References
On this, see Ahmed W. Shaker and Abdullah El-Khatib, “The Contribution of Modern Muslim Scholars and Institutions to Qurʾānic Manuscript Studies: A Preliminary Survey,” Journal of Sharia and Islamic Studies 39, no. 138 (2024): 9–69.
Since late 1999, the digital repository Islamic Awareness has compiled and regularly updated bibliographic data, paleographic descriptions, and radiocarbon reports concerning Qur’anic manuscripts attributed to ʿUthmān. See islamic-awareness.org.
In twenty-first-century Qur’anic manuscript studies, the earlier preoccupation with origins and authenticity has increasingly given way to analyses of codicology, material transmission, and the historical construction of attribution, thereby displacing a binary framework of genuine versus spurious manuscripts in favor of a more historically situated understanding of textual formation.
This concept was coined by Pierre Nora in “Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire,” Representations 26 (1989): 7–24. It is used to analyze the ʿUthmānic codices as the physical sites where the memory of the Prophetic revelation was crystallized. By applying this framework, these manuscripts are viewed not merely as historical artifacts, but as the monumental anchors that allowed the Muslim community to transition from the living oral tradition of the ṣaḥāba to a standardized, archived cultural memory.
For early testimonies regarding the regional codices, see al-Dānī, al-Muqniʿ fī maʿrifat marsūm maṣāḥif ahl al-amṣār; Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Kitāb al-maṣāḥif; and Abū ʿUbayd, Faḍāʾil al-Qurʾān. For modern discussions, see Michael Cook, “The Stemma of the Regional Codices of the Koran,” Graeco-Arabica 9–10 (2004): 89–104; Behnam Sadeghi and Uwe Bergmann, “The Codex of a Companion of the Prophet and the Qurʾān of the Prophet,” Arabica 57 (2010): 343–436; Hythem Sidky, “On the Regionality of Qurʾānic Codices,” Journal of the International Qurʾānic Studies Association 5 (2021): 133–210; Ala Vahidnia, “Whence Come Qurʾān Manuscripts? Determining the Regional Provenance of Early Qurʾānic Codices,” Der Islam 98, no. 2 (2021): 359–93; and Marijn van Putten, “‘The Grace of God’ as Evidence for a Written Uthmanic Archetype: The Importance of Shared Orthographic Idiosyncrasies,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 82, no. 2 (2019): 271–88.
See François Déroche, “Early Qur’ānic Manuscripts: An Overview,” in History of the Qur’ān: Approaches and Explorations, ed. F. Redhwan Karim (Kube Publishing, 2025), 52.
On the ʿUthmānic project, see Omar Hamdan, “The Second Maṣāḥif Project: A Step Towards the Canonization of the Qur’anic Text,” in The Qurʾān in Context: Historical and Literary Investigations into the Qurʾānic Milieu, ed. Angelika Neuwirth, Nicolai Sinai, and Michael Marx (Brill, 2010), 795–835.
Writing in 1970, the Egyptian scholar Muḥammad ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz Marzūq observed that the attribution of Qur’anic manuscripts preserved in museums, libraries, and private collections to Caliph ʿUthmān b. ʿAffān remains uncertain due to the absence of conclusive historical or material evidence. He acknowledged the sensitivity of the issue, given the reverential status these manuscripts occupy within the Islamic tradition. While underscoring the necessity of rigorous scientific and paleographic analysis in assessing such claims, Marzūq maintained that the cultural, artistic, and historical importance of these manuscripts remains intact irrespective of whether a direct connection to ʿUthmān can be definitively established. See Muḥammad ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz Marzūq, “al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf: Dirāsa tārīkhiyya fanniyya,” Majallat al-Majmaʿ al-ʿIlmī al-ʿIrāqī, no. 20 (September 1, 1970), 99–100.
The quote originates from Kitāb al-qirāʾāt, a work now lost. See al-Dānī, al-Muqniʿ (Maktabat al-Kullīyāt al-Azharīyah, N.d), 23; cf. al-Samhūdī, Wafāʾ al-wafā bi-akhbār dār al-Muṣṭafā (Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyah, 1419H), 2:200.
Abū Bakr ʿAbdullāh b. Sulaymān Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Kitāb al-maṣāḥif, ed. Muḥammad b. ʿAbduh (al-Fārūq al-Ḥadītha, 2002), 135.
Qur’an 2:137; 7:77.
Ibn ʿAbd al-Malik al-Marrākushī, al-Dhayl wa-l-takmila li-kitāb al-mawṣūl wa-l-ṣila, ed. Iḥsān ʿAbbās, Muḥammad b. Sharīfa, and Bashār ʿAwwād Maʿrūf (Dār al-Gharb al-Islāmī, 2012), 1:348.
“Al-Muṣḥaf al-ʿUthmānī,” al-Hilāl, no. 5 (1905): 305–6.
Muḥammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī, Maqālāt al-Kawtharī (al-Maktaba al-Tawfīqiyya, n.d.), 32.
Tāḥā al-Walī, “al-Qurʾān al-karīm fī bilād al-Rūsiyya,” al-Mawrid, no. 4 (October 1, 1980): 30.
Muḥammad Kurd ʿAlī, Khiṭaṭ al-Shām, 3rd ed. (Maktabat al-Nūrī, 1403/1983), 6:184.
Ibn al-Hayṣam al-Karrāmī (d. 559/1164) reports that some scribes, seeking financial gain, would present Qur’an copies to rulers or their deputies, claiming: “This is the codex of ʿAlī, this is the codex of ʿAbdullāh, this is the codex of Ubayy.” They would suggest that their treasuries were most deserving of such codices, though in reality they had themselves introduced omissions, additions, or altered words to make the copies appear unique and thus obtain payment. Arthur Jeffery, ed., “Kitāb al-mabānī li-naẓm al-maʿānī,” in Muqaddimatān fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān (N.p., 1954), 47–48. I thank Morteza Karimi-Nia for reminding me of this passage.
On the attribution of Qur’anic manuscripts to Imam ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib and Ahl al-Bayt, see Morteza Karimi-Nia, “The Qurʾānic Codices and Fragments Ascribed to Imām ʿAlī and Other Shīʿa Imāms: Forged Colophons or Historical Truths?,” Journal of Islamic Manuscripts 14, nos. 2–4 (2023): 396–441.
Tayyar Altıkulaç states that it is impossible to determine the fate of the original codices prepared under ʿUthmān, which were likely lost through wars, fires, and other disasters. He adds that this loss does not affect the preservation of the Qur’an, since the text was widely memorized and reproduced throughout Islamic history. He also suggests that some of the oldest Qur’anic manuscripts attributed to ʿUthmān today may ultimately derive from those early codices or from later copies based on them. Tayyar Altıkulaç, al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf al-mansūb ilā ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān: Nuskhah Ṭūb Qābī Sarāy (N.p., 2007), 37. Ghānim al-Ḥamad likewise rejects the possibility that any surviving manuscript is one of the original ʿUthmānic codices, noting that no complete muṣḥaf from the first or second centuries AH has come down to us with a dated colophon or the name of a scribe. Most manuscripts contain later additions, and establishing their origins would require substantial evidence and detailed study. Ghānim al-Ḥamad, Rasm al-muṣḥaf: Dirāsa lughawiyya tārīkhiyya (al-Jumhūrīyah al-ʻIrāqīyah, 1982), 190. François Déroche observes that several Qur’anic manuscripts attributed to ʿUthmān, particularly those preserved in Turkey, are frequently presented as dating from the earliest Islamic period. He states, however, that these manuscripts are in fact later productions, probably originating about a century after ʿUthmān’s time. See François Déroche, “Written Transmission,” in The Wiley Blackwell Companion to the Qurʾān, ed. Andrew Rippin and Jawid Mojaddedi, 2nd ed. (N.p., 2017), 184–85. Adam Gacek expresses a similar view, describing such attributions to ʿUthmān as “pious forgeries.” See Adam Gacek, Arabic Manuscripts: A Vademecum for Readers (Brill, 2009), 216.
Abū al-Fidāʾ Ismāʿīl b. ʿUmar Ibn Kathīr, al-Bidāya wa-l-nihāya, ed. ʿAbdullāh b. ʿAbd al-Muḥsin al-Turkī (Dār Hājar li-l-Ṭibāʿa wa-l-Nashr wa-l-Tawzīʿ wa-l-Iʿlān, 1418/1997), 10:394.
On the early Qur’anic scripts, see François Déroche, The Abbasid Tradition (Nour Foundation, 1992).
Nūr al-Dīn ʿAlī b. ʿAbdullāh b. Aḥmad al-Samhūdī, Wafāʾ al-wafā bi-akhbār dār al-Muṣṭafā (Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1419/1998), 2:200.
See Iyād Ṣāliḥ al-Sāmarrāʾī, “al-Maṣāḥif al-makhṭūṭa al-alfiyya: al-Taʿrīf bihā wa-ahammiyyatuhā wa-l-muḥāfaẓa ʿalayhā,” Majallat al-Buḥūth wa-l-Dirāsāt al-Qurʾāniyya 10, no. 15 (2014): 91–137.
This approach is known as social codicology, which examines manuscripts not just as textual artifacts but as products of specific social, economic, and cultural conditions. It explores how scribes, patrons, and readers interacted with the material aspects of books, shaping their production, transmission, and reception. See Olly Akkerman, ed., Social Codicology: The Multiple Lives of Manuscripts in Muslim Societies, Leiden Studies in Islam and Society, vol. 21 (Brill, 2024).
See for instance: Muḥammad ʿAbd al-ʿAẓīm al-Zurqānī, Manāhil al-ʿirfān fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān, 3rd ed. (Maṭbaʿat ʿĪsā al-Bābī al-Ḥalabī wa-Shurakāʾuh, n.d), 1:404–5; Ṣubḥī al-Ṣāliḥ, Mabāḥith fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān, 24th ed. (Dār al-ʿIlm li-l-Malāyīn, January 2000), 87–89; ʿAlī al-Ṭanṭāwī, Fatāwā ʿAlī al-Ṭanṭāwī (Dār al-Manāra, 2007), 1:29–35. And for modern engagement with classical reports and the reception history of codices attributed to ʿUthmān, see Maḥmūd Āghā Bū ʿIyād, al-Riḥla al-ʿajība li-nuskha min muṣḥaf al-Khalīfa ʿUthmān fī arjāʾ al-Maghrib wa-l-Andalus (al-Majlis al-Islāmī al-Aʿlā, 2004).
On the history of this muṣḥaf and its traditional narratives, see Ismāʿil Makhdūm, Tārīkh al-Muṣḥaf al-ʿUthmānī fī Ṭashqand (al-Idāra al-Tarbawiyya li-Muslimī Āsiyā al-Wusṭā, 1971).
O. Vasilyeva, “Samarkand Quran,” National Library of Russia, accessed January 6, 2025, expositions.nlr.ru.
This study was originally published in Russian in Zapiski Vostochnago Otdieleniia Imperatorskago Russkago Arkheologicheskago Obshchestva 6 (1891): 69–133. An English translation of the original essay, titled “The History of the ‘ʿUthmān Qurʾān’/Samarkand Codex and Its Extensive Description,” translated by Maxim Yosefi, appeared in Nouvelles Chroniques du Manuscrit au Yémen 18 (January 2024): 139–268.
Published under a bilingual Russian–French title, which translates as “The Samarkand Kufic Qurʾān, according to tradition written by the third Caliph ʿUthmān (644–656), preserved in the Imperial Public Library of St. Petersburg/published by the St. Petersburg Archaeological Institute by S. Iv. Pisarev.” Copies of this edition are still held in several university libraries, including Columbia University and Dār al-Kutub al-Miṣriyya. I myself recall seeing Pisarev’s 1905 facsimile at the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities (digitized by the Corpus Coranicum project). For a detailed study of the 1905 edition, see Avinoam Shalem, “On Original and ‘Originals’: The ‘Copy’ of the Tashkent Qurʾān Codex in the Rare Book Collection at the Butler Library,” Philological Encounters 5 (2020): 1–26.
Arthur Jeffery and Issac Mendelsohn, “The Orthography of the Samarqand Qur’ān Codex,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 62, no. 3 (1942): 177–95.
Ghānim Qadūrī al-Ḥamad and Iyād Sālim al-Sāmarrāʾī, Ẓawāhir kitābiyya fī muṣaḥafāt makhṭūṭa (Dār al-Ghathānī li-l-Dirāsāt al-Qurʾāniyya, 2010; ), 12–17.
Tayyar Altikulaç, al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf al-mansūb ilā ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān: Nuskhah Ṭūb Qābī Sarāy (IRCICA, 2007), 73–74.
Tayyar Altıkulaç, al-Maṣāḥif al-ūlā (IRCICA, 2016), 206.
Altikulaç, al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf, 74.
Twenty additional folios from the same muṣḥaf have been identified in various collections worldwide, including the Museum of Islamic Art (Doha, Qatar), the Aga Khan Museum (Toronto, Canada), the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York, USA), and some private collections. See François Déroche, “Twenty Leaves from the Tashkent Qurʾān,” in God Is Beautiful and Loves Beauty: The Object in Islamic Art and Culture, ed. Sheila S. Blair and Jonathan M. Bloom (Yale University Press, 2013), 75–93. (Noted via Islamic-awareness.org.)
See al-Walī, “al-Qurʾān al-Karīm fī bilād al-Rūsiyya,” 29–30. See also al-Marjānī, Wafiyat al-aslāf (N.p., 1883).
See Ismāʿīl Makhdūm, Tārīkh al-Muṣḥaf al-ʿUthmānī fī Ṭashqand; Shams al-Dīn Bābākhānūf, “Nuskhat al-khalīfa ʿUthmān min al-muṣḥaf al-sharīf: Lahā qiṣṣa,” al-ʿArabī no. 322 (Ṣafar 1406/September 1985): 41; Muhammad Hamidullah, The Emergence of Islam (Rightway Publication, n.d.), 29.
Imperial Public Library Report for 1870 (St. Petersburg, 1872), 156–57. (Noted via O.V. Vasilyeva.)
Ignaty Krachkovsky, al-Makhṭūṭāt al-ʿArabiyya: Ṣafḥāt min al-dhikrayāt ʿan al-kutub wa-l-bashar, trans. Muḥammad Ṣaghīr Ḥusayn (Dār al-Nahḍa al-ʿArabiyya, 1969), 183.
Shebunin, “History of the ‘ʿUthmān Qurʾān’/Samarkand Codex and Its Extensive Description,” 246.
Vladimir Stasov, Slavic and Oriental Ornament Based on Manuscripts of Ancient and Modern Times (Imperial Academy of Sciences, 1884).
Jeffery and Mendelsohn, “Orthography of the Samarqand Qur’ān Codex,” 195.
Tayyar Altıkulaç, al-Mushaf al-Sharīf Attributed to ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (The Copy of Sana’a) (IRCICA, 2009), 156.
Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn al-Munajjid, Dirāsāt fī tārīkh al-khaṭṭ al-ʿArabī mundhu bidāyatih ilā nihāyat al-ʿaṣr al-Umawī, 2nd ed. (Dār al-Kitāb al-Jadīd, 1979), 50.
For the development of Déroche’s dating, see in order: François Déroche, “Note sur les fragments coraniques anciens de Katta Langar (Ouzbékistan),” Cahiers d’Asie Centrale 7 (1999): 65; François Déroche, “Manuscripts of the Qurʾān,” in Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān, ed. J. D. McAuliffe (Brill, 2003), 3:261; and for his most recent reassessment based on the socio-legal context of the early Abbasid period, see Déroche, “Twenty Leaves from the Tashkent Koran,” 61–65.
E. A. Rezvan, “On the Dating of an ‘ʿUthmanic Qur’an’ From St. Petersburg,” Manuscripta Orientalia 6, no. 3 (2000): 19.
See Michael Marx, “Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin: gr.2" Zu 5956,” in Manuscripta Coranica, corpuscoranicum.de.
The challenges of dating early Qur’anic manuscripts were already addressed by Adolf Grohmann in his 1958 essay, in which he examined the difficulties arising from paleographic variation and the absence of definitive colophons. See Adolf Grohmann, “The Problem of Dating Early Qurʾāns,” Der Islam 33, no. 3 (1958): 213–31. For a more recent assessment, see Alba Fedeli, “Dating Early Qur’anic Manuscripts: Reading the Objects, Their Texts and the Results of Their Analysis,” in Early Islam: The Sectarian Milieu of Late Antiquity?, ed. Guillaume Dye (Peeters, 2023), 113–29.
Krachkovsky, al-Makhṭūṭāt al-‘Arabiyya, 183–89.
Efim Rezvan, “The Qur’ān and Its World: VI. Emergence of the Canon; The Struggle for Uniformity,” Manuscripta Orientalia 4, no. 2 (1998): 13–54.
Déroche, “Note sur les fragments coraniques anciens,” 65.
Efim Rezvan, The Qur’ān of ʿUthmān (St. Petersburg Centre for Oriental Studies, 2004). The documentary is available to watch on YouTube: youtu.be.
See “The Qurʾān of ʿUthmān at St. Petersburg (Russia), Katta Langar, Bukhara and Tashkent (Uzbekistan), from the 2nd Century Hijra,” Islamic Awareness, islamic-awareness.org.
Şeyma Genan et al., “Erken Döneme Tarihlenen Katta Langar Mushafı’nın Mushaf İlimleri Bakımından İncelenmesi,” Sakarya Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 25, no. 47 (2023): 57. A similar conclusion was reached by Altıkulaç, who likewise argued for a Basran provenance on the basis of the rasm evidence alone. See al-Maṣāḥif al-ūlā, 294.
Genan, “Erken Döneme Tarihlenen Katta Langar Mushafı’nın,” 57–59.
Krachkovsky, al-Makhṭūṭāt al-ʿArabiyya, 184–85.
Efim Rezvan, “Paying Tribute: Returning to the Story of the ‘Qur’ān of ‘Uthmān,’” Journal of College of
Rezvan, “On the Dating of an ‘ʿUthmanic Qur’an,’” 19.
Déroche, “Note sur les fragments coraniques anciens,” 68.
Michael Marx, Salome Beridze, Tobias J. Jocham, Tolou Khademalsharieh, and Jens Sauer, “Institute of Oriental Manuscripts of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Институт восточных рукописей Russian Academy of Sciences): E-20,” Corpus Coranicum, corpuscoranicum.de.
Mustafa Altundağ, “İstanbul Topkapı Mushafı Hz. Osman’a mı Aittir?,” Marife: Dini Araştırmalar Dergisi 2, no. 1 (Bahar 2002): 53–87.
Altıkulaç, al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf al-mansūb ilā ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān.
Altıkulaç, al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf al-mansūb ilā ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān (IRCICA 2007), 80–84.
Fehmi Edhem Karatay, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi Arapça Yazmalar Kataloğu: Kur’an, Kur’an ilimleri, Tefsirler No. 1 - 2171 (Küçükaydın Matbaası, 1962), no. 1.
Al-Munajjid, Dirāsāt fī tārīkh al-khaṭṭ al-ʿArabī, 55.
Altiķulac, al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf al-mansūb ilā ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān, 89. Cf. Altiķulac, al-Maṣāḥif al-ūlā, 232–33.
Bashīr al-Ḥimyarī, Muʿjam al-rasm al-ʿUthmānī (Markaz Tafsīr li-l-Dirāsāt al-Qurʾāniyya, 2015), 1:241.
See Rami Halaseh, The Topkapı Qurʾān Manuscript H.S. 32: History, Text, and Variants, Islam: Thought, Culture, and Society (De Gruyter, 2024), 7:15
Marx, “Topkapı Palace Museum (Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi): H.S. 44/32 [= Karatay 1].”
On this, see Yasin Dutton, “The Form of the Qur’an: Historical Contours,” in The Oxford Handbook of Qurʾanic Studies (Oxford University Press, 2020), 188–92.
See Altiķulac, al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf al-mansūb ilā ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān, 83–84. See also al-Ḥimyari, Muʿjam al-rasm al-ʿUthmānī, 1:276–79.
See The 1400th Anniversary of the Qur’an: The Qur’an Collection of the Museum of Turkish and Islamic Art (Antik A.Ş., 2010), 168–69.
Tayyar Altıkulaç, Mushaf-ı Şerîf: Türk ve İslâm Eserleri Müzesi Nüshası, vol. 1 (İslâm Araştırmaları Merkezi [İSAM], 2007).
On this, see Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī, Fatḥ al-bārī bi-sharḥ ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, ed. Muḥibb al-Dīn al-Khaṭīb (Dār al-Maʿrifa, 1379 AH), 17:19.
Tayyar Altikulaç, al-Maṣāḥif al-ūlā.
See François Déroche, “The Manuscript and Archaeological Traditions: Physical Evidence,” in The Oxford Handbook of Qurʾanic Studies (Oxford University Press, 2020), 167.
Altıkulaç, Mushaf-ı Şerîf, 106.
For the comparison with Codex Mixt. 917 and its dating to the late first–early second century AH, see “Codex Mixt. 917 – A Qurʾanic Manuscript From 1st / 2nd Century Hijra,” Islamic Awareness, August 8, 2008, islamic-awareness.org.
Corpus Coranicum tentatively dates Codex Mixt. 917 to 700–750 CE. See Michael Marx, Salome Beridze, and Manssur Karamzadeh, “Österreichische Nationalbibliothek: Cod. mixt. 917,” Corpus Coranicum, corpuscoranicum.de.
See Aḥmad Taymūr Bāshā, al-Āthār al-nabawiyya (Maṭbaʻat Dār al-Kitāb al-ʻArabī, 1951), 38–46.
See Labīb al-Saʿīd, “Dirāsa ʿan muṣḥaf ʿUthmān al-mūḍaʿ bi-l-Masjid al-Ḥusaynī,” Majallat al-Azhar 46, no. 7 (1974): 751–56.
Bernhard Moritz, Arabic Palaeography (N.p., 1905), 13–16.
Suʿād Māhir, Mukhalafāt al-Rasūl fī al-Masjid al-Ḥusaynī (Dār al-Nashr li-Jāmiʿat al-Qāhira, 1998), 131.
Al-Ḥimyarī, Muʿjam al-rasm al-ʿUthmānī, 1:143.
Al-Munajjid, Dirāsāt fī tārīkh al-khaṭṭ al-ʿArabī, 53.
This position, once held by Sahar al-Saʿīd and al-ʿAzīz, is now considered outdated. See Aḍwāʾ ʿalā muṣḥaf ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān wa-riḥlatihi sharqan wa gharban (N.p., 1995).
Iyād al-Sāmarrāʾī, Ẓawāhir al-rasm fī muṣḥaf jāmiʿ al-Ḥusayn fī al-Qāhira (Dār al-Ghawthānī li-l-Dirāsāt al-Qurʼāniyya, 2013), 85–86.
Michael Marx, Tobias J. Jocham, and Jens Sauer, “Central Library of Islamic Manuscripts: unknown call number,” Corpus Coranicum.
Ḥusayn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb, Taʾrīkh al-masājid al-athariyya (al-Hayʼah al-ʻĀmmah li-Quṣūr al-Thaqāfah, 2014), 92.
François Déroche, “Les emplois du Coran, livre manuscrit,” Revue de l’histoire des religions, tome 218, n° 1 (janvier–mars 2001): 13.
Taqī al-Dīn Aḥmad b. ʿAlī al-Maqrīzī, al-Mawāʿiẓ wa-l-iʿtibār bi-dhikr al-khiṭaṭ wa-l-āthār (Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1997 [1418 AH]), 4:20–21. Cf. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. ʿAbd Allāh Ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥakam, Futūḥ Miṣr wa-al-Maghrib (Cairo: Maktabat al-Thaqāfah al-Dīniyyah, 1415 AH), 144–145.
See Baron de Slane, Bibliothèque Nationale: Département des Manuscrits; Catalogue des Manuscrits Arabes (Imprimerie Nationale, 1883–1895).
François Déroche, Qur’ans of the Umayyads: A Preliminary Overview (Brill, 2014), 128.
Originally published in Russian: A. N. Shebunin, “Kuficheskii Koran Khedivskoi Biblioteki v Kaire,” Zapiski Vostochnago Otdeleniia Imperatorskago Russkago Arkheologicheskago Obshchestva 14 (1902). This essay was later translated into Arabic and published under the title “Nuskhat al-muṣḥaf bi-l-khaṭṭ al-Kūfī al-maḥfūẓa bi-l-Maktaba al-Khidīwiyya bi-l-Qāhira,” in al-Qur’ān al-Karīm fī Rūsiyya, ed. Efim Rezvan (Juma Al Majid Center for Culture and Heritage, 2011), 129–93.
Shebunin, “Nuskhat al-muṣḥaf bi-l-khaṭṭ al-Kūfī,” 192.
Moritz, Arabic Palaeography, 1–12.
François Déroche, al-Madkhal ilā al-kitāb al-makhṭūṭ bi-l-ḥarf al-ʿArabī (Muʾassasat al-Furqān li-l-Turāth al-Islāmī, 2006), 193, 204.
H.-C. G. von Bothmer, “Korane,” in Orientalische Buchkunst in Gotha: Ausstellung zum 350jährigen Jubiläum der Forschungs- und Landesbibliothek Gotha (Forschungs und Landesbibliothek Gotha, 1997), 105.
Yasin Dutton, “An Umayyad Fragment of the Qur’an and Its Dating,” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 9, no. 2 (2007): 64.
Eléonore Cellard and Pascale Richardin, “À propos de l’emploi de la datation par le carbone 14 dans l’étude des corans anciens: Le cas du Codex Amrensis 22,” Technè 52 (2021): 64–65.
See Déroche, Abbasid Tradition, 35–36.
See Michael Marx and Tobias J. Jocham, “Radiocarbon (¹⁴C) Dating of Qurʾān Manuscripts,” in Qurʾān Quotations Preserved on Papyrus Documents, 7ᵗʰ–10ᵗʰ Centuries, ed. Andreas Kaplony and Michael Marx (Brill, 2019), 216.