مقایسۀ داستان عاشقانۀ «سیاوش و سودابه» و «شاهزاده و کنیزک»
محورهای موضوعی : پژوهشهای ادبیات کلاسیک ایرانفاطمه کرامتی 1 * , احمد خواجه ایم 2
1 - دانشجوی دکتری زبان و ادبیات فارسی، گرایش ادبیات حماسی، دانشکده ادبيات و علوم انساني، دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری، ایران
2 - استادیار گروه آموزشی زبان و ادبیات فارسی، دانشکده ادبيات و علوم انساني، دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری، ایران
کلید واژه: شاهنامه, سندبادنامه, ادبیات تطبیقی, سیاوش, شاهزاده.,
چکیده مقاله :
عشق ممنوعه به تراژدی میانجامد. دو نمونه شاخص از این الگو، داستان «سیاوش و سودابه» در شاهنامه فردوسی و روایت «شاهزاده و کنیزک» در سندبادنامه است که دارای وجوه مشترکی در اصل داستان هستند. این جستار با هدف بررسی تطبیقی ساختار روایی، عناصر شخصیتی و درونمایههای اخلاقی و اجتماعی در این دو روایت شکل گرفته است. روش تحقیق در این پژوهش، تحلیل تطبیقی با تکیه بر منابع کتابخانهای و مطالعات ادبیات تطبیقی است. نتایج پژوهش نشان میدهد که هر دو روایت، بازتابدهندة یک الگوی مشترک از «عشق ممنوعه و مظلومیت قهرمان مرد» هستند؛ الگویی که ریشه در کهنالگوهای اسطورهای و اخلاقی جوامع کهن دارد و در روایت ایرانی با ویژگیهای بومی و جهانبینی اخلاقمحور بازآفرینی شده است. این دو داستان، با وجود مشابهتهای فراوانی همچون: پیشبینی آیندۀ شخصیت اصلی پس از تولد، پرورش قهرمان دور از خانواده، بازگشت او به قصر پس از دورهای تعلیم، ورود به شبستان، دلباختگی نامادری به پسرخوانده، پاکدامنی قهرمان و وفاداریاش به پدر، تهمت ناروای واردشده به او، کیفر دیدن قهرمان با وجود بیگناهی، اثبات بیگناهی، بخشش گناهکار و نجات او از مرگ، در اصل داستان و سرانجامی که در پایان برای قهرمان رخ میدهد، تفاوتهایی بنیادین نیز با یکدیگر دارند. این تفاوتها بهویژه در نوع پایانبندی، جایگاه اجتماعی نهایی قهرمان و پیام ضمنی روایت نمود مییابد و بازتابی از نگرشهای متفاوت فرهنگی و ارزشی در پسزمینه هر روایت به شمار میرود.
A Comparison of the Romantic Story
Of “Siavash and Sudabeh” and
“The Prince and the Maidservant”
Fatemeh Keramati*
Ahmad Khajehim**
Forbidden love leads to tragedy. Two notable examples of this pattern are the story of Siavash and Sudabeh in Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh and the tale of the Prince and the Handmaiden in the Sindbad-nameh, which share common features in the essence of the story. This study has been conducted with the aim of comparatively examining the narrative structure, character elements, and ethical and social themes in these two narratives. The research method in this study is comparative analysis based on library sources and studies in comparative literature. The findings show that both narratives reflect a shared pattern of “forbidden love and the oppressed male hero,” a pattern rooted in mythological and moral archetypes of ancient societies and recreated in the Iranian narrative with local characteristics and an ethics-oriented worldview. These two stories, despite numerous similarities such as: the prophecy about the future of the main character at birth, the hero’s upbringing away from his family, his return to the palace after a period of training, his entry into the women’s quarters, the stepmother’s infatuation with the stepson, the hero’s chastity and his loyalty to his father, the false accusation made against him, the punishment of the hero despite his innocence, the proof of his innocence, the forgiveness of the guilty party and saving them from death, also have fundamental differences in the essence of the story and in the ultimate fate that befalls the hero at the end. These differences appear especially in the type of ending, the hero’s final social status, and the implicit message of the narrative, and they reflect different cultural and value-based perspectives underlying each narrative.
Keywords: Shahnameh, Sindbad-nameh, forbidden love, Siavash, prince.
Introduction
Lyric literature is a manifestation of profound human emotions and a reflection of love in literature. Persian literature, too, has long been rich with love stories—works that sometimes celebrate love as a sublime mystical or human experience, and at other times depict illicit loves, giving it a tragic and cautionary dimension. The story of a stepmother’s love for her stepson presents a different perspective on love: an unwelcome and forbidden affection that neither warms the beloved nor brings pride to the lover. It is a love that begins in secrecy and concealment, but once revealed, it becomes a narrative of scandal and the onset of conflict.
In most of these narratives, the stepmother calls the stepson to her romantic and carnal desires, but the stepson, loyal to his father and committed to moral principles, refuses her advances. Consequently, the stepmother, in order to preserve her honor and power, seeks revenge and schemes against him, while the stepson endures false accusations and undeserved punishments, seeking God’s help to prove his innocence. Even after his innocence is established, he becomes entangled in an unwanted fate, and the outcome of his story is shaped by the collective unconscious and cultural ethos, sometimes ending happily and sometimes tragically, and inauspiciously
Discussion and Analysis
The narrative of Siavash and Sudabeh in the Shahnameh and the story of The Prince and the Maiden in the Sindbadnameh are two prominent examples of the depiction of forbidden love in Persian literature. Both narratives portray the doomed love of a woman for her stepson, centered around the element of “accusation” and its tragic consequences, and they share notable similarities in terms of structure, main themes, and characteristics of the central characters, which include:
Prophecy after Birth
Both the stories of Siavash and the Prince include a prophecy following the hero’s birth; however, the nature of the prophecy differs. For one hero, it predicts a bright and favorable future, while for the other, it foresees a bitter and troubled destiny.
Beauty of the Hero
Having a beautiful and charming appearance is a common feature of both Siavash and the Prince. Throughout both stories, especially from birth to adulthood, their extraordinary beauty is repeatedly emphasized, which is one of the factors that attracts the stepmothers to these heroes.
Being Raised Away from the Father
After Siavash’s birth, when astrologers predict an ominous fate for him, King Kavus entrusts him to Rostam to teach him the skills of courtly and martial life. Similarly, in the Sindbadnameh, the king, following the advice of philosophers, summons Sindbad and entrusts his son to him for education and upbringing.
Returning to the Father
In the Shahnameh, after receiving the necessary training in combat and courtly manners from Rostam, Siavash longs to see his father and asks Rostam to take him to meet him. In the Sindbadnameh, after Sindbad has taught the Prince all that was necessary, he brings him to his father to demonstrate his worthiness.
Entering the Women’s Quarters
In the story of Siavash, Sudabeh approaches the king and, under the pretext of choosing a bride for Siavash, requests that he be sent to the harem. Reluctantly, and under the king’s insistence, Siavash prepares to enter the women’s quarters. Similarly, in the Sindbadnameh, after the Prince returns to the palace, he must follow Sindbad’s advice and remain silent for seven days to ward off an ominous fate. Despite the king and ministers’ efforts, he maintains his silence, and they decide to send him to the harem in the hope that he might speak with the women.
Stepmother’s Love for the Hero
The stepmother’s love for her stepson in both stories creates profound challenges within familial relationships. The presence of the female characters in each narrative is crucial, and they enter the story at similar points in relation to the male heroes.
Chastity and Rejecting Treacherous Love
In the women’s quarters, Sudabeh prepares a private setting to seduce Siavash, but he remains chaste and does not betray his father and benefactor. Likewise, when the Prince enters the Maiden’s chamber, and she confesses her love, asking him to help poison the king and elevate her to the throne, he refuses and does not commit treachery against his father.
Accusation Against the Hero
Both Sudabeh and the Maiden attempt throughout the story to escape the control of their men. They easily yield to their personal desires, and when thwarted, they accuse their stepsons of sexual assault.
Punishment Despite Innocence
After being rejected, Sudabeh constantly incites the king against Siavash, leading King Kavus to send him to the fire—despite knowing he is innocent—so that if he is guilty, he will be punished, and if innocent, he will prove his innocence. Similarly, in the story of the Prince, after the Maiden accuses him before the king, although the ministers repeatedly assert his innocence, the king imprisons him and even contemplates executing him.
Proving Innocence
After Sudabeh’s accusation, Siavash proves his innocence by undergoing the trial of fire . When he passes through the fire unharmed, his innocence and chastity are confirmed for all. Likewise, after the ominous week predicted by Sindbad ends, the Prince breaks his silence and recounts all that occurred with the Maiden to his father, thereby proving his innocence. The Maiden also confesses her wrongdoing, confirming the Prince’s innocence.
Hero’s Forgiveness and Saving the Guilty Woman from Death
After Siavash proves his innocence through the trial by fire, the king intends to punish Sudabeh, but Siavash intervenes and prevents her death. Similarly, after the Prince proves his innocence, when the ministers plot to punish the Maiden, he intervenes and saves her from death.
Conclusion
The theme of a stepmother’s love for her stepson is a recurring motif in the literature of Iran and the world. Although these two stories differ in narrative details and endings, they exhibit notable similarities in terms of structure, main themes, and the characteristics of the central characters, which include:
-The prophecy of each main character’s future after birth
-The upbringing of both heroes away from their families
-Returning to the palace after receiving education and training
-Entering the women’s quarters
-The stepmother’s love for the stepson (the hero)
-The hero’s chastity and loyalty to his father
-Accusation against the hero
-Punishment despite innocence
-Proof of the hero’s innocence
-Forgiving the guilty party and saving them from death
Despite these similarities, the endings of the two stories are completely different. In the Sindbadnameh, the Prince ascends the throne peacefully after his father’s death. In contrast, the story of Siavash has a tragic ending. To escape Sudabeh’s schemes, Siavash makes peace with Afrasiyab and goes to Turan. Ultimately, through Garsivaz’s conspiracy, Afrasiyab kills Siavash despite his innocence. Rostam then avenges him by splitting Sudabeh in two and killing her, and with the help of Kay Khosrow, Siavash’s son, Afrasiyab is defeated. This difference in the conclusions reflects the diverse mythological and cultural backgrounds of the two works, highlighting the variety of perspectives on justice, destiny, and loyalty in classical Iranian literature.
References
Jamshidi, Zahra; Mohammadian, Abbas (2020) “New Findings on the Story of Siavash in the Course of the Kurdish Narrative of Almas Khan Kanduleh-i,” Pazhuhesh-nameh-ye Adab-e Hamasi, Year 16, No. 2, Serial No. 30, pp. 107–130.
Dabir-Siyaqi, Seyyed Mohammad (1999) The Story of Siavash (Stories of the Renowned Ancient Shahnameh of Ferdowsi), Tehran, Peyvand-e Mo‘aser.
Rouzbeh, Mohammad Reza; Fariba Iyazi (2013) “A Comparative Study of the Patterns of Forbidden Love (Sudabeh and Siavash, Zuleikha and Joseph, Phaedra and Hippolytus),” Research Quarterly of Kavosh-nameh, Year 14, No. 26, pp. 175–200.
Zandi-Zadeh, Hooman (2011) A Study of the Play Hippolytus and the Story of Siavash with a Comparative Mythological Approach, M.A. Thesis, Persian Literature, Dramatic Literature Orientation, Supervisor: Bahman Namvar Motlagh, Islamic Azad University, Central Unit, Faculty of Art.
Shamisa, Sirus (2015) Literary Genres, 5th ed., Tehran, Mitra.
Sadegh-Zadeh, Mahmoud; Karam-Panah, Mostafa (2020) “A Comparative Study of Joseph and Zuleikha from the Holy Qur’an and Siavash and Sudabeh from the Shahnameh,” Quarterly of Shahriar Studies, Year 7, No. 24, pp. 577–587.
Zahiri Samarqandi, Mohammad ibn Ali (2002) Sindbadnameh, edited by Mohammad-Baqer Kamal al-Dini, Tehran, Miras-e Maktub.
Ameli, Baha’ al-Din Mohammad ibn Hossein ibn Abdol-Samad (Sheikh Baha’i) (2000) Kashkul, edited by Azizollah Kasib, 6th ed., Tehran, Goli.
Faramarzi Fard, Saeedeh, et al. (2020) “Semiotics of the Concept of Love in the Poem Vis and Ramin Based on Daniel Chandler’s Code Theory,” Scientific Quarterly of Interpretation and Analysis of Persian Language and Literature Texts (Dehkhoda), Vol. 12, No. 44, pp. 265–286.
Ferdowsi, Abolqasem (2007) Shahnameh, edited by Jalal Khaleghi-Motlagh, 8 vols., Vol. 2, Tehran, Center for the Great Islamic Encyclopedia.
Qods, Mojtaba; Atefeh Tahouri (2011) “A Comparison of Kalila wa Dimna and Sindbadnameh,” Quarterly of Literary Thoughts, Year 2 of the New Series, No. 8, pp. 175–198.
Kamal al-Dini, Mohammad-Baqer (2003) Sindbad-e Hakim (A Rewriting of Zahiri Samarqandi’s Sindbadnameh), 2nd ed., Tehran, Ahl-e Qalam Cultural Institute.
Majidi, Maryam (2020) “A Comparative Study of the Story of Siavash and the Ramayana with Attention to Common Motifs,” Biannual Journal of Heroic Literature, Lorestan University, Year 4, No. 6, pp. 303–330.
Mohammadpour-Kachlam, Ghorban (2011) A Comparative Study of Dramatic Aspects in the Two Stories of Siavash and Sudabeh and Joseph and Zuleikha, M.A. Thesis, Supervisor: Shirin Bozorgmehr, University of Art, Tehran, Faculty of Cinema and Theatre.
Mashhadi, Mohammad Amir; Abdollah Vaseq Abbasi (2014) “An Analytical Approach to the Narrative Elements of Sindbadnameh,” Textual Studies of Persian Literature (Scientific–Research), Year 6, New Series, No. 1, pp. 61–76.
Malekouti, Seyyed Ali (2007) “A Text-Oriented Study of Zahiri Samarqandi’s Sindbadnameh,” Ayeneh-ye Pazhuhesh, Vol. 20, No. 115, pp. 18–27.
Minovi, Mojtaba (1990) The Story of Siavash from Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, Tehran, Institute for Cultural Studies and Research.
Nahvi, Ali-Akbar; Ali Amini (2013) “Siavash and Sudabeh (A Comparative Study of Similar Cases in the Myths and Literature of Nations),” Research Journal of Bostan-e Adab, Shiraz University, No. 1, pp. 139–163.
Honar, Ali Mohammad (2008) Notes on Sindbadnameh, Tehran, Dr. Mahmoud Afshar Endowment Foundation.
Yahaqqi, Mohammad Javad (2019) Dictionary of Myths and Narrative Motifs in Persian Literature, 6th ed., Tehran, Farhang-e Mo‘aser.
* Corresponding Author: Ph.D. Student in Persian Language and Literature, Epic Literature major, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Hakim Sabzevari University, Iran.
9989-8967-0006-0009
** Assistant Professor, Department of Persian Language and Literature, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Hakim Sabzevari University, Iran.
Khajehim1@yahoo.com
0000-0002-1354-834x
جمشیدی، زهرا و عباس محمدیان (1399) «نویافته¬های داستان سیاوش در خلال روایت کردی الماسخان کندوله¬ای»، پژوهش¬نامه ادب حماسی، سال شانزدهم، شماره 2، پیاپی30، صص 107- 130.
دبیرسیاقی، سید محمد (1378) داستان سیاوش (داستان¬های نامورنامۀ باستان شاهنامة فردوسی)، تهران، پیوند معاصر.
روزبه، محمدرضا و فریبا ایازی (1392) «بررسی تطبیقی الگوهای عشق ممنوع (سودابه و سیاوش، زلیخا و یوسف، فدر و هیپولیت)»، فصلنامة پژوهشی کاوش¬نامه، سال چهاردهم، شماره 26، صص 200-175.
20.1001.1.17359589.1393.14.26.7.1.
زندی¬زاده، هومن (1390) بررسی نمایشنامة هیپولیت و داستان سیاوش با رویکرد اسطوره¬شناسی تطبیقی، پایان¬نامة کارشناسی-ارشد، رشتة ادبیات فارسی،گرایش ادبیات نمایشی، استاد راهنما بهمن نامورمطلق، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد مرکزی، دانشکده¬ هنر.
شمیسا، سیروس (1394) انواع ادبی، چاپ پنجم، تهران، میترا.
صادق¬زاده، محمود و مصطفی کرم¬پناه (1399) «بررسی تطبیقی یوسف و زلیخا از قرآن مجید و سیاوش و سودابه از شاهنامه»، فصلنامۀ مطالعات شهریارپژوهی، سال هفتم، شمارۀ24، صص 577-587.
ظهیری سمرقندی، محمد¬بن علی (1381) سندبادنامه، تصحیح محمدباقر کمال¬الدینی، تهران، میراث مکتوب.
عاملی، بهاءالدین محمدبن حسین بن عبدالصمد (شیخ بهایی) (1379) کشکول، تصحیح عزیزالله کاسب، چاپ ششم، تهران، گلی.
فرامرزیفرد، سعیده و سیاوش مرادی و هادی خدیور (1399) «نشانه¬شناسی مفهوم عشق در منظومة ویس و رامین بر اساس نظریة رمزگان دانیل چندلر»، فصلنامة علمی تفسیر و تحلیل متون زبان و ادبیات فارسی (دهخدا)، دورة دوازدهم، شماره 44، صص 265-286.
10.30495/dk.2020.677301.
فردوسی، ابوالقاسم (1386) شاهنامه، به کوشش جلال خالقیمطلق، 8 جلد، ج2، تهران، مرکز دایرةالمعارف بزرگ اسلامی.
قدس، مجتبی و عاطفه طهوری (1390) «مقایسة کلیلهو¬دمنه و سندبادنامه»، فصلنامة اندیشههای ادبی، سال دوم از دورة¬ جدید، شماره 8، صص 175- 198.
کمال¬الدینی، محمدباقر (1382) سندباد حکیم (بازنویسی کتاب سندبادنامۀ ظهیری سمرقندی)، چاپ دوم، تهران، مؤسسه فرهنگی اهل قلم.
مجیدی، مریم (1399) «مقایسۀ تطبیقی داستان سیاوش و رامایانا با توجه به بن¬مایه¬های مشترک»، دوفصلنامۀ ادبیات پهلوانی دانشگاه لرستان، سال چهارم، شماره 6، صص 303-330.
http://doi.org/10.22034/heroic.2023.1.1.10.
محمدپور ¬کچلام، قربان (1390) بررسی تطبیقی جنبه¬های دراماتیک در دو داستان سیاوش و سودابه و یوسف و زلیخا، پایان¬نامة¬ کارشناسی¬ارشد، استاد راهنما شیرین بزرگمهر، دانشگاه هنر تهران، دانشکدة سینما و تئاتر.
مشهدی، محمدامیر و عبدالله واثق عباسی (1393) «رویکرد تحلیلی به عناصر داستانی سندبادنامه»، متن¬شناسی ادب فارسی (علمی- پژوهشی)، سال ششم، دورة¬ جدید، شمارة 1، صص 61-76.
ملکوتی، سیدعلی (1386) «نگاهی متنمحور به سندبادنامة ظهیری سمرقندی»، آینة¬ پژوهش، دورۀ بیستم، شماره 115، صص 18-27.
مینوی، مجتبی (1369) داستان سیاوش از شاهنامة فردوسی، تهران، مؤسسه مطالعات و تحقیقات فرهنگی.
نحوی، علی¬اکبر و علی امینی (1392) «سیاوش و سودابه (بررسی تطبیقی موارد مشابه در اساطیر و ادبیات ملل)»، مجلۀ پژوهشی بوستان ادب دانشگاه شیراز، شمارة 1، صص 139- 163.
https://doi.org/10.22099/jba.2013.1549.
هنر، علیمحمد (1387) یادداشت¬های سندبادنامه، تهران، بنیاد موقوفات دکتر محمود افشار.
یاحقّی، محمّدجواد (1398) فرهنگ اساطیر و داستان¬واره¬ها در ادبیات فارسی، چاپ ششم، تهران، فرهنگ معاصر.