Yavuz, A. T.

(1997) “The Concepts that Shape

Anatolian Seljuk Caravanserais”, Muqarnas, 14, 80-95.

AYSIL TfJKEL YAVUZ

THE CONCEPTS THAT SHAPE ANATOLIAN SELJUQ

CARAVANSERAIS
Caravan roads crossed Anatolia from east to west, from intact or have been restored; enough remains of the
south to north, and from southwest to northeast, con- majority to establish both plan and superstructure; a few
necting trading centers both inside and outside the allow only a plan. The remaining hundred range from
boundaries of the Anatolian Seljuq state (fig. 1).' In the ruins to source references only. A large number have yet
thirteenth century, the major centers were, in the south- to be surveyed. A multitude of settlements have the
east, Tabriz in Persia, Baghdad in Iraq, and Aleppo in word han attached to their names implying the exist-
Syria; in the south, Ayas, Alaiye, and Antalya on the Med- ence of a caravanserai there at some point in their his-
iterranean Sea; in the west, Ayaslug, Izmir, and FoCa on tory.
the Aegean Sea; in the northwest, Istanbul on the Bos- Research over the last thirty-five years suggests that
porus; and in the north, Sinop, Samsun, and Trabzon further research is likely to increase the number of
on the Black Sea. It was an established policy of the Ana- known caravanserais in a good state of preservation.
tolian Seljuq state to stage the roads that connected Unfortunately the majority of the caravanserais either
them with caravanserais. 2 had no founding inscription or it has since disappeared,
At present, information in varying amount and detail and of the ones that do exist not all mention the type of
is available for about two hundred of these caravanse- building. When they do, however, the word used is
rais. About a hundred of them are extant, though in var- either han or ribat and not kervansaray.3 Of the dated
ying states of preservation (figs. 2-4): several are almost buildings, the earliest was constructed in 1206 and the

BLACK SEA

MAMA HATUN Er2urum

i\
M~ of 'ivcs BURMA

G) E.MiRCiNGE BRAHI4SAH t.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~m
~ ~HAN ~~~ ~ KERVANSARAYI

SULTAN I
ORESIN *NAN
HKoyseri
> M(n~~~~ANS EE RE1<

DOK . HAN K E - KEY U

*lcrlul KIZIL SNENU N 'KS KoVIN

ADEDDIN AN
1,
AXNAN KAR".1Y

EVDiR. KIRKGOZ HAN

HAN *.AMly. XARGIHAN

MEDI TERRANEAN s

Fig. 1. Map of Turkey showing the location of the khans.

I___ I _ __
 THE CONCEPTS THAT SHAPE ANATOLIAN SELJUQ CARAVANSERAIS 81

;-·: ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 8
j

Fig. 2. Tuzhisar Sultan Han (1232-36) on the Kayseri-Sivas Fig. 4. Oresin Han (13th century) on the Kayseri-Aksaray Road.
Road. The abutments on the front facade (1969). Northwest corner (1968).

latest in 1778-79; the majority were built between 1220 include their use as government offices or statehouses
and 1250, at the height of the Anatolian Seljuq state. for the sultan and his retinue when they moved from
Caravanserais served caravans, but they also had a one town to another, especially between the capital
multitude of other functions. It is generally agreed that Konya and Kayseri, Sivas, as well as Antalya and Alanya,
they continued the function of the ribats in Transoxania, which served as winter residences." Their use as stations
and therefore it is taken for granted that they had mil- in the networks of the post, menzil, and derbent systems
itary uses. 4 Ibn Bibi and Aksarayi both refer to hans in has also recently been established.1 2
the context of the movement of armies, but these refer- Caravanserais constitute the second largest group of
ences are often to the location of the khans rather than buildings after mosques in the Seljuq architectural heri-
to the buildings themselves, and there is no direct refer- tage of Turkey. They are also the most numerous when
ence to military activities taking place in the buildings. 5 compared with contemporary caravanserais in other
The same is true for references to welcoming and leave- countries. They have been widely published starting in
taking ceremonies for the sultans or their honored the nineteenth century, in travel accounts, as mono-
guests.6 They served as royal guesthouses for visiting sov- graphs, in books on art history, and in an impressive cor-
ereigns, 7 as prisons,' as places of refuge, 9 and when they pus by Kurt Erdmann.'s F. Sarre seems to have been the
lost their commercial function, as zaviyes or for other first person to describe their various types.' 4 He
religious purposes.' ° Functions not mentioned in the describes the Aksaray Sultan Han as having a courtyard
sources on caravanserais, but verifiable by other means, and a closed section, and the Horozlu Han as being
entirely closed.' The description of these two khans was
used as the basis for a typology first by H. Edhem,' 6 then
by M.F. Ugur and M.M. Koman,' 7 S.K. Yetkin, D. Kuban,
H. Karamagarah, and several others. Erdmann's typol-
ogy was published in 1955, six years before his corpus.' 8
It was widely accepted and used in the monographs of
M. Akok and T. Ozgfic, R.H. Unal9 and many others.
The major criterion for Erdmann's classification is
the presence or absence of a courtyard.2 He lists types
in order of importance as (1) khans with a closed section
(hall) and a courtyard; (2) khans with no courtyard; and
(3) court khans. His second classification criterion is the
relationship between the size of the closed section and
the courtyard; the third and fourth are the number and
Fig. 3. Kilzllren Han (1206) on the Konya-Beyehir Road. direction of the vaults in the closed section.
Front elevation (1970). Even with the amount of information that was avail-
 82 AYSIL TUKEL YAVUZ

(rj- ~I p-:
::tIj
i

fl-b~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~: i

Fig. 5. Evdir Han (1210-19) on Antalya-Korkuteli Road. Reconstruction plan (revised Erdmann plan).

able and was collected from the buildings by Erdmann, according to the presence of a courtyard because the
this classification presented some problems. One was court is only a circulation space and not the nucleus of
the masjid attached to the $arafsa Han, as the building the plan around which the whole design revolves. That
had an extra space outside the hall, although it belongs is why the assumption that Anatolian Seljuq khans are
to the group of khans without a courtyard. The prob- similar to Karakhanid, Gaznavid, Persian, and other
lems were more acute in the third group, the court eastern khans, 2 3 where the courtyard is the starting
khans. Among the five khans listed in this group, Evdir point of the design with a formal symmetry on two axes,
Han (fig. 5) was the only one which fit. Krkg6z (fig. 6) is not acceptable. Very few Anatolian khans display
and Kargi (fig. 7) actually belonged to the group with a symmetry, and when they do, it is only on one axis; all of
courtyard (Klrkgtz Han was already noted by R. Rief- them, including Kuruesme, Klzll6ren, Ertoku, and
stahl in 1931 as having a courtyard 21). The last two, Alara Obruk, are medium-sized khans. None of the large
(fig. 8) and Eshab-i Kehf (fig. 9), displayed a very differ- khans which are referred to as the Sultan Han type show
ent plan type and design concept that did not fit any any symmetry at all.2 4 The best indication that the
courtyard category. The closed courtyard of the Alara courtyard is not the starting point of the design is the
Han was overlooked by scholars, and its plan was inter- presence of a construction joint between the closed sec-
preted as a variation on the court khan with a reduced tion and the courtyard, giving priority to the former.
courtyard surrounded by a hall on three sides.22 Erdmann also assumed that the relationship of the
The decision to choose the courtyard as the deciding width of the closed section to the courtyard was an indi-
feature for the typology is questionable. The Anatolian cation of the khan's date. If the width is equal, it belongs
Seljuq caravanserais do not allow for a classification to the first quarter of the thirteenth century; if the

---
 THE CONCEPTS THAT SHAPE ANATOLIAN SELJUQ CARAVANSERAIS 83

is the basis of the design; this is possible only because it

does not have a closed section. There is symmetry on the
two axes, and the cross-axiality of the plan is expressed
by an iwan in the middle of each side, 7 complying with a
plan type that can be traced back to the Khurasan house
with four iwans. The court concept of the Evdir Han is
very different from the Syrian court khans which Erd-
mann considered to be their source. 2? In the Syrian
court khans the starting point of the design is the peri-
phery wall, in contrast to the interior elevations of the
courtyards of the former type. Various spaces, semi-
open or closed, are lined up along them. 29 This concept
is not observed in any of the Seljuq khans in the Erd-
mann catalogue.3
The emphasis on the courtyard is reinforced by the
assumed presence of the revak or arcade that encircles it
by authors such as Erdmann, Akok, Gabriel, and Unal.
The galleries of double bays with parallel or perpendic-
ular vaulting are not semi-open circulation areas similar
to the revak in Ottoman city khans. The galleries in Sel-
juq khans were not meant for circulation but for accom-
modations. Only two khans - the Tuzhisar Sultan Han 3 '
and the Mama Hatun Kervansarayl- have anything
similar to a revak. In the Tuzhisar Sultan Han a single-
bay gallery runs in front of the spaces on the west side of
the courtyard, but it is not a circulation area. Narrow,
A vertical corridors directly connect the doors of the
rooms to the courtyard, and the remaining area is taken
up by a raised platform to sit on. Only bits of the revak
Fig. 6. Krkgtz Han (built during the reign of Giyasettin Key-
remain in the Mama Hatun Kervansarayl, but it is likely
kiisrev II (1236-46) on the Antalya-Isparta Road. Reconstruc-
tion of platform using T. Suer's plan as base plan. that the treatment there was similar. 32
In the past thirty-five years valuable information
about caravanserais has come to light in both published
courtyard is wider than the closed section, then it and visual material. Many khans have been revisited,
belongs to the "period of the larger buildings of the resulting in the correction and revision of earlier publi-
[12] 30's and 40's. " 25 Since the size of the-courtyard is de- cations, and many have been subjected to more exten-
termined by the number and types of spaces that are sive research, especially as topics for architectural-resto-
lined up along its sides, such an assumption does not ration dissertations. Some that have been restored after
seem valid. Besides, khans of an earlier date, such as the excavation revealed new information about water sys-
Hekim Han and Kadmn Han, have wide courtyards, as tems, pavements, and platforms, or vandalism by trea-
Erdmann himself notes. The most striking example of a sure hunters revealed water pipes hidden in the
courtyard as a circulation area is that of the Sadettin masonry. In this period, more than forty khans were
Han, which has a construction joint between the two published for the first time. 33
sections." The courtyard widens on the north side only, The starting point for establishing a new typology for
forming a very elongated rectangle. The spaces along its these buildings was the Alara Han,3 4 which does not fit
long sides are of unequal size, and the deeper semi- into the court-khan group with its closed courtyard and
open galleries have been pulled back, receding to the design concept. In 1967 the Alara and Eshab-i Kehf,
north exterior wall of the courtyard to make a contin- together with the Mama Hatun Kervansarayi (figs. 8-9)
uous, if not symmetrical, court facade. were determined to be concentrically planned;3 5 by
The Evdir Han (fig. 5) is exceptional in that the court today six concentrically planned khans have been pub-

_I I _C
 84 AY8IL TUKEL YAVUZ

repeated for the second, interior, entrance.

Shelter is the essential function of the building type; it
is reflected in the architecture of all khans, whatever
their plan or size. Shelter included stables for bedding
and feeding the animals, places for loading and unload-
ing goods, and accommodations for travelers. These ac-
tivities took place on parallel bands at two different lev-
els (fig. 12). The lower band on the ground level housed
the stables; the upper band in the form of a 0.6m. to
1.3m.-high seki or platform accommodated goods and
people. The platforms have cut-stone side walls and
pavement. About twenty khans still have these platforms
in various degrees of preservation, but for the most part
they are missing, even in the best preserved khans. It is
possible to ascertain their position, however, from the
faces of the arches that were in contact with the plat-
forms, as well as from the projections made in the lower
parts of the pillars to support the arches for a better
bond between the platform and the supports. Remnants
in a few khans show that the area underneath the arches
Fig. 7. Kargi Han (13th century) on the Alanya-Konya Road. had a series of stone basins, probably for fodder and
Reconstruction plan.
water for the animals (fig. 13). All the platforms are flat
on top, but the height of the sides tapers off from the
lished, and two unpublished examples remain.3 6 Their entrance to the rear because the ground level slopes up-
variations helped to complete a classification first devel- ward. It can be assumed that the highest part of the plat-
oped in 1971. 37 This new classification is based on an form, which is always nearest the entrance, is built to the
analysis of the functions as reflected in the existing height of the animals for easy loading and unloading
spaces, and the design concepts that governed the orga- and so that pack animals of different sizes (e.g., a camel
nization of the different plan types. and a donkey) could be fed from the stone basins.
The platform in the Kargl Han retains almost all its
Providing safety and shelter were the basic functions of a original features, although in varying states of preserva-
caravanserai and these functions are reflected in the tion (fig. 12). In addition to the row of basins under-
sturdiness of the buildings (fig. 2).38 The thick stone- neath the arches, the platform is further divided length-
masonry walls are pierced by a single entrance and occa- wise into two bands: a corridor band 1.4m. wide next to
sional slit windows just above eye level. Most of the walls the basins, and the rest of the platform about 3.8m.
have buttresses and are topped with crenellation. These wide and 0.2m. higher than the corridor band. People
thick, buttressed walls, slit windows, and crenellations spread their bedding and kept their goods ori the
(fig. 10) are part of the exterior expression of Anatolian higher level. This difference in level maintained differ-
Seljuq architecture generally, although they are not as ent degrees of cleanliness, since the strip underneath
extensively used together in other buildings as they are the arches between the basins and the corridor kept the
in caravanserais. The roofs of the khans were clearly animals at a distance and raised the sleeping level above
used for defense: many of them can be reached by stair- the dust and dirt of the corridor.
cases, and some even have special rooms on the roof at Afew platforms show remnants ofa tandzr,39 or clay ov-
strategic positions that give the most advantageous view en, used for heating, cooking, and baking, another of
of the road (fig. 11). The doors of the buildings were the varied functions of the platform (fig. 14). A tandzr
closed at sunset and opened at dawn to ensure the safety consists of a pit in the ground or, as in this case, sunk
of the goods and people inside. The single entrance into the platform. It is about 0.5m. deep, and 0.4m. to
facilitated control of access; the door was bolted with a 0.6m. wide, with a small mouth and a large belly in
wooden bar which slid across it into the walls on either which a pot can be placed or the cavity itself plastered
side. In khans with a courtyard, the same system is and used for cooking. A hole at the bottom or lower side

___ C _ _I __
 THE CONCEPTS THAT SHAPE ANATOLIAN SELJUQ CARAVANSERAIS 85

merchandise from the two stable bands. This is the usual

solution when shelter consists of three vaulted galleries,
as it does in Akhan (fig. 15). When there are five bays,
the platform band forms a U, but the vaults may change
direction (figs. 16-18). This is true for khans with large
shelters like the Sultan khans. In some khans, as in the
Alara (fig. 19) the shelter bands are not grouped
together but distributed around various parts of the
building. No matter where the double bands are
located, they are very closely related to the plan of the
superstructure and reflect it in the ground plan. They
are defined by the beginning or ending of the vaults or
by the arches of the banded barrel vaults.
Not all shelter galleries are treated as continuous
bands of stables and platforms. Some caravanserais have
other smaller, individual platforms at the ends of the
shelter (fig. 8) and the semi-open galleries. These
smaller platforms were probably used to store goods or
by the people responsible for taking care of the animals.
In a few khans, such as the Ibrahimsah and Mirqinge
(figs. 20-21), entrance to the galleries used by the trav-
elers or animals is controlled by a door.
The shelter sections of the khans have rather high
vaults with two centered pointed profiles. A row of small
rectangular holes, or oculi, at the keyline of the vaults
serves more for ventilation that for daylight. Most of the
shelters have slit windows in the exterior walls, but sev-
-O
F 17 S K.o
eral have no exterior opening besides the entrance. The
_ §~

spaces are quite dark and only a few khans had any facil-
ities for artificial lighting. The Alara Han has lion-faced
Fig. 8. Alara Han (1232) on Alanya-Konya Road. Reconstruc- consoles at the spring line of the arches in the galleries,
tion plan. as well as in other spaces, to place oil lamps on. The
Klziloren Han has simple consoles with a hole in them
is connected to a horizontal shaft to provide air. The fire to hold a burning torch or oil lamp.
is built at the bottom of the tandzr. Bread is baked by Many caravanserais consist only of shelter: in others
pressing the dough against the preheated surface of the the two bands of the shelter plus latrines were supple-
tandzr, or a pot or a pan could be placed on its mouth for mented with services. Nothing remains of the latrines,
cooking. It could also be used to keep people warm: in but they must have been at the end of the stables and
that case a small stool is placed above it over which a had wooden partitions similar to those in the group of
quilt or blanket is spread. People sit around it and stick latrines in the courtyard in Aksaray Sultan Han, or parti-
their feet underneath the quilt. The tandzr is still com- tions with curtains, a common means for dividing
mon in Central Asia and India, and in use in traditional spaces, as can be inferred from passages in Ibn Bibi.40
houses in several regions of Turkey. What is meant by services in this context is not wet ser-
In a few khans such as $arafsa and Kirkg6z (fig. 6) the vices only. It covers every activity and facility reflected in
platform band and the' stable band are covered with a a space or resulting as a space, in addition to the above-
single barrel vault, but in the majority of caravanserais, defined minimum offered by the shelter. What the types
each band is covered with a barrel vault. In some, a plat- of services might be, the amount of space they occupied
form band has a stable band on either side; in such an in the layout, and their nature varied considerably. No
arrangement the platform band is made much wider to two caravanserais have exactly the same plan, even
accommodate the increased number of people and though they may have similar facilities. The services may

- ------ -I______ _ ~_
 86 AY~IL TUKEL YAVUZ

Fig. 11. Agzlkara Han (1336-40) on the Kayseri-Aksaray Road.

Fig. 9. Eshab-i Kehf Han (before 1235) on Besni-Kayseri Road. The southeast corner of the courtyard, the stairs to the roof,
Reconstruction plan (revised M. Akok and T. Ozgfic plan). and the watchroom (1968).

pierced with arches, reducing the wall to a row of pillars

include a semi-open shelter (fig. 22), a masjid (figs. 23- exactly like the shelter. The rowof arches gives the false
24), rooms for various purposes, iwans (fig. 25), a foun- impression of a revak. These single or double galleries
tain (figs. 8, 24), a bath, latrines, and in a few instances, were used to accommodate people, goods, and animals
rooms for keeping watch over the road (fig. 11). Not all in warm weather. A platform is on the band near the
caravanserais with services have rooms for the use of arched openings. The band at the rear was the stables
travelers. Such rooms are few when compared with cara- (figs. 8, 18, 22). One of the arched openings at one end
vanserais to the east of the Anatolian Seljuq territory of the gallery, usually the one nearer the entrance, led
and the later Ottoman examples. Living spaces are not to the stables. In several khans, as in Akhan, the location
limited to rooms only: many khans have varying num- of the entrance can easily be discerned because its open-
bers of iwans to be utilized by travelers to sit in during ing is smaller than the others. Stone basins line the
the day in warm weather (figs. 7-8, 25). inner side of the platforms. In several khans, e.g., Kirk-
The shelter of the khans has a symmetrical layout, but g6z and Kargi, where the galleries extend between the
the arrangement of the services is rarely symmetrical, walls of the courtyard, the corner farthest away from the
again unlike the eastern caravanserais. This is especially shelter has a smaller platform like the ones in the shel-
true for the khans where the services lined the ter of the Alara Han.
courtyard. The enclosed spaces were not all used as rooms for
The most common service spaces were the single or travelers. The rather large and sometimes intercon-
double galleries with vaults parallel or perpendicular to nected rooms near the entrance were more likely to
the exterior wall. The gallery wall facing the courtyard is have been used for storage and administration. Many
have no windows, unlike the travelers' rooms which
either have a slit window or a window over the door and

o as 2 3 4 5m

ATY

Fig. 10. Obruk Han (13th century) on the Konya-Aksaray Road Fig. 12. Kargi Han (13th century) on the Alanya-Konya Road.
(1989). Section of the shelter.

___I_ __
 THE CONCEPTS THAT SHAPE ANATOLIAN SELJUQ CARAVANSERAIS 87

Fig. 13. KaratayHan (built around 1236, courtyard 1240-41) on Fig. 14. The second khan in KIzl6ren (13th century) on the
the Kayseri-Malatya Road. The basins in the shelter (1995). Konya-Beyuehir Road. The tandzron the platform (1994).

are much smaller; they are usually lined up along the age and sewerage, in the building. Some spaces first
sides of the courtyard (figs. 25-26). Most khans have thought to be rooms turned out to be latrines or baths.
iwans (fig. 8), spaces enclosed on three sides, for the Fountains usually had their own iwans (figs. 8, 18, 24) or
daytime use of travelers and sometimes for sleeping in were underneath the kiosk masjid if there was one. As in
warm weather. They are always raised by 0.3 to 0.7 the Alara Han, when there is a fountain inside, there is
meters above the courtyard pavement, once more indi- another corresponding one on the outside, at its back
cating a hierarchy of cleanliness by raising the level using the same terra-cotta water pipes.
reserved for people from the ground level where ani- Even a khan with several services did not necessarily
mals circulate. All the living spaces, both rooms and have a bath. They were not always necessary because at
iwans, vary in number from one khan to the next; the every four or five stops was a town with public baths. Sev-
number does not seem to be related to the size of the eral caravanserais, like the Mamahatun Kervansarayl
caravanserai itself, but it is to some degree related to the and the Agzlkara Han had small baths constructed near,
plan type. The iwans, together with the semi-open shel- but not abutting, the khan itself; several of the larger
ter galleries, show that some services were for seasonal khans, like the Akhan (fig. 1), Tuzhisar Sultan Han, had
use only. baths in the building proper, many of them including all
Not all khans had masjids. Where they were provided, the traditional hammam spaces from cold to hot, al-
masjids, which are easily identified by the mihrab, are though miniature in scale.
sometimes on one side of the entrance portal (fig. 8), Not all khans with services always have latrines among
sometimes above the entrance (fig. 18), sometimes next the wet services because there is inevitably one in the
to the portal of the shelter, and sometimes in the middle shelter anyway. The Evdir Han had a latrine in one of
of the courtyard - this last is known as a "kiosk masjid" the abutments (fig. 5), recalling the Umayyad palace at
(figs. 16-18). When the masjid is above the portal, it is Mshatta. In several khans the latrines were grouped
reached by a staircase independent of the one leading together in a large corner space (figs. 7, 16). The
to the roof. Many of these masjids have ornate staircases, latrines at Aksaray Sultan Han occupy the large space at
entrances, mihrabs, and even decorated muqarnas or the northwest corner of the courtyard, with a deep stone
umbrella vaults. channel encircling the space on the east, north, and
The number and type of wet services offered de- west sides. Apparently there were several individual
pended on the availability of water in the khan. Even latrines along the channel, divided by timber partitions.
when there is a water system inside the building, the car- The Anatolian Seljuq caravanserais have no space that
avanserais are still located near running water or a well. can clearly be identified as a kitchen - that is, no chim-
The present level of information and more careful anal- neys, fireplaces, and water outlets combined to suggest
ysis of the spaces show that more caravanserais than was that function. But we know that a tandzrcould be used as
originally thought had water systems, including drain- an alternative to a fireplace, and those on the platforms

1 -.. 1_1_11 - --
 88 AY5IL TUKEL YAVUZ

·~1~1 ·-

Fig. 15. Akhan (1253-54) on the Egridir-Denizli Road. Recon-

struction plan (reconstruction of platforms in A. Mocan's re-
construction plan).

(fig. 14) as well as those in the rooms were also used for
cooking and baking, so any one of these spaces identi-
fied as a room could have been used as a kitchen merely
by being equipped with one or more tandrs.Presumably
cooking using tandns went on in any number of places,
rather than in a single space designated as a kitchen.
The analysis of the way that functions reflect the
spaces of a caravanserai shows that the shelter answered
the needs and constitutes the essence of those roadside
institutions. Since no khan could be without a shelter,
the minimum it offers becomes the major criterion for
any grouping: there are Shelter Only Khans and Khans
with Shelter and Services.4' Two distinct designs in the
organization of the plan can be discussed in khans with
or without services. In one approach, the spaces are ar-
ranged in an additive fashion, one after the other (figs.
6-7; 15-18). In the second approach, the spaces are ar-
ranged in rings radiating concentrically (figs. 8, 9, 26).
In Shelter-Only khans using the first design approach,
the number of vaulted galleries varies from one to five. V
In the simplest plan both the stables and the platform
are covered with the same barrel vault. No example ex-
ists of a Shelter-Only khan with a single gallery: the two
examples in the Erdmann catalogue, arafsa and Orta- Fig. 16. Aksaray Sultan Han (1229) on Konya-Aksaray Road. Re-
payam, both have service spaces.4 2 When the shelter has construction plan (revised Erdmann plan).

_____I IA· I_
 THE CONCEPTS THAT SHAPE ANATOLIAN SELJUQ CARAVANSERAIS 89

0)
on
the
ayser
saray Road. Reons
Fig. 17. Agzlkara Han (1236-40) on the Kayseri-Aksaray Road. Reconstruction plan (revised Erdmann plan).

two parallel vaults, each band has its own vault and the side ones house the stables. Five-aisle khans are also
wall between the vaults is pierced with arches. The rare; in these, for example, in the Zvank Han, the
entrance to a Shelter-Only khan with two galleries is central vault runs parallel whereas the side bays are
from the short side; it is from the middle of the long side covered with vaults perpendicular to the side wall. The
in a khan with services, especially when they are situated walls between are pierced with high arches so that the
around a courtyard. Two khans of this type are the sec- U-shaped platform can run continuously. The Oresin
ond khan in Klzll6ren between Konya and Beyehir and Han is an exception; there, two high vaults running
the khan at Mellec between Alanya and Anamur. The along the middle of the sides meet at a dome at the
former was known before Erdmann had published his center. The single galleries on the short sides and the
catalogue, but he did not consider it to be a khan double galleries on the long sides are vaulted parallel to
because he thought that no khans had double galler- their respective walls. The platforms follow the vaulting,
ies, 43 and he overlooked the shelter of the Kargi Han resulting in four separate pieces underneath the inner,
because he put it under the category of court khan. The vertical pieces.
majority of the Shelter-Only khans have three parallel In the additive design, the plan of the shelter repeats
aisles entered from the end wall of the central vault. in the khans with shelter and services. The difference is
Here, the wider central bay houses the platform and the in the arrangement of the service spaces. When the ser-

_____I_ _I__
 90 AY¥IL TUKEL YAVUZ

Fig. 19. Alara Han (1232) on the Alanya-Konya Road. The east
stable band (1990).

Shelter-Only form has one ring around a core. The core

is occupied by a platform and surrounded by stables on
all four sides. The Miringe Han is a perfect example of
the concentric plan, a concentricity further emphasized
by the vault of the stable ring which does not break but
folds at the corners, completely encircling the core on
all four sides (fig. 21). There is no example of a Shelter-
Only concentric plan with more than one encircling
ring for the shelter. However, the khans with both shel-
ter and services show variations in the concentric plan
such as three rings encircling an open courtyard, as in
Fig. 18. Sari Han (13th century) on Kayseri-Aksaray Road. Re-
construction plan.

vices of the khan are limited, they are attached to either

side of the entrance. They can be entered directly from
the outside, from the portal iwan in the middle, or from
the inside. In khans with a single gallery, the service
space is attached to one of the short walls, as in the mas-
jid of the $arafsa Han. The existence of service spaces
without the prerequisite of a courtyard is encountered
in khans of various sizes and plans; all of the examples
have been published since the Erdmann catalogue,
which lists only the $arafsa Han as an example of a khan
without a courtyard. When a khan has a large amount of
service space, services are lined up along the courtyard,
which can be equal to or even larger than the shelter.
Their variety and arrangement varies from one building
to the next. None of the courtyards have spaces on two
levels on the enclosed three sides. Some khans have a
partial first floor on the entrance side, but it is there to
emphasize the entrance rather than to create more
space. One of these spaces usually houses the masjid. Fig. 20. brahimsah Han (13th century) on Arapkir-Harput
The second, concentric, type of plan in its simplest Road. Plan (from Doomed by theDam).

_1_1___1___ ________1·______1_1_ _11_ __

 THE CONCEPTS THAT SHAPE ANATOLIAN SELJUQ CARAVANSERAIS 91

Fig. 21. Miringe Han (before 1240) on Divrigi-Arapkir Road.

Reconstruction plan.

Fig. 23. Aksaray Sultan Han (1229) on the Konya-Aksaray

the Mama Hatun Kervansarayl (fig. 25) and the Eshab-i Road. The courtyard and the kiosk masjid (1969).
Kehf Han (fig. 9), or the closed courtyard as in the Alara
Han (fig. 8). The rings may continue on three complete regardless of the number of rings and how they envelop
or almost complete sides. In the concentric plan type, the core, the core is not a circulation space with services
lined up around it. Instead the spaces around the
courtyard are used only for accommodations; when
other services are available, they are located near the
entrance or sometimes around a secondary courtyard,
as in the Alara Han. In khans with few services, such as
the Sevserek Han (fig. 26), they are attached to the
entrance wall in a manner very like their counterparts in
the additive-design type.
Comparing two developed examples of the two
design concepts - the Aksaray Sultan Han (fig. 16) and
the Alara Han (fig. 8) - further emphasizes the differ-
ences between them. In the Aksaray Sultan Han, the
shelter is planned as a building consisting of five aisles
lined up next to each other. The platform is U-shaped,
with the long sides of the U covered by vaults that are

Fig. 24. Avanos San Han (13th century) on the Kayseri-Aksaray

Fig. 22. Kargl Han (13th century) on the Alanya-Konya Road. Road. The east side of the courtyard, entrance, and fountain
The semi-open shelter on the courtyard (1992). iwan, and the masjid above the entrance (1970).

_ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ______~~~~~~~~~~~~----
 92 AYSIL TUKEL YAVUZ

;-·.:t; ··i ·.--

'"
il;--"·--·

Fig. 25. Mamahatun Kervansarayl (13th century) on the Erzin-

can-Erzurum Road. Rooms and iwans around the courtyard
(1969).

perpendicular to them. The service quarters were add-

ed to the front of the shelter with a construction joint
between the two. The large variety and size of the ser- Fig. 26. Sevserek Han (13th century) on Malatya-Potfirge
vices required a courtyard for circulation. The service Road. Reconstruction plan (revised R.H. Unal plan).
spaces, which consist of single or linked spaces, are lined
up along the three sides of the courtyard; the fourth front of the portal is a small, open courtyard. On the
side has only the entrance to the shelter. The service east side of the portal is the fountain iwan and on the
space to the east of the entrance iwan is entered from west side is the masjid. There are two spaces, one east,
the north end of the semi-open shelter. Another space, one west of the fountain and masjid, entered from the
most probably for administration, is to the west of the north corridor. The one on the east was possibly a
portal. The large space at the northwest corner is the latrine since it is near the source of water.
common latrine. To the south is a group of spaces Although the Alara Han is only about half the size of
belonging to the first bath. Next to it is a room, then the the Aksaray Sultan Han, the area occupied by the shel-
second bath and another single room. The next two ter is almost the same - the stable band is just a little
rooms are connected to each other and the north one longer in the Aksaray Sultan Han. Both offered a variety
can only be entered from the south one. The last single of services, but because the Alara Han is much smaller,
room, where Sarre saw the tandzr, closes the loop. The its service spaces are smaller as well. Both have masjids
two connected rooms have projecting cornices around and fountains (the Aksaray Sultan Han's fountain is un-
1.5m. from the floor level, suggesting a mezzanine. derneath the kiosk masjid). Both have baths - the
The concentrically planned Alara Han does not have Alara Han bath is separate, but not far from the main
a separate shelter nor services lined up around the building. Both have rooms - the Aksaray Sultan Han
courtyard. At the core of the concentric rings is a long, has four, and the Alara Han has eight. The Alara Han
narrow courtyard covered with a row of cross vaults with has no semi-open shelter. The Aksaray Sultan Han has
a small square pool at the center. Rooms alternating no iwans for living space; the Alara Han has six.
with iwans are lined up along the long sides of the On the whole, the plan for the Aksaray Sultan Han
courtyard to form the second ring. The third and fourth displays the characteristics of an additive design and the
rings are the shelter, encircling the core on three sides; Alara Han shows the symmetry inherent in the concen-
there is a corridor on the fourth side, leading to the tric rings devoted to it various functions. One striking
shelters at both ends. The platform occupies the third difference between the two types is the importance giv-
ring and the stables constitute the fourth ring of the en to traveler accommodations in one, as clearly
shelter. There are small individual platforms at the expressed in the large number of spaces devoted to
north ends of the stables. The double bands of the shel- them and the high degree of privacy offered. Especially
ter do not continue on the north side of the khan. In when size is taken into consideration, these two factors

___1_111_ 111_
 THE CONCEPTS THAT SHAPE ANATOLIAN SELJUQ CARAVANSERAIS 93

become more striking in the concentric khans with ser- NOTES

vices.
The concentric plan type is not the most common; 1. The most extensive and reliable information on the Anatolian
Seljuk roads can be found in M. Kemal Ozergin, "Anadolu Sel-
the majority of Anatolian Seljuq caravanserais follow the cuklu Cagnda Anadolu Yollan," Ph.D. diss., Istanbul Univer-
additive design approach. However, the eight known sity, 1959, available in the Istanbul University Library, thesis
concentric-plan khans and the characteristics of the no. 2797.
plan type are more then enough to suggest that these 2. Osman Turan gives detailed information on the policy of the
buildings should be classified according to function. state in "Selcuklu Kervansaraylari," Belleten 10, 39 (1946), re-
published in Selruklularve slamiyet (Istanbul, 1971), pp. 93-116.
Functional analysis shifts the emphasis from the Also see $erafettin Turan, Tiirkiye-Italya ]iskileri I, Selcuklurlar-
courtyard to the shelter, whether the closed or semi- dan Bizans 'zn Sona Eriine (Istanbul: Metis Yaynlan, 1990).
open one, as in the single example of the Evdir Han. A 3. Caravanserai is the term used in texts written in Persian (such
khan fully performs its basic function only if it has a shel- as Ibn Bibi and Aksarayi) and seems to have been the term
more widely used in Turkey during the Ottoman period.
ter; it can be a khan without having other services, but it
4. Osman Turan, "Selquklu Kervansaraylarl," Selruklular ve Isla-
cannot be a khan if it has services but no shelter, so it is miyet (Istanbul, 1971), p.109, Dogan Kuban, Andadolu Trk
only logical that the classification should start with the MimarisininKaynak ve Sorunlan (Istanbul: Istanbul Teknik Uni-
shelter to which later additions can be appended. Put- versitesi, 1965), pp.1 5 7 - 5 9 .
ting a khan in a category with or without a courtyard 5. Ibn Bibi, Anadolu Seluklu Devieti Tarihi, trans. M.N. Gencosman
(Ankara: Uzluk Baslmevi, 1941), pp.164, Aksarayi Kerimeddin
places too much emphasis on the courtyard, whereas Mahmut, Miisamerat-al-ahyar,trans. M.N. Gecosman and F.N.
the khan with shelter and services gives the shelter and Uzuk (Ankara: Recep Uzunoglu Baslmevi, 1943), p. 1 5 8 .
its accessories the correct degree of importance. A 6. Ibn Bibi, Anadolu Seluklu Devleti Tarihi, pp. 88-89; 1. Hakkl
courtyard is not a prerequisite for the existence or Konyali, Konya Tarihi (Konya, 1964), p. 1 0 4 7. For the interpre-
tation of this type of use, see Ayil Tfikel Yavuz, "Anadolu Sel-
placement of services; it provides only one of the solu-
cuklu Kervansaraylannda Mekkn-Islev liskisi kIinde Savunma
tions for their arrangement, as the concentric-plan ve Bannma," IX. VakzfHaftast Kitabz (Ankara: Vakluflar Genel
khans show. Mfidirlfgii, 1992), p. 2 5 4 .
Starting with function eliminates attempts to prove a 7. The Mamluk Sultan Baybars stayed at the Tuzhisar Sultan Han
hypothesis about origin, tracing their source to Syrian and the Karatay Han during his 1277 campaign in Anatolia as
documented in Osman Turan, "Selkuklu Kervansaraylan,"
court khans or to other eastern khans through the exist- pp.102, 111; Faruk Simer, Yabanlu Pazan (Istanbul: Tfirk
ence of a courtyard. Any courtyard with different Dianyasml Ara~srma Vakfi, 1985). The latter includes a trans-
sources of influence or region can be placed under lation of the chronicle of Abdiizahir who provides extensive
khans with shelter and services, as a subheading of the information especially on the Karatay Han.
8. Osman Turan, "Selcuklu Kervansaraylan," p.111, relates two
organization of the services. This classification does not
incidents with reference to Aksarayl.
negate the sources of influence or regional preferences 9. Aksarayi Mtisameratal-ahyar,p. 336 .
but does not use them as criteria. The functional analy- 10. Karatay Han is referred to as a zaviyein fifteenth-century docu-
sis of spaces and the design approaches that govern ments. Osman Turan, "Celalettin Karatay, Vakiflar ve Vakfiyel-
their organization pave the way for deciphering the eri," Belleten 12, 45 (1948): 567.
11. Ayill Tfikel Yavuz, "Anatolian Caravanserais and Their Use as
functional emphasis given to a specific khan, whether by Statehouses," Proceedingsof the Xth International Congressof Turk-
choice of size, plan, or features of the shelter or by the ish Art, September 1995 (in press).
existence, number, repetition, and organization of 12. Aysll Tikel Yavuz, "Anadolu Selcuklu D6nemi Hanlan ve
some of the service spaces. Only after functional analysis Posta-Menzil-Derbent Teskilatlan," Profesir Dogan Kuban'a
of the khans is complete can other functions, such as Armnagan, (Istanbul: Eren Yaynevi, 1966), pp. 2 5 - 3 8.
13. Kurt Erdmann, Das Anatolische Karavansaray des 13. Jahrhun-
their use as statehouses or postal stations, be established derts, parts 1-2, 2 vols. (Berlin: Verlag Gebr. Mann, 1961); parts
and new ones identified. 3 and 4 were published by Hanna Erdmann in 1976.
14. Friedrich Sarre, Reise in Kleinasien (Berlin: Geographische Ver-
Faculty of Architecture lagshandlung Dietrich Reimer, 1896). Sarre visited six khans
(Goncal Akhan, Ishakli, Egridir, Obruk, Horozlu and Aksaray
Middle East Technical University Sultan Han) and published the inscription of the Incir Han.
Ankara, Turkey He drew plans for Akhan, Horozlu Han, and Aksaray Sultan
Han, and a section for the last.
15. Horozlu Han (Chorash, as Sarre writes it) has a courtyard. The
remains of the courtyard were clearly visible even before it was
excavated during restoration work done in the 1980's. This

I II
 94 AY$IL TOKEL YAVUZ

mistake is repeated by Halil Edhem, M. Ferit Ugur, and M. lected to verify the location. The inscription panel gives no ref-
Mesut Koman, without reference to Sarre. erence to a ruler, nor a title for the donor. Second is the exist-
16. Halil Edhem [Eldem], "Anadolu Selquki Hanlan," Turk Yurdu ence of fireplaces in both buildings, which seems questionable
14, 104 (1915-16): 186. for the assumed date. In Han Elbagrur they can be later addi-
17. M. Ferit Ugur and M. Mesut Koman, "Karatay Kervansarayl," tions, but in Car Melik Han they seem to be an integral part of
Konya 35 (1941): 3027. the buildings, as in seventeenth-century Ottoman derbent
18. Kurt Erdmann, "Notizien zum Inneranatolischen Karavansa- khans, which is what I think this building is, with a separate
ray: Beobachtungen auf einer Reise inJuli 1953," Kunstdes Ori- mosque and a periphery wall. If the fireplaces in Han Elbagrur
ents 2 (1955): 5-29. are accepted as original, they reflect a heating technology not
19. Rahmi Hfiseyin Unal'has published the largest number of observed in the other buildings of the period. Third, the plan
monographs on newly discovered caravanserais. His ideas on arrangement, the treatment of the spaces, and the superstruc-
typology are best reflected in "Osmanh Oncesi Devirden Yay- ture with continuous cross vaults bear no similarity to Anato-
mlanmaml Birkac Han 1zerinde Bir Inceleme," Aratzrma lian Seljuq khans as far as can be observed from the plan and
Dergisi in Memorian Prof Albert Louis Gabriel (Ankara: Atatfirk photographs, but they are similar to Ayyubid and later Syrian
Universitesi, 1978), pp. 4 6 2 - 70 . caravanserais.
20. Erdmann, Das Anatolische Karavansaray, Catalog, Text, 31. Yavuz, "Anatolian Caravanserais and Their Use as State-
pp.21-24. houses," fig. 2.
21. Rudolf M. Riefstahl, CenubugarbfAnadolu'da Tiirk Mimari Eser- 32. For the plan, see Ayisl Tfikel Yavuz, "Anadolu'da ESodaklh Sel-
ler, trans. C.T. Berktin (Istanbul: Istanbul Maarif Baslmevi, cuklu Hanlan," METUJournal ofFaculty ofArchitecture 2 (1976):
1941), p. 5 4 . The English original was published in 1931). fig. 12.
22. Erdman, Das Anatolische Karavansaray, Catalog, Text, p.18 7. In 33. The plans reproduced here are the results of these studies and
fact Erdmann does not include the Alara and Eshab-i Kehf have varying degrees of accuracy. Those of Evdir, Ehab- Kehf
Han in the court khan group in "Das Anatolische Karavansa- were revised after revisiting the buildings; those of the Aksaray
ray," Zeitschriffiir Kulturaustausch (Stuttgart, 1962), vols. 2-3, Sultan Han and Agzlkara Han were redrawn after measuring a
pp.163-70, trans. Ffigen Tuncdag as "SelIuk Kervansarayl," major part of the interior, but not the exterior walls; that of
Onasya, 2, 13 and 14 (1966). He considers the Evdir, Ksrkg6z, Miringe is a survey with straight measurements only; those of
and Kargl Han to be a small group related to Persian and Syr- Kargi, brahimaah, and Oresin were accurately surveyed on
ian buildings that can be traced to the Sasanians. field trips together with students; those of Alara, Kirkg6z and
23. Oktay Aslanapa is a fervent defender of this view: see idem, Akhan were the result of extensive and accurate measured sur-
Tulrk Sanatz I (Istanbul: Milli Egitim Baslmevi, 1972), pp. 3 2 - 9 3 . veys for restoration theses. The plan of Alara was revised after
24. Kurt Erdmann, "Bericht fiber den Stand der Arbeiten fiber the partial restoration in 1989. The only khan not visited is Sev-
das Anatolische Karavansaray des 13.Jahrhunderts," Atti delsec- serek; the revisions for it were done with the aid of photo-
ondo congresso internationaledi arte turca, Venezia 26-29 Settembre graphs sent by the author and measurements taken by Ismail
1963 (Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale, Seminario di Aytat. The sources for the base plan are Erdmann, Das Anato-
Turcologia, 1965), p. 7 8 . lische Karavansaraydes 13. Jahrhunderts, Katalog. Abbildungen,
25. Erdmann, "Bericht fiber den Stand der Arbeiten fiber das bl. XXIX, fig. 1, XI, VIII; for Evdir, Aksaray Sultan and Agzl-
Anatolische Karavansaray," p.75. kara Hans, respectively, Tahsin Ozgi, and Mahmut Akok,
26. So far sixteen khans are known to have constructionjoints be- "Aftin Yaninindaki Eshab-t Kehf Kfilliyesi," Yllk Aranttrmalar
tween the closed section and the courtyard. The two Sultan Dergisi 1 (1958): 85; for Eshab-i Kehf Han, Middle East Tech-
hans, Agzlkara, and Karatay, are among them. nical University, Faculty of Architecture, Department of Resto-
27. Riefstahl has only the entrance iwan, Riefstahl, Cenubugarbi ration, Doomed by the Dam (Ankara: Tfirk Tarih Kurumu Basl-
Anadolu'da Tiirk Mimarisi; Erdmann has the side iwans (Erd- mevi, 1967), p.46, for brahimtah Han; Tomris Sfier
mann, Das Anatolische Karavansaray des 13. Jahrhunderts, Kata- (Yardlmc), "The Krkg6z Han in Antalya," M. Arch thesis
log, Abbildungen, plate XXIX). METU Faculty of Architecture, 1975; for Kirkg6z Han: Ahsen
28. Erdmann, "Das anatolische Karavansaray." Mocan, "The Akhan Caravanserai in Denizli," M. Arch thesis,
29. See Jean Sauvaget, "Caravansrails syriens du Moyen-Age I. METU, Faculty of Architecture, 1972, for Akhan; Rahmi
Caravansrails Ayyubides," Ars Islamica 6 (1939): 48-55; idem, Hfiseyin Onal, "Sevserek Ham (Malatya-P6tfirge) ve Yerhan
"Caravansrails syriens du Moyen-Age II. Caravanserails (Erzincan-Refahiye) Hakklnda Bir inceleme," I. Tzirkoloji Kon-
Mamelouks,' Ars Islamica 7 (1940): 1-19. gresi Tebligleri (Istanbul, 1979), p.964, for Sevserek Han.
30. Actually there are two khans of the Syrian type in southern 34. Aysll Tfikel (Yavuz), "II Restauro d'Alara Han," Ph.D. diss.,
Turkey, published after the appearance of Erdmann's study Scuola di Perfezionamento per lo Studio ed il Restauro del
(G6nfil Gfiresever (Cantay), "Urfa'da Iki Kervansaray," Monumento, Rome, 1967.
MTRE Biteni, 3, 9-10 [1977]: 12-27). One is an undated khan 35. Ayl Tfikel (Yavuz), "Documentation and Comparative Study
in the village of Car Melik between Suruc and Urfa and the of Alara Han," Belleten 33, 132 (1969): 429-91.
other is the dated 1228-29 khan in Han Elbagrur to the south 36. R.H. nal has mentioned a concentrically planned khan
of Harran, only 15km. from the Syrian border. G. Gfiressever called Murat Han. A khan in $isman Kyi5 to the east of Mala-
(Cantay) claims that they are Seljuq, based on a document tya also has a concentric plan with services; Ismail Aytac,
which indicates that this region was under Seljuq rule until "Malatya-Elbistan Kervanyolu Girzergkhl ve Kurttepe Han,"
1234. For the time being, I refrain from including them VT. Milli SelCuklu Kltir ve Medeniyeti Seminen Bildirileri (in
among the Seljuq khans for several reasons: one is the term press). For the published six, see Aysl Tuikel Yavuz, "Mircinge
"this region" which is vague; more information has to be col- Han and Concentric Planned Anatolian Seljuk Period Cara-

I_ _I _II_ I
 THE CONCEPTS THAT SHAPE ANATOLIAN SELJUQ CARAVANSERAIS 95
vanserais," Proceedingsof the 9Yt International Congress of Turkish ence to partitioning a court tent by curtains; on p. 101 there is
Art, 23-27 September 1991 (Ankara, 1995), pp.4 4 9 - 70 . reference to the use of curtains in palace spaces during the
37. This typology was presented at the First International Con- welcoming ceremony for Muhyi al-Din ibn al-Jawzi by Aldad-
gress of Turcology, Istanbul 1971. din Keykubad I.
38. Ayll Tkel Yavuz, "Anadolu Selcuklu Kervansaraylannda 41. Erdmann notes that the majority of the khans he studied con-
Mekan-I*lev Ilitkisi Iinde Savunma ve Bannma," JX Vakzf Haf- sist of a courtyard and a closed hall. Among the 59 buildings
tasz Kitabz (Ankara, 1992), pp. 253-84. he studied, 40 are of this type, 18 do not have courtyards, and 5
39. Information about the tander has become available through are court khans (idem, "Bericht fiber der Stand der Arbeiten
excavations done in the last decade and not yet completely iber das Anatolische Karavansaray des 13. Jahrhunderts,"
published. Haluk Karamagarah told me that in excavating the p. 75). In the last thirty years more khans belonging to his lat-
Cifte Minareli Medrese in Sivas, he found tandrs in the floors ter two groups have been discovered than those to his major
of student cells. Evidence for their use in caravanserais came one.
later. In 1992, while R. Hfiseyin Unal was visiting the Susuz 42. In June 1994, I surveyed the Ortapayam Han and an unpub-
Han, on the Antalya-Konya road, one of the students accompa- lished khan on the road between Konya and Antalya. They
nying him fell into a pit full of ash. The contractor responsible have the same plan as the arafsa Han, with a service space
for the restoration told them that there were several others attached to one of the sides. Erdmann's plan of the Ortapayam
lined up along the platform and that he had filled them in and Han does not include this space.
closed their openings. The same year I visited the Susuz Han 43. This khan was turned into a mosque at a later date (Erdmann,
and saw the only existing tandzr there, but excavations and Das Anatolische Karavansaraydes 13.Jahrhunderts,p. 48 , Katalog,
research in the buildings themselves have increased the num- Abbildungen, Abb. 338-342, pl. XXX). For the same building,
ber of examples. In Dokuzun Derbent Han near Konya there see Rahmi Hfiseyin Unal, "A propos de la destination de l'edi-
is a tandzr in one of the rooms. Hakim Karpuz, "Konya Doku- fice siti au sud-est du Khan de Kzl16ren," Proceedingsof the 9th
zun Ham Kazl ve Restorasyon Calvsmalan, 1993," XVI. Kazz International Congress of Turkish Art, 23-27 September 1991
Sonulan Toplantzsz (Ankara, 1995), p.3 7 9 . There is another (Ankara, 1995), 3: 413-23, and Ayisl Yavuz, "Anadolu Selcuklu
one on the seki of the second khan in KIzl6ren between Konya D6nemi Hanlan ve Posta Menzil-Derbent Telkilatlan,"
and Beysehir, Yavuz, "Anadolu Selcuklu D6nemi Hanlan ve pp. 25-38. I call the building the second khan at KIzl6ren and
Posta-Menzil-Derbent TeSkilatlan," pp.25-38. It is now obvi- assume it to be a stage in the postal system. For the khan in
ous that what Sarre thought was a cistern in the last room on Melle, see Aysl Tfikel Yavuz, "Melle'teki Han ve Iki Sahlmh
the east wing of the courtyard in Aksaray Sultan Han is a tandzr Anadolu Seluklu Hanlan," I. Milli Selfuklu Kiiltiirve Medeni-
(Sarre, Reise in Kleinasien, p. 78). yeti Semineri Bildirleri (in press).
40. Ibn Bibi, Anadolu Selcuklu Devleti Tarihi; on p.151 there is refer-

_11 _I__