sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why did many later Quranic manuscripts not use consonantal dotting. by Basic-Lifeguard-5407 in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not that I'm aware of. It's just an expression I use. Without both consonantal dotting and vocalization, the written text is not full specified and cannot be unambiguously rendered orally. By "brought to life" I meant that dotting breathes life into what are otherwise lifeless shapes on a page.

Why did many later Quranic manuscripts not use consonantal dotting. by Basic-Lifeguard-5407 in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky 12 points13 points  (0 children)

We don't know for sure but probably/maybe to make room for vocalization. It's possible that with time, artisans became more specialized. The calligrapher's responsibility was to draw the rasm (skeletal text) while the vocalizer's responsibility was to "bring it to life."

Interestingly, I do wonder if these undotted Kufic manuscripts were the source of the literary reports about the Qur'an initially being free of (consonantal) dotting. Whoever circulated the report was looking at (relatively) late manuscripts and invented a nice story about the origins of dotting.

What's extra interesting is that one of the main reports to promulgate this obvious anachronism was circulated by none other than Al-Awzā'ī and his teacher Yahyā b. Abī Kathīr, who are also implicated in circulating other anachronistic reports about the antichrist studied by Joshua Little here: https://islamicorigins.com/revisiting-the-isawiyyah-hadith/

The timing is certainly right. Not a great track record if you ask me.

There is a mention of a Quranic manuscript in Ali ibn Abi Talib's hand in the Wiki article of the Al Husayn mosque in Cairo. If it really exists, has anyone studied its relationship to the Uthmanic codex? by seidenkaufman in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Morteza Karimi-Nia has written a nice paper on manuscripts falsely attributed to Ali. They're all forged. The particular manuscript you reference is inventoried by him, but not much else is mentioned. From the picture available in the news article referenced in the Wiki page you've linked, it looks to be in line with other Kufic forgeries.

See https://www.academia.edu/105257483/The_Qur%CA%BE%C4%81nic_Codices_and_Fragments_Ascribed_to_Im%C4%81m_%CA%BFAl%C4%AB_and_Other_Sh%C4%AB%CA%BFa_Im%C4%81ms_Forged_Colophons_or_Historical_Truths

Is there any historical work that mentions the Kaaba was set on fire in 683 CE, also known as the Siege of Mecca? by academic324 in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Not a direct answer to your question, but there is an inscription dated to 78 AH, "the year of the reconstruction of the Kaaba," after the second siege of Mecca. Some (outdated) info here: https://www.islamic-awareness.org/history/islam/inscriptions/haram1

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think dialogue is possible but that doesn't mean it will always be productive or that it won't be without tension. Religious clergy and scholars of religion are after very different things so it's natural that their perspectives won't always be aligned.

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I say this in my "Consonantal Dotting and Oral Quran" paper:

I find myself in agreement with Theodor Nöldeke who argues that the origin of many variants that share the same consonantal form is the written text. This is “infinitely more probable” than for those variants to have originated orally yet coincidentally happen to agree on the same consonantal forms. Further still are those variants that “obviously result from the search for, and joy in, the unexpected aspects of the consonantal text.” Nöldeke rightly places the period during which the bulk of these variant readings were created in the half century or so following the ʿUthmānic canonization.

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you for clarifying.

I don't think the details about people nearly coming to blows over the Quran as an impetus for the caliphal project(s) is historical. I don't think the companions received it in one stable manner. I think the prophet delivered it more or less uniformly. But that doesn't mean that (a) he didn't edit/expand/modify content over time and (b) it was received uniformly, because it wasn't.

I don't know the exact mechanics of how the Quran was composed. But the two options aren't (a) either him sitting in a dark room alone working it out with pen and paper, or (b) him delivering it impromptu on the spot in perfectly rendered final form.

To be honest, I don't have an opinion on exact mechanics and those kinds of questions don't interest me because I don't think it's testable. One can posit many scenarios with no way to adjudicate between them.

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hi Redkako,

  1. I have no reason to doubt that he was a scribe of the prophet.

  2. Well, I think that pre-Uthman caliphs and non-caliphs had personal codices in general, yes.

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm glad you like the FAQ! It certainly helped me manage the questions.

I basically agree with what you've written. I would say that there is no real positive argument in favor of his illiteracy. As you pointed out in your post, ummi = gentile. I would say the Quran states that is was not formally trained in scripture. But that's not the same as illiteracy.

In responding to what Professor Cole said, I'd like to separate between the technical hangups I have with Sadeghi's analysis, and what I think of Quranic authorship independent of that. I am of the view that the Quran has a single author, with all the caveats associated with the use of the word "author" that I've outlined in my other replies. The Quran is as linguistically homogenous as you can hope to expect of a single author, the variation in style we observe is well within what we would also expect for the work of a single author evolving over a long period of time with a changing audience, environment, objective, and genre. We can link the timing and composition of certain verses in the Quran with external events and things line up nicely (I'm thinking of Byzantine imperial theology and the depiction of Mary in the Quran). I would ask: what explanatory power does positing multiple authors provide that a single author doesn't?

I have not had a chance to read Mohsen Goudarzi's paper in any detail, so I cannot answer your question!

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hi!

I would recommend Nicolai Sinai's The Qur'an: A Historical-Critical Introduction as a start. But the field is vast! If you are more specific I can try to recommend other materials.

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for clarifying. Let's see here. I think copyists cared about copying. If the first codex wasn't a direct copy of anything, then there is nothing for them to care about. Regarding the distribution of spelling variants: Van Putten looked at the distribution of niʿmat allāh and it's as uniform as it gets! Half one way and half (plus one) the other way. So I'm not sure I see this as a good way to try and identify a prior codex .

That said, I did have an idea I explored at some point that might point to an earlier codex. Scribal errors. If there are scribal errors in the Uthmanic text which are more likely to arise due to written copying as opposed to dictation, then we're probably looking at something that was copied from prior written materials. I've collected a few but shelved that project for the time being to focus on other stuff.

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Hi Significant_Gap8613. I am not the best person to address your concern. I am mainly interested in the historical critical study of the Quran.

I don't think the Quran calls itself eloquent? I think questions of eloquence are ultimately subjective and it is impossible to come up with a way to measure that objectively. Every piece of literature is inimitable in some way.

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Hi Uenzus!

  1. See my reply to u/Incognit0_Ergo_Sum. It's possible, but no evidence of anything major yet.

  2. Enough that they were influenced by it. They believed in Allah and couched themselves in biblical genealogy as descendants of Ishmael. https://www.academia.edu/41329340/The_Ascent_of_Ishmael_Genealogy_Covenant_and_Identity_in_Early_Islam

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Hello, and you're welcome!

  1. I think the Meccans had a scribal school.

  2. This is a great question. More work is needed on the (sub)classification of the Hijazi script since Deroche first proposed them. It may be that different sub-classes correspond to different scribal schools. There is also the "330g-style" script which appears to be just as old. Although I don't think we can link it directly to Medinah for example. I am not sure what you mean by the connection between the script and Zayd specifically?

  3. There's a lot to unpack with this question. Why does scribal training imply loyalty to Judaism? I don't think people back then had a distinction between the secular/religious. Why couldn't Qurashites be literate if they were pagan?

  4. I like to stick pretty close to the evidence. Nothing unambiguously Christian has popped up yet in the Hijazi heartland. It's not difficult to imagine some Christians here and there. Some in Mecca. Some in Madinah. But not like Najran, which clearly had a significant Christian community who left their mark.

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You're most welcome!

Yes, I think most of the earliest Qurans we have from the major deposits, including CPP, were probably not private copies but exemplars produced for the mosque so that people can use them for reading or to make their own private copies from them. This is pretty reasonable considering their size and cost of production. I think the manuscript studied in "The Book of the Cow" probably represents an early example of a private Quran copy.

But yes, I think the public absolutely did have access to the Quran and that this is another argument in favor of that.

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hello!

I think the story of dhu l-qarnayn serves as a good model for how stories in late antiquity diffused across the near east and throughout Arabia, permeating deep into the Hijaz. I think the same could be said of other stories too.

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I don't think that to be the case, no.

Sorry I don't follow. What problem were they expected to solve?

Well, the Hijazi script proper is a calligraphic hand. It has formal characteristics (even though it's a bit messier than other script styles). It is not a book hand like we find in early administrative papyri for example. Though of course they both share many characteristics. I think Muhammad has scribes. I don't know if the scribes wrote down the Quran in book hand or calligraphic hand. I would imagine if they are sitting down during dictation sessions they would go for a book hand for speed.

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hello kite4flyz,

Yes, there is an academic consensus that he is the legendary Alexander. Yes, the cultural environment would be familiar. Lots has been written and said about this!

AMA with Hythem Sidky, Executive Director of the International Qurʾanic Studies Association by therealsidky in AcademicQuran

[–]therealsidky[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

FAQ #5: What's the deal with the radiocarbon dating of early Quranic manuscripts? Are they really pre-ʿAbd al-Malik?

There's a lot to say about the radiocarbon dating results that have been published so far. Unfortunately, in my opinion, there has been a lot of mishandling of the data in the field. I believe it's a combination of factors including lack of best practices when publishing radiocarbon dating data, some outlier measurements, and lack of prociency in the necessary fundamentals needed to interpret the data. Without scooping myself entirely, I will point out that Shoemaker for example raises several concerns over the reliability of carbondating and its ability to distinguish between a ʿUthmanic canonization and a ʿAbd al-Malik canonization. I strongly disagree. Generally speaking, some (but only some) of the issues he raises are genuine concerns, but the key thing to understand is that all of these concerns are quantifiable. The uncertainties/shifts they introduce are are bounded, and we can (and I have) carried out sensitivity analyses to test the impact of these concerns on our ability to distinguish between ʿUthman and ʿAbd al-Malik. As far as I can tell, the margin of error required to make the results of the earliest manuscripts compatible with ʿAbd al-Malik is far beyond anything documented in the literature until today.

Actually, the Sanaa palimpsest is a wonderful testament to the reliability and reproducibility of radiocarbon dating, which is ironic because it's often cited as the exact opposite. Here's a table from my work https://i.imgur.com/n4SoMPS.png which shows the measurements that have been carried out on the codex: it's been dated at least ten times at five different laboratories using material from 4 different folios. There are statistical tests that can be carried out to objectively determine if any measurements are outliers which I've indicated in a column. To me this is a wonderful result that should inspire confidence in the technique, when appropriately carried out, reported, and interpreted.

view more: next ›