Much has been reported and published on the two leaves of an early Qur’an Manuscript that has come to be known as the “Birmingham Qur’an”. The “Birmingham Qur’an” is an expression regarding two leaves of an early Qur’anic manuscript written in the Hijazi script that was dormant in the Mingana Collection at the University of Birmingham ( Accession # 1572a). The folios in the Birmingham collection are parts of Surahs: Kahf, Maryam, and TaHa. After Dr. Abla Fedeli, a researcher at the University of Birmingham, published her findings, many celebrated and spread baseless news through media reports, social media, or hateful Islamophobic outlets. This article is an attempt to set the record straight and build on the findings of the University of Birmingham and Islamic Manuscript study.
Introduction: How did these Folios get to Birmingham?
In the early 20th century, an Assyrian Chaldean priest named Alphonse Mingana was invited to England by J. Rendel Harris, the director of Woodbrooke Quaker Study Centre in Birmingham. After leaving Iraq in 1913, Mingana became a curator of Arabic manuscripts and an Orientalist who was tasked by Edward Cadbury, founding member of Cadbury Chocolates, to travel to the Muslim world seeking manuscripts for his collection. Edward Cadbury was a chairman at the college’s council and had known Mingana through the college library. Between 1924 to 1929, Mingana had traveled to the Muslim world seeking the rarest and oldest manuscripts. Edward Cadbury, a Quaker Philanthropist, himself was not well-versed on Islamic Manuscripts, which is why he employed the expertise of Alphonse Mingana (Fedeli, 2011). The story of this valuable piece of Islamic history and knowledge is a common narrative since the 19th century. Many Islamic manuscripts found their way into Western, specifically European, collections and libraries in this period. There are currently over 3000 Arabic manuscripts in the Mingana Collection at the Cadbury Research Library in the University of Birmingham.
Other Folios from the same Qur’an and their Origin
A group of folios (16ff.) of the same Qur’an can be found in the Bibliothèque nationale de France (Arabe 328(c)). Francois Deroche documented the provenance of these folios (Deroche, 2000). When the French Orientalist, Jean-Luc Asselin de Cherville, served as Vice Consul in Cairo from 1806 to 1816, he obtained numerous manuscripts that he purchased from the Grand Mosque, Jaami’ ‘Amr bin Al-‘Aas; which was the first Masjid built in the entire continent by the great Sahaabi, ‘Amr bin Al-‘Aas (d.44H/664CE) . Cherville, took these manuscripts to Paris and they were purchased by the Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF) in 1833 where they remained until today. Dr. Qaasim as-Samara’ee, a leading Arabic Paleographer, argued that many of these manuscripts taken from Egypt in the 19th century were, in fact, stolen or taken by force and deception (As-Samara’ee, 2015). This narrative of Islamic manuscripts that were stolen or taken by deception or force in the 19th and 20th centuries is well-established (Ghobrial, 2016). Sadly, this behavior still continues today.
The Findings of Dr. Alba Fedeli’s Study
The folios of 1572a remained in the Mingana collection since 1930 with an inaccurate dating that was determined decades prior. Dr. Alba Fedeli studied these manuscripts and noticed that these two folios were incorrectly compiled along with a different Qur’an manuscript dating to the late 7th Century CE. She requested a Radiocarbon analysis (C14) that yielded a date range on the parchment of 568 CE to 645 CE with a 95.4% confidence level (Fedeli, 2015).
Misinterpretations of the Media and Deceptions of Islamophobes
After the study was published, the media picked up the results and numerous conclusions were thrown around. Notions that this manuscript proves that the Qur’an was plagiarized since it was written before the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم was born or received Prophethood (البعثة) circulated among Islamophobic circles. The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم was born in roughly 570 CE and after 40 years, he attained Prophethood (610 CE) and then he died in 632 CE. Of the period given by the Radiocarbon Analysis, the majority would indicate doubt according to the Islamophobes. This accusation is a clear attempt to attack Islam and does not represent a sincere attempt to understand the findings of Dr. Fedeli’s analysis.
The Radiocarbon Analysis tells us the estimated period when the animal used to make the parchment died. The Radiocarbon, or Carbon-14, analysis is conducted on organic material, in this case the parchment made from animal skin, and measures the amount of Carbon-14 in the sample against an international reference standard. Based on this number generated based on the Carbon isotopes present in the sample, an age estimate is given for the material (Bowman, 1990). It is important to understand this: Radiocarbon Dating tells us an estimate of when the animal was alive, it does not tell us when the material was used.
Therefore, regarding the ‘Birmingham Manuscripts’, we can say: the unidentified animal used to make the parchment was alive during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم or just over a decade after his death. We absolutely do not know with any certainty when this manuscript was written. We can only assume that this is a very early copy of the Qur’an based on the closeness to the time the parchment was made.
Misinterpretations of the Muslim Community
After the media reports, many in the Muslim community began to claim that this Qur’an was either written in the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم or a pre-‘Uthmaan copy. Both these notions are unprovable and are simply problematic assumptions that only rely on the carbon dating results.
It is a faulty methodology to solely rely on carbon dating and ignore the other evidence taken from historical references and paleography. C-14 Dating is rarely used on Islamic manuscripts as more reliable methods include paleographic analysis, codicology, material study, and historical research. Dr. As-Samarra’ee (2015) argued that one must also factor in the possibility of contamination of the sample during its creation or during its testing that may lead to inaccuracies in the results. Atmospheric variations must also be considered when analyzing the results of the estimated range. Other scholars of the field, such as Dr. Ibraahim Azwagh al Faasi, mentioned that they’ve found discrepancies in testing. Similarly, leading Orientalist Islamic Paleographer, Francois Deroche expressed concerns about relying on C14.
Since the practice of writing the date on colophons did not occur on Qur’anic manuscripts until roughly the 4th century, every date range given to a Qur’anic manuscript is an estimate based on research. It is impossible to ascertain without a significant element of doubt. This is why dating in this period is often done with a century rather than a specific date or ascription. The ‘Uthmani compilation would have occurred after or around 650 CE, which falls five years past the date range given by the C14 Dating. There is absolutely no evidence that indicates that this was the Mus-haf written by ‘Uthmaan رضي الله عنه or that it is a pre-Uthmanic Mus-haf.
Due to the expense, parchment was often used within a short period of time after its production, likely not exceeding a decade or two. A well-known Qur’anic Paleographer, Dr. Qassim As-Samarra’i (2015) asserted that upon his analysis he determined that this manuscript is a Palimpsest; meaning that the parchment was reused. This theory increases doubt in ascribing this manuscript to the period soon after the death of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. However, the University of Birmingham conducted a Multi-Spectral Imaging analysis (MSI) that does not show any evidence that this manuscript is a Palimpsest.
Given this information, it’s not probable to claim that the Birmingham Qur’an is the Qur’an of ‘Uthmaan رضي الله عنه or that it preceded him and is a pre-Uthmanic codex.
Conclusions on the Birmingham Qur’an
Using all the available information and research, the conclusion that makes the most sense is that the Birmingham Qur’an Folios dates to the mid to late 7th Century after the death of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and likely during the time of the Sahaabah- after the codification of the Uthmanic script. It is impossible to state that this is the Qur’an of ‘Uthmaan رضي الله عنه. Some researchers noted that based on its provenance, we could assume that it was after the conquest of Fustat and the establishment of the Muslims in Egypt. Researchers from the Birmingham University also concluded that it is more likely based on these findings that this manuscript was written roughly 2 decades after the death of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.
The Birmingham Qur’an yields the earliest result of several other Qur’anic manuscripts that have been dated to the late 7th century. Of them are the San’aa Palimpsests that were dated with a 99% confidence interval to 671 CE and 75% confidence interval to 646 CE, the Tübingen manuscript dated between 649-675 CE with a 95% confidence interval, the Tashkent manuscript (Samarqand Qur’an) dated to 765-855 CE with a 95.4% confidence interval (University of Birmingham, 2018).
It’s clear for us to say that this manuscript is possibly an earlier codex written in the late 7th century well after the death of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. It should be noted early Qur’anic manuscripts do provide valuable insight in the field of Orthography (Rasm al Mus-haf).
References:
As-Samara’ee, Q. (2015). Qur’an Palaeography and the Fragments of the University of Birmingham. Al-Furqān Islamic Heritage Foundation. London, UK.
Bowman, S. (1990). Radiocarbon dating (Vol. 1). Univ of California Press.
Déroche, F. (2000). Manuel de codicologie des manuscrits en écriture arabe. Bibliothèque Nationale de France-BNF.
Fedeli, A. (2011). The provenance of the manuscript Mingana Islamic Arabic 1572: dispersed folios from a few Qur’anic quires. Manuscripta Orientalia. International Journal for Oriental Manuscript Research, 17(1), 45-56.
Fedeli, A. (2015). Early Qur’ānic manuscripts, their text, and the Alphonse Mingana papers held in the Department of Special Collections of the University of Birmingham (Doctoral dissertation, University of Birmingham).
Ghobrial, J. P. (2016). The Archive of Orientalism and its Keepers: Re-Imagining the Histories of Arabic Manuscripts in Early Modern Europe. Past & Present, 230(suppl_11), 90-111.
The University of Birmingham. The Birmingham Qur’an Course. May 2018.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم وبه نستعين وصلى الله على نبينا محمد وعلى اله واصحابه اجمعين ومن تبعهم بإحسان إلى يوم الدين.
الحمد لله الذي علم بالقلم وعلم الانسان ما لم يعلم. أما بعد:
This is a significantly summarized version of the previous post entitled: “Arabic Scripts From Antiquity to the Ottoman Era“, which is roughly 68 pages. In this post, I’ll leave out specifics in for the sake of brevity.
Writing is an ancient skill that has been taught and learned as long as mankind has existed. Allaah تعالى said in the first few verses revealed to the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم, from Surah Al-’Alaq (96:3-4): “اقْرَأْ وَرَبُّكَ الْأَكْرَمُ الَّذِي عَلَّمَ بِالْقَلَمِ” “Read! And your Lord is most Generous. The One who has taught (writing) by the pen.” This is an evidence from the Speech of Allaah تعالى that the concept of writing was taught by the Creator to mankind.
The current discourse, led by Western anthropologists and orientalists, dictates that the earliest written language is Sumerian written in Cuneiform script dated to roughly 3500 B.C. to 3100 B.C in Southern Mesopotamia in Ur and Kish (Cooper, 1996; Cunningham, 2013; Thomsen, 1984). Independently, Ancient Egyptians wrote with Hieroglyphics around the same time period (3500 B.C. to 3000 B.C ).
Cuneiform Inscriptions in Sumerian, Dated 3100 to 2800 B.C. Image Source: The Metropolitan Museum of Art (Accession # 1988.433.1)
While this is the case in Western Academic study, Islamic scholarly literature tells an older story, which Western sources do not consider in their research due to the lack of physical discovery and often a disdain for the sources (AbulHaab, 2011). Imaam Al-Qurtubi explained (20/120): “وفيمن علمه بالقلم ثلاثة أقاويل: أحدها: أنه آدم عليه السلام، لأنه أول من كتب، قاله كعب الأحبار. الثاني: أنه إدريس، وهو أول من كتب. قاله الضحاك. الثالث: أنه أدخل كل من كتب بالقلم، لأنه ما علم إلا بتعليم الله سبحانه.” “There are three opinions on who was the first to be taught how to write. The first: it was Aadam عليه السلام, because he was the first to write according to Ka’ab al Ahbaar. The second: It was Idrees, and he was the first to write according to Adh-Dhahaak. The third: All of those who wrote with the pen are considered in this, because they did not know it except by learning from Allaah سبحانه [..]”
The commonly cited narrative in Islamic literature is that Idrees عليه السلام was the first to write with the pen. While this cannot be decisively stated, it is clear that writing predates the Sumerians regardless of what physical evidence has been found.
The ‘Arab, ‘Arabic and Writing Tradition
Much has been said about the origins of the Arabic language and its writing. The ‘Arab were not known to be writers as they maintained oral tradition. Imaam Al-Qurtubi stated in his Tafseer (20/121): “قال علماؤنا: كانت العرب أقل الخلق معرفة بالكتاب” “Our scholars have said: The Arabs had the least understanding in writing from the creation [..]”. This statement coincides with the implementation of oral traditions and memorization among the ‘Arab since the earliest times.
In this summary, I will skip over the discussion of the Orientalist views. Refer to the full post here for that overview: http://athaar.org/makhtutaat/?p=52
As-Suyuti cites Ibn Faaris saying that the narrations regarding the first to write Arabic are numerous and differ (Al-Mazhar 2/293). It’s been reported that the first to write Arabic and Syriac was Aadam عليه السلام and after the flood, the first to revive its writing was Isma’eel عليه السلام. The statement of Ibn ‘Abbaas reported from ‘Ikrimah notes that Ismaa’eel عليه السلام was the first to write and speak Arabic and the letters were joined and later separated by his sons Hamyasa’ and Qaydhar. Ibn Katheer in his Bidaayah (1/192) emphasizes: وإنه أول من تكلم بالعربية الفصيحة البليغة وكان قد تعلمها من العرب العاربة “And he (Isma’eel) was the first who spoke with eloquent Fus-ha Arabic, and he learned it from the ‘Arab al ‘Aariba [..]“. As-Suyuti cites Ibn ‘Abbaas by way of ‘Ataa that he said: “كَانَ هود أول من تكلم بالعربيه ” “Hud was the first to speak Arabic” (Ad-Durr al Manthoor, 3/484).
Therefore, we should understand that there is (1) Arabic Fus-ha, which was spoken first by Isma’eel عليه السلام and (2) Ancient Arabic spoken by the Arabian tribes like Jurhum ath-Thani.
The Arabic Script before the time of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم:
As stated earlier, the views of the Orientalists is discussed briefly in the full post. I will not discuss it here.
The common view among Western researchers, and as a result of their influence in the field, some Muslim academics, is that the Modern Arabic script is a derivative of the Nabatean Aramaic script. The Nabateans were a non-homogeneous group of Arabs who mixed their lineage with others as well as non-Arabs who settled with them. For this reason, Aramaic as well as Arabic was spoken and used among the Nabateans. One clear example is the Arabic text written in Nabatean script, known as the Al-Namaarah inscription.
Al Namara Inscription in Nabatean Script, discovered in Southern Damascus and dated to roughly 326C.E. Image Source: AbulHab (2011)
The Musnad scripts of Yemeni Arabic
To understand this more, we must understand what script the ‘Arab used. The old Arabic script of the Yemeni tribes of Thamud, Saba’, Himyar, and others were written in Musnad. As-Suyuti narrates in Al-Mazhar (2/299) from Al-Khateeb who narrated with the chain of narration that Ibn ‘Abbaas was asked about where the Quraysh took the Arabic script before Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم was granted Prophethood. After describing the chain of Jazm script to the people of Al-Heerah, he mentions: “ من طارئ طرأ عليهم من اليمن من كندة. قال: فممن أخذه ذلك الطارئ؟ قال: الخفلجان بن الوهم كاتب الوحي لهود, عليه السلام” “From a traveler to brought it to them from Yemen to Kindah. He asked: And where did that traveler take it from? He replied: From Al-Khaflajaan bin Al-Wahm, the scribe of the revelation to Hud عليه السلام.” This theory argues that the first Arab, Yemeni tribe of ‘Aad wrote in Arabic script, and of course had spoken Arabic (Ad-Durr al Manthoor, 3/484).
Ibn Khaldoun stated in his Tarikh (1/526): “وكان لحمير كتابة تسمّى المسند حروفها منفصلة وكانوا يمنعون من تعلّمها إلّا بإذنهم. ومن حمير تعلّمت مضر الكتابة العربيّة إلّا أنّهم لم يكونوا مجيدين لها شأن الصّنائع ” “Himyar had a script known as Al-Musnad, its letters were isolated. They used to prevent people from learning it except by their permission. Mudhar learned how to write in Arabic from Himyar, except that they weren’t good at it was the case with their crafts.” There was not a single standard of Musnad, with the different tribes and regions having nuances to the script (AbulHab, 2011; Al-Ya’rabi, 2013).
Musnad Inscription from Hadhramawt. Image Source: Corpus of Hadramitic Inscriptions, Al-ʿOqm/1977
The Musnad script was closely protected by the people of Yemen, not being taught to the laymen. Imaam adh-Dhahabee mentioned in his Tarikh (28/330): “ قال: وكان لحمير كتابة تسمى المسند، وحروفها متصلة. وكانوا يمنعون العامة تعلمها. فلما جاء الإسلام لم يكن بجميع اليمن من يقرأ ويكتب.قلت: وهذا فيه نظر، فإن اليمن كان بها خلق من أهل الكتاب يكتبون بالقلم بالعبراني.إلى أن قال: فجميع كتابات الأمم اثنا عشر كتابة وهي العربية، والحميرية، واليونانية، والفارسية، والسريانية، والعبرانية، والرومية، والقبطية، والبربرية، والأندلسية، والهندية، والصينية. فخمس منها ذهبت: الحميرية، واليونانية، والقبطية، والبربرية، والأندلسية.وثلاث لا تعرف ببلاد الإسلام: الصينية، والرومية، والهندية.” “(Ibn Khalikaan) said: Himyar had their own writing known as Al-Musnad and its letters were connected. They used to prevent the laymen from learning it. When Islaam came, there was no one in Yemen who could read or write. I say: this is contentious, for Yemen has a group of people from the People of the Book who can write in Hebrew script. Until he (Ibn Khalikaan) said: All the scripts of the nations are 12 types: Arabic, Himyari, Greek, Persian, Syriac, Hebrew, Roman, Coptic, Berber, Andalusian, Indian, Chinese. Five of them have gone extinct: Himyari, Greek, Coptic, Berber, and Andalusian. Three are not known in the lands of Islaam: Chinese, Roman, Indian.” Ibn Katheer repeated this narrative in his Bidaayah (15/595).
Page from a Manuscript of Al-Iklil of Al-Hamadani (Vol.8) depicting the Musnad Alphabet with the Modern Arabic Alphabet. Image Source: Princeton University Digital Library (oct382)
The Musnad inscriptions were used until the dominance of Jazm and its spread. Examples can be seen in Yemen discussing events such as the battle that took place with Abrahah of Yemen (the Christian Ethiopian King of Yemen just before the time of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم). Because Himyar did not teach writing to others, it became necessary for another Arabic script to emerge.
“The Inscription of Abrahah” Dated 662 CE. Written in Saba’ean Musnad Script. Image Source: Ministry of Education, Deputy Ministry of Antiquities and Museums, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
The Arabic Jazm script and the Quraysh
The Arabic script that was used by the early Muslims during the time of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was known as Jazm. The alphabet we use today is Jazm script. Ibn Mandhoor mentioned from Al-Jawhari: “ الجوهري: والعرب تسمي خطنا هذا جزما” “The ‘Arab call our script Jazm” (Lisaanul ‘Arab, 12/97). Muramir bin Murrah at-Taa’iee ( مُرَامِرُ بْنُ مُرَّةَ) is credited with being the first to write in the Jazm script. Three others from Tay’i are also considered among the first who scripted Jazm: Salamah bin Hazrah (سَلَمَةُ بْنُ حَزْرَةَ), ‘Aamir bin Hadrah (عَامِرُ بْنُ حَدْرَةَ), and Aslam bin Sidrah (وَأَسْلَمُ بْنُ سِدْرَةَ). Az-Zirkili mentioned (Al-I’laam 7/200) that it’s said that Aslam bin Sidrah converted Musnad to Jazm. Jazm originated in Tai’y (طَيِّئٍ) in the ‘Asir region of modern Saudi Arabia who were from Bulaan (بُولَانَ ) from the people of Anbaar (الأنبار) in Iraq.
It is famously reported that Bishr (or Bushr in some reports) bin ‘AbdulMalik Al-Kindi ( بِشْرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمَلِكِ الْكِنْدِيُّ ), the brother of Ukaydar (أُكَيْدِرُ ) from Dumah Al-Jadal (دومة الجدل), learned it from the people of Anbaar and brought it to Makkah after marrying As-Sahbaa bint Harb (الصَّهْبَاءَ بِنْتَ حَرْبٍ). He was close to Harb bin Umayyah ( حَرْبِ بْنِ أُمَيَّةَ). He taught it the script to Sufyaan bin Harb ( سُفْيَانَ بْنَ حَرْبٍ) and this is how the Quraysh learned how to write in Jazm. Adh-Dhahabi reported in his Taarikhul Islaam (28/330) from Ibn Khalikaan: روى ابن الكلبي والهيثم بن عدي أن الناقل للكتابة العربية من الحيرة إلى الحجاز حرب بن أمية، فقيل لأبي سفيان: ممن أخذ أبوك الكتابة؟ فقال: من ابن سدرة. وأخبره أنه أخذها من واضعها مرامر بن مرة. “Ibn al-Kalbi and Al-Haytham bin ‘Adiyy narrated that the one who transmitted the Arabic handwriting from Al-Heirah to Al-Hijaaz was Harb bin Umayyah. It was said to Abi Sufyaan: where did your father learn writing? He replied: from Ibn Sidrah. He informed him that he had taken it from the one who placed it, Muraamir bin Murrah.”Ibn Katheer in his Bidaayah wan Nihaayah (15/595) noted that Ibn Khalikaan mentioned that the first to write in Arabic was Ismaa’eel عليه السلام, but the first to bring the Arabic writing to the Quraysh was Harb bin Umayyah bin Abdushams who took it from Aslam bin Sidrah. Ibn Abi Dawud narrates in his Masahif (pg 46 to 47): “ حَدَّثَنا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ الزُّهْرِيُّ، إِنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنْ مُجَالِدٍ، عَنِ الشَّعْبِيِّ قَالَ: ” سَأَلْتُ الْمُهَاجِرِينَ مِنْ أَيْنَ تَعَلَّمْتُمُ الْكِتَابَةَ؟ قَالُوا: مِنْ أَهْلِ الْحِيرَةِ وَسَأَلْنَا أَهْلَ الْحِيرَةِ مِنْ أَيْنَ تَعَلَّمْتُمُ الْكِتَابَةَ؟ قَالُوا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْأَنْبَارِ ” “‘Abdullah narrated to us that ‘Abdullah bin Muhammad Az-Zuhri narrated to us, by the Will of Allah, that Sufyaan narrated to us from Mujaalid from Ash-Sha’bi saying: I asked the Muhajireen about where they learned to write. They said: from the people of Al-Heerah, and we asked the people of al-Heerah where they learned to write, and they said from the people of Al-Anbaar.”
In my opinion, the Nabatean Aramaic script had a definite influence on the development of Arabic Jazm, but I also believe that Musnad played a strong role as the scholars mentioned. The Muslim scholars put forth the theory that the Jazm script was derived from Musnad (Dhanun, 1998). Ibn Mandhoor cited Abi Haatim saying: “سمي جزما لأنه جزم عن المسند، وهو خط حمير في أيام ملكهم، أي قطع.” “It’s known as Jazm because it was cut from Musnad, and that was the script of Himyar during their rule, meaning to cut” (Lisaanul ‘Arab, 12/97). This was the position of Ibn Durayd (Jamharah Al-Lugha 2/104), Ibn Jinni (Sirr Sina’ah Al-I’raab, 1/45) (referenced by Al-Hamad, 1982), Az-Zamakhshari (Al-Faa’iq fi Gharib al Hadith, 1/212), Ibn Seedah (Al-Muhkam, 7/302), and Az-Zubaydi (Taj al ‘Uroos, 31/403). However, due to Himyar’s guarding of the Musnad script, it’s likely the reason that the other ‘Arab tribes and the Layman among the Yemenis looked to other scripts like the Nabatean traders who used the Aramaic script. Al-Hamad (1982) noted that others like Al-Jawhari signaled the obvious differences in the script (As-Sihaah 1/487) and Al-Hamad (1982) noted that some narrations mention that the Jazm script was measured against the Syriac script by Muraamir at Taa’i. Therefore, it’s safe to say that the Arabic Jazm script, was influenced by the Arabic cursive Musnad of Himyar and the Nabatean Aramaic script, but was not a sole derivative of one or the other and comes from a decisively Arabic language- not a recent Aramaic derivate.
Comparison chart of the individual letters of Arabic script: Musnad and Jazm, alongside Nabatean and modern Arabic letters. Image Source: AbulHabb (2011)
The Early Islamic Era and its scripts (7th to 12th Century/1st to 6th Hijri)
The earliest script that was used in the 7th to 9th century (1st to 3rd century Hijri) originated in the Hijaz, logically to where the Islamic empire began to spread. The Orientalist Paleography, Francois Deroche (1992), noted that the commonly used term “kufic” was applied to all early Islamic scripts in the first two centuries by the 18th/19th century Orientalist, Jacob Georg Christian Adler who took the word from Al-Fayruzabadi and Ibn Khalliqaan. Applying the term “Kufic” to all scripts of the early Islamic period is problematic. Firstly, the script did not originate in Kufah. Deroche (1992) specified that Adler’s approach had only been applied to 5 fragments of the Copenhagen Qur’an collection. Secondly, the term ‘Kufic’ blankets a term on scripts that are obviously different for the first two to three centuries of Islamic manuscripts. Only after Al-Nadim’s Fihrisit was published did the knowledge of different styles of the early Islamic period become known, although it did not lead to proper categorization of the scripts by the Western Orientalists. Sicilian Orientalist, Michele Amari attempted to refine Adler’s classification after gaining access to the collection at Bibliotheque Nationale Paris (BNP) and had identified the Makkan script apart from Kufic (Deroche, 1992). Al-Nadim can be accredited as the reason the term “Hijazi” manifested as the earliest script of the Islamic period based on its transition from Jazm. He stated in Fihrisit (pg.16): “قال محمد بن إسحاق فأول الخطوط العربية الخط المكي وبعده المدني ثم البصري ثم الكوفي فأما المكي والمدني ففي ألفاته تعويج إلى يمنة اليد وأعلا الأصابع وفي شكله انضجاع يسير وهذا مثاله.” “Muhammad ibn Is-haaq said: the first Arabic script was the Makkan script, then the Madani script, then the Basri, then the Kufi. As for the Makkan and Madani, then its Alif is slanted to the right of the hand with elongation of the strokes, with one form having a slight slant.”
While the debate on terminologies of Kufic may continue, Deroche’s approach to classify the early scripts based on their relation to eras makes more sense. Deroche (1992) argued that this general assessment into three categories allows for easier classification based on the available data. Deroche followed a similar method as Al-Nadim in identifying the differences in certain letters, such as Alif or the Laam al Waraqiyyah, to assist in categorizing types based on actual manuscripts. The first of the three categories is the Makkan and Madani scripts, which Nabia Abbott (1939) labeled as “Hijazi”. The general ascription, “Hijazi” is fair considering we do not know the differences between the Makkan and Madani scripts used in the first two centuries of the Hijri calendar (7th and 8th century C.E.). The next two styles are categorized generally as “Abbasi”, but more specifically: Early Abbasi and New Abbasi- each of which have sub-styles. Deroche (1992) pioneered this term, which has gained momentum in Islamic Paleography. Many still consider “Kufic” and “Eastern Kufic” the correct terminology for these styles. Whether you consider “Abbaasi” or “Kufic” the correct term, both terms were popularized by the Orientalists. For instance, Nabia Abbott (1939) had theorized that the Arabic Jazm of the people of Heerah learned from Syriac script, which may justify “Kufic”. This is unlikely according to a comparison of Kufic and Jazm. Deroche’s study appears to be the most accurate of the two and allows for new additions and classifications upon greater research.
It is extremely important to note that there are no confirmed copies of the Qur’an that date to the lifetime of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in the first half of the 7th century C.E.. Although there are many claims, such as the recent “Birmingham” Qur’an, it is not definitive and is mere speculation. Paleographer and specialist in Islamic manuscripts, Professor Qasim as-Samara’i of Leiden University argued that his analysis showed that the Birmingham Qur’an was a Palimpsest (when old text is erased and written over) and the C-14 dating is meaningless in light of this (As-Samara’i, 2015). These attempts at false claims are not restricted to Orientalists, Muslim collectors and booksellers in the past have falsely ascribed Qur’an manuscripts as the Mus-haf of ‘Uthmaan رضي الله عنه (Deroche, 1992).
Milestone Marker written in Hijazi from the first century Hijri (8th Century CE). Image Source: Ministry of Education, Deputy Ministry of Antiquities and Museums, Object #1356
The Hijazi Script
During the reign of the Ummawi’s, the Arabic script was not systematic, each scribe having their own style. The earliest account identifying this script is found in Al-Nadim’s Fihrisit as being scripts of Makkah and Madinah. Deroche (1992) noted that the first Orientalist to take this into account was the Sicilian Orientalist Michele Amari in the mid-19th century. The term “Hijazi” later came to use a century later by Nabia Abbott in in 1939. Deroche (1992) notes that the small number of early fragments available demonstrate varying hands and styles, and this is likely because there was a lack of codification of calligraphy and scripts. Analyzing the Hijazi script shows a likeness to the Jazm script taught to the Quryash by Bishr bin Abdul-Malik Al Kindi.
A key indicator of the Hijazi Qur’an is the lack of vocalization, which only entered into the Arabic script during the time of ‘Ali bin Abi Talib رضي الله عنه. While there was rare use of papyrus, most early Qur’ans and manuscripts were written in Parchment (made from the skin of animals, likely goats or gazelles). This continued until the prevalence of paper in the 11th century, with the except of Al-Maghrib- where parchment was continued until centuries later. The oldest Qur’an manuscript adopts a vertical shape of the page (as it seen in modern times). The more horizontal format became popular with Qur’an manuscripts in the 8th to 9th centuries (2nd to 3rd century hijri). The earliest script depicted the Ma’il style (slanted).
An early 8th Century C.E. (2nd Century Hijri) Qur’an manuscript in the early Hijazi Ma’il style. Deroche (1992) labels this type as Hijazi I. Image Source: The British Library: BL Or. MS 2165, ff. 76v–77
A key factor to note is that there are no vocalizations within the words. Around the mid-7th century, ‘Ali bin Abi Taalib رضي الله عنه ordered Abul Aswad Dhalim bin ‘Amr ad-Du’ali (or ad-Deeli) to formulate Nahw (Arabic Grammar) and create the vocalization. Adh-Dhahabee mentioned in his Siyar A’laam an-Nubalaa (4/83) that he heard someone erring in his recitation of “أَنَّ اللهَ بَرِيْءٌ مِنَ المُشْرِكِيْنَ وَرَسُوْلِهِ” and recited the laam with a Kasrah instead of a Dhammah. Abul Aswad called for a scribe and said to him: “إِذَا رَأَيْتَنِي قَدْ فَتَحْتُ فَمِي بِالحَرْفِ، فَانْقُطْ نُقْطَةً أَعْلاَهُ، وَإِذَا رَأَيْتَنِي قَدْ ضَمَمْتُ فَمِي، فَانْقُطْ نُقْطَةً بَيْنَ يَدَيِ الحَرْفِ، وَإِنْ كَسَرْتُ، فَانْقُطْ نُقْطَةً تَحْتَ الحَرْفِ، فَإِذَا أَتْبَعْتُ شَيْئاً مِنْ ذَلِكَ غُنَّةً، فَاجْعَلْ مَكَانَ النُّقْطَةِ نُقْطَتَيْنِ، فَهَذَا نَقْطُ أَبِي الأَسْوَدِ” “If you see me open my mouth when saying a letter (with a Fath-ha sound), then place a dot above it (the letter), if you see me bring my lips together (with a Dhammah sound), place a dot between the letter. If I make the Kasrah sound, then place a dot below the letter. If I follow any of that with a Ghunnah, then place two dots instead of one. This is the dot (system) of Abil Aswad.” He further states that Abul Aswad was the one responsible for placing the dots in the Qur’an. Abul Aswad ad-Du’ali died in 69H (688C.E.) towards the end of the 7th century (Wafiyaat al A’yaan, 2/535). Any ascriptions of the Qur’an that claim to be the Mus-haf of ‘Uthman that have the vocalization are clearly fabricated ascriptions and the Qur’an may come from a later period.
Early Abbasi Script
Around the mid-8th century, after the fall of the Ummawiyeen in 750C.E, the Hijazi script began to standardize into what may be called the Early Abbasi script. Deroche (1992) argued that the application of Kufic to all the scripts of this era should be avoided because it is incorrect to credit Kufah, a geographic location, for scripts that developed around the region. This is the reason that Deroche (1992) coined the term “Abbasi” script, which he admits suffers similar issues to Kufic, just not as problematic as Kufic. Deroche (1992) argued that most of the script standardization for Hijazi occurred during the Abbasi reign, but was probably kick-started by Abdul-Malik Marwan’s formation of the Chancery in the late 7th/early 8th century.
A folio from a late 8th [2nd H] /early 9th [3rd H] century (C.E) Qur’an depicting the Early Abbasi style, possibly B.II or C.I style (based on the Alif, Final Meem, Laam waraqiyyah, Taa, and Noon]. Image Source: Athaar Collection, Ms.056fAround the 10th century C.E. (4th Century Hijri- 300’s), a change in this Abbasi style can be seen in the disappearance of the lower-end curve on the Alifs (in E-style script) and more pronounced curves and dips in the final Noon (in D.vc script), which some Orientalists called the “Western Kufic” or “Damascus School” both of which have no merit according to Deroche (1992). The field of Early Islamic Paleography is still very much open to development with many manuscripts undated and unclassified. Another contributor to this challenge is the dispersion of manuscripts in private collections or inaccessible due to numerous reasons such as war. The Abbasi style was not just used in the Qur’anic manuscripts, but also played a role in the development of styles like Naskh and Maghribi (Gacek, 2009).
New Style (New Abbasi)
The ‘New Abbasi Style’, as Deroche (1992) argued, cannot be ascertained with a great level of confidence due to the inadequate documentation of materials. Therefore, it is difficult to accurately date manuscripts of this style with complete certainty. A number of terms have been used to describe this style. Deroche denotes the terms that have been used as: Eastern Kufic, Eastern Persian Kufic, Broken Kufic, Naskhi Kufic, Western Kufic, and Broken Cursive. I found Deroche’s approach much more convincing than the orientalists that applied a variant kufic to these scripts. Especially considering the inaccuracy of ascribing the styles of Kufah, Iraq (take “Persian Kufic” for example).
A folio of a New Style Abbasi Quran (NS.I) dated Ramadhan 383H (993C.E) in Isfahan. Image Source: Nasser D. Khalili Collection KFQ90
The 12th century manuscripts in the New Style Abbasi show how quickly the scripts formed into a systematic practice. In the Islamic East, paper was already utilized as a writing surface, unlike the West (Maghrib) where parchment continued its use. A minute New Style developed and is commonly found in this period.
The Qur’an Masahif produced in the early Abbasi and New ‘Abbasi Styles were quite large due to these types of scripts. This is especially the case when Mashq was applied. There are very few complete Qur’an manuscript examples from this period, many of which are claimed to be the “Uthmani Qur’an”, but have no confirmed evidence to support it. In fact, many have evidence that contradict its placement in the time period of the Khulafa ar-Rashidoon.
A 3rd/9th century Qur’an in ‘Abbasi script in the Mashhad Husseini Masjid in Cairo, Egypt. Image Source: Shaker, Ahmed; Quranmss.com
The Six Pens (4th H/10th C.E. to Present)
The 300s to 400s Hijri (3rd/4th century Hijri- 9th/10th C.E.) was the period wherein Islamic scripts took a systematic turn with Khatt al-Mansub (proportioned script) becoming popular after its invention by the Wazeer (minister) and master calligrapher, Abu ‘Ali Muhammad bin ‘Ali bin Hasan, known as Ibn Muqleh (d.328H/940C.E.). In this period (late 4th/10th and early 5th/11th century), three script families were born: Thuluth, Muhaqqaq, and Tawqi’. From these three script families, there are three others closely related: Thuluth (ثلث) -> Naskh (نسخ); Muhaqqaq (محقق) -> Rayhani (ريحاني); and Tawqi’ (توقيع): Riqa’ (رقاع). These six styles became known as القلم الستة (the six hands/pens) that became popularized in the 7th/13th century (Gacek, 2009). These styles are born from the innovations of Ibn Muqleh, as Al-Qalqashendi and others described. Adh-Dhahabi mentioned (Siyar A’laam an-Nubalaa, 15/226) that he wrote in a beautiful handwriting and wrote with his left hand after his right had was cut off. He mentioned later (15/229) that there’s a difference of opinion on who was the calligrapher, him or his brother Al-Hasan bin ‘Ali. Adh-Dhahabee held that it was his brother Al-Hasan who was the calligrapher and he was the first to develop this style from the “Kufic script” (the term used by Adh-Dhahabee). Ibn Khalikaan stated that both him and his brother were calligraphers (Waafiyaat al A’yaan, 5/117). Ibn Muqleh was often caught up in the Fitnah during his term as Wazeer for Ali bin Yalbaq and had tried to arrest the Imaam of Ahlus Sunnah- Abu Muhammad Al-Hasan bin ‘Ali Al-Barbahaaree (Ibn Muflih, Al-Maqsad Al-Irshaad (1/no. 344)) [Refer to my note on Imaam Al-Barbaharee for more on this]. Ibn Muqleh had served as Wazeer numerous times and spanned the leadership of Al-Muqtadir, Al-Qaahir, and Ar-Radhibillah.
The meaning of “Mansub” (proportioned) is in reference to measuring the size and proportions by means of a “diamond-shaped dot”, which one obtains by use of a Qalamus (reed pen) with a slanted tip.
A reed pen with a slanted tip. Al-Qalqashendi describes the method for making a pen. Image Source: Personal picture
One of the most famous styles to be born from this proportioned script was the Naskh script, literally meaning “copyist” script. It is ascribed to Ibn Muqleh, although the earliest dated example of Naskh was in 1000 C.E., after his death.
Rare copy of Qur’an written on paper by Ibn Al-Bawwab. The earliest example of Thuluth (titles) and Naskh (text), dated 391H (1000-01 C.E.). Image Source: Chester Beatty Library, Is 1431, ff. 278b-279a
The Thuluth and Naskh scripts gained popularity in the end of the the 4/10th century (Gacek, 2009). In the 4th/10th century and 5th/11th century, another calligrapher brought additional popularity to the proportioned scripts. Abul Hasan ‘Ali bin Hilaal Ibn Al-Bawwaab (d. 413H/1022C.E.) was a master calligrapher who cemented the early proportioned scripts after Ibn Muqleh. He was a close companion of Ibn Sam’oon. The key feature of Thuluth is in the bent Alif with the lower end slightly turning left. Additionally the dips in the letters like Jeem, Raa, Daal, etc have a slight upward curve at the end. Specific proportions differentiate Thuluth from other scripts.
The earliest Muhaqqaq style Qur’an was written 499H/1160C.E in Iran, but it was well-known much earlier as Al-Nadeem mentioned that it was written in his time: “ فأما الوراقون الذين يكتبون المصاحف بالخط المحقق والمشق وما شاكل ذلك فمنهم بن أبي حسان وابن الحضرمي وابن زيد والفريابي وابن أبي فاطمة وابن مجالد وشراشير المصري وابن سير وابن حسن المليح والحسن بن النعالي وابن حديدة وأبو عقيل وأبو محمد الأصفهاني وأبو بكر أحمد بن نصر وابنه أبو الحسين ورأيتهما جميعا” “As for the scribes that wrote the Masahif in the scripts of Muhaqqaq and Mashq and what resembles that, from them was bin Abi Hassan, ibn Al-Hadhrami, ibn Zayd, Al-Faryaabi, bin Abi Fatimah, ibn Majalid, Sharasheer al Misri, ibn Seer, ibn Hasan al-Malih, Al-Hasan bin An-Na’ali, ibn Hadidah, Abu ‘Aqeel, Abu Muhammad Al Isfahani, Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Nasr and his son Abul Hussain, and I have seen all of them.” Unlike the Thuluth script, Muhaqqaq has uniquely identifiable Laam waraqiyyah and no upward curvature in the dips on the Raa, Jeem, Meen, etc.
A manuscript of 120 Hadeeth from the Sahihayn in Muhaqqaq script, dated 858H/1454C.E. Image Source: Athaar Collection, Ms.079c
These styles persisted until today gaining its prime popularity in the 7th century Hijri (13th C.E.) due to the third most famous Islamic calligrapher Abu-AdDurr Jamaluddeen Ya’qut bin ‘Abdillaah al-Musta’simi ar-Rumi (d.698H/1298C.E.) who refined the proportioned scripts and established schools to teach the art (Tarikh al-Islaam, 15/888). Adh-Dhahabi mentioned that he became an Imaam in this regard and had many imitators. Yaqut al-Musta’simi had several famous students, as it is narrated, were granted permission to sign in his name (Gacek, 2009). Therefore, many imitations ascribing to Yaqut are found in libraries and collections today. His famous students were: Ahmad bin ‘Ali As-Suhrawardi (Tayyib Shah), Abdullah As-Sayrafi, Muhammad bin Haydar al-Hussayni, Arghoon al-Kamaali, Mubarakshah bin Qutub, and Yahya as-Sufi (Az-Zubaydi: Hikmat al Ishraaq ila Kutaab al Aafaaq, 1/95; Gacek, 2009). Some styles became less popular and went out of use later in the Ottoman empire and Iran after the 10th H/16th CE century, such as Rayhan and Muhaqqaq (Gacek, 2009)
A demonstration of the Six Pens (calligraphic styles). Image Source: Islamic Arts and Architecture, islamic-arts.org
Several other styles applied unique qualities to Naskh and leading to a different classification. One example is the Sudani Naskh, prevalent in Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia, and Nigeria; which is easily distinctive and recognizable. Another example is the Ghubar script, which is more of a technique like Ma’il werein the author writes in a very small script. The Ghubar script was used for miniatures and small writing for messages (Qalqashendi, 3/17). Many other styles have been left out of this note for brevity. Refer to Qalqashendi’s Subh al A’shaa, Zubaydi’s Hikmat al Ishraaq, and Nadeem’s Fihrisit for a wider discussion on the styles and their nuances.
The Maghribi Scripts (4th H/10th C.E. to Present)
Soon after the advent of death of our Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, the Khulafa’ ar-Rashidoon began to expand into different regions and Islam spread to Iraq, Persia, and Egypt. The expansion into North Africa and Spain was spearheaded by the Umawwiyeen. The empire stretched from Spain to the Western regions of China. The Battle of Talas, for instance, in 751C.E. is often credited with bringing the art of Paper-making from China into the Muslim world. During the first two centuries of Hijrah, the Hijazi script and ‘Abbasi script (what is often called Kufic) prevailed in all regions including the Islamic Maghrib.
The Term “Maghribi” is applied to the general scripts of North Africa and Spain (Andalus). Gacek (2009) opined that the Maghribi scripts still lack detailed research into its history, development, and categorization. This is clear from researching the Maghribi script. However, it’s likely that it started entering the realm of Islamic scripts before the 4th century Hijri/10th century C.E.. The oldest dated Qur’an in the Maghribi script to our knowledge is dated 398H/1000-1C.E., while the earliest dated Maghribi manuscript, according to Gacek (2009), is Kitaab Ma’rifat al Bawl wa Aqsaamihi dated 345H/957 C.E.. Notice the similarity of this early Maghribi script to the New Style Abbasi.
Umar and Al-Maghrawi (2007) argued that from the combination of Hijazi and Iraqi Kufic, three scripts were born: the Maghribi script (that related to the Andalusian script) and the Qayrawani script (that later bore the African script). They continued to state that the Andalusi script combined with the Faasi script led to four scripts: (1) Sudani, (2) Tunisi, (3) Jaza’iri, and (4) Maghribi: (i) Kufi Maghribi, (ii) Thuluth Maghribi, (iii) Al-Mabsut, (iv) Al-Jawhar, (v) Al-Musnad/az-Zimami. Boogert (1989) also cited that the origin of Maghribi script points to the mis-named Kufic, specifically the Eastern Kufic (New Style ‘Abbasi) around the 8th/9th centuries. Dr. Muhammad Al-Manuni (1991) called the Kufic style that Umar and Al-Maghrawi called Iraqi Kufic: Al-Kufi al Mutamaghrib (Maghribized Kufic). Based on its appearance, it matches the New Style Abbasi script as Gacek (2009) noted.
The Maghribi scripts are uniquely different from the Eastern scripts due to several factors. Boogert (1989) states these differences as the final Alif being drawn from top to bottom; the stems of the Alif, Laam waraqiyyah, Laam, and Ta/dha have a rounding “club-like extension” to the left of the upper point; the Saad/Dhaad/ has a similar appearance to the Ta/Dha; the stem of ta/dha are diagonal; and the Qaf is written with a single dot on top while the Faa has a dot below. The differences in the Maghribi and Eastern scripts are obviously clear- especially the later scripts. One of the most striking features of the Maghribi scripts is the use of multiple colors such as red, green, blue, and yellow throughout the manuscript along with many decorations in these colors and inks. The general categorization in the Maghribi scripts are: (1) Faasi, (2) Andalusi, (3), Qayrawani, and (4) Sudani. Sadly, the terms that tie the script to a specific location can be problematic and confusing since the art of the script traveled throughout regions.
A Maghribi/Andalusian bifolium from the 12th or 13th century. Image Source: Athaar Collection
The Persian Scripts (8th H/14th C.E. to present)
While many of the Eastern scripts were in use in the Islamic Persia, a unique style emerged in the late 8th century (Gacek, 2009) known as Nasta’liq (al-Khatt al Faarisi). The Ottomans referred to this script as Ta’leeq, although the general thought among Orientalist Paleographers is that it developed as a “hanging Naskh”, hence the name derived from “Naskh Ta’leeq”. Around the 9th century Hijri (15th Century C.E.), Nasta’liq began to replace Naskh as the regular script for writing manuscripts. In many manuscripts, Naskh would be reserved for the main text, while Nasta’liq served as the marginal notes. Nasta’liq influenced scripts in the Ottoman lands and in Mughal India. It is not uncommon to find manuscripts written in India or the Ottoman lands with the Nasta’liq script. However, its usage for Qur’ans is rare. Urdu and Farsi adopted the style of Nasta’liq as a main script. Other styles like Shikasta are said to be born of Nasta’liq (Gacek, 2009, Ali, 1984) One of the most famous Persian Calligraphers was Meerza Ahmad An-Nayrizi who wrote in Naskh around the 17th century C.E.. He wrote in a larger style Naskh and had influenced many later Persian scribes.
A manuscript of Tajrid Asmaa as-Sahabah of Imaam adh-Dhahabi, dated 1310H/1892C.E. probably scribed in India. Image Source: Athaar Collection, Ms.005c
The Ottoman Era (10th Hijri/ 16th C.E. to present)
The Ottomans began their rule in the late 7th century Hijri/ 14th Century C.E.. The most well-known Ottoman calligraphy was Hamdullaah Ibn Ash-Shaykh Mustafa Dede Al-Amaasi (d.926H/1520C.E.). Hamdullah Al-Amasi further refined Yaqut al-Musta’simi’s development of the six pens/styles and popularized them further across the Ottoman Empire. Hamdullah was known as Ibn ash-Shaykh because his father, Mustafa Dede was the leader of the Sufi order of the Sahrawardiyyah who migrated from Bukhara to Amasya. Many of the Ottomans at this time were deeply entrenched in Sufism, mostly within the Naqshibandi and Helveti orders. Hamdullah, known as Qiblat al Kuttaab, studied calligraphy and the six pens from his teacher Khayr-uddeen Al-Mar’ashi (d.896H) who had studied from ‘Abdullah as-Sayrafi who learned from Ahmad bin ‘Ali, known as Tayyib Shah as-Sahrawardi (Hikmat al Ishraaq ila Kutaab al Aafaaq of az-Zubaydi, 1/95).
A page of a Qur’an scribed by Hamdullah al-Amasi. This Qur’an went on auction at Bonham’s in 2010 for an estimated $57,000 to $85,000. Image Source: Bonhams, Islamic and Indian Art Sale, April 15, 2010, Lot 21
Mughal India (8th Hijri /14th C.E. until 10th Hijri/16th C.E.)
The Mughal Indian empire developed an intriguing style of writing that modern researchers have rarely explored. The Bihari script seems to have come into existence in the Bihar region of India around the 7th or 8th century Hijri (13th/14 C.E.) with the oldest dated manuscript of a Qur’an written by Mahmood Sha’baan in 801H/1399 (Gacek, 2009). Some believe that it developed from Muhaqqaq and an old form of Naskh. It is a distinctive script that has bold and elongated dips and unique writing of Saad, Dhaad, Taa, and Dhaa. There is also noticeable spacing between the words. I have not yet come across any non-Qur’anic manuscripts with this script. This style disappeared when the Shah’s of the Mughal empire began to prefer the Nasta’liq style.
A folio from a Bihari Qur’an, dated 895H/1490CE. Image Source: Athaar Collection, Ms.025f
Conclusion
The Arabic script has undergone many changes in the past three thousand years. One thing that has not changed is the beauty of the script and its art form. The importance given to the written word became greater known after the first century in the Hijri calendar. I have not done justice to the field with such a short and brief summary. I simply wanted to write down a summary of my research for my brothers to benefit from. This is not a conclusive observation as I’m constantly researching and reading into the subject.
Academic References:
Abbott, N. (1939). The Rise of the North Arabic Script and Its Kuranic Development with a Full Description of the Kuran Manuscripts in the Oriental Institute. University of Chicago Press.
Abulhab, S. D. (2011). DeArabizing Arabia: Tracing Western Scholarship on the History of the Arabs and Arabic Language and Script. Blautopf Publishing.
Afa, U., Maghrawi, M. (2007). Al-Khatt Al Maghribi Tarikh wa Waqi’ wa Afaq. Ministry of Islamic Affairs, Dar Al Baidha, Morocco.
Ali, A. Y. (1984). Muslim Calligraphy: Its Beginning and Major Styles. Islamic Studies, 23(4), 373-379.
Al-Hamad, G.Q. (1982). Rasm Al-Mushaf, Dirasat Lughawiyyah Tarikhiyyah. Al-Jamhuriyah Al Iraqiyah: Al-Lajnah al Wataniyah. Baghdad, Iraq.
Al-Manunu, M. (1991). Tarikh al-Wiraqah Al-Maghribiyyah: Sina’ah Al-Makhtut al Maghribi bin Al ‘Asr al Waseet ila Fatra Mu’asirrah. College of Literature and Anthropology. Muhammad Al-Khamis University, Ar-Ribaat, Morocco.
Al‐Said, S. (2004). Early South Arabian‐Islamic bilingual inscription from Najran. Arabian archaeology and epigraphy, 15(1), 84-88.
Al-Ya’rabi, S. (2013). Bahth ‘an Khatt al Musnad. Published under the Supervision of Dr. Muhammad Al Uraymi. Center for Research, culture, and conservation. Middle East College.
As-Samara’i, Q. (2015). Qur’an Palaeography & The Fragments of the University of Birmingham. AlFurqan Heritage. London, UK- Interview.
Badawi, A.M (1995). Ahammiyyah Ta’allum Al ‘Arabiyyah. Hawliyah Kuliya al Adab. University of Kuwait. Al-Khalidiyah, Kuwait.
Blair, S. S. (2008). Arabic calligraphy in West Africa. The Meanings of Timbuktu, 59-75.
Bloom, J. M. (1986). Al-Mamun’s Blue Koran?. Extrait De La Revue Des Etudes Islamiques, 54, 59-65.
Boogert, N. van den. 1989. ‘Some Notes on Maghribi Script’. Manuscripts of the Middle East 4: 30-43.
Cooper, J. S. (1996). Sumerian and Akkadian. The world’s writing systems, 37-72.
Cunningham, G. (2013). The Sumerian Language. In The Sumerian World (pp. 119-134). Routledge.
Déroche, F. (1992). The Abbasid tradition: Qur’ans of the 8th to the 10th centuries AD, in the The Nasser D. Khalili Collection of Islami art, 1. Oxford University Press.
Dhannoon, Y. (1998). Qira’ah Jadeedah fi Asl Al-Kitaabah Al Arabiyyah. Afaq al Arabiyah.
Gacek, A. (1990). Early Qur’anic Fragments. Fontanus, 3, 45-64.
Gacek, A. (2009). Arabic manuscripts: a vademecum for readers (Vol. 98). Brill.
Hanash, I.M. (n.d.). Kitaabah al-Mus-haf ash-Shareef ‘ind al Khattateen al ‘Uthmaniyyeen. Journal of Qur’anic Studies, Qur’an Complex.
Hillenbrand, R. (2014). Ibn Al-Bawwab. Hamad bin Khalifa University, Qatar Faculty of Islamic Studies.
Macdonald, M. C. (2009). Arabs, Arabias and Arabic before Late Antiquity. Topoi, 16(1), 277-332.
Macdonald, M. C. (2000). Reflections on the linguistic map of pre‐Islamic Arabia. Arabian archaeology and epigraphy, 11(1), 28-79.
Macdonald, M. C. (2010). The development of Arabic as a written language. In Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies (Vol. 40).
Mousavi Jazayeri, S. M. V., Michelli, P. E., & Abulhab, S. D. (2017). A Handbook of Early Arabic Kufic Script: Reading, Writing, Calligraphy, Typography, Monograms.
O’Connor, M. (1996). Epigraphic Semitic scripts. The world’s writing systems, 88-107.
Retso, J. (2013a). The Arabs in antiquity: Their history from the Assyrians to the Umayyads. Routledge.
Retsö, J. (2013b). What is Arabic. The Oxford Handbook of Arabic Linguistics, 433.
