Tıbb-ı Cedîd Ne Kadar Yenidir? Osmanlı Tıbbında Yenilik Tartışmaları ve Yeninin Mahiyeti (1650-1750)Mustakim Arıcı, Esra Aksoy
Osmanlı’da birçok alanda köklü dönüşümlerin yaşandığı on yedinci yüzyılda ortaya çıkan tıp literatürü ve gelişmeler, Osmanlı tıbbının on dokuzuncu yüzyılın sonuna kadarki serüvenine ışık tutar mahiyettedir. Bu geçiş evresinin anlaşılmasında “yeni” kavramı ve “yeni” olarak adlandırılan olgular merkezi bir role sahiptir. “Yeni”, tikel olarak birçok şeye sıfat olan terimler ve tasavvurlar öbeğine karşılık gelmektedir. “Yeni” bu belirleyici, tanımlayıcı rolünün yanında tümel olarak da bir zihniyete tekabül etmektedir. Ne var ki birçok söylemin üzerine bina edilen bu tasavvurun modern araştırmalarda tikel ve tümel boyutlarıyla sorgulandığını, tahlile konu edildiğini söylemek zordur. Bu makalede “yeni”nin özellikle tümel, yani zihniyet anlamında bütünüyle nevzuhur bir şey olmadığını, kadim paradigmayla ilişkisini ve kadim’in genişleme çabası olarak görüldüğünü ifade ettik. Çalışmamız 1650- 1750 yılları arasındaki tıp literatüründe “yeni”nin mahiyetini sorgulama, ilgili zihniyeti çözümleme iddiasında olup genel bir çerçeve çizme ve bu çerçeveyi tamamlayacak makalelerle tikel problemlere uygulama motivasyonuyla yazılmıştır.
How New is New Medicine (Tıbb-ı Cedîd)? Debates on Novelty in Ottoman Medicine and the Nature of the New (1650-1750)Mustakim Arıcı, Esra Aksoy
The 17th century was a period characterized by profound transformations in various areas of the Ottoman Empire, and the medical literature and developments that emerged at that time offer an insight into the journey of Ottoman medicine until the end of the 19th century. In understanding this transitional çerçe period, the concept of the new and the phenomena it encompasses play a central role. In addition to its defining and descriptive functions, new as a term also corresponds to a mentality as being universal. However, this concept, which forms the basis of many discourses, has not been thoroughly examined and analyzed in modern research with regard to its particular and universal dimensions. This article stated the new to not be something completely new, especially in the universal sense of mentality and its relationship with the old paradigm, but to be seen as an attempt to expand the ancient paradigm. This study aims to question the nature of the new in the medical literature between 1650-1750, to analyze the associated mentality, and to establish a general framework applicable to specific issues through complementary articles.
This article aims to study the concept of new in the medical literature between 1650- 1750. The study’s main resources are books written by physicians and non-physicians who worked in medical application and preparation of pharmaceuticals. Although studies have been made on this topic, their main focus was on the definition of new as a term in medicine and drug treatment. In other words, these studies highlighted the meaning of the concept of new in iatrochemistry without taking into consideration other uses of this term in other domains. Indeed, new had multiple interpretations as a term in various disciplines during the period under study. In this context, new as a term can be classified in three layers. However, one should note that these layers are not severe classifications and occasionally overlap. The present article will examine the concept of the new in geography, in the works of contemporary and later scholars (muta’akhkhirūn), and in terms of the medical paradigm and literature (e.g., perspectives, diseases, plants, units of measurement, practices, pharmaceutical equipment, physician’s offices). The article will also examine new in the literature such as changes that occurred with regard to book titles, the order of encyclopedic works (tertīb-i jadīd), and translations (tarjamat), as well as regarding juridical (fiqh) issues that have emerged since the founders of Islamic schools of thought (madhhab).
The new world refers to the American continent as well as the new in a geographical sense. The new world was discussed in medical writings in terms of plants that had been imported from the continent and employed in medicine. The phrases that correlate to new (muta’akhkhir) as a term in a chronological sense were typically employed in respect to people or scholars who lived after the so-called old (mute’addim) period. The geographical and historical contexts are not irrelevant to what was considered new in terms of the medical paradigm and literature. This was due to the fact that, beginning in the 16th century, new diseases, new plants, new pharmaceutical ingredients, novel approaches and instruments for producing medications, new therapies, and fresh perspectives had entered the medical literature. This study specifically explores whether the so-called new concepts found in Ottoman medicine were incorporated into and justified within the pre-existing medical paradigm or if they contributed to the search for a new paradigm. The study’s hypothesis is that what had been deemed new in 17th-century Ottoman medicine led to a shift in the paradigm’s content by incorporating it within and modifying old medicine. To investigate how Paracelsian medicinal texts had been incorporated into Ottoman medicine through translations by Ibn Sallūm would be feasible from this perspective. Recent research has revealed that the passages that attacked humoral pathology and those of Paracelsus’ medicine that dealt with astrology and occult science had not been extant in the original text and were only integrated during the translation process. Ibn Sallūm was instrumental in these translations and said that Paracelsus had plundered from ancient chemistry and philosophy rather than creating the new chemical medicine. As a result, the idea of Paracelsianism is seen as a slippery term in the secondary literature. In conclusion, Paracelsus only had an impact on Ottoman medicine in terms of the usage of chemical drugs, which were then modified and utilized in humoral pathology. The theory of humoral pathology additionally offered a basis for new ailments and new plants that weren’t mentioned in the old texts. For instance, humoral pathology was employed to convey the pathophysiology of diseases and the characteristics of plants. The article’s subsequent sections cover what was regarded as new and what was influenced by it with regard to fiqh discussions, the dissemination of new knowledge in medical clinics, and novel methods of writing. The article also addresses the new pharmacological equipment and measurement units. This research has led to the suggestion that, rather than being a brandnew paradigm, this concept of new medicine in the Ottoman Empire was often confined to modern information being added to traditional medical knowledge. More specifically, the terms adm and jadd in the 17th and 18th centuries were used exclusively to denote antique medicine (an older framework) in which new materials had been assimilated.