TY  - JOUR
T1  - Eski Mezopotamya ve Eski Mısır Tıbbi Metinleri Üzerine Dönemin Katipleri Tarafından Yapılan Şerhlerin Karşılaştırılması
TT  - A Comparison of Commentaries on Ancient Mesopotamian and Ancient Egyptian Medical Texts by Scribes of the Period
AU  - Kutlu Alancı, Hilal
PY  - 2026
DA  - April
Y2  - 2025
DO  - 10.37879/belleten.2026.019
JF  - BELLETEN
JO  - TTK BELLETEN
PB  - Türk Tarih Kurumu
WT  - DergiPark
SN  - 0041-4255
SP  - 19
EP  - 68
VL  - 90
IS  - 317
LA  - tr
AB  - Eski Mezopotamya’daki şerh geleneği, MÖ birinci bin yılın başlarında Neo-Asur ve Neo-Babil dönemlerinde (MÖ sekizinci yüzyıl civarında) belirginleşti. Akamenid ve Helenistik dönemlerde de (MÖ birinci yüzyıla kadar) sürdürüldü. Şerhi yazılan temel metinlerin neredeyse tamamı, MÖ birinci bin yılın Mezopotamya edebiyatının “kanonik” külliyatına ait olarak kabul edilir. Şerhler MÖ yedinci yüzyılda, orijinal yazarları tarafından neredeyse bin yıl önce kullanılan, anlamı artık bilinmeyen arkaik sözcükler ve ifadeler için güncellenmiş eşdeğerler ve ayrıntılı anlamlar sağlamak adına bir gereklilik hâline geldi. Şerhleri ortaya çıkaran diğer nedenler ise tarihî, sosyal ve politik koşullardı. Yeni Asur döneminde akademisyenler ve akademi siyasi güçlere tabi tutulmuş ve eserleri kanonlaştırma süreci için yapılan araştırma, esas olarak krala tavsiyede bulunmayı amaçlayarak zaman zaman yorumlama gereğini doğurmuştur. Akamenid döneminde siyasi otoritenin değişmesi sonucu oluşan özgürlükle birlikte, kanonik metinler külliyatını inceleyen ve yorumlayan bilginlerden meydana gelmiş bağımsız bir iç skolastik sistem ortaya çıkmıştı. Bu şerhlerin tarihini ve tipolojisini çok disiplinli bir bakış açısıyla inceleyen son çalışmalar Babil ve Asur şerhlerine pek az yer vermişken mevcut çalışma söz konusu bakış açısıyla iki farklı disiplinden şerhleri karşılaştırma işine girişmektedir. Bu çalışma, eski Mezopotamya’daki tıbbi metinler üzerine yapılan yorumları, fiziksel metin düzeni ve şerhlerde açıklamalar sağlamak için uygulanan hermeneutik açısından Edwin Smith tıbbi papirüsünde görülen şerhlerle karşılaştırmayı amaçlamaktadır.
KW  - Şerh
KW  - Yorum
KW  - Hermeneutik
KW  - Tıp
KW  - Edwin Smith Papirüsü
KW  - Kanon
N2  - The tradition of commentary in ancient Mesopotamia became evident in the early first millennium BC, during the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian periods (eighth century BC). It continued into the Achaemenid and Hellenistic periods (up to the first century BC). Almost all of the basic texts for which commentary was written are considered to belong to the “canonical” corpus of first-millennium BC Mesopotamian literature. Commentaries became a necessity in the seventh century BC, in order to provide updated comprehensives and detailed meanings for archaic expressions whose meanings were no longer known and whose original authors had used them almost a thousand years earlier. Other factors that gave rise to commentaries were historical, social and political conditions. During the Neo-Assyrian period, scholars and academia were subject to political powers, and the research conducted for the canonization process of works was primarily aimed at advising the king, at times necessitating interpretation. With the freedom that emerged as a result of the change of political authority in the Achaemenid period, an independent internal scholastic system emerged, consisting of scholars who studied and interpreted the corpus of canonical texts. While recent studies examining the history and typology of these commentaries from a multidisciplinary perspective have given little attention to the Babylonian and Assyrian commentaries, the present study attempts to compare commentaries from two different disciplines from this perspective. This study aims to compare commentaries on medical texts from ancient Mesopotamia with those appearing in the Edwin Smith medical papyrus in terms of the physical text organization and the hermeneutics applied to provide explanations in the commentaries.
CR  - Biggs, R. D., “Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health in Ancient Mesopotamia”, Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies, Vol. 19/No. 1, 2005.
CR  - Biggs, R. D., “Medicine in Ancient Mesopotamia” History of Science 4, 1969.
CR  - Breasted, J. H., The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus. Volume 1: Hieroglyphic Transliteration, Translation, and Commentary, 1930.
CR  - Breasted, J. H., The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus. Volume 2: Facsimile Plates and Line for Line Hieroglyphic Transliteration, 1930.
CR  - Bryan, G. P., The Ebers Papyrus, 1930.
CR  - Durand, J. M., “Un commentaire à TDP I, AO 17661”, RA 73, 1979, s. 153-170.
CR  - Gabbay, U., “Akkadian Commentaries from Ancient Mesopotamia and Their Relation to Early Hebrew Exegesis”, Dead Sea Discoveries, Vol. 19/Issue 3, 2012.
CR  - Geller, M. J., Ancient Babylonian Medicine: Theory and Practice, 2010.
CR  - Geller, M. J., Introduction: “Oeil malade etmauvais oeil” in Advances in Mesopotamian Medicine from Hammurabi to Hippocrates, 2009.
CR  - George, A. R., “Babylonian Texts from the Folios of Sidney Smith, Part Two: Prognostic and Diagnostic Omens, Tablet I”, RA 85, 1991.
CR  - Ebbell, B., The Papyrus Ebers: the greatest Egyptian medical document, 1937.
CR  - Finkel, I. L., “Adad-apla-iddina, Esagil-kīn-apli, and the Series SA.GIG”, E. Leichty et. al., A Scientific Humanist. Studies in Memory of Abraham Sachs, Occasional Publications of the Samuel Noah Kramer Fund 9, 1998.
CR  - Frahm, E., “Reading the Tablet, the Exta, and the Body: The Hermeneutics of Cuneiform Signs in Babylonian and Assyrian Text Commentaries and Divinatory Texts”, ed. A. Annus Divination and Interpretation of Signs in the Ancient World, The Sixth Annual Universityof Chicago Oriental Institute Seminar, 2010.
CR  - Frahm, E., Babylonian and Assyrian Text Commentaries, 2011.
CR  - Frahm, E., “The Latest Sumerian Proverbs”, Opening the Tablet Box: Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Benjamin R. Foster, ed. S. C. Melville, A. L. Slotsky, CHANE 42, 2010.
CR  - Frahm, E., “Royal Hermeneutics: Observations on the Commentaries from Ashurbanipal’s Libraries at Nineveh”, Iraq 66, 2004.
CR  - Heeßel, N. P., “Diagnosis, Divination and Disease: Towards an Understanding of the Rationale Behind the Babylonian Diagnostic Handbook”, eds. H. F. J. Horstmanshoff - M. Stol Magic and Rationality in Ancient Near Eastern and Graeco-Roman Medicine, 2004.
CR  - Hunger, H., Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk I. ADFU 9. Berlin, 1976.
CR  - K. van der Toorn, Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible, 2007. Lambert, W. G., “An Address of Marduk to the Demons”, AfO 17, 1954-56.
CR  - Lambert, W. G., “Ancestors, Authors, and Canonicity”, Journal of Cuneiform Studies, Vol. 11/No. 1, 1957.
CR  - Lambert, W. G., “A Catalogue of Texts and Authors”, Journal of Cuneiform Studies, Vol. 16/No. 3, 1962.
CR  - Leichty, E., “Two Late Commentaries”, Af0 24, 1973. Nunn, J. F., Ancient Egyptian Medicine, 1997.
CR  - Pearce, L. E., “Babylonian Commentaries and Intellectual Innovations”, in J. Prosecký, ed. Intellectual Life of the Ancient Near East: Papers Presented at the 43rd Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Prague, July 1-5, 1996, 1998.
CR  - Popovic, M., Reading the Human Body: Physiognomy and Astrology in the Dead Sea Scrolls in Hellenistic-Early Roman Period Judaism, 2007.
CR  - Rocherg-Halton, F., “Canonicity in Cuneiform Texts”, Journal of Cuneiform Studies, Vol. 36/Issue 2, 1984.
CR  - Sigerist, H. E., A History of Medicine. Volume 1: Primitive and Archaic Medicine, 1951.
CR  - Scurlock, J. - Andersen, B. R., Diagnoses in Assyrian and Babylonian Medicine. Ancient Sources, Translations, and Modern Medical Analyses, 2005.
CR  - Veldhuis, N., “TIN.TIR = Babylon, the question of canonization and the production of meaning”, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 50, 1998.
CR  - Weeks, K.R., “Medicine, Surgery and Public Health in Ancient Egypt” In Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, Vol. 3, ed. Jack M. Sasson et al, 1995.
UR  - https://doi.org/10.37879/belleten.2026.019
L1  - https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/5897513
ER  -