a space is at a high level with little
The space syntax method is an approach developed to
segregation and vice versa. A non-distributed space has
analyze spatial configuration. Space syntax aims to describe
simple permeability, suggesting the existence of one kinetic
spatial models (e.g., mosque layouts) and represent these
method to enter another space. Permeability (i.e., distri-
models in numerical and graphical forms, thus facilitating
butedness–non-distributedness) reflects the movement of
scientific interpretation (Hanson, 2003; Franz et al., 2005;
prayer within the spatial system in terms of smoothness,
Manum, 2009). This method was adopted to deal with the
efficiency, and flexibility, and it represents a certain
syntactical characteristics of the spatial configuration of
organizational behavior of prayers and its circulation.
mosque layouts because of the following reasons:
Therefore, depth-maximizing plans (i.e., mosque layouts)
are functionally inflexible and unsuitable for most types of
1 This method combines physical and social indicators in functional patterns compared with depth-minimizing plans,
explaining the spatial–functional systems to identify which enable the efficient function of a mosque (Peponis,
configurations in terms of differences and similarities, 1985; Hillier, 2007).
thus enabling the diagnosis of the strengths and weak-
nesses of structures, types, and patterning of mosque
layouts.
2 This method adopts the syntactical characteristics of 4.2. Space syntax indicators and measurements
spatial configuration (i.e., symmetry–asymmetry and
distributedness–non-distributedness) in interpreting the The syntactical characteristics of spatial interior configura-
structures of different mosque layouts. tions (i.e., symmetry–asymmetry and distributedness–non-
3 This method facilitates the analysis, evaluation, and distributedness), which affect the functional efficiency of
comparison of various systems. the mosque layout, can be measured by numerical values
4 This method can assess, understand, describe, and model using the following benchmarks and indicators.
various formal and spatial systems, thus providing suffi-
cient credibility and reality. 4.2.1. Indicator of degree of integration (real relative
asymmetry)
The degree of integration of a space is an indicator related
to the property of symmetry–asymmetry. This indicator
4.1. Space syntax analysis of mosque layouts reflects the relative depth of space in relation to the rest
of the spaces in any spatial system (Hillier and Hanson,
Space syntax indicates that the organization of architec- 1988). The mean depth of a space (MD) from all other
tural space in mosque layouts can result from two key spaces in the configuration (i.e., mosque layout) is the

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005
Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early Ottoman period 7

integration (i.e., real relative asymmetry (RRA)) that 4.2.1.2. Calculating the integration value of space (relative
describes the extent of permeability of that particular asymmetry).
space. Low values correspond to high integration, whereas The relative depth of a space from all other spaces in the
high values correspond to high segregation (Manum, 2009). graph can be expressed as follows:
The integration degree of space can be calculated as 2ðM:D1Þ
follows. R:A ¼ ð2Þ
K2
4.2.1.1. Calculating MD
where R.A is the relative asymmetry integration value of
space, M.D is the mean depth of space, and K is the total
i. A justified graph is created by designating the intended
number of spaces in the graph.
space as the key space (i.e., root space) at the base of a
Therefore, relative asymmetry (RA) numerically expresses
mosque layout to measure the relative depth of the
a key aspect of the shape of the justified graph from that
intended space. The remaining spaces are then aligned
space. RA varies between zero and one: zero indicates
above the root space according to the number of spaces
maximum integration, that is, no depth (high functional
that must be taken to arrive at each space from the root
efficiency), and one indicates maximum segregation, that
space. Each space in the system is represented by a small
is, maximum depth (low functional efficiency) (Hillier et al.,
circle, and the permeability between spaces is repre-
1987a; Onder, 2002; Toker and Toker, 2003; Zako, 2006). The
sented by linked lines.
measurements of integration and depth are obtained using
ii. The depth of each space is calculated in the graph from
the exterior space (of the mosque) as the root space in
the root space, where the depth of each space is
relation to the rest of the spaces in the spatial system
represented by the number of spaces needed to transi-
(i.e., mosque layout). The depth from the root is considered
tion from the root space to any space in the system
the number of steps that separate a determined space from
(Figure 8).

The least depth can be achieved when all spaces are

directly connected to the original space (i.e., root space),
whereas the greatest depth can be obtained when all spaces
are arranged in a linear sequence away from the original
space. The space is symmetric in the former case with
respect to the other spaces in the system, whereas the
space is asymmetric in the latter case (Hillier and Hanson,
1988; Hillier, 2007) (Figure 9).
MD can be calculated as follows:
∑D
M:D ¼ ð1Þ
K1
where M.D is the mean depth of space from the root space,
ΣD is the total magnitude of depth for all spaces in the Figure 9 Symmetric spatial system (Spaces connect directly to
system from the root space, and K is the total number of the root space; minimum depth: symmetric system) (a); asym-
spaces in the graph. metric spatial system (Linear sequence of spaces; maximum
depth: asymmetric system) (b) (Hillier et al., 1987a).

Figure 8 Justified permeability graphs (gamma analysis method) of mosque layouts (six case studies/categories).

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005
8 F.A. Mustafa, A.S. Hassan

interchangeable space. The difference factor is used to

quantify this difference as a proportion of the sum of
integration values of spaces under consideration (Guney,
2005; Bellal, 2007). In most spatial complexes, different
functions and activities are assigned to specific spaces, thus
integrating complexes to different degrees (i.e., numerical
values). If the integration values of these spaces are consis-
tent across a sample, a cultural pattern is assumed to be
expressing itself spatially. This particular type of consistency
in spatial patterning is called “inequality genotypes.” The
strength or weakness of the inequality between integration
Figure 10 Diamond-shaped graph used to calculate the inte- values expresses the degree of cultural importance placed on
gration of spaces (Hillier et al., 1987a; Hillier and Hanson, the integration or segregation (Hillier et al., 1987a; Al-Jaff,
1988; Asami et al., 2003). 1989; Hanson, 2003). An entropy-based measure called a
difference factor is used to quantify the degree of difference
the front door/main entrance. Describing the sequence of between the integration values of any three spaces (or more
activities from the mosque entrance is of particular interest with a modified formula) or functional activities. This mea-
because this sequence describes the primary experience in sure is an adaptation of Shannon's H-measure for transition
buildings, that is, movement from the entrance to any probabilities, in which the integration values of the spaces
specific place in the structure. Therefore, RA is a useful are substituted for transition probabilities (Zako, 2006):
measurement for understanding front and back notions as ha
ai b b hc
ci
well as the relationship between spaces that are open to H ¼ ∑ In þ In þ In ; ð4Þ
worshippers and spaces that are specifically for prayers. t t t t t t
4.2.1.3. Calculating the RRA. The RA value resulting from where H is the unrelativized difference factor for the three
Eq. (2) must be adjusted to facilitate the numerical spaces; a, b, and c are the integration values of any three
comparison between spaces of different systems. The RA spaces in the configuration (mosque layout); and t is the sum
value for each space in the system is adjusted with its value of the three spaces, that is, t=Σ(a+b+c).
in the depth graph with a diamond-shaped or pyramid- Eq. (4) describes the variance in the integration within
shaped pattern (Hillier et al., 1987a; Hillier and Hanson, each spatial structure. This variance may be a result of the
1988; Asami et al., 2003) (Figure 10). functional differentiation in the use of space (Bustard,
The depth of the diamond-shaped graph represents an 1999). H can be relativized between Ln2 and Ln3 to obtain
intermediate situation between the maximum mean depth the relative difference factor (H*), which varies between
of space when the spaces are organized in a linear sequence zero and one. H*= 0 corresponds to the maximum differ-
with respect to the root space (as previously mentioned) ence, that is, strong functional differentiation, which refers
and the least mean of depth when all spaces are linked to the real functional efficiency of the space. H* = 1
directly to the root space (Hillier and Hanson, 1988). corresponds to the minimum or no difference (i.e., no
Therefore, RRA can be calculated as follows: functional differentiation), indicating that no real difference
R:A exists in the values of integration and that no real functional
R:R:A ¼ ð3Þ efficiency exists for the space (Hillier et al., 1987a). There-
DK
fore, H* can be calculated according to the following
where R.R.A is the real relative asymmetry of space, R.A is modified formula:
the relative asymmetry of space, and DK is the RA of space
HIn 2
from a diamond-shaped graph. Hn ¼ ð5Þ
RRA is a sensitive measure of building layouts. This value In 3In 2
varies around the number one; values less than one A low H* value indicates the existence of a “strong”
correspond to the most integrated and least segregated genotype. By contrast, values close to one indicate the
spaces in the system, whereas values greater than one existence of “weak” genotypes, suggesting that no functional
correspond to the most segregated spaces. The relations differentiation and weakness exist in the functional effi-
between functional activities are expressed in space ciency of a space. These simple measures, as clarified by
through the spatial relationships between the spaces of a Zako (2006), can express culturally significant typological
mosque under the assumption that the properties of inte- differences among various mosque layouts over time, as such
gration and segregation indicate space efficiency (Hillier measures are based on concepts founded on intrinsic
et al., 1987a; Zako, 2006) and the type of functional use of social logic.
spaces occupied by prayers.
4.2.3. Indicator of the spatial system (space–link ratio)
4.2.2. Difference factor of space (H*) Integration was proposed as a syntactical measure to assess
Integration values indicate the permeability of a configuration the symmetry–asymmetry properties of a spatial system,
in quantitative terms. Extensive research demonstrates that and the relative “ringiness” measure was proposed to assess
integration values are highly predictive of the use of space. the distributedness–non-distributedness properties. Distri-
The degree of variance in integration values is considered an butedness represents the existence of more than one non-
indication of the strength or weakness of social relations with intersecting route from a given point in a system to another
respect to spatial ordering, that is, the amount of point. If only one route exists for any two points in the

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005
Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early Ottoman period 9

Figure 11 Tree-like structure (a); ringy structure (b).

system, the system is considered a non-distributed system connection and lies on a ring; and d-type space, which has
with a tree-like structure (Figure 11a). In a tree-like more than two connections and lies on at least two rings.
structure, p-1 lines connect the structure together, where Therefore, a- and b-type spaces indicate tree-like graphs,
p is the number of nodes in the spatial system (Guney, 2005; whereas c- and d-type spaces indicate ringy graphs (Hanson,
Bellal, 2007). Any increase in the number of lines in the 2003; Manum, 2005; Guney, 2005; Bellal, 2007).
system will indicate the existence of rings in the system; Occupation is assumed suitable for an a-type space,
that is, the system has a ringy structure (Figure 11b). This where no “through” circulation exists. Movement is
indicator is used to measure the distributedness–non- suitable for b-, c-, and d-type spaces, with d-type spaces
distributedness property of each space and the entire offering the greatest movement. The degree of spaceness
spatial system (i.e., mosque layout). Measuring the degree (terminology borrowed from Amorim (1999)), such as the a-
of “ringiness” of a spatial system, that is, the space–link ness or b-ness of spaces, can indicate the extent to which
ratio R, represents the extent of permeability of the spatial these properties are embedded in the graphs. It offers
system. The space–link ratio is the ratio of the number of insights into the terms of space use within the mosque
links located between the spaces plus one to the number of layout.
spaces in a spatial system of a mosque. To calculate the degree of a-ness of a mosque layout, the
The R values vary around the number one, with the values number of a-type spaces is divided by the total number of
greater than one corresponding to a high degree of “ringi- spaces minus one, as the maximum number of a-type spaces
ness” and distributedness of a spatial system (i.e., ringy can be found in a shallow bush graph with all a-type nodes
structure). This distributedness indicates a high degree of connected to a b-type single node. The degree of b-ness is
flexibility (i.e., functional efficiency) in using the space, calculated by dividing the number of b-type spaces in a
enabling the user (i.e., prayer) to change the layout to mosque layout by the total number of spaces minus two, as
adapt to different circumstances by closing or opening b-type spaces always have a way of entering another space.
doors. A value less than one indicates that the spatial The degree of c-ness and d-ness is calculated by dividing the
system has a tree-like structure, suggesting the lack of number of c- or d-type spaces by the total number of spaces
distributedness and the increase in the depth of spaces in the layout (Guney, 2005).
within the mosque layout (Guney, 2005; Bellal, 2007). R can
be calculated as follows:
5. Results and discussion
L þ1
R¼ ð6Þ
K The following data are obtained by examining the results of
the analyses using the space syntax methodology (specifi-
where R is the space–link ratio of spaces in a spatial system cally the gamma analysis method). The MD value is 2.067 for
(i.e., mosque layout), L is the number of lines of the link mosques with single dome layouts, 2.722 for mosques with
between spaces in the justified graph, and K is the number earring layouts, 2.879 for mosques with multiple dome
of spaces in the system. layouts, 2.356 for mosques with duplication dome layouts,
2.517 for mosques with courtyard dome layouts, and 3.042
for mosques with earring dome courtyard layouts.
4.2.4. Indicator of space type (degree of spaceness) The overall spaces in the courtyard dome and earring dome
Aside from the measurements of depth, integration, and courtyard layouts are more integrated than those in the other
ringiness, space syntax also provides a way to categorize the remaining layouts. This finding is supported by the high mean
types of space in the system depending on the topological value of RRA for the courtyard dome and earring dome
characteristics of the building spaces that satisfy the courtyard layouts, that is, 0.946 and 1.009, respectively. This
functional requirements of occupation and movement. finding demonstrates the tendency of the system (i.e.,
According to the space syntax terminology, four different layouts) to be significantly integrated (i.e., more accessible,
topological types of space exists: a-type space, which has efficient, and flexible) compared with other cases that have
one link; b-type space, which has more than one connection low mean RRA values. Therefore, the spatial configuration of
and lies on a tree; c-type space, which has more than one layouts with low mean RRA values tend to be segregated,

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005
10 F.A. Mustafa, A.S. Hassan

Table 1 MD, RRA, and R values of different mosque layouts.

Mosque layout pattern Mean (MD) Mean (RRA) Space–link ratio (R)

Single dome layout 2.067 1.528 1.000 (tree structures)

Earring layout 2.722 1.552 1.000 (tree structures)
Multiple dome layout 2.879 1.318 1.167 (ringy structures)
Duplication dome layout 2.356 1.108 1.200 (ringy structures)
Courtyard dome layout 2.517 0.946 1.214 (ringy structures)
Earring dome courtyard layout 3.042 1.009 1.050 (ringy structures)

Table 2 Difference factor values (H*) of mosque layouts.

Mosque layout pattern Mean integration Max. integration Min. integration Difference factor (H*)

Single dome layout 1.528 2.292 0.573 0.685

Earring layout 1.552 2.591 0.789 0.744
Multiple dome layout 1.318 2.36 0.574 0.658
Duplication dome layout 1.108 1.725 0.454 0.702
Courtyard dome layout 0.946 1.777 0.336 0.562
Earring dome courtyard layout 1.009 1.689 0.442 0.695

Table 3 Mean values of space type (spaceness) of mosque layouts.

Space-type

Mosque layout pattern Mean (a-ness) Mean(b-ness) Mean (c-ness) Mean (d-ness)

Single dome layout 0.600 0.750 0.00 0.000

Earring layout 0.625 0.571 0.00 0.000
Multiple dome layout 0.273 0.400 0.333 0.083
Duplication dome layout 0.333 0.250 0.300 0.200
Courtyard dome layout 0.308 0.167 0.500 0.071
Earring dome courtyard layout 0.526 0.111 0.300 0.100

controlled, and less efficient in terms of function. The With regard to space type (i.e., spaceness), Table 3 shows
justified graphs (i.e., gamma maps) reveal that 33.33% of the mean values for the four types of spaces (i.e., a, b, c,
mosque layouts have tree-like structures (i.e., having a small and d) in mosque layouts and patterns adopted in the
number of rings within their configurations). analysis to facilitate comparison. The adopted approach
The mean R value of the layouts with tree-like structures reveals that mosques with courtyard dome layouts are the
is 1.000, suggesting that these mosque layouts are generally most important because the values of the c- and d-types of
non-distributed. For the other mosque layouts (66.66%) with spaces are the highest, whereas the values of the a- and
“ringy” structures, the mean value of R is greater than b-types of spaces are the lowest.
1.000, indicating that these layouts are spatially and
functionally distributed structures (i.e., having more rings
within their configurations) (Table 1). 6. Conclusions
The values of H* for all cases can be obtained from the
values of RRA in Table 1. These values are presented as Descriptive analysis reveals that the pendentive dome is an
follows. important element in the layout design of the Ottoman
H* is 0.685 for mosques with single dome layouts, 0.744 mosque architecture during the 13th to 15th centuries. The
for mosques with earring layouts, 0.658 for mosques with pendentive dome refers to the construction of a dome
multiple dome layouts, 0.702 for mosques with duplication above the construction system of a dome, creating vast
dome layouts, 0.562 for mosques with courtyard dome interiors and multiple volume spaces. However, design
layouts, and 0.695 for mosques with earring dome courtyard emphasis is focused not on the dome (except in the single
layouts. These findings indicate that mosques with court- dome layout design) but on the number of square plan units
yard dome layouts have the lowest difference factor value to determine the dimension of prayer halls. A higher
among all types of mosque layouts (Table 2). number of square plan units used in a layout design

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005
Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early Ottoman period 11

correspond to larger prayer halls. Although dome size spatial configuration over time. Analysis is performed using
influences the size of the square plan unit, dome size does space syntax theory to obtain numerical results and to
not play a significant role in specifying the size of the plan support the hypothesis by indicating the level of efficiency.
layout. Master builders adopted a hierarchical ordering The combination of descriptive and space syntax methodol-
system by integrating primary, secondary, and tertiary ogy promotes the effective evaluation of different types
(riwaq) square plan unit modules in the design to specify and patterns of mosque layouts. Both of these methodolo-
the dimensions of prayer halls and variations of layouts. gies complement each other in gaining insight into the
The latest design integrates a courtyard that functions as an syntactical and morphological structure of various mosque
exterior prayer area with riwaqs at its perimeters. This layouts and categories.
design concept has led to the development of the penden-
tive dome mosque architecture in the later Ottoman period.
The following conclusions are drawn based on the space References
syntax analysis:
Al-Jaff, A.J., 1989. Communication in Architecture: An Application
of Space Syntax. Department of Architecture, University of
(1) Among the mosque layouts, a mosque with a courtyard Technology, Baghdad, Iraq (M.Sc. Thesis).
layout represents the best layout in terms of functional Al-Nijaidi, H.R., 1985. Flexibility in the Design of Building. Depart-
efficiency according to the indicators of spatial depth ment of Architecture, Oxford Polytechnic, London, UK (Ph.D.
(MD) and the degree of integration (RRA). Therefore, Thesis).
contemporary mosque layout designs must apply this Amorim, L., 1999. The Sector's Paradigm: A Study of the Spatial and
type of layout to achieve the efficient use of space. Functional Nature of Modernist Housing in Northeast, Brazil. The
Bartlett School of Graduate Studies, University College London,
(2) The values of the indicator of difference factor (Hn)
London, UK (Ph.D. Thesis).
reveal that a mosque with a courtyard dome layout has Asami, Y., Kubat, A.S., Kitagawa, K., Iida, S., 2003. Introducing the
the highest difference, indicating strong distinction and third dimension on space syntax: application on the historical
functional differentiation compared with the other types Istanbul. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Space Syntax
and patterns of mosque layouts. This finding confirms the Symposium, London, 48, 1-48.
need to adopt the courtyard dome layout in the con- Aspinall, P., 1993. Aspects of spatial experience and structure. In:
temporary design of mosques, as the difference factor Farmer, B., Louw, H. (Eds.), Companion to Contemporary
demonstrates the independence of space (e.g., the main Architecture Thought. Rutledge, London, pp. 337–345.
hall of prayer or the courtyard) with other spaces. Aazam, Z., 2005. The social logic of the mosque: a building and
A strong independence corresponds to a high level of urban spatial investigation. In: Proceedings of the 5th Interna-
tional Space Syntax Symposium, Faculty of Architecture, Tech-
functionality and efficiency.
nology University, Delft, Netherlands.
(3) The R values reveal that a mosque with a courtyard Aazam, Z., 2007. The social logic of the mosque: a study in the
dome layout has high distributedness, indicating the relationships between building typology and urban morphology.
importance (i.e., efficiency) of this type of layout at the In: Proceeding of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium,
spatial–functional level. This high distributedness is due to Istanbul, Turkey, 058, 1–18.
the presence of a large number of rings in configurations, Bafna, S., 2003. Space syntax: a brief introduction to its logic and
which provide high accessibility to the system. The space analytical techniques. Environment and Behavior 35 (1), 17–29.
type indicator (i.e., spaceness) is also an effective Bellal, T., 2007. Spatial interface between inhabitants and visitors
measure for evaluating mosque layouts. A mosque layout in M'zab houses. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Space
with a courtyard element is significantly efficient accord- Syntax Symposium, Istanbul, Turkey, 061, 1–14.
Bernardini, M., 1987. The impact of Sinan on Turkish revivalism.
ing to the syntactical approach (i.e., space syntax). This
In: Petruccioli, A. (Ed.), Environmental Design: The Urban
result is evidenced by the high values of the c- and d-types Vision, 1-2. Islamic Environmental Design Research Centre,
of spaces (most efficient and flexible) and the low values Istanbul, pp. 216–221.
of the a- and b-types of spaces. This finding indicates the Bustard, W., 1999. Space, evolution, and function in the houses of
need for the spatial integration of spatial types in the Chaco canyon. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design
layout of any contemporary design. 26 (2), 219–240.
(4) The present study reveals the positive relationship Crane, H., 1993. Notes on Saldjuq architectural patronage in
between the process of spatial configuration and the Thirteen century Anatolia. Journal of the Economic and Social
level of functional efficiency according to different History of the Orient 36 (1), 1–57.
types and patterns of mosque layouts by using an Dawson, P.C., 2002. Space syntax analysis of Central Inuit snow
houses. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (4), 464–480.
analytical comparative approach in evaluating, discuss-
Dursun, P., 2007. Space syntax in architectural design. In: Proceed-
ing, and interpreting the resultant data. The indicators
ings of the 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, Istanbul,
largely contributed to quantifying the level of functional Turkey, 056, 1–12.
efficiency of different mosque layouts. The results Dursun, P., Saglamer, G., 2003. Spatial analysis of different home
clearly show that the efficiency of mosque layouts environments in the city of Trabzon, Turkey. In: Proceedings
changes over time because of the spatial configuration of the 4th International Space Syntax Symposium, London, 54,
of varying layouts. 1–18.
C. Flon The world atlas of architecture (Le Grand Atlas de
lâ•ZArchitecture Mondiale) C. Dufton Trans. 1984 Mitchell
Beazley International Ltd. London.
The results support the research hypothesis that the Franz, G., Heyde, M., Bülthoff, H.H., 2005. Predicting experiential
functional efficiency of mosque layouts is affected by qualities of architecture by its spatial properties. In: Martens,

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005
12 F.A. Mustafa, A.S. Hassan

B., Keul, A.G. (Eds.), Designing Social Innovation: Planning, Manum, B., 2005. Generality versus specificity: a study on the
Building, Evaluating. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, interior space of apartments. In: Proceedings of the 5th Inter-
pp. 157–166. national Space Syntax Symposium, Faculty of Architecture,
Friedman, A., 2002. The Adaptable House: Designing Homes for Technology University, Delft, Netherlands.
Change. McGraw Hill, New York. Manum, B., 2009. A-graph complementary software for axial-line
Goodwin, G., 1993. Sinan Ottoman Architecture and its Values analysis. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Space Syntax
Today. Saqi Books, London. Symposium, Stockholm, Sweden, 070, 1–9.
Goodwin, G., 2003. A History of Ottoman Architecture. Thames & Marshall, C., Rossman, G.B., 1999. Designing Qualitative Research,
Hudson Ltd, London. third ed. Sage publications Ltd., Thousand Oaks, California.
Guba, E.G., Lincoln, Y.S., 2005. Paradigmatic controversies, contra- Omer, S., 2008. The Origins and Functions of Islamic Domestic
dictions, and emerging confluence. In: Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y. Courtyards. International Islamic University Malaysia Press,
S. (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research 3rd ed. Kuala Lumpur.
Sage publications Ltd., Thousand Oaks, California, pp. 191–215. Onder, D.E., 2002. A new housing group for sub-residential area in
Gulru, N., 2005. The age of Sinan: architectural culture in the Ottoman Samarkand: a morphological comparison. Cities 19 (5), 327–339.
Empire. In: Gulru, N. (Ed.), Muqarnas: An Annual of Visual Culture of Osman, K.M., Suliman, M., 1993. The space syntax methodology:
the Islamic World. Reaktion Books, London, pp. 141–184. fits and misfits. Architecture and Comportment/Architecture
Guney, Y.I., 2005. Spatial types in Ankara apartments. In: Proceed- and Behavior 10 (2), 189–204.
ings of the 5th International Space Syntax Symposium, Faculty of Pasic, A., 2004. A Short History of Mostar: Conservation and
Architecture, Technology University, Delft, Netherlands. Revitalization of Historic Mostar. The Aga Khan Trust for Culture,
Habraken, N.J., 1998. The Structure of the Ordinary: Form and Geneva5–12.
Control of the Built Environment. MIT Press, Cambridge. Pasic, A., Siravo, F., 2004. Reclaiming Mostar's Monuments and
Hamdi, N., 1991. Housing without House. Van Nostrand Reinhold, Buildings: Conservation and Revitalization of Historic Mostar.
New York. The Aga Khan Trust for Culture, Geneva47–56.
Hanson, J., 2003. Decoding Homes and Houses. Cambridge Uni- Peponis, J., 1985. The spatial culture of factories. Human Relations
versity Press, Cambridge. 38 (4), 357–390.
Hillier, B., 2007. Space is the Machine: A Configurational Theory of Peponis, J., Wineman, J., 2002. Spatial structure of environment
Architecture. Space Syntax Laboratory, London. and behavior. In: Bechtel, R., Churchman, A. (Eds.), Handbook
Hillier, B., Burdett, R., Peponis, J., Penn, A., 1987c. Creating life: of Environmental Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, New York,
or, does architecture determine anything? Architecture and pp. 271–291.
Comportment/Architecture and Behavior 3 (3), 233–250. Ratti, C., 2004. Space syntax: some inconsistencies. Environment
Hillier, B., Hanson, J., Peponis, J., Hudson, J., Burdett, R., 1983. and Planning B: Planning and Design 31 (4), 501–511.
Space syntax: a new urban perspective. Architect's Journal 178 Reverson, F.O., 2009. Developing spatial configuration abilities
(48), 47–63. coupled with the space syntax theory for first year architectural
Hillier, B., Hanson, J., Peponis, J., 1984. What do we mean by studies. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Space Syntax
building function?. In: Powell, J.A., Cooper, I., Lera, S. (Eds.), Symposium, Stockholm, Sweden, 082, 1–10.
Design for Building Utilization. Spon, London, pp. 61–72. Saoud, R., 2004. Muslim Architecture Under Ottoman Patronage
Hillier, B., Hanson, J., Graham, H., 1987a. Ideas are in things: an (1326–1924). In: Ball, L. (Ed.), FSTC Limited, Manchester.
application of the space syntax methods to discovering house Steadman, P., 1983. Architectural Morphology: An Introduction to
genotypes. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 14 the Geometry of Building Plans. Pion Ltd, London.
(1), 363–385. Toker, U., Toker, Z., 2003. Family structure and spatial configuration
Hillier, B., Hanson, J., Peponis, J., 1987b. Syntactic analysis of in Turkish house form in Anatolia from late Nineteenth century
settlements. Architecture and Behavior 3 (3), 217–231. to late Twentieth century. In: Proceedings of the 4th Interna-
Hillier, B., Hanson, J., 1988. The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge tional Space Syntax Symposium, London, 55, 1–16.
University Press, Cambridge. Unsal, B., 1973. Turkish Islamic Architecture in Seljuk and Ottoman
Hillier, B., Tzortzi, K., 2006. Space syntax: the language of museum Times. Academy Editions, London1071–1923.
space. In: MacDonald, S. (Ed.), A Companion to Museum Studies. Voordt, T., Vrielink, D., Wegen, H., 1997. Comparative floorplan-
Blackwell Publishing, London. analysis in programming and architectural design. Design Studies
Karlen, M., 2009. Space Planning Basics, third ed. John Wiley & 18 (1), 67–88.
Sons, New Jersey. Zako, R., 2006. The power of the veil: gender inequality in the
Kuran, A., 1968. The Mosque in Early Ottoman Architecture. The domestic setting of traditional courtyard houses. In: Edward, B.,
University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London. Sibley, M., Hakmi, M., Land, P. (Eds.), Courtyard Housing: Past,
Mango, A.C., 1976. Byzantine Architecture. Harry N. Abrams Inc., Present, and Future; Individual Chapters. Taylor & Francis
New York. Group, New York, pp. 65–75.

Please cite this article as: Mustafa, F.A., Hassan, A.S., Mosque layout design: An analytical study of mosque layouts in the early
Ottoman period. Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2013.08.005