Humayunname (analysis-edition critic)

Classical Turkish Literature was able to address to the literary taste ofTurkish society for a long time. The poetry is the first matter that comes tomany people?s mind when Classical Turkish Literature is mentioned.Nevertheless, in Turkish Literature, there are a lot of compositions that arewritten in prose. Particularly, some of these proses are as valuable as poemsthanks to their artistic styles. ?Humayun Nameh? that is possibly stay at thepeak of these kind of works, was able to be a popular for four centuries andprovided Turkish people?s needs of ?Kalilah and Dimnah? stories.?HumayunNameh? has an esthetic form by its fiction, plot and the style of depictingcases.Filibeli Alaaddin Ali Çelebi, especially, did not digress the triangle ofword-rhyme-meaning while performing rhymes in his work. It is an otherfeature that secundates this work.Its style differs ?Humanyun Nameh? from other similar works. FilibeliAlaaddin Ali Celebi translated ?Humayun Nameh? from ?Envar-i Suhayli?which is written in Persian by Hüseyin Vaiz-i Kasifi. Many sources agree onthat Ali Celebi made many additions and removals during the translation andas a result, he changed the Persian original copy. However, in this study, thegeneral comparison between ?Envar-i Suhayli? and ?Humanyun Nameh?shows that Filibeli Ali Celebi translated ?Envar-i Suhayli? one-on-one.Contents and the number of collateral stories of both works are the same. Amore extensive comparison study between two works may reveal this factmuch more clearly.Filibeli Alaaddin Ali Celebi abode to Persian original copy but it can not casta suspicion on ?Humayun Nameh??s function and fame that lasted forcenturies. Eventually, this way that was choosen by Ali Celebi, is one of themethods that can be used during translation process.The main aim of this thesis is to constitute the comparative text of ?HumayunNameh?. In addition to that, there are biography of Ali Celebi and translationhistory of Humayun-name in the Introduction part. The form and contentcharacteristics of ?Humayun Nameh? are mentioned in the first part. There isa comparison of ?Humayun Nameh? with a translation of ?Kalilah andDimnah? that made by Kul Mesud in 14.century and with Persian ?Envar-iSuhayli? in the second part. The third part is reserved for the copies of?Humayun Nameh? and after the characterization of these copies, themethod, used in choosing the copies that disposed in arranging thecomparison text, is depicted. Afterwards, the genealogy of all copies is given.At the fourth and the last part, there is the comparison text of ?HumayunNameh?. Also, an index of proper names is added to last part of the work.