Arap ve Türk Edebiyatında Halife Abdurrahman en-Nasır’ın Şahsiyeti: Abdülhak Hamid ve Corci Zeydan Arasında Karşılaştırmalı Bir İncelemeAbdulsattar Elhajhamed
Endülüs Emevi Devleti’nin ilk Halifesi olan Abdurrahman en-Nasır, tarihte iz bırakmış önemli şahsiyetlerden biridir. Endülüs, elli yıla yakın saltanatı boyunca ilmî, idarî, siyasî, askerî gibi alanlarda gelişme yaşamıştır. en-Nasır, yazarların dikkatlerini çekmiş, onun hakkında çeşitli dillerde birçok kitap, hikâye, roman ve oyun yazılmıştır. Türk yazarlarından Abdülhak Hamid Tarhan, Tezer yahut Melik Abdurrahmanü’s-Sâlis adlı oyununda, Arap yazarlardan ise Corci Zeydan Abdurrahman el-Nasır adlı romanında Abdurrahman’ı birbirlerinden farklı bir şekilde ele almıştır. Bu çalışmada Abdurrahman’ın adını taşıyan bu iki edebî eser incelenmiş, söz konusu kişi ile ilgili ortaklıklar ve farklılıklar tespit edilmiş, karakterin işlenişindeki farklılıkların nedeni, yazarların bu konuda eser yazma niyetiyle bağlantılıdır. Çalışmamızın sonucu olarak yazarların, bu tarihi karakteri kurgusal bir hikâye çerçevesinde sundukları halde birbirlerinden farklı bir şekilde ele aldığını söyleyebiliriz. Abdülhak Hamid, Abdurrahman’ı ideal bir hükümdar olarak sunarken Corci Zeydan en çok onun olumsuzluklarına dikkat çekmiştir.
The Caliph Abd ar-Rahman al-Nasir in Arabic and Turkish Literature: A comparative study between ʿAbdūl-ḥaqq Ḥāmid and Georgy ZeidanAbdulsattar Elhajhamed
The Umayyad Caliph Abd ar-Rahman al-Nasir is one of the important figures who left an impact on history. During his rule, which was nearly fifty years, Andalusia witnessed development and prosperity in the scientific, administrative, political, military, and urban fields. He attracted the attention of writers of books, stories, novels, and plays in various languages. Among those who dealt with this character were the Turkish writer ʿAbdūl-ḥaqq Ḥāmid in the play Tezer or Malik Abd ar-Raḥmān III and Georgy Zeidan in the novel ‘Abd ar-Rahmân al-Nasir. This study deals with the character of ‘Abd ar-Rahman al-Nasir in these two literary works that bear his name. In the introduction, Abd ar-Rahman al-Nasir and the most important literary works that embodied him are introduced, and then a proposal is made for the two works under study. The comparison section notes the points of difference and similarity of the character of Abd ar-Rahman in the two works. The reasons for the difference in the presentation of this character, which is the purpose of summoning or writing about it, were also indicated. The research concludes that the two writers participated in presenting this historical character in the framework of a fictional story, but they differed in the formulation and use of this character. Although ʿAbdūl-ḥaqq Ḥāmid portrayed it as an ideal figure, Georgy Zeidan portrayed it negatively.
شخصية الخليفة عبد الرحمن الناصر في األدبين العربي والتركي: دراسة مقارنة بين عبد الحق حامد وجرجي زيدانAbdulsattar Elhajhamed
ملخص ً في التاريخ، وشهدت شخصية الخليفة األموي عبد الرحمن الناصر من الشخصيات المهمة التي تركت أثرا ً في المجاالت العلمية واإلدارية والسياسية ً وازدهارا األندلس مدة حكمه التي تجاوزت الخمسين سنة تطورا ً من الكتب والقصص والروايات والعسكرية والعمرانية. ولفتت هذه الشخصية انتباه الكتاب، فكتبوا عنها عددا والمسرحيات في مختلف اللغات، ومن الذين تناولوا هذه الشخصية الكاتب التركي عبد الحق حامد في مسرحية »تزر أو الملك عبد الرحمن الثالث«، وجرجي زيدان في رواية »عبد الرحمن الناصر«. تناولت هذه الدراسة شخصية عبد الرحمن الناصر في هذين العملين األدبيين اللذين يحمالن اسمه، لكن شخصيته ُدّم فيهما بدت مختلفة. في المقدمة تم التعريف بعبد الرحمن الناصر وأهم األعمال األدبية التي جسدته، ثم ق ُشير إلى نقاط االختالف والتوافق في العملين عرض موجز للعملين المدروسين، أما في قسم المقارنة فأ فيما يتعلق بشخصية عبد الرحمن الناصر، وتمت اإلشارة إلى أسباب االختالف في تقديم هذه الشخصية، والتي تتمثل في الهدف من استدعائها أو الكتابة عنها، وخلص البحث إلى أن الكاتبين اشتركا بتقديم هذه الشخصية التاريخية في إطار قصة خيالية، لكنهما اختلفا في صوغ هذه الشخصية، وتوظيفها، فجنح بها الكاتب التركي عبد الحق حامد إلى المثالية، بينما عدل بها جرجي زيدان نحو السلبية.
The Umayyad Caliph ‘Abd ar-Rahman al-Nasir is one of the distinguished Arab figures in Arab-Islamic history. Abd ar-Rahman assumed power in 300 AH (October 912 A.D.) and ruled for more than fifty years. During his long reign, he made changes in the state administration system and carried out administrative and military reforms. ‘Abd ar-Rahman al-Nasir attracted the attention of writers and authors worldwide because of his unique and interesting qualities. They composed books, stories, novels, and plays in various languages such as Arabic, Turkish, and Spanish. In this article, we compare the character of ‘Abd ar-Rahman al-Nasir in the play Tezer or Malik Abd ar-Raḥmān III by ʿAbdūl-ḥaqq Ḥāmid and in the novel ‘Abd ar-Rahmân al-Nasir by Georgy Zeidan because those two writers are the first to deal with this historical character in the Arab and Turkish literature in detail and because they differed in the embodiment of this character. This comparison aims to clarify the differences in the embodiment of this character between the two writers, who belong to different genres of literature and different religions, and to explain the reasons behind that.
It is noticeable that the two writers, who belong to different genres of literature, have in common the fact that they dealt with a historical figure mentioned by historical sources, provided detailed information about him, and indicated his characteristics. However, both writers preferred to deal with this character through a fictional story that was not mentioned in the history books.
It is noticeable that ʿAbdūl-ḥaqq Ḥāmid did not focus on giving much historical information about the era of ‘Abd ar-Rahman al-Nasir. History was not the center of his attention, but the character of ‘Abd ar-Rahmân al-Nasir was, and there is no other historical figure in the play other than ‘Abd ar-Rahmân. As for Georgy Zeidan, he filled the novel with encyclopedic historical information, numbers, and measurements and described places and palaces in detail. He also embodied well-known historical figures in the era of ‘Abd ar-Rahmân al-Nasir and spoke about the ambassadors of the kings of Europe who visited Cordoba.
It is noticeable that the character of ‘Abd ar-Rahmân al-Nasir in the play Tezer or Malik Abd ar-Raḥmān III seemed clearly defined because he is the hero of the play and influencer of the rest of the characters. This character was the focus of the writer’s attention and seemed generally positive in the play. As for ‘Abd ar-Rahmân al-Nasir by Georgy Zeidan, there were many strong and influential characters in the novel, and ‘Abd ar-Rahmân III al-Nasir’s character seemed faint, marginal, and weak compared with others. The fictional character of the spy Saeed was the main character in the novel.
We find that the two writers differed in portraying ‘Abd ar-Rahman’s view of the people and his relationship with them. ʿAbdūl-ḥaqq Ḥāmid illustrated the mutual respect between Abd al-Rahman and the people by showing that Abd ar-Rahman worked to serve his people throughout his caliphate and spent his time in the service of the people. He sacrificed his happiness for them. Zeidan portrayed ‘Abd ar-Rahman as a ruler isolated from the people in his palaces, a ruler who enjoys the wealth and money of the people, controls the people’s lives, and monopolizes the funds for himself.
There is another matter related to the character of ‘Abd ar-Rahman al-Nasir in the two works under study, which is the presence of an imagined character close to the character of ‘Abd ar-Rahman, represented by Tezer in ʿAbdūl-ḥaqq Ḥāmid’s play and by Saeed in Zeidan’s novel. It is noticeable that ‘Abd ar-Rahmân’s character was under the influence of those two characters, but Tezer’s influence remains limited compared to Saeed’s.
The difference in the character of ‘Abd ar-Rahman al-Nasir in the two works under study results from the goal and purpose that the writers seek to achieve by using this historical character. The Turkish writer ʿAbdūl-ḥaqq Ḥāmid wanted to present a model for the ideal ruler who puts the interests of the people ahead of his own and the people’s happiness over his own. Therefore, he presented ‘Abd ar-Rahman al-Nasir as an ideal ruler free of defects and possessing all the good qualities that a ruler should possess. Zeidan’s goal of using this character is to present it to the reader as he saw it with all its flaws, and perhaps he wanted to marginalize and belittle it, as some critics say. Zeidan created fictional characters who play heroic roles, overshadowing the historical characters, who appear weak and marginal. Zeidan is very sympathetic to the fictional characters he creates at the expense of historical figures whom he was not interested in and did not treat with fairness.
The two writers differed in the embodiment of this character. Each of them used it according to his beliefs and ideas. ʿAbdūl-ḥaqq Ḥāmid tends to idealism in his presentation, whereas Georgy Zeidan tends to negativity.
Finally, it is difficult to say that Zeidan was influenced by ʿAbdūl-ḥaqq Ḥāmid, but ʿAbdūlḥaqq Ḥāmid was the first to deal with and the most interested in this character, so he revealed its secrets and highlighted it clearly.