In order to understand the importance of the King Fuʾād Edition,
we will have a look on the technical side of book printing,
the science of "rasm and dabṭ",
the calligraphers writing maṣāḥif.
Let's start with debunking a statement made in the Muqaddima which was a leaflet put into the KFE.
In it it is stated that the government used to import foreign copies to be used in state schools, but that these often had to be distroyed because of mistakes. Around 1900 a substantial numbers had to be buried in the Nile.
I take it for a mystification. Imports came from Bairut, Damascus or Istanbul, all part of the Ottoman Empire, to which Egypt belonged upto November 1914.
I do not believe a story without years, numbers and a list of mistakes
‒ and who paid how much in compensation to the owner of the books.
In the forty years before the KFE
several times the text of the qurʾān had been type printed in Būlāq:
both in Ottoman Style (eg. صِراط) with ḥarakāṭ
and bir-rasm al-ʿUṭmānī: as reported in Dānī's Muqniʿ, Ibn Naǧāḥ's Tabyīn or aš-Šāṭibī's ʿAqīla without ḥarakāt (صرط).
Local printers reproduced Ottoman lithographies (written by Hâfız Osman (1642–1698), by Haǧǧ Ḥāfiẓ ʿUṯmān Ḫalīfa QayišZāde an-Nūrī al-Burdurī d. 1894 or by Muṣṭafā Naẓīf Qadirġālī/ Kadirğali d. 1913 ‒ do not mix up with his fellow calligrapher Mehmed Naẓīf, who died in the same year) ‒ both with tafsīr and without.
That something is not the case,
is difficult to prove.
But I declare ‒ whatever others say: A 1833 Būlāq Muṣḥaf does not exist!
Before 1873, in the Ottoman Empire it was forbidden to print a muṣḥaf.
(For an illegal one see here.)
Starting 1874 many have been printed in Istanbul ‒ both by private and state presses.
Private printers (notably Muṣṭafā al-Bābī al-Ḥalabī) are said to have produced lithograph maṣāḥif in Cairo starting in the 1860s.
Because no exact years are given, and no name of the calligraphers,
and because in the 1880s more copies of Istanbul lithographs were printed in Cairo than local calligraphers,
I doubt that there were many ‒ anonymous ‒ Egyptian muṣḥaf writers before the 1880s.
The first Cairo lithograph I have seen is now in the Azhar library.
In Michael W. Albin's article "Printing of the Qurʾān" in Brill's Encyclopedia of the Quran
it is mentioned as two different ones: one by the printer Muḥammad Abū Zaid, and one [directed, edited] by Muḥammad Raḍwān [sic].
It is the 1308/1890 copy directed/edited by Abū ʿĪd Riḍwān ibn Muḥammad ibn Sulaimān al-Muḫallalātī ( ١٢٥٠هـ-١٣١١هـ / 1834-1893), written by ʿAbdelḫāliq al-Ḥaqqī Ibn al-Ḫoǧa/Ibn al-Ḫawaǧa
Both in Istanbul
and Cairo
type set tafāṣīr with different spellings in the frame and at the margin were published
‒ in Būlāq the unvocalized rasm at the margin.
Both in large size for the use in Mosques,
gilded, with red as second colour for men of eminence, and small for craftsmen and housewives
lithographies written by the chief calligrapher of the Ottoman Marine were published.
Foundations, Tombs of Holy Men were offered expensive prints,
schools sets of cheap ones.
Three of his maṣāḥif are reproduced in other cities:
The one with 15 lines on 522 pages in Bairut, St. Petersburg, Tehran, in Cairo by ten different publishers ‒ as late as 1954 in the original Ottoman spelling by ʿAlī Yūsuf Sulaimān 1956
sometimes by the minstery of the Interior in the 1924 spelling,
the one with 15 lines on 604 pages in Tehran and Germany with red as additional colour,
in Nusantara in black and white (enriched with the {Indian} sign for /ū/,
the one with 17 lines on 486 pages in Damascus and by Turks in Germany.
Sometimes with tafsīr at the margins.
Sometimes with a different orthography.
Until today the version written by Muḥammad Saʿd al-Ḥaddād for aš-Šamarlī ‒ in style very similar to Muṣṭafā Naẓīf and line by line identical to the 522 page version is very popular ‒ a thousand times more popular than the Amiriyya prints, whose 855 page edition was never bought by normal Egyptians: it is no coincidence that the only copies of the original Giza prints survive in Orientalists libraries and studies. In the 1960s aš-Šamarli had published the original by MNQ in the Q52 orthography (see on the left), but from 1977 he sold al-Ḥaddād in different sizes, hardcover, plastic and soft;
on the right the original in Ottoman spelling;
Here a Bairūt edition in Q52 with explanations of words on the margin: Here the Ottoman original published by Muṣṭafā al-Bābī al-Ḥalābī before MNQ had died (1913)
The 815 page muṣḥaf by Hafiz Osman (1642-98) was printed in Cairo with one of the bigger Tafsir around, in Syria it was till about 1960 the muṣḥaf
Here pages 2 + 3 from the Cairo print (without the commentary)
At least until islamist Qaṭar supplied islamist forces in Syria with arms and money thus starting a bitter "civil" war, in Aleppo "Ottoman" parts of the Qurʾān were printed:
and until 1990 in al-ʿIrāq two Ottoman maṣāḥif were printed by the state.
in the Turkish Republic only expensive facsimiles reproduce old manuscripts,
"reprints" for believers are heavily edited.
In 1370/1951 the ʿIrāqi Dīwān al-ʾAuqāf had it printed under the supervision of Naǧmaddīn al-Wāʾiz with Kufi numbers after each verse and sura title boxes written by Hāšim Muḥammad al-Ḫaṭṭāt al-Baġdādī,
1386/1966 for the ʿirāqī state by Lohse in Frankfurt/Main,
1398/1978 for the suʿūdī government in West Germany,
1400/1979 in Qaṭar, 1401/1981 for Ṣaddām.
In 1236 Muḥammad Amīn ar-Rušdī had written the original muṣḥāf. In 1278 ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz's mother offered it to the tomb of Junaid in Baghdād. Today it is kept in the library of the tomb of Abu Ḥanīfa.
Whereas in the manuscript ‒ as I guess ‒ waṣl-sign were only on alifs before sun-letters, in the ʿIrāqi print most initial alifs have one, which leads to the annomaly that sometimes an alif has both "waṣl" underneath and a waṣl-sign above.
After every tenth verse a yāʾ (in the abjad system: ten) hovers before the number (see above); what was helpful in the original manuscript that had only end-of-verse-markers, is kind of ridiculous in the printed edition.
Of interest as well: "bi-yāʾ wāhida" under riyyīn in 5:111, which in another Ottoman muṣḥaf is written yāʾ + šadda + turned kasra + yāʾ and in the mordern Turkish ones with one yāʾ and in Q24 with a normal yāʾ plus a high small one. Brockett studied in Edinburgh an Ottoman Manuscript from 1800, in which under 41:47 bi-ʾaidin bi-yāʾain is written. How-to-write-notes were common (in the same Ms. in 43:3 under a hamza-letter "bi-ġair alif" is wriiten.
The Dīwān al-auqāf published ‒ with similar front and back matter ‒ reprints by Ḥafiz ʿUṯmān and Ḥasan Riḍā.
on the right the cover of the M.A.ar-Rušdī edition, in the middle Ḥasan Riḍā, on the left the editor. ‒ After the US-intervention there are two authorities: Dīwān al-waqf as-sunnī and ... aš-šiʿī, both published maṣāḥif on 604 pages: the Sunni took the text from KFC (UT1, cf Kein Standard), the Ši'i had the ʿirāqī Calligrapher, Hādī ad-Darāǧī, write it.
In anearlier post (and above) I retold the history of the manuscript and its prints.
Except for the backmatter and the division into aḥzāb they are all the same: al-Wāʾiz's edition Recently I learned that in 1415/1994 an Iranian reprint was made ‒ not based on the manusscript but on the ʿirāqī version. While the ihmal-sign were deleted alredsy in 1370/1951 forty years later other "confusing" stuff had to go:
‒ high yāʾ barī for every tenth verse,
‒ the differentiation between leading alif followed ḥarf sākin and others ‒ now ALL alifs-waṣl have a waṣl-sign (head of صـ)‒ nicht nur die vor
‒ signs for pauses or vowels are placed nearer to "their" base letter
‒ sometimes the space between words is enlarged, a swash nūn replaced by a normal one
‒ a normal ḍamma-sign was replaced by a turned one, where it is pronouinced ū (due to rules of prosody)
‒ Mūsā bekam ein Lang-fatḥa,
Is there someone who has images of the manuscript?
on the right the first "normal" page of M.A.ar-Rušdī's muṣḥaf, on the left: Ḥasan Riḍā:
‒ in lignes 3,5,6,7,9: the boundary between words is between alifs
‒ in lign 2: before (10) a small high yāʾ, which in the manucrpt was needed to signal: 10
‒ some Ihmal-signs below letter signalling: without dot
No comments:
Post a Comment