Tarihsel Bir Süreklilik Olarak “Türklerde Tebabet”: Süheyl Ünver ve Tıp Tarihi Enstitüsü
Ali ErkenBu makale Türk Tıp Tarihi Enstitüsü özelinde Türkiye’de tıp tarihi çalışmalarının kuruluş dönemini inceler. Bir bilim dalı olarak tıp tarihinin ortaya çıkışı erken Cumhuriyet döneminin hakim tarih ve kimlik algısı ile yakından ilişkili olmuştur. Ancak bu süreçte Tıp Tarihi Enstitüsü kurucu müdürü olan Süheyl Ünver’in yaklaşımı dikkat çekicidir. Süheyl Ünver 1933 Üniversite Reformu sonrası İstanbul Üniversitesi bünyesindeki yerini korumuş ve Enstitü müdürlüğüne atanmıştır. Süheyl Ünver’in bilim tarihine yönelik bakış açısının dönemin genel söylemini yansıttığını ancak Cumhuriyetin kurucu elitlerinin benimsediği tarih ve dünya görüşü ile tam örtüşmediğini söylemek mümkündür. Ünver neşrettiği çalışmalarda tıp ilmine Türklerin sunduğu katkıları öne çıkarır ve tarihsel olarak Türklerdeki tebabet ilminin sürekliliğini ortaya koymaya çalışır. Ele aldığı isimlerin tıp alanındaki çalışmalarının yanında “Türk” kimliğine de odaklanır. Tetkik ettiği eserler ve kurumlara dönemin gelenekten kopuk ve pozitivist çizgisinin dışında bütüncül bir bakış açısıyla yaklaşır. Tıp Tarihi Enstitüsü neşriyatı ve hatıratlara dayanan bu çalışma tıp tarihi yazımının Cumhuriyet döneminin kimlik inşası ile ilişkisini incelemeyi amaçlar.
As a Historical Continuity “Medicine of the Turks”: Süheyl Ünver and the Institute of Medical History
Ali ErkenThis article examines the foundational period of history of medicine in modern Turkey. The emergence of historical studies on medicine is closely linked to the dominant historiographical lines and identity formation process. Yet during this period the approach of Suheyl Unver, the founding director of the Institute of Turkish Medical History, is striking. Following the university reform in 1933 Ünver was appointed as the Director of Institute. It can be said that Unver’s approach reflected the prevailing ideological discourse of the time, yet in certain points his opinions diverged from the views of Republican elites. Ünver in his works pinpointed the contribution of Turks to the medicine and tried to demonstrate the historical continuity of medical sciences among the Turks. Unlike the positivist and anti-traditionalists currents of the time he embraced a balanced approach in dealing with past experiences in medicine. Based on primary sources from the Institute of Turkish Medical History and personal collections this research investigates the connection between the historiography of medical sciences and the identity construction in Republican period.
This article examines the works of the Institute of Turkish Medical History under the directorship of Süheyl Ünver with regard to the early Republican identity politics. Süheyl Ünver had graduated from Mekteb-i Tıbbiye and also received training in classical Islamic arts. His scholarly interest led him undertake researches in the history of medicine during his stint in Europe. After 1930 Republican rulers intensified their interest in historiography, convened two Congresses to devise a new understanding of Turkish history. Ünver’s works on the history of medicine drew the attention of politicians and intellectuals of the time and he was encouraged to carry out new researches. Ünver remained in his position at Istanbul University Faculty of Medicine following the Darülfunûn reform and was appointed as the Director of Institute of Turkish Medicine. His studies were closely followed and praised by such historians as Reşit Galip, Afet İnan and Yusuf Akçura. Ünver stressed the importance of these efforts in building a national history in medical sciences, yet the difference between his approach and that of the ruling elite in certain cases was noteworthy. It is possible to say that Ünver’s main concern was to preserve manuscripts, records and archival designs so as to transmit past knowledge to his own age.
In the works of Süheyl Ünver and the Institute of Turkish Medical History it is frequently stressed that the contribution of Turks to medical science was ignored and that they did not get the place they deserved while Arabs and Persians were treated with due respect. Unver claims that dozens of works “originally” belonged to the Turks were not attributed to the Turks. He focuses on the studies of leading men of science such as İbn Sînâ, Fârabî, Bîrûnî, arguing that these names were part of Turkish scientific history. Through this approach Ünver notes that Persians, Arabs, Turks had their own national histories different from each other and it is necessary for Turks to build their own national history. Ünver puts emphasize on political and cultural affiliation, claiming that the fact that their works were not written in Turkish would not mean that they were not Turks. A similar approach held true for research articles on medical institutions and practices published by the Institute. Many hospitals, thermals and dispensaries built in different geographies, including those institutions located in today’s Egypt, İran and Afghanistan should be considered as part of Turkish medical history. Aside from the publications in Turkish the Institute published works in French and English. Ünver notes that thanks to their efforts, which he regarded a national task, the contributions of the Turks to the history of science started to get wider recognition among the Western scientific circles. It can be said that Ünver’s stress on Turkness in a reaction against the West had emerged during the Tanzimat period and was shared by the Republican thinkers and rulers. Based on the works of the Institute of Turkish Medical History it took an institutional dimension so that these scholars could be treated as Turkish scientists in history textbooks and official discourse.
The question of identity is related to the understanding of history. The early Republicans disregarded Ottoman-Islamic identity, excluding or discounting Islamic sources in the definition of Turkness. That Suheyl Unver’s close friend Nafiz Uzluk, whom he published Turk Tıp Tarihi Arkivi journal under the Institute, had a close interest in the history of Seljukcs is worthwhile. They held an all-inclusive approach and investigated the medical practices of Ghaznevids, Uyghurs and even pre-Islamic Anatolian civilizations, regarding preach, therapy, natural care and other methods of treatment a richness in medical tradition. In this perspective the transformation to the modern medicine is a continuity with the past. Despite this divergence in devising the framework, it could be argued that the works of the Institute of Turkish Medical History received a general approval among the Republican elites in that period.
