I intended to paraphrase the good points and correct the bad ones
in Efim A.Rezvan's "A History of Printed Editions of the Qur’an"
in The Oxford Handbook of QUR’ANIC STUDIES.
Unfortunately the first part is about manuscripts and other non-print matters.
The part about the St.Petersburg and Kazan Qurʾāns is fine ‒ but not new.
The section on prints after Kazan (pp 268-270) is all wrong, not worth a critique.
picture: https://mnaber.org/img/cache/thumbnail/pZEanzZW1ilzNgi4DQVqO0vo96q0wLpj1lIKFzY0
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
mistake made, mistake copied
In 1924 the King Fuʾād Edition misplaced both hamza signs and mutating small alifs (daggers) after the yāʾ-tooth something that was not don...
-
40 years ago Adrian Alan Brockett submitted his Ph.D. to the University of St.Andrews: Studies in Two Transmissions of the Qurʾān . Now...
-
It is common knowledge that the King Fuʾād Edition of the Ḥafṣ qirāʾa was an immediate success in the Muslim world. Common knowledge, but...
-
Although it is often written that the King Fuʾād Edition fixed a somehow unclear text, and established the reading of Ḥafṣ according to ʿĀ...
No comments:
Post a Comment